Sarawak: Overcoming personal fear and making BN fearful for the betterment of Malaysia

One of the problems with the Malaysian voter has always been fear...when it comes to voting in the Opposition, and this fear have been propagated by the ruling coalition, and the time has come that people overcome this fear and vote for the best interest of Malaysia and the peoples of Malaysia.

FEAR 1 - fear that the Opposition do not have the capacity to rule effectively - and all that they can do is to highlight the wrongs, injustices and rights violations that happen. This fear, however, may no longer be justified following the victory of the Opposition in the States of Penang, Selangor and Kedah which they have shown they could effectively govern. Let's not forget that it has been the Opposition that have been effectively governing the state of Kelantan for many many years. They have also effectively governed states of Trengganu and even Sabah(at one time)

FEAR 2 - the fear that there will be repercussions and 'problems' , even violence, if the BN loses, and the racial riots of May 13 is brought up. Malaysians, generally are a peace loving people happy to live (or rather survive) 'peacefully' even in a situation where there is injustice and discrimination.

There is also the threat that 'development' and the flow of funds will be reduced and/or 'stopped' if the constituency votes for the opposition. In the people's memory, they have seen this happen before. For example, development in Seremban seemed to be stagnated until the BN won this constituency back. We remember also how the Opposition State government had difficulty getting the oil royalties. We see also today, how Federal funds for State development seems to slow down when Opposition wins States. Pakatan also indirectly justifies this by saying that they have to win at the Federal government if there is going to be real 'reformasi'. The problem, I believe is in the State-Federal relationships, where the Federal government still do retain too much power preventing State's more autonomous rule and governance. States just have too little power and say - especially when it comes to the States of the Peninsular of Malaysia.

Then, there is the fear that people will be discriminated with regards to scholarships for students, other benefits, the fear of civil servants getting transferred to some 'rural' area or being 'overlooked' when it comes to promotions, etc,...There is a belief that those who vote against the BN will suffer such discrimination at all levels...

No Equitable distribution of wealth - but sufficient to pacify the disatisfaction of most people

Malaysia is a rich country, blessed with many natural resources - but unfortunately, the BN government failed in ensuring that there be an equitable distribution of wealth not just amongst its people, but also with regard to geographical areas. Some areas have received so much of the benefits of  the countries wealth, compared to other areas. The people, who generally did not get their just share - but did get sufficient little to be able to live and survive comfortably, and this has calmed them down a bit. Poverty and abject poverty is low in the country.

Democracy - but a dictatorial/feudal style of governance

Malaysians generally do not feel that they are the 'bosses' with the power, but generally believe that they cannot get anything without the support of politicians and political parties of the rural coalition. 'People's Representatives' become 'bosses' not 'servants' of the people and promote dependency and patronage rather than empowerment - sadly, this kind of behavior has also been adopted by many a opposition politicians. 

Even when it comes to claiming justice and compensations for an industrial accident, people are encouraged to go get a letter of support from the politicians and political party to get their claim processed. This really is not at all necessary - but this 'belief' has been cemented into the minds of people, and they believe that if they do not this support, their claims will not succeed.

Even when it comes to allocations to assist the poor and elderly provided by Federal Government, State or local government, what happens is that even the letters are sent not by post to the recipients but through members of political parties, and these monies are given at a function officiated by the politician, which people are forced to attend personally to get their allocations. There really is no need for this as letters could be send, with the enclosed monies directly to the people concerned or with instructions that they could present at the relevant offices of the said departments to get their allocations. We also see that not all in the category that is entitled gets the said letter and/or the allocations propagating the myth of the necessity of having political patronage or the need to be a supporter of the ruling political parties.

If there was only a public notification vide banners, etc that there is such allocation identifying the class of beneficiaries, at least all those who did not get the letters who are entitled can also go receive their benefits from the relevant offices of the relevant departments/ministries. But alas, all is done in a 'secretive' manner, that communicates a very wrong message, i.e. only those supporters will get it and it is the political parties that decide who gets and who does not.

The power and the ability to reward (or promise to reward) those loyal to the ruling political parties have also been seen during by-elections and elections, when suddenly so much are given to the people to get their support for the ruling parties.

For the poor, the promise of a low-cost house in the future, or the continued presence in a low-rent premises, has always ensured great support for ruling parties. For the small business person, the possibility of getting a small shop premise, or a spot in the market/night markets, etc.,...

It is this dependency culture, not a culture of rights and justice, that have kept the BN in power for many many years...but again sadly, many people believe that a similar culture seems to be practiced by the Pakatan Rakyat especially in the states they now govern.

Many say that in Selangor today, what has changed is only the political parties in power, and now it is their cronies that reap the benefits no more the BN cronies - and guess what, many have become 'lallangs' shifting alliances depending on who wins and who does not - a practical option for survival. For them, there is really no loyalty to the party or its ideologies, their support is very much based on practical solutions for the sake of personal/business survival and profits. Most affected of the Pakatan Rakyat parties, have been the new PKR party and that is why we have seen so many of their 'elected reps' and even party 'strongs' so easily jumping ship to other political parties. DAP and PAS do not seem to have much of this problem.

These 'party hoppers' betrays the people, who did 'sacrifice' a lot overcoming their fears to vote for the Opposition, and will have an impact on whether they will again vote for the Opposition the next time around.

Overcoming personal fear and transfering that fear to BN and politicians
But, the people are smart, and they know it is better to keep the 'political coalitions' who want to rule and govern insecure and uncertain of the people's support, and this will ensure that the people get more benefits and rights either way. BN, who have been totally confident of winning everytime in the past 50 over years, is now worried and is 'dishing' out more benefits and wealth to the people compared to past years, and thus for the better good of the people of Malaysia, it is good that the BN (or the Opposition Coalition) be always  'kept on their toes' with the realization that if they do not behave justly .e. be more just and equitable to the people, the people will reject them and choose another.

To maintain this, it is time that the BN loses more (even maybe States and the Federal governments they currently control) this coming elections.

 

The outcome of the Sarawak State elections is thus very important - and if BN continues to lose more and more seats, maybe even the right to rule, it will not only benefit the people of Sarawak but all Malaysians. 

'They have no experience and have no capacity to rule' - is no more an argument that the BN can use anymore, as we have seen that the Opposition have managed to quite effectively and efficiently rule in Penang and Selangor ...with not too much problems or 'scandals'

So, we now have a choice - BN or Pakatan Rakyat (Opposition)

PR State Elections can be at a different time from Parliamentary elections...

The UMNO-led BN government can determine when we have our next General Elections for us to elect in our new Members of Parliament...i.e. Parliamentary elections.

The respective State governments can decide when we have the respective State Elections - for people to vote in their ADUNs.

There is really no necessity, I believe, for us to have the Parliamentary elections and all the State elections at the same time. Note, now only Sarawak has elected to have their State elections at a different time. In fact, all States can have their own State elections at different times. Previously, when the UMNO-led BN controlled all State governments (save 1 or 2), they called for elections at the same time. But really, there is no need for the State Legislative Assembly of any State to dissolve at about the same time to have a elections at the same time.

So, maybe the Pakatan Rakyat governed States can now decide a different date for their State elections.

It may be good, because the people sometimes like a 'check and balance' - i.e. If UMNO-led BN wins the Federal Elections, people may 'balance things off' by voting in the Opposition to rule the States. This was what was happening when we had Local Council elections - and people were voting in the Opposition at the Local Council level, and it is because the UMNO-led BN (or earlier coalition) was not able to change this trend, they decided to just get rid of the Local Council elections. In fact, some say that Pakatan Rakyat is also afraid that if they bring back Local Council elections, the people may vote in a significant number of UMNO-BN candidates... Why? Check and Balance....do not give anyone absolute power...

Nonsense if wakil rakyats cannot enter schools, have dialogue sessions, etc

Well, it is absurd when the people voted in the Pakatan Rakyat parties to govern Selangor...or when the people have voted in a non-BN MP/ADUN for their area that they are not allowed to go visit (or be invited to) the schools and other facilities in their own constituency...

UMNO-led BN must understand what is the meaning of democracy...and this means the people choses their 'wakil rakyat' (people's representative), be it the MP, ADUN (and later on the Loacl Councillor) and when this happens it is their responsibility to look into the welfare of their constituents - and that must certainly include visits, having dialogue sessions, etc be it in schools, clinics, police stations, etc...i.e. any public facility, and it is really absurd that the Education Ministry have come out with lists of all who can be invited to schools and school functions...and I see in that list persons who have not even the wakil rakyat for that area. 

If I was the ADUN/MP, I would write a letter to the relevant public facility and state that I am coming for a visit at this day and time, and would also like to have a meeting with the said teachers, students, etc.. as the democratically chosen people's representative for the area..., and if the headmaster or OCPD says "No", I will certainly make it an issue and challenge that decision. Maybe, then I would arrange a meeting at a nearby hall, and I will hand out pamphlets inviting students, teachers and parents to attend. Then, we shall see what happens...

Duly elected reps have the duty and obligation to represent the people in the constituency - and to be an effective rep, they must be able to meet their constituents, have dialogue sessions, ...so that they can best represent them.

Using reasons like they cannot go is absurd...

When Pakatan Rakyat (and the Opposition Party) takes control of the Federal Government at the next General Elections, then they too must allow the BN reps to be invited to and attend school functions, etc... Why? They are the duly elected people's representative...

A circular that allows specified BN leaders to attend events organised by Selangor schools but keeps out those from Pakatan Rakyat, has been criticised as an example of double standards.

The circular dated Feb 16, 2009 states that the education minister has appointed 57 leaders from Selangor Umno, MCA, MIC and Gerakan to represent him at these events in the state.

Signed by the principal secretary to the minister, the circular was sent to the director of the Selangor Education Department.

It also states that the BN representatives have each been issued a certificate of appointment, copies of which were attached to the circular with a full list of names and posts held in the respective political parties.

When contacted, Hannah Yeoh, the DAP state assemblyperson for Subang Jaya said that - by implication - school authorities have to get the minister's permission to invite Pakatan representatives.

“(When the schools ask for permission), it is never given,” she claimed.

Yeoh had recently mentioned this in a tweet, in which she questioned the contents of the circular and said she had managed to obtain the list of 'approved' BN leaders.

“I am not allowed to attend any function in the schools in my area. This is not right as it sends the message to the children that you have to receive whoever you are given. They cannot choose their own leaders,” she said.

She, however, said she was allowed to enter her alma mater - SMK Subang Utama - after the Parents-Teachers Association (PIBG) stepped in.

“In my case, because the PIBG insisted, I was able to attend. So it shows that PIBG plays an important role,” she added.

'Clearly unfair' policy

DAP's Teratai state assemblyperson Jenice Lee confirmed the situation.

“Some schools had requested donations from me, but I was not allowed to go in and give a speech," she said.

There was one occasion where I had to hand over the cheque outside the school compound.”

“I know this has happened to many other Pakatan leaders, not just me and Hannah. And this is clearly unfair.” - Malaysiakini, 4/8/2010, Elected reps kept out of S'gor schools

Education Ministry's list of 'approved visitors' 

Or maybe, the reason why they have not been trying is because these wakil rakyat's are just lazy.....happy that there are restriction imposed by the Education Ministry, etc... There is no basis to disallow Pakatan Rakyat's duly elected people's representative when they allow not only the BN's elected reps but also some other politicians from BN. This, I believe, certainly is an infringement of Article 8 which demands equality...and abhors discrimination. Certainly, this does not fall within Constitutionally permissible discriminations.

If on the hand, the Education's Ministry's list did not contain politicians and other elected reps, but maybe only academicians and educationist, then maybe it may have been OK - but this list, that is found in the Malaysiakini report purportedly issued by the Ministry of Education is certainly, in my opinion, in violation of  the Federal Constitution.

They may call the list, a list of the official representatives of the Minister, and if so it must  reasonably be people from the Ministry - not UMNO-BN politicians. In fact, there is no persons from the Ministry at all - all are UMNO, MCA, MIC...and (1)Gerakan politicians (Side issue, what about the other component parties of BN??). What about the Deputy Minister? 

Wakil rakyat's should write to schools and say that they want to attend a particular school function, and maybe even have a dialogue session, or even give a speech....and then let us see the reply that comes. If the reply, is that they cannot come because there is  a clear restriction by the Ministry (or Federal Government), then we have a stronger case. Now, the letter just talks about the Minister's representatives...and there is nothing there that say that 'wakil rakyat's', if they are Opposition cannot have any functions in the school, with the teachers, parents and/or students.. Of course, the Minister can chose whoever to represent him - and this is what this strange list is all about, odd because it only contains BN politicians and no one even from the Ministry.

An end of some discrimination againt the Sabah & Sarawak by the UMNO-led BN government after almost 40+ years..

Oh how Sabah and Sarawak have been discriminated for so long...by the UMNO-led BN government.

Najib has ended this discrimination with regard to now providing for Federal Grants to be given to Local Councils in Sabah and Sarawak..

How else have the people of Sabah and Sarawak been discriminated by Kuala Lumpur? Tell us..

And, now when the UMNO-led BN is shaky, and may lose to the Pakatan Rakyat come next election, there suddenly is a rush to 'buy' Sabah and Sarawak. A rush to remedy the wrongs done to them all these years by an UMNO-led BN government. Recently, I also saw that finally there is push to get roads build in Sabah and Sarawak. Maybe, they also deserve to have a rail link from Kuching to Kota Kinabalu...

And another question that comes to mind, is how much have been given to the Local Councils in Semenanjung Malaysia. Which local councils got the money and how much did they get? Did all local councils in Semenanjung get equal treatment or not? A MP can maybe ask these questions in Parliament and get us the answers.

Local authorities in Sabah and Sarawak will be given grants beginning next year to help them boost their services to the people.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said the move would cost the Government an additional RM62.8mil annually.

He added that prior to this, only local authorities in the peninsular were given federal government grants.

Local authorities in Sabah and Sarawak receives financial assistance from their respective state governments.

“We hope this will enhance services provided by local authorities in Sabah and Sarawak and the people can enjoy better facilities and services,” he said after chairing the National Finance Council meeting on Tuesday - Star, 25/8/2009, Grants for local authorities in Sabah and Sarawak

I also wonder why Federal Government is giving grants directly to Local Authorities? Should not the money be given directly to the State governments, for them to hand over to the Local Councils?

State Government cannot set up Selangor Royal Commissions of Inquiry - this is just an excuse, is it not?

In response to my posting (below), someone responded stating that only the Federal Government can establish a Royal Commission...

It is the power of Fed Govt to establish royal com. State Govt only can blacklist contractors and set new guidelines for demolition & other safety measures.

Why can't the HRH Sultan of Selangor set up a Selangor Royal Commission of Inquiry? Why can't the State Government set up a Commission of Inquiry? After all the deaths happened in the State of Selangor, did it not?

Just because, it has never been done before when Selangor was governed by the BN does not mean that it can never be done now when this state is being governed by the Pakatan Rakyat...

Malaysia is a Federation - and States have powers still to do as it pleases within the State...It can even acknowledge rights within the State - just include rights in the State Constitution, and this rights can be more than those now stated in the Federal Constitution - right to food, shelter and clothing, right to universal healthcare, right to freedom of information, etc...

Not doing anything now - giving the excuse that things will be done ONLY when Pakatan Rakyat is able to take over the Federal Government is an excuse that only fools will accept. ...

That earlier post is Royal Commission of Inquiry for 7 workers who were killed in 'unapproved' demolition work of Jaya Supermarket building - Petaling Jaya, Selangor??

In the end of May 2009, in Petaling Jaya, Selangor (a Pakatan Rakyat governed State), 7 people ...workers lost their life, and I wonder whether the will be any Royal Commission of Inquiry...or any Inquiry into the death of the 7.

Remember, the construction company (the employer) started demolition works without the requisite approval from the Department of Occupational Safety and Health(DOSH) - and apparently, with the approval of the local council.

Is there any investigation going on?

The 7 deceased workers - what are their names? Have their family been compensated? Etc..

Oh, you appointed (not-elected) Local Councillors of PJ... MB and government of Selangor -- Minister of Labour (in charge of approvals, employments, SOCSO/Workers Compensation) from the UMNO led-BN Federal government - UPDATE us....

This is Malaysia - and we do have the tendency of not being bothered about the 'small' people - the workers, the peasants, the poor - Sweep it under the carpet - that is the way things are done here. Is the Pakatan Rakyat any different?

The bodies of all seven workers trapped in the rubble of the collapsed Jaya Supermarket building here have been recovered.

The last three were pulled out yesterday, said Petaling Jaya OCPD Asst Comm Arjunaidi Mohamed.

On Thursday, the five-storey portion of the supermarket building collapsed right to the basement, where the car park was located, during demolition work. - Star, 31/5/2009, Bodies of all seven trapped workers found

The Department of Occupational Safety and Health did not give approval for the demolition of the Jaya Supermarket in Petaling Jaya, said Human Resources Minister Datuk Dr S. Subrama-niam.

He said the developers had a demolition permit from the local authority and while they had applied for the department’s approval, they did not obtain it when they started the demolition work.

Dr Subramaniam said the department began its investigations on Monday and it would take about two weeks to complete. - Star, 3/6/2009, Jaya Supermarket demolition done without approval

This is a really old story - why bring it up again? Well, we have to because if not 'they' may 'cover-it-up' and the victims will not get justice, and the wrong-doers will get off scot-free. We, who want answers, must persist and repeatedly knock at the doors until finally we will get some answers...

See also earlier posts:-

Jaya Supermarket Collapse: 7 Workers dead - Is there a 'cover-up'?

PJ Local Council's responsibility in the death of 7 Jaya Supermarket incident cannot be ignored...

Jaya Supermarlet Demolition tragedy :- Pictures reveal 'mistakes' that resulted in 7 dead workers

Worker Safety is not a BN priority - Occupational Safety and Health is no more important - 90% Transportation Companies...90% Estates..

746 workers died in industrial accidents in Malaysia in 2008

Who does the Police listen to? Time for State Police?

Now, would the police have arrested a Cabinet Minister on the way to attend a Cabinet meeting?

Would the police have arrested a BN State Exco member on the way to attend a State Cabinet meeting?

But when it came to Pakatan Rakyat - the police arrested a State Exco member on the way to attend a State Cabinet meeting? It certainly would have interfered with the executive functions and certainly a cabinet meeting...

And was is some serious offence that required him to be arrested then and there...surely a letter to be present in court to be charged, or to be present in the police station at a particular time and date would have been enough.

As I mentioned the loyalty of the police to the the Selangor and other Pakatan Rakyat State Government comes into question? Or maybe the word should be 'respect' ...or 'courtesy'...NOT loyalty.

The police conduct in Pakatan Rakyat governed states raises serious questions. Is it time for us to have 'State Police' just like the Federation, the USA?

For the moment, I suggest that the State Government should have a say with regard to who will be the Chief Police Officer of the State, and also the OCPD of the various police Districts in the State.

If the police still follows the instructions of the PM and the Federal Government - and not the Menteri Besar and the State Government, something is not right. (When both the Federal and State Governments were BN - it would have not been an issue - but now that we are moving into an era when there are soem BN governed States, and some Pakatan Rakyat governed States - it becomes important to consider who the police listens to...or whose policy and decision matters...).

Selangor executive councillor Ronnie Liu was arrested at the state secretariat building in Shah Alam this afternoon.

MCPX

The DAP state assemblyperson for Pandamaran was detained by several plainclothes and uniformed policemen at the entrance of the building at around 2pm.

Liu, who was on his way to attend the weekly state cabinet meeting, was later taken to the Puchong police station.- Malaysiakini, 12/11/2008 - S'gor exco man arrested, out on bail

Uthayakumar vs PM - time for a Public Debate?

I believe that it is very wrong to arrest and detain a person without trial - as is happening to RPK, Uthayakumar...

It even more wrong when they also charge them with 'another' offence... as is being done to Uthayakumar and RPK. (Remember, even if they are found not guilty - they continue to be detained under the ISA.)

How do they prepare for their case whilst being under detention without trial - Access to lawyer and others are so limited - and there is also a question of 'privacy'. Transcripts of communications of a confidential nature between lawyer and client may actually be in the possession of the police and prosecutors as I do not trust Kamunting rooms...

Now, Uthayakumar's sedition trial is an open trial - and this means that no one can be prevented from being in the courtroom - the only reasons for exclusion may be space constraints.

A small commotion in the courtroom preceded today's hearing when the case was moved to another court, but before the same judge.

Hindraf supporters were unhappy when they were not allowed into the new courtroom. A shouting match ensued between the supporters and the police, with Uthayakumar - wearing a white shirt and tattered blue pants - joining in.

Kapar MP S Manikavasagam was among those shouting, insisting that the police should stop "harrassing the supporters".

A woman fainted in the ensuing disorder and was taken to a hospital in an ambulance. Surendran claimed she had been “elbowed” by a police officer.

However, the commotion died down after 20 minutes, when more supporters were allowed to enter the courtroom where they sat on the floor.- Malaysiakini, 20/10/2008 Uthaya's sedition trial moved to February

Another report

A commotion broke out at the entrance of the Criminal Sessions Court here when police barred Uthayakumar’s supporters from attending his sedition trial.

Earlier, when the hearing began at the Civil Sessions Court at 9am, the room was packed with 70 well-behaved supporters. How-ever, when the courtroom was changed to the Criminal Sessions Court just before 11am, police prevented the supporters from entering the court and a shouting match ensued.

A police officer had told the supporters that they needed to be registered to enter the courtroom but the latter countered they had the right to enter an open court.- Star, 20/10/2008 Uthayakumar’s supporters create commotion when barred in court

Note that those who came were well-behaved - and the problems only arose when they mysteriously changed court rooms and then did not allow them in. Anyone who came early to get a seat in court who suddenly find themselves in the predicament of finding a seat again when the court room is suddenly changed will certainly not be happy...

There is NO requirement in law that one has to be registered - and the Bar, civil society groups and all concerned persons must protest that move to try to register persons who want to go into court...what next? Will we need to be photographed? Will we need to undergo DNA tests? ...Who is starting all these new requirements? The police?

In fact, the Judiciary is the 3rd arm of the government, which should be independent of the executive and the legislature.

The police are under the executive....and as such they should not even be there 'policing' the courts.

If need be, there must be a separate and distinct security force or police that comes directly under the courts. The court-police should be differently uniformed and will not be under the Inspector General of Police or the Minister of Home Affairs - they must come directly under the Head of the Judiciary.

I believe that the police should have no business in the courts - save as prosecution officers.
Accused persons or prisoners brought to court by the police (or prison officials) shall be handed over to the court police. [How difficult is it for the suspect or accused persons to even tell the Majistrate that they were tortured by the police when standing beside them and all around the room are the very same police - which may also include the alleged 'torturer']

NEXT....That consent of Public Prosecutor issue

Oh yes, Uthayakumar could only be charged and prosecuted if there was a consent by Public Prosecutor. If Ghani Patail allowed his personal feelings against Uthayakumar to influence his decision, then ... the consent is invalid... then the act of charging in court will be wrong - and, I believe, Uthayakumar should then be compensated by the government and paid damages as well.

The consent form is issued under Section 5 of the Sedition Act 1948, which states that "no person shall be prosecuted for an offence under section 4… without the written consent of the Public Prosecutor".- Malaysiakini, 20/10/2008 Uthaya's sedition trial moved to February

There has been an attempt to paint the alleged HINDRAF supporters as being ill-behaved and unruly ... is the reason behind this also prejudice? Or is it purely a political strategy of the government to discredit and kill off this peoples' movement that refuses to die until their grievances are considered and dealt with... (Yes, the PM and the BN government has yet to make a response to the all of HINDRAF's demands. Maybe we should have a public debate between Uthayakumar and the PM (or maybe DPM) just like the one that we had between Shabery Cheek and Anwar)

It is time the PM and the BN government deal with the ISSUES rather that spending so much effort trying to discredit the leaders and the movement that has raised these issues...

The declaration of HINDRAF as being unlawful was stupid...and should be immediately revoked. For so long as HINDRAF is unlawful - how can the PM or the government even initiate and have a dialogue with HINDRAF. Any reasonable person will know that like the arresting of the 5 leaders under ISA, this new move making HINDRAF unlawful will not at all settle the concerns...

Forgetting BN, Pakatan Rakyat should maybe respond to that 18 concerns raised by HINDRAF - and mind you many of this concerns could also be dealt with at the State levels.

Pakatan also avoids responding to HINDRAF's 18 concerns - choosing only to focus on 'the release ISA detainee issue', and the 'do not make HINDRAF illegal issue'...and slogans like 'Makkal Sakti'...

Sabah population increases by 285%, whilst Malaysia's population iincreases by only 113% - something is very wrong..

There are BIG questions that the Barisan Nasional government, currently led by Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, has got to answer about Sabah's "new" citizens - persons who have since 30 years ago have suddenly become Malaysian citizens or have acquired PR Status. (Children where 1 parent has PR status are automatically citizens)

Many have called it an 'illegal migrant problem' - but I think that label causes confusion, which result in Migrant Rights and Human Rights groups reacting thinking that we are talking about the undocumented migrant/refugee problem. {I believe the BN government likes to use the term "illegal migrant proiblem" to the Sabah situation just to cause the confusion.....Recall to that the recent government response was arrest and deport the undocumented migrants ---- very evasive and certainly not looking at the the Sabah "new" citizen problem...}

The Sabah problem is a "new citizen" problem. Who are these "new citizens"? How did they acquire citizenship? How do we now deal with these "new citizens" and their citizen children today? Recent revelations by MP for Sepanggar, Datuk Eric Majimbun also reveals that true original citizens are also in some cases are also losing their citizenship...

"(7) The discrepancy in the percentage increase between Kadazan, Dusun, Murut on the one hand and other Bumiputera between 1970 and 2000 i.e. 236 per cent and 631 per cent respectively; ...

(9) The discrepancies in the population increase between 1970 to 2000 in Sabah, Sarawak and Malaysia: 10,439,430 to 22,202,614 or up by 113 percent in Malaysia; 976,269 to 2,012,616 or up by 106 percent in Sarawak; and 636,431 to 2,449,389 or up by 285 percent in Sabah." - Malaysiakini, 6/10/2008 - Sapp: 'Loopholes' behind IC scam

These new facts, were amongst the many other points that were disclosed by MP for Sepanggar, Datuk Eric Majimbun. (See below for more points raised as found in the Malaysiakini report...)

Evidence of illegal issuance of MyKad to foreigners will be released by the Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) tomorrow.

The MP for Sepanggar, Datuk Eric Majimbun, said he would reveal the details that led to a population explosion in the state.

"Just imagine, our population increased by 285 per cent between 1970 and 2000," he said. "I will bare all, including proof of people not born in Sabah becoming Malaysian citizens (in Sabah)." - The New Straits Times, 3/10/2008 - SAPP to show proof of Sabah MyKad scandal

Related to this, was the answer in Parliament in 2006 with regard the ethnic composition of Sabahans

Who are the “Other Bumiputera” and Other Ethnic Groups” in Sabah? According to an answer to Teresa Kok (DAP Seputeh), the PM Department said that there are 436,300 “Other Bumiputera” and 143,500 “Other Ethnic Groups” in Sabah. These constituted 25.9 percent of the Sabah population.

The composition of ethnic groups in Sabah as of March 206:

Melayu 342,500 15.3%
Kadazan/Dusun 530,000 23.7%
Bajau 399,300 17.8%
Murut 98,400 4.4%
Bumiputera Lain 436,300 19.5%
Cina 287,200 12.8%
Lain-lain Etnik 143,500 6.4%
Jumlah Warganegara 2,237,100 100.0% (75.1%)
Bukan Warganegara 743,600 (24.9%)
Jumlah 2,980,700 (100.0%)

The question is who are the “Other Bumiputera” and “Other Ethnic Groups” that cannot be classified according to a particular ethnic group. Are these “citizens” non-indigenous to Sabah? - taken from the Blog of Chow Kon Yeow

Some interesting BN governmental responses:-

Mohd Najib Razak - Deputy Prime Minister

He dismissed Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s comment in Kota Kinabalu on Saturday that “there could have been administrative errors at the state NRD but this will be put right. No one will be victimised." - - Malaysiakini, 6/10/2008 - Sapp: 'Loopholes' behind IC scam

Nazri Aziz

A state ruling coalition leader has taken Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz to task for making light of the concerns of Sabahan over the growing menace posed by the large presence of illegal immigrants in the state.

Sabah Progressive Party (Sapp) leader Tham Nyip Shen, who is also state science and technology advisor, said he was 'utterly shocked' that Nazri could have said in Parliament recently “that the presence of foreigners, including those with IMM13 documents, did not cause social, security and economic problems in Sabah.” - Malaysiakini, 8/7/2006 Sabah leader blasts Nazri over immigrant remark

In 2007, the Parliamentary Select Committee tried to look into this but alas the National Registration Department refused to turn up, and...

“It is a serious matter and indicates an unbecoming attitude of an agency when a meeting called by the Parliamentary Select Committee can be rejected.

“This is also disrespectful to Parliament and reflects the standard and quality of administration of this country,” Ramon said in a statement today.

He also called for Dompok’sposition as chairperson of the PSCI to be reinstated and that the NRD be held accountable for the issuance of identity cards in Sabah where there is apparent widespread abuse.

“Tough disciplinary action must be taken against individuals and agencies that do not heed parliamentary meetings seriously,” he added. - Malaysiakini, 19/5/2007 - Kit Siang and groups support Dompok

.... the Chairman of that Parliamentary Select Committee resigned...

Dompok’s decision to resign from the bi-partisan committee followed Lim’s question on why a scheduled committee meeting yesterday with National Registration Department (NRD) into a fake identity card scandal in Sabah dubbed ‘Project M’ was suddenly cancelled.

Test of strength

The NRD has refused to appear before the committee - a move which Nazri has supported. - - Malaysiakini, 19/5/2007 - Kit Siang and groups support Dompok

It is obvious that the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and the BN generally have no interest in investigating the "new" citizens of Sabah, and how they suddenly became citizens. Why? Maybe, because the whole situation has benefited UMNO - who certainly is today the dominant BN component party in Sabah, a situation which would not, most likely not be if the ethnic composition remained the same as it was in 1970.

Even in Semenanjung Malaysia, some say that the difference of the ethnic composition in 2008, compared to that in 1957 raises some questions as to whether there were "new" citizens also created here. Different birth rates among the ethnic groups do not explain the difference.

There must be an investigation into this issue of the "new" citizens of Sabah (and maybe even Malaysia) - and the guilty must be exposed and penalized.

With regard the "new" citizens and their now citizen children, that will be a difficult problem to resolve BUT the whole community must come together and find a solution.

Many of these "new" citizens and their children have become Malaysian, have lived and studied in Malaysia - so the solution may not be the stripping of citizenship or the deportation to some other country.

The term "illegal migrant problem" - probable a term that the UMNO led BN government would like to use to confuse the issue especially in Malaysia. Why? Because most Malaysians immediately start thinking about the undocumented migrants in Malaysia who have been around for a couple of years or so... The "new" citizen problem of Sabah is very very different...

Anyway, back to that Malaysiakini report, and the other points raised by Eric Majimbun

Cases in point

Majimbun highlighted some pertinent facts and figures the bureau has collated in recent days:

1) The case of Filipino, Jerom Maguil, who was issued MyKad 5609030-12-5739 (old IC No: H0540992) under the name of Jerom Majimbon and staying in Eric Majimbun’s village in Inanam, Kampung Pomotodon. Inanam is in the outlying regions of greater Kota Kinabalu.

The case file includes a letter that Eric wrote to the Home Ministry secretary-general on Oct 4 last year on the case, with copies to the NRD in Kuala Lumpur and the state NRD; the reply from the Home Ministry in Parliament confirming that Jerom Majimbon a.k.a Jerom Maguil was not entitled to the MyKad he was holding.

The fact remains the MyKad has not been withdrawn, neither has Majimbon been deported. There was no reply to the Oct 4 letter;

2) The history of statements from residents in Kampong Pomotodon bringing the presence of Jerom Majimbon a.k.a. Jerom Maguil to MP Eric Majimbun’s attention;

3) The case file of a Sino-Dusun, Thien Kau Pah B Kian Kim, 60, born and bred in Kampung Melaka, Jalan Kionsom, Inanam, Kota Kinabalu and issued a MyPR and not the MyKad to which he is entitled when he had to change his old blue IC. His appeals were not entertained;

4) The state NRD replacing the MyKad of a senior citizen, Yong Lee Hua @ Piang Lin, 78, a native, with a MyPR (permanent resident status) after she lost her MyKad to a picket pocket on Feb 12 last year at a supermarket in Penampang Baru, an outlying region of Kota Kinabalu, on the grounds that “senior citizens who lose their MyKads are given the MyPR as replacement”;

5) Some cases of passport-holding foreigners from Philippines and Indonesia who have one or two of their children becoming Malaysian citizens although their other children are not citizens;

6) 65,000 Filipino refugees were issued the IMM13 refugee documents in the 1970s, according to the federal government. More recently, the federal government cited the same figures for 2008 raising various questions on the subject: how many have been given citizenship, permanent residence and bumiputera status?

7) The discrepancy in the percentage increase between Kadazan, Dusun, Murut on the one hand and other Bumiputera between 1970 and 2000 i.e. 236 per cent and 631 per cent respectively;

8) The problem of children of inter-marriages being classified as sino-natives and not as natives; and

9) The discrepancies in the population increase between 1970 to 2000 in Sabah, Sarawak and Malaysia: 10,439,430 to 22,202,614 or up by 113 percent in Malaysia; 976,269 to 2,012,616 or up by 106 percent in Sarawak; and 636,431 to 2,449,389 or up by 285 percent in Sabah.

“The situation we are in right now calls for a change (in attitude) in government,” said Majimbun.

“We are already being marginalised in all aspects. What will happen to our future generations? People should not simply say that we are touching on a sensitive issue. We are talking about something that concerns the future of our children and the future generations.”

Majimbun pledged that all information gathered by his bureau would be brought to the attention of the federal and state governments “to let them know and take these matters seriously”.- Malaysiakini, 6/10/2008 - Sapp: 'Loopholes' behind IC scam

Wakil Rakyat should have freedom of speech in State Assemblies...

This is absurd that a ADUN/MP is required to stick to the prepared text - and not have the freedom of expression...

Of course, if it were with regard a question that is to be answered by the Minister or State Exco - one should maybe not deviate into some other question - but surely if in their preamble and other matters leading to their question, they should have the freedom to add-on, take-out, or even raise more facts - there should be no requirement that one should ONLY follow the prepared text - after all this is not a written question - but an oral question. There must always be freedom of expression in Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies...

Johor DAP chairman Dr Boo Cheng Hau was publicly reprimanded in the Johor state assembly here for not following his prepared speech.

Speaker Datuk Ali Hassan had to repeatedly remind Dr Boo to not “go off topic” while reading his speech.

“You must follow your prepared text. You must respect the state assembly rules, which clearly state that the speech must follow the prepared text,” Ali told Dr Boo during the state assembly meeting here yesterday.

Dr Boo, who initially would not back down, said such action was undemocratic.

During the exchanges Ali asked Dr Boo to sit down then told him that as an educated man he should know better; he should respect the state assembly and follow the rules.

“Please do not cause further commotion and make this issue bigger than it really is.

“The text must be followed,” Ali said, granting Dr Boo extra time to speak.

Dr Boo was commenting on the huge debts accumulated by the Johor Government. - Star, 10/9/2008 - Speaker raps DAP’s Boo

And for the sake of fairness, the rest of the said report is as follows. It highlights how Johor BN government all the way owes the Federal Government about RM841 million...

State governments must learn to survive with what they have and make, and with what they are allocated annually from the Federal government - especially a rich State like Johor.

An accumulation of such an high debt is unacceptable - and mind you when Pakatan Rakyat takes over the Johor government , they too will end up burdened with these large debts...

Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman said in his reply that the state government owed the Federal Government some RM841mil, with RM689mil due to debts accumulated through government agencies such as Syarikat Air Johor Holdings (SAJH).

“The debts from the government agencies had been transferred into the form of grants, which were mostly used to fund projects to supply water to rural areas.

“The amount will be deducted from the grants allocated to the state government annually,” he added.- Star, 10/9/2008 - Speaker raps DAP’s Boo

Johor State Government owes the Federal Government about RM841 million - and who else does it owe? What really is the total debt of the Johor State Government?

What really is the total debt of all State Governments - I believe that all State Governments need to be more transparent and accountable.

Their annual accounts must be shown to the people . It should be available on their website.

The minutes of the State Assembly Proceedings must be available on the website.

In fact, decisions made by the State Exco must also be available on the website - especially those policy decisions.

The State Governments, and the Federal Government, in an ICT age must use the internet and their own official websites to communicate with its people.

In Thailand, there are such thing called Cabinet Resolutions - and it made known to the public - and it is also something that the people can rely on to claim rights. In Malaysia, we do not have such things - and it is difficult for the people to know what is the policy and/or decision of the government on matters - all we have is news reports and that is so unreliable. We need to have definite pronouncements of policy and decisions by governments - at all levels - Federal, State and even at the Local Government levels.

What every State Government must do to improve.. - Proposals for Reform

For too long the BN ruled the Federation, and the States in Semenanjung Malaysia. Many have forgotten that we are a Federation - and the State also have powers and rights, and is capable of doing so much more for the rakyat of the various States.

Pre-GE 2008, too little emphasis was placed on State Government - but things have changed today, and we need to seriously look at the States again... and when we do this, we find that there are so many things that are lacking...and so, I would like to start the ball rolling by making proposals for improvement, and I start with State Government websites....

On its websites, each and every States must at the very least have the following:-

a) The State Constitution (This must be in Bahasa Malaysia, English, and good if it is also in other languages used by its peoples..). Good also if all other State laws are up in the individual websites.
& all the relevant laws. [We really cannot find the State Constitutions and other State made laws in publications easily in the bookshops..]

b) The HANSARD - being the minits of the proceedings in the State Legislative Assembly. We have a Malaysian Parliament website, with the Hansards, copies of the Bills being tabled, etc -- likewise now that Pakatan Rakyat is governing 5 States - it will be good if the minutes of the State Legislative Assembly be on the web. Also must be there is the record of attendance of the ADUNs. We must also have the various written questions and the answers (this even the Parliament website sadly lacks...). State Legislative Assembly procedure, rules, standing orders, etc...must also be online.

c) DECISIONS and POLICY of State Governments - there must be a clear statement of such policies and decisions. In Thailand, there is something called 'Cabinet Resolutions' and it will clearly state the decisions and policies - it is a document that people can later use to claim their rights, and governments criticized for failing to adhere to its policies and decisions.
- In Malaysia, nobody really knows what exactly is the policy and decisions. What is reported in the media - is just that, and it cannot be relied on. There is no government document or minutes that one can rely on to clarify matters.
- So, now Pakatan Rakyat State governments can take the lead - and come out with State Government Resolutions, Decisions and Policies - and best it be numberred as well for easy reference (and this must be also on the State Government websites...

d) There must also be developed an online avenue for people to be able to ask questions - and get answers... This also can be there in the State Government websites..

Towards greater transparency and accountability. Improve the means of communication between the Rakyat and the government...

The present websites, most likely developed during the BN era, lacks a lot of things -- and the one thing we find is the the TENDERS, etc... but really there is so much more that should be in State Government websites..

Education of the rakoyat should also be done through these websites...

Hopefully, all you who read this posting will also forward to as many,. and let us all campaign for greater transparency and accountability -- and, of course real democracy (where the gap between rakyat and government is reduced and minimal..)

BREAKING NEWS - Are we a Democracy or are we a Feudal State?

"King Abdullah" has decided that the next Prime Minister of Malaysia shall be his current deputy Najib Tun Razak.

"Datuk Seri Najib and I have decided on the right time for me to hand over the premiership to him...."

Let us consider the FACTS:-
a) The current government is the Barisan Nasional government, and of course it should have been a matter that should have been discussed and agreed upon by the various different component parties ----- BUT NO...it was just "Datuk Seri Najib and I have decided...."

b) The main dominant party in the Barisan Nasional coalition is UMNO (United MALAY National Organisation), and as all past Prime Ministers have been UMNO Presidents, maybe it was a matter that should have been discussed and agreed by that UMNO Supreme Council (MPT) at least-----BUT it seems NO...2 persons who were not even elected by the majority of its party's membership by reason of that rediculous quota requirement before any person can challenge the top 2 position. Do these 2, the current PM and his DPM really even have the support of the majority of UMNO members -- we do not know - all we know is that there are not enough UMNO DIVISIONS who have the 'guts' to nominate any other person to challenge the post of President and DPM. Dr Mahathir was the last President of UMNO who demonstrated that he had the support of the majority, when he defeated Tengku Razaleigh by a few votes.

It is sad that Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his deputy Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, or the majority of the incumbents in UMNO seem to be NOT really interested in removing that "quota hurdle" that impedes potential challengers... and so like Kings of old, our PM has decided on who will be next PM and when will the "power" be handed over.....It really is so DEMOCRATIC ....nope, that is not the word I was looking for. It was "FEUDAL".

And we wonder whether the UMNO membership will sit by and allow this to happen. After all, what is happening is that they are being denied their right to choose and vote in their next UMNO President, No.2, 3, 4, 5.... But then, it is UMNO members -- we really cannot expect much (or can we???)

What about the Barisan Nasional component party members -- will we be hearing that normal voicing out of support for Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak to be the next PM...and happiness that the timing of handing over of power has been decided...or have things changed..and MCA, Gerakan, MIC and the other component parties are not going to come out falling head over heels to give that expected endorsement for an agreement made between the PM and his DPM.

I expect that the Media would be carrying reports of all kinds of people expressing great JOY and happiness about this BREAKING NEWS -- (of course, we will never see the views of those who are not happy or read any such comments -- mmmm maybe just a few to give the impression that the media is still 'independent'...)

BUT WAIT, what does the Federal Constitution say about the Prime Minister -- his appointment, etc..and that can be found in Article 43 of the Federal Constitution -- and it says that it is the "...Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall first appoint as Perdana Menteri (Prime Minister) to preside over the Cabinet a member of the House of Representatives who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of that House..." - it is the Yang Di-Pertuan Agung that appoints the PM - not the current PM who decides on the next PM...and here Abdullah is reported stating that there was an agreement ---

I do not know -- BUT is this not an action that demonstrates disrespect to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Is it also not an action (....an agreement) that is in breach of our very own Federal Constitution?

Our highest law of the land, the Federal Constitution, is also clear that the only consideration before appointment by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is that the candidate for PM is "...likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of that House[i.e. the Dewan Rakyat]..."

And here, I wonder whether the Barisan Nasional MPs at least were consulted on this "handing over of premiership" - was there some secret ballot as to whether this Najib Tun Razak has the "confidence of the majority", and in this case today this means that number of MPs sufficient to make up more that 50% of the total number of MPs in Parliament say they did have such confidence and agreed to this "agreement". [I wonder whether such a vote was also taken when Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was made PM.] With the happenings after the results of General Elections 2008 came out, especially in Perlis and Trengganu, I also do wonder whether he still do have the "confidence of the majority" -

Even if Abdullah Ahmad Badawi does not have, and If there was going to be a vote. I believe that many may vote because of UMNO...because of Barisan Nasional....but really not because they have confidence in the man, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

The days of FEUDALISM within UMNO, and the Barisan Nasional must come to an END. The windows must be OPENED so that a fresh air of change can enter and bring about change - but will that happen in UMNO...in Barisan Nasional ...maybe not.

Some say that it will happen in MALAYSIA in the near future, when there is a change of the Federal government, which some claim will happen in or around Malaysia Day.

___________________

43. Cabinet. (Federal Constitution- Art. 43)

(1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall appoint a Jemaah Menteri (Cabinet of Ministers) to advise him in the exercise of his functions.

(2) The Cabinet shall be appointed as follows, that is to say:

(a) the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall first appoint as Perdana Menteri (Prime Minister) to preside over the Cabinet a member of the House of Representatives who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of that House; and.....

________________

Friday June 13, 2008 MYT 3:05:21 PM

Abdullah, Najib agree on best time for leadership change

KOTA BARU: Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his deputy Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak have reached an agreement on the right time for a leadership change, the Prime Minister said Friday.

Reiterating that he and Najib enjoyed good working relations, Abdullah said they have mutually agreed on the "best time" for a leadership transition.

Abdullah raised the issue as some people were still suspicious of the relationship between him and Najib including Kelantan Umno leaders who raised the matter at the Kelantan Umno liaison committee meeting chaired by the Umno president here on Friday.

"Datuk Seri Najib and I have decided on the right time for me to hand over the premiership to him. We've no problems and we enjoy good working relations.

"The leadership change will definitely take place at the right time," he said at a luncheon with senior government officials and community leaders.

Earlier, Abdullah chaired a two-hour Kelantan Umno meeting. Abdullah is in Kelantan for a one-day visit.

Najib said in London on Thursday that he would not challenge Abdullah for power because as a "true Umno man" he would not risk destroying the party his father had built.

He described himself as a loyal party member who subscribed to an orderly leadership change, as has been the Umno convention.

Abdullah said the people should stop speculating on his relationship with Najib as such talk was of no benefit to anyone.

"It's important for everyone to see the relationship between me and Najib as very crucial to strengthen Umno and the Government and to implement the development projects and programmes that have been planned," he said. The Prime Minister also expressed his gratitude to the support given to him to continue to lead the nation and Umno.

He promised to work hard for the country, party and the people.

"I really value and appreciate the support given to me. If I am accorded solid support, it will spur me to work even harder for the party and the Government," he said. - Bernama

Ministers should be championing the cause of Malaysians - NOT just members of their own ethnic/religious/State grouping..

It is rather ODD and DISTURBING when a MINISTER attending a function as a Malaysian Minister start talking about just one ethnic group in Malaysia - the Malays, in this case. When one is out there, and speaking in the capacity of a Minister, you must talk about Malaysians and/or persons in Malaysia.

It may have been perfectly alright for Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, if he was attending some UMNO function in his capacity as some UMNO leader to speak about "Malay Unity", common direction for Malays..or "defending Malay rights"

Even then, in UMNO today, I believe that the membership is not just Malays anymore - there are, I believe, Eurasians, Indian Muslims, ethnic groups from Sabah (and maybe even Sarawak), orang asli (Temuan, etc.), Indonesian ethnic groups like Batak, Javanese - so even there it may not be proper to be just talking about "Malay Unity", common direction for Malays..or "defending Malay rights".

Being also a "wakil rakyat" (people's representative), again it must be understood that it is very divisive and unhealthy talking about just one single ethnic grouping. Talk about all persons in Malaysia - or all Malaysians.

In the report below, this Minister is reported to be addressing "graduation of silat trainees under the Silat Cekak Association of Malaysia", and I do believe that there are those there that are not ethnically Malay there.

When you are out there as a Minister of Malaysia, or as a People's Representative, do not forget that you are representing all Malaysians. Tomorrow, we may have some Indian Minister calling for Indian unity, fighting to defend Indian rights... then some Chinese Minister doing the same with Chinese.. Some Melanau Minister calling for Melanau unity, etc.. Some Christian Minister doing the same with Christians...

Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, other Ministers and peoples' representatives must not be out there speaking for just one particular ethnic group - but must do so for all persons that you represent...

I am Malaysians, and I hope that our Ministers and wakil rakyat behave as such -- representing all Malaysians irrespective of ethnicity, religion, State, gender, etc..


2008/06/08 (NST)

Zahid: Malays must defend their rights

BERNAMA

KUALA LUMPUR: Malay unity is presently at its lowest level, said Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

"Unlike previously, the Malays do not have a common direction and because of this, some groups have raised issues which are no longer relevant, like Malay supremacy," Zahid said at the graduation of silat trainees under the Silat Cekak Association of Malaysia at the International Islamic University near here yesterday.

He said the Malays were not asking more than what had been stated in the Federal Constitution nor did they want to deny other races of their rights.

"We just want to defend our rights," said Zahid.

He added that the Malays had also lost their political power, based on their representation in Parliament and recent incidents in Selangor and Perak.

Zahid also urged silat members to play a role in uniting the Malays, saying that the art of self-defence, like silat, should be used to show their love for the country.

A total of 868 silat cekak members received their certificates yesterday, 60 of them graduating with honours. -- Bernama

People in Pakatan Rakyat governed state should not be worried about Temple demolitions again or SHOULD they still be???

Pakatan Rakyat Selangor State government should just come in use the Land Acquisition Act - and acquire the land on which this temple is thus saving the Temple. It is so simple - and one wonders why PKR MP is out there protesting with the rakyat about some police reports not acted upon. [When land is acquired, the registered owner is paid reasonably for the value of the land] Talking about temples, the question now is what is the SELANGOR and the other Pakatan Rakyat State governments going to do about those temples that have been demolished? Alternative sites be found, and the temples re-built for the community. The same must also be done for the churches/chapels, temples, kuils, suraus,etc..For the Catholics, we must think about that St Anne's Chapel in Serdang...that was demolished. The Pakatan Rakyat government must also come in immediately and gazette(or do whatever necessary to) all land on which there are temples as protected. If the owners are some other, then use the Land Acquisition Act or other means to ensure that the Land is preserved - for the temple/kuil/surau/etc... In fact, it is time for a re-look and the development of NEW policy about temples, churches, suraus, kuils and other places of worship - there must be immediate allocation of land in towns and areas where there was NONE during the BN rule of these states. (Maybe, it should be that if there are 250 persons of a faith in an area (or extended area), then there is a right to build a chapel, a small kuil, a surau, etc...) There must also be a POLICY that all places of worship is the responsibility of the State - and as such there must be allocation for maintenance. Regular monthly cutting of grass, beautification works, etc should come under the Local Councils...The same must also be for burial sites and cemetery. In fact, the Christian cemetery in Cheras is overcrowded. Heard that persons are being buried above others or just too close to others. There is a need for NEW Christian cemeteries, and cemeteries for other religions as well. Talking about that, maybe it is time to ensure that there prayer places for all religions especially at hospitals ...I am sure the various different religious groups would be ever willing to look after these prayer rooms and assist in its setting-up. Was that call of "Makkal Sakti" used at them Pakatan Rakyat rallies all just for getting the votes of the Indians -- or will we be seeing changes. The announcement of things to come in the States can be done NOW -- whilst the implementation could come some months later. So will that temple in Kapar be saved by the Pakatan Rakyat government of Selangor by just stepping in an acquiring the land and that temple.... Temple demolition: Report lodged against police 'inaction'

Fauwaz Abdul Aziz | Jun 2, 08 6:21pm

A police report was filed today against Klang district police chief ACP Mohamad Mat Yusop for allegedly not acting on "tens of police reports" that have been lodged over a land transfer and clearance works involving the Sri Maha Nagamuthu Karumariamman temple near Jalan Kapar. MCPX PKR's Kapar member of Parliament S Manikavasagam filed the report this morning, a day after residents living near the 80-year-old temple and activists demonstrated against its planned demolition by the ‘owner' of the temple. "Tens of police reports have been lodged over several years, but nothing has been done," Manikavasagam told Malaysiakini. According to Manikavasagam, workers for the current owner - who allegedly acquired the one-hectare land on which the temple stands through dubious means - had already broken parts of the roof of the temple and broken or taken down the statues contained inside. "We're still doing research regarding the owner, but we believe the owner is connected to a local state assemblyperson and has development plans for the land. We believe the land costs up to RM3 million, maybe more," said Manikavasagam. He said numerous police reports had been lodged since the temple caretaker E Muthu Kumar discovered the land was transferred to somebody else. Muthu claimed that he had lived on the land for over 50 years and that his father had been given the land by its original landowner. A protracted struggle The original landowner, Harbhajan Singh, is said to have migrated to India in 1973 and died there in the 1980s. In 1996, however, Muthu found that the land had earlier been transferred to one ‘Lin Chee Yong', who obtained in 2000 a Shah Alam High Court order for the land to be vacated. A protracted struggle then ensued between Lin and Muthu, which saw contempt charges as well as a spate of police reports being filed between the parties against the other. In 2007, Muthu applied for the Shah Alam High Court to set aside its earlier decision on the basis that the land transfer was allegedly "fraudulently obtained". Muthu's lawyer Dr SN Pathmanabhan said this claim was based on the finding that Harbhajan's identity card (IC) number as contained in the memorandum of transfer to Lin actually belonged to a Chinese woman residing in Kuala Lipis, Pahang. He also said that contrary to the practice of Punjabis of his generation, Harbhajan - who would have been in his 80s in 1996 - had written in "very precise English". "The signature, furthermore, did not look like that of an 80-plus year old but that of a much stronger, younger person," he told Malaysiakini. Pathmanabhan also said the payment of RM850,000 that Harbhajan allegedly received for the sale of his land actually never materialised. Over and above all of these reasons, he added, was the fact that Harbhajan had died in India in the 1980s but supposedly entered in 1996 into a transaction to sell the land concerned. Police inaction Pathmanabhan said the Shah Alam High Court had set Aug 27 this year to hear the application to set aside the 2000 court order. Parallel to the case, said Manikavasagam, his concern today was for the police to address the questions of Muthu and the patrons of the temple as to why they had not acted on the numerous reports lodged on Lin's efforts to clear the land. These efforts were taken despite the ongoing court proceedings and included efforts to dislodge Muthu, the disconnection of the temple's water supply, and damage done to the gates and other parts of the temple building, he said. On Oct 1, 2007, a police report was lodged claiming threats had been made to the lives of the Muthu and his family, Manikavasagam added. "We lodged the police report against ACP Mohamad Mat because the police had not acted on that and the many other reports that had been lodged," said Manikavasagam. ACP Mohamad Mat could not be reached for comments.

Federal Government HERO in that Grand Saga - Bandar Mahkota Cheras issue??

For a long time in Malaysia, generally both the Federal Government and the State government were Barisan Nasional governments - and as such the fact of the division of powers between States and the Federation took a back seat. After all, the Prime Minister was even "choosing" the Menteri Besars/Chief Ministers for a long time. Of course after this GE2008, even BN governed states have asserted the rights of States to choose their own head of government - we saw this in Perlis and Trengganu.

Now that the opposition coalition known as "Pakatan Rakyat" is government in FIVE states, State Government must begin to exercise their powers and not just allow the Federal government to reign supreme. When the States formed the Federation, save for Sabah and Sarawak, most States seemed to have surrendered most of their powers and rights......

TODAY the various states must re-look at their own powers and rights, and also exercise them.....and for guidance, below is attached the provisions in our Federal Constitution what is stated with regard to the powers/areas which are still in the hands of the State and areas that are under the Federal Government.

For some in the Pakatan Rakyat - they still do behave like "Opposition MPs and/or ADUNs" forgetting that today they are actually the GOVERNMENT in 5 States, including the most important states of Selangor and Penang. When not in government, all that Opposition MPs/ADUNs needed to do was to be with the people and HIGHLIGHT matters....but that is not the case today. Reading in Malaysiakini, that a Selangor State Exco was calling on the Federal Minister to "turun padang" and resolve a matter in the State of Selangor was rather humourous.

Finally at the end of the day, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his BN government seem to have scored points when they came out and ORDERED that the toll free access road be kept open for the BMC residents

"...There is finally some good news for Bandar Mahkota Cheras (BMC) residents - the federal government has ordered that the controversial toll-free access road in their neighbourhood to remain open...." (Cabinet wants BMC access road kept open, 30/5/2008, Malaysiakini)

MCPX

Compatively, the Khalid Ibrahim led Pakatan Rakyat Selangor government fared badly ---

a) One of their solution was calling for an EGM of the toll operator Grand Saga to seek explanations (note the Selangor state-owned company certainly did not control majority shares in Grand Saga) - so would we have got anything done by taking this course of action?? [S'gor MB: State firm owns stake in Grand Saga, Malaysiakini 28/5/2008 - see below]

b) Of course, after this problems between the people of Selangor and Grand Saga flared-up again in April 2008, allegedly following a letter from the Land Office (i.e. the Selangor's Hulu Langat Land Office)

"...The Hulu Langat land office has confirmed than highway concessionaire Grand Saga has no rights over a stretch of road in Bandar Mahkota Cheras (BMC), over which it has had a long-running dispute with residents.....In a letter, assistant district officer Norhanizatuazwin Samsuni stated that Jalan Cheras Lama was acquired by BMC developer Narajaya Sdn Bhd, according to the Selangor government gazette dated May 27, 2003."('Confirmed - residents can tear down concrete barrier", Malaysiakini, 29/4/2008)

And the rakyat, in trying to enforce their rights, were beaten, tear-gassed, etc... and then suddenly on 28/5/2008, it is revealed the the Selangor government was actually a "party" that had been causing suffering to its own people ---- Why do I say that? Well, because it OWNED part of that "Grand Saga", that company that was building re-building that barricade, and preventing the demolitions.... and all that the Selangor Menteri Besar wanted to do was to call for an EGM in this private company.

""The Selangor government - through its state-owned company - will call for an emergency general meeting of toll operator Grand Saga within the next two weeks to settle the on-going Cheras toll saga. ...Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim revealed today that the call for the EGM would be made through state company Kumpulan Perangsang Selangor which indirectly owns a stake in Grand Saga...." [Khalid: Grand Saga EGM in 2 weeks, Malaysiakini 29/5/2008]

This issue is NOT an issue between 2 or 3 or 4 private companies - it was a matter of the people of Selangor, and its GOVERNMENT. It was so sad that the State Government did not use its powers and maybe ORDER that the access road be kept opened, and ensured thereafter that it was -- rather than just talking about calling for an EGM of the Grand Saga, etc

The government should place human beings as the priority - and their life and livelihood should be the priority.

Let us also not forget that LAND is a State Matter - the Selangor government could have solved the matter - or at least ensured a "temporary solution", as is now after the Ferderal Cabinet ordered it ... - BUT they did not.

If I was state government, I would have asked that Grand Saga to back-off, and leave that toll-free access-road open --- for if not, there will be consequences. Maybe, the company, their Directors and their major shareholders could be black-listed with regard to any or all future projects, tenders, etc.... Maybe the Land acquisition Act may be used. Maybe the Selangor government would build alternate "toll-free" roads for its people where there are toll roads operated by Grand Saga....

Maybe, even the Selangor government could acquire majority shares and thereafter also decide that there be no more toll collections --- after all Khalid Ibrahim, the man who some say was responsible of getting Guthrie Plantations from being a foreign controlled entity into a Malaysian company is the Selangor Menteri Besar.

Now, during that whole fiasco concerning that barricade, it seems that the Selangor government seem to have little or no control over the police -- so maybe, we seriously need to consider whether we do need a State police/Enforcement personell. The State need to be able to protect its rakyat, and also have the ability to enforce its orders. Maybe, in the interim the local council enforcement officers could be used. {United States of America is a Federation like ours - and the different States do have their own police,..laws...etc...}

RELATIONS BETWEEN THE FEDERATION AND THE STATES

CHAPTER 1 - DISTRIBUTION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS

73. Extent of federal and State laws.

In exercising the legislative powers conferred on it by this Constitution -

(a) Parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of the Federation and laws having effect outside as well as within the Federation;

(b) the Legislature of a State may make laws for the whole or any part of that State.

74. Subject matter of federal and State laws.

(1) Without prejudice to any power to make laws conferred on it by any other Article, Parliament may make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the Federal List or the Concurrent List (that is to say, the First or Third List set out in the Ninth Schedule).

(2) Without prejudice to any power to make laws conferred on it by any other Article, the Legislature of a State may make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List (that is to say, the Second List set out in the Ninth Schedule) or the Concurrent List.

(3) The power to make laws conferred by this Article is exercisable subject to any conditions or restrictions imposed with respect to any particular matter by this Constitution.

(4) Where general as well as specific expressions are used in describing any of the matter enumerated in the Lists set out in the Ninth Schedule the generality of the former shall not be taken to be limited by the latter.

75. Inconsistencies between federal and State laws.

If any State law is inconsistent with a federal law, the federal law shall prevail and the State law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.

76. Power of Parliament to legislate for States in certain cases.

(1) Parliament may make laws with respect to any matter enumerated in the State List, but only as follows, that is to say:

(a) for the purpose of implementing any treaty, agreement or convention between the Federation and any other country, or any decision of an international organisation of which the Federation is a member; or

(b) for the purpose of promoting uniformity of the laws of two or more States; or

(c) if so requested by the Legislative Assembly of any State.

(2) No law shall be made in pursuance of paragraph (a) of Clause (1) with respect to any matters of Islamic law or the custom of the Malays or to any matter of native law or custom in the States of Sabah and Sarawak and no Bill for a law under that paragraph shall be introduced into either House of Parliament until the Government of any State concerned has been consulted.

(3) Subject to Clause (4), a law made in pursuance of paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) of Clause (1) shall not come into operation in any State until it has been adopted by a law made by the Legislature of that State, and shall then be deemed to be a State law and not a federal law, and may accordingly be amended or repealed by a law made by that Legislature.

(4) Parliament may, for the purpose only of ensuring uniformity of law and policy, make laws with respect to land tenure, the relations of landlord and tenant, registration of titles and deeds relating to land, transfer of land, mortgages, leases and charges in respect of land, easements and other rights and interests in land, compulsory acquisition of land, rating and valuation of land, and local government; and Clauses (1) (b) and (3) shall not apply to any law relating to any such matter.

76A. Power of Parliament to extend legislative powers of States.

(1) It is hereby declared that the power of Parliament to make laws with respect to a matter enumerated in the Federal List includes power to authorise the Legislatures of the States or any of them, subject to such conditions or restrictions (if any) as Parliament may impose, to impose, to make laws with respect to the whole or any part of that matter.

(2) Notwithstanding Article 75, a State law made under authority conferred by Act of Parliament as mentioned in Clause (1) may, if and to the extent that the Act so provides, amend or repeal (as regards the State in question) any federal law passed before that Act.

(3) Any matter with respect to which the Legislature of a State is for the time being authorised by Act of Parliament to make laws shall for purposes of Articles 79, 80 and 82 be treated as regards the State in question as if it were a matter enumerated in the Concurrent List.

77. Residual power of legislation.

The Legislature of a State shall have power to make laws with respect to any matter not enumerated in any of the Lists set out in the Ninth Schedule, not being a matter in respect of which Parliament has power to make laws.

FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

ACT 000

NINTH SCHEDULE

[Articles 74, 77]

LEGISLATIVE LISTS

LIST I - FEDERAL LIST

1. External affairs, including -

(a) Treaties, agreements and conventions with other countries and all matters which bring the Federation into relations with any other country;

(b) Implementation of treaties, agreements and conventions with other countries;

(c) Diplomatic, consular and trade representation;

(d) International organizations; participation in international bodies and implementation of decisions taken thereat;

(e) Extradition; fugitive offenders; admission into, and emigration and expulsion from, the Federation;

(f) Passports; visas; permits of entry or other certificates; quarantine;

(g) Foreign and extra-territorial jurisdiction; and

(h) Pilgrimages to places outside Malaysia.

2. Defence of the Federation or any part thereof, including -

(a) Naval, military and air forces and other armed forces;

(b) Any armed forces attached to or operating with any of the armed forces of the Federation; visiting forces;

(c) Defence works; military and protected areas; naval, military and air force bases, barracks, aerodromes and other works;

(d) Manoeuvres;

(e) War and peace; alien enemies and enemy aliens; enemy property; trading with an enemy; war damage; war risk insurance;

(f) Arms, fire-arms, ammunition and explosives;

(g) National service; and

(h) Civil defence.

3. Internal security, including -

(a) Police; criminal investigation; registration of criminals; public order;

(b) Prisons, reformatories; remand homes; places of detention; probation of offenders; juvenile offenders;

(c) Preventive detention; restriction of residence;

(d) Intelligence services; and

(e) National registration.

4. Civil and criminal law and procedure and the administration of justice, including -

(a) Constitution and organization of all courts other than Syariah Courts;

(b) Jurisdiction and powers of all such courts;

(c) Remuneration and other privileges of the judges and officers presiding over such courts;

(d) Persons entitled to practise before such courts;

(e) Subject to paragraph (ii), the following :

(i) Contract; partnership, agency and other special contracts; master and servant; inns and inn-keepers; actionable wrongs; property and its transfer and hypothecation, except land; bona vacantia; equity and trusts; marriage, divorce and legitimacy; married women"s property and status; interpretation of federal law; negotiable instruments; statutory declarations; arbitration; mercantile law; registration of businesses and business names; age of majority; infants and minors; adoption; succession, testate and intestate; probate and letters of administration; bankruptcy and insolvency; oaths and affirmations; limitation; reciprocal enforcement of judgments and orders; the law of evidence;

(ii) the matters mentioned in paragraph (i) do not include Islamic personal law relating to marriage, divorce, guardianship, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy, family law, gifts or succession, testate and intestate;

(f) Official secrets; corrupt practices;

(g) Use or exhibition of coats of arms, armorial bearings, flags, emblems, uniforms, orders and decorations other than those of a State;

(h) Creation of offences in respect of any of the matters included in the Federal List or dealt with by federal law;

(i) Indemnity in respect of any of the matters in the Federal List or dealt with by federal law;

(j) Admiralty Jurisdiction;

(k) Ascertainment of Islamic law and other personal laws for purposes of federal law; and

(l) Betting and lotteries.

5. Federal citizenship and naturalization; aliens.

6. The machinery of government, subject to the State List, but including -

(a) Elections to both Houses of Parliament and the Legislative Assemblies of the States and all matters connected therewith;

(b) The Armed Forces Council and the Commissions to which Part X applies;

(c) Federal services including the establishment of services common to the Federation and the States; services common to two or more States;

(d) Pensions and compensation for loss of office; gratuities and conditions of service;

(e) Government and administration of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya including,Islamic law therein to the same extent as provided in item I in the State List and in respect of the Federal Territory of Labuan, native law and custom to the same extent as provided in item 13 of the Supplement to State List for States of Sabah and Sarawak;

[Am. Act A1095 - Prior text read - Government and administration of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan including Islamic law therein to the same extent as provided in item 1 in the State List and in respect of the Federal Territory of Labuan, native law and custom to the same extent as provided in item 13 of the Supplement to State List for States of Sabah and Sarawak;]

(f) Federal Government contracts;

(g) Federal public authorities; and

(h) Purchase, acquisition and holding of, and dealing with property for federal purposes.

7. Finance, including -

(a) Currency, legal tender and coinage;

(b) National savings and savings banks;

(c) Borrowing on the security of the Federal Consolidated Fund;

(d) Loans to or borrowing by the States, public authorities and private enterprise;

(e) Public debt of the Federation;

(f) Financial and accounting procedure, including procedure for the collection, custody and payment of the public moneys of the Federation and of the States, and the purchase, custody and disposal of public property other than land of the Federation and of the States;

(g) Audit and accounts of the Federation and the States and other public authorities;

(h) Taxes; rates in the federal capital;

(i) Fees in respect of any of the matters in the Federal List or dealt with by federal law;

(j) Banking; money-lending; pawnbrokers; control of credit;

(k) Bills of exchange, cheques; promissory notes and other similar instruments;

(l) Foreign exchange; and

(m) Capital issues; stock and commodity exchanges.

8. Trade, commerce and industry, including -

(a) Production, supply and distribution of goods; price control and food control; adulteration of foodstuffs and other goods;

(b) Imports into, and exports from, the Federation;

(c) Incorporation, regulation and winding up of corporations other than municipal corporations (but including the municipal corporation of the federal capital); regulation of foreign corporations; bounties on production in or export from the Federation;

(d) Insurance, including compulsory insurance;

(e) Patents; designs; inventions; trade marks and mercantile marks; copyrights;

(f) Establishment of standards of weights and measures;

(g) Establishment of standards of quality of goods manufactured in or exported from the Federation;

(h) Auctions and auctioneers;

(i) Industries; regulation of industrial undertakings;

(j) Subject to item 2 (c) in the State List: Development of mineral resources; mines, mining, minerals and mineral ores; oils and oilfields; purchase, sale, import and export of minerals and mineral ores; petroleum products; regulation of labour and safety in mines and oilfields;

(k) Factories; boilers and machinery; dangerous trades; and

(l) Dangerous and inflammable substances.

9. Shipping, navigation and fisheries, including -

(a) Shipping and navigation on the high seas and in tidal and inland waters;

(b) Ports and harbours; foreshores;

(c) Lighthouses and other provisions for the safety of navigation;

(d) Maritime and estuarine fishing and fisheries, excluding turtles;

(e) Light dues; and

(f) Wrecks and salvage.

10. Communications and transport, including -

(a) Roads, bridges, ferries and other means of communication if declared to be federal by or under federal law;

(b) Railways, excluding Penang Hill Railway;

(c) Airways, aircraft and air navigation; civil aerodromes; provisions for the safety of aircraft;

(d) Regulation of traffic by land, water and air other than on rivers outside harbour areas wholly within one State;

(e) Carriage of passengers and goods by land, water and air;

(f) Mechanically propelled vehicles;

(g) Posts and telecommunications; and

(h) Wireless, broadcasting and television.

11. Federal works and power, including -

(a) Public works for federal purposes;

(b) Water supplies, rivers and canals, except those wholly within one State or regulated by an agreement between all the States concerned; production, distribution and supply of water power; and

(c) Electricity; gas and gas works; and other works for the production and distribution of power and energy.

12. Surveys, inquiries and research, including -

(a) Census; registration of births and deaths; registration of marriages; registration of adoptions other than adoptions under Islamic law or Malay custom;

(b) Survey of the Federation; social, economic and scientific surveys; meteorological organizations;

(c) Scientific and technical research; and

(d) Commissions of inquiry.

13. Education, including -

(a) Elementary, secondary, and university education; vocational and technical education; training of teachers; registration and control of teachers, managers and schools; promotion of special studies and research; scientific and literary societies;

(b) Libraries; museums; ancient and historical monuments and records; archaeological sites and remains.

14. Medicine and health including sanitation in the federal capital, and including -

(a) Hospitals, clinics and dispensaries; medical profession; maternity and child welfare; lepers and leper institutions;

(b) Lunacy and mental deficiency, including places for reception and treatment;

(c) Poisons and dangerous drugs; and

(d) Intoxicating drugs and liquors; manufacture and sale of drugs.

15. Labour and social security, including -

(a) Trade unions; industrial and labour disputes; welfare of labour including housing of labourers by employers; employer"s liability and workmen"s compensation;

(b) Unemployment insurance; health insurance; widow"s, orphans" and old age pensions; maternity benefits; provident and benevolent funds; superannuation; and

(c) Charities and charitable institutions; charitable trusts and trustees excluding Wakafs; Hindu endowments.

16. Welfare of the aborigines.

17. Professional occupations other than those specifically enumerated.

18. Holidays other than State holidays; standard of time.

19. Unincorporated societies.

20. Control of agricultural pests; protection against such pests; prevention of plant diseases.

21. Newspapers; publications; publishers; printing and printing presses.

22. Censorship.

23. Subject to item 5 (f) of the State List: theatres; cinemas; cinematography films; places of public amusement.

24. (Repealed).

25. Co-operative societies.

25A. Tourism.

26. Subject to item 9A of the Concurrent List, prevention and extinguishment of fire, including fire services and fire brigades.

27. All matters relating to the Federal Territories, including the matters enumerated in items 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the State List and in the case of the Federal Territory of Labuan, the matters enumerated in items 15, 16 and 17 of the Supplement to State List for States of Sabah and Sarawak.

[Am. Act A1095 - Prior text read - All matters relating to the Federal Territory, including the matters enumerated in items 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the State List and in the case of the Federal Territory of Labuan, the matters enumerated in items 15, 16 and 17 of the Supplement to State List for States of Sabah and Sarawak.]

LIST II - STATE LIST

1. Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, Islamic law and personal and family law of persons professing the religion of Islam, including the Islamic law relating to succession, testate and intestate, betrothal, marriage, divorce, dower, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy, guardianship, gifts, partitions and non-charitable trusts; Wakafs and the DEFINITION and regulation of charitable and religious trusts, the appointment of trustees and the incorporation of persons in respect of Islamic religious and charitable endowments, institutions, trusts, charities and charitable institutions operating wholly within the State; Malay customs; Zakat, Fitrah and Baitulmal or similar Islamic religious revenue; mosques or any Islamic public places of worship, creation and punishment of offences by persons professing the religion of Islam against precepts of that religion, except in regard to matters included in the Federal List; the constitution, Organisation and procedure of Syariah courts, which shall have jurisdiction only over persons professing the religion of Islam and in respect only of any of the matters included in this paragraph, but shall not have jurisdiction in respect of offences except in so far as conferred by federal law, the control of propagating doctrines and beliefs among persons professing the religion of Islam; the determination of matters of Islamic law and doctrine and Malay custom.

[Am. Act 1095 - Prior text read - Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan, Islamic law and personal and family law of persons professing the religion of Islam, including the Islamic law relating to succession, testate and intestate, betrothal, marriage, divorce, dower, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy, guardianship, gifts, partitions and non-charitable trusts; Wakafs and the DEFINITION and regulation of charitable and religious trusts, the appointment of trustees and the incorporation of persons in respect of Islamic religious and charitable endowments, institutions, trusts, charities and charitable institutions operating wholly within the State; Malay customs; Zakat, Fitrah and Baitulmal or similar Islamic religious revenue; mosques or any Islamic public places of worship, creation and punishment of offences by persons professing the religion of Islam against precepts of that religion, except in regard to matters included in the Federal List; the constitution, organisation and procedure of Syariah courts, which shall have jurisdiction only over persons professing the religion of Islam and in respect only of any of the matters included in this paragraph, but shall not have jurisdiction in respect of offences except in so far as conferred by federal law, the control of propagating doctrines and beliefs among persons professing the religion of Islam; the determination of matters of Islamic law and doctrine and Malay custom.]

2. Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, land including-

[Am. Act 1095 - Prior text read -Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan, land including -]

(a) Land tenure, relation of landlord and tenant; registration of titles and deeds relating to land; colonization, land improvement and soil conservation; rent restriction;

(b) Malay reservations or, in the States of Sabah and Sarawak, native reservations;

(c) Permits and licences for prospecting for mines; mining leases and certificates;

(d) Compulsory acquisition of land;

(e) Transfer of land, mortgages, leases and charges in respect of land; easements; and

(f) Escheat; treasure trove excluding antiquities.

3. Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, agriculture and forestry, including-

[Am. Act 1095 - Prior text read - Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan, agriculture and forestry, including -]

(a) Agriculture and agricultural loans; and

(b) Forests.

4. Local government outside the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, including-

[Am. Act 1095 - Prior text read - Local government outside the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan, including -]

(a) Local administration; municipal corporations; local, town, and rural board and other local authorities; local government services, local rates, local government elections;

(b) Obnoxious trades and public nuisances in local authority areas; and

(c)(Repealed).

5. Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, other services of a local character, that is to say:

[Am. Act 1095 - Prior text read -Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan, other services of a local character, that is to say:

(a)(Repealed);

(b) Boarding houses and lodging houses;

(c) Burial and cremation grounds;

(d) Pounds and cattle trespass;

(e) Markets and fairs; and

(f) Licensing of theatres, cinemas and places of public amusement.

6. State works and water, that is to say:

(a) Public works for State purposes;

(b) Roads, bridges and ferries other than those in the Federal List, regulation of weight and speed of vehicles on such roads; and

(c) Subject to the Federal List, water (including rivers and canals but excluding water supplies and services); control of silt; riparian rights.

[Subs. Act A1239]

7. Machinery of the State Government, subject to the Federal List, but including -

(a) Civil List and State pensions;

(b) Exclusive State services;

(c) Borrowing on the security of the State Consolidated Fund;

(d) Loans for State purposes;

(e) Public debt of the State; and

(f) Fees in respect of any of the matters included in the State List or dealt with by State law.

8. State holidays.

9. Creation of offences in respect of any of the matters included in the State List or dealt with by State law, proofs of State law and of things done thereunder, and proof of any matter for purposes of State law.

10. Inquiries for State purposes, including commissions of inquiry and collection of statistics with respect to any of the matters included in the State List or dealt with by State law.

11. Indemnity in respect of any of the matters in the State List or dealt with by State law.

12. Turtles and rivering fishing.

12A. Libraries, museums, ancient and historical monuments and records and archaeological sites and remains, other than those declared to be federal by or under federal law.

LIST IIA - SUPPLEMENT TO STATE LIST FOR STATES OF SABAH AND SARAWAK

[Articles 95B (1) (a)]

13. Native law and custom, including the personal law relating to marriage, divorce, guardianship, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy, family law, gifts or succession, testate or intestate; registration of adoptions under native law or custom; the determination of matters of native law or custom; the constitution, organization, and procedure of native courts (including the right of audience in such courts), and the jurisdiction and powers of such courts, which shall extend only to the matters included in this paragraph and shall not include jurisdiction in respect of offences except in so far as conferred by federal law.

14. Incorporation of authorities and other bodies set up by State law, if incorporated directly by State law, and regulation and winding-up of corporations so created.

15. Ports and harbours, other than those declared to be federal by or under federal law; regulation of traffic by water in ports and harbours or on rivers wholly within the State, except traffic in federal ports or harbours; foreshores.

16. Cadastral land surveys.

17. (Repealed).

18. In Sabah, the Sabah Railway.

19. (Repealed).

20. Subject to the Federal List, water supplies and services.

[Ins. Act A1239]

LIST IIB - (REPEALED)

LIST III - CONCURRENT LIST

1. Social welfare; social services subject to Lists I and II; protection of women, children and young persons.

2. Scholarships

3. Protection of wild animals and wild birds; National Parks.

4. Animal husbandry; prevention of cruelty to animals; veterinary services; animal quarantine.

5. Town and country planning, except in the federal capital.

6. Vagrancy and itinerant hawkers.

7. Public health, sanitation (excluding sanitation in the federal capital) and the prevention of diseases.

8. Drainage and irrigation.

9. Rehabilitation of mining land and land which has suffered soil erosion.

9A. Fire safety measures and fire precautions in the construction and maintenance of buildings.

9B. Culture and sports.

9C. Housing and provisions for housing accommodation; improvement trusts.

9D. Subject to the Federal List, water supplies and services.

9E. Preservation of heritage.

[Ins. Act A1239]

LIST IIIA - SUPPLEMENT TO CONCURRENT LIST FOR STATES OF SABAH AND SARAWAK

[Article 95B (1) (b)]

10. Personal law relating to marriage, divorce, guardianship, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy, family law, gifts or succession, testate or intestate.

11. Adulteration of foodstuffs and other goods.

12. Shipping under fifteen registered tons, including the carriage of passengers and goods by such shipping; maritime and estuarine fishing and fisheries.

13. The production, distribution and supply of water power and of electricity generated by water power.

14. Agricultural and forestry research, control of agricultural pests, and protection against such pests; prevention of plant diseases.

15. Charities and charitable trusts and institutions in the State (that is to say, operating wholly within, or created and operating in, the State) and their trustees, including the incorporation thereof and the regulation and winding-up of incorporated charities and charitable institutions in the State.

16. Theatres; cinemas; cinematography films; places of public amusement.

17. Elections to the State Assembly held during the period of indirect elections.

18. In Sabah until the end of the year 1970 (but not in Sarawak), medicine and health, including the matters specified in items 14 (a) to (d) of the Federal List.

LIST IIIB - (REPEALED)

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

S'gor MB: State firm owns stake in Grand Saga

Rahmah Ghazali & S Pathamawathy | May 28, 08 3:08pm

MCPX Selangor Menteri Besar Abdul Khalid Ibrahim revealed today that a state-owned company holds a sizable stake in toll concessionaire Grand Saga, which is embroiled in a dispute with Bandar Mahkota Cheras (BMC) residents. “We are holding an executive council meeting this evening and we will come up with our position. I have to listen to all the facts and study the reason why the situation has to come to this stage,” he told reporters at the Parliament lobby. Khalid did not name the state-owned company. It is learnt that state investment arm Kumpulan Perangsang Selangor indirectly owns a portion of Grand Saga [see chart below]. He noted that the concessionaire wants to ensure that traffic will flow into the toll road, to enhance revenue. "I have spoken to the works minister and we are in discussion to find ways to resolve the issue," Khalid said. Saying that he stands by the BMC residents, he added that the slip road should be opened for the benefit of the community. Calling for an EGM Later at a press conference held in Shah Alam after the Selangor state exco meeting, Khalid said that the government, in its capacity as a shareholder in Grand Saga, would be calling for an emergency general meeting (EGM) of the company to seek explanation on the company's stern stand on the barricade matter. He said the state also wanted an explanation on the alleged use of thugs by Grand Saga against the residents. He added that the state government would be writing to the Malaysia Highway Authorities (LLM) to inquire if they had given permission to Grand Saga to erect the new barricade. "If LLM confirms that they had indeed given such an approval, we will ask for the barricade to be removed," he said. When asked why the state government did not intervene during last night's fracas, Khalid explained that Kajang Municipal Council did not produce "proficient" information on where the barricades were built. "They (MPKJ) and the residents said the barricades were built on state-owned land but according to Grand Saga, they said they built them on LLM-owned land," he added. He urged the residents to stay calm while the state government takes steps to solve the issue, adding that the matter also involved the federal government by virtue of the role played by LLM in the matter. "However, we are taking this matter very seriously," he said. He also added that an official letter has been sent to Works Minister Mohd Zin Mohamad for his decision so that the barricades can be taken down and to eventually open the access road. A win-win situation Khalid also stressed that the issue did not involve the residents but it was between the two companies - Grand Saga and Narajaya Sdn Bhd. "Whatever the verdict (from the court) is, the road will be open either way," added Khalid, saying that if Narajaya won the case, Grand Saga would have to take down those barricades. "If Narajaya lost, then they would have to pay compensation to Grand Saga," he further clarified. The menteri besar pointed out that the state government did not question the status of the barricades - whether they are legal or illegal. "But what made the barricades being built again is questioned," he said. Tourism, Consumer Affairs and Environment exco Elizabeth Wong, who was also present at the press conference, urged the works minister to ‘turun padang' (take a closer look) at BMC and give orders (to settle the issue). Also present during the conference were two other state excos, Dr Xavier Jayakumar and Ronnie Liu. BMC developer Narajaya and Grand Saga are involved in a land ownership tussle over part of Jalan Cheras Lama. Grand Saga had built a concrete barricade to block this toll-free access road to the highway, angering BMC residents who have torn it down three times to date. Late yesterday, they made another attempt, resulting in a fracas with 'hired thugs' that left a bloody trail of injuries.