Environs Eagles

CLICK TO VIEW VIDEO: Lobbying for a torture-free Malaysia

The Selangor State Government celebrated the Merdeka Day at I-City in Shah Alam on the eve of that day.

The ‘Malaysians for Beng Hock’, a support group was also holding a silent protest in its campaign for a torture-free Malaysia.

Teoh Lee Lan, 30, the younger sister of the Late Teoh Beng Hock was leading the protest.

One of the coordinators of the group, Chong Kok Siong said the group will continue to rally the masses to pressure the Malaysian government over Beng Hock’s case and of the other tortured victims.

The group had joined the others at the I-City to sing the national anthem after the countdown.

Video by R. Vijay Kumar, Citizen Journalist

The impasse and political maneuvering in Perak, the attempts in Selangor, and the quitting one’s own party and becoming ‘friendly’ with their once opposition party has reintroduced the question whether the government is going to pass the “Anti-Party-Hopping Act”.

Shortly after the March 2008 General Election, the 12th Malaysian General Election, two Perak State Assemblymen of Pakatan Rakyat alliance (PR) were indicted for a felony. They appeared in court to face the corruption charges and the court trials were scheduled to commence in midst February 2009. In end January 2009, these two men were reported missing. The assembly deputy speaker was also reported missing. In early February, the three state assemblymen re-appeared and declared themselves as independents and ‘friendly’ to Barisan Nasional coalition (BN). This sparked off a power struggle in the state. BN now claiming it has the simple majority to form the new government.

Meanwhile, an assemblyman from BN defects to PR, only to flip-flop back to BN within the week. In the aftermath, it appears that BN had sent a ‘Trojan horse’ to fake a defection.

Were the corruption charges deployed to force the defections? Were they under coercion to party-hop? Were they intimidated through threats and money inducement?

Are the political parties geared towards merely capturing and recapturing more seats to be or to stay in power or are they to focus on the nation-building programmes and to champion our constitutional rights and needs?

Isn’t democracy the people’s choice? The electorate, in the general elections, voted in their respective Members of Parliament (MP) and State Assemblymen. They voted mainly based on the political party to which the representatives belong, and less so on their individual ability, track record, merits and family background. Generally, the delegates in a party election look for such attributes when selecting their party leaders.
The electorate expects that the party leadership to be more stringent in the selection of their candidates. These candidates use their party’s money and platform to campaign.

Once elected, these representatives are now answerable to the people. The Federal and state government formed thereafter is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. So the government should therefore take the people into its interest and confidence.

‘Party-hopping’ among these elected representatives will tantamount to cheating the party and the people. It is unethical and immoral too. The people now demand that there be a robust public debate on whether we need a legislation to outlaw ‘party-hopping’.

The elected representative who defects could have solid reasons to justify his/her switching of parties, such as major differences with his/her own party on policy issues that affect his/her constituents. It could also highly likely be on a matter of principle. The law should provide for this defector to resign his/her seat, and re-contest the seat. This allows the defector to obtain fresh mandate from the constituents.

With the current Federal Constitution, ‘party-hopping’ is not unlawful. However, it does not allow the incumbent to stand for re-election within five years.

In 1988, Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad, the Johor Baru MP from UMNO, resigned from his seat and stood in a by-election as an independent, and won. So in 1990, the Federal Constitution was amended to incorporate Article 48(6). This means that the elected representative is banned from standing in elections for five years upon his/her resignation from a state assembly or Parliament.

Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution expressly states that all citizens have the right to form associations, that is, to join, not to join and leave any association, but Parliament may by law impose such restrictions as it deems necessary in the interest of the security of Malaysia or any part thereof, public order, morality, labour or education.

In 1992, the Supreme Court (now Federal Court) had the opportunity to decide in the case of Dewan Undangan Negeri Kelantan v Nordin Salleh 1992 whether an amendment to the Kelantan state constitution which prohibits party-hopping is inconsistent with Article 10(1)(c). Article XXXIA of Part I of the Kelantan constitution provides that if any member of the Legislative Assembly who is a member of a political party resigns or is expelled from, or for any reasons whatsoever, ceases to be a member of such political party, he shall cease to be a member of the Legislative Assembly and his seat shall become vacant.

The Supreme Court declared that such a law was invalid because the restriction imposed by the Kelantan Constitution could not be a restriction imposed under clauses 2(c) and (3) of Article 10 as it was a law passed by a state legislature and not the Federal Parliament.

In 1986, after forming the Sabah state government, Datuk Seri Joseph Pairin Kitingan, the president of Parti Bersatu Sabah enacted an ‘anti-party-hopping’ law. In 1992, the High Court declared that such a law ‘ultra vies’ Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution as it restrained one’s freedom of association. His party, then in the opposition, could not stop several assemblymen who had crossed over to BN. After he lost the state government, and ever since then Datuk Pairin has been calling for a law against defection but no one has taken him seriously.

After March 8, 2008 general election, there was a change in the political landscape in the country. BN domination had eroded, and PR was elected to govern several states. There were threats and allegations of mass defections by some BN parliamentarians to PR. This was creating political instability at the Federal level.

When Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi reshuffled his Cabinet after the general election, he appointed Datuk Zaid Ibrahim as the Minister in the Prime Minister Department to oversee legal affairs and judicial reform. On March 23, 2008, at a thanksgiving feast to mark his appointment, Datuk Zaid said that a law to ban ‘party-hopping’ would be among the first actions that he would initiate. However, the Cabinet did not sanction it.

On September 15, 2008, Datuk Zaid resigned from the Cabinet. This was after he had criticise the arrests of three prominent individuals, an MP, a blogger and a newspaper journalist, under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

Ironically, with the defection of Datuk Nasruddin Hashim, UMNO’s assemblyman in Perak to Parti Keadilan Rakyat in January 2009, there were renewed calls from Datuk Seri Joseph Pairin Kitingan and several other prominent leaders from BN component parties, stating that the time was ripe to amend the Federal and state constitutions to include an ‘anti-party-hopping’ law. The leaders who shared this calling includes UMNO vice-president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, UMNO supreme council member Datuk Seri Rais Yatim, PBRS president Tan Sri Joseph Kurup, and the new de factor Law Minister, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz.

Once again, both the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS) have also voiced their support for an ‘anti-party-hopping’ law. Since BN did not secure a two-thirds majority to be able to make amendments to the Federal Constitution, both DAP and PAS are willing to support, but they have a caveat. They want the Article 48(6), which does not allow the incumbent to stand for re-election within five years, to be removed. This will satisfy both a representative’s freedom to associate and the people’s right to choose. The representative will now be able to go back to the people again who will decide whether they want him in this or that party.

Both DAP and PAS want the motion to be raised in the Parliament meeting in February 2009.

However, when February 2009 came, the BN government had a different agenda, and the ‘anti-party-hopping’ law never saw its fruition.

Since then, the Rakyat had seen many more of their elected representatives quitting the Pakatan Rakyat fold to become Barisan Nasional-friendly. This action was apparently to be able to have more funds to support their constituents.

Why did Datuk Zaid Ibrahim fail in his bid to establish an ‘anti-party-hopping’ law? Why did he not get the support of the cabinet? Why did BN not establish an ‘anti-party-hopping’ law when it was enjoying more than a two-thirds majority in Parliament? Was it to BN’s advantage not to do so? Is BN still encouraging ‘political crossovers’ or will it follow the winds of change?

Is it possible that Malaysians can see this desired changes after the 13th Malaysian General Election, due latest by 2013? Then we can all start off on a clean slate, and the emphasis is on the word ‘clean’.

How Citizen Journalism is different from Traditional Journalism.

Journalism is the search and presentation of truth for the public to make informed decision. Jay Rosen, known as a supporter and advocate of citizen journalism defines Citizen Journalism as “When the people formerly known as the audience employ the press tools they have in their hands to inform one another”.

Citizen journalism is when a “non-professional” journalist (i.e. a person without professional journalism training) collect, analyze, report and disseminate news and information. The intent is to provide independent, reliable, accurate, wide-ranging and relevant information that a democracy requires. They may write in their own blog or an online forum.

Citizen journalism should not be confused with community journalism or civic journalism, which is practiced by professional journalists, normally working with the mainstream media. Citizen journalism is a specific form of citizen media as well as user generated content.

The idea behind citizen journalism is that people without professional journalism training can use the tools of modern technology and the global distribution of the Internet to create, augment or fact-check media on their own or in collaboration with others. For example, you might write about an event of public-interest on your blog or in an online forum. Or you could fact-check a newspaper article from the mainstream media and point out factual errors or bias on your blog. Or you might snap a digital photo of a newsworthy event happening in your neighbourhood and post it online. Or you might videotape a similar event and post it on a site such as YouTube or Vimeo.

Thus, every ordinary citizen is a journalist. The traditional journalism is the media system that ran one way, in a broadcasting pattern, with high entry fees, and a few firms compete to ‘speak’ very loudly while the rest of the population listened.

September 2, 2010
Brickfields, Kuala Lumpur

Nurul Izzah Anwar takes inter-racial warmth to a new level. Nurul, the Lembah Pantai MP, joins the devotees to celebrate Lord Krishna’s birthday or Sri Krishna Jeyanthi (also known as Shree Krishna Janmashtmi to the Northern Indian community) at the Sri Krishna Temple in Brickfields.

View the video to appreciate the values and beliefs of this young and upcoming people’s leader from Pakatan Rakyat, the People’s Pact.

Now she is what I would call a True Malaysian Leader.

Video by R. Vijay Kumar, Citizen Journalist

A Weekly Day Off for Foreign Domestic Workers

CLICK TO VIEW VIDEO: A Weekly Day Off for Foreign Domestic Workers

Friends, could you give your Foreign Domestic Worker a day off a week as well?

But why do most employers not give a day off?

1. Would a day off allow the worker to run away?
2. Would they fear the worker gets exposed to negative influence outside the home?

You do not impose such constraints or have similar doubts when you give your child the day off, do you?

Develop a healthy Employer-Worker working relationship; treat her as a worker. Tell her your work expectation as an employer and give a weekly day off just like how you deserve it too.

Pledge here to give foreign/migrant domestic workers a weekly day off: http://www.petitiononline.com/adayoff/petition.html

For more information kindly click www.caramasia.org

A video project for CARAM Asia by R. Vijay Kumar, Citizen Journalist

MALAYSIANS FOR BENG HOCK campaign.

CLICK TO VIEW VIDEO: Malaysians for Beng Hock” campaign

The family of the late Teoh Beng Hock, who died a mysterious death at the Selangor’s MACC headquarter, calls on all Malaysians to continue support in their quest to seek truth and justice. They say that their quest is beyond the Teoh’s family and it extends to the future generations of Malaysians.

At the recent public forum “Injustice for 1 Year : What Say You Malaysians?” held on Monday August 16, 2010 evening at the KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall, the sister, Teoh Lee Lan said the number of people at events related to Beng Hock has been gradually decreasing since his funeral service last year.

She had said, “We are non-partisan. This is not a political issue, but it is about the country and the kind of system we have.”

A group of NGOs, civil societies and individuals came together and formed a movement to ensure justice is secured for the family and the greater Malaysians. They call themselves “Malaysians for Beng Hock”. It is a movement in support of Beng Hock’s family. It is a movement in search of justice. It is a movement against state-sponsored torture. It is a movement for all of us Malaysians who care.

Citizen Journalist R. Vijay Kumar met several of the Coordinators of “Malaysians for Beng Hock” campaign on Wednesday August 18, 2010 at the Bangunan Mahkamah Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah in Shah Alam.

The three coordinators, Chong Kok Siong, age 40, Ng Yap Hwa, age 32 and Lim Zhen Hui, age 22 shared some brief information on the campaign.

For further information of the campaign and future activities, kindly view the website, MalaysiansForBengHock

Fund Raising: The movement needs funds to run the “Malaysians for Beng Hock” campaign; organizing various events, print of banners, flyers, stickers, badges, T-shirts, VCD etc. They seek well wishers to heartily make contributions to their fund, a joint bank account:
Maybank current a/c no: 564146533656
Maybank joint a/c : Teoh Lee Lan or Liau Kok Fah

Teoh Lee Lan, Beng Hock’s sister, is the chairperson of this campaign, and Liau Kok Fah is the Chairperson of Civil Rights Committee of KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall.

Teoh Beng Hock was the political secretary for Selangor state executive committee member Ean Yong Hian Wah. On July 15, 2009, Beng Hock was taken in for interrogation by MACC’s official on the case of an apparent misuse of fund by Ean Yong. However, Beng Hock was found dead the next day nine floors below the Selangor’s MACC headquarter at Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam. Beng Hock was getting married on that day.

Video by R. Vijay Kumar, Citizen Journalist

Abdul Razak Musa – Ho Mun Chong encounter after the Teoh Beng Hock inquest

Shah Alam: Bangunan Mahkamah Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah
Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) prosecution head, Abdul Razak Musa left lawyers and the public gallery alternately baffled and frustrated as he cross-examined Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand, a Thai forensics expert at the Teoh Beng Hock inquest on Wednesday August 18, 2010.

From the very start on asking if she knew the university that she had graduated from is not recognised in Malaysia, to which Dr Pornthip answered, “But it is in the top five in Asia.”, his barrage of provocative and many times silly questions were sought to discredit her.

The Thai pathologist stood her ground despite Razak’s incessant attacks on her expertise, observations and conclusions on the death of the DAP political aide in July 2009.

Once Dr Porntip even retorted, “I’m questioning whether you are a lawyer.” To this Abdul Razak replied, “Maybe I’m younger than you, but I’ve served as a lawyer for 24 years.”

The court’s amusement turned into frustration towards the end of Razak’s line of questioning.

Members of the public sighed loudly when he finally wrapped up – and one even bellowed “Thank you!”

Razak later left the court complex in Shah Alam in a huff, slamming shut his car door when questioned by reporters.

Mocking at Razak, a Beng Hock supporter, Daniel Chong, 53 sarcastically remarked, “Razak clarity and understanding of the English language after 24 years of experience is horrendous.” Chong, who was a former DAP Bukit Gasing Chairman, is one of the activists championing justice for Teoh Beng Hock.

As Razak’s driver moved the car forward, it ‘nudged’ another Beng Hock supporter twice, as the supporter tried to prevent the vehicle from leaving.

However, Ho Mun Chong – a DAP member who has attended every inquest hearing – was not injured.

A policeman was later seen bothering Mun Chong after the incident.

Last Sunday, August 1, 2010, what was intended to be a peaceful candlelight vigil to commemorate the Internal Security Act’s (ISA) 50th anniversary at the Dataran MBPJ became a ‘brutal’ crowd dispersal by Malaysian riot police.

That evening, many activists who had gathered at Dataran MBPJ, Padang Timur in Petaling Jaya, Selangor to mark their protest, in a peaceful manner, of this deemed draconian law had to take cover at the nearby Amcorp shopping mall from the police force.

The policemen were also seen rushing into the shopping mall to pull out people, thus breaking the peace even in the mall.

Those arrested were taken to the nearby Petaling Jaya district police headquarters.

Many of those arrested claimed to have been “shoved, beaten, slapped, dragged, choked and verbally abused” while being detained by the police. A total of 29 people were arrested in Petaling Jaya – eight women and 21 men, including the three people who were arrested outside the police headquarters when they came to meet those arrested at Dataran MBPJ and Amcorp.

It was only by 4.30am Monday, Aug 2, 2010 when the last of those arrested were released, one-by-one, under police bail. Those arrested were ordered to attend the PJ Magistrate court at 9.00am on August 16, 2010, and not report back to this district police headquarters.

In an attempt to add insult to injury, several traffic policemen from this district headquarters also summoned the vehicles of people who waited for those arrested. This work-of-summons was being done several times till after 3.30am. Those whose vehicles were summoned included several of the Members of Parliament, Selangor State Assemblypersons and MBPJ councilors.

Sivarasa Rasiah, who is Subang MP, together with Ronnie Liu, a Selangor State EXCO member & Pandamaran State Assemblyperson, both felt this further aggravations and provocations were unnecessary and hold ACP Arjunaidi Mohamed, the Petaling Jaya district police chief responsible for these intimidations.

“BE OUR GUEST” (Selamat Datang. ANDA ADALAH TETAMU KAMI). These words were explicitly displayed at the signboard at the district headquarters.

A sincere question to the Malaysian Police, “Are we really your guests”?

An MBPJ councilor, Chan Chee Kong undertook to verify the permissibility of the inclusion of details of a motor repair company on the signboard at the police headquarters which also administers a traffic police station.

Seramai 60 orang mahasiswa dari pelbagai institut pengajian tinggi awam berkumpul di sekitar Ibu Pejabat Polis Petaling Jaya untuk menaikkan sepanduk Anti ISA.

Kumpulan mahasiswa itu mahu kerajaan supaya memansuhkan Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri bukannya meminda.

Sebelum itu, polis telah bertindak menyurai serta menghalang para aktivis daripada mengadakan upacara memasang lilin di lapan tempat di seluruh negara bagi membantah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) yang kini berusia 50 tahun.

Video oleh R. Vijay Kumar, Wartawan Masyarakat

The four UKM students – Muhammad Hilman Idham, Azlin Shafina Mohamad Adzha, Woon King Chai and Muhammad Ismail Aminuddin – on May 13 received their summonses to face a disciplinary hearing for contravening the UCCA.

The case resumed today after the students received an injunction on June 1, 2010 to delay the disciplinary action. Lawyers Malik Imthiaz Sarwar, Haris Ibrahim and Ashok Kandiah appeared for the infamous UKM 4. Meanwhile lawyer Shafie Abdullah appeared for UKM.

Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, the lawyer for the UKM students spoke to CJ R. Vijay Kumar after the case.

Video by R. Vijay Kumar, Citizen Journalist