Malaysia falls short in fulfilling its promises to the UN Human Rights Council

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Public Statement

AI index: ASA 28/001/2009

13 February 2009

Malaysia falls short in fulfilling its promises to the
UN Human Rights Council

The Malaysian government should fully implement the recommendations issued by the UN's Universal Period Review (UPR) Working Group in Geneva today, Amnesty International said. The Working Group will adopt recommendations on Malaysia made during the country's review by the Human Rights Council on 11 February.

Some of the key recommendations included calls for repealing or amending the Internal Security Act (ISA) and guaranteeing freedom of expression, information and religion. Many countries also identified Malaysia's poor record in addressing human rights abuses against refugees and migrant workers.

Amnesty International welcomed Malaysia's engagement with the UPR process, but noted that Malaysia had fallen short of many of its commitments to the UN Human Rights Council when it applied to become a member in 2006.

In 2006, Malaysia pledged itself to "the promotion of a free media, including in cyberspace, as well as the encouragement of vibrant and active civil society".

"Malaysia has failed to uphold these pledges to respect human rights, including its commitment to promote a free media, particularly the Internet. Bloggers have been charged under the vaguely worded provisions of the Sedition Act," said Donna Guest, Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific deputy director.

At least 50 people are detained indefinitely without charge or trial under the Internal Security Act. These include five leaders of the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF) who as prisoners of conscience should be released immediately and unconditionally, Amnesty International said.

Amnesty International also said that the government should speed up police reform and oversight. On 20 January, 22-year-old Kugan Ananthan died in police custody. His family and others who had seen his corpse alleged that he had been tortured to death. In December 2008 27-year-old B Prabarka claimed that police beat him, splashed boiling water on his body, and threatened to hang him.

"For Malaysia the real test of the UPR process will be whether it implements changes that have a real impact on the protection of human rights in the country. As a member of the Human Rights Council, Malaysia should follow through on its promises and take the lead in respecting, protecting and promoting human rights in the Southeast Asian region," Guest said.

Karpal the devastator — super-smashes everything in his path

by Debra Chong

Karpal Singh and Lim Kit Siang appeared chummy with each other this morning at the Federal Court, where Karpal was counsel to the Hindraf 5. — Pic by Edward Cheah

PUTRAJAYA, Feb 11 — The DAP leadership appear to have resolved their differences with each other over the Perak issue at least for the time being, ahead of the two upcoming by-elections in Kedah and Perak.

Chairman Karpal Singh and party advisor Lim Kit Siang appeared to be chummy with each other this morning during a spontaneous press conference at the Federal Court here.

Karpal, who is counsel to the five leaders of the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) in Kamunting, Perak, was working to get the apex court to overturn their decision against their release.

Lim’s turn-up however was unexpected. He came in support of prominent government critic Raja Petra Kamarudin’s appeal.

The outspoken editor of online blogsite Malaysia Today is countering the Home Minister’s appeal against his release from ISA detention with his own appeal for his status quo to remain and for the Federal Court to rule that the ISA is “unconstitutional”.

Both positioned themselves close to each other as they reaffirmed their personal support, as well as their party’s commitment, for an Anti-Hopping Law to be drawn up in Parliament preventing party crossovers, leading to political instability, such as the one which caused the downfall of the Pakatan Rakyat-led state government in Perak.

“Kit Siang and I go back a long way,” Karpal said, two days after telling reporters in Penang that he was “upset” with the Lim father-and-son duo who failed to immediately back his stand to sue the Sultan of Perak.

“There’s a bigger task ahead,” he added, turning the focus on the upcoming by-elections to be called following the death of the Pas MP for Bukit Gantang in Perak, and the resignation of the PKR state assemblyman in Bukit Selambau, Kedah.

Lim agreed. “The most important task now is to see through the by-elections,” he said, adding that whatever differences in opinion the duo had would be settled within the party.

Karpal clarified that he and Lim had discussed their differences with DAP life advisor Dr Chen Man Hin last night and agreed to make peace.

However, Karpal’s mellow attitude towards Lim did not seem to extend towards his alliance compatriots in PKR, particularly against their de facto chief Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

He maintained his stand that Anwar should take responsibility over the Perak crossover fiasco and quit his position as Opposition Leader.

He also told reporters that he would not be joining the official Pakatan legal team put together by Anwar despite being “invited” because of their difference in opinions.

“I refuse to take part in that kind of activity because I firmly believe the Sultan has to be made a party,” he explained, adding that he was determined to sue Sultan Azlan Shah for going beyond his powers in determining who held the majority confidence of the state legislative assembly in private.

“That’s what the law requires,” he stated vehemently.

“Under Article 33 (1) the state legislative assembly alone can take a decision whether a member can be disqualified or not, if any question arises, and its decision shall be final,” he argued, referring to the state constitution.

He noted that a judicial review must, by law, be filed within 40 days.

Karpal who is seeking to overturn the Sultan’s decision also criticised Perak state assembly speaker V Sivakumar for failing to immediately call a sitting of the Dewan Undangan Negeri.

Karpal also vented his anger at the slow action by the police in dispersing the unlawful gathering organised by Umno Youth outside his office in Kuala Lumpur yesterday morning.

He related that he had spoken personally to an officer in uniform, whom he identified as “Mr Chan”, and was told that the organisers had not got a permit for their protest but that he was “under instructions” not to break up the rally.

“The police should have protected me yesterday. It was an unruly assembly, not peaceful,” said Karpal, describing the mob that jeered him and denounced him for acting treasonably against the Sultan.

He condemned the police and accused them of practising “double standards” when it came to allowing certain parties to hold gatherings without permits.

He pointed out that Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua and Selangor councillor Ronnie Liu had been arrested and charged for taking part in an illegal assembly last year but no action was taken against yesterday’s mob.

Sultan must act fast to save Perak

Abdul Aziz Bari

One of the difficult issues which constantly became the point of contention between my supervisor and I, when I started my PhD degree in law sometime in early 1992, was the legitimacy of public powers vested in the ruler’s office. MCPX He maintained that such was difficult to maintain in a democracy and that the holder may misuse it. Given that a monarch is not elected such was obviously not impossible. Above all, my supervisor argued, it has the potential of compromising the very raison d’etre of the retention of the monarchy itself: to stand as the symbol of the nation, a father figure who is aloof and above political fray. I countered his argument by saying that we have seen how some good monarchs, despite being non-elected, had been able to nurture the nascent democracies in their respective countries. Top of the list are exemplary monarchs such as King Bhumipol Adulyadej of Thailand and King Juan Carlos of Spain. The latter ordered his military officers to go back to their barracks when they stormed the state legislature sometime in late 1980s. Closer to home the semi-God Thai king has intervened several times during constitutional crises, particularly the one he did during the bloody clashes in Bangkok in 1992. But of course these are exceptions rather than the rule. With benefit of hindsight I think my supervisor was quite right. What happened in Perak on Feb 5 seems to have given my supervisor’s point lots of credence. Sultan Azlan Shah and his erudite son Raja Nazrin are nowhere near the top two. Some may even say that the father and son have just disqualified themselves from the list. Much has been said about the appointment, the relevant legal provisions and so on and there is no need to be pedantic and technical over here. Let us just pick some important issues and points. These include the legality of the sultan’s appointment. My take on this is in constitutional law, unlike administrative law, legality alone will not necessarily solve the problem. A decision needs to be legitimate as well. Otherwise it would trigger another problem. Not the right move A perfectly legal decision may put the country on the road to crisis. The situation in Perak requires more than just legal acumen; it is in dire need of a great deal of maturity and statesmanship. Even though the sultan was correct in the exercise of his power of appointment; namely by personally meeting all the lawmakers claimed by the Barisan Nasional to be theirs, I do not think that was the right move under the circumstances. Such was fine after the 12th General Elections. Indeed, that was the course of action pursued by the rulers of Selangor and Perlis and indeed by Raja Nazrin himself who carried out the function in the absence of the sultan. The situation in Perak at the end of January and early Feb 2009 was different as there were reports of disappearances and even kidnapping. It has even involved the Election Commission at some point and this has made the absolute power of the state assembly’s speaker directly entangled in the whole confusion. In short, the happenings during the period made the episode something different: it was one that does not nicely fall within the formula adopted during March last year. That is why I said the sultan was wrong in appointing Zambry Kadir as the new mentri besar. Having said that, there is no need to go into details as to why I have said that the sultan did not have the power to dismiss Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin. The main argument is of course the provision in the Constitution. Added to this was the wrong move to put the government in place when the “previous government” was still around. True enough the people could not accept this. This is of course not to say that the law needs popular support. The point is simply that the people did not see the legitimacy of the decision despite it being made legally. What was done by the Barisan in Perak was some kind of blitzkrieg, to use Hitler’s strategy during World War II. But there is no need to do that as there was still a government and they have just filed an application in court to determine the status of the three lawmakers. Here lies the role of the sultan; namely to weigh the options properly and avoid being seen as taking side. As of now one cannot see how the palace could say it is neutral and impartial in the circumstances. 'Against injustice we should fight' Hence the hollowness of the Barisan’s charge of treason (derhaka) on the part of Nizar and the Pakatan Rakyat supporters. I doubt if there is such a thing in both Islamic and Malay conceptions. As the ruler is the head of Islam and the epitome of Malay civilisation and culture, perhaps it is worthwhile to mention that in Islam telling the truth before an unjust ruler is considered the highest form of piety and there is a Malay adage which says: “Raja adil raja disembah raja zalim raja disanggah” (Roughly it means: To obey the law is right, against injustice we should fight). It was reported yesterday that Zambry claimed that he had the mandate from the palace. This is utter nonsense. Even in what is known as hung parliament the role of the head of state is merely to assist the formation of government: the ruler does not provide the government the mandate to rule. That is why the Constitution says the mentri besar does not hold office at the pleasure of the ruler. It is baffling to hear what Zambry said as he used to be an exco in the state cabinet. His statement also ran counter to entire notion of responsible government which includes the cabinet principle of ministerial responsibility. It is time for Barisan to stop using the palace: it must now learn how to survive on its own as required by both the Constitution and democracy. Coming back to the ruler’s powers, the Constitution unfortunately, is silent over the order of things and so on. But I think prudence tells that power of appointment needs to be seen, in circumstances such as in Perak, together with the power to decline request to dissolve the house. Even though the commission admitted that it could not explain the circumstances, they however had recommended us to learn from the experience and practice of the older Commonwealth countries practicing Westminster democracy. It follows that the sultan should have considered the request to dissolve the house tendered by Nizar. No one knows why Sultan Azlan Shah rejected the request. Be open and transparent My view that while the ruler may point to the law it was that very law that eventually put the state in the fast lane of crisis which we now see. It is the case of applying the right law to a wrong situation. Some quarters have cautioned the critics saying the ruler know what we all do not know. And that he is in possession of information we do not have access to. But whatever it is this is a democracy where basically everybody has the right to say their views and that state governance should be open and transparent. And ours is constitutional monarchy. I believe that a dissolution, in the current confusing state of Perak, is the stone that will kill two, or perhaps more, birds. It will take care of the status of the three lawmakers, saving the palace and above all giving back to the people the right to decide who will govern the state. It is still not too late for the sultan to do that. Although the Constitution is silent, I am of the opinion that the sultan has the reserve powers to dissolve the house without any request. The basis for my contention is the constitutional law theory which puts the head of state as the guardian of the nation and the constitution. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary solutions. We have come to a crisis stage and we need an extra-constitutional measure to deal with it. It goes without saying that the constitutional provisions are meant to deal with ordinary, normal circumstances. By way of analogy, the state of affairs in Perak now requires an open heart surgery; a coronary bypass. Ordinary panadol or pain killer will not do. And only the sultan has the power to do this. Some lawyers may doubt this but we are now talking about the future of the state and democracy. The problem with some of these lawyers is that they tend to pick and choose the provisions and case law which they know and spin it around, forgetting the constitutional framework , the bigger picture as well as the intensity of the problems at hand. Above all what we are facing now is not just a legal or constitutional problem. It is far bigger than that. DR ABDUL AZIZ BARI is a professor of law who has published widely on constitutional law which includes some eight books and various journal articles including a book on the Conference of Rulers.

MESSAGE FROM UTHAYAKUMAR…HINDRAF MALAYSIA

Double Jeopardy and no political or Judicial Justice. Minority and human rights lawyer in the dock even after 14 months of ISA imprisonment without trial and continuing indefinitely thereafter - P. Uthayakumar, Kemta Prison, Kemunting @ Malaysia ’s Guantanamo Bay (3/2/2009).

Intoduction

A law school in England from 1984 onwards, I was taught that Article 8 of the Federal Constitution in tandem with fundamental and Universal Human Rights Principles, guarantees equality and equal opportunities before the law and especially so prohibiting institutional racial and religious discrimination. I genuinely believed in these ideals. But what I did not realise was that under the UMNO controlled Malaysian government, Article 8 was meant to be more for decoration or puppet shadow play “wayang kulit”. UMNO never seriously intended Article 8 to be put into practice especially so when it concerned the approximately 99% of the poor and underprivileged third, fourth, fifth and even sixth generation Malaysian born Indians.

Long walk for justice

Having developed these ideals of justice during my student days I began the long walk for Justice from about the time I had started reading in chambers some eighteen years ago, mostly under the Police watch NGO banner and with just a handful of volunteers . For the first ten years or so of my legal practice and legal and especially Indian minority rights activism the UMNO controlled Malaysian authorities generally left us alone because they may have deemed our struggle. ‘a cry in the wilderness’. After the first ten years of “pioneer status” from 2003 onwards was arrested, detained and charged for criminal intimidation of a police Chief Inspector during court proceedings and the last being for two sedition charges and a few more in the pipeline. This my final arrest under the ISA was the tenth arrest effected on me.

UMNO “put me to sleep”

But when the banks unexpectedly and unprecedentedly burst with the about 100,000 People Power Makkal Sakthi Hindraf Rally on the 25^th day of November 2007, UMNO to teach me and the Indians a lesson never ever again to question the UMNO master (tuan) opted for “Summary Justice” and “put me to sleep” with effect from the 13^th day of December 2007. By imprisoning me and the three other Hindraf lawyers without trial for two years and continuing indefinitely thereafter under the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA) at the Kemta maximum Security Prison, Kemunting @ Malaysia ‘s Guantanamo Bay .

ISA originally meant to fight organised violence

The drafter of the ISA the late Professor R.H.Hickling in an interview in the New Sunday Times of 30/7/2006 had said that “the (ISA) Act was only intended against communist insurgents and those bent on your armed struggle Heckling further said that the ISA was being used against people for whom it was not intended” “it was designed to be more limited in it’s scope than it is at the moment”. Organised violence is the key to this preamble, but a lot of people who had nothing to do with organized violence at all were arrested” (and detained under ISA). “ I would want judicial review at all times”. “But the Malaysian Courts almost always” has had the interest of the government alone above everything else” and does not follow the law. ( Internal Security Act ) In short we had been arrested and detained without trial under the ISA in just because I had led/ organised a successful peaceful 100,000 people Hindraf Rally which right is given to me by virtue of Article 10 of the Federal constitution which guarantees the Right to Assemble Peacefully without arms and having championed equality and equal opportunities . But UMNO follows neither the law nor has any respect for in particular Article 5 ( Liberty of the person ) Articles 8 and 10 of the Federal Constitution. But to justify this our ISA arrest and detention UMNO without any basis at all whatsoever and in a vacuum linked us to the LTTE terrorist organisation. But our hundreds of letters, memorandums etc running into thousands of pages and addressed to the Malaysian authorities proves our peaceful, lawful, constitutional, legitimate and non violent struggle. (A simple Google search would reveal all these assertions).Terrorists use the butt of their guns and not the nip of their pens. When I filed an RM 100 million civil suit against Attorney General, Inspector General and the UMNO controlled Malaysian government for this LTTE link, allegation, without even having the guts to file in their Statement of Defence and outliving their evidence of our alleged LTTE links, have applied to strike out my civil suit. Based on many almost similar cases these authorities usually succeed before the Malaysian Courts. How else then do I clear my name with having links with the LTTE ?

“Ethnic Cleansing”

Having picked up more and more courage gradually over the years, in the year 2001 I had taken up my struggle to a higher level by championing the cause of Kampong Medan “ethnic cleansing” case where the Indians were specifically targeted, slashed and killed for fifteen days in a row with effect from the 8^th day of March 2001 to the 23^rd day of March 2001 Five Indians were mercilessly killed and about 100 others were inflicted with grievous bodily injuries. This is the worst case of Human Rights violations in the history of Malaysia but like almost all other injustice concerning the Indians in this country this tragedy received the least attention even by the Malaysian opposition parties, almost all NGOs’, civil society and the print and electronic media and not in accordance with it’s gravity and seriousness. This “ethnic cleansing” exposure to the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Harare on the 24^th day of November 2007 and the other of UMNO’S atrocities especially against the Indians found anger in UMNO and thus this malicious and vindictive criminal prosecution for sedition before the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court today. This sedition prosecution is politically motivated and UMNO has no shame about it.

Death in Police Custody – Approximately 90% Indians

In 2003, the incidences of death / killings in police custody shot up to about one in every two weeks. The instances of police shooting dead mere suspects shot up to about 1.3 persons every week. Based on the latest count it is estimated that up to about 90% (60% in 2003 as per our Memorandum to the Police Royal Commission dated 4/3/04) of the Malaysian victims there to are the Indians with the latest killing in their police custody being that of A.Kugan (22).The Attorney General after the Indians public pressure has unprecedentedly acknowledged and classified as a murder case. The record otherwise stands that there has been zero prosecution of even a single police man for murder in a killing in a police lock up case pursuant to section 302 of the Penal Code. But the criminal police in Kugan’s case are still on the loose on desk jobs. They have not been detained and locked up like any other murder suspect? Why? Is Malaysia a Police State or are the police above the law mindset allowed to Prevail. The new PKR Selangor State Government revealed at the Selangor state Assembly on 29/10/08 that from 2004 to 2007, 96 Hindu temples had been demolished in the state of Selangor alone (Tamil Nesan 30/10/08 page 2). From this we estimate that an average one Hindu temple is being demolished in Malaysia every week. The segregation of the Indians from the national mainstream development of Malaysia and the denial of equal opportunities thereto on a day to day basis right from the Development Programmes for the hardcore poor to kindergardens, Tamil schools, skills training institutions, fully residential secondary schools, fully residential science colleges institutions of Higher Learning, Universities, scholarships, job opportunities in the public and private sectors, banks and government agency business loan, business opportunities, licenses, permits, and right up to the multimillion and billion Ringgit Malaysia worth of government projects and mega projects and contracts. All the above collectively if not the Kampong Medan tragedy on it’s own alone amounts to “ethnic cleansing”

Double Jeopardy

But having already punished me with fourteen months of imprisonment also for the aforesaid “ethnic cleansing” allegations as per the charges laid out in my ISA charge sheet , I am now being subject to double jeopardy by this continued criminal prosecution before this court today. I am in the dock today for having championed the aforesaid Indian minority and human rights concerns which in UMNOs’ Malaysia conveniently and politically motivated and for their continued political survival has been classified as a crime, a threat to National Security and public order warranting our imprisonment under the ISA without trial and without the due process of the law.

“Boot Camp” for judges

What justice can I expect from the Malaysian Courts when the most senior of the 48 High Court Judges were sent to the “boot camp” with selected judges and judicial officers “to indoctrinate” those attending to hold the view that the governments’ interest was “ more important than all else when we are considering our judgments (NST 11-6-08 at Page 6). This said High Court Judge has since resigned shortly thereafter. Be that as it may I would expect this sessions court to allow me to tender and to refer without obstruction also from the Deputy Public Prosecutor the hundreds of the aforesaid letters, memorandums, gory photographs of the “ethnic cleansing” etc running into thousands of pages.. Justice must not only be done but must manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.

Only Seven Political Detainees under Pak Lah’s Regime

Throughout Abdullah Badawi’s five year term as Prime Minister the only political detainees imprisoned under the ISA has been Sin Chew Daily’s Tan, DAP Member of Parliament Teresa Kok and blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin besides the four HINDRAF lawyers of up to seventeen years standing as legal practitioners. However because of the socio political and public pressure on UMNO and the courts, Tan was released within eighteen hours, Teresa Kok within five days both by UMNOs’ Home Minister. Raja Petra Kamaruddin was set free by the Shah Alam High Court within fifty-five days. But when comes to the Indian HINDRAF lawyers cum ISA political prisoners, a different set of rule applies. These HINDRAF lawyers have been detained for about fourteen (14) months now but neither the Home Minister nor the courts have set us free as was done to Tan, Teresa Kok and Raja Petra. The political reality is because of the strong Chinese and Malay public and political pressure, UMNO and the Malaysian Courts may have set free Tan, Teresa Kok and Raja Petra because they belong to majority and economically powerful community who would have some bearing on their communities vis a vis, the political landscape of Malaysia and UMNOs’ continued political survival. But when it concerned the Indian HINDRAF lawyers the very same public and political pressure on UMNO or the courts have no or very little bearing because the Indians in Malaysia are a politically and economically weak and insignificant community. Even the only Chinese non political ISA detainee was “abruptly” and “prematurely” released early last month just before the Kuala Terengganu by elections to fish Chinese votes and to do damage control after ex ISA detainees Teresa Kok, Raja Petra and Hishamuddin Rais’ Campaign in Kula Terengganu. On my part I have made three (3) Habeas Corpus applications before three High Court Judges and one appeal to the Supreme Court but to no avail. When justice is not seen to be done to even lawyers, what justice can the common man expect?

Silent heart attack and deteriorating health

Throughout these fourteen (14) months of my imprisonment under the ISA my health condition has deteriorated. Sometime on or about January 2008 I believe I had suffered a silent heart attack at a time when I was denied my diabetic medication. The Specialist Consultant Physician and all the other doctors who had attended to me when I was admitted to the Taiping General Hospital in January 2008 had not disclosed to me my heart condition that was hypo kinetic after an ECG examination was conducted. My blood test had also revealed an excessive level of keystones which could have triggered a heart attack. It was only during my second admission at the Taiping General Hospital in April 2008 that this hypo kinetic condition was “leaked” to me by another sympathetic hospital personnel. I urgently need specialist Cardiac care and attention from a reputable Hospital but the UMNO Government deliberately deny me despite an emotional plea by my mother to the Prime Minister at his offices in Putrajaya. In prison I have contracted two kinds of skin diseases namely allergy and idiopathic gutted hypomelanosis. My pre existing diabetes and after having been a diabetic patient for about fourteen years and which had got worse with sugar being added to my food from time to time and diabetic diet not served to me right up to this day despite having lodged numerous formal, verbal and written complaints to the Kemta Prison Directors, Home Minister and even the ISA Advisory Board. I have also been diagnosed as a high blood pressure patient. Having been forced to sleep on a one inch thin foam mattress on a cement floor, I have developed arthritis in both my knees and lumbar spondalysis to my backbone. This lumber spondalysis condition was also never disclosed to me by the Orthopedic Surgeon and I had only learnt of the same when I was perusing an Affidavit of the Consultant Physician. I believe my eye sight may also have been affected because of my worsening diabetic condition. My request to be examined by an eye specialist was denied. When this matter attracted media attention, the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) conducted a so called “Inquiry” at Kemta Prison. The relevant government hospital Specialist, Director, doctors, prison personnel, police special branch and just about everyone else was interviewed except myself. An Indian Suhakam Commissioner was hurriedly dispatched by UMNO to call for a press conference and cleared the Taiping General Hospital , prison and police special branch of any wrongdoings. This is how Justice and Human Rights is upheld in Malaysia – without giving me a hearing!. In the last two months (the latest is) corn having developed on both my leg toes. The tip of my right leg toe has lost it’s sense of touch. Which I suspect may be the beginning of a possible diabetic gangrene which can lead to a leg amputation. My gums are also infected and swollen, being consistent with worsening diabetes.

Independence of government hospital compromised

The aforesaid difficulties with the Taiping government general hospital Specialists and doctors is I believe because of the police special branch and the prison authorities’ interference and having caused the independence of these medical doctors and specialists to be compromised. I have applied for my medical reports, medical notes, and medical test results from the Taiping General Hospital the Prison authorities and the Home Minister. They all have refused to furnish me the same and neither was the same exhibited in the High Court proceedings that. I had filed and despite me specially challenging for the same to be exhibited. This government hospital and police collusion experiences I have seen happening to my clients in my eighteen years of legal practice especially so in the scores of death/ killing in police custody cases, shooting, dead by police and other police beating up and torture cases that I have attended to. But little did I realise that I myself would become a victim one day! The latest example is that of A. Kugan (22) whose post mortem report did a Taiping general hospital style cover up for the police by stating the cause of Kugan’s death as lung congestion when even the Attorney General subsequently under public pressure had reclassified the case as murder based on the very badly bruised body of Kugan which was exposed by the people power Hindraf Makkal Sakthi forces to the media and on the internet. They had succeed in beating the police before they could do a full scale police cover up. Thus the Inspector General of police and the UMNO Home Minister’s anger.

Prison protest – refusing medical treatment

As a mark of protest and in furthertherance also of my struggle against the interference with and compromising the government hospital doctors and specialist in my case and scores of previous cases like Kugen, I had with effect from July 2008 to date refused to be treated by any of these government hospital doctors and specialist whose professionalism I would have no reason to doubt had I been treated by them in a non prisoner to doctor capacity. I am prepared for the worst and as matter of principle. I was mentally prepared when I started this struggle and remain as strong as ever because I believe in justice. When these doctors and specialist had refused to exhibit their medical and specialist reports, medical notes, and tests thereto I had created a doubt. But even the learned High Court Judge did not give me the benefit of at least this doubt and had refused to set me free on medical grounds at least if not judicial grounds which would have enabled me to receive independent medical treatment overseas. Independent Judiciary!

No regrets – and the struggle continues.

But I have no regrets in this my struggle for equality, equal opportunities, equal justice and towards a non racial and religious discriminatory Malaysia especially so for the ethnic minority Malaysian Indian community who are suffering from the worst forms of atrocities under the UMNO controlled Malaysian government regime. I am aware that UMNO can imprison me as long as they like, in fact technically for the whole of my natural life if they want to. But irrespective of my imprisonment the HINDRAF people power Makkal Sakthi struggle for justice, peace and equality and equal opportunities and prosperity mutual respect, co-existence and dignity will go on under the leadership of HINDRAF chairman P. Waytha Moorthy. I am delighted to note that the Hindraf people power Makkal Sakthi forces are no longer frightened of UMNO, their police force, army, Attorney General UMNO abusing the Malaysian Judiciary for their continued political survival. The latest case in point is the struggle for justice for A.Kugan which is Res Ipsa loquteor (the facts speak for itself). I have no regrets in this my HINDRAF people power Makkal Sakthi struggle. As a lawyer in particular, I stand for justice, fair play and equity.

Appeal to Court

Wherefore in the circumstances, I hereby pray that: -

1) The sedition charges against me be dismissed on the grounds of the same being groundless

further to section 173 (g) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2) I, Uthayakumar S/O Ponnusamy hereby be set free by virtue of the courts inherent jurisdiction.

3) Such other reliefs deemed fit by this Honorable Court.

Thank you

Uthayakumar Ponnusamy – 3/2/2009

by The Might Of Pen

Did they Remember the "Natang"?

About 1000 people gathered at the Ipoh City Hall field this afternoon to declare their support for the Malay Rulers.

The event was organized by Umno Youth and several NGOs including GPMS.

Umno Youth members came in from other states like Selangor, Penang, Negri Sembilan and Kedah to joun their Perak counterparts at the gathering.

"Elements like Karpal Singh who do not respect the sultans should disappear from the face of the earth", According to GPMS vice-president Jais Abdul Karim.

The crowd held banners, one of which read 'Nizar penderhaka Melayu Zaman moden', and shouted 'Daulat Tuanku'.

In his short address at the gathering, Khairy Jamaluddin suggested that the Perak Sultan should banish Mond Nizar from the state as many started to burn posters of the ousted menteri besar on the field.

Do we all remember the displayed word - Natang?

I presumed those who understands Bahasa Malaysia knows what it means without the need of dictionary.

Did they forget this banner displayed in Terengganu by Umno and Umno Youth members?

What did they call our DYTM Yang di Pertuan Agong who is also the DYMM Sultan of Terengganu?

What did our PM says about the decision by DYMM Sultan Terengganu and our present Agong?

[Quote]

Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi defended his choice of former MB Datuk Idris Jusoh for the post, saying “the appointment of anyone other than Idris is unconstitutional and invalid.” He said this was because the majority of the assemblymen in Terengganu wants Idris, the Jertih assemblyman to be reappointed the MB.

[Unquote]

Did Umno Youth forgot about their protest against the Sultan of Terengganu on the appointment of Ahmad Said?

[Quote]

Pergerakan Pemuda, Wanita dan Puteri Terengganu semalam sebulat suara membantah dan menolak campur tangan istana dalam pelantikan Menteri Besar yang tertangguh hampir dua minggu sejak Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-12, pada 8 Mac lalu.

[unquote]

Did they forgot about 1988 Constitutional crisis involving the Sultans?

Did they forgot about the Perlis MB saga in March 2008 where words used was contemptuous against the Sultan of Perlis?

[Quote]

"But the Raja's decision was to appoint another person, I do not know why," Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim said. He also said that no one should go against Abdullah's decision but should instead respect his leadership. "This is Barisan Nasional's pride. If there is no respect for Barisan Nasional and Umno, who else will respect them?

[Unquote]

"No one should go against Abdullah's decision ... no respect for BN and Umno? The Sultan of Perlis went against Abdullah's decision and accordingly it must be construed as a disrespect to Umno and BN? Saying the Sultan had disrespect to Umno, must, in the context of GPMS earlier statement be construed as treason too!

Selective memory!!!

by Maverick SM

DAP reaffirms support for Pakatan Rakyat to establish an alternative government

DAP Reaffirms Support For Pakatan Rakyat To Establish An Alternative Government That Is Democratic, People-Centric And With An Ethical Leadership Based On The 5 Principles Of Freedom, Justice, Truth, Social Welfare And Universal Moral Values

DAP's commitment towards a multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural Malaysia is not only an article of faith but a deep conviction in Bangsa Malaysia. DAP is inclusive of all races and religions. We represent the interests and fight for the rights every Malaysian.

In the effort of being representative of all Malaysians, including both Malays and non-Malays, the party is willing to undertake a transformational process that may be painful but necessary. We have no alternative but to grow without compromising our basic principles.

DAP reaffirms support for Pakatan Rakyat (PR) to establish an alternative government that is democratic, people-centric and with an ethical leadership based on the 5 principles of freedom, justice, truth, social welfare and universal moral values. In this regard the DAP supports PKR de facto leader Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim as the Parliamentary Opposition Leader and will remain so as no single leader has ever questioned this during internal meetings whether at the highest levels or otherwise.

The Pakatan Rakyat leadership has clearly endorsed a position that no individual party policy can be PR policy unless it is fully approved unanimously by all three parties. DAP's position on hudud and Islamic state is crystal clear and regardless of whatever support for both hudud and the establishment of an Islamic State, whether from PAS or PKR, this will not be PR policy as long as DAP does not agree to it.

Similarly DAP's leadership has been consistently urging the government to enact an anti-hopping law even before the Perak crisis, and we have expressed support of our 28 MPs. As BN does not have a 2/3 parliamentary majority, the support of DAP's 28 MPs will be required to effect any constitutional amendment for such an anti-hopping laws.

As a democratic party, DAP policies can be changed in accordance with the wishes of its members. However until today there has been no requests to question or disturb the basic framework of co-operation between the 3 parties of DAP, PAS and PKR that makes up PR.

As the party secretary-general, I am duty-bound to execute these policies. However should any member wishes to change them, there are required to use proper party channels to do so and not use the BN-controlled media. I appeal to Sdr Karpal Singh as Chair of the DAP to use internal party channels should he wish to change these policies or even criticise my leadership.

Lim Guan Eng

Karpal: Review membership in PR

GEORGE TOWN: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim should step down as leader of Pakatan Rakyat for causing the opposition coalition to lose control of Perak, said DAP national chairman Karpal Singh.

Karpal did not mince words in blaming Anwar and even party supremo Lim Kit Siang and secretary-general Lim Guan Eng for causing the fall of the Pakatan state government because of their inconsistent stand on party-hopping.

In a fiery press conference, Karpal lambasted the DAP leaders for falling for Anwar's theatrics on party-hopping.

He said the inconsistent stand on party-hopping had caused disarray in Pakatan Rakyat.

The veteran politician said it was time DAP seriously reconsidered its membership in Pakatan Rakyat to show the party did not condone dishonesty of any kind, in particular treachery to the people through crossovers.
Calling on Anwar to repent, Karpal said the former deputy prime minister had created enough trouble for the country.

"I wonder if he is fit to be the leader of Pakatan Rakyat. In fact, I think Pakatan Rakyat requires another leader, a good leader.

"Not someone who believes in immorality, even accepting crossovers," he said at the press conference at his law firm here yesterday.

Karpal said he regretted that some members of Pakatan Rakyat and even from DAP had fallen to the temptation of supporting crossovers.

"Some of them have not said a word all this while and I regret that I did not get support from my own party leaders (on the crossover issue).

"Kit Siang and Guan Eng should support me instead of making statements supporting Anwar Ibrahim.

"I am the chairman of DAP and let me make it clear to the party leaders that I have the support of the rank and file."

Karpal then went on to issue a warning to his party leaders not to push him too far.

"I have been patient all this while. Don't let matters come to a head in the interests of Pakatan Rakyat and also DAP.

"In fact I had even proposed that DAP come out of Pakatan Rakyat on the issue of hudud but no one supported me, neither Kit Siang nor Guan Eng.

"It is a shame and they should also bertaubat (repent)."

Asked if he would call for an emergency party meeting to discuss DAP's future in the alliance, Karpal said he was already contemplating that.

"I have been silent for too long. I cannot fight the cause of DAP alone although I have been trying.

"What I am saying and am defending is nothing but the truth."

Karpal also slammed those who accused him of committing treason over his intention to file a suit against the Sultan of Perak Sultan Azlan Shah on the appointment of a new menteri besar for Perak.

"Those who have lodged reports against me are obviously ignorant of the law.

"I would like to make it clear to everyone that they had better not play with me.

"I have taken enough... if you want trouble then you have come to the right place," he said, adding he would not be cowed by anyone on the issue.

Karpal reiterated that he had done nothing unlawful or illegal in relation to the Sultan of Perak.

"I am just stating that the sultan is also subject to the due process of the law and he can be sued in his official capacity for dismissing the Pakatan Rakyat state government.

"It is my view that the sultan has acted ultra vires to the provisions of Article 16(6) of the constitution of Perak."

In Ipoh last night, at a Pakatan Rakyat gathering at the menteri besar's official residence, Anwar claimed that Karpal's outburst was a misunderstanding caused by the "twisting of facts by the Umno-controlled media".

He also said there was no bad blood between him and Karpal.

NST

A mockery of our democratic institution

To those who argue that the political crisis in Perak now is a taste of Pakatan's own medicine (referring to the Sept 16 takeover plan), they have failed to see the key differences between the two. If you remember what happened when Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim claimed to have the numbers to form the new federal government, he wrote to PM Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi requesting him to convene an emergency sitting of Parliament. This was rejected by the PM. The next constitutional option is to press for the dissolution of Parliament to make way for fresh new elections. That was also not entertained. Anwar Ibrahim exhausted the constitutional means that were available to him. If Pakatan were to act unconstitutionally and lure defections, then we will be having a new government today. But we didn't and we will not act unconstitutionally. So you can't say that Najib's coup and Pakatan's plan were one and the same.

Some may also say, well what about the earlier defection of Bota assemblyman, Datuk Nasarudin Hashim? Why did Pakatan Rakyat accept him? Why not force his seat to be vacated for a by-election? Let's keep things in perspective here. His defection was that of an opposition lawmaker to a governing lawmaker. His defection did not alter the balance of power in the State Assembly. Pakatan Rakyat remained as government, and BN as opposition. Status quo. Logically and intelligently, anyone can safely assume that Pakatan Rakyat didn't need a defection from BN. Thus, he defected on his own accord and on his own will. There was no need for Pakatan Rakyat to force him to vacate his seat as he did not win the seat on a Pakatan ticket. The Pakatan government really has no standing in forcing him to vacate a seat which wasn't earned by Pakatan in the first place!

I must say that I had great respect for Sultan Azlan Shah. Until yesterday. I wonder how he could possibly consent to the formation of a new BN state government when constitutionally, a government is still in place. And to even approve to a new Menteri Besar when the existing one is still in office? How can any state have 2 heads of government at any one time? There can only be one Menteri Besar of Perak. This is a mockery. The Menteri Besar can only be removed by the State Assembly via a vote of no-confidence or via the dissolution of the assembly. And none of these two constitutional means has been requested by BN. How can anyone claim that Najib and Anwar are one and the same?

Next, the Sultan called for a "unity" government to be formed by BN and the Independents. Let's be clear about this. The Independents are in no way legally bound to represent BN. Well, at least not yet, not till they officially become members of a BN component party. All that the Sultan and Najib has from them is a verbal assurance that "we will be friendly to BN". And just by appearing in a press conference with Najib, it justifies the change of government? What if next week these Independents were to be seen in a press conference with Pakatan? A real "unity" government envisioned by the Sultan should have been an all-inclusive government of Pakatan, BN, and the Independents. Pakatan and BN each have 28 seats, and the Independents 3. Thus, no single party or coalition has a commanding majority. If there is to be a "unity" government, it calls for a new coalition of PR-BN-Ind which is impossible. Thus, what the Sultan has called for is simply a name without substance. What "unity" if it's going to consist of only single-minded representatives - all "friendly to BN"? That's not a "unity" government, it's a BN government. This is a mockery of the intelligence of Malaysians. A beginning of what is to come with this PM-to-be.

by Hannah Yeoh

Mohon Derhaka!, Who is on umno linked gamuda board of directors?

Y A M Raja Dato’ Seri Eleena Azlan Shah48, MalaysianNon Independent Non-Executive Director

An advocate and solicitor, Raja Dato’ Seri Eleena has been on the Board since 1 June 1992.
She was called to the English Bar in 1985. Upon returning to Malaysia, she joined Messrs Skrine & Co and was called to the Malaysian Bar in 1986. She set up her own legal practice Messrs Raja Eleena, Siew, Ang & Associates in 1987 of which she is presently a senior partner.

Raja Dato’ Seri Eleena’s extensive experience in legal practice enables her to contribute significantly to the Board. She is the niece of Dato’ Ir Kamarul Zaman bin Mohd Ali and a major shareholder of Gamuda through her interest in Generasi Setia (M) Sdn Bhd.

Raja Dato’ Seri Eleena is a Barrister-at-Law from Lincoln’s Inn, London, UK.

Nat Tan observed:

I then looked at Gamuda’s 2006 financial report, which states its largest shareholder to be Generasi Setia (M) Sdn. Bhd, which holds 8.71%, while the next largest is again EPF, at a not too distant 7.71%.

The financial report states that a major shareholder of Generasi Setia is one YAM Raja Dato’ Seri Eleena binti Raja Azlan Shah. YAM Raja DS Eleena is the daughter of the former Agong and reigning Sultan of Perak, DYMM Sultan Paduka Seri Sultan Azlan Shah.

There being no website for Generasi Setia, I had to go to the Companies Commission to see how major ‘major’ was.

According to the last available Generasi Setia (M) Sdn Bhd Company Report - for the year 2003 (isn’t it against the law not to submit accounts every year?) - out of 2 million company shares, YAM Raja DS Eleena owns 1,999,940.

YAM Raja DS Eleena is thus essentially the sole owner of Generasi Setia, which is the largest shareholder of Gamuda, which is (by far) the largest shareholder of Litrak, which owns the LDP toll concession that was raised by 60%.

Who else on board of gamuda directors:

Y Bhg Tan Sri Dato’ Mohd Ramli bin Kushairi69, MalaysianIndependent Non-Executive Director
Y Bhg Tan Sri Dato’ Mohd Ramli bin Kushairi holds a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) degree in Social Science from Hull University, England, UK. He completed his post-graduate studies at King’s College, University of London, UK.

He began his career in the public service in 1961 as Assistant Secretary at Bank Negara Malaysia. From 1965-1972 he served in senior positions at the Tariff Advisory Board and Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority. From 1972-1983, he was a Director and subsequently Group Managing Director of Kumpulan FIMA Berhad. He is a past Vice-President of the Dewan Perniagaan Melayu Malaysia and past Secretary-General of the National Chamber Of Commerce And Industry Malaysia and ASEAN-Chambers Of Commerce And Industry. He also served as UMNO Liaison Secretary for Federal Territory from 1980-1982 and as a member of the Advisory Board of Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur.

He is presently a member of the Malaysian Business Council (MBC), the Board of the National Productivity Corporation (NPC), the National Standards & Accreditation Council and Chairman of the Council’s Standards Committee. He was appointed a member of the Board of Trustees of Yayasan Tuanku Bainun on 10 June 2002 and Yayasan Suluh Budiman Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris on 1 October 2002.

Y Bhg Tan Sri Dato’ Mohd Ramli bin Kushairi was appointed to the Board of Gamuda on 22 October 2001. He is a member of the Audit Committee and Nomination Committee of the Board.
His directorships in other public companies are with South Malaysia Industries Berhad (Chairman), Meda Inc. Berhad (Chairman), Masscorp Berhad and Sime Engineering Services Berhad (formerly known as CMF Technology Sdn Bhd).

Y Bhg Dato’ Ir Kamarul Zaman bin Mohd Ali69, MalaysianExecutive Director

Y Bhg Dato’ Ir Kamarul Zaman bin Mohd Ali holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering from the Institute of Technology, Brighton, UK.

He was attached to Jabatan Kerja Raya (JKR), Penang for 17 years as a Quarry Manager. Subsequently, he joined Penang Development Corporation as a Senior Engineer for 9 years, prior to joining G.B. Kuari Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of Gamuda, on 1 June 1990.

Y Bhg Dato’ Ir Kamarul Zaman bin Mohd Ali was appointed to the Board of Gamuda on 1 June 1992.

He is the uncle of Y A M Raja Dato’ Seri Eleena Azlan Shah.

His directorships in other public companies are in Intan Utilities Bhd and Unza Holdings Berhad.
Malaysian Business: Edisi February 2008 menyenaraikan kajiselidik 40 rakyat Malaysia yang terkaya. Berikut adalah kedudukan tersebut.

1. Robert Kuok Hock Nien, 84, RM 58.110 billion, Kerry/Kuok Group
2. T. Ananda Krishnan, 69, RM 19.625 billion, Usaha Tegas
3. Tan Sri Lee Shin Cheng, 69, RM 14.943 billion, IOI Group
4. Tan Sri Quek Leng Chan, 65, RM 11.098 billion, Hong Leong Group
5. Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Albukhary, 57, RM 8.550 billion, Albukhary Foundation
6. Tan Sri Teh Hong Piow, 78, RM 8.06 billion, Public Bank
7. Tan Sri Tiong Hiew King, 71, RM 3.87 billion, Rimbunan Hijau
8. Tan Sri Vincent Tan, 56, RM 3.40 billion, Berjaya Group
9. Tan Sri Lim Kok Thay. 56, RM 3.16 billion, Genting Group
10. Tan Sri Azman Hashim, 68, RM 2.87 billion, Arab-Malaysian Corp
11. Datuk Lee Yeow Chor, 42, RM 2.33 billion, IOI Group
12. Lee Yeow Seng, 29, RM 2.29 billion, IOI Group
13. Tan Sri Yeoh Tiong Lay, 78, RM 1.74 billion, YTL Group
14. Ong Beng Seng, 62, RM 1.73 billion, Hotel Properties Ltd
15. Tan Sri Jeffrey Cheah Fook Ling, 62, RM 1.49 billion, Sunway Group
16. Datuk Yaw Teck Seng, 70, RM 1.39 billion, Samling Group
17. Datuk Seri Lee Oi Hian, 58, RM 1.304 billion, Batu Kawan
18. Datuk Lee Hau Hian, 55, RM 1.301 billion, Batu Kawan
19. Tan Sri Francis Yeoh Sock Ping, 54, RM 0.99 billion, YTL Group
20. Datuk Mokhzani Tun Mahathir, 46, RM 0.97 billion, Kencana Petroleum
21. Datuk Yeoh Seok Hong, 49, RM 0.883 billion, YTL Group
22. Datuk Yeoh Seok Kian, 51, RM 0.881 billion, YTL Group
23. Datuk Micheal Yeoh Sock Siong, 48, RM 0.87 billion, YTL Group
24. Datuk Mark Yeoh Seok Kah, 43, RM 0.86 billion, YTL Group
25. Tan Sri Hamdan Mohamad, 52, RM 0.85 billion, Ranhill
26. Raja Datuk Seri Eleena Raja Azlan Shah, 47, RM 0.83 billion, Gamuda
27. Tan Sri Dr Lim Wee Chai, 50, RM 0.78 billion, Top Glove Corp
28. Tan Sri Kua Sian Kooi, 56, RM 0.75 billion, Kurnia Asia
29. Puan Sri Chong Chook Yew, 85, RM 0.71 billion, Selangor Properties
30. Datuk Tony Tiah Thee Kian, 61, RM 0.67 billion, TA Enterprise
31. Datuk Tan Chin Nam, 82, RM 0.61 billion, Tan & Tan
32. Tan Sri Rozali Ismail, 52, RM 0.59 billion, Puncak Niaga Holding
33. Shaari Ismail, 53, RM 0.57 billion, Puncak Niaga Holding
34. Datuk Seri Panglima Lau Cho Kun, 72, RM 0.533 billion, Gek Poh Holdings
35. Datuk Lin Yun Ling, 52, RM 0.532 billion, Gamuda
36. Datuk Seri Liew Kee Sin, 49, RM 0.52 billion, SP Setia
37. Ong Leong Huat, 64, RM 0.50 billion, OSK Holdings
38. Datuk Abdul Hamed Sepawi, 57, RM 0.49 billion, Naim Cendera Holdings
39. Datuk Tony Fernandes, 43, RM 0.47 billion, AirAsia
40. Kwan Ngen Chung, 48, RM 0.40 billion, Kwantas Corp

It tells us one thing why the perak royal family is against the dissolution of the state assembly:
They are dubbed in business that is seriously affected by the economy downturn & they are directly involved in umno linked companies that squeeze dry every drop of the people’s blood & sweet.

What make us think that they will stand together with the ordinary rakyat who voted in the Pakatan state government? No way mate!!

They are umno from dulu kini & selamanya…… No wonder they can by-pass the state constitution just to create a new umno lead state government through dubious means!!! How much more will they squeezee from us, the ordinary rakyat?