Suara PRM

Tuesday, September 14, 2004

Pullout quote: It insults common sense to make those who provide the world’s weapons the guarantors of world peace.
Superducks and underducks
By Eduardo Galeano
Le Monde Diplomatique
EVERY day we spend US$2.2 billion on killing each other. Global military spending in effect pays for huge hunting parties in which hunter and hunted are of the same species; the winner is whoever kills the biggest number of his peers. Think how all this money could better be spent to provide food, education and healthcare for deprived children worldwide.
The first impression is that such vast expenditure on arms is grotesque. Does it appear more justified if we look closely at the context?
The official line is that the wastage is essential to the global war on terror. Yet common sense suggests that terrorists are grateful for the many weapons in circulation and so much military action under way. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have greatly stimulated terrorism: you do not need to be a statistician to notice the increasing number of attacks. Wars are state terrorism, which feeds and is fed by private terrorism.
Recent figures have shown signs of a recovery in the economy of the United States, with growth returning to a satisfactory level. Many experts agree that this growth would be much weaker without funds released in connection with the war in Iraq. Invading Mesopotamia was great news for the US economy. It was not such great news for those who died or their relations.
Which makes more sense: the economic statistics or the voice of Spanish politician Julio Anguita, speaking as a grieving father (son Julio Anguita Parrado was a journalist for the Madrid newspaper El Mundo, embedded with US soldiers in Iraq. He was killed by an Iraqi missile in Baghdad on April 7, 2003), who said "a curse on this war and all wars"?
Infamous Five
The five largest arms producers are the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom and France. They are also the countries with a veto in the United Nations Security Council. It insults common sense to make those who provide the world’s weapons the guarantors of world peace.
These five countries are in charge. They run the International Monetary Fund and all (except China) are among the eight countries that take most key decisions at the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation (WTO), where the right of veto exists but is never used. Surely it would be common sense for the struggle for world democracy to begin with the democratisation of international organisations. But common sense hardly has a chance to be heard, let alone vote.
Many of the worst crimes and injustices on earth are carried out through these three international organisations: the IMF, World Bank and WTO. Their victims are the disappeared - not the people who vanished under military dictatorships but the things that have gone under democracy.
Over the past few years, my country, Uruguay, has seen jobs, decent wages, pensions, factories, lands and even rivers disappear.
The story is the same all over Latin America and in many other regions. We are even seeing our children disappear, reversing their forebears’ emigrant dreams and heading for Europe and elsewhere. Does common sense tell us that we have to endure avoidable suffering and accept these tragedies as the work of fate?
Nothing to fish
Little by little, the world is getting less and less fair. True, the difference between a woman’s salary and that of a man is not quite the gap it once was. But at the current sluggish rate of progress, wage equality between men and women will not be reached for 475 years.
Common sense does not advise us to wait for it to happen: as far as I know, women do not live that long.
True education, based on common sense and leading to it, tells us we must fight to regain what has been taken from us.
The Catalan bishop Pedro Casaldaliga (nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1992) has worked for many years in the heart of the rainforest in Mato Grosso, one of the poorest states in Brazil. He says that it may be true that if you give a man a fish you feed him for a day while if you teach him to fish you feed him for life; but there is no point teaching anyone to fish when the rivers have all been poisoned or sold.
A circus trainer teaches bears to dance by hitting them on the neck with a spiked stick. If they dance correctly; the trainer stops hitting them and they get fed. If not, the torture continues, and the bears go back to their cages hungry. The bears dance for fear of blows and of going hungry. To the trainer, this is good sense. But do the bears see it that way?
After the second hijacked plane of 9/11 hit the second tower of the World Trade Centre, it began to disintegrate; people rushed to the stairs to get out quickly. A Tannoy message ordered all workers to return to their desks. Workers had to use their common sense: no one who obeyed that order can have survived.
Be like ducks
To save ourselves, we must work together. Like ducks in the same covey. Collective flying works like this: a duck sets off and makes way for two others, who are then followed by another pair, whose energy inspires a fourth pair to join, and so on, so that the ducks fly in an elegant V formation. Each duck at some time flies both at the head of this V and at its tail.
According to my friend, essayist, media expert and author from Paraguay, Juan Diaz Bordenave, who is no palmipedologist but still knows what he is talking about, no duck ever felt like a superduck when it was heading the V nor like an underduck flying at the tail.
At least ducks have kept their common sense.

Eduardo Galeano is a Uruguayan writer and journalist. His Memory of Fire trilogy (1985-89) was published in English by Quartet, London and WW Norton, New York. His most recent book published in English is Upside Down: a Primer for the Looking-glass World (Picador), New York, 2000.
¶ 11:09 PM

Pullout quote: “A defeat for Bush would create a different atmosphere, let’s say in American political culture, to show it can be done. And it will make people much more critical.” – Tariq Ali

A global perspective on defeating Bush
By Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon
www.zmag.org
The US-centric nature of American politics often affects the US left. It’s hard to get out of USA mindsets long enough to grasp the global implications of decisions made here at home.
Yet the effects of US government policies are so enormous across the planet that some people have suggested -- with more than a little justification -- that every person on Earth should get to vote in US presidential elections.
On the international left, no one has more credibility as an unwavering opponent of US foreign policy than Tariq Ali. Raised in Pakistan, he was a leader of Britain’s Vietnam Solidarity Campaign in the 1960s, and is now a prominent London-based writer and an editor at New Left Review. His recent books include Bush in Babylon and The Clash of Fundamentalisms. As progressives in the United States try to make sense out of the current presidential campaign, Ali’s perspective on the global significance of Bush’s electoral fate deserves serious consideration.
"I travel a great deal, all the continents, and I think everywhere I go there is growing anger -- and if one can just be totally blunt, real hatred of this administration -- because of what it did in Iraq, the war it waged, the civilians it killed, the mess it’s made, and its inability to understand even, the scale of what it’s done," Ali said during a recent interview on WBAI Radio in New York.
"And from that point of view, if the American population were to vote Bush out of office, I think the impact globally would be tremendous... People would say this guy took his country to war, surrounded by these neocons who developed bogus arguments and lies to go to war against Iraq, he lied to his people, he misused intelligence information, and the American people have voted him out. That in itself I think would have a tremendous impact on world public opinion.
"A defeat for a warmonger government in Washington would be seen as a step forward. I don’t go beyond that, but there is no doubt in my mind that it would have an impact globally."
Kerry conundrum
Of course John Kerry has been eagerly touting his own brand of militarism, a fact that’s very much on the minds of US progressives. Interviewing Ali on the radio broadcast, Left Business Observer editor Doug Henwood raised the point: "A lot of people in the American left in particular, such as it is, are saying that Kerry’s not much better, that Bush is really pretty much the same old thing, that he’s an imperialist and a warmonger just like all his predecessors and there’s not all that much difference, and Kerry -- who opened his acceptance speech with a military salute -- would be just pretty much more of the same. What do you say to that?"
"We're talking about the government which took the United States to war," Ali replied. ".... If Gore had been elected president, he would probably have gone to war on Afghanistan if a 9/11 had happened, but personally I doubt whether he would have gone to war on Iraq. This is very much a neocon agenda, dominated by the need to both get the oil, as we know, but also to appease the Israelis, who’ve been very keen on this war. This particular war in Iraq is very much something this particular administration went for.
“So a defeat of this administration would be a defeat of the war party."
To defeat or not
Speaking from an international perspective, Ali doesn’t hesitate to challenge the odd notion that worse could actually be better: "There is an argument ... going around in the American left, which I read, which is the following. It goes like this -- ‘Yeah, but Bush has really united the world against the United States empire, and that’s a good thing.’ But I do not like arguments like that."
Ali went on: "This is an argument you can have from the luxury of your sitting room or kitchen in the United States, but the fact is that this particular regime has taken the lives of at least 37,000 civilians in Iraq as a result of the war, not counting any members in the old army of Iraq. Thirty-seven thousand civilians have died, and for them it’s not an abstract question... So a defeat for Bush would certainly be greeted in many parts of the world as a small victory. This doesn’t mean that one has any illusions about Kerry. I certainly don’t... I’m pretty disgusted by the militarism at the Democratic convention.... But despite all that -- and we know what the Democrats are, and we know the wars they’ve waged -- our option at the moment is limited. Do we defeat a warmonger government or not? Do we try our best to do it?"
As Ali put it, "I think there is a lot to be done at the present time. And my own feeling is that a defeat for Bush would create a different atmosphere, let’s say in American political culture, to show it can be done. And it will make people much more critical..."
Tariq Ali’s analysis comes at a crucial time for the American left. On the one hand, we’re being encouraged by liberals to pretend that the Kerry-Edwards ticket is some kind of progressive dream team -- a fanciful notion that doesn’t become any more true no matter how many times it’s reiterated.
On the other hand, there’s a dangerous ultra tendency to say that it’s no big deal whether we get four more years of Bush or four years of Kerry in the White House.
Meanwhile, Ali has articulated a key question we must answer with our actions: "Do we defeat a warmonger government or not?"

¶ 11:07 PM

By Madeleine Bunting
The Guardian

Pullout quote:
The personalisation of politics and television's prioritisation of images - above ideas, rhetoric and policy - puts women under particular pressure. They always get pushed to the front of photo-shoots. It's not enough for a woman to be a good politician, she must also fit in the grooming without which she will be ridiculed.

IT’S a measure of just how conflicted our attitudes to images of women are that they warranted two items on The Guardian's news pages recently.

One reported a calendar of naked Gloucestershire mums raising money for Rwandan rape victims, while the other reported a Vogue photo-shoot of the eight female cabinet members of the Spanish government.

One is attracting widespread support for challenging old clichés, the other has been harshly criticised for reinforcing old clichés. Guess which is which?
Initially, a calendar of nude women to raise money for rape victims seemed a totally bonkers idea. I could see that it was effective; it got the London-based Rwandan survivors' charity for women and children, Surf, its first slot on Women's Hour, as well as media coverage in Australia, the Netherlands, France and Britain - what village fete would have achieved that? But didn't the stunt look a little tired (how many more nude calendars have us girls got in us)?
Act of subversion
But then the message began to get through as I looked at some of the images. This is not just a clever publicity wheeze, it is also communicating a set of very complex and powerful points. With the purpose of the calendar in mind, rape is juxtaposed with these images. The characteristics of these photographed bodies are a compelling retort to the violence meted out to women in the course of war and genocide.
These bodies are not specific (several conceal the head), they are not sexual or glamorous, they are beautiful forms of flesh and blood. They bring to mind the essentialism of King Lear's lament on "bare, forked animal". They are strong, redolent of the dignity of human life, and contrary to many images of female nudity. The poses are utterly self-absorbed; curled in on themselves, the head is bent. There is no engagement or invitation to the viewer, these women are self-sufficient and contained, inviolate even.
Images of female nudity are used to sell everything from newspapers to soap, and most of those images have been shaped by men's idealisation and eroticisation of women. Here is a small symbolic act of subversion, where women reclaim their bodies from being manipulated and abused, and use the publicity that generates to promote something they want to see sold - a cause rather than a car.
The strategy of Sarah Clifford, who initiated the idea of the calendar, is risky - it could either help dismantle the causal links drawn between rape and women's appearance or it could reinforce them. She wanted to challenge the idea that rape has anything to do with either nudity or sexuality, it is simply an act of violent aggression. She argues that rape is as common in cultures where women are swathed in veils as it is where women wear miniskirts. Clifford's gamble is worth taking.
Either authoritative or sexy
Ironically, far more shocking than this nudity is the demure photo in Vogue Espana of the eight ladies of the Spanish government, hair, make-up and wardrobes made-over, languishing on fur-draped sofas outside the Spanish prime minister's house.
Frankly, the picture wouldn't have been much worse if they'd followed the Gloucestershire mums and stripped off. They are not cast as powerful women making major political decisions, but as guests at a cocktail party. The poses, even pouts, align them with the traditional imperative placed on women: be decorative.
There have been criticisms from men and women in Spain. The ministers are accused of demeaning themselves - their male counterparts would never agree to such a photo-shoot. Depressingly, the raw nerve which this picture hits is the old dualism of women being either authoritative or sexy - they can't have it both ways. The calculation behind the picture is that you will be surprised that a clutch of women cabinet ministers can look this good.
Agreed, women politicians are caught in a vicious bind. The personalisation of politics and television's prioritisation of images - above ideas, rhetoric and policy - puts women under particular pressure. They always get pushed to the front of photo-shoots. It's not enough for a woman to be a good politician, she must also fit in the grooming without which she will be ridiculed.
Agreed, it's a difficult line to tread, but the Spanish ministers have blown it. At a ground-breaking historical moment, when for the first time women make up half the government, they have reverted to the kind of self-presentation that would have been familiar to the great court painter Velazquez.
¶ 11:04 PM

Remembering 100 years of Neruda

Chilean poet and Nobel laureate Pablo Neruda would have turned 100 years old this year. To commemorate his centenary, AMY GOODMAN from Democracy Now!, a US-based news program airing on over 225 stations, spoke to Martin Espada, poet and professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, about the significance of Pablo Neruda. Espada was invited to participate in the celebration of the Neruda centenary in Chile. Below is an extract of the interview.
AMY GOODMAN: As we turn now to an anniversary of sorts, Chilean poet and Nobel Laureate Pablo Neruda would have turned 100 years old this year. Fellow Nobel Prize-winner Gabriel Garcia Marquez called Pablo Neruda the, “greatest poet of the 20th century, in any language.” Born the son of a railway worker, Neruda began writing poetry when he was 14 years old, didn't stop until his death in 1973. A long-standing Communist Party supporter, Pablo Neruda died less than two weeks after General Augusto Pinochet overthrew Salvador Allende’s government in a US-backed coup. His funeral became the first public show of opposition to Chile's military rulers. His work was banned until 1990 under the Pinochet regime. Many Chilean towns and cities have been staging poetry readings to mark Neruda’s centenary while restaurants have prepared special menus based on his “Odes To The Onion.” We're joined right now by Martin Espada, poet and professor at the University Of Massachusetts, Amherst, teaching creative writing, poetry and the work of Pablo Neruda. Welcome to Democracy Now!
MARTIN ESPADA: Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: Great to have you with us. What was happening in Chile around this 100th anniversary of the birth of Pablo Neruda?
MARTIN ESPADA: Oh so many things. There was a celebration sponsored by the government of Chile and, in fact, I was invited to Chile by a Presidential commission set up for that purpose. But there was also popular celebration throughout Chile, which really manifested itself most clearly at Isla Negra, perhaps the most famous writer’s house in the world, belonging to Neruda. The day before his 100th birthday, an extraordinary gathering took place there and I was very fortunate to be there, too.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about Pablo Neruda's significance?
MARTIN ESPADA: I agree with the assessment of Gabriel Garcia Marquez that he was the greatest 20th century poet for any language. There really is a Neruda for everyone, there’s Neruda the love poet, Neruda the surrealist poet, the poet of historical epic, Neruda the political poet, Neruda the poet of common things, with the odes, the poet of sea and so on. But throughout it all, we see with Neruda, first of all, a great compassion for other human beings, no matter which phase of his career we're talking about. And secondly, a deep appreciation of the fact of being alive, which again we see at every stage for Neruda.
AMY GOODMAN: What about the period at end of his life, what he understand was happening in Chile as he died less than two weeks after Pinochet rose to power?
MARTIN ESPADA: Neruda's death is inseparable from the coup that took place of course on September 11, 1973, the first September 11. And at the time, Neruda was very ill with prostate cancer. Certainly the coup hastened his death. He was aware what was going on. He was aware of the destruction of Chile, the destruction of his vision for a socialist Chile and, of course, the death of many friends, including Salvador Allende. So these things became inseparable: Neruda's death and the death of democracy in Chile. It's significant that when Neruda died, his widow, Matilda, brought his body to lay in state at another one of his houses called 'La Chascona' in Santiago. She did this specifically because the military had trashed the house and she wanted the world to see what was going on with the 'La Chascona', the house in Santiago, but also what was happening with the coup in Chile at the time.
AMY GOODMAN: Yes, there were other September 11ths, September 11, 1973 is a day Salvador Allende died in the palace in Chile as the Pinochet forces rose to power. And as you are teaching Pablo Neruda, when you are first introducing students, is there a poem that you share with them or an excerpt or a book that you recommend they go to first?
MARTIN ESPADA: Well, I teach Neruda, according to the chronology of his life. It is a very easy thing to do because his poetry reflected his life so closely in so many ways. Certainly we often gravitate to Neruda, the political poet and certainly there is no greater political poem than his masterpiece, “The Heights of Macchu Picchu.” Neruda visited the ruins of the Inca city in the Andes in Peru in 1943 and subsequently wrote a book-length poem in 12 parts, celebrating the achievement of Macchu Picchu, but also condemning the oppression, the slavery, which made it possible and ultimately in the 12th Canto, calling upon the dead, centuries of the dead, to be born again and to speak through him.
AMY GOODMAN: Could you give a very loose translation of this section of this epic poem?
MARTIN ESPADA: Well, Neruda realises, once he comes to the heights of Macchu Picchu, that this magnificent achievement has been built on what he calls a groundwork of rags and there's a turning point in the poem where he essentially accuses the city, confronts the city with these questions about the slaves that were buried there. (In Neruda’s reading) you can hear the passion in his voice at this point in the poem. You know, there is a real powerful indignation there. And what becomes clear, is that there's a very, very close association between Pablo Neruda’s poetry and the idea of justice. And the people of Chile today, even now, associate Pablo Neruda with the idea of justice. I saw something really extraordinary at Isla Negra when I was there. A gathering of the families of the disappeared and the detained who came to his tomb with photographs and placards.
AMY GOODMAN: Martin Espada, we have to leave it there. I want to thank you very much for joining us.

Democracy Now! is a national, daily, independent, award-winning news program airing on 225 stations in North America.Pioneering the largest public media collaboration in the US, Democracy Now! is broadcast on Pacifica, community, and National Public Radio stations, public access cable television stations, satellite television (on Free Speech TV, channel 9415 of the DISH Network), shortwave radio and the Internet (www.democracynow.org).

¶ 10:59 PM

Chit and Chavez

www.schnews.org.uk

“Chavez, like Castro, is not only an avowed Communist who has
terrorised his own people, they both have assisted and worked with Middle
Eastern terrorists. The US should intervene at once”. - Senator Larry
Klayman, US Republican Senator - Florida.

IT’S no surprise to hear this from a US politician with an active
interest in developments in Venezuela nor is it shocking to see him so
actively embrace the neoliberal business elite in their attempt to overthrow
the Venezuelan government. Intervention in the affairs of every Latin
American country has defined US policy in the region since they stole
half of Mexico in 1848. In just a 30-year period, the CIA actively
assisted with the overthrowing of democratically elected radical governments
in Guatemala (1954), the Dominican Republic (1965), Chile (1973),
Nicaragua (1980s) and Granada (1983). Its involvement in a coup in Venezuela
in April 2002 merely continues this historical record, as does its
support for the right wing’s attempts to oust President Hugo Chavez in a
recent referendum.

Chavez is a military man, who himself failed to overthrow the
Presidency of Carlos Perez in a 1992 coup. After his release from prison, he
rose to power, promising to instigate a ‘Bolivarian revolution’, based on
the ideals of Simon Bolivar, the “great liberator” of Latin America.
Chavez posed as the new Bolivar, promising reforms to improve education,
welfare and health for 80% of Venezuelans who live in poverty.

Access to education and healthcare in some of the poorest barrios has
shot up with 1.5 million more schoolchildren getting three free meals a
day and over one million more adults can now read and write. The
Bolivarian constitution allows for the recall of any elected official (hence
the referendum) and grants the right to a plot of land for anyone aged
between 18 and 25, although as a personal favour to himself, Chavez
also squeezed extensions to the presidential term.

subhead: Aahh... Bolivar
Bolivarian markets’ are just one example of the boom in cooperative
movements that have taken place over the past few years. In Petare, a
working class district in Caracas, marketstall holders meet each Wednesday
to set fair food prices for the weekend market. Participating sellers
pay US$1 to rent a pitch with this money being reinvested in local
community projects. Out of the cities, Self Organised Rural Associations are
being set up in an effort to develop a highly integrated system of
cooperatives and LETS schemes, where skills rather than money are exchanged
for food and other goods. City vegetable gardens are cropping up across
Caracas as the country seeks to become self-sufficient in food.

But it's not the co-ops that’s got up the nose of the Bush
Administration Inc. Neither was it jealous of the fact that Chavez actually won the
election that made him president. It’s the fact that Chavez campaigned
on the basis of a need to “transform the current, brutal, neoliberal
economic model.”

Whilst that itself was bad news for US investors (Venezuelans buy 1/3
of all US goods exported to Latin America), Venezuela also happens to
account for 15% of US oil imports. The state-owned Venezuelan oil
company, PDVSA, oversees the largest reserves of any oil producing country
outside of the Middle East and the country has 148 trillion cubic feet of
proven natural gas reserves – the largest in the Western Hemisphere. A
new Hydrocarbons Law recently raised taxes paid by private companies
from 1-17% to 20%-30%.

Chavez has sought to increase his control of the oil industry, booting
out Exxon, Shell & Texaco executives and cramming the organisation with
loyal Chavistas. PDVSA owns Citgo, an oil company operating in the US
which has $12 billion invested in refineries, terminals and pipelines
there, indirectly employing 150,000 workers. When stopping short of
invasion, the US often uses economic pressure to bully a nation, but now the
situation is being reversed by Venezuela. There’s also talk of
combining Venezuela’s oil company with Ecuador’s, Brazil’s and Trinadad’s.
These countries would then be able to bargain much harder in trade talks
which, up to now, have been mostly a one-way deal designed only to
benefit US investors. But the war manual of the Project for the New American
Century, the right wing outfit that advises Bush on foreign policy
matters, has identified a need for a “concerted national trade and security
policy to prevent monopolistic collusion by foreign energy producers”.
Given that Bush’s Latin American Department is crammed with rightwing
Cuban exiles, including Otto Reich the architect of former President
Ronald Reagen’s central American policy that saw 200,000 killed, it’s safe
to say that such a deal is not going to be successful.

subhead: After Chavez
When Chavez took power the price of oil stood at $9 per barrel. Oil
production was cut and by April 2002 the stuff went for $23, with extra
revenue used to fund the reforms. Later that month Venezuela experienced
what the US state department called “a temporary alteration of
constitutional order” when the business class replaced Chavez with US-friendly
head of the Venezuelan Chambers of Commerce, Pedro Carmona in a coup.
He immediately suspended the constitution, legislative assemblies and
began reversing Chavez’s anti neoliberal reforms. The US recognised the
government immediately. Oil production was increased. Two days after the
coup, loyal army troops and a demonstration of the poor, hundreds of
thousands strong, helped restore Chavez to the Presidency. Carmona flew
to Florida.

Despite Senator Klayman’s concerns it’s unlikely that Chavez has been
plotting with the Taliban. Given that he has been re-elected numerous
times, a dictatorship it is not, but neither is it a revolution. Chavez
deals with the multinationals that have caused so much damage in the
region already and the whole reform process is linked to the cult of
personality surrounding him. If revolution is supposed to pass power to the
people, then this one’s got a long way to go.

The streets of Caracas have been ringing to the sound of banging pots
and pans for months, as the right wing nutcase opposition seeks to annoy
the government through noise pollution. Now Chavez is apparently
looking for some way to outlaw the banging of pots in protests. But
restricting the right to demonstrate is always a tricky business as Caracas
resident Armando Lefmans says, “I have made my own cassette of the noise.
You put it on at a high volume so you don’t have to bother hitting a
pan”.

** SchNEWS was born in a squatted Courthouse in Brighton in 1994 as
part of Justice? - Brighton's campaign against the Criminal Justice Act. A
few bright sparks decided to start reading out the news. Some of those
bright sparks then decided to put some of it on paper - nearly ten
years later and we're still printing! From worker's struggles such as the
Liverpool Dockers, fights against privatisation of public services to
reporting on social centres and sustainable futures - week in week out -
SchNEWS reported the news from the direct action frontlines. While we
always try to be as accurate as possible and chase people up to verify
the stories, the idea behind SchNEWS is not to believe the printed word,
but to get up off yer arse and go and see for yourself. Articles are
often first hand accounts from trusted sources or ourselves as we storm
all over the country causing trouble/saving the world/having a laugh.
¶ 10:56 PM

PEDAS-PEDAS CILI API
(21 Ogos 2004)

MAHATHIR OH MAHATHIR!

Cili Api perhatikan Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad sentiasa hendak memastikan dia terus hidup melalui media. Dia tahu, kalau tidak orang ‘mudah lupa’. Jadi, di mana saja ada peluang, dia akan bercakap, biasanya menyentuh perkara-perkara kontroversial.

Dua tiga hari sebelum pojok ini ditulis Tun Dr M merasmikan SMK Seremban Dua. Dia berucap sejam di hadapan murid-murid sekolah itu. Katanya, beliau amat sedih dengan keruntuhan moral, akhlak serta peribadi dalam masyarakat, khususnya di kalangan generasi muda.

Maka bermadahlah Tun M, jenayah dan keruntuhan moral berlaku sebab golongan muda tidak boleh mengawal nafsu dan terlalu terikut-ikut dengan cara Barat. Dalam sidang media selepas itu, dia menyeru golongan agama memainkan peranan lebih besar untuk mendidik dan membentuk akhlak mulia di kalangan semua lapisan masyarakat.

Cili Api merasa syukur kerana keprihatinan Dr M terhadap masalah sosial yang sangat serius sekarang ini. Sebenarnya, Cili Api bersetuju dengan matan ucapannya. Akan tetapi, Cili Api rasa terkilan sedikit kerana sepatutnya Tun M bercakap begini dan mengambil tindakan berkesan semasa berkuasa dulu.

Tun M berkhutbah, pengaruh-pengaruh Barat menimbulkan bermacam-macam nilai kurang sihat. Tetapi bukankah semasa dia menjadi PMlah semakin banyak ruang televisyen dan internet dibuka kepada bermacam-macam jenis unsur keruntuhan moral dari Barat?

Tun M menasihatkan agar golongan ulama patut memainkan peranan lebih besar. Benar! Benar! Tetapi mengapakah semasa menjadi PM dulu dia memusuhi golongan ulama dan mencuba menutup sekolah-sekolah agama rakyat?

Sebenarnya, Cili Api berpendapat banyak masalah sosial yang timbul sekarang ini adalah hasil daripada benih-benih nilai kebendaan dan kebaratan yang Tun M sendiri tanam semasa berkuasa dulu. Mahathir Oh Mahathir!!

NAJIB DENGAN SOAL MORAL

Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, telah mengulas tentang keruntuhan moral baru-baru ini. Pendapat menarik beliau ialah lebih kurang begini: keruntuhan moral adalah tanggungjawab peribadi bukannya tanggungjawab sosial.

Cili Api memang setuju, kalau seseorang itu melakukan sesuatu yang merupakan keruntuhan moral dia mempunyai tanggungjawab secara langsung kepada Tuhannya.

Begitu juga, Cili Api akur bahwa jikalau seseorang itu melakukan jenayah merogol, umpamanya, secara peribadi dia harus menanggung hukumannya jiakalau didapati bersalah oleh mahkamah. Dia mesti bertanggungjawab.

Tetapi, Cili Api percaya Najib memang sudah maklum dan arif bahwa jikalau seseorang menteri tertangkap kerana melakukan rasuah atau berzina, misalnya, dia akan mudah saja dilepaskan dari sebarang tindakan undang-undang. Sebaliknya, nasib tidak serupa bagi seorang rakyat biasa. Jadi tanggungjawab siapa ini? Peribadi, masyarakat atau politik?

Najib boleh tepuk dada tanya selera. Tapi Cili Api berpendapat, sebahagian besar daripada pengaruh keruntuhan moral seseorang itu datangnya dari suasana persekitarannya. Suasana persekitaran itu pula dipengaruhi, antara lain, oleh faktor-faktor seperti media, pendidikan dan juga politik.

Jadi macam mana Najib boleh kata keruntuhan moral itu tanggungjawab individu semata-mata? Adakah beliau berharap, dengan menyalahkan individu maka masyarakat dan pemerintah boleh lepas tangan?

Adakah beliau berharap juga, orang ramai akan menuding jari hanya kepada individu, dan melepaskan PM, TPM dan pemimpin-pemimpin lain daripada sebarang tanggungjawab, kerana kelemahan dasar dan tindakan mereka?

Cili Api harap kerajaan di bawah pimpinan Najib boleh memikirkan dasar dan tindakan yang bernas untuk mengurangkan segala macam jenayah dan keruntuhan moral yang semakin meluas di kalangan masyarakat kita. Ini bukan saja tanggungjawab individu dan masyarakat, tapi tanggungjawab politik beliau juga!

SAMY VELLU BUKTI KEBAL

Beberapa tiang jejambat yang baru dibina di lebuh raya MRR2 didapati retak-retak. Oleh itu jalan terpaksa ditutup kerana dianggap tidak selamat. Padahal baru saja jejambat ini siap dan dibuka. Menteri Datuk Samy Vellu berkata tempoh membaik pulih akan mengambil masa tiga bulan dan menelan belanja RM20 juta.

Banyak pihak mengesyaki dan menuduh tentu ada amalan rasuah. Mula-mula Cili Api dengar Samy Vellu kata dia boleh buka semua fail untuk disiasat. Tidak lama selepas itu beliau menukar pendirian dan mengugut beliau akan menutup jalan lebih lama jikalau BPR menyiasat.

Begitu bongkak sekali sikap Samy ini. Ramai yang mengecam beliau. Akhir sekali, beliau berubah sikap semula, dan mengulangi bahwa semua fail dan rekod boleh dibuka kepada BPR. Adakah beliau sudah merasa selamat?

Cili Api tahu dan semua orang tahu bahwa banyak malapetaka telah berlaku di lebuhraya yang dibina di bawah kementerian Samy Vellu ini, yang menimpa kesusahan ke atas pengguna lebuh raya.

Lupakah kita akan tanah runtuh di lebuh raya NKVE tidak berapa lama dulu, dan beberapa keruntuhan yang lain di lebuh raya Karak dan lebuh raya dekat Jeli? Ada juga kes jalan “tenggelam” di lebuh raya ke Selatan. Banyak benar kalau hendak Cili Api senaraikan satu persatu.

Samy ini menyalahkan alam, bahkan juga Tuhan kerana segala bencana. Tidak pernah dia menyalahkan pihak kementerian atau diri sendiri. Agaknya Samy sudah tahu dia akan disiasat tetapi pasti tidak akan diambil tindakan. Dia menteri yang berkuasa. Dia tahu dia tidak perlu letak jawatan, kerana tidak ada tradisi ini untuk mengambil tanggung jawab.

Cili Api tahu sangat sekarang ini Menteri Datuk Samy Vellu tidak merasa kedudukannya tergugat. Beliau tahu beliau kebal. Lagi pula, beliau tetap selamat selagi PM Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi belum sanggup mengotakan katanya untuk betul-betul bertindak terhadap korupsi menteri-menteri.

CARA DOLAH BASMI JENAYAH

Dalam pertengahan bulan Ogos, PM Datuk Seri Abdullah telah memanggil semua editor media untuk mengadapnya di Putrajaya. Dolah memberi tahu dia tidak puas hati kerana media selalu memberi liputan besar di muka hadapan mengenai berita jenayah yang berlaku hampir setiap hari.

Cili Api boleh faham, jikalau beritanya besar orang ramai tentu akan sentiasa diingatkan bahwa jenyah bunuh, rogol, rompak, ragut dan macam-macam lagi wujud dan sering berlaku. Macam mana jenayah dan maksiat boleh berlaku, padahal Abdullah kata negara ini mengamalkan Islam Hadari?

Jadi cara yang baik sekali ialah dengan mengecilkan berita, atau kalau boleh jangan keluarkan berita itu sama sekali. Bila tidak ada berita Insha Allah orang ramai akan yakin bahwa jenayah sudah diatasi dan tidak wujud lagi.

Hebat cara Abdullah hapuskan jenayah. Geliga sekali otaknya. Cili Api rasa tolol!

¶ 10:53 PM

Buah Tertawaan Orang

Sekali lagi Ketua Hakim Negara menjadikan sistem kehakiman kita buah tertawaan orang. Gerakan Anwar Bebas (GAM), sebuah gabungan warganegara dan kumpulan-kumpulan yang prihatin sangat rusuh dengan penangguhan kedua keputusan Mahkamah Persekutuan tentang rayuan terakhir Anwar.
Penangguhan itu telah menyebabkan siksaan tambahan kepada Anwar dan keluarganya. Siksaan itu bukanlah sekadar siksaan emosi melainkan juga siksaan fizikal apabila diingat bahwa Anwar sedang menanggung sakit yang amat sangat oleh pelbagai komplikasi dan sekarang terlantar di ranjang rumah sakit.
Penangguhan dari 28 Ogos kepada 2 September itu dikatakan diminta oleh Peguam Negara dengan alasan bahwa beliau akan ke Hong Kong atas tugas tertentu. Alasan ini sekali-kali bukanlah alasan yang wajar!
Pengumuman tentang keputusan terakhir oleh Mahkamah Tinggi tidak mewajibkan Peguam Negara hadir. Jika Peguam Negara itu sendiri sangat ingin hadir pada sesi di Hong Kong, maka dia sepatutnya menyusun semula pemergiannya demi kes yang sudah begitu lama tertangguh ini.
Oleh yang demikian kami menuntut bahwa jika tiada justifikasi lain yang laku kerana melambat-lambatkan kes ini, maka mahkamah seharusnya diteruskan mengikut tarikh yang asal, iaitu 28 Ogos.
Sungguh terasa amat aneh bahwa Ketua Hakim Negara nampaknya setuju saja dengan lagak Peguam Negara. Tindak tanduk mahkamah nyata sekali menimbulkan keraguan tentang maksud sebenar penangguhan yang berkali-kali itu.
Tidak berapa hari sebelumnya, Ketua Hakim Negara mendakwa bahwa dia tidak mempunyai kuasa menentukan tarikh penghakiman. Hari ini dia menyalahi kenyataannya itu dan memberi izin penangguhan itu kepada Peguam Negara.
Kelakuan Ketua Hakim Negara dan Peguam Negara menjadikan keyakinan orang terhadap integriti badan kehakiman bertambah merosot. Ketua Hakim Negara terutamanya mempunyai tanggungjawab kepada umum untuk menjelaskan kelakuan mahkamah yang tidak senonoh itu.
Selama beberapa tahun belakangan ini, mahkamah yang menjadi pengawal pemerintahan berundang-undang, telah dijadikan komedi yang memalukan. Rakyat sudah muak dengan sistem perundangan yang sudah roboh dan sudah tibalah masanya rakyat bangun menentang penyalahgunaan undang-undang yang terus-terusan berlaku ini.
GAB berseru kepada para penyokong dan pembela keadilan supaya berkumpul di Hospital Besar pada 28 Ogos pada pukul 5.30 petang. Perhimpunan yang aman ini akan berupa gerak isyarat perpaduan dengan Anwar Ibrahim dan untuk menghantar isyarat protes yang kuat kepada pihak-pihak yang berkuasa.

Tian Chua,
Jurubicara,
Gerakan Anwar Bebas

Perang Rasuah–KALAH!
Kini Perang Politik Wang

Waktu mula-mula memegang jawatannya sebagai PM, Dolah Badawi dengan gagah mengisytiharkan bahwa dia akan memerangi rasuah habis-habisan. Jerung kecil, jerung bersar, jerung kurus, jerus gemuk semuanya akan mendapat habuannya. Rakyat merasa lega.
Setelah delapan bulan lebih yang masuk ke dalam perangkap Dolah Badawi hanyalah seekor jerung–sekali-kali bukan jerung besar melainkan jerung yang sudah patah taringnya, iaitu Kasitah Gaddam. Itulah satu-satunya orang yang boleh dikatakan terlibat dengan rasuah.
Tentang Eric Chia–dia bukan pemakan rasuah. Dia lebih tepat dikatakan penyalahgunaan kuasa atau penggelap wang. Wang syarikat besi waja digunakan untuk kepentingannya. Berbeza dengan pemakan rasuah. Pemakan rasuah menerima sesuatu daripada pihak kedua demi kepentingannya.
Kemudian kejayaan Dolah Badawi yang paling GEMILANG ialah membebaskan dua orang menteri daripada tuduhan rasuah, sedangkan kes rasuah seorang menteri itu sudah siap hendak dibawa kepada pengadilan.
Sesudah itu Dolah Badawi diam seribu bahasa. Tidak lagi dia berbicara tentang rasuah, kecuali apabila timbul laporan bahwa korupsi berlaku dalam jabatan polis dari atas sampai ke akar-akar umbinya. Kata Dolah Badawi, ‘Rasuah tidak mudah dihapuskan dalam sehari.’
Memang tidak mudah dihapuskan dan tugas itu menjadi lebih sukar apabila yang terang-terang rasuah DIBEBASKAN.
Kini muncul pula Setiausaha Agung UMNO Datuk Radzi Sheikh Ahmad yang dengan gagah juga–mahu melawan tauke agaknya–mengatakan UMNO akan memerangi politik wang sampai ke akar-akar umbinya.
Katanya, ‘Kami tidak akan melindungi sesiapa. Yang terlibat dengan perbuatan membeli undi akan dikenakan tindakan keras, biar betapa tinggi sekalipun kedudukannya.’
Sebagai contoh tentang kesungguhan UMNO memerangi politik wang ini, beberapa hari yang lalu seorang ketua bahagian telah digantung jawatannya tetapi seorang Timbalan Menteri terlepas dengan hanya mendapat amaran. Barangkali jawatan Timbalan Menteri itu belum cukup tinggi!
Kita tunggulah hasilnya!

¶ 10:51 PM

47 TAHUN SELEPAS MERDEKA
BAGAIMANA RAKYAT DAN NEGARA?

Syed Husin Ali

Pada 31 hari bulan Ogos ini, negara dengan rasmi menyambut ulang tahun ke-47 Merdeka, walaupun ramai di Sabah dan Sarawak menganggap mereka mencapai kemerdekaan hanya selepas meyertai Malaysia 41 tahun lalu (pada tahun 1963). Sekali lagi sambutan besar-besaran diadakan, kali ini di Kuantan. Tetapi, adakah Merdeka sudah menyelesaikan masalah-masalah pokok yang dihadapi negara dan rakyat?

Cuba kita tumpukan kepada dua masalah pokok dalam bidang politik dan ekonomi.

Di zaman pejajahan, British telah membentuk masyarakat majmuk di Malaysia (ketika itu Malaya) dengan menggalakkan kemasukan buruh serta golongan lain, terutama dari Cina, India dan Indonesia. Mereka ini boleh dikatakan melakukan aktiviti ekonomi yang berasingan, meneruskan budaya, agama serta bahasa yang berbeza, dan hidup dalam kawasan atau komunti berlainan. Dengan ini mudahlah bagi penjajah Inggeris melanjutkan penjajahannya dengan melaksanakan dasar “pecah dan perintah”.

Sekarang, setelah Merdeka, dasar yang sama masih dijalankan. Sungguhpun berlaku sepanjang masa, namun dasar itu dijelmakan dengan sangat terbuka sebelum tiap-tiap pilihanraya umum. Ketika itu isu kaum dan agama dibakar melalui alat-alat pemerintah dan media yang mereka kuasai untuk menimbulkan ketakutan oleh kerana ancaman sekatan, ketegangan, bahkan pergaduhan kaum, yang kononnya boleh berlaku dalam negara dan di kalangan rakyat seandainya pemerintahan BN jatuh.

Institusi-institusi penting masih diasing-asingkan dan dipetak-petakkan mengikut kaum dan agama. Tidak ada penentuan dasar dan galakan rancangan untuk memastikan keseimbangan yang lebih rasional dari segi bilangan orang Melayu dalam kegiatan ekonomi serta industri kecil dan sederhana, dan bilangan orang bukan Melayu dalam bidang pentadbiran awam. Walaupun melalui sistem pendidikan, pemberian biasiswa dan penentuan kuota, bilangan Melayu dalam pelbagai profesyen (seperti doktor, jurutera, akauntan, dll) sudah bertambah, tetapi pertambahan itu masih dianggap belum mencukupi. Lagi pula, malangnya soal biasiswa dan kuota itu memburukkan lagi hubungan kaum dan tidak membantu proses perpaduan kaum.

Tidak wujud keazaman politik, terutama di kalangan pemerintah, untuk mendirikan parti-parti politik yang mempunyai anggota dan dasar yang tidak perkauman. Bahkan hampir semua parti dalam Barisan Nasional terbatas hanya pada satu kaum dan menyuarakan lebih banyak tuntutan untuk kepentingan kaumnya saja.

Setelah begitu lama Merdeka sepatutnya parti dan politik perkauman tidak digalakkan lagi. Seterusnya, tidak ada dorongan serta motivasi yang cukup untuk membuka pintu angkatan tentera dan pasukan polis dan menarik kaum bukan Melayu memasukinya. Memang benar orang Cina tidak suka memasuki askar atau polis, tetapi adakah usaha dan galakan yang cukup telah dibuat untuk menarik mereka?

Malangnya, sekarang ini pemecahan dan pengasingan institusi penting bukan saja semakin bertambah ketara, bahkan bertambah buruk. Dalam sistem pendidikan, dari sekolah rendah sampai ke peringkat universiti, tanda-tanda keretakan semakin jelas dan teruk. Sistem ini menimbulkan pemisahan dari segi bahasa pengantar, bahkan juga latar belakang kaum serta ekonomi penuntut atau pelajarnya.

Dari segi kesihatan pula, semakin banyak hospital swasta dibina di samping hospital awam, yang secara kebetulan menarik pesakit dari golongan yang berbeza kemampuan dan juga kaum. Selain itu, semakin bertambah pula bilangan hospital yang didirikan oleh kaum tertentu, yang sudah tentu menumpukan pelanggan dari kaum itu juga.

Bukanlah maksud di sini hendak menyekat sama sekali kebebasan mendirikan sekolah, universiti dan hospital bukan kerajaan. Yang hendak ditekankan ialah, malangnya pemerintah tidak mempunyai visi, dasar dan program yang boleh mengawal berbagai-bagai pengasingan dan perbezaan yang berlaku daripada membawa masyarakat hanyut ke gelora pertentangan dan perpecahan kaum, sehingga tidak boleh dibaiki lagi.

Yang berbahayanya sekarang ini ialah bahwa sekolah, universiti atau hospital itu didirikan di luar sistem pemerintahan. Maka akibatnya timbullah rasa tidak puas hati, terpinggir atau terasing di kalangan orang-orang yang mendirikannya. Hal ini merupakan sejenis penentangan di kalangan sebahagian rakyat. Sama juga seperti kengganan sesetengah pemuda menyertai khidmat negara menjelmakan penentangan mereka terhadap berbagai-bagai perkara yang mereka anggap tidak adil. Mereka merasa terpinggir dan dinafikan hak sebagai rakyat hingga sanggup menentang tanpa mengira apa risikonya.

Punca asas segala masalah ini perlu dikaji, dikenalpasti dan diatasi. Jikalau tidak, masalah membina perpaduan bangsa dan negara akan terus gagal, walaupun berapa kali lagi kita merayakan ulang tahun kemerdekaan, beribu jalur gemilang dikibar dan pucuk pimpinan menyeru kepada perpaduan, patriotisme dan sebagainya.

Apabila rakyat, terutama rakyat keturunan Melayu berjuang untuk kemerdekaan, mereka berharap akan dapat mencapai perubahan yang besar dalam nasib atau taraf hidupnya. Negara ini mempunyai banyak sumber kekayaan. Malangnya, di bawah penjajahan sebahagian besar rakyat Melayu terperangkapkan dalam kegiatan ekonomi tradisional yang tidak begitu produktif. Ramai antara mereka hidup dalam kemiskinan, dan kurang mendapat kemudahan pendidikan, kesihatan serta perumahan yang baik.

Memang diakui bahwa selepas 47 tahun Merdeka, banyak perubahan sudah berlaku dan taraf hidup orang Melayu kelihatan bertambah baik. Kadar kemiskinan sudah menurun daripada hampir 60 peratus kepada kira-kira 10 peratus. Sungguhpun kemiskinan “teras” (hardcore) berkurangan, akan tetapi sebenarnya kemiskinan perbandingan bertambah buruk. Maksudnya, secara perbandingan jurang antara golongan kaya-miskin atau berada-tak berada semakin bertambah melebar, kerana kekayaan tertumpu di tangan segelintir orang yang mudah mendapat peluang sebab mereka rapat dengan pihak yang memonopoli kuasa.

Sering disuarakan tentang jurang yang semakin melebar antara orang Melayu dengan orang bukan Melayu (khususnya Cina) dan antara kampung dengan bandar. Akan tetapi, tidak kurang seriusnya pula ialah melebarnya jurang antara segelintir Melayu yang paling kaya dengan bilangan besar Melayu yang miskin atau sederhana hidupnya.

Walaupun pada umumnya pendapatan golongan bawahan dan pertengahan yang miskin dan sederhana ini bertambah baik, tetapi oleh sebab kenaikan harga barang-barang keperluan dan juga kemudahan perkhidmatan sosial, seperti kesihatan, pendidikan dan perumahan, kehidupan mereka bertambah sempit.

Dalam beberapa minggu lalu banyak sekali pemimpin UMNO dan juga media berbahasa Melayu yang menimbulkan soal Agenda Melayu. Mereka mengeluh kemajuan orang Melayu lebih pada kulit daripada isi. Mereka merungut bahwa orang Melayu masih ketinggalan, berbanding dengan bukan Melayu. Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) lebih banyak menekankan penciptaan kumpulan korporat kroni besar dalam bidang perniagaan dan perindustrian. Mereka pun tidak begitu berjaya. Walaupun mereka sendiri menjadi kaya raya, namun syarikat-syarikat besar yang diamanahkan kepada mereka, seperti Renong dan Mas, hampir lingkup.

Semakin dekat perayaan Merdeka dan semakin hampir Perhimpunan Agung UMNO, semakin kuat lagi keluhan dan rungutan mereka tentang nasib orang Melayu. Jikalau benar rungutan dan keluhan mereka, apakah yang telah dibuat oleh pemimpin-pemimpin utama Kerajaan sejak Merdeka? Janganlah hendaknya kita menang sorak saja!

¶ 10:47 PM

KEDILAN RAKYAT KELANTAN BETAMBAH KUKUH

Kedudukan Parti Keadilan Rakyat Negeri Kelantan bertambah kukuh setelah mendapat pimpinan baru. Biro Politik Keadilan Rakyat sebulan lalu telah mengesahkan perlantikan Nik Mahmud bin Haji Nik Hassan sebagai Pengerusi Perhubungan Negeri Kelantan, dan Haji Saufi bin Daud, Dr Prathap serta Abdullah Abdul Hamid sebagai Timbalan Pengerusi.

Nik Mahmud adalah seorang tokoh korporat dan pernah menjadi Pengerus Besar Perbadanan Kemajuan Iktisad Negeri Kelantan. Beliau anak seorang guru agama, cucu Haji Wan Musa yang pernah menjadi mufti Kelantan, dan cicit Tuan Tabal, seorang ulamak terkenal. Haji Saufi pernah menjadi anggota Parlimen penggal lalu, Dr Prathap seorang pengamal perubatan dan Abdullah pula seorang peniaga.

Dua minggu kemudian Pengerusi, dengan persetujuan mesyuarat Jawatankuasa Perhubungan Negeri, telah melantik Nik Hassan bin Nik Yahya sebagai Setiausaha, Nik Aziz bin Haji Nik Hassan sebagai Ketua Penerangan dan seorang Bendahari. Selepas Mesyuarat Agung Bahagian-bahagian nanti, wakil masing-masing akan dipilih untuk menjadi ahli Jawatankuasa Perhubungan Negeri.

Boleh dikatakan hampir semua pimpinan Keadilan Rakyat Negeri Kelantan terdiri daripada muka-muka baru yang berwibawa. Nik Aziz, selaku Ketua Penerangan, memberitahu kami bahwa kira-kira 500 orang anggota baru akan memasuki Keadilan Rakyat. Mengikut Ketua Angkatan Muda Keadilan Kelantan, Zamakh Sari, Keadilan Rakyat Negeri Kelantan tidak terjejas sama sekali dengan kemasukan beberapa orang anggota ke dalam parti PAS.

Lima orang bekas pemimpin Keadilan Nasional Kelantan, diketuai oleh Haji Muhammad Mustafa, telah mengumumkan mereka masuk PAS. Pengumuman mereka dibuat selepas pimpinan baru Keadilan Rakyat Kelantan diputuskan. Ertinya, mereka yang keluar itu tida mempunyai apa-apa jawatan dalam Keadilan apabila mereka memasuki PAS.

“Mereka tidak menghadiri mesyuarat yang dipanggil kerana tahu tidak akan dipilih oleh sebab pimpinan mereka tidak disenangi oleh majoriti bahagian,” demikian disebut oleh Ketua Penerangan.

Suara diberitahu bahwa pimpinan baru Keadilan Rakyat Kelantan merasa tidak puas hati kerana segala rekod dan fail parti masih belum diserahkan oleh pimpinan lama. Mereka berharap penyerahan ini tidak akan dilengah-lengahkan. Lagi pula ada perkara-perkara yang berkaitan dengan kewangan pilihan raya yang masih belum diselesaikan.

Namun begitu, ramai anggota parti dan juga masyarakat mengharapkan Keadilan Rakyat di bawah pimpinan Nik Mahmud akan berkembang dengan pesat secara bebas tanpa memerlukan naungan daripada parti lain.
¶ 10:45 PM

Isteri Tahanan ISA:
Memperjuangkan Kebebasan Suami

Norlaila Osman, isteri tahanan ISA, Mat Sah Mohd Satray yang ditahan di bawah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) kerana dituduh terlibat dalam Kumpulan Militan Malaysia (KMM) berjanji akan berjuang demi kebebasan suaminya.

Ibu kepada seorang anak ini mengaku bahwa pada awalnya beliau enggan menonjolkan diri selepas suaminya ditangkap. Namun, kini beliau merasakan bahwa beliau tidak mempunyai banyak pilihan.

“Sekiranya saya duduk di rumah pun, suami saya masih ditahan,” kata Norlaila.

Mat Sah yang telah ditahan selama 2 tahun sepatutnya bebas pada 12 Jun lepas tetapi tempoh tahanannya disambung dua tahun lagi.

Norlaila kini membantu Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI) dan mengikuti sebarang program yang dianjurkan oleh GMI.

Beliau telah diundang oleh Jawatankuasa GMI menghadiri majlis forum sempena memperingati akta kejam itu di negara ini selama 44 tahun.

Dalam majlis tersebut, Norlaila juga sempat menceritakan kisah sewaktu polis datang ke rumahnya pada tengah malam untuk menangkap suaminya.

“Polis telah menyelongkar rumahnya untuk mencari bahan bukti bagi penahanan,” kata Norlaila.

Menurut Norlaila, orang ramai perlu diberi pendedahan betapa zalimnya akta ini (ISA). Beliau percaya suaminya telah diberi tekanan mental ketika sesi soal-siasat hingga suaminya mengalami trauma ketika pertama kali berjumpa dengannya selepas tiga minggu ditahan.

Oleh sebab tidak ada apa bahan yang boleh diambil untuk menuduh suaminya ahli KMM, gambar Saari Sungib telah dirampas dan digunakan sebagai pertuduhan.

Saari Sungib yang juga hadir pada majlis tersebut memberitahu orang supaya jangan percaya akan kata-kata dan janji pegawai penyiasat semasa dalam 60 hari pertama penahanan.

Dalam majlis tersebut, dua buah filem pendek telah ditayangkan untuk tontonan umum, ‘Road to Kamunting’ dan ‘Big Durian’ arahan Amir Muhamad.

Majlis tersebut juga dihadiri oleh peguam Norlaila, Latheefa Koya.

¶ 10:43 PM

Suhakam Diminta Memantau Pilihanraya Kampus

Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia (SUHAKAM) diminta memberi perhatian yang serius terhadap kebebasan bersuara dan hak mahasiswa di Institusi Pengajian
Tinggi Awam (IPTA) bagi mempertahankan matlamat utama institusi itu, iaitu melahirkan cendekiawan.

Sehubungan dengan itu, beberapa persatuan mahasiswa yang bernaung di bawah Solidariti Mahasiswa Malaysia (SMM) telah menghantar memorandum kepada Suhakam supaya memantau pilihan raya kampus yang akan berlangsung serentak tidak lama lagi.

Menurut memorandum tesebut, perjalanan pilihan raya kampus yang lepas nyata menindas hak mahasiswa sebagai pengundi dengan terdapatnya kes pelaksanaan 'e-voting', pengambilan nombor siri kertas undi serta halangan kepada mahasiswa untuk menjadi calon.

Memorandum setebal tujuh muka surat itu juga menegaskan di dalamnya bahwa hak-hak demokrasi yang patut dinikmati oleh mahasiswa ketika pilihan
raya tersebut telah dinafikan sepenuhnya oleh pihak-pihak tertentu.

Memorandum tersebut telah dibacakan oleh Pengerusi SMM, Khairil Anwar Mat Zuki; Wakil kelab Rakan Islah Mahasiswa (Karisma), Naim Jusri; Jawatankuasa Kebajikan Mahasiswa-mahasiswi (JKMI), Rama dan Setiausaha
Pergerakan Mahasiswa Demokratik (Demma), Lih Kang dalam pertemuan mereka dengan Naib Pengerusi Suhakam, Tan Sri Datuk Simon Sipaun pada awal bulan Ogos lalu.

Hampir 50 orang mahasiswa dari pelbagai IPTA hadir dalam pertemuan di pejabat Suhakam tersebut.

Seperti yang diberitahukan oleh Khiril kepada akhbar alternatif Harakahdaily.net, beberapa tuntutan yang dikemukakan dalam memorandum tersebut
merupakan cetusan keperihatinan sebahagian besar mahasiswa yang mahu menghayati erti demokrasi.
"Justeru itu kami mahukan mahasiswa di negara ini mendapat hak dan kebebasan sepenuhnya ketika menyertai pilihan raya kampus akan datang
sebagaimana yang telah diperuntukkan dalam perlembagaan.

"Sewajarnya mahasiswa diberi peluang tersebut bagi memastikan bakat kepimpinan yang ada pada mereka tidak pudar begitu saja tanpa adanya gilapan melalui realiti kehidupan kampus," kata beliau.

Sehubungan itu, antara permintaan pelajar-pelajar termasuklah perluwesan prosedur pencalonan bagi mengelakkan pelbagai kerenah birokrasi yang merumitkan, kebebasan untuk bertanding secara kumpulan atau individu serta kerahsiaan undi.

Menurut Naim pula, pihaknya menggesa Suhakam mewujudkan satu garis panduan dan etika pilihan raya dalam proses perlantikan Majlis Perwakilan Pelajar (MPP) yang bersifat umum dan selaras dengan semua kampus.
Kata beliau, garis panduan sebelum ini terlalu fleksibel hingga mudah diubahsuai oleh mana-mana pihak tertentu mengikut kepentingan politiknya.
Suhakam juga diminta menubuhkan jawatankuasa pemantau terhadap urusetia yang mengendalikan proses pilihanraya kampus untuk mengelakkan penyelewengan seperti ugutan dari pihak pentadbiran IPTA.

Lih Kang pula, ketika membacakan memorandum itu, berkata, pelaksanaan kaedah 'e-voting' di beberapa kampus utama merupakan ancaman terkini terhadap hak mahasiswa yang sebelum ini dijanjikan dengan perjalanan
pembuangan undi secara rahsia.

Sementara itu Rama menggesa Suhakam supaya memastikan kebebasan mahasiswa memilih mana-mana calon atau dipilih menjadi calon tanpa dikenakan tekanan.q

Dipetik dari Harakahdaily.net

¶ 10:42 PM

Merdeka: Siapa yang Merdeka?

SEMINGGU lagi kita akan menyambut hari kemerdekaan yang ke-47–sudah hampir separuh baya umur negeri kita. Kerajaan sibuk mengatur acara untuk menyambut hari tersebut dan rakyat turut diminta memberi sokongan yang penuh kepada acara penyambutan ini. Apatah lagi inilah pertama kali pemimpin besar kita Imam Hadhari akan mengetuai upacara penyambutan ini.
Sebahagian besar rakyat secara melulu akan menyambut hari ini, bukan kerana mempunyai pengertian yang penuh terhadap erti kemerdekaan itu, melainkan untuk berseronok-seronok dan berpesta-pesta. Itulah saja erti kemerdekaan bagi kebanyakan orang.
Sebenarnya sambutan hari kemerdekaan itu bukanlah sambutan yang berupa pesta-pestaan melainkan untuk mengenangkan perjuangan generasi yang sebelumnya, yang telah berkorban, untuk merebut kemerdekaan itu. Meskipun kemerdekaan kita tidak banyak menumpahkan darah–tidak seperti Indonesia, misalnya–namun pengorbanan pejuang-pejuang kita yang lalu amatlah besar.
Sayangnya perjuangan mereka ini dilupakan–sengaja dilupakan oleh pemerintah sekarang semata-mata untuk menutup kelemahannya kerana tidak mempunyai tradisi berkorban dan berjuang..
Perjuangan tokoh-kokoh kita yang lalu untuk mencapai kemerdekaan bukanlah untuk kemegahan dan kemewahan dirinya sendiri. Mereka menghendaki negara dengan rakyatnya bebas menentukan nasibnya sendiri di dunia internasional serta berjiwa besar. Sayangnya perjuangan mereka itu tidak tercapai sepenuhnya sebelum mereka pergi.
Memang pada mulanya kebebasan itu dapat dirasakan sedikit di bawah Tunku, Tuan Razak dan Tun Hussein. Tetapi di bawah Mahathir dan kini di bawah Imam Hadhari, kebebasan itu sudah terhakis habis. Kita tidak bebas lagi–malah dijajah oleh pemimpin-pemimpin yang gelojoh kuasa dan wang.
Kehilangan kebebasan ini sangat dirasakan oleh semua golongan yang mahu berfikir.

1. Golongan Pegawai Kerajaan dan Peniaga
Kedua-dua golongan ini kini paling tertekan. Berbicaralah dengan mereka tentang soal politik dan kita akan mendapati mereka agak takut-takut pengeluarkan pendapatnya–apatah lagi mengkritik kerajaan–kepada orang yang tidak mereka kenal betul sedangkan dalam negara yang merdeka siapa saja boleh berbicara tentang politik, kerana politik bukan milik pemerintah saja. Setiap orang bebas memilih dasar politik yang sesuai dengan cita rasanya.
Sayangnya perkara ini tidak ada di negeri kita sekarang ini. Orang kerajaan takut mengemukakan pendapatnya dengan terang kerana nanti akan dikenakan tindakan disiplin dalam bentuk dipindahkan ke tempat terpencil, dipecat, tidak dinaikkan pangkat dan lain-lain lagi.
Para peniaga–yang dimaksudkan peniaga di sini ialah orang yang mendapat kontrak dengan kerajaan–juga tidak lepas daripada perasaan takut ini. Mereka senantiasa bimbang kalau-kalau mereka akan disingkirkan baik kerana kebetulan mereka menyokong parti pembangkang secara diam-diam tetapi akhirnya terbongkar oleh kesilapan sendiri ataupun difitnahkan orang kerana iri hati.
Di negara yang merdeka perkara ini tidak seharusnya berlaku kerana wang kerajaan bukanlah wang parti pemerintah yang hanya akan diagih-agihkan kepada penyokong parti. Setiap orang, biar apa jua pendirian politiknya, harus diberi hak yang sama memperoleh kontrak daripada kerajaan berdasarkan kebolehan dan kemampuannya.
Berdasarkan perkara-perkara di atas apakah kita sebenarnya merdeka?

2. Suara Rakyat Biasa Terkongkong
Rakyat di negeri yang merdeka mempunyai hak bersuara tentang apa jua yang tidak disenanginya. Apakah hak ini ada pada kita sekarang ini?
Ketika bahasa Inggeris hendak dijadikan bahasa pengantar sains dan matematik tahun pertama di sekolah rendah, banyak orang yang menentangnya tetapi mereka diancam oleh kerajaan dengan penahanan di bawah ISA. Selain itu tidak ada ruang bagi penentang rancangan ini menyuarakan tentangannya dalam bentuk apa pun. Hanya kerajaan saja yang bebas menyuarakan pendapatnya.
Yang paling ketara ialah dalam hal pemilihanraya. Hanya kerajaan yang bebas bersuara di kaca tv maupun di suratkhabar. Pembangkang tidak diberi ruang sama sekali untuk bersuara. Malahan izin untuk mengadakan ceramah juga sukar diperoleh. Malah ada pula tokoh politik yang ditahan dan dibawa pergi dengan berigari–seolah-olah penjenayah–ketika berceramah di markas partinya sendiri setelah pilihan raya tamat.
Antara negara-negara ASEAN, kecuali Burma yang sememangnya negara diktator, Malaysia dan Singapura sajalah yang rakyatnya tidak bebas bersuara. Meskipun Filipina menghadapi kekacauan di selatan dan Indonesia dengan ancaman pengeboman di sana sini namun dalam pilihanraya baru-baru ini rakyatnya bebas berkempen tanpa perlu izin dari pihak polis. Mereka juga bebas mengadakan protes jika ada sesuatu perkara besar yang tidak mereka senangi.
Berdasarkan fakta di atas, apakah kita merdeka?

3 Kebebasan Media Massa
Kebebasan media massa juga merupakan ciri kemerdekaan dan demokrasi. Suratkhabar yang bebas dapat membentuk fikiran rakyat. Tetapi sayangnya suratkhabar kita tidak bebas menjalankan tugasnya, baik kerana ditekan maupun kerana pilihan sendiri untuk mendampingi kerajaan. Isinya boleh dikatakan hampas dan banyak yang bohong daripada yang benar. Para pemberitanya tidak malu-malu memutarbelitkan kenyataan atau pendapat parti pembangkang. Apa jua pendapat pemimpin pemerintah, meskipun pendapat itu bodoh, dibesar-besarkan.
Yang nampak bebas ialah majalah hiburan dan lucah yang berpuluh-puluh buah terbitnya. Maka tidaklah menghairankan kelau banyak terjadi kes rogol dalam kalangan orang Melayu. Kerajaan tidak hendak memajukan mentaliti rakyat kerana takut nanti rakyat lebih matang daripada pemimpinnya sendiri. Maka oleh sebab itu majalah hiburan diberi izin sebanyak-banyaknya agar anak-anak muda kita terus khayal untuk mencari glamor sebagai penyanyi dan bintang filem.
Apakah ini tanda kita merdeka?

4. KEBEBASAN BADAN KEHAKIMAN

Badan kehakiman kita kini sudah menjadi bahan tertawaan dunia, terutama dengan penghakiman terhadap Sdr Anwar Ibrahim. Hampir tidak orang yang percaya akan mendapat keadilan daripada badan kehakiman kita, sedangkan badan kehakiman ialah salah satu tonggak pemerintahan demokrasi. Namun begitu Ketua Hakim Negara kita dengan tidak malu-malu pernah mengatakan bahwa badan kehakiman kita ialah yang terbaik di rantau Asia Tenggara.
Memang badan kehakiman itu baik bagi dirinya kerana dia telah diangkat menjadi KHN melampaui beberapa orang hakim lain yang lebih kanan semata-mata kerana dia telah menjadi kaki Mahathir. Kini dia bertakhta di Palace of Justice (keadilan dan pengadilan tidak boleh dipakai lagi sebab tidak setaraf dengan istilah Inggeris).
Kalau orang yang begitu tinggi kedudukannya dalam negeri dapat diperlakukan dengan kejam, apakah harapan orang biasa untuk mendapat keadilan daripada badan kehakiman?
Apakah ini juga tanda kemerdekaan kita?

5. KEBEBASAN AGAMA

Dengan alasan untuk menjaga keharmonian masyarakat konon, maka kegiatan agama Islam disekat-sekat. Untuk itu UMNO berusaha merampas pentadbiran mesjid-mesjid dan hanya orang-orang tertentu saja yang diizinkan berceramah atau memberi khutbah. Maka dengan itu kebanyakan isi khutbah hambar dan perkara yang sama juga diulang-ulang dengan bentuk yang lain.
Malah ada pula surau yang dirobohkan kerana memanggil penceramah dari pihak pembangkang berceramah.
Sekatan terhadap perkembangan agama ini mencapai puncaknya dengan penarikan bantuan kepada Sekolah Agama Rakyat kerana sekolah-sekolah ini dituduh konon menjadi penghasut menentang kerajaan. Bukan pendidikan agama saja yang rugi malahan banyak pula pengusaha dan pendidik sekolah-sekolah ini yang rugi kerana tindakan ini.
Masih lagi mahu kita mengatakan kita merdeka?

SIAPA YANG MERDEKA?

Jadi siapa yang sebenarnya merdeka?
Jawapannya mudah saja–pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO sekarang. Mereka boleh berbuat apa saja–boleh menggunakan wang rakyat untuk kepentingannya sendiri seolah-olah wang rakyat milik bapanya seperti yang dilakukan oleh bekas PM kita Mahathir yang menghadiahkan RM100 ribu kepada sahabatnya Mugabe tanpa kelulusan dan pengetahuan kabinetnya. Dan pemberian ini disokong oleh Najib dengan mengatakan bahwa memang biasa di kalangan orang-orang besar negara memberikan hadiah kepada rakan sejawatnya. Sampai RM100 ribu dan dengan sembunyi-sembunyi?
Mereka inilah yang sebenarnya merdeka untuk mengaut keuntungan demi membuncitkan perut sendiri. Betapa tidak? Lihatlah wakil-wakil rakyat UMNO–siapa antara mereka yang tidak kaya raya? Seorang ADUN di Kedah mempunyai istana di Kuala Lumpur. Pernah sekali seorang ADUN di Negeri Sembilan yang baru saja sepenggal menjadi ADUN mempunyai harta yang begitu banyak hingga isterinya ketika bercerai menuntut RM2 juta kepadanya. Isteri tokoh UMNO yang lain pula menuntut RM11 juta kepada bekas suaminya.
Di kalangan pengikutnya pula ada ahli-ahli UMNO yang ke sana sini–terutama di Selangor–yang mengancam akan mengambil tindakan terhadap penjual-penjual suratkhabar pembangkang, mengganggu keharmonian mesjid dengan berusaha merampas badan pentadbiran mesjid hanya sekadar untuk menunjukkan kuasanya saja.
Begitulah ciri kemerdekaan yang ada pada kita dan yang hendak kita sambut dengan besar-besaran. Sesungguhnya selagi kita mempunyai kerajaan seperti sekarang ini selama itulah kita tidak merdeka dalam erti kata yang sebenarnya. Kita hanya merdeka daripada penjajahan oleh kuasa asing tetapi dijajah oleh orang-orang yang tamak, rakus dan tidak tahu akan keadilan dan bobrok.

¶ 10:39 PM

Kes G Francis: Ada udang di balik batu
Oleh Ang Hiok Gai

Kes yang Sengaja Dirumitkan

Seketika dulu pihak polis mengatakan G Francis Udayappan telah mati lemas akibat melarikan diri dari Ibu Pejabat Polis Daerah Brickfields pada 16 April 2004 dan terjun ke dalam Sungai Klang. Tetapi kini pihak polis pula yang mencuba membangkitkan teori bahwa dia masih hidup.

Kalau G Francis masih hidup, mengapa dia langsung tidak menghubungi ibunya, Sara Lily, agar ibunya tidak menjadi bimbang?

G Francis, berumur 24 tahun, adalah seorang peniaga VCD (cakera padat video). Dia telah ditahan oleh polis pada 14 April 2004 di rumahnya di Kampung Datuk Senu, Sentul kerana disyaki mencuri sebuah motosikal yang digunakannya. Dia juga disyaki mencuri sebuah telefon bimbit.

Walaubagaimanapun, kes G Francis ini hanya disyaki melibatkan pencurian dan bukannya kes yang berat. Buat apa dia mahu melarikan diri sedangkan melarikan diri dari balai polis berisiko besar? Polis boleh menembaknya kerana mencuba melarikan diri.

Ibu G Francis sama sekali tidak menerima penjelasan daripada pihak polis sedangkan dia sendiri tahu betul bahwa anaknya tidak tahu berenang. Maka, kalau G Francis sendiri terjun ke dalam Sungai Klang berertilah dia mencari maut.

Mayat ditemui

Sara mendakwa anaknya telah dibelasah sehingga mati semasa dalam tahanan polis dan kemudian dicampakkan ke dalam sungai itu.

Pada 23 Mei, setelah lebih sebulan G Francis dikatakan melarikan diri, suatu mayat telah ditemui dan dikeluarkan dari Sungai Klang.

Sara telah dihubungi untuk mengecamkan mayat itu. Pada pertama kali, Sara tidak dapat mengecamkan mayat yang berlumpur dan berbau busuk itu. Pada kali kedua, Sara mendapati bahwa mayat itu mayat anaknya.

Setelah mendapati mayat itu mayat anaknya, Sara telah berkali-kali mencuba mengeluarkannya dari Pusat Perubatan Universiti Malaya (PPUM) agar mayat itu dapat dikebumikannya. Akan tetapi, dia gagal berbuat begitu kerana pihak polis tidak mahu percaya bahwa mayat yang teruk cedera dan berlebam itu mayat anaknya.

Pada 7 Jun, lebih dua minggu selepas mayat itu ditemui, saya dan rakan-rakan bersama Sara dan peguamnya pergi ke PPUM untuk menuntut mayat itu atau setidak-tidaknya mendapat laporan bedah siasat mayat itu. Tetapi gagal juga. Pihak hospital enggan bekerjasama dan memberitahu bahwa banyak lagi ujian yang perlu dilakukan.

Pihak polis telah menjalankan dua kaji ujian DNA dan keputusan mereka adalah bahwa mayat itu bukan mayat anak Sara dan suaminya. Namun, ibu G Francis tidak mahu menerima keputusan itu kerana dia pasti mayat itu mayat anaknya.

Ujian DNA Sekali Lagi

Maka Sara menuntut ujian DNA dijalankan oleh pihak berkecuali. Sungguhpun Sara, melalui peguamnya N Surendran, telah memperoleh kebenaran untuk menjalankan ujian DNA oleh pihak berkecuali pada 20 Julai, tetapi hingga hari ini ujian DNA itu masih belum dapat dijalankan.

Mayat yang tersimpan di PPUM itu atau sekurang-kurangnya sampelnya masih tidak dibenarkan dibawa ke NISF (National Institute of Forensic Science) untuk dijalankan ujian DNA ke atasnya.

Mengapakah pihak berkuasa tidak sanggup menyelesaikan kes G Francis secara terus terang? Kalau mayat itu bukan mayat G Francis, siapakah orang? Siapakah yang berketurunan India dan kira-kira sama umurnya dengan G Francis turut terjun ke dalam Sungai Klang?

Sepatutnya, identiti mayat itu boleh diselesaikan dengan lebih cepat dan mudah jika pihak berkuasa tidak menyekat ujian DNA yang telah disetujui oleh NISF untuk dijalankannya. Buat apa takut, jika pihak polis yakin dengan kebenaran ujian DNAnya?

Baru-baru ini, M Puravelan, peguam Sara, dan Amer Hamzah Arshad, wakil Majlis Peguam, tidak dibenarkan menyoal siasat saksi-saksi (pegawai polis) berhubung dengan kes G Francis dalam penyiasatan oleh mahkamah (judicial inquest) pada 10 Ogos. Sekali lagi, apakah yang menakutkan pihak berkuasa?

[Menurut berita terakhir Mahkamah Tinggi telah membenarkan peguam Sara menyoal siasat-siasat pegawai polis dalam penyiasatan mahkamah itu.]

Mangsa Keganasan Polis?

Usaha pihak berkuasa yang menyekat usaha mahu menegakkan kebenaran hanya memperkuat tuduhan yang dilemparkan oleh Sara bahwa pihak polis, pihak hospital dan pihak mahkamah bersekongkol menyembunyikan keganasan polis terhadap anaknya.

Kalau Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim boleh ditutup matanya, digari tangannya dan kemudian dibelasah oleh Ketua Polis Negara sehingga nyaris mati ketika dalam lokap polis, masakan G Francis tidak boleh dibelasah hingga mati dalam tahanan polis. Itulah tuduhan yang dilontarkan oleh ibu G Francis kepada pihak polis.

Kes kematian semasa dalam lokap polis telah bertambah serius di negara kita. Menurut Laporan Hak Asasi Kemanusiaan Tahun 2002 (Malaysia: Human Rights Report 2002) Suaram, terdapat 6 kes itu pada tahun 2000, 10 pada tahun 2001 dan 18 pada tahun 2002. Kementerian Keselamatan Dalam Negeri sendiri melaporkan sebanyak 23 kes kematian berlaku dalam tahanan polis dari bulan Januari 2002 hingga bulan Julai 2003.

Kini Sara bersama keluarga-keluarga mangsa kematian semasa dalam tahanan polis telah berkali-kali berjumpa dengan pihak polis, Suhakam, Suruhanjaya Polis, Peguam Negara dan membuat puluhan laporan polis, namun tiada tindakan diambil oleh pihak berkuasa untuk menyelesaikan kes mereka.

Malah Sara telah juga menulis kepada Perdana Menteri merangkap Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, tetapi suratnya tidak pernah dijawab.

Tidakkah Abdullah berhati perut terhadap Anwar, G Francis dan lain-lain yang menjadi mangsa keganasan polis yang di bawah tanggungjawabnya selaku Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri?

Pada 20 Julai, Sara bersama keluarga-keluarga lain telah pergi ke Parlimen untuk menarik perhatian ahli-ahli Parlimen serta masyarakat umum terhadap kes mereka. Tampaknya, mereka tidak akan berdiam diri dan akan terus bergiat aktif selagi keadilan tidak ditegakkan.

Kes yang berbau konspirasi pihak berkuasa ini masih meleret-leret sesudah lebih empat bulan kononnya G Francis melarikan diri dan hampir tiga bulan setelah mayat yang banyak dipertikaikan itu ditemui.

Adakah kes G Francis salah satu kes kematian dalam tahanan polis atau dia mati lemas dalam sungai atau dia masih hidup? Apakah sebenarnya berlaku?
¶ 10:34 PM

Pergerakan politik anti-kolonial wanita dibukukan

Oleh: Faisal Mustaffa

Sebuah buku yang menceritakan pergerakan 16 pejuang wanita dari Thailand, Malaysia dan Singapura semasa darurat telah dibukukan oleh Agnes Khoo yang bertujuan untuk menyampaikan fakta sejarah kepada generasi muda.

Buku bertajuk Life as the River Flows: Women in the Malayan Anti-Colonial Struggle itu menyimpang daripada kajian sejarah dahulu yang memfokuskan kepada personaliti-personaliti raja dan dinasti. Buku tersebut memberitahu mengenai pergerakan rakyat terbanyak, kehidupan seharian, yang menjadi sejarah sosial bagi rantau ini.

Buku itu juga memberi pengetahuan mengenai peranan dan penyertaan wanita dalam pergerakan-pergerakan sosial seperti kesatuan sekerja dan penyertaan mereka dalam Parti Komunis Malaya.

Life as the River Flows juga memberi keseimbangan dalam puak kanan dan kiri serta sejarah pejuang lelaki dan wanita.

Menurut Agnes, beliau mengambil 6 tahun dalam menyiapkan buku tersebut sehingga terpaksa berkampung di selatan Thailand selama setahun untuk berjumpa mereka dan mendapatkan maklumat mengenai perjuangan mereka dahulu.

Agnes juga percaya bukunya yang setebal 312 halaman itu akan merapatkan hubungan Malaysia-Singapura yang mana selama ini diasingkan dengan propaganda. Menurut kajian beliau, kedua-dua negara ini mempunyai sejarah awal yang sama untuk dinikmati.

¶ 9:31 PM

Just a public holiday

Every August 31, Malaysians are made to feel duty-bound to roll out the Jalur Gemilang, either on their buildings or motor vehicles, as a sign of our patriotism. Government bodies don’t even have a choice and are directed to go all out and deck our cities and towns with flags.

All this showiness, and even then you don’t see a sea of cars with mini Jalur Gemilangs on the road. Does this indicate a lack of interest among the general populace in joining the celebration? Or is it a typical case of undemonstrative Malaysians who don’t feel compelled to wear our patriotism on our sleeves?

This lack of public interest is palpable enough to concern Deputy Home Affairs Minister Tan Chai Ho who said Malaysians should not regard August 31 as just another public holiday.

In a report in The Star Metro (Aug 19), he said it should be a day to remember what our forebears suffered to achieve independence for the nation.

That makes good sense. But it does not seem to be a priority for Pahang Menteri Besar Adnan Yaakob. The minister whose state is hosting the national celebrations this year was only concerned with building more arches and putting up more flags, instructing the state authorities and local councils to do so.
“If I can have it my way, I would like the Jalur Gemilang to hang from every light and telephone pole and tree. There should be more flags and banners. All of us should understand that we are not just celebrating the day on Aug 31 itself. We must show that the National Day is an eventful time that highlights the success of our country,” he was quoted in a Star report (Aug 19, 2004).
More kiasu-ism confirmed in his next quote: “Neighbouring countries have carried out impressive National Day celebrations, and we must prove that we can hold an event just as impressive, if not better.”
And how must the rakyat greet Merdeka Day?

Adnan’s thoughtful suggestion: “The people should also be more responsible and civic-minded by keeping their houses and surroundings clean.”

So the Menteri Besar is implying that Malaysians are generally uncivic-minded and a sloth when it comes to tidying up their homes (hey, great to know I’m not alone!), but no worries as long as they clean up their act for National Day.

For a dose of reality for the ministers, we asked a few Malaysians how they spent Merdeka last year and posed a few questions about the meaning of Merdeka.

Tellingly, all had treated it as just another public holiday and not even memorably at that.

However, there may be hope yet as the day still holds some reverence for them; just not as that time of the year to let loose our flag-flying fervour.

Here’s what they have to say:

How did you spend Merdeka Day last year?
Jonson Chong, 33, lawyer/politician: Can't remember, really.
Seah Li Ling, 30, student: Visited some old friends in Penang. But can't remember what we had exactly done on the Merdeka Day, so probably nothing special.
ARTIS MERDEKA, 38: Can't remember. Doing something at home, I think
Meng Yew Choong, 35, journalist: Can't remember. Probably not at work.
Clarissa Lee, 25+, research fellow: Didn't do anything memorable so I can't remember. Just another public holiday to me.
LFF, 30s, writer: Can't remember.
SOPHIA’S MOM, mid-30s, PR manager: Babysitting my kid
SOCIAL CRITIC, 52: Spend time at home with the family, watching TV.

How will you spend Merdeka Day this year?
Chong: Haven't thought about it.
Seah: No specific idea yet. It may be just another routine day.
ARTIS MERDEKA: Working at home...
Meng: Unlikely to be at work again.
Lee: Work. Maybe meet some friends, if I've the mood.
SOPHIA’S MOM: Most likely at home babysitting my kid.
LFF: Hope to go away somewhere; if not, hang out with friends.
SOCIAL CRITIC: The same as last year, but perhaps much more TV.

What does Merdeka Day mean to you?
Chong: Freedom. The greatest irony is this: you become free only when you realise that you are never truly free. When you submit to that that governs life on earth, you will taste freedom for the first time. You will be free and yet feel compelled to do so much.
Seah: A day to be remember our commitment to build a true nation of citizens from all ethnic groups.
ARTIS MERDEKA: It's good Malaysia is independent, but we are still in shackled in so many ways – mindset, especially.
Meng: It's my birthday. Day of Rest. If I am not at rest, then it is definitely a day where I can claim overtime. Otherwise, I can wake up a bit late, and reflect on another year to my life.
Lee: The day itself means nothing. I believe "merdeka" to be the spirit in you, whether you appreciate your freedom and the responsibilities that come with it, or whether you would rather live in bondage and be told what to do. However, it could be a day to remember that freedom of choice and expression are not won easily and could be easily lost. However, I think of this every day. Not only on one lousy celebration day, which is more hype than anything else. But I like the extra holiday!
SOPHIA’S MOM: Malaysia was freed from 'penjajah' in 1957.
LFF: An Older Malaysia.
SOCIAL CRITIC It means that there's a holiday to be celebrated.

Do you think it is the patriotic duty of all Malaysians to celebrate Merdeka Day? If so, how should it be celebrated?
Chong: Freedom should be relished and celebrated every day. It should be celebrated by using it to better ourselves, our lives. By doing that, doing the right thing for our nation will come naturally.
Seah: Not necessarily. Everyone has his/her own way of life, e.g. how to be patriotic, how to love and care, etc. Why should we judge others by our own views/standards? For me, diversity is one of the most wonderful things in this world.
ARTIS MERDEKA: If we could do at least one good thing for another human being or to the society and the environment, that would be very good.
Meng: Patriotism means always desiring the best for your country, and it is more than just flying the flag. It means not evading taxes, not bribing the traffic cop, and staying in line patiently to wait for your turn .... On how it should be celebrated, it should be a day of reflection on the current state of the nation, and how we can work towards a better society for all. It should not be another day for mere sloganeering (eg ‘Malaysia Boleh’ and all the other clichés).
Lee: Depends on what you mean by celebrate. Would one term partying and getting high a form of merdeka celebration? Or do we just make it a day of reflection and introspection? Or just another day for families to do things together by going to state-sponsored celebrations?
SOPHIA’S MOM: Not necessary to celebrate but recognise and remember the country's achievement of independence.
LFF: Yes, celebrate moderately, by reflecting and evaluating the country's strengths and weaknesses. See in what areas we can further achieve independence.
SOCIAL CRITIC: Yes and no. One can be patriotic on and off Merdeka Day. Patriotism is an on-going thing. Life doesn't necessarily stop on Merdeka Day. And, by the way, patriotism can be expressed without even hoisting the longest ever Jalur Gemilang in the country.

So if the opinions and hopes of these eight Malaysians are any indication of the sentiment out there, then the general lack of interest in the pivotal day is partly due to the government’s own superficial celebrations as well as its inability to meet our aspirations as a nation.

After all, in spite of his pronouncement that we should be thinking about our country’s heroes, the deputy home minister appeared to have other ideas of how Malaysians can celebrate Merdeka, if his action speaks louder than his words. They can go to shopping malls to catch stage performances and contests for families, for those were the plans for Endah Parade’s “Merdeka Muhibbah 2004” celebration which he launched in Kuala Lumpur.

The shopping centre’s celebration will last 20 days with a three-day karaoke contest thrown in. So all of you out there expecting yet another mundane and uneventful way of spending our 47th Merdeka Day, you might want to mosey along to the shopping centre and sing your heart out for our country.

That should please the deputy home minister.

Disclaimer: This is not a paid advertorial for Endah Parade. Any promotional vibe felt stems entirely from the deputy home minister’s stamp of approval to the event.
¶ 9:17 PM

PULANGKAN HAK PEKERJA GOODYEAR

Oleh: Faisal Mustaffa

Setelah rundingan gagal dikecapi, Kongres Kesatuan Pekerja Malaysia telah melancarkan boikot terhadap barangan Good Year pada 6 Ogos di Kompleks Sukan Matshushita, Shah Alam.

Pihak Kementerian Sumber Manusia telah gagal dalam mempertahankan hak pekerja di Malaysia.

Ahli jawatankuasa kesatuan telah diberhentikan cuba menghalang Good Year mengutamakan pekerja asing. Mohd Saad (exco NUECMRP, sebuah kesatuan pekerja) telah digantung dan kemudiannya diberhentikan pada 21 Januari kerana dikatakan ponteng tetapi sebenarnya beliau bercuti secara sah.

Sulaiman Amin (Naib Presiden NUECMRP) telah digantung pekerja dan kemudiannya dipecat gara-gara cuba mencampuri proses pengambilan pekerja.

Hisham bin Shariman (AJK NUECMRP) pula digantung sehingga notis diberikan.

Selain daripada pemecatan ahli jawatankuasa kesatuan, Good Year juga telah didapati mencabuli hak pekerja asing mengikut Akta Pekerjaan 1955 dan dalam perjanjian bersama mereka. Mereka hanya diberikan jumlah nominal dan tidak adil berbanding dengan pekerja domestik. Pekerja asing tidak diberikan bonus, cuti tahunan, cuti sakit dan cuti rehat seperti yang diperuntukkan dalam piawai pekerjaan.

Good Year juga telah didapati telah menafikan peluang pekerjaan kepada pekerja domestik dengan mengambil kesempatan daripada kuota pekerja.

Dalam isu pengambilan pekerja luar, Good Year telah didapati mengeksploitasikan kontraktor pekerja yang bertanggungjawab dalam pengambilan pekerja dari India, Pakistan dan Bangladesh sebagai operator pengeluaran . Cara sedemikian adalah kaedah bagi menghalang tanggungjawab pekerjaan sebagai majkan kepada pekerja-pekerja asing.

Justeru, sempena pelancaran boikot terhadap Good Year itu, kaum pekerja dan kesatuan sekerja diminta untuk menghantar protes kepada Good Year di alamat Jalan 15/17 Persiaran Selangor, 40000 Shah Alam dan kepada Kementerian Sumber Manusia yang beralamat di Tingkat 6-9, Blok D3, Parcel D, Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan, 62502 Putrajaya.

¶ 9:10 PM

Gaji siapa yang tinggi?
Oleh Syed Shahir

Perkara yang berkaitan dengan gaji atau upah adalah sesuatu yang tidak dapat dipisahkan dari pekerja. Boleh dikatakan pada umumnya pekerja bekerja untuk mendapatkan gaji. Dengan pendapatanlah mereka boleh menanggung kehidupan diri dan keluarganya.

Hal ini akan terus diperkatakan selagi adanya pekerja. Yang menjadi persoalan ialah tahap gaji yang bagaimana sesuai dengan kos kehidupan harian masa kini.

Sejak akhir-akhir ini banyak majikan dan tokoh korporat yang bercakap mengenai daya saing pekerja dalam negara kita. Bagi golongan ini bahwa daya saing pekerja kita masih belum mencapai tahap yang sepatutnya. Mereka malah mendakwa bahwa gaji pekerja adalah ‘tinggi’ dan tidak setimpal dengan produktiviti mereka. Untuk itu mereka mahu supaya gaji pekerja di Malaysia ditentukan mengikut produktiviti seseorang pekerja.

Hal mengenai daya saing, produktiviti, disiplin, AFTA, kos pengeluaran dan lain-lain sudah menjadi seperti sebuah lagu polular yang diperdengarkan saban hari melalui corong-corong radio dan layar tv. Seolah-olah bahwa jika tidak disebut hal-hal tersebut maka kita bakal dituduh sebagai orang yang ketinggalan zaman!

Gambaran yang dipaparkan seolah-olah memperlihatkan bahwa gaji pekerja di Malaysia adalah tinggi jika dibandingkan dengan pekerja-pekerja di negara lain. Apakah contoh yang majikan berikan? Di antara negara yang selalu disebut ialah China dan Thailand.

Dikatakan bahwa barang atau produk yang sama yang dibuat di negara China jauh lebih rendah harganya jika dibandingkan dengan di Malaysia. Biasanya majikan akan mengatakan bahwa keadaan sedemikian berterusan maka syarikat akan berpindah ke China atau tempat-tempat lain yang lebih murah kosnya! Ugutan begini kadang kala menjadi berkesan buat pekerja tertentu.

Dalam beberapa hari yang lalu, sebuah stesen TV swasta telah dalam siaran menerbitkan berita mengenai pendapatan yang diterima oleh ketua pegawai eksekutif (CEO) atau pengarah urusan syarikat-syarikat besar yang terdapat di negara kita. Berita itu sebenarnya memetik sebuah rencana yang diterbitkan oleh Malaysian Business keluaran awal bulan ogos 2004.

Orang yang gajinya tinggi sekali dalam 548 buah syarikat yang dibuat kajian ialah Tan Sri Lim Kok Thay iaitu pengerusi dan CEO Genting Resort World. Beliau dibayar sebanyak RM40 juta lebih setahun. Ini bermakna kalau dibahagikan dengan 12 bulan bersamaan dengan RM3.33 juta sebulan.

Apa yang menarik dalam rencana tersebut ialah terdapatnya beberapa orang pengerusi eksekutif atau pengarah urusan atau CEO yang dibayar jutaan ringgit akan tetapi syarikat yang diterajuinya dilaporkan sebagai mengalami kerugian.

Jika demikian halnya bagaimana jika pekerja-pekerja biasa mahu dibayar gajinya mengikut produktiviti sedangkan tokoh-tokoh korporat yang berkenaan tetap dibayar dengan gaji tinggi serta faedah yang tidak berkurangan walaupun syarikat yang terajuinya rugi dan prestasinya merosot! Dalam sistem yang ada sekarang hal sedemikian bukanlah sesuatu yang aneh.

Sayang sekali pekerja-pekerja termasuk para pemimpin mereka tidak prihatin terhadap rencana atau artikel yang diterbitkan oleh majalah-majalah tertentu yang secara tidak langsung menjejaskan kepentingan pekerja. Sepatutnya rencana sedemikian dimanfaatkan untuk memperlihatkan kepada golongan pekerja di negara ini akan jurang pendapatan golongan atasan dengan mereka yang terus melebar.

Pekerja sewajarnya bertanya bahwa apabila majikan menyebut mengenai kos buruh semakin meningkat maka mereka harus menyoal semula: Apakah yang dimaksudkan dengan kos buruh?

Apakah komponen dalam kos buruh tersebut? Bagaimana dengan gaji para pengarah dan pengurus? Seribu satu macam soalan boleh ditanyakan sepanjang mengenai soal kos buruh ini. ¶ 9:09 PM

Buku ISA Koh mencabar Dolah
Oleh Ang Hiok Gai

Kira-kira dua bulan yang lalu Perdana Menteri merangkap Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi mendakwa bahwa deraan serta penyiksaan yang tidak berperikemanusiaan tidak berlaku di Malaysia seperti di Iraq. Tidakkah Dolah berbohong?

Apabila dicabar oleh Dr Syed Husin Ali, Timbalan Presiden Parti Keadilan Rakyat, untuk berdebat secara terbuka mengenai deraan, penyiksaan dan kezaliman oleh pihak polis terhadap orang tahanan, Dolah membisu seribu bahasa.

Malaysia: 45 Years under the ISA oleh Koh Swe Yong terbit tepat pada masanya untuk mendedahkan kezaliman yang dilakukan di bawah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) selama 45 tahun sejak wujudnya akta itu pada tahun 1960.

Sejak dibebaskan Koh, bekas tahanan ISA dari tahun 1976 hingga tahun 1985, berusaha keras mendokumentasikan kezaliman di bawah ISA. Setelah dizalimi oleh ISA selama sembilan tahun, Koh bertekad mendedahkan kezaliman ISA secara menyeluruh. Dalam tempoh sepuluh tahun, beliau telah berusaha mengumpulkan maklumat daripada pelbagai sumber, khususnya laporan berkenaan ISA dalam akhbar Tionghua.

Pada tahun 1999, buku pertamanya, 40 Tahun di Bawah ISA, telah terbit dalam bahasa Tionghua.

Koh, juga bekas calon keADILan untuk kawasan Parlimen Selayang pada pilihanraya umum 2004, tidak berhenti di situ saja. Beliau telah menglibatkan diri dalam penerbitan bukunya dalam bahasa Inggeris agar lebih ramai orang dapat mengetahui secara menyeluruh kezaliman di bawah ISA.

Buku kedua Koh bukan semata-mata merupakan terjemahan buku lama, tetapi ditambah pula dengan lima tahun kezaliman di bawah akta itu.

Buku baru ini bukan kerja ilmiah untuk mendapatk kelulusan universiti. Buku ini mengandung banyak maklumat dan fakta serta peristiwa yang membawa kepada penangkapan di bawah ISA.

Yang menjadikan buku ini menarik mungkin perkara-perkara yang kurang diketahui umum. Misalannya, perubahan sikap parti politik, NGO (Pertubuhan Bukan Kerajaan) dan individu terhadap ISA, kematian dan mogok lapar membantah layanan buruk di dalam kem tahanan, dan sebagainya.

Barangkali, maklumat yang berharga sekali adalah kezaliman yang dilakukan ISA sebelum Operasi Lalang pada Oktober 1987. Tidak banyak yang mengetahui penangkapan secara beramai-ramai di bawah ISA yang juga berkali-kali berlaku sebelum tahun 1987.

Jauh lebih banyak kezaliman dilakukan oleh pemerintah Perikatan dan kemudian BN sebelum Operasi Lalang. Secara tidak langsung, buku ini telah memperbetulkan perspektif orang ramai mengenai kezaliman yang dilakukan di bawah ISA.

Koh, juga bekas aktivis pelajar Universiti Malaya, membuat kesimpulan bahwa ISA telah digunakan untuk menindas pemimpin serta anggota parti pembangkang, pengkritik dan yang tidak sehaluan, di dalam atau di luar parti pemerintah, terhadap yang berkuasa.

Pada masa yang sama, Chia Kwang Chye, Timbalan Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri, cuba mempertahankan perlunya ISA dan niat baik pemerintah BN untuk menggunakan ISA. Menteri yang baru ini cepat mengubah pendiriannya mengikut selera tuannya.

Chia, juga bekas aktivis pelajar Universiti Sains Malaysia, seperti Koh, pernah menentang ISA dengan sekeras-kerasnya ketika di universiti. Berbeza dengan Koh, kini Chia menjadi penyokongnya.

Tanpa segan silu, Chia bersama bosnya, Dolah, menegakkan benang basah dan sanggup berbohong.

Dengan tujuan mendedahkan yang sebenarnya berlaku di bawah ISA selama 45 tahun, buku Koh harus dibaca oleh sesiapa yang mahu menegakkan keadilan dan kebenaran.
¶ 9:08 PM

Biarkanlah Si Luncai Terjun dengan Labu-Labunya
Oleh : Che Alias Che Mat

Setelah menunggu satu setengah tahun (bermula pada 15hb. Nov 2002), maka pada 17hb. Mei 2004 baru pindaan perlembagaan Parti Keadilan Nasional yang membolehkan percantumannya dengan Parti Rakyat Malaysia diluluskan oleh pihak Jabatan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan Malaysia.
Saya tidak tahu di mana letaknya slogan ‘Bersih Cekap dan Amanah’ yang dilaung-laungkan oleh pemimpin-pemimpin BN. Di mana cakapnya jika cuma sedikit pindaan terpaksa menunggu satu setengah tahun. Adakah cakapnya itu cuma untuk kepentingan BN saja, kerana ada parti yang baru didaftarkan, termasuk UMNO Baru dulu, diluluskan pendaftarannya dalam tempoh sehari dua saja.
Walau bagaimanapun kita bersyukur kerana dengan itu, redalah sedikit keresahan ahli kedua-dua buah parti tersebut yang menunggu kelulusan pendaftarannya. Dan dengan itu kedua-dua buah parti itu sudah mendapat nama dan lambang baru, iaitu Parti Keadilan Rakyat. Dengan lambangnya (bendera) yang ditambahkan lajur merah di kiri kanannya.
Yang sangat menghairankan saya, mengapa pihak pendaftaran pertubuhan sangat tidak suka kepada perkataan ‘Keadilan’. Daripada 30 muka surat (A4) salinan Perlembagaan Parti Keadilan Rakyat, terdapat 27 perkataan Keadilan yang dipotong daripada perlembagaan tersebut.
Yang anehnya Moto Perjuangan Parti ‘Keadilan untuk Semua’, pada Fasal 3 dalam perlembagaan tersebut juga dipotong. Dan ditukar kepada ‘Kesaksamaan untuk Semua’. Antara ‘saksama’ dengan ‘adil’, walaupun mempunyai maksud yang sama, namun ada sedikit perbezaannya daripada segi teknikalnya. Kita tidak berkata “Raja itu raja yang saksama”. Tetapi kita selalu berkata “Raja itu raja yang adil dan saksama”.
Kita berharap pihak Jabatan Pendaftaran dapat meneliti semula dan tidak keberatan meluluskan Moto ‘Keadilan untuk Semua’ itu untuk slogan Parti Keadilan Rakyat.
Moto atau slogan adalah jiwa bagi perjuangan sesebuah parti politik, sebagaimana UMNO dengan slogan ‘Hidup Melayu’nya. Saya tidak tahu sama ada slogan ini masih relevan atau tidak. Apa ertinya dengan slogan itu, jika sekiranya ‘Bahasa Melayu’ sebagai jiwa kepada bangsa Melayu ‘Bahasa Jiwa Bangsa’, tidak begitu dipentingkan oleh UMNO sendiri.
Berbalik kepada Parti Keadilan Rakyat, maka sekarang antara ahli kedua-dua buah parti tersebut, tidak lagi sebagai kawan antara dua parti tetapi sudah menjadi satu keluarga dalam sebuah parti. Dan hubungannya mestilah lebih kukuh dan padu. Kita mestilah berbangga kerana parti kita parti yang mempunyai asas yang kukuh dalam senario politik Malaysia yang penduduknya berbilang kaum ini.
Biarlah politik perkauman menjadi dasar parti seperti UMNO, MCA, MIC dan beberapa parti lain yang bertopengkan multi-kaum, tetapi sebenarnya masih tebal dengan sifat perkaumannya. Percayalah saudara-saudara, perpaduan Nasional tidak akan wujud selagi kita tidak berani membebaskan diri dari belenggu perkauman.
Cuma yang menjadi tanda tanya di kepala saya, mengapa beberapa orang yang berjuang dalam Parti Keadilan Nasional di Kelantan dulu tidak hadir pada perjumpaan Badan Perhubungan PKR bersama Saudara Azmin Ali di Hotel Perdana pada malam 15hb. Julai 2004 yang lepas?
Ada desas-desus daripada beberapa kawan yang datang pada malam tersebut mengatakan mereka itu akan menyeberang ke ‘Rakit’ lain. Saya masih belum yakin dengan berita itu. Saya berharap perkara itu tidak berlaku. Azmin telah mempengurusikan mesyuarat pada malam itu dengan meminta semua Ketua Bahagian mengadakan mesyuarat segera. Mengikut beliau Mesyuarat Agung Parti KeAdilan Rakyat akan diadakan selewat-lewat pada bulan Disember nanti.
Apabila saya terbaca dalam Fokus di Utusan Malaysia Isnin 9hb. Ogos 2004, maka yakinlah saya bahwa desas-desus yang saya dengar pada malam itu memang kebenaran. Antara nama yang disebut oleh Saudara Zukifli Bakar dalam rencana itu, termasuklah seorang dua orang yang kuat melobi untuk dipilih menjadi calon pada pilihanraya yang lepas.
Rupa-rupanya mereka menyertai parti untuk dipilih menjadi calon dalam pilihanraya. Patutlah masa pilihanraya yang lepas mereka itu tidak pernah datang membantu calon Parti Keadilan, saudara Nik Mahmud bagi kawasan Parlimen Kota Bharu. Parti Keadilan ketika itu kelihatan seperti parti Nik Mahmud dan keluarganya. Jika mendapat sokongan padu daripada setiap ahli, khususnya di Kota Bharu, tidak mustahil beliau akan beroleh kemenangan. Jadi eloklah orang-orang yang cuma berjuang untuk kepentingan diri itu meninggalkan Parti Keadilan Rakyat. Parti Keadilan Rakyat tiada tempat bagi orang-orang seperti itu. Dan mereka seperti ini tidak akan menguntungkan parti dan rakyat apabila mereka beroleh kejayaan.
Biarlah Si Luncai terjun dengan labu-labunya. Biarkan! Biarkan!. Kita dalam Parti Keadilan Rakyat haruslah memperkuat dan memperkemas organisasi parti mulai sekarang, agar kita tidak berterusan bergantung kepada orang lain Percayalah ‘Mata Keadilan’ sudah dapat melihat cahaya di hujung terowong.
Yang perlu kita lakukan ialah kita harus bergerak terus menuju cahaya di hujung terowong itu. Mungkin kita tidak terpaksa menunggu sehingga tahun 2020 sebagaimana Wawasan Dr. Mahathir untuk menjadikan Malaysia negara Maju (negara perindustrian).
Pada hemat saya, kalau hendak dibandingkan antara politikus Si Luncai dengan politikus monyet (lihat rencana saya dalam Suara PRM keluaran Feb 2004) yang lepas, saya rasa politikus monyet lebih cerdik berbanding dengan politikus Luncai. Politikus monyet melompat dari pokok ke pokok semasa buah hampir masak, walaupun hasilnya tidak seberapa. Tetapi politikus Si Luncai terjun ke sungai dengan labu-labunya ke ‘rakit’ yang hampir karam. Kita sama-samalah tunggu untuk melihat nasib Si Luncai itu.
Saya tidak setuju dengan pendapat saudara Zulkifli Bakar yang berpendapat bahwa ‘PKR datang tidak dijemput, pergi tidak disuruh’. Saya tidak faham siapa yang menjemput dan siapa yang datang? Siapa yang pergi, siapa yang suruh?
Zulkifli tidak patut menyamakan PKR dengan PTI (Pendatang Tanpa Izin), datang tidak dijemput, pergi sangat dialu-alukan. PKR adalah rakyat Malaysia yang setia kepada bangsa dan negaranya, khususnya Kelantan yang sudah lama rakyatnya terlenal di Pantai Cahaya Bulan dengan ulitan nyanyian lagu Serambi Mekah dan Pasar Siti Khadijah.
Rakyat Kelantan perlu disedarkan dengan pintu-pintu gerbang yang dihiasi dengan ayat al-Quran yang terjemur dipanas terik matahari dan basah ditimpa hujan ketika monsun Timur Laut,. Itu sebenarnya cuma hiasan yang tidak mempunyai apa-apa signifikan dengan perjuangan Islam yang dilaung-laungkan.
Saya setuju dengan saudara Zulkifli bahwa kemasukan beberapa kerat (bukan semua) pemimpin PKR ke dalam PAS, tidak membawa apa-apa erti kepada kekuatan PAS yang sudah goyah selepas pilihanraya lepas. Dan kerana itulah pemimpin-pemimpin PAS Kelantan terpaksa menjilat ludahnya sendiri dengan membuat persetujuan di ‘belakang tabir’ dengan pemimpin UMNO berhubung dengan patisyen PAS terhadap UMNO dan sebaliknya di Kelantan dan Terengganu (lihat Suara PRM Ogos 2004).
Oleh sebab itulah Datuk Seri Abdullah sangat terhutang budi kepada Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz dan sangat perihatin apabila Nik Aziz sakit baru-baru ini. Sedangkan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang sudah sekian lama menderita kesakitan di penjara di Sungai Buluh langsung tidak ada perasaan belas kasihan Abdullah untuk membenarkan beliau berubat di luar negara yang difikirkan lebih terjamin. Datuk Seri Abdullah tidak sepatutnya mengamalkan sifat ‘talam dua muka!!!’.
Namun begitu kita sebagai insan yang yakin kepada takdir dan takbir Allah s.a.w. tetap berdoa agar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz dan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim sihat dan selamat. Amin!!q
¶ 9:06 PM

LAPORAN PROGRAM BRAINSTORMING
PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT NEGERI PAHANG

MENGORAK LANGKAH, MENGATUR STRATEGI DAN GERAK KERJA
MASA DEPAN, MENJELANG PILIHANRAYA UMUM 12, 2008
======================================================

1. Bertempat di Suntiana Resort, Anak Air, Peramu, Kuantan pada 7 dan 8 Ogos 2004, pemimpin-pemimpin dan kader penting Parti Keadilan Rakyat dari 12 bahagian di seluruh Negeri Pahang telah berkumpul bagi memenuhi
program motivasi dan "brainstorming" yang julung-julung
kalinya dianjurkan. Inilah kali pertama pemimpin-pemimpin di peringkat Negeri Pahang dari Parti Keadilan Nasional dan Parti Rakyat Malaysia bergabung tenaga dalam bentuk sebuah parti politik berganding
bahu melaksanakan dan menjayakan sebuah program secara bersama.

2. Perasmian program telah berlangsung pada petang 7 Ogos 2004. Saudara Jefri Abd Rashid selaku Pengerusi Perhubungan Parti Keadilan Rakyat Negeri Pahang telahberucap memberi kata-kata aluan, di samping menerangkan maksud dan matlamat program itu dianjurkan. Timbalan Pengerusi Perhubungan, Saudara Dzulkifli Ismail turut berucap. Dengan penuh bersemangat beliau telah menggariskan dengan ringkas dan padat perjalanan
peristiwa pahit dan manis parti hingga tercapainya persetujuan penggabungan kedua-dua Parti Keadilan Nasional dan Parti Rakyat Malaysia, yang seterusnya melahirkan Parti Keadilan Rakyat.

3. Perasmian program telah disempurnakan oleh Saudara Azmin Haji Ali, Naib Presiden (Peralihan) Parti Keadilan Rakyat. Beliau telah berucap dengan panjang-lebar dan menerangkan segala aspek berkaitan dengan Perlembagaan Parti Keadilan Rakyat yang telah diluluskan oleh Pendaftar Pertubuhan Malaysia pada 29 Mac 2004.

4. Dalam mesyuarat rasmi yang pertama Jawatankuasa Perhubungan Negeri (Peralihan), Parti Keadilan Rakyat Negeri Pahang yang berlangsung pada 7 Ogos 2004, senarai pimpinan Parti Keadilan Rakyat Negeri Pahang telah diluluskan dan akan diguna pakai sehingga Kongres Nasional Pertama yang akan berlangsung pada bulan Disember 2004 nanti.

5. Senarai Jawatankuasa Peralihan, Parti Keadilan Rakyat Negeri Pahang:

Pengerusi: Sdr Jefri Abd Rashid
Timbalan Pengerusi: Sdr Zakaria Abd Hamid
Timbalan Pengerusi: Sdr Dzulkifli Ismail
Timbalan Pengerusi: Sdr Lim Ong Hang
Setiausaha: Sdr Rizan Ali
Pen. Setiausaha: Sdr Sahari Ismail
Bendahari: Sdr Amir Abd Aziz
Pen. Bendahari: Tuan Haji Rahim Puteh
Ketua Penerangan: Sdr Ahmad Nizam Hamid
Tim. K/Penerangan: Sdr Syed Shahir Mohd
Ketua Pemuda: Sdr Zulfikar Ali Ariffin
Tim. K/Pemuda: Sdr Ahmad Nizam Hamid
Ketua Wanita: Puan Dasimah Zainuddin
Tim. K/Wanita: Puan Fatimah Apong
Ahli J/Kuasa:
Sdr Zainal Afandi
Sdr Rabidin Kasmawi
Puan Hjh Fuziah Salleh
Sdr Ahmad Shah
Sdr M. Muthusamy
Sdr Mohamad Zahri
Sdr Mohd Zukri Aksah
Sdr Zulkifli Omar
Sdr Kamarul Aiza Adnan
Sdr Anas Marhaein Dzulkifli
Sdr Ahmad Baghdad Omar Baki
Sdr Ahmad Sukarno Ahmad Baghdad
Sdr Yusairi Ahmad

6. Sesi "brainstorming" telah dilangsungkan pada sebelah malam 7 Ogos dan disambung pada 8 Ogos 2004. Sesi yang menjadi begitu rancak dan bersemangat ini telah dipimpin oleh YBhg Datuk Salehuddin b. Hashim, Setiausaha Kerja Parti Keadilan Rakyat. Sdr Ahmad Zakaria Abd Hamid, Timbalan Pengerusi Perhubungan Negeri telah mempengerusikan sesi ini dengan dibantu oleh Saudara Ahmad Shah, Ahli Jawatankuasa Perhubungan
Negeri.

7. Pada akhir sesi "brainstorming" dua hari ini, para peserta telah mencapai ketetapan untuk meluluskan satu resolusi yang dinamakan "Kenyataan Anak Air 2004" yang antara lain tercatat sebagai berikut:

Bahwa kami anggota pimpinan Parti Keadilan Rakyat dari seluruh Negeri Pahang yang hadir pada sesi "brainstorming" yang berlangsung pada 7 dan 8 Ogos 2004 secara bersama membuat kenyataan berikut:

a) Kami dengan ini mengisytiharkan komitmen yang menyeluruh dalam memastikan kesinambungan dan penerusan perjuangan serta berazam memberi tentangan secara total dalam menghadapi Barisan Nasional untuk pilihanraya umum yang akan datang (2008). Dengan kerjasama dan perpaduan BA yang lebih mantap, tersusun dan lebih berdisiplin, kami yakin akan dapat mengalahkan Barisan Nasional dan bakal menegakkan
Kerajaan BA pimpinan Parti Keadilan Rakyat, dalam strategi menjadikan Pahang sebagai "front line" Parti Keadilan Rakyat.

b) Dasar-dasar perjuangan Parti Keadilan Rakyat yang mengandung 17 perkara boleh diringkaskan sebagai identiti parti berasaskan 4 prinsip utama:

b-1. Keadilan untuk semua
b-2. Kepelbagaian kaum
b-3. Demokrasi
b-4. Ketuanan rakyat

c) Semangat dan roh perjuangan yang diasasakan oleh Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim dalam menentang nepotisme, kronisme, rasuah serta penyalahgunaan kuasa akan terus hidup dan berkobar dalam jiwa setiap pejuang Parti Keadilan Rakyat.

d) Kami berikrar akan turun padang menyusun rakyat, memperkemas organisasi parti di semua peringkat demi kebaikan rakyat tanpa mengira agama, bangsa dan jantina. Kami berazam akan mendirikan sebuah negara
Malaysia yang adil dan makmur, yang sememangnya dinanti-nantikan oleh seluruh rakyat Malaysia.

Parti Keadilan Rakyat
Negeri Pahang

Kuantan
8 Ogos 2004
¶ 9:04 PM

IPU Mengecam Mahkamah Persekutuan

Inter-Parliamentary Union, yang mewakili 130 buah parlimen kebangsaan di seluruh dunia, telah menerima resolusi yang mengecam Mahkamah Persekutuan Malaysia kerana enggan membebaskan bekas Perdana Menteri Anwar Ibrahim yang kini dalam penjara.

Jwatankuasa organisasi hak asasi manusia ini, yang berpangkalan di Geneva, telah melangsungkan sesinya yang ke-106 baru-baru ini dan mengatakan bahwa keputusannya itu berdasarkan laporan interim oleh wakilnya yang memperhatikan penghakiman rayuan Anwar di Mahkamah Persekutuan pada bulan yang lalu.

Kata organisasi tersebut, walaupun laporan pemerhati interim tentang pengadilan itu menyatakan bahwa hak memberi ikat jamin hak asasi manusia hak asasi manusia itu seluruhnya terletak pada kebijaksanaan mahkamah, namun biasanya ikat jamin itu ‘biasanya diberi jika tiada sebarang tanda bahwa tertuduh menunjukkan risiko akan lari atau mungkin mengulang lagi perbuatannya’.

‘IPU menyesali keputusan mahkamah apatah lagi dengan mengingat keadaan kesihatan Anwar yang semakin bertamah merosot.’

Anwar telah dikejarkan ke hospital dari penjara pada awal bulan Julai disebabkan komplikasi daripada selisih tulang belakangnya, iaitu penyakit lama yang dikatakan menjadi bertambah buruk kerana dibelasah teruk oleh bekas Ketua Polis Negara setelah beliau ditahan pada tahun 1988.

Anwar telah berkali-kali meminta kerajaan mengizinkannya menjalani pembedahan di Jerman tetapi semua permohonannya telah ditolak oleh kerajaan. Beliau diduga akan kekal di hospital selama-lamanya. Keluarganya telah memberi amaran bahwa penyakit tulang belakang Anwar itu akan menyebabkannya lumpuh jika tidak diberi rawatan dgn segera.

IPU–dan Parlimen Malaysia menjadi anggotanya–telah melahirkan perhatian yang serius tentang betapa tidak adilnya pengadilan terhadap Anwar, termasuk pecubaan oleh pihak pendakwa hendak memalsukan bukti terhadap Anwar, saksi utamanya yang tidak dapat dipercaya, iaitu Azizan, ketiadaan bukti perubatan dalam kes liwatnya, dan kegagalan mahkamah mengambil kira notis alibi.

IPU mengulangkan lagiresolusinya yang lebih awal agar Anwar diizinkan menjalani pembedahan menurut pilihannya sendiri sebagaimana yang dinasihatkan oleh Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia (SUHAKAM).

‘Parlimen Malaysia, sebagai pelindung hak asasi manusia, seharusnya jangan teragak-agak menyokong nasihat SUHAKAM itu dan seharusnya berusaha sedaya upayanya menyampaikan nasihat-nasihat itu kepada pihak-pihak yang cekap,’ tegas IPU.

IPU juga mengecam pihak berkuasa parlimen Malaysia kerana tidak memberi penjelasan tentang persoalan maklumat yang kononnya disediakan secara tidak betul dan diberi kepada IPU pada bulan September yang lalu.

Parlimen Malaysia memberitahu IPU bahwa Anwar diberi sebuah bilik gimasium yang ‘besar’ dan berhawa dingin untuk kegunaannya sendiri lengkap dengan kelengkapannya untuk menjalani latihan psioterapi menurut kesenangannya.

Parlimen Malaysia juga mendakwa bahwa Anwar telah dibawa ke Hospital Kuala Lumpur antara bulan Oktober 1999 dan bulan Jun 2003 untuk rawatan perubatan yang biasa.

Anwar menyanggah semua dakwaan ini.

Perlekaskan Keputusan

Menururut IPU, resolusi itu akan disampaikannya kepada pihak yang berkuasa Malaysia dan juga akan menimbulkan perkara itu pada perhimpunan agung Antar-Parlimen Asia anjuran Organisasi ini yang akan diadakan di Phnom Penh pada bulan September nanti.

Sementara itu sebuah organisasi lain yang berpangkalan di Geneva juga–International Commission of Jurists–yang terdiri daripada 60 orang peguam yang terkenal, termasuk hakim-hakim kanan, peguam negara dan ahli akademi, telah mendesak mahkamah segera membuat keputusannya terhadap rayuan liwat Anwar.

¶ 8:59 PM

Mengapa Golkar Menyokong Mega-Hasyim?

Oleh Ikrar Nusa Bhakti

TIM-tim sukses dua pasangan yang masuk ke pemilihan umum presiden pada putaran kedua 20 September mendatang memiliki strategi-strategi yang berbeza untuk dapat meraih sebanyak-banyaknya suara pemilih. Ada yang lebih mementingkan koalisi setelah pemilu, ada yang sudah menggalang koalisi saat-saat ini.

Strategi yang lebih ditonjolkan oleh tim pasangan Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono-Jusuf Kala (SBY-JK) adalah bagaimana meningkatkan citra pasangan yang didu- kungnya, mendekati para pemilih secara langsung ke masyarakat bawah, dan baru akan membangun koalisi setelah pemilihan presiden (pilpres) putaran kedua berlangsung. Strategi ini tampaknya didasari oleh pemikiran bahwa pada pilpres ini masyarakat memiliki kebebasan memilih susuk calon pemimpin bangsa secara langsung, tanpa dipengaruhi oleh parti-parti politik (parpol).

Selain itu, pembentukan koalisi setelah pilpres putaran kedua tentunya memberikan keleluasaan yang lebih besar bagi presiden terpilih nantinya untuk menentukan siapa saja yang akan masuk menjadi anggota kabinet. Strategi ini tampaknya kurang diminati oleh parti-parti besar kerana dianggap mengecilkan erti penting parpol dalam sistem demokrasi. Selain itu, koalisi yang baru dibangun setelah pilpres putaran kedua tentunya menyebabkan bargaining power (kuasa tawar menawar) parti- parti tersebut menjadi lemah.

LEBIH MENARIK

Strategi tim sukses Megawati Soekarnoputri-Hasyim Muzadi amat berbeza dengan strategi SBY-JK. Selain mendekati masyarakat akar rumput, strategi membentuk koalisi dengan parti-parti besar sebelum pilpres kedua juga menjadi pilihan utama. Ini didasari oleh suatu pemikiran bahwa: Pertama, walaupun masyarakat secara individu memiliki kebebasan memilih pasangan calon presiden dan calon wakil presiden pada pemilu itu, parpol tetap harus menjadi tonggak utama sistem demokrasi yang sedang dibangun.

Kedua, dengan dibentuknya koalisi sebelum pilpres putaran kedua diharapkan mesin-mesin parpol yang berkoalisi itu akan dapat bergerak menjangkau masyarakat akar rumput.

Ketiga, jika pasangan yang disokongnya menang, maka akan terciptalah sebuah pemerintahan yang lebih stabil kerana didukung oleh kekuatan koalisi di parlemen.

Keempat, jika pasangan yang didukungnya kalah, maka kekuatan koalisi di parlemen dapat menjadi penyeimbang bagi kekuatan eksekutif yang didukung oleh parti-parti minoriti. Koalisi parti-parti yang menyokong pasangan Mega-Hasyim yang dideklarasikan pada 19 Ogos untuk sementara terdiri atas empat parpol dengan kerusi majoriti di parlimen, iaitu 308 daripada 550 buah kerusi dengan perincian PDI-P 109, Partai Golkar 127, PPP 58, dan PDS 13.

Kelima, koalisi sebelum pemilu juga menguntungkan parpol-parpol yang diajak berkoalisi kerana dapat melakukan tawar menawar kedudukan yang lebih setara, baik dalam memberikan masukan program mahupun dalam menentukan siapa saja yang masuk dalam kabinet. Strategi tim Mega-Hasyim ini tampaknya lebih menarik bagi parti-parti besar, maka tak hairanlah kalau Partai Golkar dan PPP lebih memilih bergabung dan menyokong pasangan Mega- Hasyim menentang pasangan SBY-JK.

KEPUTUSAN PARTAI GOLKAR

Keputusan Rapat Pimpinan (Rapim) Partai Golkar pada 15 Ogos 2004 menunjukkan bahwa dari 31 DPD I dan lima wakil pengurus organisasi sayap, 35 menyokong Mega-Hasyim dan hanya satu yang bersikap neutral, iaitu DPD I Jawa Barat. Keputusan Rapim Partai Golkar itu tidaklah mengejutkan walaupun pada awalnya ada beberapa DPD I yang lebih condong menyokong pasangan SBY-JK.

Arah sokongan Partai Golkar ini sebetulnya telah dapat kita cium bahkan sebelum berakhirnya Konvensi Nasional Partai Golkar untuk memilih calon presiden dari parti pemenang pemilu legislatif tersebut. Dalam suatu kesempatan, walau kemudian dibantah kembali, Ketua Umum Partai Golkar Akbar Tandjung sudah menyatakan bahwa siapa pun yang terpilih untuk menjadi calon presiden dalam konvensi nasional parti itu harus bersedia menjadi calon wakil presiden Megawati Soekarnoputri.

Bahkan dalam suatu wawancara dengan harian The Strait Times menjelang pemilu legislatif, Akbar sudah menyatakan bahwa beliau bersedia menjadi pendamping Megawati. Bagi Akbar, seperti yang diungkapkan kepada harian yang terbit di Singapura itu, beliau masih memiliki kesempatan untuk maju sebagai calon presiden pada pemilu presiden pada tahun 2009, ketika pamor politiknya sudah bertambah baik.

TAK INGIN MEMBESAR ANAK HARIMAU

Jika kita buat analisis mengapa Partai Golkar akhirnya menyokong Mega-Hasyim, tentunya banyak faktor yang memengaruhinya, bukan hanya cita-cita individu Akbar Tandjung semata. Pertama dan terpenting, sebahagian besar fungsionaris parti tampaknya menilai bahwa parpol sebagai tonggak demokrasi harus tetap dipertahankan.

Pandangan dari sebahagian tokoh Partai Demokrat yang lebih menonjolkan koalisi dengan rakyat (bahkan ada yang menambahkannya koalisi dengan Tuhan) bertentangan dengan parti-parti politik, dipandang oleh beberapa fungsionaris Partai Golkar sebagai pengabaian atas wujudnya parpol sebagai tonggak demokrasi.

Kedua, Partai Golkar lebih memilih hubungan historis yang pendek dalam kerjasama dengan PDI-P pada era reformasi ketimbang sejarah yang panjang dengan tokoh-tokoh mantan militer. Dengan kata lain, tampaknya, kerjasama dengan elit politik sipil yang semata-mata orang awam dipandang lebih menguntungkan masa depan Partai Golkar dan para tokohnya.

Ini tampak jelas dengan adanya ketakutan pada sebahagian kalangan Partai Golkar, seperti yang muncul dalam dialog di Radio El- shinta bahwa Golkar tak ingin membesarnya "anak harimau", iaitu membesarkan Partai Demokrat yang akhirnya setelah besar akan menerkam Partai Golkar pada kemudian hari.

Faktor ketiga yang juga yang amat terkait dengan faktor kedua itu ialah bahwa Partai Golkar akan memiliki faedah yang lebih besar jika bergandingan dengan PDI-P. Bukan saja Golkar akan dijanjikan delapan jawatan dalam kabinet (belum tentu orang Golkar tetapi boleh juga orang yang disokong oleh partai), selain akan memiliki keleluasaan berpolitik di dalam koalisi ini, baik jika pasangan Mega-Hasyim menang ataupun kalah.

Jika pasangan Mega-Hasyim menang, paling tidak orang- orang Golkar akan menikmatinya. Jika pun kalah, koalisi ini akan tetap dapat berperan positif di parimen untuk tetap mempertahankan atau mengukuhkan demokrasi di Indonesia.

Seperti diuraikan di atas, koalisi yang terbentuk sebelum pilpres kedua tentunya akan lebih memberikan ‘political leverage’ kepada Partai Golkar baik dalam memberikan masukan kebijakan pemerintahan mendatang mahupun dalam tawar menawar jawatan untuk membentuk kabinet.

Keempat, koalisi yang dibangun sebelum pilpres tentunya akan menimbulkan adanya ikatan moral dan politik dari parti-parti yang berkoalisi untuk menggerakkan mesin-mesin parti agar rakyat dapat diyakinkan supaya memilih pasangan yang disokong. Slogan yang akan diusung mungkin bukan lagi "Sudah Terbukti, Sudah Teruji", tetapi juga kata-kata "Asasmua telah terbangun, kini bagaimana kita mengukuhkan asas dan mencipta bangunan yang indah bagi masa depan bersama". Dipetik dari Kompas

Ikrar Nusa Bhakti Peneliti pada Pusat Penelitian Politik LIPI

¶ 8:58 PM

PESTA KIBARKAN JALUR GEMILANG

Najib ajak rakyat kibarkan Jalur Gemilang. Demikian tajuk berita dalam sebuah akhbar mingguan baru-baru ini. Berikutan daripada itu maka tidak kuranglah tempatan yang lain menyiarkan gambar dan berita mengenai perayaan bulan kemerdekaan.

Kemudian, Datuk Paduka Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir, selaku pengerusi jawatankuasa kebangsaannya pula menyahut supaya sambutan kali ini diadakan secara besar-besaran. Kalau tidak silap, beliau juga ada berkata dia ingin melihat lautan jalur gemilang!

Yang lebih menariknya ialah permintaan menteri itu supaya orang ramai melupakan perbezaan politik buat sementara waktu. Katanya, ‘Bulan ini kita perlu anggap sebagai non-political month untuk mengingatkan diri kita bahwa kita sebagai satu keluarga besar.’

Saya ingin bertanya: Secara jujur, Datuk, dapatkah kita melupakan perbezaan politik semata-mata untuk membolehkan perayaan bulan kemerdekaan disambut dengan meriah?

Sekiranya pemerintahan BN benar-benar ikhlas, maka kerajan perlu mengiktiraf sumbangan golongan kiri dalam perjuangan kemerdekaan tanah air seperti yang pernah disebut oleh Tun Dr. Ismail Abdul Rahman pada suatu majlis Konvokesyen di Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) pada tahun 1973.

Selagi fakta sejarah ini tidak diambil kira dan diselesaikan, maka selagi itulah perayaan kemerdekaan tidak akan mempunyai sebarang erti selain daripada untuk berpesta-pesta mengibarkan jalur gemilang sahaja!

PERIHAL SEORANG LELAKI DENGAN JALUR GEMILANG

Kami berkereta dari Pontian ke Batu Pahat. Perjalanannya agak lancar kecuali apabila sampai di Simpang Rantai di tempat satu-satunya bulatan di bandar yang hendak dituju. Mulai dari situ, semua kenderaan mula merangkak. Kami menjangkakan ada kemalangan di hadapan. Rupa-rupanya tidak berapa jauh, iaitu di Dataran Penggaram, kerja persiapan untuk menyambut perayaan Hari Kebangsaan peringkat negeri sedang sibuk dijalankan.

Bagi perayaan tersebut, banyak wang diperuntukkan untuk mendandan bandar itu–termasuk membina menara jam, membina tiang bendera tertinggi, membaiki jalan-jalan yang sudah banyak tahun terbiar, memasang tiang-tiang lampu elektrik, menggantikan lampu isyarat lama dengan yang digital, menanam pokok dan bunga-bunga perhiasan di sepanjang jalan dan macam-macam lagi!

Di jalanraya yang sesak itu tadi, tiba-tiba muncul sebuah basikal yang dihias Jalur gemilang‚. Empat helai semuanya–yang kecil-kecil di hendal, dan sehelai yang besar terpasang di belakang tempat duduk.

Penunggangnya seorang lelaki Melayu kira-kira dalam usia 30-an. Dia tidak sabar-sabar hendak meluru ke hadapan. Kadang-kadang dia bergesel dan kadang-kadang dilanggarnya saja cermin tepi kenderaan yang masih merangkak di situ. Dalam keadaan terburu-burunya itu dia langsung tidak mempedulikan orang lain–kecuali benderanya saja supaya berkibar.

Dari dalam kereta, siapa pun tidak dapat berbuat apa-apa melainkan melihat saja telatah si lelaki dengan jalur gemilangnya itu.

Sampai di satu persimpangan jalan, kami dapati dia sudah berada di sana dan mengarahkan kereta mengikut caranya sendiri. Siapa sangka, rupa-rupanya dia setengah gila akibat dadah dan tekanan jiwa. Kasihan, sungguh kasihan!!

JALUR GEMILANG DAN TOL

Satu lagi tajuk berita yang agak menarik mengenai perayaan bulan kemerdekaan ialah: Letakkan Jalur Gemilang di Kenderaan Mungkin Dikecualikan Tol. Dalam hal ini, saya sokong usulan Timbalan Menteri Pelancongan, Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Sesungguhnya, aktiviti yang paling bererti semasa cuti perayaan 31 Ogos ialah membawa anggota keluarga kita berjalan-jalan ke mana saja untuk melihat kehidupan manusia di bumi Malaysia yang subur dan makmur ini. Sudah tentu akan lebih banyaklah manfaatnya.

Namun begitu, sebelum berbuat demikian, tidak sedikit juga perkara yang mesti diambil kira. Satu daripadanya ialah tol. Jangan kata hendak pergi jauh-jauh sampai ke utara, dari Johor Bahru sampai ke Kuala Lumpur pun sudah RM 40 tolnya!

Buat masa sekarang, memang masih ada lagi alternatif. Boleh ikut jalan persisiran ˆ melalui Pontian, Batu Pahat, Muar dan seterusnya ∑..

Tetapi setelah semuanya pun nanti dikenakan tol, macam mana? Lihat apa sudah terjadi di Kuala Lumpur–kota tolitu.

Kerana itulah dari awal-awal tadi saya sambut baik cadangan mengenai potongan atau pengecualian bayaran tol bagi pengibar Jalur Gemilang‚ ˆ kecuali bagi tol-tol tertentu yang memang hanya mahu melihat Jalur Gemilang, cemerlang dan terbilang‚ saja terpasang di kenderaan mereka!

Selat Tan
14 Ogos, 2004
¶ 8:57 PM

KEPUTUSAN YANG MENGAJAIBKAN
Oleh Datuk George Seah

Dalam artikel saya yang lalu saya katakan bahwa saya akan menjelaskan mengapa saya pulang ke Kuala Lumpur dari Kota Baru. Supaya mudah difahami maka saya perlu mengulang fakta-fakta yang berkaitan.

Pertama-tama, panel asal penghakiman Mahkamah Agung di Kota Baru itu terdiri daripada Tun Salleh Abas (pengerusi), Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman dan Tan Sri Hashim Yeop Sani.

Setelah Ketua Hakim Negara Tun Salleh Abas digantung, maka korumnya terdiri daripada Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman (pengerusi), Tan Sri Hashim Yeop Sani dan Datuk Harun Hashim.

Apabila Tan Seri Yeop Sani tidak dapat pergi ke Kota Baru kerana sebab-sebab peribadi, maka pemangku Ketua Hakim Negara Tan Sri Hamid meminta saya–sesudah saya pulang dari pengadilan Mahkmah Agung di Negeri-negeri Borneo apabila saya bersetuju menggantikan Tan Sri Muhamed Azmi–apakah saya bersedia atau tidak mengambil tempat Tan Sri Yeop Sani.

Saya bersetuju meskipun terdapat tiga orang lagi hakim Mahkamah Agung yang dapat dipanggil pada waktu tersebut, yakni Tan Sri Mohamed Azmi, Tan Sri Abdoolcader dan Tan Sri Wan Hamzah. Nyatalah sekali bahwa ada orang yang menghendaki saya jangan ada di Kuala Lumpur walaupun saya tidak dapat melihat sebabnya pada waktu itu.

Tatkala saya di Kota Baru bersama Datuk Harun Hashim, saya menerima pesan seperti yang berikut di bawah ini:

• Dari Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman: meminta saya pulang ke Kuala Lumpur dengan serta merta, dan
• Dari Tan Sri Hamid yang menyuruh saya terus tinggal di Kota Baru dan mengambil alih tugas pengerusi penghakiman Mahkamah Agung, jika Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman tidak hadir di Kota Baru. Pesan ini disampaikan kepada saya oleh Datuk Harun apabila saya bertemu dengan beliau di bilik hotelnya.

MENGAPA SAYA PULANG KE KL

Setelah memikirkannya baik-baik saya lebih suka akan serta menerima saran oleh Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman daripada saran oleh Pemangku Ketua Hakim Negara Tan Sri Hamid atas sebab-sebab berikut, yakni:

1) Saya bersetuju menggantikan Tan Sri Hashim Yeop Sani pada penghakiman Mahkamah Agung di Kota Baru dan persetujuan ini saya beri dengan kehendak sendiri.
2) Tetapi saya tidak pernah bersetuju menjadi hakim pengerusi di Mahkamah Agung di Kota Baru apabila Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman tidak hadir.

a) Selanjutnya, pemangku KHN Tan Sri Hamid tidak mempunyai kuasa mengarahkan saya menjadi hakim pengerusi Mahkamah Agung Kota Baru tanpa persetujuan saya.
b) Dan sekiranya pemangku KHN itu menggunakan seksyen 38(2) dalam Akta Kehakiman Mahkamah tahun 1964 dan sampai mengabaikan persetujuan saya, maka menurut pendapat saya peruntukan subseksyen ini tidak boleh digunakan dalam konteks kes ini.

Menurut pendapat saya, subseksyen itu hanya boleh digunakan jika dua syarat dipenuhi, yakni:

i) korumnya hendaklah dipengerusikan oleh KHN dan sekiranya KHN tiada, anggota kanan Mahkamah Agung hendaklah menjadi pengerusinya;
ii) perkara ini mengandaikan bahwa anggota kanan Mahkamah Agung itu haruslah bersetuju duduk sebagai anggota Mahkamah pertama-tamanya dan dengan kehendaknya.

Di sini saya harus menegaskan bahwa saya bukanlah anggota asal panel Mahkamah Tinggi. Kedua, saya hanya diminta menggantikan tempat seorang anggota lain Mahkamah. Ketiga, saya tidak memberi persetujuan pada waktu mana pun akan menjadi hakim pengerusi Mahkamah. Akhir sekali, apabila hakim pengerusi Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman tidak hadir, anggota lain di Kota Baru pada waktu tersebut ialah Datuk Harun Hashim dan seksyen 38(1) dengan jelas menyatakan bahwa:

‘Setiap prosiding di Mahkamah Tinggi hendaklah didengarkan dan diselesaikan oleh tiga orang hakim ataupun oleh bilangan hakim yang lebih besar tetapi tidak genap sebagaimana yang akan ditentukan oleh KHN dalam sebarang kes tertentu.’

Walau bagaimanapun, pada peringkat ini hanya ada dua orang hakim di Kota Baru dan, oleh yang demikian, Seksyen 38(1) tidak berkuatkuasa.

Suatu lagi sebab ialah bahwa sebagai Pengerusi Tribunal yang dibentuk untuk menyelidiki tuduhan berat terhadap KHN yang digantung, iaitu Tun Salleh Abas, pemangku KHN Tan Sri Hamid, menurut pendapat saya, tidak seharusnya sibuk dengan prosiding di Mahkamah Agung Malaysia yang dijadualkan akan berlangsung. Nyata sekali bahwa tugas-tugas ini akan dilaksanakan oleh hakim kanan (yakni Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman) dlam hirarki Mahkamah Agung di bawah seksyen 9(1) Akta Kehakiman Mahkamah tahun 1964 dan Artikel 131A dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Pandangan saya kemudian disokong oleh empat orang lagi anggota Mahkamah Agung pada 2 Julai 1988 dan mereka itu ialah:

1) Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman,
2) Tan Sri Mohamed Azmi,
3) Tan Sri Abdoolcader, dan
4) Tan sri Wan Hamzah.

Hanya pemangku KHN Tan Sri Hamid yang mempunyai pendapat berlainan yang berupa pendapat minoriti dalam mentafsirkan seksyen 9(1) dalam Akta Kehakiman Mahkamah tahun 1964 itu dan Fasal 131A dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Saya saja yang pulang dari Kota Baru sesuai dengan saran oleh Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman, hakim paling kanan pada waktu itu, sementara Datuk Harun Hashim masih di Kota Baru.

KEPUTUSAN YANG MENGajaibKAN

Sementara itu, Tun Salleh Abbas telah memfailkan sut di Mahkamah Tinggi di Kuala Lumpur menentang kesahan Tribunal yang diketuai oleh Pemangku KHN Tan Sri Hamid dari sudut perlembagaan. Tun Salleh juga meminta secara usul ex parte untuk Perintah Melarang anggota-anggota Tribunal tersebut daripada menjalankan, menimbang atau melaksanakan sebarang tugas menurut Fasal 125 dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan kerana relief-relief lain.

Permohonan itu sampai kepada Datuk Ajaib Singh, seorang hakim di Mahkamah Tinggi di Kuala Lumpur, pada hari Sabtu 2 Julai 1988.

Untuk mencegah Tribunal yang dipersoalkan itu daripada mempersembahkan syornya kepada Yang Dipertuan Agung, maka peguam Tun Salleh Abas, iaitu Raja Aziz Addruse, meminta Tribunal itu ditangguhan sementara hingga hari Isnin 4 Julai 1988 tetapi permintaan ini ditolak oleh hakim yang arif Datuk Ajaib Singh.

PENGHAKIMAN YANG MENDESAK

Peguam Tun Salleh, Raja Addruse, serta merta pergi menemui Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman, hakim paling kanan yang tinggal di Kuala Lumpiur. Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman pun mengadakan penghakiman khas Mahkamah Agung yang terdiri daripada lima orang hakim untuk mendengar permohonan ex parte itu atas alasan keadaan yang sangat mendesak pada 2 Julai 1988. Tindakan itu sesuai dengan seksyen 9(1) Akta Kehakiman tahun 1964 dan Fasal 131A dalam Pelembagaan Persekutuan.

Peguam menghujahkan bahwa Tribunal Tun Salleh Abas sudah pada peringkat menyiapkan Loporan yang akan disampaikan kepada Yang Dipertuan Agung. Itulah sebabnya timbul keadaan yang sangat mendesak dan inilah yang mendorong kelima-lima orang hakim Penghakiman Khas Mahkamah Agung itu mengeluarkan Perintah Larangan dengan serta merta untuk mencegah daripada berlakunya perbuatan yang sangat tidak adil itu.

Setelah mendengar penghujahan lisan Peguam Tun Salleh Abas, kelima-lima orang Hakim Mahkamah Agung yang terdiri daripada:

1) Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman (pengerusi),
2) Datuk George Seah,
3) Tan Sri Mohamed Azmi,
4) Tan Sri Abdoolcader, dan
5) Tan Sri Wan Hamzah

secara sebulat suara memperkenankan Perindah intelokutori yang diminta itu.

Menurut pendapat kami yang sebulat suara, tentangan terhadap apakah Tribunal Tun Salleh Abas itu sah atau tidakmenurut perlembagaan dan hendaklah diputuskan dulu sebelum sebarang laporan dapat disampaikan oleh Tribunal tersebut kepada Yang Dipertuan Agung.

Bahwa mahkamah tertinggi dapat dan akan besidang dengan notis yang singkat disebabkan oleh keadaan yang sangat mendesak untuk mencegah perbuatan tidak adil daripada terjadi, baru-baru ini ditunjukkan di United Kingdom apabila Mahkamah Sesyen di Edinburgh menolak permohonan untuk suatu Injunksi Interlokutori. Peguam serta merta membuat rayuan kepada Dewan Negara di London dan rayuan itu didengarkan pada hari itu juga. Tiada siapa yang membuat komentar yang buruk tentang prosedur yang digunakan oleh peguam-peguam perayu.

TAN SRI WAN HAMZAH MENELEFON TIMBALAN KPN

Setelah Perintah Interlokutori Mahkamah Agung itu dibuat dan dimaterai, para peguam Tun Salleh Abas berangkat ke Gedung Parlimen untuk menyampaikannya kepada Pengerusi Tribunal, iaitu pemangku KHN Tan Sri Hamid. Akan tetapi mereka mendapati pintu masuk ke Gedung Parlimen dikunci, dengan demikian secara berkesan menghalang mereka daripada menyampaikan Perintah Interlokutori tersebut.

Halangan ini disampaikan kepada Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman yang menelefon Timbalan Ketua Polis Negera setelah berunding dengan Tan Sri Abdoolcader. Timbalan KPN kemudian memerintahkan pegawai polis yang ditempatkan di pintu masuk ke Gedung Parlimen itu membenarkan para peguam Tun Salleh Abas masuk untuk menyampaikan Perintah Mahkamah tadi kepada Pengerusi Tribunal Tun Salleh Abas. Perkara ini selesai dilaksanakan pada pagi hari Sabtu yang sama.

LIMA ORANG HAKIM DIGANTUNG

Tak lama sesudah itu, kelima-lima orang hakim Mahkamah Agung yang mengeluarkan Perintah Interlokutori itu serentak digantung. Penggantuan ini dibuaat setelah aduan dibuat oleh pemangku KHN Tan Sri Hamid kepada Perdana Menteri yang kemudian menggsyorkan kepada Yang Dipertuan Agung agar kelima-lima orang hakim itu itu digantung.

Patut juga diceritakan bahwa Tan Sri Hashim Yeop Sani ada diminta oleh Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman menjadi anggota penghakiman khas Mahkamah Agung tetapi Tan Sri Hashim Yeop Sani menjawab bahwa ‘kami akan melancarkan revolusi’!

Dalam artikel saya yang berikutnya saya akan menyentuh tuduhan terhadap kelima-lima orang hakim Mahkamah Tinggi dan tuduhan yang berasingan terhadap Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman dan saya.q Dipetik dan diterjemahkan daripada Suara Aliran

¶ 8:53 PM

ISA HARAM?
Oleh Claudia Theophilus

Mufti Perak Harussani Zakaria yang menjadi Pengerusi Majlis Mufti Malaysia berkata bahwa beliau akan mengkaji surat rayuan yang dihantar oleh sekumpulan tahanan Akta Keselamatan dalam Negeri (ISA) kira-kira dua minggu lalu, yang mendesak Majlis Mufti mengisytiharkan undang-undang yang kontroversial itu haram.

Ketika dihubungi beliau berkata bahwa beliau belum lagi menerima surat bertarikh 5 Ogos yang setebal 10 halaman itu, tetapi ‘oleh sebab mereka telah menghantar surat itu kepada saya, maka saya pasti akan membacanya.’

Beliau menegaskan bahwa Majlis Mufti yang berpengaruh itu masih lagi belum bertemu untuk membincangkan perkara tersebut.

Akan tetapi Harussani menambahkan bahwa beliau sebelumnya telah menyentuh perkara tersebut yang ditimbulkan oleh tahanan ISA pada ceramahnya di Kamunting, Perak, iaitu di tempat tahanan-tahanan itu ditahan.

‘Saya telah disoal-soal tentang perkara ini oleh tahanan ISA di Kamunting dan saya jelaskan kepada mereka akan pandangan saya,’ katanya sambil menegaskan bahwa beliau bukanlah berbicara bagi pihak Majlis Mufti.

‘Saya beritahu mereka bahwa penahanan tanpa pengadilan atau jika seseorang itu ditahan tanpa sebarang tuduhan melakukan kesalahan, maka perbuatan itu haram.

‘Saya juga memberitahu mereka bahwa kerajaan mungkin mempunyai maklumat yang menyebabkan kerajaan percaya bahwa tahanan-tahanan itu entah bagaimana terlibat dengan kumpulan-kumpulan atau kegiatan-kegiatan yang dianggap sebagai membahayakan negeri.’

Pemuda Kacak Dibuang Daerah
Sambil memetik kisah di zaman pemerintahan Khalifah Umar al-Khattab, Harussani berkata bahwa khalifah telah membuang daerah seorang pemuda yang kacak untuk mengelakkan masalah.

Katanya khalifah itu berbuat begitu setelah sedar bahwa semakin bertambah banyak orang perempuan yang tertarik kepada pemuda tersebut.

‘Kepala pemuda itu disuruhnya cukur sampai gundul tetapi rupa pemuda itu malahan bertambah kacak dengan kepalanya yang gundul itu. Jadi Khalifah Umar pun membuang daerah pemuda tersebut,’ katanya.

‘Apabila orang muda itu memberitahu Umar bahwa dia tidak meminta supaya dia jadi kacak dan kesalahan apakah yang dialukannya sampai dikenakan hukuman itu, maka Umar memberitahunya bahwa perbuatan itu untuk mengelakkan berpuluh-puluh orang perempuan daripada terkena fitnah kerana terpikat olehnya.’

Dalam hal yang seperti itu, undang-undang tidak boleh digunakan.

Malaysiakini baru-baru ini melaporkan (lihat ikhtisar surat di sebelah) bahwa 22 orang tahanan ISA menghendaki Harussani mengisytiharkan bahwa ISA dan peraturan penahanannya di Kamunting bertentangan dengan dasar Islam dan oleh yang demikian haram.

Tahanan-tahanan itu meliputi orang yang kononnya menjadi anggota kumpulan Jemaah Islamiah yang militan dan Kumpulan Mujahidin Malaysia yang kononnya dikatakan ada hubungannya dengan Kumpulan Jemaah Islamiah. Jemaah Islamiah konon dikatakan menjadai sayap wilayah al-Qaeda dan pernah dipersalahkan kerana pengeboman di Bali dalam bulan Oktober 2002, dengan mengorbankan nyawa 202 orang.

Surat itu juga mengandung butir-butir tentang kesengsaraan yang ditanggung oleh tahanan ketika dalam tahanan, termasuk senarai perbuatan aniaya yang ditimpakan kepada mereka di khemah tahanan Kamunting.

Gesaan-gesaan yang serupa juga telah dibuat oleh beberapa orang intelektual Islam.q Dipetik dan diterjemahkan daripada Malaysiakini.

Boxed
Ikhtisar Surat Tahanan
ISTIHARKAN ISA HARAM!
Desak tahanan ISA kepada Pengerusi Majlis Mufti

Sekumpulan tahanan Akta Keselamatan dalam Negeri (ISA) telah menghantar sepucuk surat kepada pengerusi Majlis Mufti Malaysia yang mendesaknya supaya mengisytiharkan akta tersebut haram.

Kedua-dua puluh dua orang tahanan itu juga menyeru Harussani Zakara supaya mengutuk peraturan di khemah Kamunting di Perak, di tempat tahanan-tahanan itu ditahan.

Mereka mendesak Harussani ‘menyimak undang-undangnya dari sudut Islam dan menyatakan apakah hukum dan peraturan itu haram atau tidak selaras dengan syarak’.

Dalam rayuan bertulis tangan setebal 10 halaman yang bertarikh pada 5 Ogos itu, para tahanan tersebut berkata bahwa mereka direman selama 60 hari di bawah ISA hanya dengan berasaskan perasaan curiga polis dan tanpa waran tangkap.

‘Sewaktu kami ditahan oleh polis, mereka hanya berkata bahwa kami telah menjalankan kegiatan yang dapat mengancam keselamatan negara.

‘Akan tetapi kami sendiri tidak tahu apa yang telah kami lakukan yang menyebabkan timbul tuduhan itu,’ bunyi surat tersebut–salinannya ada diserahkan kepada Malaysiakini.

Sebahagian besar tahanan itu ialah orang yang kononnya dikatakan menjadi anggota kumpulan militan Jemaah Islamiah (JI) dan Kumpulan Mujahidin Malaysia (KMM) yang kononnya dikatakan ada kaitannya dengan Jemaah Islamiah.

¶ 7:59 PM

Chief Justice on the Run

Anwar Ibrahim went to court today to appeal against the judge's decision to disallow the defense from calling the Prime Minister to court to testify. This would be a prelude to the verdict on 4th August 2000.

I arrived in front of the court at 7.30am expecting to be first in line, but there was already someone ahead of me. Within half an hour the crowd had swelled to the "allowed" limit of 40. I could see the latecomers anxiously rushing to join the back of the queue. Anwar Ibrahim's family had turned up in full force, so they knew that only the first 20 would be allowed in.

Many were turned away disappointed. Some had left their homes in the wee hours of the morning in the pouring rain. Some phoned in to complain of being stuck in massive traffic jams due to the floods and traffic accidents all over the Kelang Valley, and they would now miss the trial because of it.

One observer from the Canadian Bar Council, a lawyer, was not allowed entry as she had not brought her passport along with her. She did not know that, in Malaysia, no one is allowed into any government installation without proper identification papers. She thought this only applied to banana republics. Now she knows what Malaysia is - a banana republic.

The lawyer from Canada told us that Anwar Ibrahim's trial is attracting a lot of interest from the Canadian legal fraternity and that the Canadian Bar Council is monitoring the trial closely. They have heard a lot about the trial, and now they are here to hear for themselves how the trial is being conducted.

We were let into the court at 9.30 and it was a mad scramble to find the most strategic seat in the house. Anwar Ibrahim was led in soon after, surrounded by about half a dozen prison guards practically sandwiching him. I wondered whether Anwar could even breathe properly.

A few menacing-looking SWAT members stood at the door ready for action in the event any Mission Impossible-type rescue attempt is made to free Anwar from police custody. Maybe the Sauk weapons heist incident had gone to their heads. You could see they were itching for action.

The Chief Justice walked in flanked by two of his associates. After the formalities of "introducing" the legal team from both sides of the fence, one of the defense's lawyers, Christopher Fernando, stood up to say a few words, which the Chief Justice replied to. None of us could hear what was being said. Anwar Ibrahim stood up to indicate he could not hear what they said and the court officials switched on the microphone. Now we could hear better.

Anwar Ibrahim said he would be defending himself to which the Chief Justice replied he (Anwar) would have to first sack his counsel before the court could agree to that. Anwar coolly said, "Okay". Anwar then said he would be submitting an application for the Chief Justice to disqualify himself and, before he does so, he would like to give notice to the court.

At this point the court took a short recess and the three judges withdrew to their chambers. When the trial commenced Anwar Ibrahim took the floor and opened with, "I respectfully am applying to this court for your Lordship Tun Eusoff Chin, the Chief Justice, to disqualify himself from hearing this appeal".

"The essence of a fair trial is that the proceedings, including appeals thereafter, are conducted by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. This principle is enshrined in International law and practice, and the Malaysian Constitution".

Anwar Ibrahim then quoted the case of Valente vs The Queen (1998) in the Supreme Court of Canada. We could see the Chief Justice beginning to get irritated and he cut Anwar short by saying he had noted the case name and citation. By now it was starting to turn into a debate and every point raised by Anwar was replied to or rebutted by the Chief Justice.

There were smiles all around in the public gallery. Everyone could see that Anwar had the Chief Justice on the defensive and he was replying to Anwar's every statement and trying to explain or justify every point that Anwar brought up.

Then Anwar moved into next "gear" and things really heated up.

"I have ample evidence to show that the Chief Justice craved for an additional six months extension to ensure that no action would be preferred against him, and to ensure that I fail in my appeal. I am also privy, then a Deputy Prime Minister, to the fact that the Anti-Corruption Agency had prepared a preliminary report against the Chief Justice in 1998 over corruption".

When Anwar reached the part where he said, "……and the issue of corruption left hanging, would the Chief Justice dare cause the displeasure of the Prime Minister?", the Chief Justice tried to dispute Anwar's Statement. Anwar then repeated the statement and reminded the Chief Justice that, in August 1998, the Chief Justice had come to see him to express sympathy and concern for him (Anwar).

The Chief Justice profusely denied doing such a thing but Anwar reminded him about the episode, again, and mentioned that the Chief Justice even gave all his phone numbers to him (Anwar). Realising he was cornered, the Chief Justice tried to explain himself. He was through denying. He was now justifying what he did and why he did it.

Anwar had won round one. The Chief Justice was now on the run. How small he suddenly looked sitting up there in his high chair. Here was a man at the point of desperation. He had allowed Anwar to defend himself and now he cannot close the Pandora's Box he had allowed to be opened.

Anwar then reminded the Chief Justice that he (the Chief Justice) had come to see him (Anwar) to complain about a lawyer and a Cabinet Minister who, the Chief Justice said, were smearing his (the Chief Justice's) reputation. The Chief Justice had also commented that the Attorney General, Mohtar Abdullah, was concerned that the said lawyer was also claiming he was being recommended by Anwar to replace the Attorney General.

The Chief Justice tried to deny the meeting or the conversation ever taking place but Anwar persisted and the Chief Justice backed down.

Round two for Anwar.

The Chief Justice looked very nervous. The skeletons in the closet were popping out one-by-one, and there was nothing he could do to close the lid. Anwar had the floor and he was going to reveal all. And reveal all he did.

Anwar said it was public knowledge that the Chief Justice had been accused of "certain irregularities", and these allegations were supported by photographs. Anwar was referring to the New Zealand holiday the Chief Justice took with an "interested party" in a case before him.

The Chief Justice said he had already explained this particular episode and started lecturing Anwar. He probably thought he had very little ground left and the best form of defense would be to attack Anwar. That was his next mistake. He tried to engage Anwar in a debate but he was no match for Anwar. The more he talked, the more defensive he sounded. He was no longer denying Anwar's allegations. He was trying to justify himself. But they all came out sounding like lame excuses.

The Chief Justice said his New Zealand trip had nothing to do with this trial but Anwar disagreed and said it has everything to do with the trial. The Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) had, as early as 1998, prepared a report on this matter. The issue here is whether the Chief Justice can now be impartial because of it.

Anwar said that he was the Chairman of the Cabinet Committee against Corruption. Therefore, Anwar was, in every way, a party to this 1998 ACA investigation. How could the Chief Justice, a "victim" of the ACA investigation, not be suspected of holding a grudge against Anwar? It was so difficult to stifle our laughter when the Chief Justice said he was not aware that Anwar was the Chairman of the Cabinet Committee against Corruption. It was like saying he was not aware Anwar was the Finance Minister then.

The Attorney General knew the Chief Justice was not doing too well and he stood up to try to get Anwar's application to disqualify the Chief Justice nipped in the bud. Maybe that would be one way of silencing Anwar. But Anwar would now allow himself to be cut off, not until he was finished saying all he intended to say. Anwar reproached the Attorney General for not allowing him to continue and commented that this was a reflection of the very sorry state of Malaysia's judicial system.

The Attorney General accepted defeat and meekly sat down again allowing Anwar to continue. Anwar then said that the Prime Minister had told him the Chief Justice was angry with him (Anwar) because he (the Chief Justice) was being investigated by the ACA. The Chief Justice denied this. Anwar said, well, that was what the Prime Minister had told him.

The Chief Justice again tried to offer his explanation but Anwar told him off for the constant interruption. In retaliation, the Chief Justice accused Anwar of making personal attacks on him. The Chief Justice was now angry, another reaction of a desperate man. He had lost his cool.

Anwar reminded the Chief Justice that he (the Chief Justice) was already angry with him (Anwar) back in July 1998 when Anwar had addressed an assembly of Malaysian students in London and had commented on the Lim Guan Eng case. The Attorney General had told Anwar this. The Chief Justice was also angry with Anwar about his (Anwar's) meeting with Syed Ahmad Idid, a judge who had criticised the Malaysian judicial system.

The Chief Justice became very angry and simply denied any knowledge of these episodes. His standard reply from then on was "I was not aware then. Now I am". After repeatedly saying this to all Anwar's charges, the crowd started to laugh loudly and some serious looks from the police guards were required to calm the gallery down. The crowd almost became uncontrollable when Anwar told the Chief Justice, "You don't seem to know anything!"

Anwar then said the Prime Minister himself had told him (Anwar) that the Chief Justice was angry with him (Anwar). The Chief Justice replied he was not aware of this. Anwar then brought up the Ayer Molek shares case and the Chief Justice again interrupted him (Anwar).

Anwar was now really angry and said that there is an erosion of public confidence in the judiciary. Anwar then reprimanded the Chief Justice for conveniently denying everything.

At this point we wondered who was on trial here. Anwar was listing out all the "irregularities" of the Chief Justice while the Chief Justice was trying to defend himself and explain what "really happened", and doing a bad job at that too.

Anwar then said, "All that I know of you, I am apprehensive of your impartiality. Hence, I urge you to recuse".

Then Anwar sat down again. But the Chief Justice declared he would not disqualify himself. The Federal Court appeal would proceed with the Chief Justice still presiding.

This report will continue tomorrow.

The Full Text of Anwar Ibrahim's Appeal on the Judge's Decision to Disallow the Defense from Calling the Prime Minister to Court to Testify at His Second Trial is available here.

Raja Petra Kamarudin
Kuala Lumpur
Tuesday, 1st August 2000
¶ 7:59 PM

Anwarrior Ibrahim: Rebel with a cause
RANJAN ROY

As the Asian crisis triggered by the crashing bhat in Thailand devoured economies in 1997, a renewed hope of political resurgence grew. And as Suharto grew wobbly and finally fell, the cries of Reformasi spread from the streets of Jakarta to Kuala Lumpur and liberals grew emboldened in Malaysia. Enter Anwar Ibrahim, the renaissance man, who had spoken about civil liberties and democracy in his younger days, ready to lead the charge and end two decades of authoritarian rule.

He had announced a battle in an arena where political rallies were banned, speeches monitored by police and activists arrested without reason. But in a country where every inch of political space was filled by Mahathir Mohamad and Mahathirisms, even fighting for political oxygen was a bold move.

He spoke about building a civil society and universal values, about freedom of speech and of the judiciary, which in the years to come would trample on every notion of justice to convict a man who was framed on a rickety account of homosexual relations and corruption.

He announced that Merdeka, the Malay word for freedom from Britain, would arrive only when Mahathir left.

As the Asian crisis triggered by the crashing bhat in Thailand devoured economies in 1997, a renewed hope of political resurgence grew. And as Suharto grew wobbly and finally fell, the cries of Reformasi spread from the streets of Jakarta to Kuala Lumpur and liberals grew emboldened in Malaysia. Enter Anwar Ibrahim, the renaissance man, who had spoken about civil liberties and democracy in his younger days, ready to lead the charge and end two decades of authoritarian rule.

He had announced a battle in an arena where political rallies were banned, speeches monitored by police and activists arrested without reason. But in a country where every inch of political space was filled by Mahathir Mohamad and Mahathirisms, even fighting for political oxygen was a bold move.

He spoke about building a civil society and universal values, about freedom of speech and of the judiciary, which in the years to come would trample on every notion of justice to convict a man who was framed on a rickety account of homosexual relations and corruption.

He announced that Merdeka, the Malay word for freedom from Britain, would arrive only when Mahathir left.

"It would be a tragedy indeed if this hard-earned freedom were to result in the substitution of a foreign oppressor with a domestic one, or as in George Orwell's Animal Farm, the replacement of the two-legged animal by the four-legged," Anwar wrote in The Asian Renaissance published two years before he actually fired his first public salvos against Mahathir.

Later, speaking to this reporter from prison, Anwar insisted his battle wasn't ill-timed or premature and time had come for Mahathir to go. "Previously, the ruling party was considered unassailable. Now there is serious talk of forming an alternative," he said. "In recent times, we have never witnessed such debate on corruption in high places, abuse of police powers and instruments of government."

True, Anwar's sacking brought out the biggest crowds on the streets of Kuala Lumpur and Merdeka Square, the central plaza flanking the court which condemned Anwar, quickly turned into a Ground Zero for political resistance. Incredible in a country where reporters feared discussing politics even with their closest colleagues, people increasingly voiced their opinions and flaunted their views by pasting stickers and flying flags of opposition parties on their cars.

Executives wore tie-pins of the Justice Party, the opposition group created by Anwar, new opposition magazines flooded the newsstands and new websites, accessed by thousands each day, spouted venom at Mahathir.

But as the economy rebounded, anger ebbed and Malaysians went back to their business-as-usual life.

Mahathir Mohamad has retired, but Malaysia remains without freedoms that people enjoy in most democracies and without a free press.

Perhaps, Anwar's return could revive the debate on expanding political space in Malaysia.
¶ 7:57 PM

Anwar Ibrahim freed after sodomy sentence overturned
Reporter: Mark Colvin

Transcript
This is a transcript from PM. The program is broadcast around Australia at 5:10pm on Radio National and 6:10pm on ABC Local Radio.

MARK COLVIN: "It's good to be free" - the words of the Malaysian Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim after the country's highest court unexpectedly upheld his appeal against a six year sentence for sodomy.

Anwar spoke briefly to reporters from his wheelchair before leaving to see his elderly father, his wife Wan Azizah and his children.

The former deputy prime minister has spinal problems as a result of a police beating when he was first arrested.

It's an extraordinary reversal of fortunes for the man who many believed was only jailed in a corrupted judicial process because he represented a major political threat to his former political master Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

It appears to be an indication that under Mahathir's successor, Abdullah Badawi, the judiciary will be able to act with greater independence.

The Director of the Free Anwar Campaign, Raja Petra, spoke to me this afternoon from among the crowd outside the Federal Court in Putrajaya, where Anwar had just been freed.

RAJA PETRA: The crowd is excited. They are waiting for Anwar to come out and every time a lawyer, one of the lawyers come out they give him a cheer. Word has already spread around the whole country.

MARK COLVIN: How big a crowd is there?

RAJA PETRA: Well a couple of hundred - not that big.

MARK COLVIN: And what's the condition of Anwar Ibrahim now? I heard a report that he had been wheeled out in a wheelchair with a neck brace on. He's obviously still not very mobile at all.

RAJA PETRA: Anwar is in great pain. His spinal injury is aggravated and the doctors are pressing for him to go for surgery. He, however, refused to do the surgery until after today's outcome because he wants to know first of all whether he is going to be acquitted or not.

MARK COLVIN: And does he still want to leave the country and go to Germany for that surgery?

RAJA PETRA: Of course. And that's the whole reason he refused surgery up to now.

MARK COLVIN: So as soon as he's released he'll be making arrangements to leave?

RAJA PETRA: There were rumours… I don't know, but there were rumours that the King of Saudi is arranging a private medical jet for him to bring him up to Germany.

MARK COLVIN: And there's no question if he leaves the country that he will be able to come back in again?

RAJA PETRA: Oh yes. There's no reason why he shouldn't because he holds a Malaysian passport.

MARK COLVIN: And do they think that the surgery will get him back to full strength? Do you think that he'll be able walk again?

RAJA PETRA: That's not known because even the surgeons who examine him cannot guarantee that the surgery will be able to correct his medical problem.

MARK COLVIN: Now what are the legal implications of him winning this appeal today? Is Anwar Ibrahim going to able to sue for wrongful imprisonment?

RAJA PETRA: No. In Malaysia, we don't have a provision for wrongful detention or wrongful address, ah, wrongful arrest. So there's no, basically there's nothing that Anwar can do.

MARK COLVIN: And there's no possibility then of compensation for all this time in jail?

RAJA PETRA: No we don't have that system here.

MARK COLVIN: Now, what about the situation regarding his ability to campaign politically because he has still… while his appeal has been successful this time, there is still one conviction against his name isn't there?

RAJA PETRA: Yes, which he is also going to a judicial review for that as well.

MARK COLVIN: So he may be able to get off on appeal for that one?

RAJA PETRA: Correct. If he wins the judicial review then he'll be basically discharged of that one as well though he has already fully completed the sentence.

MARK COLVIN: But if he is not, for how long is he barred from standing for political office?

RAJA PETRA: Five years.

MARK COLVIN: Five years from now?

RAJA PETRA: Five years from, I believe, the day he completed his sentence.

MARK COLVIN: Which was a year or two ago?

RAJA PETRA: Which was a year plus ago.

MARK COLVIN: So that would mean that he wouldn't be able to stand for four years. Would he, let's say that his appeal does succeed, would he stand for political office? Would he reconstitute his political campaign?

RAJA PETRA: Well the only thing Anwar cannot do is he cannot stand for elections as a member of parliament but he can still lead the party nevertheless.

MARK COLVIN: So he might lead the party nevertheless but...

RAJA PETRA: Correct. He can still hold a position in the party. There's no problem.

MARK COLVIN: But a great deal has happened during the time that he's been in jail. Notably, September the 11th has happened and that has really profoundly changed the political landscape. Will he be able to regain the popularity that he had before?

RAJA PETRA: Well I suppose this will all depend on his charisma and whether the people will still flock to him like they used to. So I suppose as soon as all his medical problem have been corrected, his first step will see whether he's still the crowd puller that he used to be.

MARK COLVIN: Do you think that his release is a result of changes… of new independence in the judiciary under Abdullah Badawi?

RAJA PETRA: No. I think probably the judiciary are not so cowed by the present Prime Minister as compared to the previous prime minister.

MARK COLVIN: Well in other words, it wouldn't have happened under Mahathir?

RAJA PETRA: It would never have happened if Mahathir was still prime minister.

MARK COLVIN: So you don't want to give Abdullah Badawi any credit for that?

RAJA PETRA: Well, I believe Abdullah Badawi could do very little to control the judiciary even if he did want to, so he might as well not try to.

MARK COLVIN: But on the other hand, won't it strengthen Abdullah Badawi's own hand as a democratic leader to show that he is prepared to release a major opposition figure?

RAJA PETRA: Correct. Correct, and that is also probably a very good political move for Abdullah Badawi. Knowing that he cannot control the judiciary, he might as well not try to, and allow Anwar to be freed. And then he can claim credit for it. And at the same time, this is a slap in the face for Mahathir.

MARK COLVIN: Finally, just to sum up Raja Petra, would you just tell us what you think of this decision in terms of what kind of a day is this for Malaysian democracy and Malaysian justice?

RAJA PETRA: Now that these judges have made this kind of decision, I think the judiciary basically will fall into the same spirit and will now be brave enough to make judicial decisions without political considerations. I think this is going to be a test case for the rest of the judges.

MARK COLVIN: The Director of the Free Anwar Campaign, Raja Petra, speaking to me from among the crowd outside the Federal Court in Putrajaya just after the decision to free Anwar Ibrahim.
¶ 7:56 PM

Anwar Ibrahim's statement to the court after conviction and before sentencing on 8 August 2000

A Nobel Peace Laureate who is also a leader of a nation recently made this remark: "The Anwar Case ceased to be a legal case a long time ago!"

In the beginning, there were indeed some who maintained some confidence in the Malaysian court system. They thought there was still a chance that this court would exonerate me. But they have seen how the trial was conducted, and they have concluded that this case has nothing to do with the crime. There has been no criminal trial in this court, only political persecution.

I agree that no one is above the law. But that principle is not applied to Dato Seri Dr. Mahathir. Instead the court acquiesced to his insolence. I have steadfastly maintained that I am the victim of political conspiracy, through a web of intrigue, orchestrated by the maestro Dr. Mahathir. Despite strenuous appeals, my counsels were prevented from questioning this principal witness.

The pronouncement of your judgement today was a mere formality, according to preordained script of the conspirators. It is inconceivable that anyone can be found guilty with such clear incontrovertible evidence of fabrication. There is absolutely no cogent evidence that I have committed the offence. Azizan accused that retracted in 1997, made a statutory Declaration denying the allegations in 1998, than under oath in court in 1998, 1999, accused again then denied that he was ever sodomised, then amended not after May, yet again soon after September 1992. He lied in the Shariah Court of committing khalwat offence and later admitted both of khalwat and adultery and was convicted subsequently. And this court ruled that this is a credible and consistent witness!

Our challenge to have him examined by doctors was conveniently ignored. The dates January to March 1993 was on the suggestion of the police officer. Our alibi on the said premise at Tivoli Villa and my movements were never challenged by the prosecution. It's a conviction based on conjectures and imagination.

I never dreaded this judgement. It has legal basis. It is unjust, disgraceful and revolting. It does not disgrace me; it disgraces you, the judiciary and this nation of ours.

I reiterate my innocence with a clear conscience. I will fight even from behind iron bars and prison walls. Truth and justice cannot but prevail. Let the plotters plot all they want, for God is still the best of schemers.

Dr. Mahathir could have used the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA) to imprison me for as long as he wanted, without destroying the judiciary and without sullying the Attorney General's chambers. But he is a coward who would not take responsibility for his own evil. So he uses the courts, and with the same stroke, he completes the destruction of the judiciary.

Nonetheless, the proceedings during the trial reveal the deplorable methods used by the police, the absurdities of our adversarial system of justice malicious prosecution and corruption involving the ruling clique. Dr. Mahathir's lust for power is insatiable. He will lie and force others to lie to save himself. He has lied in the face of the testimony of the former Anti Corruption Agency Director-General, Dato Shafie Yahaya. Not only did he lie by denying that he ordered the investigation stopped, he went further by instructing a deputy minister to tell Parliament that the investigation was never closed. He had lied about my being assaulted as self-inflicted. He had lied that the cost of his Putrajaya Palace was only 17 million Ringgit. He lied that his children did not benefit from the government despite billions of Ringgit worth of contracts, privatisation, shares allocation and bailout.

His other colleagues would naturally echo. Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin lied to the public when he said he did not take a holiday with lawyer V. K. Lingam in New Zealand. Instead of investigating the alleged improprieties, Dr. Mahathir has extended his service beyond his retirement date "to see that everything is in place."

During my 17 years of government service, I was loyal to the government and the Prime Minister. But mine was a loyalty based on principles. If justice, the law or public interest were threatened, I would defy Dr. Mahathir. I objected to the use of massive public funds to rescue the failed businesses of his children and cronies. Here was where respect of justice and public interest overcame loyalty to the Prime Minister. And it was precisely because I defied him and sided with public interest that I was dismissed and persecuted.

This is a small sacrifice to pay in the cause of democracy and justice. But I worry for the nation. Corruption is endemic. The pillars of democracy civil society and the rule of lay are shattered.

This nation needs reform and renewal. To Dr. Mahathir and his greedy family and cronies, I say beware the wrath of the people, for the people are rising to reclaim justice, they are rising against graft and abuse of power. And, to the champions of Reformasi, I salute you for your courage and urge that you keep your fighting spirit.

ANWAR IBRAHIM

High Court, Kuala Lumpur

(in lien of mitigation)

August 8, 2000
¶ 7:54 PM

A REPORT ON THE ANWAR SODOMY TRIAL

INTRODUCTION

Anwar's sodomy trial took 118 days to complete and appears to be the longest High Court trial in the country's history. It must be remembered that, although the criminal laws as administered in Malaysia are based on local statutes, the principles underlying these statutes are English "common law" principles which have been adopted by the local courts as part of the local law for almost two centuries. Specifically, English principles of criminal justice have been part of local law since 25 March, 1807, when a Charter of Justice was granted to Penang. Penang was then known as the Prince of Wales Island, and had been ceded to the (British) East India Company by the Sultan of Kedah in 1786. The Charter of Justice is believed to have introduced the laws of England into the then Straits Settlements, subject to certain modifications in its application.

One of the basic principles of English criminal law is that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent court of law. Another important principle is that justice must not only be done but manifestly be seen to be done. It is the view of many observers that these principles were blatantly disregarded in the two Anwar trials.

This part of the Report is based on evidence given by witnesses and arguments of counsel in Court between the period 7 June, 1999 and 18 October, 1999. Part 2 of this Report will be made available to readers soon. It will cover the evidence of Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim given in Court between 22 October, 1999 and 4 February, 2000.

1. The trial begins

On Monday, 7 June, 1999 Anwar was charged for the second time at the Kuala Lumpur High Court, this time for the offence of sodomy, before High Court judge, Justice Dato' Arifin Jaka. This case was entitled PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v DATO SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM (In the High Court of Malaya, Federal Territory Criminal Trial No 45-51-98. Anwar was tried jointly with second accused Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja, his Indonesian-born adopted brother. Sukma's case was entitled PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v SUKMA DARMAWAN SASMITAAT MADJA (In the High Court of Malaya, Federal Territory Criminal Trial No 45-26-99).

Dato Seri Anwar was represented by eight defence counsel: Raja Aziz Raja Addruse (leading counsel), Christopher Fernando, Gurbachan Singh Bannu, Sulaiman Abdullah, Pawancheek Marican, Zainur Zakaria, Zulfikli Noordin and Sankaran N Nair. Sukma had the services of counsel Karpal Singh and his two sons - Jagdeep Singh Deo and Gobind Singh Deo. CV Prabhakaran held a watching brief for witness Mohd Azmin Ali, Anwar's former private secretary. In the course of the trial Raja Aziz Addruse and Sulaiman Abdullah withdrew as counsel as they had prior engagements elsewhere, and Christopher Fernando took over as Anwar's leading counsel. Karpal Singh switched from representing Sukma to representing Dato' Seri Anwar.

The prosecution side comprised the Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, Senior Deputy Public Prosecutors Datuk Abdul Gani Patail and Dato Azahar Mohamed, and Deputy Public Prosecutors Nordin Hassan and Shamsul Sulaiman. In the course of the trial, Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah was added to the prosecution team.

2. The charges

When the trial started on 7 June, 1999 one charge was preferred against Anwar and two charges against Sukma. The respective charges against the two accused were as follows:

The charge against Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim

That you, on one night in the month of May 1992 about 7.45pm, at No. 10-7-2, Tivoli Villa, Medang Tanduk Road, Bangsar, in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, voluntarily committed carnal intercourse against the order of nature against one Azizan Abu Bakar ... and you have, therefore, committed an offence under section 377B of the Penal Code.

The two charges against Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja

First charge

That you, on one night in the month of May 1992 about 7.45 pm, at No. 10-7-2, Tivoli Villa, Medang Tanduk Road, Bangsar, in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, voluntarily committed carnal intercourse against the order of nature against one Azizan Abu Bakar ... and you have, therefore, committed an offence under section 377B of the Penal Code.

Second charge

That you on one night in the month of May 1992 about 7.45pm, at No. 10-7-2, Tivoli Villa, Medang Tanduk Road, in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur had voluntarily committed carnal intercourse against the order of nature with Azizan Abu Bakar... and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 377B of the Penal Code.

The Law

Whoever voluntarily commits carnal intercourse against the order of nature shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 20 years, and shall also be liable to whipping. [Section 377B of the Penal Code].

Whoever abets any offence shall, if the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment, and no express provision is made by this Code for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with the punishment provided for the offence. [Section 109 of the Penal Code].

3. Anwar and Sukma claim trial

After the three charges were read out by the court interpreter to Anwar and Sukma respectively, both pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution produced a witness list of 12 persons, among whom were the "star" prosecution witnesses, Azizan Abu Bakar and Ummi Hafilda Ali. A second list of 6 prosecution witnesses was produced shortly after. One important name that was missing from the first list was Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohammad, who was in fact the first person to "blow the whistle" publicly on Anwar's alleged homosexuality. In the first trial, the Prime Minister was the number 1 witness in the prosecution's witness list.

The absence of Mahathir's name in the prosecution witness list in this trial would only become obvious to the public later, when Dr Mahathir refused to come to court as a witness for the defence despite a subpoena having been issued against him by the Court at the request of Sukma's lawyers.

4. Amendment to charge and objection thereto

Just before the first prosecution witness was called, the Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah informed the High Court that he was making an application to amend the charges. He asked for the date in the charges to be changed from -

"One night in May 1992" to "one night from January to March 1993".

The accused was asked to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty to this amended charge. Raja Aziz objected to this, saying that the accused could not be asked to enter this plea as the amendment was being challenged. He argued that a specific date must be stated in the charges, and the prosecution had failed to follow standard guidelines when preferring the charges. Raja Aziz said:

R Aziz: Can you imagine giving an alibi for (the period) between January and March 1993!

This was the second time the prosecution had applied to amend the charge against Dato' Seri Anwar. The original charge, being one of ten charges read out to Dato' Seri Anwar on the first day of the first criminal trial against him on 2 November, 1998, was first amended at the preliminary stage of the trial in April 1999 when the Court agreed to change the date "from May 1994 to May 1992" after an application was made by the prosecution. The prosecution stated that the amendment was due to "a typographical error", and the defence had not objected. After the first amendment, both Dato' Seri Anwar and Sukma had filed notices of alibi for the month of May 1992.

The lawyers for Dato' Seri Anwar and Sukma immediately objected against the second amendment of the charge and urged the Court to use its inherent jurisdiction to strike out the case against the two accused on the ground that there was mala fides on the part of the prosecution in amending the charges. In objecting to the "multiple amendments", Raja Aziz Addruse, Anwar's leading counsel, described the move as "unreasonable and not fair to the accused."

On the widening of the time frame of the alleged offence from "one to three months", Raja Aziz said it would be impossible for an alibi to be given for such a long period. Arifin interjected:

It's not difficult to prove that he was away ... he can show that he was not at Tivoli or that he was doing something else, like playing tennis!

Sukma's lawyer Karpal Singh also objected to the amendment of the charges on the same grounds as Raja Aziz. Karpal said the notice of alibi filed earlier would become void; and if the amendments were allowed, the accused would not have time to file another notice. Karpal said under the law, the accused must give written notice of the alibi to the Public Prosecutor (who is the Attorney-General himself but wearing another hat) as least 10 days before the trial began. Karpal said the notice of alibi must state the particulars where the accused claimed to have been at the time of the alleged offence, and the names and addresses of witnesses. Karpal added that the accused would want to file a notice of alibi and if the hearing proceeded on the amended charge, the accused would not be able to comply with the 10-day requirement.

Urging the Court to strike out the case, Karpal said the defence would show there was male fides on the part of the prosecution to amend the charges, and the Court had the power "to throw out the case". The defence, said Karpal, wanted to apply to strike out the proceedings for being an abuse of process. Karpal then applied for time to file an application to strike out the proceedings and to file an affidavit in support of the application. He said the prosecution's application to amend the charges at various intervals was an indication that "something is amiss". Karpal said:

Your Lordship should be put on guard, to perceive and to go into the actual situation. I urge the Court to take the matter seriously. There's clear mala fides. The Attorney-General has the discretion to prefer charges but it must be done fairly. The Court must ensure that the Executive does not go beyond its confines. The discretion does not mean that the Attorney-General can do as he pleases; the discretion means knowing what is just in law.

When Justice Arifin Jaka pointed out to Karpal that such allegations must be backed by facts, the senior lawyer retorted that that was why the defence needed time to file an application.

Judge: It's a serious allegation!

Karpal: Yes, and time should be of no consequence!

Karpal said the defence has filed a Notice of Motion. The judge allowed the defence until 9 am the next day to file its application and to serve it on the prosecution. He said the Court would sit at 10 am the next day to hear the application, if the Attorney-General would want to file an affidavit in reply. The judge added:

This is a very serious allegation against the prosecution. Let me see the substance of the affidavit. This sort of thing must stop. I don't want to be caught again halfway through, alleging male fide. We will thrash it out at the beginning.

In his reply, the Attorney-General Mohtar Abdullah refuted the defence's contention that the prosecution had abused its powers in asking for the amendment. The Attorney-General said:

I want to rebut the accusation that we are doing this in bad faith. If the prosecution really has bad faith, it would have asked for the amendment after witnesses had given evidence and thereby preventing the defence from filing a fresh notice of alibi. If the defence is sincere in wanting 10 days to file a notice of alibi, the prosecution would leave it up to the Court to decide whether to allow it. We are doing it (applying for the amendment) at this stage to allow it (i.e. to allow the defence to file a notice of alibi). The prosecution is accused of abusing the process when it is actually giving the defence the advantage of the system.

The Attorney-General further told the Court he was being fair although "they (the defence) never believe me", and adding that the prosecution had prepared its charges based on the evidence, and also taking into consideration the first notice of alibi. He said the purpose of a notice of alibi was to enable the prosecution to investigate further and if necessary, review or drop the charges. He also said that the issue of dates in a charge was immaterial, as stated by an English Court of Appeal case which was adopted by Malaysian courts. Mohtar Abdullah argued:

An accused person can be found guilty if the evidence showed that the offence was committed on a date other than that specified in the charge. Many charges, for example, in rape, state a time frame of a year or some months. Not all witnesses can remember or write the dates in their diary. People don't talk about being raped, what more being sodomised. The prosecution had to check and double-check the facts, and even if the facts showed that the offence was not committed on X day, as stated in the charge, but on Y day, the accused can be convicted for committing the offence on Y day.

5. Applications by Anwar and Sukma to strike out the charges

On 8 June, 1999 Anwar and Sukma filed separate applications to strike out the case against them but the hearing was adjourned to the next day to enable the prosecution to file a reply. Justice Arifin fixed hearing at 9.30 am. Although Anwar had filed an affidavit in the morning, defence lead counsel Raja Aziz Addruse told the Court in the course of proceedings that Dato' Seri Anwar would like to withdraw it first and file afresh in the afternoon. This was because the document was prepared in a hurry and amendments had to be made. Raja Aziz added:

I had indicated to the Honourable Attorney-General the amendments to be made, so that he can proceed to prepare his reply.

Sukma also filed an affidavit in support of his motion to strike out the sodomy charge against him. The motion was filed at the High Court by his solicitors, Karpal Singh and Co.

6. Sukma's affidavit

In his affidavit, Sukma said it was impossible for him to sodomise former driver Azizan Abu Bakar at Tivoli Villa apartment in May 1992 since the building was not ready then. He said he bought the apartment unit in September 1992 and was given the keys on December 15 that year. Objecting to the prosecution's attempt to amend the date of the offence from "May 1992" to "between January and March 1993", Sukma said his counsel had sent a notice of alibi to the prosecution on May 27, 1999 indicating his intention to raise a defence of alibi.

In his affidavit, Sukma said several names and documents were included in the notice of alibi in support of his defence. "Hence", he said, "after considering the facts, the Attorney-General had, at the beginning of the trial on June 7, applied to amend the charges against me and Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim." Sukma further said the Attorney-General's act in repeatedly amending the charges showed that he was unaware of the facts and/or had acted hastily without considering any justice for him. Sukma further averred in his affidavit:

It is even more disturbing (to note that) Azizan had testified (during Anwar's trial for 'corrupt practice') that nothing happened between him and Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim during the material months between 1992 and 1997.

Sukma, who also faced a second charge of abetting Dato' Seri Anwar in sodomising Azizan, said in his affidavit that it was unreasonable for the Attorney-General to have acted without considering the evidence of a material witness in the case. He urged the court to scrutinise the prosecution's action and grant him the order that was sought i.e the order to strike out the charge of sodomy. Sukma's notice of alibi stated that he was at Anwar's private residence each night from 7.30pm onwards from May 1 to 22, 1992. He was in Sydney, Australia, from May 23 to June 2, 1992.

After taking note of the filing of Sukma*s affidavit, Justice Arifin fixed the hearing on Sukma's application to strike out the next day.

7. Anwar's affidavit

Anwar's application to have the charges against him struck out was filed by his solicitor, Sankaran Nair at the High Court registry the next day, i.e. on Wednesday, 9 June, 1999. Anwar's application had been withdrawn earlier because his lawyers wanted to make some amendments. In his application Anwar asked that the proceedings to be struck out for being "oppressive" and an "abuse of process". Alternatively, Anwar asked the court to refuse the prosecution's application to amend the date in the charge from "May 1992" to "January to March 1993" on the grounds that the application was made in "bad faith, was prejudicial, oppressive and an abuse of process."

In his affidavit, Dato' Seri Anwar contended that the prosecutors have shown themselves to be "highly unprofessional in the performance of their duties and to be personally interested" in securing a conviction by questionable means. He referred to lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon's statutory declaration which had set out the details of his (Manjeet's) conversation with prosecutors Abdul Gani Patail and Azahar Mohamed. Manjeet, who was representing Anwar's tennis partner Dato S Nallakaruppan (who was charged under the Internal Security Act for illegal possession of bullets), had met the prosecutors to ask for a reduced charge. Manjeet claimed that Abdul Gani and Azahar had asked him, in exchange for a reduced charge against his client, Dato S Nallakaruppan, to get the latter to implicate Anwar in sexual offences with women. Anwar averred in his affidavit:

Their conduct ... shows both Gani and Azahar ... to have abused their positions as officers of the Attorney-General's Chambers by going out of their way to procure evidence against me improperly.

Anwar also referred to the presence of Datuk Abdul Gani Patail at Bukit Aman (the National Police Headquarters) on the night of Dato Seri Anwar's arrest and assault:

The unhealthy involvement of Gani and Azahar raises questions as to the impartiality and attitude of the prosecution in relation to the institution of the proceedings against me.

As for the Public Prosecutor (Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah), I had on a few occasions prior to my arrest had discussions with him regarding matters related to the offence for which I am now being charged.

As the then Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, I went to him for legal advice in his capacity as the Attorney-General.

Anwar also said that he believed that the prosecution against him was male fide because of Sukma's statement that the police had forced him to confess to sodomy. Anwar contended that instead of inquiring whether the confession was forced, the prosecution has charged Sukma for the offence of giving a false statement. Anwar also said the prosecution had similarly charged fashion designer Mior Abdul Razak for the offence of giving a false statement after Mior had come up with a statutory declaration stating that he was not sodomised by Anwar.

A statutory declaration made by his former speechwriter Dr Munawar Anees was also referred to by Anwar. In the affidavit, Dr Munawar had accused the police of forcing a confession out of him. Munawar was convicted in September, 1998 of committing sodomy with Dato' Seri Anwar. He has since appealed but he had left Malaysia and had not been back.

Anwar argued that the institution of the criminal proceedings was mala fide because the Public Prosecutor had preferred the charge against him on September 29, 1998 but only amended it on April 27, 1999. Anwar alleged that when the Attorney-General found that the amended charge could not stand after taking into account the issuance of an alibi notice by Anwar under section 402A of the CPC (Criminal Procedure Code), the Attorney-General made another application to amend the charge. Anwar also said notwithstanding the Attorney-General's publicly-announced guidelines for instituting prosecutions:

... it is evident that the Public Prosecutor had not exercised due care when he preferred the charge (and amendments) against me.

Anwar argued that the prosecution was regurgitating the same allegation of sodomy involving Azizan which it had failed to establish in the earlier trial.

8. Attorney-General replies

In his affidavit of reply, Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah said he had applied to amend the charge against Anwar based on further investigations. He said clarification was obtained from witnesses following the filing of notices of alibi by Anwar and Sukma. Mohtar said the charge was preferred based on the evidence available at that time; the amendment was requested for based on further investigations, showing that his office had endeavoured to bring accurate charges founded on the latest evidence. Mohtar added:

The amendment is not "oppressive" and does not prejudice the applicant (Anwar) because he can still raise the defence of alibi.

9. Issue of "Abuse of Process"

The main legal arguments on the question of abuse of process as contended by the defence - which arose from the amendment of the charges - were heard on Wednesday, 16 June, 1999. At the last stage of the arguments, defence counsel Sulaiman Abdullah referred to the second amendment of the charge against Anwar - which the prosecution said was made following the discovery of further evidence. Sulaiman said the "further evidence" was obtained from the notice of alibi.

Judge: What's wrong with that? ... There is nothing wrong!

Sulaiman: If the prosecution is so sure that it happened in May 1992 or 1994, why keep amending it? The prosecution did that to find a suitable date to ensure a conviction. It is an attempt to get a charge against which we cannot put up a defence - that is, to prejudice our defence! The prosecution must make a complete investigation before preferring any charges.

Senior Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden replied for the prosecution. He said there was no evidence or circumstances which would prejudice the accused, and said both Anwar and Sukma would get a fair trial. He argued that there was no embarrassment on the part of the defence and neither was there a miscarriage of justice against them. The defence was free to challenge Azizan when he testified later. The defence could apply for time to give a notice of alibi as it was still not too late as the trial had not begun.

Karpal Singh stood up to respond to the DPP.

Karpal: The Court should not be subjected to the Executive, and should be independent in making its decision!

Judge: My decision will only be based on evidence adduced in Court.

Karpal: The defence expects the Attorney-General to be reasonable. Why is it that Azizan, who is said to have been sodomised, is not charged, unlike Sukma and Dr Munawar Anees.

With that, the submissions in support of the defence application to strike out the case were concluded.

Justice Arifin Jaka dismissed the application to strike out the charges against Anwar and Sukma, ruling that the defence had failed to adduce evidence to prove that there was an abuse of process by the Attorney-General in amending the charges twice, and after the notice of alibi had been given. The judge added:

On the other hand, I am more than convinced that the Attorney-General had exercised his discretion properly to institute the proceedings against the accused. As the Public Prosecutor, he has control and discretion of all criminal proceedings under the Criminal Procedure Code.

10. Issue of notice of alibi

The defence, following the ruling by the judge to dismiss the striking-out application, applied for a postponement of the proceedings to enable it to file a fresh notice of alibi for the amended charges.

Karpal, for Sukma, submitted that under the law, the defence had to serve a notice of alibi on the prosecution. At least 10 days were needed before the trial began if the defence intended to adduce alibi evidence, he said, adding that it was clear the 10 days' notice must be complied with. He argued that a previous decision where the Court had refused to accept this time-frame could not be applied in this case because the circumstances were different. There was a risk of a mistrial if the court ignored this requirement, said Karpal.

Karpal: If Your Lordship wants to take the risk, take it!

Judge: I may take the risk after I have listened to the Attorney-General and find that it can be justified.

Karpal: The Attorney-General wants to do the impossible!

Judge: Go on with your submission.

Karpal: How can we fly in the face of the law? To be on the safe side, we want to give notice that we have done all we could. If Your Lordship wants to proceed, the blame should not be put at our feet; it should be at the feet of the judge!

Karpal further said Dato' Seri Anwar and Sukma were already prejudiced by the vague charge and asked for 12 days to prepare an alibi for the (period of) 90 days as stated in the charges. He argued that the idea behind the notice of alibi was to enable the prosecution to investigate further, and if the alibi was verified, the prosecution was obliged to drop the charges, unless it wanted "to amend now to 1998!".

Karpal: Let's not make a mockery of the law. My God! We will be made the laughing stock of the world!

In his reply Attorney-General Mohtar Abdullah, citing a case, argued that if a notice of alibi had been served and the prosecution later amended the charge, the accused did not have to serve a fresh notice. He said the defence was entitled to serve a fresh notice while the trial proceeded and this would not contravene the law. Mohtar added:

They are in fact at a greater advantage now. They can lie back and listen to what the prosecution has to say, and then produce an alibi!

Arifin Jaka ruled that the amendment did not require a new notice of alibi to be filed within 10 days before the commencement of the trial. He ordered the trial to proceed.

11. Prosecution opens its case

The prosecution finally opened its case against Dato' Seri Anwar and Sukma on Wednesday, 16 June, 1999, signalling the commencement of the trial proper. The prosecution would call its witnesses to give evidence to support its case until it closed its case. The first prosecution witness was a subordinate court registrar, Kathir Velayutham son of Palaniaapan. In this first stage of the trial, many unexpected events occurred in Court, beginning with the trial within a trial.

12. The trial within a trial

On Wednesday, 16 June, 1999, when the prosecution wanted to tender evidence on the confession that Sukma had purportedly made to a Sessions Judge about his homosexual relations with his "adopted brother", the defence objected and requested for a trial within a trial. The court ordered a "trial within the trial" to be carried out first in order to determine whether Sukma's confession was admissible in evidence. A number of witnesses were called to give evidence in this "mini-trial" in order to determine the admissibility of the so-called confession. After hearing the evidence from the witnesses, the judge asked counsel to put up (legal) submissions. Between 20 July, 1999 and 22 July, 1999, the judge heard the submissions of counsel.

Jagdeep Singh Deo, Sukma's counsel submitted on the question of the voluntariness of the confession obtained by the police from Sukma. Jagdeep argued that the prosecution had failed to prove the voluntariness of the confession based on evidence adduced during the proceeding to ascertain such voluntariness. He said, "elements of oppression, inducement, threat or promise" were involved before Sukma made his confession to Sessions Judge Abdul Karim Abdul Razak and the sudden shock treatment given to Sukma, coupled with the fact that he was not given food throughout the first day (of arrest), had a profound effect on him.

Jagdeep also spoke of the condition of Cell No 8 at the Bukit Aman lockup, where Sukma was detained, which appeared "eerie, small and gloomy" and which would have affected Sukma. Then, added Jagdeep, Sukma underwent prolonged interrogation by four or five police interrogators who had humiliated and frightened him. Further, said Jagdeep, Sukma was put through a "humiliating and painful medical examination" where a finger was inserted into his anus and photographs were taken "for reasons only privy to the assistant investigating officer, Assistant Superintendent of Police Mohd Rodwan Yusof."

Karpal Singh, acting for Dato Seri Anwar, argued that the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) had not been complied with by the magistrate (i.e. a Sessions Judge acting as a magistrate) when he recorded the confession of Sukma. The confession document, said Karpal, should only be kept by the recording magistrate - but in this case, the confession document, which was made under section 115(2) of the CPC, was in the hands of the police the same day it was recorded. Citing a Federal Court decision, Karpal said the failure by the police to comply with the CPC's provisions would render the whole exercise of ascertaining the admissibility of the confession "fatally flawed".

Karpal said the investigating officer, Senior Assistant Commissioner of Police Musa Hj Hassan, was instrumental in getting the confession; he was the one who rang up Deputy Public Prosecutor Stanley Augustin "to arrange for a senior officer of the Court, not a Magistrate", to record a confession. Augustin made the necessary arrangements and got Sessions Judge Abdul Karim to record the confession. Karpal explained Musa's eagerness in this way:

So, would he not be so eager to know the fruits of his efforts? This sized up the defence contention that Sukma was taken back to police custody for them to know whether he (Sukma) had complied and the "programming" would be reflected in the handwriting of Abdul Karim.

This argument was connected to Sukma's earlier testimony in Court that he was "programmed" by the police to admit that he had a homosexual relationship with Anwar. Karpal said there was no evidence to show under what circumstances Sukma "suddenly decided to make a confession". Karpal said, no one, in the course of evidence, had referred to the matter or on Sukma's motive in making the confession; all that the Court had was, that an "intelligence statement" was recorded, that Sukma was taken to see ASP Rodwan and they both went to see SAC Musa. Karpal said:

Musa decides that a confession is in the offing, and he makes arrangements. Where is the evidence to show that between the interrogation and his (Sukma's) presence before Musa on 16 September (1998), that he had in fact desired to make the statement? It must have been the "programming": Just tell the robot he will do it and he will press the button!

Karpal argued that from the confession, it would appear that the magistrate would have been told that Sukma wanted to make a confession. Karpal said:

This was very odd. In other words Rodwan was present, saying to the magistrate without an option but to proceed to record the confession, and the police were eventually directing the magistrate.

Kapal said the Court should further consider that Sessions Court Judge Abdul Karim did not ask what was Sukma's motive in making the confession. Karpal argued that "Abdul Karim did not ask for the reason except in this Court when he said: 'Although (the question was) not recorded (in the confession), I asked for it'." Karpal asked the Court to reject Abdul Karim's evidence. On the other hand, he urged the Court to accept Sukma's evidence, which was made under oath in the trial within a trial, and said "it ought to stand".

Karpal then went on to the issue of denial of access to counsel. Karpal said Sukma was brought before a magistrate without the benefit of legal counsel, although his sister, Komalawati, had appointed a lawyer.

By 16 September (1998), the investigation was over; why wasn't the lawyer called? This man (Sukma) was denied his right under the Federal Constitution. We have the sudden emergence of lawyer Mohamed Noor Don, a former police officer, who had taken over.

13. The ruling on the admissibility of Sukma*s confession

On Monday, 26 July, 1999 Justice Arifin Jaka delivered his ruling on the admissibility of the confession by Sukma:
I find that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was made voluntarily. I will give my full reasons when the judgment is given at the end of the trial. I find that the scales of justice are in favour of the prosecution. Although the confession is admissible, that does not mean that I believe in its truth yet; that will have to be proved.

14. Impeachment proceedings against Azizan Abu Bakar

After Arifin ruled that Sukma's confession was admissible, the trial proper proceeded. The prosecution brought in their witnesses to give evidence and these witnesses were put through the usual examination procedure - examination-in-chief by the prosecution, cross-examination by defence counsel and re-examination by the prosecution. The trial proceeded without interruption until 9 August, 1999, when the prosecution's principal witness, Azizan Abu Bakar, was giving his testimony. The defence applied to the court to be allowed to commence impeachment proceedings against Azizan over his allegations of being sodomised by Anwar and Sukma.

Anwar's leading counsel Christopher Fernando explained to the Court that Azizan had testified in the earlier trial (the so-called "corruption trial") that the former Deputy Prime Minister had not sodomised Azizan between 1992 and 1997 but in this (second) trial Azizan had testified that he was sodomised between January and March 1993. The Court allowed the application for impeachment proceedings. In allowing the defence to attempt impeachment, Arifin said:

There is material contradiction here in respect of his sodomy allegations. You had told (in the previous corruption trial) you were sodomised up to May 1992 but in my Court you said you were sodomised by Dato' Seri Anwar and Sukma in 1993. This is a serious contradiction!

The examination of Azizan began. At one stage of the impeachment proceedings i.e on 16 August, 1999, Fernando applied to the High Court to charge Azizan Abu Bakar with perjury, calling the witness "a liar." The Attorney-General objected, saying it was premature for Azizan to be charged for perjury. Arifin Jaka agreed with the Attorney-General and said:

Yes, he had changed his story now but I will consider (this) at the end of the prosecution's case after hearing the evidence in its totality.

15. Show-cause letter issued to Dr Chandra Muzaffar

Another significant event in the continued trial occurred on 2 August, 1999. During a break in the impeachment proceedings, Arifin Jaka, acting on the Attorney-General's complaint in Court, issued a notice to Dr Chandra Muzaffar, the Parti Keadilan Nasional Deputy President for him to show cause why he should not be cited for contempt of court in respect of a statement that he was alleged to have made in which he had criticised the judiciary, police and media. Following this, Dr Chandra filed an application to set aside the notice to show cause. After hearing arguments on the application on 21 August, 1999, Arifin Jaka ruled that there was no proof to show that the alleged statement which was downloaded from the internet could be attributed to Dr Chandra. In allowing Dr Chandra's application to set aside the notice, Arifin accepted the legal submissions of Karpal Singh. Karpal had argued that the extract from the internet was not admissible under the Evidence Act and could not therefore form the basis on which the notice to show cause could be issued.

The trial proceeded until the prosecution closed its case on 20 August, 1999. Nine witnesses gave evidence for the prosecution thus far, the last witness being SAC Musa Hj Hassan, who was the investigating officer for the case.

16. Ruling on whether Azizan should be impeached

On 7 September, 1999 the Court rejected the defence's attempt to impeach Azizan. Justice Arifin ruled that he was satisfied with Azizan's explanation over the contradictions relating to the dates when he was allegedly sodomised by Dato' Seri Anwar and Sukma. Arifin added that there was no need to impeach Azizan "as his explanation was reasonable and acceptable."

17. Submissions on No Case To Answer

Submissions of "No Case To Answer" were made to the Court on 8 September, 1999 and ended on Wednesday, 13 October, 1999. The trial had reached 48 days by then. Leading defence counsel Christopher Fernando and his colleague, Karpal Singh, submitted for Dato' Seri Anwar, whilst Jagdeep Singh submitted for Sukma.

Fernando said the charge against Anwar was "vague, inconsistent and doubtful" and added that "it was doomed to failure from the very outset". He said the prosecution had no choice but to amend the (original) first charge against the accused - that Anwar had sodomised Azizan from "on one night in May, 1994" to "one night in May, 1992" since Azizan had testified in the (earlier) corruption trial against Anwar that he was not sodomised after September, 1992. Fernando added that the prosecution had also failed to show that the two accused were at Tivoli Villa during the (newly amended) alleged period between January and March, 1993. Fernando submitted:

It is obvious that the charge against Anwar was fabricated.

Karpal submitted that the Court could only act on the evidence adduced "and not be influenced by statements made by the Executive in the country relating to Dato' Seri Anwar." He said the prosecution had destroyed their own case when Azizan and SAC Musa Hj Hassan contradicted each other as to who was the one who gave the dates of the alleged offence. Karpal eloquently described the contradictory evidence as -

Two of the prosecution's fighter jets colliding into each other, leaving no survivors.

Sukma's counsel Jagdeep Singh argued that there was no corroborative evidence for the court to order Sukma to enter his defence. He said:

A charge of sodomy is very easy to bring and very difficult to refute. Based on the testimony of a sole complainant, it could happen to me or even to Your Lordship. Therefore the evidence in support of such a charge has to be very convincing.

For the prosecution, the Attorney-General Mohtar Abdullah submitted that there was clear and cogent evidence to prove the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt which warranted calling for Anwar's and Sukma's defence.

18. Allegation of poisoning

On 10 September, 1999 while the legal submissions were still going on, Anwar's defence counsel Karpal Singh informed the Court that Anwar's urine sample contained a "dangerous" level of arsenic. Karpal said the sample had been sent to a laboratory in Melbourne, Australia under a false name for tests and a pathology report showed that the arsenic level was far beyond the normal range. Justice Arifin ordered Anwar to be sent to Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (HUKM) for a medical examination and to test his urine for possible arsenic poisoning. The trial was adjourned until Anwar was certified fit to attend court. A report on HUKM's tests on Anwar was sent to the Court on 5 October, 1999. The report, dated 4 October, 1999 stated that Anwar was fit to attend court. An application was made by counsel Karpal Singh to have the report explained by the HUKM Director and professor of medicine Dato Khalid Abdul Kadir. It was obvious that Karpal wanted to challenge HUKM's report. The application was turned down by the judge.

19. Ruling of no case to answer

At 9.05 am on Monday, 18 October, 1999 - the 59th day of the protracted trial - High Court Judge Arifin Jaka delivered his ruling. He held that the prosecution had made out a prima facie case against the two accused, Anwar and Sukma. This meant that if the defence wanted to succeed they would have to call witnesses to give evidence that could create reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case. In a brief ruling Arifin said:

After a maximum evaluation of all the admissible evidence adduced by the prosecution, I am satisfied that the prosecution has made out a case beyond reasonable doubt against the first accused Dato Seri Anwar, and second accused Sukma Darmawan. I accordingly order that the first accused be ordered to enter his defence on the charge and the second accused be called to enter his defence on both charges.

Karpal Singh stood up and requested that reasons be given for calling the defence. He cited the case of Khoo Hi Chiang v Public Prosecutor & Anor [1994] in support. Karpal said that this was a trial that went on for 61 days [this is incorrect; it should be 59 days] and the defence was therefore entitled to know where it had gone wrong. He argued that under the law, the defence had a right to apply for the reasons, and the judge*s decision "must be based on sound judicial principles." Karpal added that this was a high-profile case and he urged the Court to uphold the law and allow his application for the Court to state the reasons for calling the defence.

Attorney-General Mohtar Abdullah objected. He said there was nothing in the Criminal Procedure Code to say that the defence was entitled to demand that the judge give reasons for his ruling. He urged the judge to dismiss Karpal's application.

In response, Karpal agreed with the Attorney-General that there was no statutory provision governing this point, and therefore the Court could rely on common law (i.e. English common law principles). Judges, said Karpal, did sometimes give reasons in complicated cases. Karpal submitted that this was a complicated case, and the judge had (even) called upon the Registrar of the Syariah (Islamic) Court to produce the record (on Azizan's conviction by the Syariah Court for adultery). Karpal asked:

Are you going to disregard the evidence? You have to exercise your discretion. Your Lordship should ask your own conscience before making the ruling.

Justice Arifin Jaka disagreed and said:

I have heard the arguments in support and against the application. I am not obliged to give reasons at this stage for calling the defence. I have searched my conscience and I say that this is not a complicated case. This is just an ordinary criminal case of sodomy under the Penal Code. It is a high profile case as what people think because it involves a former Deputy Prime Minister of this country. Besides this, as in other like criminal case, the decision of the Court depends on the evidence adduced. There is nothing complicated. The defence is of the view that the case is complicated because of the evidence of PW6 (Azizan Abu Bakar). The question whether PW6 is a creditable and truthful witness is for the Court to decide (based) on the evidence. There is nothing unusual or complicated about the evidence of Azizan.

The application is dismissed as I do not have to give my reasons at this stage for calling the defence.

Justice Arifin went on to explain the options open to Anwar and Sukma at the next stage of the trial - the opening of the defence case. First, said the judge, Anwar and Sukma could remain silent. Second, they could make a statement from the dock where they could not be asked any question by their lawyers, the prosecution or the Court, but this statement carried a weight which was lower than evidence given on oath. Third, they could enter the witness box and give sworn evidence (evidence on oath); in such a case they could be examined by their lawyers, the prosecution and Court. Both Anwar and Sukma chose to give evidence from the witness box.

¶ 7:52 PM

Anwar's freedom catches UMNO with pants down
By Ioannis Gatsiounis

KUALA LUMPUR - With the only viable opposition party all but knocked out of the picture and the ruling National Front (BN) promising reform but carrying on its brand of feudalism with impunity - in other words, just when the political climate in Malaysia seemed to reach a new nadir - things got interesting. On Thursday morning in Putra Jaya, a federal court in a 2-1 decision stunned the nation by overturning the sodomy conviction of Malaysia's most famous political prisoner, Anwar Ibrahim.

Anwar in 1998 was sacked as deputy premier by then prime minister Mahathir Mohamad and subsequently jailed on corruption and sodomy charges. The debacle touched off mass protests and gave rise to a reform movement centering on justice and human rights, as many Malaysians believed that Anwar, 57, was framed because he posed a political threat to Mahathir.

Anwar had already served his term for the corruption conviction and was down to his last appeal for his nine-year sodomy sentence when Judge Abdul Hamid Mohamad told the courtroom on Thursday, "We are not prepared to uphold the conviction. We therefore ... set aside the conviction and the sentence."

Now, beneath the euphoria and bewilderment - in a nation in which the courts are reputedly a puppet of the government - two burning questions persist: How will Anwar's release shape Malaysia's political landscape, and second, does it suggest a new dawn of reform in Malaysian politics?

When Mahathir's hand-picked successor Abdullah Badawi took over from the long-ruling Mahathir last October, speculation surfaced as to whether Abdullah might release Anwar. It was just as soon concluded that releasing the charismatic Anwar would be political suicide for Abdullah, who was - some say still is - struggling to form a political base within his United Malays National Organization (UMNO).

On Wednesday, however, Abdullah said he would not meddle in the courts' decisions. And it appears he did not. So stunned was even Anwar at the fact that he went out of his way to say, "I must thank Badawi for the decision."

To some observers such cap-tipping is a priori, as Abdullah had already assured the public that the judiciary was independent and the government would not tamper with court decisions. But, said Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, deputy president of the National Human Rights Society (HAKAM), "There's a fundamental defect in making this assurance." He added that while Abdullah deserves some credit for not tampering with a court ruling that just might seal his political fate, "We cannot say the rule of law prevails in Malaysia as of yet."

Added a longtime commentator: "There remain so many problems in the judiciary." Those seeking reform, he said, cannot afford to bask in this decision.

But at least, said the leader of the opposition, Democratic Action Party (DAP) chairman Lim Kit Siang, "It reminds us not to despair in our fight for democracy."

And with Anwar's release, that fight for democracy likely got a major jolt. Anwar assured supporters outside the courthouse: "I'm committed to the struggle with the opposition parties that are committed to reform. I'm starting it right away."

Under Malaysian law, he will need to wait five years to seek political office because of his corruption conviction. But the message is clear: he will not allow himself to be sublated by the party that sought to destroy him.

Whether he links up with Keadilan (Justice Party), the party that was formed in the wake of his ouster, is not known. But it is thought that his release will "breathe new life directly and indirectly into opposition parties", said Hassan Ali of the conservative Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS).

UMNO officials were not immediately available for comment. But most observers say the decision puts UMNO against the wall. "It puts pressure on UMNO to stand up to the issues they promised to address" when Abdullah became premier, Lim said. Among those issues were corruption, transparency, accountability and good governance.

Some say Anwar's release may cause further fissures within UMNO, with some members aligning themselves with Anwar and others behind UMNO Supreme Council member Razaleigh Hamzah, who unsuccessfully challenged Abdullah for the party presidency in July.

At cafes around Kuala Lumpur on Thursday, some Malaysians saw Anwar's release as an omen for Malaysian politics. "Let him stay in jail where he deserves to be," said Mohamad Yusuf Bachok, 52. "His release will only divide."

Indeed, the Anwar debacle embarrassed and exhausted many Malaysians, and finds them averse to change. If Anwar can't reverse this trend, needless to say his political comeback will be over before it gets started.

Columnist M G G Pillai said Anwar's release is nothing to fear. "A realignment of forces is good for Malaysia."

And a realignment is what he foresees. Part of the problem, Pillai said, is that UMNO has become an Islamic party, trying to outduel PAS for that title. "Both have talked up cutting off the hands of thieves - the only difference is UMNO will cauterize it and PAS use the blade directly," he quipped.

While Muslims here, most all Malays, make up 60% of the population, UMNO and PAS have alienated many Malay voters because Malay identity is not exclusively Islamic. It is in some ways distinct, with a unique history that Islam has confused.

By contrast, Keadilan has always played more to Malay rather than Islamic sensibilities. Anwar did spearhead an Islamic revival in Malaysia in the early 1980s, but his appeal has transcended ethnic and religious lines.

As recently as Wednesday, Anwar and his former party were all but forgotten. His final appeal on Thursday was seen as a foregone conclusion, considering the courts' corrupt history; few Malaysians were even tuning in. As well, Keadilan was virtually buried in the March parliamentary elections, with only Anwar's wife Wan Azizah Wan Ismail winning a seat in parliament. Anwar's battle back into politics will no doubt be an arduous one.

Anwar, in neck brace and wheelchair, was expected to fly to Munich immediately for treatment for his back, an injury he said was aggravated by a beating inflicted by Malaysia's former police chief after his jailing in 1998. When Anwar appeared in court the next day with a black eye, Mahathir said Anwar beat himself up. The police chief later confessed to the crime.

After his release on Thursday, Anwar told reporters, "I bear no malice against [Mahathir]. Let him retire." Mahathir retired last October. Anwar's plans are a little different.

Ioannis Gatsiounis is a New York native who has worked in Indonesia as a freelance foreign correspondent for various US dailies and co-hosted a weekly political/cultural radio call-in show. He now lives in Malaysia.
¶ 7:46 PM

The full text of Anwar Ibrahim's address during his appeal on the judge's decision to disallow the defense from calling the Prime Minister to court to testify at his sodomy trial

I respectfully am applying to this court for your Lordship Tun Eusoff Chin, the Chief Justice to disqualify himself from hearing this appeal.

The essence of a fair trial is that the proceedings including appeals thereafter are conducted by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. This principle is enshrined in international law and practice, and the Malaysian Constitution.

Ref: UN Declaration of Human Rights (Article 10), further elaborated in the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 14(1)).

In Valente vs. The Queen (1988) 2.S.S.R.673

The Supreme Court of Canada set out the distinction between impartiality and independence. It described impartiality as a "state of mind or attitude of the tribunal to the issues and the parties in a particular case" whereas independence focussed on the status of the court or tribunal in its relationship with others particularly the executive branch of the Government. The Court asserted that the traditional objective guarantees for judicial independence must be supplemented with the requirement that the Court or tribunal be reasonably perceived as independent. This additional requirement was deemed necessary to ensure not only that justice is done in individual cases, but also of ensuring public confidence in the justice system." The Court added:

"Without that confidence the system cannot command the respect and acceptance that are essential to its effective operation, It is, therefore, important that a tribunal should be perceived as independent, as well as impartial, and that the test for independence should include that perception. The perception must, however, as I have suggested, be a perception of whether the tribunal enjoys the essential objective conditions or guarantees of judicial independence, and not a perception of how it will in fact act, regardless of whether it enjoys such conditions or guarantees."(p.689)

The applicable test for recusal as laid down by the appellate courts of Australia, Canada, U.K. and recently reiterated by the Constitutional Court of South Africa is as follows:

"...The question is whether reasonable, objective and informed person would on the correct facts reasonably apprehend that the Judge has not or will not bring an impartial mind to bear on the adjudication of the case, that is a mind open to persuasion by the evidence and the submissions of counsel. The reasonableness of the apprehension must be assessed in the light of the oath of office taken by the Judges to administer justice without fear or favour, and their ability to carry out that oath by reason of their training and experience. It must be assumed that they can disabuse their minds of any irrelevant personal beliefs and predispositions. They must take into account the fact that they have a duty to sit in any case in which they are not obliged to recuse themselves. At the same time, it must never be forgotten that an impartial Judge is a fundamental prerequisite for a fair trial and judicial officer should not hesitate to recuse herself or himself if there are reasonable grounds in the past of the litigant for apprehending that the judicial officer, for whatever reasons, was not or will not be impartial."(President of the Republic of S. Africa and others vs. S. Africa Rugby Football Union and others 1999 (4) SA147)

It is not for the Judge called upon to recuse to say that he will be independent or impartial. It is how a reasonable objective and informal person will perceive.

I am conscious of the presumption that judicial officers are impartial in adjudication disputes. I am equally conscious of the principle that the onus is upon me to rebut that presumption by adducing urgent and convincing facts.

My application for recusal are based on the following grounds:

1. I have ample evidence to show that the CJ craved for an additional six months extension, to ensure that no action would be preferred against him, and to ensure that I fail in my appeal. I am also privy, then as DPM, to the fact that the ACA had prepared a preliminary report against the CJ in 1998 over corruption.

Undoubtedly, there were precedents to the extension what is exceptional in this case is that it was given amidst public knowledge of the CJ's misconduct. And with the issue of the tribunal being pursued and the issue of corruption left hanging, would the CJ dare cause the displeasure of the PM? Particularly so, when I have been appealing to the courts not to allow itself to be used to legitimise political persecution!

In early August 1998, the CJ called on me at the Treasury, initially to express his sympathies and concern over the scurrilous and malicious allegations against me. He then accused a Cabinet Minister and a lawyer of smearing his reputation. He further mentioned to me that the Attorney General was disturbed that the said lawyer had claimed that he would be recommended by me to replace the AG, Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah. I denied. The following when I met the CJ at Parliament House, I noticed a distinct change in his demeanour and was rather cold and aloof. I gathered later that something was amiss after he was summoned a few times by the PM. It was later confirmed that the PM had decided to dismiss and prosecute me and that the CJ was incorporated into the scheme. This is a major cause of apprehension to me.

2. It is now public knowledge that certain improprieties have been leveled against the CJ. The allegations, together with photographs and other documentary evidence are widely disseminated through the Internet and the alternative media. A serving Minister, when questioned about the CJ's conduct described it as "improper". The revelations about the CJ's family holiday travel to New Zealand with lawyer Dato VK Lingam's family in late 1994, compounded by his attempt to dismiss the episode as "coincidental" in contrast to the facts revealed in the Bowman Report exposed the discrepancies and contradictions and have brought into question the CJ's conduct and credibility. Rule 3(1)(d) of the Judges' Code of Ethics reads:

"conduct himself dishonestly or in such manner as to bring the judiciary into disrepute or to bring discredit thereto ..."

The Constitution provides under Article 125 (3) that a judge could be removed on ground of breach of the Code. The Prime Minister makes a representation to the Yang diPertuan Agong to appoint a tribunal. In the meantime, Article 125(5) stipulates that the judge concerned could be suspended from his office pending the tribunal hearing.

Dato V K Lingam's name surfaced earlier when I presented the preliminary report on Perwaja to Parliament in 1996. In the Price Water House's report, the fees paid for legal services were considered exorbitant and "questionable" coming to millions. The CJ was known to have made critical comments on my announcement. I chose to ignore the comments, not being aware then of his close association with Dato VK Lingam.

A Cabinet minister and a lawyer met the PM and me separately to allege the CJ of the improprieties. Accordingly I advised them to report to the Anti Corruption Agency. I did not initiate the investigations as alleged by the CJ.

Incidentally, attempts by the Malaysian Bar Council to deliberate on the conduct of the CJ and recommend the setting up of a tribunal was evidently frustrated and derailed through a select judicial process providing a restrictive interpretation of Article 125 and 127 of the Constitution.

We had one of the best judiciaries in the Commonwealth, or in this part of the world. However, under the CJ's leadership, it has deteriorated to such a level further eroding public confidence. Even when I was Minister of Finance, the Bar, Bank Negara and the Treasury informed me of several feedbacks from foreign investors and local businessmen, as to their loss of confidence in the Malaysian judiciary. Many of the international contracts now contain clauses that in the event of any dispute or litigation arising from these contracts, the parties involved will not resort to Malaysian courts, but instead subject themselves to arbitration, usually in a foreign forum. The appraisals and concerns expressed on these issues by me in appropriate forums with the Bar, Bank Negara and the cabinet were viewed with contempt by the CJ.

The appeal of MGG Pillai and others in the Tan Sri Vincent Tan case reveals serious improprieties in the part of the CJ. Arguments in that appeal was heard by the Federal Court presided by the CJ on January 12, 1998. Judgement was not delivered until July 12,2000 - more than two and a half years later. Rule 3(1) (f) of the Judges' Code of Ethics provides as follows:

"inordinately and without reasonable explanation delay in the disposal of cases, the delivery of decisions and the meeting of grounds of judgement."

The reason given by the CJ was flimsy, i.e. that the delay was because the judges could not agree on the quantum! (The Star - June 7,2000) However, when judgement was in fact delivered, one of the three, namely Justice Chong Siew Fai, had already retired on July 3. The single judgement written by the CJ was delivered in open court by the Senior Assistant Registrar.

It is also relevant to note that the earlier High Court Judgement was delivered by Judge Dato Moktar Sidin. Revelations on how the judgement was written in part by Dato VK Lingam shows the extent of the decadence among some members of the judiciary.

The CJ was apparently impervious, sitting in the same MGG Pillai appeal when the counsel who argued for the respondent Tan Sri Vincent Tan was Dato VK Lingam, perceived as his close friend. The CJ ought to have voluntarily recused himself from hearing the appeal. Subsequently in another case where Dato Lingam appeared for one of the parties, the CJ recused at the request of the Bar Council when the holiday photographs were produced.

The CJ reached his age of retirement on June 19, 2000, and Dato Sri Dr. Mahathir had dismissed any possibility of making representations for a tribunal. (1) But most amazing amidst public consternation about the CJ's conduct, he extended the CJ's term of office for another six months, suggesting that:

"we have the need to see that everything is in place before he leaves."(2)

(1) See star June 14,2000

(2) NST June 17,2000.

Is my appeal on the agenda: "to see that everything is in place"? This perception that the CJ has become more beholden to the Prime Minister is pertinent. There is reasonable apprehension to the effect. All along my defence has consistently seen that the malicious and fabricated charges, inter alia, has been that there was a political conspiracy at the highest level to dismiss, persecute and vilify me with Dato Seri Dr. Mahathir as the maestro.

In any event, the CJ should not be sitting in any new appeals during the extended six months. Though Article 125 (1) does not expressly say so, yet the purpose of the short extension is to enable the judge concerned to complete any unfinished business like outstanding judgements, and not to be assigned any new cases including appeals.

The CJ on a number of occasions found my remarks on the judiciary objectionable and abhorrent, and strongly protested to the Prime Minister. My decision to keep the rapport with the Bar Council, personalities such as Param Curnaraswamy; some of the speeches including with reference to the LIm Guan Eng case, and the access given to some senior Judges, including Judge Syed Ahmad Idid and Judge Dr. Visu Sinnadurai were regarded with contempt. My statement was seen as a personal attack on him and it angered him enormously.

In his first meeting with me as the DPM, I strongly urged him to accept the overtures from the Bar Council. Unfortunately, the CJ chose to adopt the confrontational politics inherited from Tun Hamid Omar. Be that as it may, that should not preclude my having meetings with representatives of the Bar to listen to their proposals and grievances.

I submitted to the PM and the Cabinet that Param Cumaraswamy, UN Special Representative is entitled to immunity from legal process during the course of his omission under the UN Convention on Privileges and Immunities. The CJ disputed this in a memo to the PM which was subsequently sent to me. Obviously the CJ had prejudiced Param's case and deplored my so-called intervention. Admittedly, I intervened at the personal request of the UN Secretary General, Kofi Anan. And this was conveyed to the Cabinet on 3rd December 1997. I alerted my Cabinet colleagues that Param's interview "Malaysian justice on trial" merit scrutiny. And by prolonging the issue, and by subjecting to the CJ, would seen untenable and an embarrassment to the Malaysian judiciary. Understandably, I was overruled by Dato Seri Dr. Mahathir. But, its most unbecoming of the CJ to cast aspersions and anger against me for expressing my views to the PM and the Cabinet.

In late July, 1998, Dato Seri Dr, Mahathir informed me that the CJ and the AG met him and denounced my speech in London as an attack on the AG's Chambers and the judiciary. I was mindful and circumspect of the sensitivities but I did relate to the students my predicament having to explain the decision on the Lim Guan Eng case, the solution being legal and judicial reform. The PM further intimated to me the CJ's extreme displeasure for what he perceived as personal attacks against him and undermining his authority.

The CJ should not have objected to my meeting Judge Syed Ahmad Idid. He sought an appointment prior to his retirement; i.e. after investigations over his controversial open letter was completed. But these were serious allegations of corruption, abuse of power, and misconduct or the CJ and some members of the judiciary. In retrospect, looking at these complaints, many of the allegations contained therein appear to have been substantiated.

In another case, one of the most qualified judges in the country opted to resign rather than be subjected to the CJ's victimisation. I had personal knowledge of the alleged victimisation through uncouth disciplinary methods and occasional transfers to Muar and finally to Tawau. Again I intervened and intimated the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, the CJ was adamant and the judiciary's last Judge Dr. Visu Sinnadurai who had such impeccable credentials. Judge Dr. Visu had earlier written a Memorandum on the Judiciary including Proposals for Reform in the Judiciary. The memo was a confidential document to the PM and myself and the DPM. The memo to the PM was submitted through me and I indicated my support to most of the proposals. Unfortunately, being anathema to reforms, and seeking a judiciary that works in cohort with the executive, the memo was detested by both the PM and the CJ.

The Memo/Report emphatically states that the "Malaysian Judiciary appears currently to be in a state of turmoil..." The Report enumerated Tun Eusoff Chin's demeanour, alienating the Bar, verbal exchange of challenges in the Press, citing for example the Ayer Molek case being "something was amiss in the Judiciary." (see extract of a Report on the Judiciary, on Eusoff Chin pp.11-13)

The Report attributes the blame to the CJ for aggravating the loss of public confidence in the Judiciary. "It even appears that the appointment of Judges to the High Court in the past few years were made not in accordance with the Federal Constitution insofar as there had been no prior consultation with the Chief Judge, at least of Malaya." As such only people known to be close to him, as cronies were appointed or promoted. A Judge with questionable integrity, and in the wake of negative representation from the Bar was promoted to the Court of Appeal.

Incidentally, this was the same Judge that I sought to disqualify from hearing my case at the Court of Appeal. Judge Dato Moktar Sidin retired to recuse himself even after my insistence of his clear impartiality and bias due to the deferment of his appointment to the Court of Appeal as a result of my meeting with the Rulers. In the pre-council to the Rulers Conference, the issue of alleged corrupt practice of Judge Dato Moktar was brought up. Subsequently the PM dismissed the allegations without investigation being carried out and facilitated his appointment. The CJ took it as a personal challenge that his recommended candidate was objected to.

The Report states, inter alia, "senior Judges are not promoted either because, it is said, the Prime Minister does not approve of them, or because of quota, or even on the ground that such persons are unsuitable as being 'anti-establishment.'" Other related issues were also highlighted, for example that "the Courts have arrogated to themselves the law making function", usurping the powers of the Chief Judge on transfers, distribution of cases, etc., and the fact that the "Judiciary is now rife with clashes of personalities, with less time for the development of the law." And yet most damaging to the image of the judiciary is the perception of biasness, friendly lawyers continue appearing before the CJ and the same judges and "by coincidence or otherwise, these lawyers appear before the same Judges and win their cases."

I have alluded to the infamous Ayer Molek Case, which have generated much public debate particularly in the legal fraternity. It has adversely affected the credibility of Judge Dato Azmel Maamor due to the questionable judgement that bear an appearance of being influenced by unseen hands. The fairs surrounding the case have been well documented in the law reports. But the observations of the Court of Appeal (comprising Dato NH Chan, Dato Siti Normah Yaacob, and Dato KC Vohrah), when allowing the Defendants' Appeal (on 31 July, 1995), on the facts of the case and the procedural manipulations involved bear repeating. Dato NH Chan, delivering the judgement of the Court of Appeal had the following to say:

(a) "This is a case about injustice which as been perpetrated by a court of law. This is also a case of abuse of the process of the High Court and, therefore, it concerns the inherent power which any court of justice must possess to prevent misuse of its procedure and in which the court has a duty to exercise this salutary power.

(b) "Here, the Plaintiffs through their legal advisers have abused the process of the High Court by instigating the injustice through misuse of the courts procedure by manipulating it in such a way that it becomes manifestly unfair to the Defendants. By doing what they did, these unethical lawyers have brought the administration of justice into disrepute among right-thinking people."

(c) ...These observations are made so that people will not say, 'something is rotten in the State of Denmark.' - Shakespeare Hamlet, 1.'

This timely rebuke by the Court of Appeal was welcome by the public because the excesses and corruption were getting pervasive. An expedited hearing by the Federal Court was heard within four days of the Plaintiffs' application (again involving Dato VK Lingam) at an Ipoh sitting. The CJ constituted an unconstitutional Federal Court as it breached the provisions of Article 122 (2) of the Federal Constitution in that on member of the sitting was a judge of the High Court. The Counsel involved was a close friend of the CJ. The Court of Appeal's decision was overturned, and the relevant portions of the grounds of judgement of the Court of Appeal was expunged!

Allegations of corruption and instances of conflict of interest continue to undermine the integrity and rocked the foundation of the nations' judicial system. Exasperated by such developments, I chose to circulate the Ayer Molek judgements to the Cabinet, and specifically underling Dato NH Chan's rebuke and the Federal Court's alleged transgression of the Constitutional provision Article 122(2). The Prime Minister interjected by informing the Cabinet that he would seek clarification from the CJ. That episode was cited on a few meetings by the CJ showing a clear displeasure and prejudice towards me.

The CJ, according to one High Court Judge took exception to some of my speeches perceived to be critical of misdemeanours of some members of the judiciary, particularly my speech inaugurating the seventh Asean Law Association and the chapter 'Justice and the Law', in my The Asian Renaissance (1996). I retorted to the said Judge that I merely reaffirmed the Constitutional mandate and democratic ideal, including the issue of separation of powers. May I further reiterate:

"Judges ought to exercise their judicial powers in accordance with the rule of law and not the rule of men. In doing so, judges must constantly bear in mind the legitimate expectations of the people as to their competency dedication and impartiality.....

The growing concern of the public regarding the increasing incidences of judicial indiscretions is a matter to be neither taken lightly nor viewed negatively...

Not only must judges display the requisite level of competence and expertise, they must, like Caesar's wife, be above suspicion." (The Asian Renaissance) 1996 (pp. 64-65)

I made reference to judges with impeccable credential. There are many other judges still in our judiciary who discharge their duties according to the oath of office, and who are also guided by their religious duty and moral courage, respect the rule of law and be dictated by their conscience. For, it is in them that the future and the hope of our judiciary lies.

The most distressing that the CJ should consider my clamour for judicial and legal reforms as a personal threat to him. He should not have summarily dismissed it as merely echoing "foreign sentiments." Long before the report "Malaysian Judiciary in Jeopardy" was released, our Lord Presidents, Judges, the Malaysian Bar and others, consistent with all the great traditions of mankind enjoin the maintenance of the rule of law and the dispensation of justice. Clearly, my criticisms of "retrogressive judgements from our own courts" and insistence for "progressive reforms" to be instituted was resented by the CJ. Such reform and reviews are critical to ensure that our ideals of justice are not compromised and our laws not rendered archaic and obsolete. (The Asian Renaissance) 1996 (pp. 68-70).

The test applicable for recusal is whether a reasonable objective person informed of these facts would have any confidence in the Chief Justice to dispense independent and impartial justice. The scurrilous allegations, the malicious persecution preferred against me is as consistently contended in my defense, a result of a high level conspiracy involving the supreme, Dato Seri Dr. Mahathir himself instructing the instruments of the state to persecute and vilify me. I must prove my innocence. I need to be adjudicated by an independent judiciary. And I fear with the grounds stated, and with all that I know of you, subservient to the Prime Minister and now beholden to him, I am apprehensive of your impartiality on this appeal.

Hence, I urge you, please CJ, recuse.

ANWAR IBRAHIM
Tuesday, 1 August, 2000
¶ 7:40 PM

The Forgotten Crisis
By Howard Dean
Sitnews (17 August 2004)

As everyone knows from my previous writings, I strongly opposed the war in Iraq because I did not believe the president was being truthful with us about the potential dangers Saddam Hussein posed to our safety.

I also criticised the president for not using institutions such as the United Nations in a cooperative way to help accomplish a goal most Americans shared, which was to limit the destructive role Saddam played in the region and in his own country.

However, I have also said that the UN bears a portion of the blame for the Iraq war. The UN did not understand that sometimes action is necessary and talk is not enough. There is often too much dithering in the European Union and at the UN when action is needed. The shameful reluctance of the European Union to intervene forcefully in Bosnia in order to stop genocide is one such instance. The ultimate failure of the entire world community, including the United States, to stop the massacres in Rwanda is another example.

The UN does not seem to learn very fast.

In Sudan, Africa's largest nation geographically, a terrible ethnic cleansing has been going on for more than a year in the western Darfur region where government-sponsored Arabic-speaking Sudanese militias have been systematically moving black Muslim Sudanese off their traditional lands. Over one million people have been displaced. Systematic rapes, burning women and children alive, and other forms of murder and intimidation are the preferred methods of the roving gangs called the Janjaweed. These gangs, supported sometimes directly by Sudanese government forces, are burning villages and sending their populations either to mass graves or, for the lucky ones, to foul refugee camps along the border with Chad.

This spring, the US pushed a resolution through the U.N. Security Council threatening sanctions on Sudan for their disgraceful conduct. The already weak resolution was watered down at the request of a number of countries, including the Europeans.

Where is the EU or UN?

Europeans cannot criticise the United States for waging war in Iraq if they are unwilling to exhibit the moral fibre to stop genocide by acting collectively and with decisiveness.

US President George W Bush was wrong to go into Iraq unilaterally when Iraq posed no danger to the United States, but we were right to demand accountability from Saddam.

We are also right to demand accountability in Sudan.

Every day that goes by without meaningful sanctions and even military intervention in Sudan by African, European and if necessary UN forces is a day where hundreds of innocent civilians die and thousands are displaced from their land.

Every day that goes by without action to stop the Sudan genocide is a day that the anti-Iraq war position so widely held in the rest of the world appears to be based less on principle and more on politics.

And every day that goes by is a day in which Bush's contempt for the international community, which I have denounced every day for two years, becomes more difficult to criticise.

Now is the time for the world community to act if they are serious about encouraging an enlightened leadership role for the United States.

My challenge to the UN and Europe is simple: if you don't like American diplomacy under Bush, then do something to show those of us in opposition here in the US that you can behave in such a way that unilateralism is not necessary.

¶ 7:08 PM

Isteri tahanan ISA akan perjuangkan kebebasan suami

Norlaila Osman, isteri kepada tahanan ISA, Mat Sah Mohd Satray yang ditahan di bawah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) kerana dituduh terlibat dalam Kumpulan Militan Malaysia (KMM) berjanji akan berjuang demi kebebasan suaminya.

Ibu kepada seorang anak ini mengaku pada awalnya enggan menonjolkan diri selepas suaminya ditangkap. Namun, kini beliau merasakan bahawa beliau tidak mempunyai banyak pilihan.

“Sekiranya saya duduk rumah pun, suaminya masih ditahan”, kata Norlaila.

Mat Sah yang telah ditahan selama 2 tahun sepatutnya bebas pada 12 Jun lepas tetapi disambung tempoh tahanan kepada 2 tahun lagi.

Norlaila kini membantu Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI) dan mengikuti sebarang program yang dianjurkan oleh GMI.

Beliau telah dijemput oleh jawatankuasa GMI dalam majlis forum sempena memperingati akta drakonian itu di negara ini selama 44 tahun.

Dalam majlis tersebut, Norlaila juga sempat menceritakan kisah sewaktu polis datang ke rumah pada tengah malam untuk menangkap suaminya.

“Polis telah menyelongkar rumahnya untuk mencari bahan bukti bagi penahanan”, kata Norlaila.

Menurut Norlaila, orang ramai perlu diberi pendedahan betapa zalimnya akta ini (ISA). Beliau percaya suaminya telah diberi tekanan mental ketika sessi soal-siasat sehingga suaminya didapati trauma ketika pertama kali berjumpa selepas 3 minggu ditahan.

Oleh kerana tiada apa bahan yang boleh diambil untuk menuduh suaminya ahli KMM, gambar Saari Sungib telah dirampas dan digunakan sebagai pertuduhan.

Saari Sungib yang juga hadir pada majlis tersebut memberitahu supaya tidak mempercayai kata-kata dan janji pegawai penyiasat semasa dalam 60 hari pertama penahanan.

Dalam majlis tersebut, dua file pendek telah ditayangkan untuk tontonan umum, ‘Road to Kamunting’ dan ‘Big Durian’ arahan Amir Muhamad.

Majlis tersebut juga dihadiri oleh peguam Norlaila, Latheefa Koya.

¶ 7:05 PM

Masyarakat Malaysia belum bersedia untuk dialog keagamaan

Pengharaman tayangan filem kontroversi Mel Gibson, 'The Passion of the Christ' merupakan satu langkah yang tepat kerana ia akan menimbulkan banyak masalah di kalangan orang Malaysia, kata seorang cendekiawan Islam yang bertugas di Universiti Malaya.

Bekas pengarah Akademi Pendidikan Islam, Prof Mahmood Zuhdi Ab Majid berasa bahawa tayangan filem itu di negara ini pasti akan membangkitkan kemarahan rakyat, terutamanya
orang Islam.

"Terdapat beberapa isu asas dalam Islam yang terkandung dalam filem itu dan orang kita belum cukup matang untuk menghargai unsur sejarah atau berupaya membezakan apa yang betul dan salah dalam filem itu," dia menyatakan pendapatnya dalam temuramah dengan malaysiakini baru-baru ini.

Antara isu yang mendorong kepada salah faham oleh orang Islam ialah identiti Jesus Christ sebagai anak tuhan (seorang nabi dalam Islam) dan adegan penyaliban Christ (yang tidak mati menurut Islam).

"Orang ramai tidak akan dapat memahami unsur sejarah atau menentukan apa yang betul dan salah, dan ini boleh mendorong kepada salah faham terutamanya kepada orang Islam. Langkah (pengharaman tayangan filem) itu tidak sepatutnya dilihat sebagai tindakan ke atas pihak-pihak tertentu.

"Kadangkala kita tidak boleh mendedahkan semua benda kepada semua orang. Terdapat faktor-faktor yang perlu diambilkira memandangkan kita mempunyai pelbagai agama dan sejarah kebudayaan," katanya lagi.

Malangnya, tambah profesor itu, masyarakat Malaysia juga tidak terbuka kepada dialog antara kepercayaan atau agama, walaupun beberapa percubaan telah dibuat untuk menjayakannya beberapa tahun lepas. Ini berikutan terdapat beberapa isu sensitif yang tidak dapat di hadapi dengan baik oleh orang Islam.

"Pelik kerana dialog yang dianjurkan oleh UM itu gagal kerana orang bukan Islam tidak menunjukkan minat untuk menyertai dialog tersebut. Kehadiran mereka sangat rendah walaupun kita telah cuba untuk mengadakannya lima atau enam kali."

Mahmood dilantik sebagai dekan Fakulti Syariah UM pada tahun 1985. Dia kemudiannya menjadi pengarah Akademi Pendidikan Islam selama lebih 12 tahun dan bersara pada Januari.

Merujuk kepada cabaran hidup dalam masyarakat yang mempunyai pelbagai agama dan sensitiviti kaum, Mahmmod berkata bahawa orang ramai secara amnya tidak berminat kepada agama lain tetapi mungkin mereka lebih bersemangat untuk berdialog dengan pihak berkuasa untuk menuntut hak tertentu.

Baru-baru ini, satu perbahasan hangat telah berlangsung dalam media berikutan satu artikel tentang toleransi agama yang diterbitkan dalam 'Malaysian Bar's official newsletter Infoline'.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/28923
Satu laporan polis, yang dibuat oleh satu bahagian Umno, ke atas artikel yang didakwa menghina itu telah mendapat reaksi serta-merta daripada ahli-ahli politik, pihak berkuasa agama dan juga daripada keluarga diRaja.

Episod itu berterusan dengan haiwan peliharaan, khususnya anjing, dikaitkan dengan upacara keagamaan dalam laporan polis itu. Ini bertujuan untuk membuatkan orang awam bertindak secara negatif.

Mahmood berkata bahawa ini adalah satu contoh bagaimana reaksi spontan tentang isu-isu sensitif, yang kebanyakannya disalurkan melalui media, boleh menjurus kepada masalah yang lebih besar.

"Respon yang sebegini terhadap isu-isu keagamaan boleh membawa kesan yang amat buruk. Ia bukannya menyelesaikan perbedaan yang wujud di kalangan masyarakat bahkan ia menyulitkan lagi keadaan. Ia menimbulkan tanggapan yang tidak baik serta menyebabkan perasaan curiga bertambah terhadap kaum lain," tambahnya lagi.

Dia menafikan bahawa Islam adalah satu cara hidup tegar yang mencabul hak orang lain. "Sebenarnya Islam mengajar bahawa orang lain juga mempunyai hak masing-masing dan orang Islam perlu menghormati serta melindungi hak tersebut."

Merujuk kepada pengalaman peribadinya bagi menjelaskan tentang pemeliharaan anjing di kawasan perumahan, Mahmood berkata bahawa ia tidak sepatutnya dijadikan isu keagamaan atau kaum oleh sesiapa pun.

Bercakap tentang ketika dia memelihara angsa di belakang bunglonya di Kuala Lumpur, dia mengatakan bahawa haiwan tersebut membuat bising setiap kali melihat manusia dan tidak lama kemudian dia menerima notis.

"Anjing adalah haiwan peliharaan dan kebanyakannya dipelihara atas sebab keselamatan. Salakan anjing yang bising itu sudah cukup untuk menyakitkan hati sesiapa pun, tidak kira walau apa pun kepercayaan agamanya. Tiada sebab untuk orang Islam memandang perkara ini dari sudut agama dan tiada sebab untuk orang lain berfikir bahawa ini adalah isu orang Islam."

"Pokoknya di sini, bunyi bising daripada haiwan peliharaan adalah gangguan kepada semua orang, tidak kira bangsa atau agamanya. Jadi mengapa tidak kita melihatnya sebagai satu masalah umum dan bukannya masalah agama atau bangsa?" ujarnya.

Meskipun begitu, dia berkata bahawa dia belum pernah berjumpa dengan orang Melayu yang mengadu tentang keperluan untuk bertolak ansur dengan ajaran agama lain tetapi mengaku bahawa terdapat sebilangan kes di mana mereka (orang Melayu) merasa tertekan tetapi memilih untuk tidak menyuarakan rungutan mereka.

"Anda perlu faham yang budaya Melayu secara amnya tidak terlalu terbuka atau 'confrontational'. Tetapi ia tidak bermakna bahawa masalah itu difahami dan diterima. Ia tetap ada di situ di sebalik kemesraan yang dizahirkan mereka."

"Ancaman utama kepada orang Melayu adalah budaya Barat yang menular melalui televisyen dan ketidaksamaan pembahagian ekonomi di kalangan kaum-kaum di Malaysia. Kedua-duanya lebih memberi kesan kepada orang Melayu berbanding kepada kaum lain."

Dia berkata lagi, isu haram atau halal bukanlah satu isu yang mahu terus diperkatakan oleh orang Melayu.

"Saya tertanya bolehkah orang bukan Melayu/Islam cuba untuk memahami dan mungkin bertolak ansur sedikit tentang perbezaan mereka untuk hidup bersama, dan juga menghilangkan rasa tidak senang mereka?" katanya sambil mengenangkan tentang hidup di kawasan kampung terpencil dan pekan kecil di negara ini.

"Mereka (masyarakat kampung) masih merupakan contoh terbaik dalam kehidupan bermasyarakat. Semua orang gembira dan tiada yang menghadapi masalah menyesuaikan diri dengan kepercayaan dan ajaran agama orang lain," katanya sambil menyatakan bahawa tiada toleransi merupakan fenomena masyarakat bandar yang mensia-siakan perpaduan kaum.

Bercakap tentang perbincangan keagamaan terbuka, satu isu yang menjengkelkan ramai orang Melayu/Islam adalah perbincangan atau soalan yang diajukan oleh orang bukan Islam berkenaan Islam dan beberapa isu yang berkaitan. Soalan-soalan ini diajukan kerana mereka (orang bukan Islam) percaya bahawa Islam adalah di luar jangkauan pemikiran orang bukan Islam.

Mahmood menjelaskan bahawa ini tidak sepatutnya berlaku.

"Perbincangan terbuka adalah sentiasa dialu-alukan asalkan tiada sesiapa pun yang menghina atau merendahkan martabat Islam, atau mana-mana agama sekali pun. Perbincangan terbuka itu adalah berasaskan logik dan kehidupan seharian. Asalkan ia bebas daripada perdebatan teologi, tiada sebab untuk menghalang sesiapa daripada menyertai perbincangan tersebut."

Malah, tambah cendekiawan Islam yang berumur 59 tahun itu, Islam sendiri menggalakkan perbincangan terbuka dan mengajar umatnya bahawa penerimaan atau penolakan sesuatu perkara itu mestilah berasaskan kefahaman.

"Berdasarkan pada doktrin Islam yang terkandung dalam Al-Quran, kepercayaan bergantung kepada kefahaman. Tetapi realitinya hari ini adalah berbeza kerana ia tidak berlaku kepada kita. Saya juga sedar yang orang Islam tidak cukup serius untuk membuatkan orang lain faham tentang cara hidup mereka.

"Barangkali, masalahnya ialah untuk memahami diri mereka (orang Islam) sendiri...satu dilemma dalaman yang perlu diselesaikan dulu."

Hanya apabila orang Islam yakin dengan agama mereka, barulah mereka boleh berinteraksi dengan orang lain dalam mewujudkan kefahaman antara agama yang menjadi tunjang kepada negara kita.
¶ 6:59 PM

Effendi gagal martabatkan pertanian kini mencuba pendidikan pula

Menyelamatkan kroni merupakan fenomena lumrah di Malaysia. Kroni yang diperkatakan ini sudah pastinya kroni Perdana Menteri yang memerintah. Ketika Dr Mahathir Mohamad menyandang jawatan Perdana Menteri selama lebih 22 tahun, ramai kroni beliau yang hampir tersungkur telah diselamatkan dan diberi nafas baru. Kini, apabila Abdullah Ahamad Badawi menjadi Perdana Menteri, kita menjangkakan sekumpulan kroni baru pula mengambil tempat.

Kebanyakan kroni-kroni Mahathir adalah para usahawan - tokoh-tokoh korporat berjaya yang punya gaya hidup 'melampau' dan akhirnya jatuh terduduk akibat beban hutang yang maha besar. Mahathir, seperti yang kita sedia maklum, menafikan usaha menyelamat ini dan sebaliknya mengatakan mereka adalah usahawan 'tidak berdosa' yang menjadi mangsa situasi ekonomi yang tidak menyenangkan. Hakikat bahawa mereka ini bukanlah mangsa yang tidak berdosa tetapi adalah si gelojoh yang menelan lebih dari yang termampu dan akhirnya tercekik dek kelahapan sendiri, nampaknya tidak sedikit pun merisaukan Perdana Menteri atau negaranya.

Kini, Effendi Norwawi, Menteri Tugas-tugas Khas di Jabatan Perdana Menteri dan bekas Menteri Pertanian telah dilantik sebagai Duta Pendidikan yang baru, suatu jawatan dengan status menteri. Perlantikan ini pastinya perlu dijelaskan. Adakah ini juga satu cara menyelamat dalam diam-diam? Jika benar, kerja menyelamat jenis apakah ia? Ekonomi atau politik? Mungkinkah kedua-duanya sekali?

Khabarnya Effendi sedang menanggung hutang RM1 billion akibat menceburi perniagaan paling mahal dan berisiko tinggi iaitu mengendalikan sebuah stesen televisyen. Stesen televisyen yang diusahakannya sejak beberapa tahun lalu memerlukan kos permulaan sebanyak kira-kira RM250 juta dan kos penyelenggaraan berjumlah RM100 juta setahun.

Stesen TV Effendi adalah TV percuma, bukan TV berbayar, jadi ia perlu bergantung kepada hasil iklan. Namun, sememangnya wang pengiklanan yang ada terhad dan juga menjadi rebutan stesen-stesen TV yang lebih kukuh kedudukannya seperti RTM dan TV3.

Effendi sedar beliau perlu menanti tujuh tahun untuk stesen TVnya balik modal. Tujuh tahun memerlukan RM700 juta dan ditambah dengan kos permulaan sebanyak RM250 juta, defisitnya akan melonjak kepada hampir satu billion sebelum beliau boleh bernafas lega. Ini ditambah pula dengan kegagalan usaha niaganya yang lain di mana jumlah kesemuanya menghasilkan hutang yang sangat besar.

Namun, kesemua ini adalah hal empayar perniagaan yang tiada kena-mengena dengan karier politik beliau - jadi mungkin kita harus mengasingkan hal kewangan (atau kesempitan wang) dari rekod khidmat awam beliau. Mari kita perhatikan bagaimana prestasi industri pertanian negara sepanjang Effendi menjadi Menteri Pertanian.

Sumbangan industri pertanian kepada hasil kasar domestik (GDP) merosot dari 9.8% pada 1996 kepada 4% pada saat Effendi bersara dari jawatan Menteri Pertanian. Pada tahun-tahun 1960an nilainya adalah 30%.

Penduduk Kelantan dan Terengganu, dua negeri yang bergantung hidup kepada pertanian (termasuk perikanan) merupakan rakyat yang termiskin dan kedua termiskin. Ini tetap terjadi biarpun Terengganu negeri kedua terkaya dari segi hasil oleh sebab sumber minyaknya.
Bil makanan negara mengalami defisit RM6 bilion (kita mengeksport RM7 bilion tetapi mengimport RM13 bilion) dan sehingga tahun 2010, dianggarkan ia akan meningkat kepada RM10 bilion (eksport RM10 bilion sedangkan import RM20 bilion). Tiada satu pun bahan makanan kita yang tidak diimport dan, sekiranya negara-negara penjual makanan ini memberhentikan bekalan, rakyat Malaysia mungkin terpaksa berpuasa panjang.

Semenjak 30 tahun yang lalu, kerajaan telah memulihkan kira-kira 235,000 hektar tanah terbiar dengan penanaman kelapa sawit dan getah. Sungguhpun begitu, sebanyak anggaran 260,000 hektar tanah masih terbiar dan penanaman kedua-dua tanaman ini pun tidak akan menambah makanan untuk kita.

Kerajaan telah meluluskan lebih kurang 100 lesen menangkap ikan tuna sejak 15 tahun lalu.
Dianggarkan penangkapan ikan tuna di Lautan Hindi berpotensi menghasilkan kira-kira RM420 juta. Biarpun begitu, setakat ini hanya satu syarikat sahaja yang aktif menangkap ikan tuna di Lautan Hindi. Di Laut China Selatan pula hasil ikan tiada lagi disebabkan aktiviti penangkapan keterlaluan oleh nelayan Thai yang menceroboh perairan kita. Kerajaan nampaknya tidak mampu berbuat apa-apa mengenainya.

Lebih menyakitkan lagi, ikan yang diternak secara haram di perairan Malaysia dibawa balik ke Thailand dan kemudiannya diimport semula oleh Malaysia pada harga yang lebih mahal.
Sebahagiannya dieksport ke Singapura dan penduduk Johor memakan ikan yang dibawa melalui negara itu. Pernahkah anda tertanya-tanya mengapa harga ayam dan daging lebih murah dari makanan laut?

Situasi menakutkan ini terus berpanjangan. Pendekata, Effendi telah gagal di dalam dunia korporat. Beliau lebih gagal lagi sebagai Menteri Pertanian. Sekarang kita mahu pula beliau menguruskan industri pendidikan, yang setahu kita tidaklah begitu makmur juga.

Peranan Effendi sebagai Duta Pendidikan adalah untuk mengadakan rangkaian hubungan dengan universiti-universiti luar negara di samping memasarkan Malaysia sebagai sebuah pusat pendidikan serantau. Bagaimanapun, kerajaan belum pasti lagi bila beliau akan diarah melaporkan diri. Ini sudah tentu memberi kita gambaran yang segalanya diputuskan dengan tergesa-gesa tanpa berfikir panjang.

Nampaknya ia bukanlah satu jawatan kosong yang perlu diisi. Effendi kelihatannya memerlukan kerja, jadi mereka dengan pantas mengumumkan perlantikannya dan hanya kemudiannya memikirkan keperluan jawatan tersebut. Ini satu lagi kes rumah disiapkan pahat masih berbunyi.

Menurut desas-desus di Sarawak, negeri asal Effendi, beliau berasal dari suku Melanau, sama seperti Ketua Menteri sekarang. Ketua Menteri mahu memastikan negeri itu terus diperintah oleh suku Melanau. Oleh itu, Effendi diberikan tugas baru ini untuk menyelamatkan karier politiknya dan memastikan namanya masih bersinar sehingga tiba masa untuk beliau mengambil alih. Ini sememangnya satu usaha menyelamat; penyelamatan politik.

Walaupun jawatan ini diadakan khas untuk Effendi dan bukan sebaliknya, apakah kepakaran yang beliau miliki? Mungkinkah Malaysia akan memiliki industri pendidikan yang berkembang maju seperti di Britain dan Australia? Atau pun ia akan menyerupai nasib industri pertanian - menjunam jatuh saban tahun?

Pada asalnya, adakah Malaysia sesuai sebagai sebuah pusat pendidikan? Para pelajar bukannya cuma mahu membaca buku teks dan lulus peperiksaan. Mereka perlu dipupuk, dibimbing dan digilap ke arah kesempurnaan dalam bidang lain juga. Namun, bagaimana ini boleh dicapai? Mereka tidak bebas berdebat. Mereka tidak boleh menyuarakan pendapat. Mereka dihalang menglibatkan diri dalam politik. Mereka juga dilarang berada dalam kelompok melebihi empat orang. Dan bermacam-macam lagi. Mereka cuma dibenarkan duduk diam di dewan kuliah sambil menyalin nota.

Jenis pelajar yang bagaimanakah akan kita lahirkan? Rakyat asing waras yang manakah mahu menghantar anak mereka menuntut ilmu di Malaysia? Dan bagaimana Effendi hendak menjual Malaysia? Bagaimanakah mungkin beliau meyakinkan ibu bapa asing yang Malaysia ideal bagi pendidikan anak-anak mereka? Dan bagaimanakah Effendi dapat menjelaskan, bahawa di Malaysia, tidak mengira anak tempatan atau orang asing, pelajar yang bersuara menghentam kerajaan akan ditahan tanpa bicara di bawah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA )?

Selamat berjaya, Effendi. Harap anda lebih berjaya sebagai Duta Pendidikan dari percubaan anda sebagai Menteri Pertanian. Untuk ini, tuah sahaja tidak mencukupi.
¶ 6:57 PM

Masalah MRR 2: Salahkan Kerajaan, Bukannya Pengundi

Saya pernah menjadi seorang ahli Umno. Hakikatnya, saya mungkin masih lagi seorang ahli, dengan mengambilkira kali terakhir saya membuat semakan nama saya masih lagi tersenarai; walaupun saya tidak pernah membayar sesen pun yuran keahlian.

Saya menyokong Umno yang terdahulu, kerana Anwar kelihatan menunjukkan sedikit kewarasan terhadap parti. Parti-parti alternatif, pada pandangan saya, seolah-olah berada dalam kedudukan yang terlalu tidak pasti mengenai haluan mereka.

Saya berhenti apabila mendapati kumpulan manusia ini tidak mempunyai kekuatan yang cukup untuk memperbetulkan keburukan-keburukan Umno.

Hujah perdebatan saya ialah saya secara peribadi, percaya bahawa saya tidak sepatutnya mendapat pemerintahan sebegini. Saya tidak pernah mengundi ahli-ahli parti komponen BN sepanjang dua pilihan raya umum yang saya berpeluang melibatkan diri.

Saya terlepas dua yang lain kerana berada di luar negara ketika itu. Saya tidak patut dijadikan sebahagian daripada kesilapan kerajaan sekarang.

Kesilapan bukannya terletak di tangan para pengundi. Mereka yang membuat keputusan patut menanggung kesilapan mereka.

Di dalam kes jambatan MRR Kepong yang heboh diperkatakan, jika seorang individu yang memegang kuasa itu takutkan Tuhan beliau patut mengambil sepenuh tanggungjawab seorang diri. Kepimpinan perlu ditukar. Samy Vellu perlu berundur. Dia tidak mungkin berbuat begitu, kerana saya rasa dia tidak takutkan Tuhan.

Kemenangan BN yang terbaru masih lagi menimbulkan tanda tanya kepada kebanyakan orang-orang yang berfikir. Terhakisnya kewibawaan badan kehakiman dan Majlis Raja-raja Melayu merupakan hasil kerja tangan dan pemikiran 'pintar' Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Beliau telah berjaya dalam mempergunakan Umno dan BN untuk memenuhi kehendak dirinya. Saya takut untuk memikirkan segala jawapan-jawapan yang beliau harus beri kepada Tuhan pada hari pengadilan nanti.

Bagaimana, sebagai seorang yang mengaku Islam, masih boleh menjalani kehidupan normal dengan segala apa yang berlaku semasa beliau menjadi perdana menteri? Saya juga secara peribadi, percaya yang Mahathir masih lagi membuat keputusan sekarang, dengan Perdana Menteri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi hanya sebagai boneka.

Soalan yang paling menarik sekarang ialah apa yang kita semua - yang masih mempunyai kewarasan - lakukan, dalam usaha menghentikan segala salahlaku ini?

Media massa di bawah kawalan kerajaan, badan kehakiman meragukan dan Majlis Raja-Raja tidak mempunyai kuasa. Jentera-jentera kerajaan hanyalah alat, yang digunakan oleh puak-puak elit yang memegang kuasa, orang-orang bisnes yang berpalit rasuah dan tamak-haloba.

Ahli akademik terlalu mengambil berat tentang menyelamatkan diri masing-masing, daripada mendedahkan yang benar. Remaja terlalu leka berpesta untuk mengambiltahu tentang sebarang permasalahan di sekitar mereka. Individu lain, termasuk juga kakitangan kerajaan, terlalu mengambilkira keuntungan materialistik daripada berkata 'TIDAK'.

Semoga Tuhan menyelamatkan kita semua.
¶ 6:55 PM

Guan Eng berbelah bahagi untuk kembali ke arena politik

Bekas Ketua Pemuda DAP, Lim Guan Eng berdepan dengan dua pilihan sekarang memandangkan kemungkinan untuk membuat comeback dalam arena politik semakin cerah - patutkah beliau meluangkan lebih masa bersama tiga orang anak-anak beliau atau bersiap-sedia untuk berkhidmat sebagai setiausaha agung DAP yang baru?

Guan Eng, yang digantung dari aktif berpolitik selama lima tahun selepas merengkok 18 bulan di dalam penjara, kini kembali layak berjuang dalam parti pembangkang DAP.

Selama tempoh tersebut, terdapat dakwaan yang bapa beliau, Kit Siang, pengerusi DAP, telah melatih beliau secukupnya untuk mendukung jawatan yang paling berkuasa yakni setiausaha agong.

Spekulasi itu semakin terserlah apabila kongres parti ditangguhkan dari Ogos ke 4 September, kononnya untuk menyesuaikannya dengan tarikh kelayakan beliau pada 25 Ogos.

Bagaimanapun, Guan Eng tetap menegaskan bahawa soal jawatan yang akan dipegangnya di dalam parti nanti, masih lagi "persoalan yang terbuka kepada semua".

"Ini bukanlah satu keputusan yang mudah, memandangkan (ia melibatkan) pengorbanan …yang lebih mustahak, anak-anak saya sedang membesar. Sudah tentu saya mahu melihat mereka membesar, dan berkongsi saat-saat ini bersama mereka," ujar bapa kepada tiga orang anak yang berusia di antara sembilan ke 13 tahun itu; sambil menambah bahawa ibu bapanya sendiri akan tetap menyokong apa jua keputusannya berkenaan masa depan politiknya.

Beliau menerangkan yang mereka telah banyak menderita sepanjang beliau dihukum penjara dan bimbang beliau akan dipenjarakan sekali lagi jika memasuki politik semula.

Kerana ini juga, menurut Guan Eng, beliau harus lebih berhati-hati apabila menangani mana-mana isu; biarpun beliau turut menyatakan tidak mungkin berkompromi tentang beberapa isu tertentu.

"Hukuman penjara telah gagal menghalang saya, dan tentunya kebebasan juga tidak akan mengekang saya," kata beliau.

Dilema yang dihadapi Guan Eng makin bertambah apabila pihak atasan parti seperti timbalan pengerusi Karpal Singh tanpa sengaja meningkatkan tekanan dengan menyatakan beliau berpotensi menjadi setiausaha agong yang baru.

Guan Eng tertawa apabila diminta memberi komen dan berkata "give me a break", yang diulanginya dua kali lagi pada akhir sesi temuramah 90 minit itu.

Beliau juga menyatakan DAP memiliki ramai pemimpin berkaliber, termasuk pemangku setiausaha agong M Kulasegaran, yang merupakan ahli parlimen Ipoh Barat.

Apabila ditanyakan tentang anggapan umum bahawa DAP mengamalkan politik dinasti dan nepotisme, beliau menjawab: "Dinasti diamalkan supaya anda mendapat sokongan, tapi jika anda mahukan dinasti ke penjara, tak mungkin ada ibu bapa yang mahukannya."

Beliau enggan mengulas banyak tentang masalah parti, lebih-lebih lagi tentang gesaan supaya Kit Siang berundur.

"Saya tak boleh komen memandangkan kami anak-beranak…Tapi jika melihat dari segi sebab, sama ada Lim Kit Siang masih diperlukan atau tidak, jawapannya jelas. Lim Kit Siang masih diperlukan," menurutnya.

Guan Eng menjelaskan para penyokong sepatutnya tidak menaruh harapan tinggi kepada beliau. Beliau masih boleh berkidmat kepada masyarakat tanpa menjadi anggota parlimen.

Beliau merupakan Ahli Parlimen Kota Melaka untuk tiga penggal berturut-turut; tetapi telah kehilangan kerusi tersebut kerana menjalani hukuman penjara. Di dalam pilihan raya umum Mac lalu, kerusi itu dimenangi Barisan Nasional.

"Saya tidak mempunyai rancangan untuk mendapatkan semula kubu kami," ulas beliau, sebaliknya menyarankan parti mengenalpasti punca banyak kerusi gagal dipertahankan pada pilihan raya yang lalu.

Akauntan kelahiran Johor itu menceburi bidang politik pada tahun 1986 dan menjadi Ahli Parlimen termuda pada usia 25 tahun. Pada tahun 1999, beliau telah dipilih oleh majalah Asiaweek sebagai salah seorang daripada 20 pemimpin politik dan kerajaan Asia bagi milenium baru.

Walau bagaimanapun, beliau diharamkan dari memegang sebarang jawatan parti setelah didapati bersalah menyebarkan berita palsu melibatkan dakwaan kes rogol gadis bawah umur oleh bekas ketua Pemuda Umno dan ketua menteri Melaka Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik.

Rahim telah memfailkan saman malu terhadap DAP tetapi menariknya semula setelah parti tersebut buat pertama kalinya membuat pengakuan mahkamah Oktober lalu bahawa dakwaan yang dibuatnya adalah 'tidak berasas' sama sekali.
¶ 6:54 PM

Pertahankan kepentingan Melayu dalam pembangunan tanah rizab

Langkah berjaga-jaga perlu diadakan bagi memastikan hak Melayu dipelihara sekiranya undang-undang tanah dipinda untuk menbenarkan pembangunan tanah rizab Melayu oleh bukan Melayu, menurut sebuah organisasi bukan kerajaan yang memperjuangkan
kepentingan Melayu.

Presiden Teras, Mohd Azmi Abdul Hamid menegaskan langkah tersebut amat mustahak untuk memastikan tanah-tanah itu dibangunkan untuk kepentingan orang-orang Melayu dan kekal sebagai hak milik mereka.

"Walaupun pembangunan (tanah rizab Melayu) itu nanti dikendalikan oleh orang Melayu bersama-sama bukan Melayu, perlu ada sebuah badan yang menentukan kerja-kerjanya tidak menyimpang dari matlamat asal tanah rizab itu," ujar Azmi bila dihubungi semalam.

Beliau mengulas pengumuman Timbalan Perdana Menteri Najib Razak pada Khamis lalu bahawa tanah rizab Melayu akan dibenarkan dipindahmilik kepada bukan Melayu dengan pajakan 60 tahun apabila pindaan undang-undang tanah diluluskan bulan depan.
.
Azmi menyarankan penubuhan sebuah badan pemantau yang bertanggungjawab memastikan proses pajakan tanah rizab Melayu kepada bukan Melayu dilakukan secara telus agar tidak berlaku hal-hal yang tidak sewajarnya.

"Kelulusan pajak harus diberikan oleh majlis eksekutif negeri terlibat, dan bukan pejabat tanah negeri supaya adanya ketelusan," menurut beliau lagi.

Azmi mencadangkan satu lagi mekanisme bagi melindungi hak Melayu dalam hal ini ialah dengan melarang keras pajakan tersebut diperbaharui semula.

Pindaan yang diumumkan oleh Najib merupakan antara beberapa cadangan yang akan dibentangkan di Parlimen pada bulan September sebagai sebahagian dari rombakan undang-undang tanah.
.
Bagaimanapun, menurut Azmi, kerajaan tidak sepatutnya terburu-buru membentangkan pindaan tersebut tanpa menjelaskan kepada rakyat mengapa perlunya hakmilik tanah rizab Melayu dibuka kepada bukan Melayu.

"Kerajaan mesti menerangkan rasional di sebalik cadangan pindaan undang-undang tanah itu sebelum ia diluluskan," kata beliau.

Kerajaan perlu berterus-terang sekiranya agensi-agensi kerajaan seperti Perbadanan Pembangunan Bandar (sekarang UDA Holdings Bhd) - yang ditubuhkan untuk membangunkan tanah milik orang Melayu telah didapati gagal, tambah beliau.

"Banyak agensi-agensi, terutamanya UDA, ditubuhkan dengan tujuan membangunkan tanah orang Melayu. Yang dikesalkan adalah gagalnya agensi-agensi ini berfungsi."

Menurut Azmi, jumlah keseluruhan tanah rizab Melayu telah berkurangan dari 4.5 juta hektar pada 1995 kepada hanya dua juta hektar lebih, kini. Sehingga sekarang, tiada penjelasan lengkap mengenai keadaan sebenar tanah-tanah tersebut.
"Apakah status tanah-tanah ini? Sudah dibangunkan atau belum? Kami telah menghantar berpucuk-pucuk surat dan memorandum berserta cadangan kepada pihak berkuasa terbabit tetapi tiada respons diterima setakat ini," dedah Azmi.

Undang-undang tanah, sesetengahnya wujud sejak zaman kolonial Malaya di abad ke-19,
melindungi tanah rizab Melayu sebagai tanah 'simpanan untuk pendudukan orang Melayu atau pribumi negeri di mana ia berada.'

Kecuali Kelantan dan Kedah yang membolehkan pajak kepada bukan Melayu bagi tempoh maksimum tiga tahun, undang-undang ini sangat ketat sehingga ada kes tertentu melarang orang Melayu sendiri memiliki tanah rizab di negeri yang bukan negeri asal mereka.

Bekas Perdana Menteri Dr Mahathir Mohamad dilaporkan di dalam akhbar Utusan Melayu
telah mencela sikap orang Melayu yang terlalu mengagung-agungkan status tanah simpanan Melayu.

"Ketuanan Melayu bukan terletak pada tanah simpanan tetapi keupayaan kita dan kekuatan untuk bersaing dengan bangsa-bangsa lain," ujar Mahathir.

"Adanya tanah-tanah rizab ini adalah suatu yang memalukan kerana ia memaparkan kelemahan kita, tiadanya daya saing, dan perlu sentiasa bergantung kepada langkah perlindungan," kata beliau di dalam ceramahnya di Kompleks Yayasan Kepimpinan Perdana pada hari Isnin.
¶ 6:53 PM

Keadilan ajak rakyat hayati lagenda Kuih Bulan

Oleh: Faisal Mustaffa

Parti Keadilan Rakyat telah melancarkan kuih bulan Reformasi sempena perayaan tersebut tahun ini di Parlimen.

Perayaan Kuih Bulan yang berasal dari China itu mempunyai persamaan dengan perjuangan reformasi Parti; untuk menegakkan keadilan.

Menurut kenyataan media yang dikeluarkan oleh Naib Presiden, Tian Chua, kuih bulan berasal semasa pemerintahan Rejim Monggol yang zalim. Pemimpin rakyat, Zhu Yuan Zhang, telah menyelitkan nota, "bangkit Lawan kezaliman" dalam kuih bulan dan diedarkan kepada semua keluarga di ibu kota.

Akibat daripada itu, rakyat telah bangun dan memberontak dengan senjata dan obor sehingga berjaya menggulingkan pemerintah zalim.

Menurut Presidennya, Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah ismail, kebebasan bukan sahaja bermaksud bebas daripada pentadbiran zalim tetapi juga bebas daripada kegiatan rasuah dan kezaliman.

Azizah berharap perayaan itu dapat menyatukan keluarganya kembali - dengan bebasnya suaminya yang akan menerima penghakiman daripada Mahkamah Rayuan esok, 2 September di Putrajaya.

Timbalan Presiden, Dr Syed Husin Ali pula menambah dengan menyatakan bahawa perayaan Kuh Bulan perayaan untuk semua supaya dapat memupuk perpaduan semua kaum.

Kuih bulant ersebut dijual pada harga RM20 di ibu pejabat Keadilan di Shah Alam.

Majlis pelancarannya turut dihadiri oleh Naib Presiden; Lee Sang, sdr Mustafa Kamil Ayub dan Pn Animah Ferrar.

¶ 6:52 PM

Wujudkan nilai-nilai baik

Penguatkuasa Kementerian Perdagangan Domestik dan Hal ehwal Pengguna baru-baru ini menahan sepasang pelajar kolej di Pulau Pinang kerana didakwa membantu menjual CD cetak rompak di internet.

Mengambil individu bawah umur dan pelajar bagi menjual CD cetak rompak kian menjadi taktik jualan yang ketara oleh peniaga yang tidak bertanggungjawab. Tidak sukar untuk mengesan remaja yang bergerak di sekitar pusat penjaja dan kedai kopi dengan beg yang penuh berisi CD untuk dijaja kepada pelanggan. Sebelum ini, di Melaka, seorang pelajar perempuan sekolah menengah dijumpai menjaja VCD lucah di pasar malam.

Remaja-remaja ini tahu bahawa mereka akan dibayar dengan 'lumayan'. Dipercayai mereka telah terpedaya dengan tarikan keuntungan material.

Disebabkan masyarakat yang mengkomersialkan segala benda, generasi muda dijadikan kuasa pendorong pasaran pengguna. Tetapi selagi mereka mempunyai nilai moral yang betul, mereka akan jauh daripada keterlaluan.

Meskipun demikian, kita mempunyai terlampau ramai individu yang sentiasa memikirkan keuntungan, yang telah menjadi contoh yang buruk kepada generasi baru: peragut boleh hidup mewah sementara ahli perniagaan yang kaya-raya dan pemimpin politik telah salahguna duit awam dan dituduh dalam kes rasuah. Semua ini menunjukkan kepada nilai moral yang kian terhakis dalam masyarakat kita. Di dalam keadaan demikian, bagaimana anak muda kita tidak terjejas dengan apa yang mereka sudah lihat dan dengar?

Apabila negara semakin dikomersialkan dan bila masyarakat kita lebih menekankan pembangunan fizikal, kita telah mengabaikan pendidikan moral yang amat penting.

Kita sering menilai seseorang dengan besar mana gajinya atau aset yang dimilikinya, bukan ilmu dan nilai moral seseorang.

Masyarakat yang tidak menghargai pendidikan tidak mampu mewujudkan rantai nilai baik bagi golongan muda.

Jika kita mahu anak-anak muda melihat pendidikan sebagai suatu yang penting, kita perlu perlihatkan kepada mereka kesan dan kuasa pendidikan. Kerajaan mesti pertama sekali menghapuskan politik wang; parti-parti politik dan jabatan-jabatan kerajaan mesti diketuai oleh kumpulan elit yang berpendidikan, bijaksana dan adil, bukan kaya.

Selepas itu, kerajaan mesti menyuntik semangat baru dalam sektor pendidikan supaya pelajar dapat nikmati persekitaran pembelajaran yang sesuai.

Pendekatan pendidikan yang berorientasikan peperiksaan telah merampas dari pelajar-pelajar tersebut rasa cinta pada sekolah. Dengan penekanan yang keterlaluan pada keputusan peperiksaan, pelajar akan sentiasa lupa akan pencapaian yang dijana dalam proses persekolahan.

Ketiga, kerajaan mesti juga menawarkan lebih insentif cukai dalam pendidikan dan pembelian buku-buku teks, dan membantu sekolah-sekolah dalam mendapat lebih banyak buku dan membiaya lebih ramai pelajar melanjutkan pelajaran ke peringkat tinggi.

¶ 6:46 PM

Langkah Segera bagi Belanjawan Berimbang
Haniza Talha

Saya tahu bagaimana kerajaan boleh capai belanjawan berimbang dalam masa setahun. Malah, ada kemungkinan mendapat lebihan pendapatan daripada perbelanjaan dalam masa 12 bulan. Ia bukan suatu yang ajaib daripada seorang yang bukan ahli ekonomi seperti saya, tapi bagi mereka yang gemarkan perkara yang kompleks akan merasakannya tidak berkesan dan terlalu simplistik.

Tetapi ada muslihat - ia memerlukan ketelitian sepenuhnya, tiada belas kasihan dan komitmen yang tidak berbelah-bagi untuk menjejaki sesiapa saja yang mengambil kesempatan mengaut keuntungan berlebihan daripada kerajaan.

Adakah kerajaan bersedia berbuat demikian dan menganggu ramai orang, termasuk ramai ahli-ahli politik akar umbi dan 'penyokong kuat'nya? Adakah ia sanggup melaksanakan perubahan total kepada cara ia membeli barangan dan perkhidmatan?

Dua kisah menunjukkan dengan jelas apa yang saya maksudkan. Pertama, perbualan dengan seorang pegawai bank. Saya mencadangkan agar kerajaan wajar mengurangkan keuntungan yang diberikan kepada pembekal, berbanding harga pasaran.

Saya dengan naif mengatakan, 40% hingga 50% garis keuntungan (jika harga pasaran RM100, ia akan bilkan kerajaan sebanyak RM140 atau RM150) sangat melampau, dan jika kerajaan fikirkan, ia sebenarnya mampu jimatkan kos yang agak banyak - sehingga sepertiga kos jika ia mengambil pada kadar pasaran.

Pegawai bank tersebut merenung seraya berkata, "Puan, jika garis keuntungan sebanyak 40% ke 50%, ia tidak jadi masalah - kita masih ok. Saya ingin bagitau puan, sebenarnya ia lebih daripada itu, berkali-kali ganda lebih dari itu."

Kening saya ternaik, tidak menyangka jawapan yang diberi. Banyak mana lebih, 100%? Pegawai bank tersebut memandang ke bawah. Dua ratus peratus? Dia hampir mengeluh dan memandang saya seolah mengatakan 'puan tak tahu apa sebenarnya yang berlaku, ya?' Awak mengatakan ia beberapa ratus peratus, saya mendesak. Dan dia hanya mengangguk dengan perlahan, hampir tidak perasan.

Sebagai pegawai bank, dia menerangkan bahawa dia bertemu ramai yang datang untuk mendapatkan pembiayaan kewangan bagi kontrak yang mereka peroleh daripada kerajaan, dan dia sungguh tidak percaya apa yang sedang berlaku. Dalam banyak kes, mereka mengenakan beberapa kali ganda kadar pasaran semasa.

Kisah seterusnya. Seorang pekerja pendidikan, muda dan bijak, di sebuah pertubuhan kerajaan, menyemak beberapa sebutharga percetakan. Mempunyai pengalaman sebelum itu dalam mengurus majalah sekolah, dia sedar kadar bayaran yang dikenakan begitu tinggi, dua hingga tiga kali ganda. Ini disahkan dengan membandingkan dengan syarikat percetakan lain.

Wanita muda tersebut dengan api idealismenya masih membakar dan keinginannya menjimatkan kos bagi pihak kerajaan, menunjukkan angka tersebut kepada bosnya, yang hanya ketawakan wanita muda yang 'naif' tersebut. Kata bosnya, itulah kontrak kerajaan kalau tak tahu lagi, dan ia tidak boleh diubah.

Darah muda, idealisme, ideologi, keikhlasan dan kesanggupan bekerja untuk menambahbaikan demi negara ternyata bercanggah dengan realiti yang hodoh, dan realiti yang menyerap masuk ke dalam hampir semua kontrak yang diberikan oleh kerajaan.

Mohon anda bersabar dengan angka-angka berikut. Menurut laporan ekonomi terakhir Perbendaharaan, kerajaan pusat akan mendapat RM96 bilion daripada cukai dan akan membelanjakan RM80 bilion bagi perbelanjaan operasi (berulang) dan RM30 bilion untuk pembangunan.

Dengan itu meninggalkan defisit sebanyak RM14 bilion yang kerajaan akan terpaksa meminjam. Ini ialah 3.3% daripada unjuran produk domestik kasar, nilai barangan dan perkhidmatan, yang akan dihasilkan tahun ini. Jika kerajaan mahu menseimbangkan belanjawan dan tidak meminjam, ia hanya perlu berjimat RM14 bilion. Itulah yang akan ditunjukkan selepas ini.

Mari kita lihat kepada perbelanjaan operasi. Suku daripadanya ialah gaji dan kebanyakan daripada kategori yang lain juga tidak boleh diubah-ganti, contohnya, caj khidmat hutang, pencen, bantuan dan sebagainya.

Tetapi ada satu perkara menarik - bekalan dan perkhidmatan. Dan apa yang anda dapati, pada unjuran RM17.2 bilion untuk 2004, ia perkara terbesar selepas gaji yang berjumlah hampir RM21 bilion.

Mengikut pengalaman dua kisah benar kami, besar kemungkinan kerajaan akan membayar sekurang-kurangnya dua kali ganda apa yang diperlukan bagi bekalan dan perkhidmatan tersebut. Dalam contoh-contoh kami, kerajaan membayar sebanyak tiga ke lima kali ganda lebih daripada biasa.

Langkah pertama ialah mengaudit semua kontrak bagi bekalan dan perkhidmatan dan bawakan mana-mana yang terlalu tinggi, kepada nilai pasaran. Audit tersebut dilakukan oleh firma audit utama negara.

Jangan bayar mereka berlebihan. Mereka mungkin boleh dipujuk untuk mengurangkan keuntungan yang biasa mereka peroleh, memandangkan skala kerja-kerja audit yang besar yang akan dilakukan dan sudah pastinya mereka akan mendapat keuntungan yang lebih berbanding kerja audit yang biasa dilakukan.

Anggaran kasar kami, akibat daripada ini, malah selepas membayar, katakan dua ratus juta ringgit, untuk yuran audit, perbelanjaan dapat dikurangkan sehingga separuh kepada RM8.5 bilion dan menjimatkan, hanya tinggal RM5.5 bilion menuju sasaran iaitu RM14 bilion.

Tapi tunggu dulu. Bagaimana anda dapat memujuk syarikat-syarikat tersebut melepaskan kontrak-kontrak yang mengiurkan itu? Jika sekiranya mereka masih berdegil, mulakan siasatan serta-merta bagaimana mereka mendapat kontrak yang begitu lumayan. Panggil pegawai audit, libatkan polis! Hanya dengan cara yang tidak amanah, kontrak begitu lumayan boleh diberikan. Dengan cara itu saja akan membuatkan syarikat-syarikat mengelakkan diri daripada mengaut keuntungan berlebihan dari kontrak bagi menyelamatkan diri daripada dakwaan jenayah.

Baki RM5.5 bilion perkara enteng saja. Mari lihat perbelanjaan pembangunan. Pengangkutan menunjukkan angka yang besar sebanyak RM6.4 bilion dan pendidikan sebanyak RM4.6 bilion. Kedua-dua ini memang diketahui umum memberi pulangan yang tinggi kepada para kontraktor - ingat lagi skandal makmal komputer tidak lama dulu dan keuntungan yang segera dituai oleh kontraktor jalanraya.

Dengan mengetatkan seluruh proses dan dengan cadangan kerajaan kepada sistem tender terbuka bagi kebanyakan kontrak kerajaan dimasa akan datang, kita menjangkakan akan menurunkan kos tersebut sekurang-kurangnya 20%. Realitinya, penjimatan mampu dicapai lebih daripada itu.

Dengan perbelanjaan pembangunan pada kira-kira RM30 bilion, simpanan akan menjadi seperlima daripada itu atau RM6 bilion berbanding dengan baki RM5.5 bilion yang kita perlukan untuk belanjawan berimbang. Katakan RM500 juta sebagai pengimbang.

Belum lagi kita bercakap tentang langkah meningkatkan pendapatan melalui cukai.

Kini saya sudah gariskannya, ia bukan satu rahsia besar, kan? Tidakkah anda dan saya tahu akan perkara ini sekian lama? Adakah kita benar-benar perlukan langkah-langkah potongan kos dan cukai bagi mengurangkan perbelanjaan dan meningkatkan pendapatan dan ahli-ahli serta penasihat ekonomi untuk memberitahu kita bagaimana melakukannya?

Sering - terlalu galak - jawapannya ada di situ, merenung tepat ke muka kita. Tetapi adakah kita mempunyai kekuatan untuk melakukan apa yang patut dilakukan? Salah satu jenis rogol yang perlu dihentikan segera ialah perkosaan terhadap negara ini!
¶ 6:44 PM

KEBANGKITAN ASIA DAN PEMBINAAN SEMULA TAMADDUN Bahagian 2

Anwar Ibrahim

Kepentingan untuk membina semula tamadun sudah diusahakan dengan gigih oleh seorang anak muda Asia sekurun yang lalu, dia tidak lain daripada bekas pelajar yang terkenal universiti ini, Dr. Jose Rizal. Lelaki kebangkitan Asia ini, menunggu hari di mana idea menguasai kekuatan fizikal. Katanya, pembebasan kemanusiaan tidak mungkin berlaku jika alasan tidak bebas, jika agama memaksa ke atas fakta, jika nafsu menjadi undang-undang dan ada bangsa yang menjajah yang lain.

Jika barah yang merbahaya seperti yang dirasakan oleh Rizal sewaktu zamannya sebagai agama yang karut di mana Tuhan ialah manusia, memetik kata-katanya, "digunakan sebagai perisai dan pelindung kepada pencabulan," tetapi hari ini kita melihatnya ekstrim yang sebaliknya. Musuh kini bukan lagi kepercayaan karut, tetapi Hujah yang terlalu angkuh, Hujah yang membunuh, seolah ia sendiri Tuhan, dan ideal moral yang terbit daripada kepercayaan pada kesempurnaan yang melampau.

Pembinaan semula tamadun tidak mungkin berlaku tanpa pembaharuan pegangan kepada Yang Esa. Ini memang menjadi satu sumbangan Asia kepada dunia. Berbeza dengan Barat, semenjak zaman Enlightenment, yang telah menjejaskan dirinya daripada pandangan dunia yang dominan mengenai Zaman Kepercayaan, Asia walaupun berkurun melalui perubahan dan transformasi, masih mengekalkan ciri keagamaannya yang pokok.

Orang Asia dihatinya ialah seorang yang berpegang pada agama. Kepercayaan dan amalan keagamaan tidak terhad kepada individu, ia merangkumi kehidupan komuniti itu sendiri. Malah, agama telah membuatkan Asia, benua yang banyak kepelbagaiannya dan bukan disebabkan lain-lain kuasa sosial. Orang Barat, sebaliknya, dalam kejahilannya dan tidak bertolak-ansurnya terhadap perkara yang ia tidak biasa, memilih untuk membentuk dunia mengikut visi yang berkisar pada egonya yang terhad melalui alat natural reason yang diasaskan pada kuasa permodenan.

Sikap mementingkan diri ini adalah punca imperialisme di zaman Rizal, di mana manusia mempergunakan kaumnya untuk memuaskan nafsunya bagi mendapatkan kuasa dan pangkat. Hari ini manusia terus melepaskan keganasannya terhadap alam dan persekitaran dengan sikap imperialistik yang sama dan pandangan rendah seperti yang biasa dilakukan sebelum ini.

Imperialisme ini yang dibantu dan disokong hari ini oleh kuasa-kuasa revolusi teknologi, kini cuba mengembangkan hegemoninya ke dalam lingkungan budaya. Walau bagaimnapun, komuniti global yang baru tidak boleh didasari atas satu budaya, tidak kira bagaimana menarik pengakuan yang dibuat. Ia mesti memasukkan dan diasaskan atas budaya yang pelbagai. Dan dunia perlu melihat kepada Asia dan belajar, pengajaran-pengajaran dalam kehidupan sejagat yang pelbagai budaya.

Dalam hal ini, Asia Tenggara ialah Asia pada skala yang kecil. Permasalahannya - hal-hal yang kompleks dan potensi yang ada - merangkumi permasalahan Asia keseluruhannya. Di sini, anak-anak Ibrahim menemui tamadun Indic dan Sinic yang hebat. Toleransi, hormat-menghormati dan keinginan yang ikhlas untuk mengenali satu sama lain akan mengubah pertemuan ini daripada permusuhan, kesangsian dan salah faham kepada persahabatan, percaya-mempercayai dan persefahaman. Tetapi toleransi dan hormat-menghormati hanya akan wujud dalam komuniti multi budaya dan multi agama jika ada keadilan dalam urusan, jika golongan minoriti tidak dipinggirkan kerana agamanya, kaumnya dan budayanya. Dengan itu, keadilan sosial merupakan elemen penting dalam mengekalkan solidaritas dalam komuniti pelbagai budaya.

Realiti masa kita, memerlukan bangsa-bangsa rapat dan bekerja bersama-sama sebagai satu entiti. Kita perlu punyai kebijaksanaan untuk belajar dari satu sama lain untuk maju ke hadapan dan mencapai masyarakat madani. Sementara setengah negara Asia Tenggara telah menunjuk jalan dalam lingkungan ekonomi, Filipina telah menunjukkan keberanian lebih daripada yang lain dalam memberdayakan rakyatnya dengan cara demokrasi. Kesungguhan bangsa ini berhadapan dengan kuasa yang angkuh dan mengalahkannya ialah pengajaran yang real bagi dikongsikan dengan yang lain-lain.

Tetapi demokrasi sendiri memerlukan pembaharuan. Ia mesti membersihkan dirinya daripada keterlaluan, menangani keruntuhan moral, dan membanteras korupsi. Ia tidak boleh menggalakkan salahguna kuasa dan menjadi sandiwara bagi segelintir yang kaya dan berkuasa. Demokrasi hanya akan bermakna jika ia memberi khidmat kepada rakyat dan menjadi kenderaan bagi pemberdayaan budaya. Apa pun, demokrasi mesti dibimbing oleh nilai moral dan kebangkitan kepercayaan.

Jangan kita lupa, kepercayaan yang dihidupkan semula jangan sekali membawa kepada taksub, jika tidak agama akan menjadi racun di zaman kita, menyebabkan kita jatuh ke dalam kegelapan. Jika agama mahu menyumbang kepada pembinaan semula tamadun dan kebangkitan Asia, kepercayaan diperbaharui mesti menjadi kuasa budaya yang membebaskan manusia daripada kejahilan dan tidak toleransi, ketidakadilan dan tamak, dominasi dan eksploitasi.

Ini akan hanya berlaku jika kepimpinan setiap komuniti agama secara aktif menganjurkan perspektif sejagat. Dogmatisme dan kelipan teologi hanya akan dijangkau dengan memupuk kebijaksanaan sejagat, philosophia perennis seperti yang dipupuk oleh Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas dan Dante, atau hikmah al-khalidah oleh al-Farabi, Ibn Sina dan Ibn Rushd.

Beban membina semula tamadun memang berat tetapi perlu, bagi membebaskan diri kita daripada kegelapan diri, hutan yang gelap dan ganas di masa kita. Tuntutan Asia yang sebenar ke atas dunia dalam milenium baru ini akan bergantung kepada peranannya dalam pengembaraan yang berani dan mencabar ini. Dan seperti Dante berkata, kita perlu menyeru seluruh tenaga dan sumber yang ada.

Dengan semangat dan kekuatan baru, kita mesti menyatakan dengan jelas mesej moral kita, ketamadunan yang ideal, yang sejagat dan sesuai sepanjang masa, mesej yang cucuk dengan hujah dan kebaikan; mesej kebenaran, keadilan dan kasih sayang, mengenai keindahan yang Haq, dan paling utama, mengenai kebebasan dan kehormatan manusia sebagai imago dei dan khalifatullah fil ardh.

¶ 6:42 PM

Suhakam digesa pantau pilihanraya UM

Majlis perwakilan pelajar Universiti Malaya telah memfailkan aduan kepada Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (Suhakam), dengan mendakwa bahawa pihak berkuasa universiti itu telah mencabul hak mereka dalam menghadapi pilihan raya kampus yang akan datang.

Dalam satu memorandum kepada Suhakam pada 30 Ogos, majlis itu mendakwa bahawa pelajar-pelajar tahun pertama telah dipaksa untuk menghadiri pelbagai jenis program anjuran hal ehwal pelajar yang diadakan semasa waktu kuliah.

"Program luar kampus yang dikenali sebagai Kem Latihan Kemerdekaan dan Patriotisma itu jelas sekali sebagai satu kempen pilihan raya. Sementara itu, pengetua-pengetua beberapa kolej kediaman telah mengugut dan memaksa untuk membuang pelajar dalam usaha mereka untuk mendapatkan sokongan bagi calon-calon hal ehwal pelajar.

Majlis tersebut juga menuduh pentadbiran universiti itu sebagai berlaku tidak adil dan mempengaruhi proses pencalonan dan pilihan raya tersebut.

"Pihak pentadbiran telah mengarahkan pelbagai jawatankuasa untuk membantu beberapa kumpulan yang terlibat dalam pilihan raya ini. Mereka telah mengeksploit dan menyalahgunakan badan-badan ini yang sepatutnya menjalankan aktiviti yang memberi manfaat kepada para pelajar dan bukannya memfitnahkan kami," kata majlis itu itu dalam memorandum tersebut.

Sehubungan itu, pelajar-pelajar tersebut telah meminta supaya Suhakam campurtangan dan memastikan supaya pilihan raya itu dijalankan dengan cara yang betul.

"Kami mahu Suhakam menghantar seorang pesuruhjaya atau pegawainya untuk menjadi salah seorang daripada anggota badan pemerhati pilihan raya itu. Dia juga perlu mengeluarkan kenyataan tentang kepincangan yang terdapat dalam proses itu serta berjumpa dengan hal ehwal pelajar untuk mendapatkan kepastian tentang tuduhan-tuduhan tersebut bagi memastikan keadilan ditegakkan," kata mereka.

Mereka juga meminta supaya satu garis panduan pilihan raya dibuat sejajar dengan hak asasi manusia serta amalan demokrasi yang betul.

"Pilihan raya ini merupakan satu proses pendidikan politik bagi para pelajar. Ia sepatutnya dihormati serta dijalankan dengan bebas daripada pengaruh luar bagi memberi peluang pelajar memilih pemimpin yang mempunyai nilai-nilai yang baik, karisma dan kredibiliti," tambah mereka lagi.

Pelajar-pelajar daripada universiti tempatan yang lain juga ada mengadu tentang masalah yang di hadapi dalam pilihan raya kampus mereka.

Yang terbaru, dua orang wakil pelajar Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) telah dilaporkan diserang serta dilabel sebagai komunis oleh pihak pengurusan.

Pilihan raya kampus selalunya dilihat sebagai pertarungan di antara calon 'pro-kerajaan' dan calon 'anti-kerajaan.
¶ 6:41 PM

Habeas corpus Nik Adli ditolak

Pada 1 September 2004, Mahkamah Tinggi Shah Alam telah menolak permohonan habeas corpus lima tahanan Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA), termasuk Nik Adi, anak mursyidul am PAS Nik Aziz Nik Mat, dengan alasan bahawa penahanan mereka dilakukan mengikut prosidur yang betul

Hakim KN Segara memutuskan bahawa Kementerian Keselamatan Dalam Negeri telah bertindak mengikut garis panduan undang-undang dalam menahan mereka yang disyaki ahli Kumpulan Mujihiddin Malaysia (KMM) dan lanjutan penahanan mereka juga adalah sah di sisi undang-undang.

"Melihat kepada bukti yang ada, jelas sekali bahawa menteri tersebut telah mematuhi semua syarat-syarat prosidur untuk melanjutkan penahanan mereka," katanya selepas 'recoding' hujah daripada timbalan pendakwaraya (DPP) Mohamad Hanafiah.

Permohonan tersebut pada asalnya dibuat pada 22 April oleh 13 orang tahanan, tetapi selepas itu lima orang telah dibebaskan dan tiga lagi menarik balik permohonan mereka. Peguam Edmund Bon mewakili Nik Adli dan empat yang lain pada hari ini.

Sementara itu, Segara berkata, dia menolak permohonan tersebut kerana dia "tidak nampak mengapa mahkamah perlu campurtangan" dalam perkara lanjutan penahanan mereka yang yang dituduh memperolehi senjata api daripada Thailand, terlibat dalam pembunuhan ahli politik Dr Joe Fernandez, mengarahkan pembunuhan orang Islam yang murtad dan juga memiliki bahan letupan.

Sebelum itu, Mohamad Hanafiah dan pendakwaraya Abdul Wahab Mohamed dan Sharlyza Alias memberitahu mahkamah bahawa perintah lanjutan penahanan selama dua tahun itu dibuat dengan jujur.

"Tiada alasan baru yang diberikan oleh perdana menteri untuk melanjutkan penahanan mereka di bawah ISA selain seperti apa yang dikatakan ketika mereka mula-mula ditahan, iaitu untuk memastikan keselamatan negara," kata DPP.

Perdana menteri yang juga menteri keselamatan dalam negeri itu telah dinamakan sebagai responden kedua dalam permohonan yang dibuat melalui Bon, yang dibantu oleh Muhammad Faiz Fadzil.

Kedua-dua peguam tersebut telah menyambung hujah mereka pada Sabtu lepas selepas perintah lanjutan ke atas lima tahanan itu ditandatangani pada September 2003.

Habeas corpus adalah satu writ yang memerintahkan tahanan dibawa ke mahkamah atau hakim bagi memastikan sama ada terdapat kecacatan dalam mematuhi prosidur penahanan mereka,yang mana jika ada, akan membuatkan penahanan mereka menjadi tidak sah.

Pada bulan lepas, Bon berhujah bahawa, oleh kerana terdapat perintah penahanan yang 'baru' ke atas lima orang tersebut, maka mahkamah harus memberi ruang untuk menimbang serta memutuskan tentang kesahihan penahanan tersebut.

Walau bagaimanapun, pada 1 September 2004, DPP berkata bahawa perdana menteri telah berpuas hati dengan laporan terperinci mengenai tahanan-tahanan tersebut dan melanjutkan penahanan mereka bagi menghalang mereka daripada menjalankan aktiviti yang akan membahayakan keselamatan negara.

"Menteri tersebut mempunyai kuasa penuh untuk menentukan bahawa isu itu adalah isu keselamatan negara dan bukannya isu mahkamah," kata Mohamad Hanafiah sambil merujuk kepada kes-kes yang 'diselesaikan' atas kelulusan menteri itu dan ianya tidak boleh dipersoalkan.

13 orang tahanan tersebut adalah di antara sekumpulan tahanan ISA yang melancarkan 19 hari mogok lapar pada Mac bagi membantah lanjutan penahanan mereka di bawah undang-undang keselamatan.

Mogok itu dihentikan selepas pegawai Kementerian Dalam Negeri, yang bertemu dengan tahanan-tahanan tersebut di kem tahanan Kamunting, berjanji untuk mengkaji semula kes mereka serta membuat satu laporan yang 'positif' mengenainya.

Walau bagaimanapun, mereka mendakwa bahawa pihak berkuasa telah gagal untuk menunaikan janji itu. Oleh sebab itu, mereka kemudiannya memfailkan permohonan habeas corpus tersebut.

ISA, yang pada awalnya digunakan bagi menentang pemberontakan komunis, membenarkan seseorang itu ditahan tanpa bicara selama 60 hari dan kemudiannya boleh dilanjutkan selama dua tahun lagi atas budi bicara kerajaan.
¶ 6:39 PM

Noh diberitahu, Jangan sembunyi Laporan Suruhanjaya Polis

Timbalan Menteri Keselamatan dalam Negeri, Noh Omar menafikan bahawa laporan awal yang dibuat oleh suruhanjaya khas polis situ sengaja disembunyikan daripada pengetahuan umum.

Dia berkata demikian ketika menjawab soalan pemimpin pembangkang Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timor) semasa sesi soal jawab di Dewan Rakyat pada 1 September 2004.

Lim yang juga pengerusi DAP, bertanya mengapa Noh "dijangkiti sindrom berahsia" berikutan laporan yang tidak didedahkan kepada umum itu.

Walau bagaimanapun, timbalan menteri itu menjawab bahawa ia bukanlah satu rahsia dan pemimpin pembangkang itu boleh mendapatkan satu salinan daripadanya jika mahu.

Ketika ditemui kemudian, Noh memberitahu wartawan bahawa laporan itu tidak didedahkan kepada umum kerana ia hanya satu laporan awal.

"Tunggulah sehingga laporan itu siap sepenuhnya pada Mei depan dan kita juga perlu menghantarnya kepada Yang Dipertuan Agong dulu," katanya sambil menambah bahawa dia tidak pasti sama ada laporan itu akan dibentangkan dalam Parlimen untuk dibahaskan atau tidak.

Laporan awal yang telah disiapkan awal bulan lepas itu menyenaraikan beberapa maklumat dan maklum balas daripada orang ramai termasuk anggota polis yang masih bertugas dan yang sudah bersara.

Suruhanjaya itu menerima 26 maklumbalas daripada orang awam seluruh negara dan juga memorandum daripada beberapa pertubuhan termasuk parti-parti politik dan golongan profesional.

Rasuah yang menjadi-jadi

Dalam laporan itu, suruhanjaya itu menyatakan bahawa rasuah dalam pasukan polis bukan sahaja menular di peringkat atasan malah juga berlaku di peringkat bawahan. Ia juga menyatakan bahawa pasukan polis menghadapi masalah kekurangan sumber untuk menguatkuasakan undang-undang dengan berkesan.

Suruhanjaya yang dianggotai oleh 16 orang ahli itu juga mendapati bahawa terdapat kes di mana kekerasan yang berlebihan digunakan ke atas suspek semasa dalam tahanan polis.

Suruhanjaya Khas bagi Menambahbaikan Pengurusan dan Operasi Polis itu telah ditubuhkan oleh Perdana Menteri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi berikutan banyaknya aduan yang diterima terhadap pihak polis.

Suruhanjaya itu ditugaskan untuk memberi cadangan tentang bagaimana memperbaiki mutu pasukan polis.
¶ 6:38 PM

Pasukan OIC ganti pasukan AS di Iraq?

Cadangan bagi penghantaran pasukan pengaman Islam ke Iraq di bawah panji Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu (PBB) mungkin tidak dapat dilaksanakan, kata Menteri Luar, Syed Hamid Albar.

Malaysia mengetuai Persidangan Pertubuhan Islam (OIC), yang dianggotai oleh 57 ahli, yang sedang mempertimbangkan cadangan Arab Saudi untuk menggantikan pasukan yang diketuai AS dengan satu pasukan Arab atau orang Islam.

Syed Hamid berkata dalam satu sidang media bahawa negara-negara OIC tidak mahu menyertainya di bawah pimpinan AS dan tiada tanda-tanda yang Washington bersedia untuk berundur bagi memberi laluan kepada pasukan PBB.

"Saya tidak fikir bahawa AS berminat untuk meninggalkan Iraq. Pada awalnya saya rasa idea tersebut memang menarik tetapi bagaimanakah kita hendak melaksanakannya? Terdapat terlalu banyak isu-isu teknikal yang perlu diselesaikan."

"Pada pandangan saya, idea penggantian pasukan pengaman mungkin tidak praktikal atau mustahil," kata Syed Hamid.

"Secara amnya, negara-negara OIC tidak mahu menyertainya di bawah pengawasan pasukan multinasional. Mereka mahu ia diketuai oleh pasukan pengaman PBB."

Perdana Menteri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi berkata pada bulan lepas bahawa Malaysia sedang "menimbangkan secara serius" cadangan Arab Saudi itu dan terbuka untuk menghantar pasukan pengaman di Iraq, tetapi hanya jika keadaan keselamatan stabil.

Syed Hamid mengatakan bahawa idea untuk mewujudkan sebuah pasukan pengaman PBB tidak langsung berada dalam agenda perbincangan di Majlis Keselamatan yang seharusnya memberi mandat jika ia mahu dilaksanakan.

"Kita dapat beberapa petunjuk bahawa AS tidak akan bersetuju untuk berundur. Adalah sukar jika mereka enggan berundur dan perkara ini tidak langsung terdapat dalam agenda Majlis Keselamatan," kata Syed Hamid.

Idea untuk mewujudkan satu pasukan pengaman OIC "sedang dibincangkan di rantau ini dan juga di antara negara-negara Islam tetapi belum ada apa-apa perkembangan atau pun keputusan yang konkrit."

Syed Hamid menyatakan bahawa adalah sukar bagi negara OIC untuk menggantikan pasukan pengaman multinasional pimpinan AS yang dianggotai lebih kurang 130,000 orang.

"Jika negara-negara OIC mahu terlibat, ianya mestilah di bawah keputusan rakyat Iraq dan bukannya orang lain. Elemen utama mengenai keselamatan dan kewujudan keamanan haruslah terletak pada rakyat Iraq sendiri," katanya.

Bincang strategi

Berikutan tentangan ganas yang dihadapi pasukan pengaman pimpinan AS di Iraq, pegawai pertahanan daripada lebih kurang 30 negara yang menyertai pakatan itu, akan bertemu di ibu negara Poland, Warsaw pada Rabu depan bagi membincangkan strategi.

"Situasi di Iraq adalah baru, dengan kerajaan dan parlimen sementara. Ia bukan sahaja mengenai peranan pasukan akan datang, tetapi juga termasuk perubahan taktik," kata menteri luar Poland, Jaroslaw Drozd pada Khamis lalu.

Poland yang merupakan sekutu AS, mengetuai satu pasukan multinasional yang dianggotai 6,500 orang. Pasukan yang menjaga kawasan selatan Baghdad itu juga terdiri daripada 2,500 anggota Poland sendiri.

Warsaw telah menyatakan hasratnya mengurangkan bilangan askarnya di Iraq tahun hadapan. Menteri pertahanannya berkata, perkara itu akan dibincangkan secara terperinci pada pertemuan yang akan datang.

¶ 6:34 PM

Mana satu, 'retorik' atau 'peringatan yang baik'?

Ucapan dasar presiden PAS, Abdul Hadi Awang mendapat reaksi yang berbeza-beza dengan para pemimpin parti itu merasakan bahawa ia telah berjaya meningkatkan moral ahlinya manakala para pemerhati pula berpendapat bahawa ia adalah retorik semata-mata.

Timbalan presiden, Hasan Ali berkata, ucapan itu telah membakar semangat para ahlinya untuk bekerja lebih keras untuk parti, manakala seorang bekas wartawan dan penyokong parti pula beranggapan bahawa ianya 'membosankan'.
Hasan menjelaskan yang ucapan itu mengingatkan pemimpin dan ahli parti supaya tidak hilang arah dan kepercayaan terhadap parti.

"Itulah sebabnya mengapa presiden mengambil contoh daripada ayat-ayat Al-Quran dan hadis serta sunnah nabi untuk menunjukkan yang perjuangan kita - yang berasaskan Islam - pasti akan menghadapi cubaan dan rintangan, sama seperti apa yang telah dilalui oleh nenek moyang kita. Walau apa pun dugaannya, kita mesti teruskan perjuangan," katanya.

Bekas wartawan itu meluahkan kekecewaannya dengan mengatakan bahawa "tiada apa yang baru dalam ucapan Hadi".

"Ia adalah retorik semata-mata, amat membosankan. Apa yang lebih menyedihkan adalah ianya satu anti-klimaks kepada sentimen yang dicetuskan oleh pemuda sebelum ini," katanya.

"Pemuda telah menyenaraikan dengan tepat kesilapan yang telah kita lakukan dan meminta agar perubahan dilakukan. Mereka bercakap tentang memperkenalkan semula parti untuk menarik lebih banyak sokongan. Tetapi presiden menyentuh sedikit sahaja tentang ini.

Ketua pemuda, Salahuddin Ayub dalam ucapan dasarnya pada perhimpunan agong pemuda pada hari Rabu, yang telah meminta agar perubahan dalaman dilakukan dan parti harus diperkenalkan semula bagi menarik sokongan orang ramai.

Seorang pemerhati parti juga melahirkan kekecewaannya tentang ucapan itu yang dianggap gagal untuk fokus kepada isu-isu penting berkaitan prestasi hambar parti itu dalam pilihan raya umum Mac lalu.

Dia berkata, presiden telah memilih untuk menyalahkan faktor luaran walhal dia sepatutnya menumpukan kepada kesilapan parti serta strategi untuk mengatasinya.

"Kita tahu bahawa Suruhanjaya Pilihan raya, taktik kotor Barisan Nasional dan kumpulan-kumpulan anti Islam sememangnya sentiasa cuba menghapuskan pengaruh kita tetapi ia bukanlah satu isu yang baru. Mengapa perlu fokus lebih tentang faktor-faktor tersebut," dia berkata.

Seorang lagi pemerhati dari Lembah Klang berkata Abdul Hadi seolah-olah cuba untuk mengalihkan perhatian para ahlinya daripada kelemahan parti.

"Bagaimana kita dapat membantu parti sekiranya ia (parti) tidak mahu membantu dirinya sendiri," tanya pemerhati tersebut yang juga merupakan penyokong parti.

Seorang pemimpin parti dari Selangor berkata bahawa ucapan itu bermula dengan baik di mana Abdul Hadi meminta para pemimpin supaya mengkaji keputusan-keputusan yang dibuat oleh parti sebelum ini dan mencari jalan untuk memperbetulkan kesilapan yang telah dilakukan.

"Malangnya, ketika ucapan terus berjalan, kita sedar bahawa ianya cuma satu kenyataan yang ringkas. Dia tidak komen tentang apakah kesilapan yang telah dibuat dan dia juga tidak menyatakan tentang bagaimana mengatasinya," kata pemimpin itu yang mahu namanya dirahsiakan.

"Saya fikir dia mahu supaya kita sendiri yang mengulas tentang perkara itu dan mencari jalan untuk memperbaiki keadaan. Saya rasa, kita perlu berbincang tentangnya dalam sesi bahas hari ini."

Ahlijawatankuasa PAS pusat, Husam Musa, yang tidak bersetuju dengan pandangan-pandangan tersebut berkata, presiden, dalam ucapan dasarnya telah membuka isu tersebut (perubahan dalaman) untuk dibahaskan oleh para perwakilan.

"Tidak perlu untuk bercakap tentang semua perkara secara terperinci dalam ucapan dasar. Mesej yang disampaikan jelas memberitahu bahawa semua perwakilan perlu bersikap terbuka dan menerima kritikan. Kami para pemimpin bersedia untuk mendengar aduan dan kami akan mempertimbangkan kesemuanya," katanya.

Melihat kepada aspek positif dalam ucapan tersebut, Salahudin berkata Abdul Hadi telah mengingatkan ahli parti supaya tidak membiarkan keputusan pilihan raya lepas melunturkan semangat mereka.

"Sebaliknya, dia meminta agar kita menjadikannya sebagai satu pengajaran untuk membimbing kita bagi mencipta taktik baru dalam perjuangan kita pada masa hadapan," katanya.
¶ 6:31 PM

MENTERI KESIHATAN SIBUK UNTUK TERIMA MEMORANDUM

Menteri Kesihatan, YB Dato’ Chua Soi Lek telah tidak hadir di pejabatnya untuk menerima memorandum berkaitan dengan Rayuan Berikan Hak Perubatan Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim sungguhpun temujanji dengannya telah dibuat 3 hari sebelum penyerahan memorandum pada 19 Ogos.

Temujanji yang telah dibuat pada 16 Ogos oleh Naib Presiden Angkatan Muda Parti Keadilan Rakyat, S.Manickavasagam telah pun disahkan oleh pejabatnya.

Namun, pada jam yang dijanjikan (11 pagi), Dato’ Chua telah diberitahu tiada di pejabat dan wakilnya, En Teh enggan memberitahu di mana Menteri Kesihatan itu berada pada ketika itu.

Penyerahan memorandum yang diketuai Ketua Angkatan Muda Selangor, Mohd Fauzi Yusoff tidak berputus asa dan tetap ingin berjumpa sekurang-kurangnya wakil yang dapat menerima memorandum berkenaan. Tetapi, setiausaha politiknya, En Tian juga memberi alasan kerana ‘terlalu sibuk’ sungguhpun kita berjanji penyerahan memorandum itu memakan masa tidak lebih daripada 5 minit. Setiausaha politik Menteri Kesihatan itu diberitahu berada di dalam pejabatnya di Kementerian Kesihatan.

Oleh yang demikian, kumpulan Angkatan Muda Selangor itu telah membuat keputusan untuk membawa memorandum itu untukdiberikan kepada Timbalan Menteri Kesihatan, YB Dato’ Dr Abd Latif Ahmad yang bertempat di blok bersebelahan.

YB Dato’ Dr Abd Latif Ahmad juga telah diberitahu oleh pejabatnya bahawa beliau tidak berada di pejabat. Tetapi akhirnya setiausaha politik beliau, En Huzaimi telah menerima bagi pihak Timbalan Menteri Kesihatan selepas lebih kurang 10 minit menunggu di luar perkarangan pejabat Timbalan Menteri itu.

Memorandum itu mengandungi alasan perikemanusiaan untuk membenarkan bekas Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim untuk menjalankan rawatan mengikut pilihannya di Jerman.

Turut hadir dalam penyerahan memorandum itu ialah Syed Putra (setiausaha Angkatan Muda Negeri), Faisal Mustaffa (Ketua Penerangan Angkatan Muda Negeri), S.Jayathas dan S.Manikavasagam (exco Angkatan Muda Negeri) dan 3 jawatankuasa bahagian Angkatan Muda Selangor.

¶ 6:30 PM

Saya bersama exco Angkatan Muda Wilayah Persekutuan telah membuat keputusan untuk melaporkan satu kes rasuah yang melibatkan seorang pemimpin parti politik kerajaan kepada polis.

Dalam laporan saya, saya telah sertakan bukti yang menunjukkan Dato’ Mustapa Mohamed, telah menyalahgunakan kuasanya sebagai Pengarah Eksekutif Majlis Tindakan Ekonomi Negara (MTEN) dalam memberi rasuah kepada beberapa pihak dalam Umno dalam memastikan beliau menang dalam Parlimen Jeli dan DUN Lanas yang ditandingininya pilihanraya umum Mac lepas.

Dalam notanya bertarikh 18 Mac 2004 berkepala surat MTEN, beliau nyatakan; “Saudara, Saya sertakan sedikit sumbangan untuk membantu kempen pilihanraya. Saya harap kita semua akan pastikan Saya akan menang di Parlimen Jeli dan SUN Lanas, En Adham di Bukit Bunga, En Aziz di Kuala Balah. Selamat berjuang. Doakan kejayaan kami. Salam.”

Jelas, dalam notanya beliaulah yang mengepelai perasuah-perasuah BN seraya memberi sogokan kepada para pengundi bagi pihak rakan-rakan BN yang lain.

Dalam petisyen yang difailkan oleh Husin bin Ismail pada 28 April, dinyatakan Dato’ Mustapa telah melakukan perbuatan penyogokan, penjamuan atau intimidasi secara am atau rasuah atau perbuatan yang menyalahi Undang-undang di bawah seksyen 32 (a), (b) dan ( c ) Akta Kesalahan Pilihanraya 1954.

Menurut petisyen tersebut, semua aktiviti pemberian rasuah tersebut diketahui oleh Dato’Mustapa sendiri:

No Tarikh Wakil penyogok Penerima Barangan rasuah
1 18-03-2004 Zawawi bin Yusof Mohd Khari bin Che Hat RM50, sehelai kain pelikat dan sekotak rokok
2 13-03-2004 Habibah bt Samat Rusdee bin Mat Daham RM100
3 15-03-2004 Aini bt Abdullah Fauzi bin Ishak RM100
4 19-03-2004 Zalina bt Abdul Rahman Roslizin b Wan Hamat RM100, senaskah surah Yaasin
5 15-03-2004 Salma bt Yusof Halimah bt Awang Lah RM50, satu pasang kain telekong, sehelai kain srong batik dan sanaskah surah Yaasin
6 15-03-2004 Datin Kamarzan bt Meah (isteri Dato’Mustapa) Fatimah bt Abdullah RM30
7 19-03-2004 Che Dan bin Idris Kamaruddin b Ismail Janji memberi RM50 ribu dan tambahan RM15 ribu kepada orang bawahan lain
8 15-03-2004 Mokhtar b Mohamed (adik Dato’ Mustapa) Md Zawi b Idris RM4 ribu untuk diagihkan
9 16-03-2004 Mokhtar b Mohamed (adik Dato’ Mustapa) Md Zawi b Idris RM4,200 untuk diagihkan
10 18-03-2004 Mokhtar b Mohamed (adik Dato’ Mustapa) Md Zawi b Idris RM2,700 untuk diagihkan
11 19-03-2004 Mokhtar b Mohamed (adik Dato’ Mustapa) Md Zawi b Idris RM700 untuk diagihkan
12 20-03-2004 Mokhtar b Mohamed (adik Dato’ Mustapa) Md Zawi b Idris RM1,000 untuk diagihkan
13 18-03-2004 Rahmah bt Ibrahim Mek Som bt Che Kub RM100
14 18-03-2004 Rahmah bt Ibrahim Ibrahim b Awang Ahmad RM100
15 19-03-2004 Ramli b Omar Che Daud b Yaacob RM200

Namun pada petang laporan polis yang saya buat di Balai Polis Dang Wangi, saya telah dipanggil oleh …..untuk memberikan kenyataan. Saya telah memberikan kerjasama sebaik mungkin. Sungguhpun, saya kira pihak yang patut dipanggil ialah Dato’ Mustapa Mohamed, bukannya saya.

Selain daripada kes tersebut, saya juga telah diberitahu bahawa terdapat kes lain yang melibatkan rasuah di kalangan calon-calon BN pada pilihanraya lepas.

Dalam satu salinan akuan sumpah yang saya terima, Joni bin Mat telah mengaku di hadapan pesuruhjaya sumpah. Kenyataannya seperti berikut:

“Pada 28 hb Jun 2004 lebih kurang jam 5.30 petang saya telah ditahan oleh rombongan Dato’ Rahim Ab Rahman di hadapan rumah En Mustafa Ab Rahman (Che Pa) di Kg Bechah Kelubi. Mereka ialah Dato’ Rahim Ab Rahman, En Mustaman Hj Yusuf, KPPM Mohamad Abdoh, PPM Razali, Alias dan En Mahadi (pemandu). Saya telah dipujuk dan diugut oleh mereka supaya mengadakan Mesyuarat Agong Umno Cawangan Tandak di ‘Bungkus’ dengan mencalonkan Dato’ Ab Rahim Ab Rahman sebagai calon Keta Umno Bahagian Pasir Mas. Oleh kerana saya tidak mahu perkara yang tidak diingini berlaku saya menandatangani Borang Peringatan Mesyuarat yang mana mencalonkan Ketua Bahagian mereka mahukan Dato’ Ab Rahim Ab Rahman sebagai Ketua Bahagian Umno Pasir Mas. Selepas itu saya diberi balasan wang sebanyak RM2,000.00 (Ringgit Malaysia: Dua Ribu Sahaja). Kejadian ini saya telah laporkan kepada Badan Pencegah Rasuah Negeri Kelantan pada 1hb Julai 2004. Bersama ini saya lampirkan salinan senarai nombor siri wang sebanyak RM2,000.00 yang telah diberikan pada saya dan wang ini telah disimpan oleh Badan Pencegah Rasuah Negeri Kelantan.”

Dalam satu akuan bersumpah yang lain bertarikh 8 Julai 2004, Mohd Adznan bin Hamzah juga telah membuat akuan sumpahnya:

“Pada 27hb Jun 2004 jam lebih kurang 1.00 tengahari bertempat di hadapan rumah saya. Saya telah didatangi oleh Setiausaha Umno Bahagian Pasir Mas En Mohd Nor Abdullah (Cikgu Nor Agong) dan KPPM Tendong En Hanapi b Seman (Ababg Setowi. En Mohd Nor telah memujuk dan mengugut saya supaya mengadakan Mesyuarat Agong Cawangan Penggu, pada masa itu juga. Beliau mahu cawangan Umno Penggu mencalonkan Dato Ab Rahim Ab Rahman sebagai calon Ketua Umno bahagian Pasir Mas. Oleh kerana takut perkara tak diingini berlaku saya menandatangani Borang Peringatan Mesyuarat Agong Umno Cawangan Penggu, dimana di dalam borang itu telah ditulis Dato Ab Rahim Ab Rahman sebagai Ketua Umno Bahagian Pasir Mas. Selepas itu En Mohd Nor menyerahkan wang RM2,000.00 (Ringgit Malaysia: Dua Ribu Sahaja) sebagai balasan dan mengarahkan saya supaya memberi kepada ahli-ahli cawangan Umno Penggu untuk menutup mulut agar mengatakan Mesyuarat Agong Umno Cawangan Penggu berjalan dengan sempurna sepertimana yang telah dinotiskan pada 29hb Julai 2004 jan 9.00 malam di Tadika Kemas Bechah Semak. Bersama ini dilampirkan salinan senarai nombor siri wang RM2,000.00 dan wangn ini telah diserahkan [ada Badan Pencagah Rasuah Negeri Kelantan pada 6hb Julai 2004.”

Jelas, inilah budaya yang diamalkan oleh Umno dan BN dalam memenangi kerusi Parlimen dan Dewan Undangan Negeri yang baru lalu.

Namun apa yang mengecewakan saya dan rakan-rakan saya di Angkatan Muda ialah petisyen tersebut telah ditarik balik kerana tawaran lain yang diberikan oleh Dato’ Musatapa Mohamed kepada kerajaan Negeri Kelantan, PAS.

Dari pengamatan saya, petisyen yang saya lampirkan dalam laporan polis saya itu mempunyai bukti kukuh untuk dijalankan Pilihanraya Umum yang baru di Parlimen Jeli dan Dun Lanas. Melalui nota tulisan tangan Dato’ Mustapa itu juga sudah menunjukkan rasuah dan penyalahgunaan kuasa yang jelas sehingga Dato’ Mustapha dikeluar senaraikan (dsqualify) daripada bertanding.

Rundingan Mustapha bersama PAS mendapat persetujuan untuk menarik balik petisyen dengan syarat Umno jug menarik balik semua petisyen terhadap PAS kecuali Parlimen Pasir Puteh kerana kesilapan SPR.

Saya berharap dan berdoa agar pihak berkuasa, yakni polis dan Badan Pencegah Rasuah (BPR) akan melakukan penyiasatannya dengan tulus dan ikhlas tanpa menghiraukan tekanan-tekanan dan ugutan-ugutan yang bakal diterima demi bangsa, agama dan negara.

Kami di Angkatan Muda tidak dapat menerima amalan rasuah seperti ini yang saya secara peribadi mengaggapnya satu perbuatan yang jijik.
¶ 5:58 PM

The Day After Tomorrow:
Sindrom Galileo di LA, NY, KL dan serata dunia

Oleh: Faisal Mustaffa

Filem ini boleh memberikan kesedaran sedikit sebanyak kepada umat manusia terhadap kesalahan yang pernah dibuat kerana apabila tibanya ‘Hari Kiamat’, tiada siapa pun akan terlepas.

Apa yang menarik mengenai isu yang terdapat dalam filem ini punca daripada bencana alam ini. Global warming ini berpunca daripada kecuaian manusia terbanyak.

Filem mengisahkan Jack Hall yang mendapati bahawa bencana alam yang diandaikan berlaku; tiba lebih awal dari jangkaannya. Jack yang dilakonkan oleh Dennis Quaid, seorang ahli kajicuaca yang mengembara serata dunia bersama kumpulannya untuk mengkaji perubahan dalam cuaca dunia. Pada satu sidang akhbar yang dijalankan, Jack telah menggesa pemimpin-pemimpin dunia mengambil tindakan jangka panjang dengan mengurangkan aktiviti-aktiviti yang menjurus kepada global warming ini.

Apa yang berlaku dalam pemasalahan ini, Hall telah menceritakan bahawa lapisan ais di Kutub Utara sedang mencair dan menyebabkan suhu dunia meningkat.

Bagaimana sebenarnya perkara ini boleh berlaku? Menurut US Environmental Protection Agency, tenaga cahaya yang diperolehi daripada matahari dipantulkan ke angkasa. Gas-gas atmosfera rumah hijau (sebut; green house) sepert air sejatan, karbon dioksida terperangkap, dan mengakibatkan suhu bumi meningkat.

Fenomena ini sebenarnya telah berlaku sejak zaman Revolusi Industri yang mana kandungan karbon dioksida telah meningkat 30 peratus, methane meningkat dua kali ganda dan nitrous oksida telah meningkat 15 peratus.

Tetapi perkara sebaliknya berlaku di mana akibat daripada lapisan ozon yang menebal itu terdapat kebocoran dan mencairkan ais-ais dari lapisan ozon bumi.

Atas faktor-faktor ekonomi, kerajaan Amerika (dalam filem ini) enggan menerima kajian saintis tersebut dan memutarbelitkan kenyataan dengan mengatakan bahawa global warming hanyalah suatu dongengan. Presiden Amerika enggan mengambil nasihat pakar untuk mengosongkan kota New York dan berhijrah ke Amerika Latin. Kenyataan untuk mengabaikan sahaja kenyataan saintis itu juga disokong pula oleh Timbalan Presidennya.

Jadi, apakah punca sebenarnya malapetaka ini sehingga merobohkan dua kota terbesar di Amerika Syarikat itu? Secara realitinya, global warming terjadi akibat daripada aktiviti-aktiviti manusia itu sendiri. Pencemaran yang dilakukan manusia sendiri mengakibatkan penghasilan karbon dioksida yang melampau. Manusialah pembunuh alam dan pusaka estetika Illahi.

Akibat daripada sikap kapitalis dan permainan politik juga kita dapati fenomena sedemikian (tidak seteruk The Day After Tomorrow) berlaku di Malaysia. Disember 1993 menyaksikan kematian beratus penghuni Blok 1 Highland Towers termasuk anak TanSri Musa Hitam, Carlos dan isterinya, Rozita.

Pada masa itu, masing-masing menuding jari. Yap Brothers yang membangunkan projek di bawah Highland Towers Development menafikan kesalahan pihak mereka kerana projek tersebut telah mendapat kelulusan Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya (MPAJ). Kelulusan tersebut tidak dijalankan berdasarkan laporan Penilaian Kesan Alam Sekitar (EIA). Akhirnya yang disalahkan ialah faktor bencana alam.

Sekiranya faktor etika diambil, projek tersebut tidak dimulakan sama sekali kerana tahu bahawa kawsan tersebut sememangnya tidak sesuai sebagai sebuah projek pembinaan. Bangunan tersebut tidak mempunyai cengkaman yang kuat sehingga hakisan dari hujan dapat merobohkan sebuah bangunan 20 tingkat.

Saya kira pengarah Roland Emmerich mempunyai mesej explisit bagi menyedarkan umat manusia kerana sikap kapitalis yang akhirnya membunuh diri sendiri ini.

Menarik juga apabila membaca buku karya Daniel H. Gottlieb bertajuk GALILEO Syndrome yang meneritakan mengenai perubahan cuaca.

Menurutnya, “alam sekitar kita akan berubah, ia sentiasa akan berubah, tetapi pakar alam sekitar bersikap tutupmata kepada sebahagian besar daripada sistem yang diinapi; suatu budaya korporat, ekonominya, dan struktur kuasa, mereka akan sentiasa dipengaruhi oleh pihak yang membuat keputusan. Juga budaya yang dimiliki oleh pembuat-pembuat keputusan yang bodohnya mengabaikan kesedaran alam sekitar yang mementingkan pasaran daripada ketakutan yang ada, ego serta tamak. Semuanya adalah untuk kita semua, suatu ketidakfahaman kolektif terhadap alam sekitar dan kesan yang menakjubkan terhadap manusia serta yang yang lainnya yang terdapat di planet ini – yang amana pada waktu-waktu tertentu kita harus mempunyai suatu pembetulan dramatik”.

Menurutnya lagi, “kita sudah pun menyaksikan tragedi yang tidak diandaikan sebagai suatu jenayah yagn disengajakan. Ia adalah suatu isyarat bahawa kita telah pun melanjutkan diri kita dari segi kesedaran. Namun, dalam satu aspek yang lainnya, jika kita tetap menyorokkan kesedaran tersebut bagi tujuan perdagangan; keselamatan individu, atau kuasa – ia dinamakan satu jenayah. Kita telah hilang alasan tersebut yang patutditanam dalam planet ini, yakni kemanusiaan.”

Bagi mencantikkan filem fiksyen ini, pengarah terpaksa memasukkan unsur emosi dan percintaaan. Dalam tanggungjawab cuba memberi kefahaman kepada Presiden yang cukup bengap, Jack Hall juga terpaksa menjalankan operasi menyelamatkan anaknya yang terperangkap dalam ribut taufan New York. Ciri-ciri keintelektual Jack diwarisi oleh anaknya, Sam Hall (lakonan Jake Gyllenhaal).
Kesan-kesan khas yang ditayangkan melalui filem ini seolah-olah seperti ianya benar-benar berlaku. Penilitian dititikberatkan untuk menunjukkan kesan malapetaka termasuk putting beliung, ribut, ombak besar, banjir dahsyat dan permulaan era Ais.
¶ 5:56 PM

Saturday, September 11, 2004

THE ANWAR DILEMMA

            When Anwar was sacked by Mahathir in 1998, some of us in PSM had
this to say about the two persons? from the same party, who believed in the
same system but lately having differences over a number of things.
Fundamentally, our analysis indicated that the economic crisis of 1998
triggered this strained relationship and made this contradiction between
them more severe. It is no secret that Mahathir needed funds to bail out his
cronies and Anwar was in his way as the Finance Minister. We also knew that
Anwar had his own cronies and the battle line had been drawn. Similarly in
1987, when Razaleigh took on Mahathir, it was again in the backdrop of
another economic crisis. Economic crisis ultimately make political crisis
and this has repeated many times in history.

            Our argument then was very similar to what Hishamuddin Rais is
now talking about with reference to Bush and Kerry and comparing it with
Pepsi and Coke. So what is the difference between Mahathir and Anwar?

When Dr. Mahathir was the Deputy Prime Minister, non-Malays were very
worried because he was seen as a racist as he would harp upon the issue of
Malay unity and Malay rights over everything else. This same accusation was
levelled at Anwar when he was the UMNO youth leader and later Deputy Prime
Minister. It is perhaps mandatory for one to talk along racial lines, if one
would want to win the support of their own community and it this case UMNO.
Mahathir and Anwar do not differ much in their styles on things which made
them become the champion of the Malay community. Anwar went along Mahathir
when UMNO Baru was started, when the Judiciary was ripped apart with the
sacking of Salleh Abbas and five judges, when the Monarchy?s powers were
curbed and when ISA was used on political opponents. Then, the pressure
group which Anwar built, ABIM was quiet because they have been co-opted.

            Since then things have changed. Badawi is now the Prime Miniter
and Mahathir has retired. Anwar is back in the bad books.

            The release of Anwar on September 2nd. could not have come in a
better time. It is perhaps the best tonic for the opposition after the
landslide defeat in the recent elections. Abdullah Badawi seemed to have
become such a popular character and his rather soft approach seems to get
massive approval from the public. The opposition, who have been trained to
battle along with Mahathir?s hard lines for the last twenty years, found it
baffling to fight along Badawi?s soft approach. If one thought, PAS would
win the recent by-election because of sympathy votes, then the shock
continued. BN won the election with a higher majority. All indications were
that we were heading towards the same path as Singapore where there is
almost no opposition.

            The unexpected release of Anwar suddenly rekindled the spirit.
Suddenly, Malaysian politics have become interesting again. The Malaysian
newspapers which have only been highlighting rape, murder and crime,
suddenly found that there are political news to write. Suddenly the media
seems to look fair and giving balanced news and suddenly the Judiciary is
seen to be independent.

            Reading the editorials of major newspapers, it is clear that the
papers want Anwar and his supporters to reconcile and forget the past. The
papers keep repeating Anwar?s own words that he would not take vengeance of
Mahathir. The worry is clearly written all over Najib, who would want to
keep insisting that Anwar is a Keadilan member and the issue of him joining
UMNO does not arise. Mahathir was forced to call a press conference, having
almost his entire family with him at the Press Conference as a clear
indication how the news of Anwar?s release has shaken him. All this and with
the stock market reacting positively with Anwar?s release is a clear
indication on the power and influence Anwar has on Malaysian politics as
well as Internationally..

            It was reported that suddenly everything looks bright. Many who
have stayed away during the tiring and difficult period in the last six
years have suddenly re-emerged. Keadilan which was almost wiped out in the
last election has suddenly found the momentum. It is indeed time to rejoice
for Malaysian politics and to those who have been committed to the struggle
of reform.

            Having said that, and taking a line from Lenin that the role of
the party is to be the memory of the people, it is important to list down
some issues of the past so that history would not repeat itself. This would
be a caution to the people as well as to Anwar on some past mistakes. Anwar
being a seasoned politician have actually not ruled out anything. His
statements can be read both ways and each time you read it, you could still
say it is open ended.

In the last few days, this has been the biggest worry in many peoples mind
especially those who want a genuine political change. Would Anwar lead the
opposition or be an opportunist and betray the people?
In 1969 during the student movement, there was a call to ask Tunku to resign
because of his failure the handle the May 13 incident. The student
organisation led by Syed Hamid Ali (Socialist Club) called on Tunku to
resign because of the capitalist economy promoted by Tunku as well as
allowing foreign capital to control the wealth of the nation. This was
different from the line taking by Anwar who was leading the PBMUM
(University Malaya Malay Language Society). Anwar blamed the Tunku for
giving in too much to the Chinese and his failure to uphold the Malay
language in implementing the National Education policy.
In 1982, Anwar joined UMNO after being wooed by Dr. Mahathir. Most people
thought that Anwar would join PAS after leading ABIM for eleven years
because of his Islamic background but again he was roped in by Dr. Mahathir
to oppose PAS.
In 1987, during the Operasi Lallang, Anwar was the Education Minister. In
spite of being arrested under the ISA in 1974, Anwar supported Mahathir?s
move in using the ISA against the opposition. He has officially stated that
Mahathir had no choice but to use the ISA because the opposition did not
want to back down.

        Another worrying aspect of Anwar was his relationship with the US.
Though this might not be true, but yet it appears that while Mahathir took a
very anti-IMF stand and put currency control in place, Anwar is said to have
supported in such moves to further liberalise and globalise Malaysia.

Dr. Mahadevan, a famous psychiatric once said that Anwar is like an egg. If
you put fire on him, he won?t melt, he would became hard. He said some
people are like ice, they melt when you put fire on them but not Anwar. True
to that, six years after his incarceration, being tortured and beaten during
detention and publicly humiliated, Anwar had definitely come out stronger.
So far, Anwar has made the principle stand on number of issues including his
call to continue to fight for reforms. DAP and PAS have both welcomed the
return of Anwar and are both seem prepared to allow Anwar to lead the
opposition.

It is without doubt that Anwar is the only person today which looks capable
in uniting the opposition and wresting power from Barisan Nasional to pave
the way for a more democratic Malaysia which respects human rights and
democracy.

In order to do this task, Anwar has to be careful not to fall on three
traps.

1.                  He should be principled in building a multi racial party
for Malaysia and not fall into the trap of Semangat 46 who a short time
after registration, amended their constitution to include the word Malay
because they felt that they need to win over UMNO. The game is to be more
Malay.

2.                  He need to work towards building a movement which would
empower the people rather than building everything around him. I can still
remember immediately after Anwar and number of his key supporters were
detained under the ISA in 1998, ABIM members just did not know what to do
because they said for the last few years, the only thing they learned is how
to do programme with the Government. That is why it didn?t take that long
for Mahathir to cripple the Reformasi movement.

3.                  To safeguard the nation against global forces whose
agenda is to colonise the country                          using economy
control.

        The danger now is still the same. Anwar has told his supporters to
wait for him to come back and he will tell them what plans he has. A
movement cannot be built by one person. In recent years, a lot of dedicated
activist have emerged. This group of dedicated activist, although a handful
of them but they have been true to the struggle and the principles. It is
important for Anwar to consolidate with this group. Wan Azizah has also
proven to be a dedicated, principled and a non-manipulative leader. She
should continue to play an important role as I believe she is the conscience
on why Anwar needs to lead the opposition and not stray away.

While much hope is rightly placed in Anwar?s shoulders. The people have to
be always be alert. If we have a bad leader, it is only so, because we allow
it to happen. Let?s together built a multiracial Malaysia which respects
human rights, democracy and freedom.

6 September 2004

¶ 10:04 AM

The full text of Anwar Ibrahim's address during his appeal on the judge's decision to disallow the defense from calling the Prime Minister to court to testify at his sodomy trial

I respectfully am applying to this court for your Lordship Tun Eusoff Chin, the Chief Justice to disqualify himself from hearing this appeal.

The essence of a fair trial is that the proceedings including appeals thereafter are conducted by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. This principle is enshrined in international law and practice, and the Malaysian Constitution.

Ref: UN Declaration of Human Rights (Article 10), further elaborated in the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 14(1)).

In Valente vs. The Queen (1988) 2.S.S.R.673

The Supreme Court of Canada set out the distinction between impartiality and independence. It described impartiality as a "state of mind or attitude of the tribunal to the issues and the parties in a particular case" whereas independence focussed on the status of the court or tribunal in its relationship with others particularly the executive branch of the Government. The Court asserted that the traditional objective guarantees for judicial independence must be supplemented with the requirement that the Court or tribunal be reasonably perceived as independent. This additional requirement was deemed necessary to ensure not only that justice is done in individual cases, but also of ensuring public confidence in the justice system." The Court added:

"Without that confidence the system cannot command the respect and acceptance that are essential to its effective operation, It is, therefore, important that a tribunal should be perceived as independent, as well as impartial, and that the test for independence should include that perception. The perception must, however, as I have suggested, be a perception of whether the tribunal enjoys the essential objective conditions or guarantees of judicial independence, and not a perception of how it will in fact act, regardless of whether it enjoys such conditions or guarantees."(p.689)

The applicable test for recusal as laid down by the appellate courts of Australia, Canada, U.K. and recently reiterated by the Constitutional Court of South Africa is as follows:

"...The question is whether reasonable, objective and informed person would on the correct facts reasonably apprehend that the Judge has not or will not bring an impartial mind to bear on the adjudication of the case, that is a mind open to persuasion by the evidence and the submissions of counsel. The reasonableness of the apprehension must be assessed in the light of the oath of office taken by the Judges to administer justice without fear or favour, and their ability to carry out that oath by reason of their training and experience. It must be assumed that they can disabuse their minds of any irrelevant personal beliefs and predispositions. They must take into account the fact that they have a duty to sit in any case in which they are not obliged to recuse themselves. At the same time, it must never be forgotten that an impartial Judge is a fundamental prerequisite for a fair trial and judicial officer should not hesitate to recuse herself or himself if there are reasonable grounds in the past of the litigant for apprehending that the judicial officer, for whatever reasons, was not or will not be impartial."(President of the Republic of S. Africa and others vs. S. Africa Rugby Football Union and others 1999 (4) SA147)

It is not for the Judge called upon to recuse to say that he will be independent or impartial. It is how a reasonable objective and informal person will perceive.

I am conscious of the presumption that judicial officers are impartial in adjudication disputes. I am equally conscious of the principle that the onus is upon me to rebut that presumption by adducing urgent and convincing facts.

My application for recusal are based on the following grounds:

1. I have ample evidence to show that the CJ craved for an additional six months extension, to ensure that no action would be preferred against him, and to ensure that I fail in my appeal. I am also privy, then as DPM, to the fact that the ACA had prepared a preliminary report against the CJ in 1998 over corruption.

Undoubtedly, there were precedents to the extension what is exceptional in this case is that it was given amidst public knowledge of the CJ's misconduct. And with the issue of the tribunal being pursued and the issue of corruption left hanging, would the CJ dare cause the displeasure of the PM? Particularly so, when I have been appealing to the courts not to allow itself to be used to legitimise political persecution!

In early August 1998, the CJ called on me at the Treasury, initially to express his sympathies and concern over the scurrilous and malicious allegations against me. He then accused a Cabinet Minister and a lawyer of smearing his reputation. He further mentioned to me that the Attorney General was disturbed that the said lawyer had claimed that he would be recommended by me to replace the AG, Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah. I denied. The following when I met the CJ at Parliament House, I noticed a distinct change in his demeanour and was rather cold and aloof. I gathered later that something was amiss after he was summoned a few times by the PM. It was later confirmed that the PM had decided to dismiss and prosecute me and that the CJ was incorporated into the scheme. This is a major cause of apprehension to me.

2. It is now public knowledge that certain improprieties have been leveled against the CJ. The allegations, together with photographs and other documentary evidence are widely disseminated through the Internet and the alternative media. A serving Minister, when questioned about the CJ's conduct described it as "improper". The revelations about the CJ's family holiday travel to New Zealand with lawyer Dato VK Lingam's family in late 1994, compounded by his attempt to dismiss the episode as "coincidental" in contrast to the facts revealed in the Bowman Report exposed the discrepancies and contradictions and have brought into question the CJ's conduct and credibility. Rule 3(1)(d) of the Judges' Code of Ethics reads:

"conduct himself dishonestly or in such manner as to bring the judiciary into disrepute or to bring discredit thereto ..."

The Constitution provides under Article 125 (3) that a judge could be removed on ground of breach of the Code. The Prime Minister makes a representation to the Yang diPertuan Agong to appoint a tribunal. In the meantime, Article 125(5) stipulates that the judge concerned could be suspended from his office pending the tribunal hearing.

Dato V K Lingam's name surfaced earlier when I presented the preliminary report on Perwaja to Parliament in 1996. In the Price Water House's report, the fees paid for legal services were considered exorbitant and "questionable" coming to millions. The CJ was known to have made critical comments on my announcement. I chose to ignore the comments, not being aware then of his close association with Dato VK Lingam.

A Cabinet minister and a lawyer met the PM and me separately to allege the CJ of the improprieties. Accordingly I advised them to report to the Anti Corruption Agency. I did not initiate the investigations as alleged by the CJ.

Incidentally, attempts by the Malaysian Bar Council to deliberate on the conduct of the CJ and recommend the setting up of a tribunal was evidently frustrated and derailed through a select judicial process providing a restrictive interpretation of Article 125 and 127 of the Constitution.

We had one of the best judiciaries in the Commonwealth, or in this part of the world. However, under the CJ's leadership, it has deteriorated to such a level further eroding public confidence. Even when I was Minister of Finance, the Bar, Bank Negara and the Treasury informed me of several feedbacks from foreign investors and local businessmen, as to their loss of confidence in the Malaysian judiciary. Many of the international contracts now contain clauses that in the event of any dispute or litigation arising from these contracts, the parties involved will not resort to Malaysian courts, but instead subject themselves to arbitration, usually in a foreign forum. The appraisals and concerns expressed on these issues by me in appropriate forums with the Bar, Bank Negara and the cabinet were viewed with contempt by the CJ.

The appeal of MGG Pillai and others in the Tan Sri Vincent Tan case reveals serious improprieties in the part of the CJ. Arguments in that appeal was heard by the Federal Court presided by the CJ on January 12, 1998. Judgement was not delivered until July 12,2000 - more than two and a half years later. Rule 3(1) (f) of the Judges' Code of Ethics provides as follows:

"inordinately and without reasonable explanation delay in the disposal of cases, the delivery of decisions and the meeting of grounds of judgement."

The reason given by the CJ was flimsy, i.e. that the delay was because the judges could not agree on the quantum! (The Star - June 7,2000) However, when judgement was in fact delivered, one of the three, namely Justice Chong Siew Fai, had already retired on July 3. The single judgement written by the CJ was delivered in open court by the Senior Assistant Registrar.

It is also relevant to note that the earlier High Court Judgement was delivered by Judge Dato Moktar Sidin. Revelations on how the judgement was written in part by Dato VK Lingam shows the extent of the decadence among some members of the judiciary.

The CJ was apparently impervious, sitting in the same MGG Pillai appeal when the counsel who argued for the respondent Tan Sri Vincent Tan was Dato VK Lingam, perceived as his close friend. The CJ ought to have voluntarily recused himself from hearing the appeal. Subsequently in another case where Dato Lingam appeared for one of the parties, the CJ recused at the request of the Bar Council when the holiday photographs were produced.

The CJ reached his age of retirement on June 19, 2000, and Dato Sri Dr. Mahathir had dismissed any possibility of making representations for a tribunal. (1) But most amazing amidst public consternation about the CJ's conduct, he extended the CJ's term of office for another six months, suggesting that:

"we have the need to see that everything is in place before he leaves."(2)

(1) See star June 14,2000

(2) NST June 17,2000.

Is my appeal on the agenda: "to see that everything is in place"? This perception that the CJ has become more beholden to the Prime Minister is pertinent. There is reasonable apprehension to the effect. All along my defence has consistently seen that the malicious and fabricated charges, inter alia, has been that there was a political conspiracy at the highest level to dismiss, persecute and vilify me with Dato Seri Dr. Mahathir as the maestro.

In any event, the CJ should not be sitting in any new appeals during the extended six months. Though Article 125 (1) does not expressly say so, yet the purpose of the short extension is to enable the judge concerned to complete any unfinished business like outstanding judgements, and not to be assigned any new cases including appeals.

The CJ on a number of occasions found my remarks on the judiciary objectionable and abhorrent, and strongly protested to the Prime Minister. My decision to keep the rapport with the Bar Council, personalities such as Param Curnaraswamy; some of the speeches including with reference to the LIm Guan Eng case, and the access given to some senior Judges, including Judge Syed Ahmad Idid and Judge Dr. Visu Sinnadurai were regarded with contempt. My statement was seen as a personal attack on him and it angered him enormously.

In his first meeting with me as the DPM, I strongly urged him to accept the overtures from the Bar Council. Unfortunately, the CJ chose to adopt the confrontational politics inherited from Tun Hamid Omar. Be that as it may, that should not preclude my having meetings with representatives of the Bar to listen to their proposals and grievances.

I submitted to the PM and the Cabinet that Param Cumaraswamy, UN Special Representative is entitled to immunity from legal process during the course of his omission under the UN Convention on Privileges and Immunities. The CJ disputed this in a memo to the PM which was subsequently sent to me. Obviously the CJ had prejudiced Param's case and deplored my so-called intervention. Admittedly, I intervened at the personal request of the UN Secretary General, Kofi Anan. And this was conveyed to the Cabinet on 3rd December 1997. I alerted my Cabinet colleagues that Param's interview "Malaysian justice on trial" merit scrutiny. And by prolonging the issue, and by subjecting to the CJ, would seen untenable and an embarrassment to the Malaysian judiciary. Understandably, I was overruled by Dato Seri Dr. Mahathir. But, its most unbecoming of the CJ to cast aspersions and anger against me for expressing my views to the PM and the Cabinet.

In late July, 1998, Dato Seri Dr, Mahathir informed me that the CJ and the AG met him and denounced my speech in London as an attack on the AG's Chambers and the judiciary. I was mindful and circumspect of the sensitivities but I did relate to the students my predicament having to explain the decision on the Lim Guan Eng case, the solution being legal and judicial reform. The PM further intimated to me the CJ's extreme displeasure for what he perceived as personal attacks against him and undermining his authority.

The CJ should not have objected to my meeting Judge Syed Ahmad Idid. He sought an appointment prior to his retirement; i.e. after investigations over his controversial open letter was completed. But these were serious allegations of corruption, abuse of power, and misconduct or the CJ and some members of the judiciary. In retrospect, looking at these complaints, many of the allegations contained therein appear to have been substantiated.

In another case, one of the most qualified judges in the country opted to resign rather than be subjected to the CJ's victimisation. I had personal knowledge of the alleged victimisation through uncouth disciplinary methods and occasional transfers to Muar and finally to Tawau. Again I intervened and intimated the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, the CJ was adamant and the judiciary's last Judge Dr. Visu Sinnadurai who had such impeccable credentials. Judge Dr. Visu had earlier written a Memorandum on the Judiciary including Proposals for Reform in the Judiciary. The memo was a confidential document to the PM and myself and the DPM. The memo to the PM was submitted through me and I indicated my support to most of the proposals. Unfortunately, being anathema to reforms, and seeking a judiciary that works in cohort with the executive, the memo was detested by both the PM and the CJ.

The Memo/Report emphatically states that the "Malaysian Judiciary appears currently to be in a state of turmoil..." The Report enumerated Tun Eusoff Chin's demeanour, alienating the Bar, verbal exchange of challenges in the Press, citing for example the Ayer Molek case being "something was amiss in the Judiciary." (see extract of a Report on the Judiciary, on Eusoff Chin pp.11-13)

The Report attributes the blame to the CJ for aggravating the loss of public confidence in the Judiciary. "It even appears that the appointment of Judges to the High Court in the past few years were made not in accordance with the Federal Constitution insofar as there had been no prior consultation with the Chief Judge, at least of Malaya." As such only people known to be close to him, as cronies were appointed or promoted. A Judge with questionable integrity, and in the wake of negative representation from the Bar was promoted to the Court of Appeal.

Incidentally, this was the same Judge that I sought to disqualify from hearing my case at the Court of Appeal. Judge Dato Moktar Sidin retired to recuse himself even after my insistence of his clear impartiality and bias due to the deferment of his appointment to the Court of Appeal as a result of my meeting with the Rulers. In the pre-council to the Rulers Conference, the issue of alleged corrupt practice of Judge Dato Moktar was brought up. Subsequently the PM dismissed the allegations without investigation being carried out and facilitated his appointment. The CJ took it as a personal challenge that his recommended candidate was objected to.

The Report states, inter alia, "senior Judges are not promoted either because, it is said, the Prime Minister does not approve of them, or because of quota, or even on the ground that such persons are unsuitable as being 'anti-establishment.'" Other related issues were also highlighted, for example that "the Courts have arrogated to themselves the law making function", usurping the powers of the Chief Judge on transfers, distribution of cases, etc., and the fact that the "Judiciary is now rife with clashes of personalities, with less time for the development of the law." And yet most damaging to the image of the judiciary is the perception of biasness, friendly lawyers continue appearing before the CJ and the same judges and "by coincidence or otherwise, these lawyers appear before the same Judges and win their cases."

I have alluded to the infamous Ayer Molek Case, which have generated much public debate particularly in the legal fraternity. It has adversely affected the credibility of Judge Dato Azmel Maamor due to the questionable judgement that bear an appearance of being influenced by unseen hands. The fairs surrounding the case have been well documented in the law reports. But the observations of the Court of Appeal (comprising Dato NH Chan, Dato Siti Normah Yaacob, and Dato KC Vohrah), when allowing the Defendants' Appeal (on 31 July, 1995), on the facts of the case and the procedural manipulations involved bear repeating. Dato NH Chan, delivering the judgement of the Court of Appeal had the following to say:

(a) "This is a case about injustice which as been perpetrated by a court of law. This is also a case of abuse of the process of the High Court and, therefore, it concerns the inherent power which any court of justice must possess to prevent misuse of its procedure and in which the court has a duty to exercise this salutary power.

(b) "Here, the Plaintiffs through their legal advisers have abused the process of the High Court by instigating the injustice through misuse of the courts procedure by manipulating it in such a way that it becomes manifestly unfair to the Defendants. By doing what they did, these unethical lawyers have brought the administration of justice into disrepute among right-thinking people."

(c) ...These observations are made so that people will not say, 'something is rotten in the State of Denmark.' - Shakespeare Hamlet, 1.'

This timely rebuke by the Court of Appeal was welcome by the public because the excesses and corruption were getting pervasive. An expedited hearing by the Federal Court was heard within four days of the Plaintiffs' application (again involving Dato VK Lingam) at an Ipoh sitting. The CJ constituted an unconstitutional Federal Court as it breached the provisions of Article 122 (2) of the Federal Constitution in that on member of the sitting was a judge of the High Court. The Counsel involved was a close friend of the CJ. The Court of Appeal's decision was overturned, and the relevant portions of the grounds of judgement of the Court of Appeal was expunged!

Allegations of corruption and instances of conflict of interest continue to undermine the integrity and rocked the foundation of the nations' judicial system. Exasperated by such developments, I chose to circulate the Ayer Molek judgements to the Cabinet, and specifically underling Dato NH Chan's rebuke and the Federal Court's alleged transgression of the Constitutional provision Article 122(2). The Prime Minister interjected by informing the Cabinet that he would seek clarification from the CJ. That episode was cited on a few meetings by the CJ showing a clear displeasure and prejudice towards me.

The CJ, according to one High Court Judge took exception to some of my speeches perceived to be critical of misdemeanours of some members of the judiciary, particularly my speech inaugurating the seventh Asean Law Association and the chapter 'Justice and the Law', in my The Asian Renaissance (1996). I retorted to the said Judge that I merely reaffirmed the Constitutional mandate and democratic ideal, including the issue of separation of powers. May I further reiterate:

"Judges ought to exercise their judicial powers in accordance with the rule of law and not the rule of men. In doing so, judges must constantly bear in mind the legitimate expectations of the people as to their competency dedication and impartiality.....

The growing concern of the public regarding the increasing incidences of jdicial indiscretions is a matter to be neither taken lightly nor viewed negatively...

Not only must judges display the requisite level of competence and expertise, they must, like Caesar's wife, be above suspicion." (The Asian Renaissance) 1996 (pp. 64-65)

I made reference to judges with impeccable credential. There are many other judges still in our judiciary who discharge their duties according to the oath of office, and who are also guided by their religious duty and moral courage, respect the rule of law and be dictated by their conscience. For, it is in them that the future and the hope of our judiciary lies.

The most distressing that the CJ should consider my clamour for judicial and legal reforms as a personal threat to him. He should not have summarily dismissed it as merely echoing "foreign sentiments." Long before the report "Malaysian Judiciary in Jeopardy" was released, our Lord Presidents, Judges, the Malaysian Bar and others, consistent with all the great traditions of mankind enjoin the maintenance of the rule of law and the dispensation of justice. Clearly, my criticisms of "retrogressive judgements from our own courts" and insistence for "progressive reforms" to be instituted was resented by the CJ. Such reform and reviews are critical to ensure that our ideals of justice are not compromised and our laws not rendered archaic and obsolete. (The Asian Renaissance) 1996 (pp. 68-70).

The test applicable for recusal is whether a reasonable objective person informed of these facts would have any confidence in the Chief Justice to dispense independent and impartial justice. The scurrilous allegations, the malicious persecution preferred against me is as consistently contended in my defense, a result of a high level conspiracy involving the supreme, Dato Seri Dr. Mahathir himself instructing the instruments of the state to persecute and vilify me. I must prove my innocence. I need to be adjudicated by an independent judiciary. And I fear with the grounds stated, and with all that I know of you, subservient to the Prime Minister and now beholden to him, I am apprehensive of your impartiality on this appeal.

Hence, I urge you, please CJ, recuse.

ANWAR IBRAHIM
Tuesday, 1 August, 2000
¶ 9:59 AM

Malaysia Today: Wednesday, 08-Sep-2004 12:12 AM

Yes, let’s call a spade a spade

They say, in the political arena, you must first make plenty of enemies before you can make friends. Those who are afraid of making enemies will never make any friends. There is no such thing as a ‘safe’ politician. Those who try to play safe will certainly never make any enemies; they will never make any friends either.

One needs to take a strong stand on whatever issue is close to your heart. For example, if one is against abortion, the women libbers would go for your family jewels. But the religionists would support you though. You lose the support of one segment of society but you gain the support of another. The Iraq invasion is another issue. You oppose the invasion of Iraq and the ‘nationalist’ would slam you but the anti-war group would support you instead. If you do not take any stand on either issue, then no one would hate you but no one would love you either. It’s as simple as that.

Since the Free Anwar Campaign (FAC) was launched in 2000, I have been receiving my share of hate mail, in particular from the Chinese Democratic Action Party (DAP) supporters. They call me all sorts of names just too despicable to repeat here. If I were to take it personal, I would hate both the DAP and the Chinese. But I chose instead to just ignore all these as coming from narrow-minded people. We do, after all, have a bigger agenda than engaging small-minded bigots.

Well, the FAC has now been ‘put to sleep’ and, rising from the ‘ashes’ of the FAC like the mythical Phoenix, is Malaysia Today, which I launched on Friday the Thirteenth (of August). Hardly a month into it and I have already received a good number of hate mail. I can see many are unhappy with what I have to say. That is good. I now have plenty of enemies. That would mean I have plenty of friends as well.

My image in the opposition is that of a loose cannon. Many a party leader shudders when I start writing for they do not know who is going to be the target of my opinion pieces. And they know all are fair game as far as I am concerned. Even Anwar Ibrahim has on many an occasion been the brunt of my criticism. And Anwar knows better than to try to silence me for trying to do so would just make me more vocal and ‘out of control’.

During my two months detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) in 2001, I irritated my Special Branch (SB) interrogators like hell for always having the last word.

“You always have a reply to whatever we say,” said one very perturbed SB officer.

“Well, that is because I am from the Malay College Kuala Kangsar,” I replied. “We Collegians are tera (Malay word for ‘terror’ meaning ‘fierce’) in debates.”

“I suppose that is why I have been detained as a terarist (terrorist),” I quipped, but the sarcasm was wasted on those who do not have the wit and humour of we Collegians.

“Yea, just like your boss Anwar Ibrahim,” retorted the SB officer. “He is only clever at talking. Other than that he is worthless.”

“Right!” I replied. “And that shows he is smart. If all he can do is talk, yet he managed to become the Deputy Prime Minister, then that is a mark of a smart man is it not?”

They gave up on me. And I never lost a debate in those two months I was the guest of the Malaysian government.

Anyway, today I am in the mood for a debate so I will respond to one of those who wrote to me, Bhuvan Govindasamy. His e-mail to me is as follows:

Mr. Kamarudin,

OK. Let's call a spade a spade. Did you personally benefit from the government's affirmative program? Are your children and grandchildren benefiting from this same program?

If the answer is affirmative (which I'm sure it is), then you are nothing more than a hypocrite! And your write-up is another "wayang kulit (shadow play)".

Unless, by some miracle, you can affect a change to the constitution that both segregates the races and awards benefits to the Malays, then all other changes that you or your group can perform either by legislation or a change in the mind-set is naught. For all it takes is another racial fanatic like Mahathir, Hishammudin, etc., to roll back all changes and/or create more wayang kulit like the "meritokrasi" fiasco.

Let's not even talk about UMNO. Let's talk about you as an individual. What have you done for the country or the minorities on a personal level? Have you adopted a Chinese or Indian orphan, and raised that child in his/her own religion, be it Buddhism, Hinduism or Christianity, in your Muslim household? Did you visit Kg. Medan or Kg. Rawa and shared the grief with the Indian households? Did you put your life at risk to save the innocent during these riots, irrespective if they were Malay or Indian? Have you ever fought for the rights of the Indian estate workers? If you have not done these or anything else, other than scream "Free Anwar", then, you, sir, are a pig, a glutton who feeds on the political uncertainties for your own benefit.

I suggest you get off your lazy and cowardly behind, sitting at your computer posting more useless junk and do something real!

Bhuvan Govindasamy

Bhuvan.Govindasamy@respironics.com

Well, Bhuvan, as starters, I have a Chinese wife. She is actually Thai Chinese and carries the surname Lee. Her mother is Thai (Teh Soon Hua) and father Chinese Christian (James Anthony Lee). Her sister is Buddhist. My wife’s Auntie (mother’s sister) married a Eurasian and carries the name Decosta (I think Decosta is Portuguese).

One of my wife’s cousins, Janet, married an Indian (Davis) and they are both Christians. Two other cousins (Ambrose and George) married Chinese girls, one (Alfred) married a Eurasian girl while another (Peter) a Malay girl.

My two sisters married Englishmen while my mother is Welsh and my father Bugis. Incidentally, two of my uncles also have Chinese wives.

It would be most interesting to find out how multi-cultural your family is compared to mine. And I do not need to adopt any English, Welsh, Portuguese, Bugis ‘minority’, Indian, Chinese, Christian, Buddhist, etc. They already exist in my family.

During the infamous May 13 race riots of 1969 I was just 19 years old then. As soon as the curfew was lifted, I rushed over to my wife’s home (we were not married yet then, just ‘going steady’) to stand guard the entire week. They were Chinese living in a Malay area so my ‘job’ was to face the Malay rioters if they decided to raid my wife’s home and kill anyone or burn the house down. No doubt I had a ‘personal interest’ in this family but at least my conscience is clear that I did protect one family from harm.

On the government's affirmative program that you are talking about, I take it you mean the New Economic Policy (NEP). Well, I sent two of my sons off to England on a one-way ticket so that they could go to College because I could not get them into a local government-owned College though they are considered Malays. They work in a security firm (jagas) to survive and with the pay they earn they support their way through school. I have no money to send them so they are entirely self-sufficient. Another of my sons works as a driver for a towkay.

My daughter too went to a UK university but I had to sell my house to pay for her fees because she could not get a scholarship. The three years she was in England I lived in a rented house in Subang.

No, my children are NOT beneficiaries to the NEP.

In the mid-1980s, the Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry organised a two-day economic convention at the Shangrila Hotel in Kuala Lumpur and I was invited to present a paper. The Prime Minister then, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, officiated the event while his Deputy, Ghaffar Baba, closed it.

My paper (which was made into a book) called for an end to the NEP in 1990 when it was due to end, five years hence. I blasted the NEP as not benefiting the Bumiputeras but the Umnoputeras. I said that the Malays have grown weak because of the NEP. They are too protected until they do not know how to stand on their own two feet. And why should the first or second generation Malay Malaysians (like Dr Mahathir Mohamad) benefit from special rights and privileges while the 20th generation non-Malay Malaysians (like the Chinese who came to Melaka in the 1500s) be treated as second-class citizens?

And I still say this. The Malays are too protected and do not know how to compete. Once Malaysia feels the full effect of globalisation by 2008 the Malays will be swept aside. The non-Malays, however, will survive for they have been forced to compete on a non-level playing field. The NEP, which was to enable the Malays to bring themselves up to the same economic level of the non-Malays, will be the thing that will see the death of the Malays.

Oh, and my father was one of the founders of MIDF and was one of its Directors till the time of his death. How many Chinese and Indians do you think have benefited from the MIDF?

I can go on and on but let me stop here. I am not being defensive or trying to blow my own horn. You have painted all Malays in one colour. You regard all Malays as insatiable leeches and racists. Maybe you do not have many Malay friends.

By the way, I am not Malay. I am Bugis and proud of it. I am a descendant of Upu Tenribong Daing Rilaka of Riau.

Raja Petra Kamarudin
Malaysia Today: your source of independent news
http://www.malaysia-today.net/

¶ 9:50 AM

ASIAN RENAISSANCE AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF CIVILIZATION
(Part1)
Anwar Ibrahim

When the supreme Christian poet Dante Alighieri began work some time in the first decade of the 14th century on his Divine Comedy, his country was being torn apart by a succession of civil wars. Factionalism was rife, and the struggles for power between the Lords Temporal and the Lords Spiritual were seemingly endless. Dante skilfully wove the political convulsions of the Italy of his time into a universal, and timeless, drama of the human predicament. Thus he begins the first canto of the Inferno:

"Midway in the journey of our life I found myself in a dark wood, for the straight path was lost. Ah, how hard it is to tell what that wood was, wild, rugged, harsh; the very thought of it renews fear! It is so bitter that death is hardly more so."

Dante is relevant to us today, even after seven centuries, because we too are entrapped in selva obscura, our own hard and savage dark wood. The world of politics in our time is perhaps more convoluted, with its constantly changing landscape, than the relatively straightforward intrigues familiar to the great poet.

Today, however, politics has been reduced to a mere game of chess. It appears that nowadays, with the exception of occasional voices in the wilderness, ethics and transcendent principles have no relevance whatsover in statecraft. From Machiavellian machinations to Metternichian manoeuvres, all is realpolitik. Yet, despite the claim to be realistic, many of the real problems are not addressed. Politics itself has fallen into disrepute because the practitioners of realpolitik do not appear to have a handle on the chronic ills of society. The similitude of the modern world is of an acutely sick person being treated by the doctor for the symptoms, while the underlying cause of the illness is ignored.

In the realm of thought, the modern man is groping in the dark, no longer certain of the guiding ideas of civilization. This is the fundamental crisis of our time. Not so long ago, all the world was under the spell of the modern West. But today, the spell has been broken, and its moral and political ideas are no longer perceived as the universal criteria of civility and progressiveness. If today one is more likely to hear about the failures and shortcomings of the secular West than its strengths; and warnings about its evils rather than kind words about its virtues, it should not be taken as anti-Western xenophobia at work.

The debate on Western values has become the dominant cultural discourse of our time, having been preceded by a sustained and devastating critique of the Enlightenment, the very substratum of the modern West, by its own leading thinkers. They are disenchanted with reason and modernity and they attribute the malaise of their society -- moral decadence, rising crime, and the disintegration of the family insitution -- to the fatal mistake of the Enlightenment thinkers in exalting human reason as the sole guide in civilization.

Thus, before us, is a very huge challenge, which transcends the political and economic spheres, and even dwarfs the quest for a new world order, crucial and fundamental as that may be. For in fact the task at hand for the global community is nothing short of the reconstruction of civilization itself. Economic prosperity and political order, the prime concerns of our time, are undoubtedly integral parts of our civilization. But neither economic vitality nor political virility alone, essential as they are, can be the basis for the reconstruction of civilization, which must be founded upon humanitarian and civilizational ideals such as justice, compassion and moral uprightness.

One should not belittle the continuing search for a just new order after the collapse of the superpower-dominated Cold War arrangement. A stable international political arrangement as well as sustainable growth are undoubtedly among the building blocks of civilization. But if we desire an order that is to withstand the test of time rather than one that merely satisfies the need of the moment then it must be built upon firm moral foundations. Certainly, it must not be based upon the domination of the powerful over the weak, the wealthy over the poor, but one founded on a vision of common humanity or to use the Quranic expression, ummatan wahidatan. Such an order must be animated by a sense of justice and mutual respect. It must stimulate the flowering of human virtues and encourage the realization of civilizational ideals.

The Asian economy, which continues to grow by leaps and bounds, is perhaps the most powerful force currently shaping the global order. Asia has toiled to prosper and with that prosperity we can expect a certain degree of clout and influence. But our claim to a prominent part in determining the conduct of the affairs of the global community must not be based solely on economic might.

Let us remember that the strongest is never strong enough to be always the master, unless he transforms strength into right. Asia, which has often condemned the Western powers on moral grounds, must remain faithful to its own moral values. Indeed, it would be easy to invoke the moral voice when we are weak, but the greater challenge is to pay heed to it when we are strong. Asia has to revitalize its moral and cultural life. Only through this process can we articulate the moral message or risk incomprehension, jealousy and opposition from others.

As Asia contributes to the world economy and global order it must actively work towards the reconstruction of global civilization. Let us not be lulled into complacency by the so-called East Asian Economic Miracle. Even in this domain much work needs to be done. Grinding poverty, disease, ignorance and inhumane living conditions are stark realities. For those caught in this vicious circle, wealth and comfort remain elusive. The challenge for the Asian leadership is indeed enormous if we want to prevent the growth of economic apartheid. As we embark on the course of civilizational reconstruction, economic growth is essential but distributive justice is paramount.

Be that as it may, it is in the economic sphere that Asia has realised its potential. After 500 years of marginalization, Asia has begun to move to the centre stage of global affairs. However, instead of indulging in self-adulation, this new found confidence should spur us to aspire to transcend mere economic pursuit for the more noble and enduring cause. And that is none other than to breathe new life into contemporary civilization which has been seized and crippled by a general malaise. We must rekindle the flame of idealism, restore the lost balance between reason and revelation, and reinvigorate the love for learning and the passion for justice.

ASIAN RENAISSANCE AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF CIVILIZATION
(Part2)
Anwar Ibrahim

The necessity for the reconstruction of civilization was already forcefully articulated by a young man of Asia a century ago, who is no other person than the most distinguished alumnus of this university, Dr. Jose Rizal. This Asian renaissance man "awaits a day when Idea conquers brute force." "The redemption of humanity" he said "would not be possible while reason is not free, while faith would want to impose itself on facts, while whims are laws and there are nations who subjugate others."

If the malignant cancer as perceived by Rizal in his day was superstitious religion in which God was being, in his words, "utilized as a shield and protector of abuses," our day has seen the pendulum swing to the other extreme. The enemy is no longer superstition, but rather Reason that is too proud, Reason that murders, as it were, God Himself and the moral ideals that spring from faith in the Absolute Transcendent.

Thus the reconstruction of civilization would not be possible without a renewal of faith in the Divine. This indeed would be Asia's singular contribution to the world. Unlike the West since the Enlightenment, which severed itself from the dominant world view of the Age of Faith, Asia, despite centuries of change and transformation, still preserves its essential religious character.

The Asian Man at heart is persona religiosus. Faith and religious practice is not confined to the individual, it permeates the life of the community. In fact it is religion rather than any other social force which makes Asia a continent of infinite diversity. Western man, on the other hand, in his arrogance and intolerance towards all things unfamiliar, sought to fashion the world according to his limited egocentric vision through the instrument of natural reason founded on the forces of modernity.

This self-centred preoccupation was the root of imperialism in Rizal's day, where men exploited their fellow men, l'exploitation de l'homme par l'homme, to satisfy their lust for power and control. Today, man continues to unleash his savagery on nature and the environment with the same imperialistic disdain and contempt as he did then.

This imperialism, aided and abetted today by the forces of the technological revolution, now seeks to extend its hegemony into the cultural sphere. However, the new global community cannot be based upon a single culture, no matter how attractive its claims. It must be inclusive and founded upon multiculturality. And the world must look towards Asia for lessons in living in a multicultural universe.

In this regard, Southeast Asia is Asia on a smaller scale. Its problematique -- complexities and potentialities -- encapsulates the predicament of Asia as a whole. Here, the children of Abraham encounter the great civili zations of the Indic and the Sinic worlds. Tolerance, mutual respect and a genuine desire to know each other will transform this encounter from one of enmity, suspicion and mutual incomprehension into one of friendship, trust and understanding. But tolerance and mutual respect can only come about in a multicultural and multireligious community if there is justice in dealings, if minorities are not marginalized on account of their faith, race and culture. Thus, social justice is a crucial element in sustaining solidarity in a multicultural community.

The reality of our time requires that nations come closer to one another and collaborate as a larger entity. We must have the wisdom to learn from one another to progress towards the realization of a civil society. While some Southeast Asian countries have led the way in the economic sphere, the Philippines has shown more courage than others in empowering the people by means of democracy. The determination of this nation to confront an arrogant power and defeat it is a veritable lesson for others to share.

But democracy itself is in need of renewal. It must purge itself of its own excesses, arrest moral decadence, and stamp out corruption. It must not abet abuses of power and become a concert for the rich and powerful few. Democracy is only meaningful if it serves the needs of the people and becomes the vehicle for cultural empowerment. Above all democracy must be guided by moral precepts and faith reawakened.

Lest one forget, faith revitalized must never lead to bigotry, otherwise religion would be the bane of our time, causing us to descend further into darkness. If religion is to contribute to the reconstruction of civilization and the renaissance of Asia, faith renewed must be a cultural force liberating man from ignorance and intolerance, injustice and greed, domination and exploitation.

This can only take place if the leadership of every community of faith actively promotes a universal per spective. Dogmatism and theological blinkers can only be transcended by cultivating universal wisdom, the philosophia perennis, as was cultivated by Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas and Dante, or the hikmah al-khalidah of al-Farabi, Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd.

To borrow the imagery from the Gospel of Saint John, this perennial wisdom is the light that "shineth in darkness," although "the darkness comprehendeth it not." This wisdom is alluded to in the Qur'an with arresting imagery, the light of a lamp "lit from a blessed tree, an olive neither of the East nor of the West, whose oil is well-nigh luminous, though fire scarce touches it."

The burden of reconstructing civilization is indeed heavy but necessary to free ourselves from the selva obscura, the dark and savage wood of our times. Asia's true claim on the world in the new millennium will rest upon its role in this bold and perilous odyssey. And as Dante said, we must summon all our strength and resources:

" as little flowers bent down and closed by the chill of night,straighten and unfold upon their stems when the sun brightens them."

With this new vigour and vitality we must articulate our moral message, civilizational ideals that are universal and perennial, a message that appeals to reason and goodness; the message of truth, justice and compassion, of beauty as splendour of Truth, and above all, of the liberty and dignity of man as the imago dei and the khalifatullah fil ardh.
¶ 9:33 AM

The judge's summary judgment on the Anwar Ibrahim trial guilty verdict

Elements to be proved in the charge under section 377B Penal Code:

1) that the accused sodomised the victim (Azizan Abu Bakar);
2) he did it voluntarily;
3) penetration occurred.

The prosecution's case rests principally on the evidence of Azizan. The evidence of the defence's case is of alibi and conspiracy to fabricate evidence.

In order to establish whether the elements have been proved, it is necessary to consider the credibility of Azizan. Azizan gave evidence for a total of 10 days and was cross-examined aggressively and extensively. He came out unscathed.

There is also evidence for cross-examination of Senior Assistant Commissioner Musa Hassan that Azizan has made five prior consistent statements. This enhances his credibility. There is no necessity for Azizan to lie, as he has nothing but everything to lose by coming out with this complaint. In addition, his evidence is consistent with confessions of Sukma (Dermawan Sasmitaat Madja) which I have found to be voluntary.

I am also convinced of the truth of what is stated in the confession. This finding is consistent with the fact that Sukma had used this confession in his mitigation when he had pleaded guilty earlier in session court when he was charged for an offence under Section 377D. It is therefore my finding that evidence of Azizan is credible.

With regard to corroboration and evidence of Azizan, it is sufficiently supported and corroborated by the confession of Sukma. Although it is a confession of the accused, it is a piece of substantive evidence. It can therefore be used against the first accused. To that extent it corroborates the evidence of Azizan against both accused.

The evidence of Azizan is also corroborated by the conduct of the first accused which is:

Firstly, the first accused requested to SAC Musa to stop investigations into the allegations against him; secondly, in asking Azizan to lie about the declaration that he had made, that is P5. With regard to the second accused, there are two charges, namely for abetting for sodomy and sodomy.

There is ample evidence to establish these two charges in the confession made by Sukma which has been supported by Azizan's evidence.

The defence of the first accused is one of alibi, conspiracy and conspiracy to fabricate evidence. If these defences are accepted, then the charges of the second accused will also collapse. In his alibi defence, the first accused must show that he was at a different place from Jan 1 to March 31, 1993. No such evidence was adduced as to his whereabouts for this period of Jan 1 to Feb 12,1993. Therefore, the evidence of alibi fails.

With regard to the defence of the second accused, that offence of sodomy could not have taken place because his apartment was under renovation. No evidence was adduced to show when renovation works started and were completed. Even though there is evidence to show that renovation works were in fact carried out, these findings do not create any reasonable doubt that the offence was not committed in that apartment.

Even if the divan and mattress were not delivered until Feb 12, 1993, to my mind it does not mean that there was no other bed and mattress.

With regard to the defence of fabrication, I am satisfied that the evidence on record does not support the defence.

The evidence of Tun Haniff Omar in the question asked by the first accused (Anwar Ibrahim) on the possibility of police blackmailing him indicates that the first accused had something to worry about.

The evidence of Azizan when he said the first accused asked him to lie in the declaration when the first accused asked Musa to stop investigations against him militates against the defence of fabrication of evidence.

I am therefore satisfied that the defence had not raised any reasonable doubt in the case of the prosecution. For the above reason and after considering the circumstances of the case and evidence adduced, I am satisfied that the prosecution has proved its case against both accused beyond reasonable doubt.

I therefore find both the accused guilty of the charges.

Judge Arifin Jaka
High Court
¶ 9:29 AM

Chief Justice on the Run

Anwar Ibrahim went to court today to appeal against the judge's decision to disallow the defense from calling the Prime Minister to court to testify. This would be a prelude to the verdict on 4th August 2000.

I arrived in front of the court at 7.30am expecting to be first in line, but there was already someone ahead of me. Within half an hour the crowd had swelled to the "allowed" limit of 40. I could see the latecomers anxiously rushing to join the back of the queue. Anwar Ibrahim's family had turned up in full force, so they knew that only the first 20 would be allowed in.

Many were turned away disappointed. Some had left their homes in the wee hours of the morning in the pouring rain. Some phoned in to complain of being stuck in massive traffic jams due to the floods and traffic accidents all over the Kelang Valley, and they would now miss the trial because of it.

One observer from the Canadian Bar Council, a lawyer, was not allowed entry as she had not brought her passport along with her. She did not know that, in Malaysia, no one is allowed into any government installation without proper identification papers. She thought this only applied to banana republics. Now she knows what Malaysia is - a banana republic.

The lawyer from Canada told us that Anwar Ibrahim's trial is attracting a lot of interest from the Canadian legal fraternity and that the Canadian Bar Council is monitoring the trial closely. They have heard a lot about the trial, and now they are here to hear for themselves how the trial is being conducted.

We were let into the court at 9.30 and it was a mad scramble to find the most strategic seat in the house. Anwar Ibrahim was led in soon after, surrounded by about half a dozen prison guards practically sandwiching him. I wondered whether Anwar could even breathe properly.

A few menacing-looking SWAT members stood at the door ready for action in the event any Mission Impossible-type rescue attempt is made to free Anwar from police custody. Maybe the Sauk weapons heist incident had gone to their heads. You could see they were itching for action.

The Chief Justice walked in flanked by two of his associates. After the formalities of "introducing" the legal team from both sides of the fence, one of the defense's lawyers, Christopher Fernando, stood up to say a few words, which the Chief Justice replied to. None of us could hear what was being said. Anwar Ibrahim stood up to indicate he could not hear what they said and the court officials switched on the microphone. Now we could hear better.

Anwar Ibrahim said he would be defending himself to which the Chief Justice replied he (Anwar) would have to first sack his counsel before the court could agree to that. Anwar coolly said, "Okay". Anwar then said he would be submitting an application for the Chief Justice to disqualify himself and, before he does so, he would like to give notice to the court.

At this point the court took a short recess and the three judges withdrew to their chambers. When the trial commenced Anwar Ibrahim took the floor and opened with, "I respectfully am applying to this court for your Lordship Tun Eusoff Chin, the Chief Justice, to disqualify himself from hearing this appeal".

"The essence of a fair trial is that the proceedings, including appeals thereafter, are conducted by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. This principle is enshrined in International law and practice, and the Malaysian Constitution".

Anwar Ibrahim then quoted the case of Valente vs The Queen (1998) in the Supreme Court of Canada. We could see the Chief Justice beginning to get irritated and he cut Anwar short by saying he had noted the case name and citation. By now it was starting to turn into a debate and every point raised by Anwar was replied to or rebutted by the Chief Justice.

There were smiles all around in the public gallery. Everyone could see that Anwar had the Chief Justice on the defensive and he was replying to Anwar's every statement and trying to explain or justify every point that Anwar brought up.

Then Anwar moved into next "gear" and things really heated up.

"I have ample evidence to show that the Chief Justice craved for an additional six months extension to ensure that no action would be preferred against him, and to ensure that I fail in my appeal. I am also privy, then a Deputy Prime Minister, to the fact that the Anti-Corruption Agency had prepared a preliminary report against the Chief Justice in 1998 over corruption".

When Anwar reached the part where he said, "ÖÖand the issue of corruption left hanging, would the Chief Justice dare cause the displeasure of the Prime Minister?", the Chief Justice tried to dispute Anwar's Statement. Anwar then repeated the statement and reminded the Chief Justice that, in August 1998, the Chief Justice had come to see him to express sympathy and concern for him (Anwar).

The Chief Justice profusely denied doing such a thing but Anwar reminded him about the episode, again, and mentioned that the Chief Justice even gave all his phone numbers to him (Anwar). Realising he was cornered, the Chief Justice tried to explain himself. He was through denying. He was now justifying what he did and why he did it.

Anwar had won round one. The Chief Justice was now on the run. How small he suddenly looked sitting up there in his high chair. Here was a man at the point of desperation. He had allowed Anwar to defend himself and now he cannot close the Pandora's Box he had allowed to be opened.

Anwar then reminded the Chief Justice that he (the Chief Justice) had come to see him (Anwar) to complain about a lawyer and a Cabinet Minister who, the Chief Justice said, were smearing his (the Chief Justice's) reputation. The Chief Justice had also commented that the Attorney General, Mohtar Abdullah, was concerned that the said lawyer was also claiming he was being recommended by Anwar to replace the Attorney General.

The Chief Justice tried to deny the meeting or the conversation ever taking place but Anwar persisted and the Chief Justice backed down.

Round two for Anwar.

The Chief Justice looked very nervous. The skeletons in the closet were popping out one-by-one, and there was nothing he could do to close the lid. Anwar had the floor and he was going to reveal all. And reveal all he did.

Anwar said it was public knowledge that the Chief Justice had been accused of "certain irregularities", and these allegations were supported by photographs. Anwar was referring to the New Zealand holiday the Chief Justice took with an "interested party" in a case before him.

The Chief Justice said he had already explained this particular episode and started lecturing Anwar. He probably thought he had very little ground left and the best form of defense would be to attack Anwar. That was his next mistake. He tried to engage Anwar in a debate but he was no match for Anwar. The more he talked, the more defensive he sounded. He was no longer denying Anwar's allegations. He was trying to justify himself. But they all came out sounding like lame excuses.

The Chief Justice said his New Zealand trip had nothing to do with this trial but Anwar disagreed and said it has everything to do with the trial. The Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) had, as early as 1998, prepared a report on this matter. The issue here is whether the Chief Justice can now be impartial because of it.

Anwar said that he was the Chairman of the Cabinet Committee against Corruption. Therefore, Anwar was, in every way, a party to this 1998 ACA investigation. How could the Chief Justice, a "victim" of the ACA investigation, not be suspected of holding a grudge against Anwar? It was so difficult to stifle our laughter when the Chief Justice said he was not aware that Anwar was the Chairman of the Cabinet Committee against Corruption. It was like saying he was not aware Anwar was the Finance Minister then.

The Attorney General knew the Chief Justice was not doing too well and he stood up to try to get Anwar's application to disqualify the Chief Justice nipped in the bud. Maybe that would be one way of silencing Anwar. But Anwar would now allow himself to be cut off, not until he was finished saying all he intended to say. Anwar reproached the Attorney General for not allowing him to continue and commented that this was a reflection of the very sorry state of Malaysia's judicial system.

The Attorney General accepted defeat and meekly sat down again allowing Anwar to continue. Anwar then said that the Prime Minister had told him the Chief Justice was angry with him (Anwar) because he (the Chief Justice) was being investigated by the ACA. The Chief Justice denied this. Anwar said, well, that was what the Prime Minister had told him.

The Chief Justice again tried to offer his explanation but Anwar told him off for the constant interruption. In retaliation, the Chief Justice accused Anwar of making personal attacks on him. The Chief Justice was now angry, another reaction of a desperate man. He had lost his cool.

Anwar reminded the Chief Justice that he (the Chief Justice) was already angry with him (Anwar) back in July 1998 when Anwar had addressed an assembly of Malaysian students in London and had commented on the Lim Guan Eng case. The Attorney General had told Anwar this. The Chief Justice was also angry with Anwar about his (Anwar's) meeting with Syed Ahmad Idid, a judge who had criticised the Malaysian judicial system.

The Chief Justice became very angry and simply denied any knowledge of these episodes. His standard reply from then on was "I was not aware then. Now I am". After repeatedly saying this to all Anwar's charges, the crowd started to laugh loudly and some serious looks from the police guards were required to calm the gallery down. The crowd almost became uncontrollable when Anwar told the Chief Justice, "You don't seem to know anything!"

Anwar then said the Prime Minister himself had told him (Anwar) that the Chief Justice was angry with him (Anwar). The Chief Justice replied he was not aware of this. Anwar then brought up the Ayer Molek shares case and the Chief Justice again interrupted him (Anwar).

Anwar was now really angry and said that there is an erosion of public confidence in the judiciary. Anwar then reprimanded the Chief Justice for conveniently denying everything.

At this point we wondered who was on trial here. Anwar was listing out all the "irregularities" of the Chief Justice while the Chief Justice was trying to defend himself and explain what "really happened", and doing a bad job at that too.

Anwar then said, "All that I know of you, I am apprehensive of your impartiality. Hence, I urge you to recuse".

Then Anwar sat down again. But the Chief Justice declared he would not disqualify himself. The Federal Court appeal would proceed with the Chief Justice still presiding.

This report will continue tomorrow.

The Full Text of Anwar Ibrahim's Appeal on the Judge's Decision to Disallow the Defense from Calling the Prime Minister to Court to Testify at His Second Trial is available here.

Raja Petra Kamarudin
Kuala Lumpur
Tuesday, 1st August 2000
¶ 9:27 AM

A blow for justice

Pledges to deal with brutality and corruption in Malaysia's police forceare not being matched by action, writes John Aglionby

The Guardian

When Malaysia's former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim appeared in court with a spectacular black eye shortly after his arrest in 1998, it fuelled widespread speculation that his interrogators had beaten him up.

It later transpired the then-national police chief was responsible for the injury and although he was jailed for the assault, the incident was brushed off as an isolated aberration. The authorities claimed Malaysia's police force was not like its counterparts in neighbouring Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines, where corruption is regarded as endemic.

Few people who have had any contact with the police believed such explanations, and this week their suspicions were been confirmed with the preliminary findings of a special commission on the police force.

After holding 26 public hearings around the country and a series of other consultations, commission chairman Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah said his taskforce had been "inundated" with allegations of corruption and brutality.

The most criticised departments were, Mr Mohamed said, traffic, narcotics, commercial crimes and internal investigations.

Beatings in custody were another regular complaint and the commission says it intends to investigate several suspicious deaths in custody. This particular problem grabbed headlines earlier this year when several people who had been detained under the catch-all Internal Security Act - which allows for indefinite detention without charge - alleged they had were
regularly beaten in the special police holding centres before being transferred to prison.

Mitigating factors in the state of the police force are lack of equipment, financial resources and personnel, according to Mr Mohamed.

Will anything really change though in a nation where the police have been regarded for decades as a trigger-happy tool of the executive to repress dissent and perpetuate the elite's grip on power?

The signs are mixed. When he came to power last October, the country's prime minister, Abdullah Badawi, said rooting out corruption would be one of his main priorities. He started promisingly enough: the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) detained a few medium-sized fish, he promised at least another 18 bigger fish would soon be behind bars and he appointed the
commission to investigate the police.

But there have been no other major arrests and since his landslide election win in March, Mr Abdullah has allowed his attention to wander elsewhere, most notably to shoring up his party base ahead of its convention in October.

Analysts say that an obvious reform would be to make the ACA, which is currently under the prime minister's authority, an independent body. But in a recent interview with Guardian Unlimited, Mr Abdullah insisted such a move was unnecessary.

"The ACA doesn't think they need more independence than what they have at the moment," he said. "They know that I don't interfere in what they do. I don't give instructions to go after certain people."

The leader of the opposition People's Democratic Party, Lim Kit Siang, believes such an answer speaks volumes about the reality of power in Malaysia.

"If it's true it's a sorry reflection on the state of the ACA that they aren't even independent," he said. "It also reflects badly on the PM to give such an excuse.

"We could not have expected a full opening up [since Mr Badwi took office] but perhaps movement in that direction. But we are not even seeing that."

Another worrying sign emerged this week, when the Police Watch and Human Rights Committee - a non-governmental organisation that monitors the police and investigates claims of misconduct - had its application to be registered as a formal society rejected. No reason was reportedly given for the decision.

The commission is due to present its final report in February. Its findings will be picked over to assess whether it has met public expectations and then scrutiny will switch to Mr Abdullah to see if he keeps his word and really is a reformer. Catching a few more fish in the meantime would, analysts say, cut him some significant slack.
¶ 9:24 AM

Judgment on Anwar is thoroughly flawed
By: Kim Quek

Justice Arifin Jaka's Summary Judgment is a total fiasco. In his sketchy Judgment, the handful of grounds on which Arifin convicted Anwar is mostly either untrue or illogical. In his opening statement, Arifin rightly pointed out that "the Prosecution" case rests principally on the evidence of Azizan, and the Defence case on alibi and conspiracy to fabricate evidence. Arifin was also right in stating that Azizan's credibility was vital to this trial. Regrettably, the above statements are about the only things stated correctly by Arifin in the entire Judgment

ON AZIZAN'S EVIDENCE

A main thrust of Arifin's Judgment was that Azizan's evidence was corroborated by Sukma's confession. This claim was untrue. Firstly, Sukma's confession in Sept 98 contradicted Azizan's evidence, in that Sukma's confession stated that sodomy in his Tivoli apartment took place about two or three years ago (meaning 95 or 96) (Star 29.07.99), while the alleged offence in this trial is between Jan and Mar 93.

Secondly, the Defence alleged that Sukma's confession was a fabrication forced upon Sukma by the police for the purpose of incriminating Anwar. Goring details of physical and mental torture over a 12-day period in Sept 98 was given by Sukma in the first instant available to him in his affidavit dated 10th Dec 98, and also later in his testimony in this trial.

Defence also produced the following unchallenged evidence to disprove the accuracy of the "confession" thereby reinforcing its allegation that the "confession" was fabricated under coercion:

Sukma's confession stated that he drove Anwar from his official residence to the Tivoli apartment for the sodomy rendezvous (Star 29.07.99), but Anwar did not move into his official residence until mid 94.

Contrary to Sukma's story in the "confession", Anwar did not share a bed room with Sukma in the house of Anwar's father in Petaling Jaya, but an Indonesian student Hermawan Bustaman did. Also, Anwar never stayed in Section 17 of Petaling Jaya as claimed in the "confession".

Sukma stated in the "confession" that his last sexual encounter with Anwar was in March or April 98, but forensic pathologist Dr. Zahari Noor concluded that "there were no physical signs on his private parts that he had homosexual activities", after a thorough examination on Sukma. (Star 07.07.99)

In spite of the above evidences, Arifin said, "I am convinced of the truth of what is stated in the confession®. Arifin further said, "This finding is consistent with the facts that Sukma had used this confession in his mitigation when he had pleaded guilty earlier in the Sessions Court, when he was charged with an offence in Section 377D of the Penal Code."

In making the above statement, Arifin failed again to deal with Sukma's testimony that using the confession to plead for leniency was something pre-planned by SAC(I) Musa. Arifin also commended Azizan's credibility as a witness, saying that the latter "came out unscathed" after a grueling cross-examination, and that "there is no necessity for Azizan to lie as he had nothing to gain but everything to loose by coming out with this complaint."

These statements are manifestly untrue. Azizan oscillated many times under oath between "he was sodomised" and "he was not sodomised by Anwar", and between "he was instructed" and "he was not instructed by the police" to change the date of the alleged offence from the first date to the second to the third.

In fact Arifin himself was often exasperated by Azizan's frequent shifting testimony, prompting Arifin to say on record: "This witness is saying one thing today and another thing tomorrow." Arifin also said "This witness refuses to answer even simple questions". Azizan's credibility as a witness took another serious blow when he was later convicted and jailed in a Syariah Court for committing illicit sex, after having admitted he had lied earlier in the same Court.

Arifin's claim that Azizan "has nothing to gain" blatantly contradicted unchallenged evidence in court that Azizan, a former driver, was made an executive and a director of a company and was given a car, soon after he accused Anwar of sodomising him.

ON DEFENCE OF ALIBI

Arifin said Defence's alibi failed because Anwar did not give his whereabouts between lst Jan to 12th Feb. The truth is Anwar's unchallenged alibi covered from 4th Feb to 31st Mar. As for the period 1st Jan to 3rd Feb, Defence had produced unchallenged evidence that the apartment then was under heavy renovation and that the mattresses to the rooms were moved in only on 12th Feb. Arifin now said, "Even if the divan and mattress were not delivered until Feb 12, 1993, to my mind it does not mean that there was no other bed and mattress". This speculation by Arifin is not feasible, as the ceilings and wall between the master bedroom and the adjoining room was broken down during the renovation, and the broken bricks and ceilings had to be deposited in the third and only remaining room in the apartment, leaving no space for the queen sized bed described by Azizan to be accommodated there. Arifin's rejection of Defence alibi is therefore faulted.

ON DEFENCE OF FABRICATION

Defence had produced witnesses to substantiate the motive, identify the individuals and describe the activities, involving politicians, diplomats, police and ordinary citizens in the fabrication of evidence and the plotting of Anwar's downfall. Arifin had not come up with any challenge to these evidences in his Judgment.

Instead, he said: "With regards to the defence of fabrication, I am satisfied that the evidence on record does not support the defence. The evidence of Tun Hanif Omar on the question asked by the first accused on the possibility of blackmailing him, indicates that the first accused had something to worry about. The evidence of Azizan, when he said the first accused asked him to lie on the declaration and when the first accused asked SAC(I) Musa to stop investigations against him, militates against the defence of fabrication of evidence."

Arifin's above statement is a mouthful of skew logic. There is not an iota of evidence from the above witnesses to negate the well-knit and unchallenged evidence of political conspiracy and fabrication as constructed earlier by the Defence. The abovementioned evidences of Hanif, Azizan and Musa are totally unrelated to the issue of conspiracy and fabrication. Apart from being unrelated to fabrication, the pivotal significance attached by Arifin to these evidences is also not justified.

Azizan is a discredited witness, and his assertion that Anwar asked him to lie cannot be trusted without corroboration. Musa has played a mirky and questionable role in the entire investigation of these cases. His part in fixing and changing the various dates of offence was hardly disguised.

The evidences submitted by Musa and Hanif could at best be taken by Prosecution to cast suspicion on Anwar's homosexual status, but could in no way be looked upon as proof beyond reasonable doubt that Anwar had committed homosexual act in the Tivoli apartment between Jan and Mar 93.

IN CONCLUSION

Arifin has failed to justify his verdict that the Prosecution has proven the offence beyond reasonable doubt in that :

1. He has not successfully restored confidence to the Prosecution case which was fatally marred earlier during the trial, due to unjustifiable inconsistencies in the dates of the offence and in questionable evidence given by the principal witness Azizan.

2. He has not succeeded in challenging Defence's alibi and Defence's evidence of conspiracy and fabrication of evidence against the accused.

In fact, reviewing the entire trial, the balance of evidence is so overwhelmingly tilted in favour of the Defence that it looks more like the Defence has succeeded in proving the ruling power guilty of political and criminal conspiracy to persecute Anwar, rather than Anwar is proven guilty of sexual offence. When this trial is considered together with the previous separate trials on Anwar, Sukma and Dr. Munawar, one cannot help but conclude that the entire exercise of these trials is a grotesque perversion of justice and a massive abuse of public institutions to serve the evil interests of one man to the destruction of another.
¶ 9:21 AM

Anwar supporters bring airport to standstill

Several thousand supporters of newly freed former deputy leader Anwar Ibrahim brought Malaysia's main airport terminal to a standstill in a potent reminder of the charismatic sway he holds over the country.

The crowds overwhelmed airport security as they surged toward Anwar's gold-coloured Mercedes-Benz when he arrived for a flight to Germany, where he will undergo back surgery for an injury suffered partly during a police beating six years ago.

It was the biggest show of support for the politician, who was prime-minister-in-waiting before his downfall in 1998, since he was freed from prison on Thursday after Malaysia's highest court overturned a sodomy conviction that he long contended was trumped up to destroy him.

Anwar, his wife, Azizah Ismail, two of their children and several aides left Kuala Lumpur International Airport - a showcase built by his political nemesis, retired leader Mahathir Mohamad - on a Malaysia Airlines flight to Frankfurt early today.

The airline was expected to allow him to keep his first-class seat reclined during takeoff and landing to ease his back pain, which has left him increasingly confined to a wheelchair and neck brace.

Anwar is scheduled to undergo minimally invasive endoscopic surgery tomorrow at the Alpha Klinik in Munich.

In 2000, Anwar was examined in Malaysia by the Alpha Klinik's Dr Thomas Hoogland. Authorities refused to let him leave prison and travel to Germany for surgery, fearing he would not return.

Also tomorrow, the Federal Court will begin hearings on whether to reconsider its previous decision to uphold Anwar's separate conviction for corruption. If the appeal succeeds, Anwar will no longer be a convicted felon and would avoid the five-year ban against running for office.

''I hope to come back stronger to continue my struggle,'' Anwar told reporters at the Kuala Lumpur airport. The crowd cried, ''Viva Anwar!'' and ''Arrest Mahathir!'' as he flashed a thumbs-up.

Significantly, there were no shouts against current Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, who took office 10 months ago and is credited with granting the courts the leeway to free Anwar.

The crowds were happy, but their fervour was reminiscent of the tens of thousands of people Anwar led in 1998 to demand the ouster of his one-time mentor, Mahathir, and to call for democratic reforms.

Malaysian leaders have issued veiled warnings to Anwar's supporters to follow the law. Anwar said earlier Saturday that he did not intend to lead street protests again, but that authorities should allow peaceful demonstrations as part of a more democratic society.

Anwar was beaten by Malaysia's then-police chief while chained to a cell bed September 20, 1998, after his arrest for leading the biggest street protests in decades, calling for Mahathir's ouster.

Mahathir had spent years grooming Anwar to succeed him but had fired him as his deputy two weeks earlier in a power struggle.

After his initial arrest on national security grounds, Anwar was charged and convicted of corruption and sodomy and sentenced to 15 years in prison. The United States and human-rights groups considered him a political prisoner.

¶ 9:18 AM

IF YOU ARE A HUMAN

This article is about Human beings, Democracy, UNHCR, Refugees, The Iraqis,
Islam, Kurds, Human rights, Respect, Money, Donations, Angelina Jolie,
Pavarotti, Giorgio Armani, Donors, Peace, History, Campaigns and about you if
you care about these words.

Hi there,

I am Sam, an Iraqi refugee living in Lebanon at the moment; I have spent the last
9 years of my life as a refugee registered with the UNHCR in Beirut. The last 3
years, I have spent as an activist for human rights (especially refugees and
asylum seekers) on the Internet; I'm also a books author and ebooks publisher. I
have launched many campaigns to improve our situation as refugees in Lebanon
and hopefully bring more understanding to our problems worldwide. I helped
make many changes and improvements at the UNHCR office in Beirut; I used the
Internet as the field for my activities (you can read more about that in my free
ebook 'MY CAMPAIGNS' http://www.umacr.org/truth/free_ebooks.htm).

My latest campaign is to stop the UNHCR from conducting illegal and humiliating
actions, by using photos of refugees as banners and human-buttons to collect
money. This is an abuse of the dignity and humanity of the refugees and must
stop immediately and a clear public apology present by the United Nations High
Commissioner of Refugees. My friends, I am talking about the pictures you can
see here: http://www.unhcr.info/if_human/if_human.htm

As I'm a refugee and an activist for human rights, I feel that the problems of
refugees are not being solved by the UNHCR in fact their policies are worsening
them. I have been saying this since the first day I started my activities and I said
then that "If we want to improve the situation of the refugees in the world we must
start with changing the policies of the UNHCR," I even wrote this in my books.

The people of the UNHCR have used these pictures as banners and buttons to
collect money from donors. As a human being and a refugee, I felt these pictures
represent a bad and offensive example of the disrespect for our humanity as
refugees and asylum seekers. It does nothing to represent the meaning and the
principles that were mentioned in the UN51 convention. It fills me with pain and
sorrow to see this disrespect to our dignity and humanity and also how they are
deceiving the community with these pictures.

Unfortunately, the people who work at the UNHCR are working hard to present to
you a portrait of a refugee as a poor human being who's problem will end when
you donate a few $$$. Please look at their website (just google for the unhcr) and
look at the pictures there. Everywhere on the site you'll just see pictures about
poor people!

They have worked hard to establish a deep-rooted connection between poverty
and refugees. Everywhere in the world now if you ask anyone what the word
'refugee' means the answer will be "a poor person who has lost his home" does
any one of you know another meaning for the word?

They have showed you just one thing: poor people as refugees and they made it
clear that by paying some money to them, the problem will be solved; all it needs
is financial resources! When you look directly at their websites, the pictures of
poor people will grab your attention straight away! For UNHCR, the problem is
the money only! We're all as humans need money, but not only the money! There
are many things in the life not only the money, for example things like what you
could read in my free ebook 'REFUGEES FARM'
http://www.umacr.org/truth/free_ebooks.htm

When I started to post in Yahoo groups mentioning I'm a refugee, many people
didn't believe me, and they asked, "how it was possible for me to have access to
the Internet?" I was astonished at the beginning but afterwards I understood the
reality of what they were saying and started to post messages telling the truth
and because of this the UNHCR declared war on me. So then I started to call
myself "The Truth Warrior" because I am struggling to tell you the truth.

The people of the UNHCR emphasized the connection between the refugees
and poverty and drew a foggy picture of refugees, creating a strong impression
about their poverty, more than the fact they were stateless refugees. They also
put forward the idea it was the poverty creating the reality of them being refugees
in the first place. Now it is an accepted idea in the world community that a
refugee is just a poor person looking for a better life, well this is just not true! The
majority of the world doesn't even realize that it is even possible for a millionaire
to have to flee his home and be a refugee.

Article 1 of the Convention defines a refugee as "A person who is outside his/her
country of nationality or habitual residence; has a well-founded fear of
persecution because of his/her race, religion, nationality, membership in a
particular social group or political opinion; and is unable or unwilling to avail
himself/herself of the protection of that country, or to return there, for fear of
persecution."

There is no mention made of the financial situation of the refugee or the degree
of poverty he is experiencing, in plain simple words 'poverty does not make
someone a refugee'. As I said before "the link between poverty and being a
refugee is another thing entirely". Most of the time the situation of the refugees is
bad because they have no security, no opportunities to get work and this then
does create poverty! Its clear that giving money will not solve the problem, what's
needed is real understanding of the problems that refugees are facing and they
need global co-operation to solve this. This inspired me to adopt as my motto:
Justice brings peace, freedom brings democracy
Understanding is the way.

Let me share with you some figures published by the UNHCR itself.
The table is on my site here: http://www.unhcr.info/if_human/if_human.htm

From that table, we can see the total private donations in year 2003 were US$
20,072,010. Now let's analyze that number, Anyway if we consider the total
numbers of asylum seekers and refugees and others of concern to the UNHCR
which was 20,556,781 people published on their table on the 1st of August 2003.
Now we need to divide that amount on the number of refugees
20,072,010/20,556,781 guess what? It's equals $0.97!

So then each refugee will have a grand sum of $0.97 every year from these
donations!!! Yes my friend, they humiliated us for less than $1 a year. Now let me
think what I can do with this amount of money in one-year m'mmmm, maybe I can
buy 2 bars of Lebanese candy! I registered with UNHCR more than 8 years ago
now and until this day I have not received one cent from them! So according to
that table they owe me $7.80, a fortune!!! I declare now that I don't want this
money ($7.80) I just want them to remove these humiliating pictures and make a
public apology.

The big question is: Does all this money come from these human-buttons asking
for donations on the UNHCR'S site? Does Pavarotti or Giorgio Armani need
these human-buttons to make donations? If they need these buttons and it's a
good way for collecting money for the UNHCR why don't they use their own
pictures this way to bring more money in for the UNHCR. Also about Angelina
Jolie, she is a goodwill Ambassador for the UNHCR and she has worked hard to
collect money for the UNHCR, she is pretty and attractive and her picture would
make an excellent human-button. They could write on the Angelina Jolie button
"make a donation and be like Angelina" or Send a donation to receive thanks
from Angelina" do you think that would offend her or the others we spoke about?
Why would it do you think??? Her pictures are everywhere so let them use these
as a human-button to collect money if they feel it is inoffensive and not
dishonorable to her.

The last thing about these numbers is the percentage of the amount that different
governments contribution to the UNHCR. I read in one table the total is
$928,865,984. So what will happen if the UNHCR loses the 20 million that
comes from private donors, if they remove the human-buttons of refugees? OK,
they will have $908,865,984, but they would be giving respect to the refugees of
the world, do you think they care?

$0.97 a year makes no difference to a human being but if we divide the same
amount between the number of people working for the UNHCR, I believe they
have about 5000 employees… so 20,072,010/5000=$4014.40 more than
$4000 a year don't you think that makes a difference?

I have finished now about the numbers, let us continue about the pictures, and the
idea of using the Angelina Jolie, maybe you will say that her picture is already
being used on the site of the UNHCR and you would be right! But there are a few
differences between her picture and the pictures of the refugees. Angelina's
picture isn't used to collect money; it's used to show how much she cares about
people and her help for the UNHCR. When you click on her picture, you read
about Angelina, but when you click on the human-button of the refugees you find
a form to donate money.

The important difference being this, Angelina's picture gives you her name,
dates and history. The human-buttons, say nothing about the people on them, no
names, no dates, nothing! This pushed me to find out more about these human-
buttons. I found out the truth about the picture on the Iraqi banner in the page
about Iraq, and the button on this page to donate money. I wrote about it in my
book "THE TRUTH WARRIOR" I could tell you quickly about it now, for more
details please look in the book.

This is a picture of a Kurdish family, and it was taken in 1991! So that was 13
years ago!!! The funny thing is that they used it to illustrate and draw attention to
an event that happened last year, writing on it "IRAQ EMERGENCY" strange to
speak about an emergency and use a 13 year old picture don't you think?

Do you know why they used that picture? Because it was easy… they had it
already, no new refugee crisis happened during the last war with the USA on Iraq
in 2003! Guess what? This picture shows a Kurdish family fleeing by crossing
the border near Suleymaniye in the north of Iraq! The problem now, of course is
the returning of refugees who left during Saddam's rule. The age of the picture
and the fact it was taken for a different reason, it's deceptive and dishonest act.

I would have thought that a big organization like the UNHCR would be able to get
a more modern picture of what is happening. They receive information daily and I
am sure they don't need to resort to 13-year-old pictures; this information is from
the last century!!! Maybe now there are not any pictures of Iraqi refugees to
encourage donors to click the human-button! What a pity for the people of the
UNHCR and for the refugees, especially the Iraqis. I wonder, how old the other
pictures?

Do you feel that the picture shows the real situation of Iraqi refugees now? Are
the Iraqis still fleeing and seeking refuge outside Iraq? The truth is always painful.
The UNHCR has stopped receiving new applications form Iraqis seeking help,
and when an Iraqi goes to the UNHCR in Beirut to ask for assistance they are
told that the only help they can get is repatriation to Iraq. At the moment Iraqi
refugees are scattered around the world, Many countries are offering to help
return Iraqis home. These countries governments mostly finance these plans. For
example in England the government has offered $1000 plus the cost of their flight
home to each refugee.

In Lebanon, we are not sure about the amount of financial support for those
wishing to return home, but someone who had gone home that it was about $40
informed me, the source of the money was also unclear. Some people are
saying that this money is from unknown Iraqi parties and some say the Iraqi
Embassy in Beirut. I am currently looking for more information on this matter.

Anyway I don't feel the $40 dollars given to refugees in Lebanon is worth
anything. Especially when viewed against the $1000 given by most European
countries. The question is this: If there is no refugee crisis in Iraq and the
financial support is being paid for by the governments where these people are,
why is the UNHCR still asking for money using pictures of Iraqi refugees?

One more important question about that picture, do you think that the people who
work for the UNHCR know anything about this woman or her family? Are they
registered refugees? What is her name and where are they all now? Do you think
she agreed to have her picture put on the web and used as a human-button?

I would love to know the answers to these questions, but unfortunately I can't ask
the people at the UNHCR even though I tried many times over the years. They
never answer any questions! Instead they have tried to hurt me and even tried to
get my ISP to cut my connection! I hope one day you get the chance to ask them,
and that maybe they will answer you. They didn't answer any of my friends who
sent them messages. So please if you like, let us play their game and be a little
cheeky. I hope that one of you can contact them and tell them you want to donate
money to help the family they showed in the picture. Not telling them of course
that you know the picture is old. Just tell them you want to sponsor that family.
Notice that they wrote on it 'Emergency' so it's good to help them out! I'll wait
with baited breath to hear their answers.

What do you think the answer will be? What do you think she would feel like if she
saw her picture used like that, and what if her family sees her like this or
someone in her village? She is a Moslem woman and to expose herself like this
is a sin in Islam. Did you notice she uses two pieces of cloth to cover her head.
the UNHCR using pictures of Moslem women on the net as a banner and as a
human-button to collect money where millions of men could see her!!! That is a
very big sin in Islam.
As I'm a Moslem and I am sure the UNHCR haven't asked the woman's
permission to display her picture publicly like they are doing now, I am asking
them to respect the Islamic religion and apologize to the woman and remove her
picture immediately. Also I am asking each Moslem person reading this article to
express their concern about this sin, which is being committed by the UNHCR for
the sake of this woman and her family. Every Moslem knows what sin is, and it is
also a sin to be silent when you see a wrong being committed. I am asking each
Moslem to contact the UNHCR and express your opinion as we are guided to do
by Islam.

There is a legal point of view for this subject:

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was established by the
U.N. General Assembly in 1950. According to the UN51 convention and the
Statute of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
(G.A. res. 428 (V), annex, 5 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 20) at 46, U.N. Doc. A/1775
(1950)).

"CHAPTER II. - FUNCTIONS OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER

10. The High Commissioner shall administer any funds, public or private, which
he receives for assistance to refugees, and shall distribute them among the
private and, as appropriate, public agencies which he deems best qualified to
administer such assistance.
The High Commissioner may reject any offers which he does not consider
appropriate or which cannot be utilized.
The High Commissioner shall not appeal to governments for funds or make a
general appeal, without the prior approval of the General Assembly.
The High Commissioner shall include in his annual report a statement of his
activities in this field."

As you can see the UNHCR must have permission from the General assembly
for any general appeal for money. The question is: Did the General Assembly
agree to use these pictures to appeal for funds?

I would sincerely love to receive an answer, I am a refugee and I feel it is an
abuse of our humanity as refugees in this world. Its not just abuse of our humanity
but for the humanity of all humans.

We appeal to you to support this campaign to remove these abuses and to
provide more respect for all refugees worldwide. Our situation in the world
worsens day after day without any new polices to help or improve our situation.
The UNHCR uses us as human-buttons and baits to collect money! Our problem
is not only because of poverty it's because the general abuse of the meaning and
the principles of UN51 convention because of these money collectors in UNHCR
and other organizations.

This abuse must stop immediately. If UNHCR needs money so badly, there must
be other respectable and honorable ways to make general and public appeals
for money. For example using buttons like paypal provides for donation without
any humiliating pictures of humans at all.

I'm not saying that the people of UNHCR are all bad, they're just part of a system
and they have their procedures and regulations. I just wanted to explain some of
our feelings as refugees. To offer my understanding of the relationship between
the refugees and the UNHCR. I'm an eyewitness to that relationship, trying hard
to improve the relationship using my campaigns, my books and my unanswered
questions.

I feel sad because the UNHCR has failed in the past 3 years to answer my
questions. Until this day they failed to answer even one question! I'm not asking
for the impossible. I just want some answers, as I'm a refugee, as I'm a human
and as I'm an activist for human rights. All that gives me the right to ask and to
have my questions answered.

I invite you as fellow humans and members of the world community to support my
mission by asking the UNHCR to remove these abuses and to provide some
reasonable answers for the questions that you have read in this article.

This invitation is a very important as part of the collective efforts to enhance
human rights, respect and global peace. The UNHCR represent an important
constituent of our community, as humans and any failure in its performance will
weaken the harmony and peace of the world.

We're living in a time where wars are declared to liberate people from
despotism and further democracy and human rights. Blood is being shed now to
try and improve democracy, human rights and respect. Do we need wars and to
shed blood every time we face disregard for human rights and democracy?! Isn't
there any peaceful way?

I have heard many people claim that they're working to help the refugees and
human rights activists and some of them are collecting money also. I'm asking
these people: What are you doing to help refugees and enhance human rights
and respect? I'd like to know, and if you have nothing to do now, you can start
work and help refugees by working to remove these abuses and humiliations for
all humans. Contact the UNHCR and ask them about these pictures and tell them
that these pictures are an abuse of refugees' dignity and humanity, when you can
do this then we can see that you really care about refugees.

I don't have any money to pay you but if you would like to help us in our struggle
and you respect our humanity as refugees in the world, then we would be very
thankful for this help. I'm an E-book publisher and I will be publishing many more
E-books in the future. I would like to have answers to the questions in this article
and since the people at the UNHCR refused to answer my questions, I declare
now that I'll give free access to all of the E-books I will write in my lifetime to the
first person who will find the answers to my many questions concerning the
UNHCR. He/she will be a hero of all refugees and I'll write about them what they
would like. I can't give them a medal now, but we will give them our love and our
thanks as refugees.

Please, if you think this issue is important and needs acts, you can send
messages to the UNHCR and your government to speak your opinions
according to your rights and democracy. Here are some emails:
ecu@un.org,inquiries@un.org,Hqpr00@Unhcr.Ch,tb-
petitions@ohchr.org,info@usaforunhcr.org

Notice that you can find more emails here: http://www.umacr.org/truth/emails.htm
or you can brows for more on the net or to find more ways for contact them like
phones or faxes.

Together we will build better world.

You could reach me fast via this form: http://www.unhcr.us/email_me.htm

Thanks

THE TRUTH WARRIOR
OSAM ALTAEE
http://www.unhcr.info

¶ 9:04 AM

Anwar Ibrahim freed after sodomy sentence overturned
Reporter: Mark Colvin

Transcript
This is a transcript from PM. The program is broadcast around Australia at 5:10pm on Radio National and 6:10pm on ABC Local Radio.

MARK COLVIN: "It's good to be free" - the words of the Malaysian Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim after the country's highest court unexpectedly upheld his appeal against a six year sentence for sodomy.

Anwar spoke briefly to reporters from his wheelchair before leaving to see his elderly father, his wife Wan Azizah and his children.

The former deputy prime minister has spinal problems as a result of a police beating when he was first arrested.

It's an extraordinary reversal of fortunes for the man who many believed was only jailed in a corrupted judicial process because he represented a major political threat to his former political master Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

It appears to be an indication that under Mahathir's successor, Abdullah Badawi, the judiciary will be able to act with greater independence.

The Director of the Free Anwar Campaign, Raja Petra, spoke to me this afternoon from among the crowd outside the Federal Court in Putrajaya, where Anwar had just been freed.

RAJA PETRA: The crowd is excited. They are waiting for Anwar to come out and every time a lawyer, one of the lawyers come out they give him a cheer. Word has already spread around the whole country.

MARK COLVIN: How big a crowd is there?

RAJA PETRA: Well a couple of hundred - not that big.

MARK COLVIN: And what's the condition of Anwar Ibrahim now? I heard a report that he had been wheeled out in a wheelchair with a neck brace on. He's obviously still not very mobile at all.

RAJA PETRA: Anwar is in great pain. His spinal injury is aggravated and the doctors are pressing for him to go for surgery. He, however, refused to do the surgery until after today's outcome because he wants to know first of all whether he is going to be acquitted or not.

MARK COLVIN: And does he still want to leave the country and go to Germany for that surgery?

RAJA PETRA: Of course. And that's the whole reason he refused surgery up to now.

MARK COLVIN: So as soon as he's released he'll be making arrangements to leave?

RAJA PETRA: There were rumoursÖ I don't know, but there were rumours that the King of Saudi is arranging a private medical jet for him to bring him up to Germany.

MARK COLVIN: And there's no question if he leaves the country that he will be able to come back in again?

RAJA PETRA: Oh yes. There's no reason why he shouldn't because he holds a Malaysian passport.

MARK COLVIN: And do they think that the surgery will get him back to full strength? Do you think that he'll be able walk again?

RAJA PETRA: That's not known because even the surgeons who examine him cannot guarantee that the surgery will be able to correct his medical problem.

MARK COLVIN: Now what are the legal implications of him winning this appeal today? Is Anwar Ibrahim going to able to sue for wrongful imprisonment?

RAJA PETRA: No. In Malaysia, we don't have a provision for wrongful detention or wrongful address, ah, wrongful arrest. So there's no, basically there's nothing that Anwar can do.

MARK COLVIN: And there's no possibility then of compensation for all this time in jail?

RAJA PETRA: No we don't have that system here.

MARK COLVIN: Now, what about the situation regarding his ability to campaign politically because he has stillÖ while his appeal has been successful this time, there is still one conviction against his name isn't there?

RAJA PETRA: Yes, which he is also going to a judicial review for that as well.

MARK COLVIN: So he may be able to get off on appeal for that one?

RAJA PETRA: Correct. If he wins the judicial review then he'll be basically discharged of that one as well though he has already fully completed the sentence.

MARK COLVIN: But if he is not, for how long is he barred from standing for political office?

RAJA PETRA: Five years.

MARK COLVIN: Five years from now?

RAJA PETRA: Five years from, I believe, the day he completed his sentence.

MARK COLVIN: Which was a year or two ago?

RAJA PETRA: Which was a year plus ago.

MARK COLVIN: So that would mean that he wouldn't be able to stand for four years. Would he, let's say that his appeal does succeed, would he stand for political office? Would he reconstitute his political campaign?

RAJA PETRA: Well the only thing Anwar cannot do is he cannot stand for elections as a member of parliament but he can still lead the party nevertheless.

MARK COLVIN: So he might lead the party nevertheless but...

RAJA PETRA: Correct. He can still hold a position in the party. There's no problem.

MARK COLVIN: But a great deal has happened during the time that he's been in jail. Notably, September the 11th has happened and that has really profoundly changed the political landscape. Will he be able to regain the popularity that he had before?

RAJA PETRA: Well I suppose this will all depend on his charisma and whether the people will still flock to him like they used to. So I suppose as soon as all his medical problem have been corrected, his first step will see whether he's still the crowd puller that he used to be.

MARK COLVIN: Do you think that his release is a result of changesÖ of new independence in the judiciary under Abdullah Badawi?

RAJA PETRA: No. I think probably the judiciary are not so cowed by the present Prime Minister as compared to the previous prime minister.

MARK COLVIN: Well in other words, it wouldn't have happened under Mahathir?

RAJA PETRA: It would never have happened if Mahathir was still prime minister.

MARK COLVIN: So you don't want to give Abdullah Badawi any credit for that?

RAJA PETRA: Well, I believe Abdullah Badawi could do very little to control the judiciary even if he did want to, so he might as well not try to.

MARK COLVIN: But on the other hand, won't it strengthen Abdullah Badawi's own hand as a democratic leader to show that he is prepared to release a major opposition figure?

RAJA PETRA: Correct. Correct, and that is also probably a very good political move for Abdullah Badawi. Knowing that he cannot control the judiciary, he might as well not try to, and allow Anwar to be freed. And then he can claim credit for it. And at the same time, this is a slap in the face for Mahathir.

MARK COLVIN: Finally, just to sum up Raja Petra, would you just tell us what you think of this decision in terms of what kind of a day is this for Malaysian democracy and Malaysian justice?

RAJA PETRA: Now that these judges have made this kind of decision, I think the judiciary basically will fall into the same spirit and will now be brave enough to make judicial decisions without political considerations. I think this is going to be a test case for the rest of the judges.

MARK COLVIN: The Director of the Free Anwar Campaign, Raja Petra, speaking to me from among the crowd outside the Federal Court in Putrajaya just after the decision to free Anwar Ibrahim.
¶ 8:58 AM

Kebebasan Akhbar di Malaysia Bagi Yang Berkuasa

Dengan kuasa penentu definasi berita tertumpu di tangan elit politik, kebebasan akhbar di Malaysia ialah kebebasan bagi mereka yang berkuasa.

Sebenarnya kerajaanlah yang memiliki rangkaian sebaran berita yang luas liputannya dan berupaya meliputi ke seluruh negara dengan pelbagai pilihan. Dan dengannya, mereka menyebarkan isu-isu dan peristiwa-peristiwa mengikut tafsiran mereka dan mereka-reka kebenaran.

Inilah keistimewaan kerajaan yang menghalalkan hak untuk menghadkan kepelbagaian sumber dan pandangan, yang boleh diperolehi rakyat.

Dalam memperkatakan mana-mana isu semasa, terdapat pelbagai pendapat tentang apa yang perlu dilakukan dalam bidang yang paling 'bebas' bagi akhbar, iaitu ruangan editor.

Kebanyakan pendapat yang disuarakan dalam akhbar kroni adalah yang betul dari segi politik. Pandangan sebegini selalunya cetek dan bergaya; yang paling kurang mencabar bagi akhbar yang lebih berwibawa.

Taktiknya seringkali melibatkan kebijaksanaan dalam beraksi selamba terhadap perkara-perkara salah laku yang serius dalam masyarakat.

Bagi orang ramai yang mengharapkan pihak media menjelaskan isu-isu dengan saksama, tepat dan analisis segar peristiwa-peristiwa semasa, laporan sedemikian rupa di akhbar utama hanyalah menimbulkan kekecewaan kerana 'lebih banyak, lebih menyedihkan'

Jika rencana pengarang menggambarkan jiwa sesebuah akhbar yang mempercayai keadilan adalah segala-galanya, maka penilaian diri sendiri boleh membantu. Begitu juga dengan persaingan.

Satu hujah yang menegakkan kebebasan bersuara mengatakan, hanya dengan bertikam lidah sahaja kebenaran akan terserlah. Namun 'kebebasan akhbar bagi yang berkuasa' di Malaysia mengakibatkan kehambaran yang mengancam proses demokratik.

Sememangnya dengan adanya peraturan yang ketat sebegini, satu perkara lumrah jika akhbar cuba mewajarkan tindakan mereka. Amat mengecewakan juga kerana ramai wartawan yang mengamalkan menapis sendiri berita.

Isu kebebasan media memerlukan keberanian dan kata-kata yang jujur kerana ia menyentuh hubungan di antara media dan pihak umum.

Tanpa saranan untuk memansuhkan Akta Rahsia Rasmi, anjuran agar dikuatkuasakan kebebasan maklumat oleh sebuah akhbar pro-kerajaan menjadi tidak ubah seperti satu jenaka atau usaha mengalihkan perhatian umum.

Kewartawanan yang tidak mengendahkan hubungan pentingnya dengan demokrasi, akan mengancam integritinya sendiri. Mungkin ini punca utama merosotnya akhbar aliran utama.

Dentam-dentum dan berkembangnya industri media tidak mencukupi untuk memperkuatkan kebebasan media. Hak demokratik untuk bebas bersuara telah dikekang dengan hebatnya semenjak tahun-tahun kebelakangan ini.

ISA, Akta Mesin Cetak dan Penerbitan dan Akta Hasutan - hanya menamakan beberapa kongkongan - adalah sebahagian dari rejim pengawalan yang menakut-nakutkan atau cuba menutup mulut wartawan dari memberi laporan mengkritik.

Realiti menakutkan akibat ancaman ini masih terpahat di memori - cuba imbas kembali 'Operasi Lalang' pada tahun 1987.

Gangguan dan serbuan ke atas pejabat malaysiakini masih segar di ingatan dan merupakan peringatan betapa hebatnya kuasa badan pengawal itu.

Dengan peristiwa-peristiwa yang meyedihkan ini, tanggapan bahawa kerajaan telah melonggarkan cengkamannya atas kawalan akhbar hanya memperkukuhkan lagi hakikat betapa hebat dan berkesannya pengurusan medianya. Dengan wartawan seperti Moreira yang mudah dikelentong dan akhirnya terperangkap dalam situasi kelam-kabut pastinya amat menyenangkan hati mereka yang mempergunakan akhbar.

Seperkara lagi, Rang Undang-undang Jaminan Koridor Raya Multimedia mendedahkan bagaimana pihak kerajaan gagal memenuhi keinginannya bersaing bagi mendapatkan pembangunan ekonomi dan kawalan.

Tersasar juga amalan para wartawan yang bertindak sebagai jururunding kerajaan atau ahli lembaga pengarah syarikat-syarikat awam dan pegawai-pegawai kerajaan yang menonjolkan diri dalam akhbar.

Jika wartawan selaku individu, atau akhbar selaku sebuah pertubuhan; dilihat berlakon secara terang-terangan, ia memusnahkan kewibawaan mereka sebagai saksi-saksi utama. Bagaimana tatkala itu akhbar menyesuaikan diri dengan kepentingan umum? Bagaimana pula hubungan berterusan media dengan masyarakat?

Seperti mana kata-kata seorang belia Malaysia dalam forum Aidcom, 'Kami tidak mahu media menjadi pro-kerajaan. Kami mahu mereka menjadi pro-keadilan.'

Kenyataan yang menyedihkan di sini ialah kerjaya kewartawanan kini hanya menjadi satu peluang untuk mengaut keuntungan.
¶ 8:56 AM

Malaysia tidak selamat lagi

Membunuh dirinya dan tiga orang anaknya oleh seorang pemandu lori Liau Kok Keong, telah mengejutkan semua. Bagaimana kemanusiaan amat kejam dan seorang manusia mampu mengambil nyawa anak-anaknya sendiri?

Jika dibuka dada akbar setiap hari, anda akan merasa negara ini tidak selamat lagi, dengan berita-berita ngeri seperti rompakan, pembunuhan, rogol dan bermacam lagi jenayah kejam, dan kini Liau Kok Keong kes bunuh dan bunuh diri, memenuhi akbar.

Setelah kejadian yang ngeri dan menyayat hati itu, sekali lagi akbar dan media menjadi sasaran. Seorang pegawai kanan kerajaan telah berkata, pihak media dalam negara wajar melaporkan semua jenis kes bunuh dengan sederhana dan tidak berlebih-lebihan yang memberi gambaran silap bahawa Malaysia sebuah negara yang tidak selamat.

Namaun, bolehkah media berdiam diri saja dalam kes ini? Bolehkah masyarakat kita menjadi lebih selamat jika kita sorok semuanya bawah tikar?

Kita ingin bertanya apakah kerajaan telah lakukan setakat ini. Adakah rakyat Malaysia merasa lega dengan terbitnya beberapa angka menunjukkan keselamatan negara ok, tidak teruk dari tahun lepas? Mungkin kerajaan wajar mengambil langkah mengemukakan polisi kaunseling dan mengambil serius akan inisiatif kaunseling.

Sebenarnya kita sedang hidup dalam keadaan dan ketika yang amat bahaya. Terima kasih kepada pembangunan pesat,, setiap orang daripada kita menghadapi sedikit sebanyak masalah psikologi. Kita semua 'sakit' dan persoalannya setakat mana seriusnya sakit kita ini. Terdapat ramai pembunuh berpotensi di kalangan kita seperti Liau Kok Keong dan pembunuh yang "saya sayang awak", yang boleh berubah menjadi ganas jika emosi mereka mengalami ketidakseimbangan.

Seorang rakan saya baru-baru ini berkongsi pengalamannya membesarkan anak, "Hanya sebab budak itu saja... anak perempuan saya tu degil. Kadang-kadang saya rotan dia sungguh-sungguh Ö memang boleh masuk paper dan jadi tajuk akbar."

Saya berasa amat terkejut. Saya fikir, apa yang akan berlaku jika dia menggunakan terlebih tenaga dan kuasa?

Ini menunjukkan bahawa kita amat kurang dalam ilmu kaunseling. Kita terlupa akan elemen dan kecenderungan ganas dalam manusia. Kita bekerja kuat siang dan malam untuk mendapat duit demi kehidupan yang lebih selesa. Apabila sesuatu yang buruk berlaku, kemarahan dan perasaan yang terpendam akan meluap-luap dari dalam dan terkena pada mereka yang di sekeliling kita. Nyawa yang tidak berdosa mungkin akan bersama kita sewaktu itu.

Kita telah lupa akan kesan komunikasi spiritual. Kita lupa bahawa kita perlu rehat supaya dapat terus maju. Akibatnya, ada yang kecundang disebabkan tekanan, ini sering diikuti dengan tragedi.

Walau macamana sibuk sekalipun, kita masih perlu masa bersama dengan anak-anak, isteri-isteri, suami-suami dan saudara-mara.

Namun, rumah kita masih menjadi tempat berlindung paling selesa.
¶ 8:54 AM

Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA

Press statement: 5 September 2004

JUSTICE FOR ALL POLITICAL DETAINEES

Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI) is delighted that the two-time Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee, Anwar Ibrahim was acquitted and released at the Federal Court yesterday.

GMI strongly supports the call of Anwar Ibrahim to the Abdullah Ahmad Badawi‚s government after his release to abolish the ISA and release or charge all political detainees.

GMI views this as an important and meaningful call for the democratization and political reform of the country, as Anwar himself has fell victim to the ISA twice as a vocal young dissident as well as a government senior minister. Anwar was first detained under the ISA in 1974 when he was still a student leader in University Malaya. In the second ISA detention in 1998 after he was sacked by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad from his prestige position as Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, he was not only detained without trial, but beaten almost to death by the then Inspector General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Rahim Noor.

The experiences of Anwar under the ISA are good enough testimonies of how the ISA, which provides for unchallenged power to detain anyone without trial, can be abused so horribly by the government. The beating that Anwar had to suffer under the ISA detention only further strengthened the numerous claims of many detainees that they were tortured mentally and physically while under the ISA detention.

The Anwar saga is also a good lesson of how anyone can be victimised by the ISA, regardless of his or her ethnicity, religion, political believes or affiliation and social status.

A civilised society has no place for barbaric laws like the ISA. GMI hopes the call of Anwar for the ISA to be abolished and all political prisoners to be charged or released will become an important political agenda in future and be carried out with determination in democratizing Malaysia.

Release all ISA detainees!

Abolish ISA!

Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh
Chairperson
¶ 8:50 AM

Hal berkaitan kejantanan

Pembunuhan tiga orang anak Liau Kok Keong dan diikuti dengan dirinya sendiri melibatkan lebih daripada isu psikologi dan kaunseling. Terdapat di situ satu aspek penting yang belum diteroka dan ini ialah bahagian yang terselindung di dalam badan berjuta-juta lelaki di seluruh dunia.

Dengan perubahan masa dan perkembangan sosial, kaum lelaki dan wanita kini diberi peluang yang sama dan sudah mula dilayan dengan saksama. Menjadi lelaki dalam sesebuah keluarga tidak lagi membawa gambaran dominasi ke atas wanita yang total. Kini, lelaki mengetuai keluarga bukan kerana mereka lebih kuat tetapi dengan persefahaman antara lelaki dan wanita, meletakkan lelaki bertanggungjawab ke atas keluarganya.

Dulu, kaum lelaki mendominasi sesebuah keluarga dan sering wanita tidak dirujuk dan diambilkira pandangannya. Tetapi kini, itu telah berubah, lelaki memegang kuasa tersebut dengan persetujuan wanita sendiri dan segala ketidakpuasan hati diselesaikan melalui rundingan dan perbincangan.

Generasi baru telah melihat wanita menjadi lebih berdikari dari segi ekonomi. Mereka tahu akan hak mereka dan semakinyakin pada diri mereka. Lelaki tidak lagi boleh 'menguasai' wanita sesuka hati mereka.

Lelaki yang benar-benar memahami hak setiap individu tidak mengira samada dia lelaki atau wanita, tidak akan merasa tergugat. Kerana ia tidak mengurangkan haknya begitu juga kuasanya terhadap wanita. Kini, wanita membantu membangunkan keluarga bukan dari segi jiwa tetapi secara ekonominya juga. Dengan itu, lelaki dan wanita sama-sama berkongsi beban membina rumahtangga bahagia iaitu termasuk mendidik anak-anak begitu juga melakukan kerja-kerja harian di rumah.

Lelaki tidak boleh mengubah layanannya terhadap wanita hanya kerana wanita sudah berdikari dari segi ekonomi, kerana ini perbuatan yang tidak ikhlas dan bermuka-muka dalam menghormati wanita sebagai manusia yang sama taraf dengan lelaki.

Dengan itu, para suami wajar menghormati isteri dan wanita secara amnya walaupun mereka tidak bekerja dan mendapat pendapatan bulanan seperti wanita yang bekerja makan gaji. Tidak hilang kelelakian seseorang jika dia menghormati wanita dan melayannya dengan baik.

Setelah bekata demikian, ada lelaki yang sudah begitu sebati dengan pandangan rendahnya terhadap wanita telah merasa tertekan dan tidak mampu memujuk hatinya bahawa wanita mampu menjadi setanding lelaki malah dalam keadaan tertentu wanita lebih baik daripada lelaki.

Apabila mereka berhadapan dengan wanita yang tetap dengan pendiriannya, lelaki-lekai seperti ini akan merasa dirinya dayus dan jalan keluar kepada situasi menekan ini ialah dengan mengambil nyawanya sendiri.

Kegagalan dalam perkahwinan Liau mungkin disebabkan sikapnya dan pemikirannya yang masih melihat wanita dikuasai oleh lelaki. Diberitahu bahawa, peguamnya pernah memberitahunya dia tidak akan mendapat hak penjagaan anak kerana pendapatannya lebih rendah daripada isterinya. Mungkin ini telah menyebabkan dia merasa kuasanya sebagai seorang lelaki telah dirampas.

Wanita sudah lalui banyak halangan dan rintangan untuk sampai ke tahap kebebasan yang ada pada hari ini. Namun apa pun, setiap orang perlu terima, bertolak-ansur, menghormati satu sama lain bagi mengelak tragedi yang menimpa keluarga Liau.
¶ 8:48 AM

Perlu tunaikan janji, bukan tabur janji manis

Terdapat banyak isu yang memerlukan perhatian segera, dan ia amat mendesak untuk kenalpasti punca permasalahan dan menanganinya dengan bijak.

Kadar jenayah negara ini semakin meningkat. Penjenayah yang tidak berhati perut bukan saja
membunuh anggota polis yang bersenjata, orang awam yang tidak bersenjata, jauh sekali mengancam, juga tidak dikecualikan.

Melihat kejadian bunuh yang menjadi-jadi, rakyat Malaysia merasa mereka tinggal dalam masyarakat yang amat merbahaya. Sementara pihak plis berjaya menyelesaikan beberapa kes jenayah utama, keamanan sosial dan keselamatan tidak terhapus dengan tertangkap atau terbunuhnya beberapa penjenayah, tetapi keselamatan hanya akan dirasakan apabila bebas daripada ketakutan dan tekanan gejala sosial.

Kadar jenayah yang tinggi dalam negara dan isu berkait mungkin berpunca daripada meningkatnya bilangan buruh asing dalam negara. Kerajaan amat bimbang tentang perkara ini dan telah mengambil langkah menangkap pekerja-pekerja asing yang tidak sah dan membuat polisi baru mengenai pengambilan pekerja-pekerja asing.

Walau bagaimanapun, ini telah mendedahkan bahawa polisi jangka panjang kerajaan mengenai pekerja asing, amat memerlukan perancangan yang rapi dan tadbir selia yang baik.

Lepas itu, timbul isu pendidikan. Dalam bandaraya utama dan bandar-bandar, pembangunan sekolah tidak dapat mengejar perubahan sosial yang pantas dan pertumbuhan populasi yang mendadak.

Daripada kejadian di atas, kita dapat lihat bahawa kerajaan berkongsi kefahaman yang sama seperti kebanyakan kita. Inilah cabaran yang biasa di hadapi yang kita perlu tanganinya bersama, dan isu mendesak yang perlu ditangani segera. Walau bagaimanapun, kita mendapati kerajaan tidak membebaskan dirinya daripada pemikiran sempit tentang perkauman dan penyelesaian sering gagal.

Akibatnya, pihak berkuasa mesti mencari jalan penyelesaian untuk semua kaum dalam negara dan melihatnya secara adil, sama-rata dan pendekatan yang objektif. Sudah tentu mereka juga mesti bersikap positif dan efisyen dalam melakukan tindakan.

Kami mahu kerajaan menunaikan janjinya dengan mengambil langkah yang praktikal daripada memberi janji-janji manis hanya untuk menambat hati rakyat dikala pilihan raya.
¶ 8:43 AM

Aku begitu heran melihat sikapku yang berubah akhir-akhir ini. Tiba-tiba saja semuanya menjadi kenyataan. Impianku yang sekian lama menghantui otakku sebagai bintang sepak bola buyar sudah. Memperoleh medali! Itulah impianku. Semua orang juga begitu, jika dia menjadi seorang pemain sepak bola.

Tapi Arita merubah semua anganku. Arita secara tak sengaja melibatkanku dalam sebuah kecelakaan. Kakiku terluka parah. Lututku harus dioperasi dan, aku tak bisa lagi berlari selincah dulu. Walaupun berbagai terapi telah kulakukan, semua percuma saja. Bahkan Arita sudah mecoba membujukku agar tabah menghadapi semua ini. Tapi semua kata-katanya membuatku serasa ingin muntah. Aku muak mendengar kata-katanya, apalagi melihat wajahnya. Walaupun dia cantik dan baik, aku menganggap, dialah segala biang kesialan yang kualami.

Kini aku tak bisa lagi menggapai cita-citaku menjadi bintang sepak bola negri ini. Semua ini gara-gara Arita! Arita sialan! Bangsat! Keparat! Babi! Monyet! Seandainya aku tak memiliki teman lama yang bernama Arita ini, pasti masa depanku akan cerah.

Ya, walaupun dia adalah teman lamaku, teman baikku sejak kecil, yang selalu bermain berdua, ke mana-mana berdua sejak kami sekelas di TK…. Tak ada gunanya bagiku……..

Barangkali aku akan puas bila berhasil mengoyak-ngoyak masa depannya. Akan kupotong tangannya? Kugilas kakinya, seperti truk itu menggilas kakiku? Kujatuhkan dia dari lantai 20? Kucekik? Kutikam? Berbagai ilham untuk balas dendam terlintas di benakku…….

Tiba-tiba saja ide itu terlintas! Ya! Dia hanya seorang wanita lemah. Wanita tak berdaya. Wanita yang betul-betul wanita, yang hanya mengandalkan kewanitaannya untuk bertahan hidup. Sebagai seorang gadis pasti dia mendambakan seorang suami yang kaya, perkasa, mapan dan seterusnya. Dan untuk mendapatkan itu dia harus punya barang yang harus ditawarkan – sebagai seorang gadis – untuk mendapatkan keperkasaan itu, kemapanan itu, kemewahan itu. Barang itu pastilah sangat berharga baginya! Ya! Kenapa tak kurenggut saja barang itu, biar dia kehilangan masa depan, seperti juga aku… Ha… ha… ha…

Maka suatu malam, kuajak dia ke atas sebuah gedung tinggi. Gedung sepi, di mana tak seorangpun pernah menginjakkan kakinya di situ. Gedung angker yang hanya pantas untuk shooting film horor. Seperti biasa, Arita mau kuajak. Dia memang tak pernah menolak kemanapun kuajak pergi. Kami adalah kawan lama. Kawan yang bersahabat sejak kecil. Kami selalu bersikap baik satu sama lain. Walaupun begitu di antara kami tak pernah ada rasa cinta. Bagiku dia hanya kawan. Begitu juga aku baginya, hanyalah kawan.

Sampailah kami di atap. Kami bercerita tentang apa yang kami jumpai seharian tadi. Malam semakin larut. Rencanaku yang kusiapkan sejak siang tadi kini akan kulaksanakan. Ketika Arita hendak memberikan bekal makanan padaku, kusekap lehernya dengan lenganku. Kudorong dia ke tembok. Dia nampak kaget dan berteriak memanggilku, “Hiroshi!” Tapi teriakannya tak membuatku surut. Kurobek bajunya yang hanya berkancing 3 buah itu. Kurobek Bhnya. Nampak dengan jelas buah dadanya yang kekuningan. Kuremas-remas tetek yang besar itu. Dia kesakitan, menjerit histeris, berusaha berontak, dan dengan sekuat tenaga mendorongku aku hampir terjatuh, tapi tangaku tersangkut celana dalamnya, robek……… dan terlhat jelas “barang” berharga itu………

Berhasilkah Hiroshi memperkosa Arita? Saksikan kisahnya di film animasi Jepang, “Dawn of New Age”. Untuk pemesanan, silahkan kirim email lewat japri untuk keterangan lebih lanjut.

¶ 8:41 AM

Hakim buntu, capai keputusan rayuan Anwar

Mahkamah Persekutuan Malaysia telah menetapkan review kehakiman Anwar Ibrahim mengenai kesalahan rasuah pada 9 pagi, Isnin 6 September 2004, di Istana Keadilan, Putrajaya. Pendengaran tersebut pada asalnya ditetapkan pada 10 Ogos tetapi ditangguhkan setelah ahli keluarga salah seorang daripada hakim-hakim meninggal dunia.

10 Ogos juga merupakan hari jadi Anwar yang ke 57 tahun dan tahun keenam dia dipenjarakan.

Pendengaran khas ini agak jarang berlaku di negara ini dan ini cubaan akhir Anwar membersihkan namanya, walaupun sehingga 14 April 2003 dia sudah pun menjalani hukuman penjara bagi kesalahan yang didakwa.

"Kami berharap review tersebut akan membersihkan nama Anwar. Kami menjangkakan pendengaran tersebut akan diadakan dalam beberapa hari.." salah seorang peguam Anwar, Sankara Nair berkata.

Anwar dijatuhkan hukuman pertamanya pada 14 April 1999 dan dipenjarakan enam tahun. Dia diberi keringanan atas kelakuan baik iaitu dikurangkan sepertiga tempoh tahanan yang membawa kepada tahanannya kurang kepada empat tahun sahaja. Walau bagaimanapun, Anwar hadapi kesalahan kedua dan hukuman sembilan tahun penjara kerana liwat, yang berjalan selepas hukuman pertama selesai. Jadi, Anwar akan terus berada dalam penjara di Sungai Buloh.

Anwar telah merayu terhadap kesalahannya yang kedua, yang diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Tinggi pada 8 Ogos 2000. Walau bagaimanapun, setelah lebih empat tahun, Anwar masih menunggu keputusan tersebut, di mana di akhir rayuan pada 30 Mei 2004, mahkamah telah berjanji memberikan keputusan secepat mungkin.

"Mengenai rayuan tersebut, kami berjanji akan duduk dan bekerja kuat dan tidak diganggu dan akan memberi keputusan secepat mungkin," kata Hakim Abdul Hamid Mohamad.

Anwar juga dinafikan ikat jamin, yang beliau telah mohon pada 31 Mei 2004, dengan itu dia merengkuk dalam penjara sementara menunggu keputusan rayuannya.

Menurut mereka yang dalam undang-undang, kelewatan tiga bulan dalam memberi keputusan ialah disebabkan barisan hakim berlainan keputusan tentang rayuan yang dikemukakan. Nampaknya, dua daripada hakim-hakim iaitu Abdul Hamid Mohamad dan Tengku Baharudin Shah Tengku Mahmud, berpendapat Anwar wajar dibebaskan sementara hakim Rahmah Hussain mahu keputusan awal tidak diubah.

Khabar angin mengatakan orang yang berkuasa merasa tidak selesa mendengar kemungkinan Anwar akan dibebaskan, lalu mengeluarkan arahan supaya Anwar kekal dalam penjara sehingga habis hukuman pada 14 April 2009.

Sementara itu, Anwar berada di Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) di mana dia dimasukkan bulan lepas untuk rawatan komplikasi daripada kerosakan spinal disc.

Para doktor telah menasihatkannya menjalani pembedahan secepat mungkin, tetapi dia meminta pembedahan dilakukan di Jerman - rayuan yang kerajaan masih nafikan. Anwar tidak mahu orang melihatnya sebagai tidak yakin dengan kemampuan para