Category: Politics


Caught In Action – Aksi Terlampau Perusuh Bersih 3.0!!

Source: novandri.blogspot.com

Advertisements

KUALA LUMPUR, 30 April – The time has come for the political and NGO factions in the country to move on from the aftermath of Bersih 3.0 and face the real issues surrounding the forthcoming 13th general election.

Bersih 3.0 can be seen as a win-win situation for both the opposition grouping under Pakatan Rakyat (PR) and the ruling BN government. The BN government headed by prime minister Najib Tun Razak for the first time displayed its true resolve in allowing a peaceful assembly in line with the latest statutory reforms it has introduced in the country. The government even offered four alternatives to Bersih organisers to hold their peaceful sit in protest.

The only contention of the BN government was that it cannot allow the peaceful protest to be held at the chosen venue, Dataran Merdeka, because of security reasons and the refusal by the owners Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur. However, the Bersih organisers refused to budge from their stand although they could have easily accepted the alternative venues which were much larger and equally centrally located such as Stadium Merdeka.

 Even in western nations where protests and peaceful gatherings are the norm of the day, the police usually will have the final say on the location of such protests and the street venues for rallies, taking into consideration factors such as security measures and inconvenience to public.

Until the end, the government never said ‘NO’ to the Bersih sit in and never banned bersih movement as in previous occasions. They only said that the sit in protest cannot be held in Dataran Merdeka. This is a far cry from previous BN administrations when such rallies and assemblies were banned right from the beginning.

Such liberal moves by the BN government have displayed its resolve and will in seeing political and democratic changes in the country and shows the people that the BN government is prepared to listen to the voices of public and is prepared to amend its ways accordingly.

Opposition’s attempt to derail Najib’s reforms

It is clear that right from beginning Bersih 3.0 was hijacked by opposition parties and the Bersih organisers headed by Datuk Ambiga Seenivasan were clearly exploited by the opposition leaders. Needless to say Bersih 3.0 could not have gathered such a large number people without the backing of the opposition parties.

In this context, it is clear that Bersih 3.0 is another attempt by the opposition Pakatan Rakyat to derail the reforms plans put in place by prime minister Najib Tun Razak, fearing that it could spoil their chances to capture Putrajaya.

Najib has systematically introduced or amended various laws to pave way for democratic reforms and for the people to have more freedoms. This change of approach by the BN government is clearly winning praises from the people and the opposition expects this dramatic change of approach by the BN government to win more votes for BN.

Therefore, Bersih 3.0 comes in at a time to reduce the impact of Najib’s reforms and to tarnish the image of BN government and to show that there is no freedom of assembly as in fact promised.

However, the opposition has fallen into its own trap, looking at the violent incidents that took place during Bersih rally which were clearly in violation of our laws. The incidents have shown the country that the true intention of the rally was to cause problems by provoking the police so that the organizers could next ride on issues such as police high handedness and brutality.

The people who gathered were not sitting down to protest but in fact were only interested in breaking the police barriers to enter into Dataran Merdeka. The crowd could have easily sat down at the spots where they gathered to show their intention of the assembly but they did not do this.

Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyideen Yassin has also accused Ambiga Seenivasan for stoking tensions and provoking such untoward incidents and has warned that Ambiga should be held responsible for what happened. Ambiga now seems to have been trapped into opposition’s game plan and political ploy.

Opposition strength

At the same time the mammoth Bersih 3.0 rally, estimated to have attracted between 50,000 to 100,000 people has also shown that the opposition is not to be underestimated and still has the strength and support to amass such a huge gathering despite court orders and the police cordoning of roads leading to Dataran Merdeka.

Two messages have been clearly conveyed by the participants of Bersih 3.0. First is their unhappiness about the electoral reforms and the role of the election commission. Second is the Lynas Plant issue, to which there were many opposing placards and banners. Showing such displeasure to a project in a rally called primarily in support of electoral reforms is something the government should take note of and react.

The time has come for the government to seriously review the Lynas issue and make the necessary decisions however difficult it may be. If not, Lynas could crystallize into a major set-back for the government and the issue may over-shadow other convincing reforms the BN government is embarking upon.

Bersih 3.0 could not have succeeded without the support from the opposition parties within Pakatan. Therefore, Bersih 3.0 has also displayed the might of opposition and that it is still intact and enjoys the support of a sizable population.

Therefore, it is an eye-opener for the BN government not to take things for granted. The BN government should seriously consider expediting electoral reforms to meet the aspirations and expectations of the people, failing which the unhappiness of the people towards electoral reforms would be translated into votes against BN candidates in the forthcoming GE – 13.

Source: http://www.themalaysiantimes.com.my

KUALA LUMPUR, 28 April 2012 – The Bersih 3.0 which ended today can be termed as a win-win situation for both the opposition grouping under Pakatan Rakyat (PR) and the ruling BN government.

 The BN government headed by prime minister Najib Tun Razak for the first time displayed its true resolve in allowing a peaceful assembly in line with the latest statutory reforms it has introduced in the country. The government even offered four alternatives to Bersih organizers to hold their peaceful sit in protest.

The only contention of the BN government was that it cannot allow the peaceful protest to be held at the chosen venue, Dataran Merdeka, because of security reasons and the refusal by the owners Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur. However, the Bersih organizers refused to budge from their stand although they could have easily accepted the alternative venues which were much larger and equally centrally located such as Stadium Merdeka. Even in western nations where protests and peaceful gatherings are the norm of the day, the police usually will have the final say on the location of such protests and the street venues for rallies.

Until the end, the government never said ‘NO’ to the Bersih sit in and never banned bersih movement as in previous occasions. They only said that the sit in protest cannot be held in Dataran Merdeka. This is a far cry from previous BN administrations when such rallies and assemblies were banned right from the beginning.

Such liberal moves by the BN government have displayed its resolve and will in seeing political and democratic changes in the country and shows the people that the BN government is prepared to listen to the voices of public and is prepared to amend its ways accordingly.

Opposition strength

At the same time the mammoth Bersih 3.0 rally, estimated to have attracted between 50,000 to 100,000 people has also shown that the opposition is not to be underestimated and still has the strength and support to amass such a huge gathering despite court orders and the police cordoning of roads leading to Dataran Merdeka.

Two messages are clear the participants of Bersih 3.0. First is their unhappiness about the electoral reforms and the role of the election commission. Second is the Lynas Plant issue, to which there were many opposing placards and banners. Showing such displeasure to a project in a rally called primarily in support of electoral reforms is something the government should take note of and react.

The time has come for the government to seriously review the Lynas issue and make the necessary decisions however difficult it may be. If not, Lynas could crystallize into a major set-back for the government and the issue may over- shadow other convincing reforms the BN government is embarking upon.

Bersih 3.0 could not have succeeded without the support from the opposition parties within Pakatan. Therefore, Bersih 3.0 has also displayed the might of opposition and that it is still intact and enjoys the support of a sizable population.

Therefore, it is an eye-opener for the BN government not to take things for granted. The BN government should seriously consider expediting electoral reforms to meet the aspirations and expectations of the people, failing which the unhappiness of the people would be translated into votes against BN candidates in the forthcoming GE – 13.

Source: http://www.themalaysiantimes.com.my

They talk about righteousness, principles and accountability.

They talk about holiness.

Well, Azmin is just following the footsteps of his Boss! Talk about sucking up to Anwar Ibrahim!

Source: http://stopthelies.my

Source: http://stopthelies.my/

S.Nallakaruppan, Muhammad Shafee Abdullah & Shamsidar Taharin

A sex video involving sex addict Anwar Ibrahim and Shamsidar Taharin, the wife of PKR leader Azmin Ali, is set to explode the nation.

The sex video, which is said to show Anwar and Shamsidar having oral sex, has become the hottest topic in the city.

The video tape was handed by S.Nallakaruppan – who is facing a RM100million suit filed against him by Anwar – just hours ago to his lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah in the presence of reporters.

He told his lawyer at the Kuala Lumpur court complex to “take care of this properly” and handed over the tape in a sealed brown envelope.

Nalakaruppan said he would reveal the content of the video in open court but when pressed by the reporters what the video showed, he said:  “Ice cream.”

The extra marital relationship between Anwar and Shamsidar has long been openly talked about.

Azmin has been accused of “sacrificing” his wife to gain the affection of Anwar and has never denied the ties between his wife and Anwar, except to describe such talk as gutter politics.

Well, we can expect fans of Anwar to dismiss the video as another impersonation of Anwar but surely it’s difficult getting another Shamsidar look-alike, wouldn’t you say?

Well, there will be more videos coming this way soon. Watch this space! You need plenty of popcorns because the videos are piling up!

Source: http://stopthelies.my

STAR Land Reforms Masterplan – NCR First, Sabah Land for Sabahans First

The purpose of this Press Conference is to announce the LAND AND NCR REFORMS MASTERPLAN of STAR Sabah and the relevant portion of the STATE ADMINISTRATION REFORMS related to land administration which forms part of the Land and NCR Masterplan.

“Under its Land and NCR Reforms Masterplan, STAR will respect and restore the rights of natives to NCR and native lands and prioritize land for all Sabahans based on its policy and vision “NCR FIRST, SABAH LAND FOR SABAHANS FIRST”.

The Land and NCR Reforms Masterplan has 3 key objectives:-

(1) Reforms of the laws and administration relating to land and NCR;

(2) A more effective and efficient land administration and management;

(3) Resolution of land and NCR problems.

The reforms of the land and NCR laws will involve:-

(a) Unequivocal and clear recognition of NCR;

(b) For other lands, Sabahans will be given priority;

(c) Native land rights will be uplifted, strengthened and protected in particular:-

(i) A Demographic Mapping will be undertaken to identify and confirm native rights, NCR, land occupation and population;

(ii) Category of land use in Native Titles (NT) will be extended to include commercial, industrial and other uses and not just restricted to agricultural use.

(d) The establishment of SABAH LAND AND NCR COMMISSION;

(e) The establishment of SABAH NATIVE LAND FOUNDATION;

(f) The establishment of SABAH LAND TRIBUNAL;

(g) The de-centralization of land administration from central-based to region-based.

The Land and NCR Commission will be tasked with implementing and managing a NEW LAND POLICY incorporating the Masterplan and recognizing and prioritizing NCR and native rights and prioritizing Sabah’s land for Sabahans first.

The Commission will be responsible for the supervision of the land administration in the State where power and authority will not be concentrated in the hands of one person only. In the present system, the authority and decision of the Director in alienating lands to anyone under Section 9 of the Land Ordinance cannot even be appealed as provided in Section 41.

Under the new Land Policy, NCR will be recognized first in land alienation after which Sabahans will be accorded priority. The present policy of the State Government in failing to recognize NCR and alienating land to companies against existing original settlers will be abolished.

The Director of Land recently disclosed that out of 2.1 million hectares of land available for alienation, the State had already alienated about 1.9 million hectares of which only 31% was alienated to natives and the other 69% to others. It is wrong for the Government not to give priority to natives and Sabahans in land alienation.

This Land Policy will put a stop to the current land and NCR disputes where companies are given vast tracts of tens of thousands of acres leading to destruction of plants and crops of the original settlers and the destruction of homes and eviction of natives will be stopped.

The following policies on land alienation will be adopted:-

(a) Native rights under NCR will be recognized first;

(b) For non-NCR lands, priority will be given to Sabahans;

(c) Land will only be rented or leased to the federal government or federal agencies and land ownership will be retained by the State in perpetuity;

(d) For lands alienated for agricultural purpose on commercial basis will be required to include a 30% of the land area to be developed and owned by the Sabah Natives (Land) Foundation with provision for reimbursement of the development costs;

(e) The process of renewal of leases will be simplified and approved based on semi-automatic renewal basis and all 999-year leases will be given a same leasehold period upon conversion and not new 99-year leasehold titles;

(f) A periodical 10-15 years review of land premiums will be considered.

A new system of recognition of NCR claims and owners will be adopted. The current process of making natives claiming NCR via a land application (LA) or “permohonan tanah” (PT) will be changed as it may not be correct.

Natives should not be made to “apply for land” where the issue is whether they are the legitimate NCR owners which will be determined by a new NCR Land Process (NLP).

NCR ownership and claims will be determined via the NLP with a client charter of resolution by the NLP in 6 months for normal cases and 12 months for complicated cases.

As for the land administration reforms, they will include:-

(1) The establishment of the Land and NCR Commission as explained above;

(2) Land Administration will be handled through 3 Departments;

(3) The Land and Survey Department will be split into 2 Departments, namely:-

(a) Land Department;

(b) Survey and Mapping Department;

(4) A 3rd Department related to land matters, namely, VALUATION AND PROPERTY SERVICES DEPARTMENT will also come under the purview of the Commission;

(5) The Land Department will be responsible for land matters and collection of land revenues and other associated matters not specifically provided by other Departments or Authorities or Agencies;

(6) Land administration under the Land Department will be de-centralized with a Headquarters headed by a Director General who will also be the State Collector of Land Revenue (State CLR) and 5 Regional centres headed by a Regional Director cum Regional CLR each and Assistant CLRs in the Districts and Sub-districts;

(7) The Survey and Mapping Department will be responsible for survey, mapping and other related services;

(8) The Survey and Mapping Department will be entrusted with a State Demographic Mapping exercise which will identify and confirm the existence of native rights and NCR as well as to identify and determine the location of all residents. This task is also part of a Homeland Security, Immigration and Registration Masterplan to be announced;

(9) The Valuation and Property Services Department will be responsible for property valuation services, administration of land and properties of the State and other land and property related services.

Land Administration will be administered as in the Chart below:-

The objective of the Land and NCR Commission will be to take charge, streamline and oversee land administration in Sabah and to resolve all land issues, problems and related matters.

The responsibilities of the Commission include:-

(1) To formulate the new Land Policy and other land policies from time to time;

(2) To review and recommend law reforms pertaining to land, NCR and land administration;

(3) To oversee the Land, Survey and Mapping and Valuation and Property Services Departments;

(4) To act as the bridge between the 3 Departments and the rakyat and clients including the handling of public complaints;

(5) To work with the Land Tribunal and assistance towards resolution of land disputes and problems;

(6) Review and recommend changes to land premiums and land revenues.

Amongst the new policies to be adopted under the new land laws will be:-

(1) Safeguards for the rights of natives, NCR and native lands;

(2) Native lands and native titles will not just be confined to agriculture use only but also commercial, industrial and other uses;

(3) “Native Land Reserves” will be established in every Administrative Region for the benefit of future generations;

(4) There will be no alienation of land to Federal Agencies or Agencies from other States;

(5) There will be a review of all lands alienated to Federal Agencies or Agencies from other States for agriculture purposes:

(6) Federal Agropolitan and other agriculture projects will not be granted land rights which will be reserved for qualified natives and other Sabahans only;

(7) The issuance of Communal Titles will be reviewed together with existing policies on land, forest reserves and NCR;

(8) Alienation of lands to non-Sabahans may be subject to development of certain percentage of the land for natives and Sabahans;

(9) All existing land applications will be reviewed and resolved with a targeted resolution of 50% of the cases within a period of 2 years;

(10) There will be a review of all court cases involving alienation of land, NCR and forest reserves as well as all lands alienated in breach of NCR.

(11) Updating the system and knowledge of land administration and land officers with Sabah land laws without interferences of land administration in Peninsular where the land laws are different where NCR and customary lands do not exist.

On the issue of communal titles, the State administration should re-consider the issuance of communal titles and not merely rush through the process and give out communal titles

without considering the NCR claims of legitimate NCR owners who may been legal owners for several generations and which their applications have been pending for years, some even decades. Where applicable NCR titles should be issued to these NCR owners before blanket cancellation of their NCR ownership through the issuance of new communal titles over the NCR lands and NCR applications.

The rights of the owners of the communal titles should be considered first and not “robbed” through the imposition of trustees or third-parties who make decisions as though they are the owners when the natives are the legitimate owners of the communal title. If the State administration is looking to protect rights of the natives and prevent sale, there are many better alternatives such as only transfers through succession only or to family and related persons.

The sudden rush-job of issuing communal titles can only be interpreted as solely for political reasons due to pending general elections to appease local natives and to quell their growing anger against the political leaders who have alienated their NCR lands to companies who in turn have destroyed their crops, plants, homes and evicted them from their own land.

The Sabah Native Land Foundation will be entrusted to safeguard and act as guardians of native land rights as the natives being the indigenous people in Sabah are the owners of the land which existed before the British colonial times or the promulgation of the Land Ordinance and long before Malaysia was formed.

The Foundation will hold lands on behalf of all natives in Sabah as well as the percentage allocation of land alienated for commercial agriculture purposes. It will also act as a safety net for native lands facing foreclosure and auctions and will buy at or before auction and or settle the outstanding debts and hold the native lands concerned and the owner will be granted the opportunity to buy-back or redeem the native land concerned. The Foundation will also assist natives in all matters relating to native lands.

The Sabah Land Tribunal will be formed to administer justice in relation to land matters in Sabah and to adjudicate all land disputes and problems. It will be similar to what the industrial court, consumer tribunal and housing tribunal and will work in conjunction with the civil court system and the native court system.

As can be seen, the Land and NCR Reforms Masterplan is intended to reform the existing land laws and related laws as well as to reform the entire system of land administration in Sabah.
Both reforms are progressive and advances the rights of natives and Sabahans to lands in Sabah and to promote economic development of natives through their native lands as well as through the allocation of certain percentage of commercial agricultural lands and at the same time protective of native rights and native lands.

As enshrined in the BATU SUMPAH, we cannot rely on and cannot depend on outsiders and politicians with outside political masters to decide on Sabah’s land. And certainly not in prioritizing alienation of land rights to outsiders at the expense of natives and genuine Sabahans.

Meantime, as for the others and business communities, we wish to re-assure that notwithstanding our land policies, we will be people and business-friendly in our policies which will be announced separately.

Datuk Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan
Chairman, STAR Sabah.
04 April 2012

The 20 point agreement / 18 point agreement is between made between TWO countries ( Malaya and Sabah / Malaya and Sarawak).

Such being the case, no changes can be made on the agreement without the consent of the other. In the case, they seemed to be effort by the Federal Government to put aside this agreement or even ignore this agreement as it gets their way of integrating Sabah and sarawak according to West malaysia UMNO point of views and political agenda.

Sabah and sarawak must NEVER give up on this agreement as it provides us with more autonomy. The founding fathers has the foresight to see the greed of West Malaysian and sadly for Sabah since UMNO has come in and rule Sabah it has lost most of its autonomy. sarawak should continue to fight to uphold the 18 points agreement. While working with PKR those leaders from sarawak MUST insist that Pakatan Rakyat respect and enforce the 18 point agreement when they do come into power.

Monitor and review the implementation of the agreement

The government of Sarawak may like to consider setting a monitoring and reviewing committee to consolidate the implementation status and audit the programme that has been set to comply with the agreement. That will help Sarawak Malaysian to understand how much has been done in respect to the 18 point agreement.

Probably it would be good initiative to trace this document back in the UK to find more detail on the intent, spirit, process and even minutes of discussion leading to the signing of these agreement.

A memorandum for House of Lord in UK

Where is the Cobbold commission report now – probably in UK too. Malaya would never want to show it because the result is 33% want Malaysia, 33% do not want Malaysia and 33% undecided. How they concluded that Sabah and Sarawak should join Malaysia based on the statistics only “Allah” know. The British has some explaining to do to both Sarawak and sabah. Maybe a memorandum should be sent to the House of Lord to ask for explanation on the matter.

What is the agreement all about?

The 20-point agreement, or the 20-point memorandum, is an agreement made between the state of Sabah (then North Borneo) with what would be the federal government of Malaysia prior to the formation of Malaysia in September 16, 1963. A similar agreement was made between the state of Sarawak and the federal government but with certain differences in their 18-point agreement

The agreement

Point 1: Religion

While there was no objection to Islam being the national religion of Malaysia there should be no State religion in Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah), and the provisions relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malaya should not apply to Borneo

Point 2: Language

* a. Malay should be the national language of the Federation

* b. English should continue to be used for a period of 10 years after Malaysia Day

* c. English should be an official language of Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) for all purposes, State or Federal, without limitation of time.

Point 3: Constitution

Whilst accepting that the present Constitution of the Federation of Malaya should form the basis of the Constitution of Malaysia, the Constitution of Malaysia should be a completely new document drafted and agreed in the light of a free association of states and should not be a series of amendments to a Constitution drafted and agreed by different states in totally different circumstances. A new Constitution for Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) was of course essential.

Point 4: Head of Federation

The Head of State in Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) should not be eligible for election as Head of the Federation

Point 5: Name of Federation

“Malaysia” but not “Melayu Raya”

Point 6: Immigration

Control over immigration into any part of Malaysia from outside should rest with the Central Government but entry into Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) should also require the approval of the State Government. The Federal Government should not be able to veto the entry of persons into Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) for State Government purposes except on strictly security grounds. Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) should have unfettered control over the movements of persons other than those in Federal Government employ from other parts of Malaysia Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah).

Point 7: Right of Secession

There should be no right to secede from the Federation

Point 8: Borneanisation

Borneanisation of the public service should proceed as quickly as possible.

Point 9: British Officers

Every effort should be made to encourage British Officers to remain in the public service until their places can be taken by suitably qualified people from Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah)

Point 10: Citizenship

The recommendation in paragraph 148(k) of the Report of the Cobbold Commission should govern the citizenship rights in the Federation of Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) subject to the following amendments:

* a) sub-paragraph (i) should not contain the proviso as to five years residence

* b) in order to tie up with our law, sub-paragraph (ii)(a) should read “7 out of 10 years” instead of “8 out of 10 years”

* c) sub-paragraph (iii) should not contain any restriction tied to the citizenship of parents – a person born in Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) after Malaysia must be federal citizen.

Point 11: Tariffs and Finance

Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) should retain control of its own finance, development and tariff, and should have the right to work up its own taxation and to raise loans on its own credit.

Point 12: Special position of indigenous races

In principle, the indigenous races of Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) should enjoy special rights analogous to those enjoyed by Malays in Malaya, but the present Malays’ formula in this regard is not necessarily applicable in Borneo(Sarawak & Sabah)

Point 13: State Government

* a) the Prime Minister should be elected by unofficial members of Legislative Council

* b) There should be a proper Ministerial system in Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah)

Point 14: Transitional period

This should be seven years and during such period legislative power must be left with the State of Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) by the Constitution and not be merely delegated to the State Government by the Federal Government

Point 15: Education

The existing educational system of Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) should be maintained and for this reason it should be under state control

Point 16: Constitutional safeguards

No amendment modification or withdrawal of any special safeguard granted to Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) should be made by the Central Government without the positive concurrence of the Government of the State of North Borneo

The power of amending the Constitution of the State of Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) should belong exclusively to the people in the state. (Note: The United Party, The Democratic Party and the Pasok Momogun Party considered that a three-fourth majority would be required in order to effect any amendment to the Federal and State Constitutions whereas the UNKO and USNO considered a two-thirds majority would be sufficient)

Point 17: Representation in Federal Parliament

This should take account not only of the population of Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah) but also of its seize and potentialities and in any case should not be less than that of Singapore

Point 18: Name of Head of State

Yang di-Pertua Negara

Point 19: Name of State

Sarawak or Sabah

Point 20: Land, Forests, Local Government, etc.

The provisions in the Constitution of the Federation in respect of the powers of the National Land Council should not apply in Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah). Likewise, the National Council for Local Government should not apply in Borneo (Sarawak & Sabah).

*Merger

In 1961, when the Malayan government began discussing a possible merger with neighbouring Singapore, Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei, problems of ethnic power relations arose again. The “Malaysia” proposal sans Sabah and Sarawak went back more than a decade; earlier negotiations had proved fruitless. The Singaporeans themselves were not anxious to be ruled by what they considered a Malay government. By 1961, however, Singapore had grown receptive to the idea of joining Malaysia, largely because of the prevailing idea at the time that industrial Singapore could not survive without access to Malayan markets.

Singapore Chinese population is a threat to Malaya

The Malayan government was not keen on having the Chinese Singaporean population push the Malays into a minority position in the new Malaysia. Many Malays felt that upsetting the Malay-dominated nature of the armed forces and police might place them in a dangerous situation. It was also argued that the inferior economic position of the Malays would be emphasised by the entry of even more rich Chinese, setting the stage for major discontent.

Malaya get Sabah and Sarawak to form Malaysia to make use of their native population numbers

The Malayans decided to resolve this by merging with Sabah and Sarawak; both British colonies had large native populations whom the government considered “Malay”. Under Article 160 of the Constitution, most of them were not Malay; the natives were mainly animists or Christians instead of Muslims as required. To resolve this issue, the government expanded its informal definition of “Malay” to include these people.

*The natives of Sarawak and Sabah are to be considered ‘Malays’ by the malayan union to solve their problems.. the ibans, the kenyahs, the bidayus, and etcs… My question is – is this true today or we from Sabah and sarawak being con / cheated by UMNO Malaya?

Change WE Must.

Source: dayakbaru.com

For further information in regards to the related article, kindly refer to Wikipedia.

Anis Qureshi is escorted by a policeman after being booked for sexual harassment

A 17-year-old girl in Mumbai, India, has filed a formal complaint against her politician father for making vulgar advances on her over the past one-and-a-half years.

The father, Anis Qureshi,38, is a small-time politician and is the president of the minority cell of a national party. He has been placed under judicial custody after the girl lodged a police report.

She told the police that her father had been showing her obscene photographs stored in his camera. He had also allegedly been getting physically too close to her while no one else is at home.

The girl was accompanied by her friends when filed her complaint, according to local newspaper reports.

“Qureshi has been showing her obscene photographs on his camera; he even tried coming close to her on several occasions, the victim has stated in her complaint,” said an officer from Vartak Nagar police station.

Qureshi's wife Shabina swearing on the Quran in front of media to prove that the allegations made by their daughter were baseless

The teenager’s mother, Shabina, however, however, came out strongly in support of her husband.

She said the allegations made by her daughter were baseless. She claimed that the girl’s boyfriend, who belongs to a different caste, had influenced her daughter.

“Almost a month ago, we had caught our daughter indulging in obscene chats with her boyfriend. When we scolded her, she got upset and disappeared from the house for two days.”

“Since we are against her relationship with the boy, she has come up with such allegations in order to threaten us,” said Shabina, who spoke to the media outside the Thane court, holding a Quran in her hand to show that she was speaking the truth.

“Qureshi has been showing her obscene photographs on his camera; he even tried coming close to her on several occasions, the victim has stated in her complaint,” said an officer from Vartak Nagar police station.

Qureshi has been charged with assault or criminal force on woman with intent to outrage her modesty and 509 with using words, gestures or acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman.

Source: Agencies

 

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, when launching the Foreign Correspondents Club on Monday night, said a hung Parliament would be the worst possible result for the country. What does a hung Parliament entail?

In political science, the term hung Parliament refers to a fragmented parliament in which no party or coalition secures an absolute majority. In the context of Malaysia, an absolute majority would mean 112 out of the 222 seats in the elected Dewan Rakyat.

Hung parliaments are the norm in many democracies. In Britain, hung parliaments occurred in January 1910, December 1910, 1929, 1974 and May 2010. Australia has a parliament with no clear-cut majority for any party.

A legislature with no overall control by any party can also arise when a slim government majority is eroded by deaths, resignations, by-election defeats or by defection of government MPs to opposition ranks. This happened in Britain in mid-1978 and in 1996.

What happens if there is such a stalemate after the next general election in Malaysia?

The Constitution provides very little guidance about the murky world of government formation. A few tentative generalisations about Commonwealth conventions can be made.

First, the government that took the country into the election remains in the saddle during the interim period, but only in a caretaker capacity and with the implied understanding that its job is to hold the fort and not to undertake any radical initiatives.

Second, there is no strict rule that a defeated Prime Minister must resign immediately. In 1974, Ted Heath, and in 2010 Gordon Brown, though not victorious, stayed put in Downing Street while they attempted to forge coalitions with the Liberals.

In Australia last year, Prime Minister Julia Gillard hung on despite failing to secure an electoral triumph. Ultimately, however, she was able to strike a deal with independent MPs to keep her government afloat.

The Commonwealth convention seems to be that in a stalemate, the government in office gets first choice to form the government.

Third, if this effort to cobble together a new coalition fails, then the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may install a “minority government” that, while lacking a majority, will rely on ad hoc support from willing MPs to survive no-confidence motions, pass budgets and secure essential legislation.

Minority governments are, understandably, weak governments and generally lead to early dissolutions and fresh polls.

Fourth, if neither side succeeds in making an agreement with cross benches, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may allow the caretaker PM to continue until he is defeated on the floor. In that case, a new election will be ordered.

Fifth, an untested and untried possibility is that if no party can put together a working majority, the King may exercise his influence to bring together a unity government of all parties to run the show for an interim period pending new elections.

In such a case, the PM must be from the previous Dewan Rakyat and must cease to hold office unless he is also an MP in the new Dewan Rakyat.

In a country with a hung parliament, can the King assume political control of the nation and rule by decree during such times?

Alluring though this proposition is, one must be reminded that in our system of constitutional monarchy, the King is not expected to rule in person.

He must have an interim caretaker government to advise him on all matters other than the limited areas of personal discretion permitted under Article 40(2).

The appointment of a prime minister is one such discretionary area. The advice of the previous or caretaker PM is not binding on the King.

However, the royal discretion is not absolute. Under Article 43(2)(a), the PM must be a member of the Dewan Rakyat who in the judgment of the King is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of that House.

In making his choice, the King must act impartially. He is not obliged to choose the leader with the largest number of Dewan Rakyat seats if the leader of any other party is able to forge a working majority.

In selecting the PM, the King is not required to take the percentage of electoral votes into consideration. It is the percentage of seats in the elected House that matters.

Under our winner-takes-all system, it is entirely possible that a party may have more or a majority of the popular vote, yet a minority or a lesser number of the seats in the House of Representatives.

Who decides when the new House sits? How and when is the new parliament convened?

The Constitution in Article 55(4) requires that the newly-elected parliament must be convened no later than 120 days from the date the previous parliament was dissolved.

This means that the defeated caretaker government is not obliged to throw in the towel immediately after the results. It may wait for negotiations to be completed before submitting its resignation.

New elections: After an inconclusive election result, can an immediate new election be called? Article 55(4) is explicit that after an election, parliament must be convened.

Only if the deadlocked parliament has met and the appointed PM has lost a confidence vote must the new House be dissolved and fresh elections ordered.

These are some of the issues a hung parliament may throw up. Of course, life is larger than the law and who knows what other interesting issues may crop up to challenge our imagination?

Source: The Star – Shad Saleem Faruqi