Condolence to the Family of Lawrence Selvananthan!!

It it very sad when a father, a husband and a friend dies. It is a time of grief! It should not be the time for 30 strangers in enter your house and to demand for the body so that they can bury it in another religious customs!!

This is the 21st Century!! For crying out loud!!! Leave the family and friends of Lawrence Selvananthar a lone to grief!!

What benefit do they gain by doing this incredibly stupid an insensitive act!

Taken from Malaysiakini

The religious status of a recently deceased man has sent his family into a tailspin after religious authorities in Negri Sembilan went to their house to claim his body earlier today.

The body of Lawrence Selvananthan, 33, was scheduled to be brought to a church in Seremban at 3pm today for a funeral mass followed by his burial, but his family was stopped by police and Negeri Sembilan Islamic Affairs Department (JHEINS) officials who claimed that he had already converted into Islam.

The deceased's cousin, who asked to only be identified as Jenny, said they were approached by police officers at the family home in Lukut, Port Dickson at about 12.40pm to inform them that they could not proceed with the burial.

She said the police officers showed them what she described as a photocopied document, detailing Lawrence's alleged conversion into Islam.

“They told us that he just converted three days ago. The name and IC number were correct, but there was no photo. We're not even sure of (the authenticity of) the signature,” she said when contacted by Malaysiakini.

It is understood that Lawrence, a lorry driver, was found unconscious in his parked lorry by family members, and declared dead on arrival at the Seremban General Hospital sometime last night. The cause of death is unclear.

Both sides in discussion

PKR's Port Dickson state assemblyperson Ravi Munusamy, who was mediating between the two parties, confirmed that there was a stand-off between the family members and JHEAINS and police officers.

He estimated at least 30 officials went to the house to claim the body, though both sides have since entered discussions, which were still ongoing at the time of writing this article.

Ravi pointed out that the family members are sceptical over the conversion claim as the witness to Lawrence's alleged conversion did not turn up despite being asked to verify the claim.

“Even the signature on the document is not his. His brother confirmed it is not his (Lawrence's) signature,” he added.

Jenny stressed that the situation is only making things worse for the family, as they cannot even grieve over their loss.

“The family is very sad. His daughter lost a father and his wife lost a husband.

"They said he had already mengucap (took his vows of conversion) at the department, but by right they should have informed his family immediately. We think this is very unfair to us,” she said.

Opps! Mahathir let it slip!

Today Malaysia former prime minister indirectly talk about the corruption of UMNO members.

From Malaysiakini

Addressing 400 of them in Kuala Selangor, including BN elected representatives, the veteran leader said the coalition would otherwise continue to be perceived as "disgusting".

"I find that many view (BN) as disgusting and that they openly state their rejection of the BN.

"If we analyse this, we find this is because we no longer struggle to form the government, but to reap personal benefits," Mahathir said.

Besides flashing their wealth by suddenly building "RM7 or RM8 million houses", which they previously could not afford, elected representatives also felt the need to "buy support".

Speaking at a BN State Assembly Backbenchers Club event, Mahathir said BN representatives said they needed to "get contracts and raise their income" as "their supporters demand money".

"The society then views Umno and other component parties (as) corrupt as the leaders got to where they are because of money," he said.

HOWEVER! The most telling statement was when the former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad told BN leaders today to...

Change your image and do not flash your wealth in order to change the perception that the ruling coalition is corrupt, .

Notice all he mention was to tell the people not to flash their wealth and to change the perception. For me he is implying that it is ok to be corrupt and to gain wealth illegally as long as you don't flash it around. This is so that they can con the people and win the election!!

I just hope that not all Malaysian are as stupid as the former PM thinks!

Hei! We know your tricks! BN may have con many people in the past. (like this poor supplier)

We will not be fooled by your false perception!! Malaysian see the system breaking down in Malaysia and we want a CHANGE!!!

Najib's Reforms goes up in smoke with this stupid Criminal Defamation charge!!!

ONLY IN MALAYSIA CAN YOU BE CHARGE FOR CRIMINAL DEFAMATION FOR HAVING A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION WITH REGARDS TO HISTORY!!

From Malaysiakini

PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu was this morning charged with criminal defamation in a Butterworth Sessions Court for challenging the official account of the 1950 Bukit Kepong incident at a ceramahin Tasek Gelugor on Aug 21.

Mohamad, better known as Mat Sabu, was charged under Section 500 of the Penal Code for defaming the dead police personnel who were killed while defending themselves at the Bukit Kepong police station and their families (principal charge), and the aggrieved parties (alternative charge) who lodged police reports against him.

Judge Ikmal Hishan Mohd Tajuddin fixed Oct 27 for mention of the case and Dec 5-9 for trial.

Bail was set at RM15,000.

Mohammad Hanafiah had initially asked for bail to be fixed at RM50,000 but Hanipa asked for the minimum sum of RM15,000, saying he was confident his client would be present in court whenever required.

Asked to comment later, Mat Sabu said: "This case is about the interpretation of history and should be resolved through dialogue and debate, not by the court. However, since it is a court case, we have to face it."

He said the government is losing ground among the youth and has to deal with him by using physical force and legal means.

Charge 'ludicrous'

Outside the court, Mat Sabu's deputy defence counsel Aminuddin Zulkifli said his team has yet to receive documents pertaining to the case.

"It seems that the prosecutors were more interested in trying to push up the amount of the bail," he added.

Penang DAP chief Chow Kon Yeow(right), who was present, said the charge against Mat Sabu is "politically motivated" and has no basis whatsoever.

He said the case has dealt another "cruel blow" to democracy and that the premier's reform speech rings hollow when the promised "transformations" are blatantly contradicted and violated by actions such as the "ludicrous criminal charge" against Mat Sabu.

"How can Najib claim Malaysia to be the best democracy in the world when his government uses bully tactics in silencing people who do not agree with or offer alternative interpretations to their monopolised account of history?" he asked.

"I find this episode saddening, though not entirely shocking, and would like to offer my best wishes to Mat Sabu, who I believe will fight handsomely against this injustice."

On Aug 27, Umno-owned daily Utusan Malaysia published several reports that Mat Sabu had praised the communists who attacked the Bukit Kepong police station in 1950, leaving 26 people dead.

"But history has been covered up. Jins Samsuddin, who made the (Bukit Kepong) film, is an Umno (member). His story of Bukit Kepong (said that) those who attacked the police station were criminals..." Mat Sabu was quoted as saying.

The reports further alleged that the PAS deputy president had treated Mat Indera as a freedom fighter.

Mat Sabu has since claimed that Utusan had grossly distorted his words and has filed a defamation suit against Utusan Malaysia.

His speech also sparked debate between BN and the opposition on the country's independence history and whether Malaya was ever colonised.

A book published by the Johor government in 2004 names insurgent Mat Indera as a freedom fighter and lists him as a celebrated Johor hero.

Speaking to Malaysiakini today, PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu said this was revealed in the book titled Pengukir Nama Johor.

“The book has five pages on Mat Indera and he is essentially called a freedom fighter. It states that he is not a communist,” Mohamad, who is widely known as Mat Sabu, said.

Under fire for describing Mat Indera as a hero for attacking the Bukit Kepong police station in 1950, he said the foreword of the book was written by Johor Menteri Besar Abdul Ghani Othman.

Five pages of the book are dedicated to Mat Indera while the remainder are biographies of 21 other key historical figures from Johor.

These include the late Sultan Ismail and former Umno chairperson Sulaiman Ninam Shah.

Also included in the Johor Heritage Foundation published book is a biography of Bajuri Siraj, who turned Mat Indera in to the British for a reward.

Mat Indera's photograph is featured on the cover of the book

The section on Mat Indera was written by Ismail Adnan, who once served as deputy director of Institut Kepimpinan dan Latihan Semangat Dato' Onn.

The book is edited by former Universiti Malaya media studies lecturer Abu Bakar A Hamid and Teacher of the Year 2002 award recipient Md Ismail Zamzam.

'Pious and hardworking man'

Contacted by Malaysiakini today, Abu Bakar said Mat Indera is described in the book as someone who was “pious and a tahfiz” (someone who has memorised the Quran).

“The author used this as a basis to conclude that it is unlikely that he had turned into a communist,” Abu Bakar said.

He added that Ismail had written the section based on several credible sources and his own research.

Interestingly, Abu Bakar revealed that his own father had also served alongside Mat Indera at Sekolah Agama Parit Setongkat in Muar, Johor, in the 1940s.

“My father was the headmaster and Mat Indera was a teacher there. My father remembers him to be a hardworking and pious man who had a good voice,” he said.

At the same time, Abu Bakar revealed, in his memoir published by UKM, once Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) chairperson Abdullah CD named Mat Indera as one of his platoon members.

In the memoir, Abdullah said that Mat Indera had led the insurgency against the Bukit Kepong police station and was later “poisoned” before he was captured and hanged to death.

“This public and intellectual discourse about history is a good thing, but I urge politicians to stay out of it.

“There is no need to make a lot of noise for nothing. Even in academia there are differing views, so we conduct more research and present our findings. The case (of Mat Indera) is not yet closed,” Abu Bakar added.

Why BERSIH 3.0 is necessary to save Malaysia!

From Malaysiakini

Leaked cable: Ex-EC chief issued 60,000 fake ICs

A leaked US Embassy cable carries an explosive charge against former Election Commission (EC) chief Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman - that he admitted to issuing more than 60,000 fake Malaysian identity cards to foreign workers in Sabah in the 1990s on Umno's orders.

The cable, posted on WikiLeaks, quotes former Malaysians for Free and Fair Elections (Mafrel) chief Malek Husin as claiming that Rashid confessed this to him during a private meeting at Rashid's house on Oct 25, 2006.

In the cable marked confidential, Malek is said to have told US Embassy officials that Rashid (left) also confirmed Umno's launch of a "shadowy" campaign in the 1990s to wrest political control of Sabah - held until 1994 by then opposition front PBS.

"During that decade, Umno granted citizenship and Malaysian identity cards to over 600,000 foreign migrant workers (predominantly Muslims from Indonesia and Mindanao in the Philippines) in Sabah, in exchange for their votes in state assembly elections.

"According to Husin, Rashid 'admitted to personally issuing over 60,000 fraudulent Malaysian ICs in Sabah', to help Umno assume political control there," the cable says.

Up to the time of writing, Malaysiakini was unable to get an answer to calls or a text message sent to Abdul Rashid's mobile phone.

Instant citizenship and voting rights for illegal immigrants have long been an issue in Sabah, with local leaders within and outside the BN coalition having repeatedly demanded a solution from the federal government.

However, nothing has come of their demands.

It is claimed that the situation became acute in the 1990s, with the blame placed on then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad for allegedly launching what is now called 'Projek IC' - a clandestine operation said to involve the National Registration Department, related government agencies and their agents - to artificially boost votes in favour of Umno and the BN.

In the 1994 state election, PBS - which had held Sabah as an independent opposition front since 1985 - saw its majority hold of the state assembly reduced to a razor-thin margin over the BN.

Although PBS was eventually toppled with a string of defections to the BN by party stalwarts, many blamed the contentious 'Projek IC' for playing a major role in the success of BN's hostile takeover of Sabah.

Wan Ahmad is 'anti-reform'

The cable, created on March 16, 2007, also includes Malek's claim that Rashid had described EC deputy chief Wan Ahmad Wan Omar as "an Umno member who is anti-reform".

Malek is said to have told US Embassy officials that Rashid had intended to stay on as EC chief until "the number two is gone", with the aim of easing in then EC secretary, Kamaruzaman Mohd Noor, as his successor.

In a separate meeting with Kamaruzaman, the cable quoted him as telling US Embassy officials that the EC was not in a position to push for reforms, as each and every proposal had to go through the Prime Minister's Office for approval.

Kamaruzaman is also reported to have said that the EC has no power to investigate election day abuses, with it having to refer allegations of fraud or election tampering to either the police or the Anti-Corruption Agency, the predecessor of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.

Battle for polls reform 'very steep'

Based on meetings among US Embassy officials and the EC, Mafrel, Bersih and several academicians, the cable summarised that electoral reforms in Malaysia faced a "very steep uphill battle" as it moved towards the March 2008 general election.

It ironically proved to be a watershed outing for opposition parties, which were able to deny the BN a two-thirds majority in Parliament.

The cable described the "Umno-led BN governing coalition" as keeping a tight rein over all important levers of power, including the EC, leaving little wiggle room for any efforts to open up elections to greater transparency and fairness.

It pointed out that, despite concerted efforts by Mafrel and Bersih to push for grassroots engagement in their bid for a revamp of an electoral system heavily tilted in BN's favour, "their best efforts will almost certainly not produce meaningful reforms", at least in the medium term.

"Umno, in power since independence, faces no effective public, opposition party or internal pressure to reduce its overwhelming powers of incumbency," the cable states.

Will Najib succeed in repealling ISA?!

Article 149, which is meant for national security, is the mother of repressive laws, as it enables parliament to brush aside fundamental human rights guaranteed under Part 2 of the Constitution to enact laws that grant the Executive sweeping power that includes detention without trial. The human rights so affected include those enshrined under Article 5 (life and liberty), Article 9 (freedom of movement), Article 10 (freedom of speech and assembly), etc.

By Kim Quek

Prime Minister Najib Razak’s stunning announcement of his intention to repeal the abominable Internal Security Act (ISA) as well as the three archaic Proclamations of Emergency has brought much excitement to a country long struggling to rid itself of repressive rule.

Najib said in a much anticipated speech delivered on the “historic night” of Sept 15 (as he himself described) that the lifting of these repressive legislations was meant to meet the “aspiration of the people for a more open and dynamic democracy, …..so as to be at par with other democratic systems in the world”.

The immediate emotional impact of such a momentous announcement must be one of exhilaration and euphoria for many – we are now finally on the path to regain our long lost democracy!

But are we?

OLD WINE IN NEW BOTTLE?

In the same breath as Najib announced the good news, he said new legislations will be enacted – an anti-terrorism act and a public order law - under the umbrella of Article 149 of the Federal Constitution to combat subversives and organized violence, so as to preserve public order and security.

But isn’t this the same umbrella Article 149 that gave birth to the detestable ISA?

Article 149, which is meant for national security, is the mother of repressive laws, as it enables parliament to brush aside fundamental human rights guaranteed under Part 2 of the Constitution to enact laws that grant the Executive sweeping power that includes detention without trial. The human rights so affected include those enshrined under Article 5 (life and liberty), Article 9 (freedom of movement), Article 10 (freedom of speech and assembly), etc.

Article 149 was written in such a way that it virtually gives the dominant party in parliament a blank cheque to write whatever autocratic law whenever it desires, as the grounds upon which such law can be enacted encompass a wide range of vague justifications – grounds such as any actual or threatened action that may cause citizens to fear organized violence, or to excite disaffection against government, or to promote ill-will among races, or prejudice the functioning of public service or supply, etc.

With such licence to create autocratic legislations, can Umno resist the temptation to fashion the new anti-terrorist laws after its repressive impulse for self-preservation? Considering Umno’s notorious record of contempt for the sanctity of law, as reflected in its cavalier attitude in amending the Constitution for political expediency – having made more than 600 amendments to the Constitution in the short period of the country’s independence – the answer must be an emphatic no.

NO CHANCE OF FAIR IMPLEMENTATION

Even in the unlikely event of Umno managing exceptionally to enact the replacement security laws in accord with the democratic spirit of our Constitution on this occasion, there is still the huge question of whether Umno is capable of implementing these laws with fairness and equity.

In this respect, we recall that when the ISA was enacted in 1960, our first prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman gave the solemn pledge in parliament that the vast power of ISA would only be used to curb the communist insurgency, and would never be used to suppress political opposition.

But we all know that the ISA detention center at Kamunting has played host to such distinguished “guests” (detainees) as Anwar Ibrahim, Lim Kit Siang, Mat Sabu, Karpal Singh, Lim Guan Eng (among thousands of others). Does anyone in his right mind believe that any of them could have been a communist or a subversive?

It is an undeniable fact that the history of ISA is a mirror of the relentless abuse of draconian power by the Umno led regime to oppress opponents and silence critics. Instead of using the ISA as a weapon to combat the communists as pledged, ISA has been turned into Umno’s potent instrument to keep its hegemony intact all these decades.

Umno is now facing unprecedented challenge to its political survival. Are we to believe that it will give up this potent weapon at this most vulnerable moment of its existence?

What Najib is effectively tellings us is that the anti-communist law (ISA) will now be replaced by anti-terrorist law.

Since both laws derive from the same root (Article 149), have the same power of preventive detention, exercised by the same political masters, and implemented by the same institutions (police, attorney general and judiciary), which now enjoy even less public confidence than in the past, why should one believe that history will not repeat itself?

If an anti-communist law has been persistently and unhesitatingly abused to blunt opposition challenges in the past, why should we believe that the new anti-terrorist law will not be similarly abused now that Umno is struggling desperately for its political survival?

GENUINE REFORM UNLIKELY

Even if Najib is serious about these changes this time, as he may have been persuaded to adopt this course as the best way to recoup the middle ground support he lost in the recent Bersih rally debacle, obstacles ahead abound.

For a start, Najib appears to have acted in isolation, as two key players seem to have been left out of the loop. Neither his deputy Muhyiddin Yassin nor Home Minister Hishamuddin Hussein – and by extension, the cabinet – seem to have participated in the decision-making process.

The hardliner Home Minister, who is responsible for implementing the security laws, expressed ignorance, when reporters asked him about rumours of a pending repeal of ISA only two days before Najib’s speech.

While Muhyiddin, speaking at a Merdeka-Raya event in Nibong Tebal, Penang on Sept 17, said that Najib’s announcement was “unexpected and radical”, but he quickly added that Najib’s speech was “bold and courageous”. He went on to praise Najib for moving with the time and assured the people that the changes were meant for the good of the people.

Such expressions of “surprise” and “praise”, coming after keeping mum for two days, give a lot of food for thought.

A reasonable interpretation is that the staunchly conservative and increasingly more powerful deputy leader of Umno cum deputy prime minister was not happy with such a “radical” move, but pragmatism dictates that he must not show it. Instead, he must have decided over the two days of contemplation to turn an apparently unhappy event into advantage by riding on this new wave of “democratic reform” to reap maximum support at home and abroad, without the slightest intention to let go of Umno’s repressive grip. After all, there is still ample opportunity to keep Umno’s draconian power intact during the legislative as well as the implementation stage.

Indeed that seems to be the case, as unmistakably signaled by Muhyiddin when he pointed out that the new security laws will prioritize security over human rights, when answering query whether there would be true reforms with the introduction of two new security laws.

Without the prior consultation and support of Umno’s top guns for genuine reforms, and with Najib’s miserable record of flip-flops whenever opposed by conservatives, it is almost a foregone conclusion that there will not be true reforms whether there is or isn’t repeal of current repressive legislation.

ELECTORAL REFORM TOP PRIORITY

The real danger to true reformists lies in the false propaganda that can be generated from this new development, considering the immense power of BN’s propaganda machinery, which encompasses all newspapers and all TV channels.

Among the casualties of such false propaganda would be the Bersih 2.0 movement for electoral reform, as euphoria so created may deflate the immense momentum generated by the recent Bersih rally. It may even cripple Bersih’s capacity to rally another mass demonstration, if substantial section of the middle ground is doped into cherishing such false hope of democratization.

And Bersih rally 3 looks inevitable, in the light of alarming increase of discovery of frauds in the electoral roll, against the back drop of a reluctant BN to institute real reform.

This new menace of apparently systemic infestation of phantom voters in the electoral roll, unless effectively checked now, can snowball into something like ‘Project M’ (M stands for Mahathir) which had singularly propelled Umno to political dominance in Sabah in the Nineties.

We are therefore landed in the dire state of having to face new trouble spots while resolution of old issues is not in sight yet.

It is therefore imperative that we redouble our effort to press for swift and effective measures to rectify the current electoral flaws, and not allow ourselves to be unnecessarily distracted by Najib’s new initiative over democratization.

Top priority must always be electoral reform, as it holds the key to a fair chance of winning the right to administer the country. Without the mandate to rule, all talks of reforms will be in vain.

Injustice by Chief Justice for not standing up for Justice!

The Federal Court has dismissed a crucial appeal by five native customary rights landowners, a decision which will adversely affect more than 100 similar cases.

The three-member panel of judges led by outgoing Chief Justice Zaki Azmi, chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richad Malanjum and Federal Court Judge Md Raus Sharif made a unanimous decision to dismiss the case, brought by Bato Bagi and five others.

Bato, along with five others, are suing the state government over the loss of their lands to the Bakun dam project.

This is also Justice Zaki's last judgment. He steps down on Monday, after reaching the retirement age of 66.

Bato, whose name is now synomous with the case, was unable to hear the judgment today, as he died two months ago.

The Federal Court today (8 Sept) refused to answer a question on whether the seizure of land by the Sarawak government for the Bakun dam was unconstitutional or not.

The decision by Chief Justice Zaki Azmi (left) and the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum, both of whom refused to answer the question, was to let other pending cases deal with the issue.

The other Federal Court judge, Justice Md Raus Sharif, answered the question in the negative, and said the seizure was not unconstitutional.

However, all three judges unanimously decided to dispose of lawyer Baru Bian's appeal following the land seizure in Bakun by the state government 14 years ago to build the multi-billion ringgit dam and a wood pulp mill.

The question posed before the court was “whether section 5(3) and (4) of the Sarawak Land Code relating to the extinguishment of native customary rights are ultra vires of Article 5 (right to life) and Article 13 (right to property) of the federal constitution.”

Zaki in his 15-page judgment, which was the last to be read out, said there seems to possibly be other grounds for challenging the unconstitutionality of section 5(3) and (4) of the Code.

Unfortunately, he said as pointed by Justice Malanjum these were not raised or properly canvassed before the court.

“A lengthy part of the submission was for the case to be reverted to the High Court for a full trial, which for reasons mentioned I do not find it proper to do so. I will therefore have to decide the question based on the arguments put before us.

“Based on those arguments and after having read the grounds of the other two judgments I would associate with the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak and find I do not need to answer the question,” he said, adding the court unanimously made no orders as to cost here and below.

Following this, Zaki ruled in dismissing the appeal and upholding the orders by the two courts ie the Sarawak High Court and Court of Appeal below.

The Chief Justice, noted before the start in delivering the decision that this was one of the most difficult verdicts he had to make in his three years' tenure as the top judge in the country.

Normally the Federal Court being the highest court in the land can determine on constitutional interpretation, but it chose not to due to arguments that there is not much before them to decide.

'Bring it to arbitration'

Zaki noted that while parties are not satisfied with the amount of compensation, the matter should have been brought to arbitration.

“In my opinion during that arbitration they could have raised all the issues regarding loss of their farms, burial grounds and other matters affecting their livelihood. There is no need for this case to be sent back for trial.

“To me that wold be unnecessary waste of money and time. Bato Bagi has accepted the compensation without referring it to arbitration. How could he now come before us to review the compensation or the extinguishment of the natives rights itself?,” the parting Chief justice said in his final judgment.

Justice Malanjum, in his 37-page detailed judgment, wrote he was of the view the court was not fully assisted although the question posed was staring at the parties.

“There was no discussion on whether the courts below were correct in their approaches in construing the relevant provisions of the constitution or whether they adopted the right test in considering the constitutionality of the impugned sections.”

Not mere existence

The Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak noted that the expression of life in Article 5 (1) does not refer to mere existence.

It, he said, incorporates all those facets that are an integral part of the life itself and those matters which go to form the quality of life.

“Of these are the right to seek and be engaged in lawful and gainful employment and to receive those benefits that our society has to offer to its members. It includes the right to live in a reasonably healthy and pollution free environment.

“If indeed extinguishment of their native customary rights has an adverse effect on the livelihood of the natives in the same way as dismissal has on the livelihood of a gainfully employed person... then it is only fair in my view that before any extinguishments direction is issued the holders of native customary rights should be given the opportunity to present their case,” he said.

Malanjum said this is essential justice and procedural fairness which a public decision-maker should ensure as having been meted out.

Justice Raus in holding sections 5 (3) and (4) of the Sarawak Land Code as constitutional said he was always guided by the principle that when the court is faced with the issue of constitutionality of a provision or statute, the court should be slow in striking down the impugned provision for being unconstitutional.

“The approach of the court while examining the challenge to the constitutionality of an enactment, is to start with the presumption of constitutionality. The court should try to sustain its validity to the extent possible. It should strike down the enactment only when it is not possible to sustain,” Raus cited former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram.

Background of the suit

Bato Bagi, five longhouse residents of Uma Balui Ukap at Batu Kalo, Uma Lesong at Batu Keling, Uma Bakah at Long Bulan, Rumah Kulit at Long Jawe and Rumah Ukit at Long Ayak on June 23, 1997, claimed native customary rights over lands along Batang Balui and its tributaries in the Belaga District of Kapit division. Other claimants, Jalang anak Paran and Kamong Anak Amih, had their lands taken for the Borneo Pulp and Paper Sdn Bhd.

They were ordered to vacate the land and surrender their native customary rights for the construction of the dam.

The indigenous people wanted the order to be declared void on the grounds that:

• The directive violated the plaintiffs' fundamental rights under Articles 5(1) of the federal constitution, and/or Article 8 of the federal constitution and/or Art. 13(2) of the federal constitution;

• The directive was in violation of Article 39(1) and (2) of the constitution of the state of Sarawak and/or Article 153 of the federal constitution; and

• The directive was made pursuant to sections 5(3) and (4) of the Sarawak Land Code, which are void and unconstitutional as being in violation of Article 5(1) of the federal donstitution and/or Article 8 of the federal constitution and/or Article 39(1) and (2) of the constitution of the state of Sarawak and/or Article 153 of the federal constitution.

Bato has since passed away.

Disappointment at decision

Counsel for the natives Baru Bian expressed disappointment at the apex court not allowing the appeal but rejoiced that there is an opportunity for the issue to be brought up again in other cases.

“There are many similar cases affecting NCR land which had been seized by the Sarawak government without considering the livelihood of the people. This cases will be coming up and it gives us another bite to challenge the constitutionality of the land grab,” Baru (left in photo) said.

Sahabat Alam Malaysia representative Mohideen Abdul Kadeer also expressed disappointment at the court not wanting to interpret the question.

He said the case took 10 years for it to come to the Federal Court, and it missed a golden opportunity to put such matter at rest and resolve other pending NCR land cases.

“Our concern is not only the livelihood of the person affected but also the ecological impact of such projects which would affect climate change,” he said.

Before the start of the case Baru led prayers in Bahasa Malaysia for a positive ruling in court but this was not to be.

Meanwhile a law professor said Chief Justice Zaki Azmi and Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Justice Richard Malanjum, could have abdicated their oath of office by their refusal to interpret the question of law posed to them.

The question posed before the court was "whether section 5(3) and (4) of the Sarawak Land Code relating to the extinguishment of native customary rights are ultra vires Article 5 (Right to life) and Article 13 (right to property) of the Federal Constitution."

Islamic International University professor Abdul Aziz Bari said by refusing to deal with the constitutionality issue, the Federal court has abdicated its duty.

"Under the Federal Constitution, the Federal Court which is the highest court of the land is essentially the constitutional court of the country; the main tribunal whose major duty is to take care of the constitution," he said.

Abdul Aziz (left) pointed out that their refusal meant that they had failed to fulfill their oath when taking office by saying "I will faithfully discharge my judicial duties in that office to the best ability, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to Malaysia, and will preserve, protect and defend its constitution."

The don added that the court is the custodian of justice, so the judges have let the citizens down for the constitution is the supreme law of the land, one that protects them from arbitrariness whether in the form of laws passed by the legislature or through executive decisions.

"It is the duty of the judiciary to declare the rights of the citizens, being custodial of justice," he said

'Case cannot be good authority'

Abdul Aziz said from the law standpoint when the decision is not decided unanimously, then there is a loophole.

“Since there is only one judge who made a ruling (on the constitutional question) on it, this case cannot be a strong authority.

“In any case, one wonders why the two did not make up their mind? Is it a case of just wanting to let go this one and later the court can take a more restrictive approach?” he asked, adding that the bottom line is the same; that the land grab is now deemed legal and the citizens have lost.

The law expert said the right to property is guaranteed by the constitution under Article 13 of the supreme law of the nation.

“There seems to be a kind of politics or manoeuvring here,” observed Abdul Aziz.

Highway Robbery in Malaysia!

The figures quoted here are shocking!

What kind of idiots working in the Government came up with such stupid deals?!?! Baffling!!!

Taken from Malaysiakini

Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng today questioned why major highway concessionaires were still increasing their toll rates when they have already recovered their construction costs and were raking in "exorbitant" profits.

Deputy Works Minister Yong Khoon Seng, in a parliamentary written reply to Lim, revealed that concessionaires managing 27 highways have raked in a total of RM37.7 billion from toll collections, in addition to RM2.1 billion from the government as compensation.

This is despite the total construction costs amounting to RM26.4 billion, giving the concessionaires profits exceeding RM13 billion, Lim, who is also DAP secretary-general, told a press conference at the party headquarters in Kuala Lumpur today.

"This is a cash cow at our expense. We want to know why the toll rates keep on increasing. They are already making money. Project Lebuhraya Utara Selatan (Plus) is the most glaring example and its concession will last until 2039," he said.

According to statistics provided by Lim, the North-South Expressway was built at a cost of RM5.9 billion, but it has since collected more than RM23.5 billion in toll fees, on top of RM735.2 million in compensation from the government.

Another highway that made more than RM1 billion in profit is Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong (LDP).

The LDP was built at a cost of RM1.1 billion but has since collected RM2.1 billion in toll charges, on top of RM631 million in compensation from the government.

The amounts of toll charges collected are up to December 2010.

"They've earned enough, so stop increasing the toll. They can even afford to give it back to the people," said Lim.

The concessionaires are being paid large sums of compensation as the government was bound by its agreement with the companies.

"It is in the agreement, that's the problem. If they (the concessionaires) are not allowed to increase the toll rates, then the government must still pay them, eventhough they are already making money," he added.

While these highway operators make the lion's share of the profits, a number of minor highways have yet to recoup their costs.

Among them are the New Pantai Expressway, Shah Alam-Klang Expressway and Kuala Lumpur-Putrajaya Expressway.