Sunday, April 06, 2025

Nga Kor Meng(Minister of Housing and Local Government) or some Minister should be leading/coordination gas pipeline 'disaster'. - Now, ODDLY no Minister taking the lead, but POLICE, ....?

In my opinion, following the Petronas Gas Pipeline Disaster (lucky no child, man or women died) - that EXPOSED the fact that there are houses/buildings allowed to be built so close to such a dangerous pipeline raises so much questions. Remember, the damage by extreme heat caused cars to melt about 200-300 meters or more from the PIPELINE? The nearest house was about 100 meters only... These GAS PIPELINE are dangerous and there is a RISK of leakages, and gasses can be dispersed far, and can affect health. The other RISK is explosion/fire, which we just experienced - and high temperature about 1,000 degrees CELCIUS causing cars/etc to be melted by the extreme heat, and what is the effect on human persons - luckily no one died this time.


Now, this Pipeline is long, and as such there is a RISK that 'accidents' can happen anywhere anytime along the said Pipeline - so, the concern is now NO MORE the site of the explosion, but anywhere along the Pipeline.

PETRONAS and the government would have placed very strict conditions for these pipeline - there would be a CORRIDOR. 

Sarawak has acted fast, the Federal Government and rest of the State Government not yet. 

This recent explosion may need a REVISION of the size of these 'gas corridors' - in the media reports, it seems the houses was about 100 meters away, but since the damage by reason of extreme heat caused melting of cars, etc about 300-400 meters away - it may be BEST to protect lives to increase the corridor to be at least 500 meters from the pipe. SO, what will the government do with all the houses/buildings and existing human activity that is now within that 500 meter distance from Gas Pipeline. ACQUIRE the land, and move the houses??? ALTERNATIVELY, move the Gas Pipeline

Nobody has yet been TRANSPARENT and revealed the existing standards, and answered the question whether the Subang Jaya Local Government VIOLATED the law, when they allowed houses/buildings/children's playground to be built so close to these GAS PIPELINES.

Sadly our Prime Minister/Finance Minister who is also responsible for PETRONAS has been very silent about the relevant facts > what exactly happened? The cause and weaknesses? Improvement needed to the standards to ensure safety? He has been talking about RELIEF for victims but he must go deeper...

HE, in my opinion, has avoided TRANSPARENCY - and has been treating in as though it was some flood, earthquake, tsunami, etc - and focusing on giving some financial aid, etc... 

We are still even in the DARK about the regulations governing the Pipeline? Was there a BREACH? Was there a breach when some contractor brought in heavy machinery and worked so close to the Pipeline - there may be attempt to lay blame on some worker, some contractor - but I feel blame ought to fall on the relevant authorities, who seem to have FAILED to prevent the MISHAP? No comment yet as we still are only guessing as to what happened and WHY?

PM Anwar Ibrahim also FAILED to appoint a Federal Minister to oversee and coordinated investigations, and matters related - and the most appropriate Minister ought to be the Minister for Housing and Local Governments, NGA KOR MING(DAP-PH) who should take the lead > not the Selangor Menteri Besar as this is about HOUSING, and Local Government possible wrongdoings - noting that Local Government decides ALONE on the approval of houses/buildings/development activities within its jurisdiction. Did the Local Government BREAK the law when it approved the building of houses so close to the GAS Pipeline? OR was the Local Government 'extremely' Negligent when it approved the development and buildings, so close to that dangerous gas pipeline

As a lawyer, I believe that all the VICTIMS have a case against the LOCAL GOVERNMENT - and they may be able to claim FULL cost of House, Cost of Relocation, other damages/compensations.

Interestingly, to date, we still do not know the cause of the accident? Did the pipes crack because of old age? Did it crack because someone broke the pipes? Did the excavator/tractors(that was allegedly working very near) hit the pipe and cause the gas to leak? Was it the weight of the heavy machinery on the pipeline that cause it to leak? Who allowed work to be done in that 'GAS CORRIDOR' in which the pipeline was? Was it the LOCAL Government - should we demand immediate resignation of the Mayor and all Councillors NOW..

After the incident, Sarawak has started to act - but what about PM Anwar and the Federal Government, or the State Governments and Local Governments??

Sarawak will officially designate gas corridors under the Sarawak Gas Roadmap (SGR) as a precautionary measure to prevent incidents like the recent gas pipeline explosion in Jalan Putra Harmoni, Putra Heights, Subang Jaya....“The key is to establish a proper buffer zone and designate a wide corridor for gas infrastructure. This will allow for early detection of potential hazards and significantly reduce risks in case of a fire or explosion,” he said.

QUESTION:- 

Remember, it is generally the LOCAL GOVERNMENT that approves any proposed development (building of houses/buildings/play grounds/etc..), the approve the PLAN and make sure that all construction is done according to specifications - and, the also issue the Certificate of Fitness, which is needed before homes/buildings can be utilized. 

So, did the Local Government(Subang Jaya mayor Amirul Azizan Abd Rahim and the politically appointed Local Councillors, NOT democratically elected by the people), BREAK the law??? So, they should not be involved in the INVESTIGATIONS - it should be an INDEPENDENT Board of Inquiry or even Royal Commission of Inquiry possibly led by or set up by Minister Nga Kor Ming). The Selangor MB and the State Government of PH who appointed the possibly 'wrong' Mayor and Councillors may also be responsible?

Subang Jaya mayor Amirul Azizan Abd Rahim says a development project near the Putra Heights gas pipeline fire had secured legal approvals since 2022....The mayor said the project, which involves the construction of shop lots, has also secured all required permits in accordance with established regulations. .. Petronas had granted permission for the use of its ROW for the installation of Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) pipelines. However, the project itself is not located within the ROW.

The problem was whether there was strict compliance with the regulations to ensure safety, amongst others. as it is not uncommon, for some projects to be approved because of 'corruption', abuse of power, political 'connections' - so proper investigations, please....

The incident reminds us of the 1991 Bright Sparklers incident, where Twenty six people were killed and over a hundred people were injured in the disaster.[2] The explosion was strong enough to rip off the roofs of some local houses, and ended up damaging over 200 residential properties and was felt as far as 7-8 kilometers from the side. There was a RCI - and it also led to the development of new laws like the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994.

This gas pipeline 'disaster' is WORSE - as the pipeline is everywhere, and the 'accident' can happen anywhere along the pipeline - Time to REVIEW Standards, time to move farms/houses/buildings when the GAS Corridor may be expanded - to maybe be about 500 meters from the pipelines.

When, we talk about GAS Corridors - it is absurd that contractors can still enter the corridor and work on IWK, TNB or any structures for development's outside the corridor. The said Gas Corridor should be a 'secure' site, and no one should be allowed in - What was the security like? Was there CCTV? Security guards to prevent trespass, etc? This may have been an accident - but such dangerous gas pipelines can also be subject to sabotage and even attacks by enemy forces... 

ACT NOW - If the Prime Minister is not confident with Nga Kor Ming, then appoint some other Minister or personally take charge. Anwar should preferably not appoint any Minister or Chief Minister from his own party, PKR - best it be from some other PH Party, or even someone from the Opposition.

What is Parliament doing? Are they not going to INVESTIGATE this case - remember, their 'check and balance' role to prevent abuse by the PM and Federal government, and others?

RCI now for the Gas Pipeline Fires - and Mr PM, no quick 'forgiveness' for those involved - for the Financial Implication may be Billions of Ringgit - for the Pipeline runs everywhere, and there may be a need to ACQUIRE LAND, re-locate all those too close to the Gas Pipeline for the purpose of future safety, ...

Heard that some of the victims have been allowed to return to their HOMES - who is deciding this? All buildings/homes should be now considered NOT FIT - so, do a proper appraisal of the fitness to live and ensure safety. Extreme heat will have caused damage to electrical wiring, and possibly even the structure of the buildings - just because electricity can flow - does not mean that the wiring is OK and safe? This is NOT FLOOD - where we can send people home after flood recedes. Here, we are talking about EXPOSURE to very high heat, an explosion that have affected the foundation - this, in my opinion, is not a situation that can speedily be swept under the carpet...What do you think? 

 

 

Putra Heights fire: Project secured approvals in 2022 - Subang Jaya mayor
Published:  Apr 2, 2025 6:38 PM

Summary

  • Subang Jaya mayor Amirul Azizan Abd Rahim says a development project near the Putra Heights gas pipeline fire had secured legal approvals since 2022.

  • He says the project had also obtained Petronas’ permission to access its Right of Way for the installation of Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) pipelines, with the contractors involved approved and recognised by relevant authorities.

  • IWK denies any involvement in the fire, asserting that the developer and contractor bear full responsibility to ensure regulatory compliance.


ADS

A development project near the site of yesterday's gas pipeline fire in Putra Heights, Subang Jaya received legal approvals in 2022, said Subang Jaya mayor Amirul Azizan Abd Rahim.

The mayor said the project, which involves the construction of shop lots, has also secured all required permits in accordance with established regulations.

He also said that the project had obtained approval to access Petronas’ Right of Way (ROW), with the contractors involved being an approved panel recognised by the relevant authorities.

A Petronas ROW refers to an unobstructed corridor of land where the national oil and gas firm has been granted the legal right to operate, maintain and protect its pipelines.

"All necessary approvals were obtained in accordance with regulations. Petronas had granted permission for the use of its ROW for the installation of Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) pipelines. However, the project itself is not located within the ROW.

"Based on the documents and on-site assessments, all approvals are in place,” Amirul said, adding that the project is in the final stages of securing its certificate of completion and compliance (CCC).

“The project was initially scheduled for completion in December last year, but faced some delays due to the CCC approval process,” Bernama quoted him as saying.

Responding to allegations on social media, Amirul stressed that no official statement will be issued at this time as probes remain ongoing by the police, Petronas and other relevant authorities.

“At this stage, any claims spreading online should not be taken as official (statements). We will leave it to the investigating agencies to determine the facts,” he added.

IWK issues denial

In a separate statement, IWK denied any relation to the fire, asserting that the developer’s contractor constructed the pipeline.

ADS

“It is important to note that the laying of this pipeline is the developer’s responsibility for its own development.

“While IWK granted planning approval, the responsibility for regulatory compliance and authority approvals lies with the developer and its appointed contractor, which is not registered with IWK as claimed in media reports,” it said.

It added that it remains fully committed to assisting investigations, noting that it will defer to the project owners and relevant authorities for further action on the matter.

Earlier today, Selangor police chief Hussein Omar Khan told Malaysiakini that two construction companies are among those being scrutinised by authorities in relation to the recent disaster.

Since the gas pipeline fire broke out yesterday, creating a massive blaze visible from several kilometres away, allegations have been rife on social media that the incident was linked with earthworks tied to a construction project nearby.

Many social media users also shared visuals of the purported construction works, including a photo showing heavy machinery allegedly encroaching on land reserved for the pipeline. - Malaysiakini, 2/4/2025

Sarawak to gazette gas corridors to prevent pipeline fire incidents
Published on: Thursday, April 03, 2025
By: Bernama

Sarawak to gazette gas corridors to prevent pipeline fire incidents
KUCHING: Sarawak will officially designate gas corridors under the Sarawak Gas Roadmap (SGR) as a precautionary measure to prevent incidents like the recent gas pipeline explosion in Jalan Putra Harmoni, Putra Heights, Subang Jaya.

Sarawak Premier Tan Sri Abang Johari Tun Openg (pic) said the move aims to prohibit any construction within these designated zones, ensuring safety and mitigating risks associated with gas pipelines.

“We are concerned about potential hazards, as seen in Putra Heights. The gas corridor areas, including Samalaju, will be strictly controlled to prevent similar incidents. “Residential developments and public facilities will not be permitted in these zones,” he told reporters at Tupong state assemblyman Datuk Fazzrudin Abdul Rahman’s open house here today.

Abang Johari added that the state government is in a position to implement this measure, as the SGR initiative is still in its early stages.

He further explained that planners involved in the Sarawak Gas Roadmap project have proposed the creation of a gazetted gas corridor to ensure better safety measures.

“The key is to establish a proper buffer zone and designate a wide corridor for gas infrastructure. This will allow for early detection of potential hazards and significantly reduce risks in case of a fire or explosion,” he said.

The devastating gas pipeline fire on Tuesday caused towering flames and intense heat, destroying rows of houses and properties, including more than 300 vehicles.

As of 8 am today, 377 victims from 98 families are still staying at two temporary relief centres. Of these, 311 people from 84 families are at Dewan Masjid Putra Heights, while 66 people from 14 families are at Dewan Camelia, Subang Jaya City Council Multipurpose Hall.

According to the Ministry of Health, the number of victims receiving treatment remains the same as yesterday. Thirty-one individuals are in public hospitals in Putrajaya, Serdang, Klang, and Kuala Lumpur, while 33 others are at private hospitals. No fatalities have been reported.

In pictures: A tale of fire and loss

Over 500 residents from Putra Heights in Subang Jaya and the surrounding area were forced to move to temporary relief centres due to the huge blast which left many homeless.

Photographs by MalaysiaNow

The huge fireball that erupted on the morning of April 1 due to a leak in an underground gas pipeline in Putra Heights, Subang Jaya.


- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

 Malaysia Now, 4/4/2025

Saturday, April 05, 2025

TEMPLE issues - article on misguided claims??

 

4 misguided claims surrounding KL temple making way for Masjid Madani

Two lawyers set the record straight over allegations against the Devi Sri Pathrikalliamman Temple in the Masjid India area.

Ambiga Sreenevasan and N Surendran

We refer to the public controversy surrounding the Devi Sri Pathrikalliamman temple in Masjid India over the past week. 
 
Subsequent to the resolution of the matter on March 25, 2025, the public space continues to be flooded with allegations and counter-allegations, some in inflammatory language against the temple. These allegations are wholly unfair, unjust and plainly incorrect.

We wish to set the record straight on key allegations that give an erroneous impression of the status and legal rights of the temple. The allegations are set out below and answered in turn:
 
1. The temple is 'haram'
 
a. This is plainly wrong and disregards the entire historical background and circumstances of the temple in that location. The temple was built long before Merdeka and remained in substantially the same location, despite some rebuilding in 2008 under Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur's (DBKL) instructions to allow for an access road to be made. Those extensive renovations were carried out with the knowledge and consent of DBKL, which proves that the temple was never "haram", but was always recognised by the authorities as legitimate.
 
b. Furthermore, given the history the legal position is not as simple or simplistic as it is made out to be. When Jakel bought the land in 2014, it was subject to the rights of the temple which was situated on the land. This is why we had earlier asked for the sale and purchase agreement between Jakel and DBKL to be disclosed. The legal position is that rights have been acquired by and subsist in the temple by equity and estoppel. Hence, it is plainly wrong to suggest that the temple is not legal, or has inferior rights as compared to the new land owner who came in a mere 10 years ago. Had the matter proceeded to Court those legal issues, and the issues arising under the National Heritage Act 2005 and other legislation, would have been presented and vigorously argued on behalf of the temple.

c. Further, the court would have scrutinised the Jakel sale & purchase agreement to resolve the competing rights and interests. Such an examination was undertaken in the landmark "Taman Rimba case" where the Federal Court examined the history of the case and found that the involvement of the mayor in the sale of the land to the purchasing party and yet later granting a development order to the purchaser was indeed a conflict of interest. 

Similar issues would have arisen in this case if it had gone to court, which demonstrates that the legal position goes far deeper than has been portrayed and poses serious questions. 

2. "The temple had a windfall due to the market value of the land"

The temple had its beginnings in the area in the 1890s, when the land was not registered to anyone and was of little economic value. To now value the land at the current market value, and pronounce it as an exorbitant gain to the temple is malicious and ill-intentioned. Assessing the land by value per square foot is quite meaningless as it is a place of worship, and not a commercial investment. Further, the government has affirmed that the new land will be gazetted as a place of worship, which means by law it cannot be sold for profit. 
 
3. "The temple is a trespasser"

It has been repeatedly said that the temple is a "penceroboh" or trespasser, and is now being rewarded with land despite its own "wrongdoing". 

A trespasser is a person who enters someone’s land without consent. How can the temple be dubbed "trespasser" when they were on the land first, long before anyone else? Long before Malaysia was even formed or DBKL or Jakel had even existed. 
 
4. "The temple unreasonably insisted upon staying on in order to get valuable new land"
 
The issue that ultimately arose was not of the temple’s making. It was always the temple’s wish to remain at the present site, and welcome the new mosque as its near neighbour.

However, matters were precipitated by a letter dated Feb 21, 2025 from DBKL, giving the temple committee three days to agree to move to an alternative site, which was far away from the Masjid India area and the large community of worshippers the temple served. 

To have accepted that unsuitable site would have removed all trace of the historical presence of the temple in the Masjid India locality. It would have been the obliteration of a piece of Malaysian religious and cultural history and the extinguishment of a key facet of the multi-cultural make-up of Masjid India. Other sites offered had to be rejected due to fundamental unsuitability.

The new site 50m away from the current location was accepted by the temple on March 25 as it would remain among the community there and to some extent maintain the ethos and history of the temple.

We trust that the clarification we have provided will make clear some of the legal issues that arise in a case like this and will stop the misguided polemics that have multiplied around this issue.

Ambiga Sreenevasan and N Surendran are rights activists and lawyers. - Malaysia Now, 29/3/2025

Tuesday, April 01, 2025

Pipeline Fires - Investigate, Identify Those Responsible and make sure THEY(not Government) pay for the damages, compensation for Victims?

PETRONAS (a government linked company) must be SOLELY responsible for the damage caused by its PIPELINE fire...Why should the government use the peoples' monies?  

This is not like a natural disaster like FLOOD or earthquake - where it is OK use government funds. In this case, it must be PETRONAS(the corporate entity) that should bear the cost.

We are still in the DARK as to what caused the FIRE? That should be the priority of the government - a comprehensive investigation to investigate the cause of the FIRE...was it because of poorly maintained pipelines - Is the fault solely PETRONAS? or also some local government or government agency that failed to ensure proper construction and maintenance of the pipes... the BLAME for the disaster lies on someone?

Was it OLD pipes, due to be replaced but was not replaced wrongly by Petronas to save money? Did the government say OK?

Is Petronas wholly wholly owned by the government, or NOT - are there other owners too, being individuals and other corporation. Is Petronas owned in part by some foreign entity like BlackRock?? We need to know - because all the shareholders must foot the Bill and not just the Federal Government and/or State governments?

Who built the PIPELINE - some 'crony' or some trusted company? Who approved the construction, and ensured that the construction was according to SPECIFICATIONS and standards set by the government? 

WHAT happened and whose fault is the PRIORITY - and if it is PETRONAS or those who are responsible who should bear the cost of damages, and compensation of VICTIMS?

Anwar Ibrahim is the Finance Minister, hence wholly responsible for PETRONAS - should he not at least APOLOGIZE, or even RESIGN for this disaster - not try to get the government to take the blame, and use people's monies yet again - the TRUTH first.

It comes so soon after the 'Sapura Energy Scandal' where the government again 'bailed out' a company - by settling its debts to vendors. There too, no investigation - no identifying of the people responsible for the LOSS. Just pump in government money, which belongs to the PEOPLE not Anwar.

Debt-laden Sapura Energy Bhd (KL:SAPNRG) has received a lifeline in the form of a RM1.1 billion investment from the Minister of Finance (Inc) through its special purpose vehicle Malaysia Development Holding Sdn Bhd (MDH). - Edge, 11/3/2025

Same thing happened with FELDA or FELDA Settlers - again paid for Felda Settlers Debt - There too,. no explanation of how come the debt arose, no identification of the wrongdoers, no action against the wrongdoers...just settled the DEBT. 

"The RM8.3 billion settler's loans remained on the financial books of Felda and were not written off during the administration of the PN government or BN-PN government but rather on or after the formation of the unity government. - NST, 27/11/2023

This is not the way the GOVERNMENT should be run, or more importantly peoples' MONIES be used...

Foolishly Anwar Ibrahim is trying to push the blame to the Government? And we will pay the VICTIMS damages/compensation for the losses they suffered.  

Will the victims be tricked into signing some document that they accept these monies as full and final settlement, and surrender their right to sue or claim damages from Petronas and those responsible? 

The priority is to find out the TRUTH - what happened, and who is responsible? If needed, take criminal action against them, and maybe even civil action. Help the victims prepare their legal action against those responsible - which may at the end of the day also include the Local Government, State government and Federal Governments?

This was NO ACT OF GOD like a flood, earthquake or Tsunami... 

Even, in the FELDA and Sapura issue, there was not even a Government WHITE PAPER - basically the government's explanation, that usually is tabled in Parliament. So, money spent - but no explanation, identification of the 'culprits' and faults that caused the loss, etc..

NO RCI also - this is a lot of money of the people, more precious now as we are in debt RM1.5 Trillion or more...

I worry about Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, and his style of governance - his easy 'forgiving' of perpetrators, and no action taken against the wrongdoers... OH, its OK, the government will help... 

Govt, Petronas, to repair and rebuild properties damaged by pipeline fire

SUBANG JAYA: The federal government and national energy company Petronas, with the help of the Selangor government, will repair and rebuild properties damaged by today's gas pipeline blaze in Putra Heights.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim announced this after visiting the site of the now-extinguished blaze this evening.

"The responsibility of restoring this residential area, repairing or replacing (damaged properties), will be fully undertaken by us, The Federal Government and Petronas, in cooperation with the state government.

"There is no need to worry, it will just take a bit of time," Anwar told reporters at the site.

Anwar said rebuilding the area and affected properties may take around a year.

"It's not like a flood that sometimes takes a week or two (before people can return home)."

Anwar said the entire government machinery including the Housing and Local Government Ministry will meet to submit proposals on the way forward after discussions with residents groups.

In the meantime, the government will provide RM5,000 to those whose homes were destroyed, while those whose houses were damaged will receive RM2,500.

Anwar said if needed, the government and Petronas would look at the need to increase aid.

The fire was reportedly accompanied by several explosions that shook the ground. The flames also caused fires at several houses as the pipeline was located near residential areas.

Earlier today, a massive explosion and fire broke out at a Petronas gas pipeline in Putra Heights, Subang Jaya, causing widespread panic as huge flames shot up into the air.

The heat from the flames — felt kilometres away from the burning site — were said to have melted plastic and rubber objects within a wide radius of the pipeline.

A total of 145 people were injured and are receiving treatment in several hospitals.

In terms of property damage, 227 houses were affected, of which 78 were razed to the ground.

Meanwhile, 365 vehicles were damaged, including 275 cars and 56 motorcycles.

Firefighters managed to extinguish the fire at the source at 3.45pm. - NST, 1/4/2025

 

 

 

 

GENDER DISCRIMINATION - No Raya at home for MEN accussed of SOSMA listed offences, for LAW discriminate based on Gender, contrary to the Federal Constitution. Discrimination against women or men is GENDER DISCRIMINATION.

GENDER DISCRIMINATION - Most often it has been discrimination against WOMEN, and we opposed it. But, there are is also discrimination against MEN - and, it is also Gender Discrimination - and, as such, our position must be same on principle if we oppose discrimination based on Gender. We must oppose all forms of Discrimination based on Gender - there is no CHOICE...

GENDER DISCRIMINATION in SOSMA - Women can get BAIL but not men because the law says so, and this is DISCRIMINATION based on GENDER...

Section 13  Bail (SECURITY OFFENCES (SPECIAL MEASURES) ACT 2012)

(1) Bail shall not be granted to a person who has been charged with a security offence.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1)-

(a) a person below the age of eighteen years;

(b) a woman; or

(c) a sick or an infirm person,

charged with a security offence, other than an offence under Chapter VIA of the Penal Code [Act 574] and the Special Measures Against Terrorism in Foreign Countries Act 2015 [Act 770], may be released on bail subject to an application by the Public Prosecutor that the person be attached with an electronic monitoring device in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code.

So, ALL MEN in the GISBH case had their Bail application rejected because they were MEN, but all the 8 women that applied were released on Bail because they were WOMEN. The Court did try to use the exception of 'sick or an infirm person' but that could not be applied

Latifah, in allowing the applications by the eight women, said they fell under the exemption category stipulated under Section 13(2)(b) of Sosma.“There is no evidence in the (public prosecutor’s) reply affidavit to show the applicants have a risk of absconding. The affidavit only states that there is a very high probability the applicants will contact or meet with witnesses or victims and may try to influence them.

“However, the applicants have given an undertaking not to meet or contact the witnesses if bail is granted. “Taking this into account, the court exercises its discretionary power provided in the Act to grant bail to all the applicants,” she said.She ordered the women to report themselves at a nearby police station every two weeks, appear in court on every date set, and not to disturb any of the witnesses in the case.

The men could have been granted bail on the same conditions - but the BAR was their GENDER - they were MEN, not women.

Discrimination based on GENDER was effectively eliminated in Malaysia on 8/9/2001 when CONSTITUTION (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) ACT 2001 came into force, and thereafter NO more discrimination against citizens on the ground of GENDER in any law - and that reasonably includes SOSMA.

Article 8 Federal Constitution - Equality

(2) Except as expressly authorized by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender in any law or in the appointment to any office or employment under a public authority or in the administration of any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.

Thus, Section 13(2)(b) SOSMA is most likely ULTRA VIRES the Federal Constitution... and as such invalid.

In Malaysia, under the administration of criminal justice, other provisions that discriminate based on Gender is the judicial punishment of WHIPPING...

Section 289 Criminal Procedure Code - Sentence of whipping forbidden in certain cases

No sentence of whipping shall be executed by installments, and none of the following persons shall be punishable with whipping:

(a) females;

(b) males sentenced to death;

(c) males whom the Court considers to be more than fifty years of age, except males sentenced to whipping under section 376, 377C, 377CA or 377E of the Penal Code.

Women cannot be whipped but men can, is another case of Gender discrimination. 

The presumption that men are stronger than women, and can withstand being whipped is wrong. Even men are not the same, some are physically stronger and some are at higher risk of sustaining serious injury, even death, if they are whipped.

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) has urged the government to join other nations in taking a firm stance against torture, including corporal punishment, following the recent death of an inmate at Pokok Sena Prison, allegedly resulting from whipping. - NST, 22/10/2024

Whipping as a criminal punishment should have been abolished a long time ago. It is a form of corporal punishment that inflicts TORTURE, physical pain - that can inflict even permanent physical and psychological injury on persons, totally different from other judicial sentences like imprisonment, fines, community service. 

The whipping in the criminal administration of justice is very different from the whipping or caning in the Syariah legal system - where the purpose is shame or embarrassment, not torture, the breaking of shin, the drawing of blood, or damage to flesh, nerves, bones and body. 

Right to apply for BAIL in SOSMA is just that. It is not a guarantee that the application will succeed, and the accused will be released on BAIL. Whether Bail application succeeds or not is up to the Court(Judge) who will consider all relevant factors before deciding to grant BAIL or not.

Even, if BAIL is granted, many, mostly POOR or in the B40/M40 class, may simply not be able to get out on Bail, as they cannot afford the Bail amount, or they cannot get the needed sureties. Some, knowing this, do not even make any Bail applications - and choose to languish in detention until their trial is over - which in Malaysia now can take very very long at times. At present, NO POLICY to expedite trials to end fast, maybe in less than 6 months, for those in languish in detention because they are denied BAIL, or simply cannot meet the Bail conditions. Many a time, it is because of POVERTY.

Although, the High Court did not grant bail - some courts have. Blame lies with government and Parliament who should remove gender discriminatory provisions in law

Judicial commissioner Su Tiang Joo said this is because Section 13 of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma) is in breach of the gender equality provision under Article 8 of the Federal Constitution....“Such discrimination goes against the non-gender discrimination provision housed within the fundamental liberty of equality, which is expressly provided in Article 8(1) and (2) of the Federal Constitution,” he said in his judgment to grant bail for eight men facing charges for being members of an organised criminal group named “Kumpulan Viki Naidu”.- FMT, 11/11/2021

High Court dismisses bail bid by GISBH CEO, 12 others

-

However, eight women accused, including Nasiruddin Ali’s wife, Azura Yusof, are granted bail of RM40,000 each in two sureties.

Nasiruddin Mohd Ali
Shah Alam High Court judge Latifah Tahar said GISBH CEO Nasiruddin Ali and the 12 others are in stable health and able to carry out their daily activities independently. (Bernama pic)

PETALING JAYA:
The Shah Alam High Court today dismissed the application by Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings (GISBH) CEO Nasiruddin Ali and 12 others, facing charges of being members of an organised crime group, to be allowed bail.

Apart from Nasiruddin, 66, the others are Adib At-Tamimi, 33; Shukri Noor, 54; Afdaluddin Latif, 35; Sayuti Omar, 36; Fazil Jasin, 58; Dhirar Fakhrur Razi, 35; Mokhtar Tajuddin, 61; Fajrul Islam Khalid, 29; Abu Ubaidah Ahmad Shukri, 35; Shuhaimi Mohamed, 57; Hasnan Abd Hamid, 54; and Zahid Azhar @ Nadzri, 52.

However, the court allowed the application for bail by eight women – Nasiruddin’s wife Azura Yusof, 58; Nurul Jannah Idris, 29; Nur Jannah Omar, 33; Siti Salmiah Ismail, 58; Asmat @ Asmanira Ramly, 45; Siti Hajar Ismail, 52; Khalilatul-Zalifah Jamil, 28; and Mahani Kasim, 55.

Each of them was allowed bail of RM40,000 in two sureties.

Justice Latifah Tahar, in dismissing the bail applications by Nasiruddin and the 12 men, said they failed to meet any of the conditions provided for in Section 13(2) of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma) 2012.

She said seven of the applicants – Nasiruddin, Mokhtar, Hasnan, Fazil, Shuhaimi, Zahid and Shukri – were not under the age of 18 or within the category stipulated for exemption from detention in the section.

There was also insufficient evidence in their affidavits showing they had health problems.

“Most of the applicants reported having illnesses, including diabetes and high blood pressure, and said they were taking medication provided by the medical authorities.

“The latest health report provided by the medical officer at the Sungai Buloh prison clinic showed that the applicants’ health condition was stable.

“The applicants were able to walk on their own without any disability while attending health check-ups, showed no signs of difficulty breathing and could carry out their daily lives independently,” she said at the proceedings held at the Kajang prison complex.

She said there was also no evidence to show that the other six applicants were sick or infirm, and the latest health report showed them to be in good condition and stable, without any chronic diseases, and able to carry out their daily activities independently.

Latifah, in allowing the applications by the eight women, said they fell under the exemption category stipulated under Section 13(2)(b) of Sosma.

“There is no evidence in the (public prosecutor’s) reply affidavit to show the applicants have a risk of absconding. The affidavit only states that there is a very high probability the applicants will contact or meet with witnesses or victims and may try to influence them.

“However, the applicants have given an undertaking not to meet or contact the witnesses if bail is granted.

“Taking this into account, the court exercises its discretionary power provided in the Act to grant bail to all the applicants,” she said.

She ordered the women to report themselves at a nearby police station every two weeks, appear in court on every date set, and not to disturb any of the witnesses in the case.

The group was charged in the Selayang sessions court on Oct 23 last year with being members of an organised crime group at a premises in Bandar Country Homes, Rawang, between October 2020 and Sept 11, 2024.

They were charged under Section 130V(1) of the Penal Code, which carries a prison sentence of between five and 20 years upon conviction. The case was later transferred to the Shah Alam High Court for trial. - FMT, 24/3/2025

Suhakam calls for an end to corporal punishment after inmate's tragic death

KUALA LUMPUR: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) has urged the government to join other nations in taking a firm stance against torture, including corporal punishment, following the recent death of an inmate at Pokok Sena Prison, allegedly resulting from whipping.

In a statement, Suhakam said that several neighbouring Asean countries, such as Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Cambodia, had ratified the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).

"In light of the recent tragedy at Pokok Sena Prison, we call on the government to immediately abolish all forms of corporal punishment, including those enshrined in the Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Prisons Act, and related legislation.

"Additionally, corporal punishment in schools, which normalises violence against children, must also be outlawed to protect the mental and physical well-being of future generations," Suhakam said.

The commission highlighted that corporal punishment, including whipping, violates fundamental human rights and human dignity, causing severe physical and psychological harm that contradicts international human rights standards.

Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights state that no one shall be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment.

"Moreover, Article 1 of CAT defines torture as 'any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted.' Corporal punishment clearly falls under this definition and should be regarded as inhumane and degrading," Suhakam said.

Suhakam has also called for a full, independent, and transparent investigation into the incident to ensure accountability for those responsible.

However, it said that addressing this incident alone was insufficient; the country needed to reform its criminal justice system and abandon outdated practices like corporal punishment in favour of rehabilitative approaches that respected human dignity.

Recently, media reports highlighted the case of an inmate's death at Pokok Sena Prison following caning, which was attributed to a blood infection.

The Prison Department confirmed this in a statement, saying the matter was verified through an initial autopsy.

The inmate had complained of feeling unwell on the ninth day after the caning, which occurred on Sept 25.

The 33-year-old inmate was sentenced to 33 years in prison along with 12 strokes of the cane following the abolition of mandatory death sentences in Malaysia, with his sentence reviewed on Sept 10. - NST, 22/10/2024

Denying bail to men is gender discrimination, says judge

-

Court says women are as equally capable of committing security offences under Sosma as men.


Free Malaysia Today
The Ipoh High Court ruled that Section 13 of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma) is in breach of the gender equality provision under the Federal Constitution.

IPOH:
The High Court here has ruled that men are equally entitled as women to get bail though charged with security offences.

Judicial commissioner Su Tiang Joo said this is because Section 13 of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma) is in breach of the gender equality provision under Article 8 of the Federal Constitution.

The Sosma provision states bail will be denied to those facing security offences but the exceptions are when a person is aged below 18, a woman, or a sick or infirm person.

Su said Section 13 discriminated against men from being granted bail when such a right is given to women.

Free Malaysia Today
Judicial commissioner Su Tiang Joo.

“Such discrimination goes against the non-gender discrimination provision housed within the fundamental liberty of equality, which is expressly provided in Article 8(1) and (2) of the Federal Constitution,” he said in his judgment to grant bail for eight men facing charges for being members of an organised criminal group named “Kumpulan Viki Naidu”.

The eight were D Enthiran, D Ganesan, P Velmurugan, K Ganesan, S Vinodh, S Anandh Kumar, G Kesavan and K Prabu.

If convicted they could be punished with imprisonment of up to 20 years.

Su said “woman” in the Sosma provision must include “men” and they are entitled to apply for bail.

The judge said women are as equally capable of committing security offences as men and any discrimination would not qualify as a rational or reasonable classification.

Su said Sosma, a procedural law enacted under Article 149 to check subversion and acts prejudicial to public order, could remove four fundamental rights but not the right to equality.

Su imposed RM30,000 bail on each of the men in two sureties and ordered that they be fitted with an electronic monitoring device to keep tabs on their movements.

They are also to surrender their passports to the court and are prohibited from communicating with any of the witnesses until the disposal of the trial. - FMT, 11/11/2021