Mahathir-Anwar Trial - 3rd Judge? Why not stayed until Anwar's application for IMMUNITY against civil suits whilst he is PM as done in Rawther's case?

Anwar applied for a STAY in the Yusoff Rawther's case until the Federal Court decided on the question whether the Prime Minister enjoys LEGAL IMMUNITY from civil cases whilst he is Prime Minister - personally, I do not think he should. Even the King and Rulers can face legal suits commenced by anyone, so no JUSTIFICATION for any such immunity. Furthermore, he is not being sued as Prime Minister, but personally as Anwar Ibrahim...

The appeal in question is in relation to Anwar’s bid to refer legal questions to the Federal Court, on whether a sitting prime minister has qualified immunity from civil lawsuits during his tenure. The High Court had on June 4 rejected Anwar’s bid to refer the legal questions to the Federal Court. - Edge, 9/9/2025

ODD - Why did Anwar not make a similar application in all other cases - including the defamation suit commenced by Mahathir against him for defamation. In my opinion, to be consistent and reasonable, a similar application to stay proceedings in all civil cases where Anwar Ibrahim is named as a party...

So, was Anwar Ibrahim unusually worried about Yusoff Rawther's suit of sexual abuse/harassment?? I and many have been waiting for this trial to begin, so we can get a better picture of what was being alleged - and hear the facts as Yusoff takes the stand to testify...

The High Court judge dismissed Anwar's application, and Anwar appealed to the Court of Appeal - which fixed the hearing date in March 2026? So far away - why?   

In a letter dated Sept 8, to Court of Appeal President Datuk Abu Bakar Jais, Yusoff’s lawyers from the firm Law Practice of Rafique requested that the appeal, currently scheduled for hearing on March 4, 2026, be brought forward.

I think the Court of Appeal should decide faster - as nobody wants the Yusoff Rawther's trial to be delayed any further.

Yusoff, now 32, filed the civil suit against Anwar in July 2021, alleging that he had been sexually assaulted at Anwar’s Segambut home on Oct 2, 2018.... Yusoff's civil suit comes after he made a statutory declaration and a police report over the incident in 2019. In January 2020, the Attorney General’s Chambers said it would not pursue the matter. - Edge, 9/9/2025

# After the incident, Yusoff did file a police report - and even when the police failed, he applied to the Public Prosecutor ...when all else failed, he filed the civil suit in 2021 - and the trial is YET to start more than 4 years later...is it because the named Defendant is the Prime Minister? This is just not right .... Even if what Yusoff alleges is TRUE - he may still fail in the civil court because he failed to prove his allegations on a 'Balance of Probabilities' - which is not really that easy in cases of rape or sexual assault - when it is only the victim and perpetrator present, and most likely no other eye-witness to the crime. It is just as difficult to prove that police officer A tortured the victim - when in such cases, it may not be because of a lack of eye-witnesses but because of  WEIRD 'brotherhood mentality' amongst some law enforcement ...

The "balance of probabilities" is a standard of proof used in civil legal cases, meaning a judge must be convinced that a fact or event is more likely than not to have occurred. This is also known as a "preponderance of the evidence" and requires a probability greater than 50%. 

Now, the Mahathir-Anwar trial is proceeding now - but the Yusoff Rawther's suit has been stayed because Anwar wants to ask the Federal Court on whether a sitting prime minister has qualified immunity from civil lawsuits during his tenure. 

Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s RM150 million lawsuit against his one-time heir apparent, Anwar Ibrahim, took a tense turn today with the long-time former premier bitterly complaining about questions posed to him in court...“I’d like to point out that the line of questioning has nothing to do with (my) complaint that Anwar defamed me,” Mahathir told Judicial Commissioner Donald Joseph Franklin....“Anwar accused me of committing a crime, stealing money, enriching myself and my children, (and) moving money abroad. These are what make the accusation against me defamatory.”...The trial will resume on Oct 29 - FMT, 23/10/2025

3rd Judge to take over this trial -and the new Judge was just appointed on 13/8/2025 - and thus the validity of the appointment is Doubtful. 

Roz Mawar Rozain must recuse herself from Yusoff Rawther - Anwar Ibrahim case for justice to be seen to be done. Will judges 'picked' by Anwar be INDEPENDENT in cases involving Anwar, family/friends or even his government?

SHAH ALAM (Aug 18): The hearing of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s RM150 million defamation suit against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, initially scheduled on Tuesday (Aug 19) and Wednesday (Aug 20), has now been deferred for two months and will begin on Oct 21 instead.

The date was fixed by newly appointed Judicial Commissioner Datuk Donald Joseph Franklin in a case management on Monday, who is taking over from JC Zaharah Husain.

Franklin was previously the head of the Civil Division of the Attorney General’s Chambers and was recently sworn in to the judiciary last Wednesday (Aug 13).

He is the third judge to take over the matter, after the case was slated earlier before Jamhirah Ali who had recused herself due to her purported ties with one of the lawyers representing the parties. - Edge, 18/8/2025

 

WHY Doubtful? 

It is generally accepted that after the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009, the Prime Minister can no longer be free to choose whoever he wants to be appointed judge, or elevated to higher court or high Judicial Office save those specifically recommended by the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC ). 

Doubts arose that this PM Anwar may have appointed/elevated judges, those not recommended by the JAC. Anwar could have easily settled this doubt by stating that all appointments/elevation in the Judiciary that he advised the King were as recommended by the JAC -he did not, and so Doubts remain - hence the new 'Judicial Crisis' - raising doubts of all Judicial Appointment since Anwar Ibrahim became Prime Minister.

If PM Anwar Ibrahim just choose persons recommended by the 'correct' JAC, and advised the king to appoint  - Then ALL OK and NO JUDICIAL CRISIS.

HOWEVER, if any or some judges that he advised the King to appoint/elevate were not recommendations of the JAC - then, we have a problem - or a JUDICIAL CRISIS - we are back to the same problem that came to light in 2007.  

Before, it was true that the Prime Minister had absolute power in choosing judges, deciding which judge be elevated, and which Judge be the Chief Justice, etc -the King had no choice but to appoint as advised by the PM. All other obligations are consultations with required judge and Rulers Conference - PM no need to get their approval. 

BUT NOW - the Judicial Appointments Commission pick out those truly qualified - and give the recomendations to the PM, who then pick 1 from the JAC's recommendations, and advise the King. [So, PM no longer can whoever he wants - his choices limited to persons/judges recommended by the JAC]

The CONCERN now is whether even the current Chief Justice of Malaysia is Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, who was appointed on July 28, 2025 was recommended by the 'correct JAC' - Why are we asking whether it is the 'correct' JAC - Reasonably JAC starts finding a CJ or any judge when the vacancy is about to happen - so, the JAC that recommended Wan Ahmad Farid should have included the former CJ Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat and the former President of COA - so, the question is 'was Wan Farid one of the names recommended by this JAC as a person qualified to be the next Chief Justice - The JAC would have recommended about 3-5 names - so was Wan Ahmad Farid one of the names recommended? OR was Wan Ahmad Farid recommended by a JAC that did not include Tengku Maimun? Here lies the DOUBTS - it is about the appointment process - NOT about the person Wan Ahmad Farid and his qualifications, character, etc.. 

The best solution is a ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY to look into this matter....

What is from now on, the PM faithfully only picks persons recommended by the JAC - Will the problem be settled? 

NO, it will not be - because the most important matter that needs to be CONFIRMED is that  Chief Justice of the Federal Court (as chairman), the President of the Court of Appeal, the Chief Judge of the High Court in Malaya, the Chief Judge of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak are PROPERLY APPOINTED, and were recommended by the 'correct' JAC - because, if not, there has been an 'effective' change of the 4 who will be involved in ALL future appointment/elevation of judges... 

ASK THIS QUESTION - if Chief Justice of the Federal Court (as chairman), the President of the Court of Appeal, the Chief Judge of the High Court in Malaya, the Chief Judge of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak were different from the current ones, would the same persons be appointed as NEW judges, would the same judges be elevated to the Court of Appeal and Federal Court or to some Judicial Office... 

As it is the Rulers are already UNHAPPY that the PM picks 5 members of the JAC - they want the Prime Minister to have NO ROLE in choosing the members of the JAC too 

The Malaysia Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) is made up of nine members: the Chief Justice of the Federal Court (as chairman), the President of the Court of Appeal, the Chief Judge of the High Court in Malaya, the Chief Judge of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak, and 5 others who are picked by the PM  

1. 
   

Dr M’s defamation trial against Anwar deferred two months, to be heard before new judicial commissioner

By Hafiz Yatim / theedgemalaysia.com

18 Aug 2025, 01:45 pmUpdated -

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad seen at Shah Alam Court (Photo by Zahid Izzani/The Edge)

SHAH ALAM (Aug 18): The hearing of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s RM150 million defamation suit against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, initially scheduled on Tuesday (Aug 19) and Wednesday (Aug 20), has now been deferred for two months and will begin on Oct 21 instead.

The date was fixed by newly appointed Judicial Commissioner Datuk Donald Joseph Franklin in a case management on Monday, who is taking over from JC Zaharah Husain.

Franklin was previously the head of the Civil Division of the Attorney General’s Chambers and was recently sworn in to the judiciary last Wednesday (Aug 13).

He is the third judge to take over the matter, after the case was slated earlier before Jamhirah Ali who had recused herself due to her purported ties with one of the lawyers representing the parties.

The new date was confirmed by Anwar’s lawyer Alliff Benjamin Suhaimi when contacted by The Edge.

The centenarian Mahathir arrived in court with his counsel Rafique Rashid Ali at 10.30am.

The former prime minister had filed the RM150 million defamation suit against the current prime minister in May 2023, over claims made by Anwar during a speech at the Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) congress in March 2023, alleging that “a leader of 22 years and 22 months” had enriched his own family.

Anwar, in his defence to Mahathir’s suit, claimed that the statements he made at the party’s congress were true.

FAM Scandal - A Malaysian Citizenship Scandal, A Fraudulent/Forged Document Scandal - Independent Inquiry With View of Prosecution of Wrongdoers including Minister?

It matters not if FIFA allows the FAM appeal - because it includes serious CITIZENSHIP issues

Constitution strict about CITIZENSHIP - did they reside in Malaysia for 10 years of more, and intend to reside in Malaysia permanently? Did the RENOUNCE or give up all other Citizenship to be/remain Malaysian citizens. Malaysia generally does not allow DUAL Citizenship. Was there abuse of power? Was citizenship wrongly granted?

Under the Constitution of Malaysia - Article 24 Termination of Citizenship, the Government of Malaysia does not recognize dual nationality.  - Embassy of Malaysia in Washington Website

Fraudulent/Forged Documents - A serious crime. Was the Ministry/Government involved in generation of said documents, or 'approve' the use of such documents - or did the Players submit forged documents? 

Sec. 463 Penal Code - Forgery

 464 - Making a false document  

465  Punishment of forgery -  imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both.

466  Forgery of a record of a Court, or a public register of births, etc. -imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine 

468  Forgery for the purpose of cheating - imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

 471  Using as genuine a forged document  

Should the Players, FAM (and/or officials), the Ministry/Government officers and/or Minister be investigated, charged and tried in court for these CRIMES?

Who should Investigate/Inquire - FAM? Or an INDEPENDENT Commission (without FAM or the implicated Ministries)? 

Should not the relevant LAW ENFORCEMENT agency already be investigating these CRIMES?  

Media Statement – 18/10/2025

Need An INDEPENDENT Inquiry or Royal Commission of Inquiry NOW to Look into The FAM Football Scandal, As It Is About Malaysian Citizenship and Fraudulent/Forged Documents

FAM and possibly implicated Ministries Should Not Be Involved

The Football Association of Malaysia (FAM) scandal is now a BIG issue for Malaysians, and it does not end even if FAM is subsequently successful in its appeal at FIFA.

The issue is about the granting of Malaysian citizenship to these 7 foreign footballers, and whether Malaysia issued or used fraudulent/forged documents about, amongst others possibly the proof of birth of parents/grandparents of these footballers so that they satisfy the eligibility requirements of FIFA. FIFA requires not just proof of nationality, but proof of other matters, including proof the acquiring of new nationality was not for the purpose of participating for Malaysia at international tournaments.

The FIFA Disciplinary Committee found that FAM and/or the said players breached Article 22 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC), which is the offence of forgery and falsification, which is also a serious crime in Malaysia. It states, ‘forged a document, falsifies an authentic document or uses a forged or falsified document.’ Article 22(2) also states ‘An association or a club may be held liable for an act of forgery or falsification by one of its officials and/or players.’ So, it is useless shifting blame to one FAM office bearer, or the players.

Citizenship has strict requirements that need to be complied with

When it comes to the issuance of citizenship, by naturalization under Article 19 of the Federal Constitution, there is that requirement, amongst others, that the applicant need to have resided in Malaysia for an ‘aggregate to not less than ten years in the twelve years immediately preceding the date of the application’ and ‘…intends, if the certificate is granted, to do so permanently…’. Was this requirement even satisfied in this case?

DUAL citizenship not allowed

The next issue, is whether these foreign players, now allegedly Malaysian citizens have already renounced their other national citizenship/s they held, and now are only Malaysian citizens. Malaysia does not allow Malaysian citizens to have DUAL Citizenship, and this principle clear having reference to Article 23-25 of the Federal Constitution.

Birthplace of parents/grandparents not a requirement for Malaysian citizenship

The fact that your parent or grandparent was born in Malaysia, or resided before in Malaysia is irrelevant in the consideration for the granting of a Malaysian citizenship. Only FIFA is interested in this as they do not want any national team to simply grant citizenship to foreign nationals so that they can play in tournaments representing Malaysia.

Some may argue that it has happened before, where foreigners have been given citizenship so that they can represent Malaysia, so what is the big deal now. It was wrong then, and past wrongs are never a justification for committing the same crimes/wrongdoing again. In fact, as there is no limitation to criminal prosecution in Malaysia, these past crimes should now be investigated and the wrongdoers should be prosecuted in accordance to Malaysian law.

INDEPENDENT investigation – not FAM or any Ministry possibly involved

Thus, these are serious issues of citizenship and fraud/forged documents, that ought to be now investigated or inquired into by an INDEPENDENT body or commission, maybe even a Royal Commission of Inquiry, as it not only concerns the wrongdoings or crimes of FAM, but also implicates several Ministries.

This Independent body naturally ought not include any FAM officials, or even anyone from the 2 implicated Ministries, being the Ministry of Youth and Sports, and the Ministry of Home Affairs of Malaysia, including Minister Hannah Yeoh and Minister Saifuddin Nasution.

Attempts to lay blame on just some officials will not work

Thus, it was shocking to see that FAM, not even the Sports Ministry, seems to be conducting an Investigation now. FAM and/or Ministry should have investigated immediately when the allegations surfaced, certainly not now after FIFA already heard the matter and made a ruling.

It was reported that the ‘Football Association of Malaysia (FAM) general secretary Noor Azman Rahman has been suspended amid the ongoing controversy surrounding allegations that falsified documents were submitted to Fifa on the issue of naturalized players…“The general secretary will be suspended with immediate effect in order to allow the committee to carry out its duties,” he[FAM deputy president S Sivasundaram] told a press conference (FMT, 17/10/2025).

This is so wrong and unacceptable.

The investigation must be conducted by an Independent Committee/Commission, and it ought not include any FAM officials, or even anyone from the 2 implicated Ministries, being the Ministry of Youth and Sports, and the Ministry of Home Affairs of Malaysia, including Minister Hannah Yeoh and Minister Saifuddin Nasution.

We believe that Malaysians would want a TRULY Malaysian team competing at international tournaments, and not a team that comprises of foreign nationals, who had questionably been granted Malaysian citizenship. How sad for Malaysian players, who lost their spot to play for Malaysia, which was taken by these ‘new citizens of Malaysia’.

Amend Federal Constitution if you want to make foreign athletes Malaysians

If Malaysia, wants to grant Malaysian citizenship to foreign athletes or sports persons, then the Federal Constitution need to be amended first to add in this ‘new way’ of making foreign national citizens. The government should table the needed Constitutional amendments in Parliament, and if passed by a two third majority in Parliament, then foreign athletes can become Malaysian citizen. Now, even the Home Minister cannot on his discretion grant anyone citizenship – the law must be strictly complied with even by the Minister or Prime Minister.

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture), that is concerned with human rights and justice, hopes that this ‘football scandal’ will not simply put to rest if and when FIFA allows FAM’s appeal. This is a SERIOUS issue that cannot be swept under the carpet. It must be investigated, and all wrongdoers including even possibly Ministers should be prosecuted in accordance to law.

Conduct Independent Inquiry Now – No need to wait for FIFA’s Appeal

MADPET calls for Malaysia to immediately set up a INDEPENDENT Commission/Committee of Inquiry, including possibly a Royal Commission of Inquiry to deal with this issue that affects all Malaysians especially when it involves creating new citizens, and the serious allegation of fraudulent or forged documents. As the outcome of the appeal to FIFA is irrelevant, this commencement of an independent inquiry with a view of all prosecuting all those criminally liable must start now.

 

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

FAM gen sec suspended amid falsified document controversy

4 hours ago

Jason Thomas

Noor Azman Rahman previously said the dispute stemmed from a 'technical error' by an administrative staff in FAM when submitting documents to Fifa.

FAM general secretary Noor Azman Rahman has been suspended with immediate effect to allow an FAM committee to probe the ongoing controversy surrounding allegations that falsified documents were submitted to Fifa on the issue of naturalised players. (Bernama pic)

PETALING JAYA:

Football Association of Malaysia (FAM) general secretary Noor Azman Rahman has been suspended amid the ongoing controversy surrounding allegations that falsified documents were submitted to Fifa on the issue of naturalised players.

Last week, Fifa issued a statement saying that contrary to documents submitted by FAM claiming that the grandparents of seven naturalised players were born in Malaysia, its own investigation found original records indicating the grandparents were actually born in Spain, Argentina, Brazil, and the Netherlands.

FAM deputy president S Sivasundaram today said it has formed a committee to prevent this issue from happening again.

“The general secretary will be suspended with immediate effect in order to allow the committee to carry out its duties,” he told a press conference at Wisma FAM in Kelana Jaya, here.

“We want the investigation to be carried out transparently. Let the committee decide what went wrong.”

Noor Azman previously said that the dispute stemmed from a “technical error” by an administrative staff in FAM when submitting documents to Fifa.

Sivasundaram said FAM’s executive committee made the decision to suspend Noor Azman yesterday.

FAM and seven naturalised Malaysian footballers were penalised by Fifa last month after the world football body said FAM had submitted falsified documents to confirm the seven players’ eligibility prior to Malaysia’s 2027 Asian Cup qualifier against Vietnam on June 10.

FAM was fined 350,000 Swiss francs (about RM1.8 million), while the players – Gabriel Felipe Arrocha, Facundo Garces, Rodrigo Holgado, Imanol Machuca, Joao Figueiredo, Jon Irazabal and Hector Hevel – were each fined 2,000 Swiss francs (about RM10,560) and suspended for 12 months from all football-related activities.

In a statement last week, FAM said the dispute stemmed from an “administrative error” after a staff member mistakenly uploaded documents from an agent instead of official ones issued by the national registration department (JPN).

When asked whether any action had been taken against the staff member for the error, Sivasundaram said the committee was working to identify the staff member involved.

FAM has appealed Fifa’s decision, the result of which will be delivered by Oct 30. A failed appeal could result in points deduction for the national team in their ongoing 2027 Asian Cup qualifying campaign.

Malaysia beat Laos 5-1 in their 2027 Asian Cup qualifier on Tuesday to maintain their unbeaten record after four matches, keeping them top of Group F with 12 points, followed by Vietnam (9), Laos (3) and Nepal (0).

Malaysia will face Nepal on Nov 18 before concluding their campaign against Vietnam in Hanoi next March. - FMT, 17/10/2025

Art.19 Federal Constitution - Citizenship by naturalization 

(1) Subject to Clause (9), the Federal Government may, upon application made by any person of or over the age of twenty-one years who is not a citizen, grant a certificate of naturalization to that person if satisfied—

(a) that—

(i) he has resided in the Federation for the required periods and intends, if the certificate is granted, to do so permanently;

(ii) (Repealed);

(b) that he is of good character; and

(c) that he has an adequate knowledge of the Malay language.

(2) Subject to Clause (9), the Federal Government may, in such special circumstances as it thinks fit, upon application made by any person of or over the age of twenty-one years who is not a citizen, grant a certificate of naturalization to that person if satisfied—

(a) that he has resided in the Federation for the required periods and intends, if the certificate is granted, to do so permanently;

(b) that he is of good character; and

(c) that he has an adequate knowledge of the Malay language.

(3) The periods of residence in the Federation or the relevant part of it which are required for the grant of a certificate of naturalization are periods which amount in the aggregate to not less than ten years in the twelve years immediately preceding the date of the application for the certificate, and which include the twelve months immediately preceding that date.

(4) For the purposes of Clauses (1) and (2) residence before Malaysia Day in the territories comprised in the States of Sabah and Sarawak shall be treated as residence in the Federation; and for the purposes of Clause (2) residence in Singapore before Malaysia Day or with the approval of the Federal Government residence in Singapore after Malaysia Day shall be treated as residence in the Federation.

(5) A person to whom a certificate of naturalization is granted shall be a citizen by naturalization from the date on which the certificate is granted.

(6) (Repealed).

(7) (Repealed).

(8) (Repealed).

(9) No certificate of naturalization shall be granted to any person until he has taken the oath set out in the First Schedule.

FIFA Disciplinary Code 

22. Forgery and falsification

 
1. Anyone who, in football-related activities, forges a document, falsifies an authentic document or uses a forged or falsified document will be sanctioned with a fine and a ban of at least six matches or for a specific period of no less than 12 months.

2. An association or a club may be held liable for an act of forgery or falsification by one of its officials and/or players. 

- https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/59dca8ae619101cf/original/FIFA-Disciplinary-Code-2023.pdf 

FIFA RULES GOVERNING ELIGIBILITY TO PLAY FOR REPRESENTATIVE TEAMS 

 ART. 5 PRINCIPLES

1. Any person holding a permanent nationality that is not dependent on residence in a certain country is eligible to play for the representative teams of the association of that country.

2. There is a distinction between holding a nationality and being eligible to obtain a nationality. A player holds a nationality, if, through the operation of a national law, they have:

a) automatically received a nationality (e.g. from birth) without being required to undertake any further administrative requirements (e.g. abandoning a separate nationality); or

b) acquired a nationality by undertaking a naturalisation process.

3. With the exception of the conditions specified in article 9 below, any player who has already participated in a match (either in full or in part) in an official competition of any category or any type of football for one association may not play an international match for a representative team of another association.

4. For the purposes of arts 6 to 9 below, the phrase “lived on the territory of the relevant association” shall mean a period of physical presence on the territory of that association. The period shall be for a defined period of time (in years) in accordance with the relevant provision.

a) The period of physical presence is not interrupted by:
i) short absences abroad for personal reasons;
ii) holidays abroad during the football off-season;
iii) medical treatment or rehabilitation abroad following injury or illness; or
iv) travel abroad as a result of football employment.

b) The period of physical presence is interrupted (and time requirement resets) where:
i) a player is transferred to a club affiliated to a different association; or
ii) a player is absent from a territory for any reason other than those set out in par. a) above.

5. Notwithstanding art. 5 par. 4 a), unless exceptional circumstances exist, a player must be physically present on the territory of an association for at least 183 days during a 12 month period to be considered to have “lived on the territory” of that association for that year.

6. For the purposes of arts 6 to 9 below, the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall govern any requests for eligibility or change of association....

 ART. 7 ACQUISITION OF A NEW NATIONALITY 

1. Any player who refers to art. 5 par.1 to assume a new nationality and who has not played international football in accordance with art. 5 par. 3 shall be eligible to play for the representative teams of the new association only if he fulfils one of the following conditions:

a) He was born on the territory of the relevant association;

b) His biological mother or biological father was born on the territory of the relevant association;

c) His grandmother or grandfather was born on the territory of the relevant association;

d) He has lived on the territory of the relevant association:

i) for players that began living on the territory before the age of 10: at least three years;

ii) for players that began living on the territory between the age of 10 and 18: at least five years;

iii) for players that began living on the territory from the age of 18: at least five years.

2. A player who seeks to rely upon par. d ii) must:

a) demonstrate that the move to the territory of the association was not for the purpose of participating for its representative teams; and

b) submit, via the relevant association, a request for eligibility to the Players’ Status Committee.
 

Source:- https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/ccab990abf45fcf6/original/ro8mje8vw98yp3rvfbmi-pdf.pdf 

 

Right of Prisoners/Remand Detainee To Vote In Elections - Postal Ballot, Early Voting....About 100,000 maybe...

No Malaysian should be denied their right to VOTE - and certainly not REMAND prisoners/detainees. They are in detention not because they are serving a sentence after they were convicted of committing a CRIME - but just 'for purpose of investigations' OR because they could not afford Bail or could not get Bail - for all other accused who are out there on BAIL, they can VOTE - so no rationalle to deny remand prisoners their right to VOTE.

SIMPLE - Election Commission can arrange POSTAL BALLOT, or Early Voting - Even a few VOTES can determine which election candidates WIN or lose > this means outcome of Election can change if these REMAND Prisoners could exercise their Right to Vote. When convicted and sentenced, the sentence did not include 'deprivation of the right to VOTE' - so no reason why convicted prisoners also cannot VOTE, is there?    

Media Statement – 16/10/2025

Ensure the Right and Ability to Vote to about 100,000 Malaysians in Remand Detentions or Detention in Prison, Police Lock-Ups and Other Places of Detention.

Postal Ballot and Early Voting Mechanisms are options Election Commission can use to ensure the democratic right to vote is not denied

As the Sabah State Elections draw near, MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) calls for the right of prisoners, especially the about 30,000 remand prisoners who have not yet been tried and convicted, be accorded the RIGHT and the ability to VOTE immediately.

These remand persons are PRESUMED INNOCENT until they are tried and convicted, and thus should not be denied the right of a Malaysian citizen to vote in elections.

Remand prisoners are those who could not afford Bail by reason of poverty, denied Bail by draconian laws like SOSMA[Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012] and other laws like the DDA[Dangerous Drugs Act 1952], or by other reasons like denial of bail because the Court believed there was the risk of absconding or tampering with evidence.

Besides remand prisoners/detainees, should not the right and ability to vote also be guaranteed for all convicted prisoners serving their prison sentences.

POSTAL VOTING and/or EARLY VOTING a reasonable option

Reasonably, the Election Commission should facilitate so that they could vote by POSTAL VOTE, which is now available for Malaysians who are overseas or could not physically turn up at voting centers physically to cast their votes physically. This is also considering that many Malaysians do still vote not in the place they are currently residing or working.

The other option is EARLY VOTING, which is provided for police, members of the armed forces and those assisting in the election process on voting days.

This right to VOTE should also be accorded to those held in remand in police lock-ups and other detention places of Malaysian law enforcement.

The RIGHT to Stand For Elections

It should also be considered whether remand prisoners, and maybe even convicted prisoners, should also be accorded the right to stand for elections to become Members of Parliament or a State Assemblyperson.

The State could abuse its power by detaining potential contenders in elections, and that right to stand for elections even when detained in police lock-ups or as remand prisoners on the nomination date will make Malaysia more democratic.

After all, it is the people who vote, and if they so choose to vote for a person in detention, including even a convicted person, the people’s right and choice ought to be respected. Even former Prime Minister Najib Razak, now serving his prison sentence, should really be accorded the right to stand for elections if he so desires. Ultimately, the people decide.

In these modern times, it is still possible for an incarcerated MP or ADUN to participate in Parliamentary and State Legislative Proceedings – so, why deny them the right to stand for elections? After all, it is the people that decide who they want to be their peoples’ representative in a democracy.

Proactive action by Election Commission Needed to Ensure Exercise of the Right to Vote

If in prison or other places of Detention, it is difficult for them to get access to the needed forms that need to be filled, posted, etc – thus it is all up to the Election Commission to ensure that they get their right to vote.

More than 100,000 denied right to Vote?

At present, it seems that the right to vote is being denied to maybe about 30,000 remand prisoners in Malaysian prisons, and more than 85,000 in total in Malaysian prisons (NST, 7/11/2024).

There is an even higher number, if we take into account remand detainees in police lock-ups and other remand detention facilities of other law enforcement facilities who are denied the right and ability to vote on voting day by reason of being detained for the purpose of investigation in State detention facilities, and this number could be in excess of 10,000 at least. A few votes can change the outcome of some elections.

Right to Vote to Those in Detention Will Improve Detention Conditions?

One thing good that will happen is that more politicians and potential candidates would reasonably pay more attention prisons, lock-ups and the prison overcrowding issues, as they need to woo support from those in detention and their families.

According to data shared by the department, prison facilities are currently housing 87,419 inmates, exceeding their total capacity of 74,146 by 11.24 per cent. With the current incarceration rate, the department reported a ratio of 245 inmates per 100,000 residents, compared to the global average of 145 per 100,000 residents…Out of 43 prisons in the country, 19 are operating at more than 20 per cent above capacity, particularly those located in major urban areas.

Hence, MADPET calls for an end of the denial of the Right and Ability to Vote for Malaysians in State Detention Facilities. They may not be able to physically be able to go to the various voting centers to cast their votes, but they will be able to vote by Postal Ballot and/or through Early Voting, and the Malaysian Election Commission and the Malaysian Government shall do all that is necessary to end the deprivation of the exercise of the  right to vote by these possibly above 100,000 Malaysians.

No Malaysian should be denied the right to vote in Malaysian State or General Elections, and for those facing difficulty in exercising this right, the responsibility falls on the Election Commission and the Malaysian government to ensure that the ability to exercise this right to vote in ensured.

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

 

 

Angkhana Neelapaijit, a human rights defender at RISK - Let us stand together iN SOLIDARITY with her

Senator Angkhana Neelapaijit, a prominent woman human rights defender (WHRD), former National Human Rights Commissioner of Thailand, and a long-standing advocate for human rights, justice, peace, and reconciliation is now facing death threats and online gender-, racial-, and religious-based attacks. Angkhana is the wife of disappeared Muslim human rights lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit.In 2006, Angkhana won the Gwangju Prize for Human Rights, which honors "individuals, groups or institutions in Korea and abroad that have contributed in promoting and advancing human rights, democracy and peace through their work". In 2019 Angkhana Neelapaijit was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award. (Bangkok Post)

As a human rights defender, it is our duty to HIGHLIGHT human rights issues, including possible human rights violations, and that is exactly what Angkhana did...

On 12 October 2025, Senator Angkhana Neelapaijit raised legitimate human rights concerns on her verified Facebook page, urging the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) to investigate reports of cross-border intimidation by Thai civilians and military-affiliated influencers who  broadcast ghostly and military sounds into Cambodian villages near Sa Kaeo Province. 

The Senator warned that such actions could undermine Thailand’s international credibility, violate international humanitarian principles, and potentially constitute psychological torture under the Convention against Torture (CAT), to which Thailand is a party.

Her warning was consistent with reports submitted to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights by Mr. Keo Remy, President of the Cambodia Human Rights Committee (CHRC), alleging that Thai military units had broadcast loud, distressing noises directed at Cambodian civilians, causing sleep deprivation, fear, and psychological distress among vulnerable groups.The letter emphasized that such acts contradict the UN Charter and violate the 28 July 2025 Ceasefire Agreement between Thailand and Cambodia. - Thai PBS, 14/10/2025

The response - a lot of ONLINE and other attacks including death threats like “Take this bitch and bury her in a grave.”(translated from Thai), etc.. 

See below a Statement by the Community of Women Human Rights Defenders - LET US STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER ANGKHANA

When it comes to human rights violations and injustices, everyone has the duty and obligation to HIGHLIGHT and act against such violations even if the alleged perpetrator is our father, our child, our friend, our Prime Minister, our country's police or armed forces....and we should uphold the cause of justice and human rights without FEAR or favour. Despite the Thai-Cambodian border conflict, that is exactly what Angkhana did, and thus we should all stand in solidarity with her. 

We ask Thailand, the ASEAN under the leadership of Malaysia, and the United Nations to investigate this allegation, and if true, take the needed action to end this Injustice or Human Rights Violations and take action against the perpetrators to ensure JUSTICE and HUMAN RIGHTS is done. 

In this case, we expect to hear from Anwar Ibrahim who is involved in trying to resolve this Thai-Cambodian situation - Silence is not an option. 

Article 14. No person shall be subject to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.  - ASEAN Human Rights Declaration

We hope that the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand also speedily look into this allegation and do the needful. 

If true, the violation is directed against INNOCENT civilians - something the world condemns as it does not against the Israeli Zionist Regime who is acting against the innocent Civilians in Gaza. Our response need to be CONSISTENT and not 'selective' by reason of religion, ethnicity, gender or even nationality... 

Deeply concerned by reports of death threats & online attacks against Angkhana Neelapaijit, Senator, former NHRC Commissioner & woman human rights defender in #Thailand. Defending truth, justice & dignity is not a crime. She must be protected, not vilified. - Mary Lawlor UN Special Rapporteur for human rights defenders

 

Statement by the Community Women Human Rights Defenders Movement of Thailand

October 14, 2025

We Stand for Truth, Human Rights, and the Dignity of Every Human Being

We stand in unwavering solidarity with Angkhana Neelapaijit.

In a time when fear is dressed up as patriotism and hatred is paraded as civic duty, parts of society have turned their rage against one woman — an independent senator, a women human rights defender, and a voice of conscience — Angkhana Neelapaijit.

She is a woman of courage, doing nothing more than fulfilling her duty — to question what is unjust, to speak truth with integrity, and to stand firmly on the principles of human rights.

Angkhana knows that speaking out today means swimming against the current.

Yet she speaks — because she believes that truth has dignity. Even when state power has been merciless to her family, she has never abandoned the side of what is right, even if it means standing alone.

She does not speak for herself — she speaks to protect the rights of us all.

Human rights do not belong to lawyers, NGOs, or any single organization. They live in our breath and in our everyday lives — in our right to speak without fear of reprisal, our right to access truthful information, our right as citizens to question the power of the state, the military, and capital — even influencers, and our right to live in safety and dignity without fear.

To question power is the heart of democracy. To question power is not to overstep —it is to hold power accountable when it fails its people.

When the state refuses responsibility, the people have both the right and the duty to rise and ask. To question is the highest act of civic responsibility — and the only path to protect truth, justice, and human dignity.

We can question Senator Angkhana Neelapaijit’s views — but we cannot build a culture of hate.

When Patriotism Becomes a Weapon

It is encouraging to see the public alert to the situation along the Thai–Cambodian border. But when we awaken, we must ask — Are we awakening to seek understanding and solutions?
Or are we being drawn into an information war (IO) that spreads hate under the banner of patriotism?

The nationalism being incited today is cultivating a culture of fear and hatred in the hearts of people.

When we sow hatred, we will harvest only violence.

When we nourish division, we destroy the roots of justice and peace with our own hands.

We must ask ourselves honestly: What kind of culture are we growing in our hearts and in our society? If we build a society rooted in hatred, we will be trapped within that hatred. But if we nurture a culture of understanding, justice, and care for one another, we will create a society brave enough to defend the dignity of every human life.

True patriotism is not measured by the loudness of hate, but by the courage to stand for the dignity of every person — even when the nation trembles.

Human Rights and Humanity Must Never Be Abandoned

Thailand is bound by international human rights and humanitarian law — including the Convention against Torture (CAT) and International Humanitarian Law (IHL) — which require all parties to respect the dignity of civilians and limit the harm caused by conflict. Even in moments of war or tension, we must not lose our humanity in the fight.

Lessons from Rwanda: When National Security Devours Human Dignity

In 1994, the “Hutu Power” movement in Rwanda unleashed hatred in the name of “defending the nation.” In less than a hundred days, over 800,000 people were slaughtered — simply for being born into a different ethnicity. Rwanda stands as a warning to humanity: State security must never come before human security. The silence of the world then remains an open wound today.

True patriotism cannot be built upon the bodies of our fellow human beings. Defending the country means nothing if we do not defend the dignity of every life.

Voices of Women Human Rights Defenders from Across Thailand

“Influencers have no privilege above the law. Nationalist incitement is a social danger that must be stopped at its root.”

“Thai or Cambodian — we are all human. Everyone deserves peace, safety, and freedom from violence and discrimination.”

“Authorities on both sides must resolve the Thai–Cambodian conflict responsibly. Do not let the people of both nations suffer from the greed and power of those who rule.”

“War brings only loss and pain. Peaceful solutions must always come before political pride.”

 Our Urgent Demands

The Community Women Human Rights Defenders Collective of Thailand calls on the Thai Government, the Armed Forces, and independent institutions — including the National Human Rights Commission — to act immediately, transparently, and accountability in line with international human rights standards.

The state must:

Uphold International Humanitarian Law (IHL);

End the use of nationalist rhetoric and information operations (IO) that breed hatred;

Protect the dignity and safety of all civilians — regardless of sides or borders.

To the Media

We call upon all journalists and media outlets to report responsibly — to uphold ethics, accuracy, and fairness, and to reject hate speech. An honourable media does not amplify fear.
It shines light into darkness. “The duty of the press is to illuminate — not to deepen the shadows.”

 The Power of the People

The power of the people is beautiful — when it rises for human rights, justice, and democracy.
We urge all citizens to use that power to question authority:

Why can we not elect a 100% people’s constitutional assembly (Sor Sor Ror.)? Why are citizens denied the right to amend every section of the constitution? Why does the economy collapse while inequality rises and people take their own lives? Why do political and border conflicts persist without resolution?

And — are the recent Bangchak stock acquisitions linked to money laundering by former Prime Minister Hun Sen or Thaksin Shinawatra? What is the role of Minister Thammanat — reportedly close to the influencer leading this nationalist campaign and to the network of scammers linked to the Bangchak affair?

How are these networks tied to scammers and financiers who exploit people’s resources and dignity, including those in Dan Khun Thot and other affected communities?

We demand truthful answers

And we urge the people —to keep asking these questions, with courage and clarity. Because the people are not accomplices to silence or hatred — they are the sovereign power of the nation,
with the right to know, to question, and to change their own future. 

Lessons from October 14, 1973: The People Are the Heart of the Nation

The political awakening after October 14 was a turning point for modern Thailand. When students and citizens rose to question power, the nation learned that state authority only has meaning when the people stand tall in their own dignity.

We have lived through that pain — and its lesson still echoes: The strength of a nation is not built on silence. It grows from a society that embraces scrutiny, that upholds rights, freedoms, justice, and shared responsibility.

A great nation is not one that never errs — but one that faces the truth and rises again with dignity.

Our Stand

We stand in solidarity with Angkhana Neelapaijit, and with all human rights defenders and people across this country — not because we agree with every word they speak, but because we share the same principle: Every human being has the right to safety, dignity, and truth.

True security cannot be built on fear. Peace cannot grow from hate. Justice cannot exist without accountability.

When patriotism is used as a weapon, love must become our resistance.And when fear is turned into policy, courage must become our collective voice.

Community Women Human Rights Defenders Collective of Thailand

 

The Thai version can be found here.

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1401321391997179&set=a.532651885530805

 

About Us

The Community Women Human Rights Defenders Collective of Thailand is a grassroots movement of women from communities across the country — representing struggles in 19 key issue areas. We are mothers, caregivers, Indigenous women, rural and urban poor, garment workers, landless labourers, sex workers, and young activists — all dedicated to protecting life, land, and our way of living. We fight for land and housing rights, resist destructive mining and mega-projects, and advocate for migrant women, refugees, women with disabilities, and women in conflict areas in southern Thailand and Myanmar. We call for a Care Income for mothers and caregivers —because care work sustains not only families but the future of our nation.