Kabinet Malaysia telah memutuskan menghapuskan hukuman mati...ini adalah satu tindakan yang wajar dan adil. Ini keputusan rakyat/kerajaan - bukan keputusan beberapa keluarga mangsa kes bunuh saja. Yang membunuh dalam undang-undang Islam ada pilihan tidak dihukum mati - prinsip 'Diyat'(pampasan).
Hakikat kini adalah undang-undang yang mengenakan hukuman mati di Malaysia adalah kesalahan dalam undang-undang biasa atau 'sekular' - bukan undang-undang Islam atau Syariah.
Undang-undang Islam, bila mengenakan hukuman Islam, bila ada peruntukan untuk hukuman mati, ia juga harus melalui Kaedah Pentadbiran Jenayah Islam, dan juga memastikan keperluan keterangan Islam terpakai.
Di setengah bidangkuasa, bila ada undang-undang Islam memperuntukkan hukuman mati tetapi tidah ada Kaedah Pentadbiran Islam(Islamic Criminal Procedure Code/CPC) atau undang-undang Keterangan Islam, undang-undang ini tidak digunakan. Sebagai contoh, di negara Brunei.
The first phase of the Syariah
Penal Code was enforced on May 1, 2014. His Majesty added that before
the second phase can be implemented, the country has to wait for another
12 months after the CPC can be gazetted. "Now two years have gone by, but
the CPC is not gazetted yet and the vetting process has not even
started. This means that after it is gazetted in 2016, we have to wait
another year, until 2017 before the second phase can be implemented.”
Justeru, tindakan menghapuskan hukuman mati dari undang-undang 'sekular' di Malaysia adalah betul - tidak sama sekali bercanggah dengan Islam atau agama lain.
Untuk pengetahuan am, di dalam undang-undang Islam yang mengenakan hukuman mati untuk kes bunuh(murder), ia juga memberi pilihan yang dikenali sebagai 'Diyat' - di mana ini jika keluarga mangsa pembunuhan sedia menerima pampasan...[Mungkin, adil bagi yang kaya tetapi yang miskin mungkin tak mampu membuat pembayaran pampasan]..
Diya (Arabic: دية; plural diyāt, Arabic: ديات) in Islamic law,
is the financial compensation paid to the victim or heirs of a victim
in the cases of murder, bodily harm or property damage. It is an
alternative punishment to qisas (equal retaliation). In Arabic, the word means both blood money and ransom, and it is spelled sometimes as diyah or diyeh.It only applies when victim's family want to compromise with the guilty party; otherwise qisas applies.
Islam secara jelas hanya menetapkan hukuman mati untuk kesalahan khusus. Tak ada hukuman mati untuk kes pengedaran dadah, dsb.
Justeru, bila parti politik Islam saperti PAS tidak membantah, saya memahami pendirian ini. Kini bila Presiden PAS tiba-tiba meminta agar keputusan memansuhkan hukuman mati dikaji semula, saya cukup hairan..
Hadi Awang juga nampaknya ada silap - beliau nampaknya bercakap tentang 'hukuman mati mandatori' saja kerana keputusan kabinet kini adalah pemansuhan keseluruhan 'hukuman mati' dalam undang-undang sekular/biasa di Malaysia.
Hukuman Mati Mandatori - ini adalah SATU-satu hukuman yang ditetapkan oleh Parlimen yang harus dikenakan apabila seseorang didapati bersalah melakukan jenayah tersebut. Ini bererti Hakim, setelah bicara dan dapati sidituduh bersalah dirampas kuasa mengenakan hukuman wajar/adil berasaskan fakta, halkeadaan dan perkara lain dalam kes tersebut. Ini sebenarnya juga TIDAK demokratik kerana Parlimen(legislature) sepatutnya tidak menceroboh apa yang sepatutnya fungsi badan kehakiman. Prinsip 'Separation of Powers' dicabul.
ANTARA SEBAB MENGAPA HUKUMAN MATI HARUS DIMANSUHKAN
- Risiko seseorang yang tidak bersalah akan dibunuh oleh Kerajaan
Hakim juga manusia dan boleh melakukan kesilapan. Polis boleh juga silap atau juga menyembunyikan fakta/maklumat dari Mahkamah termasuk juga membekalkan Mahkamah dengan maklumat/keterangan palsu. Pendakwaan dan juga peguam sidituduh mungkin melakukan kesilapan. Peguam sidituduh pun boleh melakukan silap - jangan lupa yang miskin tidak ada peguam sendiri...hanya peguam lantikan Mahkamah.
Berapa kali sudah Mahkamah Rayuan/Mahkamah Persekutuan membenarkan rayuan dan mengatakan Mahkamah Tinggi silap? Kemungkinan Mahkamah tertinggi pun silap adalah juga besar? Adakah kita sedia membunuh seseorang yang didapati bersalah kerana ada kemungkinan bahawa dia yang sudah dibunuh mungkin seorang yang sebenarnya tidak bersalah. Satu kes sedemikian berlaku di Taiwan beberapa tahun yang lepas - kerajaan telah meminta maaf dan juga membayar pampasan TETAPI sedih orang yang kini diketahui tak bersalah sudahpun dibunuh oleh kerajaan.
Silap kerajaan demokratik adalah silap semua rakyat yang memilih kerajaan tersebut. Justeru, yang melakukan kesalahan menyebabkan kematian seseorang itu adalah kesalahan kita semua...bukan sahaja kerajaan atau Mahkamah. Adakah anda rakyat Malaysia sanggup menanggung kesalahan bunuh seseorang yang mungkin bersalah atau tidak wajar dilupuskan nyawa?
- Jika lakukan satu kesalahan - wajarkah seorang dibunuh? Atau lebih wajarkah dia dihukum dan diberi peluang insaf dan kemungkinan teruskan kehidupan dalam masyarakat? [Jika pimpinan politik 'merampas' wang rakyat - kemiskinan menyebabkan seseorang melakukan jenayah mengakibatkan kematian - siapakah yang bersalah? Siapakah yang harus dihukum mati?]
- Untuk seorang kanak-kanak, adakah lebih baik untuk anak jika bapa, ibu, adik-beradik, ahli keluarga dibunuh digantung ...atau dipenjarakan(iaitu masih hidup)? Ya, hukuman bunuh bukan sahaja melibatkan sidituduh tetapi juga mengakibatkan seluruh keluarga dan kenalan beliau...
- Hukuman Mati adalah hukuman yang 'tua' - kini, ada penjara dan kehidupan dalam penjara adalah sangat teruk dan memedihkan kepada mereka yang dipenjarakan.... Yang bersalah tetap akan dihukum...tetapi tak perlu kita membunuhnya, di gantung sampai mati di Malaysia...[Pembunuh ramai(77 orang) di Norway pun merayu dihukum mati tetapi Mahkamah memerintahkan dipenjarakan ...]
- Hukuman Mati Mandatori atau Hukuman Mati nyata tidak ada kesan mengurangkan insiden jenayah tersebut dalam masyarakat Malaysia. Beberapa tahun dahlu, Menteri sendiri mengakui hakikat ini mengenai kes pengedaran dadah yang terus bertambah. Saya percaya keadaannya sama dengan kes bunuh dan juga kes-kes lain yang kini ada hukuman mati sebagai hukuman jika disabitkan jenayah berkenaan. Kerajaan PH harus mendedahkan bilangan kes bunuh dan jenayah lain - kerajaan UMNO-BN menyembunyikan bilangan hanya kini dedahkan 'kadar jenayah'(bukan bilangan khusus) saperti dulu.
- Ramai yang menyatakan bahawa hukuman mati harus dikekalkan untuk kes serius saperti 'rogol dan bunuh' dan kes bunuh yang teruk. Ini isu prinsip? Tetapi adakah kita pasti seratus peratus bahawa seseorang yang dituduh telah melakukan jenayah tersebut? Adakah dia melakukan jenayah tersebut kerana 'suka' atau kerana diarahkan atau untuk wang kerana kemiskinan - baru ini pun dilapurkan kes bunuh diri kerana kemiskinan? Jika sebab seseorang melakukan adalah kemiskinan, bukankah itu menjadi kesalahan kita semua - kerajaan kerana tak memastikan bahawa semua orang sekeluarga ada cukup untuk hidup dan tak perlu buat salah untuk dapat wang untuk menampung hidup diri dan keluarga?
- Ramai kita terpengaruh dengan TV dan wayang Amerika yang mengalakkan budaya 'balas dendam' - bukan budaya insaf, kemaafan, pemulihan dan peluang kedua? Adakah kita mahu ikut sahaja budaya sedemikian...atau adakah kita akan pegang teguh kepada budaya keprihatinan, kemaafan ...budaya Malaysia? Di dalam rancangan janaan Amerika, kita lihat juga tindakan polis 'memalsukan' keterangan demi memastikan seseorang itu disabitkan - ada juga dipamerkan sebagai 'OK' untuk bunuh sahaja seorang yang dianggap bersalah tanpa dibicarakan? Jangan kita di Malaysia buta-buta sahaja menyerap budaya Amerika sebegini ...Jika anak lakukan kesalahan, kita tak bunuh saja?
- Ada yang mengatakan kekalkan hukuman mati kerana sehingga kini, tak ada kenalan atau ahli keluarga mereka sendiri dihukum gantung ...atau sudah digantung. Sekiranya, ahli keluarga sendiri kena...maka posisi mungkin berbeda? Senang sekali membuat komen kerana fikir kesan perundangan ini akan tidak sama sekali dihadapi oleh diri sendiri atau keluarga....Sama juga pendirian setengah mengenai banyak isu termasuk isu gaji minima, kemiskinan...YA - tapi sebagai seorang ahli komuniti Malaysia, tak kira sama ada
Dahulu bila saya bersama dengan peneroka bandar berjuang menghalang rumah mereka dimusnahkan, komuniti kampung terbabit itu akan bersama berjuang TETAPI kampng setinggan sebelah yang belum lagi menghadapi ugutan rumah diroboh tak keluar menyokong walaupun kemungkinan tak lama mereka pun akan menghadapi isu sama? Ini merupakan sifat ramai...sifat tidak prihatin kepada ketidakadilan yang menimpa orang lain...
Sama juga dengan isu ISA dan penahanan tanpa bicara, ramai tak ambil berat kerana memikirkan mereka tidak akan sama sekali menjadi mangsa undang-undang tak adil itu ---TETAPI di Malaysia, ramai telah mula mengambil berat dan menentang undang-undang sedemikian dan akhirnya ISA di mansuhkan tetapi sedih masih ada undang-undang tanpa bicara lagi, yang perlu kita berusaha untuk memansuhkan undang-undang tidak adil sedemikian.
Kini isu adalah HUKUMAN MATI - dan amat bangga bila kerajaan BARU kerajaan PH telah memutuskan mahu menghapuskan hukuman ini, yang mengambil nyawa seseorang. Jangan lupa bahawa hukuman penjara lama adalah hukuman yang lebih 'teruk' berbanding dengan hukuman mati. Sakit gigi berterusan adalah lebih teruk bagi mangsa berbanding dengan sakit sekali beberapa hari bila gigi dicabut. Mungkin perbandingan yang tak bagus...???
Bila hukuman sesuatu jenayah adalah hukuman mati - penjenayah mungkin juga akan juga sanggup mengelak dengan membunuh saksi dan sebagainya...kerana tahu jika ditangkap, beliau akan dibunuh oleh kerajaan...
Bila hukuman mati dimansuhkan, kadar jenayah kemungkinan akan turun. Ini adalah apa yang berlaku di Canada, negara-negara Eropah Barat dan banyak negara lain bila hukuman mati dimansuhkan..
The removal of capital punishment from the Canadian Criminal Code in
1976 has not led to an increase in the murder rate in Canada. In fact,
Statistics Canada reports that the murder rate has generally been
declining since the mid-1970s. In 2009, the national murder rate in
Canada was 1.81 homicides per 100,000 population, compared to the
mid-1970s when it was around 3.0.
- Adakah orang lain terlibat dalam pembunuhan atau jenayah tersebut, yang masih belum diketahui dan dibawa kepada keadilan? Ini adalah situasi untuk kes pengedaran dadah - sebab yang ditangkap biasanya 'orang delivery' yang menerima bayaran untuk bawa masuk dadah...saja. KES bunuh pun ada yang sama - contohnya kes Altantuya - adakah mereka yang melakukan pembunuhan diarah oleh orang lain? bertindak atas arahan orang lain? Jika kita bunuh sahaja 2 yang ditangkap, pasti yang lain terlepas gitu sahaja? [Jika jenayah itu mengenakan hukuman mati, apa guna yang ditangkap mendedahkan maklumat memastikan semua lain juga ditangkap dan dihadapi muka keadilan? - Jangan lupa bahawa mereka yang dituduh melakukan jenayah yang ada hukuman mati akan 'berdiam diri saja' (kerana ini tindakan bijak - apa guna kata saya bunuh kerana dibayar, kerana ini hanya akan membuktikan kesalahan yang akan menyebabkan hukuman mati? Justeru, tak pelik bila Sirul, selepas habis semua rayuan Mahkamah dan selepas beliau cabut diri lari ke Australia, mendedahkan bahawa ada lain yang terlibat]..
Kes Canny Ong - Ahmad Najib sudah mati digantung. Adakah semua orang yang terlibat telah dikenalk pasti, ditangkap atau dituduh? Adakah Ahmad Najib bersalah atau wajar secara adil digantung mati? Ada banyak keraguan masih wujud mengenai kes pembunuhan tersebut? Lihat rencana di bawah ini - The Truth Related About A.Najib Murder Canny Ong Death – Is It Related To VVIP?
Sep 24, 2016 - PETALING JAYA: After spending 11 years on death row and having exhausted all his appeals, Ahmad Najib Aris (pic) was finally executed for the 2003 murder of Canny Ong.
Yang berpendirian bahawa hukuman mati harus dikekalkan sering merujuk kepada kes pembunuhan teruk, kes rogol dan bunuh, ...TETAPI ini isu prinsip...hukuman mati harus dimansuhkan keseluruhannya...kerana dalam kes paling teruk pun, hukuman perlu tetapi bukan hukuman mati.
Di Norway, sebuah negara di mana hukuman mati telah dimansuhkan, baru ini berlaku insiden di mana seorang telah membunuh ramai orang...Pembunuh itu juga meminta dihukum mati ...
The right-wing fanatic said he doesn't fear death and that militant
nationalists in Europe have a lot to learn from al Qaeda, including
their methods and glorification of martyrdom. "If I had feared death I would not have dared to carry out this
operation," he said, referring to his July 22 attacks — a bombing in
downtown Oslo that killed eight people and a shooting massacre at a
youth camp outside the Norwegian capital that killed 69.
Insiden ini membuka semula perbincangan sama ada hukuman mati harus kembali TETAPI akhirnya kerajaan Norway dan rakyat bertekad berasas prinsip membuat keputusan tidak mahu kembalikan hukuman mati ini. Malangnya, perkara sama membawa kesan berlainan di India...
Di Malaysia pun kita ada kes LAHAD DATU - dan kita telah hukum mati beberapa orang(tetapi mereka sebenarnya tidak dibuktikan membunuh sesiapa pun - serta 'bos' tak ditangkap dan dihukum)..
Nampaknya, ramai pembunuh mahu dibunuh tidak mahu dipenjarakan - tetapi isu hukuman ada perkara yang diputuskan rakyat dan negara, bukan juga ahli keluarga mangsa dibunuh saja, dan yang paling adil dan wajar, sealiran dengan sifat kemanusian, sifat keprihatinan, harapan seseorang itu insaf, kepentingan kanak-kanak, keadilan, hasrat bertobat dan peluang kedua,...hukuman wajar tak sama sekali hukuman mati...SYABAS KERAJAAN BARU KERAJAAN HARAPAN yang berani menghapuskan Hukuman Mati di Malaysia...
Kerajaan UMNO-BN sudah berdekad-dekad mengkaji isu memansuhkan hukuman mati, tetapi kurang berani bertindak kerana mungkin takut RAKYAT(segulungan) akan tidak suka dan mungkin akan kehilangan sokongan semasa pilihanraya akan datang.
Tentangan perubahan dilakukan oleh kerajaan satu perkara yang biasa yang sudah lama wujud adalah perkara biasa TETAPI pimpinan politik harus menunjukkan kepimpinan - sanggup membawa perkara yang baru...dengan kepercayaan bahawa rakyat akhirnya akan dapat menerima perubahan sedemikian adalah adil dan baik...PRU akan datang pun lama lagi...4 tahun lebih ...dan sekiranya perlu, apa-apa undang-undang baru pun boleh dipinda semula pada masa depan, jika perlu... ISA pun boleh dibawa balik...
JUSTERU, adakah kerajaan Pakatan Harapan kini berani melakukan apa yang wajar - hapuskan hukuman mati? Adakah PAS, UMNO dan ahli politik pembangkang juga akan ikut prinsip dan nilai, bukan hanya buta-buta membangkang apa saja kerajaan mahu, dan sedia menyokong pemansuhan hukuman mati, yang juga adalah dalam undang-undang sekular di Malaysia? Jangan lupa Hadi Awang, dalam RUU355, tidak mahu hukuman mati...
RUU355,
jika dilihat adalah usaha untuk meningkatkan had hukuman penjara, denda
dan sebatan sahaja - ia bukan secara nyata meminta hak untuk mengenakan
hukuman mati - dan tidak juga apa-apa permintaan untuk mengenakan
hukuman 'potong tangan' dan sebagainya.
Kerajaan harus bertindak cepat isu pemansuhan hukuman mati...kita ada banyak lagi perubahan yang perlu termasuk pemansuhan undang-undang tahanan tanpa bicara[POCA, POTA, DD(SPM)A,..), SOSMA, Akta Perhimpunan Aman, Akta Hasutan, Akta Universiti, Akta Pertubuhan, Akta-akta Pekerja...
Jika ada hukuman mati dalam Undang-undang Syariah mana-mana Negeri, ini adalah tanggungjawab kerajaan negeri masing-masing untuk melakukan apa yang perlu untuk memansuhkan. [Kini, kerana Akta Persekutuan menghalang hukuman Mahkamah Syariah kepada hanya denda, penjara dan sebatan - hukuman lain tidak boleh dikenakan termasuk hukuman mati...potong tangan...dll.] RUU 355 adalah usul untuk tambahkan jumlah denda, penjara dan sebatan yang boleh dikenakan oleh Mahkamah Syariah diperingkat Negeri. RUU355 secara jelas tidak meminta kuasa untuk kenakan hukuman mati.
Kaji semula mansuh hukuman mati mandatori - Pas
Diyana Ibrahim, Astro Awani | 
Oktober 16, 2018 18:30 MYT
KUALA LUMPUR: Putrajaya digesa untuk mengkaji semula keputusan memansuhkan hukuman mati mandatori, kata Pas hari ini.
Presidennya Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang berkata keputusan itu
sepatutnya dibawa ke peringkat perbincangan membabitkan semua pihak
berkepentingan terlebih dahulu.
“Saya harap kerajaan dapat
mengkaji terlebih dahulu keputusan berkenaan mengikut proses yang adil
dan betul mengikut peringkat-peringkat tertentu.
“Saya tak kata
setuju atau tak, tapi ia harus dikaji dahulu. Boleh ambil pakai kaedah
hukuman ta’zir dalam Islam,” kata Abdul Hadi yang juga Ahli Parlimen
Marang kepada media di lobi Parlimen hari ini.
Katanya, kerajaan harus mendahulukan hukuman ringan terlebih dahulu, sebelum memikirkan hukuman mati sebagai jalan terakhir.
Sebelum ini Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Datuk Liew Vui Keong
berkata hukuman mati mandatori akan digantikan dengan penjara minimum 30
tahun jika Parlimen meluluskan pemansuhannya.
Rang undang-undang tersebut dijangka dibentangkan pada sidang Dewan Rakyat akan datang.
Menteri itu turut menggesa Lembaga Pengampunan mempertimbangkan untuk menggantung hukuman mati bagi kesemua kesalahan.
Terdapat 18 kesalahan jenayah memperuntukkan hukuman mati seperti
mengedar dadah, membunuh, rogol kanak-kanak, rogol hingga menyebabkan
kematian dan menggunakan senjata api, selain terorisme dan melancarkan
perang.
Kenyataan menteri itu mengundang kritikan daripada pihak
pembangkang apabila menyifatkan pemansuhan hukuman mandatori tidak
sensitif kepada keluarga mangsa. -
Astro Awani, 16/10/2018
Oleh Luqman Arif Abdul Karim
KUALA
LUMPUR: Hasrat kerajaan untuk menghapuskan pelaksanaan hukuman mati
mandatori bersandarkan prinsip kemanusiaan diharap tidak disabotaj
pembangkang yang ketika ini mempelopori kuasa Dewan Negara.
Jurucakap
Malaysia Menentang Hukuman Mati dan Penyeksaan (MADPET), Charles Hector
Fernandez, ketika menyuarakan pendirian itu berkata janji atau jaminan
sama pernah diusulkan pentadbiran terdahulu, namun ia akhirnya
mengundang kekecewaan dalam kalangan masyarakat dan aktivis apabila
gagal ditepati.
Sehubungan itu, katanya, MADPET berharap
ahli Parlimen dan Senator daripada blok pembangkang akan memberikan
sokongan penuh terhadap keputusan yang adil oleh kerajaan ketika
membentangkan usul untuk menghapuskan hukuman mati mandatori.
“Oleh
itu, kami harap usul menghapuskan hukuman mati mandatori ini
dibentangkan pada sidang Parlimen akan datang, mulai 15 Oktober ini,
sekurang-kurangnya untuk bacaan kali pertama sekiranya tiada masa
mencukupi bagi perbahasan dan diluluskan,” katanya dalam kenyataan, hari
ini.
Persidangan Dewan Negara, pada 12 September lalu,
melakar kejutan apabila menolak Rang Undang-Undang Antiberita Tidak
Benar (Pemansuhan) 2018 yang sebelum itu diluluskan di Dewan Rakyat pada
16 Ogos lalu selepas bacaan kali ketiga.
Perkara itu
diumumkan Yang Dipertua Dewan Negara, Tan Sri S A Vigneswaran, selepas
undi belah bahagian menyaksikan 28 anggota dewan tidak menyokong
pemansuhan akta itu berbanding 21 yang menyokong, manakala tiga yang
lain memilih untuk tidak mengundi.
Menteri di Jabatan
Perdana Menteri, Datuk Liew Vui Keong, semalam dilaporkan berkata
pelaksanaan hukuman mati mandatori bagi semua kesalahan akan dimansuhkan
di negara ini.
Susulan pengumuman itu, katanya, semua pelaksanaan hukuman mati akan ditangguhkan sehingga pemansuhan berkenaan berkuat kuasa.
Mengulas
lanjut, Fernandez menyifatkan pengumuman itu ialah khabar gembira untuk
waris dan ahli keluarga kira-kira 1,267 banduan yang ketika ini menanti
hukuman mati mandatori.
“Perangkaan yang mewakili 2.7
peratus daripada keseluruhan 60,000 banduan ini akhirnya tidak akan
digantung, justeru ahli keluarga dan ibu bapanya berupaya menarik nafas
lega kerana mereka masih diberikan peluang untuk meneruskan hidup. -
Berita Harian, 11/10/2018
The Truth Related About A.Najib Murder Canny Ong Death – Is It Related To VVIP?
Who
was Ahmad Najib and why did he abduct Ong? Why did he torch her body?
What led the police to him? What about the conspiracy theories? Why
didn’t the undercover policemen who found Ahmad Najib and Canny by the
roadside arrest him immediately?
Was the suspect a frequent
visitor to Bangsar shopping centre, a ‘higher-class’ shopping complex?
Has he worked there before? Why did he choose a time period when
shoppers were leaving the complex Did he know which escape route to
take? Many questions are unanswered.
And how come no one spoke to the
management of the mall – didn’t they think it suspicious that a car
rammed through the barrier? Why didn’t the guards check the security
videos before Pearly approached them?
In the documentary, Rosal is
quoted as saying that he had a hard time believing a quiet guy like
Ahmad Najib, who was helpful to his neighbours, could commit such a
heinous crime.
Now, please tell me who gave
Ahmad Najib Aris the instructions to rape and murder Canny Ong on the
night of 14 June 2003? – A.Kadir Jasin
THE brutal murder of 28-year-old Canny Ong in 2003 remains embedded
in the minds of many Malaysians. The tragedy shook the nation not just
because of the gruesome and senseless nature of the crime committed –
Ong was abducted, raped, stabbed and torched – but also because it
happened in a popular and upscale neighbourhood-mall that was fitted
with security cameras.
Ong, an IT-analyst living in the United States with her husband
Brandon Ong, was back in Malaysia to visit her ailing father. On June
13, 2003, a day before she was due to return to the US, Ong went out for
dinner with some family and close friends at the Bangsar Shopping
Complex in Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur. After their meal, she went to the
basement carpark to retrieve her parking ticket from her car. She asked
her mother and sister to wait for her by the autopay machine.
Unfortunately, Ong never returned with the ticket. After waiting for
20 minutes, Ong’s mother Pearly Visvanathan Ong and her sister decided
to go to the car park to look for her. When they went down they found
the car, a purple Proton Tiara, missing. Sensing something bad had
happened to her daughter, Pearly ran to the mall’s security office to
view the CCTV tapes. The tapes confirmed their worst fears: they saw
Canny being abducted by an unidentified male who drove off with her in
her car, crashing past the exit barrier of the carpark.
Who was Ahmad Najib and why did he abduct Ong? Why did he torch her
body? What led the police to him? What about the conspiracy theories?
Why didn’t the undercover policemen who found Ahmad Najib and Canny by
the roadside arrest him immediately?
The Murder Of Canny Ong, a documentary by directors Ahmad Yazid and
Rob Nevis commissioned by AETN All Asia Networks exclusively for the
Crime and Investigation Network aims to unscramble the mishmash of facts
and conspiracy theories that were published by the media in presenting
the facts of the case through careful examination of police
documentation, interviews with the investigators on the case as well as
insight from Ong’s family and friends who were with her on the night of
her abduction.
The hour-long documentary, which premiered on Monday night, certainly
succeeded in being a remembrance of Ong. The exclusive interviews with
Noreen Natasha (Ong’s close friend who was at the farewell dinner) and
Pearly were poignant and reveals the pain and torture that Ong’s family
and friends went through.
It
was clearly still difficult for Pearly to talk about her daughter – she
mentions at the end of the documentary that she sometimes pretends that
Ong is still alive and residing in the US. Still, she manages to muster
up the courage to recall the events leading to Ong’s disappearance –
she relates how she had an uneasy feeling as they were looking for a
parking spot as the carpark was dimly lit. She recalls how, throughout
the initial stage of the investigations, she had a sinking feeling,
fearing that something terrible had happened to her daughter. Noreen
shares the trauma of having to go to the hospital morgue to identify
Ong’s remains.
Also, she speaks about having to break the news of Ong’s disappearance to Brandon.
It’s a terrible thing listening to a mother talk of her deceased
child. It is so easy for us to get caught up with the facts of a case or
get riled up about the hunt for the perpetrator or find fault with the
handling of a particular case that we forget that there are real people
involved that are suffering a real loss. We forget that for the family
and friends of Ong, the murder is more than a case. It’s a tragedy.
While the The Murder Of Canny Ong documentary chronicled the case in
detail – the interviews with SAC Abu Bakar Mustaffa (who was the
Selangor CID chief) and Amidon Anan (head of forensics) shed light about
the details of the investigations that led to Ahmad Najib’s arrest –
there are still some unanswered questions at the end of the documentary.
First of all, there wasn’t a clear enough explanation about why
undercover cop lance corporal S. Ravichandra didn’t arrest Ahmad Najib
immediately upon seeing the woman beside him (Ong) apparently pleading
for help.
The policeman got their identity cards and shot the front tyre of the
car twice but why couldn’t he chase them down or call for back up? It
really wasn’t clear what happened. Did the policeman run an immediate
check on the two ICs he had seized – if he had, wouldn’t he have known
immediately that the woman was a victim in a kidnapping? Or does this
only happen in crime dramas on TV?
Also, although documentary producer Lydia Lubon explained in the
aforementioned press conference that it was difficult to secure
interviews with friends and family of the victim (because of the private
nature of Malaysians who would rather not talk about personal issues in
public), it was rather disappointing that there were no interviews with
some of the other people who were involved, either directly or
indirectly, in this case.
Was it not possible to secure an interview with Ahmad Najib – even if
he could not be on TV, to get a comment from him through his lawyer?
Was it not possible to get a statement from Ong’s spouse? And what about
Ahmad Najib’s wife? Perhaps she could have shed some light on the man
who so brutally took the life of an innocent woman.
There was an interview with a neighbour of Ahmad Najib, but nothing
from his wife? What is her life like now that her husband is awaiting
the gallows?
And how come no one spoke to the management of the mall – didn’t they
think it suspicious that a car rammed through the barrier? Why didn’t
the guards check the security videos before Pearly approached them?
Days
later, Ong’s charred remains were found in a manhole along Old Klang
Road in Kuala Lumpur. Forensic and criminal investigators found evidence
that led to the arrest of a 27-year-old aircraft cabin cleaner, Ahmad
Najib Aris.
The Canny Ong rape and murder case has
virtually gripped the attention of the nation even until today. It has
also thrown a spotlight on the crime of RAPE. This has actually led to
the government increasing the penalty for rape.
Unfortunately, it has caused many people
to come up with all sorts of “solutions” to prevent this incident from
ever happening again. Solutions like equipping shopping complexes and
public car parks with tons of close circuit cameras and employing
legions of security guards, etc…
You will also note the sheer
PROLIFERATION of tips on how girls can defend themselves and
exhortations by various parties for girls to learn self-defence or
better still, how to castrate a horny male in 5 seconds… or something to
that effect!
Naturally, being a sex crime, it has also
led to certain parties condemning the “sick” and “depraved” nature of
all “MEN”. There are also many who blamed the prevalence of illegal
pornographic material as the cause of such sadistic behaviour. These are
just some of the many accusations being thrown around in the media and
by the public.
Sad to say… All this is NOT going to solve anything at all.
Mark my words.
Within 6 months, there won’t be anyone
watching the thousands of close circuit cameras installed in the large
shopping complexes and car parks.
Within 6 months, there won’t be any legion of security guards peeling their eyes for potential rapists.
Within 6 months, it will be business as usual for the rapists and rapist-wannabes.
Why?
Cause the GOVERNMENT and the public have
not quite seem to have understood anything in the Canny Ong case. That’s
only my opinion, of course and you are most welcomed to argue this with
me!
But from what I can tell, they seem to be
missing the point. The crux of the issue. So, if they are barking up
the wrong tree, how the heck can they solve anything??? :wall: :wall:
:wall:
Why am I saying that they are barking up the wrong tree?
Well, IMHO, the Canny Ong case isn’t as simple as it seems. Let’s take a look at some points.
1. Canny was a black-belt Taekwondo expert so she was WELL prepared to defend herself.
2. She let the suspect drive her car!
3. Both of them drove around town for 4-5 hours!
4. They stopped twice and she never took the opportunity to run away!
5. When they were stopped by the police, she did NOT even tried to signal to them that she was in danger!
6. The suspect actually came OUT of the
car to ask for directions!!! She could have easily have ran out and
SCREAMED for help.. but no, she did NOT do that.
Isn’t it obvious that the Canny Ong case isn’t as simple as it seems???
Unfortunately, the government and the
public are obviously avoiding the issue, either intentionally or
unintentionally. It seems to me that everyone prefers to label this as a
neat rape and murder case, instead of delving deeper.
Perhaps, they suspect they might not like
what they find. Perhaps the case is a useful tool for certain parties
to further their agenda.
But
one thing’s for sure… Everyone is doing Canny Ong an injustice by not
following the trial of evidence she left and finding out WHAT EXACTLY
happened to her.
I welcome any discussion on the Canny Ong case here. Doesn’t matter if you agree with me or not!
Dr Chean Tiang Eang
Firstly, the police have now confirmed that this horrific act was performed by a single person now in their custody.
However, previous reports have said that closed circuit security
cameras showed three men involved.
Two men forced Canny into the back
seat of her Proton Tiara while the third drove the car. Such details
were later denied by the police saying that such evidence never surfaced
in the first place.
Thinking logically, it would have been very difficult for a man the
size of the alleged perpetrator to overpower Canny all by himself. Canny
must have put up a little fight. Even if a weapon was used, the
perpetrator would have to carry her into the back seat of the car and
then proceed into the driver’s seat.
The incident occurred roughly between 9.45pm and10pm, a time when
most people leave shopping malls – the risk of getting caught is high.
There must have been witnesses, even to the slightest shout or
commotion. But no, this was a swift operation which leaves no doubt in
my mind that there were more than one alleged perpetrator.
The modus operandi of the perpetrator probably showed that he is
“power assertive”. His victim could have been pre-selected or
opportunistic, i.e too good to pass up. However the location is a
mystery.
Such power assertive random rapists would usually choose a convenient
and secluded place – not a car park in a shopping mall at peak time!
Such rapists also usually do not harm the victims. Sadism, perhaps? What
was the exact motive?
It is also illogical that security cameras did not reveal much.
Either the perpetrator knew the security measures there or the cameras
are not well located. Was the suspect videotaped at the parking lot or
is there physical evidence linking him to the crime at Bangsar?
Was the suspect a frequent visitor to Bangsar shopping centre, a
‘higher-class’ shopping complex? Has he worked there before? Why did he
choose a time period when shoppers were leaving the complex Did he know
which escape route to take? Many questions are unanswered.
Secondly, two detectives reportedly stopped the vehicle and spoke to
the driver and even managed to get identify cards of the driver and
victim. Several inconsistencies here.
One, the police should have noticed something amiss. How often do
drivers carry their passenger’s identity cards? How did the suspect
produce both documents? Was the victim conscious at the time? If she
was, I have no doubt she would have sought help. If she was unconscious,
shouldn’t the police have attempted to revive her?
Two, why on earth did the two officers casually return to the police
station and not radio for backup? The car obviously sped off while the
police were questioning the driver. This is absurd if it is the truth.
But is it?
It is amazing how the police is so eager to close this case. The
investigation is only as good as its investigators, and this case is far
from over. I strongly urge someone in this field to pursue the matter.
Justice must be done. -
The Coverage, 21/5/2018
![View through a vehicle window shows cell blocks inside Singapore's Changi Prison [Vivek Prakash/Reuters]](https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2018/10/25/f63c251687974f2f94194abf3cbe33e0_18.jpg "Human rights groups urge Singapore to halt imminent executions")
Posts
