Kerajaan Kedah dah buat keputusan menangguhkan pelaksanaan dasar baru perumahan yang menetapkan kuota 50 peratus untuk bumiputera. Berapa lama tak tau. Tapi depa kata sehingga satu garis panduan baru yang lebih jelas dikeluarkan.
Menurut Datuk Ir Phahrolrazi Mohd Zawawi, Exco perumahan (dan…banyak sangat portfolio, tak larat nak tulis), keputusan itu dibuat selepas pihaknya mengadakan perjumpaan serta perbincangan dengan wakil-wakil Pertubuhan Bukan Kerajaan (NGO) dan parti-parti politik pelbagai kaum.
"Tangguh dulu pelaksanaan kuota 50 peratus ini sebab nampak ada pihak tak puas hati dengan dasar ini dan kita akan cari kaedah yang lebih munasabah untuk menyelesaikan masalah ini.
"Kita tak mahu ada yang kata dasar yang dibuat ini, tidak adil dan isu perumahan jadi berlarutan, sebab kuota 50 peratus tu bukan dasar umum, yang beri gambaran seolah-olah semua keadaan tanah mesti ada 50 peratus kuota untuk bumiputera,” katanya.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Corruption is a two-player game
NOV 22 — Malaysians are a funny lot. We’ll rant and rave about institutional corruption yet have no qualms whatsoever partaking in bribery on a personal level. One minute it’s PKFZ this, double-tracking that but the moment we get pulled over by the coppers for any number of the traffic infractions we commit in a day, we see nothing wrong in slipping the guy a RM50 note to “make him go away.”
Sometimes we even take a perverse sense of pride in how “easy” it is to negotiate the pitfalls of our local traffic laws. Many a time, we will proudly declare to foreigners “Malaysia no problem wan, if get caught can settle!” It’s not so much that we even say this, but more the wicked satisfaction with which we tell all and sundry about something that cannot possibly be any source of dignity whatsoever.
“Settle? What do you mean ‘settle’?” is the near-inevitable reply. This is where we not only regale them with tales of rampant corruption but also “teach” them the wily ways to avoid “overpaying.” Some even go as far as giving them a Lonely Planet guide on how much should be offered: “If parking, you offer RM20. If speeding, RM50 can already. Drink-driving, aiyoh, that wan expensive!”
I readily admit that I used to be part of the “everything can settle” crowd. Each time I see flashing blue lights in my rear-view mirror, I make a quick mental note of how much it will cost to pay the fine and adjust my opening gambit to suit. It was just... easier.
One day, however, I snapped. It had been a particularly long day and the country was in some turmoil with the Kampung Medan riots then. I was on my way home when a car runs a red light and nearly T-bones me.
Like all good Malaysians, I offer him a good dose of my extra-loud horn and a quick one-fingered salute, before proceeding straight into a waiting roadblock. Mental check: No bats, knives, swords, guns, or dead bodies in the trunk so I should sail right through this.
Then the man approaching my window drops the bomb of a line: “Encik tadi langgar lampu merah.”
What. The. Fish.
At that point in time, there would have been no possible way for me to hold him in lower esteem. The scum that sticks to the scum that sticks to the scrapings from the bottom of the shoes you throw away would have been a better thing.
I hand him my licence and proceed to close the window. He knocks. I crack it open enough to let in some air. “Dari mana?” he asks, like he gives a toss. “Sana,” I answer as I flick my thumb vaguely in the direction from where I came.
He seems taken aback by the aloofness but soldiers on nonetheless, “Pergi mana?” “Sana,” I say as I casually wave a hand towards where I want to go. I develop a sudden fascination with my radio to avoid having to hurt my eyes looking at him so he wanders off to speak to what looks like his “senior.” Some minutes later, he saunters back.
“Ni kena saman, ni.” There’s so much false concern in his voice for my sudden “misfortune” that I can barely keep my dinner down. So I flash him my biggest, friendliest smile and say: “Ye ke? Kalau kena tu, kenalah, kan?”
That’s not how the script goes and it catches him off guard. He stands there pretending to scribble in his notepad. Before long, he goes to confer with his “senior.” He comes back, knocks on my window, and hands me my licence. Then he says, “Saman tu kita hantar kat rumah.” I give him the same wide smile as I drive off.
From that day on, I vowed never to directly give him and his ilk another single sen. Instead, I just take whatever ticket that’s coming and pay that instead. You’d be surprised, more often than not they don’t even bother writing one when the shakedown has clearly failed.
It’s a simple concept to live by: You do the crime, you pay the fine. Obviously this demands a certain degree of pain and sacrifice on your part in terms of money and time, but is there really any other way to go about it?
People try to bribe their way out of trouble because it’s “easier” but is this any different to the undeserving contractor who offers kickbacks to secure a project he’s not qualified to receive, instead of actually bringing himself to meet the standards actually required or match the prices his competitors offered? Isn’t he just taking the “easy” way out, too?
Corruption also doesn’t happen in isolation; it takes at least two to play. There’s the corruptor and the corrupted. The bribe giver and the bribe seeker. And corruption is corruption, regardless of whether there’s RM50 in it or RM50 million.
So the next time you feel tempted to take the “easy” way out, think hard about what it really means. You may not have had a similarly encouraging experience as mine so I can only implore you to join me in saying no to the corruption that we can. We might not be able to personally do much about the things like PKFZ or frivolous Disneyland trips but we can surely do at least this much.
So, are you going to stay a part of the problem? Or will you choose to be part of the solution?
Sometimes we even take a perverse sense of pride in how “easy” it is to negotiate the pitfalls of our local traffic laws. Many a time, we will proudly declare to foreigners “Malaysia no problem wan, if get caught can settle!” It’s not so much that we even say this, but more the wicked satisfaction with which we tell all and sundry about something that cannot possibly be any source of dignity whatsoever.
“Settle? What do you mean ‘settle’?” is the near-inevitable reply. This is where we not only regale them with tales of rampant corruption but also “teach” them the wily ways to avoid “overpaying.” Some even go as far as giving them a Lonely Planet guide on how much should be offered: “If parking, you offer RM20. If speeding, RM50 can already. Drink-driving, aiyoh, that wan expensive!”
I readily admit that I used to be part of the “everything can settle” crowd. Each time I see flashing blue lights in my rear-view mirror, I make a quick mental note of how much it will cost to pay the fine and adjust my opening gambit to suit. It was just... easier.
One day, however, I snapped. It had been a particularly long day and the country was in some turmoil with the Kampung Medan riots then. I was on my way home when a car runs a red light and nearly T-bones me.
Like all good Malaysians, I offer him a good dose of my extra-loud horn and a quick one-fingered salute, before proceeding straight into a waiting roadblock. Mental check: No bats, knives, swords, guns, or dead bodies in the trunk so I should sail right through this.
Then the man approaching my window drops the bomb of a line: “Encik tadi langgar lampu merah.”
What. The. Fish.
At that point in time, there would have been no possible way for me to hold him in lower esteem. The scum that sticks to the scum that sticks to the scrapings from the bottom of the shoes you throw away would have been a better thing.
I hand him my licence and proceed to close the window. He knocks. I crack it open enough to let in some air. “Dari mana?” he asks, like he gives a toss. “Sana,” I answer as I flick my thumb vaguely in the direction from where I came.
He seems taken aback by the aloofness but soldiers on nonetheless, “Pergi mana?” “Sana,” I say as I casually wave a hand towards where I want to go. I develop a sudden fascination with my radio to avoid having to hurt my eyes looking at him so he wanders off to speak to what looks like his “senior.” Some minutes later, he saunters back.
“Ni kena saman, ni.” There’s so much false concern in his voice for my sudden “misfortune” that I can barely keep my dinner down. So I flash him my biggest, friendliest smile and say: “Ye ke? Kalau kena tu, kenalah, kan?”
That’s not how the script goes and it catches him off guard. He stands there pretending to scribble in his notepad. Before long, he goes to confer with his “senior.” He comes back, knocks on my window, and hands me my licence. Then he says, “Saman tu kita hantar kat rumah.” I give him the same wide smile as I drive off.
From that day on, I vowed never to directly give him and his ilk another single sen. Instead, I just take whatever ticket that’s coming and pay that instead. You’d be surprised, more often than not they don’t even bother writing one when the shakedown has clearly failed.
It’s a simple concept to live by: You do the crime, you pay the fine. Obviously this demands a certain degree of pain and sacrifice on your part in terms of money and time, but is there really any other way to go about it?
People try to bribe their way out of trouble because it’s “easier” but is this any different to the undeserving contractor who offers kickbacks to secure a project he’s not qualified to receive, instead of actually bringing himself to meet the standards actually required or match the prices his competitors offered? Isn’t he just taking the “easy” way out, too?
Corruption also doesn’t happen in isolation; it takes at least two to play. There’s the corruptor and the corrupted. The bribe giver and the bribe seeker. And corruption is corruption, regardless of whether there’s RM50 in it or RM50 million.
So the next time you feel tempted to take the “easy” way out, think hard about what it really means. You may not have had a similarly encouraging experience as mine so I can only implore you to join me in saying no to the corruption that we can. We might not be able to personally do much about the things like PKFZ or frivolous Disneyland trips but we can surely do at least this much.
So, are you going to stay a part of the problem? Or will you choose to be part of the solution?
AI condemns intimidation of lawyers in Malaysia
Sun, Nov 22, 2009
National
PETALING JAYA: Amnesty International is concerned over attempts to intimidate lawyers carrying out their professional duties in Malaysia.
Margaret John, the AI coordinator for Singapore and Malaysia, said the latest attack on the home of prominent lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon illustrated once more the risks faced by Malaysian lawyers protecting the legal rights of government critics.
Last Tuesday evening, several Molotov cocktails were thrown into the house of Manjeet but no one was injured.
Manjeet believed the attack was linked to private investigator P. Balasubramaniam’s recent exposure of an alleged cover-up in the Altantuya affair and the involvement in it of prominent public figures.
Bala made the startling allegations in an interview done last month in the presence of three lawyers, one of whom was Manjeet.
“The incident illustrates once more that lawyers in Malaysia, acting in their professional capacity to protect the legal rights of government critics, are exposed to risks of harassment, threats and worst,” John said in a statement.
Her full statement follows:
“ I have learned that several Molotov cocktails were recently thrown into the home of prominent Malaysian lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon, a former Bar Council President. He said he regarded the attack on his home as a possible warning and threat to him and his family.
“He and his family were fortunately out of the country at the time. The incident illustrates once more that lawyers in Malaysia, acting in their professional capacity to protect the legal rights of government critics, are exposed to risks of harassment, threats or worse.
“Many of you will be aware that Manjeet Singh Dhillon is counsel for (now former) prisoner of conscience Dr Munawar Anees and will know that Dr Anees made a Statutory Declaration during his incarceration a decade ago, in which he detailed the appalling treatment to which he had been subjected in prison. Manjeet has remained his counsel during the numerous court challenges to clear Dr Anees’s name.
“The Molotov cocktail attack is believed to be related to Manjeet Singh Dhillon’s recent interview with private investigator P Balasubramaniam, who had alleged a year ago that Prime MInister Najib Abdul Razak had been sexually involved with murder victim Altantuya Shaariibuu of Mongolia and that police were ordered to remove evidence of any links. Balasubramiam later retracted the allegations and fled.
“Manjeet Singh Dhillon asserted that he conducted the interview (now on Youtube) as a professional duty in the absence of Balasubramaniam’s actual counsel, Americk Sidhu.
“Amnesty International has previously expressed concern about attempts to intimidate lawyers carrying out their professional duties.
“In the most controversial case in Malaysia’s recent history, defence lawyers were harassed and their offices searched during the trial for sodomy a decade ago of former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. At that time, prominent defence lawyer Karpal Singh was arrested under the Sedition Act in connection with remarks he made in court.
“Referring to high levels of arsenic in Anwar’s blood, Karpal Singh expressed in court his concern that “someone out there wants to get rid of him…even to the extent of murder. I suspect that people in high places are responsible for the situation”. Karpal Singh is himself a former prisoner of conscience.
“One of the more recent cases involves five lawyers who were arrested for illegal assembly when they gathered outside a police station where a group of candlelight demonstrators was held. The five lawyers wished to provide legal assistance to detainees.
“A number of international standards guarantees protection for lawyers carrying out their professional duities. These include: UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and the Latimer House guidelines. Such standards, however, do not always provide protection in Malaysia in cases in which there is a link to criticism of the government.”
National
PETALING JAYA: Amnesty International is concerned over attempts to intimidate lawyers carrying out their professional duties in Malaysia.
Margaret John, the AI coordinator for Singapore and Malaysia, said the latest attack on the home of prominent lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon illustrated once more the risks faced by Malaysian lawyers protecting the legal rights of government critics.
Last Tuesday evening, several Molotov cocktails were thrown into the house of Manjeet but no one was injured.
Manjeet believed the attack was linked to private investigator P. Balasubramaniam’s recent exposure of an alleged cover-up in the Altantuya affair and the involvement in it of prominent public figures.
Bala made the startling allegations in an interview done last month in the presence of three lawyers, one of whom was Manjeet.
“The incident illustrates once more that lawyers in Malaysia, acting in their professional capacity to protect the legal rights of government critics, are exposed to risks of harassment, threats and worst,” John said in a statement.
Her full statement follows:
“ I have learned that several Molotov cocktails were recently thrown into the home of prominent Malaysian lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon, a former Bar Council President. He said he regarded the attack on his home as a possible warning and threat to him and his family.
“He and his family were fortunately out of the country at the time. The incident illustrates once more that lawyers in Malaysia, acting in their professional capacity to protect the legal rights of government critics, are exposed to risks of harassment, threats or worse.
“Many of you will be aware that Manjeet Singh Dhillon is counsel for (now former) prisoner of conscience Dr Munawar Anees and will know that Dr Anees made a Statutory Declaration during his incarceration a decade ago, in which he detailed the appalling treatment to which he had been subjected in prison. Manjeet has remained his counsel during the numerous court challenges to clear Dr Anees’s name.
“The Molotov cocktail attack is believed to be related to Manjeet Singh Dhillon’s recent interview with private investigator P Balasubramaniam, who had alleged a year ago that Prime MInister Najib Abdul Razak had been sexually involved with murder victim Altantuya Shaariibuu of Mongolia and that police were ordered to remove evidence of any links. Balasubramiam later retracted the allegations and fled.
“Manjeet Singh Dhillon asserted that he conducted the interview (now on Youtube) as a professional duty in the absence of Balasubramaniam’s actual counsel, Americk Sidhu.
“Amnesty International has previously expressed concern about attempts to intimidate lawyers carrying out their professional duties.
“In the most controversial case in Malaysia’s recent history, defence lawyers were harassed and their offices searched during the trial for sodomy a decade ago of former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. At that time, prominent defence lawyer Karpal Singh was arrested under the Sedition Act in connection with remarks he made in court.
“Referring to high levels of arsenic in Anwar’s blood, Karpal Singh expressed in court his concern that “someone out there wants to get rid of him…even to the extent of murder. I suspect that people in high places are responsible for the situation”. Karpal Singh is himself a former prisoner of conscience.
“One of the more recent cases involves five lawyers who were arrested for illegal assembly when they gathered outside a police station where a group of candlelight demonstrators was held. The five lawyers wished to provide legal assistance to detainees.
“A number of international standards guarantees protection for lawyers carrying out their professional duities. These include: UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and the Latimer House guidelines. Such standards, however, do not always provide protection in Malaysia in cases in which there is a link to criticism of the government.”
Court ruling takes bite out of local council summonses
(The Star) KUALA LUMPUR: If you have been issued local government summonses for illegal parking, not displaying a valid parking ticket, open burning or not having a dog licence, can you just throw them away?
Yes, you may be able to get away with it, going by a recent High Court ruling in a landmark case which stated that local councils did not have the right to prosecute anyone as such a prosecution would contravene the Federal Constitution.
What is common hearsay — that tickets issued by local councils have no legal bite — has been proven in a case in the sleepy hollow of Lanchang, Pahang.
Little man’s big win: Subramaniam showing the court order as his wife hugs him outside their shop in Lanchang, Pahang. The High Court ruled that the local council has no right to prosecute him for not obeying its order to move his fish and vegetable business. — AZHAR MAHFOF / The Star.
Mini-market owner Subramaniam Gopal, 50, defied the orders of the Lanchang Temerloh Municipal Council to move his fish and vegetable business to the new council market and was taken to court on four charges of operating his business — the GSM Mini Market — on Jalan Besar Lanchang, without a valid licence.
Temerloh High Court Judicial Commissioner Akhtar Tahir overturned a magistrate court’s ruling and said that if anyone was going to prosecute Subramaniam, it should be the Attorney-General. Judge Akhtar then ordered that Subramaniam be given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal.
Does this mean that members of the public can throw away summonses and not fear legal reprisal?
“Considering that the High Court declared Section 120 of the LGA unconstitutional, it would appear that there is no power to prosecute,” said lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar.
Lawyer Derek Fernandez, however, said it is better not to ignore the summons because a warrant of arrest could be issued against the offender if he is not in court when his case is called.
Father of two David J said he had often heard that one need not pay local council summons, unlike traffic police summons, and had not paid for many of them.
Yes, you may be able to get away with it, going by a recent High Court ruling in a landmark case which stated that local councils did not have the right to prosecute anyone as such a prosecution would contravene the Federal Constitution.
What is common hearsay — that tickets issued by local councils have no legal bite — has been proven in a case in the sleepy hollow of Lanchang, Pahang.
Little man’s big win: Subramaniam showing the court order as his wife hugs him outside their shop in Lanchang, Pahang. The High Court ruled that the local council has no right to prosecute him for not obeying its order to move his fish and vegetable business. — AZHAR MAHFOF / The Star.
Mini-market owner Subramaniam Gopal, 50, defied the orders of the Lanchang Temerloh Municipal Council to move his fish and vegetable business to the new council market and was taken to court on four charges of operating his business — the GSM Mini Market — on Jalan Besar Lanchang, without a valid licence.
Temerloh High Court Judicial Commissioner Akhtar Tahir overturned a magistrate court’s ruling and said that if anyone was going to prosecute Subramaniam, it should be the Attorney-General. Judge Akhtar then ordered that Subramaniam be given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal.
Does this mean that members of the public can throw away summonses and not fear legal reprisal?
“Considering that the High Court declared Section 120 of the LGA unconstitutional, it would appear that there is no power to prosecute,” said lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar.
Lawyer Derek Fernandez, however, said it is better not to ignore the summons because a warrant of arrest could be issued against the offender if he is not in court when his case is called.
Father of two David J said he had often heard that one need not pay local council summons, unlike traffic police summons, and had not paid for many of them.
What the Greater Unity Plan involved and implies
By Thomas Lee
(1) Ignoring and dismissing the majority will of the party central delegates in wanting to remove the top two leaders by claiming that they lack the two-third vote to effect the dismissal, but not acepting the fact that the top two lack the support of more than half of the grassroots delegates.
(2) The coming together of the two former enemies for the sole purpose of retaining power despite losing massive support from the grassroots members. One leader is a shameless person who has no intergrity and lost all credibility when he reneged on his pledge that he will resign even if he lost by a vote but shamelessly stays on and becoming the laughing stock of the country. Another leader has a soiled reputation with his immoral behaviour the subject of ridicule and derision among the people, bringing disrepute to the party.
(3) The sacking of appointed central committee members who hold dissenting views and/or who want the double-ten EGM decision of grassroots delegates respected and implemented. The irony of the so-called "Greater Unity" Plan involves the chopping of heads, casuing further disunity and alienation among the party leaders and members. The hypocrisy of the whole fiasco has make the party the height of folly and mockery in the public eyes.
(4) The appointment of a young and immature political greenhorn and unfamiliar party lightweight, who is a son of the soiled leader, into the central committee as part of the horse-trading for "peace" reflects the immorality of the whole party power play. The fate and interest of the party have been made bargaining chips for the selfish personal agenda of two power-crazy individuals. Why is there no comment on this crony appointment by the party members?
(5) The removal of the women chief and youth leader from their legitimate positions as members of the presidential council is the height of authoritarian power practice as both are ex-officio vice-presidents. The derogatory and demeaning treatment of these two elected leaders is further debased by the appointment of their subordinates in their place. Such a detestable action, semblable to the fascism of the tyrannical rule of Hitler, by a dictatorial president cannot be ignored and tolerated by the grassroots members.
(6) The interference and intervention of power forces from outside the party to effect the so-called Greater Unity Plan have shown the party to be a mere powerless puppet, a castrated political eunuch, in the national political arena and, hence, not worthy of support by the community it purportedly represents. The party has lost face and it will never recover from this current shameful episode. The beginning of the end of the party has started and the momentum of its dismantle is gaining strength, and the next general election will be its funeral and burial.
Quo vadis, MCA?
(1) Ignoring and dismissing the majority will of the party central delegates in wanting to remove the top two leaders by claiming that they lack the two-third vote to effect the dismissal, but not acepting the fact that the top two lack the support of more than half of the grassroots delegates.
(2) The coming together of the two former enemies for the sole purpose of retaining power despite losing massive support from the grassroots members. One leader is a shameless person who has no intergrity and lost all credibility when he reneged on his pledge that he will resign even if he lost by a vote but shamelessly stays on and becoming the laughing stock of the country. Another leader has a soiled reputation with his immoral behaviour the subject of ridicule and derision among the people, bringing disrepute to the party.
(3) The sacking of appointed central committee members who hold dissenting views and/or who want the double-ten EGM decision of grassroots delegates respected and implemented. The irony of the so-called "Greater Unity" Plan involves the chopping of heads, casuing further disunity and alienation among the party leaders and members. The hypocrisy of the whole fiasco has make the party the height of folly and mockery in the public eyes.
(4) The appointment of a young and immature political greenhorn and unfamiliar party lightweight, who is a son of the soiled leader, into the central committee as part of the horse-trading for "peace" reflects the immorality of the whole party power play. The fate and interest of the party have been made bargaining chips for the selfish personal agenda of two power-crazy individuals. Why is there no comment on this crony appointment by the party members?
(5) The removal of the women chief and youth leader from their legitimate positions as members of the presidential council is the height of authoritarian power practice as both are ex-officio vice-presidents. The derogatory and demeaning treatment of these two elected leaders is further debased by the appointment of their subordinates in their place. Such a detestable action, semblable to the fascism of the tyrannical rule of Hitler, by a dictatorial president cannot be ignored and tolerated by the grassroots members.
(6) The interference and intervention of power forces from outside the party to effect the so-called Greater Unity Plan have shown the party to be a mere powerless puppet, a castrated political eunuch, in the national political arena and, hence, not worthy of support by the community it purportedly represents. The party has lost face and it will never recover from this current shameful episode. The beginning of the end of the party has started and the momentum of its dismantle is gaining strength, and the next general election will be its funeral and burial.
Quo vadis, MCA?
IMAGINE...
...a democratic malaysia: commentaries and reflections by g. krishnan
Sunday, November 22, 2009
It Wasn't Fish Head Curry, It Was Bah Kut Teh, la
So, on the evening of 3rd July 2008 Bala did not go out for fish head curry with ASP Tonny after all. Well, I’m glad that’s been cleared up for us all; not to mention all the other details and missing pieces of the Bala saga that unfolded following his first statutory declaration.
So it’s been cleared up for us now that ASP Tonny wanted to actually get together with Bala at an ikan bakar joint, and this too did not materialise. Bala ended up with one ASP Suresh character and they were having bah kut teh when things began to really happen and Bala’s life takes a dramatic turn as his path crosses with some of the other characters. Well, I’m sure you must have read the transcript of Bala’s interview since he resurfaced again.
I’m glad the confusion about fish head curry, ikan bakar, and bah kut teh has now been cleared up. I suppose it’s understandable how we might have thought it was fish head curry as that was his lawyer’s understanding that Bala was meeting ASP Tonny when Bala left the lawyer's office. This was just before Bala ended-up in a deeper political web than he could have ever imagined, and before he was plunged into an abyss.
And I tell you I believe him when he says it was bah kut teh that he had that evening and not ikan bakar or fish head curry. And you know something else? I also believe his account of what transpired the hours, days, weeks, and subsequent months. Is it possible that there may be some details in his account that are not absolutely accurate as he recounted them in his recent interview?
Of course in recounting everything about one’s life over the past several months, you should be understandably forgiven if you, for example, could not exactly remember what time it was when such-and-such a person called you or met you in the lobby of a hotel or some such thing. And given Bala’s account, we’re of course free to draw our own conclusions.
For me, while I have several reasons to think he’s recounting events and incidents that actually did happen, the main reason why I find him believable is because he has spelled out so many specific encounters about people his path crossed with, places, and meetings he had with individuals that if any major aspect of his account was untrue, he would be in an even much deeper mess. And I’m inclined to think he – and his lawyer - understands this very well. After all, it would not take much for any investigation to verify flights on which he traveled the hotels he stayed in, and such. And Bala being a PI knows that better than anyone, so he can ill afford his story to be a fabrication.
And given the deafening silence from the other relevant parties in this saga, well, this just speaks volumes for me. But this latter point notwithstanding, what we might also consider is that if Bala’s first SD was untrue, he would have been especially concerned for his and his family’s safety after having made that first SD and sought to go underground immediately. Instead, he did not!
On the contrary, he only disappeared after the second SD, after supposedly recanting what he said in the first SD. If he had actually disappeared and left the country on his own will – and not been forced or intimidated to do so – he would have done so after the first SD. The fact that he disappears only after supposedly willingly and freely making the second SD – one that was favourable to the political establishment – and then disappears, does not make any sense.
Essentially, the mainstream media would expect me to believe that Bala stuck around after making damning claims in the first SD, when he might have most vulnerable to intense scrutiny from the establishment. And further, he stuck around to retract his first SD and, after having removed the cloud over some high profile politician and his inner circle, then felt like his life and the lives of his family members would be in grave danger? In fact, I would have thought if the second SD was true, rather than going underground, Bala's supposed new lawyer who was with him at the news conference for the second SD would have been glowing and beaming - along with Bala - that perhaps he'd be rewarded with a Datukship!
But instead, Bala goes missing after the second SD?
For me, all this is very sound reasoning indeed to suggest that, as the saying goes, where there’s smoke…there’s fire.
Well, guess what? I’m feeling the urge for some bah kut teh myself, so I’m off.
G. Krishnan
...a democratic malaysia: commentaries and reflections by g. krishnan
Sunday, November 22, 2009
It Wasn't Fish Head Curry, It Was Bah Kut Teh, la
So, on the evening of 3rd July 2008 Bala did not go out for fish head curry with ASP Tonny after all. Well, I’m glad that’s been cleared up for us all; not to mention all the other details and missing pieces of the Bala saga that unfolded following his first statutory declaration.
So it’s been cleared up for us now that ASP Tonny wanted to actually get together with Bala at an ikan bakar joint, and this too did not materialise. Bala ended up with one ASP Suresh character and they were having bah kut teh when things began to really happen and Bala’s life takes a dramatic turn as his path crosses with some of the other characters. Well, I’m sure you must have read the transcript of Bala’s interview since he resurfaced again.
I’m glad the confusion about fish head curry, ikan bakar, and bah kut teh has now been cleared up. I suppose it’s understandable how we might have thought it was fish head curry as that was his lawyer’s understanding that Bala was meeting ASP Tonny when Bala left the lawyer's office. This was just before Bala ended-up in a deeper political web than he could have ever imagined, and before he was plunged into an abyss.
And I tell you I believe him when he says it was bah kut teh that he had that evening and not ikan bakar or fish head curry. And you know something else? I also believe his account of what transpired the hours, days, weeks, and subsequent months. Is it possible that there may be some details in his account that are not absolutely accurate as he recounted them in his recent interview?
Of course in recounting everything about one’s life over the past several months, you should be understandably forgiven if you, for example, could not exactly remember what time it was when such-and-such a person called you or met you in the lobby of a hotel or some such thing. And given Bala’s account, we’re of course free to draw our own conclusions.
For me, while I have several reasons to think he’s recounting events and incidents that actually did happen, the main reason why I find him believable is because he has spelled out so many specific encounters about people his path crossed with, places, and meetings he had with individuals that if any major aspect of his account was untrue, he would be in an even much deeper mess. And I’m inclined to think he – and his lawyer - understands this very well. After all, it would not take much for any investigation to verify flights on which he traveled the hotels he stayed in, and such. And Bala being a PI knows that better than anyone, so he can ill afford his story to be a fabrication.
And given the deafening silence from the other relevant parties in this saga, well, this just speaks volumes for me. But this latter point notwithstanding, what we might also consider is that if Bala’s first SD was untrue, he would have been especially concerned for his and his family’s safety after having made that first SD and sought to go underground immediately. Instead, he did not!
On the contrary, he only disappeared after the second SD, after supposedly recanting what he said in the first SD. If he had actually disappeared and left the country on his own will – and not been forced or intimidated to do so – he would have done so after the first SD. The fact that he disappears only after supposedly willingly and freely making the second SD – one that was favourable to the political establishment – and then disappears, does not make any sense.
Essentially, the mainstream media would expect me to believe that Bala stuck around after making damning claims in the first SD, when he might have most vulnerable to intense scrutiny from the establishment. And further, he stuck around to retract his first SD and, after having removed the cloud over some high profile politician and his inner circle, then felt like his life and the lives of his family members would be in grave danger? In fact, I would have thought if the second SD was true, rather than going underground, Bala's supposed new lawyer who was with him at the news conference for the second SD would have been glowing and beaming - along with Bala - that perhaps he'd be rewarded with a Datukship!
But instead, Bala goes missing after the second SD?
For me, all this is very sound reasoning indeed to suggest that, as the saying goes, where there’s smoke…there’s fire.
Well, guess what? I’m feeling the urge for some bah kut teh myself, so I’m off.
G. Krishnan
Nik Aziz kesal penangkapan Dr Asri E-mail
Written by Azhar
KOTA BHARU, 3 Nov: Menteri Besar Kelantan, Tuan Guru Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, melahirkan rasa dukacita di atas penangkapan yang dilakukan ke atas bekas Mufti Perlis, Dr Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin.
Ketika dihubungi Harakahdaily beliau berkata, tindakan berkenaan amat tidak wajar dilakukan ke atas seorang pendakwah apa lagi kesalahannya belum dapat dipastikan.
Beliau berkata demikian ketika mengulas insiden tangkapan yang berlaku ke atas pendakwah berkenaan malam tadi ketika menyampaikan kuliah agama di Taman Sri Ukay, Kuala Lumpur.
Tuan Guru yang juga Mursyidul Am PAS itu juga mengngagap ia satu tindakan yang melampau kerana menangkap seorang tokoh agama yang juga bekas mufti.
"Penangkapan itu amat tidak masuk akal, masih ramai lagi orang yang patut ditangkap, tetapi kenapa seorang pendakwah, dia mengajar agama dan bukannya buat huru hara atau melakukan sesuatu yang bertentangan dengan agama,"ujarnya lagi
Nik Aziz berkata walaupun ada pihak mendakwa Dr Mohd Asri menyebarkan ajaran Wahabbi, ia perlu diperhalusi terlebih dahulu bagi memastikan ia benar-benar salah di sisi undang-undang.
"Nasihat saya kepada Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS), jangan buat untuk kali kedua kerana akan merosakkan imej Islam di Malaysia dan seterusnya merosakkan imej golongan pendakwah itu sendiri," katanya.
Beliau meletakkan masaalah itu seharusnya dibincang terlebih dahulu antara Asri dengan JAIS dan bukannya terus menangkap tanpa pasti kesalahannya.
Katanya, kalau benar dia telah melakukan kesalahan di sisi undang-undang, barulah tindakan diambil terhadapnya dan bukannya menangkap begitu sahaja tanpa mengetahui hujung pangkalnya.
"Masyarakat juga menjadi keliru dengan kejadian itu," ujarnya lagi
Written by Azhar
KOTA BHARU, 3 Nov: Menteri Besar Kelantan, Tuan Guru Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, melahirkan rasa dukacita di atas penangkapan yang dilakukan ke atas bekas Mufti Perlis, Dr Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin.
Ketika dihubungi Harakahdaily beliau berkata, tindakan berkenaan amat tidak wajar dilakukan ke atas seorang pendakwah apa lagi kesalahannya belum dapat dipastikan.
Beliau berkata demikian ketika mengulas insiden tangkapan yang berlaku ke atas pendakwah berkenaan malam tadi ketika menyampaikan kuliah agama di Taman Sri Ukay, Kuala Lumpur.
Tuan Guru yang juga Mursyidul Am PAS itu juga mengngagap ia satu tindakan yang melampau kerana menangkap seorang tokoh agama yang juga bekas mufti.
"Penangkapan itu amat tidak masuk akal, masih ramai lagi orang yang patut ditangkap, tetapi kenapa seorang pendakwah, dia mengajar agama dan bukannya buat huru hara atau melakukan sesuatu yang bertentangan dengan agama,"ujarnya lagi
Nik Aziz berkata walaupun ada pihak mendakwa Dr Mohd Asri menyebarkan ajaran Wahabbi, ia perlu diperhalusi terlebih dahulu bagi memastikan ia benar-benar salah di sisi undang-undang.
"Nasihat saya kepada Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS), jangan buat untuk kali kedua kerana akan merosakkan imej Islam di Malaysia dan seterusnya merosakkan imej golongan pendakwah itu sendiri," katanya.
Beliau meletakkan masaalah itu seharusnya dibincang terlebih dahulu antara Asri dengan JAIS dan bukannya terus menangkap tanpa pasti kesalahannya.
Katanya, kalau benar dia telah melakukan kesalahan di sisi undang-undang, barulah tindakan diambil terhadapnya dan bukannya menangkap begitu sahaja tanpa mengetahui hujung pangkalnya.
"Masyarakat juga menjadi keliru dengan kejadian itu," ujarnya lagi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)