Bin or binti in a name does not make someone a Muslim - government 'inefficiency' creates injustice

It is really not right for government officials to simply insert the religion of a non-Muslim as being a Muslim in Identity Cards, Birth Certificates or other documents - when this happens, it is really so difficult for the non-Muslim to correct this ....now, it seems he has to go to court ...the Syariah Court and get an order confirming that he/she is not a Muslim...

If there is a 'bin' or a 'binti' in a name, we Malaysians should reasonably know that this 'bin' or 'binti' is not evidence or proof that one is a Muslim..

Orang asli in Semenanjung Malaysia also face similar problems - even when they go register the name of their child, some officers insert the 'bin' or 'binti' into the names children ...This used to happen, is it still happening?

This wrongly inserting that one is a Muslim causes a lot of problems - usually when it comes to marriage, etc -

Is it policy...or is it just inefficiency?

 

Native Christians 'converted' by state policy

 

COMMENT When Juinah binti Paulus, a native Christian, went to the National Registration Department (NRD) to get her new identity card, the NRD changed her religious identity to Islam without her knowledge nor consent.

This is not unusual. Many native or bumiputera Christians in Sabah and Sarawak with bin (son of) or binti (daughter of) in their names, are automatically classified as Muslims in their identity cards, known as MyKad. Once this is done there is virtually no remedy, except to wait in an administrative purgatory.

Christians and non-Muslims consider this as backdoor conversion or “MyKad Islamisation”.

The NRD denies this is done as a government policy whenever it is confronted and put the blame on “technical glitches”.

The then director of the NRD in Sabah, Ismail Ahmad (left), is reported as acknowledging that, “While there have been cases where Christians in Sabah have been ‘converted to Islam’ by the NRD, simply because they have ‘bin’ or ‘binti’ in their names, he described those incidents as ‘technical glitches that occur due to the data entered into the department’s database when they first started the computerisation system.”

“I admit that sometimes we make mistakes, but this is actually something that can be rectified immediately. All you have to do is come to the office to point out the mistake and we will rectify it for you,” Ismail had said.

However, this is not that simple nor the policy of the NRD head office in Putrajaya, the country’s administrative capital.

In a meeting in 2012 with the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF) and the NRD’s director-general, NECF in an official statement pointed out that, “At the meeting with NRD officials, NECF also raised the issue of East Malaysian Christians whose religion in their MyKad is recorded as ‘Islam’ simply because their names carry ‘bin’ and ‘binti’.

Data change only with approval of syariah court

It said, “The NRD confirmed that those who are affected could change the data in their MyKad provided they had obtained clearance from the Syariah Court.”

The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) lashed out and warned that the NRD's decision meant that it would continue to list such bumiputera Christians as Muslims until they have obtained an order from a syariah court to say that they are not Muslims. This would also be a violation of the affected persons constitutional rights and fundamental liberties as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

The conflict was referred to the cabinet and Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak wanted a quick resolution. However, the NRD continues to drag its feet, giving an impression that the ‘MyKad Islamisation’ may, after all, be an unwritten government policy.

How then can there be a plausible explanation that the director-general of the NRD can be so bold as to defy the PM’s directive?

So Juinah binti Paulus, 30, a Murut native from Tenom in the western interior of Sabah, situated in Sabah’s oldest interior division, in the beautiful valley between the Crocker and Trus Madi ranges, has no choice but to go to the Syariah High Court, even though the court is supposed to have jurisdiction only over Muslims. Her main hurdle is that she is not allowed to be represented by Christian lawyers.

In her affidavit, Juinah said she is a full fledged member of Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) Sabah or the Borneo Evangelical Church since 2008 and was baptised 17 years ago. She married Matius bin Mangantig, 35, who is also a Christian of Rungus ethnicity and they have a four-year old son, Carl Xavier.

Files of 162 native Christian go missing

The other three cases still pending were brought by a 54-year-old widow and her two adult daughters and supported by the respective local churches. All three are from the Dusun Banggi tribe from the tip of Borneo. The case has been postponed a few times.

Meanwhile, files of 162 native Christians who complained that they were wrongly classified as Muslims have gone missing from the National Registration Department in Sabah.

This was highlighted by the NECF-COSA, the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship Commission of Sabah Affairs, during its meeting last year with Sabah’s (then) Assistant Minister of Finance, Donald Mojuntin. The files were handed to Abdul Jafer Henry, the then state NRD director in his office on Sept 24, 2010, by a lawyer and witnessed by two pastors.

The MyKad Islamisation controversy and the missing 162 files from the NRD surfaced once again two weeks ago when two senior Sabah clergymen demanded action from the NRD.

Taking a cue from the Catholic Archbishop of Sabah Rev John Wong’s urging to Putrajaya to act against aggressive Islamisation in the state, Rev Jerry Dusing (left), president of the indigenous denomination Sidang Injil Borneo Sabah, said, “As highlighted by Archbishop Wong, we urge NRD to immediately rectify the wrong classification of Bumiputera Christians in Sabah as Muslims just because they have ‘bin’ and ‘binti’ in their names. The JPN must desist from this ‘MyKad Islamisation’ drive through changing the religious status in the MyKad of these Christians.”

Dusing said the wrong classification of the MyKad belonging to native Christians in Sabah has brought untold misery to those affected.

And so, marriages too cannot be registered

“Christians wrongly classified as Muslims are unable to get married legally. Getting married in churches would not solve their problems as these marriages cannot be officially registered,” he said.

“The birth of their offspring also cannot be registered as their parent’s marriage is, in the first place, not recognised in law. This makes them illegitimate children. This presents a major problem in registering them in schools and in applying for their own identity cards. Eventually, they cannot even get married as Christians.”

The NRD responded to the senior clergymen by going once again into denial overdrive. The Sabah NRD deputy director, Adrian Allan Richard, is quoted as saying the NRD has no jurisdiction to decide on the religion of MyKad holders.

“Having a bin or binti in the name is not the criterion for a MyKad holder to be listed as Islam in the document,” Adrian said.

Adrian also denied receiving reports of lost files, saying that they have records dating back to the 1970s, which were digitally uploaded into their system.

“We have no agenda here, we only act according to facts. If it was indeed an administrative mistake, it will be easily cleared up by verifying past records,” he said, also denying previous reports that “technical glitches” prevented the correction process.

Meanwhile, Joseph Kurup (right), a Sabahan and a minister in the Prime Minister's Department, is scheduled to meet church leaders over several issues in Kota Kinabalu, on Aug 29, in the run-up to the celebration of Sabah’s 51st independence day on Aug 31.

However, Kurup is not expected to resolve the MyKad issues as the NRD is not under his jurisdiction but under the Home Ministry, whose minister is Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. And Zahid has not attended to this problem thus far.

The MyKad Islamisation presents itself as a serious ethno-religious conflict with far reaching consequences and Zahid cannot remain silent. Neither can the prime minister.

---

BOB TEOH is enrolled in a Master's programme at the Asian Center for Journalism at the Ateneo De Manila University in the Philippines and this paper is part of his Conflict & Peace Reporting course requirements.
- Malaysiakini, 24/8/2014, Native Christians 'converted' by state policy

Stop classifying Bumi Christians as Muslims, Sabah church tells NRD

  File picture shows Datuk Jerry Dusing, President of the Sabah Sidang Injil Borneo. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 14 — A Sabah church called on the National Registration Department (NRD) today to rectify the problem of Bumiputera Christians with “bin” or “binti” in their names being wrongly classified as Muslims in their MyKads.

Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) Sabah president Rev Datuk Jerry Dusing said the church lodged a complaint with NRD two years ago for 162 such cases in Sabah, but was told that no further action could be taken because the files were lost.

“The JPN must desist from this Islamisation drive through changing the religious status in the MyKad of these Christians,” Dusing said in a statement today, using the Malay acronym for the NRD.

“We also wish to call on the authorities to rein in aggressive Islamisation in Sabah by overzealous ‘dakwah’ (evangelistic) elements from the peninsula through conversion by dubious means such as intimidation, inducement and deception,” he added.

Dusing said the wrong classification of Christians as Muslims in their MyKads has prevented them from getting married legally, which in turn prevented the registration of the birth of their children, as well as the children’s registration in schools and applications for their own identity cards.

“They have also been told by JPN that the department would only rectify their religious status if they went to the Shariah Court to get a declaration that they are not Muslims. It is most ludicrous to subject Christians to the dictates of the Shariah Court,” he said.

Dusing stressed on Sabahans’ right to freedom of religion that Sabah Catholic Archbishop John Wong had raised at the mamangkis gathering organised by the Perpaduan Anak Negeri (PAN) Sabah in Papar last Saturday.

“As we prepare to celebrate the 51st anniversary of the formation of Malaysia on 16 September, we wish to remind the government that the cornerstone of Sabah’s 20-point conditions to the Malaysia Agreement is anchored on freedom of religion,” he said.

News reports surfaced last January of Borneo natives being coerced and duped into embracing Islam, leading Christian group PAN Sabah to accuse Muslim extremists from the peninsula of oppressing Bumiputera Christians in the East Malaysian state.

In the so-called Project IC, which was investigated by a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) probing Sabah’s massive illegal immigrant problem, Muslim foreigners were purportedly given citizenship in exchange for their votes in order to keep the ruling government in power. - Malay Mail Online, 14/8/2014, Stop classifying Bumi Christians as Muslims, Sabah church tells NRD

Selangor - Elections or just a new Menteri Besar - What does the law say?

Well, legally what can happen in Selangor - Disolution and Elections Again, or the appointment of Wan Azizah as the new Menteri Besar?

I am still at a loss why Pakatan Rakyat has not moved to remove the ethnic-religious requirement for who can be the Menteri Besar in Selangor. I believe that the best and most qualified Malaysian who is a State Assemblyperson(ADUNs), irrespective of ethnicity or religion, so long as he enjoys the confidence of the majority of ADUNs should be the Menteri Besar. [Now, our Federal Constitution does not such ethnic-religious requirement for who can be the Prime Minister - likewise Selangor and other State constitutions should also be amended to come in line with the Federal Constitution]

Well, after 2008 PR may have advanced concern about the impact of such a move to amend the State Constitution  would have in the outcome of the upcoming elections. But, really after 2013 - what is the reason for not moving for it? Remember, the position of the Menteri Besar is a very important position - so let it be the choice of the people, now exercised vide the ADUNs... 

Remember, there is no requirement in law that it must be a person from a party(or coalition) that has the most number of ADUNs - but just the ADUN who enjoys the confidence of the majority...I believe too that the person who should be the Menteri Besar really should the best person to govern the State.

Below is an article by Shad Saleem Faruqi as appeared in Star Online which discusses the legal possibilities of what may happen in Selangor. My hope is that Khalid, the existing Menteri Besar do the needful for Wan Azizah to be Menteri Besar and not advise dissolution and elections.

Updated: Thursday August 21, 2014 MYT 6:54:36 AM

Royal options in the MB saga

by shad sallem faruqiUpdated: Thursday August 21, 2014 MYT 6:54:36 AM

Birth in the state is not a constitutional prerequisite. Residence is sufficient. Nor is gender prescribed.

WITH PAS’ withdrawal of support to the embattled mentri besar of Selangor, it is clear that 43 out of 56 Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen are now ranged against Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim. Clearly, the sun has set on his tenure and while he is entitled to savour the colours of the dusk, the political night is impending. Several uncertainties, however, remain. 

Dissolution: Will Khalid gracefully submit his resignation when the Selangor Sultan returns from abroad or will he retaliate by invoking Article 53(6) to advise the dissolution of the assembly? 

The Sultan is not bound by this advice. Premature dissolution is a discretionary power of the Sultan under Article 55(2)(b) and there is no telling how he will react. There are three well-known precedents from the states when the political executive’s advice to dissolve the state assembly prematurely were turned down by the head of state: Kelantan (1977), Sabah (1994) and Perak (2009).

Being a constitutional head, above politics, the Ruler will, undoubtedly, take all legally relevant factors into consideration. 

Among them are that the ruling Pakatan coalition has 76% of the support in the assembly and is capable of providing continuity. The last election was held only 15½ months ago and the country will have to fork out an estimated RM50mil to hold a snap poll. 

It is to be noted that while the Ruler can refuse the advice to dissolve the assembly, he cannot order dissolution on his own initiative.

Caretaker government: If, despite factors that weigh against a dissolution, a snap election is called, the poll must be held within 60 days of the dissolution: Article 70(4). Nomination and voting dates will be fixed by the Election Commission. The new assembly must meet within 90 days from the date of the dissolution.

Who will helm the state during the interim period? The constitution is thunderously silent. We follow the British convention that the incumbent MB continues in caretaker capacity pending the appointment of the new government after the election. 


This Westminster convention is, however, qualified by Article 53(2) that during the dissolution, the Sultan is empowered to appoint members of the executive council from amongst those who were members of the last assembly. 


Appointment of successor: If elections are not called, then Khalid has no choice but to tender his resignation so that the Sultan may anoint someone else with the task of leading the state. 

Under the Selangor constitution the following provisions guide the MB’s appointment:

> In the exercise of this discretionary function, the Sultan is not bound by advice: Article 55(2)(a). However, the discretion is not absolute. It is regulated by Article 53(2) and by well-established constitutional conventions that supply the flesh to clothe the dry bones of the law. 

> The MB must be a member of the legislative assembly: Article 53(2).

> He must, in the Sultan’s judgment, be likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly: Article 53(2).

> He must be Malay and Muslim: Article 51(2). The Sultan may dispense with this provision: Article 53(4).

> He must not be a citizen by naturalisation or registration: Article 53(3).

It is noteworthy that birth in Selangor is not a constitutional prerequisite. Residence is sufficient: Article 63.

Nor is gender prescribed. In fact, gender discrimination would fall foul of the promise of equality in the Federal Constitution’s Article 8(2).

Despite the above provisions, some controversy is swirling around the royal power to pick the successor to Khalid. The “royalists” are putting forward a number of cogent arguments to support the existence of a wide, personal royal discretion.

Their arguments are, first, that the appointment of an MB is an explicitly conferred discretion in Article 55(2)(a) and therefore British conventions limiting royal discretion are excluded. Within the limits of Article 53(2), the Sultan is free to choose his preferred candidate.

Second, the Constitution is what happens! There is no dearth of examples to illustrate successful royal assertiveness in this area – Terengganu and Perlis after the 2008 general elections being spectacular recent examples.

In earlier decades, several former MBs, popular within their party, were, nevertheless, eased out of office due to pressure from the palace. They were Tan Sri Ghazali Jawi in Perak, Datuk Abdul Rahim Abu Bakar in Pahang and Datuk Haji Othman Saat in Johor.

According to former The Star columnist the late Dr Tan Chee Khoon, these incidents indicate that in submitting a candidate for appointment as MB, the party always takes into consideration his acceptability to the Ruler.

At the other end of the spectrum is the argument of the constitutionalists that the 1957 Merdeka Constitution launched a new era of constitutional supremacy, limited monarchy, parliamentary democracy and federalism.

If there is a party or coalition enjoying an absolute majority, the Ruler has no choice but to appoint its leader to lead the government. The Ruler’s role is primarily formal and ceremonial.

To disregard constitutional provisions or insist on alternative names or thwart a democratically elected leader would drag the Ruler into raw politics and besmirch the institution of monarchy.

“When the party which obtains the majority of seats … decides to nominate one of its members of the assembly for appointment as mentri besar,… the Ruler has no choice but to appoint him.”

These words were authored by Raja Azlan Shah (later Sultan Azlan Shah) in 1986 when he contributed an erudite essay to Trindade & Lee’s The Constitution of Malaysia.

It must be pointed out, however, that in some circumstances, the Sultan’s discretion does indeed become pivotal.

For example, if for any reason the ruling party or coalition becomes hopelessly divided over the choice of its leader; or the electoral verdict throws up a “hung assembly”; or an upheaval creates a vacancy in the MB’s post while the assembly is in prorogation or dissolution.

Barring these extraordinary situations, it is best for a constitutional Ruler to remember the advice of the great English jurist Bagehot: “The sovereign has under a constitutional monarchy three rights – the right to be consulted, the right to encourage, the right to warn. A King of great sense and sagacity would want no others.”

 
> Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of Law at UiTM. The views expressed are entirely the writer’s own. -

- Star Online, 21/8/2014, Royal options in the MB saga

Fathers and brothers cannot attend netball tournament daughter/sister is playing in?

Well, the rules and regulations are generally fixed by the organizers - so they can even have rules like all spectators must dress in orange, etc.

But, this not allowing male spectators is maybe too much. From a family perspective, now father and male brothers also cannot be present cheer on their sister who is playing - is this right?  As I mentioned earlier, it is the organizers decision...and the organizers need to re-think such rulings - it is certainly going against family values...I am sure players would like their family and friends to come and support them in sports...as well.

Female spectators only ruling is with regard this specific tournament - not yet a general law/policy concerning all women sporting events.

But, the organizer is the State government - so, is this what the people of Kelantan want? Were they consulted? 

Players wearing proper dressing covering their aurat seem to be inadequate -  “Although female athletes cover their aurat (while playing netball), since netball involves active movements, we are worried that such movements will reveal their aurat,” - what do you think about this?

 

'Male spectator ban based on positive response'

 

The Kelantan state government today said that the state’s move to ban male spectators from a netball tournament next month was based on the prior positive response it had received.

Its youth and sports secretariat director Ahmad Fadhli Shaari (left) said the move was based on the government’s experience in organising the Nisa’ Games, which introduced the move to ban male spectators in sports that involve women.

“The government viewed the positive response from the participants and spectators it received in the Nisa’ Games then, as an important factor in continuing the ruling,” he said in a statement.

The Nisa’ Games was organised in line with the Belia Benci Dadah campaign and Visit Malaysia Year 2007 on Feb 17 and 18, 2007.

The netball tournament being organised by the Kelantan state government through the sports secretariat would meanwhile be the first to be organised by the state on its own.

The New Straits Times on Monday reported that the Kelantan government will organise the netball tournament which will only allow female spectators, in the state’s 14 parliamentary constituencies.

All players, including non-Muslims, have to wear long-sleeved T-shirts and loose-fitting track pants, while the matches will take place indoors.

Meawhile, Ahmad Fadhli added that the ruling was suitable with the ‘Developing with Islam’ policy which has been the core thrust in the state’s administration.

“Although female athletes cover their aurat (while playing netball), since netball involves active movements, we are worried that such movements will reveal their aurat,” he said.

He also stressed that it was the organiser’s right to introduce such rulings felt to be necessary as long as such rulings do not affect the course of the game.

On Kelantan MCA economic consultative committee chairperson Lua Choon Hann who said that the female-only affair is a “step backwards” and “destroys the sport”, Ahmad Fadhli said that MCA should not politicise the issue.

"We hope that the concerned party (MCA) will not politicise the issue for the common good," he said.- Malaysiakini, 20/8/2014, 'Male spectator ban based on positive response'

Cease Use of, and Abolish, the Sedition Act - Malaysian Bar

Press Release | Cease Use of, and Abolish, the Sedition Act

Wednesday, 20 August 2014 03:09pm
The Malaysian Bar is concerned with the ongoing use of, and resort to, sedition laws by the authorities.  This is in direct contradiction to the express recognition by the Government that the Sedition Act has long outlived its purpose, and undermines the explicit pledge by the Prime Minister in July 2012 to repeal this law. The recent furore over the investigation of a 17-year-old student for allegedly having “liked” a Facebook page titled “I Love Israel” is a prime example of how inappropriate the Sedition Act is and how it can be abused.  The continued existence of such a law warps the thinking of the authorities in addressing or dealing with issues in our society. They have a penchant to resort to the Sedition Act almost as an unthinking and knee-jerk reaction.  It should be obvious that, irrespective of how many police reports or complaints may have been made with respect to this incident, any investigation pursuant to the Sedition Act is misconceived. The reports this week of the sedition charge against a lawyer, N Surendran, for a press release he issued on 18 April 2014 entitled “Court of Appeal’s Fitnah 2 written judgement is flawed, defensive and insupportable”, provide further evidence of an unacceptable repudiation by the authorities of the Prime Minister’s promise.   Our judicial system is an open system where proceedings are transparent, public and accessible (save for chamber matters or matters heard in camera due to the special or vulnerable nature of the parties involved (such as children), and matters of national security).  Judgments in such proceedings are pronounced in public and published, to ensure that justice is done, and seen to be done.  Such proceedings are thus subject to public scrutiny, and judgments are subject to examination, dissection, discussion, debate, praise, dissent and criticism.  This is an intrinsic and important aspect of our justice system, and serves in the development of our juridical thought and as a check-and-balance of our administration of justice. The Malaysian Bar has long called for the abolition of the Sedition Act as being repressive, anachronistic and an affront to fundamental liberties. The Sedition Act, as with its predecessor the Sedition Ordinance, was conceived and designed by a colonial government to stifle fundamental rights and liberties, oppress the rakyat and deny them democratic space.  Its sole purpose was to suppress and persecute the citizenry.  The Sedition Act has no place in our nation, which aspires to be a modern democratic society, and should be relegated to the dustbin of history.  The Prime Minister’s pledge represented a clear admission and recognition by the Government that the Sedition Act was antiquated and obsolete. The continued use of the Sedition Act in the probe with respect to the 17-year-old student and the charge against N Surendran embarrasses the Government in that it places the Government in an invidious position of being seriously questioned as to its sincerity in pursuing transformation and greater civil liberties through legislative reforms.  The Malaysian Bar strongly urges the authorities to stop the probe with respect to the 17-year-old student and to withdraw the charge against N Surendran.  We urge them to respect the freedom of speech and assembly as enshrined in the Federal Constitution, and to resist the temptation to resort to archaic and oppressive legislation.     Christopher Leong President Malaysian Bar   20 August 2014

3 migrant workers die & CEO of MRT resigns - "constantly stressed on the needs to improve on the safety standards in the construction industry"

3 migrant workers from Bangladesh killed at construction worksite accident - and the CEO of Mass Rapid Transit Corporation Sdn Bhd (MRT Corp) resigns - well Azhar, by the way, stated that he had always stressed on the need to improve safety in the construction industry.

Azhar said his decision to resign was in line with MRT Corp taking full responsibility for the incident. “As the head of MRT Corp, I am taking personal responsibility for the incident and this is the correct thing to do...

Malaysia really needs to be proactive and improve the safety at construction work sites - The attitude of just hoping that nothing happens and responding to accidents and death of workers must stop.

Azhar said he hopes this incident will serve as a lesson for those in the construction industry on ensuring safety at construction sites."I have been constantly stressed on the needs to improve on the safety standards in the construction industry since the first day I became the MRT Corp CEO."Unfortunately, this incident showed that safety standards may have been breached and that has brought about my resignation," said Azhar.

MRT boss resigns over fatal accident at worksite 

Published: 19 August 2014

Azhar has decided to resign following the incident which occurred in Kota Damansara yesterday. - The Malaysian Insider pic by Afif Abd Halim, August18, 2014. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mass Rapid Transit Corporation Sdn Bhd (MRT Corp) chief executive officer Datuk Wira Azhar Abdul Hamid has tendered his resignation over the accident at an MRT worksite near Kota Damansara last night which claimed the lives of three workers.

Azhar said his decision to resign was in line with MRT Corp taking full responsibility for the incident.

“As the head of MRT Corp, I am taking personal responsibility for the incident and this is the correct thing to do. I have informed the Chairman of MRT Corp, Tan Sri Dr Ali Hamsa, of my decision,” he says.
Azhar was appointed CEO of MRT Corp on September 1, 2011 following the Government’s decision to set up the company to take over the ownership and development of the Klang Valley MRT Project from Syarikat Prasarana Malaysia Bhd. Meanwhile, MRT Corp also informed media in the latest update on the worksite accident that the bodies of the two remaining workers who were trapped beneath the span of the MRT guideway, which had dislodged from its piers and fallen on the ground below at 8.30pm yesterday night, have been recovered.

The bodies of Bangladesh nationals Mohamad Faruk Khan, 38, and Mohammad Alauddin Mollik, 34, were recovered at about 1.35pm after the sixth segmented box girders which form the span were lifted.

The body of the third Bangladeshi, Mohammad Elahi Hossain, was pulled out from under the MRT guideway at 2.34am.

In a statement today, Azhar assured that the relevant authorities will begin an investigation into the incident to identify its cause.

“I hope all weaknesses which are identified will be rectified,” he said, adding that he was "extremely saddened' by the loss of lives.

Azhar had always stressed the need to improve safety in the construction industry and had personally made some effort to achieve this.

MRT Corp also said that the bodies of two remaining workers, who were trapped under the concrete span, have been recovered.

The bodies of Bangladeshis Mohamad Faruk Khan, 38, and 34-year-old Mohammad Alauddin Mollik were recovered at about 1.35pm, after the sixth segmented box girders which form the span were lifted.

Earlier this morning, the body of Mohammad Elahi Hossain, 27, was found at 2.30 am trapped under the collapsed span.

The workers' remains were taken to the Sungai Buloh Hospital for post-mortem.

The three construction workers went missing after the 650-tonne span at the MRT worksite near the former Rubber Research Institute land collapsed at 8.30 pm yesterday

The Bangladesh High Commission has been informed, MRT said, to contact the family members of the three workers who had died.

"MRT Corp and SMPP (contractor Syarikat Muhibah Perniagaan dan Pembinaan Sdn Bhd) will make the necessary arrangements for the bodies to be repatriated to Bangladesh once the next of kin have been informed and consent is given by the High Commission," the statement read.

All work at the site has been called off until further notice, it said, adding that Project Delivery Partner MMC Gamuda KVMRT (PDP) Sdn Bhd has commenced investigations to determine the cause of the incident.

“Initial investigations have revealed that the work method approved for the installation of parapets was not adhered to.

“We will investigate why this happened, and no stone will be left unturned so that we can get to the bottom of this tragic incident. We will also not spare anyone whose actions are found to have caused or contributed to this accident,” Azhar said.

He also assured that the MRT structures have been checked to be safe, allaying public worry over the safety of the span.

“Immediate checks carried out have revealed that there is no reason for the public to worry about the other spans which have been built along the alignment. There is absolutely no issue with structural integrity along our alignment,” he says.

Meanwhile, Subang MP R Sivarasa has urged authorities to suspend the whole MRT project until investigations can be carried out to prove that it was safe, adding that this was the second case of a similar nature in merely two months.

"Road users who frequently pass through MRT work sites should have confidence in their safety. These two incidents, unfortunately, do not inspire any confidence.

"Until this confidence is restored through detailed reports, I urge that the work should be stopped immediately," he said in a statement. – August 19, 2014, Malaysian Insider, MRT boss resigns over fatal accident at worksite

 

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/mrt-boss-resigns-over-accident#sthash.RCabbStb.dpuf 

 

 

MRT CEO resigns over construction site accident

Posted on 19 August 2014 - 06:19pm
Last updated on 19 August 2014 - 06:53pm

Nabilah Hamudin
newsdesk@thesundaily.my

SUNPIX

SUNGAI BULOH: Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) Corp chief executive officer Datuk Azhar Abdul Hamid (pix) has resigned over Monday night's accident at the MRT construction site in Kota Damansara.

"I have informed the Chairman of MRT Corp Tan Sri Ali Hamsa of my decision and I will be submitting my resignation letter to him later. I know my resignation will not bring the lives of the three workers back, but I believe it is the correct thing to do," said Azhar during a press conference at the Kota Damansara MRT project site today.

Azhar said he hopes this incident will serve as a lesson for those in the construction industry on ensuring safety at construction sites.

"I have been constantly stressed on the needs to improve on the safety standards in the construction industry since the first day I became the MRT Corp CEO.

"Unfortunately, this incident showed that safety standards may have been breached and that has brought about my resignation," said Azhar.

Meanwhile, the Director of Stakeholder Relations and Land Management, Haris Fadzilah Hassan will assume the role of acting CEO until a successor is appointed by the government.

In the 8.30pm incident yesterday, 650 tonnes of concrete at the construction site of an overhead rail passage of the Sungai Buloh – Kajang MRT line had collapsed, resulting in the deaths of three Bangladeshi nationals - Mohamad Faruk Khan, 38, Mohammad Alauddin Mollik, 34, and Mohammad Elahi Hossain, 27.

It is learnt that the three victims worked for MRT Corp's sub-contractors.- Sun, 19/8/2014, MRT CEO resigns over construction site accident

EPF beneficiaries, being private sector employees, must be most concerned about losing MBSB - housing and personal loans provider

EPF monies belong to workers - and it is sad that the number of worker representatives is rather low given this fact.

Now, EPF is the majority shareholder of  MBSB(Malaysia Building Society Bhd ). EPF has a 64.73% stake in MBSB, and this means they control the decision making in MBSB. MBSB provides for housing loans and personal loans. Since EPF, which is 100% workers money, naturally MBSB would be expected to be sensitive to the needs of workers - being sensitive also to when a worker is suddenly retrenched or become unemployed - one would expect that in such situations MBSB, compared to other financial institutions, would be more sensitive to workers allowing for delays in monthly payments in such cases. But, I wonder whether this is happening - is there this 'special sensitivity' to the plight of workers. I am shocked, when I visited the MBSB websites, that there is a special loan package for public servants - why not for all workers. Further, Employee Privident Fund monies are monies of usually private sector employees - not public sector employees. Most public sector employees are subscribed to a pension scheme, unlike private sector employees that make monthly contributions for their old age, the public sector employees do not.

MBSB is a building society whose loans are mainly for residential loans and commands a lesser premium. 

Now, there is this big merger being planned for involving RHB Capital Bhd, Malaysia Building Society Bhd (MBSB) and CIMB Group Holdings Bhd which will result in the biggest bank in Malaysia - but end result is that the EPF share would be reduced to only 25% - no more controlling interest, and really a minority shareholder despite being the biggest shareholder. 

Should the EPF go ahead with this merger? Well, workers must really decide on this. Now, the EPF has controlling stake in MBSB, and this means policies could be enacted that it functions differently than other financial situations when it comes to private sector employees - the contributors and ultimate beneficiary of the EPF monies. 

Has the Unions discussed this? Have workers been consulted? Or is this decision being made just by the Board of these different companies. Now, a bank is subject to competition to all banks, foreign and national, and really even though it may be biggest in Malaysia risks not doing well - even failing. 

Workers, from the private sector and those under the EPF scheme must be consulted before any merger happens - it is after all worker's monies at the end of the day in EPF today - not employers, not the government - BUT workers' monies.

Thursday July 10, 2014 MYT 9:33:40 AM

RHB, CIMB, MBSB seek to merge

by m. shanmugam, yvonne tan, intan farhana zainul, AND isabelle lai

PETALING JAYA: Just as the market was heading towards a period of listless trading due to the World Cup and prevailing cautious sentiments, trading in three financial institutions are being suspended today, paving the way for the formation of Malaysia’s biggest bank.

The trading of RHB Capital Bhd, Malaysia Building Society Bhd (MBSB) and CIMB Group Holdings Bhd are suspended today, all three told Bursa Malaysia separately yesterday.

It is learnt that the three banks will write to Bank Negara to seek permission to commence a corporate exercise which will result in a mega bank that will have a market capitalisation of more than RM90bil, assuming the deal is concluded at about 1.70 to 1.75 times book value.

“The deal is likely to be done at 1.75 times book value based on CIMB’s current valuation of almost 1.70 times book. It is unlikely to be transacted at anything less,” said a source.

At 1.75 times book value, RHB Cap would have a market capitalisation of about RM30bil, while MBSB’s total capitalisation would be about RM6.8bil. 

“Together with CIMB’s market capitalisation, the merged entity would fetch a market value of more than RM90bil,” said the source.

The Employees Provident Fund (EPF) will play a significant role in this merger because it has significant stakes in all three entities.

It is the major shareholder in RHB Cap with a 40.76% stake. The other major shareholders of RHB Cap are Aabar Investments PJSC with a 21.43% stake and OSK Holdings Bhd with a 9.91% stake.

The EPF has a 64.73% stake in MBSB and 14.46% in CIMB. 

The eventual merger will see the EPF emerge as the largest shareholder in the mega bank, with a stake estimated to be more than 25%.

RHB Cap and CIMB closed four sen lower each at RM8.72 and RM7.24 respectively, while MBSB ended 12 sen higher at RM2.34 at yesterday’s market close. 

Sources said the impending merger was a well-kept secret, with only a few people having knowledge of it.

“Only a few people were clued in on the entire deal. News of a merger between RHB Cap and MBSB was already out in the market in the afternoon, but CIMB entering the fray caught most people by surprise,” said a source.

When the market closed and the announcements came out late, it became apparent that the creation of Malaysia’s largest bank was in the making. 

At the close yesterday, CIMB was trading at 1.70 times book value, RHB Cap at 1.29 times book value and MBSB at 1.60 times book value. 

Sources said the exercise would possibly involve a share swap between CIMB and RHB Cap at a book value of 1.75 times and an outright buyout of MBSB.

MBSB is a building society whose loans are mainly for residential loans and commands a lesser premium. 

“But it is probably one of the most profitable financial institutions and has the fastest growing balance sheet. 

This is evident from the returns it has given to its shareholders in the last two years,” said an analyst.

A merger of the three financial institutions will result in a bank with the largest asset base, market capitalisation and earnings based on the latest published numbers.

Based on latest figures, the merged entity’s asset size is expected to be more than RM600bil and combined profits based on its last financial year will exceed RM7bil.

It will surpass that of Malayan Banking Bhd (Maybank) that has a market capitalisation of RM91.1bil currently and asset size of RM578bil as of March 31 this year.

RHB Cap has been a takeover target as far back as three years ago, with both CIMB and Maybank as its suitors.

The block in RHB Cap that belonged to Aabar Group from Abu Dhabi was up for sale then.

However, talks fell through due to a pricing issue and the block changed hands between companies related to the Aabar Group.

Recently, Datuk Seri Nazir Razak charted a leadership transition plan for CIMB, whereby he will relinquish his role as group chief executive in September this year to become the chairman of the group replacing Tan Sri Md Nor Yusof, who is retiring.- Star Online, 10/7/2014, RHB, CIMB, MBSB seek to merge

MAS : Will increasing Khazanah's ownership from about 70 to 100% save MAS?

Khazanah, a Malaysian government company,  owned about 70% of Malaysian Airlines - hence would have 'total dominance and control' - hence the move to make Khazanah the 100% shareholder may be futile - unless the CEOs and decision makers of Khazanah itself is CHANGED....




If the same people in Khazanah are calling the shots - there will be no change, and MAS may continue to slide down... so maybe, they are putting new people in charge? 

Khazanah Nasional Berhad is the Government of Malaysia's strategic investment fund. As trustees to the nation's commercial assets, our role is to promote economic growth and make strategic investments on behalf of the Government which would contribute towards nation-building. Khazanah is also tasked to nurture the development of selected strategic industries in Malaysia with the aim of pursuing the nation's long-term economic interests...

The government is taking over - but they are still calling it 'privatization' - interesting, for after all, if it is a private company, there will be less ability to scrutinize and monitor MAS - and when and if, things go wrong, so easy to blame the 'private company'. Well, in this case, maybe ownership should be taken over by another 100% government owned entity or better still nationalize it(back with the government).

INDEPENDENT INQUIRY TEAM  - this may be needed to analyze what were the things that have been done WRONGLY (be it linked to also corruption, cronyism, mis-management, etc...) - maybe a Parliamentary Select Committee...maybe some kind of 'Royal Commission'... In any event, MAS should come under the continuous scrutiny of Parliament - and there must be transparency and accountability.[How much was the CEO of MAS being paid - some say half a million ringgit per month?? - Be transparent about this and even the Director's allowances, etc...Frankly, they should not be earning more that Malaysia's Prime Minister.]

 

'...Khazanah, I believe, is a Government company, or at least a Government controlled company. The CEO reports to the Prime Minister and usually acts on the direction of the Prime Minister....'

Well, if this is true, then it is time that Prime Minister Najib should also be held accountable...HEY - PM's brother also appointed as Director in   Khazanah on July 2014 [Dato' Sri Nazir Razak appointed to Khazanah Board of Directors 3 July 2014]

Our former PM, Dr Mahathir, wrote about this and I believe that you should consider his views...

1. I am a bit mystified by the privatisation of MAS. Khazanah, I believe, is a Government company, or at least a Government controlled company. The CEO reports to the Prime Minister and usually acts on the direction of the Prime Minister.

2. The Prime Minister personifies the Government. If a company is fully acquired by a Government company, is it privatisation or nationalisation?


3. Yes, a company that is owned 100% by one entity, is not a public company. It is a private company. But if that person or entity is the Government, can it be said to be private?

4. I believe prior to this privatisation, Khazanah owned 70% of MAS shares. Its control over MAS must be almost absolute. None of the minority shareholders can really say ‘No’ to MAS even if they all act together. 
So Khazanah has been in full control of MAS all this time. And all this time MAS has been bleeding profusely. In 10 years it has lost 10 billion Ringgit in terms of capital injection.

5. So why should anyone believe that with 100% control Khazanah will not keep on losing.

6. In fact with no one to check and give concerned criticism as when there were minority shareholders, MAS can go very wrong indeed.

7. In true privatisation, fear of losing money on the part of a private owner would force him to scrutinise the management and check the balance sheets frequently. The Government as the owner would be less concerned. The Government is about spending money. Any shortages (or losses) can be overcome by increasing taxes or borrowing money. The way money is being spent nowadays doesn’t indicate the kind of careful financial management and scrutiny that MAS would require in order to turn around.

8. Once when a new CEO was appointed MAS registered some profit. But that was through selling assets. How much more assets can MAS sell?

9. Catering was given to a company with very long term contract and even as MAS loses money the contractors seems to be doing well. A Government company will not be able to terminate this unusual contract. It is too sensitive. Someone might advice against it.

10. People in glass houses should not throw stones. Right. I shouldn’t say all these. I had such a bad record as Prime Minister. But I was ready to resign. And I did. I did because I failed. But no one wants to follow my example.

11. I may be wrong but I think Khazanah’s 100% ownership of MAS will not be much different from its 70% ownership. We are going to see a lot of new people who will receive huge salaries, allowances and bonuses and not much else. That I believe is how Khazanah operates.- Che Det (Dr Mahathir Mohamad, 12/8/2014, MAS PRIVATISATION

MB Selangor Saga - Does Pakatan Rakyat operate just like BN or differently?

Well, the Selangor Menteri Besar crisis should be over now since the majority of the ADUNs(State Assembly Persons) have indicated that they no longer support Khalid, and now support Wan Azizah to be the new Menteri Besar. PAS, after their Exco meeting, was the last to make the decision.

This incident raises much question about Pakatan Rakyat - and the political parties that are members of PR.

How does Pakatan Rakyat come to a decision?

- Call a meeting of the heads of DAP, PAS and PKR and make a decision.... well, the problem with democracy is that a rep or even the President cannot really make such a decision. If there is a decision have to be made, the respective parties will have to take the matter back to the EXCO [Executive members of the party], and then make a decision. I believe PAS rightfully held an Exco meeting to come to a decision on behalf of the party - prior to that we had different members of the leadership expressing different views...

- Certain decisions really cannot be 'rushed' ....especially, matters of which a political party has never before considered as a party. 

KAJANG MOVE - I wonder whether that came about as a result of a decision by Pakatan Rakyat - or just a decision by PKR? Well, if it was just about replacing a 'bad ADUN' with a better one, maybe one can argue, it could have been a decision of just PKR ....but then, even this would lead to a by-elections, where all the PR parties would have to expend energy and resources - so, maybe, even this should have been a Pakatan Rakyat decision.

Well, now we are being told that the intention of the Kajang Move was to get a suitable replacement for the current Menteri Besar - that surely had to be a Pakatan Rakyat decision, which should have also involved all the PR ADUNs of Selangor. Was it? Or was it a decision made by a few only or just one party? 

Well, the perceived problem in the Barisan Nasional is the dominance of one party - hopefully the Pakatan Rakyat will not move in that direction where the shots are called by one party or certain individuals - but will always remain a 'democratic grouping' - where hopefully one day, it will be even more democratic with greater involvement of the general membership in the decision making process. 

But at the same time, PR must really come out with what changes that they want with regards to education, healthcare, agriculture, taxation, employment, welfare, etc - Is Pakatan Rakyat more for accountability and transparency? Is PR more for greater democracy at all levels? Is Pakatan Rakyat for real change for the better? 

Or is Pakatan Rakyat just for 'cleaner, efficient and trustworthy' (besih, cekap dan amanah).

Is PR for neo-liberalism? Is it right? or left? or what? Is it for privatization of even basic amenities or what? 

People want CHANGE - and this does not just mean change in the parties and persons that rule and govern....but real changes...

 

 

Malaysian HR Commission rightly condemns the response to the Facebook ‘like’ issue

As it is, the state of freedom of expression and opinion in Malaysia is deplorable...and the internet was one thing that this government promised earlier they would not try to 'control'. 

Malaysians generally have been cowed to silence and obedience - and people generally are afraid to reveal contrary opinions, disagreements, etc ... Since the end of 90s, there has been changes as more and more people are willing to take the risks of arrest, detention and other forms of persecution to come out to the streets the express their views collectively. 

With the advent of satelite TV, Malaysians have also been more exposed to what is happening in other countries, and they are making comparison with our Malaysia. For example, the question arises as to why in Malaysia, unlike other democracies, we the people of Malaysia do not have the right to elect our own local government - the Local Councils. Mind you, even in Palestine (and Gaza) there is elections for local government. 

Now, we are all angry with what is happening in Palestine - but really this anger must be directed at the Israel government - the Zionist regime NOT all people of Israel. Remember that that about (possibly more) of the Israeli citizens are Palestinians(most Muslims but there are also Christians and Jews). Now, likewise the Palestinian people are multi-religious - Muslims, Christians and Jews. I remember once when Arafat came to Malaysia, he clearly stated that the Palestinian struggle was never a Islamic struggle or a 'Jihad' but a struggle of the Palestinian people. Now, also in Israel, there are many who are also opposed to what their government is doing. 

'I love Malaysia' - does it translate to 'I love BN government' - I do not think so. We all love Malaysia, and that is why many are struggling for a better Malaysia...and this many a times means opposing the current government...

Freedom of expression and opinion means that I also allow those with opposing views to do so as well. There is and must never be double standards - one rule for those with like views, another set or rules for those with a different view. We are always in a continuous dialogue...discussion...debate - and it is often that we find that we may change our original stand after considering all the other points of view. 

Look at the Facebook groups that discuss current affairs, rights and justice, and you will see that there may be many members - but really a very few that actually posts or comment...and a few more who read that press the 'Like' button. Unfortunately, there is no button 'Agree', 'Disagree', 'Neutral - meaning I am still considering'. So pressing the 'Like' button does not really imply anything but an appreciation of the point made...a 'syabas' for voicing out - and cannot be taken as anything more than this....unless the one who posted or commented, asked readers to press 'Like' if you agreed. 

So, why the overkill with this issue of teen pressing 'Like' button. Is it just to put fear into all Malaysians to return to where they were - silent, obedient, unquestioning,.? Wonder whether this and all the other 'internet' things being highlighted is to prepare us for laws that may come in to further affect our freedoms and rights? 

Sedition probe into Facebook ‘like’ draws criticism from Suhakam

Published: 15 August 2014

 

 

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia is shocked that the police is pressing ahead with a sedition probe into the ‘I love Israel’ Facebook page which was ‘liked’ by a schoolboy. – August 15, 2014.The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) is shocked at the way the police are handling the incident involving a Form Five student who "liked" a "I Love Israel" Facebook page, just as authorities said today they would press ahead with the sedition probe.

Suhakam chairman Tan Sri Hasmy Agam, in a strongly-worded statement today, said that the sedition probe was an overreaction on the part of the police.

He added this was yet another example of how the Sedition Act could restrict freedom of expression, adding that it could have been resolved without invoking the act or exposing the student to criticism and threats.
"We call upon all relevant authorities to weigh their actions accordingly and to use their discretion appropriately in the handling of matters that concern the social media and the expression of various views and opinions." A concerned Hasmy said that it was also unfortunate that the teachers failed to handle the matter responsibly as educators.

"Instead, they created a situation that has violated the basic rights of the student, contrary to the spirit and articles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Malaysia is a State Party.

‎"We also call upon the Ministry of Education to incorporate human rights as part of the school curriculum to better promote respect, understanding and acceptance of the basic rights of all citizens, including those of students."

Hasmy urged everyone to practise restraint and not to partake in any action that promotes ignorance and hatred.

The Form Five student at the centre of the controversy attends a school in Taman Tasek Mutiara in Simpang Ampat, Seberang Perai Selatan.

It was reported that he allegedly liked the "I Love Israel" page on Facebook and his teacher posted a screenshot of what he did.

The teacher's post attracted many comments condemning the boy, with some calling for him to be boycotted. One Facebook user even remarked that the boy should be burned.

Lawyers and netizens have criticised the police for the sedition probe, describing it as an overreaction and a waste of resources.

Communications and Multimedia minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Shabery Cheek had also described the probe as "unfair".

Despite that, ‎Penang police chief Datuk Abdul Rahim Hanafi had said two investigation papers had been opened, and the boy would be probed under Section 4 (1)(c) of the Sedition Act.

Police would also haul up those who allegedly threatened the boy on Facebook for criminal intimidation. – August 15, 2014, Malaysian Insider, Sedition probe into Facebook ‘like’ draws criticism from Suhakam

  Suhakam says pro-Israel 'like' probe overreaction

 

The Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) has slammed the authorities for overreacting tothe incident of the teenage  schoolboy who 'liked' a pro-Israel Facebook page.

Suhakam is of the view that the reported sedition probe of the 17-year-old is an overreaction on the part of the police, said chairperson Hasmy Agam in a statement today.

“It is unfortunate to note that the teachers concerned had failed to handle the matter responsibly as educators and instead created a situation that has violated the basic rights of the student, contrary to the spirit and articles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Malaysia is a state party,” he added.

Hasmy said the heavy handed action was an example of how the Sedition Act is misused when the matter could have been easily resolved..

"Such an incident is another example of how the Sedition Act can restrict freedom of expression.

“This matter could have been resolved through other approaches without having to invoke the
Sedition Act or to expose the student to criticisms and threats by various parties.”

The commission also told the authorities to "practise restraint" in their actions especially in matters concerning the social media, and "not to partake in any actions that promote ignorance and hatred".

The police are probing a Form Five student from Simpang Ampat, Penang for sedition after he clicked 'Like' on the ‘I Love Israel’ Facebook page.

Penang police chief Abdul Rahim Hanafi said they schoolboy is being investigated under Section 4(1)(a) of the Sedition Act and if convicted will be fined up to RM5,000, jailed up to three years, or both. - Malaysiakini, 15/8/2014, Suhakam says pro-Israel 'like' probe overreaction

Below are extracts of the relevant provisions of the Sedition Act.... 

 4  Offences.SEDITION ACT 1948

(1) Any person who -

(a) does or attempts to do, or makes any preparation to do, or conspires with any person to do, any act which has or which would, if done, have a seditious tendency;
(b) utters any seditious words;
(c) prints, publishes, sells, offers for sale, distributes or reproduces any seditious publication; or
(d) imports any seditious publication,

shall be guilty of an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable for a first offence to a fine not exceeding five thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both, and, for a subsequent offence, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; and any seditious publication found in the possession of the person or used in evidence at his trial shall be forfeited and may be destroyed or otherwise disposed of as the court directs.


3  Seditious tendency.

(1) A "seditious tendency" is a tendency -.SEDITION ACT 1948

(a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government;
(b) to excite the subjects of any Ruler or the inhabitants of any territory governed by any Government to attempt to procure in the territory of the Ruler or governed by the Government, the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any matter as by law established;
(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State;
(d) to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the subjects of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or of the Ruler of any State or amongst the inhabitants of Malaysia or of any State;
(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia; or
(f) to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal Constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution.