This makes me question supporting Pakatan - an interesting read about Shah Alam Community Forest (SACF)?

 

OPINIONS

COMMENT | This makes me question supporting Pakatan

Andrew Sia

22 Sep 2020, 2:19 pm

COMMENT | Klang and Shah Alam do not have a Bukit Gasing or Bukit Kiara. So why is the Selangor Pakatan Harapan government hell-bent on chopping down the nearest forest that residents there have? To build a graveyard of all things!

That’s what I asked in my last column. The probable answer, as usual, is the connection between politics and business. It also involves the position of the Selangor menteri besar, which is said to be "jinxed" or "cursed".

This is an area of hills near the coast of Selangor at Kapar. They are visible from the sea, and Admiral Cheng Ho even made a note of them (500 years ago) as a navigational aid, said veteran forestry researcher Lim Teckwyn.

It's also an area that is still rich in wildlife, including "spectacled" leaf monkeys, kingfishers, and colourful frogs. Even hornbills are found here!

In 1909, the British officially gazetted this area of rolling hills as the Bukit Cherakah forest reserve (the former agricultural park of the same name sits on one small slice of this), covering a huge area of 10,000 acres (4,047 hectares). What residents, organised as the Shah Alam Community Forest (SACF) group, are trying to save now is a mere 172 hectares.

Fast forward to 2005, and this area hit national headlines for forest destruction, which left then prime minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi “outraged” after seeing it for himself in a helicopter ride.

What happened was that Khir Toyo, then the Selangor menteri besar (MB), and his state executive council (exco), had allocated large swaths of forest land to four “friendly” companies, which had some “directors” who were not even adults!

In the usual Malaysia Boleh style, some rules were bent, some wrists were slapped, and Khir Toyo blamed the previous state Umno leaders for the fiasco.

Has money politics been solved?

The SACF issue also goes back to the Khir Toyo era. Sometime before the 2008 general election, the BN state exco decided to allocate this particular forest to third parties, said Lim, a researcher of tropical forest ecology, limestone caves, and indigenous people.

Yet one crucial law was not fulfilled, he said, because any “forest reserve” can have its protected status removed only if it’s published in the government gazette.

He showed this writer all the survey maps and old gazettes that he has been patiently collecting on several trips to government departments. Yes, there are records of other parts of the forest reserve losing their protected status - in 1962, 1976, 1991, 1992, and 2001. But, he pointed out, there is no record that this particular forest has been officially degazetted.

Moreover, in 2011, Selangor became the first state in Malaysia where any removal of forest protection must go through a public hearing. Again, there has been no such hearing for SACF.

More importantly, if the previous “bad old” BN state government had improperly “given out” this forest area to whoever, why didn’t the new “good guys” (Pakatan Rakyat, later Pakatan Harapan) restore the protection for the forest reserve when they took over Selangor in 2008? After all, the land has not been developed for over ten years.

“That’s a good question,” Lim replied.

This led me to speculate. Could it be that the previous menteris besar, including the Pakatan ones (Khalid Ibrahim and Azmin Ali) have been a tad too “corporate-friendly”?

The position of the Selangor MB seems to be jinxed. Former MB Muhammad Muhammad Taib from Umno fell from power in 1997 after he was arrested by Australian customs for not declaring millions of dollars in his suitcase. Khir Toyo lost Selangor to Pakatan in 2008 and was then convicted for corruption in 2011.

Khalid was pushed out from the MB post by his own party at the time, PKR, for allegedly suspicious financial matters. When Anwar Ibrahim tried to become MB via the “Kajang Move”, he was charged for Sodomy 2. As for Azmin, oh well, he’s now best buddies with Umno and gang.

What about the current MB, Amirudin Shari, who was famously part of the “Azmin cartel”? Well, his main “contribution” to the environment was his attempt to destroy 97 percent of the Kuala Langat North Forest Reserve (KLNFR), for “development”, a move that was met with a firestorm of protests.

The problem of rich men giving “donations” to political parties to “influence” decisions remains in our system, no matter which party is in power.

As wittily written by Hishamuddin Rais in his Malaysiakini column, after Pakatan took over Selangor, there was a flood of “gifts” for politicians, the most “cekai” (Cantonese for “lousy”) of which were Chinese New Year oranges and goats for Hari Raya Haji.

We can only guess what the bigger “contributions” of Malaysia's political culture are. And what do the gift-givers “harvest” in return? According to Hisham, they include “land for housing development”.

Thus, the question is: are our politicians “wakil rakyat” or "wakil towkay”? This is why a reform of political funding is crucial if Pakatan really wants to improve this country and free it from big money “influence”.

Bureaucratic basketball

As a first step to chopping down the Shah Alam community forest, the authorities want to build a road through this forest connecting the Setia Alam township to the new DASH highway further north. Yet, the government has just built a new two-lane road on flat land to do that (via the housing area of Alam Budiman).

Why build yet another road through hilly terrain (which costs much more than a road on level ground) when the existing two-lane road can be easily widened to four or even six lanes?

This hilly forest has been zoned as “tanah perkuburan” (cemetery land) in the Local Plan of the Shah Alam City Council (MBSA). But who builds a graveyard on steep slopes? Will bodies be buried slanted at 45-degree angles?

Or will the land be terraced into the 8th Wonder of the World like the rice terraces of Banaue in the Philippine mountains? Can one imagine the amount of soil erosion from that? (Or, is the supposed graveyard, just a fig leaf to cover the actual, hot desire for housing development?)

While hilly forest land is unsuitable for a graveyard, it is totally suitable as a hiking recreation ground. Only 172 hectares are left, of which 52ha is supposedly "state land" (for the graveyard) while 120ha has been allegedly allocated to PKNS (Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor). Does government-linked PKNS have to be so greedy to take away this forest for housing development?

The SACF people have cared for this forest over the years, building little hiking trails with hoes. They have gone through all the “proper channels” to save this forest, writing numerous letters to the authorities. Last December, there was a meeting with the MBSA, the forestry department, the land office, and Hee Loy Sian, the state exco handling environment matters.

“Basically, we were told, ‘this is the Local Plan (for a graveyard and PKNS) and nothing can be done’,” said SACF secretary Alicia Teoh.

SACF had appealed to the Shah Alam mayor and he replied, “If you want to change the Local Plan, you have to refer back to the state exco.” 

This is a classic case of giving people “the runaround”, a game of “bureaucratic basketball”. In effect, the Pakatan state government is saying “this was done by the previous BN government” and we are “powerless” to reverse it. Doesn’t that sound like Khir Toyo blaming the previous Umno leaders for forest destruction under his watch?

Let’s face it, the only thing that matters is: will there be sufficient public pressure to force the politicians in the state exco to change their decision? For example, will the 44,292 written objections to the clearing of the Kuala Langat forest stop the bulldozers there?

If Bukit Gasing or Bukit Kiara were to be chopped down, you can be sure there will be a firestorm of protests because the places are well known, the neighbourhoods are well established, and the residents are well-connected (including several Datuks). But the housing areas surrounding the SACF are newer and many residents are not fully aware of its beauty.

In fact, when this writer was hiking here, I met a Malay lady who told me, “I live around here but I used to drive 40 minutes to Bukit Gasing to hike. I didn’t know this place was in my backyard til some friends told me.”

Power against the people?

But residents are getting organised with whatever meagre resources they have. The latest move is to make official objections to the Shah Alam Local Plan, which by law, must undergo public consultation.

SACF has managed to mobilise hundreds of people to register their official objections to the proposed forest road. 

(If you want to help out, please follow the instructions here. The deadline is Sept 26.)

However, the online objections had an unexpected result - MBSA now seems to be going all out to discourage people from visiting the forest. For years, visitors have parked along the four-lane main road in Setia Alam to enter the trail.

Now, "suddenly" MBSA has become very "hardworking" at issuing parking summonses to cars there. SACF now advises hikers to park legally at shops some 800m away.

“If illegal parking is really the issue, how come they are not summoning those who park illegally every day outside nearby Setia City Mall?” asked SACF president Yeow Mei Jyn.

Normally, the job of local authorities is to help people visit nature spots. For example, when cars were parked along the two-lane main road outside Bukit Gasing, the Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) solved the issue by building a small car park nearby.

The KL City Hall (DBKL) went even further, building a multi-storey car park for visitors to the Kepong Metropolitan Park. But MBSA is doing the opposite. Why?

Even worse, MBSA has recently put up big red signs warning: “TANAH KERAJAAN, PENCEROBOH AKAN DIDENDA TIDAK MELEBIHI RM500,000” (government land, trespassers will be fined up to RM500,000).

Hikers have entered the forest here for years without any problems, but now MBSA threatens to slap them with a half-million ringgit fine for loving nature.

"These are smokescreens. MBSA is probably hoping that if they prevent people from entering, they will care less about the forest and fewer people will protest its removal," Yeow said.

MBSA even wants to demolish the information signboard put up by SACF years ago because it’s now deemed as an “advertisement” that is “illegally erected” on government land. What game are they up to? What is really behind this new-found “zeal” to impose every law it can find against powerless nature lovers? When it was ever an issue in years before?

Are they doing this because some "higher power" gave orders to ensure that the huge online protests against the Kuala Langat destruction are not repeated? Is this how a “people-friendly” state government should behave? Or are they more “developer-friendly”?

It’s not too late as the state government can still do the right thing - save the small (just 172 hectares) but beautiful forest here so that residents can practise healthy lifestyles, to add value to surrounding properties, and to create a new tourism attraction for Selangor.

In other words, enrich the public, rather than a property developer. Moreover, surely PKNS, as a government-linked company, can find land elsewhere to build houses on?

There have been troubling decisions and broken promises by Pakatan, on issues such as Lynas, PTPTN loans, repealing repressive laws, reforming political funding, etc. And the recent water crisis showed us how easily factories can still pollute rivers, an age-old problem that has not been solved even though Pakatan has controlled Selangor for 12 years.

They are probably confident that many voters “do not have any other choice” and will keep supporting them. But is this how Pakatan plans to win the next hotly contested election, because “the other side is worse”? What if some supporters get fed up and not show up to vote? This, by the way, was exactly how Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump.

Many of us have supported Pakatan, believing that it still represents the hope of real change. Let’s hope we have not made a mistake.

---

ANDREW SIA is a veteran journalist who likes teh tarik khau kurang manis. You are welcome to give him ideas to brew at tehtarik@gmail.com. - Malaysiakini, 22/9/2020

People power in Thailand - Malaysians too need to start showing their 'power' - Politicians/Political parties unreliable?

Public protests involving about 100.000 plus in Bangkok - so sad for us in Malaysia, where Covid-19 would be the excuse to block protests and the right to Peaceful Assembly..

 "About 100,000 attended,...."

Then, we still have the draconian Peaceful Assembly of Act - which disappointingly was not abolished by the Pakatan Harapan government - a major betrayal, and it is still difficult to organize and have peaceful protests in Malaysia...

All that PH government did was to reduce the number of days of notice to the police from 10 to 5 days > so, when there is even an urgent issue that demands our speedy protest > we cannot - we have to wait for at least 5 days - That draconian Act also requires organisers to get permission from the owners of the place we want have our peaceful protest - and that still include public spaces - oh yes, we still need our DBKL's permission if we want to protest at Dataran Merdeka > so not just POLICE but also Local Council(or government permission) to protest in public places...

But even with such unjust laws, when justice demands, many people will bravely come out and exercise their right to peaceful protest - we cannot allow bad governments or bad laws to deny us our rights, can we? 

People need to speak up and the people need to fight for change and REFORMASI - we have been fooled too often by politicians and political parties - when after, they come into power, they change > they even try to justify why the promised changes cannot happen - but are they not the MAJORITY in Parliament...and in GOVERNMENT - so, if politicians cannot be relied on, then it is up to the people, is it not >> unless you are happy with the current situation ...and do not want any changes?????

Thailand fails to block massive night protest near Grand Palace

Police ordered crowd to disperse without taking further steps

Pro-democracy protesters light up their mobile phones as they attend a mass rally to call for the ouster of Prime Minister Prayuth and reforms in the monarchy, in Bangkok, Thailand, September 19, 2020.   © Reuters 

MASAYUKI YUDA, Nikkei staff writerSeptember 19, 2020 18:29 JSTUpdated on September 20, 2020 02:05 JS

 

BANGKOK -- Despite light rain, Bangkok on Saturday night saw by far its largest demonstration since a coup in 2014 installed a military government and put a lid on free speech. Police claimed that only about 18,000 people turned up, while organizers said the figure was well above what authorities told media. 

"About 100,000 attended," Panusaya Sithijirawattanakul, a key student leader, told reporters. "The turnout is proof of people's support for our demands," she said.

The turnout was expected to take the temperature of political activism, and provide an indication of the depth of support for political reform. By most accounts, the rally exceeded another of about 20,000 on Aug. 16 at Democracy Monument close to the administrative heart of Bangkok, stepping up critical pressure on the military-backed government of Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha.

Protesters in recent weeks have openly called for a free debate on bold pro-democracy reforms -- including for the first time the role of the formerly sacrosanct monarchy.

The protest started early afternoon ahead of schedule with two trucks parked on Thammasat University's soccer pitch serving as a temporary stage for a succession of speakers.

Thousands of protesters have huddled down in front of Bangkok's Grand Palace after an afternoon of sporadic rain. (Photo by Masayuki Yuda)

As with the Aug. 16 demonstration, older people also participated. Thanyathorn Pipitthanakajornchai, 55, told the Nikkei Asian Review that it was her first time at a protest. She said she was not against the monarchy but fed up with the present government. The prime minister keeps blaming everyone else," she said. "The economy is awful, but it is not just because of COVID-19."

At around 3:45 p.m., people led by Panupong Jadnok started moving away from the university soccer field to Sanam Luang outside the university's main gate. Police from nearby Chanasongkram police station arrived and ordered the crowd to disperse within an hour since the gathering was illegal under section 10 of the 2015 public assembly act and had not been notified to the authorities in advance. The police took no further steps at that time, but could charge organizers later.

Political use of Sanam Luang -- which has the dazzlingly illuminated Grand Palace at its southern end -- is normally not allowed, but local media had reported that it would be permitted on this occasion providing protesters did not come within 150 meters of royal property.

The organizers said they would stay overnight on the 12 hectare expanse that is used for major royal cremations and other ceremonies. A March to Government House on Sunday morning was also originally planned, but organizers said this had been changed without giving any details.

The United Front of Thammasat and Demonstration, or UFTD, an activist group at Thammasat University, scheduled the protest for Saturday afternoon despite officially being denied access to Thammasat University's historic Tha Phra Chan campus located between Sanam Luang and the Chao Phraya river.

At a press conference ten days ago, the organizers said a turnout of 50,000 to 100,000 was expected. The government had predicted a much smaller turnout, with security forces preparing for 20,000 protesters.

Student leader Panusaya Sithijirawattanakul broke a major taboo in Thai society when she read out a 10-point agenda on Aug. 10 for reform of Thailand's once sacrosanct monarchy. (Photo by Masayuki Yuda)

Among other demands, the UFTD has tabled 10 reforms of the monarchy. Panusaya read the proposed reforms out during a rally on Aug. 10 at another Thammasat University campus at Rangsit in northern Bangkok.

These included revocation of the law of lese-majeste, a reduction in public spending on the royal family, and a clearer distinction between royal and public assets.

The brazen demands broke a longstanding taboo on public criticism of the monarchy and stunned many, including some pro-democracy advocates.

"I agree with the 10-point demand for the monarchy to be under the constitution," Panithan Chanviboon, a 33-year-old company employee from Bangkok told the Nikkei Asian Review. "I also want the government to resign -- it is incapable of running the country."

Panithan said he used to see things differently and had come to the rally to make amends. "I want to redeem myself for being one of those people who called for coups to get rid of corrupt politicians," he said. "This is my way of repaying back to the country."

The Aug. 16 protest was organized by Free People, an activist group. Its organizers focused on three demands: dissolution of both chambers of parliament; rewriting contentious parts of the constitution; and an end to official harassment that inhibits people from exercising their fundamental rights.

Criticism of the monarchy was less strident at that event, during which Parit Chiwarat, a leading activist commonly known as Penguin, was released from police custody. On Saturday, he gave reporters a glimpse into his revolutionary thinking: "I learned you need 3% of the entire population to make a political change," he said. "Our goal is to attract 2 million people who can act together."

Parit Chiwarak, who goes by the nickname Penguin, was released from arrest during another major protest at Democracy Monument on Aug. 16.  (Photo by Masayuki Yuda)

Political awareness has unquestionably been raised by the protests. Hundreds of academics have offered support and welcomed more debate. Secondary school students, many of whom will vote in the next general election due in 2023, have taken to wearing white ribbons and giving three-fingered salutes as expressions of silent rebuke to the government.

Access to Royalist Marketplace, a private Facebook group that openly discusses the role of the monarchy, was restricted on Aug. 24 following a legal submission by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society. The group had already garnered over a million subscribers. A replacement Facebook group, Royalist Marketplace Talaat Luang, was immediately set up and has already attracted over 1.38 million members.

Although he resides mainly in Germany, King Maha Vajiralongkorn has been very much in the public eye recently, both at home and abroad. On Sept. 2, he reinstated Sineenat "Koi" Wongvajirapakdi as his royal noble consort after abruptly stripping her of the position in October 2019. She was the first to be elevated to the position in about a century when the king turned 67 in July 2019. A few months earlier, the king married for the fourth time, and Queen Suthida Bajrasudhabimalakshana remains his main consort.

According to the government's public journal Royal Gazette, the new army chief in October will be Gen. Narongphan Jitkaewthae, one of the king's favorites. His trusted predecessor, Gen. Apirat Kongsompong will become a lord chamberlain in the royal household after his retirement and is expected to wield considerable influence on the king's behalf.

Prayuth has attempted to dampen public enthusiasm for this weekend's rally by playing up the COVID-19 threat. "When you gather in crowds, you are creating an enormous risk of new transmissions, and with that you also create enormous risks to the livelihoods of tens of millions of fellow Thais," the former army chief who staged the 2014 coup said in a televised speech on Thursday. "Any major flare-up of infections will lead to terrible consequences and even worse economic destruction the likes of which we have never seen."

Persistent light rain gave the latest rally in Bangkok a passing resemblance to Hong Kong’s Umbrella Movement. (Photo by Masayuki Yuda)

But many of the youngsters see the government as the bigger problem. "The economy will thrive if we can truly establish the foundation of democracy," Somsom, a 20-year-old Thammasat student told Nikkei. She was sitting under an umbrella with two friends who asked not to be identified, but said they had come to demand constitutional reform and freedom of speech.

Sanam Luang has many links to history. It used to be known as the Pramane Ground, and the title is restored for major royal cremations, including most recently that of King Bhumibol Adulyadej in October 2017 before a massive crowd. In ancient times, it was also used for public executions. From 1958 to 1983, it was home to the Weekend Market prior to its relocation to Chatuchak in northern Bangkok.

Sanam Luang, Thammasat University and Rajadamnoern Avenue, where Democracy Monument is located, were the settings for large demonstrations in 1973, 1976 and 1992, all of which led to major bloodshed at the hands of the military and other actors. Some of the most egregious violence occurred on Oct. 6 1976 when paramilitary Border Patrol Police and rightist ultra-monarchist groups massacred at least 49 students at Thammasat University, desecrating some of the corpses. The massacre left a permanent stain on Thai political life.- The Asian Review, 19/9/2020

Thousands gather in Bangkok to protest against government, call for reform of monarchy

1 of 7

Pro-democracy protesters link arms during a mass rally in Bangkok on Sept 20, 2020.PHOTO: REUTERS

Published

Sep 20, 2020, 5:00 am SGT

Facebook Twitter

Over 30,000 pledge to camp overnight in field next to Grand Palace before a march today

Tan Hui Yee Indochina Bureau Chief In Bangkok

Thousands of people gathered in Bangkok yesterday in the biggest anti-government demonstration since the coronavirus pandemic gripped the kingdom.

The protesters, led by university students and joined by political activists from other parts of the country, swarmed Sanam Luang, a field next to the Grand Palace which is normally fenced off and reserved for royal or official events. They pledged to camp overnight and march to a yet undisclosed government office today. Over 30,000 people were estimated to have turned up yesterday.

The weekend rally is the latest in a series of protests that have erupted all over Thailand against the coalition government led by Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, which critics argue is propped up by a Constitution specially written to cement the influence of the royalist pro-military establishment.

Unlike previous flash-mob-style protests, activists planned an extended sit-in this time round.

Led by a student group called the United Front of Thammasat and Demonstration (UFTD), the protesters are demanding reform of Thailand's powerful and wealthy monarchy. During a rally on Aug 10, UFTD put forward 10 reform proposals which included reducing the budget for royal expenses and not excessively glorifying the monarchy.

The proposals caused an uproar among royalists, who regard the monarchy as an untouchable institution.

While the government has said it is open to constitutional change, it has called the demands for reform of the monarchy a "sensitive" topic. A 3.3 trillion baht (S$144 billion) budget for the coming fiscal year passed by the House of Representatives at its final reading on Friday included almost nine billion baht for palace expenses.

The protests are taking place at a time when Mr Prayut is facing tough economic challenges. Thailand's economy is projected to shrink by 8.1 per cent at the year's end and the Prime Minister is still struggling to fill the post of finance minister after former banker Predee Daochai hastily vacated the position earlier this month. The deep recession and looming mass unemployment has led to intense scrutiny on how tax money is spent.

Key UFTD member Parit Chiwarak told The Sunday Times yesterday: "When we mention our problems, we never talk about the real cause of it... This should end in our generation."

Thai protest targets government and monarchy

A 21-year-old undergraduate from Thammasat University - a traditional hotbed of dissent - who was at the rally said the 10 proposals on the monarchy were intended to strengthen the institution for the future.

Also present at yesterday's protest were many "red shirt" activists who played a key role in the past decade of colour-coded political conflict in the kingdom - something the current generation of young protesters have little affinity with.

"They joined us with the same ideology, to demand for democracy," said Mr Parit.

A 60-year-old red shirt supporter, who called herself Aew, said: "The students came out to protest because the red shirts failed to achieve our goals."

The protesters, wearing black T-shirts, face masks and raincoats because of an intermittent drizzle, were largely peaceful. One report said at least 10,000 uniformed and plainclothes police officers were patrolling the area around the rally.

The government has so far avoided direct confrontation with the demonstrators. But Mr Prayut, in his strongest comments yet, said on Thursday: "When you gather in mobs, you are creating an enormous risk of new infections. And with that, you also create enormous risk to the livelihoods of tens of millions of fellow Thais."

He said that while he had asked the police to be tolerant, the protests will delay business recovery by affecting business confidence and make tourists think twice about returning to Thailand.

Recognize Sabah Timber Industry Employees’ Union, Stop Wage Theft practice! - A LLRC Media Statement(BM&Eng)

Kenyataan Media oleh Gabungan Reformasi Undang-Undang Perburuhan pada 21hb September 2020 di Shah Alam

Mengiktiraf Kesatuan Pekerja Industri Kayu Sabah dan menghentikan amalan Pencurian Upah!

Gabungan Reformasi Undang-Undang Buruh (LLRC), sebuah gabungan besar 58 Kesatuan Sekerja dan NGO, menyeru agar hak pekerja-pekerja perkayuan yang menyertai Kesatuan Pekerja Industri Kayu Sabah (KPPIPS) dan rundingan secara kolektif dengan majikan mereka dilindungi.

Hak mereka untuk berunding secara kolektif telah dinafikan sejak tahun 1991 kerana pertarungan undang-undang yang berpanjangan dalam tuntutan pengiktirafan ke atas Sabah
Forest Industry. Penafian hak keatas KPPIPS untuk berunding berkenaan upah dan kebajikan pekerja sudah selama 29 tahun.

Cukup, cukuplah! Kami menggesa kepada para Yang Berhormat dan calon pilihanraya negeri Sabah membantu menyelesaikan nasib KPPIPS dengan menghentikan penghapusan kesatuan oleh Industri Perhutanan Sabah dan segera mengiktiraf kesatuan.

Selain itu, kami ingin menarik perhatian orang awam mengenai isu kecurian gaji di Syarikat Fu Yee di Tawau dan beberapa syarikat gabungan Persatuan Industri Perkayuan Sabah (STIA). Syarikat Fu Yee telah memaksa pekerja untuk menerima 50 peratus upah tanpa persetujuan pekerja, dan mengintimidasi anggota KPPIPS untuk memaksa mereka untuk menyertai kesatuan dalaman.

LLRC meminta komitmen daripada kesemua YB dan calon untuk menamatkan penghapusan kesatuan dan melindungi hak asasi ahli-ahli KPPIPS.

Pertanyaan media sila hubungi Setiausaha KPPIPS Pn. Engrit Liaw di 013-8512436 atau Pengerusi LLRC N. Gopalkishnam 019-3174717.

Terima kasih.

Yang benar,

N. Gopal Kishnam &
Irene Xavier

Pengerusi Bersama

Gabungan Reformasi Undang-Undang Buruh

 

http://www.fb.com/llrcmalaysia

https://www.facebook.com/stieus70/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Press Statement by Labour Law Reform Coalition on 21 September 2020 in Shah Alam

Recognize Sabah Timber Industry Employees’ Union, Stop Wage Theft practice!

The Labour Law Reform Coalition (LLRC), a broad coalition of 58 Trade Unions and NGOs, calls on all political parties and Sabah election candidate to protect timber workers’ right to join Sabah Timber Industry Employees’ Union (STIEU) and bargain collectively with their employer.

Their right to collective bargaining has been violated due to prolonged legal battles on claim for recognition filed by Sabah Forest Industry since 1991, this denies STIEU’s right to bargain for workers’ wages and welfares for 29 years.

 

Enough is enough! We urge the honourable members and election candidates resolve the plight of STIEU by putting an end of union busting by Sabah Forest Industry and recognize the union immediately.

Moreover, we would like to draw the public attention on wage theft issue at Fu Yee in Tawau and few members of Sabah Timber Industry Association (STIA). The Fu Yee company forced
workers to accept 50 per cent of wages without consent of workers, and intimidated STIEU members in order to force them to join an in-house union.

LLRC seeks political parties and election candidates’ commitment to end all these union busting and protect the fundamental rights of STIEU members.

Media enquiry please contact the general secretary of STIEU Engrit Liaw at 013-8512436 or LLRC chairperson N.Gopal Kishnam 019-3174717.

Thanks.

 

Yours Sincerely,

N. Gopal Kishnam &
Irene Xavier

Co-Chairpersons

Labour Law Reform Coalition

NOTE - Merely highlighting a media statement issued by others on worker rights, etc

 

Concrete slab from construction site fell on Proton Saga driven by woman.How construction safety hazards can be avoided?

Malaysia, despite having laws that give the power to the Minister to come out legally binding and enforceable Regulations, Orders and Directions - that will clearly specify what safety measures MUST be put in place to keep workplaces safe CHOOSES to come out with non-legally binding or enforceable documents - even referring to them as 'Construction Industry Standards'

During COVID-19, the Health Ministry gives us legally binding and enforceable Regulations, Orders - all of which starts with made pursuant to the power under Section XXX of the Act. If anyone breaches this, then they clearly commits an offence - and can be arrested, charged in court, sentenced or even compounded.

Without similar legally binding and enforceable regulations, etc for workplaces and construction sites - the number of deaths and accidents will remain high - Malaysia's contruction fatal accidents is disappointingly 10 times higher than UK..

So, quick was our Malaysian government to impose even more deterrent sentences for drunk driving - but unfortunately a similar concern to impose better laws and deterrent sentences to ensure workplace safety is lacking...workers safety do not matter? public safety do not matter? A pro-business approach that protects construction bosses, companies, employers MUST shift to a pro-people...pro-worker 

Safe site ....2nd accident > see article below > but all that  “Construction Activities Risk Assessment — Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Risk Control (Cara-Hirarc)” and “Guideline on prevention of fall at construction site”are still not legally binding and enforceable legislation. It is maybe just advice or recommendations - do not follow is not a CLEAR offence. No legally binding legislations and regulations - also means public/worker cannot even complain to the authorities that they are breaking the law 

Concrete slab falls on car on SUKE: Works Ministry awaiting report from CIDB, says minister

Tuesday, 22 Sep 2020 05:47 PM MYT

A woman escaped with just an injured left hand when a concrete slab from the 

construction of the Sungai Besi-Ulu Klang Elevated Expressway (SUKE) fell 

and hit her car September 19, 2020. — Picture via Twitter/Bernama

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 22 — The Works Ministry is awaiting the full investigation report from the Malaysian Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) on the incident in which a parapet wall slab from the ongoing Sungai Besi-Ulu Klang Elevated Expressway (SUKE) construction fell and hit a car last week, before taking any further action.

Its minister Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof said the investigation, among others, involved the highway structural design as well as safety monitoring and traffic management aspects in the area.

“We will get the report from CIDB and DOSH (the Department of Occupational Safety and Health) first and we will share the actions to be taken later,” he said at an engagement session with more than 40 construction industry players here today.

According to media reports, a one-sq metre concrete slab from a construction site of SUKE fell on a Proton Saga BLM driven by a woman at the Middle Ring Road 2 at about 4.30pm on Saturday.

The 25-year-old victim was however rescued by members of the public with injuries on her left arm before being sent to the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre for treatment.

Meanwhile, Fadillah said the government has agreed to a proposal to form a committee to discuss the issues and direction of the country’s construction sector on a regular basis.

He said the proposal was submitted by construction industry players at the engagement session.

“The committee will, among others, hold non-ad-hoc discussions between the government and the industry players,” he said.

The second engagement session was held to get input and feedback from the industry players on the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic as well as the recovery plan for the construction industry.

Earlier in his speech, Fadillah said the ministry is formulating digitalising construction sector-based initiatives and programmes in an effort to support the country’s economic growth.

He said among the initiatives drawn up were the Industrialised Building System (IBS) and the Building Information Modelling (BIM). — Bernama - Malay Mail, 22/9/2020

 

 

How construction safety hazards can be avoided — Wong Chee Fui

Monday, 21 Sep 2020 12:45 PM MYT

SEPTEMBER 21 — The public are shocked and horrified with the incident where a parapet wall has fallen from the Sg Besi — Ulu Klang Elevated Expressway (SUKE) under construction and hit a car travelling along MRR2 near Tasik Bandar Selatan at 5.45pm on 19 Sep 2020.

The woman driver was inches away from death but instead escaped with an injury on her hand. It is even more shocking that this is not the first construction mishap incident for the same construction project site.

It was also reported that piling steel frame has fallen and injured three construction workers for the same SUKE construction project near Taman Connaught Cheras on August 16, 2020.

Construction sites create a risk not only for construction workers, but also for members of the public who move around the site or who may live adjoining them. The public must be protected from the hazards associated with construction that may be carried out in a public area or adjacent to such areas.

The Department of Occupational Safety and Health (Dosh) and other government agencies have regulations that lay down the legal requirements to ensure the safety and health of not only the workers at the place of works but also the public as well.

For a construction project it is paramount important that the structure to be built is designed and constructed so that workers, and any other persons on the construction site, are protected from hazard such as a fall from height.

The risk management process should be undertaken to identify fall hazards and control measures. CIDB has published the “Construction Activities Risk Assessment — Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Risk Control (Cara-Hirarc)” and “Guideline on prevention of fall at construction site” to assist the construction stakeholders to adopt and implement risk management and best safety practices.

An investigation committee should be formed to identify and assess the risk hazard and formulate the control measure to prevent similar incident from happening again. Dosh, CIDB and other government regulating bodies should take necessary measures to ensure all occupational safety and health regulation and guidelines are implemented at the construction site.

* Wong Chee Fui is a Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (Utar) specialist - Malay Mail, 21/9/2020

'Eye for an eye' arguement is FOOLISH and unjust reason for protesting abolition of Mandatory death penalty? Death sentence still possible after mandatory sentence abolished?

EYE FOR AN EYE - for some, this means that if a person kills another, the one who kills will also be killed. For a person who rapes another, should the rapist be raped? For a person who injures another causing him to lose a hand, then cut of the hand of the perpetrator. What about a Minister who 'stole' our money - who commits kleptocracy, etc?

No doubt, criminal need to be punished - should someone who caused the death of another be hanged to death. What about your employer, who did not provide a safe workplace, and it resulted in a worker being killed - kill that employer too? A drunk driver that causing an accident killing someone - hang him to death too?

Mahatma Gandhi allegedly used this phrase in the context of universal harmony: "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." Coretta Scott King(partner of Martin Luther King,  later used this phrase in the context of racial violence: "The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind."

Many who take that position of an 'eye for an eye' really may have no friend, family or friend that has been executed - or is waiting to be hanged to death.

Is DEATH a punishment - after death, the criminal fells nothing > Is not long prison term really a worse punishment?

Who decides on the sentence? When it comes to MANDATORY death penalty, Parliament decided that everyone found guilty of murder will face the one and only punishment - HANGED BY THE NECK TO DEATH.

But what about an abused wife, who finally cannot take it - and hits her husband, and he dies. She is guilty of Murder - so, she too will be hanged to death.

A rich man orders or pays A, B and C to kill V. A, B and C gets caught and they are all found guilty of Murder. Now, A was the one who actually killed - B and C followed him, but really may not have not beaten or killed. C was the 19 year old brother of A, and he followed A not even knowing the plan. Mandatory Death Penalty means all 3 will be hanged to death. The judge has NO CHOICE to sentence B and C to a lesser sentence. The rich man usually escapes despite his order or payment to kill.

Why abolish mandatory death penalty? Well, this gives the JUDGE after hearing all the facts and evidence to make a just and appropriate sentence - he may still sentence A(the actual killer to death), and sentence B and C to prison sentences - maybe young C to a lesser prison term. 

Now, if A helps the police identify and provide evidence so that Rich man is also caught and prosecuted. Then maybe, for this 'assistance' - the judge may not sentence A to death but instead to a long prison sentence > so, the abolition of the mandatory death penalty will increase the possibility of those who ordered or paid others to kill to also be caught and prosecuted. After all, A, B and/or C would not have killed anyone if not for the fact they were paid to kill.

Poverty - A may have a family and they have no money for rent, and the following month they may be evicted. So, desperate A agreed to receive maybe RM10,000 from A to kill the victim. Does poor A deserve the death penalty? 

MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY now is there for about 10 offences > and guess what, only about 3 crimes result in the death of the victim - there is no death caused in the other 7 crimes. So, even 'eye for an eye' position cannot be justified for the mantaining of the mandatory death penalty in offences where no one dies.

There are several kinds of mandatory death penalty offences in Malaysia

a) Where death results; and 

b) Where no death results by reason of committing the said offence that carries the mandatory death penalty.

In the first category, where death results, there are really only 3 offences - 

a) Murder(sec. 302 Penal Code), 

b) Committing terrorist acts where the act results in death (sec. 130C (1)(a) ]; and 

c) Hostage taking where the act results in death (sec. 374(a) Penal Code)

In there second category, where death is not the result

a) Drug Trafficking (sec. 39B Dangerous Drugs Act 1952

AND, in certain listed offenses where a firearm is discharged, both the person who discharged the firearm and the accomplices will face the mandatory death penalty [Firearms (Increased Penalties Act 1971 - section 3 and 3A with reference to the Schedule in the Act]

1. Extortion 

2. Robbery.

3. The preventing or resisting by any person, of his own arrest or the arrest of another by a police officer or any other person lawfully empowered to make the arrest.

4. Escaping from lawful custody.

5. Abduction or kidnapping under sections 363 to 367 of the Penal Code and section 3 of the Kidnapping Act 1961 [Act 365].

6. House-breaking or house-trespass under sections 454 to 460 of the Penal Code.

 

** So, one person shoots a gun not even aiming at anyone, he and all accomplices will be sentenced to hang to death if convicted. But if the criminals just brought knives and even slashed a few of the victims, they will not be sentenced to mandatory death > an odd and unjust offence - the intention seems to be against the people getting or having firearms. What about the Altantuya case, where she was allegedly killed with a bomb(C4) - was there any investigation as to who supplied the C4 - was anyone charged?

Interestingly, there are also many other offences where death results that do not even carry the death penalty, or the mandatory death penalty.

THUS, no one should object the abolition of the MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY - trust our judges to impose an appropriate, just sentence.

Mandatory death penalty today only exists in a few countries - Ghana, Iran, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Singapore

Abolishing MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY - does not mean that the death sentence is abolished - it will still be a possible sentence, and judges can after hearing the case, and considering all facts/points can still impose the death sentence for those they feel justly deserve the death sentence.

VERY ODD why some Malaysians are opposing the abolition of the mandatory death penalty...

If it is based on their 'eye for an eye' position/value, then not just mandatory death penalty, but also the death penalty MUST be forthwith removed from all offences where no death happens...

Removing the mandatory death penalty, is nothing but a first step towards total abolition of the Death Penalty - the then BN, and the then PH government was taking steps towards abolition...and now this PN government (which is made up of also BN and some former PH) seems to have forgotten about abolition of the mandatory death penalty - REMEMBER, the PH government was supposed to table the Bill abolishing mandatory death penalty during the March 2020 Parliamentary session.

Politicians and political parties sometimes is 'weak' when it comes to their position, values and stances > so easy do they waiver, or even 'change' simply because they fear that they will lose some votes if they push forward # we should reject such politicians and parties > we need politicians and parties that stick to their promises made before election, who will not change positions after they get into power..'Janji Tidak DiTepati' was previously used against BN - could it also now apply to the PH Plus as well.

So, speedily abolish the MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY - ignore the foolish, who simply want every person, despite their age, circumstances, irrespective of whether they were the ones that actually killed or just one who was there with no intention of killing anyone,...

'Eye for an Eye' position > so no more delays to abolish the mandatory death penalty, where the crime does not result in anyone being killed. For such offences, death penalty also must be abolished???

 

Hard to abolish mandatory death sentence as Malaysians favour ‘eye for an eye’ punishments, says ex-law minister

Thursday, 17 Sep 2020 06:00 AM MYT

BY YISWAREE PALANSAMY

Padang Rengas MP Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz speaks during an interview at his office in 

Kuala Lumpur September 15, 2020. — Picture by Ahmad Zamzahuri

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 17 — Former law minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz has admitted that it is difficult to abolish the country’s mandatory death sentence, as Malaysians always demand “an eye for an eye”.

He said ignoring public opinion and pushing through the amendments to the law necessary for its removal would inflict collateral damage on any government of the day.

“Well, I don’t believe in the mandatory death penalty. But then again, if you want to touch the law, you must convince the rakyat and our rakyat still feel that it must be an eye for an eye.

“Yes, it cuts across all races,” Nazri, who is a staunch advocate for the abolishment of the mandatory death sentence, told Malay Mail in an interview recently.

In 2018, the then Pakatan Harapan (PH) government announced that it planned to abolish the death penalty and halted all pending executions — in a move that was hailed by international human rights groups.

The death penalty would then be replaced with a minimum 30-year prison sentence.

But in February this year, the PH government said it was still studying the possibility of abolishing the mandatory death penalty but not capital punishment altogether.

A survey published by research outfit The Centre in June, however, found that most Malaysians feel the mandatory death penalty should be retained, especially for brutal crimes like murder, where the perpetrator exhibited high levels of intention and aggression.

The death penalty is currently applicable to 33 offences in Malaysia, including 12 for which it is the mandatory punishment. They are drug trafficking, murder, offences against the King, five offences pertaining to terrorism, hostage taking, organised crime, firearms offences and rape.

Covid-19 - Immediately quarantine all Parliamentarians and staff present on 10 September for 14 days - until September 24?

Covid-19 victim in Parliament on 10th September - so immediate quarantine for 14 days of all Parliamentarians and staff present on that day. Close Parliament - immediate sanitization. Or the standard SOP does not apply to Parliament?

All family members and other contacts should be immediately tested, or quarantined now.

Or will this case again receive a DIFFERENT TREATMENT because it will affect Ministers, MPs, etc

It happened before when a Minister attended Parliament, after return from Turkey, when he should have been on 14 day mandatory quarantine - Lucky he did get infected..

But this is WORSE, that officer has been infected by Covid-19...

So many people continue to be arrested everyday for gathering with friends, partying, etc - What will the government do about the Parliamentarians and others..

14 day incubation period - they may now be tested positive ...but then anytime within the 14 day period, they could be infected by Covid-19/

Carriers - they may not get infected personally - but they may infect others they came into contact with..

Immediate ban on travel at least until 24th September - that includes no going to Sabah..

Sabah is having a high incidence of Covid-19 > and so many 'politicians' are going over to campaign - when they return, should they be subjected to mandatory 14 day quarantine.

First, quarantine the MPs and Parliamentary Staff - at the very least self-quarantine at home for 14 days...

  

Works Dept officer with Covid-19 was in Parliament during ongoing meeting

Friday, 18 Sep 2020 06:33 PM MYT

BY JUSTIN ONG

Administrators have confirmed a Works Department officer confirmed with Covid-19 was in the Parliament complex on September 10 when the legislature was meeting. — Picture by Shafwan Zaidon

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 18 — A Works Department officer confirmed with Covid-19 was in the Parliament complex on September 10 when the legislature was meeting, administrators confirmed today.

The Chief Administrator of Parliament said checks conducted after the Works Department disclosed the officer’s infection yesterday showed that the person was present in the federal legislature building about five days before he tested positive for Covid-19.

Covid-19 has an average incubation period of two weeks, the entirety of which may be contagious.

“The officer was confirmed to be in the Parliament complex on September 10.

“Based on checks done, the officer was present to assist the deputy works minister during the winding-up of debate on Yang diPetuan Agong Al-Sultan Abdullah Ria'yatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah’s royal address to the Dewan Rakyat,” the official said in a statement today.

The deputy works minister is Datuk Shabudin Yahaya from Umno.

It is unclear how many of the 70 senators, some of whom may be campaigning in Sabah for the state election, came into contact with the infected officer.

The officer was allowed into the Parliament compound as he was asymptomatic and had passed all Covid-19 screenings that were done in accordance to the National Security Council’s standard operating procedures, the administrator said.

The Parliament official stressed that all precautionary measures as instituted by the NSC and the Health Ministry were observed the entire time federal lawmakers sat.

The Fire and Rescue Department will conduct a sanitisation and disinfection exercise to ensure the Senate may continue its sittings scheduled from September 21 to 23.

Yesterday, the Works Department confirmed that the officer attached to its headquarters in Jalan Sultan Salahuddin tested positive for Covid-19 after undergoing a random swab test at the Kuching International Airport in Sarawak on Monday.

The person still flew back to the peninsula and disembarked at Kuala Lumpur International Airport, from where he was taken to Hospital Sungai Buloh for treatment.- Malay Mail, 18/9/2020

 

Workers’ right to safe workplace must be protected – Bar

By

Aliran admin

-

17 Sep 2020

File photo: sulekha.com

Employers and employees are reminded that workers are entitled to employment rights such as minimum wage, annual leave, termination or lay-off benefits payment and most importantly, the right to a safe workplace as provided under the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994.

In this regard, the Malaysian Bar welcomes the Selangor government’s decision to give one final chance to legalise the operations of unlicensed factories and landowners by the end of this year.

Legalisation would ensure that the workers receive their entitlement as employees, as the factories need to adhere to the relevant laws and regulations, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Employment Act 1955 and the Factories and Machinery Act 1967.

Much more can be done to better safeguard workers’ right to a safe workplace. The Malaysian Bar proposes increasing the capacity of the Department of Occupational Safety and Health to handle the responsibility of administration and enforcement of legislation related to occupational safety and health.

This would ensure that the employers who have flouted the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 and its regulations are prosecuted expediently and punished for causing unnecessary injury or casualty to workers.

In line with the International Labour Organization’s Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (C187) as ratified by Malaysia in 2012, the Malaysian Bar also calls upon the federal government to introduce stricter legislation on workplace safety in order to provide a more conducive working environment for workers in our country.

Salim Bashir is president of the Malaysian Bar - ALIRAN Website