SMALL TALK

This is what Dato' Ahmad Husni Hanazlah said of Khir Toyo as reported in the NST of today 30th June 2008.
If you are a leader, you are supposed to be the leader for all. Not just for the Malays or the Chinese or the Indians or the Ibans.
Was it really Khir Toyo who demolished the temple concerned? Was it not done by Orders of the Court. When I was Senior Assistant Registrar of the High Court in the 80s, I did carry out Orders to demolish too. Orders made by the Court upon Writ of Possession. Can Khir Toyo stop the Court Order? I don't think so.
If Khir Toyo was really in a position to postpone the demolition and if he did not do so, then he should be blamed. Execution of Court Orders can be postponed. Justice must always be tempered with mercy. If the temple need to be used for prayers in a few days time, why can't it be postponed?
Will there be Hindraf if not for the demolition of the temple?
If so, sorry Khir Toyo, I agree with Ahmad Husni.... I will also DQ you!


"Temple issue disqualifies you, Khir told

TANJUNG RAMBUTAN: Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo's involvement in the demolition of a Hindu temple in Selangor while he was menteri besar is coming back to haunt him.
Tambun Umno division chief Datuk Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah said the party supreme council member should not join the race for the Umno Youth chief post in December because of the incident. Ahmad Husni, who is MP for Tambun and deputy finance minister, cited the temple demolition last October as the main reason for asking Dr Mohd Khir to drop out of the race."The Hindu community was very hurt (with the demolition). How can you demolish a temple? What if a mosque was demolished? What do you think will happen? "Political leaders should not do this type of thing. I do not give face to this type of political leader (referring to Dr Mohd Khir). He has done wrong and, therefore, must withdraw (from the race)," he said after launching a mobile service unit for his constituency here yesterday.
Ahmad Husni said Dr Mohd Khir should not have offered himself for the post as he had failed to guard the interests of the Indian community in Selangor while he was menteri besar, adding that the people of Selangor voted for the opposition because of his actions.He said politicians should keep in mind that they had a higher benchmark to satisfy, especially if they held high public office. "Their actions will be judged because of the position they hold. This (being morally accountable) must be the number one consideration. Therefore, he (Dr Mohd Khir) should withdraw from the race."

THE CARD SAYS IT ALL....FRIENDS, BE THERE PLEASE!

Everybody talks about it now. Lawyers, non-lawyers, politicians and everybody.

Some think that independence of the judiciary is the ex-gratia payment to Tun Salleh Abas & gang. Some say independence of the judiciary must mean that the Courts must not be in anyway having any relation or reliance on the Executive or the Legislature. Those are the one who know or heard about the doctrine of separation of powers. Some say that the independence of the judiciary mean that the Bar Council must be given bigger role in the appointment of judges and must be consulted when judges are to be promoted. Others say that the independence of the judiciary must mean that the Courts be upgraded and judges be given all facilities and higher remuneration.

Come what may, say what ever you like, the independence of the judiciary was and is never a big issue to anybody during the last election. Who cares what happened in the Courts, who gets appointed or who gets promoted. Make a survey, the courts are not at all a popular place to be to all Malaysian. No one wants to be in the Courts be it as a witness or worst as an accused. It's always the last resort. In all matters and in all statement of account of any company or corporation, legal fees never ever become an important payment to be made. No body wants to be in Courts and lawyers are always the last to be called.

Its been 50 years now since Merdeka and our Courts have been there even before Merdeka. Our judiciary have always been independent. So independent that the Courts used to be the least maintained of all government buildings.

Think about it, the judiciary needs the Executive to survive and maintain itself. Lets not allow one Minister and one President of the Bar Council plus a few spinners divert our attention to a more pressing issues. Lets think about the higher food and fuel prices and how to survive in this era of a vote of no confidence against the PM, which had never happened before.

Acquired Intense Denial Syndrome (AIDS)

Kenapa masih deny lagi? Sudah ada satu parti komponen yang secara terang-terangan hilang kepercayaan kepada Pak Lah. Kenapa masih dinafikan? Kenapa masih dipersoalkan yang itu bukan keputusan SAPP tetapi itu pendirian presidennya sahaja?

Samada itu pendirian Presidennya atau SAPP tidak penting. Yang pentingnya ada yang sudah tidak percaya kepada Pak Lah.

Kenapa pula sebagai jawapan kepada permintaan SAPP/Yong Teck Lee, Pak Lah katakan yang Yong Teck Lee itu tamak. Sudah ditawarkan Senatorship/Special Envoy, Yong Teck Lee masih tidak mahu. Yong Teck Lee bukan tidak percaya sebab jawatan yang dia hendak. Yong Teck Lee tidak percaya sebab apa yang orang Sabah minta masih tidak dapat.

Apa yang diminta oleh SAPP terdapat dalam blog parti itu http://sapphq.blogspot.com/
Yang mereka minta adalah seperti berikut :

Monday, June 9, 2008

SAPP's 14 Points "Sabah Issues"
SAPP's 14 points submitted to the PM on 7 April 2008. Long and overdue issues highlighted.

SAPP’s 14 points submitted to PM

1. Political autonomy should be enhanced so that Sabah can manage its own affairs, including the implementation of the Sabah Development Corridor, 9th Malaysia Plan projects and the civil service.
Response from the Federal Government? None.

2. Respect for and recognition of the State Government under the leadership of the Chief Minister of the day. At times, Sabah representatives bad mouth other Sabah leaders in front of federal leaders. This has made Sabah look divided and therefore easily manipulated.
Response from the Federal Government? None.

3. Sabah needs increased representation at the national political (Cabinet) and administrative (civil service) main stream and revival of the Ministry of Special Affairs for Sabah and Sarawak.
Response from the Federal Government? PM announced 2 for civil service. No reply on Minister of Special Affairs.

4. A non-racial approach to national unity and the empowerment of minority groups are also important in nation building to stop the polarization of racial and religious communities in the country.
Response from the Federal Government? None.

5. There is also a need to clarify once and for all the validity of post-NEP New Economic Policy) policies so that any affirmative action must reach the target groups, irrespective of race, that is the people truly in need of assistance.
Response from the Federal Government? No clarification to date.

6. The government must embark on an immediate action plan to solve the illegal immigrant situation in Sabah, including the syndicated My Kad and other dubious documents, that has been a source of unhappiness among the people.
Response from the Federal Government? Cabinet Committee merely window dressing. (Same committee was announced in 2004)

7. The closure of the JPPS (Federal Department of Development) in Sabah. The reason for JPPS's existence is long gone.
Response from the Federal Government? Closure affirmative, only after more than a decade. 38 local staff not given post.

8. Abolition of the double taxation on oil palm in the form of cooking oil subsidies paid ever since June 2007. This taxation should be refunded to the oil palm planters concerned. On the other hand, Sabah does not benefit from the other rice-producing regions in the country. In fact, we pay more for the rice that we consume in Sabah.
Response from the Federal Government? A new tax of 7.5% will be imposed on CPO millers in Sabah and Sarawak and 15% from Peninsular Malaysia. Questionable Windfall Profit Levy.

9. To address the higher freight charges, exorbitant air fares, increasing costs of living, inefficient internet broad band services, electric power break downs, bureaucratic red tape and a host of other entrenched interests (BERNAS monopoly, proton car prices, newspaper prices, KLIA-spoke and wheel policy (against an open air policy), etc..) have staked up against a State like Sabah.
Response from the Federal Government? No action.

10. Federal negligence, the abrupt way that the Money Lenders Act 1951 (Act 400) was extended to Sabah on 1 January 2008. No mechanism was put in place to administer the new law. This has caused much confusion, financial losses and potential legal disputes in Sabah. How can this be allowed to happen in the first place? How can the Sabah Money Lenders Ordinance 1901 (Sabah Cap 81) be brushed aside just like that? Where is the hurry to displace an already established administration of the Sabah Money Lenders Ordinance that has worked well for a century? Now, Sabah is left to bear the consequent losses.
Response from the Federal Government? None.

11. Proposal to make legally binding (on the Federal Treasury) the compensation of loss of revenues due to Sabah under the Part V of the 10th Schedule of the Federal Constitution (Additional Sources of Revenue Assigned to Borneo States). This relates to import duty and excise duty on petroleum products in Sabah and Sarawak. Parliamentary amendments (necessitated by the Asean Free Trade Area (AFTA)pact) to the Sales Tax Act 1972 in 1999 had caused Sabah and Sarawak to lose this revenue which amounted to about RM 200 million per annum per state.
Response from the Federal Government? None.

12. The Special Status of the High Courts in Sabah and Sarawak under Article 121 of the Federal Constitution must be borne in mind too. The amendments to the Sabah Advocates Ordinance 1953 proposed by the Sabah Law Association has been long overdue to be made into federal law. This is so that the Legal Profession Act need not be extended to Sabah (and Sarawak).
Response from the Federal Government? None.

13. Proposal that Petronas money should be used to build the Labuan bridge because Labuan needs a bridge to the main land.
Response from the Federal Government? None.

14. To seek an increase of oil royalties to 20%.
Response from the Federal Government? None.


Mari kita tackle isu yang sebenar BUKAN ALIHKAN ISU.

Selepas PRU 12 bermacam-macam analisa dibuat. BN membuat analisa kenapa mereka kalah di Penang, Kedah, Perak dan Selangor. PR pastinya membuat analisa juga dan mungkin terkejut atas kemenangan yang mereka perolehi.

Anak-anak muda yang baru keluar universiti sudah tidak dapat kerja. Kalau dulu boleh kerja dengan syarikat-syarikat yang dapat kontrek dari kerajaan. Sekarang syarikat itu pun tidak dapat kontrek. Ramai yang menggangur dan mereka lihat ada pula anak-anak muda yang tiba-tiba jadi kaya raya. Bila mereka siasat rupa-rupanya mereka itu Pemuda UMNO yang dapat habuan kerana ada line dengan kumpulan KJ. Mereka bukan dengki tapi mereka jadi underdog. Mereka dengar kalau nak jadi kaya mesti ada line dengan KJ atau Reezal atau Norza. Mereka anak orang kampung manalah ada line macam itu. Lama-lama mereka rasa meluat dan tak mahu pun masuk UMNO. Mereka jadi underdog. Mereka meluat tengok Pemuda/Putera UMNO gah sana sini. Pemuda UMNO pakai Harrier cermin gelap. Putera UMNO terjun payung Kutub Utara.

Bila mereka rasa mereka underdog, masa pilihanraya, mereka pun sokong underdog yang lain. Underdog yang lain tak lain tak bukan PAS, DAP dan PKR. Pembangkang dah lama jadi underdog. Underdog pun sokong lah underdog!

Bukan soal UGAMA, BANGSA ATAU BAHASA! Kalau ugama, bangsa atau bahasa, masakan orang Melayu boleh undi Cina DAP, Cina dan India boleh undi PAS!

Kita sudah lama mengenepikan soal ugama, bangsa dan bahasa bila kita hidup di Malaysia ini. Tidak ada perbalahan kerana ugama, bangsa dan bahasa antara Melayu, Cina dan India. Kita saling faham memahami dan saling hormat menghormati.

Roboh kuil di Selangor itu termasuk juga roboh surau! Orang India faham hal itu. Kenapa mereka buat Hindraf? Sebab mereka rasa mereka jadi underdog.

Kenapa orang Cina tidak sokong BN? Orang Cina baik yang kaya raya atau pun yang tak berapa kaya, sudah jadi underdog. Dulu mereka kuasai perniagaan sana sini. Sekarang mereka sudah kalah dengan GLC dan lagi-lagi Khairy dan Scomi! Mereka jadi underdog juga!

Orang Melayu dah lama jadi Underdog di negara sendiri. Sesama Melayu pun ada yang rendah ada yang tinggi! Kalau dia UMNO bukan main lagi lagak gerak dan geri. Kesana kemari macam Malaysia ini dalam poketnya. Sombong dan lagak dah tak dapat nak kawal lagi. Melayu sama Melayu pun dah ada kategori dan ramai yang kategorikan dirinya underdog.

MUNGKIN PERSEPSI SAHAJA MEREKA RASA MEREKA JADI UNDERDOG. TAPI PERSEPSI ITULAH YANG TIDAK DISEDARI OLEH BN ATAU BN BUAT-BUAT TAK TAHU!

Akhirnya underdog pun undi lah underdog! Kalau ikut kiraan di Semenanjung, yang undi underdog melebihi 57% dan yang undi BN hanya 43% saja.

Perkahwinan lelaki Islam dengan seorang Kitabiyah.

Didalam rang undang-undang ini pasal 10 (1) membenarkan seorang lelaki Islam berkahwin dengan seorang Kitabiyah. Saya berpandangan perkara ini amat mengelirukan. Siapakah dan apakah definasi Kitabiyah itu tidak dibuat penjelasan didalam rang undang-undang ini.

Saya mencadangkan supaya pasal ini dimansuhkan sahaja dengan memotong perkataan “ kecuali dengan seorang Kitabiyah”.

Adalah dikhuatiri jika perkahwinan dengan Kitabiyah dibenarkan, Pahang akan jadi seperti Indonesia. Kesannya nanti adalah kepada anak-anak hasil perkahwinan itu. Jika ibunya yang Kitabiyah itu lebih dominan dari bapanya yang Islam itu, maka anak-anak itu sudah pasti lebih kepada pengaruh Ibu nya dan jika ini berlaku kita akan melahirkan generasi yang tidak tentu pegangan ugamanya.


Pertukaran Ugama

Pasal 46 (2) didalam rang undang-undang ini berbunyi :

“Jika salah satu pihak kepada sesuatu perkahwinan bukan Islam memeluk agama Islam, maka perbuatan yang demikian tidak boleh dengan sendirinya berkuatkuasa membubarkan perkahwinan itu melainkan dan sehingga disahkan sedemikian oleh Mahkamah”

Ini bermakna seseorang lelaki bukan Islam yang telah beristeri dan mempunyai anak boleh memeluk agama Islam dan berkahwin pula dengan wanita Islam sedangkan perkahwinannya dengan wanita bukan Islam yang terdahulu masih lagi berkuat kuasa sehingga dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah. Ini membuka ruang kepada keadaan dimana seseorang itu boleh mempunyai dua Isteri ; satu Islam dan satu lagi bukan Islam ( walaupun seketika sehingganya ianya dibatalkan oleh mahkamah)

Saya juga percaya peruntukan ini akan menimbulkan masalah dari segi penguatkuasaannya vis-à-vis undang-undang sivil. Undang-undang sivil memperuntukan bahawa sesuatu perkahwinan itu adalah dengan sendirinya terbubar jika salah satu pihak kepada perkahwinan itu memeluk agama Islam dan ianya adalah alasan mutlak untuk pembubaran perkahwinan itu. (Annulment of the marriage)

Persoalannya adalah, bagaimanakah Mahkamah Syariah di negeri Pahang boleh berkuasa untuk membubarkan sesuatu perkahwinan pihak-pihak yang bukan berugama Islam?

Peruntukan ini boleh disalahguna oleh lelaki bukan Islam untuk berkahwin dengan wanita Islam walaupun dia sudah mempunyai isteri dan anak semasa belum berugama Islam.

Perkara ini pernah berlaku. Seorang lelaki India bernama Max telah memeluk ugama Islam dan menggunakan nama Omar. Omar berkahwin dengan Rita, seorang perempuan Melayu Islam. Semasa belum memeluk Islam, Max telah berkahwin mengikut adat dan ugama Hindu dengan perempuan India dan mereka mempunyai anak.

Undang-undang Syariah Pahang tidak mempunyai apa-apa kuasa untuk membubarkan perkahwinan Max dengan perempuan India kerana Undang-undang Syariah Pahang hanya terpakai kepada pihak-pihak yang berugama Islam sahaja.

Jesteru itu Omar (Max) mendapat “benefits of both worlds” iaitu pempunyai dua isteri; satu Islam dan satu lagi bukan Islam. Keadaan ini amat memalukan dan Rita terpaksa menjalani satu proses penceraian melalui Mahkamah Syariah yang mengambil masa yang lama. Rita bernasib baik kerana anak hasil perkahwinan itu berada dengannya. Max menghilangkan diri entah kemana dan perkahwinan dengan perempuan India yang asal dahulu masih berjalan.

Saya mencadangkan supaya diadakan peruntukan secara jelas dimana “ seseorang lelaki bukan Islam yang memeluk agama Islam dan ingin berkahwin dengan perempuan Islam di Negeri Pahang mesti lah membuktikan dan mendapat perintah Mahkamah mengesahkan bahawa dia telah pun menyelesaikan segala perkara mengenai perkahwinannya yang terdahulu yakni perkahwinannya secara lain dari cara Islam dan dia adalah bebas dan mempunyai capacity untuk berkahwin pula secara Islam”