Teks Ucapan Debat Bajet oleh YB Wee Choo Keong, Ahli Palimen Wangsa Maju, pada 5 hb November 2009.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua,Saya berdiri untuk mengambil bahagian dalam debat Bajet 2010.Saya menyokong slogan “RAKYAT DIDAHULUKAN” yang disarankan oleh PM.
Akan tetapi, nampaknya ia adalah satu slogan kosong sahaja kerana campurtangan oleh “UMNOputras” dalam pentadbiran Kerajaan termasuk DBKL.
Contoh : Danau Kota Uptown Pasar Malam di Wangsa MajuAdanya 500 penduduk di kawasan Danau Kota, Wangsa Maju telah menandatangani satu petisyen untuk menentang terhadap Pasar Malam Danau Kota Uptown di Wangsa Maju di mana ia beroperasi setiap malam dari 10 malam hingga 4 pagi berhampiran dengan kawasan perumahan. Jam operasi ini adalah tidak pernah didengar dalam masyarakat tamadun mana-mana kecuali “Boleh Land” ini. Petisyen itu telah diserahkan kepada Datuk Bandar KL pada Julai 2009.
DBKL bukan setakat tidak mengambil tindakan untuk memindahkan pasar malam dari kawasan perumahan, dalam masa kini, DBKL telah meluluskan 30 gerai tambahan untuk UMNOputras. Adakah ini in line dengan slogan BN “Rakyat Didahulukan”?
Saya diberitahu bahawa UMNOputras ini telah menyewakan 30 gerai-gerai tambahan ini dengan sewaan RM1,000 setiap bulan.
Tukarlah slogan ini kepada “UMNOputras DiDahulukan”.
Tuan Yang di-PertuaPasar Malam yang beroperasi sehingga 4 pagi dalam satu kawasan perumahan adalah tidak boleh diterima kerana ia telah menyebaban pelbagai gejala sosial.
Indeks jenayah juga telah meningkat di Wangsa Maju.
Ia menyebabkan kesesakan lalu lintas. Kereta-kereta diletak di depan gate rumah menyebabkan masalah akses kepada penduduk. Ia juga menyebabkan pencemaran bunyi (bising – gangu kacau dan sebagainya) “noise pollution” di kawasan itu.
Fakta semua ini telah menyebabkan harga rumah di kawasan Danau Kota jatuh dengan banyak.
Saya ada terima banyak aduan dengan masalah dengan penjaja meletakkan kerusi dan meja di atas jalan awam di mana ia telah menimbulkan banyak masalah di Wangfsa Maju dan juga mengacam keselamatan awam.
Sudah ada satu contoh yang ketara di Selangor beberapa tahun lepas dimana orang awam di langgar dengan kereta dan mati.
Saya berharap DBKL mengambil tindakan dengan segara diatas perkara ini unutk kepentiongan orang awam.
Dengan melihat kesan tak sensitif oleh DBKL terhadap penduduk-penduduk di Danau Kota, slogan “Rakyat DiDahulukan” adalah satu slogan kosong.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua,
Mungkin Datuk Bandar tidak berani untuk mengambil tindakan kerana UMNOputras adalah dalang sebaliknya.
Saya tahu bahawa Datuk Shafie Abdullah, setiausaha politik PM selaku Menteri Kewangan, yang sangat aktif dengan pentadbiran seharian DBKL.
Saya diberitahu bahawa dia adalah de facto Datuk Bandar KL.
KERUSI DAN MEJA DI LETAKKAN ATAS JALAN RAYA
Saya ada menerima banyak aduan mengenai dengan kerusi dan meja di letakkan atas jalan raya dan tiada tindakan diambil oleh DBKL.
Kegiatan ini mesti dihentikan dengan segara kerana ia menimbulkan banyak masalah kesesakan jalan raya dan menjejaskan keselamatan orang awam. Kita sudah ada bukti di Selangor bahawa orang awam telah dilangar oleh kereta dan mati.
Walaubagaimanapun, saya berharap bahawa Menteri Wilayah Persekutuan yang baru memberi penjelasan apakah tindakan untuk kepentingan rakyat akan diambil oleh DBKL untuk memindahkan pasar malam ini ke tempat lain yang jauh daripada kawasan kediaman dan kes kerusi danmeja telah diletakan di atas jalan raya.
Tuan yang di-Pertiua,Datuk Shafie Abdullah, Setiausaha Politik Kepada PMSaya mesti menarik perhatian PM melalui Dewan Yang Mulia ini bahawa kelakuan Datuk Shafie Abdullah adalah bertentangan dengan kepentingan PM dengan bercampur tangan dengan pentadbiran seharian DBKL.
Saya ingin menanya samada YAB PM ada memberi arahan kepada Datuk Shafie untuk mentadbir DBKL secara langsung atau tidak langsung untuk menjadikan Datuk Ahmad Fuad, Datuk Bandar KL sebagai seorang “puppet”nya.
Nampaknya Datuk Shafie ada banyak “free time” untuk memain politik di DBKL dan kawasan Wangsa Maju dan kawasan lain. Saya tahu dia memain politik “on the ground” kerana dia ada niat menjadi popular supaya dia mencapai matlamatnya untuk menjadi Menteri taka lama lagi.
Dia memang amat ambitious seperti Norza, bekas Setiausaha Politik Menteri Kewangan yang telah di tuduh di Mahkamah di Pahang kerana rasuah.
Saya berharap Datuk Shafie Abdullah, seorang UMNOputra, sila mengambil perhatian kedudukan sekarang sahabat karibnya, Norza.MR “POLITICAL TOLL”Saya telah dapat banyak “rumours” terhadap Datuk Shafie ini. Dia amat berkuasa kerana kedudukannya sebagai setiausaha PM selaku Menteri Kewangan. “This “Mr Political Toll” has been dropping PM name every corner of Malaysia.”, dengan izin.
Dia telah dapat satu gelaran yang hebat dan sesuai iaitu “MR POLITICAL TOLL”. Saya tak faham apa maksud “MR POLITICAL TOLL”. Toll jalan, saya faham! POLITICAL TOLL, saya tak faham. Samada maksud “Toll” ini adalah kutipan Toll untuk perjalanan ke pejabat PM atau Menteri Kewangan?
Kemungkinan YAB PM lebih faham atau teliti mengenai apa maksub gelaran “MR POLITICAL TOLL” yang telah dianugerahkan kepada Setiuasahanya, Datuk Shafie!.
Saya ingin memberi amaran kepada Datuk Shafie jangan bermain politik di DBKL – hand off DBKL let the officers do their work without interference. Keep your “Political Toll” to Kementerian Kewangan dan Pejabat Perdana Menteri. DBKL adalah untuk menjaga kepentingan wargakota di Wilayah Persekutuan dan bukan kepentigan politik “Mr Political Toll”, Datuk Shafie Abdullah.
Saya ingin memberi satu contoh yang amat jelas terhadap percampuran tangan dengan pentadbiran harian DBKL oleh Si Political Toll ini (Datuk Sahfie Abdullah).
Pengawai tinngi telah berjanji untuk mengambil tindakan terhadap struktur haram yang dibina oleh Restoran Rashatini di Seksyen 2, Wangsa Maju. Gerai penjaja ini adalah dibina di atas tanah kerajaan tanpa kebenaran dan telah menduduki atas kaki-lima (pavement) dengan tiada ruang untuk orang awam berjalan. Gerai itu memlebihi 10 kaki x 30 kaki yang dibenarkan dibawah undang-undang kechil DBKL.
Saya telah diberitahu oleh pegawi tinggi DBKL bahawa DBKL tidak boleh mengambil apa-apa tindakan sehingga DBKL dapat kebenaran daripada Mr Political Toll ini. Hebatnya kuasa Mr Political Toll ini sampai pegawai tinggi DBKL pun takut kepada dia.Kerana campur tangan politik “poltical interference” oleh Mr Political Toll sehingga hari ini (sudah 5 bulan) tiada apa-apa tindakan diambil oleh DBKL terhadap struktur haram tersebut.
Tuan Yang Di-Pertua,Berani saya cakap dengan terus terang bahawa “the 4th Floor Syndrome” masih wujud di Pejabat Perdana Menteri dan Kementerian Kewangan.
Saya fikir bahawa “4th Floor syndrome ini wujud pada zaman Kerajaan “Tertidur” sahaja. Saya berharap PM mengambil perhatian terhadap “Mr Political Toll” ini dan kuncu-kuncunya.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua,
Saya bersetuju dengan PM semasa beliau menyatakan bahawa “Kerajaan meikul tanggungjawab besar untuk memastikan bahawa hasil Negara dinikmati oleh seluruh rakyat secara adil dan saksama.”
Tuan Yang di-Pertua,
Pentadbiran Suruhanjaya SekuritiUnico Holding Bhd (UHB) telah ditubuhkan untuk masyarakat orang Tiong Hua tetapi sarikat ini telah dipergunakan oleh pengrahnya, Tan Sri Ngan Ching Wen an kuncu-kuncunya iaitu, Teoh Hock Chai @ Tew Hock Chai, Dr Yeong Cheong Thye @ Yeong Yun Chai, Lim Guan Teik untuk kepentingan mereka sendiri. Mereka telah mengabaikan masyarikat orang Tiong Hua.
Mereka mengunakan pelbagai taktik-taktik perniagaan kotor dan Unico Holding telah dijadikan sebuah syarikat persendirian Tan Sri Ngan Ching Wen dan kuncu-kuncunya.Mereka ini adalah “corporate crooks” yang mesti di “flushed out from our corporate world” to protect members of the public from being cheated by these corporate crooks, dengan izin.
Tan Sri Ngan Ching Wen Semenjak pertubuhan UNICO Holding Bhd, Tan Sri Ngan Ching Wen selaku pengarah dari tahun 2000 hingga 2002 selepas diiystiharkan sebagai seorang bankrupt, sehingga sekarang, telah melanggar beberapa undang-undang termasuk
(i) Section 132 (1) Akta Syarikat 1965 dengan tidak melaksanakan kewajipan untuk kepentingan yang terbaik untuk Unico Holding Bhd, susidiarinya and syarikat-syarikat berkaitannya telah melanggar kewajipan fidusiarinya terhadap Unico Holding Bhd,
(ii) mengambil tindakan untuk memudaratkan kepentingnan minoriti di Unico Holding Bhd (iii) memasuki beberapa transaksi-transaksi parti berkaitan yang tidak dikemukakan kepada penguatkuasa dan
(iv) melanggar beberapa kesalahan-kesalahan termasuk insider trading melanggari Capital Market and Services Act 2007.Contoh yang amat jelas :Projek Di Xi-an Negara People Republic of ChinaDeposit Sungguh-sungguh (Earnest Deposit) / Pelanggaran Amanah Jenayah (Criminal Breach of Trusts)Pada 18.9.2009, ia adalah didedahkan dalam mesyuarat umum tahunan Unico Holding Bhd bahawa Tan Sri Ngan Ching Wen telah mendapatkan satu pinjaman daripada Unico Holding Bhd, menerusi subsidiari Unico Holding Bhd iaitu Shanghai Orchid Garden Properties Development Co. Ltd berjumlah RMB10 juta dengan alasan untuk membayar deposit untuk mendapatkan satu projek pembagunan di Xi’an untuk Unico Holding Bhd.Tan Sri Ngan telah melanggari undang-undang dengan mendapatkan satu pinjaman peribadi daripada syarikat dan seterusnya, sampai sekarang, deposit tersebut itu adalah tidak dapat dikesan dan dana itu telah disalurkan kepada satu syarikat yang dikawal oleh Tan Sri Ngan Ching Wen di Hong Kong, iaitu, Group 5 International Investment Ltd (“Group 5”). Pengarah-pengarah Group 5 adalah Tan Sri Ngan Ching Wen, Lim Guan Teik and Yeong Cheong Thye. Ini adalah satu kesalahan “criminal breach of trust”.Saya juga difahamkan bahawa penipuan dan pelanggaran undang-undang yagn telah dilaporkan kepada Suruhanjaya Sekuriti tetapi sehingga kini tiada apa apa-apa tindakan diambil. Inikah “Rakyat DiDahulukan” oleh Kerajaan “1 Malaysia”?
Saya berharap bahawa YAB PM selaku Menteri Kewangan boleh memebri penjelasan apakah tindakan akan diambil oleh Suruhanjaya Sekuriti terhadap “corporate crooks” terebut demi menjaga kepentingan pemengang saham kecil di dalam Negara.
Kami menyeru pihak pihak berkuatkuasa, termasuk polis, Securities Commission dan Surahanjaya Syarikat Malaysia untuk mengambil tindakan trhadap “corporate crooks “ tersebut dengan segara. .
Tuan Yang di-Pertua,
Bagaimana kekayaan Negara dapat dinikmati oleh rakyat dalam keadaan yang adil dan saksama semasa dana Negara adalah dipersalahgunakan dan disedut keluar oleh individu atau syarikat-syarikat menggunakan dokumen yang tidak sah?
Ministry of Science, Technologies and InnovationsTechnoFund – Venturepharm asia Sdn BhdSebagai contoh, Kementerian Science, Technologies and Innovation (MOSTI) semasa berurus dengan TechnoFund juta-juta Rnggit telah diagihkan dengan tiada kawalan kepada syarikat penyelidikan palsu.
Venturepharm Asia Sdn Bhd (Venturepharm), satu syarikat yang dimiliki dan dikawal oleh Madam Grace Chen Oyan Yun Shai, yang berasal dari Taiwan.
Venturepharm menggunakan satu perjanjian palsu yang telah ditandatangani dengan XLW Inc di USA untuk membuat penyelidikan bio-feed. XLW Inc adalah tidak wujud. Dengan tiadanya proses pencarian dan siasatan yang sewarjanya, MOSTI telah memluluskan Technofund berjumlah RM5.36 million kepada Ventruepharm.
Dalam tempoh satu tahun, MOSTI telah membayar sejumlah RM2.3 million dengan tiada “due diligent”.
Saya telah memberi semua maklumat-maklumat yang terperinci termasuk Joint Venture agreement, emails dalam sessi Parlimen terdahulu berkenaan penipuan Venturepharm dan juga telah memberi bukti-bukti dokumen kepada Menteri MOSTI, sehingga sekarang, MOSTI belum mengambil apa-apa tindakan untuk mendakwa pengarah-pengarah Venturepharm atau mengambil apa-apa tindakan untuk menuntut wang rakyat sejumlah RM2.3 million yang ditipu oleh Grace Chen Oyan Yun Shai.
Apakah tindakan akan di ambil oleh MOSTI terhadap pengarah Venturepharm ia itu Grace Chen Oyan Yun Shai?Tuan Yang di-Pertua,Venturepharm Asia Bhd dan Madam Chen Oyan Yun Shai bukanlah menipu MOSTI sahaja ia juga ada terlibat dengan Kementerian Pelancongan.Saya menyeru Menteri Perlancongan untuk memberi penjelasan:
Memandangkan pembantu peribadi terdahulu Menteri, iaitu Madam Ivy See adalah seorang pengarah eksutif Daley PR, adakah ia mempunyai satu conflict of interest terhadap Menteri semasa memberi kontrak pengiklanan kepada Daley PR untuk kerja-kerja pengiklanan di China?
Apakah alasan-alasan tender pertama Malaysian Pavilion Project dibatalkan selepas Menteri mengambil jawatan sejak April 2009?
Apakah alasan-alasan sementara akhir bulan June 2009 Venturepharm telah dianugerahkan dengan kerja pembinaan Malaysian Pavilion di mana ia tidak mempunyai rekod dalam kerja pembinaan semasa Venturepharm telah didedahkan di Parlimen dengan terlibat dengan penipuan MOSTI untuk mendapatkan TechnoFund?
Adakah ia mempunyai apa-apa perbezaan (variation order) dengan jumlah RM10 to 20 million untuk Malaysian Pavilion project?
Sekian, terima kasih.Nota:Kerana masa tidak cukup, Speaker telah hadkan masa 12 minit untuk saya mengucap. Ada banyak isu-isu penting tidak boleh di bahas. Saya akan bahawa isu-isu yang belum di bahas kepada peringkat Perbahasan Jawantkuasa Parlimen dalam tempoh dua minggu lagi. Terima kasih.
Sumber - KLPos.com
Friday, November 13, 2009
CORRIDORS OF POWER RAJA PETRA ( KES DSAI )
Kalau dulu masa perbicaraan kita tidak begitu faham mengenai prosiding perbicaraan, kira maklumat Raja Petra nampak lebih jelas lagi.
DAY 2 - 25 MARCH 2003 ( PART 1 ).
Ummi confesses to being the architect behind the Anwar sodomy allegation; a purely fabricated charge
During the earlier trial, it was revealed that the Special Branch tried to convince Anwar to “take action” but that Anwar refused, until pressed further by the Director who said it was “for the sake of national security” before Anwar agreed that action be taken.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
In a new twist to the Anwar Saga, it was revealed that Ummi Hafilda Ali was the architect behind the accusation that Anwar had sodomised Azizan Abu Bakar. And, for this, she was disowned by her father just months before he died of a broken heart.
Christopher Fernando told the Kuala Lumpur Appeal Court that Said Awang, the Director of the Special Branch, went to meet Azmin Ali, Ummi’s brother, who was then Anwar’s Chief Private Secretary, to solicit his (Azmin’s) assistance to persuade Ummi to retract the allegation that Anwar had sodomised Azizan.
What is most interesting by this revelation is that:
1. Said Awang went to meet Azmin BEFORE he met Anwar. Therefore, the allegation that Anwar had abused his position by summoning the Special Branch, and that he asked them to force Ummi and Azizan to withdraw the sodomy allegation, is a fallacy. In fact, it was not Anwar who summoned Said Awang to see him, but the Special Branch Director who took the initiative to meet Anwar.
2. The idea to persuade Ummi and Azizan to retract the sodomy allegation came from the Special Branch and not Anwar. During the earlier trial, it was revealed that the Special Branch tried to convince Anwar to “take action” but that Anwar refused, until pressed further by the Director who said it was “for the sake of national security” before Anwar agreed that action be taken.
3. The Special Branch was fully aware that it was Ummi who was behind the sodomy allegation and that Azizan was merely the instrument to the whole thing. That was why they wanted Azmin, her brother, to try to persuade Ummi to retract the allegation.
This sheds light on the previous day’s proceedings where Fernando revealed that Azizan testified three times, under oath, that Anwar never sodomised him – an admission that took even the trial judge aback.
Fernando related how Said went to meet Azmin to request a meeting with Anwar Ibrahim. In the meeting with Azmin, Said asked him whether Ummi is his sister and Azmin confirmed so.
Said Awang then asked Azmin whether he was able to persuade his sister to withdraw the sodomy allegation against Anwar but Azmin replied that would be impossible as he no longer talked to his sister since the allegation surfaced.
The Special Branch was aware that Ummi was behind the accusation and was, in fact, the plotter of the whole thing. And, the period when this discussion with Azmin was going on, the Special Branch had not met Anwar yet.
Azmin then called the family together to discuss the issue. In all, three meetings were held that included Ummi herself.
Ummi at first denied she had written the letter to the Prime Minister accusing Anwar of sodomy. Azmin then advised his sister to steer clear of the conspiracy, and that was when she admitted this would be impossible to do as she had been promised money and contracts for her role and, in fact, money had already changed hands.
Ummi later confessed to her father her involvement in the conspiracy and that it was actually she who had written the letter to the Prime Minister. The father, a religious teacher, then disowned her and, soon after, died of a broken heart, never forgiving his daughter for what she had done.
It was clear, from the testimony in court, that Azizan’s letter to the Prime Minister had been written by Ummi. Ummi had confessed to this. Azizan, in turn, during the course of the trial, admitted that Anwar did not sodomise him.
However, when the defence tried to bring up this very crucial bit of evidence during the trial, the trial judge disallowed it. The judge refused to allow the letter to be admitted as evidence or to allow Ummi to be called to court to testify.
Ummi’s role in this whole thing was clear and indisputable. The fact the sodomy accusation against Anwar was false was apparent. Just before he died, Ummi’s father wrote an open letter to Harakah, an opposition newspaper, explaining the whole matter and, in no uncertain terms, accused his daughter of involvement in the conspiracy to frame Anwar and of being the person who wrote the letter to the Prime Minister.
Had the judge allowed this crucial bit of evidence to be admitted, argued Fernando, it would have changed the entire complexion of the case and the judge would have been hard-pressed to find Anwar guilty.
Attempt after attempt was made to frame Anwar of sexual misconduct charges; and Pak Lah is involved too
“There was an evil plot to secure a conviction through devious means,” said Christopher Fernando on the second day of Anwar’s appeal hearing in the Kuala Lumpur Appeal Court.
Fernando then told the court that attempt after attempt was made to frame Anwar on sexual misconduct charges.
One such case was Dr. Munawar Ahmad Anees, then one of Anwar’s speech writers, who was arrested and subjected to physical and mental torture to force him to admit he had a homosexual relationship with Anwar.
Fernando then took the court through the lengthy Affidavit signed by Dr Munawar on 7 November 1998 that detailed the experience he went through at the hands of the Malaysian police.
The torture he endured finally broke him and he admitted to the ‘crime’, which he later retracted in his Affidavit.
Fernando then brought the court’s attention back to the Manjeet Singh Dhillon matter that was raised in court yesterday to emphasis his point of yet another attempt to frame Anwar.
At this point, Fernando called upon the court to recommend a Royal Commission of Inquiry be established to investigate Manjit Singh Dhillon's serious allegation against Abdul Gani Patail and Azhar Mohamad as this is a most serious matter affecting the administration of justice and the rule of law.
"If they are found not to be involved in extorting fabricated evidence, then their names will be cleared," said Fernando. "It will be to their benefit."
"If they are involved, then they ought to be brought to justice. That is the only way to resolve this pressing problem and to restore public confidence."
Clearly there was a concerted effort to frame Anwar. But these attempts were not confined to Malaysia. It also extended to the shores of the US as well, argued Fernando. One case in point was an incident involving Jamal Abder Rahman.
“We are trying to show a pattern, how witnesses were approached to give fabricated evidence and these efforts extended beyond the shores of Malaysia to the US,” said Fernando.
Jamal is an American citizen of Arab descent who operates a limousine service in Washington DC and had a contract to provide limousine services to the Malaysian Embassy in Washington.
In September 1998, soon after Anwar’s dismissal and subsequent arrest, a Malaysian Diplomat, Mustapha Ong, asked Jamal to declare that he had procured women and young boys for Anwar.
DAY 2 - 25 MARCH 2003 ( PART 1 ).
Ummi confesses to being the architect behind the Anwar sodomy allegation; a purely fabricated charge
During the earlier trial, it was revealed that the Special Branch tried to convince Anwar to “take action” but that Anwar refused, until pressed further by the Director who said it was “for the sake of national security” before Anwar agreed that action be taken.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
In a new twist to the Anwar Saga, it was revealed that Ummi Hafilda Ali was the architect behind the accusation that Anwar had sodomised Azizan Abu Bakar. And, for this, she was disowned by her father just months before he died of a broken heart.
Christopher Fernando told the Kuala Lumpur Appeal Court that Said Awang, the Director of the Special Branch, went to meet Azmin Ali, Ummi’s brother, who was then Anwar’s Chief Private Secretary, to solicit his (Azmin’s) assistance to persuade Ummi to retract the allegation that Anwar had sodomised Azizan.
What is most interesting by this revelation is that:
1. Said Awang went to meet Azmin BEFORE he met Anwar. Therefore, the allegation that Anwar had abused his position by summoning the Special Branch, and that he asked them to force Ummi and Azizan to withdraw the sodomy allegation, is a fallacy. In fact, it was not Anwar who summoned Said Awang to see him, but the Special Branch Director who took the initiative to meet Anwar.
2. The idea to persuade Ummi and Azizan to retract the sodomy allegation came from the Special Branch and not Anwar. During the earlier trial, it was revealed that the Special Branch tried to convince Anwar to “take action” but that Anwar refused, until pressed further by the Director who said it was “for the sake of national security” before Anwar agreed that action be taken.
3. The Special Branch was fully aware that it was Ummi who was behind the sodomy allegation and that Azizan was merely the instrument to the whole thing. That was why they wanted Azmin, her brother, to try to persuade Ummi to retract the allegation.
This sheds light on the previous day’s proceedings where Fernando revealed that Azizan testified three times, under oath, that Anwar never sodomised him – an admission that took even the trial judge aback.
Fernando related how Said went to meet Azmin to request a meeting with Anwar Ibrahim. In the meeting with Azmin, Said asked him whether Ummi is his sister and Azmin confirmed so.
Said Awang then asked Azmin whether he was able to persuade his sister to withdraw the sodomy allegation against Anwar but Azmin replied that would be impossible as he no longer talked to his sister since the allegation surfaced.
The Special Branch was aware that Ummi was behind the accusation and was, in fact, the plotter of the whole thing. And, the period when this discussion with Azmin was going on, the Special Branch had not met Anwar yet.
Azmin then called the family together to discuss the issue. In all, three meetings were held that included Ummi herself.
Ummi at first denied she had written the letter to the Prime Minister accusing Anwar of sodomy. Azmin then advised his sister to steer clear of the conspiracy, and that was when she admitted this would be impossible to do as she had been promised money and contracts for her role and, in fact, money had already changed hands.
Ummi later confessed to her father her involvement in the conspiracy and that it was actually she who had written the letter to the Prime Minister. The father, a religious teacher, then disowned her and, soon after, died of a broken heart, never forgiving his daughter for what she had done.
It was clear, from the testimony in court, that Azizan’s letter to the Prime Minister had been written by Ummi. Ummi had confessed to this. Azizan, in turn, during the course of the trial, admitted that Anwar did not sodomise him.
However, when the defence tried to bring up this very crucial bit of evidence during the trial, the trial judge disallowed it. The judge refused to allow the letter to be admitted as evidence or to allow Ummi to be called to court to testify.
Ummi’s role in this whole thing was clear and indisputable. The fact the sodomy accusation against Anwar was false was apparent. Just before he died, Ummi’s father wrote an open letter to Harakah, an opposition newspaper, explaining the whole matter and, in no uncertain terms, accused his daughter of involvement in the conspiracy to frame Anwar and of being the person who wrote the letter to the Prime Minister.
Had the judge allowed this crucial bit of evidence to be admitted, argued Fernando, it would have changed the entire complexion of the case and the judge would have been hard-pressed to find Anwar guilty.
Attempt after attempt was made to frame Anwar of sexual misconduct charges; and Pak Lah is involved too
“There was an evil plot to secure a conviction through devious means,” said Christopher Fernando on the second day of Anwar’s appeal hearing in the Kuala Lumpur Appeal Court.
Fernando then told the court that attempt after attempt was made to frame Anwar on sexual misconduct charges.
One such case was Dr. Munawar Ahmad Anees, then one of Anwar’s speech writers, who was arrested and subjected to physical and mental torture to force him to admit he had a homosexual relationship with Anwar.
Fernando then took the court through the lengthy Affidavit signed by Dr Munawar on 7 November 1998 that detailed the experience he went through at the hands of the Malaysian police.
The torture he endured finally broke him and he admitted to the ‘crime’, which he later retracted in his Affidavit.
Fernando then brought the court’s attention back to the Manjeet Singh Dhillon matter that was raised in court yesterday to emphasis his point of yet another attempt to frame Anwar.
At this point, Fernando called upon the court to recommend a Royal Commission of Inquiry be established to investigate Manjit Singh Dhillon's serious allegation against Abdul Gani Patail and Azhar Mohamad as this is a most serious matter affecting the administration of justice and the rule of law.
"If they are found not to be involved in extorting fabricated evidence, then their names will be cleared," said Fernando. "It will be to their benefit."
"If they are involved, then they ought to be brought to justice. That is the only way to resolve this pressing problem and to restore public confidence."
Clearly there was a concerted effort to frame Anwar. But these attempts were not confined to Malaysia. It also extended to the shores of the US as well, argued Fernando. One case in point was an incident involving Jamal Abder Rahman.
“We are trying to show a pattern, how witnesses were approached to give fabricated evidence and these efforts extended beyond the shores of Malaysia to the US,” said Fernando.
Jamal is an American citizen of Arab descent who operates a limousine service in Washington DC and had a contract to provide limousine services to the Malaysian Embassy in Washington.
In September 1998, soon after Anwar’s dismissal and subsequent arrest, a Malaysian Diplomat, Mustapha Ong, asked Jamal to declare that he had procured women and young boys for Anwar.
Monday, November 9, 2009
THE NIZAR versus ZAMRY FEDERAL COURT APPEAL : An analysis of the judge involved
Teringat pula masa Tun Salleh Abbas menjadi Ketua Hakim Negera. Kes UMNO yang dibawa oleh Team N. YA Tun Salleh nak penuhkan korum seramai 9 orang. Akhirnya..... jatuh terduduk Tun Salleh Abas. Belajar & fahami.......
Surely a competent, unbiased and diligent thing to do is to assign this very important case to Judges who have not been involved in any of the ‘Perak Cases’ before -- so that the public would not view or perceive any bias on the part of the Judges, especially when the Judges who are now sitting have decided against Nizar (and in favour of Zambry) in one or two of the ‘Perak Cases’ before.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
When I was detained under Section 73(1) of the Internal Security Act in April 2001, my wife filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus. We lost the case so my wife then filed an appeal and eventually it went up to the Federal Court and was heard by a five-man bench as follows:
1) Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah, CJ
2) Wan Adnan Ismail, PCA
3) Steve Shim Lip Kiong, CJ (Sabah & Sarawak)
4) Abdul Malek Ahmad, FCJ
5) Siti Norma Yaakob, FCJ
Halfway through the hearing, Wan Adnan died and I was asked whether I would like to ask for him to be replaced or go with the remaining four-man bench. If I insist that the dead Judge be replaced then the case would have to start all over again.
The Chinese say ‘four’ means ‘die’ but so much time had already been wasted and I did not want to go through the whole thing from the beginning. I agreed to take my chances and go with the four-man bench, which was actually quite dangerous if the decision turns out to be two-two with no fifth vote.
On 6 September 2002, the four-man bench ruled my detention illegal. Nevertheless, I had already been released by then so it was merely a ‘technical win’. But it was important because this meant that the court agreed that my detention was illegal and this would help in the event I get detained a second time some time in the future.
And, as suspected, I was detained a second time in September 2008. And, yet again, my wife filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus. And, yet again, the court ruled my detention illegal and freed me on 7 November 2008.
But this time there was a slight twist to the whole issue. The government decided to appeal against my release at around the same time that the government announced it would not appeal the Razak Baginda acquittal on the murder charge.
My lawyers requested a nine-man bench. We thought at best we would get a five-man bench. Seven Judges would have been good but we could live with five, like the last time in 2001-2002.
But the court turned us down. They would only give us a three-man bench. And when we asked on whose decision this was made we were told it was ‘an administrative decision’, whatever that means.
We were also not told who the three judges were going to be even though we asked. It was not until the morning of the hearing that we knew who the Judges were and one of them was certainly not acceptable because over the last 11 years I had insulted him many times and called him a slime-ball and a scumbag.
And considering what I had written about him -- and am still writing about him until today -- how can I be expected to get a fair hearing? Even I would send myself to jail based on what I had written about the Judge. And we objected to this Judge being in the Coram and asked that he be replaced.
But the Federal Court turned us down and refused to listen to our objections. The court insisted that the hearing proceed with the three Judges and I told my lawyers to walk out of court and boycott the hearing if the court refuses our request to replace that Judge who was clearly my ‘enemy’.
And that was when the court backed down.
My lawyers then filed an appeal in another court and this second court agreed that we had grounds to object to one of the members of the three-man bench. Then they suddenly ‘froze’ my case. After telling us not to waste any time and that they are going to proceed with my hearing immediately without further delay, they suddenly just went to sleep and for the last nine months we have heard nothing from the court.
It is apparent they realise they are not able to proceed with the hearing unless they agree to our request to change one of the Judges. But they do not wish to change the Judge. So this means they can’t proceed with my hearing.
So what do they do? If they do not proceed with the hearing, because they refuse to change the Judge, then they can’t get me back into Kamunting. Ah, but they can. If they can’t get me back into Kamunting by reversing the court decision to free me, they can always get me back by issuing a new detention order.
Just ignore the earlier detention order -- which is being contested and which the court has already declared null and which is being argued in court as to whether the three-man bench should be changed. It is already getting too messy anyway. Issue a fresh detention order and bypass the entire court process. After all, there are hundreds of other articles published in Malaysia Today that they can use as the justification for a fresh detention order.
And that was when I decided I have had enough of the Malaysian judicial system. I am prepared to fight them in court if they play fair. But to fuck around with the selection of Judges and then bury the hearing when they realise they are losing and then pursue me with a fresh detention order is pushing it a bit.
And that was when I decided to tell the court to go fuck itself. I am no longer going to entertain this charade and sham trial in a kangaroo court. They can’t keep moving the goalposts halfway through the game when they find they can’t win. And even after moving the goalposts and they find they still can’t win they declare game over and start a new game.
I am not as stupid as I look. And if the government thinks I am going to sit there while they play around with the judicial system and snigger behind my back then they got another think coming. Now it is I who am having the last laugh on them.
And now we see the same thing happening in the Perak Constitutional Crisis fiasco.
In the recent appeal in the Federal Court, a five-man bench sat to hear the case. The Coram was:
1) YAA Tan Sri Dato' Seri Alauddin bin Dato' Mohd. Sheriff (President of the Court of Appeal)
2) YAA Dato’ Arifin bin Zakaria (Chief Judge of the High Court of Malaya)
3) YA Dato' Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin (Federal Court Judge) (appointed 5th September 2007)
4) YA Datuk Wira Haji Mohd Ghazali bin Mohd Yusoff (Federal Court Judge) (appointed April 2009)
5) YA Dato' Abdull Hamid bin Embong (Federal Court Judge) (appointed October 2009)
The Federal Court has nine Judges. In addition to this, the Chief Justice; President of the Court of Appeal; Chief Judge of Malaya and the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak also sit in the Federal Court. So, in total, there are 13 Judges who sit in the Federal Court. They are, in order of seniority:
1) YAA Tun Dato’ Sri Zaki bin Tun Azmi (Chief Justice) - A
2) YAA Tan Sri Dato' Seri Alauddin bin Dato' Mohd. Sheriff (President of the Court of Appeal) - B
3) YAA Dato’ Arifin bin Zakaria (Chief Judge of the High Court of Malaya) - B
4) YAA Tan Sri Datuk Seri Panglima Richard Malanjum (Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak) - A
5) YA Dato' Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin (Federal Court Judge) (appointed 5th September 2007) - B
6) YA Dato’ Sri Augustine Paul - C
7) YA Dato’ Hashim bin Dato’ Haji Yusoff - A
8) YA Datuk Gopal Sri Ram - A
9) YA Datuk Wira Haji Mohd Ghazali bin Mohd Yusoff - B
10) YA Dato’ James Foong Cheng Yuen - C
11) YA Dato’ Mohd Raus bin Sharif - C
12) YA Dato' Abdull Hamid bin Embong - B
13) YA Datuk Heliliah binti Mohd Yusof - A
The ones marked ‘B’ in green are the Judges in the recent Federal Court ‘Perak Case’. These are Judges who had always been involved in the other ‘Perak Cases’. The chart below provides all the Judges who have been involved, one way or another, in the other ‘Perak Cases’ in either the Court of Appeal or the Federal Court.
The ones marked ‘A’ in red have never been involved with any of the ‘Perak Cases’.
The ones marked ‘C’ have been involved in one or two of the ‘Perak Cases’.
It is not suggested that the Judges who have been involved in any of the ‘Perak Cases’ before ought not to hear the Federal Court appeal. They involve different issues. But the bigger issue here is the perception of the public. Surely a competent, unbiased and diligent thing to do is to assign this very important case to Judges who have not been involved in any of the ‘Perak Cases’ before -- so that the public would not view or perceive any bias on the part of the Judges, especially when the Judges who are now sitting have decided against Nizar (and in favour of Zambry) in one or two of the ‘Perak Cases’ before.
The questions, which the public now asks, are:
i) Why is the appeal not fixed to be heard before Judges who have not heard any of the ‘Perak Cases’ before (the ones marked ‘A’ in red)? Of course, Tun Zaki cannot hear this case because he has said he will not be involved in any cases involving UMNO. So the other four Judges could still hear this latest case together with another Court of Appeal Judge who similarly has not been involved at all. (Under the law, Judges of the Court of Appeal may sit in the Federal Court).
ii) When Tun Zaki said he will not get involved in any ‘UMNO cases’, does that mean he can still exercise his administrative power, i.e., the power of choosing the Judges to hear a case involving UMNO? Was he not the one who selected the Judges in this latest appeal?
iii) Why, in an important case involving Constitutional issues such as this, junior Judges are selected instead of more senior Judges?
iv) Would it not be more prudent, diligent, as well as competent, had the Court been convened with a seven-, nine- or even 11-man bench (or even 13) considering the constitutional ramifications of the latest appeal? This case has to review the Ningkan; Amir Kahar and Adegbenro v Akintola case. It brings long-lasting consequences to Malaysian politics and administration. It will define the function, power and discretion of the Sultan (as well as the Agong -- because the Federal Constitution has similar provisions as the Perak Constitution) in relation to a very important matter, i.e., the dissolution of the Assembly/Parliament. This case will be the causa celebrae for the future. It will set precedents. Even in two drug cases, a seven-man bench was convened.
a) ARULPRAGASAN SANDARAJU V. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
FEDERAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
TAN SRI DATO' SERI EUSOFF CHIN CJ TAN SRI DATO' LAMIN MOHD YUNUS PCA TAN SRI DATO' ANUAR ZAINAL ABIDIN CJ (MALAYA) TAN SRI DATO' MOHD AZMI KAMARUDDIN FCJ TAN SRI DATO' EDGAR JOSEPH JR FCJ DATO' PADUKA MOHAMED DZAIDDIN FCJ DATO' WAN ADNAN FCJ
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 05-237-92] – 27.7.1996
b) PP V. TAN TATT EEK & OTHER APPEALS FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA AHMAD FAIRUZ CJ ; ABDUL MALEK AHMAD PCA ; HAIDAR MOHD NOOR CJ (MALAYA) ; STEVE SHIM CJ (SABAH & SARAWAK) ; SITI NORMA YAAKOB FCJ ; PAJAN SINGH GILL FCJ ; AUGUSTINE PAUL JCA [CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS: 05-40-2002 (W), 05-41-2002 (W), 05-68-2002 (P) & 05-70-2002 (P)] - 3 FEBRUARY 2005
The above cases are drug related cases, which concerns the interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Code as well as the Dangerous Drugs Act. But it was deemed fit to convene a seven-man bench because of the ramifications of the case. Surely matters involving Constitutional issues should attract the same, if not more, amount of attention and concern so as to justify a full bench
Surely a competent, unbiased and diligent thing to do is to assign this very important case to Judges who have not been involved in any of the ‘Perak Cases’ before -- so that the public would not view or perceive any bias on the part of the Judges, especially when the Judges who are now sitting have decided against Nizar (and in favour of Zambry) in one or two of the ‘Perak Cases’ before.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
When I was detained under Section 73(1) of the Internal Security Act in April 2001, my wife filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus. We lost the case so my wife then filed an appeal and eventually it went up to the Federal Court and was heard by a five-man bench as follows:
1) Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah, CJ
2) Wan Adnan Ismail, PCA
3) Steve Shim Lip Kiong, CJ (Sabah & Sarawak)
4) Abdul Malek Ahmad, FCJ
5) Siti Norma Yaakob, FCJ
Halfway through the hearing, Wan Adnan died and I was asked whether I would like to ask for him to be replaced or go with the remaining four-man bench. If I insist that the dead Judge be replaced then the case would have to start all over again.
The Chinese say ‘four’ means ‘die’ but so much time had already been wasted and I did not want to go through the whole thing from the beginning. I agreed to take my chances and go with the four-man bench, which was actually quite dangerous if the decision turns out to be two-two with no fifth vote.
On 6 September 2002, the four-man bench ruled my detention illegal. Nevertheless, I had already been released by then so it was merely a ‘technical win’. But it was important because this meant that the court agreed that my detention was illegal and this would help in the event I get detained a second time some time in the future.
And, as suspected, I was detained a second time in September 2008. And, yet again, my wife filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus. And, yet again, the court ruled my detention illegal and freed me on 7 November 2008.
But this time there was a slight twist to the whole issue. The government decided to appeal against my release at around the same time that the government announced it would not appeal the Razak Baginda acquittal on the murder charge.
My lawyers requested a nine-man bench. We thought at best we would get a five-man bench. Seven Judges would have been good but we could live with five, like the last time in 2001-2002.
But the court turned us down. They would only give us a three-man bench. And when we asked on whose decision this was made we were told it was ‘an administrative decision’, whatever that means.
We were also not told who the three judges were going to be even though we asked. It was not until the morning of the hearing that we knew who the Judges were and one of them was certainly not acceptable because over the last 11 years I had insulted him many times and called him a slime-ball and a scumbag.
And considering what I had written about him -- and am still writing about him until today -- how can I be expected to get a fair hearing? Even I would send myself to jail based on what I had written about the Judge. And we objected to this Judge being in the Coram and asked that he be replaced.
But the Federal Court turned us down and refused to listen to our objections. The court insisted that the hearing proceed with the three Judges and I told my lawyers to walk out of court and boycott the hearing if the court refuses our request to replace that Judge who was clearly my ‘enemy’.
And that was when the court backed down.
My lawyers then filed an appeal in another court and this second court agreed that we had grounds to object to one of the members of the three-man bench. Then they suddenly ‘froze’ my case. After telling us not to waste any time and that they are going to proceed with my hearing immediately without further delay, they suddenly just went to sleep and for the last nine months we have heard nothing from the court.
It is apparent they realise they are not able to proceed with the hearing unless they agree to our request to change one of the Judges. But they do not wish to change the Judge. So this means they can’t proceed with my hearing.
So what do they do? If they do not proceed with the hearing, because they refuse to change the Judge, then they can’t get me back into Kamunting. Ah, but they can. If they can’t get me back into Kamunting by reversing the court decision to free me, they can always get me back by issuing a new detention order.
Just ignore the earlier detention order -- which is being contested and which the court has already declared null and which is being argued in court as to whether the three-man bench should be changed. It is already getting too messy anyway. Issue a fresh detention order and bypass the entire court process. After all, there are hundreds of other articles published in Malaysia Today that they can use as the justification for a fresh detention order.
And that was when I decided I have had enough of the Malaysian judicial system. I am prepared to fight them in court if they play fair. But to fuck around with the selection of Judges and then bury the hearing when they realise they are losing and then pursue me with a fresh detention order is pushing it a bit.
And that was when I decided to tell the court to go fuck itself. I am no longer going to entertain this charade and sham trial in a kangaroo court. They can’t keep moving the goalposts halfway through the game when they find they can’t win. And even after moving the goalposts and they find they still can’t win they declare game over and start a new game.
I am not as stupid as I look. And if the government thinks I am going to sit there while they play around with the judicial system and snigger behind my back then they got another think coming. Now it is I who am having the last laugh on them.
And now we see the same thing happening in the Perak Constitutional Crisis fiasco.
In the recent appeal in the Federal Court, a five-man bench sat to hear the case. The Coram was:
1) YAA Tan Sri Dato' Seri Alauddin bin Dato' Mohd. Sheriff (President of the Court of Appeal)
2) YAA Dato’ Arifin bin Zakaria (Chief Judge of the High Court of Malaya)
3) YA Dato' Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin (Federal Court Judge) (appointed 5th September 2007)
4) YA Datuk Wira Haji Mohd Ghazali bin Mohd Yusoff (Federal Court Judge) (appointed April 2009)
5) YA Dato' Abdull Hamid bin Embong (Federal Court Judge) (appointed October 2009)
The Federal Court has nine Judges. In addition to this, the Chief Justice; President of the Court of Appeal; Chief Judge of Malaya and the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak also sit in the Federal Court. So, in total, there are 13 Judges who sit in the Federal Court. They are, in order of seniority:
1) YAA Tun Dato’ Sri Zaki bin Tun Azmi (Chief Justice) - A
2) YAA Tan Sri Dato' Seri Alauddin bin Dato' Mohd. Sheriff (President of the Court of Appeal) - B
3) YAA Dato’ Arifin bin Zakaria (Chief Judge of the High Court of Malaya) - B
4) YAA Tan Sri Datuk Seri Panglima Richard Malanjum (Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak) - A
5) YA Dato' Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin (Federal Court Judge) (appointed 5th September 2007) - B
6) YA Dato’ Sri Augustine Paul - C
7) YA Dato’ Hashim bin Dato’ Haji Yusoff - A
8) YA Datuk Gopal Sri Ram - A
9) YA Datuk Wira Haji Mohd Ghazali bin Mohd Yusoff - B
10) YA Dato’ James Foong Cheng Yuen - C
11) YA Dato’ Mohd Raus bin Sharif - C
12) YA Dato' Abdull Hamid bin Embong - B
13) YA Datuk Heliliah binti Mohd Yusof - A
The ones marked ‘B’ in green are the Judges in the recent Federal Court ‘Perak Case’. These are Judges who had always been involved in the other ‘Perak Cases’. The chart below provides all the Judges who have been involved, one way or another, in the other ‘Perak Cases’ in either the Court of Appeal or the Federal Court.
The ones marked ‘A’ in red have never been involved with any of the ‘Perak Cases’.
The ones marked ‘C’ have been involved in one or two of the ‘Perak Cases’.
It is not suggested that the Judges who have been involved in any of the ‘Perak Cases’ before ought not to hear the Federal Court appeal. They involve different issues. But the bigger issue here is the perception of the public. Surely a competent, unbiased and diligent thing to do is to assign this very important case to Judges who have not been involved in any of the ‘Perak Cases’ before -- so that the public would not view or perceive any bias on the part of the Judges, especially when the Judges who are now sitting have decided against Nizar (and in favour of Zambry) in one or two of the ‘Perak Cases’ before.
The questions, which the public now asks, are:
i) Why is the appeal not fixed to be heard before Judges who have not heard any of the ‘Perak Cases’ before (the ones marked ‘A’ in red)? Of course, Tun Zaki cannot hear this case because he has said he will not be involved in any cases involving UMNO. So the other four Judges could still hear this latest case together with another Court of Appeal Judge who similarly has not been involved at all. (Under the law, Judges of the Court of Appeal may sit in the Federal Court).
ii) When Tun Zaki said he will not get involved in any ‘UMNO cases’, does that mean he can still exercise his administrative power, i.e., the power of choosing the Judges to hear a case involving UMNO? Was he not the one who selected the Judges in this latest appeal?
iii) Why, in an important case involving Constitutional issues such as this, junior Judges are selected instead of more senior Judges?
iv) Would it not be more prudent, diligent, as well as competent, had the Court been convened with a seven-, nine- or even 11-man bench (or even 13) considering the constitutional ramifications of the latest appeal? This case has to review the Ningkan; Amir Kahar and Adegbenro v Akintola case. It brings long-lasting consequences to Malaysian politics and administration. It will define the function, power and discretion of the Sultan (as well as the Agong -- because the Federal Constitution has similar provisions as the Perak Constitution) in relation to a very important matter, i.e., the dissolution of the Assembly/Parliament. This case will be the causa celebrae for the future. It will set precedents. Even in two drug cases, a seven-man bench was convened.
a) ARULPRAGASAN SANDARAJU V. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
FEDERAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
TAN SRI DATO' SERI EUSOFF CHIN CJ TAN SRI DATO' LAMIN MOHD YUNUS PCA TAN SRI DATO' ANUAR ZAINAL ABIDIN CJ (MALAYA) TAN SRI DATO' MOHD AZMI KAMARUDDIN FCJ TAN SRI DATO' EDGAR JOSEPH JR FCJ DATO' PADUKA MOHAMED DZAIDDIN FCJ DATO' WAN ADNAN FCJ
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 05-237-92] – 27.7.1996
b) PP V. TAN TATT EEK & OTHER APPEALS FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA AHMAD FAIRUZ CJ ; ABDUL MALEK AHMAD PCA ; HAIDAR MOHD NOOR CJ (MALAYA) ; STEVE SHIM CJ (SABAH & SARAWAK) ; SITI NORMA YAAKOB FCJ ; PAJAN SINGH GILL FCJ ; AUGUSTINE PAUL JCA [CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS: 05-40-2002 (W), 05-41-2002 (W), 05-68-2002 (P) & 05-70-2002 (P)] - 3 FEBRUARY 2005
The above cases are drug related cases, which concerns the interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Code as well as the Dangerous Drugs Act. But it was deemed fit to convene a seven-man bench because of the ramifications of the case. Surely matters involving Constitutional issues should attract the same, if not more, amount of attention and concern so as to justify a full bench
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER : RAJA PETRA KAMARUDIN
Down to the memory lane, renung renungkan.........
Prosecution’s ‘star witness’ proven unreliable; admits Anwar never sodomised him.
Fernando then related the meetings another lawyer, Manjeet Singh Dhillon, had with the two Chief Prosecutors, one of whom is now the Attorney-General. In the meetings, the two prosecutors, Abdul Gani Patail and Azhar Mohamad, used extortion and blackmail to try to get Manjeet’s client, Dato’ Nalla Karuppan, to fabricate evidence against Anwar.
Christopher Fernando, Anwar Ibrahim’s lead counsel, kicked off the appeal hearing in the Kuala Lumpur Appeal Court by telling the court that the prosecution’s case rested primarily on the evidence of Azizan Abu Bakar. The entire case, in fact, was based on the credibility of Azizan.
However, Fernando said, Azizan consistently contradicted himself during the course of the trial and, therefore, is an unreliable witness.
In fact, the court was told, not only should Azizan have been declared an unreliable witness, but he also should have been impeached and cited for perjury.
“Instead,” argued Fernando, “The learned judge held the witness to be credible, reliable and honest.”
“This witness is one of the most unreliable witnesses ever to have come before a court of law,” said Fernando.
“His evidence is riddled with inconsistencies and outright lies. He has given three different versions of what actually transpired.”
Fernando explained that in the first (corruption) trial, Azizan gave evidence that he was sodomised by Anwar but, in the second (sodomy) trial, he testified he was never sodomised by Anwar.
“He admitted not once, but three times that between the years 1992 and 1997 he was never sodomised by Anwar, and that was why he continued to visit Anwar. If not, he would have kept far away from Anwar.”
“He admitted this in the most unequivocal terms,” said Fernando. “The judge himself was taken aback.”
Fernando said the judge then asked him to repeat the question as maybe Azizan did not understand it. Fernando said he then asked Azizan a second time and, for the second time, Azizan admitted Anwar did not sodomise him.
“I then asked him third time just to make sure and to be fair to him,” said Fernando, “And, for the third time, he admitted that Anwar did not sodomise him.”
“After several days, and during the re-examination, a leading question was asked by the prosecution which was most unfair and the judge ought to have rejected it.”
And the question was, “After 1992, were you sodomised again?”
“The defence objected to this question but the judge allowed the question to be asked,” explained Fernando.
“However, in response to this leading question, whether he was sodomised from 1992 to today (1998), Azizan, again, said he was never sodomised.”
“The judge himself made specific findings. On one occasion he said, “This witness says one thing today and another thing tomorrow”.”
The judge also said, “This witness is very evasive. He refuses to answer even simple questions”.”
“The judge himself found Azizan an unreliable witness.”
“It is mind boggling that, after making such a strong statement, the judge can turn around and say the witness is credible, honest and trustworthy.”
“The judge’s statement contradicts his own findings.”
Prosecution desperate; charges amended to fit witness’ testimony
The prosecution amended the charges against Anwar Ibrahim, twice, in a desperate attempt to fit it to the testimony of its star witness, Azizan Abu Bakar.
“The original charge was ‘one night in the month of May 1994’,” said Christopher Fernando, Anwar’s lead counsel.
“Then, it was revealed that the Tivoli Villa, the place the alleged crime was supposed to have been committed, had not been completed yet.”
“The prosecution found itself in a terrible dilemma. How could sodomy have taken place in a building that had not been completed?”
“So the charge was amended to ‘one night in the month of May 1992’,” explained Fernando.
But this date still could not fit Azizan’s testimony so, in a desperate attempt to salvage their case, it was again amended to “committed the offence of sodomy at 7.45pm between the month of January to March 1993,” argued Fernando.
“First 1994, then 1992 and, finally, 1993,” said Fernando to the court that had the spectator’s gallery by now in stitches.
“The significance of all this was lost on the judge. He was not able to appreciate what was happening.”
“Why the need to amend it to a date in 1993? They could not go backwards to 1992, or earlier, as the building was not even built yet. So the only way was to go forward.”
“Can anybody, without exception, answer a charge as vague as that, all of us included?” asked Fernando.
“One evening in 90 days! I cannot conceive of a more vague and uncertain charge - a most unfair charge.”
“The amendments to the charge are not Bona Fide.” “
The judge then asked, “You mean the amendments were Mala Fide?” to which Fernando replied, “Yes.”
“The charge was amended to fit Azizan’s testimony,” added Fernando.
Azizan, however, testified that he was never sodomised from 1992 onwards.
“He admitted not once, but three times that between the years 1992 and 1997 he was never sodomised by Anwar, and that was why he continued to visit Anwar. If not, he would have kept far away from Anwar,” said Fernando.
“Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah (the Attorney-General then) said, “We have all the records and evidence pertaining to Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s movements in and out of the country between 1992 and 1998’.”
“If you have all the records and evidence of Dato’ Seri Anwar’s movements, why not produce them? Why such a vague date in the charge?”
“The conclusion to this would be, the records and evidence did not show that Dato’ Seri Anwar was at the Tivoli Villa between January and March 1993.”
“These are trumped-up charges. It has to be. There are no two ways about it.”
“The Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister are followed every hour of the day for their own protection and the records of their movements are available.”
“The judge failed to invoke the provisions in section 114(g) of the Evidence Act against the prosecution for failing to produce evidence and records showing Dato’ Seri Anwar’s movements.”
“The records, if produced, would exonerate Dato’ Seri Anwar and would show he was never there (at the Tivoli Villa) during the 60 days (January to March 1993).”
Police coached Azizan on what to testify
It was the police that coached Azizan Abu Bakar, the prosecution’s star witness, on what to testify in court. Christopher Fernando said he had asked Azizan, “Did you tell the police you were sodomised in 1992?”
“Azizan replied that he cannot remember.”
“After further questioning, he then said he did not tell the police he was sodomised in 1992.”
“I then asked him, ‘who fabricated the evidence?’”
“And he replied, he does not know.”
“I further asked him, ‘did you tell the police you were sodomised in May 1994?’”
“He said a number of times that he cannot remember.”
“Finally, he admitted he did not inform the police he was sodomised in May 1994.”
The court was told that Azizan then revealed he was called up by the investigation officer, SAC Musa Hassan, in June 1999.
“I then asked him, ‘were you asked to change the date to 1993?’”
“And he replied, ‘yes’.”
“When asked, ‘who asked you to change the date’, he replied ‘police officer’. Finally, he admitted it was SAC Musa Hassan.”
“Shocking and chilling”; Evidence against Anwar was fabricated
“Shocking and chilling!” That was how Christopher Fernando described the conspiracy to fabricate evidence against the one-time Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia.
Fernando then related the meetings another lawyer, Manjeet Singh Dhillon, had with the two Chief Prosecutors, one of whom is now the Attorney-General. In the meetings, the two prosecutors, Abdul Gani Patail and Azhar Mohamad, used extortion and blackmail to try to get Manjeet’s client, Dato’ Nalla Karuppan, to fabricate evidence against Anwar.
The prosecutors threatened Dato’ Nalla with the death sentence unless he agrees to testify that he was instrumental in procuring women for Anwar.
Dato’ Nalla, however, refused, saying that, short of lying, there is no way he could do that.
They then continued to threaten both him and his family. At first they wanted him to implicate Anwar with two women, then three, then four, and finally they settled for five women, Fernando revealed. The prosecutors also admitted they were looking into matters on behalf of the Prime Minister.
On 25 August 1998, Manjeet filed an Affidavit in court with regards to this matter. On 13 October 1998, Manjeet met the then Attorney-General in the presence of the two prosecutors where the issue was raised.
The Attorney-General apologised for not taking action on Manjeet’s complaint while the two prosecutors remained silent and did not deny the allegation.
They also tried to blackmail another of Manjeet’s client, Dr Munawar Anees, to implicate Anwar with sexual misconduct.
“This shows the police not only tried to get Azizan to lie, but also Dato Nalla and Dr Munawar as well,” said Fernando.The court was told, Anwar did not leave office until 2 September 1998, yet the Attorney-General and Chief Prosecutors were already attempting to fabricate evidence against him long before then
Prosecution’s ‘star witness’ proven unreliable; admits Anwar never sodomised him.
Fernando then related the meetings another lawyer, Manjeet Singh Dhillon, had with the two Chief Prosecutors, one of whom is now the Attorney-General. In the meetings, the two prosecutors, Abdul Gani Patail and Azhar Mohamad, used extortion and blackmail to try to get Manjeet’s client, Dato’ Nalla Karuppan, to fabricate evidence against Anwar.
Christopher Fernando, Anwar Ibrahim’s lead counsel, kicked off the appeal hearing in the Kuala Lumpur Appeal Court by telling the court that the prosecution’s case rested primarily on the evidence of Azizan Abu Bakar. The entire case, in fact, was based on the credibility of Azizan.
However, Fernando said, Azizan consistently contradicted himself during the course of the trial and, therefore, is an unreliable witness.
In fact, the court was told, not only should Azizan have been declared an unreliable witness, but he also should have been impeached and cited for perjury.
“Instead,” argued Fernando, “The learned judge held the witness to be credible, reliable and honest.”
“This witness is one of the most unreliable witnesses ever to have come before a court of law,” said Fernando.
“His evidence is riddled with inconsistencies and outright lies. He has given three different versions of what actually transpired.”
Fernando explained that in the first (corruption) trial, Azizan gave evidence that he was sodomised by Anwar but, in the second (sodomy) trial, he testified he was never sodomised by Anwar.
“He admitted not once, but three times that between the years 1992 and 1997 he was never sodomised by Anwar, and that was why he continued to visit Anwar. If not, he would have kept far away from Anwar.”
“He admitted this in the most unequivocal terms,” said Fernando. “The judge himself was taken aback.”
Fernando said the judge then asked him to repeat the question as maybe Azizan did not understand it. Fernando said he then asked Azizan a second time and, for the second time, Azizan admitted Anwar did not sodomise him.
“I then asked him third time just to make sure and to be fair to him,” said Fernando, “And, for the third time, he admitted that Anwar did not sodomise him.”
“After several days, and during the re-examination, a leading question was asked by the prosecution which was most unfair and the judge ought to have rejected it.”
And the question was, “After 1992, were you sodomised again?”
“The defence objected to this question but the judge allowed the question to be asked,” explained Fernando.
“However, in response to this leading question, whether he was sodomised from 1992 to today (1998), Azizan, again, said he was never sodomised.”
“The judge himself made specific findings. On one occasion he said, “This witness says one thing today and another thing tomorrow”.”
The judge also said, “This witness is very evasive. He refuses to answer even simple questions”.”
“The judge himself found Azizan an unreliable witness.”
“It is mind boggling that, after making such a strong statement, the judge can turn around and say the witness is credible, honest and trustworthy.”
“The judge’s statement contradicts his own findings.”
Prosecution desperate; charges amended to fit witness’ testimony
The prosecution amended the charges against Anwar Ibrahim, twice, in a desperate attempt to fit it to the testimony of its star witness, Azizan Abu Bakar.
“The original charge was ‘one night in the month of May 1994’,” said Christopher Fernando, Anwar’s lead counsel.
“Then, it was revealed that the Tivoli Villa, the place the alleged crime was supposed to have been committed, had not been completed yet.”
“The prosecution found itself in a terrible dilemma. How could sodomy have taken place in a building that had not been completed?”
“So the charge was amended to ‘one night in the month of May 1992’,” explained Fernando.
But this date still could not fit Azizan’s testimony so, in a desperate attempt to salvage their case, it was again amended to “committed the offence of sodomy at 7.45pm between the month of January to March 1993,” argued Fernando.
“First 1994, then 1992 and, finally, 1993,” said Fernando to the court that had the spectator’s gallery by now in stitches.
“The significance of all this was lost on the judge. He was not able to appreciate what was happening.”
“Why the need to amend it to a date in 1993? They could not go backwards to 1992, or earlier, as the building was not even built yet. So the only way was to go forward.”
“Can anybody, without exception, answer a charge as vague as that, all of us included?” asked Fernando.
“One evening in 90 days! I cannot conceive of a more vague and uncertain charge - a most unfair charge.”
“The amendments to the charge are not Bona Fide.” “
The judge then asked, “You mean the amendments were Mala Fide?” to which Fernando replied, “Yes.”
“The charge was amended to fit Azizan’s testimony,” added Fernando.
Azizan, however, testified that he was never sodomised from 1992 onwards.
“He admitted not once, but three times that between the years 1992 and 1997 he was never sodomised by Anwar, and that was why he continued to visit Anwar. If not, he would have kept far away from Anwar,” said Fernando.
“Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah (the Attorney-General then) said, “We have all the records and evidence pertaining to Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s movements in and out of the country between 1992 and 1998’.”
“If you have all the records and evidence of Dato’ Seri Anwar’s movements, why not produce them? Why such a vague date in the charge?”
“The conclusion to this would be, the records and evidence did not show that Dato’ Seri Anwar was at the Tivoli Villa between January and March 1993.”
“These are trumped-up charges. It has to be. There are no two ways about it.”
“The Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister are followed every hour of the day for their own protection and the records of their movements are available.”
“The judge failed to invoke the provisions in section 114(g) of the Evidence Act against the prosecution for failing to produce evidence and records showing Dato’ Seri Anwar’s movements.”
“The records, if produced, would exonerate Dato’ Seri Anwar and would show he was never there (at the Tivoli Villa) during the 60 days (January to March 1993).”
Police coached Azizan on what to testify
It was the police that coached Azizan Abu Bakar, the prosecution’s star witness, on what to testify in court. Christopher Fernando said he had asked Azizan, “Did you tell the police you were sodomised in 1992?”
“Azizan replied that he cannot remember.”
“After further questioning, he then said he did not tell the police he was sodomised in 1992.”
“I then asked him, ‘who fabricated the evidence?’”
“And he replied, he does not know.”
“I further asked him, ‘did you tell the police you were sodomised in May 1994?’”
“He said a number of times that he cannot remember.”
“Finally, he admitted he did not inform the police he was sodomised in May 1994.”
The court was told that Azizan then revealed he was called up by the investigation officer, SAC Musa Hassan, in June 1999.
“I then asked him, ‘were you asked to change the date to 1993?’”
“And he replied, ‘yes’.”
“When asked, ‘who asked you to change the date’, he replied ‘police officer’. Finally, he admitted it was SAC Musa Hassan.”
“Shocking and chilling”; Evidence against Anwar was fabricated
“Shocking and chilling!” That was how Christopher Fernando described the conspiracy to fabricate evidence against the one-time Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia.
Fernando then related the meetings another lawyer, Manjeet Singh Dhillon, had with the two Chief Prosecutors, one of whom is now the Attorney-General. In the meetings, the two prosecutors, Abdul Gani Patail and Azhar Mohamad, used extortion and blackmail to try to get Manjeet’s client, Dato’ Nalla Karuppan, to fabricate evidence against Anwar.
The prosecutors threatened Dato’ Nalla with the death sentence unless he agrees to testify that he was instrumental in procuring women for Anwar.
Dato’ Nalla, however, refused, saying that, short of lying, there is no way he could do that.
They then continued to threaten both him and his family. At first they wanted him to implicate Anwar with two women, then three, then four, and finally they settled for five women, Fernando revealed. The prosecutors also admitted they were looking into matters on behalf of the Prime Minister.
On 25 August 1998, Manjeet filed an Affidavit in court with regards to this matter. On 13 October 1998, Manjeet met the then Attorney-General in the presence of the two prosecutors where the issue was raised.
The Attorney-General apologised for not taking action on Manjeet’s complaint while the two prosecutors remained silent and did not deny the allegation.
They also tried to blackmail another of Manjeet’s client, Dr Munawar Anees, to implicate Anwar with sexual misconduct.
“This shows the police not only tried to get Azizan to lie, but also Dato Nalla and Dr Munawar as well,” said Fernando.The court was told, Anwar did not leave office until 2 September 1998, yet the Attorney-General and Chief Prosecutors were already attempting to fabricate evidence against him long before then
Sunday, October 18, 2009
WHY PAKATAN RAKYAT GOVERNMENT WAS BROUGHT DOWN IN PERAK
Hang Jebat kata : Raja yang adil Raja disembah, Raja yang zalim Raya yang disanggah..... mamu tak boleh nak komen lebih - lebih. Pikiaq pikiag laa.
Monday, 19 October 2009 04:23
Nazrin’s succession to the Perak throne depends on the goodwill of the federal government. But only if the state government is a Barisan Nasional government will there be this goodwill. If Pakatan Rakyat remains the state government, then expect Nazrin to pay the price when his time comes to succeed his father.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
We all know what happened in Perak. What many do not know is why it happened.
If you can remember, it took one week for the Perak and Selangor state governments to get sworn in after the March 2008 general election. The Sultans of these two states wanted to first ‘discuss the matter’ with the Pakatan Rakyat State Assemblypersons. The Sultans then set certain terms and conditions before agreeing to swear in the new Pakatan Rakyat state governments.
This gap of one week allowed the old Barisan Nasional state governments time to remove and destroy quite a lot of very damaging evidence of the wrongdoings of the previous governments.
The one-week delay also allowed Barisan Nasional to negotiate the possibility of PAS teaming up with Umno to form the state governments in Perak and Selangor. Umno even agreed that PAS would become the Menteris Besar of these two states. And, to add icing to the cake, Umno even agreed to allow PAS to implement Islamic laws in these two states.
But PAS stayed loyal to their two other partners in Pakatan Rakyat, PKR and DAP, and they declined Umno’s offer. Finally, the two Sultans had no choice but to swear in the Pakatan Rakyat state governments in Perak and Selangor. But this did not stop them from plotting behind the scenes on how to bring down the governments.
The Sultan of Selangor was quite prepared to consider the whole matter a fait accompli. After all, Pakatan Rakyat in Selangor had a clear majority and it would be quite difficult to buy off so many State Assemblypersons. But Perak was another matter altogether. Pakatan Rakyat’s majority in Perak was thinner than in Selangor.
As soon as the new state government had been put in place, the Sultan of Perak began asking for this, that and the other. The Pakatan Rakyat Perak state government would have been quite prepared to tolerate some of the demands of the Perak Palace for the sake of maintaining a good relationship with the Palace. But what the Sultan and his family wanted was just too excessive and the Pakatan Rakyat Perak state government had no choice but to say no to the Sultan’s demands.
And this, of course, upset the Sultan. So, when Pakatan Rakyat lost its majority in the Perak State Assembly, it did not take too much persuading for the Sultan to agree to swear in a new Barisan Nasional state government.
At first, the Sultan was not too sure whether he should kick out the Pakatan Rakyat state government in favour of a Barisan Nasional government. When the Pakatan Rakyat Menteri Besar, Nizar Jamaluddin, went before the Sultan to request that the State Assembly be dissolved to make way for fresh state elections, the Sultan said he would think about it first. But immediately after that the Prime Minister, Najib Tun Razak, went to meet the Sultan and the Sultan was persuaded to reject the Pakatan Rakyat request to dissolve the State Assembly and instead he swore in Barisan Nasional as the new state government.
Najib’s ‘persuasion’ was simple. Nazrin, his son, should not be the Raja Muda of Perak. And this means he should also not be the next Sultan. And in the event that the Sultan dies, as surely he will one day, the federal government will not support Nazrin as the next Sultan of Perak. See what happened to Negeri Sembilan. Although the Yamtuan appointed his son as the regent, this does not mean he becomes the next Yamtuan.
So, Nazrin’s succession to the Perak throne depends on the goodwill of the federal government. But only if the state government is a Barisan Nasional government will there be this goodwill. If Pakatan Rakyat remains the state government, then expect Nazrin to pay the price when his time comes to succeed his father.
Furthermore, the Sultan and his family has asked for a lot of things from the Pakatan Rakyat state government, all of which they rejected. Umno will ensure that the Sultan and his family get whatever they want if Barisan Nasional takes over as the Perak state government.
And with that Pakatan Rakyat’s fate was sealed. The Sultan swore in Barisan Nasional as the new Perak state government and Pakatan Rakyat was sent into the opposition aisle.
What was it that the Sultan and his family wanted which Pakatan Rakyat said no to and which Barisan Nasional has now said yes? Yes, let us see how in just a few months the Sultan and his family has suddenly become one of the richest royal families in Malaysia, of course, at the expense of Pakatan Rakyat.
1. Umno gave the Sultan a piece of state land known as lot 183578. The land is approximately 600 acres in size and is at Tanjong Tualang in the district of Kinta. This land has been parked under the name of the Sultan’s proxy, Mohamed Khaair Johari Hj Osman.
2. Umno gave the Sultan a 1,000-acre timber concession along the 11km Gerik-Kupang highway in Ulu Kenderong, Gerik, Hulu Perak. This concession was originally given to Universiti Utara Malaysia. However, it was later revoked and given to Pusat Kreatif Kanak-Kanak whose Chairman is Raja Datuk Seri Ashman Shah Ibni Sultan Azlan Shah.
3. Umno gave the Sultan seven timber concessions at compartments 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45 and 49 in the Kenderong Forest Reserve in Hulu Perak. The seven lots, which come to approximately 600 acres, were parked under two proxy companies of the Sultan -- Syarikat Zotonjaya Sdn Bhd and Kibaran Wang Sdn Bhd.
4. Umno is about to approve a proposal for reforestation involving 10,781 hectares. 5,781 hectares is at the Gunung Besout Forest Reserve in Southern Perak while 5,000 hectares is at Pondok Tanjung in the Larut Matang district. The company that will get this huge project is Permatang Utama Sdn Bhd (company registration number 513583-D) whose Executive Chairman is Datuk Seri Ismail Farouk Abdullah, the Sultan’s son-in-law.
5. Further to that, Datuk Seri Ismail Farouk Abdullah was allowed to take over the state-owned Casuarina Hotel in Ipoh for a negotiated cut throat price of only RM43 million whereas it can fetch a far higher price on the open market. The hotel is located in one of the most prime land in Ipoh and just the empty land alone is worth a huge amount of money.
It is not that the Perak Royal Family is destitute. It is more like they are greedy. Raja Datuk Seri Eleena Azlan Shah is a Director of GAMUDA BERHAD and is Malaysia's 25th richest person with assets worth over RM 773 million. This makes her the second richest woman in Malaysia after Puan Sri Chong Chook Yew, who occupies the number 18 slot with more than RM 1 billion in assets.
Gamuda Berhad has been awarded more than RM10 billion worth of contracts. It also operates and maintains 230 kilometres of highways plus is a major township and property developer with four township projects involving more than 30,000 houses.
So there you have it. Perakians, in particular the Malays, think that the opposition is not showing the Sultan of Perak the respect he deserves. What they do not know is the Sultan does not deserve any respect. And many are also not aware why the Sultan wanted Pakatan Rakyat kicked out of Perak.
Now, we hope, they do.
Monday, 19 October 2009 04:23
Nazrin’s succession to the Perak throne depends on the goodwill of the federal government. But only if the state government is a Barisan Nasional government will there be this goodwill. If Pakatan Rakyat remains the state government, then expect Nazrin to pay the price when his time comes to succeed his father.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
We all know what happened in Perak. What many do not know is why it happened.
If you can remember, it took one week for the Perak and Selangor state governments to get sworn in after the March 2008 general election. The Sultans of these two states wanted to first ‘discuss the matter’ with the Pakatan Rakyat State Assemblypersons. The Sultans then set certain terms and conditions before agreeing to swear in the new Pakatan Rakyat state governments.
This gap of one week allowed the old Barisan Nasional state governments time to remove and destroy quite a lot of very damaging evidence of the wrongdoings of the previous governments.
The one-week delay also allowed Barisan Nasional to negotiate the possibility of PAS teaming up with Umno to form the state governments in Perak and Selangor. Umno even agreed that PAS would become the Menteris Besar of these two states. And, to add icing to the cake, Umno even agreed to allow PAS to implement Islamic laws in these two states.
But PAS stayed loyal to their two other partners in Pakatan Rakyat, PKR and DAP, and they declined Umno’s offer. Finally, the two Sultans had no choice but to swear in the Pakatan Rakyat state governments in Perak and Selangor. But this did not stop them from plotting behind the scenes on how to bring down the governments.
The Sultan of Selangor was quite prepared to consider the whole matter a fait accompli. After all, Pakatan Rakyat in Selangor had a clear majority and it would be quite difficult to buy off so many State Assemblypersons. But Perak was another matter altogether. Pakatan Rakyat’s majority in Perak was thinner than in Selangor.
As soon as the new state government had been put in place, the Sultan of Perak began asking for this, that and the other. The Pakatan Rakyat Perak state government would have been quite prepared to tolerate some of the demands of the Perak Palace for the sake of maintaining a good relationship with the Palace. But what the Sultan and his family wanted was just too excessive and the Pakatan Rakyat Perak state government had no choice but to say no to the Sultan’s demands.
And this, of course, upset the Sultan. So, when Pakatan Rakyat lost its majority in the Perak State Assembly, it did not take too much persuading for the Sultan to agree to swear in a new Barisan Nasional state government.
At first, the Sultan was not too sure whether he should kick out the Pakatan Rakyat state government in favour of a Barisan Nasional government. When the Pakatan Rakyat Menteri Besar, Nizar Jamaluddin, went before the Sultan to request that the State Assembly be dissolved to make way for fresh state elections, the Sultan said he would think about it first. But immediately after that the Prime Minister, Najib Tun Razak, went to meet the Sultan and the Sultan was persuaded to reject the Pakatan Rakyat request to dissolve the State Assembly and instead he swore in Barisan Nasional as the new state government.
Najib’s ‘persuasion’ was simple. Nazrin, his son, should not be the Raja Muda of Perak. And this means he should also not be the next Sultan. And in the event that the Sultan dies, as surely he will one day, the federal government will not support Nazrin as the next Sultan of Perak. See what happened to Negeri Sembilan. Although the Yamtuan appointed his son as the regent, this does not mean he becomes the next Yamtuan.
So, Nazrin’s succession to the Perak throne depends on the goodwill of the federal government. But only if the state government is a Barisan Nasional government will there be this goodwill. If Pakatan Rakyat remains the state government, then expect Nazrin to pay the price when his time comes to succeed his father.
Furthermore, the Sultan and his family has asked for a lot of things from the Pakatan Rakyat state government, all of which they rejected. Umno will ensure that the Sultan and his family get whatever they want if Barisan Nasional takes over as the Perak state government.
And with that Pakatan Rakyat’s fate was sealed. The Sultan swore in Barisan Nasional as the new Perak state government and Pakatan Rakyat was sent into the opposition aisle.
What was it that the Sultan and his family wanted which Pakatan Rakyat said no to and which Barisan Nasional has now said yes? Yes, let us see how in just a few months the Sultan and his family has suddenly become one of the richest royal families in Malaysia, of course, at the expense of Pakatan Rakyat.
1. Umno gave the Sultan a piece of state land known as lot 183578. The land is approximately 600 acres in size and is at Tanjong Tualang in the district of Kinta. This land has been parked under the name of the Sultan’s proxy, Mohamed Khaair Johari Hj Osman.
2. Umno gave the Sultan a 1,000-acre timber concession along the 11km Gerik-Kupang highway in Ulu Kenderong, Gerik, Hulu Perak. This concession was originally given to Universiti Utara Malaysia. However, it was later revoked and given to Pusat Kreatif Kanak-Kanak whose Chairman is Raja Datuk Seri Ashman Shah Ibni Sultan Azlan Shah.
3. Umno gave the Sultan seven timber concessions at compartments 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45 and 49 in the Kenderong Forest Reserve in Hulu Perak. The seven lots, which come to approximately 600 acres, were parked under two proxy companies of the Sultan -- Syarikat Zotonjaya Sdn Bhd and Kibaran Wang Sdn Bhd.
4. Umno is about to approve a proposal for reforestation involving 10,781 hectares. 5,781 hectares is at the Gunung Besout Forest Reserve in Southern Perak while 5,000 hectares is at Pondok Tanjung in the Larut Matang district. The company that will get this huge project is Permatang Utama Sdn Bhd (company registration number 513583-D) whose Executive Chairman is Datuk Seri Ismail Farouk Abdullah, the Sultan’s son-in-law.
5. Further to that, Datuk Seri Ismail Farouk Abdullah was allowed to take over the state-owned Casuarina Hotel in Ipoh for a negotiated cut throat price of only RM43 million whereas it can fetch a far higher price on the open market. The hotel is located in one of the most prime land in Ipoh and just the empty land alone is worth a huge amount of money.
It is not that the Perak Royal Family is destitute. It is more like they are greedy. Raja Datuk Seri Eleena Azlan Shah is a Director of GAMUDA BERHAD and is Malaysia's 25th richest person with assets worth over RM 773 million. This makes her the second richest woman in Malaysia after Puan Sri Chong Chook Yew, who occupies the number 18 slot with more than RM 1 billion in assets.
Gamuda Berhad has been awarded more than RM10 billion worth of contracts. It also operates and maintains 230 kilometres of highways plus is a major township and property developer with four township projects involving more than 30,000 houses.
So there you have it. Perakians, in particular the Malays, think that the opposition is not showing the Sultan of Perak the respect he deserves. What they do not know is the Sultan does not deserve any respect. And many are also not aware why the Sultan wanted Pakatan Rakyat kicked out of Perak.
Now, we hope, they do.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
IN THE BEGINING HE WAS DPM by Steadyaku47
What was Anwar's biggest contribution to what we are today? I sat and ponder over this question the whole day today. I wanted to write about it and yet I cannot because there were so many thoughts that came and went inside me. All I could do today was about two half page - notes on times go by – Cakap cakap about AP and then I revisited the “Bentong car park” issue because one of our friends sent me something new about that car park. It is now 11.42pm and I have been thinking since 7.15am this morning….fifteen minutes ago it hit me! I believe that what Anwar did to me and to many of us can be conceptualised in two words:
‘POLITICL AWAKENING”
Before Anwar was dismissed by Mahatir I was a Bumiputra intent on pursuing my “rights” as a Bumiputra. The right to have a share in the perceived richness brought into the consciousness of the Malays as a result of the New Economic Policies. All that was in my mind was where the next ringgit was going to be found. Tenders, project proposals, pink slips, AP’s, IPO, licenses, Privatisation opportunities…life was a whirl of meetings and discussions in five star hotels and lunches in restaurants whose name you find hard to pronounce – Troika was one of those that I can still remember – in Jalan Raja Chulan. The evenings were again another whirl of coffee houses and meetings until the early mornings.
Then 2nd September 1998 he was dismissed as DPM. The next day he was expelled from UMNO. September 20th he was arrested and September 29th he was brought to court to be charged. Five cases for sodomy and five for corruption. My first conscious understanding that this was really happening was seeing him with a black eye. Common sense tells me that no policeman would dare lay a hand on someone who was the DPM just a few months ago….surely Anwar must have injured himself….but looking at him I could see that he was accepting of the fact that he was no longer DPM and I felt that he was coming to terms within himself as to where he would have to go from there. There was a grim acceptance in his face that the battle for his life and his future had begun.
When his trail started do you remember what Judge Augustine Paul said when a request was made by Anwar’s lawyers for observer status to be given to the Malaysian Bar Council, several rights group and the U.N. Rapporteur Param Cumaraswamy?
"This is a big insult to the court," Augustine said of the request. "It gives the impression that the court may not be dispensing justice."
In hindsight and knowing what we know now, I do not know how this Augustine Paul could have prostituted himself to do the biddings of Mahathir! He is the scum of the earth!
As the days unfold and I relive Anwar’s arrest in his house with Balaclava clad personals, his black eye, how he was being treated during the trial and how UMNO and Mahathir was trying to demonized him…my dislike for Mahathir became a dislike for UMNO. Slowly this crystallized into my questioning what was happening within UMNO. It was not enough that Mahathir have dismissed him as DPM - that he relentlessly pursued Anwar in such a manner made me, and I am sure most of us, start to question the sanity of that man who was then our Prime Minister.
So my friends if you ask me what was Anwar’s biggest contribution to our consciousness until now – it will be our political awakening of what is right and what is wrong with our government,with our Prime Minister and with UMNO.….and after much thought we know that Mahathir and UMNO is wrong for our nation! So do not question Anwar’s on his commitment to our cause – we are with him in HIS cause to bring decency and dignity back to how things are done in Malaysia. He showed us the way, he stands in front - but we are together now and we will persevere.
‘POLITICL AWAKENING”
Before Anwar was dismissed by Mahatir I was a Bumiputra intent on pursuing my “rights” as a Bumiputra. The right to have a share in the perceived richness brought into the consciousness of the Malays as a result of the New Economic Policies. All that was in my mind was where the next ringgit was going to be found. Tenders, project proposals, pink slips, AP’s, IPO, licenses, Privatisation opportunities…life was a whirl of meetings and discussions in five star hotels and lunches in restaurants whose name you find hard to pronounce – Troika was one of those that I can still remember – in Jalan Raja Chulan. The evenings were again another whirl of coffee houses and meetings until the early mornings.
Then 2nd September 1998 he was dismissed as DPM. The next day he was expelled from UMNO. September 20th he was arrested and September 29th he was brought to court to be charged. Five cases for sodomy and five for corruption. My first conscious understanding that this was really happening was seeing him with a black eye. Common sense tells me that no policeman would dare lay a hand on someone who was the DPM just a few months ago….surely Anwar must have injured himself….but looking at him I could see that he was accepting of the fact that he was no longer DPM and I felt that he was coming to terms within himself as to where he would have to go from there. There was a grim acceptance in his face that the battle for his life and his future had begun.
When his trail started do you remember what Judge Augustine Paul said when a request was made by Anwar’s lawyers for observer status to be given to the Malaysian Bar Council, several rights group and the U.N. Rapporteur Param Cumaraswamy?
"This is a big insult to the court," Augustine said of the request. "It gives the impression that the court may not be dispensing justice."
In hindsight and knowing what we know now, I do not know how this Augustine Paul could have prostituted himself to do the biddings of Mahathir! He is the scum of the earth!
As the days unfold and I relive Anwar’s arrest in his house with Balaclava clad personals, his black eye, how he was being treated during the trial and how UMNO and Mahathir was trying to demonized him…my dislike for Mahathir became a dislike for UMNO. Slowly this crystallized into my questioning what was happening within UMNO. It was not enough that Mahathir have dismissed him as DPM - that he relentlessly pursued Anwar in such a manner made me, and I am sure most of us, start to question the sanity of that man who was then our Prime Minister.
So my friends if you ask me what was Anwar’s biggest contribution to our consciousness until now – it will be our political awakening of what is right and what is wrong with our government,with our Prime Minister and with UMNO.….and after much thought we know that Mahathir and UMNO is wrong for our nation! So do not question Anwar’s on his commitment to our cause – we are with him in HIS cause to bring decency and dignity back to how things are done in Malaysia. He showed us the way, he stands in front - but we are together now and we will persevere.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Fuhhh.... terangkat perbicaraan kali ni, otai perundangan dah turun padang masuk gelanggang. Panas lagi lah si mamat saifool ni.
Raja Aziz leads Anwar's defence team
Thursday, 20 August 2009 02:37
(Bernama) - After representing Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in his corruption case in 1998, counsel Raja Aziz Addruse has once again been appointed by Anwar to lead the defence team in his second sodomy trial.
Raja Aziz, who was a former Bar Council president, would replace prominent lawyer Sulaiman Abdullah, who had excused himself due to health reasons on July 15.Solicitor for Anwar, SN Nair said in a statement today that Raja Aziz, in the new legal team, would be assisted by Datuk Param Cumaraswamy, Karpal Singh, Datuk CV Prabakharan and himself (Nair).
"In making this announcement, our client, his wife and his family would like to express their deepest and most sincere gratitude to Sulaiman for having rendered exemplary services to our client and would like to wish him all the best," Nair said.
In the previous legal team, Sulaiman had been assisted by Nair, Leela Jesuthasan, Edmund Bon, Saiful Idham Ramli, Amer Hamzah Arshad, Latheefa Koya and Mohd Radzlan Jalaludin.Anwar, 62, is accused of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, 24, at a condominium in Bukit Damansara here on June 26, last year.
The Criminal High Court has set Sept 2 for mention of the sodomy case. The court had initially set July 1 for the hearing but postponed it to facilitate the applications filed by Anwar.
Raja Aziz leads Anwar's defence team
Thursday, 20 August 2009 02:37
(Bernama) - After representing Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in his corruption case in 1998, counsel Raja Aziz Addruse has once again been appointed by Anwar to lead the defence team in his second sodomy trial.
Raja Aziz, who was a former Bar Council president, would replace prominent lawyer Sulaiman Abdullah, who had excused himself due to health reasons on July 15.Solicitor for Anwar, SN Nair said in a statement today that Raja Aziz, in the new legal team, would be assisted by Datuk Param Cumaraswamy, Karpal Singh, Datuk CV Prabakharan and himself (Nair).
"In making this announcement, our client, his wife and his family would like to express their deepest and most sincere gratitude to Sulaiman for having rendered exemplary services to our client and would like to wish him all the best," Nair said.
In the previous legal team, Sulaiman had been assisted by Nair, Leela Jesuthasan, Edmund Bon, Saiful Idham Ramli, Amer Hamzah Arshad, Latheefa Koya and Mohd Radzlan Jalaludin.Anwar, 62, is accused of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, 24, at a condominium in Bukit Damansara here on June 26, last year.
The Criminal High Court has set Sept 2 for mention of the sodomy case. The court had initially set July 1 for the hearing but postponed it to facilitate the applications filed by Anwar.
MUHYIDDIN : CORRUPTION ALLEGATIONS DON'T SCARE ME.
Teringat pulak saya pada kes Dato'Ramli Yusof, Pengarah CID PDRM yang didakwa dan dibicarakan atas pertuduhan menyalah guna pesawat PDRM untuk lawatan kesalah satu ladang beliau di Sabah.
Mat Sembam ( pinjam ayat Hishammudin Rais ) ni ke Sabah untuk attent mesyuarat UMNO bukan atas kapisiti tugas sebagai TPM. Pikiaq pikiaq nuuu.
Muhyiddin: Corruption allegations don’t scare me.
The Malaysian Insider, 18 August 2009
Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin dismissed a corruption complaint filed by PKR over his use of a military helicopter to attend Umno meetings in Sabah.
The deputy Umno president did not, however, offer any explanation as to why he used a military helicopter to fulfill his party duties.“It (the allegations) does not scare me at all. It is a blatant example of how short on ideas Pakatan (Rakyat) are that they have to start coming up with something like this,” he told reporters here today when asked to comment on PKR’s recent allegations of corruption against him.
Yesterday, PKR Youth leaders lodged a complaint against Muhyiddin with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) over his alleged abuse of government property for personal use.This was first highlighted by the news agency Bernama when the DPM flew on a military helicopter to attend the Penampang UMNO division meeting in Sabah after he officiated another division party meeting in Kudat.
PKR Pantai Jerjak assemblyman Sim Tze Min, who lodged the report, said that the news coverage had clearly shown that Muhyiddin was abusing government property for a non-governmental purpose, which was tantamount to corruption.
However, the No.2 leader in the government appeared unfazed by the accusation.“These are views that they should just keep to themselves as they are purposely creating a lot of problems for people,” stated Muhyiddin.
Mat Sembam ( pinjam ayat Hishammudin Rais ) ni ke Sabah untuk attent mesyuarat UMNO bukan atas kapisiti tugas sebagai TPM. Pikiaq pikiaq nuuu.
Muhyiddin: Corruption allegations don’t scare me.
The Malaysian Insider, 18 August 2009
Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin dismissed a corruption complaint filed by PKR over his use of a military helicopter to attend Umno meetings in Sabah.
The deputy Umno president did not, however, offer any explanation as to why he used a military helicopter to fulfill his party duties.“It (the allegations) does not scare me at all. It is a blatant example of how short on ideas Pakatan (Rakyat) are that they have to start coming up with something like this,” he told reporters here today when asked to comment on PKR’s recent allegations of corruption against him.
Yesterday, PKR Youth leaders lodged a complaint against Muhyiddin with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) over his alleged abuse of government property for personal use.This was first highlighted by the news agency Bernama when the DPM flew on a military helicopter to attend the Penampang UMNO division meeting in Sabah after he officiated another division party meeting in Kudat.
PKR Pantai Jerjak assemblyman Sim Tze Min, who lodged the report, said that the news coverage had clearly shown that Muhyiddin was abusing government property for a non-governmental purpose, which was tantamount to corruption.
However, the No.2 leader in the government appeared unfazed by the accusation.“These are views that they should just keep to themselves as they are purposely creating a lot of problems for people,” stated Muhyiddin.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
KES ANWAR MAKIN CELARU
Pergelutan perundangan antara Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim dengan Peguam Negara Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail terus berlanjutan - kali ini bukan di mahkamah tetapi di balai Damansara Utama, Petaling Jaya.Penasihat PKR membuat dua aduan polis berhubung "kenyataan- kenyataan palsu" yang terdapat dalam afidavit pihak pendakwaan berhubung kes liwat terhadapnya dan juga tiada tindakan konkrit berhubung aduannya terhadap peguam negara dan Ketua Polis Negara, Tan Sri Musa Hassan.
Kenyataan tersebut berhubung siasatan terhadap Abdul Gani yang dituduh oleh mantan timbalan perdana menteri, dalam laporan polisnya, pernah terlibat memalsukan laporan berkaitan insiden mata lebamnya, kira-kira 11 tahun lalu.Kedua-dua laporan polis itu akan dibuat awal petang ini.
Aduan pertama berhubung pendirian tiga hakim bebas yang menilai hasil siasatan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) terhadap Abdul Gani yang mendapati seorang daripada anggota panel itu berhujah bahawa terdapat kes jenayah terhadap peguam negara.
Bagaimanapun afidavit yang disediakan oleh Pengarah Bahagian Perundangan dan Pendakwaan SPRM Datuk Razak dan timbalan pendakwaraya Hanafiah Zakariah, pada 30 Jun lalu, menyatakan ketiga-tiga hakim tersebut mendapati tiada kes terhadap Abdul Gani.
"Saya menemui kenyataan palsu yang terkandung di dalam afidavit tersebut. Saya percaya mereka menyedari kepalsuan kenyataan-kenyataan tersebut namun masih tetap memasukkannya untuk tujuan digunakan dalam prosiding mahkamah nanti," kata Anwar.
"Tindakan mereka adalah satu kesalahan jenayah dan menguatkan serta mengesahkan hujah bahawa saya berhadapan dengan pasukan pendakwaan yang merupakan sebahagian daripada konspirasi politik sebagaimana yang wujud ketika perbicaraan 1998 itu."
Ahli parlimen Permatang Pauh mendakwa "Razak dengan sengaja mengelirukan Mahkamah Tinggi" dengan berkata tiga hakim bersara tersebut Datuk Kadir Sulaiman, Datuk Mohd Noor Ahmad dan Datuk Mohama Noor Abdullah "mendapati Abdul Gani tidak terlibat dalam sebarang kesalahan jenayah.
Razak ... sewajarnya menyedari sekurang-kurangnya seorang ahli panel daripada tiga hakim tersebut mendapati Abdul Gani sememangnya melakukan kesalahan jenayah," kata Anwar dalam satu kenyataan berhubung aduan polis terbarunya.
"Hanafiah pula selaku timbalan pendakwaraya kanan semestinya sudah menyiasat dan meneliti fakta-fakta tersebut sebelum memasukkan afidavit Razak yang mengandungi kenyataan palsu ke dalam afidavit pendakwaan (untuk menjawab permohonan Anwar agar kes liwatnya diketepikan)."
Kes ini akan disebut pada 24 Julai, sementara esok mahkamah akan mendengar permohonan pihak pendakwaan untuk menangguhkan perintah menyerahkan dokumen kes liwat kepada Anwar yang diperolehinya daripada hakim, 16 Julai lalu.
Aduan kedua Anwar dibuat berhubung dakwaan polis gagal menyiasat laporan olehnya pada 20 Februari lalu ke atas Abdul Gani dan Musa susulan peranan mereka yang dituduhnya memalsukan laporan polis berkaitan penahanannya pada 20 September 1998.Peguam cara saya telah menghantar surat bertarikh 23 April lalu kepada ketua balai Damansara (Utama) untuk mengetahui status laporan, namun sehingga ke saat ini belum ada sebarang jawapan," kata Anwar lagi.
Menteri Dalam Negeri, Datuk Hishammuddin Hussein - dalam jawapannya kepada soalan Naib Presiden PKR Sivarasa Rasiah di Dewan Rakyat 22 Jun lalu - berkata laporan yang dikemukakan Anwar telah dirujuk kepada SPRM untuk tindakan lanjut pada 21 Februari.
"Peguam saya kemudiannya menghantar surat bertarikh 26 Jun lalu kepada SPRM bertujuan untuk mengetahui kedudukan penyiasatan kerana kami belum mendapat sebarang maklum balas dari mereka selama ini," kata Anwar.
"Kami terkejut apabila menerima maklum balas bertulis bertarikh 10 Julai lalu yang menyatakan mereka telah menerima laporan tersebut, telah menelitinya dan mendapati kesalahan yang didakwa berlaku adalah luar dari bidang kuasa mereka."
Mereka merujuk semula laporan tersebut kepada polis untuk tindakan selanjutnya."Mantan timbalan perdana menteri itu menambah, perkembangan ini bermakna polis dan pegawai Kementerian Dalam Negeri "menyebabkan Hishammuddin mengelirukan Parlimen" dengan mengemukakan jawapan pada 22 Jun kepada Sivarasa, juga ahli parlimen Subang."Polis yang menerima semula laporan tersebut daripada SPRM gagal untuk berbuat apa-apa.
Kesimpulannya adalah jelas - wujud satu perancangan dalam polis untuk memastikan tidak ada tindakan terhadap laporan yang dibuat oleh saya serta memastikan jenayah yang berlaku disembunyikan," kata Anwar dalam kenyataan yang sama."Oleh kerana laporan saya ini menyatakan Abdul Gani dan Musa terbabit memalsukan laporan, usaha menutup serta menyembunyikan dakwaan saya ini pastinya datang dari pihak atasan."Akibat sikap kedua-dua agensi penguatkuasaan itu, Anwar mendakwa Abdul Gani dan Musa "dilindungi secara politik demi menyembunyikan peranan yang dimainkan mereka merekayasa pertuduhan palsu terhadap saya pada 1998 dan sekarang.
"sila klik sini untuk membaca kenyataan penuh.Konon mahkamah adil serah bukti, namun hingga kini bukti pendakwaan masih tidak diserahkan.Permohonan pendakwaan bagi mendapatkan penangguhan perintah Mahkamah Tinggi supaya menyerahkan dokumen yang diminta oleh Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim akan didengar esok.Ia dijadual didengar di hadapan Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah pada 9 pagi, lapor Bernama.
SN Nair, salah seorang peguam yang mewakili Anwar, ketika dihubungi mengesahkan bahawa firmanya SN Nair & Partners menerima surat berhubung perkara itu daripada mahkamah menerusi faksimili, pagi ini.Pada 2 petang semalam, pihak pendakwaan memfailkan notis usul di Bahagian Jenayah Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur, bagi memohon penangguhan pelaksanaan perintah itu yang ditandatangani oleh Datuk Nordin Hassan, seorang daripada timbalan pendakwaraya bagi kes liwat berkenaan.
Turut difailkan ialah perakuan segera agar kes itu didengar secepat mungkin.Pada 16 Julai, Mohamad Zabidin membenarkan permohonan Anwar dan memerintahkan pendakwaan supaya menyerahkan dokumen berkenaan dalam masa tujuh hari.Tempoh tujuh hari itu berakhir pada Khamis.Bagaimanapun, hakim itu menolak permohonan penasihat PKR itu untuk mendapatkan sampel spesimen yang diambil daripada pengadu Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan selepas memutuskan bahawa sampel itu telah disita oleh ahli kimia dan pihak pembelaan boleh memeriksanya setelah dikemukakan kepada mahkamah.Anwar, 62, didakwa meliwat bekas pembantunya Mohd Saiful, 24, di sebuah kondominium di Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur pada 26 Jun tahun lepas.Mahkamah menetapkan 24 Julai untuk sebutan permohonan Anwar bagi mengetepikan tuduhan liwat yang dikenakan terhadapnya dan tarikh sebutan perbicaraan kes itu.
by cheguBard
Kenyataan tersebut berhubung siasatan terhadap Abdul Gani yang dituduh oleh mantan timbalan perdana menteri, dalam laporan polisnya, pernah terlibat memalsukan laporan berkaitan insiden mata lebamnya, kira-kira 11 tahun lalu.Kedua-dua laporan polis itu akan dibuat awal petang ini.
Aduan pertama berhubung pendirian tiga hakim bebas yang menilai hasil siasatan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) terhadap Abdul Gani yang mendapati seorang daripada anggota panel itu berhujah bahawa terdapat kes jenayah terhadap peguam negara.
Bagaimanapun afidavit yang disediakan oleh Pengarah Bahagian Perundangan dan Pendakwaan SPRM Datuk Razak dan timbalan pendakwaraya Hanafiah Zakariah, pada 30 Jun lalu, menyatakan ketiga-tiga hakim tersebut mendapati tiada kes terhadap Abdul Gani.
"Saya menemui kenyataan palsu yang terkandung di dalam afidavit tersebut. Saya percaya mereka menyedari kepalsuan kenyataan-kenyataan tersebut namun masih tetap memasukkannya untuk tujuan digunakan dalam prosiding mahkamah nanti," kata Anwar.
"Tindakan mereka adalah satu kesalahan jenayah dan menguatkan serta mengesahkan hujah bahawa saya berhadapan dengan pasukan pendakwaan yang merupakan sebahagian daripada konspirasi politik sebagaimana yang wujud ketika perbicaraan 1998 itu."
Ahli parlimen Permatang Pauh mendakwa "Razak dengan sengaja mengelirukan Mahkamah Tinggi" dengan berkata tiga hakim bersara tersebut Datuk Kadir Sulaiman, Datuk Mohd Noor Ahmad dan Datuk Mohama Noor Abdullah "mendapati Abdul Gani tidak terlibat dalam sebarang kesalahan jenayah.
Razak ... sewajarnya menyedari sekurang-kurangnya seorang ahli panel daripada tiga hakim tersebut mendapati Abdul Gani sememangnya melakukan kesalahan jenayah," kata Anwar dalam satu kenyataan berhubung aduan polis terbarunya.
"Hanafiah pula selaku timbalan pendakwaraya kanan semestinya sudah menyiasat dan meneliti fakta-fakta tersebut sebelum memasukkan afidavit Razak yang mengandungi kenyataan palsu ke dalam afidavit pendakwaan (untuk menjawab permohonan Anwar agar kes liwatnya diketepikan)."
Kes ini akan disebut pada 24 Julai, sementara esok mahkamah akan mendengar permohonan pihak pendakwaan untuk menangguhkan perintah menyerahkan dokumen kes liwat kepada Anwar yang diperolehinya daripada hakim, 16 Julai lalu.
Aduan kedua Anwar dibuat berhubung dakwaan polis gagal menyiasat laporan olehnya pada 20 Februari lalu ke atas Abdul Gani dan Musa susulan peranan mereka yang dituduhnya memalsukan laporan polis berkaitan penahanannya pada 20 September 1998.Peguam cara saya telah menghantar surat bertarikh 23 April lalu kepada ketua balai Damansara (Utama) untuk mengetahui status laporan, namun sehingga ke saat ini belum ada sebarang jawapan," kata Anwar lagi.
Menteri Dalam Negeri, Datuk Hishammuddin Hussein - dalam jawapannya kepada soalan Naib Presiden PKR Sivarasa Rasiah di Dewan Rakyat 22 Jun lalu - berkata laporan yang dikemukakan Anwar telah dirujuk kepada SPRM untuk tindakan lanjut pada 21 Februari.
"Peguam saya kemudiannya menghantar surat bertarikh 26 Jun lalu kepada SPRM bertujuan untuk mengetahui kedudukan penyiasatan kerana kami belum mendapat sebarang maklum balas dari mereka selama ini," kata Anwar.
"Kami terkejut apabila menerima maklum balas bertulis bertarikh 10 Julai lalu yang menyatakan mereka telah menerima laporan tersebut, telah menelitinya dan mendapati kesalahan yang didakwa berlaku adalah luar dari bidang kuasa mereka."
Mereka merujuk semula laporan tersebut kepada polis untuk tindakan selanjutnya."Mantan timbalan perdana menteri itu menambah, perkembangan ini bermakna polis dan pegawai Kementerian Dalam Negeri "menyebabkan Hishammuddin mengelirukan Parlimen" dengan mengemukakan jawapan pada 22 Jun kepada Sivarasa, juga ahli parlimen Subang."Polis yang menerima semula laporan tersebut daripada SPRM gagal untuk berbuat apa-apa.
Kesimpulannya adalah jelas - wujud satu perancangan dalam polis untuk memastikan tidak ada tindakan terhadap laporan yang dibuat oleh saya serta memastikan jenayah yang berlaku disembunyikan," kata Anwar dalam kenyataan yang sama."Oleh kerana laporan saya ini menyatakan Abdul Gani dan Musa terbabit memalsukan laporan, usaha menutup serta menyembunyikan dakwaan saya ini pastinya datang dari pihak atasan."Akibat sikap kedua-dua agensi penguatkuasaan itu, Anwar mendakwa Abdul Gani dan Musa "dilindungi secara politik demi menyembunyikan peranan yang dimainkan mereka merekayasa pertuduhan palsu terhadap saya pada 1998 dan sekarang.
"sila klik sini untuk membaca kenyataan penuh.Konon mahkamah adil serah bukti, namun hingga kini bukti pendakwaan masih tidak diserahkan.Permohonan pendakwaan bagi mendapatkan penangguhan perintah Mahkamah Tinggi supaya menyerahkan dokumen yang diminta oleh Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim akan didengar esok.Ia dijadual didengar di hadapan Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah pada 9 pagi, lapor Bernama.
SN Nair, salah seorang peguam yang mewakili Anwar, ketika dihubungi mengesahkan bahawa firmanya SN Nair & Partners menerima surat berhubung perkara itu daripada mahkamah menerusi faksimili, pagi ini.Pada 2 petang semalam, pihak pendakwaan memfailkan notis usul di Bahagian Jenayah Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur, bagi memohon penangguhan pelaksanaan perintah itu yang ditandatangani oleh Datuk Nordin Hassan, seorang daripada timbalan pendakwaraya bagi kes liwat berkenaan.
Turut difailkan ialah perakuan segera agar kes itu didengar secepat mungkin.Pada 16 Julai, Mohamad Zabidin membenarkan permohonan Anwar dan memerintahkan pendakwaan supaya menyerahkan dokumen berkenaan dalam masa tujuh hari.Tempoh tujuh hari itu berakhir pada Khamis.Bagaimanapun, hakim itu menolak permohonan penasihat PKR itu untuk mendapatkan sampel spesimen yang diambil daripada pengadu Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan selepas memutuskan bahawa sampel itu telah disita oleh ahli kimia dan pihak pembelaan boleh memeriksanya setelah dikemukakan kepada mahkamah.Anwar, 62, didakwa meliwat bekas pembantunya Mohd Saiful, 24, di sebuah kondominium di Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur pada 26 Jun tahun lepas.Mahkamah menetapkan 24 Julai untuk sebutan permohonan Anwar bagi mengetepikan tuduhan liwat yang dikenakan terhadapnya dan tarikh sebutan perbicaraan kes itu.
by cheguBard
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
LUNA COHEN - WANITA YAHUDI YANG MENDAPAT CAHAYA ISLAM
Masyarakat Israel Tiada Pendidikan.. Luna Cohen Pilih Islam
LUNA Cohen, lahir di kota Tetouan, Maroko dari keluarga Yahudi. Pada usia 16 tahun, ia sudah meninggalkan rumah keluarga di Maroko untuk melanjutkan sekolahnya di sekolah khusus perempuan Bet Yaakov di Washington Heights, Manhattan, Amerika Syarikat. Bet Yaakov adalah sebuah sekolah Yahudi Ortodoks yang dikenal rasis. Dia berkahwin pada usia 18 tahun. Luna dan suaminya sudah 3 kali pindah tempat tinggal di apartemen Brooklyn, New York, dan akhirnya pindah ke Israel bersama 4 nanak-anaknya.
Ketika tiba di Israel, Luna dan keluarganya tinggal pemukiman Yahudi, Gush Qatif di wilayah Jalur Gaza. Luna mengaku menjalani masa-masa yang berat kerana melihat ‘cara hidup’ orang-orang Yahudi di tempat tinggalnya itu dan meminta pada suaminya agar mereka pindah saja ke Netivot, yang terletak sekitar 23 kilometer ke arah utara di wilayah pendudukan Israel di Palestin. Di tempat itu, Luna lagi-lagi menyaksikan kehidupan masyarakat Yahudi Israel yang disebutnya tidak berpendidikan.
“Mungkin cuma satu dari sejuta anak yang berperangai baik.” kata Luna. Ia menyaksikan bagaimana orang-orang Yahudi di Netivot, sama seperti di pemukiman Yahudi Gush Qatif, membenci orang-orang yang bukan Yahudi, Arab Palestin. “Kami lihat tindakan mereka buruk dan mahu menang sendiri. Pada titik ini, saya dan suami tidak sepakat terhadap sikap mereka itu!”
Hingga suatu hari suami Luna yang juga Yahudi tetapi sekuler, pulang ke rumah dan mengatakan baru sahaja membaca al-Quran dan memutuskan untuk masuk Islam. Luna tidak tahu, rupanya suaminya itu selama ini sudah banyak mempelajari Islam melalui dialog dengan seorang Muslim asal Emirat Arab Bersatu yang tinggal di pemukiman Gush Qatif, selama 2 tahun.
“Kerana dalam fahaman Yahudi, kami selalu diajar untuk membenci agama lain," kata Luna bertanyakan mengenai ajaran Islam.Tetapi, suaminya cukup bijak dan mengatakan, Luna boleh tetap dalam agama Yahudi jika tidak mahu masuk Islam, kerana dalam Islam, seorang lelaki Muslim boleh berkahwin dengan perempuan ahli kitab. Suami Luna pun masuk Islam dan memakai nama Islam Yousef al-Khattab.
Dua minggu setelah suaminya masuk Islam, Luna tertarik untuk membaca al-Quran dan ketika ia membacanya, Luna merasa semua pertanyaan yang bersimpul di kepalanya terjawab semua dalam al-Quran.Luna lalu menyusul suaminya mengucap dua kalimah syahadat dan menjadi seorang Muslimah. Luna memilih nama Qamar atau ‘bulan mengambang’ sebagai nama Islamnya.
Kerana keadaan yang tidak memungkinkan mereka tinggal lebih lama di wilayah Israel itu, maka keluarga mualaf itu lalu memutuskan pindah ke Maroko, negara asal Luna pada tahun 2006. Hingga sekarang pasangan Yousef dan Qamar Al-Khattab hidup bahagia di tengah saudara-saudara Muslim Maroko setelah menemu kebenaran sejati dalam cara hidup Islam.
(ln/jewsforAllah)Oleh itu tiap warga Muslim wajib menghayati Al-Quran dalam seluruh kehidupan, termasuk peribadi, keluarga, masyarakat, dan lebih-lebih lagi dalam politik yang meletakkan Al-Quran sebagai dasar negara. Wallahu ‘aklam.
10 SEBAB MENGAPA UMNO TIDAK LAGI RELEVAN
Ramai kawan-kawan seangkatan saya apabila berjumpa, berkata baguslah anta berjuang dalam PAS. Saya bertanya balik fasal apa anta tidak berjuang bersama PAS, sebaliknya menjadi ahli Umno.
Jawapan mereka mudah, untuk hendak cari makan kena duduk dalam Umno. Pendeknya mereka sendiri pun tidak percaya kepada Umno. Tetapi apa mereka boleh buat. Hendak berniaga kena isi borang Umno kalau tidak payah hendak buat kerja. Ini adalah sebahagian daripada rakan-rakan yang seangkatan yang duduk dalam Umno. Mereka tahu bahawa Umno bukan tempat untuk perjuangkan agama, bangsa dan tanah air. Jika watak seperti ini yang akan memimpin Umno pada masa akan datang, apa yang mereka boleh buat untuk menyambung talian hayat Umno yang hampir putus.
Inilah realiti yang Umno hadapi sekarang, lebih-lebih lagi selepas keputusan PRU ke-12. Nampaknya macam-macam mereka buat telahan untuk pulih Umno. Ada yang cadang Presiden sekarang kena undur, ganti dengan Najib Razak. Adakah ini penyelesaian yang terbaik. Bas buruk, cuma tukar pemandu sahaja. Antara beberapa hujah kenapa Umno akan hilang daripada persada politik tanah air adalah;
1. Islam tidak menjadi dasarSejak awal lagi penubuhan Umno adalah untuk melawan Malayan Union sahaja. Bukan untuk mempertahankan Islam. Islam hanya alat, bukan sebagai satu asas dalam perjuangan. Kalau Islam sudah menjadi asas perjuangan, tentu mereka akan merujuk kepada Islam dalam semua hal, tetapi apa yang berlaku adalah sebaliknya. Kalau soal tudung yang menjadi nas yang qat'i dalam al-Quran, pemimpin wanita, puteri dan isteri pemimpin tidak ambil kisah, maka apa yang hendak diharap untuk mereka bercakap perkara yang lebih besar mengenai Islam. Apabila Islam tidak mendasari dalam perjuangan maka modal pembangunan akan lapuk, kerana minda rakyat semakin berubah dan maju terutama generasi muda, mereka tahu apa tanggungjawab sebuah kerajaan yang memerintah. Siapa yang memerintah semuanya akan membuat pembangunan. Hujah pembangunan hanya sesuai pada zaman 60-an dan kawasan majoriti orang jahil. Sedangkan Islam relevan sepanjang masa sehingga hari kiamat.
2.Dasar Umno yang pragmatis (ikut suasana)Kita pun tidak tahu apa dasar Umno yang pakai sekarang, Islamkah, Melayukah, mempertahan tanah airkah. Cuma seperti yang disebut oleh Ketua Penerangan Badan Perhubungan Umno Johor, Dr Fuad Zarkashi, perjuangan Umno hanya untuk perut sahaja. Maka sekarang mereka bergaduh bukan kerana bangsa tidak terbela, agama dihina. Tetapi kerana perut sekarang sudah keroncong. Lima negeri sudah jatuh ketangan Pakatan Rakyat. Maka banyaklah peluang terlepas, terutama negeri Selangor, Perak dan Pulau Pinang. Tidak hairanlah kepada kita bekas Menteri Besar Selangor sudah naik minyak dan berani lawan arus. Kerana lubuk emas sudah terlepas ke tangan orang lain.
3. Sikap individualistikPemimpin Umno hanya pentingkan diri dan kaum keluarga bukan untuk bangsa dan agama. Akhirnya pengikut sudah naik mual dengan gelagat pemimpin Umno. Parti hanya menjadi sebagai batu loncatan untuk memperkaya anak menantu, sedangkan pengikut di bawah kais pagi makan pagi.
4. Akhlak tidak senonohSkandal seperti yang berlaku kepada bekas ahli Parlimen Gombak, Ampang Jaya dan Ketua Wanita di Klang memburukkan suasana. Kebetulan mereka ini tidak bernasib baik, media dapat tahu. Banyak lagi kelakuan yang tidak senonoh yang membuatkan orang memandang sinis kepada Umno. Malahan apabila kita bercakap dengan ahli Umno mengenai gejala yang tidak bermaruah, maka mereka mengatakan ini adalah lumrah dan menjadi rukun dalam seharian.
5. Matlamat masuk Umno untuk mengumpul kekayaanSikap materialistik yang sudah berakar umbi dalam Umno sukar untuk diubah. Siapa pun masuk dalam Umno semuanya akan terpengaruh. Kerana semua rakan-rakan mereka baru sepenggal jadi YB sudah ada kereta mewah dan rumah mewah. Akhirnya pengikut biasa melihat kalau pemimpin mereka mewah. Bodohlah mereka kalau berjuang tidak kaut kekayaan macam pemimpin mereka.
6.Tidak membela agamaMasyarakat melihat apa yang Umno sudah lakukan untuk membela agama. Orang murtad Umno diam membisu. Malahan apabila ada di kalangan pemuda PAS dan orang Islam tunjuk perasaan di Cititel Pulau Pinang dan Hotel Sentosa di Johor Baharu ketika kumpulan Artikel 11 membuat program untuk membolehkan orang Islam bebas murtad, seorang Ahli Majlis Tertinggi Umno, Nazri Aziz kata ini kerja bodoh. Nampaknya Umno sanggup berdiam dalam isu murtad. Sudah 62 tahun kewujudan Umno kita tidak dengar Umno bertindak sesuatu untuk mengadakan undang-undang murtad. Isu pengabaian terhadap agama mengenai murtad adalah satu contoh sahaja. Banyak lagi isu mereka yang mengguris perasaan orang Melayu Islam.
7. Orang agama hanya subang tembagaPeranan golongan agama hanya untuk menjadi peluru melawan PAS sahaja dan tidak lebih daripada itu. Peranan mereka hanya untuk tukang baca doa, tahlil dan marhaban. Mereka bukan dijadikan rujukan untuk mengemudi negara. Sebaliknya si jahil yang menjadi kepala, manakala si alim menjadi pengikut. Apabila ini terjadi banyak dasar yang bertentangan dengan Islam telah berlaku.
8. Dasar Umnoputera bukan bumiputeraDiskriminasi sesama bangsa hanya kerana berlainan ideologi, akhirnya telah menempatkan bangsa merempat di bumi sendiri. Kita tidak pernah dengar bagaimana pemimpin kaum lain yang menindas kaum sesama bangsa kerana berlainan ideologi. Tetapi ini berlaku dalam Umno akhirnya peratus kemiskinan di kalangan bumiputera meningkat seperti yang dinyatakan oleh bekas Timbalan Menteri Pembangunan Luar Bandar Dan Wilayah, Dato' Zainal Osman, Cina 0.6%, India 2.9%, Melayu 8.3%. Diskriminasi terhadap kerajaan yang sebangsa dan seagama di Kelantan sebagai satu contoh yang ketara. Apakah layak Umno hendak mendakwa mereka sebagai tulang belakang orang Melayu. Apakah slogan kuat Umno perkasa Umno menjadi realiti?
9. Khianati bahasa sendiriUmno sudah membunuh bahasa sendiri sebagai bahasa ilmu. Sudah berjuta wang negara dihabiskan untuk memartabatkan bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa kebangsaan, tetapi Umno memusnahkan dengan memperkenalkan Matematik dan Sains dalam bahasa Inggeris pada tahun 2003. Semua cendekiawan menentang tetapi keangkuhan pemimpin Umno tetap melaksanakan juga. Akhirnya orang melihat apakah ini perjuangan sebuah parti yang hendak diharapkan. Maknanya yang menjahanamkan bahasa Melayu bukannya Lim Guan Eng, tetapi adalah pemimpin Melayu Umno.Yang penting adalah kuasa, sama ada mengorbankan kepentingan agama dan bangsa lain bicara. Persempadanan semula dalam pilihan raya 2004, bagaimana Umno telah mengkhianat orang Melayu-Islam semata-mata untuk melawan PAS. Kenapa kerusi Parlimen di Kelantan, Terengganu dan Kedah tidak bertambah. Contohnya Parlimen Baling pengundinya melebihi 70,000 orang, keluasannya boleh buat solat jamak qasar. Perjuangan yang dilihat sebagai usaha yang sia-sia. Maka tidak ada ertinya lagi mereka mewakafkan diri untuk bersama dengan Umno.
10. Politik wang adalah rasuah politik.Tetapi hendak bagi sedap dengar maka jenamakan dengan politk wang. Amalan ini memusnahkan Umno. Mereka yang dipilih bukan berdasarkan kewibawaan masing-masing dalam mempertahankan bangsa dan agama. Tetapi siapa yang ada memiliki wang dialah yang menjadi ketua. Apabila mereka menjadi pemimpin maka mereka bukan menjadi pemimpin orang Umno tetapi menjadi boneka kepada tauke-tauke yang memberi wang kepada mereka akhirnya inilah yang memusnahkan bangsa dan agama. - lanh
Sumber:Ustaz Idris Ahmad AJK PAS Pusat
ANTARA SAF BERINTEGRITI DENGAN YANG MEMBAWA MATI : A.Kadir Jasin
“SAFKANLAH kepada saya sekumpulan pemimpin yang ampuh dan padu. Bariskanlah kepada saya satu pasukan yang setia, berintegriti, berkebolehan lagi dedikasi,” – Mohd Najib Abdul Razak ketika merasmikan serentak persidangan Wanita, Pemuda dan Puteri semalam.
“SALAM Datuk, malam tadi saya masuk Dewan Tun Hussein Onn. Jelas Datuk Seri Najib mahu ubah Umno secara total dan benar-benar tahu apa yang majoriti orang Melayu mahu. Kebimbangan saya adalah kepada perwakilan, bermula hari ini, dan kepimpinan di peringkat bahagian yang bermasalah sebenarnya,” – seorang muda Melayu profesional lulusan Jepun yang juga pemerhati persidangan.
“FIKIR. Negara kita sedang menghadapi saat-saat yang sukar. Krisis yang dihadapi adalah di peringkat global dan setiap negara mengharungi pahit getir dengan cara tersendiri. Namun negara yang akan bangun dengan pantas adalah negara-negara yang dapat menggemblengkan pemikiran-pemikiran terbaik mereka dalam menangani kemelesetan yang dialami dan mencari jalan penyelesaian,” – iklan Universiti Limkokwing di muka 18 Utusan Malaysia hari ini.
Adakah Mohd Najib akan mendapat saf kepemimpinan yang setia, berintegriti, berkebolehan lagi dedikasi seperti yang dirayukannya itu?
Apakah kebimbangan pemuda Batang Kali hasil Dasar Pandang Ke Timur Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad itu akan menjadi kenyataan?
Apakah Mohd Najib akan memperoleh barisan kepemimpinan yang mampu menggembleng pemikiran-pemikiran terbaik bagi menangani kemelesetan ekonomi dan mencari jalan penyelesaian seperti yang diharapkan oleh Universiti Limkokwing itu?
Atau kerana politik wang, kedangkalan minda dan kerendahan akhlak saf kepemimpinan Umno selepas esok akan dibarisi oleh bekas pelibat salah laku seks, tertuduh penyeludup wang, pelari anak dara orang, pesalah disiplin parti, pengampu dan segala macam lagi musang berbulu ayam?
Calon Timbalan Presiden, Muhammad Muhd Taib, dilaporkan oleh Utusan Malaysia hari ini sebagai berkata apa juga peristiwa yang berkaitan skandalnya di Australia di masa lalu tidak perlu diungkit lagi. Katanya Umno sudah terima dia.
Manakala Azalina Othman Said yang sedang disiasat oleh Suruhanjaya Pencegah Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) merayu perwakilan “menganggapnya tidak bersalah sehingga sabit kesalahan.” Dia bertanding ahli biasa Majlis Tertinggi.
Mohd Najib, pemuda Look East Policy dan Universiti Limkokwing tidak perlu tunggu lama. Gambaran awal akan diperoleh malam ini apabila keputusan pemilihan Wanita, Pemuda dan Puteri diumumkan.
Kalau perwakilan Umno dan sayap-sayapnya terus memilih oleh bekas pelibat salah laku seks, tertuduh penyeludup wang, pelari anak dara orang, pesalah disiplin parti, pengampu dan segala macam lagi musang berbulu ayam maka takdir akan secara masih dan mutakhir menentukan kemelaratan Umno.
Atau Mohd Najib menggunakan hak dan budi bicaranya sebagai Presiden Umno dan Perdana Menteri, insya-Allah, untuk membina saf yang menolak penjawat parti yang tidak berintegriti dan tidak berkebolehan.
Dia wajib mengekalkan pemuka yang tidak terpilih tetapi berintegriti dan tidak berkebolehan. Dia juga perlu memikirkan untuk membawa masuk pakar-pakar dari luar lingkaran parti.
Tetapi kalau Mohd Najib mahu menjadi Presiden Umno dan Perdana Menteri yang popular – ibarat peserta Akademi Fantasia – atau mahu dilabelkan “Mr Nice”, dia mungkin menjadi Perdana Menteri Umno yang terakhir seperti yang dimanterakan oleh musuh-musuh Umno.
Umno akan menuruni cerun yang sama seperti parti yang dialami oleh Parti Kongres di India, Kuomintang di Taiwan dan Liberal Democratic Party di Jepun.
Umno bukan mengenai 2,000 lebih perwakilan atau tiga juta lebih ahli. Umno adalah satu-satunya parti yang berteraskan kebangsaan Melayu. Di Malaysia, Melayu adalah Islam.
Umno tidak akan menang pilihan raya hanya dengan 2,000 perwakilan atau tiga juta ahli. Apatah lagi pada pilihan raya umum tahun lalu, orang Umno sendiri memboikot malah ramai mengundi pembangkang kerana marah kepada kepemimpinannya.
Tetapi sekiranya keputusan pemilihan hari ini dan esok menepati aspirasi ahli dan penyokong Umno dan diikuti pula oleh ketegasan Mohd Najib memimpin, ramai daripada mereka akan kembali semula ke pangkuan Umno.
Atau setidak-tidaknya mereka akan memberi peluang kepada beliau sehingga pilihan raya umum akan datang untuk membuktikan cakap-cakapnya.
Orang Melayu masih memerlukan sebuah parti seperti Umno. Hanya segelintir liberal dan elit Melayu yang percaya bahawa orang Melayu tidak lagi memerlukan bantuan dan bimbingan.
Walaupun orang Melayu tidak semiskin dan sedaif sebelum merdeka, namun secara perbandingan mereka masih jauh ketinggalan berbanding kaum-kaum lain.
Tidak banyak berbeza dengan huraian Allahyarham Datuk Onn Jaafar dalam ucapan perasmian Mesyuarat Agung Umno di Sekolah Francis Light, Pulau Pinang, 27-28 Julai, 1946, berbunyi:
“Kita orang Melayu masih ada juga menaruh sakit hati dan ada juga menaruh fikiran apakah sebabnya kita orang Melayu keciciran daripada bangsa asing. Jika kita perhalusi sedikit (dan) siasat, kita nescaya akan dapat jawapan dengan nyatanya. Lihatlah bangsa asing walau sedikit jumlahnya sekalipun pada satu-satu tempat tetapi mereka itu semua sentiasa bersatu dan berbantu-bantuan dalam segala hal.”
MENANGKIS LOGIK POLITIK TUN MAHATHIR by Ti Lian Ker
Berikut adalah hujah-hujah Tun yang ingin saya tangkis supaya Pemimpin sekarang tidak menerima segala padah perbuatan ataupun kegaggalan yang lampau...
PEMILIHAN MAJLIS TERTINGGI UMNO
By Dr. Mahathir Mohamad on March 21, 2009 3:00 PM
1. Perhatian rakyat Malaysia terutama orang Melayu ialah kepada peristiwa-peristiwa yang sedang berlaku dalam UMNO. Samada mereka ahli atau bukan ahli mereka tahu UMNO memainkan peranan yang besar dalam kehidupan mereka, dalam maju mundurnya Negara mereka.
2. Apa yang mereka lihat sehingga kini tidak menyenangkan hati mereka akan keupayaan UMNO dikekalkan.
( tilianker: Kegaggalan UMNO sekarang telah bermula dalam zaman Tun memimpin Negara di mana arus pertama membantah kepimpinan Tun telah dipelopori oleh Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah dalam pertengahan tahun 80an. Ini telah disusuli dengan arus kebangkitan mencabar kepimpinan UMNO yang kedua dalam akhiran tahun 90an. Kebangkitan mencabar kepimpinan UMNO mutakhir ini adalah arus pemberontakan yang ketiga dan melibatkan Parti Pembangkang dan semua lapisan rakyat. Maka adalah tidak adil meletakkan segala kelemahan dan kesalahan UMNO pada bahu pemimpin sekarang atau akan datang. Isunya ialah banyak isu semasa ini adalah masalah lapuk atau masalah larutan dari zaman Tun. Tun's legacy?? )
3. UMNO yang telah perintah Negara ini dengan baik selama 50 tahun sekarang dilihat sebagai parti yang tidak bermaya.
(tilianker: UMNO sudahlah tidak bermaya dalam pemilihan umum 1999 di mana ramai ahli UMNo ternganga apabila Tun memecat DSAI dan menghadapkannya ke mahkamah dengan tuduhan rasuah dan meliwat.Populariti Tun adalah pada tahap yang paling rendah paada masa itu dan Tun dipangil Mahazalim.. Pada masa itu undi masyarakat Cina yang kukuh telah membolehkan kemenangan BN dengan kerusi melebihi 2/3 tetapi kemenangan undi kebanyakkan kerusi adalah amat tipis sekali termasuk Parlimen Pekan yang ditandingi oleh YAB bakal Perdana Menteri .)
4. Dalam hanya lima tahun dibawah pimpinan Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, parti UMNO sudah rosak dan menjadi amat lemah. Seiring dengan kelemahan parti, Kerajaan juga menjadi lemah dan kehidupan rakyat sudah tidak lagi sempurna.
(tilianker: Dalam tahun-tahun awalan kepimpinan Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi,rakyat telah memberi mandat yang kukuh dan tidak berbelah-bahagi kepada BN sehingga Tun mencampuri dan mengusik kepimpinan BN dengan kecaman yang pedas dan pedih sekali walaupun Tun pernah berjanji tidak akan melibatkan-diri apabila bersara nanti. Kelemahan parti adalah disebabkan oleh pembelotan seorang bekas Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan Timbalan Presiden UMNO. Ini telah bertambah tenat apabila seorang lagi bekas Perdana Menteri dan bekas Presiden UMNO memberanikan Parti Pembangkang dan rakyat jelata untuk mencabar institusi, norma dan tradisi. Ini termasuklah saranan mengurangkan majoriti BN dalam Parlimen untuk menguatkan Pembangkang. Tetapi nampaknya Pembangkang bukannya mahu kekuatan tetapi membentuk Kerajaan. Inilah yang menyebabkan rakyat dibelenggukan. Gajah sama Gajah bertempur, Kancil mati tengah-tengah.Kehidupan rakyat tidak lagi sempurna disebabkan oleh perkembangan ekonomi dunia dan bebanan serta tanggungan kerajaan pada keputusan-keputusan lampau seperti toll, PPA , IPP dsbgnya. Rakyat seronok semasa pembangunan infrastrutur yang di bawa zaman Tun tetapi belenggu,kos dan tanggungan kontrak Kerajaan cuma dirasai sekarang.)
5. Sekarang Abdullah berjanji akan letak jawatan pada hujung bulan ini dan Dato Seri Najib Razak akan mengambil alih jawatan Perdana Menteri. Apakah Najib akan dapat memulihkan UMNO sehingga jadi kuat semula? Ini menjadi satu tanda tanya.
(tilianker: Keupayaan Dato Seri Najib untuk memulihkan UMNO terpulang kepada keupayaan UMNO untuk mengubah dan menyakinkan rakyat bahawasanya UMNO bukanlah satu parti yang mempunyai bau perkauman yang tebal, mempunyai budaya rasuah dan penyalahgunaan kuasa yang berleluasa. Ini memerlukan kerjasama dan komitmen semua dan bukannya meletakkan babanan pada bahu Dato Seri Najib seorang. Collective dan bukannya individual responsibility! Saya ingat lagi hujah Tun semasa menjadi PM bahawasanya jangan memberi satu penyelesaian simple kepada satu isu komplicated yakni Do not prescribe a simple solution to a complicated problem.)
6. Apa yang berlaku dalam proses pemilihan kepimpinan tidak menjadi petanda yang baik. Parti UMNO sudah jadi parti perasuah. Samada ahli atau pemimpin, semuanya utamakan kepentingan diri.
(tilianker: Budaya rasuah dan mementingkan diri telah lama bertapak dan dibenihkan dalam era pemerintahan Tun. Tun yang pada masa itu begitu berwibawa, berkuasa dan berupaya telah gagal menanggani gejala-gejala ini. Bak kata pepatah Melayu " Melentur biarlah waktu rebungnya". Maka kegagalan Tun adalah amat ketara sekali.)
7. Sepatutnya pemilihan pemimpin yang baru akan meyakinkan rakyat yang UMNO bersedia untuk membasmi gejala rasuah. Tetapi yang berlaku menunjuk yang UMNO tidak mempedulikan pemulihan parti dan pencapaian kemenangan dalam Pilihanraya Umum ke-13. Yang diutamakan ialah untuk menjadi pemimpin UMNO dengan apa cara sekalipun. Harapan mereka jika jadi pemimpin UMNO akan dapat jadi Menteri dan dapat kontrak dan lain-lain nikmat untuk diri sendiri.
(tilianker: Kita perlulah berlaku adil dan mengakui bahawa tindakan pemimpin UMNO pada masa ini adalah tindakan yang paling tegas dalam menanggani gejala rasuah. Fenomena dapatkan kontrak dan nikmat telah bermula dalam zaman Tun dan diberhentikan atau dikurangkan secara beransur dalam era kepimpinan Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Ini adalah antara sebab ramai orang UMNO menentang Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi yang telah mengurangkan kepentingan individu demi menjaga kepentingan negara. Sebenarnya kita telah mengubah dan berubah tetapi oleh kerana kritikan dan tohmahan yang bertalu-talu dari semua, maka bermulalah keretakan dan pemecahan kekebalan institusi dan kepimpinan BN.)
8. Ternampak jelas yang pencalonan ahli-ahli Majlis Tertinggi yang dibuat oleh bahagian adalah hasil sogokan. Ramai yang dicalon diketahui umum telah beli undi. Dengan itu peluang pertama untuk memulih imej parti dikalangan rakyat sudah gagal kerana bahagian-bahagian utamakan sogokan. Peluang kedua untuk memulih imej parti juga tidak direbut. Sebenarnya Lembaga Disiplin dan Tribunal yang ditugas untuk membicara dan menghukum calon-calon yang dituduh terlibat dengan rasuah telah tidak menggunakan tugas mereka untuk memperbaiki imej parti. Sebaliknya Tribunal membuat keputusan yang menunjuk ia tidak bersungguh untuk menghukum mereka yang diketahui terlibat dengan rasuah. Dengan itu imej parti tidak terpulih dan menjadi lebih buruk.
( tilianker: Dalam kes-kes Mahkamahpun banyak kes yang melibatkan fakta berbeza telah mendapat keputusan dan hukuman yang berbeda walaupun tuduhan yang sama. Istilah falsafah perundangan atau jurisprudence ialah rule skeptics as opposed to fact sceptics. Memperbesarkan perbedaan ini semata-mata untuk mencabar dan mengaibkan UMNO adalah kerja-kerja musuh UMNo yang sebenar. Yang pentingnya tindakan yang tegas telah diambil dan akar-umbi mendapat syarat bahawasanya era politik wang yang bermula dalam zaman Tun sudah mula berakhir....)
9. Sekarang datang pula peranan para wakil untuk memulih imej parti dengan menolak calon yang dikenali mengguna wang untuk undi calon. Jika mereka tolak calon-calon ini, mereka akan sedikit sebanyak memulih imej parti dan kemungkinan parti akan menang dalam Pilihanraya Umum ke-13.
10. Tetapi oleh kerana keputusan Tribunal membolehkan calon-calon yang diketahui korup bertanding, perwakilan mungkin akan pilih mereka ini untuk menganggotai Majlis Tertinggi. Apabila ini berlaku imej parti akan jadi lebih buruk dan besar kemungkinan parti akan dikalahkan dalam Pilihanraya Umum ke-13.
(tilianker: Calon yang korup bertanding bukanlah berlaku pada masa ini sahaja. Pernahkah Datuk Harun Idris dibebaskan dan memenangi jawatan tinggi dalam UMNO? )
11. Tetapi terdapat satu lagi peluang untuk imej parti dipulih. Apabila Kerajaan baru dibentuk oleh Dato Seri Najib, beliau boleh menolak pemimpin-pemimpin yang menang kerana rasuah daripada menganggotai Kabinet dan lain-lain jawatan Kerajaan pimpinannya. Jika sebaliknya Najib melantik orang yang diketahui menang kerana rasuah ke dalam Kerajaannya maka akan termusnahlah kepercayaan rakyat kepada Najib dan Kerajaannya. Tidak syak lagi yang UMNO dan Barisan Nasional akan kalah teruk dalam Pilihanraya Umum ke-13.
(tilianker: Kita perlulah memberi Dato Seri Najib hemah dan hikmah kebijaksanaan seorang pemimpin yang tinggi dan disanjungi dan bukannya mempertikaikan dan mempersoalkan serta membayangkan bahawasanya beliau mungkin melantik orang yang sedemikian atau mungkin kurang kewibawaannya.)
12. Saya percaya Dato Seri Abdullah akan paksa Najib pilih orang tertentu untuk jadi Menteri Kabinet Najib. Kita tahu sangat keinginan orang ini menjadi Perdana Menteri termuda. Sebenarnya kalau pun dia menang, penyertaannya dalam Kerajaan akan menyebabkan pengundi tolak Barisan Nasional dalam Pilihanraya Umum ke-13. Apatah lagi jika dia kalah dan masih lagi dapat tempat dalam Kerajaan.
(tilianker: Adakah paksaan ini dilakukan oleh Tun pada Dato Seri Abdullah sebelum ini ? Bukankah Tun yang begitu lantang sekali menghendaki Dato Seri Najib dilantik sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri? )
13. Jika Dato Seri Najib memilih perasuah dan orang tertentu dalam Kerajaan pimpinannya, UMNO akan kalah dan terus hancur. Najib akan tinggal legasi sebagai pembunuh UMNO yang dihidupkan oleh ayahnya.
(tilianker: Nampaknya Tun lebih berminat agar individu tertentu tidak dilantik dalam Kabinet. Adakah Tun mempunyai senarai hitam tertentu? Adakah elemen arm-twisting di sini? Tun seakan-akan nostalgia, menghendaki UMNO kembali kepada zaman keangkuhannya yang mana rakyat mahupun ahli UMNO telah menolak keangkuhan kuasa dan amalan authoritative zaman Tun dan kini menuntut ketelusan dan keadilan . )
14. Ahli-ahli UMNO harus ingat tidak ada gunanya menjadi pemimpin UMNO, menjadi Presiden UMNO pun jika BN kalah dan tidak dapat tubuh Kerajaan.15. Orang Melayu akan kutuk mereka yang telah hancurkan UMNO kerana mereka tamak dan mengkhianati bangsa dan negara.
(tilianker: Negara kita sudah bergerak ke arah perjuangan dan kenegaraan dan kemasyarakatan dan kemanusiaan. Tun masih lagi dengan keMelayuan yang secara intrinsiknya adalah tertakluk kepada pembangunan Negara, Sosial dan Insan...)
Saya akhiri dengan menyusun jari sepuluh memohon maaf sekiranya tersasul di sini tetapi saya terasa terpanggil untuk menangkis hujah-hujah Tun yang telah menjadi satu pemangkin yang membangkitkan kemarahan dan seterusnya pencabaran terhadap regim dan kepimpinan pemerintahan di masa ini.Yang baik kita terima tetapi yang keruh biarlah dijernihkan....Sama-sama kita ketepikan ego demi negara, bangsa dan agama!rhetorik...logik atau politik!
Posted by Ti Lian Ker at 2:00 AM
Friday, March 6, 2009
TERJEMAHAN DARI AKHBAR PERANCHIS : BAGAIMANA DAN MENGAPA IA DIBUNUH............ALTANTUYA
Artikel ini diterjemahkan oleh Kerajaan Rakyat dari artikel asal yang bertajuk “The Altantuya Shaaribuu’s Case : How And Why She Was Killed?” dan disiarkan oleh sebuah akhbar Perancis pada 5 Mac 2009.
—-
Shaaribu Setev adalah seorang lelaki yang kecewa dan marah. Namun disebalik wajah sedih lelaki Mongolia ini tersimpan semangat yang tinggi. Duduk di sebuah sofa di lobi sebuah hotel di Ulaan Battar sambil bergetar menahan angin beku yang bertiup, dia lelaki berumur 60 tahun itu bersiap sedia untuk melawan. Raut parasnya dibentuk dari segala penderitaan dan iklim yang melampau, dan renungannya yang dalam menceritakan semuanya.
“Anak perempuan saya dibunuh oleh orang Malaysia di bumi Malaysia. Namun mereka langsung tidak memohon maaf,” katanya yang juga seorang professor psikologi di Universiti Kebangsaan Mongolia.
Pembunuhan anak perempuannya, Altantuya Shaaribu, berlaku pada bulan Oktober 2006. Ini adalah jenayah bunuh yang berbeza dari yang lain berlaku di sebuah rantau di mana konflik-konflik perniagaan atau pertelingkahan politik yang remeh diselesaikan dengan muncung pistol. Segala yang berkaitan dengan kes ini, yang bermula pada tahun 2002 apabila syarikat Perancis-Sepanyol Armaris mencapai persetujuan untuk menjual tiga buah kapal selam kepada kerajaan Malaysia dengan harga satu bilion Euro, adalah luar dari kebiasaan. Kesan “kes Altantuya” ini di Perancis, Malaysia dan Mongolia belum lagi mencapai klimaknya. Pembunuhan gadis Mongolia berusia 28 tahun itu adalah akibat dari “komisen” berharga 114 juta daripada Armasi kepada rakan niaganya di Malaysia. “Komisyen” ini yang diakui oleh kerajaan Malaysia di dalam Parlimen di Kuala Lumpur, telah mencetus beberapa siri peristiwa yang membawa kepada pembunuhan Altantuya dan kehilangan beberapa orang saksi penting di dalam kes itu.
Sebuah laporan dari polis Malaysia, yang masih disimpan secara rahsia sehingga sekarang, mendedahkan secara terperinci bagaimana perempuan muda yang tergolong dalam golongan atasan Asia itu dibunuh. Di dalam dokumen tersebut, salah seorang pembunuhnya, seorang anggota polis dari Cawangan Khas bernama Sirul Omar, menjawab soalan-soalan yang ditanya oleh seorang pegawai di sebuah stesen polis yang berdekatan dengan tempat pembunuhan.
“Apabila perempuan Cina itu melihat saya mengeluarkan sepucuk pistol, dia merayu supaya dilepaskannya kerana dia sedang mengandung. Azilah (pegawai pemerintah kepada Sirul) menarik perempuan itu dan [menghumbannya] ke atas tanah. Saya segera menembak pada bahagian kiri mukanya. Kemudian Azilah menanggalkan pakaian perempuan itu dan memasukkan pakaian yang ditanggal itu ke dalam sebuah plastik hitam. Azilah mendapati tangan perempuan itu masih bergerak. Dia memerintahkan saya untuk menembak sekali lagi, dan saya melakukannya”, ujar Sirul. Ini adalah merupakan pengesahan yang pertama identiti pembunuh Altantuya. ” Kemudian kami mengusung mayatnya ke dalam hutan, Azilah membalut bahan letupan di sekeliling kaki, abdomen dan kepala perempuan itu dan kemudian kami meletupkannya.”
Pendedahan laporan tersebut di dalam akhbar Perancis *Liberation* adalah bab terbaru dalam kisah yang penuh warna-warni dan dramatik ini yang melibatkan penjual senjata Perancis, pawang Mongolia dan politikus-politikus Malaysia. Kes ini sangat sensitif kepada kerajaan Malaysia, kerana Timbalan Perdana Menteri Malaysia, Najib Razak yang dijadualkan menjadi Perdana Menteri pada akhir bulan Mac nanti disyaki terlibat di dalam kes ini, tetapi ini juga kerana kes ini boleh memalukan DCNS, sebuah syarikat Perancis yang mengkhusus dalam pembinaan kapal laut tentera. Syarikat Perancis-Sepanyol Armaris, yang menjual Scorpene dan satu kapal selam Agosta kepada Malaysia pada bulan Jun 2002, dibeli oleh DCNS pada tahun 2007.
Dengan kecantikan dan keanggunannya yang memukau, Altantuya mengingatkan pada imej kacau seorang perempuan dari Timur Jauh bernama Mata Hari. Altantuya membesar di Saint Petersburg (Russia), kemudian belajar di Institut Pengurusan Ekonomi di Beijing. Di samping bertutur di dalam bahasa Inggeris, dia juga fasih di dalam bahasa Russia, Cina dan Korea. Sebagaimana yang telah ditakdirkan, semasa di Hong Kong dia bertemu dengan Abdul Razak Baginda pada tahun 2004. Baginda adalah seorang pakar keselamatan dan pengarah Malaysian Strategic Reseach Centre, sebuah badan pemikir yang pro-kerajaan. Tidak berapa lama kemudian hubungan mereka menjadi percintaan. Altantuya, atau dipanggil Tuya oleh teman-temannya, membuktikan bahawa dia adalah seorang pembantu yang berguna, menolong Baginda menterjemah bahasa Rusia ke bahasa Inggeris.
Jika Altantuya muda dan cantik, Baginda yang kaya dan menarik adalah seorang yang terkenal di kalangan elit Kuala Lumpur, terutama sekali kerana dia rapat dengan Timbalan Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan menteri Pertahanan, Najib Razak (baginda juga penasihat urusan keselamatannya). Baginda selalu bertemu dengan lingkungan-lingkungan yang sangat eksklusif di Kuala Lumpur, kadangkala ditemani oleh isterinya yang sah.
Pada bulan Mac 2005, Altantuya dan Baginda berangkat ke Eropah, mengelilingi Perancis, Jerman, Itali dan Portugal dengan Ferrari merah Baginda, menginap di hotel-hotel mewah dan menjamu selera di restoran-restoran terbaik di benua itu. Bagaimanapun, lawatan itu bukan sekadar lawatan biasa: kontrak untuk menjual dua kapal selam itu telah ditandatangani pada tahun 2002, tetapi beberapa hal-hal penting yang berkaitan masih belum diselesaikan.
“Kami mengetahui bahawa Baginda digunakan oleh Timbalan Perdana Menteri Najib Razak sebagai pengantara dalam urusan system persenjataan, terutama sekali di peringkat tertinggi,” kata seorang pakar urusan keselamatan serantau.
Pada hujung bulan Mac Altantuya dan Baginda berada di Paris, di mana mereka bertemu dengan Najib Razak. Sekeping gambar yang diambil pada akhir Mac 2005, menunjukkan bahawa ketiga mereka berada di sebuah kelab persendirian di Paris.
“Tuya menunjukkan gambar itu. Katanya salah seorang lelaki itu, Abdul Razak Baginda adalah teman lelakinya, dan seorang lagi, Najib Razak, adalah “big boss”. Saya bertanya kepadanya adakah mereka bersaudara kerana nama mereka, tetapi katanya tidak, dan Najib Razak adalah “perdana menteri”, cerita Amy, teman rapat Altantuya (Najib Razak telah bersumpah dengan Quran mengatakan bahawa dia tidak pernah bertemu dengan Altantuya). Menurut seorang detektif persendirian, sekarang bersembunyi di India, si Tuya yang cantik itu juga adalah perempuan simpanan Timbalan Perdana Menteri, yang dikenalkan oleh Baginda kepadanya pada akhir tahun 2004.
Cerita ini menjadi dramatik apabila pada Oktober 2006, Altantuya dimaklumkan bahawa komisyen yang dibayar oleh syarikat Perancis-Sepanyol Armaris telah masuk ke dalam akaun bank di Kuala Lumpur. Komisyen itu telah dibayar kepada Perimekar, sebuah syarikat yang dimiliki oleh Baginda. Altantuya segera berangkat ke Kuala Lumpur dengan tujuan menuntut bahagiannya dari komisyen itu dari Baginda; dia berkata dia berhak untuk mendapat 500, 000 dolar. Baginda dan Altantuya putus hubungan tidak berapa lama sebelum itu lagi. Rosmah Mansor, seorang ahli perniagaan yang digeruni dan isteri Najib Razak, cemburu lalu menghalang sebarang pembayaran kepada Altantuya. Altantuya tiba di Kuala Lumpur dengan dua orang wanita Mongolia, salah seorang darinya adalah pawang yang akan menjampi Baginda jika dia tidak membayar. Selama beberapa hari, Altantuya mengganggu bekas kekasihnya. Pada 18 Oktober, Baginda tidak dapat lagi tahan dengan Altantuya yang setiap hari berada di hadapan rumahnya. Dia menghubungi Pengarah Cawangan Khas, Musa Safrie, yang juga merupakan pegawai keselamatan Najib Razak.
Pada 19 Oktober 2006, jam mendekati 9 malam, dua orang pegawai polis Cawangan Khas, Azilah Hadridan dan Sirul Omar, dihantar ke hadapan rumah Baginda di mana Altantuya menjerit dan berteriak. Mereka mendapat arahan “meneutralkan perempuan Cina itu.” Mereka menculiknya dan membawanya sejauh sepuluh kilometer dan menembaknya beberapa kali. Kemudian, mereka memusnahkan tubuhnya dengan bahan letupan C4, jenis yang hanya boleh diperolehi dari Kementerian Pertahanan. Kemasukannya ke Malaysia telah dipadam dari rekod imigresen. Ini seolah menunjukkan bahawa Altantuya tidak pernah ke Malaysia kerana tidak ada rekod yang menunjukkan sebegitu.
Tidak ada jenayah yang sempurna. Pemandu teksi yang disewa oleh Altantuya pada hari tersebut tidak dapat menerima kenyataan bagaimana penumpangnya yang masih belum membayar tambang diculik di depan matanya. Dia mencatit nombor pendaftaran kereta penculik itu dan membuat repot di sebuah balai polis. Dalam beberapa hari, polis mendapat tahu indentiti kereta itu dan mendapati ia adalah kereta kerajaan. Beberapa peristiwa berlaku sehingga Najib Razak sendiri tidak dapat menghalangnya. Dia cuba untuk menutup kes ini. Beberapa jam sebelum penahanan Baginda, dia menghantar satu SMS: “Saya Akan bertemu dengan Ketua Polis Negara pada jam 11 pagi hari ini…masalah tersebut akan selesai. Sabarlah”. Beberapa jam kemudian, Baginda ditahan, begitu juga dengan dua orang pegawai dari Cawangan Khas, Azilah dan Sirul.
Selepas perbicaraan yang dianggap meragukan oleh ramai pemerhati, Baginda dilepaskan dari tuduhan telah memerintahkan pembunuhan itu dilakukan dan dibebaskan pada bulan November 2008. Azilah dan Sirul yang dituduh melakukan jenayah tersebut, tampil di hadapan Mahkamah bulan lepas. Jika disabit kesalahan, mereka akan dihukum mati. Mahkamah akan memutuskan pada 9 haribulan April.
Beribu batu dari Kuala Lumpur, di ibu Negara Mongolia, Ulaan Baataar, Shaaribuu Setev, bapa Altantuya berusaha mengawal perasaan marahnya. Untuk dia dan keluarganya, pembebasan Baginda adalah simbol kepada ketidakadilan di dalam proses perundangan Malaysia.
“Kerajaan Malaysia langsung tidak membals surat-surat yang dihantar oleh Kementeria Luar Mongolia,” katanya. Ketika Shaaribu datang ke parlimen Malaysia untuk bertemu dengan Najib Razak, Timbalan Perdana Menteri itu terpaksa keluar mengikut pintu belakang untuk mengelakkan pertembungan yang memalukan. Kes Altantuya telah menjadi elemen penting di dalam permainan politik Malaysia di antara Najib Razak (yang dijangka akan menjadi Perdana Menteri selepas Perhimpunan Agong UMNO pada bulan Mac ini) dan Anwar Ibrahim. Sehingga kini, Najib Razak Berjaya menghadapi rintangan ini, tetapi pembunuhan perempuan Mongolia itu akan menjadi pedang yang tergantung di atas kepalanya.
Salah satu aspek yang kabur di dalam kes Altantuya ini adalah peranan syarikat Armaris. Pada Oktober 2007, Timbalan Menteri Pertahanan, Zainal Abidin Zin, mengakui di hadapan Parlimen bahawa Armaris telah membayar sebanyak 114 juta Euro sebagai komisyen kepada Perimekar. Dia menegaskan bahawa bayaran itu bulan rasuah tetapi adalah untuk “perkhidmatan-perkhidmatan sokongan dan koordinasi.” Adakah terdapat korupsi di dalam kes kapal Taiwan di mana DCNS French dikaitkan juga? DCNS, adalah syarikat swasta dengan dana awam, telah menolak permintaan kami untuk mengadakan pertemuan. ‘Tiada siapa yang boleh memberi komen terhadap kes itu,” jawab pegawai perhubungan awam DCNS di Paris. Sebuah dokumen, yang boleh menghubungkan antara Altantuya dan syarikat Perancis itu adalah surat jaminan yang ditulis oleh Abdul Razak Baginda supaya perempuan simpanannya itu dapat memohon visa untuk memasuki zon Schengen (Perancis adalah Negara ahli). Kedutaan Perancis tidak boleh menolak permintaan seorang lelaki yang telah dianugerahkan dengan Legion d’Honneaur itu. Tetapi peranan Altantuya di dalam perundingan kapal selam itu masih lagi belum jelas. Agensi-agensi perisikan mendapati latar belakangnya menarik dan FSB Rusia (ex-KGB) memantau secara dekat kes ini.
Di Ulaan Baatar, Mungunshagai, anak lelaki sulung Altantuya, yang berumur 12 tahun, mengalami trauma dengan kematian emaknya. Altanshagai, anak bongsu, yang berumur 5 tahun dan terencat akal, tidak dapat memahami bahawa dia tidak akan bertemu ibunya lagi. “Dia selalu bertanya tentang ibunya dan dia sepanjang hari meniarap di atas kerusinya. Setiap malam, saya akan memberinya gula-gula dan mengatakan bahawa ibunya memberikan kepada saya untuk diberikan kepadanya”, ujar Shaaribuu Setev, datuk kepada dua dua orang budak lelaki itu. Tentang baginda pula, dia sekarang menetap di United Kingdom dengan keluarganya. Dia tidak sekalipun pernah melafaz sepatah kata penyesalan terhadap kematian seseorang yang pernah berkongsi hidup dengannya selama dua tahun.
Terjemahan Bahasa Melayu oleh : Kerajaan Rakyat
Arnaud Dubus (di Kuala Lumpur, Ulaan Baataar dan Paris
—-
Shaaribu Setev adalah seorang lelaki yang kecewa dan marah. Namun disebalik wajah sedih lelaki Mongolia ini tersimpan semangat yang tinggi. Duduk di sebuah sofa di lobi sebuah hotel di Ulaan Battar sambil bergetar menahan angin beku yang bertiup, dia lelaki berumur 60 tahun itu bersiap sedia untuk melawan. Raut parasnya dibentuk dari segala penderitaan dan iklim yang melampau, dan renungannya yang dalam menceritakan semuanya.
“Anak perempuan saya dibunuh oleh orang Malaysia di bumi Malaysia. Namun mereka langsung tidak memohon maaf,” katanya yang juga seorang professor psikologi di Universiti Kebangsaan Mongolia.
Pembunuhan anak perempuannya, Altantuya Shaaribu, berlaku pada bulan Oktober 2006. Ini adalah jenayah bunuh yang berbeza dari yang lain berlaku di sebuah rantau di mana konflik-konflik perniagaan atau pertelingkahan politik yang remeh diselesaikan dengan muncung pistol. Segala yang berkaitan dengan kes ini, yang bermula pada tahun 2002 apabila syarikat Perancis-Sepanyol Armaris mencapai persetujuan untuk menjual tiga buah kapal selam kepada kerajaan Malaysia dengan harga satu bilion Euro, adalah luar dari kebiasaan. Kesan “kes Altantuya” ini di Perancis, Malaysia dan Mongolia belum lagi mencapai klimaknya. Pembunuhan gadis Mongolia berusia 28 tahun itu adalah akibat dari “komisen” berharga 114 juta daripada Armasi kepada rakan niaganya di Malaysia. “Komisyen” ini yang diakui oleh kerajaan Malaysia di dalam Parlimen di Kuala Lumpur, telah mencetus beberapa siri peristiwa yang membawa kepada pembunuhan Altantuya dan kehilangan beberapa orang saksi penting di dalam kes itu.
Sebuah laporan dari polis Malaysia, yang masih disimpan secara rahsia sehingga sekarang, mendedahkan secara terperinci bagaimana perempuan muda yang tergolong dalam golongan atasan Asia itu dibunuh. Di dalam dokumen tersebut, salah seorang pembunuhnya, seorang anggota polis dari Cawangan Khas bernama Sirul Omar, menjawab soalan-soalan yang ditanya oleh seorang pegawai di sebuah stesen polis yang berdekatan dengan tempat pembunuhan.
“Apabila perempuan Cina itu melihat saya mengeluarkan sepucuk pistol, dia merayu supaya dilepaskannya kerana dia sedang mengandung. Azilah (pegawai pemerintah kepada Sirul) menarik perempuan itu dan [menghumbannya] ke atas tanah. Saya segera menembak pada bahagian kiri mukanya. Kemudian Azilah menanggalkan pakaian perempuan itu dan memasukkan pakaian yang ditanggal itu ke dalam sebuah plastik hitam. Azilah mendapati tangan perempuan itu masih bergerak. Dia memerintahkan saya untuk menembak sekali lagi, dan saya melakukannya”, ujar Sirul. Ini adalah merupakan pengesahan yang pertama identiti pembunuh Altantuya. ” Kemudian kami mengusung mayatnya ke dalam hutan, Azilah membalut bahan letupan di sekeliling kaki, abdomen dan kepala perempuan itu dan kemudian kami meletupkannya.”
Pendedahan laporan tersebut di dalam akhbar Perancis *Liberation* adalah bab terbaru dalam kisah yang penuh warna-warni dan dramatik ini yang melibatkan penjual senjata Perancis, pawang Mongolia dan politikus-politikus Malaysia. Kes ini sangat sensitif kepada kerajaan Malaysia, kerana Timbalan Perdana Menteri Malaysia, Najib Razak yang dijadualkan menjadi Perdana Menteri pada akhir bulan Mac nanti disyaki terlibat di dalam kes ini, tetapi ini juga kerana kes ini boleh memalukan DCNS, sebuah syarikat Perancis yang mengkhusus dalam pembinaan kapal laut tentera. Syarikat Perancis-Sepanyol Armaris, yang menjual Scorpene dan satu kapal selam Agosta kepada Malaysia pada bulan Jun 2002, dibeli oleh DCNS pada tahun 2007.
Dengan kecantikan dan keanggunannya yang memukau, Altantuya mengingatkan pada imej kacau seorang perempuan dari Timur Jauh bernama Mata Hari. Altantuya membesar di Saint Petersburg (Russia), kemudian belajar di Institut Pengurusan Ekonomi di Beijing. Di samping bertutur di dalam bahasa Inggeris, dia juga fasih di dalam bahasa Russia, Cina dan Korea. Sebagaimana yang telah ditakdirkan, semasa di Hong Kong dia bertemu dengan Abdul Razak Baginda pada tahun 2004. Baginda adalah seorang pakar keselamatan dan pengarah Malaysian Strategic Reseach Centre, sebuah badan pemikir yang pro-kerajaan. Tidak berapa lama kemudian hubungan mereka menjadi percintaan. Altantuya, atau dipanggil Tuya oleh teman-temannya, membuktikan bahawa dia adalah seorang pembantu yang berguna, menolong Baginda menterjemah bahasa Rusia ke bahasa Inggeris.
Jika Altantuya muda dan cantik, Baginda yang kaya dan menarik adalah seorang yang terkenal di kalangan elit Kuala Lumpur, terutama sekali kerana dia rapat dengan Timbalan Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan menteri Pertahanan, Najib Razak (baginda juga penasihat urusan keselamatannya). Baginda selalu bertemu dengan lingkungan-lingkungan yang sangat eksklusif di Kuala Lumpur, kadangkala ditemani oleh isterinya yang sah.
Pada bulan Mac 2005, Altantuya dan Baginda berangkat ke Eropah, mengelilingi Perancis, Jerman, Itali dan Portugal dengan Ferrari merah Baginda, menginap di hotel-hotel mewah dan menjamu selera di restoran-restoran terbaik di benua itu. Bagaimanapun, lawatan itu bukan sekadar lawatan biasa: kontrak untuk menjual dua kapal selam itu telah ditandatangani pada tahun 2002, tetapi beberapa hal-hal penting yang berkaitan masih belum diselesaikan.
“Kami mengetahui bahawa Baginda digunakan oleh Timbalan Perdana Menteri Najib Razak sebagai pengantara dalam urusan system persenjataan, terutama sekali di peringkat tertinggi,” kata seorang pakar urusan keselamatan serantau.
Pada hujung bulan Mac Altantuya dan Baginda berada di Paris, di mana mereka bertemu dengan Najib Razak. Sekeping gambar yang diambil pada akhir Mac 2005, menunjukkan bahawa ketiga mereka berada di sebuah kelab persendirian di Paris.
“Tuya menunjukkan gambar itu. Katanya salah seorang lelaki itu, Abdul Razak Baginda adalah teman lelakinya, dan seorang lagi, Najib Razak, adalah “big boss”. Saya bertanya kepadanya adakah mereka bersaudara kerana nama mereka, tetapi katanya tidak, dan Najib Razak adalah “perdana menteri”, cerita Amy, teman rapat Altantuya (Najib Razak telah bersumpah dengan Quran mengatakan bahawa dia tidak pernah bertemu dengan Altantuya). Menurut seorang detektif persendirian, sekarang bersembunyi di India, si Tuya yang cantik itu juga adalah perempuan simpanan Timbalan Perdana Menteri, yang dikenalkan oleh Baginda kepadanya pada akhir tahun 2004.
Cerita ini menjadi dramatik apabila pada Oktober 2006, Altantuya dimaklumkan bahawa komisyen yang dibayar oleh syarikat Perancis-Sepanyol Armaris telah masuk ke dalam akaun bank di Kuala Lumpur. Komisyen itu telah dibayar kepada Perimekar, sebuah syarikat yang dimiliki oleh Baginda. Altantuya segera berangkat ke Kuala Lumpur dengan tujuan menuntut bahagiannya dari komisyen itu dari Baginda; dia berkata dia berhak untuk mendapat 500, 000 dolar. Baginda dan Altantuya putus hubungan tidak berapa lama sebelum itu lagi. Rosmah Mansor, seorang ahli perniagaan yang digeruni dan isteri Najib Razak, cemburu lalu menghalang sebarang pembayaran kepada Altantuya. Altantuya tiba di Kuala Lumpur dengan dua orang wanita Mongolia, salah seorang darinya adalah pawang yang akan menjampi Baginda jika dia tidak membayar. Selama beberapa hari, Altantuya mengganggu bekas kekasihnya. Pada 18 Oktober, Baginda tidak dapat lagi tahan dengan Altantuya yang setiap hari berada di hadapan rumahnya. Dia menghubungi Pengarah Cawangan Khas, Musa Safrie, yang juga merupakan pegawai keselamatan Najib Razak.
Pada 19 Oktober 2006, jam mendekati 9 malam, dua orang pegawai polis Cawangan Khas, Azilah Hadridan dan Sirul Omar, dihantar ke hadapan rumah Baginda di mana Altantuya menjerit dan berteriak. Mereka mendapat arahan “meneutralkan perempuan Cina itu.” Mereka menculiknya dan membawanya sejauh sepuluh kilometer dan menembaknya beberapa kali. Kemudian, mereka memusnahkan tubuhnya dengan bahan letupan C4, jenis yang hanya boleh diperolehi dari Kementerian Pertahanan. Kemasukannya ke Malaysia telah dipadam dari rekod imigresen. Ini seolah menunjukkan bahawa Altantuya tidak pernah ke Malaysia kerana tidak ada rekod yang menunjukkan sebegitu.
Tidak ada jenayah yang sempurna. Pemandu teksi yang disewa oleh Altantuya pada hari tersebut tidak dapat menerima kenyataan bagaimana penumpangnya yang masih belum membayar tambang diculik di depan matanya. Dia mencatit nombor pendaftaran kereta penculik itu dan membuat repot di sebuah balai polis. Dalam beberapa hari, polis mendapat tahu indentiti kereta itu dan mendapati ia adalah kereta kerajaan. Beberapa peristiwa berlaku sehingga Najib Razak sendiri tidak dapat menghalangnya. Dia cuba untuk menutup kes ini. Beberapa jam sebelum penahanan Baginda, dia menghantar satu SMS: “Saya Akan bertemu dengan Ketua Polis Negara pada jam 11 pagi hari ini…masalah tersebut akan selesai. Sabarlah”. Beberapa jam kemudian, Baginda ditahan, begitu juga dengan dua orang pegawai dari Cawangan Khas, Azilah dan Sirul.
Selepas perbicaraan yang dianggap meragukan oleh ramai pemerhati, Baginda dilepaskan dari tuduhan telah memerintahkan pembunuhan itu dilakukan dan dibebaskan pada bulan November 2008. Azilah dan Sirul yang dituduh melakukan jenayah tersebut, tampil di hadapan Mahkamah bulan lepas. Jika disabit kesalahan, mereka akan dihukum mati. Mahkamah akan memutuskan pada 9 haribulan April.
Beribu batu dari Kuala Lumpur, di ibu Negara Mongolia, Ulaan Baataar, Shaaribuu Setev, bapa Altantuya berusaha mengawal perasaan marahnya. Untuk dia dan keluarganya, pembebasan Baginda adalah simbol kepada ketidakadilan di dalam proses perundangan Malaysia.
“Kerajaan Malaysia langsung tidak membals surat-surat yang dihantar oleh Kementeria Luar Mongolia,” katanya. Ketika Shaaribu datang ke parlimen Malaysia untuk bertemu dengan Najib Razak, Timbalan Perdana Menteri itu terpaksa keluar mengikut pintu belakang untuk mengelakkan pertembungan yang memalukan. Kes Altantuya telah menjadi elemen penting di dalam permainan politik Malaysia di antara Najib Razak (yang dijangka akan menjadi Perdana Menteri selepas Perhimpunan Agong UMNO pada bulan Mac ini) dan Anwar Ibrahim. Sehingga kini, Najib Razak Berjaya menghadapi rintangan ini, tetapi pembunuhan perempuan Mongolia itu akan menjadi pedang yang tergantung di atas kepalanya.
Salah satu aspek yang kabur di dalam kes Altantuya ini adalah peranan syarikat Armaris. Pada Oktober 2007, Timbalan Menteri Pertahanan, Zainal Abidin Zin, mengakui di hadapan Parlimen bahawa Armaris telah membayar sebanyak 114 juta Euro sebagai komisyen kepada Perimekar. Dia menegaskan bahawa bayaran itu bulan rasuah tetapi adalah untuk “perkhidmatan-perkhidmatan sokongan dan koordinasi.” Adakah terdapat korupsi di dalam kes kapal Taiwan di mana DCNS French dikaitkan juga? DCNS, adalah syarikat swasta dengan dana awam, telah menolak permintaan kami untuk mengadakan pertemuan. ‘Tiada siapa yang boleh memberi komen terhadap kes itu,” jawab pegawai perhubungan awam DCNS di Paris. Sebuah dokumen, yang boleh menghubungkan antara Altantuya dan syarikat Perancis itu adalah surat jaminan yang ditulis oleh Abdul Razak Baginda supaya perempuan simpanannya itu dapat memohon visa untuk memasuki zon Schengen (Perancis adalah Negara ahli). Kedutaan Perancis tidak boleh menolak permintaan seorang lelaki yang telah dianugerahkan dengan Legion d’Honneaur itu. Tetapi peranan Altantuya di dalam perundingan kapal selam itu masih lagi belum jelas. Agensi-agensi perisikan mendapati latar belakangnya menarik dan FSB Rusia (ex-KGB) memantau secara dekat kes ini.
Di Ulaan Baatar, Mungunshagai, anak lelaki sulung Altantuya, yang berumur 12 tahun, mengalami trauma dengan kematian emaknya. Altanshagai, anak bongsu, yang berumur 5 tahun dan terencat akal, tidak dapat memahami bahawa dia tidak akan bertemu ibunya lagi. “Dia selalu bertanya tentang ibunya dan dia sepanjang hari meniarap di atas kerusinya. Setiap malam, saya akan memberinya gula-gula dan mengatakan bahawa ibunya memberikan kepada saya untuk diberikan kepadanya”, ujar Shaaribuu Setev, datuk kepada dua dua orang budak lelaki itu. Tentang baginda pula, dia sekarang menetap di United Kingdom dengan keluarganya. Dia tidak sekalipun pernah melafaz sepatah kata penyesalan terhadap kematian seseorang yang pernah berkongsi hidup dengannya selama dua tahun.
Terjemahan Bahasa Melayu oleh : Kerajaan Rakyat
Arnaud Dubus (di Kuala Lumpur, Ulaan Baataar dan Paris
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)