PM Muhyiddin - Pendapatan bulanan RM93,841.65 menimbulkan banyak tanda tanya? Bila gaji bulanan PM adalah RM93,841.65?

Apakah sumber yang menjadikan gaji bulanan Perdana Menteri Muhyiddin Yassin menjadi RM93,841.65, manakala undang-undang, MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT (REMUNERATION) ACT 1980] menyatakan bahawa gaji Perdana Menteri adalah  RM93,841.65 sahaja. Ini berasaskan apa yang diistiharkan kepada MACC.

Prime Minister's salary RM22,826-65, so what are the other sources of Muhyiddin's RM93,841.65 monthly income?

Rakyat ada hak untuk mengetahui, dan Muhyiddin perlu jelaskan. Adakah ini daripada elaun sah - takkan elaun bulanan melampaui nilai gaji?

Adakah ini daripada 'perlantikan politik' yang lain, di mana ini dilakukan oleh Perdana Menteri, Menteri atau kabinet?

Apa yang diperlukan adalah deklarasi yang jelas dan terang - tentang sumber pendapatan bulanan

Gaji Perdana Menteri - Berapa?

Elaun tambahan kerana jawatan Perdana Menteri - Berapa?

Elaun tambahan selaku Ahli Parlimen? - Berapa?

PENCEN(jika ada) - Berapa?

Pendapatan lain(Dividend, Faedah simpanan) - Berapa?

Pendapatan lain(Sewa,) - Berapa?

Derma politik orang ramai dan/atau penyokong - Berapa?

Derma politik daripada syarikat atau perniagaan - Berapa?

RASUAH - Berapa?

Kekayaan lain saperti tanah, rumah, syer, wang dalam bank, dll... ini tak begitu menjadi isu > TETAPI apa-apa perolehan semasa menjadi PM, Menteri, Ahli Kabinet adalah sangat relevan - kerana ianya mungkin 'rasuah' untuk melakukan sesuatu(atau tidak melakukan sesuatu).

Untuk membenteras RASUAH, Kleptokrasi atau salahguna kuasa - mungkin Malaysia juga memerlukan undang-undang yang menjadikan penerimaan wang, hadiah atau faedah daripada mana-mana pihak lain, semasa menjadi Perdana Menteri, Menteri atau Ahli Kabinet satu kesalahan, di mana juga mungkin menyebabkan kelucutan jawatan.

Thailand, negara jiran, pun ada undang-undang sedemikian. Seorang bekas Perdana Menteri kerana menerima bayaran daripada satu rancangan masak di TV apabila beliau menyertai program masak menjadi alasan mengapa beliau hilang kelayakan terus menjadi Perdana Menteri. Terima RM50 pun salah...jumlah tak penting.

Seorang Menteri lain kerana terima hadiah jam tangan pun sama - ia merupakan kesalahan.

Malaysia juga memerlukan undang-undang sedemikian untuk memastikan Perdana Menteri dan ahli Kabinet semua BERSIH. Menerima wang atau hadiah dari pihak lain semasa mereka memegang jawatan pentabiran kerajaan adalah satu kesalahan yang akan menyebabkan mereka hilang jawatan, dan juga posisi MP atau Senator.

Kini, DEKLARASI yang perlu Ahli Kabinet dan ahli Parlimen beri adalah tak memadai - Biar jelas dan ada butiran mencukupi mengenai pendapatan bulanan, serta sumber pendapatan.

KEKAYAAN LAIN tak begitu penting kecuali

(1) Syer atau kepentingan dalam mana-mana syarikat atau perniagaan. [MENGAPA - kita tak mahu kerajaan/PM/Menteri membuat apa-apa keputusan yang akan membantu perniagaan tersebut - saperti memberi projek, dll - kerana ia secara tidak langsung akan juga menjadi pemegang syer/kepentingan lain juga kaya);

(2) Tanah di mana (Mengapa? Kerana kerajaan dan Menteri mempunyai kuasa membuat keputusan mengenai pembangunan setempat, yang akan secara tak langsung menyebabkan nilai tanah ini naik - justeru memberikan keuntungan besar kepada pemilik tanah. Bila kerajaan membuat keputusan meminda pusat pentadbiran kerajaan ke Putrajaya - ramai yang 'tahu terdahulu' mungkin telah cepat-cepat pergi membeli tanah di situ, dan apabila pengumunan dibuat secara rasmi - mereka menang kerana nilai tanah meningkat. Perkara sama berlaku di Janda Baik, kerana dulu ada ura-ura kerajaan mungkin akan memajukan kawasan tersebut - akhirnya tak ada apa-apa yang berlaku dalam kes ini.]

Bagi orang biasa yang meneka, dan membeli tanah  atau syer syarikat sedemikian bukan isu besar - tetapi bagi mereka saperti Perdana Menteri, Menteri atau ahli Kabinet yang mempunyai maklunat perlu dan kuasa membuat keputusan sedemikian, mereka atau ahli keluarga(atau rakan karib) tidak harus dibenarkan beruntung akibat keputusan kerajaan sedemikian.

SEMUA mahu kerajaan dan pemimpin negara BERSIH dan BERAMANAH - tujuan deklarasi pendapatan dan aset bertujuan untuk menghalang salah-laku sedemikian mengunakan maklumat atau kuasa dalam pentadbiran kerajaan.

Deklarasi Pendapatan dan Aset sekali saja tak cukup - ia perlu dibuat mungkin 3 bulan sekali, mungkin 6 bulan sekali - paling kurang sekali setahun, sama sebagai kehendak kini berkenaan deklarasi kepada pihak Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negara.

Ini penting supaya rakyat boleh memantau setiap masa - dan akan mempersoalkan apa-apa pendapatan yang tiba-tiba meningkat. Jika wang masuk dalam akaun peribadi sebagai DERMA pun mesti diistiharkan.

AKAUN BANK - sekiranya ada akaun bank di luar negara pun, di mana ini tempat ramai penjenayah menyimpan 'wang haram' kerana di luar bidangkuasa kerajaan Malaysia, dan setengah bank sedemikian juga tidak akan dedahkan butiran akaun kepada kerajaan atau mana-mana penyiasat jenayah.

Adakah PM, Menteri, Ahli Kabinet, MP, Senator atau ADUN ada memiliki akaun sedemikian di bank luar negara? Ini juga maklumat perlu yang perlu didedahkan.

Penyimpanan wang di bank sedemikian juga biasa tidak didedahkan atau diketahui oleh pihak Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negara(LHDN) - justeru cukai yang perlu dibayar untuk apa-apa pendapatan atau perolehan dapat dielakkan. Mangsa terus adalah RAKYAT MALAYSIA.

* Kita tahu semasa pemerintahan BN dan PH terdahulu, ahli parlimen parti kerajaan telah diberikan berjuta ringgit, kononnya untuk digunakan untuk membantu rakyat di kawasan Parlimen atau ADUN berkenaan > Mana akaun pembelanjaan tersebut? Kenapa BN, PH atau PN tidak mendedahkan? Adakah wang tersebut telah digunakan untuk rakyat dengan betul - adakah wang itu diambil oleh wakil rakyat berkenaan untuk memperkayakan diri atau kepentingan peribadi? Adakah wang itu digunakan untuk memperkayakan kroni atau parti? Semua ini rakyat perlu tahu dengan jelas, kerana ini DUIT RAKYAT?

Sekali buat DEKLARASI tak memadai? Membuat DEKLARASI tanpa butiran tak cukup.

Tujuan utama DEKLARASI sedemikian adalah untuk memberikan jaminan kepada rakyat bahawa PM, Ahli Kabinet atau MP tidak mengunakan kedudukan, kuasa atau posisi untuk memperkayakan diri, keluarga, kawan secara salah - untuk memastikan tak ada RASUAH, dsb.

Selepas buat DEKLARASI, kesalahan dilakukan kini tidak akan diketahui umum - Deklarasi harus dilakukan setahun sekali, lebih baik setiap 3 atau 6 bulan.

PM Muhyiddin tops MACC list with RM93,000 monthly income, 10 other govt officials have assets over RM10m

Wednesday, 22 Jul 2020 09:48 PM MYT

BY IDA LIM

Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yasin had on June 15 declared his monthly income to be RM93,841.65 and his total assets to be worth more than RM10 million. — Picture by Miera Zulyana

KUALA LUMPUR, July 22 — With his public declaration of getting RM93,000 every month, Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin earns the highest income in the Perikatan Nasional (PN) government.

A list of assets owned by 57 of the country’s top officials who have declared the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is now publicly accessible on this portal as part of a move towards greater government transparency. However, this list does not include all 70 government officials.

Muhyiddin had on June 15 declared his monthly income to be RM93,841.65 and his total assets to be worth more than RM10 million.

10 other officials with assets exceeding RM10 million

The list also names 10 others in PN as having declared their assets to be worth more than RM10 million to the MACC.

They are:

1. Federal Territories Minister Tan Sri Annuar Musa

2. Deputy Tourism, Arts and Culture Minister Datuk Jeffrey Kitingan

3. Deputy Science, Technology and Innovation Minister Ahmad Amzad Mohamed @ Hashim

4. Finance Minister Tengku Datuk Seri Zafrul Zainal Abidin

5. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Maximus Johnity Ongkili

6. Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Datuk Kamarudin Jaafar

7. Deputy Education Minister II Datuk Dr Mah Hang Soon

8. Deputy Federal Territories Minister Datuk Seri Edmund Santhara Kumar

9. Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Hanifah Hajar Taib

10. Deputy International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Lim Ban Hong

However, they are not necessarily the ones with the highest monthly income that has been declared.

The MACC portal does not put the exact amount when it comes to the assets held by the members of the PN government.

Instead of listing the exact amount, MACC gave a range of values for the assets declared by each of the 57 members of the PN administration.

The other brackets of asset values listed by the MACC and the government officials in them are as follows.

With assets worth RM8.5 million to RM10 million:

1. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohd Redzuan Md Yusof

2. Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation Khairy Jamaluddin

With assets worth RM5 million to RM8.5 million (eight individuals); RM2.5 million to RM5 million (12 individuals); RM1 million to RM2.5 million (16 individuals including Datuk Shahruddin Md Salleh who has since quit as deputy works minister); and those with less than RM1 million (eight individuals).

The eight individuals with less than RM1 million in declared assets are Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Takiyuddin Hassan; Environment and Water Minister Datuk Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man; Deputy Finance Minister II Mohd Shahar Abdullah; Deputy Home Minister I Jonathan Yasin; Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Arthur Joseph Kurup; Deputy Human Resources Minister Awang Hashim; Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Rina Harun; and Deputy Rural Development Minister II Datuk Henry Sum Agong.

The previous version of the MACC portal that was first unveiled on November 1, 2018 initially only listed the total income for members of the administration and MPs from the ruling coalition, but did not include information on the value of their declared assets. The previous version of the portal had subsequently the same month included the exact value of the total assets declared by members of the then Pakatan Harapan administration and MPs from the ruling coalition.

The new version of the portal contains additional information such as the post of the individuals in the government.

Unlike the older version, the new version omits information on whether the spouse and children of the government official in question had also made declarations to the MACC.

Top 10 earners in PN government

Other than Muhyiddin, the top 10 monthly income earners are:

1. Annuar at RM87,877.20

2. Kitingan (RM85,450)

3. Home Minister Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin (RM84,615.20)

4. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed (RM69,427.20)

5. Senior Minister and Minister of International Trade and Industry Datuk Seri Mohamed Azmin Ali (RM69,186.48)

6. Redzuan (RM65,407.20)

7. Transport Minister Datuk Seri Wee Ka Siong (RM65,236.48)

8. National Unity Minister Datuk Halimah Mohamed Sadique (RM64,527.20)

9. Ahmad Amzad (RM64,087.41)

The top 11th to 20th earners in terms of declared monthly income are:

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Takiyuddin Hassan (RM62,412.13), Tengku Zafrul (RM62,077.20), Khairy (RM61,188.22), Agriculture and Food Industry Minister Datuk Seri Ronald Kiandee (RM59,972.43), Shahruddin (RM59,524.27), Ongkili (RM59,500.20), Deputy Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Ali Biju (RM58,762.89), Deputy Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister Datuk Rosol Wahid (RM57,322.89), Environment and Water Minister Datuk Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man (RM57,227.20) and Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Mansor Othman (RM56,347.65). If Shahruddin is excluded from the list since he has quit as deputy works minister, Rural Development Minister Datuk Abd Latiff Ahmad will be the 20th highest monthly earner at RM55,147.35.

As for the 10 who have the lowest declared monthly income in the list as of the time of writing, they are Deputy Transport Minister Hasbi Habibollah (RM36,262.89), Deputy Agriculture and Food Industry Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Hamzah (RM36,262.80), Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datin Mastura Mohd Yazid (RM35,847.65), Deputy Minister Lim Ban Hong (RM34,347.65), Senior Minister and Education Minister Mohd Radzi Md Jidin (RM34,242.00), Rina (RM34,004.48), Deputy Plantation Industries and Commodities Minister I Willie Mongin (RM33,450), Deputy Entrepreneur Development and Cooperatives Minister Datuk Mas Ermieyati Samsudin (RM 25,700), Datuk Henry Sum Agong (RM25,700) and finally Youth and Sports Minister Datuk Seri Reezal Merican Naina Merican at RM24,687.

Those yet to declare their assets

The MACC said that it has to date received and displayed the information on assets declared by 57 out of the 70 members of the PN administration. If Shahruddin is excluded, 56 have made their declarations to the MACC.

Based on the MACC’s definition of members of the administration covering the prime minister, senior ministers, ministers and deputy ministers, there are currently 14 of them who have yet to submit their monthly income and total assets declarations to the MACC.

Based on Malay Mail’s comparison of the MACC portal and the current list of ministers and deputy ministers, five of the 32 PN ministers are not currently listed as having declared their assets to the MACC for the public portal.

These five ministers are:

1. Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri M. Saravanan
2. Energy and Natural Resources Minister Datuk Shamsul Anuar Nasarah
3. Health Minister Datuk Seri Dr Adham Baba
4. Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister Datuk Alexander Nanta Linggi
5. Plantation Industries and Commodities Minister Datuk Mohd Khairuddin Aman Razali

Of the 38 deputy ministers, nine not on the MACC list are:

1. Deputy Defence Minister Datuk Seri Ikmal Hisham Abdul Aziz
2. Deputy Home Minister I Datuk Seri Ismail Mohamed Said
3. Deputy Works Minister Datuk Shabudin Yahaya
4. Deputy Rural Development Minister I Datuk Seri Abdul Rahman Mohamad
5. Deputy Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Abd Muttalib
6. Deputy Communications and Multimedia Minister Datuk Zahidi Zainul Abidin
7. Deputy Youth and Sports Minister Wan Ahmad Fayhsal Wan Ahmad Kamal
8. Deputy Environment and Water Minister Datuk Ahmad Masrizal Muhammad
9. Deputy National Unity Minister Datuk Seri Ti Lian Ker

* A previous version of this story contained errors which have since been corrected - Malay Mail, 22/7/2020

Police and Media must be held accountable for antics at "anti-vice' raid

The police must be condemned for their action of 'inviting the media' to accompany them as they conduct a raid on a premise allegedly carrying out illegal activities...

The law gives police certain powers....to enter premises where there is a believe that crime is being committed - but certainly, there is no power to bring guests ....and certainly not the media and 'outside' photographers and video camera men..

The police is supposed to gather evidence to prove a crime....and then submit to the prosecutors...who then may charge a person in court... and only after a person is convicted will he be presumed guilty...

And in this case, what were the police doing? What were the media personnel doing? Was it criminal intimidation.... or maybe even defamation...assault???

506.  Punishment for criminal intimidation.
Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; and if the threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or imprisonment, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.

Was there any 'prostitution' proven at all? Was there any sex for money at all? At night, they raided a premise - and there were women - some not having the time to dress up properly...

"If one of the girls is your mother, sister, or daughter, would you take the photos and publish them?" - Muhammad Sha'ani Abdullah, Commissioner, Human Rights Commission of Malaysia

Is it a crime for a group of women scantily dressed to be in a private premise at night? I do not think so...

Is it even wrong for a man and women to be caught having sex....No, it is not a crime if it is consensual and both are adults. For Muslims, it may be an offence in Syariah law if they are not married...but not the case for non-Muslims.

Is it wrong for a women masseur to be scantily dressed when she is massaging a customer...in a premises licensed as premise that provides massage services...No, it is not.

Is it wrong for a women scantily dressed to be massaging a man in some other premises... No, it is not.

Sometimes, our own prejudices...and 'excitement' blinds us from the facts...interestingly also we find that there are very few (if any at all) cases where a person have been tried and convicted for prostitution... 

Too many times, these kind of abuses by the police (and the media) have occurred - and sadly it continues... We have seen many media reports (even reports on TV) about similar raids ... where we are also shown pictures and images of usually young women....

SUHAKAM maybe should have a public inquiry about this raid - and come up with recomendations about proper conduct of the police and the media...

1. Media should never be invited to accompany the police on any such raids... 

2. If media is to report on any such raid, there must be no pictures, video or graphics of any of the said women or persons arrested, etc that allows any third person to be able to be able identify such women and persons....be it vide their faces, clothing, physical trait/description, nationality, religion ....

*** The victims, the women and other persons victimized, most likely would not want to take any action (or legal action) against the police, media and ...who violated their privacy and rights... 

Be that the case, justice loving Malaysians and persons, must insist an end to such behavior and conduct by the police, the media ....against SUSPECTED sex workers...

 

Photographers have a ball at anti-vice raid

Loh Iee Wen 9:10AM Aug 1, 2012

COMMENT Two weeks ago, the media was invited by the Selangor police to witness its anti-vice, gambling and secret societies unit in action.

Media personnel gathered at the Puchong Jaya police station that night and were given a short briefing by the enforcement team.

The team leader then told his 20-strong team that the police rarely bring the media along during a raid, reminding his subordinates to behave and not to embarrass themselves.

He also reminded his men not to smoke cigarettes or behave aggressively during their raid. Just before the briefing ended, the leader said: "I don't like the media following us either."

This remark didn't really bother me, but I did find it rather baffling at the time.

Later, we arrived at the gates of a suspected vice-den and the police went through a considerable effort to break down the door.

Personal gratification

What followed were some rather "lively" scenes caused by the media personnel present.

While the police did not abuse their power, some media personnel did. They used their cameras and cell phones to take photographs of suspected sex workers for their personal gratification.

Many suspected sex workers did not have enough time to dress, and were forced to stand naked in front of the trigger-happy press photographers. The police did not interfere.

Some suspected sex workers were shocked by the sudden appearance of the police personnel and the media horde, causing them to grab their clothes to cover their bodies.

One senior male media personnel appeared extremely excited when he saw a naked woman in front of him. While training his camera on the woman, he scolded her in Malay: "Who asked you to cover (your body)?"

The woman tried in vain to locate a private nook to dress herself, but the photographer tailed her until a police personnel said: "Forget it. Let her dress up."

The media man slowly made his way out of the room, but stopped in front of a curtained cubicle to take photographs of another woman putting on her clothes.

After the suspected sex workers had put on their clothes, they were taken to the lobby of the establishment.

Female journalists too join the fun

One suspected sex worker wore a short dress and in her haste, did not put on any underwear. As she sat down, several photographers and videographers noticed her exposed private part and quickly trained their cameras on her.

When the victim realised what was going on, she rushed back to a room to put on an underwear.

Meanwhile, several female journalists were having a ball posing for photographs in front of the suspected sex workers.

The incident clearly illustrate how some media personnel had violated their journalistic ethics.

It is no surprised that Bukit Aman Anti-Vice, Gambling and Secret Societies Division director Abdul Jalil Hassan once said that the media often enjoyed such assignments.

This reminded me of the police officer who had earlier ordered his subordinates to take care of their image during the raid.

But that night, the members of the media were the ones who embarrassed themselves.

WAO: Stop taking media on anti-vice raids

---

LOH IEE WEN is a crime desk reporter with Oriental Daily News. The above article appeared in Oriental Daily News on July 30, and is reproduced with permission.- Malaysiakini, 1/8/2012, Photographers have a ball at anti-vice raid

See earlier post: -

Not just defaming young foreign women - but now chaining and marking them - Shame on you Malaysia

WAO: Stop taking media on anti-vice raids

Sara Ghazie 5:10PM Aug 1, 2012

Amidst criticism of a media pursuit to photograph naked women during a recent police anti-vice raid in Selangor, calls have been aired for greater respect for news subjects as well as a stronger grip on journalistic ethics.

Women’s Aid Organisation executive director Ivy Josiah said the police should stop taking media personnel along on the raids, especially to massage parlours.

“Why should the media be there in the first place? The police should have never invited the media,” said the long-time campaigner for fairer portrayal of women in the media.

“Over the years, whenever there is a raid, they (media have) tended to take photographs of naked women… The customers and employers have rarely been shown and this is sexist.

“It is a common practice but it is humiliating and disrespectful to the women. The portrayal of women in the media has always been problematic.”

Photographers involved in the raid stand accused of taking pictures of the women, even following them to their changing rooms. The police apparently did not stop the photographers.

Ivy said reporters and media photographers should be educated by their editors to stop being unethical.

“The editors should focus on the ethical issues of their subordinates. They should be educated to respect women, innocent or guilty,” she told Malaysiakini today, noting that those caught in such situations could be victims of human trafficking.

She suggested that the media industry should monitor itself by seeking help from support groups like the Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) and National Union of Journalists (NUJ) to step up ethical reporting.

Malaysiakini also spoke to other stakeholders on this issue.

NUJ secretary-general V Anbalagan 

All journalists and photographers covering events must respect the privacy of the people involved.

They (news subjects) are innocent until proven guilty. Media are quick in blaming people and it is dangerous especially when it involves the rights of women and children.

The media is trying to paint a negative picture by posting (indecent) photos of women. The women have not been charged (with any offence). They are still being questioned by the police.

Since reporters need to write their stories, they should be careful in handling the photos and should not identify the women.

Although the NUJ has provided classes on ethics in the past, it is the job of the employer to fully educate the photographers and journalists.

The NUJ will look into updating the code of ethics. Times have changed, so the code needs to be changed too.

Muhammad Sha'ani Abdullah, Commissioner, Human Rights Commission of Malaysia

The media should not sensationalise their articles to sell more newspapers.

In any news coverage, they (media) should respect the subject's dignity.

The media should not use images of these people to promote their newspapers. This is not in our culture.

The police too have no right to invite the media on raids.

Suhakam will decide whether or not a dialogue is required with news editors to discuss the journalistic code of ethics.

We have highlighted this before. It is the media's responsibility to protect the privacy of (subjects), not degrade them any further.

If one of the girls is your mother, sister, or daughter, would you take the photos and publish them?  - Malaysiakini, 1/8/2012, WAO: Stop taking media on anti-vice raids

Resolution condemning actions of police at BERSIH 3.0, and demanding apology passed (11/5/2012)

Extraordinary General Meeting of the Malaysian Bar (11 May 2012)

Friday, 11 May 2012 10:05pm

Contributed by Chin Oy Sim, Deputy CEO, and photos by Md Faizal Mahat, Administrative Assistant, Bar Council 1,270 Members of the Bar attended the Malaysian Bar’s Extraordinary General Meeting (“EGM”) held at Sunway Putra Hotel on 11 May 2012. The EGM was scheduled to begin at 3:00 pm.  By 2:20 pm, 143 Members had already signed in, and the figure rose quickly to 214 Members within the next 11 minutes.  The quorum of 500 Members was achieved by 2:55 pm, but the meeting did not commence until almost 3:30 pm, while the crowd waited for hundreds of additional Members to be registered.  By 3:32 pm, 1,101 Members had signed in, and there was standing room only in the hall. One motion had been proposed for consideration at the EGM: “Motion in relation to the events of and surrounding the BERSIH 3.0 public assembly on 28 April 2012, and matters in connection therewith, proposed by Lim Chee Wee (Chairman, Bar Council), on behalf of the Bar Council, dated 4 May 2012”. Although a few Members spoke fervently against the motion and the convening of the EGM, the vast majority of Members present were strongly supportive of both, and were vocal in expressing their viewpoints.  After a number of amendments had been made to the motion, it was put to a vote and carried by a majority, with 939 votes in favour, 16 against, with no abstentions. The EGM was adjourned at approximately 5:40 pm. (Full report to come) Resolution adopted at the Extraordinary General Meeting of the Malaysian Bar held at Sunway Putra Hotel, Kuala Lumpur (Friday, 11 May 2012) Resolution in relation to the events of and surrounding the BERSIH 3.0 public assembly on 28 April 2012, and matters in connection therewith Motion proposed by Lim Chee Wee (Chairman, Bar Council), on behalf of the Bar Council, dated 4 May 2012 (As amended) Whereas: (A)  A public assembly was called for and organised by BERSIH 2.0, a coalition of 84 NGOs, on 28 April 2012 for electoral reforms.  The public assembly was commonly known as BERSIH 3.0; (B)  Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur refused to allow the assembly at Dataran Merdeka, as chosen by the organisers, and insisted on the use of alternative venues; (C)  Despite the Minister of Home Affairs having twice asserted that the BERSIH 3.0 assembly was not a security threat, the police obtained an ex parte order from the Magistrates’ Court on the evening of 26 April 2012 restraining Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan, the organisers of the BERSIH assembly and members of the public from gathering at Dataran Merdeka; (D)  The police announced, after obtaining the court order, that participants were permitted to gather at various points in Kuala Lumpur, except Dataran Merdeka; (E)  It has been reported by various news agencies that there were between approximately 30,000 to 250,000 people gathered for the assembly in Kuala Lumpur on 28 April 2012.  The Malaysian Bar monitoring team estimated the crowd to be at least 100,000 people; (F)  The crowd that gathered that day reflected a broad cross-section of Malaysian society, and was peaceful; (G)  There were police barriers set up at every point/road leading to Dataran Merdeka, most of which consisted of metal gates, water-filled dividers and razor wire; (H) There was massive police presence: approximately 14,000 personnel were reportedly deployed (including personnel from the Federal Reserve Unit) together with water cannons.  It was observed that a substantial number of police personnel did not display their police identification numbers on their uniforms;  (I)  At approximately 2:35 pm the organisers of the assembly, through its Co-Chairperson Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan, announced that the assembly had concluded and requested that the crowd disperse; (J)  The police were initially restrained.  However, this changed at approximately 3:00 pm, when there was a reported breach of the perimeter barriers set up at the junction of Jalan Tun Perak and Jalan Raja; (K)  The police then responded by unleashing water cannon and firing successive volleys of tear gas directly into the crowd gathered at that junction, and along Jalan Tun Perak, Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman and Jalan Raja Laut.  Similar police action was reported at other points where crowds had gathered; (L)  The Malaysian Bar’s monitoring teams reported witnessing the use of heavy-handed tactics by the police, including the indiscriminate discharging of multiple rounds of tear gas directly into the crowds, without any obvious provocation, and the arbitrary use of water cannons; (M)  The police also directed their use of water cannon and firing of tear gas to box in participants rather than allowing them to disperse quickly.  As participants retreated, the police should have re-established their barriers and given sufficient time to the crowd to disperse in an orderly and safe manner, instead of chasing participants and persistently shooting water cannon and firing tear gas on them.  It appeared that the purpose of the police was not to disperse, but to attack, the crowd; (N)  Random, widespread and wanton physical assault and brutality by the police on members of the public and media professionals have been reported.  It has further been reported that there was confiscation and/or destruction of photographs and video recordings made by members of the public and media professionals, and damage caused to their recording equipment; (O)  There were unwarranted arrests of members of the public and media professionals.  The police also arrested Members of the Bar who had participated in the public assembly.  Whilst in the care and custody of the police, at least three of these Members were physically assaulted and beaten, and suffered serious injuries; (P)  In response to the use of force by the police, sections of the crowd resorted to retaliatory acts, including the throwing of stones and bottles.  The police responded like for like.  These skirmishes between the police and sections of the crowd carried on until approximately 7:00 pm; (Q)  The police have failed to display the maturity, discipline and restraint required of a professional force.  Instead of acting to calm the situation, they aggravated it and contributed to its escalation; (QA) The findings and recommendations of the previous four SUHAKAM public inquiries, regarding the incidents at Kesas Highway (2001), KLCC (2007), Bandar Mahkota Cheras (2008) and the BERSIH 2.0 public assembly (2012), do not appear to have been put into consistent practice by the police; (R)  It has been reported that the organisers of the BERSIH 3.0 assembly had not made sufficient efforts to manage the crowds or to resolve the impasse between the police and the crowds; (S)  It has been reported that between 388 and 513 persons were arrested and taken to Pusat Latihan Polis (“PULAPOL”), Jalan Semarak, Kuala Lumpur.  The Malaysian Bar’s urgent arrest team, comprising members of the Bar Council Legal Aid Centre (Kuala Lumpur) and volunteer lawyers, were present at PULAPOL to assist and represent the arrested persons.  However, the police refused to allow them access to the arrested persons despite repeated requests by both the lawyers present and the arrested persons.  This denial of access to legal representation is a violation of Article 5 of the Federal Constitution and section 28A of the Criminal Procedure Code; (T)  The right of every citizen to freedom of speech and expression, and to assemble peaceably, is enshrined in Article 10 of the Federal Constitution as well as Articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; (U)  The right of every person to life and liberty, including the right not to be assaulted or harmed, is enshrined in Article 5 of the Federal Constitution as well as Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and (V)  The Malaysian Government, as a member of UNESCO, is aware of the Medellin Declaration on Securing the Safety of Journalists and Combating Impunity, adopted at the UNESCO Conference on Press Freedom, Safety of Journalists and Impunity on World Press Freedom Day 2007; Now it is hereby resolved that with respect to the events of and surrounding the BERSIH 3.0 public assembly on 28 April 2012 in Kuala Lumpur:   (1)    The Malaysian Bar views with grave concern, and condemns: (a)    the excessive, indiscriminate and wrongful use of water cannons and tear gas by the police on participants of the assembly; (b)    the action of the police in not allowing the crowd sufficient time to disperse in an orderly and safe manner, and instead chasing the participants and attacking them by persistently shooting water cannon and tear gas on them; (c)    the tactics of the police in trapping and attacking the participants with water cannon and tear gas instead of permitting them to disperse;         (d)    the random, widespread and wanton physical assault and brutality by the police on members of the public and media professionals; (e)    the unwarranted arrests of members of the public, media professionals and Members of the Bar, and the physical assault and beating of at least three arrested Members; (f)    the unjustifiable and unlawful confiscation and/or destruction of photographs and video recordings made by members of the public and media professionals, and damage caused to their recording equipment; and (g)    the lack of discipline and professionalism of the police; (2)    The Malaysian Bar calls for the police to identify their personnel involved in the misconduct and unlawful acts and surrender all the wrongdoers, in particular those who assaulted members of the public, media professionals and lawyers, for prosecution; (3)    The Malaysian Bar renews our call on the Government to give effect to the recommendation of the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysia Police to set up the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission recommended therein, without further delay; (4)    The Malaysian Bar calls for the Minister of Home Affairs and the Inspector General of Police to issue a public apology for the actions and conduct of the police, including the excessive, indiscriminate and wrongful use of water cannons and tear gas; (5)    The Malaysian Bar calls for the Minister of Home Affairs and the Inspector General of Police to issue a public apology to members of the public, media professionals and lawyers who were assaulted or beaten by the police; (6)    The Malaysian Bar calls for the setting up of an independent commission to recommend and formulate proper guidelines or operating procedures governing conduct of police in the control and management of public assemblies, and the use of non-lethal and lethal weapons, which would be in accordance with internationally-accepted standards, in particular the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (adopted by United Nations General Assembly resolution 34/169 of 17 December 1979) and the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials 1990; (7)    The Malaysian Bar calls on the Government to pay just and proper compensation to members of the public, media professionals and lawyers who were assaulted; (8)    The Malaysian Bar condemns the police for denying lawyers access to arrested persons and calls upon the police to abide by and give effect to Article 5 of the Federal Constitution and section 28A of the Criminal Procedure Code; (9)    The Bar Council will look into how it can assist those denied their constitutional rights and those who were assaulted to pursue claims against the relevant parties for just and proper compensation; (10)    The Malaysian Bar calls on the Government, in line with the Medellin Declaration, to: (a)    prevent crimes against media professionals, investigate and penalise such crimes, provide witness protection for those testifying about them and ensure that the perpetrators do not go unpunished; (b)    promote awareness and train Malaysian law enforcement agencies to respect and promote the safety of media professionals, and ensure that they are able to work in full security and independence; and (c)    take resolute action for the safety of media professionals and ensure respect for their professional independence; (11)    The Malaysian Bar calls on Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur to uphold freedom of assembly and the right of all to utilise Dataran Merdeka for public assemblies; and (12)    The Malaysian Bar reaffirms the right of individuals to participate in public assemblies.  The Malaysian Bar is however concerned by, and does not countenance, any acts of violence in a public rally.  Such action by participants is not an appropriate response to the police.  Such right of public assembly must be exercised in a peaceful and responsible manner.  The Malaysian Bar reminds organisers of public assemblies of their responsibility to take all reasonable action to ensure a peaceful assembly.  The Malaysian Bar is equally concerned by reports that certain persons had crossed through the police perimeter barriers at the relevant location when the said organisers had at about 2:35 pm called for a dispersal of the assembly. The motion, as amended, was put to a vote and carried by a majority (939 votes in favour, 16 against, with no abstentions). Source: Malaysian Bar Website

Spending too much on Defence - and unnecessarily increasing cost of living

Why are we wasting so much money for Defence spending? 

We may need air-ambulances and fire-fighting helicopters ... but certainly not submarines and other military hardware...

Are we being forced to buy military hardware as part of some 'trade agreements'?

Malaysia is not in war with anyone at the moment - and we seem to be spending more than Thailand, Indonesia and Philippines.

Let us also not forget to take into account population - and we find that Malaysia's spending per person for Defence is just too high...

Malaysia's BN government says that they have financial problems - and cannot anymore afford 'subsidies' - and need to cut it ....end result increase in the cost of living...

Are we heading for a 100% capitalistic model - when we know that capitalism has failed, evident in the US where the number of 'new poor' and homelessness is on the rise...

Najib and his BN government must stop this trend which will ultimately be very bad for Malaysians especially the poor, the 'not so competitive', the elderly, ...

We still need to accept that all times, now and the future, we will need to share and ensure a good life also for the poor, weak, marginalized, disadvantaged,.... 

We do not want a Malaysia that promotes 'self-centredness' - you want to benefit, you go for it and reap its benefits...Those who do not 'win' the rat race will just have to suffer the consequence of their failures, weakness, etc... We certainly do not want this for we understand fully that a community is made of people, not all who will win the 'rat race', and as community we need to be striving for the good of all - not just I and my family and 'my gang'.

APCET: When the court rules in favour of the people, the government just cannot accept it

Apcet II case: Gov't files to reverse judgement

Regina Lee
Apr 26, 10
11:03am

 

The government will be filing to reverse the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment which ordered it to pay RM30,000 each to 29 human rights activists and journalists.

This comes just five months after the court ruled in favour of the 29 in a civil suit where they accused the police of wrongfully detaining them, following Umno Youth's disruption of the Apcet II civil society gathering in Kuala Lumpur more than a decade ago.

The letter by the Attorney-General's chambers obtained by Malaysiakini, said that judge Wan Ahmad Muhamad was erroneous in the law and the facts of the case when he decided that the defendants acted illegally in detaining the plaintiffs.

"The judge was also erroneous when he awarded the plaintiffs RM30,000 each and with an annual interest of eight percent from the date the case was filed until judgement.

"The judge was erroneous when he decided that the defendants should bear the cost of legal proceedings for the plaintiffs," the letter said.

Long trial

The judgement on Dec 22 last year, ordered the government to pay a total of RM870,000 in general damages.

The local activists and journalists had initially filed a RM87 million suit against the government two years after the incident.

The suit was filed against the government after the group's "wrongful detention" at the Second Asia Pacific Conference on East Timor (Apcet II) on Nov 9, 1996.

The international conference was organised to discuss human rights abuses in East Timor and its struggle for independence from Indonesia.

Held at the Asia Hotel in Kuala Lumpur, the function turned unruly when a mob led by Umno Youth stormed the venue and harassed the 100 participants.

About 400 members of the Umno Youth-led Barisan Bertindak Rakyat Malaysia (BBRM), or Malaysia's People's Action Front, charged in and disrupted the meeting as it was about to begin.

They broke down the conference hall doors, flung chairs and verbally and physically abused the participants.

Police then moved in to arrest the participants, who were detained for between one and six days, while 40 foreign participants were deported.

A total of 36 activists and journalists originally filed the law suit. However, four withdrew, one passed away and two did not appear to provide testimony during the trial.

Among the high-profile plaintiffs are:

1) Former PRM secretary-general Sanusi Othman
2) PKR deputy president and senator Syed Husin Ali (right)
3) Batu parliamentarian Tian Chua
4) Malaysiakini chief executive officer Premesh Chandran
5) Malaysiakini editor-in-chief Steven Gan
6) Malaysian Trade Union Congress president Syed Shahir Syed Mohamad.

Others include Subang MP R Sivarasa, Parti Sosialis Malaysia president Dr Nasir Hashim and former New Era College principal Kua Kia Soong.

The defendants are former Kuala Lumpur police chief Ismail Che' Ros, former Dang Wangi OCPD Zainal Abidin Ali, investigations officer chief inspector Tengku Hamzah Tengku Abdullah, the Inspector General of Police and the Malaysian government.

The trial also heard shocking testimonies by the Umno youth secretary then, Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, who said that he the then deputy home minister, the late Megat Junid Megat Ayob, had ordered for him to disrupt the proceedings a full month before the function was held.

Saifuddin is now PKR strategy director and has since issued a public apology over his role.- Malaysiakini, 26/4/2010, Apcet II case: Gov't files to reverse judgement

Kasitah Gaddam & Eric Chia - Prosecution's failure to call witnesses - Was it just incompetence OR....?

The new Prime Minister (i.e. Abdullah Ahmad Badawi) came in and said that he was serious about fighting corruption - and, maybe to show that he was serious about it 2 BIG-GUNS were charged with corruption, one a famous businessman (seen by some as a good friend of the former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad), and the other a Land and Cooperative Development Minister (not an MP but a Senator).

Tycoon Tan Sri Eric Chia Eng Hock - he was acquitted in June 2007.

Kasitah Gaddam - he was just acquitted in 2009.

In both cases, it was as if the prosecution was not interested in ensuring that they be found guilty - and they failed to call important crucial witnesses, hence sabotaging their own case. Is this also not 'corruption'? Rakyat's money and resources have been wasted here...

In his 30-page oral judgment, he went on to fault the prosecution in every aspect of the case, from the way the main charge and alternative charge were proffered right to the tendering of documents, and its failure to call crucial witnesses.

Akhtar said the most glaring setback was the prosecution’s failure to call two material witnesses, who would have been able to confirm whether payment was needed for the technical assistance agreements (TAA) signed between Perwaja Rolling Mill Development and NKK Corporation.

He said former Perwaja company secretary R.R. Durai Rajasingam, who was involved in all Perwaja’s contracts, would have known the actual contents of the TAA.

“Yet the prosecution never called him. The question is why? I see nothing to say that he would be a hostile witness or give evidence against them.”

The judge also questioned the prosecution’s reluctance to call the five Japanese witnesses, including NKK Corporation, Japan, director N. Otani, who was present at the signing of the TAA in Japan in 1993.

“I wonder whether it was the Japanese witnesses who were reluctant or the prosecution was the one reluctant to bring them here,” he said.

Akhtar also said the prosecution’s contention that the TAA was free fell flat in its face when tendering its documents at the trial as they clearly stated that the agreements would be effective upon receiving first payment.

Another document by NKK Corporation not only requested for the payment to be in a lump sum but also stated the amount.

He said the prosecution failed to lead any evidence to show fabrication of that document, which it contended.- Star, 27/6/2007, Eric Chia acquitted of CBT

Now, see the similarities in the Kasitah Gaddam's case...

Former land and cooperative development minister Tan Sri Kasitah Gaddam was acquitted and discharged by the High Court here of committing corrupt practice and cheating involving shares belonging to the Sabah Land Development Board (SLDB) in 1996.

Judge Justice Suraya Othman ruled that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case on both charges for the court to call Kasitah to enter his defence.

“The essential ingredients of both the offences of corrupt practice and cheating were not made out on the facts before the court. In the circumstances, the accused stands acquitted and discharged of both the charges against him,” Suraya said in her 74-page judgment.

Kasitah, 62, was the first Cabinet member to be charged with such crimes.

Not guilty: An overjoyed Kasitah sharing his elation with his wife Puan Sri Rosni Ambuting and lawyer Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah after his acquittal of corruption and cheating charges at the Kuala Lumpur High Court Wednesday.

Immediately after the verdict, Kasitah said he was relieved and happy, adding that the judgment was a “pleasant surprise”.

“I want to see my mother in Ranau and spend a few days with her. Then, I want to perform the umrah with my family and close friends. After that I will think about reorganising my life,” he said.

His wife Puan Sri Rosni Ambuting and his grandaughter Jennay Joanis rushed up to kiss and congratulate him immediately after the court’s decision was announced.

Kasitah had claimed trial to using his position as SLDB chairman for his financial gain by taking part in the decision to approve a proposal to sell 16.8 million shares held by the board in Sapi Plantations Sdn Bhd to Briskmark Enterprise Sdn Bhd, where he was promised 3.36 million shares in Sapi Plantations on Oct 22, 1996.

On the second charge, Kasitah was alleged to have cheated the SLDB board members by omitting to disclose the offer by PPB Oil Palms Sdn Bhd to allocate five shares of the company for each share of Sapi Plantations in the proposal by company for listing on the KLSE.

He thereby dishonestly induced them to approve the sale of 16.8 million shares held by SLDB in Sapi Plantations to Briskmark Enterprise whereas they would not have approved the sale if they had known about the offer by PPB Oil Palms.

Justice Suraya said the failure of the prosecution in not calling six board members who were present in the meeting was detrimental to the case as it had created a big gap over the question of whether the board members were actually cheated by the accused.

She also said that evidence by lawyer cum board member Catherine Yong was very damaging as she did not indicate that Kasitah had misused his position or influence her or other board members during the meeting.

Besides that, the judge said there was no element of inducement on the part of Kasitah to the board members.- Star, 13/8/2009, Kasitah freed of corruption charges

The questions that many may be asking are:-

1) Whether the arresting and charging of these persons just a 'political drama', or was merely politically motivated? If this be the case, the police and the Public Prosecutor may be guilty of abusing their powers. Charging someone without even doing proper investigations or getting sufficient evidence is definitely wrong. Who is going to compensate them for the monies spent for lawyers, etc and for the pain and suffering they suffered. Who is going to compensate for the impact on Kasitah's political career? So, did the police and the Public Prosecutor just do the bidding of their then political master, and not the job they are meant to do independently and honestly, without fear or favour?

2) Did the Public Prosecutor throw the case...sabotage their own case..by not disclosing to court all the incriminating evidence they had...or calling all the necessary witnesses? Was this done at the bidding of their 'political master'? Was this done because there was 'corruption' involved?

If they had called all necessary witnesses, and adduced all available witness, and then the court found them not guilty, we would not be asking these questions now. But the fact is that both judges in both cases, as reported in Star, finds that the prosecution did fail to call material witnesses, and or adduce required evidence...

Appeal to the Court of Appeal may also be useless. Why? Because the Court of Appeal will only be able to consider evidence already adduced during the trial at the High Court. Hence, evidence of witnesses not called or other evidences not adduced at the trial stage by the prosecution will also not be available for the Court of Appeal to consider. New evidence, just found not available at the time of trial, may be brought in ....but, in this case, we are talking about the prosecution - they should have all the required evidence before they even charge people...

Another trial - nope, our law does not allow a person to be charged and tried twice for the same offence...

Some may say that all this happens because our Malaysian police, Anti-Corruption Officers and the Public Prosecutor are incompetent and of 'poor-quality'...but, I would disagree, for I believe that they are sufficiently competent and are good when they want to...Hence, these failures in both these cases may be for some other reason...

Somebody should inquire into this matter...investigate it....after all, a lot of money was wasted here...

New guidelines need to be put into place ... as to when someone should be arrested? When someone should be tried? ...and maybe also about compensation to people who have been put to unnecessary expenses by the police, public prosecutors, courts...

Very wrong to suspend ADUNs/MPs - revoke the suspoension order of Khir Toyo & 3 Ors..

No Member of Parliament(MP) or Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri(ADUN) should be suspended...

Why?
Because these are the people's elected representative, and the act for suspending them from the House is an anti-people action - it deprives these people their right to be represented, their right to be heard, their right to participate..

We have all condemned strongly the suspension of certain opposition personalities in the past, when it was done by the BN - but today Pakatan Rakyat seems to be WORSE because their suspension is not merely some token 1-day suspension but suspension for long periods..

It started in Perak with the Pakatan Rakyat Speaker suspending ADUNs for of up to 18 months for one (and 12 months for some other ADUNs)...

Then, we had a 'retaliation' of sorts with Gobind being suspended by a BN-majority Parliament for

Now, Selangor is doing the the same...and this 'anti-people' and undemocratic action must be condemned in the strongest terms...

Soon, we may find the BN also doing the same - maybe suspending all 7o over Members of Parliament(MPs) - and that will be OK...will it? I think not.

No duly elected people's representative must be prevented from carrying out all of his duties and functions - and the most important of this is to attend the sitting of the Dewan Rakyat/State Assembly as apeople's representative - to voice out opinions, to debate, to vote on motions and Bills.

A deprivation of this right and privilege accorded to a people's representative by a Speaker...or some Parliamentary/State Assembly Committee or even the full Dewan/Assembly is wrong...and certainly against the principles of democracy..

See also earlier related post:- The power to suspend MP/ADUNs must be removed, and Judicial Review must be made available

The Selangor assembly's powerful rights and privileges committee has suspended state opposition leader and former menteri besar Dr Mohd Khir Toyo for 12 months from the House.

MCPX

The decision follows the Umno leader's absence from the Balkis inquiry in March and for criticising the Selangor Select Committee on Competence, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat) in his blog.

The privileges committee also called for the suspension of Barisan Nasional assemblypersons Warno DogolIsa Abdul Kasim (Batang Kali), Marsum Paing (Dengkil) and Mohamad Idris Abu Bakar (Hulu Bernam) for six months for questioning the integrity of Selcat...

State assembly speaker and committee chairperson Teng Chang Khim announced the decision after chairing the privileges committee meeting in Shah Alalm to discuss the matter.

State assembly speaker and committee chairperson Teng Chang Khim announced the decision after chairing the privileges committee meeting in Shah Alalm to discuss the matter.

"Khir is found guilty of contempt of the House in refusing to attend the Selcat hearing, and is suspended from the assembly for 12 months and his allowances would also be frozen during the period.

"However, the decision would have to be tabled at the Selangor state assembly sitting scheduled in July for it to be adopted. This includes the suspension of the four other assemblypersons," he said - Malaysiakini, 19/5/2009, Khir Toyo suspended one year

What other wrongs have been done?

Suspending the allowances of a Wakil Rakyat is also very wrong. Remember not all MPs/ADUNs have got other sources of income...from businesses, law firms, etc. Some of these MPs/ADUNs depend only on their allowances as wakil rakyat - and it is this money that is used to pay the rent of service centres, pay their support staff, etc... and when you suspend or deprive a ADUN/MP of his allowance, it is really very very wrong...

Teresa Kok, when she was MP of Seputeh used what she received as an MP to maintain her staff and her service centre - and she was a good MP, as she was not distracted by other business or professional work. We want MPs/ADUNs to be such totally dedicated to being a 'wakil rakyat'...

I strongly urge the Selangor Speaker, Selangor Select Committee on Competence, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat), and the Selangor Pakatan Rakyat to immediately revoke that suspension orders.

There must be other means of 'punishing' - maybe a reprimand ...a strong reprimand would suffice. Even, if there is to be suspension, it should be something very rarely used, and it should only be suspension for not more than until the next rising of the sun...

Maybe, using that Contempt of the House (Selangor Legislative Assembly) Enactment 2008 could be used. I have not seen that Enactment, and hoped that it has a very narrow and clear definition on the meaning of 'contempt'. The Enactment should apply to a person who failed to attend Select Committee hearings, on being summoned., etc ..but it never be too wide or vague, for that will be too open to possible abuse...

Respect the people - respect their representative and the duties that the rep has to perform for and on behalf of his/her constituents...

We appreciate all the difficulties that Pakatan Rakyat State governments may be facing with the many 'interferences' from the BN State government...by the refusal of BN Federal Government to duly channel required funds through the legitimate State Government rather than through other 'proxies' (like the BN MPs/ADUNs/BN JKKKs/BN Party Offices/ etc...) but Pakatan Rakyat has to be different...and struggle on always doing the right thing.

And for me, suspending wakil rakyat is very wrong...

REVOKE immediately all suspension orders...

ACA DG 'leaps into the fire from the frying pan' on that 2 PKR State Exco issue...

ACA DG's effort to try convince Malaysians that arrest of the 2 PKR State Exco members 'has nothing to do with politics' just further reinforces the believe that the ACA may have sold its soul to the 'devil'.

If it was a normal usual arrest for the purposes of investigations - there would not have been a Press Statement issued. Remember, they are just suspected of being involved is some corruption at this stage. Are they corrupt? Well, the ACA is still investigating. Maybe they are just persons who may be able to assist in the ACA investigations - i.e. witnesses.

Oh yes, the police/ACA do not just arrest suspects - they also arrest witnesses (or people who, they believe, will be able to help in the investigations) - strange, is it not?

As I mentioned earlier, a notice requiring the attendance to assist in the investigations would have been sufficient - no necessity really to arrest at this stage. They did not do an 'Anwar' by not turning up after being notified that their presence is required to assist in some investigation.

And would these persons now arrested and being detained, i.e. them EXCO members (and the others) run and flee the country....I do not think so.

Do the police/ACA have the power to arrest and detain persons like this -- oh yes they do have - and that is why the law must be reformed --- amended. (See my earlier post for some of my suggestions for reform).

Even if you did arrest, there was no need to go to the media and publicize it --- ACA cannot deny this because they did prepare and issue a Kenyataan Media (Media Statement) - which went into details of the alleged corruption being investigated. Why? [Malaysiakini did publish the full statement]

Remember - in the case of Anwar - there was great secrecy about the contents of even Saiful's police report (which is a public document) - but here the whole world knows almost the full details of the alleged crime.

Now, ACA DG comes out again today in the press saying that the arrest and its timing had nothing to do with politics...This attempt to salvage spilled milk just makes matters worse for the ACA..

The arrest of the two Perak executive council members by the Perak Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) has nothing to do with politics, the agency’s Director-General Datuk Ahmad Said Hamdan said Thursday.

He said he was disappointed with allegations by certain quarters who accused the agency of deliberately detaining the two men when there was by-election fever in the country. “I am disappointed when the ACA is accused of conspiracy, scheming with the ruling party, that is not true. This is a criminal case. We have nabbed many people ... Director-General of Immigration and senior police officers. - Star Online, 21/8/2008 - ACA DG: Arrest of Exco members not politically motivated

He should not have even come out and responded - or is it just a case of 'siapa makan cili dia rasa pedas' (he who eats chily will feel the chilly hot - a very bad translation).

Here, he goes further and apparently blurts out to the press --- we have proof - and that the ACA have conducted investigations for 3 months

WHY is the DG of the ACA telling us all this now?

The investigation is still on-going, and the arrest is to facilitate investigations into determining the truth. Is the DG now implying that they are really the 'suspects', and not just witnesses?

The proof is there so we arrest them,” he told reporters after attending a forum titled ‘Independent Anti-Corruption Commission: Towards Effectively Combating Corruption and Enhancing Integrity’ at the Integrity Institute of Malaysia here Thursday.

Ahmad Said said the ACA conducted investigations on both the Exco members for more than three months and it was a coincidence that the arrests were made close to the by-election.- Star Online, 21/8/2008 - ACA DG: Arrest of Exco members not politically motivated

If the proof is there, why not just charge them in court? End of story...

What you are doing now is violating the rights of the 2 PKR State Exco members, and them others. You are slinging mud at them in the wrong forum - it is becoming a trial by media.

The proper way of doing things is investigate - and if there is sufficient evidence, then charge them in court - and bring forth all them evidence in court. Let them who have been charged defend themselves in court.

The ACA and its DG should not be going to the media at this stage - it is not at all proper.

From the frying pan, the ACA DG has jumped into the fire -- and now, I believe, that more people are going to believe that the whole arrest and the timing of the arrest is really politically motivated.

I fully agree with the DG when he says “Just because of the election (it does not mean) we put aside the case till later...." - but there is proper way of doing things...

Is it becoming the trend that DGs are now going to the media and making statements with regard to on-going criminal investigations. If I am not wrong, the Health DG(Merican) also went to the media even before Anwar was charged... now we have the ACA DG.

I believe that the fumble on the part of the ACA, and now its Director General is significant enough for the ACA DG to be removed, or for him to resign.

It is most important that ACA be seen as independent - and not politically motivated.

ACA must also be professional...and behave professionally....and I believe that they have failed here.

And guess what, this issue is already being used by the BN in its campaign in Permatang Pauh....

...Citing the arrests of two PKR Perak executive councillors by the Anti-Corruption Agency yesterday, he [Khairy Jamaluddin - the Prime Minister's son-in-law] chided the opposition party for being inconsistent in their graft-busting campaign... -Malaysiakini, 21/8/2008 - Khairy: We've come to 'bury' Anwar

In any event, even if the 2 are found guilty ultimately by a fair and open court, some bad apples would not make the whole bunch bad...

OR....would the other saying be more appropriate - 'It is just the tip of the iceberg...