Is this true, Sivakumar?

BN's Anti-Democracy Campaign? ....

"Are Kuala Lumpur's rent-seekers raiding the public purse again?
... and telephone calls to its notional head office go unanswered...
Indeed, it is becoming a particular problem for ... Najib Tun Razak,
who last November took over the finance ministry,
the portfolio ultimately responsible for ValueCap."

===================================

After having used the Royal office, the EC, the Police, the AG chambers and the Judiciary to grab the Perak govt and exercise what many might call "backdoor legitimacy", they are now training their guns at yet another institution of democracy - the very valid electoral process of democracy.
It appears that, devoid of ideas and inspiration (despite the return of the "prodigal dad"), the humongous BN election campaign machinery is suffering from a severe case of "chronic fatigue syndrome".
"Too much effort and resources are being wasted by holding by-elections when the nation should be concentrating on strengthening its economy, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said."-Najib: By-elections draining resources

Yes. The expenses incurred by Police for 5 buy-elections is RM31million- and that's 12.9 times the cost incurred by the ever "neutral" EC!!
Please take note that half that amount was most likely spent on the Kuala Terengganu buy-elections (Bernama: PDRM Spend RM15 Million For Kuala Terengganu By-Election). That means - RM 16 Million was spent on the other four!
Quite a drain on "certain pockets" indeed ....

Poor guys - They find it difficult to cough up more of the "Class-F contracts" lottery as promised at a certain other buy-election. That isn't considering the many "ang-pows" which were dished out by "unknown individuals" or the paid campaigners or the hotels. No wonder they say it is an expensive affair and they just despise the whole democratic electoral process.

So they have gone on a media blitz to run down the one process which is the hallmark of a Democracy ...... They even went so far as to quote Khoo Kay Khim (the "historian" & Suhakam Commissioner) as having said that the people have the right to reject the democratic process ("Rakyat boleh menolak kerana itu hak mereka," katanya ketika dihubungi Utusan Malaysia di sini hari ini.) This ultra-conservative Umno mouthpiece also went on to say in another article that the election is "Menyusahkan, bazir wang" and that "Pengundi sudah bosan!. These conservative spin-doctors sure are quite "smart" to tap the resources of the stupid - who are more often than not, conservatives.

But you Class F contractor guys need not despair - going by what has been reported, there's still plenty of money to go around (if you know whose boots needs to be shined)......
"Are Kuala Lumpur's rent-seekers raiding the public purse again?
....It doesn't have a website, and telephone calls to its notional head office go unanswered... Indeed, it is becoming a particular problem for Prime Minister-designate Najib Tun Razak, who last November took over the finance ministry, the portfolio ultimately responsible for ValueCap."
-Asia Sentinel - The Malaysian Mystery of ValueCap

"Some people" lately appeared to take history lessons from Ho Chi Minh - asking us to do away with "agreements signed under duress", while another asks us to relearn history, "lest we repeat our mistakes".
Maybe these elements believe that Malaysia as we know it, is a mistake- and we need a new Federal Constitution, after what we have has been chewed and spat out.
Observing the powers that be and the propaganda machinery in action, somehow, it makes one wonder if the grand design in the agenda of certain quarters is to bring about a totalitarian racist state ala "islamic republics" - demi agama, bangsa dan negara.

The people should see what is attempted by certain quarters here, and defend the democracy upon which this was established - as per the Rukunegara.
So, to pirates who complain that buy-elections are "expensive" affairs- as disgusting as it may be, the people should probably take a leaf from this which was reported:
"... who could not come up with any money..... was even forced to kiss the man’s backside."
-No money so oral sex will do

When The People Are Cheated By Pirates of The Constitution...

"Article 72, Clause (1) of the Federal Constitution clearly states:

72. (1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court."

"The judge had gone against the Constitution of Malaysia which is the supreme law of the land. What do you call a judge who has defied the law of the land? A renegade judge?
A judge who does not appear to be fair is useless to the judicial process. As such he is a bad judge and is therefore unfit to sit on the bench."

When Justice is Not Administered According To Law

By Justice N.H. Chan, former Court of Appeal Judge (The Malaysian Insider)

APRIL 16 — The story unfolds with the application of three turncoat members of the Perak Legislative Assembly for a declaration that Speaker V. Sivakumar’s order, which was made in the Legislative Assembly, that their seats in the Assembly have become vacant because they have resigned was illegal. Here is the report from theSun newspaper, Thursday, April 2, 2009:

IPOH: The High Court yesterday dismissed the application by Perak State Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar to strike out an original summons brought by the three independent assemblymen, seeking a declaration that Sivakumar’s order to declare their assembly seats vacant was illegal.

Justice Datuk Balia Yusuf Wahi set April 8 to hear the suit by the assemblymen Mohd Osman Mohd Jailu (Changkat Jering), Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang) and Hee Yit Foong (Jelapang) against the speaker.

He also dismissed an application by three former Pakatan Rakyat state executive councillors … and three registered voters to intervene in the case, ruling that they are not interested parties as claimed.

Sivakumar had declared the three state seats vacant based on their pre-dated resignation letters as the three assemblymen were formerly from the ruling coalition. Their resignation from their parties caused the balance of power to shift to Barisan Nasional.

Sivakumar had informed the Election Commission (EC) to call for fresh elections for these three seats but the EC declined and said the seats were not vacant.

The three assemblymen then referred their suit to the High Court here for a ruling that they had not vacated their seats as declared by Sivakumar.

I don’t have to tell you how to judge the judge. You must know by now how to do it if you have read my articles in the Internet. You will know he is a bad judge if he behaves unfairly to one side as against the other. It is your perception as a member of the public that matters and not what the judge thinks of himself. A judge who does not appear to be fair is useless to the judicial process. As such he is a bad judge and is therefore unfit to sit on the bench. The other essential qualification of a judge is to administer justice according to law. That said, we can now judge this judge.

Article 72, Clause (1) of the Federal Constitution clearly states:

72. (1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.

Yet Mr Justice Balia Yusuf Wahi, who knew that the Speaker’s order which was made in the Legislative Assembly was a proceeding in the Legislative Assembly, dismissed the Speaker’s application to strike out the summons of the three turncoat assemblymen who were asking the court to question the validity of what the Speaker had done in the Assembly. As you know what the Speaker did in the Assembly, rightly or wrongly, is not to be questioned in any court. Isn’t what the judge had done by dismissing the Speaker’s application to strike out the turncoats’ summons, not administering justice according to law? The judge had gone against the Constitution of Malaysia which is the supreme law of the land. What do you call a judge who has defied the law of the land? A renegade judge?

There is another thing. Why did the judge dismiss the application of the three voters from the Behrang, Changkat Jering and Jelapang constituencies, who claimed that their rights were affected because they had voted for the DAP and PKR? They were not allowed to intervene because they were not interested parties ruled the judge. Why are they not interested parties? The voters have voted for them as their representatives in the Legislative Assembly because they were DAP and PKR candidates. Now the turncoats have reneged on the arrangement on which they have stood for election on a DAP or PKR ticket. Such an arrangement has formed the basis of an underlying assumption on which they have conducted the dealings between them. Therefore, they would not be allowed to go back on that assumption when it would be unfair or unjust to allow them to do so. In other words, it would be unfair or unjust to allow them to say that they are no longer DAP or PKR members but are independent members of the Assembly. The authority for what I have just said is so well known that I am surprised the judge had chosen to ignore it. The case is Boustead Trading (1985) Sdn Bhd v. Arab-Malaysian Merchant Bank Bhd [1995] 3 M.LJ. 331, F.C., where Gopal Sri Ram JCA sitting in the Federal Court gave the judgment of the Court. He said, p. 344:

The time has come for this court to recognize that the doctrine of estoppel is a flexible principle by which justice is done according to the circumstances of the case. It is a doctrine of wide utility and has been resorted to in varying fact patterns to achieve justice. Indeed, the circumstances in which the doctrine may operate are endless.

And at p. 345, he went on to say:

The width of the doctrine has been summed up by Lord Denning in the Amalgamated Investment case ([1982] 1 Q.B. 84 at p. 122; [1981] 3 All E.R. 577 at p. 584; [1981] 3 W.L.R. 565 at p. 575) as follows:

“The doctrine of estoppel is one of the most flexible and useful in the armoury of the law. But it has become overloaded with cases. That is why I have not gone through them all in this judgment. It has evolved during the last 150 years in a sequence of separate developments: proprietary estoppel, estoppel by representation of fact, estoppel by acquiescence, and promissory estoppel. At the same time it has been sought to be limited by a series of maxims: estoppel is only a rule of evidence, estoppel cannot give rise to a cause of action, estoppel cannot do away with the need for consideration, and so forth. All these can now be seen to merge into one general principle shorn of limitations. When the parties to a transaction proceed on the basis of an underlying assumption — either of fact or of law — whether due to misrepresentation or mistake makes no difference - on which they have conducted the dealings between them - nether of them will be allowed to go back on that assumption when it would be unfair or unjust to allow him to do so. If one of them does seek to go back on it, the courts will give the other such remedy as the equity of the case demands.” (Emphasis added)

So the judge Balia Yusuf Wahi had wrongly ruled that the three voters were not interested parties. The voters’ interest in the matter is that they have a right to insist on the persons whom they have voted to be their elected DAP or PKR representatives not to change sides by switching to the other political coalition Barisan Nasional. “When the parties to a transaction proceed on the basis of an underlying assumption on which they have conducted the dealings between them neither of them will be allowed to go back on that assumption when it would be unfair or unjust to allow him to do so. If one of them does seek to go back on it, the courts will give the other such remedy as the equity of the case demands.”

We know that the judge had adjourned the hearing of the suit by the turncoat assemblymen to April 8. But to our amazement we were told by the newspaper that the turncoats have also made two applications to the Federal Court on Friday, that was Friday, April 3, for two declarations, viz:

Whether, on a true interpretation of article 36(5) of the Laws of Perak Darul Ridzuan (Perak Constitution) read together with section 12(3) of the Election Act 1958, the Election Commission is the rightful entity which establishes if there is a casual vacancy of the state legislative assembly seat.

When a resignation of a member of the Perak state legislative assembly is disputed, is such resignation within the meaning as ascribed under article 35 of the Perak Constitution.

If they have applied to the Federal Court for a determination, then it is only proper to inform the High Court and the other side about it. So that what is pending in the High Court could be adjourned until the Federal Court has decided on the questions that have been referred to it.

Then on Friday, April 10, the New Straits Times carries this report:

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has declared that three assemblymen who quit their parties are still members of the Perak state legislature. This follows an unanimous ruling by a five-men bench yesterday which ruled that the Election Commission had the authority to declare a seat vacant.

“The Election Commission is the rightful entity to establish if there was a casual vacancy in the Perak state legislature,” said Federal Court judge Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sheriff. Sitting with him were Datuk Arifin Zakaria, Datuk Nik Hashim Nik Abdul Rahman, Datuk Sen S Augustine Paul and Datuk James Foong.

Last month, Parti Keadilan Rakyat’s Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang) and Mohd Osman Jailu (Changkat Jering), together with DAP’s Hew Yit Foong (Jelapang), filed an urgent application for the Federal Court to decide their matter. The three wanted a declaration whether it was the Election Commission or the Perak Speaker (V Sivakumar) had the final say in determining a vacancy.

In February, Sivakumar, using resignation letters signed by the three, had declared the seats vacant. He informed the Election Commission, but the commission refused to hold by-elections on the ground that there was ambiguity over whether the assemblymen had resigned voluntarily.

Was the Federal Court right? Before you can judge the judges of the highest court in the country, it is necessary for me to appraise you of the law applicable which is found in the Constitution of Perak. Thus, the heading of Article XXXI of the Perak Constitution reads:

Disqualification for membership of Legislative Assembly

XXXI. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Article, a person is disqualified for being a member of the Legislative Assembly if-

(a) [he is of unsound mind]; (I have summarised the paragraph)

(b) he is an undischarged bankrupt;

(c) he holds office of profit;

(d) [he has failed to lodge any return of election expenses within time]; (I have summarised the paragraph)

(e) [he has been convicted of an offence and sentenced to imprisonment of not less than one year or to a fine of not less than RM2,000]; (I have summarised the paragraph)

(f) [disqualification involving election offences]; (I have summarised the paragraph)

(g) [he has acquired the citizenship of another country] (I have summarised the paragraph)

(2) [The disqualification of a person under paragraphs (d) or (e) above may be removed by the Sultan or ceased at the end of five years] (This is a summary)

(3) …

(4) …

(5) A person who resigns his membership of the Legislative Assembly of this State or any other State shall, for a period of five years beginning with the date on which his resignation takes effect, be disqualified from being a member of the Legislative Assembly of this State.

So that it is clear to all of us that Article XXXI, Clause (5) says that an assemblyman who resigns is disqualified from being a member of the Assembly for a period of five years from the date of his resignation.

And Article XXXIII, Clause (1) says:

XXXIII. (1) If any question arises whether a member of the Legislative Assembly has become disqualified for membership, the decision of the Assembly shall be taken and shall be final.

This means that whether a person is disqualified for membership of the Assembly is the decision of the Assembly. So that when a person has resigned he is disqualified from being a member of the Assembly for five years from the date his resignation takes effect.

You may want to know how an assemblyman can resign. Article XXXV states:

XXXV. A member of the Legislative Assembly may resign his membership by writing under his hand addressed to the Speaker.

So that a member can resign simply by writing to the Speaker. But whether the letter itself amounts to a resignation, as a resignation would disqualify him for membership of the Assembly, is for the Assembly to decide. Article XXXIII, Clause (1) says that the decision of the Assembly shall be taken on the disqualification if any question arises on it, which in the present context is the effectiveness of the letter of resignation. And the decision of the Assembly is to be final.

The above is simple enough for all of us to understand. But then, all of us are wondering how on earth the Federal Court could have decided that “(t)he Election Commission is the rightful entity to establish if there was a casual vacancy in the Perak state legislature”? Don’t you all feel superior to the judges of the Federal Court because you know the correct answer whilst the highest court gave a wrong decision. So you see, when you know how to judge the judges you would be able to separate the wheat from the chaff from among our judges. The chaff, you will discover, may not be up to your expectations.

What really happened was that with their myopic reading of the Perak Constitution they pick on Clause (5) of Article XXXVI and say that is the correct answer. This is what Article XXXVI, Clause (5) says — the article starts with the heading:

Summoning, prorogation and dissolution of Legislative Assembly

XXXVI. (5) A casual vacancy shall be filled within sixty days from the date on which it is established by the Election Commission that there is a vacancy.

A casual vacancy means an occasional vacancy which can be filled simply with a by-election. But the question whether the turncoat assemblyman have resigned or not will have to await the outcome of the decision of the Assembly which decision shall be final: see Article XXXIII, Clause (1). It is only upon receiving the decision of the Legislative Assembly will the Election Commission be able to establish that there is a vacancy. As it turns out the Federal Court has put the cart before the horse - in this case, just the cart without the horse - which is that the court has held that it is for the Commission to establish that there is a casual vacancy without waiting for the decision of the Assembly whether the three turncoat assemblymen have been disqualified for membership of the Assembly by resignation.

"1 Malaysia" - Among Many ...

"That is what I call a classic - in the same vein as Si Luncai, Pak Pandir, Lebai Malang, well you get the idea - case of missing the blinking concept."

- Missing The Concept, ARTiculations

Malay groups say that the concept will not alter the affirmative action programme and is only meant to bring up the level of economic development of under privileged groups, regardless of race. The Opposition and non-Malays believe that it is not possible to speak about One Malaysia if Chinese, Indians and Ibans continue to be accorded second class status here.

-Unless defined, One Malaysia could lead to many
=================================

"Malaysian simpletons just don't seem to get it ....."

In Jibby's (or is it Rosy & Mahathir's) "1Malaysia", where he takes care of himself, everyone else should rally around him.
Altantuya's ghost is most welcome - thank you.

The fact has been, is and will be (make no mistake about that) that -
It is actually a confession that there are indeed many Malaysias.
One each for "orang kuat" Melayu Umno,
the royalty/aristocrats, non-Umno Melayu,
then for the Balas, Lingams, Vincent Tans, Eric Chias, Tajudins, Halim Saads, Nasimudins, and "anak orang kuats",
then we have one for the "bumiputra",
then the "saudara baru" and the "lain-lains".....
then for the "kafirs" who are further subdivided depending on the color of their skin, religion, political affiliation, social standing and bank balance.
The only difference is, in this "pyramid scheme" of things, this idea actually is meant to articulate the need for the many Malaysias, which in turn will fight for the one Malaysia as defined by Umno.
It is actually meant to perpetuate the status quo. That's all.
(The Altantuyas, Kugans, Adi Mansors, Noritas - you guys "can eat cake", alright!)

In other words, this "1Malaysia" is plain hogwash, Horse%^, & Bulls!#%. This clown we have for a leader doesn't have the "goods" to call a spade, a spade - but indulges in hypocrisy so that he can get some "chinese & indian" votes!! Already his deputy, after the "post-mortem", has shot the "chinese" for not having "membalas budi", after the many electioneering bribes at Bkt Selambau & Bkt Gantang! In DPM's book, for one to respond positively to bribes, is called - "membalas budi".

Already we have one ex-Umno (and now an independent "frog") threatening with pride to run amuck should anyone say that this "1 Malaysia" is meant to displace the "ketuanan melayu" ideas and the NEP. Many other fascists have come out in open support of this shameless stance - Jibby's underlings included. The Car-Toon has yet to do so - but be very sure that he'll managed to spin it well enough (squeezing a few pairs of testicles, while at that), so that his worshippers dumbfounded by the "depth of his wisdom".

The sloganeering tactics of Mahathir has caught on big-time with the "politikus" of Umno/ BN. So much so, these rats cannot do without it, if they were to start a campaign, and this is just another slogan off the mill. As with all slogans in the past, Malaysians (and the new "bumiputras/Melayu/saudara baru" from across the straits) should actually know that these slogans in fact articulates what Mahathir & Umno Baru do not want. Their job is supposed to be to cheer these aristocrats on for a "fee" (okay - if you insist, call it a bribe, if you don't care for it to sound halal), and applaud the great wisdom of these "leaders".

Anyway, whatever slogan they may use, the desired end result is always the same - hoodwinking the masses into total submission, so that the power of the Umno aristocracy is unchallenged.
But of course you have the freedom to "express yourself" through a "vibrant, free and informed media" , and journalists are to be brave enough to report to "allow people to hold public officials accountable", "regardless of consequences". Truly amazing indeed, this Jibby fella - this is just after some journalists were barred from certain events. No wonder some people say that he just another bureaucrat - an intellectual amoeba on par with Pak Lah.

Of course - as they say, it is your freedom after the expression which will be in question.
Meanwhile, Mr. Rais Yatim- our latest (our "three-in-one" info minister) said, “I can bring the horse to the water, but I can't force it to drink.”
Yup - they wanna feed horses hogwash, and hope they drink!

Oh boy - here I was hoping that we'll have someone more credible after Mr. Sleepy ......

"Zahidism" - "Securing" Parliamentary Constituencies

Heard about this a few days back .......
It appears that certain quarters are keen on some "internal security duties" for the Armed Forces. Zahid Hamidi has become a military tactician, and suggested that they have a platoon of "Askar Wataniah" in every Parliamentary Constituency, and not selected strategic locations!!
Looks like the Army is ready to stake its claim in national politics. Is this a subtle admission that we are indeed a Failed State, and are headed towards a Military Govt?

One can only ask - Are we moving from a Police State to an "Army State"?
This reflects very poorly on the Police, if you ask me. Gone are the days when the police jealously defended their "territory"- Looks like the Police are gonna be relegated to being "mandors" on their own turf......
Wonder what our newly minted Home Minister, Mr. Hishamuddin, has got to say about it. 'Some people' are definitely quite nervous about the state of affairs and are beginning to resort to desperate measures to secure their positions.
Well maybe, "somebody" has given the greenlight, after the "joint exercises" with the police some time back. Perhaps there is a subtle plan for an impending "emergency" or a Military Coup?
Thailand - Red shirt, Yellow shirt ...... here we come!!
The following article was taken from Aisehman :

Atten-SHUN!

Got this from Jeff Ooi’s blog, and it made me sit up like nobody’s business:

Kementerian Pertahanan akan menubuhkan satu batalion Tentera Wataniah di kesemua 222 kawasan Parlimen dalam usaha memantapkan sistem pertahanan bagi seluruh negara, kata Menteri berkenaan Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Beliau berkata pasukan pertahanan itu akan mengandungi 300 anggota bagi setiap platun yang terdiri pelbagai kaum dan bilangan anggota secara keseluruhan dijangka 60,000 dalam tempoh lima tahun akan datang.

“Penubuhan Tentera Wataniah adalah sebagai usaha untuk membantu angkatan tentera dalam menjalankan tugas menjaga keamanan negara,” katanya … [Bernama]

Last time I checked, our soldiers are there to defend the country against external armed threats.

So why do you need to form a Tentera Wataniah and station a platoon of 300 soldiers in each of the 222 Parliamentary constituencies?

What sort of external armed threats do we face in say, the middle of Kuala Lumpur?

All this only makes sense if the soldiers are to be used against internal “threats”.

Because if the rationale behind the formation of the Tentera Wataniah is to defend the country against external armed threats, don’t you think they are being spread out too thin?

60,000 soldiers across the country to “menjaga keamanan negara” — what is the government up to here?

Isn’t “keamanan negara” the job of the police?

I don’t like how this sounds. Because it sounds pretty disturbing to me.

Especially when someone like Zahid Hamidi is the person announcing it.

ON ANOTHER matter, Zahid certainly didn’t waste time on more immediate concerns:

… beliau mengumumkan penubuhan satu batalion Kem Tentera di kawasan seluas 80 hektar berhampiran Ladang Jenderata di Hutan Melintang di sini serta sebuah pangkalan mini Tentera Laut Diraja Malaysia (TLDM) di Jeti Bagan Datoh.

That was fast — a new 80-hectare Army Camp and a mini Naval Base in his kawasan, within less than a week of becoming Defense Minister.

Talk about rapid deployment, eh?

Zahid gains on several counts here — he makes the Armed Forces happy, he gets to dish out contracts for the construction of the two facilities, and once they’re operational, he stands to receive thousands of new votes in elections.

AND BTW dude, 300 soldiers x 222 equals 66,600 soldiers. That’s more than a battalion — that’s about two divisions, a full-blown corps.

Kugan's case: Unsettling questions remain.

David KL Quek | Apr 9, 09 12:33pm
DR DAVID KL QUEK is past editor-in-chief of the MMA (Malaysian Medical
Association) News for 11 years and currently president-elect of the MMA.:

It is laudable that the Ministry of Health had taken the preemptive move to help diffuse the public anger regarding the custodial death of Kugan Ananthan, especially in the light of discrepancies between two separate
post-mortems.

Whether an inquiry initiated on its own behalf is the correct avenue to address the public unease about this custodial death, is open to differing interpretation, acceptance or otherwise.

Any inquiry if it should be made at all should be carefully-constituted, thoughtfully empanelled and well-empowered by law. Its terms of reference
must be made absolutely clear. It must uphold the final truth.

It must be based on facts and rational analyses of findings which are consistent, and which should be striving towards the ultimate truth of what actually is the cause of death or its contributing factors.

It should not be simply to water down discrepancies which would need fuller explanation and perhaps further elaboration from the actual forensic pathologists who had performed their respective tasks. These pathologists
should be allowed to defend their findings and interpretations.

Furthermore, more expert and renowned forensic pathologists should have been invited to give their interpretations as to the facts of the findings and their weightage of causes of death, especially since there had been
unmistakable evidence of torture, i.e. undeniable beating marks and
unexplained bruises. These experts should be fiercely independent and thus unimpeachable.

Most importantly, this inquiry held behind closed doors, should not be seen to be papering over any misdeeds of any authority which it may be perceived as trying to defend.

Also, since this is not a public hearing and we know that the second
pathologist declined to take part in the inquiry, this may make the report less than solid or above reproach. Seniority of pathologists is no measure of professional competence. Forensic evidence based on previous precedents and specialist experience, and not conjectures should be the essence of any
meaningful truth-finding exercise.

It is usually disingenuous and pointless to assume another chance event as having taken place to be the cause of death, just because it is possible. Suggesting the unlikely pathologically- unevidenced diagnosis of acute
myocarditis is simply conjecture. Whichever is more probable and plausible is usually the truth, to paraphrase the legendary Shelock Holmes.

Doctors are alarmed by seizure. Unfortunately, because of these glaring slants to the report, questions will continue to linger as to whether this report is truly independent and whether all the inquiry members are in agreement with the findings.

The legal standing of the report is still questionable, and may be
challenged in a proper court. It might be better to have a public inquiry where all queries and representation can be made known to the satisfaction of the public, and especially, the victim's family.

To add salt to injury, doctors are aghast and very alarmed that the police had raided the UMMC pathologist's office and taken the material records of his autopsy findings. We are also shocked about media reports that tissue
samples for toxicology which had meant to be sent to an independent
laboratory in Australia had been intercepted and seized by the police.

Toxicological studies should always be allowed to enable proper and independent discovery of the truth. Denial of such a legitimate avenue for forensic finding would prejudice against the police, and make their action that much more difficult to accept or to tolerate.

Therefore, this arbitrary seizure is reprehensible, unprecedented and
certainly breaches normal procedures of medico-legal discovery. Usually only detailed reports are obtained from court-approved injunctions and demands.

Medical records and details are nominally the property of the physician in charge or the facility where he practices, and should only be made available
under a court order, and are usually never confiscated or seizable by any enforcement authority.

There are clear procedures to be followed, and are well articulated in handbooks for the police and enforcement authorities, clearly established by the UN Center for Human Rights. I'd like to reiterate that: "International
humanitarian law prohibits the following acts in all situations: - murder; - torture; - corporal punishment; - mutilation; -outrages upon personal
dignity; - hostage-taking; - collective punishment; - executions without
regular trial; - cruel or degrading treatment."

Such extrajudicial actions should never be made in a climate of intimidating circumstances just because these events may mar the good name and professionalism of the police force.

It is difficult to comment when the DG of Health decides to come forward and announce this so-called independent inquiry, which incidentally incorporates
two foreign specialists. At best this inquiry had added to the confusion of being a third interpretation into this sad case of custodial death and did
not refute the probability of torture.

Adhere to humanitarian principles

Any custodial death in any instance the world over, is inexcusable, wrong and criminal. The UN Human Rights Committee has defined "Extralegal, arbitrary or summary executions as deprivation of life without full judicial
process, and with the involvement, complicity, tolerance or acquiescence of the government or its agents. This includes death through the use of excessive force by police or security forces."

Torture is further defined by the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) and its Committee against Torture (CAT as: "Any act committed with intent to cause severe pain or suffering, whether mental or physical, for
purposes such as: (a) obtaining information or a confession; (b) punishing, intimidating or coercing."

Therefore, torture of any one suspect or detainee or prisoner is never condoned, whether this leads on to death is immaterial (but which only adds to the grievousness of the crime), and is liable for prosecution in any
international court of law.

Kugan's custodial death and other possible past custodial deaths should be given a truly independent investigation by a publicly open Royal Commission
or Inquiry or even by Suhakam.

It is time that we adhere to humanitarian principles as we grapple with our modernisation to become a developed people and nation. Our human development
index as a civilised nation must necessarily rise proportionately.

We call on the police and law enforcement agencies to respect these tenets of modern life and human rights and urge them to abide by these nondiscriminatory rules as a norm. Only then, can we believe and respect their true and usual professionalism again.

Spinning for the "Real Ketuanan Melayu" ......

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
"The Lord of the Manor does not make enemies of his charges.
Instead he looks after all their needs and interests.
For that he is called the 'Lord of the Manor'.
Itulah Ketuanan yang sebenarnya."
- Syed Akbar Ali, Lets Start The Perubahan : Ketuanan Melayu

"..... But we have some real ass@#l@s."
- Mathias Chang, Why I Am Happy .....
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Well said Syed ..... well said. Good job.
Jeez, Dude - I didn't know there was a "Real Ketuanan Melayu" ...... thanks for the enlightenment! What were the "real Malays" thinking ....
I curse all these guys who made me fall for the "UnReal Ketuanan Melayu" - may the fleas of a thousand Arab Camels infest them where the sun don't shine(Mathias Chang calls them ass@#l@s!!
It almost made me burst with pride to know that this was what Umno meant all along - and that it was only these days that they got it all wrong.
You know what? I'll go see Fr. O.C Lim, and confess that I have wronged Umno-ites who have had such depth to their philosophy since the 513 they brag about. Maybe I'll even flog myself silly for having "sinned" in ignorance against Umno.

This is lipstick on a pig. Crap when repackaged and resold, is still crap, Syed. No matter how you try to twists the words, to mean something "magnanimous" - they'll still stink to the high heavens. Redefining four letter words don't make them any less vulgar, Syed - and that applies to the term "Ketuanan Melayu".
The very notion of the literal interpretation of the words send nothing less than a Fascistic Nazi message of supremacy to the "uninitiated", who may not be able to comprehend the deeper 'divine nature' of it all as defined by the spin-masters.

It is simply a symptom of a much more malignant illness which plagues Umno (vis a vis the Govt)- for a long time now. It is something that many Malaysians from all walks of life have been lamenting all these years.
It is just something that Malaysians have gotten used to - disgust with Umno's philosophical bankruptcy.

It has been there since you were a child - the only difference is, they boldly express themselves these days. The vulgarity of the posters are no less then the call for a chinese bloodbath, or the waving of the kris with blood curdling screams from "eminent persons" who feign innocence.

Really Syed - It beats me how you could've missed the fact that this was indeed the culture within Umno since its inception - overtly expressed or not.
Forget Mr. Chris or Mr. Mongolia - One needs to look no further than the institution of BTN to see an even uglier facet of the political ideologues who rule the nation. The ("New") economic policies which are akin to that of Pietr Botha's South Africa, is the manifestation if it all. The Arab wannabes are of course a whole new chapter in the "Ketuanan Melayu" ideology ....

What was expressed in the posters is the least of the problems, Syed - which Umno needs to confront and eradicate. What it needs to do is dismantle the institutional racism and apartheid that has become synonymous with the Govt. It is something which unlikely to change for some time, 1 Malaysia (among many) not withstanding.

Come what may, it's better late than never.
Nevertheless, well said Syed - after all these years, thanks to you, I now believe in Santa Claus.