Monday, September 24, 2018

RESOLUSI PERSIDANGAN NASIONAL TANAH ORANG ASLI KE-10 JKOASM HAK TANAH DAN PERLINDUNGAN HUTAN PENTING BAGI ORANG ASLI!

Attachment Report Bee-ch.doc added.
Conversation opened. 1 read message.

Kenyataan Media

RESOLUSI PERSIDANGAN NASIONAL TANAH ORANG ASLI KE-10 JKOASM
HAK TANAH DAN PERLINDUNGAN HUTAN PENTING BAGI ORANG ASLI!

20 - 23 September 2018
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia


Dalam Persidangan Nasional Tanah Orang Asli ke-10 telah dihadiri oleh perwakilan Orang Asli seramai 117 orang dari 7 negeri di bawah Jaringan Kampung Orang Asli di Semenanjung Malaysia (JKOASM), dengan sokongan oleh Pusat Komas dan perwakilan dari Sabah dan Sarawak. Kami juga ingin mengucapkan terima kasih kepada rakan-rakan seperjuangan seperti SUHAKAM, Majlis Peguam  dan NGO-NGO yang lain. Pada Persidangan yang mengambil masa selama 4 hari ini turut dihadiri oleh yang berhormat YB Timbalan Menteri KKLW/PLB tuan Sivarasa Rasaiah sebagai perasmi persidangan. Pengarah JAKOA Perak sebagai mengantikan Tuan Ketua Pengarah yang tidak dapat hadir, wakil Jabatan Hutan, peguam, pesuruhjaya SUHAKAM dan juga YB Senator OA tuan Bob Manolan. Sepanjang persidangan kami telah bersama-sama mengupas dan mengulas perubahan dan perkembangan isu-isu semasa OA terutamanya pengiktirafan tanah OA, pembangunan dan lain-lain. Amat mendukacitakan nampaknya sepanjang tempoh ini apa yang diperjuangkan oleh JKOASM berkenaan isu-isu OA di atas tidak ada perubahan. Malah keadaan masih amat mendukacitakan dan memerlukan usaha rundingan, perbincangan antara kerajaan dan Orang Asli harus berterusan.

Dari pihak Orang Asli baik melalui JKOASM atau pertubuhan Orang Asli yang lain, usaha-usaha untuk mendapatkan pengiktirafan wilayah tanah adat dari pemerintah telah dibuat dengan pelbagai cara seperti; Inkuiri Nasional Hak Tanah oleh SUHAKAM, penubuhan taskforce di bawah Jabatan Perdana Menteri,  penubuhan Kabinet Tanah Orang Asli dan  oleh komuniti melalui penghantaran memorandum, surat-menyurat, perbincangan, mesyuarat, penyerahan peta komuniti, membawa kes ke mahkamah dan akhirnya ada negeri yang terpaksa mengadakan blockade sebagai jalan terakhir seperti kes di Gua Musang.. Malangnya setakat ini maklumbalas dari pihak kerajaan terdahulu berkenaan tuntutan tersebut adalah kerajaan perlu mengkaji semula, walhal perkara ini telah banyak dikaji oleh pelbagai pihak baik akademik ataupun badan berkanun. Pada pandangan kami pihak kerajaan hanya perlu membaca, memahami dan melaksanakan dapatan dan syor-syor yang dalam Inkuiri Nasional Hak Tanah, SUHAKAM.

Selepas 60 tahun bersedih, Orang Asli sekarang mempunyai harapan baru dengan adanya kerajaan PH baru yang dengan jelas menyatakan komitment dan janji untuk mengembalikan hak tanah adat dan menghormati maruah dan jatidiri Orang Asli. Kita bersedia untuk bekerjasama dengan kerajaan PH menyempurnakan apa yang termaktub dalam manifesto PH PRU 14 khusus nya janji nombor 38.

Apa yang amat membimbangkan kami adalah wilayah tanah adat OA terus-terusan diceroboh oleh pelbagai pihak malah ada sesetengah kampung sudah hilang wilayah tanah adat mereka, penempatan yang tinggal cukup-cukup hanya penempatan.

Dengan itu, sempena persidangan ke-10 JKOASM ini dan berdasarkan kepada manifesto kerajaan Pakatan untuk membela dan memberi pengiktirafan tanah wilayah adat OA maka kami telah sebulat suara berharap supaya Kerajan PH dapat menunaikan beberapa perkara berikut:

  1. Sebulat suara menggesa kerajaan PH melaksanakan kesemua 18 syor dalam Laporan Inkuri Nasional Mengenai Hak Tanah Orang Asli/Asal SUHAKAM. www.SUHAKAM.org.my/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Ringkasan-Laporan-Inkuari-Nasional.pdf

  1. Menunaikan janji dalam manifesto PH dalam PRU ke 14 untuk mengiktiraf hak OA terutama hak tanah, hak penentuan diri, pendidikan dan pembangunan serta merasa selamat.

  1. Mengalu-alukan kerajaan meneruskan usaha perundingan yang berpandukan Iizin-MABT dengan melibatkan semua lapisan kepimpinan OA untuk mencapai kata sepakat dalam hal memberi pengiktirafan tanah OA dan pembangunan OA.

  1. Beberapa perkara yang telah diputuskan oleh kerajaan terdahulu seperti memberi hanya tapak rumah untuk masyarakat OA keseluruhannya hendaklah tidak diteruskan dan mendapat persetujuan terlebih dahulu dari komuniti setempat memandangkan setiap komuniti dan suku kaum mempunyai kedudukan dan status keluasan dan keperluan tanah yang berbeza.

  1. OA tidak menuntut tanah seluruh negara diberi kepada kami tetapi hanya apa yang kami warisi dari nenek moyang kami kepada anak cucu kami sahaja kerana kebanyakan tanah yang kami tuntut adalah tanah yang kami miliki secara tradisi secara turun temurun bukan sesuatu kawasan yang tiada kena mengena dengan kami.

  1. Mengalu-alukan penekanan terhadap konsep tanah dan wilayah adat Orang Asli dan mengesa  kerajaan menerima dan mengiktirafkan konsep tersebut.

  1. Menyokong penuh syor ke-17 dalam Inkuiri Nasional SUHAKAM mengenai Hak Orang Asli/Asal yang menonjolkan tanah sebagai nadi kepada identiti Orang Asli memandangkan hubungan rapat antara Orang Asli dengan tanah mereka yang bukan sahaja sebagai sumber kepada ekonomi mereka tetapi untuk menjamin penerusan kerohanian, budaya dan identiti mereka sejajar dengan Perkara 11 Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang memperuntukkan kebebasan beragama.

  1. Pemeliharaan kepentingan tanah Orang Asli juga penting untuk pembangunan dan kesejahteraan Orang Asli. Oleh yang demikian maka ia amat memerlukan tindakan afirmatif di pihak Kerajaan untuk mengiktirafkan hak tanah dan wilayah adat Orang Asli secara nyata.

  1. Sejajar dengan konsep tanah dan wilayah adat Orang Asli dan kepentingan tanah kepada Orang Asli seperti dinyatakan di perenggan (4) di atas, kami mengesyorkan supaya pengiktirafan tanah Orang Asli dilakukan melalui Kaedah Hakmilik bersama/komunal di mana Kuasa Dimiliki Oleh Komuniti, mengurus, mengguna dan memulihara tanah tersebut dipegang sepenuhnya oleh Orang Asli. 

  1. Pengiktirafan hakmilik komunal yang dicadangkan juga harus memberi jaminan dan pelindungan serta pemuliharaan hak asasi kaum perempuan dan kanak-kanak ke atas tanah dan wilayah adat dari pelbagai aspek.

  1. Sehubungan ini, Akta 134 dan akta lain yang berkaitan hendaklah dipinda untuk memasukkan peruntukan bagi tujuan merealisasikan perlaksanaan kaedah tersebut. Sekiranya perlu, satu undang-undang baru hendaklah digubal bagi tujuan ini.

  1. Mengesyorkan seksyen 3 Akta 134 dipinda untuk tujuan memberi kuasa menentukan siapa Orang Asli itu dipegang oleh Orang Asli sendiri dan bukannya Menteri dan Jabatan Kemajuan Orang Asli JAKOA.

  1. Menuntut supaya Kerajaan, Pusat dan Negeri menuruti prinsip Izin-MABT dalam segala perbincangan/urusan/perlaksanaan mengenai undang-undang/dasar dsbnya berkaitan hak tanah Orang Asli serta lain-lain perkara yang melibatkan kepentingan Orang Asli.

  1. Menyokong penuh syor supaya peranan JAKOA dikaji semula memandangkan Jabatan ini telah gagal untuk menangani isu tanah Orang Asli dan juga atas sebab gagal membawa pembangunan kepada Orang Asli sebagaimana yang sepatutnya.

  1. Menuntut supaya hak tanah dan wilayah adat Orang Asli dimasukkan secara jelas dan nyata di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

  1. Menuntut Kerajaan-kerajaan Negeri agar segera merealisasikan peruntukan Perkara 8(5)(c) bagi melindungi tanah wilayah adat Orang Asli.

  1. Menyokong penuh satu suruhanjaya bebas ditubuhkan untuk Orang Asli bagi tujuan di atas sebagaimana yang disyorkan oleh SUHAKAM.

18.    Wilayah tanah adat harus diiktiraf berpandukan peta komuniti yang dibuat sendiri oleh       komuniti Orang Asli sendiri.

19.    Wilayah tanah adat harus diiktiraf melalui peta komuniti yang dibuat sendiri oleh komuniti Orang Asli sendiri atau dibincangkan dengan komuniti Orang Asli setempat sebelum kerja-kerja pengukuran kawasan dijalankan oleh pihak berkenaan.
Dengan semangat baru satu negara yang berkobar-kobar, kita OA ingin bersama-sama dalam membina Malaysia baru yang sudah lama di ingini oleh seluruh rakyat Malaysia. Masyarakat OA tidak seharus nya menunggu-nunggu lagi untuk penyempurnaan hak–hak OA yang selama ini telah diabaikan. Waktu nya sekarang: Masyarakat OA, sebagai sebahagian masyarakat Malaysia, harus dihormati dan diiktiraf. Laungan OA tetap sama “Tanah Itu ada lah kehidupan kami” dan “tiada tanah tiada budaya, tiada budaya tiada bangsa”.

Disediakan oleh : 
Jaringan Kampung Orang Asli Semenanjung Malaysia (JKOASM)
Tijah Yok Chopil (017 7264746) - Pengerusi  JKOASM

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friday, September 21, 2018

2 more extrajudicial killing by police that need to be investigated HOME Minister?

Wow - yet again 2 persons shot dead by police ...and one gun recovered. That means police shot dead one person who did not have a gun...or was not shooting at them... 

The duty of the police is to arrest people...not shoot and kill. 

And guess what, the police now allege that these 2 were involved in 15 robberies...well, if the police knew...why were these people picked up by the police before this? Was there any notice that the police were looking for these 2 'foreigners'...

REALLY, THERE MUST BE INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION ABOUT THIS SHOOTING INCIDENT THAT RESULTED IN THE DEATH OF 2 PERSONS ...Was the killing justified? ...

 

While MADPET appreciates the fact that the new Pakatan Harapan federal government is in the process of establishing an Independent Police Complaints-Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) as mentioned by the Minister of Home Affairs Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin on 22/5/2018, steps need to be taken now to immediately investigate these police ‘shoot to kill’ incidences. Delay is not an option.


MADPET proposes that the Minister immediately appoint an interim Task Force, to immediately investigate these cases. Further, the Minister and/or the government should maybe order that inquests (or inquiries into the deaths) be done for all such cases, where police shooting resulted in deaths.

 

Another man with a machette shot and killed by police? Speedy INDEPENDENT inquiry needed?

Extrajudicial Killings Need Speedy Independent Investigations - 6 Reported Shot To Death By Police After Pakatan Harapan Became Government.

 

 

 

 

Two foreigners linked to 15 robberies shot dead by police

Last update: 21/09/2018
 
KULAI, Sept 21 (Bernama) -- Two foreigners suspected of committing a spate of robberies in Johor were shot dead by the police in Bukit Batu, Jalan Sedenak here early today.

Johor police deputy chief Datuk Mohd Kamarudin Md Din said in the incident at 4.15 am, the suspects were cruising suspiciously in a car when policemen in a patrol car ordered them to pull over.

Instead, the driver of the car rammed into the police vehicle and tried to sped away before it skidded.

“At that juncture, the men began firing several shots in the direction of the policemen,” he told reporters when met at the scene.

Mohd Kamarudin said the police returned fire, killing both of them and seized a revolver, a machete, face mask and gloves.

“We believe we have solved about 15 robbery cases which occurred in Johor, especially in Johor Bahru, Pontian, Kulai and the surrounding areas. The latest case was in Pontian yesterday,” he said.

Mohd Kamarudin said the deceased, in their 30s, were believed to have been part of a bigger group, adding that the police were tracking down the remaining members of the group.

Meanwhile, he said about 50 robbery cases reported this year in Johor were linked to foreigners.

-- BERNAMA

Thursday, September 20, 2018

MACC to publish asset declarations of cabinet, Harapan MPs in October? Yes, TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY at last

Temptation is great when in power, and there is always the risk that Ministers and MPs of the Pakatan Harrappan may wrongly take advantage to enrich themselves, their family and friends...but when the PUBLIC is also monitoring, it can deter such abuse, and that is WHY ASSET DECLARATION MUST BE PUBLIC? Income(all sources of income), Assets owned, interests in companies...

When it was revealed recently that UMNO MP's assets was about RM2 billion...one wonders how many other UMNO-MPs have become so rich...surely it not just the salaries/allowances of MPs/Ministers that lead to such wealth accumulation...

Thankfully, MACC just announced that these ASSET DECLARATION will be available online, accessible to the public from next month - October 2018.

Asset declarations of Pakatan Harapan cabinet and its MPs will be made available on the MACC website from next month. MACC deputy chief commissioner (prevention) Shamsun Baharin Mohd Jamil said this was to ensure that all Harapan leaders were free from corruption. “It will be the first time that the asset declaration will be uploaded on MACC’s portal for public viewing.

How wealthy they are is not of concern? BUT what is of concern is whether they become even more rich after this ...We will now know salaries/allowances of MPs and Ministers ...and also other legitimate sources of income. So, we can monitor.

One-off asset declarations will not help the public monitor - what we need is REGULAR Declarations, and the best would be every 6 months( or at least annual declarations)...

Declaring just to the PM or the MACC was never enough ...the Malaysian people should be the monitors to ensure that there is no abuse in power to enrich oneself...

 

 

 

MACC to publish asset declarations of cabinet, Harapan MPs

Bernama  |  Published:  |  Modified:
   
Asset declarations of Pakatan Harapan cabinet and its MPs will be made available on the MACC website from next month.

MACC deputy chief commissioner (prevention) Shamsun Baharin Mohd Jamil said this was to ensure that all Harapan leaders were free from corruption.

“It will be the first time that the asset declaration will be uploaded on MACC’s portal for public viewing.

“The declarations will also be sent to the Prime Minister's office and the copied to MACC,” he said after appearing as a guest on Bernama Radio talk show programme “Ala Carte Pagi” today to introduce the MACC 360 talk show programme.

Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was previously reported to have said that all members of the administration, including ministers, their deputies and political secretaries were required to declare their assets to the Prime Minister.

Dr Mahathir, when announcing the move, said the information received would “not be hidden”, instead it would be submitted to agencies responsible for corruption prevention.

Shamsun Baharin said the MACC had yet to get all the copies of asset declarations from the Prime Minister's office as the government’s MPs were given three months after their swearing in to do so.

"The period is still in force and on Oct 1, we will see those who have declared their assets,” he said.

Meanwhile, on the MACC 360 talk show, it’s broadcast would begin on Sept 22 on Bernama Radio.

"There will be 13 episodes, to be aired Saturday from 10am to 12pm.

“We will bring a senior MACC official as a guest to talk on issues related to corruption prevention every week," he said.

He said the MACC 360 programme would also serve as a platform for the commission and Bernama in disseminating information related to corruption prevention.

"Although there is a MACC My Anti-Corruption Channel (MACC.fm), its access is not as widespread compared to regular radio, so this collaboration with Bernama is to reach out to more listeners.

"This is because corruption is a national issue and we need to get support from all parties as the community itself will be impacted if corruption is allowed to continue," he said.

Wednesday, September 19, 2018

Anwar, time to investigate, prosecute and fair trial for all false witnesses, bad prosecutors and judges?...travesty or miscarriage of justice?

Many, including Anwar Ibrahim and now our King, alleges that the administration of justice had been abused resulting in a 'travesty or miscarriage of justice'.


“He said: I pardoned you not because of the legal allocation under my power alone, but because I am confident you are innocent, Anwar, and there was travesty or miscarriage of justice. I had to do my duty as a King, to stop this injustice towards you since 1998 till 2018....“You know what was my response? ‘Your Majesty, this is a very serious statement from you. You are now saying that the judiciary, attorney general’s prosecution, investigation, was all compromised, to fix me up.’...“He said: Yes, I’m telling you the truth. You want to, you can tell tonight in your lecture,” Anwar told a packed hall at the Corus Hotel. - Malay Mail, 16/9/2018

Time has come for a thorough investigation concerning the 2 convictions that led to Anwar Ibrahim being convicted and sentenced to prison. 

The persons who fabricated evidence and lied to the court by giving false evidence, which may also include police officers, and other witnesses need all to be investigated, identified and prosecuted if they did wrong. 

The prosecutors who failed in their duties - all will now need to be identified and prosecuted for their wrongdoings. 

The judges that were 'compromised'  - Such judges that allowed external factors affect their judicial functions really ought to be identified and removed...and prosecuted.

They must all be charged and tried in an open court. Internal disciplinary procedures resulting in fines, transfers and resignation(termination) simply will not do - because the people need to know and all accused deserve a fair trial.

Shafee, the special prosecutor, has now been charged for receiving 'dirty money' from Najib, and some alleged breaches of income tax law. That really do not address the issue at all about Anwar's trials, do they? If the allegations are about Anwar's trials, then the charges must be directly related. Some other charges about some other matters really won't do.  

Maybe, Shafee did his job as special public prosecutor correctly and as required - after all, it is judges that decide on the guilt or innocence, and all that a prosecutor does is present the case and arguments on behalf of the prosecution, and the accussed lawyers do the same for the accused.


We really do not need anymore such 'dirty' judges, prosecutors and police officers in our administration of justice system...How many others have fallen victim to such persons - how many have been imprisoned (or still in prison including death row?), and how many have been executed?

ANWAR'S PARDON still does not settle the problems?
Anwar may have been pardoned by the Yang Di Pertuan Agung but as we all know, that does not overturn the finding of guilt by the courts. 

It matters not what the King believes, as what Anwar has recently mentioned. 

Anwar may make a police report, or some other may do so, which will begin the process of identifying and bringing all these persons to justice. 

For Malaysians, this doubt need to be dispelled one way or the other. 

Anwar personally may now take the position to let bygones be bygones, and leave the punishment to God BUT personally, for the good of Malaysia, especially our Administration of Justice system, the wrong-doers needed to be identified and made to pay for his crimes.

'LET BYGONES BE BYGONES - I FORGIVE THEM' - Well, then the doubts remain. There were really no wrongdoings, and Anwar's conviction was right. Was the reason why Anwar did not want to pursue to demand actions against 'false' witnesses and 'compromised' judges and prosecutors could be because all these assertions about 'miscarriage of justice' are really false, and all Anwar's allegations was simply just to win favour with the people in his quest to be MP...and maybe later our Prime Minister?

SO YES - a thorough investigation, followed by criminal action against all these witnesses, police officers, prosecutors and judges is a MUST - there is no option.

By the way, Anwar publicly stated what the Kind told him. It really will be good if the King confirms this conversation really did happen, and that is exactly what he said. 

REVIEW OF THE JUDGMENTS THAT LED TO CONVICTIONS - not enough?

I believe Anwar may be attempting to review the judgments that led to his convictions, and this is GOOD but really this is not good enough...because even a reversal of a guilty conviction really means that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Anwar is guilty...there will still be doubt as to whether he did what he was alleged to have done.

BUT - the prosecution of persons that gave 'false' evidence, prosecutors that did wrong, and judges that were compromised will once and for all expose the real truth ... 

When this happen, I hope Anwar will not do what he did about the case of a former IGP giving him a 'black eye', where before the court gave its judgment, Anwar 'settled'. That judgment would have helped so many others who have been tortured by police and/or enforcement officers in getting justice ...and also may have been the standard that set the kind of compensation/damages that such victims can get.

This time - prosecution and the open trial must be up to the end ...with a Court Judgment ..




Anwar: Agong always believed I was innocent


Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim speaks during the ‘Meet Anwar’ dialogue in Kuala Lumpur September 16, 2018. — Picture by Razak Ghazali
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim speaks during the ‘Meet Anwar’ dialogue in Kuala Lumpur September 16, 2018. — Picture by Razak Ghazali
KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 16 — Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim claimed today that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Muhammad V has always believed in his innocence, ever since the first sodomy conviction.

The incoming PKR president said that this was conveyed to him by the King himself, when Anwar was given a royal pardon, following his release after Pakatan Harapan (PH) won Putrajaya on May 9.

“I am thankful to the Agong because he executes [justice] strictly,” Anwar said at a dialogue session with youths here.

“He said: I pardoned you not because of the legal allocation under my power alone, but because I am confident you are innocent, Anwar, and there was travesty or miscarriage of justice. I had to do my duty as a King, to stop this injustice towards you since 1998 till 2018.

“You know what was my response? ‘Your Majesty, this is a very serious statement from you. You are now saying that the judiciary, attorney general’s prosecution, investigation, was all compromised, to fix me up.’

“He said: Yes, I’m telling you the truth. You want to, you can tell tonight in your lecture,” Anwar told a packed hall at the Corus Hotel.


On May 16, just a week after PH took over, Anwar was granted a full pardon by the Agong at Istana Negara.

The royal pardon meant that Anwar could return to politics immediately, and run for election. Anwar is now seeking to contest the Port Dickson by-election.

He was first charged for sodomy and corruption in 1998 by then and current prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. The Agong was then Tengku Muhammad Faris Petra, Kelantan crown prince.

Anwar was subsequently charged and jailed a second time for sodomy in 2014, during then prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s administration. Sultan Muhammad V was then the deputy Agong.

The former deputy prime minister reiterated today that PH will also continue to uphold and protect Malaysia’s constitutional monarchy system.

“So, for us, for the current PH government, is to abide by the principles of constitutional monarchy, parliamentary democracy. We will maintain the constitutional monarchy system,” he said. - Malay Mail, 16/9/2018

PH - Printed Detailed Bank Statements, Amanah Saham, Bills must be sent to Consumers by post?

During the UMNO-BN rule, many banks suddenly stopped sending monthly bank statements to customers, and informed customers to get their statements online. Even the Bank books are being done away with - so even when we go to the bank to update our Saving Account Books - banks are saying that the service is no longer available.

Now, this was done to all customers - not just customers who were then already doing online banking, which generally are members of the younger generation. There was even no agreement sought from bank customers before this was done. When we went to certain banks to get our statements, customers were 'forced' to agree to this getting of bank statements online...This was must unjust.

For the older generation (maybe those 45 and above) and for the poor who do not have a computer and internet(or a printer) to be able to print out this statements, check it and keep a copy for record purpose, this is a major problem...

For PESARA(pensioners), now they cannot even check their bank statements to ensure that pension has come in, and that no monies have been 'stolen' or 'disappeared' from their accounts.

POLICY CHANGES REQUIRED FOR CUSTOMERS OF BANKS

- Banks must continue to send printed detailed bank statements, especially to those above 45 and the poor especially MONTHLY bank statements. For workers too, they need the statement to verify that their wages have been banked in, rental have been banked in, and even to ensure that suppliers of utilities and services(that convinced some to agree to these service providers to automatically take money out of accounts to settle bills by some e-pay scheme)

- People need to know that they are not being cheated or that all is correct with regard their bank accounts. They must know that no one has 'hacked' their accounts and taken out monies wrongly.

- Ordinary computers, will not have the security aspects, making it easier for anyone to hack and get needed passwords, etc which may result in them being able to take out monies from people's accounts.

- Many chose not to use 'internet banking'...and rather still prefered to use ATMs to take out their monies and personally go pay their bills are still so many as evidenced as payment points like Pos Laju, TM, etc 

- At the very least, if banks are having problems sending printed monthly detailed statements, then at the very least DETAILED printed statements should be send once maybe every 3 mnonths..

AMANAH SAHAM - Likewise, the different unit trusts must be required to send printed STATEMENTs at least once every 6 months, to inform consumers the current standing of their accounts including the 'interest' gained.

There have been rumours circulating that some service providers may also STOP sending monthly BILLS - this again is not right. BILLS should be send to consumers if payment is required. With Bills, payment will be made at Pos Laju or other premises who now accept payment from service providers.Most of the time, people may ask friends to help pay the Bills. Hence, sending to an email is not practical, as how many Malaysians have printers to print these Bills.

What this service providers are planning is probably to 'force' people to agree to some 'e-pay' system, where the consumer agrees to the service provider directly taking monies from personal accounts of the consumer....to probably avoid possible cut in services...This is not right...This is not just?

For example if TM stop sending Bills, TM also will cut phone services and will not restore the services until the Bill is paid. Problem is that 'No BILL came' --and sending the Bill by SMS or emails will not help - for majority are not so computer savvy...especially the older generation, maybe those 40 or over..

The PH government must stop any such moves to stop sending printed BILLS. 
 
The argument that may be used by some of this Banks, Unit Trusts and service providers is that this is to protect the environment - to become a paperless society >> but the problem is that most in Malaysia do not have a computer and/or printer, or are even computer savvy...  

Many people still find it most difficult reading online - they prefer to 'print out' and read. 

THIS IS THE MONEY OF ORDINARY PEOPLE - THEY MUST BE PROVIDED DETAILED BANK STATEMENTS, DETAILED UNIT TRUST STATEMENTS...AND CERTAINLY DETAILED BILLS THAT NEED TO BE PAID...

A summary of money coming in and going out does not help - because people want to check details - how much 'pension', 'wages', share dividends received on this date for what shares, how much rent received, how much they paid to TM or CELCOM...etc Details are important to ensure that money is not 'secretly' siphoned out...

ACCOUNTABILITY demands such detailed statements be sent to all in Malaysia on a regular basis...people may even be willing to pay 'minimal fees' to receive such statements...[But for existing customers of banks, it is not right to suddenly start imposing such fees...maybe for new bank customers..]

An Agreement between consumer and bank cannot simply be altered by one party - and this is what Banks did, without the explicit informed consent of the Consumer. This is what happened during the UMNO-BN reign...

As it is Banks are today giving such low interest for savings (even fixed deposits) and charging so much interest for loans...

HACKING is a reality, and it is easy to hack personal computers/smartphones. Even  government and bank computers have been hacked. So, if someone hacks your computer and gets access to your accounts and starts taking out the people's money, and without monthly 'DETAILED BANK STATEMENTS', many will not be aware for a very long time that money is being taken out wronglyby some 'crook'...Even ATMs have increased security - Detailed printed statements are really needed...

DATA PROTECTION - Sometime ago, I received a letter from an Insurance Company asking me to agree that pay-outs be directly banked into my Maybank Account. [What was strange is that I do not recollect ever giving the said Insurance Company my Bank account number - How did a private Insurance company get my bank account number?

HELP CONSUMERS - PRINTED DETAILED BANKING STATEMENTS SHOULD BE SEND TO ALL BANK CONSUMERS, BEST EVERY MONTH. FOR UNIT TRUST LIKE AMANAH SAHAM, PRINTED DETAIL ACCOUNTS SHOULD BE SEND AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH.

BILLS FOR UTILITIES MUST CERTAINLY BE SEND TO CONSUMERS - DETAILED PRINTED VERSIONS.
 

Education minister must not head any university - 62 Groups(12/9/2018)


Education minister must not head any university
Gabungan Bertindak Malaysia  |  Published:  |  Modified:
   
LETTER | On the proposed appointment of Education Minister Maszlee Malik as the president of International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) and the ensuing developments, we the following undersigned civil society organisations hold the following positions:

Our education minister should not head any university to avoid conflict of interests. An education minister who is concurrently the president of IIUM would be caught in a split of loyalty towards the ministry and the university as the two have legitimate institutional interests that are and should not be identical.

On the one hand, the minister should not favour any university based on personal linkages as he must be fair to all higher learning institutions. On the other hand, the IIUM president must be prepared to fight for the best interests of the university or universities in general, which the education ministry may not necessarily agree with.

Such a distinction of roles is pertinent for the healthy functioning of both the ministry and universities and a shared leadership in one person is bound to compromise such check-and-balance and undermine the legitimate interests of either if not both parties.

We salute the education minister’s pledge to liberate, reform and advance our universities towards excellence but all these require legal and organisational reforms, not management control.

Starting with the repeal of Universities and University Colleges Act 1971, the minister should work to end power concentration, non-transparency, unaccountability, authoritarianism and cronyism in our tertiary institutions and not replace old academia warlords with himself or his appointees.

The argument that the education minister doubling up as IIUM president will save RM500,000 annually as Maszlee said he will work without a salary is completely misplaced as the check-and-balance between the education ministry and universities is not an item for cost-cutting.

If this logic is to be applied across the board, then all cabinet ministers would have to helm many government-linked institutions and corporations. This would likely result in the minister’s attention and energy split too thin and likely result in poor leadership and management of both the ministries and the government-linked bodies.

It is time to cease our indulgence for supermen and superwomen. It is also time to cease overburdening people and concentrating power in a few as cost-cutting measure. In particular, the education sector must be allotted adequate budgets to invest in new leadership and avoid overburdening and concentrating of power in a few.

The past precedents of two sitting education ministers, Anwar Ibrahim and Najib Abdul Razak, holding the IIUM presidency, which reflected the old Malaysia practice that personal linkages ensures development, must not continue in the New Malaysia which the education minister helped to install on May 9.

In a clear appreciation of new realities, the prime minister-in-waiting, Anwar Ibrahim, has set an excellent example by declining the offer of the IIUM presidency and this should be emulated by the new education minister.

The education minister should honourably decline the appointment of the IIUM presidency by sultan of Pahang as the constitutional head of IIUM. He can certainly recommend a towering academic/intellectual who can enhance autonomy and stature of the university, both at home and in the world, without a ministerial office.

Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad has made it clear that the minister's appointment is not cast in stone. A graceful decline by the education minister will allow a smooth return to the drawing board.

The arrest of two IIUM students on Sept 8 night for protesting the education minister’s appointment as the IIUM president, the first student arrests since May 9, is much regretted. We note the contradicting accounts by the education minister and the police on the arrests.

We hereby appeal to the education minister's wisdom for a decision that would uphold the freedom of universities from undesirable influence and political interference. We believe this is a cause the education minister himself identifies with especially when he was the subject of such occurrences in the past.

The above stand is endorsed by:
1. Agora Society
2. Angkatan Mahasiswa Universiti Malaya (Amum)
3. Angkatan Warga Aman Malaysia (Wargaaman)
4. Bersih 2.0
5. Centre for Malaysian Chinese Studies (Huayan) 华研
6. Centre to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4)
7. Challenger Malaysia
8. Challenges Foundation
9. Childline Malaysia
10. Community Action Network (CAN)
11. Demokrat Universiti Malaya (DUM)
12. Engage 愿景工程
13. Federation of Malaysian Indian Organisation (Prima)
14. Gabungan Persatuan Guru-Guru Sekolah Cina Malaysia (Jiaozong) 教总
15. Global Organisation of People of Indian Origin, Malaysia (Gopio Malaysia)
16. Greenfriends Sabah
17. Health Equity Initiatives
18. Justice for Sisters
19. Knowledge and Rights with Young people through Safer Spaces (KRYSS)
20. KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) 隆雪华堂
21. Kumpulan Aktivis Mahasiwa Independent (Kami)
22. LLG Cultural Development Centre (LLG) 林连玉基金
23. Malaysian Atheists and Secular Humanists (Mash)
24. Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism & (MCCBCHST) 马来西亚五大宗教理事会
25. Malaysian Indians Progressive Association (Mipas)
26. Malaysian Indians Transformation Action Team (Mitra)
27. Malaysia Muda
28. Malaysian Youth Care Association (Prihatin)
29. Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet)
30. Merdeka Education Centre 独立教育中心
31. My Petaling Jaya (MyPJ)
32. MySkills Foundation

33. National Human Rights Society (Hakam)
34. Negeri Sembilan Chinese Assembly Hall (NSCAH) 森华堂
35. North South Initiative (NSI)
36. Oriental Hearts & Mind Study Institute (Ohmsi)
37. Partners of Community Organisation, Sabah (Pacos Trust)
38. Pergerakan Tenaga Akademik Malaysia (Gerak)
39. Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara (Aliran)
40. Persatuan Bahasa Cina Universiti Malaya 马来亚大学大华文学会
41. Persatuan Bekas Siswah Universiti dan Kolej Di China, Msia (LiuHua) 马来西亚留华同学会
42. Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor (Empower)
43. Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor Dan Wilayah Persekutuan (Permas)
44. Persatuan Rapat Malaysia (Rapat)
45. Persatuan Sahabat Wanita (PSW)
46. Sabah Women's Action Resource Group (Sawo)
47. Sahabat Rakyat 人民之友
48. Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia (SABM)
49. Selangor and Kuala Lumpur Hokkien Association Youth Section 雪隆福青
50. Sisters in Islam
51. Society for the Promotion of Human Rights, Malaysia (Proham)
52. Suaram 人民之声
53. Suara Siswa Universiti Malaya (SSUM)
54.Tamil Foundation Malaysia 淡米尔基金
55. Tenaganita
56. Teoh Beng Hock Trust for Democracy赵明福民主基金会
57. Tindak Malaysia (TM)
58. United Chinese School Committees Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong) 董总
59. United Chinese School Alumni Associations of Malaysia (Ucsaam) 校友联总
60. University of Malaya Association of New Youth (Umany) 马大新青年
61. Women Development Organisation Malaysia (WDO)
62. Youth Era

Source: Malaysiakini, 12/9/2018
 

Tuesday, September 18, 2018

PH fumbles? 42(out of 56) plead guilty to amended charge? To go home after 1 year plus detention? Just Repeal SOSMA?

Pakatan Harapan government's(or AG's) strategy of amending charges, to facilitate releases of persons in detention during trial by reason of unavailability of the right to bail because they were charged with offences, listed as security offences under SOSMA, fails and is still UNJUST. SOSMA should be repealed. See earlier post:-  Hanipa and Tommy Thomas - Ignorant about SOSMA? Delay means langusihing without Bail until trial over?
The amended charges were read out to 56 out of the 57 men as one of them had his charge withdrawn by the prosecution and given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal. Forty-two of them pleaded guilty, while 14 claimed trial to the amended charges. - Sosma charge revised – 42 freed(Star)

After waiting more than 1 year  in detention for their trial to start, ONLY 42 persons pleaded guilty to the amended charge, which carried a maximum 3 year sentence if convicted. If one pleads guilty, the sentence normally will be one third(1/3) the sentence, i.e. in this case it will be 1 year or less. 

Many, who have already spend more than a year in prison, would have jumped at the opportunity, even if innocent, and pleaded guilty as it means they can go home.

What is interesting is that 14 did not plead guilty to the amended charge, and claimed trial. Now, that the charge has been amended, they will also now be entitled to BAIL. 

The fact that 14 did not plead guilty raises the possibility that maybe all are really innocent, and they have all been falsely charged. 

DID THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR'S PLAN FAIL? If they all pleaded guilty, then no accusation of wrongly charging people...In any event, will they be compensated by the government for the 'additional unnecessary time' they spend in prison?

SOSMA REALLY MUST BE REPEALED - the amending of charges to 'encourage' guilty pleas so that victims of SOSMA could be speedily released from detention is just not fair or just. 

SUSPECTS AND ACCUSSED persons must always be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. 

The right to BAIL is a right of all accused persons. When after a trial, a person who has languished in detention is a victim of grave injustice. Worse still, in Malaysia, there is no provision for COMPENSATION for such accused persons for his loss of liberty.

We all know that the police can arrest people because they 'SUSPECT' them of committing a crime...and so many get released after investigations...

We all know that a person can charged for a crime because the police/prosecution believe they are guilty...but all this is irrelevant for ultimately only the Judge after a full trial decides whether a person is guilty or not.(Even then judge's can be wrong, because an Appellate Court may overturn the conviction). Now, so many cases where people have been charged of an offence, the courts decide otherwise...i.e. that they are NOT GUILTY.

Recently, we saw media reports with headlines that read,'42 walk free after a year’s detention under Sosma' and 'Sosma charge revised – 42 freed'. It creates confusion. There are no offences in the SOSMA Act, so no one can be charged under SOSMA. SOSMA merely list certain offences in other Acts as being 'security offences'


SOSMA defines as security offence in the First Schedule of the Act  as being :-

a) ALL offences under Chapter VI, VIA and VIB of the Penal Code;     

b) Offences under Part IIIA Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007; and 

c) Offences under Special Measures Against Terrorism in Foreign Countries Act 2015.

Thus, when anyone is charged of committing any of these listed 'security offences'(as SOSMA defines), the case will be tried at the High Court, and Bail is denied by law to the accused. This means such accused person will have to languish in detention until their trial is over. 


 13  Bail (SOSMA)



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

Now, these 57 persons were originally charged under Section 130V of the Penal Code for being a Member of an organized criminal group, which is an offence under Chapter VIB of the Penal Code, and as such are 'security offences according to SOSMA - so they were denied bail, and had to stay in detention until their trial was over.

Remember if you are charged in court for certain offences, that SOSMA list as 'security offences', by law, you are denied bail. The Prosecution cannot offer bail. Neither can the judge. Parliament decided that BAIL will not be available - thus ousting the judge's ability or discretion to grant bail.

Whether BAIL is to be granted really should be up to the Judge alone, after hearing the prosecution and accused persons submission. This is one of the reason why SOSMA must be repealed. Parliament through SOSMA has wrongly removed judicial discretion in bail applications.

Over 1 year in detention before trial starts?

The 57 have apparently been in detention(in prison) for over a year. 

One wonders why their trial is not over by now. Normally, courts will prioritize and speed up trials of accussed persons who are detained without bail. In some cases, they have no right to bail like those charged for such 'security offences', and in other cases where they may be entitled to bail - but simply cannot afford the bail money.

BAIL is a right that should be accorded to all accussed persons. WHY? Because simply because all persons should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Bail is denied because some may be 'flight risk' but then nowadays courts can hold on to their passports, and could also impose other conditions. If someone tries to tamper with witnesses or evidence, bail could be denied. If someone, fails to turn up in court, bail could be revoked.

Now, if an accussed person is denied bail(or cannot afford bail), justice demands a speedy trial ...

PLEADING GUILTY does not mean that one is really guilty?

PLEADING GUILTY - Well, if one were to go to court, it is not uncommon for many people to simply plead guilty BUT this really does not mean that they are really Guilty. Many, especially the poor.

AMENDING CHARGES AFTER MORE THAN A YEAR IN DETENTION

The original charge against the 57 was under Section 130V of the Penal Code(see below for this section), i.e. 'being a Member of an organized criminal group', and, if convicted carried the sentence '...imprisonment for a term of not less than five years and not more than twenty years...'

On the day, fixed for the start of the trial, the charge was amended to Section 43 Societies Act 1966, i.e. being a member of an unlawful society, which if convicted carried the sentence '...imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to a fine not exceeding five thousand ringgit or to both..'

According to media report, 42 pleaded guilty and 14 pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. For 1, the case was withdrawn and he was given 'a discharge not amounting to an acquittal.' 

The 2 sections referred above are as follows...

130V  Member of an organized criminal group(Penal Code)

(1) Whoever is a member of an organized criminal group shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than five years and not more than twenty years.... 

43  Penalties on member of unlawful society(Societies Act 1966)

 Any person who is or acts as a member of an unlawful society or attends a meeting of an unlawful society or who pays money or gives any aid to or for the purposes of an unlawful society shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable, on conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to a fine not exceeding five thousand ringgit or to both.

SOSMA should be repealed immediately. Pakatan Harapan's delay to review the law is unacceptable - because obviously, they already should have reviewed the law when the committed to the repeal of SOSMA in their Election Manifesto. Some of the other promises, could be delayed because only after becoming government did they realise that our financial position was worse that what they believed before...That reason cannot really be used for the delay in repealing the bad laws like SOSMA, POCA, Sedition Act, etc...

See related earlier posts:-



Hanipa and Tommy Thomas - Ignorant about SOSMA? Delay means langusihing without Bail until trial over?

ANWAR finally speaks out on SOSMA - weakly calling for 'remedial action' not strongly calling for REPEAL?


Mohd Azis Jamman '...firmly believes that the law[SOSMA] is good' - REMOVE HIM FROM CABINET?

Siapa arahkan SOSMA digunakan untuk kes Maria? AG Apandi Ali kena nasihat kerajaan buat yang betul?


  

42 walk free after a year’s detention under Sosma

Pix for representational purposes only. — AFP
KAJANG: Forty-two suspected members of the notorious Gang 360 Devan, who were detained under the Special Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012, walked free today after a special court at Kajang Prison Court Complex sentenced them to a year's jail from the date of arrest. 

The 42 men, aged between 23 and 63, pleaded guilty to an amended charge under Section 43 of the Societies Act 1966. They were detained for more than a year.

Another 14 claimed trial after the charges were read out before High Court judge Datuk Abdul Halim Aman. One was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal as the prosecution team withdrew the charge against him.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Muhammad Iskandar Ahmad informed the court that the prosecution had amended the charges from Section 130V of the Penal Code to Section 43 of the Societies Act 1966.

Under the amended charge, the men faced a maximum of three years imprisonment or RM5,000 fine, or both, for being members of an unlawful society.

They were previously charged for being members of an organised criminal group and could have been jailed between five and 20 years if found guilty.

"I hope all of you have repented your crimes. And many of you are senior citizens or have many to support. You are lucky to be offered the amended charge and not an alternative charge," the judge said in his ruling.

The special court convened here in Kajang Prison for the first time in Peninsular Malaysia due to strict security measures, before this a similar special court convened at the Kota Kinabalu Central Prison to hear the Lahad Datu intrusion in 2016.

As part of the security measures, the family members were brought here via a bus and no communication devices were allowed into the room where members of media and family watched the live proceedings.

Gang 360 Devan is said to be a splinter of the notorious Gang 36, which has been linked to a spate of violent crimes, and even high profile murders. - Sun Daily, 6/9/2018

Sosma charge revised – 42 freed


KAJANG: A total of 42 men – originally accused of being members of organised crime group “Geng 360 Devan” – were freed after a special court sentenced them to a year’s jail to run from the date of arrest on a reduced charge of being members of an unlawful society.

“During mitigation, most of the accused were remorseful and said they won’t take part in such activities again. If this is indeed sincere, then this is for their own good,” said High Court judge Justice Abd Halim Aman.

The 42 men were part of a group of 57 who were originally charged under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma).

The 57 men, aged between 23 and 63, appeared before a special court for Sosma offences at the Kajang Prison Complex yesterday.

This is the first time the special court convened in the peninsula, due to strict security measures as Sosma offences involve national security and the number of accused persons involved in the case is overwhelming. 
Yesterday was initially fixed for the first day of trial.

However, DPP Muhamad Iskandar Ahmad told the court that the prosecution was amending the charges.

“The prosecution wishes to amend the charges from Sosma to Section 43 of the Societies Act 1966,” he said.

According to the amended charge sheet, the men were accused of joining “Geng 36”, which is an unlawful society, at MV Empayer Sdn Bhd at No. 1-B, Jalan Perniagaan Masria 1, Pusat Perniagaan Masria, Batu 9, Cheras, between 2013 and 2017.

The offence under the Societies Act for being members of an unlawful society carries a maximum three years’ imprisonment or a maximum fine of RM5,000 or both upon conviction.

The men were initially charged under Section 130V of the Penal Code, which carries imprisonment ranging from five to 20 years if convicted.

The amended charges were read out to 56 out of the 57 men as one of them had his charge withdrawn by the prosecution and given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal. 

Forty-two of them pleaded guilty, while 14 claimed trial to the amended charges. 

Justice Abd Halim then gave a discharge not amounting to an acquittal to the 14 men on the original Sosma charges.

He said they would still be held temporarily to await instructions from the prosecution team.

“The magistrate will take over the cases (of the 14 men) after this,” he said.

A special room for live viewing of the proceedings was set up for family members and the media.

Each of the accused persons was allowed the attendance of one family member.

Only 10 reporters were allowed to cover the proceedings viewable through a projector and a screen.

Those attending the proceedings in the separate room were subjected to a body search. They were also​ not allowed to bring in any mobile or recording​ device.

Previously, a special court for Sosma offences was convened at the central prison in Kota Kinabalu for the Lahad Datu intrusion case in 2016. - Star, 7/9/2018