Wang Kelian RCI Report - Disclose it - no more secrets?

Just like the SUHAKAM Inquiry that determined that Amri and Pastor Koh were victims of 'enforced disappearance' which pointed to the fact that police may have been involved in wrongdoing. the Wang Kelian incident also raises questions about the police ...including the reasons why 'crime scene' was destroyed, etc ... 

It is disappointing when our new Coalition of Hope (Pakatan Harapan) is behaving like this ...if the police or enforcement officers committed crimes or wrongdoing ...there must be no cover-ups - they too must be prosecuted to the full extend of the law..

Wang Kelian - This was a ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY - that report should have been made public as soon as it was ready. Have there been other RCIs where the report and conclusions were withheld from the public?

If the DAP and PKR were still in Opposition, they would be vigilant on ensuring the truth be revealed and justice be done ...but now, they are in government, and the current Opposition is not as effective ... 

Wang Kelian 'Death Camps' RCI Report was to be ready by September 2019 - Where is it? Make it public?

We came to know about Wang Kelian thanks to investigative journalism by New Straits Times - Media should do more such investigations and reveal the truth to all...

Wang Kelian - An UMNO-BN government cover-up?The secrets of Wang Kelian exposed by investigative journalism? 

An exhaustive, two-year investigation by the New Straits Times Special Probes Team into the mass killings in Wang Kelian in 2015 that shook the world, has revealed startling new evidence, which suggests a massive, coordinated cover-up....

Another huge question mark was why did police order the destruction of these camps, which were potential crime scenes, before they could be processed by forensics personnel?

The report on the Bukit Wang Burma raid stated that the local middleman, who had been taken into custody, had admitted to greasing the palms of personnel in border security agencies to ensure that his operation could continue unmolested. 

 

“Many of these agencies are highly involved in human trafficking, and this is a serious trans-border crime that cannot be eliminated by arresting illegal immigrants and deporting them.

 

“For as long as there are authorities working hand-in-glove with these syndicates, eradicating this problem will be an uphill battle,” the document stated.

We need a strong government, especially a Home Minister who is responsible for the police and other law enforcement agencies -- The capability and suitability of the current Home Minister, also a former BN Deputy Prime Minister  is again in question...Maybe, we need a younger and stronger Home Minister for Malaysia who will uphold the cause of justice even if it means that the perpetrators are police or other enforcement officers...

 

Make Wang Kelian RCI report public

02 Jan 2020 / 08:16 H.

A photo showing the conditions of one of the camps found by VAT 69 personnel on May 25, 2015 — Ihsan PDRM

PETALING JAYA: Human rights groups and lawyers are urging the government to make public the findings from the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into the Wang Kelian human trafficking camps and mass graves in 2015.

The gruelling 17-day inquiry spanning over two months, involving 48 witnesses, concluded in June last year and the report was submitted to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri’ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah in September.

A copy of the report was also later sent to the Cabinet, theSun was told.

However, about three months on, the government has neither made public the RCI report, nor have the people been updated on the findings.

Prominent human rights lawyer Andrew Khoo said three months was sufficient for the government to study the report and circulate internally the findings to the relevant agencies for feedback and response.

“Such reports have to be made public. The people have the right to know what happened, who were involved, and they want to know what action is going to be taken to bring those responsible to justice.

“If they are still not released to the public, then there is always the question of transparency and accountability,” he said yesterday.

Tenaganita director and consultant on anti-human trafficking Aegile Fernandez said it was incumbent that the report be made public, and if there was sufficient evidence, for a public trial to be held.

“I think they have had enough time since September. They just have to study (the report) and make the necessary arrangements. There should be no cover-ups, we all need to know who is responsible for the incident,” she said.

In an immediate response, one of the RCI panellists, former Malaysian ambassador to Thailand Datuk Nazirah Hussain defended the delay, saying the matter needed greater scrutiny due to the enormity and seriousness of the case.

“It’s actually good they are taking a long time to study the report, because that means they are really scrutinising it. It is also up to them (Cabinet) if they want to make it public,” she said.

Another panellist, former Public Accounts Committee deputy chairman Dr Tan Seng Giaw said the King had decreed that the report be presented to the Malay rulers at a future date to be announced soon.

“It is for the RCI chairman (former chief justice Tun Ariffin Zakaria) to table and present it to the rulers. On whether the findings will be made public, that you have to ask the government. We (panellists) have done what we were supposed to do.”

During the RCI, several prominent witnesses testified, including former inspector-general of police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar and ex-Perlis police chief Datuk Zul Aznam Haron. - Sun Daily, 2/1/2020

Paying way too much to our Malaysian MPs, Ministers...present and past? REFORMS needed

In Malaysia, where the Minimum Wage is RM1,100 per month, Malaysian Members of Parliament(MP) and Ministers may be earning just too much ...MPs get an entertainment allowance of RM2,500 which is more than 2 times the Minimum Wage...

At a time when Malaysia's financial position is so bad that even ordinary Malaysians have been donating ...one wonders whether MP allowances and salary should be cut...

What about the other perks - Remember MP Zuraida and her cars - '..

Zuraida also stressed that the vehicles were bought at nearly 50 percent discount using facilities provided to all federal lawmakers.

"Every MP will get one AP (approved permit) for each term. We were also given a quota for one vehicle with reduced excise duty. The other facility is a RM100,000 loan to buy a car.

"So if I don't use these facilities, am I not stupid? In two-terms I have (bought) six cars," Zuraida said,..- PKR's Zuraida Kamaruddin reveals disturbing concerns ...which PKR,DAP,PAS ...must explain?

Are we using too much of the peoples' monies for MPs? Please tell us all the 'perks' that MPs get ...Do they get daily attendance of RM400 allowance for being in the Dewan for a few minutes ...after all, most times we see so few MPs.. 

MPs need financial support to maintain offices(support centres), staff(including research assistants, clerks, personal assistants, etc) - BUT all these must be paid directly....NOT by the HIGH salary and high allowances. PH MPs now is said to get RM1.5 million per year - but where are the accounts? They should not be using this monies for 'kleptocracy' or for paying for services that really is the responsibility of specific Ministries or departments...

'Santa Claus' MP/ADUN of Pakatan Harapan just like BN? NO please.

Time for MPs to be provided with MORE paid support staff,....

Batu MP P. Prabakaran - What happened to the RM1.5 million? All MPs, now and before, must provide accounts and be accountable?

Peoples' Money - Was there 'kleptocracy' and abuses on monies MPs get? RM5 mil? RM1.5 mil? Should MACC investigate?

How can we save monies? Cut the allowances and other benefits of MPs and members of the Cabinet...

PENSIONS - after 36 months, an MP is entitled to pension..after 55 years of age..

GRATUITY - they also receive gratuity ...when they cease to be MP, Minister, etc..

Really, how much our the peoples' monies is wasted on MPs and former MPs...Ministers...Prime Ministers... Maybe, these pensions and/or gratuity should be eliminated ...or a Maximum pension stipulated ...maybe not more than RM5,000 or less per month? [After all, they cannot be said to be poor in need of pensions as many are RICH or have other sources of income...]

SALARY AND ALLOWANCE - Really if an MP is the Prime Minister or a Minister, he should be entitled only to the ONE higher salary or allowance, and get both the salary and allowance of an MP PLUS the salary of Minister? But is this so because section 6(2) MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT (REMUNERATION) ACT 1980 seems to suggest they get both...which is not right..

6  Remuneration of Members of the Administration(This include PM, DPM, Ministers,...)

(2)(a) Where a Member of the Administration is a member of the Senate, he shall be entitled, in addition to the salary specified in subsection (1), to the monthly allowance payable to him as a member of the Senate as specified in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of section 3. 

(b) Where a Member of the Administration is a member of the House of Representatives, he shall be entitled, in addition to the salary specified in subsection (1), to the monthly allowance payable to him as a member of the House of Representatives as specified in paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of section 3.

3  Remuneration of Members of Parliament

(1) The remuneration of Members of Parliament shall consist of-

(a) in the case of a member of the Senate, a monthly allowance of eleven thousand ringgit;

(b) in the case of a member of the House of Representatives, a monthly allowance of sixteen thousand ringgit.

Really, if a person is a Minister, he/she should just be entitled to the higher salary and allowance of the MINISTER not to both that is plus his/her MP's allowance/salary? 

Maybe the ACT need be amended to reflect this CLEARLY...

MPs are peoples' representative - but they EARN so much more than the ordinary people they represent ...ODD is it not?

 

How much do Pakatan ministers and MPs actually earn? Saifuddin Nasution explains

Friday, 27 Dec 2019 04:56 PM MYT

BY DANIAL DZULKIFLY

The allowance list is listed as ‘confidential’, but Saifuddin said he agreed to share the details as ‘there is nothing to hide’. ― Picture by Miera Zulyana

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 27 — In the interest of transparency, Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail has reportedly revealed the allowance of Pakatan Harapan (PH) lawmakers and ministers.

Detailing the allowance list to Malaysiakini, Saifuddin said that PH ministers are paid exactly what BN ministers made in the previous administration, but with a 10 per cent reduction.

The allowance list is listed as “confidential”, but Saifuddin said he agreed to share the details as “there is nothing to hide”.

“When government files are labelled as ‘confidential’, it means the letter, circular or document cannot be circulated but the contents and details can be shared. 

“There is nothing to hide. My view on this issue of this viral image [on ministers’ allowance] is to be transparent with our incomes and not exploit or partake in corruption. The rest, we leave to the rakyat,” he said.

He was referring to a news report on how a PH minister allegedly can claim RM5,700 a month for parking.

Saifuddin explained that a PH minister is paid RM13,400 a month in salary, as well as the RM16,000 monthly wage as an MP.

A PH minister also enjoys the same allowance as other lawmakers; however, without the RM400 per day allotment to attend parliamentary sittings, he said.

Saifuddin then detailed what PH ministers can claim as follows:

Entertainment allowance: RM12,000

Cabinet minister’s allowance: RM4,000

Housing allowance: RM4,000 (not claimable if residing in an official residence)

Domestic helper allowance: RM2,500

Driver allowance: RM2,500

Ministers can also claim a vacation allowance that includes first- or business-class air travel for their spouse, and economy class for their children below the age of 21.

Ministers can also claim a daily subsistence and food allowance if they travel for work. Saifuddin, however, said he did not remember the exact amount.

Members of the Dewan Rakyat’s allowance

While the allowance of a Cabinet minister is not detailed by the Treasury Department, all ministers, deputy ministers and their respective political secretaries have publicly declared their monthly incomes, allowance and assets to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), and the information is accessible to the public.

This differs from the allowance for lawmakers, including the Speaker and deputy Speakers of the upper and lower houses which available through Statute Papers published on the Parliament website.

Listed below is the allowance accorded to lawmakers:

Attendance for Parliamentary sittings: RM400 per day 

Attendance for government agency meetings or workshops: RM300 per day

Entertainment allowance: RM2,500 per month

Special payment: RM1,500 per month (except if the MP is member of the administration)

Business-class air travel allowance and first-class rail travel allowance

Hotel allowance when overseas: Standard room

Hotel allowance when on domestic duty more than 32km from home: No more than RM400 a night

Daily stipend during business trips: RM100 a night (domestic), RM170 a night (international)

Food allowance when overseas: RM340 a night

Fixed travel allowance: RM1,500 per month

Fuel allowance: RM1,500 per month

Toll allowance: RM300 per month

Driver allowance: RM1,500 per month

Black-tie attire subsidy: RM1,500

Saifuddin’s revelation to Malaysiakini comes after public uproar over the Public Service Department’s announcement that it would stop paying critical service incentives to newly recruited professional civil servants.

The Critical Services Incentive Payment or BIPK — a special allowance worth RM750 — is intended to attract and retain skilled workers in professions deemed vital to the country’s development.

Those serving in the public sector who will be affected include government-employed nursing lecturers, doctors, pharmacists, medical officers, engineers and lecturers. - Malay Mail, 27/12/2019

ODD that Johor State government decides on allowance increase of Local Government Councillors? Local Council Elections NOW please?

The Federal Government has no power to decide on the wage or allowance increase of any STATE government employees or State ADUNs(State Legislative Assembly Persons) or State Menteri Besar or State Cabinet members - That power is with the respective State governments..

Likewise, the State government (or the Federal government) has no power to decide on wages and/or allowances of the members of Local Government(i.e. the Local Councils - Town Councils, District Councils, City Councils) - that power is and should be with the respective Local Governments...

Hence, it is VERY ODD that the Johor State government recently decided on doubling '...monthly allowances of all city councillors from RM900 to RM1,800 beginning Jan 1 next year....Johor state exco in charge of local government, Tan Chen Choon (above) said the allowances for municipal councillors has been increased from RM800 to RM1,300, and district councillors from RM600 to RM1,000...'

These 'Councillors', the persons with the power to make decisions in their local government area are now NOT DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED - and as such they are all just 'political appointees' - mostly from the 4 political parties of the Pakatan Harapan government that rules Johor... So, is this not simply 'kleptocracy'  - or a means of enriching fellow political party members and friends? Not democratically elected ...means not chosen by the people of the area...

Local Government make a lot of money - from all that business permits/licenses, signboard fees, parking fees, ...every home and business premises pay yearly rates to the Local Government(Local Councils) > and these monies are meant to be spent for maintenance, development and well-being of the area governed by the particular Local Government ...

When the State Government decides on increasing allowances for 'Councillors' - one wonders whether the monies of Local Government is also being taken by the State Government? What percentage? Is there a law of the relevant 'local governments'(Local Council) that stipulates a certain percentage of monies will go to the State government for use of the State?  Maybe a certain percentage should go to the State to be used to help poorer local governments in the State??

One reason, that some friends did suggest, as to why State governments are not too keen for democratic elections, where the people will decide who will be in Local Council (local government) is because of the FEAR that the State government may lose its ability to CONTROL local governments - and maybe also lose monies? 

Local Councillors, like MPs and ADUNs in Malaysia are still not full-timers - many of them spend a lot of time in their other or own businesses/occupations...lawyers, dentists, businessman. They have other INCOME - so it even necessary to increase their ALLOWANCES in Malaysia now when our MINIMUM WAGE is just RM1,100 per month? 

Local Council meetings are supposed to OPEN to the public by law - but

23  Meetings of local authority to be public

All meetings of the local authority shall be open to the public and to representatives of the Press unless the local authority by resolution at the meeting otherwise decides:

Provided that this section shall not apply to any Committee of the local authority unless such Committee by resolution otherwise decides.

But sadly, many Local Councils have decided not have their meetings 'open to the public and to representatives of the Press'. Similarly, committees of the local council also decided not to open their meetings to the public.Why SECRET - what do they want to hide?

ACCOUNTS - local government make a lot of monies from the public - How do they spend it? Do you see the accounts? Don't the people who pay the monies have a RIGHT to know how these monies are being spent? Local authorities can do a lot including making available good public transport within its area of administration...They are supposed to upkeep the roads, road signs, parks, etc.. They should be setting up sports facilities for public use like squash courts, swimming pools, football fields, basketball courts, etc > BUT many(if not most) do not have many of these ...so, where is the money? should we even be increasing councilors' allowances?

LOCAL COUNCIL ELECTIONS - it was claimed by the then Pakatan Rakyat government's of Penang and Selangor, that there was a FEDERAL ACT that preventing them from carrying out elections - so, why has this LAW been amended by the new PH government. Remember, the Minister promised local council elections by the 3rd year of this government...should there not be preparation already being made? 

The Housing and Local Government Ministry is expected to amend several laws in Parliament as early as the end of 2020 to reinstate local government elections, its minister Zuraida Kamaruddin said. These include the Local Government Act 1976 and other relevant laws, said Zuraida, who pledged in May 2018 to restore the voting system for local councils in three years.  - .- Malaysiakini, 1/5/2019  ....'Political Appointed' Local Councilors in Temerloh? with no contact info? No income expenditure info?

According to the Royal Commission of Enquiry into the Workings of Local Authorities in West Malaysia led by Senator Datuk Athi Nahappan, if a local government is not elected, it is non-representative.If we hold fast to the time-honoured concept of "no taxation without representation", nominated local government undermines the legitimacy of local authorities to collect assessment rates which are the most important source of income of the local authorities.That is why the Royal Commission Report concluded that the merits of elected local government with all its inherent weaknesses outweigh those of the nominated ones.It is only right that Malaysia reintroduces local government elections. In a democratic society people elect their representatives.

Decisions to be made?

- Will the Local Government Area be divided into separate Constituencies where each area will elect one representative?

- Who can vote? All Residents OR simply rate payers - that means just home and business premise owners that pay yearly rates to the Local Authority?

- Will all the Local Councilors be democratically elected? Or some elected, and others appointed? Maybe 7-9 Councillors will be elected, and maybe 4 will be appointed to represent special interest groups - Orang Asli, Workers, Employers, Professional Persons(Doctors/Engineers/Architects/Accountants/...)...and the State Assembly person of the area will have a right to be a part of the Local Government but not a voting member.

- For the elections, will party candidates be allowed to contest? Or only individuals RESIDENT in the are of the Local Government be allowed to contest? Personally, it may be best to just allow individual candidates rather than party candidates..

-......?????

Local Council Elections may take time - What about democratic elections at kampung, kampung baru, kampung orang asli, Felda settlements, tamans NOW? Democracy is seriously lacking in Malaysia at all levels - in Thailand, our neighbour, they do have such elections..

Remember that the JKKKs....are all political appointees not democratically elected by the people ..

Jawatankuasa Kemajuan dan Keselamatan Kampung (JKKK) adalah jawatankuasa yang ditubuhkan oleh Kerajaan Negeri manakala Jawatankuasa Kemajuan dan Keselamatan Kampung Persekutuan (JKKKP) ditubuhkan oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan. Jawatankuasa ini tidak termasuk Jawatankuasa Kemajuan dan Keselamatan Rancangan (JKKR) dan JKKK Perkampungan Orang Asli memandangkan institusi ini diselia oleh jabatan/agensi masing-masing.

Finally, the start of democracy in PR Selangor's kampungs....

Finally, after more than 3 years have lapsed, the Selangor Pakatan Rakyat government has started bringing democracy to the people at the lowest community units - the kampungs, kampung barus, kampung orang aslis and taman perumahan. They are starting with three(3) Chinese villages. Better late than never.

Perak, on the other hand, did democratic elections almost immediately after the Pakatan Rakyat came into power in that state, and that democratic elections happened in over 800 Malay kampungs and several kampung barus (predominantly Chinese new villages).

Even Thailand have local council (local government) elections. Shame on you, Malaysia.

DEMOCRACY - feared by UMNO-BN and Opposition? Restore democracy at all levels to the Rakyat?

 

Johor doubles allowances of city councillors to RM1,800

Published: Dec 21st, 2019  |  Modified: Dec 21st, 2019

 

The Johor state government has doubled the monthly allowances of all city councillors from RM900 to RM1,800 beginning Jan 1 next year.

Johor state exco in charge of local government, Tan Chen Choon (above) said the allowances for municipal councillors has been increased from RM800 to RM1,300, and district councillors from RM600 to RM1,000.

"The proposal to increase the allowances for local councillors was based on recognition of their role and contributions in improving the local councils' delivery system, particularly in the cities," he said.

According to government guidelines, a city council must comprise an area which includes the state administrative capital and with a minimum population of 500,000 people.

A city council must also be fiscally sustainable and be able to generate an annual income of RM100 million at the minimum.

"The role and responsibilities which must be carried out by every single local councillor in planning and developing an area have become more challenging," Tan further said.

"After taking into account increased cost of living factors, comparison of allowances for councillors in other local councils, as well as the financial strength of Johor's local authorities, the state government has decided to increase the monthly allowances of all councillors," he added.

In total, there are two city councils in Johor, six municipal councils and seven district councils. - Malaysiakini, 21/12/2019

yyyyy

Some local councils can't afford to increase allowance - Zuraida

Published: Dec 22nd, 2019  |  Modified: Dec 22nd, 2019

 

Housing and Local Government Minister Zuraida Kamaruddin today said a coordinated nationwide increase to local councillors allowances remains an unfeasible move.

Online portal Free Malaysia Today quoted Zuraida as saying that any increase to allowances for city, municipal and district councillors remain dependent on the respective local authority's financial strength.

"The ministry sees a need for coordination but I myself cannot instruct it because there are local authorities that are still (financially) weak, there are local authorities that could not afford to increase, and the ministry also could not afford to cover the increase," she told reporters after a football match in Ampang this morning.

She said this when asked for comments on reports of the latest increase in monthly allowances for local councillors in Johor beginning Jan 1.

Johor exco in charge of local government Tan Chen Choong yesterday announced that allowances for all city councillors has been doubled from RM900 to RM1,800, taking into account increased challenges and increased cost of living.

Tan said that allowances for municipal councillors have also been increased from RM800 to RM1,300, and district councillors from RM600 to RM1,000.

According to the Housing and Local Government website, there are at present 149 local authorities nationwide, including Kuala Lumpur City Hall.

The figure represented 12 city councils, 39 municipal councils and 98 district councils. - Malaysiakini, 22/12/2019

Freedom of Assembly Curtailed - the Penang Fisherfolk and now the Dong Zong conference?

Now, will the PH government 'sack' or reprimand the Inspector General of Police and the other relevant police officers who went to court to apply for the injunction? Was the Attorney General being the 'government lawyer' even consulted or was he in agreement? 

Or is the Malaysian police today all powerful - even more that our democratically elected government? Home Minister? Cabinet? PH government parties MPs? 

 

Freedom of Assembly and Expression under Pakatan Harapan government stifled? 

Many missed the fact that the the police allegedly restricted the number of participants in a public assembly by fishermen and others protesting the 3 artificial islands Penang government wants to build. There was a HARTAL when about 4,000  fisher folk did not go to sea...Read more in earlier posts...One object of a peaceful assembly is to show that a viewpoint is shared by MANY not just a few leaders allegedly representing many...

Penang Fishermen’s Association chief Nazri Ahmad said about 4,000 fishermen had wanted to attend the protest but police only allowed 1,000 as part of the peaceful assembly permit. - NST -Penang fishermen peaceful assembly only allowed if NOT MORE than 1,000? Totally unjust? 

Dong Zong  organized conference stopped because police went and applied for a court order at the eleventh hour - without even a right to be heard? 

It reminds one of the days of the Barisan Nasional when the police similarly applied to court to stop peaceful assembly - but this is worse because it was a closed event...It would have been better if the police applied way in advance and allowed all parties to be heard by the court before a decision is made by court...

There were allegedly 'threats' of counter rallies in front of the venue and also some other venue ...well, not everyone have the same view and opinion - and we have all to respect this fact and not BLOCK any person/s' right to peaceful assembly, expression and opinion even if it is to express a view against the government, government policy, practice or law.

It is applaudable that the Malaysian Human Rights Commission came out fast critical of the police action....in favour of the freedom of speech, opinion and peaceful assembly...

Some in Cabinet and other government MPs seems to try place the blame on the police - BUT the police is under the government under the Home Minister?...the Cabinet?

What the police should have done was to provide protection to people in their exercise of their freedom of opinion, expression and assembly...

Anyone could have applied to court to stop that conference ...but they did not. 

All they did was to express intention to have  have separate assemblies that took a different position - that is their right...These different gatherings could have gone on peacefully...with police making sure that the different groups do not interfere with the other group's rights...

Many fought hard to oust the former Barisan Nasional government not simply for 'kleptocracy' or corruption but also for denial of human rights and fundamental freedoms - we voted in the ALTERNATIVE ...a new PH (DAP-PKR-BERSATU-Amanah) government that will enhance and respect our human rights... 

Disappointingly, the Pakatan Harapan government did not repeal the Peaceful Assembly Act - they just insignificantly amended it --- reducing the 10  day notice to police requirement to 5 days... Police still have the power to impose all kinds of conditions...and even will completely make sure that right is totally denied. Police permission required for exercising a human right is just ABSURD...

Will Malaysians' right to freedom of speech, expression, opinion and assembly be respected and enhanced..?

PEOPLE's REPRESENTATIVE - well, after the Elections, many do not even have regular dialogue with their constituents, let alone even communication or reporting. MPs seem to choose 'silence' and fail to speak for the people - or at least communicate the different views of the people... They vote in Parliament according to 'orders' from the party - that 'WHIP' should be abolished and/or restricted just to Financial Bills giving our MPs more freedom of speech, opinion...they should be free to represent the people and NOT be forced to blindly follow the position of their party leaders...or PH leaders?

 

Suhakam opposes move to cancel Dong Zong conference
30 Dec 2019 / 10:48 H 

KUALA LUMPUR: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) says Chinese educationist group Dong Jiao Zong (or Dong Zong) should not have been stopped from holding a peaceful assembly as this right is enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

“We are deeply concerned by the threat of violence against Dong Jiao Zong as the right to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech is guaranteed by Article 10 of the Federal Constitution,” the human rights group said in a statement today.

It added that cancelling the conference through a court injunction gives the impression the authorities are giving into inciters of violence at the expense of the protection of the fundamental rights of Malaysian citizens.

“We believe the Dong Zong conference, as well as the subsequent protests by Dong Zong detractors, should have been allowed to proceed, and for authorities to ensure that both groups could safely and fully complete their activities to satisfy their rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech, which is vital for the realisation of a free and open democracy,” Suhakam said.

It urged the police to investigate threats of violence as they could amount to incitement to hatred, sectarian riots, and threaten the rule of law in the country.  - Sun, 30/12/2019

Suhakam fears authorities enabling violence after Dong Zong conference derailed by threats

Monday, 30 Dec 2019 09:00 AM MYT

BY JUSTIN ONG

Suhakam urged the police to continue investigating the threats against Dong Zong. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 30 — The police’s failure to act on violent threats against the aborted Dong Zong rally last week could be seen as encouraging such behaviour, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia said.

The commission noted that the failure to act was also compounded by the police’s decision to seek a restriction order preventing the Chinese education group’s rally over the introduction of jawi lessons in vernacular schools.

Suhakam said the combination simultaneously undermined civil liberties guaranteed under the Federal Constitution and enabled those who used violence to impose their will on others.

“The commission is concerned that the authorities are giving in to inciters of violence at the expense of the protection of the fundamental rights of Malaysian citizens,” Suhakam said in a statement.

The Chinese education group should have been allowed to continue with its rally despite disagreement from rival groups and the police should have protected Dong Zong’s right to do so instead of curtailing this, Suhakam said.

Suhakam urged the police to continue investigating the threats against Dong Zong, saying these were considered incitement to hatred and sectarian riots and threats to the rule of law in the country.

On December 18, Dong Zong said it would hold a mass gathering of Chinese organisations on December 28 to urge the government to cancel the teaching of the jawi script in the Bahasa Melayu subject in vernacular schools.

The event that was to include Tamil education group representatives was later clarified to be an indoor consultative meeting, instead of a protest or stand-off between the Chinese and Malays.

A day before the December 28 gathering, Malay-Muslim groups announced they would hold a rally outside New Era University College where the event would be held to block it and hold a separate rally at the Kajang stadium just over 1km away.

The police obtained a court order on the same day to bar Dong Zong from proceeding with the conference, citing a danger to public order. - Malay Mail, 29/12/2019

Wee responds to Guan Eng's 'disappointment' over cancelled Dong Jiao Zong gathering

Nation
Monday, 30 Dec 2019 4:42 PM MYT

By MAZWIN NIK ANIS

 

 

PETALING JAYA: MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Wee Ka Siong has responded to Lim Guan Eng over his disappointment at the cancellation of the Dec 28 Dong Jiao Zong gathering to discuss the implementation of a Jawi calligraphy module in vernacular schools.

“Lim, don’t you have Home Minister (Tan Sri) Muhyiddin (Yassin)'s handphone number? If you need it, I can give it to you.

“Remember if you go overseas, switch on your phone’s roaming function, there’s a fee of RM38 daily. Just a gentle reminder, ” Wee said in a Facebook post on Monday (Dec 30).

Earlier, the DAP secretary-general said that under Malaysia Baru, the Pakatan Harapan government believes in the freedom of speech and that the police had no reason to prevent the event from taking place.

"There was no reason to prevent the gathering. The Kongress Maruah Melayu was allowed and this (gathering) should have also been allowed.

"Perhaps there are those who disagree with the views expressed (by Dong Jiao Zong) but this is what Malaysia Baru is about, freedom of speech," he said.

Dong Jiao Zong had cancelled the gathering scheduled to be held on Dec 28 after the group was served with a court order the day before.

Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador had said that the police had obtained the court order as a safety precaution.

To a question, Lim said that parents should be the ones to decide if Jawi is to be taught in vernacular schools as the decision would affect their children.

"Parents decide and they are represented by the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA). If the school does not have a PTA, the government has given flexibility by allowing school boards to decide on the matter.

"This is a Cabinet decision and I have explained this to Dong Jiao Zong," he said.

It was reported that the educationist group had criticised Lim, asking why the school board of directors was not considered as stakeholders to decide on the teaching of Jawi.

The guidelines issued by the Education Ministry on the teaching of the Jawi script for Year Four pupils in Chinese and Tamil primary schools states that the teaching will be optional.

However, a school will have to teach Jawi calligraphy if 51% of parents vote in favour of it in a survey conducted by the school's PTA.

According to the ministry, Jawi calligraphy was to be introduced in three pages of the Year Four Bahasa Melayu subject starting Jan 1,2020.

This caused an uproar among various groups, prompting the ministry to first let teachers decide if they wanted to teach Jawi to pupils before passing the decision to parents in the latest guidelines. - Star, 30/12/2019

Lawyers: Police should have protected, not prevented Dong Zong conference that was under threat

Tuesday, 31 Dec 2019 04:23 PM MYT

BY IDA LIM

Lim Wei Jiet said the police did not act in accordance with the Peaceful Assembly Act, arguing that the police should have arranged for the counter-rallies to not overlap with the initial gathering by Dong Jiao Zong. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 31 — The police should have facilitated a planned conference last Saturday by Chinese educationist groups despite the threats posed by two counter-rallies by Malay groups, instead of blocking the exercise of the constitutional right to assemble, lawyers have said.

Constitutional lawyer Lim Wei Jiet said the police should have ensured the conference organised by Chinese vernacular schools’ educationists Dong Zong and Jiao Zong could safely continue.

“It should in fact facilitate their constitutional right to assemble by protecting them from other counter-assemblies who are clearly threatening in nature,” he told Malay Mail when contacted.

What happened

A man practises khat calligraphy in Balik Pulau, Penang August 6, 2019. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin

On December 18, the umbrella body for Chinese education Dong Jiao Zong had announced that it would hold a mass gathering of Chinese organisations on December 28 to urge the government to cancel the teaching of the Jawi script in the Bahasa Melayu subject in vernacular schools. Dong Jiao Zong then said that materials such as banners and slogans were barred from the event.

It was later clarified that the event including Tamil education group representatives would be an indoor consultative meeting, instead of a protest or stand-off between the Chinese and Malays.

But just a day before the December 28 gathering, Malay-Muslim groups announced that they would hold a rally outside New Era University College where Dong Jiao Zong’s conference would be held to stop the latter from proceeding.

They would also hold a separate rally at the Kajang stadium just over 1km away.

On the same day, the police obtained a court order for Dong Jiao Zong’s conference to be cancelled, with the magistrate stating that this was necessary to prevent disturbance of public peace or riots. 

Dong Jiao Zong complied with the court order, while the police also asked the public not to attend the planned counter-rallies.

An alternative

Lim said the police did not act in accordance with the Peaceful Assembly Act, arguing that the police should have arranged for the counter-rallies to not overlap with the initial gathering by Dong Jiao Zong.

“Under Section 18 of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012, if the police receives a notification of a counter assembly and it is evident that will cause conflict between the participants of the assemblies, the police is legally obliged to give an alternative for the counter assembly to be organized at another time, date or place.

“Instead of adhering to Section 18 by arranging for the counter assembly to take place somewhere else at a different time, it decided to seek an injunction against the main assembly instead,” he said, referring to the court order.

“Further, the police’s action would only incentivise extremist groups to prevent any peaceful public assemblies by threatening to hold a counter assembly,” he added.

When asked about the possibility of participants of counter-rallies still showing up at the initial gathering despite the police’s suggested alternative, Lim said the Peaceful Assembly Act would give priority to the main assembly and that the police should then act to safeguard the initial gathering.

“The police should stop the counter-assembly if it’s held on the same time and venue,” he said, adding that this may not necessarily be through a court order but could be done with a police presence to disperse the counter-assembly.

In November 2016, a similar scenario saw polls reform group Bersih 2.0 carrying out the Bersih 5 rally in Kuala Lumpur, while an anti-Bersih group known as the Red Shirts mounted a counter-rally in the same general area in the city.

Despite initial fears of possible unrest and chaos, the police succeeded in ensuring both events went on peacefully and keeping both groups apart.

The High Court had on November 17, 2016 refused an attempt by Malay traders for a court order to block the November 19 Bersih 5 rally, ruling that the police were duty-bound to prevent a conflict via redirection of the Red Shirts’ counter-rally.

Equal freedom of expression

Lawyer Surendra Ananth speaks to reporters at the Kuala Lumpur Courts Complex August 27, 2019. — Picture by Firdaus Latif

Constitutional lawyer Surendra Ananth said the police were entitled to seek the court order to stop Dong Jiao Zong’s event under the Criminal Procedure Code, but called the manner it was obtained questionable.

Surendra said the police should have sought the court order earlier if it believed it was justified as it had known of the conference for quite some time, but went on to say that the police should have played a facilitative role unless there were grounds to believe that there would be public disorder.

“From public reports, it appears that the concern was counter rallies that were planned. In that case, the best thing to do was to facilitate both the conference and rallies.

“It is only in extreme scenarios where the police believes, with proper basis on an objective standard, that there would be disruption to public order, then perhaps it would have been justifiable,” he said.

Surendra said that the police must genuinely attempt to address the potential risks of disruption to public order, but noted that the approach in this case appeared to be the halting of such events when a counter-rally comes up.

“This is inconsistent with the right to assemble and free expression. The approach should be to facilitate those rights, not shut it down the moment a threat is made,” he said.

Surendra said he respected Dong Zong’s right to express its opinions despite not sharing the same views, which he said was key to free expression.

“To shut down groups from voicing out and assembling simply because other groups do not agree would be akin to rendering such rights illusory,” he said, adding that it gave the impression that those who planned the counter-rallies enjoy priority when it comes to the right to assemble and free expression.

“I think it is important to bear in mind that a fundamental principle of any constitutional democracy is that it should treat minorities equally. We are not doing well in this respect,” he said.

A neutral space for all Malaysians

Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar speaks to reporters at the Federal Court in Putrajaya June 22, 2018. — Picture by Azinuddin Ghazali

Asked to weigh in on the recent events, senior lawyer Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar highlighted the police’s facilitative role unless public order is clearly under threat.

“In my view, unless there was strong reason to believe that there was going to be a disruption of public order on the part of one or the other, then the police should have tried to facilitate rather than obstruct. And if there was a real threat, then all events should have been blocked through legal means.”

He highlighted the role of the government to ensure a neutral space for discussion of opinions regardless of what they are or who was expressing the views, and that this be done in what is seen as an impartial manner.

“It’s important for public confidence that the police be seen to be acting impartially. So, if one event was capable of causing a disturbance then logically the other would too. The Federal Constitution guarantees the right of expression and association, the law only being able to encroach in circumstances where there is a clear threat to public order. The PAA allows for peaceful assemblies without discrimination.

“The reason the constitution guarantees expression and association is for us to have a neutral space to discuss matters that impact on us. The government and its agencies must act as an honest broker, protecting that space impartially,” he added. - Malay Mail, 31/12/2019

NEWS

Bar: Cops shouldn’t have used court order to stop Dong Zong’s congress

Published: Dec 31st, 2019  |  Modified: Dec 31st, 2019

 

The police should not have resorted to obtaining a court order to stop Chinese educationist group Dong Zong’s "Chinese Organisations Congress" to discuss the teaching of the Jawi script in vernacular schools, said the Malaysian Bar.

Malaysian Bar president Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor (above) noted that police had handled similar situations in the past without resorting to a court order.

 

 

Such a move amounts to a curtailing of the constitutional right to the freedom of expression, he said in a statement today.

“It is unreasonable and contrary to the constitutional scheme that the fundamental liberty of freedom of expression is liable to be denied on such a basis.

“Therefore, such a move by the police in invoking this provision is unprecedented and calls into question the standard operating procedures surrounding such an application as we understand that there are several instances in the past where such orders have not been sought.

“The Malaysian Bar is of the view that the police should not have resorted to applying for the court order but managed the situation as had been done in the past,” he said.

The congress was due to be held in Kajang on Dec 28, with the participation of 1,118 schools and NGOs despite threats of a counter-demonstration.

A day ahead of the congress, however, police obtained an injunction to stop the rally citing security concerns.

Abdul Fareed said Malaysians must be given room to voice their grievances.

Dong Zong representatives

“As we move towards further opening up our democratic space in this new decade, it is essential that fundamental liberties be guarded.

“There must be room for every Malaysian citizen to have legitimate discourse and to ventilate grievances in a robust Malaysia that serves her people.

“It is for the proper and safe facilitation of such future events, particularly pursuant to government-invoked policies, that we look to the executive to for further guidance,” he said.

Apart from the Malaysian Bar, the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) has also voiced concerns about the police’s move to obtain an injunction against the congress.

Suhakam said both the congress and the protests against it should be allowed to proceed, while authorities ensure that both activities proceed peacefully. It also expressed concern that authorities are giving in to threats of violence. - Malaysiakini, 31/12/2019