Parti KeADILan Rakyat Johor柔州人民公正黨

歡迎到柔州人民公正黨論壇來

2008-03-25T22:53:00.001+08:00

各位朋友,黨員們,歡迎你們來人民公正黨柔州論壇:
http://www.keadilan.ws/

謝謝

刘顺强欢迎有志之士加入公正党

2008-03-12T10:19:00.000+08:00

柔佛州人民公正党署理主席刘顺强指出3月8日的大选结果，显示出人民已经厌倦了种族政治，要否决国阵的政治霸权，要让我国的两线制到来。随着北马5州的联合政府成立，长期受国阵政府打压的人民心声将会获得解放，刘氏希望在不久的将来柔佛的人民也将会像北马一样获得还政于民的喜悦。为了要做好迎接新时代的来临，本州公正党需要再加强及扩大现有组织，以便在来届大选做好执政柔佛州甚至中央政府的准备。所以，该党非常欢迎有意为柔佛州民主化作出贡献的有志之士加入该党团队。

刘氏承认在野党要在被称为巫统堡垒的柔佛执政并不容易，但不是不可能因为堡垒会被贪腐侵蚀而变得不稳固，在野党在这次大选一举攻破柔佛州的1国6州就是一个很好的例子。他坚信该党的主张在随着新的替代政府成立，并获得充分的落实后，柔佛州人民将可以看到该党领导的政府是真正为人民服务，而会对该党更有信心。
刘氏也表示自从该党在全国大选取得空前的胜利后，已接获不少来电表示支持并要加入该党为民服务。这表示柔佛州的人民也已经开始接受该党多元种族、公正公平的主张，并希望有朝一日可以看到柔佛州变天。他指出柔佛州人民公正党正积极在全州筹备设立多个党支部，任何有意加入该党行列的人士欢迎联络他，电话019-7553486。

OPPOSITION MUST TREASURE THIS GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY

2008-03-11T09:54:00.001+08:00

Malaysian Election 2008 has heralded the arrival of a new era. The spectacular election results demonstrated in no uncertain terms that the racial bondage that has imprisoned this country for 50 years has finally begun to disintegrate under the combined onslaught of PKR, DAP and PAS.

Not only the target of breaking Barisan Nasional’s long standing two third parliamentary majority was achieved, but more importantly, the opposition has unexpectedly captured the heartland states of Selangor, Perak, Penang and Kedah, in addition to retaining Kelantan in a landslide. These achievements would not have been possible, if not for the new ground boldly broken into by the electorates themselves – hordes of Chinese and Indians who never supported PAS before had rushed to vote for the latter, while Malays in unprecedented numbers had voted for DAP. And needless to say, all the three major races have supported PKR enthusiastically.

It is this willingness to break the racial and religious taboos (which have been instilled into the people by BN) that has opened up a new vista of great opportunity for the nation, made possible through the electorate’s newfound wisdom of choosing a government not based on race or religion but on merits. Henceforth, political parties must fight their battles with sound policies and ideals and records that are most attuned to the welfare of the masses, not by appealing to the primordial instincts of race and religion; as the electorate are clearly discarding the latter for the former. This will surely result in vast improvement in governance through better selected political leadership.

However, this rosy scenario may come to naught if the opposition parties fail to transcend their differences and work together effectively as a team to transform promises into realities.

COLLECTIVE LEADERSHIP
None of the opposition parties has a simple majority in any of the state assemblies of Selangor, Perak, Penang and Kedah, so they have no choice but to form coalitions if they want to rule these states. Since coalition is thrust upon them, they must form a political partnership, and this partnership should logically also extend to states where a partner may have only one seat, namely Penang (PAS: 1) and Kedah (DAP: 1). The inclusion of PAS and DAP in Penang and Kedah respectively will ensure that policies made in these states will have taken cognizance of the interests and views of the constituents represented by these parties in these states. Besides, these minor inclusions will help to foster solidarity among partners and minimize dissatisfaction of minority constituents in these states.

A major faiture of the BN model of leadership is the over-concentration of power on the leader and the lack of mutual respect and genuine consultation among partners, as the former encourages corruption and abuse of power while the latter will doom the partnership to eventual disintegration through desertion by the victimized partners.

Hence, the opposition parties must genuinely practice collective leadership in the state governments, not only to avoid pitfalls of BN but to ensure long term flourish of the partnership. All policies and major decisions must be the product of consultations, not whims of the autocrat.

With the understanding that the leader is but the executor of policies, which in turn are collectively decided, the choice of the leader (chief minister or menteri besar) should not be an oversensitive issue, as long as the decision is collectively made and the candidate is deemed suitable.

TOP PRIORITY
The main scourge of this country is corruption, which is the root cause of high crime rate and inefficient government which in turn is a contributing cause to economic hardships manifested by stagnant economy and runaway inflation. We have promised the electorate to wipe out this vice, so anti-corruption measures must be on the top of the opposition agenda. As a start, I propose these two immediate measures:

One, push for public declaration of assets of all elected representatives, with those in PKR, DAP & PAS taking the lead. All opposition-controlled state governments should include in their official websites a section showing the assets of all assemblymen. Pass a resolution to call for these public declarations if BN assemblymen are reluctant to do so. These asset details should be updated regularly.

Two, make it compulsory for all contracts under state government control to go through open and transparent tendering system: all tenders to be advertised and tender prices announced promptly (including posting in official website) upon closing of tenders. All tenders to be evaluated professionally with known criteria and awarded through the tender board.

PUBLIC SUPPORT CRUCIAL

Now that the electorate has given the mandate to the opposition parties to govern these states, the people can help to make these new governments a success by giving them whole-hearted support and constructive criticisms where they are due. We must not forget that Malaysia has been badly managed for a long time, and it is only through maximum co-operation from the public, that the arduous task of reforming an old and impaired system can be speedily accomplished.

As for the opposition parties, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to demonstrate their competence to take over the helm of the entire country by doing a good job of running these states. This, I am sure, can be achieved if the leadership of these three parties are willing to put the nation above personal or parochial party interests at all times. And let all adopt the motto: “The nation must always come first, no matter what happens”.

Kim Quek.

陆庭谕先生在古来的教育政治演说

2008-03-04T10:20:00.001+08:00

我们需要您的帮忙

2008-03-04T10:07:00.002+08:00

选战进入了尾声也越来越剧烈，我们武吉巴都州候选人刘顺强，拉央拉央州候选人叶韦宽，森布隆国会候选人李尚及礼让候选人刘德海等，希望能得到国内外广大朋友，支持者的捐款，有意者可直接汇入刘顺强个人帐户：liew shin kheong ,pbb :3101128019.

谢谢

刘顺强：口水战之前先解决古来21哩小贩中心问题

2008-03-04T10:01:00.001+08:00

人民公正党武吉巴都州议席候选人刘顺强吁请其竞争对手先解决了古来21哩小贩中心存在的问题，才对他进行“口水式”的攻击。
日前，刘顺强在进行拜访选民的时候，接到古来21哩小贩中心小贩的集体投诉之后，认为作为人民代议士的候选人应该先为人民服务及争取权利，因为人民的利益应该是第一位的。
据当地小贩向刘顺强反应的情况，这个小贩中心三个月内陆续出现许多问题，这些问题直接影响到小贩中心的日常运作及小贩们的生计。这些问题当中，最早爆发的就是公共厕所水表离奇失踪的问题。这个小贩中心公厕的水表失踪之后造成当地公厕没有水源供应，卫生情况非常严重，负责清洗厕所的工人，必须从其他地方运送水源到来，十分不方便。
而且，这个公共厕所不止没有水供，其马桶还处于阻塞的状态，墙壁上的电灯还操作失灵，使得这个厕所又脏又臭还漆黑一片，几乎可以算是全古来最肮脏的公共厕所，顾客不敢来光顾这里的小贩中心。
当地的小贩针对厕所的问题向负责单位古来市议会多次反映这个问题，但他们的也就是派人来拍照罢了，问题仍然没有得到解决。
也是人民公正党柔佛州署理主席的刘顺强还说，21哩小贩中心的问题还不至于此，古来市议会在管理小贩中心的方式也非常不专业，不清理其垃圾，垃圾堆积如山，非常不卫生，为苍蝇的滋生及繁殖创造了有利条件，这使得小贩中心里的人及附近居民的健康都受到威胁。
因为古来市议会不负责任的态度，造成许多问题发生了很久仍然没有解决，原任州议员应该向市议会施压，督促他们把古来21哩小贩中心管理妥当，不要像其他环保问题一样等到公正党出来抗议之后，才进行匆忙的补救

刘顺强：希望张震亮进行一场文明的选举

2008-03-04T09:56:00.001+08:00

人民公正党武吉巴都候选人刘顺强吁请其竞争对手张震亮和他展开一场文明的选举，不要进行任何的人身攻击或不文明的举动。
这是对于日前前武吉巴都州议员张震亮先生，在公开的场合用不适当的字眼对本人的指责的看法。而且张震亮作为公众人物，应该注意自己的言行，不应该避免造成社会不良的典范。
也是人民公正党柔佛州署理主席的刘顺强说，出来竞选议员，都是希望能够得到选民的委托，代表人民在议会发表声音及更好的服务人民，但是自提名日之后我们一直可以看到某些候选人就将竞选的焦点放在丑化或者诬蔑竞争对手上，逃避对公共议题的讨论，选民也就不能从我们的言行中知道各个政党的理念。

公正党在各地候选人都尝试挑战国阵派出的代表以进行政策公开辩论，但都不得要领，但作为负责任的候选人，我们觉得有必要与对手一起讨论公共政策议题，比如说治安不佳、石油补贴、议员在议会的表现、经济展望等，应该让选民在投票之前清除知道候选人的政纲及政见。
另一方面公正党在选区内立起的20面巨型看板，在短短的几天内都纷纷被破坏。不论犯罪的人是谁，会用这样肮脏及卑劣的候选人是极度健康的行为。因此希望前州议员张震亮出来解释，不然这种健康的竞选手段对它本身将会十分不利。

公正党也对这些破坏行为向警方报案，希望警方能够尽快揪出罪犯，并根据选举法令治罪，不能因为这些人有权有势而让他们逍遥法外。

PILIHANRAYA: MAHU ATAU TOLAK UMNOPUTRA

2008-03-03T22:12:00.000+08:00

Buat pertama kali dalam sejarah ibu pertiwi, wujudnya garis perang yang jelas diantara parti-parti pembangkang – Pas, DAP & KeADILan – dan parti pemerintah Barisan Nasional dalam pilihanraya akan datang.

Meneliti manifesto yang diketengahkan parti-parti pembangkang, mereka nampaknya sepakat dalam satu kata: tiada lagi politik poerkauman, ayo kita bina sebuah negara merdeka dengan nilai-nilai demokrasi seperti yang digariskan Perlembagaan Persekutuan untuk semua warganegara, tanpa kira bangsa atau agama.

Sebaliknya BN berkata: kita telah melakukan yang terbaik sejak 50 tahun dahulu, kekalkan status quo. Ini bermakna Umno akan meneruskan hegemoni yang bercirikan penghinaan demokrasi, mencemar kedaulatan undang-undang, menyemai sikap perkauman yang memudaratkan, rasuah berleluasa, salahguna kuasa, tiada toleransi agama, jenayah yang semakin menjadi-jadi dan inflasi yang melonjak naik.

Dari semua kejahatan-kejahatan yang menular di negara ini, apa yang paling memberi kesan kepada para pengundi adalah apa yang paling menyakitkan rakyat kebanyakan: kenaikan harga yang melampau dan kadar jenayah yang semakin parah.

Mari kita teliti dua isu ini dengan lebih mendalam.

Kadar jenayah yang tidak terkawal mutakhir ini berpunca dari dua faktor utama: pasukan polis yang tidak cekap dan rasuah sehingga ke akar umbinya, serta tiadanya pemantauan kerajaan dibawah pentadbiran Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri merangkap Perdana Menteri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Pasukan polis yang rasuah adalah hasil jadian pimpinan politik yang rasuah. Langsung tidak masuk dek akal sebuah pimpinan politik yang rasuah mampu mengekalkan sebuah pasukan penguatkuasa undang-undang yang bersih dan cekap, ini kerana, sekiranya polis benar-benar tidak rasuah, maka sudah lama pimpinan rasuah dihambat dan dihukum.

Atas alasan ini kenapa Suruhanjaya Bebas Aduan & Salahlaku Polis (IPCMC) tidak akan dilaksanakan selagi mana Umno terus berkuasa. Dan atas alasan ini juga mengapa kadar jenayah tidak akan turun untuk lima tahun lagi sekiranya Umno kekal berkuasa.

Bagaimana dengan inflasi? BN beralasan bahawa harga tempatan menerima kesan dari kenaikan harga komoditi dunia. Ada benarnya disebalik alasan itu, tetapi tidak tepat sama-sekali.

Persoalannya, mengapa Singapura, yang menerima kesan dari kenaikan harga komoditi sedunia pada tahap jauh lebih hebat dari kita, tidak menderita sehebat kita? Bukankah Singapura, yang tidak menghasilkan sebarang komoditi utama, sepatutnya menderita lebih dahsyat berbanding Malaysia, yang merupakan pengeksport komoditi-komoditi utama dunia?

Pertama, Singapura telah menikmati pembangunan ekonomi yang meluas dan Malaysia tidak, meskipun BN mendakwa sebaliknya. Majoriti rakyat Malaysia, yang bersengkang mata dan menggerakkan tulang empat kerat untuk sesuap nasi dan mencukupkan keperluan sehari-hari, sudah nyawa-nyawa ikan ditekan harga yang naik dan terus naik.

Kedua, jurang perbezaan pendapatan Malaysia yang mengerikan, diantara salah satu negara yang mempunyai jurang pendapatan terburuk di rantau ini, semakin membarah di bawah Umnoputra – dasar yang mengutamakan kepentingan elit-elit Umno dan kroni-kroni mereka, lantas menyebabkan majority rakyat dipinggirkan dari menerima bahagian yang selayaknya dari kemakmuran negara.

Ketiga, kenaikan kos perkhidmatan yang tidak munasabah – tol jalanraya, elektrik, air, telekomunikasi dan sebagainya – berpunca dari perjanjian urusniaga yang berat sebelah dan monopoli terpilih untuk kroni masing-masing dengan mengorbankan kepentingan para pengguna.

Keempat, kita mempunyai pentadbiran yang rasuah dan tidak berwibawa. Luput darinya wibawa moral untuk mengenakan displin keatas peniaga dan pemborong, yang jelas mengaut keuntungan dari masa-masa susah sebegini.

Dari empat sebab-musabab ini, seperti ayam kembali semula ke rebannya, semua kejahatan ini dapat dikesan menuju satu kiblat – perkauman.

Melalui perkauman Umno berjaya mengekalkan kuasa melalui dasar pecah dan perintah. Ketika berkuasa, Umno meminda Perlembagaan dan membuat undang-undang yang menindas demokrasi secara berterusan, yang akhirnya memusatkan kuasa kuku besi pada pihak Eksekutif.

Mereka manipulasikan institusi demokrasi – kehakiman, pejabat peguam negara, polis, BPR, suruhanjaya pilihanraya, perkhidmatan awam dan sebagainya – semata-mata untuk memuaskan kepentingan parti. Melalui manipulasi-manipulasi ini, golongan elit pemerintah melunaskan kepentingan haram tanpa takut, seperti mengumpul kemewahan dari hasil rompakan wang rakyat dan menindas suara-suara bantahan.

Hasilnya, perkauman dan rasuah tumbuh meliar tanpa kawalan, menghancurkan negara ini dari dalam dibawah naungan mereka yang berkuasa. Selain dari meluaskan jurang perkauman dan larinya cerdik pandai dan sumber manusia melalui diskriminasi kaum yang diperhebatkan, Umnoputra menghakis kewibawaan dan kecekapan seluruh jentera kerajaan melalui rasuah. Terutamanya, badan kehakiman kita dipandang hina, dan kualiti pendidikan terus corot.

Daya saing antarabangsa negara juga turut menurun, dari tangga tertinggi ke paras terbawah di rantau ini, dipinggirkan pelabur asing dan tempatan. Indikasi yang paling membimbangkan adalah corotnya peratus perkembangan eksport Malaysia di rantau ini bagi tahun 2007 (sila rujuk akhbar The Star 29 November 2007).

Pada tahun 2007, dimana ekonomi global berkembang dengan baik dan harga komoditi utama juga naik dengan menggalakkan, Malaysia sepatutnya menerima manfaat dari perkembangan eksport dan pacuan ekonomi yang pantas kerana Malaysia merupakan pengeksport komoditi utama dan pengeksport petroleum utama.

Oleh itu, mengapa rakyat masih mengeluh kesukaran ekonomi disebalik peningkatan kos kehidupan dan turunnya kualiti kehidupan?

Hong Kong dan Singapura tidak mempunyai sebarang sumber asli, tetapi mereka mengaut lebihan perbelanjaan yang besar serta mengagihkan wang dan kemewahan kepada warganegara mereka. Kontranya Malaysia, sebuah negara yang dianugerahkan dengan sumber asli yang banyak tetapi masih merangkak memulihkan ekonomi melalui 10 tahun perbelanjaan yang dibeban defisit.

Tiada mana-mana orang rasional yang boleh menafikan Malaysia telah diuruskan dengan salah dan tidak cekap. Penyangaknya ialah politik perkauman dan rasuah Umno.

Di ambang pilihanraya, Umno mungkin berpuas hati ia akan terus dipikul diatas bahu-baru penyokong tegarnya. Keyakinan ini tanpa salah lagi diuja oleh 'rasa syukur' yang ia peroleh dari kenaikan gaji baru-baru ini yang melibatkan 1.2 juta pekerja kerajaan, serta kenaikan harga komoditi yang tidak dijangka dan dinikmati oleh peneroka Felda yang tersebar di merata negara.

Tetapi mereka ini harus diingatkan bahawa manfaat menakjubkan ini tidak kekal lama, kerana kenaikan gaji ini adalah berlaku sekali dalam bertahun lamanya, dan harga komoditi juga berubah-ubah. Hanya kepimpinan politik yang bersih, cekap dan bertanggungjawab yang boleh menyelamatkan tanahair dari kemelut hari ini, dan menabur kemakmuran kepada semua rakyat jelata.

Rakyat Malaysia dari semua bangsa harus memutuskan apa mereka mahu pecahan-pecahan perkauman hari ini diteruskan untuk lima tahun lagi dibawah Umno, dengan semunya kejahatan hari ini kekal tidak diubat. Atau mereka mahu Malaysia mengorak langkah baru dengan mendakap semangat majmuk yang tulen, untuk memulihkan demokrasi dan kepimpinan yang baik untuk rakyat.

Pokoknya, rakyat menjadi hakim dan undi pada 8 Mac nanti harus dilihat sebagai penghakiman keatas Umnoputra: kamu mahu atau kamu tolak?

Kim Quek.

大选：赞同或否决"巫统特权主义” Election: for or against Umnoputraism? Inbox

2008-03-03T22:10:00.000+08:00

这是历史上第一次，在来临的大选中，反对党——回教党、民主行动党、人民公正党——跟执政的国民阵线之间，战线壁垒分明。细读各反对党的竞选政纲，发觉他们几乎是发出同一个呼声：别再玩弄种族政治；我们大家不分种族或地域，恢复宪法神圣赋予全体人民的民主权利，同心协力真正建设国家吧。反观国阵则说：我们在过去50年做得很好，继续保持现状吧。而这将意味着巫统霸权继续张牙舞爪。他们的典型表现便是践踏民主、摧残法治、种族主义嚣张、贪污腐化猖獗、滥用权力、没有宗教宽容、犯罪率失控，以及煞不住车的通货膨胀。在这些折磨着这个国家的罪恶当中，选民最关注的便是那些让普罗老百姓感到切身痛楚的伤害：难以承受的物价高涨，以及同样无法忍受的犯罪率。现在，我们集中来讨论这两个课题。近年，犯罪率失控般地攀升，原因主要有两个：警察部队彻底腐化与无能，以及兼任国内安全部长的首相阿都拉的失职，没有负起监管部门的责任。贪腐的政治领导人自然产生贪腐的警察部队。不可能期待在贪腐的政治领袖之下维持一个清廉又有能力的警队，因为，如果这个警队不贪腐，贪腐的政治领袖自己就麻烦了。这就是为什么说，只要巫统掌握大权，原先倡议的警察投诉独立调查委员会Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) 独立委员会就永远不能落实。如果未来五年仍是UMNO掌权，那么，同样道理，犯罪率也不会下降。
通货膨胀又如何呢？当国阵说本地物价上涨是由於全球物资价格上涨的影响，是有一点道理的，但是，为什么受到世界物价上涨影响更大的新加坡人民不必像马来西亚人民这样哀嚎？新加坡这个完全没有出产原产品的国家，怎么没有比马来西亚这个原产品出口大国遭受更重的打击？首先，新加坡持续取得强大的经济增长，而马来西亚却没有——尽管国阵吹嘘的与这个事实相反。绝大多数马来西亚人民拮据度日，在持续的物价高涨之中几乎无法透气，即将溺毙。其次，马来西亚严重的收入差距问题已经是本地区最糟糕的，在"巫统特权主义" (Umnoputraism）下——"巫统特权主义" 就是只供巫统精英权贵享受利益的徇私偏袒政策——造成广大民众被剥夺了公平分享国家财富的权利。第三，公共服务收费不合理的高涨——过路费、电费、水费、通讯费等等——源自于只惠及权贵朋党企业而不顾消费者死活的徇私合约与市场垄断。第四，我们的政府贪污腐败又无能，已经丧失了对商家实行监督管理的道德权威。一些商家乘火打劫，谋取暴利。就像条条道路都通向罗马，人们将发现，以上这些妖魔都来自一个源头——种族主义。巫统便是通过种族主义政治将各族分而治之来维持它的霸权。掌握大权的巫统不断修改宪法、制定新条文来践踏民主，最终让自己独揽专横的行政大权。它操弄各个原本是民主体制下的机关——司法体系、检察体系、警察部队、反贪污局、选举委员会、民事服务部门，等等——以遂政党私利。通过这些操弄，执政精英也就不受任何惩罚地攫取不合法的利益，例如聚敛庞大的非法财富和压制政治异议者。
结果，种族主义和贪污泛滥，使这个国家在独裁氛围中被摧毁到几乎要垮了。除了由於不断强化的种族歧视造成空前严重的种族两极化和人才外流，巫统特权主义不受遏制的贪腐也严重伤害了整体政府机关的威信和行政效率，尤其是我国的司法体系如今已沦为笑柄，教育品质则持续下滑。我们的国际竞争力已经从本地区的前面掉到车尾，不论国内还是国外的投资者都不予垂青。最令人忧虑的指标是马来西亚出口增长率掉到了2007年本地区的尾巴（参阅2007年11月29日《星报》Star）。在2007年，全球经济蓬勃发展，原产品价格扬升，照理马来西亚应该取得令人艳羡的出口增长和兴旺的经济，因为，它是原产品主要出口国，也是石油净输出国。那么，为什么人民会申诉生活费上涨而生活品质却下滑？香港和新加坡都没有任何天然资源，而它们却获得巨大的预算盈余，并且慷慨地分发现金让人民分享，相反的，马来西亚拥有丰富的天然资源，却必须连续１０年捉襟见肘地以沉重的赤字预算来振兴经济。头脑清楚的人都不会否认，马来西亚已经遭到恶劣管治。罪魁祸首正是巫统种族主义分子和贪污腐败的政治。在投票前夕，巫统可能很满意于仍得到死忠支持者的簇拥而胸有成竹。这也由於最近政府赐给
１２０万公务员大幅度加薪，以及遍布全国的Felda垦植民享受到原产品的空前好价而得到这般人的好感。然而，我们要提醒这些得到好处的人们，他们不寻常的得利可能只是短暂的，因为，大幅度加薪只是一次过的事，原产品价格则有周期变化，而只有廉洁、有效率的政治领导人才有办法将这个国家从现在的困境中解救出来，并为全民带来长期的繁荣。马来西亚的各族人民现在必须决定，是要让巫统将现在的种族分而治之再继续５年、各种弊病如影随行，还是要给国家一个新的起点，大胆拥抱真正的多元种族政治，恢复民主，带给全民一个好政府。总之，我们应该把３月８日的一票必须作为对巫统的一个判决：赞同还是否决"巫统特权主义"。金格 (Kim Quek)　

刘顺强看板被蓄意破坏

2008-02-27T09:46:00.000+08:00

大古来城夜市扫街拜票

2008-02-25T17:00:00.001+08:00

人民公正党刘顺强告选民书

2008-02-25T10:52:00.000+08:00

投我一票，我将力争更多，更加可靠的权利回到你们自己的手中。

柔佛州人民的声音被忽略得太久了，太久了。过去13年，柔佛州议会一直牢牢控制在国阵的手里，州议会没有不一样的声音，许多事情除了执政党议员外，没有人知道议会内发生了什么事情，我们的钱怎么用？

目前的局势而言，柔佛州政府或许很难改朝换代。但是我们应当看到的是，2008年第12届全国大选这一次是个可以改变现状的机会，这毕竟是一次真正的机会。只要我们愿意，我们就能够赋予这场选举以更丰富的内容，更鲜明的色彩，以及更深远的意义—柔佛州不能没有反对党了。

在过去的日子里，因为柔佛州没有反对党议员，没有人在议会里监督政府的施政，使得柔佛州的治安状况每况愈下。太阳下山之后没有人敢在路上走动、每个有车人都不断的提升自己的防盗设备、每个人都不敢随身携带太多的现金、女士不敢携带手提包在路上行走及各地区居民必须自掏腰包聘请保安保卫家园等。各族人民都是糟糕治安的受害者，没有人能够幸免遇难。

同样也在这个时候，我们柔佛州的经济状况不如邻国新加坡般灿烂，我们一直停滞不前。大量的办公楼宇被闲置、打工者工作的机会没有得到太多的增加、工资上涨的速度不如物价的速度快、更多的人民必须提早摸黑的往返新加坡工作。然而，我们的执政者认为只要有大型发展计划我们的经济就能得到发展，然而这样得到好处的就是那几个朋党罢了，人民没有从中得到实质好处。

在这种环境下，过去四年里我默默为武吉巴都地区居民解决各种的民生问题，尤其是环保的课题，古来（21里）、加巴拉沙威（26里）、亚逸马尼（29里）、亚逸文满（31里）及武吉巴都（33里）都留下我服务过的痕迹。

感谢本区居民对我的信任，即便我们政党的财力及人力都不比执政党丰富，我们也没有行政资源，但是通过我们在野党的施压，还是让许多课题得到答复，虽然不见得是百分百的让人满意，但至少我问心无愧，作为一个没有资源的反对党人，我已经是尽了最大的努力了。

现在，我决定再次直接投入这场选举中，我既不单出於减少国阵多数票的目的，也不是为了增添几分民主的空气，促使我不得不站出来的是：我有一种强烈的意识，当前柔佛州没有反对党议员，我们需要有人在议会里监督我们的政府，传达真正属于人民的声音。除非我们及时地，有力地抓住了这个机会中最关键的一环，否则我们就失去了一次用自己力量推动历史前进的一次美好机会。

我承诺，如果我当选之后，作为在野党议员，竭尽所能督促政府的政策更加对环境友好及更加环保、在州议会里尽全力监督政府使用的每一分钱，确保用在适当的地方及推动政府更加关注我们的治安状况。

我们这场正在进行中的选举，可能产生非常重要的影响。我们应当，我们必须怀着对民主的强烈憧憬，十分严肃而郑重地履行这一次看来毫不重大的责任。
我们必须向世人证明：柔佛州是需要反对党议员的！今天，我们必须抓住改变的机会。

提名日

2008-02-25T10:14:00.007+08:00

古来公正党：公正党支持者2月24日同去提名

2008-02-22T17:03:00.003+08:00

人民公正党古来区部今天呼吁古来地区的公正党支持者在2月23日（星期日）一起陪同武吉巴都区候选人刘顺强前去提名。
根据三大在野党议席谈判的结果，古来地区的一国3州将出现一对一与国阵对垒的情况。其安排的议席情况分别是古来国会选区及士乃州议席皆由民主行动党候选人竞选；马来人比较集中的武吉柏迈州议席交由回教党竞选；武吉巴都则由人民公正党负责竞选。
我们希望通过这样一对一的对垒，不至于分散支持者的力量，更好地为国阵形成威胁，甚至是击败国阵候选人。
在提名日当天，我们已经动员了数百党员一起转达我们提名声势，我们希望我们古来地区的支持者可以一起前来表示支持。我们将在当天上午早上7:30時在古來華小前集合，然后与公正党及其他的候选人一同步行到土地局提交提名表格。
因为马华公会总会长已经在日前宣布前来古来竞选国会议席，让这个国会议席名声大起，所以我们预料会有许多媒体云集在这里负责报道整个提名过程。
而且为了方便识别，我们希望的支持者用衣着来表达其政治立场。浅蓝色或者红色的上衣，为公正党支持者；绿色上衣则表示对回教党的支持；白色上衣则是行动党支持者；如果没有明显的政党倾向，则身穿黄色的上衣。
我们希望支持者们可以将提名日视为一个嘉年华，然后我们众多的支持者可以一起共襄盛举，庆祝第12届选举的到来。

公正党武吉巴都行动室已经开放

2008-02-22T16:58:00.001+08:00

人民公正党武吉巴都州议席候选人刘顺强今天正式对外宣布其选区内的行动室正式成立并对外开，欢迎社会人士前来支持。
两个行动室的地址分别是位于:
· 34，Jalan Susur 4, Taman Sri Kudai Baru, Kulai. （新古來市21哩古來行動黨支部
行动室负责人：联系电话：林先生（0127090519）
· 42，Jalan Tokong, Kelapa Sawit, Kulai.（加巴拉沙威洪仙大帝對角）
行动室负责人：联系电话：劉文丰（0127507280）

人民公正党竞选的武吉巴都州议席被视为柔佛州公正党的其中一个重点选区，我们希望通过公正党在过去数年里在这个地区辛勤耕耘的表现获得这个地区选民的青睐。
人民公正党的财力及人力都非常有限，目前为止我们的行动室只是可以进行选民册查询的工作。在接下来的几天时间里，我们的选务人员将进一步完善我们的行动室，并充分利用这些行动室以更好的宣传我们的消息。
我们的两个行动室都都外开放，欢迎社会人士前来共商时事议题，我们备有简单的茶水招待。当然，我们更加欢迎愿意各界人士向我们提供财力、物质及人力的协助。

MALAYSIAN MEDIA TURNS ELECTION INTO A KILLING FIELD

2008-02-22T12:09:00.000+08:00

Unlike any election in the world, the Malaysian election is not about winning the majority, but about winning or breaking the two third majority.

This is odd, as Malaysia is an apparent democracy whose incumbent government has held on to uninterrupted powers for half a century – with two third majority no less – despite its record of being thoroughly corrupted. Other similarly corrupted and similarly aged regimes – like those in Indonesia, Philippines, Taiwan, Mexico etc – have already crumbled under the weight of liberalizing democracy, but the corrupted Malaysian regime have withstood it all. How is it done?

In this respect, it is noteworthy that the Malaysian Government’s only claim to democracy is that it holds regular elections. It does not claim, nor is it true that its laws and institutions are democratic.

But is Malaysia’s election democratic? Emphatically not! In fact, Malaysia is well known for its unleveled electoral playing field. Its election commission is notoriously biased in favour of the incumbent, indulging in unabashed gerrymandering, frauds in electoral rolls and oblivion to rampant breaches of election rules and ethics by the ruling coalition, the Barisan Nasional (BN).

With election to be held only two weeks from now (on Mar 8), leaders of BN have already been playing Santa Clauses, profusely handing out goodies left and right. These are no ordinary Christmas gifts, however, but public funds that run into millions targeted at specific groups of the electorate to curry favour with them.

Damnable as these practices are, perhaps the blow that really knocks the opposition out is the ruthless manipulation of the media to mass-brainwash the electorate.
The entire Malaysian press and all TV and radio channels are doing the biddings of BN through ownership control or legislative coercion. These media, which usually polishes BN’s image through exaggeration and distortion, are turned into full-blown propaganda machines that virtually turns the electoral arena into a killing field.

While the press has launched an intensive campaign to glorify BN and denigrate or black out the opposition, local TV and radio - which churn out endless pro-BN news, commentaries and songs - are out of bounds to the opposition. The latter’s only means of reaching the masses are the Internet, ceramah (political talks) and party newsprints, which are prohibited from circulating to the public or published more than twice a month. Since Malaysia’s Internet broadband penetration is no more than ten percents of the population, there is no way the opposition can effectively carry their messages across to the population or counter BN’s offensive within the ridiculously short campaign period of thirteen days. The contest is therefore akin to a debate, umpired by a biased judge, in a hall of ten thousand audience where one contestant is given a microphone while the other is not. It is also akin to a feud where one combatant is armed, the other is not given any weapon to hit back.

PKR BLACKED OUT

It is significant to note that while the entire opposition is badly treated by the press in general, there is a vast difference in the treatment meted out to two opposition parties – the multi-racial People’s Justice Party (PKR) and the People’s Action Party (DAP) which is Chinese-based though having a multi-racial platform. This disparity in treatment is particularly conspicuous in the Chinese press, where DAP has been given considerable publicity (though still very small compared to those given to BN), while PKR has been virtually shut out.

Political analysts have attributed this to a shrewd strategy adopted by BN, for it is a political reality that out of the three main opposition parties of DAP, PKR and the Islamic party PAS, only PKR has the potential to replace BN, which is a coalition of 14 racial parties dominated completely by the Malay party UMNO. Neither DAP nor PAS could threaten the political hegemony of UMNO, for DAP has no significant Malay support while PAS has no significant non-Muslim (mainly non-Malays) support. In contrast, PKR is now supported by all the three main races of Malays, Chinese and Indians, and led by former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, whose distinguished leadership has been acclaimed at home and abroad.

It is not difficulty to see that PKR’s multi-racial platform of clean and enlightened governance, led by an outstanding leader and backed by the masses of all races, is the anti-dote to the present racist, corrupted and feudal regime. Given due democratic space, PKR will surely lead the opposition to defeat the incumbent power in due course to turn a new leaf for the country.

But right at this moment, PKR’s fate is precariously hanged on the publicity it can get from the Chinese press, without which PKR may not fully capitalize on the strong swing of Chinese votes away from BN that is currently taking place now. And without this Chinese support, the risk of widespread electoral disappointment cannot be discounted, considering the fact that UMNO seems to be still riding on considerable popular Malay support procured through massive showering of pecuniary benefits and long term media indoctrination.

The politics of PKR offer the only hope of Malaysia breaking free from the grip of racism and feudalism perpetrated by UMNO, the perpetuation of which will doom Malaysia to a failed state in due course in this age of globalization. Hence, should PKR be politically eclipsed in the coming election, Malaysia may not get another chance for its salvation from the evil rule of UMNO for the foreseeable future.
It now rests on the conscience of the Chinese press to play a constructive role that would keep the flame of hope alive to avert eventual catastrophe for this country (the Malay and English press have long been given up to play any constructive role for this purpose).

The coming election may also be a day of destiny for all stake-holders in the country – ruling parties, opposition parties, Malays, Chinese, Indians and other races – when they are given the challenge to gaze through the haze of propaganda and look beyond the immediate material inducement to discern what is good for the long term well-being of the country.

Kim Quek

NO ELECTORAL REFORMS – NO ELECTION!

2008-02-04T10:13:00.000+08:00

In the Proclamation of Independence, the Father of Independence said in a one-sentence proclamation:

“Now in the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful, I Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra …..…., the Prime Minister of the Federation of Malaya with the concurrence and approval of Their Highnesses the Rulers of the Malay States do hereby proclaim and declare on behalf of the people of the Federation of Malaya that as from ……..… the Federation comprising ……....is and with God’s blessing shall be forever a sovereign democratic and independent State founded upon the principles of liberty and justice and ever seeking the welfare and happiness of its people and the maintenance of a just peace among all nations.”

Fifty years after independence, if our beloved Tunku is alive today, he would be a heart-broken old man. For instead of a democratic State founded on the principles of liberty and justice where the people are living in unity and happiness, Malaysia is now an undemocratic State with neither liberty nor justice where the people are in turmoil and dangerously polarized in race and religion – more than ever in our history.

The state of this nation has never descended so low.

STATE OF THE NATION BAD

Our democratic institutions are in tatters, as exemplified by the unprecedented arrogance of power displayed in recent days in crushing the fundamental constitutional rights of peaceful citizens through the police force acting in cohort with the attorney general’s chambers and the courts. These three bodies, which are heavily corrupted as revealed in recent scandals and investigations, are increasingly identified as the triumvirate of oppression serving the illegitimate political interests of the ruling power.

Meanwhile, administration of the country has rapidly deteriorated, with Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi showing every sign that, despite pledges to the contrary, he is plunging the country to greater depths of mismanagement with his weak and rudderless leadership. Abdullah has not only failed to rectify Mahathir’s faults, but he has compounded these with his own weaknesses. Apart from institutional deterioration and racial polarization as mentioned above, this country is facing crisis of a new dimension: uncontrollable crime rates and runaway inflations in the backdrop of an economy that has run out of steam. These are seen as inevitable consequences of an incompetent political leadership loosing its moral authority to rule through its own indulgence in unashamed corruption and abuse of power.

This scenario will get worse as the economy runs into rougher waters in the days ahead in anticipation of a global slowdown triggered by the US subprime mortgage crisis. Malaysia is ill equipped to face any economic reverses due to its structural weaknesses: declining economic competitiveness against its regional neighbours, a racially segregated population perpetually embroiled in racial squabbles, critically impaired rule of law with a badly tarnished judiciary and police and a delivery system maimed by corruption. That investors have lost confidence in this country is reflected in the latest UN produced FDI figures which show Malaysia has already entered the capital flight mode, in contrast with its neighbours which enjoy robust net capital influx.

As globalization continues its unrelenting march forward, economic noose on this country will tighten, leading to intensification of racial strife. An eventual meltdown is on the cards unless the current decline is checked.

How did we land up in such hot soup? Didn’t we inherit from the British a first-class administration and a judiciary second to none? Isn’t Malaysia richly endowed with natural resources, free from natural disasters? Wasn’t Malaysia a leading economy in this region two to three decades ago when our economy was even ahead of those of South Korea and Taiwan? Why has Malaysia slipped so badly in the past one to two decades?

The answer lies in our political leadership. And the main culprit is UMNO, which has been transformed from a nationalist political party to a racist body of wealth seekers. By clinging to the long defunct NEP, which has been racialised and twisted to generate illegitimate wealth for its leaders and cronies, UMNO has inflicted incalculable damage to the nation and ironically to the Malays as well, for whom it professes to serve. The resultant national regression with the corollary loss of national competitiveness is proving to be the undoing of the nation.

PERVERTED ELECTORAL PROCESS

How does a corrupt racist body like UMNO maintain its political hegemony for so long? This is done through a combination of a) monopoly of media and b) subversion of the electoral process through an openly biased and partisan election commission and through abuses of government resources and institutions such as police, attorney general, ACA, judiciary and even Parliament (by passing unfair legislation). The former factor ensures that the minds of the people are conditioned and shaped as desired by the ruling power, while the latter factor maximizes the winning chances through gerrymandering and unethical practices with collusion of the election commission and government institutions. Under such grotesquely tilted playing field, the incumbent – particularly a corrupted one – can rule in perpetuity.

Election under such a perverted system among a badly informed electorate is a meaningless exercise to ascertain the true and free will of the people. Without a fare election, democracy is dead. And without democracy, fundamental liberties and justice as guaranteed in our Constitution are mere empty words, as proven in the present wanton oppression of the people. It is therefore not an exaggeration to say that the essence of our Constitution as well as the democratic foundation of this nation have already been destroyed through such an electoral system.

Hence, meaningful electoral reforms to the extent of restoring election as a fair criterion for ascertaining majority support are absolutely essential, if this country is to function as a democracy again.

Only when democracy is restored can we hope to check the unrelenting slide of this nation towards oblivion under the present leadership. Electoral reform is therefore seen as a life-or-death issue, for which there can be no compromise.

That our electoral process is deeply flawed is an undeniable fact. Fraudulent practices and irregularities have been well documented by opposition parties, election-watch bodies and even the courts (refer to Likas election judgment where tens of thousands of ‘phantom voters’ consisting of illegal immigrants were revealed as only the tip of the ice-berg), and these remain unexplained and undisputed. I will not repeat any of these except to highlight recent utterances of E C Chairman Rashid Rahman which are revealing of the degree of political partisanship of this commission. Rashid publicly claimed that only the ruling BN was capable of governing the country. On a separate occasion, he also challenged opposition parties to withdraw from the election if the latter thought that election was unfair. Now, don’t these statements sound like those from a BN loyalist? Such atrocious conduct of the chairman of a supposedly neutral organization to conduct fair elections only emphasizes the urgency and indispensability of a thorough revamp of the E C and the entire electoral process.

On 10th of November 2007, BERSIH delivered a petition for electoral reform to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, accompanied by 40,000 peaceful citizens (this number would have exceeded 100,000 if not for the stringent police and government clamp-down). In this petition, BERSIH – a coalition for clean and fair election consisting of opposition parties and some 70 civil society organizations – has outlined comprehensive reforms that will regain confidence and restore democracy to the people, for which a royal commission was proposed to spearhead the movement.

BERSIH also appealed to the Agong to use his discretionary power under Article 40 (2) of the Federal Constitution to withhold consent to a request for dissolution of Parliament – expected imminently - unless four urgent measures of reforms are carried out. These four urgent measures are the minimum required to avoid the election being turned into a farce.

To date, both the E C and the government are unresponsive to the proposal for these urgent measures except for the use of indelible ink.

SHOULD THE AGONG ACT?

I have in my previous article “Can the Agong withhold consent to dissolution of Parliament?” advanced the constitutional basis that supports the Agong’s discretional power to act on this issue, independent of whatever constitutional convention that may be practiced in United Kingdom, and I will not repeat the argument here.

The question at hand is: is the proposed electoral reform an issue of such gravity that it justifies the Agong exercising his power under Article 40 (2) (b)? Conversely, we can also ask: if there is no reform, is the consequential damage to the nation so critical that it should move the Agong to exercise his power?

On the other hand, we should also ask the following questions:

How would the nation suffer if election is delayed for a while for some essential short term reforms to take place, keeping in mind that the term of this government expires only in 15 months’ time?
What benefits will accrue to the nation when an election is held after urgent reforms have taken place?
If we do not reform, are we not guilty of willfully prolonging a serious breach of the fundamental principle of our Constitution as a democratic state?
What valid reasons are there to oppose electoral reforms?
What valid reasons are there to object to the formation of a royal commission to carry out the necessary investigations and review?

It is anticipated that the exercise of such discretionary power by the Agong will raise eye-brows, as many still tend to draw parallel between the Queen of England and our Agong, and maintain that the Agong, like the Queen, should only play a ceremonial role.

Without repeating the arguments advanced in my previous article regarding the implications arising from the difference between UK’s unwritten constitution and our written constitution, I would submit that our Agong plays quite a different role, in a completely different historical and social context.

The independent state of Malaya was formed half a century ago out of a population of diverse races, religions, cultures and languages. The institution of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (meaning Paramount Ruler) was then created to instill loyalty and to provide a symbol of sovereignty and unity that would bind the diverse races together. In fact, the Agong’s role is more than symbolic under the Constitution. As head of the Executive, the Agong personally performs many important functions of state, such as appointing the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, all judges, attorney general, members of the election commission, inspector general and other key positions; and he also summons, prorogues and dissolves Parliament, and proclaims a state of emergency if required, etc.

Though most of these functions are carried out in accordance with advice by the Prime Minister/Cabinet, some additionally with consultation with the Council of Rulers, the Agong has, however, the discretionary power to perform some of these based on his own judgment. Even where the Agong has to act according to advice, he is entitled to call for any information concerning the government (Article 40 (1)). This implies that the Agong can be in constant consultation over matters of state if he wishes to be so involved – mostly with his Prime Minister, and sometimes with the Council of Rulers. It is through these consultations that the Agong can exert his quiet influence over important affairs of the state. Given this constitutional authority, a wise and diligent Agong can act as a benevolent force of check and balance to prevent the government from moving wayward beyond the bounds of the Constitution.

Take for instance the issue at hand: electoral reforms. If the Agong wants to see the reform process underway, all he needs to do may be just a friendly but firm word of advice to the Prime Minister, the latter being conscious that the advice could be buttressed by Article 40 (2) if need be.

A courageous and just act to defend the integrity of the Constitution, such as the recent decline to accept the PM’s nominee for the vacancy of the Chief Judge of Malaya in early 2007, would enhance immensely the prestige of our constitutional monarchy, and win the respect and love and loyalty of the common people, for whose welfare the royalty and the government are supposed to serve.

It is hoped that our royalty will continue to act courageously in that spirit and make this institution into a bulwark of stability to bring peace and justice to the people.

Kim Quek

CAN THE AGONG WITHHOLD CONSENT TO DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT?

2008-01-28T12:19:00.000+08:00

At this moment when the Prime Minister is expected to announce the imminent dissolution of Parliament to pave the way for the next general election, it is perhaps relevant and urgent that the critical issue of the power to dissolve Parliament be reviewed.

It seems to be a popular belief that the Prime Minister has absolute power to decide when Parliament is to be dissolved. Is there a constitutional basis for this belief?

The answer is no; for there is a clear-cut provision in the Constitution whereby the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is given the power to withhold consent to a request for dissolution of Parliament. The fact that the Agong has always acceded to the Prime Minister’s request to dissolve Parliament in the past does not detract from this constitutional principle.

Granted that in the normal course of events the Agong is generally bound to act in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister or the Cabinet. However, there are certain functions where the Agong is conferred the exclusive power to act on his own without the advice of the Prime Minister, and the power to withhold consent to dissolution of Parliament is one of them.

AGONG’S DISCRETIONARY POWERS
These discretionary powers of the Agong are clearly and unambiguously prescribed in Article 40 (2) of the Constitution. In order to dispel any doubt as to whether these discretionary powers are really intended to be exercised by the Agong without any advice from the Prime Minister or Cabinet, we will take a look at the entire Article 40 in full, which is titled “Yang di-Pertuan Agong to act on advice”.

Article 40 consists of 4 clauses, which are as follows:
Clause (1) is a general statement which says that when the Agong exercises his functions, he “shall act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet”, except as otherwise provided by the Constitution.

Clause (1A) elaborates on Clause (1) to say that “where the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is to act in accordance with advice, on advice, or after considering advice, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall accept and act in accordance with such advice”.

Clause (2) prescribes the discretional powers of the Agong, and I quote this clause in full:

“The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may act in his discretion in the performance of the following functions, that is to say –
(a) the appointment of a Prime Minister;
b) the withholding of consent to a request for the dissolution of Parliament;
(c) the requisition of a meeting of the Conference of Rulers concerned solely with the privileges, position, honours and dignities of Their Royal Highnesses, and any action at such a meeting,

and any other case mentioned in this Constitution.”
While the discretional power on item (a) has to be exercised in conjunction with the provision of Article 43 Clause (2) (a) where the Agong is required to appoint “a member of the House of Representatives who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of that House”, the Agong’s power over item (b) and (c) is unencumbered by other provisions of the Constitution. Note also that the Agong’s discretional power is not confined to items (a), (b) and (c) alone, but covers “any other case mentioned in this Constitution.”

Clause (3) merely says that the Agong may be required to act in consultation with bodies other than the Cabinet, if so required by federal law.

Viewing the entire Article 40 in its full perspective, there is no doubt that the powers conferred in Clause (2) are prerogative powers exclusive to the Agong. They are intended to be exercised with the Agong’s own judgment without hindrance from others. And among these is the power to withhold consent to the Prime Minister’s request to dissolve Parliament.

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
Despite the clarity of our Constitution on this issue, there are those who think that since we have inherited the Westminster system of government, we must follow the constitutional conventions of Britain and that means the Agong, like the Queen, must not exercise his own judgment, but to accept the Prime Minister’s decision to dissolve Parliament as a fait accompli.

The question I want to put across is: why must we follow the British constitutional convention?

We must understand that Britain is governed through what is famously known as an ‘unwritten constitution’, which is in effect a combination of written documents and unwritten rules. The written documents are statues and court judgments accumulated over the ages, while the unwritten rules are known as ‘constitutional conventions’ which are rules of constitutional behaviour recognized and accepted by the political players, though these are not legally binding. Under such a system, Parliament reigns supreme.

In contrast, Malaysia has a wholly written constitution, which being modeled after the British system, has already included many of the British constitutional conventions that were intended to be incorporated into our system of government. As such, our Constitution is supreme, as stated in Article 4, which clearly states that any law which is inconsistent with the Constitution shall be void. And the courts must interpret the Constitution from the words alone without importing extraneous rules and practices. There is therefore no justification to use any so-called convention to usurp the personal power expressly granted to the Agong under Clause (2) of Article 40.

In fact, as far as adherence to the British constitutional convention is concerned, hardly any commonwealth country is following strictly to these British rules, despite almost all of them having inherited the British system at the time of independence. This is understandable, as no independent state fully exercising its sovereignty can remain contended at faithfully maintaining the constitutional traditions and practices of its former colonial ruler.

A most prominent case is the Australian crisis of 1975, when a political stalemate in the midst of a series of breaches of conventions by both the ruling and opposition parties in parliament led to the sacking of then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam by Governor General John Kerr, which is itself a major breach of convention. Can you imagine the Queen sacking the Prime Minister of Britain? But this is exactly the kind of constitutional drama that took place in Australia, which ironically remains as one of the ex-colonies most closely linked to Britain, symbolized by maintaining a head of state whose official status is a representative of the Queen. These events illustrate the impracticability of expecting the British constitutional conventions to be faithfully adhered to outside the United Kingdom.

And so, Malaysia being a sovereign state with a constitution that is fully written, I don’t see why the Agong should feel any unease when any exercise of his discretional power sanctioned by the Constitution should be found in variance with the British convention – such as withholding consent to dissolve Parliament.

POLITICAL CRISIS
The real issue Malaysians must focus on is: under what circumstances should the Agong withhold his consent. Though there is no clear statement in our Constitution on this issue, a hint can be found in Article 43 (4), which I quote in full:

“If the Prime Minister ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the House of Representatives, then, unless at his request the Yang di-Pertuan Agong dissolves Parliament, the Prime Minister shall tender the resignation of the Cabinet.”

This clause implies that the Agong can turn down the Prime Minister’s request to dissolve Parliament in the event that the latter looses the support of the majority of members of Parliament, in which event, the PM together with the Cabinet will have to resign. Following such resignation, the Agong will have to appoint a new PM who will in turn select a new Cabinet. In short, a new government will be appointed.

This also implies that, in the event the PM looses majority support in Parliament, the Agong has the prerogative to decide on how the political crisis is to be resolved - either by appointing a new Prime Minister who can command majority support in Parliament, or by holding a new election, for which Parliament has first to dissolve.

We can see from this scenario that the Agong possesses vast powers to extricate the nation from a crisis by virtue of the provisions in Article 40 (2). The question in our minds is: apart from the PM loosing majority support in Parliament, what other serious political turmoil or grave abuses that could give rise to the Agong acting under Article 40 (2) (b) – such as the degrading of the electoral system to the point that it has destroyed the democratic foundation of our nation?

I will deal with these issues in my next article.

Kim Quek

排臭氣多年污染環境,商家聲討促關電子廠

2008-01-24T22:44:00.000+08:00

（古來24日訊）古來25哩電子廠釋放臭氣污染環境多年，投訴至今情況仍未見改善；附近廠商對政府效率深表失望，希望在大選前能解決問題。
此外，人民公正黨也恫言，將在大選前展開另一輪的大型行動，促請當局關閉電子廠。
人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強接獲古來25哩工業區廠商投訴后，今午到現場瞭解情況。
他指出，2004年12月接獲電子廠污染環境的投訴后，曾到現場測量空氣指數，證實附近地區的二氧化硫及二氧化氮偏高，方圓約一公里地區皆受影響。
他表示，當時曾展開簽名運動、到工廠前展開抗議行動及提呈備忘錄給柔佛州務大臣；柔州旅遊及環境委員會主席龍莆天、古來區國會議員拿督林時清、柔州環境局長與古來市議會主席也曾于2005年3月到該廠視察。
“龍莆天指出該廠釋放對人體有害的硝酸煙，並表示會對付廠商；廠方后來也安裝了過濾器，並加高煙囪，我之后到現場幾次，剛開情況確實有改善一些。”
惟他指出，最近又再次接到附近廠商投訴，指電子廠的煙囪依然釋放臭味。
對此，劉順強表示，已于今日聯絡柔州環境局，提呈新的投訴，同時也會繼續向相關部門投訴，並致函反貪污局。
“人民公正黨將在大選前展開另一輪的大型行動，促請關局採取行動，關閉有關電子廠。”
2004年12月，古來25哩工業區逾十間工廠的業者與工人，首次申訴有關電子廠釋放難聞的有毒氣體，一些員工甚至出現嘔吐與頭暈的現象。
當局接獲投訴后，曾多次派員到現場瞭解情況，古來市議會也表示將考慮申請庭令，關閉該廠，但至今未見任何行動，污染情況也未見改善。
據瞭解，上述電子廠是從事電腦軟件電鍍行業，資方是新加坡人，從2004年10月起開始在25哩工業區投入運作。

疑煙囪增高飄散更遠沙威村民也嗅到
劉順強到電子廠附近進行測量，議器顯示證實空氣中含有二氧化硫（小圖），已構成污染。疑電子廠煙囪“增高”后臭味飄散更遠，加拉巴沙威新村尾端也出現奇怪臭味。
劉順強指出，曾陸續接獲沙威新村居民投訴，指常會聞到一股無法形容的奇異臭味，讓人有欲作嘔的感覺。
“我高度懷疑村民聞到的臭味，與這間電子廠有關，因為該廠將煙囪‘加高’后，臭味也飄的更遠。”
惟他表示，一切仍未經證實，有待進一步查證。
感覺呼吸困難★張國安(鐵廠商)
每年七八月開始起風時，味道飄散的最嚴重，只要一有風，就有味道，會讓人感覺呼吸困難。
有時下午時分，整個工業區會籠罩在煙霧瀰漫中，路面也矇矓一片。
喉嚨乾患氣喘★梁北生(機械廠員工)
每次刮大風時，煙囪所釋放的臭味會隨風飄向遠處；若是下雨或無風時，臭味就會傳到附近的工廠，工廠裡外，都聞到臭味。
自從有臭味問題后，我晚上睡覺時喉嚨很乾，且有很多痰，看了幾次醫生，醫生說患上氣喘。
古來市議會與環境局已來視察，但情況並沒有改善；如果問題不解決，來屆大選會利用手中的一票，做明智的決定。
星期天更嚴重★蔡少明(燒焊廠商)
我最近常在星期天回工廠加班，發現污染情況更嚴重，整個地區都可聞到硫酸的臭味；相信這間電子廠以為附近廠商多數星期天休息，所以大量生產。
電子廠釋放臭氣已有很多年，當局也派員來視察，但污染問題還是繼續存在，我希望大選前能解決。
投訴多年無效★林來和(廠商)
電子廠污染問題已近4年，我們投訴了這么多年都沒有下文，臭味問題沒有改善，讓人感到無能為力，也對政府的行事效率感到失望

公正黨行動黨舉大字報,促落實建古來華小二校

2008-01-24T13:55:00.000+08:00

（古來23日訊）人民公正黨與民主行動黨逾20人，今早在古來華小二校優美城新校地前舉大字報，促請教育部落實該校的動土、建校與啟用日期，而不要再把此課題當成大選前的“政治糖衣”. 出席者包括人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強、民主行動黨古來國會選區聯委會主席吳柏松及柔州副宣傳秘書張育民等。
劉順強認為，政府應根據需求每年增建至少50間國小，可是華族的這種基本權益，卻被當政者拿來當政治籌碼，在大選前常常拿來當政治糖果施捨，增建一間新華小成為一件很困難的事。
他表示，以古來二校為例，1999年大選前，當時的副教育部長馮鎮安已移交遷校准證，但卻面對無校地的窘境；直至2003年10月12日，古來區國會議員林時清為古來華小校友會主持動土禮時披露，古來二校預料將被列入大馬第9計劃，建校工程料將于2005年后展開。
“為應付04年大選，古來二校再次被利用作為宣傳課題，當時林時清解釋，該校已獲得遷校准證，但因技術問題及官員的疏忽，而未被列入第8大馬計劃內；大選后，林氏重提此事，希望把二校遷校列入第9大馬計劃。”
“去年4月，副教育部長韓春錦在國會答覆行動黨大山腳區議員章瑛提問時肯定地說，林時清已在第9大馬計劃下爭取到720萬令吉，作為古來二校遷校與建校基金，包括硬體和軟體設備，不需華社捐款。”
劉順強認為，這意味著，來臨的大選，古來二校遷校問題依然是會被利用作為“政治糖果”。
他表示，根據過往的經驗，預測大選前教育部長或副部長，一定會到古來二校新校地主持動土禮，又來作一次政治宣傳的花招。
他指出，遷校只需一兩年的時間便能解決，只要公正黨執政，必定會根據章程，公平對待各源流小學，不用等到10年、20年才落實建校計劃。

張育民：若嚴正看待遷校新校地早有畢業生
民主行動黨柔州副宣傳秘書張育民指出，如果馬華于1999年嚴正看待與關注古來二校遷校課題，新校地的第一屆畢業生早已誕生。
他指出，如果二校遷課題能于1999年獲得關注，便能在2000年興建，今天相信第一屆6年級學生已能從新校地畢業。
惟他表示，在國陣政府的種族政治下，建新華小甚至比中萬字更難，教育部長所宣傳的古來二校，其實就是“政治糖果再循環”的產物。
他也質疑古來的華社需要等待第13屆大選或2012年，才能完全滿足于對華小的需求。
吳柏松促重建瑞林園華小大選前宣佈建校日期
民主行動黨古來國會選區聯委會主席吳柏松促請教育部，在大選前宣佈古來二校確實的建校日期，並批准在古來太子城重建瑞林園華小。
他指出，古來二校遷校課題已拖延10年，資料顯示，林時清去年7月間已宣佈，該校將于2008年進行遷校計劃。

此外，吳柏松也促請教育部與本區人民代議士，宣佈批准瑞林園華小的建校准證，即在古來太子城重建瑞林園華小。
他表示，行動黨直接挑戰馬華，在大選前落實上述兩間華小的興建，否則即是推翻“朝裡有人好辦事”的說詞，也說明馬華已被邊緣化。

新聞背景前身由三校合併
古來華小一校與二校的前身是中華公學，成立于1945年。中華公學的前身是英才學校、育才學校和崇德學校三校合併。
中華公學的名字一直沿用至1953年，后改名為古來學校。1955年，在新教育法令下，古來學校正式改名為古來國民型華文小學。
1968年，隨著學生人數的增加，學校分為古來一校和古來二校，從此兩校共用校地至今，校址在古來新村華校路，一片佔地7畝的土地上。1995年，兩校師生人數達到4500人，因此董事會積極推動遷校計劃。古來二校于1999年獲教育部批准遷校，並于2003年獲教育部批准，將遷校事宜從第8大馬計劃延至第9大馬計劃；同時也成為全國52間獲准搬遷的華小中，唯一一間政府同意承建的學校。
同年，古來二校獲得亞太置地捐獻古來優美城一片5畝的華小保留地，校地與寬柔中學古來分校毗鄰。

古來區人民公正黨與印裔社群交流

2008-01-21T17:18:00.000+08:00

人民公正黨最高理事馬尼干原本受邀出席交流,由於臨時被警方傳訊問話而缺席交流會,改由新山區公正黨青年團出席演說.
人民公正黨古來區主席劉順強報效300令吉給家途四壁丈夫生病失業在家面臨斷糧其中一個家庭
出席者紛紛申請加入人民公正黨
一印裔婦女要求劉順強協助解決生份證問題.

道路雖拓寬結構不協或肇意外‧大古來花園盼建新路

2008-01-21T17:05:00.000+08:00

（柔佛‧古來）由於擔心商業區與住宅區相連的道路，因結構上不協調可能導致意外事故的發生，大古來花園的部份居民今日再次通過人民公正黨，促有關方面建築新路。
公正黨古來區部主席劉順強表示，自大古來花園居民在兩個星期前展開簽名運動後，他便將信函直接呈交給古來市議會工程局，傳達了要求發展商在該花園區築建新道路的要求。
他說，一個星期後，有關方面展開了建路的工程，將原有24尺的舊路拓寬至34尺，即新路寬約10尺。

路肩成道路陷阱
“但是，以這條路段70尺的道路保留地來看，新的道路並不符合新的標準。更重要的是，若我們觀看整條道路的結構，我們會發現這條道路從交通圈至新建店屋的道路寬約40尺，到了大古來花園前的路段則縮小至34尺。”
“道路縮小後所築起的路肩，以後肯定將成為這一條道路的陷井，進而導致交通意外事故的發生，我們希望當局能夠正視這項問題，不要等意外發生後才來亡羊補牢。”
該區約80戶居民，是就該花園區道路即將被新住宅區“共同”，擔心未來該區將出現交通擁擠的情況，而展開簽名運動並致函古來市議會，要求關注該花園區的交通問題。另一方面，宣稱是該花園區居民代表的黃維生則致電《大柔佛》指出，上個星期四，他在馬華古來市議員黨鞭蔡國新的安排下，就道路的保留與發展商代表會談，發展商代表親口表示願意保留大古來花園舊路，且在新住宅區前興建雙向的道路，供大家使用。
“發展商代表指出，該公司必須重新規劃道路後，交給市議會審批。”蔡國新受詢時，拒絕發表任何相關的言論

古來公正黨發動簽名,冀廢戶外廣告私營化

2008-01-20T10:28:00.000+08:00

（古來19日訊）人民公正黨將從即日起發動簽名運動，要求古來市議會廢除戶外廣告私營政策，所有古來與士乃區商家受促響應。
該黨古來區部主席劉順強今早在一項新聞發佈會上，作出上述宣佈。

劉順強聲稱，近日來，部分在路肩、天橋等張掛戶外布條、招牌、廣告版及看板的古來商家，紛紛接獲一家私營公司來電，要求支付廣告費。

他表示，每個戶外廣告布條的收費視布條大小而定，例如一張4呎乘20呎的廣告布條，每月收費為136令吉，一年則須繳付1639令吉，比過去古來市議會所收取的廣告費高。

他透露，曾向古來市議會執照組查詢，獲悉該會去年8月，已核准將戶外廣告特許經營頒授給一間私營化公司，即任何戶外等廣告布條及看板等，向市議會申請后須付費給該公司才可張掛。

“對方表示，私營化主要的目的，是因為過去大小廣告牌及布條隨處亂挂的問題，已達到失控的地步，因此市會才將有關管理權交給私營公司處理，希望能有效整頓市容。商家如有不滿，也可致函古來市議會主席要求減低收費。”

劉順強也致電有關私營公司，一名負責人告知，除了商店前的招牌外，其他戶外及五腳基前的任何廣告及招牌，都必須申請及付費，且必須符合該公司定下的標準。

“他說，有關收費主要是根據廣告牌大小來而定，而那些已經張掛的布條或看板，該公司會事先聯絡商家，若未獲回應，他們才會採取行動拆除。”

劉順強說，根據他向公司註冊局索取的資料顯示，這間私營公司的其中一名股東是柔州一名重要人物。

收費高出5倍
劉順強：增加商民負擔

人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強指出，戶外廣告私營公司的收費，比私營化前高出3至5倍，徒增本區民與商家的負擔。

他說，古來于2003年升格為市議會及今年升格為古來再也縣，非但沒有為本區人民帶來喜訊，反而增加他們的負擔，首當其衝的是張掛布條及廣告看板的商家。

“私營公司的管理區除了戶外布條看板外，也包括設在路肩、天橋與高架橋的戶外大型廣告看板，甚至有權拆除任何非法戶外大型廣告板。”

他質疑一間私人公司的權力，竟然超越地方政府的權限。

對此，劉順強促請古來市議會應向公眾解釋，有關私營公司的合約年限、是否有權私自或逐年提高收費、接近大路旁的私人地是否需申請與付費，而已張掛而又不符合公司標準的布條與看板，又是否須拆除並重新設計。

公正黨配合大選年
發動第三波簽名運動

之前發動的兩次大型簽名運動皆取得成效，人民公正黨配合大選年，再次發動第三波的大型簽名運動。

人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強表示，該黨過去曾發動兩次大型簽名運動，包括2001年的廢除士乃收費站及2006年的要求沙威棕油廠搬遷。

“兩次的簽名運動皆號召數千人響應，且都取得成功，士乃收費站已成功被廢除，沙威棕油廠也已遷往他處。”

因此，他透露，隨著大選即將到來，該黨將從即日起，再次發動大型簽名運動，號召大家響應，要求古來市議會廢除不合理的戶外廣告私營政策

2008-01-18T09:36:00.000+08:00

THE CONSTITUTION AND MALAY RIGHTS

2008-01-17T15:35:00.000+08:00

The recent HINDRAF demonstrations against racial marginalization of Indian Malaysians have again brought into focus the issue of Malay "privileges" as provided for under the Constitution. Judging from public utterances in the press and websites, there seem to be continuing wide-spread ignorance, misrepresentation and misunderstanding of what our Constitution precisely provides on this issue.

The center of controversy is Article 153 of the Constitution which provides for what is popularly known as Malay "privileges". Due to misrepresentation by UMNO in the past, many have come to identify Article 153 – and even the entire Constitution – as racially discriminatory. This is not so. In spite numerous constitutional amendments, the egalitarian spirit of our Constitution in respect of racial equality remains largely intact. Public misunderstanding is attributed to UMNO hijacking Article 153 to practice unbridled racial discrimination for self-enrichment in the past few decades.

Due to the heightening racial tensions caused by UMNO's retrogressive move to intensify its racial agenda under the NEP (New Economic Policy) and brewing racial discontent by HINRAF, it is imperative and urgent that the truth be known with regards to the true legal standing of the various races as provided for in our Constitution - the legal foundation upon which this nation is built. For this reason, I am reproducing as follows the main part of an article I wrote three years ago (see note below), which analysed and clarified these controversial issues.

commencement of previous article
Forty seven years after Independence, racial issues continued to monopolise national politics, and championing Malay rights remains the single dominant ideology of UMNO - the only ruling power that this nation has known since Independence. Thousands of speeches have been made championing this Malay cause, using various terminologies such as Malay "special rights", Malay "special privileges" or simply Malay "rights", often invoking the nation's Constitution as the legal back-up. But, of the many politicians who have used these terminologies, how many have read through the Constitution to find out what these "rights" really are? Very few, I am afraid.

Our Constitution is printed in a small booklet titled "Federal Constitution" that can be bought for RM10 in the book shops. Buy one copy and read through to find out what it says about these "rights". After all, these issues - more than any others - have dominated our lives, and all citizens should know what these rights truly are as spelled out in our Constitution.

If you have read through the Constitution to look for an answer to these Malay "rights", perhaps the first thing that has struck you is that, familiar terminologies such as Malay "special rights", Malay "special privileges" or Malay "rights" are no where to be found in the Constitution. Instead, we only find the term "the special position of the Malays", which appears twice, in Clause (1) and Clause (2) of Article 153, which is titled "Reservation of quotas in respect of services, permits, etc, for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak".

(The words "natives of Sabah and Sarawak" were only incorporated into the Constitution upon the formation of Malaysia in 1963, during which Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore were merged with Malaya to form Malaysia. In this article, these words will not be repeated after the word "Malay" when I quote from the Constitution, for abbreviation purpose).

Any one who has read through Article 153 might be surprised to discover that the provisions favouring Malays are in fact quite moderate, and certainly no way as stretched out in intensity and scope as our politicians would want us to believe. Similarly, those provisions protecting the non-Malays as a counter-balance to the special position of the Malays under the same Article 153 are also surprisingly quite well conceived and fair. In fact, when read in conjunction with Article 8 (Equality) and Article 136 (Impartial treatment of Federal employees), Article 153 cannot be construed as having significantly violated the egalitarian principles of our Constitution, contrary to common perception.

Since the egalitarian nature of our Constitution is largely intact, in spite of the presence of Article 153, then why should it have acquired such an adverse reputation as the legal root of all kinds of racial inequalities in this country?

Answer: the fault is not with our Constitution, but with our politicians twisting, misinterpreting and abusing it.

ARTICLE 153
It is perhaps high time we get to the bottom of Article 153.
Clause (1) of Article 153 states: "It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article".

So, the first understanding that we must have on Article 153 is that it is meant to protect the interests of not only the Malays, but also those of the non-Malays.

Next, note the deliberate use of the words "safeguard" and "special position" (instead of "special rights" or "special privileges"). The choice of these words must be understood in the historical context of the drafting of this Constitution half a century ago when Malays were economically and educationally backward in relation to other races. It was thought fit and proper then that there must be "safeguards" to protect the Malays from being swarmed over by other races. Hence, the creation of the "special position" of the Malays, which was obviously intended for defensive purpose: to protect for survival. The meticulous avoidance of using words like "rights" and "privileges", and the choice of the word "safeguard" were clearly calculated to reflect its defensive nature. Under that historical context, the provision of the special position of the Malays in the Constitution certainly could not be interpreted to mean the endowment of racial privileges to create a privileged class of citizenship. If it were otherwise, this country would have been turned into a racist and feudal state right from day one of our Independence.

Clause (2) says that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall safeguard the special position of the Malays by reserving positions "of such proportion as he may deem reasonable" in a) the public service b) educational facilities and c) business licenses.

Clauses (3) & (6) say that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may, for purpose of fulfilling Clause (2), give general directions to the relevant authorities, which shall then duly comply.

There is a separate clause covering the allocation of seats in tertiary education – Clause (8A). It says that where there are insufficient places for any particular course of study, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may give directions for the "reservation of such proportion of such places for Malays as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may deem reasonable; and the authority shall duly comply with the directions."

As for the protection of non-Malays against possible encroachment of their existing interests, there are several provisions under different clauses in this Article, prohibiting the deprivation of the existing facilities enjoyed by them, whether in public service, education or trading licenses. Of these protective clauses, Clauses (5) and (9) are particularly significant.

Clause (5) consists of one sentence, which reads: "This Article does not derogate from the provisions of Article 136".

Article 136 also consists of one sentence, which reads: "All persons of whatever race in the same grade in the service of the Federation shall, subject to the terms and conditions of their employment, be treated impartially."

Clause (9) consists of one sentence, which reads: "Nothing in this Article shall empower Parliament to restrict business or trade solely for the purpose of reservations for Malays."

ARTICLE 8
Reading Article 153 will not be complete without reading Article 8 (Equality). I will quote the more significant Clauses (1) and (2) of this Article in full, as follows:

Clause (1) of Article 8 states: "All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law."

Clause (2) states: "Except as expressly authorized by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law or in the appointment to any office or employment under a public authority or in the administration of any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment."

After reading through these Articles of the Constitution, we are able to draw the following conclusions:

1. The present clamour for Malay "special rights" as sacrosanct racial privileges of a privileged race, especially under the ideological ambit of Ketuanan Melayu (Malay the master race), is in conflict with the letters and spirit of the Constitution.

2. The special position of the Malays as prescribed under Article 153 of the Constitution is limited in scope to only the reservation of reasonable quotas in these 3 sectors: public services, educational places and business licenses. Hence, the present rampant racial discriminations practiced on almost every facet of our national life are mostly violations of the Constitution.
Examples of these violations are:

a) Racial discrimination in the appointment and promotion of employees in publicly funded bodies, resulting in these becoming almost mono-raced bodies (particular so in their top strata). These bodies include: the civil service, police, army and various semi and quasi government agencies.

b) Barring of non-Malays from tenders and contracts controlled directly or indirectly by the government.

c) Imposition of compulsory price discounts and quotas in favour of Malays in housing projects.

d) Imposition of compulsory share quota for Malays in non-Malay companies.

e) Blanket barring of non-Malays to publicly funded academic institutions.

f) Completely lop-sided allocation of scholarships and seats of learning in clearly unreasonable proportions that reflect racial discriminations.

3) Our Constitution provides for only one class of citizenship and all citizens are equal before the law. The presence of Article 153 does not alter this fact, as it is meant only to protect the Malays from being "squeezed" by other races by allowing the reservation of reasonable quotas on certain sectors of national life. However, this Constitution has now been hijacked through decades of hegemony of political power by UMNO to result in the virtual monopoly of the public sector by a single race. The ensuing racism, corruption and corrosion of integrity of our democratic institutions have brought serious retrogression to our nation-building process in terms of national unity, discipline, morality and competitiveness of our people.

At this critical juncture, when nations in this region and around the world are urgently restructuring and shaping up to cope with globalization, our nation stagnates in a cesspool that has been created through decades of misrule. Unless urgent reforms are carried out, beginning with the dismantling of the anachronistic racial edifice, we are in for serious troubles in the days ahead.

end of previous article
Note: The above article was written on 3rd Dec 2004 in response to a controversy in Parliament over Lim Kit Siang's move to reprimand an UMNO minister for radical racial utterances in the freshly concluded UMNO annual assembly. This article is included in my book "Where to Malaysia – A future with Anwar's Reformasi or back to Mahathirism?", and also published in several websites.

Kim Quek

反對黨州議席分配未定案,柔佛再也恐四角戰

2008-01-15T21:41:00.000+08:00

（新山15日訊）柔佛再也州議席恐出現四角戰？
2004年大選，柔佛再也州選區出現三角戰，即馬華的陳書北、行動黨的徐傑和公正黨的劉振廣。據悉，來屆大選，行動黨和公正黨雖求合作，惟至今柔佛再也區的議席分配仍未定案。

同時，人民黨又已宣佈攻打柔佛再也州選區，所以，柔佛再也在來屆大選即使沒有出現“四角戰”，相信也逃不過三角戰的命運。
針對反對黨協商議席分配，人民公正黨古來區主席劉順強說，在議席分配上，該黨僅與行動黨和回教黨協商，已有90%議席達成協議。

“3黨將按上屆大選攻打議席、黨候選人活躍地區為分配依據，除非有其他黨開出特別條件或建議。”
他舉例，公正黨不想放棄武吉峇都選區，惟行動黨又有興趣攻打該區，除非行動黨有充足理由其勝算比公正黨高，公正黨才會選擇讓步。
至于民主行動黨，僅透露協議一事還在洽談當中，議席分配全權交由黨中央決定。
回教黨柔州主席賽奧曼卻指出，反對黨的議席分配已經全數解決，僅存百萬鎮州議席將出現三角戰。
他說，議席分配也獲中央同意，估計近期回教黨將聯合行動黨召開記者會，公佈攻佔議席的分佈圖；他已確定成為回教黨百萬鎮州議席候選人。

巫程豪續守土矢攻下士姑來
巫程豪將繼續守土，誓要完成攻下士姑來州選區的大業。
自巫程豪升任民主行動黨柔州主席后，來屆大選，身為州主席的他是否會再戰士姑來，還是會到柔北戰情變數較大的選區，一直是坊間不斷揣測的話題。
惟據可靠消息指出，巫程豪不會離開士姑來區，尤其上屆大選，他將前一屆落后對方1萬1245票的距離，拉近到2193票，證明他在士姑來區的影響力，以及對國陣的威脅力。

同時，巫程豪過去4年採用親民和中庸的處事方式，逐漸在人民心中建立起“好好先生”和“任勞任怨”形象，不少國陣黨員更曾私下或公開贊揚他，以致其人氣在短短的兩屆大選，持續飆升。
來屆大選，談及反對黨有沒有機會攻下一城？回教黨柔州主席賽奧曼便很有信心地說：“有，我們都看好巫程豪！”。
回教黨更坦言，若巫程豪將繼續守士姑來，回教黨也全力支持，巫程豪更視為反對黨攻破國陣堡壘的最大期望。
上屆大選，巫程豪戰民政柔州聯委會主席拿督張國智，被喻為柔州最有看頭的一場戰役。
因此，在即將來臨的大選，不管國陣是否繼續由張國智出戰，相信戰情肯定比上屆更激烈。
有人說，這會是巫程豪的背水一戰，所以，養軍千日的巫程豪，相信已經蓄勢待發，準備替自己在來屆大選打出漂亮一仗

在野党协商,刘德海攻礼让国会

2008-01-15T18:19:00.000+08:00

地點：大古來花園,新花園佔用舊路,逾百居民簽名抗議

2008-01-11T18:57:00.000+08:00

（古來11日訊）大古來花園逾百人簽名投訴，抗議古來市議會批准新屋業計劃佔用舊路與溝渠，要求當局採取行動，訓令有關發展商另築新車道與排水道。
受影響居民申訴，新屋業計劃未重新興建一條新道路，而是把該花園已使用30多年的江布峇都路約10尺寬路面稍為擴寬，新舊花園共用一條道路，使道路變窄。
居民也非議該新發展商興建的地下排水溝渠淺窄，部分溝渠更是銜接舊有的排水溝渠，導致一些住戶發生淹水事件，並擔心水患問題惡化。大古來花園約有80戶居民，自1969年搬遷于此；約十多位居民今早在人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強的陪同下，召開新聞發佈會，表達心中的不滿。出席者包括民主行動黨古來區部聯委會主席吳柏松。

要求另建新路

居民聲稱，由于該屋業發展已獲批准才施工，他們已于昨晚展開簽名運動，投訴當局批准新屋業佔用舊車道與水溝問題，要求另建新道與排水道，並獲得百多位居民響應。
他們預計今天將有關簽名與致函古來市議會，副文則呈交柔佛州務大臣、房屋及地方政府部與本區國州議員。
針對大古來花園居民的上述投訴，亞太置地集團總經理凱茲再奴丁日前受詢時解釋，有關新住宅區的排水系統是建在地下水道，因此表面看不到；而有關道路的興建則是根據當局批准的圖測施工，一切皆依法行事。
他促請有關居民若有任何問題，可到亞太置地設于優美城的辦事處找他商量，他將盡所能協助居民解決。

居民提出2要求

大古來花園居民致函向古來市議會提出2項要求，即：
＊避免新舊花園共用一條舊有車道，新花園住宅必須在其範圍內另築建一條車道；
＊發展商必須在其範圍內興建全面的排水道，而非用淺窄的溝渠銜接舊有的排水溝渠，因舊有的排水溝已無法負荷現有的排水量，且導致部分住家淹水。

劉順強：未取得住用證當局有權要求修改
人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強指出，雖然新屋業發展商聲稱該屋業是獲得批准才施工，只要尚未取得住用證，當局有權要求發展商修改。
他表示，在接獲大古來花園居民投訴后，曾多次前往現場視察及向居民瞭解實際情況，並致電多個部門訊問及翻閱城市規劃法令。
他透露，根據城市規劃法令，一般住宅區道路規格分大路與巷路，大路須保留32至36尺、巷路24尺、房屋籬笆路基離道路則8尺寬。
“一般道路保留地如果為40尺，巷路為24尺；若道路保留地超過40尺，例如大古來花園江布峇都路寬70尺，較為合理的保留路為32至36尺。”
他指出，江布峇都路目前只有24尺寬，顯然是被劃定為巷路，隨著聯邦大道重新規劃與新花園住宅的出現，這條路或將會因此繁忙與擁擠，道路應保留32至36尺寬。
“江布峇都路除去已被劃定巷路的24尺，新舊住宅規定路基16尺，即左右各8尺，仍然有30尺可用之地。”
他認為，如果認定該路段的興建並不符合公共安全、衛生、交通與使用期限等，當局有權要求發展商，將巷路修改為大路。

劉順強也表示，新發展商雖有興建地下排水溝渠，且銜接舊有的排水溝，可是舊有的1尺排水溝渠不勝負荷，常出現淹水情況。
他指出，在目前新房屋發展法令下，所有排水溝渠必須是1尺半，居民有權要求發展商更換舊有1尺的排水溝渠，鋪設凸型路面以達到最大的排水功效，並在新住宅前興建另一排水溝渠，平衡水流且發揮作用。

共用舊路很危險

★大古來花園江布峇都居民，蕭先生（70歲）
我住在大古來花園已28年，兩個花園一起共用舊路是很危險，應擴寬道路。除聯邦大道外，從古來新村通往新山方向的車輛，也可使用江布峇都路，尤其駕車人士擔心大路會塞車，因此這條路段的車流量會愈來愈多。

佔用舊路不合理

★大古來花園江布峇都居民，林亞苟（58歲）
地方政府應為人民服務，批准兩個花園住宅區共用一條道路是很危險的；據瞭解，新的屋業發展應有40呎的保留地興建道路，佔用舊路是很不合理的。如果古來市議會仍未採取行動，我相信居民會響應行動黨與公正黨發動的抗議行動。

共用道路不公平

★民主行動黨古來區部主席吳柏松
新花園佔用舊路，只將舊路加寬3至4尺，新的住宅區應該要有自己的保留道路，我質疑當局是根據甚么標準批准圖測。
江布峇都路的交通流量會愈來愈大，新舊花園共同一條道路，對當地居民不公平；古來市議會應趁工程未完成前，指示發展商與建本身保留的路。否則行動黨將與人民公正黨聯合發動居民大事抗議

立即停止砍大樹,種小樹的荒誕行動

2008-01-07T14:50:00.000+08:00

. （柔佛‧古來）人民公正黨古來區部週日（6日）早拉布條促請古來市議會立即停止“砍大樹，種小樹”的荒謬政策。
該黨古來區部主席劉順強表示，最近古來多個地區皆可見到市議會人員在砍伐大樹，或者在栽種新樹，從舊士乃收費站至沙令聯邦大道已經成長的椰科棕櫚及其他樹木，皆已被砍伐。
他指責市議會以美化景觀為名，卻成了生態保育殺手，同時浪費民脂民膏。劉順強指出，根據該黨多天的仔細觀察，發現當局在砍伐樹齡僅3年的椰科棕櫚樹後，改種以木枝撐起的“雨樹”及以鐵枝撐起的不知名小樹。
雨樹將面臨被砍命運
他說，資料顯示，雨樹在兩三年後，樹幹可粗達1尺多，高達30尺，生長期達五六十年，是一種遮蔭樹。
“但是，當局卻在雨樹下約半尺的距離，種了另一種不知名的小樹，這意味著3年後，當局就要將雨樹旁的小樹砍掉，這不是在浪費公款嗎？”
“此外，雨樹與聯邦大道的距離不及1尺，如果當局要拓寬道路，這些雨樹必將面臨被砍的命運。這項無知及浪費公款的工程，讓我們對市議會相關人士的思維及看待事務的角度感到質疑。”
他說：“我們希望古來市議會停止在人前栽種小樹，在人後砍伐大樹的行為，而應將更多公款用在有需要的地方，包括加強基本設施、維修道路、修剪枯樹、增設路牌等。”星洲日報／大柔佛‧2008.01.06

政党网站人民公正党排位最高　政治领袖网站林吉祥排633位

2008-01-04T15:28:00.000+08:00

吉隆坡讯）著名网际网络资讯公司Alexa公佈全新的大马网站排行榜，在国内各主要政党的网页中，反对党的排位远远超过执政党，排在最高的则是人民公正党，在大马网站排行榜中位列2019。

第二高的则是行动党，排位為2500，接著则是马华排在5489。执政党「老大」巫统的官方网站排行则在2万6435，民政党排在第3万1085位，印度国大党则是第1万2254位。

人民公正党的主要瀏览者来自国内网友，大马网友佔了87.1％，其次则是中国网友，佔据5.7％，接著则是澳洲网友，共有2.3％。

行动党网站的主要瀏览者同样以大马為主，超过90％的瀏览者来自大马。

除了各政党的官网外，政党领袖的部落格或个人网站中，反对党领袖林吉祥的排位可谓最理想，其部落格由于每日更新文章，导致瀏览量颇高，致使该部落格排在第633位。

其部落格主要的读者群，来自国内的佔了90.4％，新加坡读者也有2.4％。

人民公正党顾问安华的个人网站则排在第1297位，而大马还是主要的「基地」，其读者中84.6％為大马人。
在执政党方面，党魁中马华总会长拿督斯里黄家定的个人网站可谓不甚理想，该网站在Alexa调查中竟然无法列入前10万名。

公正黨：砍樹植樹‧古來市會“製造商機”?

2008-01-03T10:54:00.000+08:00

（柔佛‧古來）人民公正黨質疑古來市議會在聯邦大道沙令路段砍樹後植樹的作法，並認為有製造“商機”之嫌。該黨古來區部主席劉順強週三（2日）在新聞發布會上披露，該黨於前天接獲公眾的投訴，指有承包商在聯邦大道沙令路段如火如荼的展開砍伐椰科棕櫚樹，並種植其他樹木、花草的工程。
他說，該黨在接獲這項投訴後，便向各方面收集相關的資料，包括致電古來市議會，結果被官員“模糊”的告知，他們砍樹是為了展開一項“工程”。
他表示，目前遭砍伐的60棵棕櫚樹，是種植在士乃舊收費站至佳食閣約1公里的路段，尚有約百棵仍等待有關方面“開鋸”。這些棕櫚樹都是於3年前栽種，每一棵的價格約2000令吉。
他指出，根據他瞭解，除非有關方面打算拓寬道路、土地被徵用或特殊原因才能砍樹，否則隨意砍伐當局所栽種的樹木屬非法性。
將致函首相要求關注

“但是，根據我們查悉，當局目前並沒有計劃在這一路段展開拓寬工程，只是在展開另一項數百萬令吉的植樹工程。”
他說：“任何砍樹及移植樹木的計劃，必須獲得綠化局的批准，以確保相關不會出現浪費、不環境的問題，因而古來市議會有必要就這項不符合環保且浪費的作法，給予我們一個交待。”
“我們也質疑古來市議會，在過去半年於聯邦大道兩旁所展開的大大小小綠化工程，是否在製造商機。”
他表示，鑒於首相拿督斯里阿都拉不久前才再次呼吁各部門節省及不要隨意砍伐樹木，該黨除了對市議會的不典範作法感到驚訝，也將致函首相，要求首相關注。

安華巡迴演講

2007-12-28T10:27:00.000+08:00

CERAMAH PERDANA
安華開講
DATO’SERI
ANWAR IBRAHIM
(PENASIHAT PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT MALAYSIA)
(前副首相,人民公正黨實權領袖)

其他主講者 :蔡添強(公正黨宣傳主任)
:梁自堅律師(公正黨總財政)

07.1.2008(星期一)

TEMPAT : KG BARU PENGERANG

地點: 四灣翡翠園海鮮酒樓

時間:晚間7:00-9:00

入場免費,請踴躍出席

特別報道：“鐵蝴蝶”折翼巴基斯坦前總理布托遇襲身亡

2007-12-28T00:05:00.001+08:00

巴基斯坦前總理、現任反對派領導人貝·布托（港譯貝娜齊爾）被稱為“鐵蝴蝶”，意思是說她像蝴蝶般美麗，內心卻比鋼鐵還堅強：“鐵蝴蝶”兩次當選總理，兩次被罷免，期間九次被軟禁或入獄，但她仍然熬了過來，希望再次返回祖國東山再起。10初她回國時車隊曾遇襲，“鐵蝴蝶”當時避過一劫，但在12月27日，布托這位首位成為伊斯蘭世界的女總理，終因遭到恐怖事件襲擊，重傷去世，終年54歲。

據美聯社報道，貝·布托領導的巴基斯坦人民黨代表已經証實，貝·布托受恐怖襲擊後被送往在醫院，但因傷勢過重不治身亡。現場消息指貝·布托先遭槍傷再遇自殺式炸彈爆炸。外電消息指巴基斯坦多個城市都爆發騷亂。巴國總統穆沙拉夫晚上發表聲明譴責暴力，並呼籲國民冷靜。

今年10月初，穆沙拉夫和貝·布托已就總統選舉等事宜達成一項全國和解協議。根據協議，穆沙拉夫將對貝·布托等前高官予以特赦，而貝·布托領導的人民黨將不會抵制選舉。不過，特赦高官並不包括另一位前總理謝里夫。10月21日，布托回國時，其車隊在卡拉奇遭襲，造成至少136人死亡。事後，巴警方逮捕3名疑犯。曾兩任巴總理的貝·布托，是伊斯蘭國家中的第一位女總理，也是世界上最年輕的女總理。現年５４歲的貝·布托出身政治世家，其父阿里·布托曾任巴總理。

從小就聰慧過人的貝·布托極受父親寵愛。在重男輕女嚴重的巴國，阿里·布托每次都是帶著聰明美麗的女兒出席各種政治活動，將其作為繼承人精心栽培。貝·布托也不負眾望，１６歲就考入哈佛大學學習，後又進入牛津大學深造。1976年，學成歸國的貝·布托繼承父志，進入政界。被稱為“鐵蝴蝶”的貝·布托，外表如蝴蝶般美麗，內心卻比鋼鐵還堅強。她的父親在1977年遭政變被免去職務，並於1979年被處以絞刑。貝·布托受牽連遭軟禁，但她的政治抱負沒有絲毫動搖。恢復自由後，貝·布托參加選舉，1988年，35歲的貝·布托成了巴歷史上第一位女總理，但在任不足兩年，就被解除了職務。

1993年，貝·布托再次當選總理，又因“嚴重腐敗”被解職。兩次當選總理，兩次被罷免，期間９次被軟禁或入獄。1999年，貝·布托被迫流亡海外。為了讓貝·布托對政治“死心”，巴政府曾連下兩道通緝令，通緝貝· 布托夫婦。惡劣環境沒能熄滅貝·布托內心對政治的渴望，在海外流亡至今的貝· 布托，依然領導著巴國人民黨，並積極與各種在野勢力接觸，為回國參選做準備。接受西方教育的貝·布托擁有純伊斯蘭式的婚姻。在父母安排下，同建築業巨頭扎爾達里相識５天後即訂婚，兩人在婚前從未單獨相處過。

但在婚後，貝·布托卻深愛上了自己的丈夫，即使他給貝·布托帶來了大麻煩。貝·布托的兩次被罷免都與其夫有關。被戲稱為“１０％先生”的扎爾達里，在貝·布托任職期間，曾向公司收取１０％回扣。下臺後貝·布托流亡海外，其夫也被投入監獄。2004年，扎爾達裏結束了８年牢獄生活，飛往倫敦同貝·布托團聚。

雖然丈夫兩次讓她從權力巔峰跌落，但貝· 布托對他還是一片癡心，並堅信其無辜。受國內極端主義困擾的穆沙拉夫，為了下個５年總統任期，主動向貝·布托拋出橄欖枝，同意其回國參加議會選舉，並撤銷腐敗指控。據BBC中文網報道，攻擊事件中也至少有另外15人遇難。人民黨一些支持者在事發後痛哭流涕，也有一些支持者則在街道上點燃篝火以示抗議。美國政府在事發後，迅速譴責這次自殺襲擊事件﹔美國國務院表示，事件破壞了巴基斯坦國內和解的努力。俄羅斯外交部也迅速譴責了爆炸事件，並警告說，此舉可能導致更多的恐怖事件。中國政府目前還沒有就事件發表評論

亞洲時報

貝娜齊爾﹒布托生平

2007-12-28T00:00:00.000+08:00

不久前結束流亡生涯歸國從政的巴基斯坦前總理貝娜齊爾﹒布托，12月27日在競選集會期間遇刺身亡﹔悲壯中結束了轟轟烈烈的一生。
貝﹒布托曾是巴基斯坦及國際間家喻戶曉的名字：她曾兩次出任政府總理，也曾多年遭腐敗罪名指控。
出身世家就像印度的甘地家族一樣，巴基斯坦的布托家族在世界政治舞台是相當響亮的。

貝娜齊爾的父親，阿里﹒布托市1970年代初的巴基斯坦總理。阿里﹒布托的政府是當時巴基斯坦獨立之後30幾年來少數的非軍方政府之一。

貝娜齊爾在1953年出生，在美國哈佛大學同英國牛津大學受教育。他從父親的名聲之中獲得了公眾信任，即使她當初並不願意走政治的道路。
她曾經在1988到1990年間及1993到1996年間兩度擔任巴基斯坦總理。
在這兩次擔任總理，他都因為涉及腐敗醜聞而被總統驅逐下台。
被驅逐下台顯示了她不穩定的政治生涯，當中經過了高峰和入低谷。貝娜齊爾最受歡迎的時刻是首次當選之後，她成為了世界上其中一個最高調的女性領袖。她當時年輕，光芒四射，成功在男性主導的政治世界中，將自己塑造出一個清新的形像。
但是在她第二度下台之後，她的名字同腐敗及治國無能掛鉤。
決心與毅力貝娜齊爾﹒布托的決心與毅力見於他的父親在1977年齊亞﹒哈克將軍軍事政變之後被抓進牢，兩年之後被處決。
貝娜齊爾當時在她父親被處決之前已經進牢，五年牢獄生涯大部分時間都是單獨關押。她形容當時的情況異常惡劣。
因為疾病治療而脫離牢獄之後，布托女士在倫敦成立了巴基斯坦人民黨的辦事處，開始發動對抗齊亞﹒哈克將軍的運動。布托在1986年放回巴基斯坦，吸引了大批群眾集會。齊亞﹒哈克在1988年飛機爆炸事件身亡之後，布托成為了伊斯蘭國家罕見的民選女總理。

腐敗控訴
布托在位期間，她的丈夫扎爾達裡的角色引起了極大爭議。
他在布托兩任總理期間都擔當了重要角色，被多屆巴基斯坦政府指控盜竊數以百萬美元的公款。布托同扎爾達裡都否認了這項指控。
這些指控稱他們將金錢分散存放在歐洲多個國家。
很多評論家都說布托丈夫被指控貪婪加速了布托的下台。
不過，經過了十年審訊，扎爾達裡被控的大約18項腐敗和刑事罪名都不能證實有罪。但是，扎爾達裡還是蹲了至少八年大獄。他在2004年獲准保釋出獄。
布托則一直否認對他指控的腐敗罪名，說指控是有政治目的的。
直到2007年10月的特赦為止，布托面對的至少五項腐敗控罪都沒有一項罪名成立。布托在1999年自我流亡海外，同家人居住在迪拜。她經常到西方國家的大學講學，同智囊機構及政府官員會面。
布托在2007年10月18日結束流亡生涯回國，軍政府總統穆沙拉夫簽署法令給她同其他人特赦。

布托回國是同穆沙拉夫總統達成分享權力協議的結果。但是在她回國之後，兩人之間的關係嚴重倒退。
布托回國第一天，她的車隊就遭受了自殺式炸彈襲擊。
就在布托準備即將在明年初舉行的議會大選之際，第二次炸彈襲擊結束了她短暫卻有輝煌的一生。貝﹒布托終年54歲。

BBC 中文罔

STOP THE MADNESS!

2007-12-19T11:13:00.000+08:00

The award of the RM 12.5 billion contract to build the Ipoh – Padang Besar (Thai border) double-tracking railway is destined to create the most wasteful white elephant among the many white elephants already existing in this country.

This is crystal clear from a cursory glance at the current operation of the state-owned monopoly Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad (KTMB) or The Malayan Railways Ltd.

Traversing the Malaysian Peninsular with a network of 1,700 km of railways, KTMB only raked in RM 288 million in transportation revenues in 2006, made up as follows:

Intercity services RM 71 million
Commuter services in Kuala Lumpur areas RM 85 million
Freight services RM 132 million
Total RM 288 million

Excluding the commuter services in KL areas (175 km) from our calculations, the total pan-peninsular transportation revenue is RM 203 million, yielded by a network of 1525 km of railways (1,700 – 175). Apportioning 30% of this total revenue to the Ipoh – Padang sector of 329 km (though this sector forms only 22% of the total linear length of 1525 km), the corresponding revenue is RM 60 million.

Granted that traffic volume will increase substantially after completion of the double-tracking project, but there is a limit to this increase. Assuming a generous revenue growth of 7 folds, future annual revenue for this sector will be RM 420 million – a mere 3.3% of the initial capital investment of RM 12,500 million.

Such meager revenues simply mean that due to its low usage, this project will not have any significant impact on the economy or on transportation in this sector after its completion.

On the other hand, let us pause for a moment to ponder over what this astronomical sum of public funds - RM 12,500 million - means to the people.

In the first place, it means every family in this country will have to shoulder an average burden of RM 2,500/-.

Then, if this money is spent for other purposes, the government can complete any one of the following feats:

plant 1.2 million hectares of matured oil palm, which are capable of generating annual revenues of RM 10 billion (5 million tons of palm oil @ RM 2,000 per ton),or
build 400,000 low cost housing units, which is capable of housing to 2 million have-nots, or
establish 100 medium sized institutions of higher learning, capable of taking in 300,000 students for tertiary education, or
build 1,200 km of expressways (equivalent to one more north-south expressway plus one more east-west highway).
The glaring contrast in returns between building the double-tracking project and any of the abovementioned alternative usages clearly indicates that this project is of very low priority at this stage of our development when the country is still short of funds to address many social-economic needs urgently. But our government has chosen to implement it, and worst, doing it in circumstances that are most deplorable.

First, there has never been a proper cost/benefit analysis. For a project that is labeled as the largest ever undertaken (when completed from north to south), this omission is shocking though perhaps understandable, as the cabinet should have been aware that the project proposition could not have survived the preliminary round of analysis.

Second, this project has never been properly discussed in the cabinet – not in Mahathir’s reign when the contract was first dubiously awarded to Gamuda Bhd – MMC Corp Bhd joint venture in Oct 2003 (but shelved in Dec 2003) (see note 1), nor during Abdullah’s premiership when it was revived in Mar 2007 (see note 2).

Third, it was the Cabinet Committee on Public Transport – not the Cabinet – which made the decision to revive the project and to award the contract to the same contractor in a subcommittee meeting held on 16 Mar 2007 chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, who also made the announcement. That such an important project should have been left to Najib’s subcommittee to decide reflected Prime Minister Abdullah’s weak leadership as well as serious-flaw in the decision-making process of his government. One cannot help but ask: Did Najib usurp the authority of the Prime Minister and the cabinet?

Fourth, no open tender has been called for this project. Worst, the decision to award the contract to Gamuda – MMC was made even before prices were known to the government, thus weakening the latter’s bargaining position and throwing the door wide open for collusion and corruption. For a contract of this size, billions of ringgit could easily have been leaked, further burdening the taxpayers. What happened to Abdullah’s promises of open tender, transparency and accountability?

Fifth, it is most improper that the momentous announcement on the official award of this contract with a finalized price should have been left to the contractor, who also doubled up as the spokesman to speak in length to drum up the project’s economic justification, while the government was keeping completely mum? Is it any of the contractor’s business to justify public expenditure to the taxpayers? Shouldn’t that be the responsibility of cabinet ministers? Why have they hidden behind the contractor? Shouldn’t the ministers have appeared in full force to bask in the glory of launching of such a stupendous project, if they really believe it will yield handsome rewards to the people?

Noting the absurd return of this project in relation to its huge capital layout, a series of serious questions beg for answers.

Why did former premier Mahathir Mohammad push for the double-tracking project so urgently, to the extent of clandestinely issuing the letter of offer to Gamuda – MMC only days before he stepped down on 31 Oct 2003? The contract then was for the construction of both the northern Ipoh-Padang sector and the southern Seremban-Johor Bahru sector for a total contract sum of RM 14.5 billion.

Having rightly shelved the project by the new Abdullah cabinet in Dec 2003 due to its low priority, why was it revived in Mar 2007? What was the rationale for its revival? Who made the decision?

Finding no compelling economic or social rationale, what conclusion can we draw other than to attribute the motivation behind this project to the base human instinct of greed – both on the part of giver and recipient of the contract?

Kim Quek.

Note 1: The circumstances under which the double-tracking project was awarded in Oct 2003 (under Mahathir) and shelved in Dec 2003 (under Abdullah) were described in my article listed in Malaysiakini on 17.12.2003 under the title “Double tracking: government back on track”, and also published in my book “Where to, Malaysia?” as Article No. 71.

Note 2: I commented on the revival of the project in Mar 2007 in my article listed in Malsaysiakini on 19.03.2007 under the title “Najib runaway train or Pak Lah Express changes route?”.

大馬政府：印裔“平均收入不窮

2007-12-18T22:34:00.000+08:00

撰文郭華盈
2007/12/18, 週二
馬來西亞的“新經濟政策”（New Economic Policy, NEP）上月中旬遭前歐盟駐大馬大使羅默爾（Thierry Rommel）公然批評而引起爭論後。最近，由於“印裔權益行動委員會”指責大馬政府50年來邊緣化印裔族群，這個議題再度躍上媒體版面。非政府組織“印裔權益行動委員會”申訴，大馬的低下印裔社群，長期面對貧窮、升學機會不足、廟宇被拆等各類社會政治問題，令他們成為邊緣化社群，在扶弱政策中備受忽略。

就著印裔社群是大馬最貧困一群的說法，大馬官方新聞社《馬新社》12月11日刊登了一篇文章反擊。這篇文章專訪了大馬歷史協會執行委員會的主席奧瑪哈欣（Omar Hashim），當中指馬來族才是生活在最低層的一群，華裔與印裔實際上在“新經濟政策”中受惠。奧瑪哈欣以2004年各族的每戶家庭收入統計來反駁，指華裔與印裔平均每月收入分別為馬幣4427與3456，比馬幣2711的馬來裔來得富裕；因此他們才是新經濟政策的受惠者。奧瑪哈欣並不是第一個拿每月家庭收入，來反駁印裔並非大馬最貧困社群的人。

不少執政巫統（UMNO）的領袖也跳出來作出反駁。大馬的國陣聯盟政府向來聲稱平等對待各族，甚至為多元種族和平共處而驕傲。印裔被邊緣化的言論令政府難以接受，也令其覺得在國際社會顔面盡失。要知道，大馬多元宗族融洽相處的實例，還被西方國家視為值得學習的典範。

大馬首相巴達維曾於2006年9月在芬蘭舉行的亞歐峰會上，發表關於不同文明與文化融洽共處的演講。平均收入抹殺族內貧富差異以家庭平均收入企圖證明印裔社群比馬來社群富裕的說法，惹來經濟學家與在野派的駁斥。他們紛紛指出，上述數據完全沒有考慮印裔社群內部的貧富懸殊因素。針對印裔社群比馬來社群富裕，專業人士也比馬來人多的言論，“馬來西亞印裔商業聯合會”（Malaysian Indian Business Association）總會長西華古瑪（P Sivakumar）駁斥，以專業領域以印裔居多為由，否決印裔社會遭邊緣化的言論，並不公平。他解釋，是父母一代的刻苦耐勞以及“淚水和汗水”，才造就了印裔專業人士的成就，而非政府的功勞。

他補充說，在缺乏政府援助的情況下，要獲得良好教育是很難的事情；在前任首相馬哈蒂爾執政的時期，每家國立大學只有一名印裔學生能夠進入醫學系。社會經濟學者林德宜指出，如果族群內的財富分配極度懸殊或不均，那麽家庭平均收入，就不是衡量各族經濟狀況的良好指標。

另一經濟學者查爾斯（Charles Santiago）也不約而同指出，單看家庭平均收入水平和貧窮率，來判斷印裔社會未遭邊緣化，無疑是以偏概全。大馬“亞洲策略及領導院”（Asli）在去年提呈予政府的第9大馬計劃建議中也表示，大部分印裔從國家獨立前開始，就在經濟和政治領域方面被有系統地邊緣化。這份由亞洲策略研究院屬下的公共政策中心（CPPS）發表的報告，題目為《低收入的大馬印裔》。它指出，當局缺乏特定的政策和計劃，以解決印裔族群在城鄉面對的貧困問題。

根據第9大馬計劃的數據，印裔家庭於2004年的平均收入是馬幣3215，而馬來人則是2522。從1999年到2004年，印裔家庭收入的增長率只有 3.5％，而馬來人是4.9％。該研究報告說，“在另一個末端，另外一套社會指標顯示，我國社會正處於貧困之中”，三分之一的印裔沒有自己的房屋，比率較土著和華裔來得高。該研究報告也引述數據說，印裔雖然只佔大馬2600萬人口的7.55萬人，但是其自殺率卻是全國最高的。

另外，也有很多印裔涉及嚴重罪案和私會黨活動而被捕。“先進國家的研究指出，犯罪案和不平等的待遇是有關連的。如果某個群體涉及違法的活動，那說明他們通過正當管道爭取發展的機會很少。

”新經濟政策的源起“新經濟政策” 在1970年誕生，是針對1969年5月的種族流血事件而出台的，其宗旨是“不分種族消除貧窮”與“拉近族群間的財富分配重組社會”。此政策期望通過消除社會經濟不等導致的族群間的不滿，從而製造國民團結的條件。該政策通過偏向馬來人的措施（積極歧視政策），來提升馬來族群與土著的經濟地位。它在工作、教育、商業與其他領域，為超過2600萬的馬來民族提供優惠對待。馬來人佔大馬人口6成，華裔佔約百分之25，印裔佔百分之8。扶貧的努力在馬來裔農民居多的鄉區展開，重組社會目標，特別著重於縮窄馬來人與華人之間的族群間不平等。

“新經濟政策” 推行之初，目標是促使馬來族群在1990年前，擁有國內所有企業30 %的股權。但在年期屆滿後，當家當權的巫統以馬來土著利益仍未得到適當體現為由，多次延長“新經濟政策”的實施年期。而究竟上述目標是否已經實現，仍在爭議中。

新經濟政策在1990年到期後，由1991-2000第二遠景大綱，與較後的2001-2010第三遠景大綱取代。這兩個國家發展計劃雖把重點擺在達到快速增長、工業化與結構改變，但它們還是被視為新經濟政策的延伸，特別是重組社會或重新分配財富的目標。淪為權力集團牟利工具時評人鄭庭河指出，作為解決結構性因素導致的財富分配不均政策的扶弱政策，除了成為保持社會穩定與經濟發展“工具性”措施以外，背後還必須有“社會正義和人權”的崇高精神為基礎。如此一來，扶弱政策才可以正當樹立、持續推行與發揮功效。

鄭庭河指出，在不民主、民智不高的社會，“扶弱政策和很可能被權力集團濫用，成為謀取私利的工具。”社會正義與人權不止無法高舉，更刻意被忽略、遮蔽、顛覆，模糊了原本的價值目的。學者普遍指出，“新經濟政策”有意混淆了馬來西巫的種族與階級分野，在縮少種族間經濟差距的同時，卻擴大了不同階級間的經濟差距，而且造就了一個高踞社會頂層的馬來族官僚資本階級。然而，種族矛盾的表象，卻無法掩蓋階級間的利益衝突這一具有本質意義的社會矛盾。

經濟學家佐摩（Jomo K.S）在一篇為聯合國屬下結構撰寫的論文中指出，“新經濟政策”的兩大目標大致已經達到，不過卻未必達到改善族群間的關係目的，反而製造族群間的不滿與階級間的競爭。他指出，“新經濟政策”及其後的發展政策，影響了企業擁有財富、教育與就業機會等公共政策的制定。換言之，積極歧視政策主要影響了商界與中產階級的關係。

商界與中產階級之間的族群緊張關係，最為尖銳。佐摩表示，80年代開始的私營化計劃的工程合約，完全由政治領袖決定交給誰人完成，招來朋黨主義與尋租方面的批評。這樣的發放私營化計劃方式，鞏固了領導人的權勢，進而鼓勵黨職與官職，以及提升社會和經濟地位的競爭。1997年至1998年間的金融風暴後，大馬被指選擇性拯救私人或官聯企業，這更進一步強化上述傾向。“獲得政府分配工程合約或商機的馬來商人，通常把工程交給擁有資金與技術的華商完成。這樣的‘阿里巴巴’式合作關係，累計不少不滿。” 因此，他指出，馬來西亞有必要尋找替代方案來改善族群關係。

Forum:'Prices are going up.Where are we gong'

2007-12-15T10:45:00.000+08:00

WHERE TO, PAK LAH?

2007-12-15T10:19:00.000+08:00

Who in his wildest dream would have imagined Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi’s (Pak Lah) promised land of reforms pledged in the last election in 2004 could so dramatically degenerated into a virtual police state on the eve of the next election?

Yes, the ridiculous spectacle of arrest of opposition party and civic leaders (who only wanted to present a petition) in a Parliament house that was completely sealed off by police road blocks in the absence of any threats of attacks is indeed one that exudes the image of a police state.

This spectacle was rendered even more ridiculous when the petition was a noble mission to persuade the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional (BN) from rushing through a wanton alteration of the Constitution for political expediency – amending Article 114 of the Constitution to extend the retirement age of the chairman of election commission (EC) from 65 to 66, so as to enable the discredited and pro-BN chairman Rashid Rahman (due for mandatory retirement at 65 on Dec 31) to helm the coming election.
On the same day of these arrests, Dec 11, the headquarters of main opposition party PAS was cordoned off by police so as to prevent leaders of the party from going to Parliament House to present the petition. Where on earth can you find a democratic country indulging in such high-handed acts of contempt of democratic principles and such uninhibited abuse of police force? What a big slap on the face of the Prime Minister, who only days before shamelessly declared to the world through an article in the Asian Wall Street Journal (Dec 7) what glorious democracy Malaysia had been practicing!

FRANTIC REPRESSION
To get a further view of the state of repression this country has descended to, I will list briefly relevant events that took place recently, in reversed chronologic order:

Dec 11: Arrests in Parliament and cordoning of PAS headquarters as stated above.

Dec 9: International human rights day. Arrest of Bar Council human rights committee chairman for preventing government officials from removing a human rights banner in the premises of the Bar Council. Arrest of lawyers and activists who were walking in a small group toward the Bar Council premises in celebration of International human rights day, after the Bar Council had cancelled its annual human rights walk under pressure from the government.

Dec 9: Scores of activists including opposition party leaders were arrested in different parts of the country for participating in the Nov 10 rally organized by BERSIH – a movement supported by opposition parties and NGOs to campaign for free and fair elections.

Nov 25: Hindra rally of 30,000 in the streets of Kuala Lumpur to protest against marginalization of ethnic Indians due to racial discrimination under the “New Economic Policy” (NEP). The demonstrators were brutally suppressed with endless volley of tear gas canisters, chemically laced water cannons and beating with batons by police. Subsequently 31 ethnic Indians were arrested and charged for attempted murder for wounding a policeman; and leaders of Hindra - an ethnic Indian rights movement - were arrested and charged.

Nov 10: BERSIH rally of 40,000 in Kuala Lumpur to present a petition to the King requesting for electoral reforms. The marchers were confronted by police blockades and chased around by riot squats using tear gas, chemically laced water cannons and batons.

In an apparent attempt to exonerate himself from accusation of reckless repression, Pak Lah said in a speech on Dec 10: “If the choice is between public safety and public freedom, I do not hesitate to say here that public safety will always win.” He alluded to demonstrators as law-breakers who threatened public safety and vowed to apply the dreaded Internal Security Act if necessary.

But what blatant lies these assertions are, when there is not a shred of evidence to indicate there has been any intent, act or weaponry of violence on the part of participants throughout these assemblies. In fact these protesters should be commended for having exhibited exemplary conduct of discipline and self-restraints, particularly when subjected to harsh treatment from the police. There was no violent clash, safe in the Batu Cave temple incident in the early hours of Dec 25 when large crowd of Hindu worshippers and participants were locked in and subjected to endless attacks of tear gas and water canons.

REBUKE FROM SUHAKAM
In a statement in apparent rebuttal to the Prime Minister’s wild accusation of “threats to public safety”, the Chairman of Suhakam, which is Malaysia’s Human Rights Commission, said:
“The possibility of public disorder should be based on evidence, not speculation or imagination.
“Suhakam regrets the government had ignored its repeated call to repeal the law requiring permits for public assemblies and processions. In London you can hold peaceful assemblies and the police are around to prevent public disorder. But here a group needs a permit even to present a memorandum.
“Suhakam wants Section 27 of the Police Act 1967 (which requires a police permit for an assembly of more than three) repealed, because it goes against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and appears to be inconsistent with the spirit of the Federal Constitution.” (Star Dec 12).

A Suhakam statement further said:
“Currently, it appears that arrests and prosecutions are selective and seemingly biased. Suhakam calls on the authorities to respect and uphold the law and to implement it equally as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Federal Constitution. Suhakam regrets that many of its recommendations remain unheeded, and this has not enhanced our national human rights status.” (Malaysiakini Dec 12)

It should be clear from the foregoing who the villains are in these shameful episodes of trampling of the people’s constitutional rights.

PARANOID REFLEXES?
Why would Pak Lah and his cabinet resort to such dastardly acts that have put Malaysia to shame? I venture to suggest two main reasons.

FIRST, Abdullah’s government has been rocked by endless series of mega scandals of corruption and abuse of power since early this year. These included the grisly Mongolian murder with links to top political hierarchy; dubious commissions that run into hundreds of millions paid in respect of purchases of submarines and fighter jets respectively; the almost simultaneous investigations of the top three crime-busters – deputy minister of home security, inspector general of police and former anti-corruption agency chief; the inflated spending of RM 4.6 billion to create a “Ghost Town” in Port Klang; the inflated RM 6.75 billion naval vessel contract that ran foul; the auditor general’s report that reveals pervasive corruption in the millions that run right across the full spectrum of the entire government; and the recent Lingam video clip that exposes judicial rot of the worst kind.

Any of the above scandals would have dealt a fatal blow to any democratic country, but in Malaysia, thanks to collusion of local press and TV, these are largely hidden from the masses. However, with increasing influence exerted by critics through a growing Internet, the government is beginning to feel the heat of critical public opinion. Needless to say, the regime’s popular support will change in inverse proportion to the spread of public knowledge of the ruling coalition’s incompetence and corruption.

Economic hardships caused by spiraling inflation in an uncompetitive economy help to fester growing dissatisfaction against a leadership that is increasingly exposed as one which feathers its own nests through abuses of the NEP. The latter is supposed to be an affirmative policy but has been illegitimately hijacked by UMNO to enrich its elites in the name of helping the Malay race. These abuses, built on racial discriminations, have in turn heightened resentment among minority races as well as accentuating class conflicts due to widening disparity of wealth. To cling to power, UMNO has to depend on a manipulated electoral system as pillar to its political hegemony. This is why it is so determined to retain current EC chairman Rashid Rahman’s service, to the extent of amending the social contract of the founding fathers of this country – the Constitution.

And so, when tens of thousands of people threaten to amass in the streets to demand for fair elections (by BERSIH) or protest against racial marginalization (by Hindra), UMNO has reasons to feel panicky. What if these crowds swell to over a hundred thousand? What if news of the evil deeds of the regime spread like wild fire through word of mouth among the disgruntled masses? As UMNO’s popularity wanes, would it implode in the midst of worsening internal power struggle? Or would it be deserted by its racial hangers-on who have been scrounging on UMNO’s power, but whose roles as champions of their own racial groups are increasingly untenable in the light of UMNO’s recent surge in racial arrogance and dominance under the competitive influence of Pak Lah’s ambitious son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin?

These nagging thoughts are fair assumptions, judging from the paranoia displayed by UMNO in clamping down so recklessly and insanely on any public expression of dissent.

SECOND, Pak Lah seemed to have been emboldened by the favourable findings of a recent opinion poll commissioned by the UMNO owned New Straits Times, judging from his recent smugness at the poll results and the sudden tightening of the police noose on the opposition of late. The spin doctors and sycophants who have insulated him from the real world might have convinced him that it is safe and timely to strike as hard a blow as possible against the opponents irrespective of what the Constitution prescribes, given the supposed unswerving support of the people.

CAUTION TO PAK LAH
A word of caution for Pak Lah here. Since when is opinion poll in a highly repressed state like Malaysia taken seriously? Democracies like US or Australia which practices exemplary democracy can rely on opinion poll to predict electoral outcome to the nearest percent or two. But haven’t we noticed that opinion polls on political support are rarely conducted in countries in Africa, middle east, the former Soviet Union and large parts of Asia? Why? It is simply because the people there have been so repressed that few would feel at ease to give honest answers openly, especially those answers deemed unfavourable to the ruling power. The same goes with Malaysia, where long entrenched political culture of submission under threats and inherent fear of punitive consequences will preclude any meaningful results from such an opinion poll. Taking this into consideration, it is safe to assume that there will be a large margin of error in favour of the ruling power, if at all such a poll is conducted.

A case in point was the opinion poll conducted by the Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research in 2004 when Pak Lah won a sweeping electoral victory. Though his popularity rating then was found to be 91% by Merdeka Centre, his coalition BN could only garner 64% of the popular votes. Projecting this trend onto his present popularity rating at, say 70%, that could mean he may only garner 49% of the popular votes for BN, a prospect not at all comfortable for the mighty and haughty UMNO/BN.

Regardless what the true level of Pak Lah’s popular support is, he will be well advised to stand on the right side of history by honouring his oath of allegiance to the country and the Constitution. For any betrayal of his oath of allegiance, such as the rampant violation of the constitutional rights of the people as is being committed now may bring misfortune to himself and his party in due course, as truth will eventually triumph. By then, his name will be defiled in eternity.

Kim Quek

工廠3害,鐵粉,異味,噪音擾民

2007-12-14T12:01:00.000+08:00

古來）古來沙令成業花園附近一間鐵工廠被指散發鐵粉、異味及噪音，嚴重影響附近居民的健康與生活起居。
該花園區的楊志騰（37歲）指出，他居住在該花園約10年，隨著這家工廠在一年多前，在其住宅後面的商店開設廠房後，他們居家的環境嚴重受污染。
他說，這間廠不時傳來焊鐵的噪音，加上鐵粉的散發及異味，讓他們苦不堪言，特別是他6歲大的女兒，近一年多來幾乎都因為氣管疾病而進出醫院，他們全家也不時會患上傷風、咳嗽等與支氣管相關的疾病。
“醫生在問診時，一直問我們住的環境是不是很差；我女兒進醫院所索取的保費，連保險公司都怕了我們。”
他指出，曾經向有關方面投訴，包括衛生部，但相關部門表示沒有問題，於是他只好向人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強投訴。

工廠老板稱將解決問題

劉順強表示，其實他在1年前曾經接獲相關的投訴，並曾經致電該工廠的老板，有關老板聲稱將解決相關的問題，並搬遷到其他地區。
“我今早致電古來市議會投訴後，市議會表示將採取行動；我今午再次致電相關老板，老板說該廠經在前兩天將生產部分搬遷到其他地區，以期減少對居民的干擾。”

他表示，其實與住家毗鄰的商店並不適宜作為鐵工廠，有關業者應將相關行業搬遷至小型工廠地帶，更何況根據當局的條令，在工作時間以外的時段，工廠不允許發出超過60分貝的噪音。
他希望，當局能認真監督古來或各區，特別是未掛上招牌的商店，是否進行將導致環境受污染的行業。

Bersih memorandum to Parliament

2007-12-11T23:43:00.000+08:00

抗议修宪续聘选委会主席,23人被捕

Tian Chua Arrested At Malaysian Parliament

公正黨新山講座會講座會

2007-12-11T09:48:00.000+08:00

沒有必要逮捕蔡添強

2007-12-10T23:35:00.000+08:00

人民公正黨全國副總秘書羅志昌指警方的逮捕行動是無理的，因為警方可以傳召這些人士到警察局作筆錄，而相關人士都會配合，沒有必要展開氣氛緊張的行動。

他週日（9日）晚上在新山一場講座會上說：“警方要資料，蔡添強自會配合，根本不需要來新山捉他，而且警方逮捕他的方式很粗野。”另一方面，蔡添強的父親週日晚上9時許致電羅志昌，向對方瞭解兒子的情況。由於羅志昌當時正在講座會上演講，因此他把手機交給人民公正黨柔佛州副主席劉順強接聽。

劉順強說，蔡添強的父親只是打來瞭解兒子的情況，並安排友人前來士姑來拿取兒子的車子，以駕回馬六甲。他說，蔡添強週日下午5時30分曾傳送了一則手機短訊給他，告知自己身在士姑來警局，並會被押返吉隆坡。蔡添強過後又傳來一則短訊，要求劉順強安排律師到士姑來警察局.-星洲日報

新山訊）人民公正黨全國宣傳局主任蔡添強原本週日（9日）晚上出席一項講座會，詎料卻在講座會開始前的兩個小時被警方逮捕，使得主辦單位只好找來全國副總秘書羅志昌頂替，並在講座會前播放一段蔡添強被捕的影像，以及在他的名卡上添加了“剛被捉”3個字。
由柔佛州人民公正黨舉行的講座會是於晚上7點半開始，講座會分為兩個部分，第一個部分是由主修區域經濟學的中國人民大學碩士吳以倫負責，他的講題是《從深圳看依斯干達》，而羅志昌則代替蔡添強主講《大集會的反思》。
60位民眾出席講座會共吸引逾60位民眾參與。蔡添強是於週日下午5點，在人民之聲柔佛州分會設於士姑來的會所前被捕。事發前，他剛剛主講完一場講座會.-光明日報

蔡添強被捕

2007-12-10T19:17:00.000+08:00

人民公正黨全國宣傳局主任蔡添強因為11月10日參與了在吉隆坡舉行一項非法集會，週日（9日）下午在新山主講一場講座會後即被4名警方人員逮捕。警方是援引警察法令第27項條文，即涉及非法集會，而逮捕蔡添強。除了蔡添強外，警方週日也逮捕回教黨副主席莫哈末沙布、莫哈末阿斯里和莫哈末哈里斯，使到因參與乾淨與公平選舉聯盟（Bersih）於11月10日所舉辦之大集會而被捕的人士增加到14名。

消息說，這14人當中有一些曾在大集會當天被捕，他們過後獲得口頭保釋外出。警方在他們保釋期週日期滿後，決定重新逮捕他們。莫哈末阿斯里和莫哈末哈里斯的身份暫時不詳。
該黨古來區部主席劉順強說，蔡添強於週日晚上在新山原本還有另一場由公正黨舉辦的演講；蔡添強在演講後即接到消息，指吉隆坡有兩名回教黨領袖被捕，因而預料自己可能週日晚上也會被捕。劉順強說，蔡添強是於下午5時13分被帶往士姑來警局，然後押返吉隆坡。蔡添強較早的演講內容圍繞在最近發生的兩次大集會.

高通膨對經濟的影響-講座會

2007-12-10T12:32:00.000+08:00

Forum:
'Prices are going up.Where are we gong'
Kenaikan Harga barang!Dimana Silapnya
高通膨對經濟的影響-阿根廷借鏡-講座會

Tarikh:14/12/07(Jumaat)

Masa:7:30-10:30pm

Penceramah(主講人):
Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim(Setiausaha Agong PKR)
丹斯里卡立依布拉辛(人民公黨正總秘書)

William Leong(Bendahari Agong PKR)
梁自堅律師(人民公正黨總財政)

Din Merican(Pengarah Program PKR)

Venue:Hotel Crystal Crown
地點:新山世紀花園晶冠酒店

Masuk Percuma.
入場免費,請踴躍出席

聯絡:劉順強SK LIEW0197553486,陳仁明YM TAN:0197184052

柔人民公正黨將競選7國12州

2007-12-08T10:11:00.000+08:00

東甲人民公正黨飲茶論政

2007-12-08T10:08:00.000+08:00

三萬印裔大馬公民請願後續：電台主持支持行動遭開除

2007-12-07T10:44:00.000+08:00

撰文郭華盈 -亞洲時報
2007/12/06, 週四
馬來西亞印裔社群日前動員三萬人上街、抗議遭邊緣化後，策劃大集會的“印裔權益行動委員會”（Hindu Rights Action Force, Hindraf）派遣代表到印度求助，並獲得印度外交部長與總理對大馬印裔社群處境表達關注，令事件迅速轉升級為國際社會關注的議題。值得注意的是，委員會放棄向代表當地印裔的執政聯盟成員“馬來西亞印度國大黨”（Malaysian Indian Congress）求助，卻派遣代表展開國際行程，訪問倫敦、聯合國、歐洲與美國，申述大馬印裔社群的困境，企圖贏得國際社會支持，發聲向大馬政府施壓。他們成功令歐盟輪任主席國葡萄牙的總理蘇格拉底開腔，在新聞發布會上提及大馬印裔社群狀況。

“印裔權益行動委員會”也致信英國首相布朗，要求插手大馬印裔社群被“滅族”事件。“印裔權益行動委員會”於11月25日號召印裔走上首都吉隆坡街頭，試圖向英國最高專員署提呈請願書，要求英女王委派御用律師，免費為在150年前遭英殖民地政府剝削的印裔先輩申冤，索取4兆美元的賠償。大馬的印裔公民大部分是印度的泰米爾族人，在英殖民時期，被英國人從印度南部帶到該國發展當地經濟。大集會未獲得警方發出准證，參與示威的群眾遭受警方以水炮和催淚彈驅散。大集會後的一周內，聯盟政府閣員與人民代議士，紛紛譴責大集會破壞國家安寧與治安；聲援集會群眾的聲音，也出現在網絡媒體、博客、一些英文報章與中文報章上。

雖然警方逮捕示威者，總檢察長又親自提控集會者企圖謀殺和破壞公物等罪名，然而，三萬印裔上街公開宣洩不滿與憤慨的事件，並沒有因此而畫上句號。政府宣佈成立特別委員會研究印裔社群問題，似乎也無法阻止草根印裔社群把不滿情緒燃燒至海外。“印裔終於發出心底憤怒”國內外民間組織與個別人士，紛紛對印裔社群被邊緣化狀況表達看法。
一位在大馬居住了17年的斯里蘭卡女詩人，不久前接受印度孟買一家報章訪問時，聲稱大馬實行的是“種族隔離”政策。另一位在英國牛津大學修讀博士學位、大馬出生的印裔學人阿納提（Anathi），則在一封公開信中指出，儘管她並不認同“印裔權益行動委員會”提出的滅族論，但她完全瞭解印裔社群為何走上街頭，也很欣慰草根印裔社群終於把埋藏在心底的憤怒發出來。阿納提在信中寫道：“那是關於被忽視，那是關於無法在談判桌上平起平坐跟人討價還價，那是關於不可信賴甚至於可恥的國家與族群領導人。”阿納提說出了走上街頭和沒有走上街頭的印裔社群，不願意繼續成為被遺忘與邊緣化的馬來西亞人的心聲。

大馬印裔佔了2600萬人口中的7%。本地非政府組織“公民關懷組織”（Group of Concerned Citizens），也呼籲執政的“國陣聯盟”誠心傾聽人民的心聲。該組織協調員阿魯慕甘（K Arumugam）說，首相巴達維才聲稱有一雙“大耳朵”能夠聽到人民的不滿，隔天（12月1日）就對印裔社群指印裔備受欺壓的言論表示極度生氣，他對此感到不解。 “首相發出這樣的言論是荒謬的，他必須藉著自己的‘大耳朵’，走進街頭親自視察窮人的情況，無論是印度人、華人還是馬來人，並聆聽他們的心聲。”在集會前10天，“印裔權益行動委員會”法律顧問烏泰雅古瑪（P.Uthayakumar）致信英國首相布朗，要求他插手馬來西亞印裔社群遭受大馬政府“種族清洗” （ethnic cleansing）或“滅族”的問題。
信函內容指大馬政府對印裔族群犯下了四宗暴行。第一宗是在甘榜美丹（Kampung Medan）的暴力行動中，至少100名印裔人士被攻擊，其中6人被殺害。其二，許多扣留者在扣留期間死亡，其中60%為印裔。其三，每三個星期就有一所印度教廟宇被拆毀。其四，政府在錄取印裔學生進入公立大學、技術培訓學院與政府機構等方面，實行歧視政策。
這封向布朗控訴大馬政府“暴行”的信函，在11月25日大集會過後曝光。它恰巧寫在沙亞南一所印度教廟宇被強行拆毀，執法人員與捍衛廟宇的村民發生肢體沖突當天。一般相信，大部分參與和支持11月25日大集會的人士，對這封信函一無所知。

巴達維對這封“遲來”的滅族言論“冒火”，指責“印裔權益行動委員會”無中生有，企圖製造宗教與種族間的仇恨、引起騷亂。大馬執政聯盟由14 個政黨組成，其中的主要政黨為代表馬來裔的巫統（United Malays National Organization，UMNO）、華裔的“馬華公會”與“民政黨”、代表印裔的“馬來西亞印度國大黨”。被指責不平等對待印裔的執政“巫統”領袖，一個接一個站出來抨擊“印裔權益行動委員會”。不過，並非所有執政聯盟的領袖都持同樣立場。在聯盟政府裏代表華裔的“馬華公會”與“民政黨”的領袖，都站出來“仗義執言”。唯獨聯盟裏代表印裔社群的“馬來西亞印度國大黨”領袖三美維魯（Samy Vellu）一再聲言，聯盟政府不曾待薄印裔，他們也不曾被邊緣化。印裔大集會一周後，當地一些英文與中文報章的評論文章中，雖都不認同滅族論，卻不乏聲援印裔社群的聲音。

大馬政府指示媒體低調報道鑑於印裔社群被邊緣化議題獲國內一些組織與個別人士積極回應，甚至開始獲得國際媒體關注，大馬政府指示國內媒體，低調處理相關新聞。一如面對其他涉及種族與宗教的議題，巴達維領導的聯盟政府向來採取的手段，都不是正面回應與解決問題，而是把可能展現在大眾媒體裏的聲音“和諧”掉，即指示國內媒體低調報道，企圖不讓閱聽人對事件有全面的認知與瞭解。

網上媒體《當今大馬》昨日（12月5日）報道說，掌握印刷媒體生死大權的國內安全部，前日再度召見各語文報章的編輯，指示低調報道所有有關“印裔權益行動委員會”，以及即將再次舉行的“乾淨與公正選舉聯盟”（淨選盟，Bersih）集會新聞。報道指出，圖文並茂大篇幅報道印裔大集會的泰米爾語報章，成為了國安部“勸告”的首當其衝對象。《當今大馬》引述消息來源指出，國安部下達了三道指令：（一）不得以圖片或新聞方式，正面突顯“印裔權益行動委員會” ；（二）相反的，必須正面突顯警方和政府對大集會的處理，不得指控警方動用暴力；以及（三）不得為“淨選盟”未來所號召的大集會作宣傳。

不僅如此，《當今大馬》也報道，國營泰米爾語電台Minnal FM有多名主持人，包括一些極受歡迎的七位主持人，都遭到內部紀律處分，理由是他們參與11月25日大集會，又或在廣播時段大肆宣傳大集會和“印裔權益行動委員會”。該網站指出，有數名主持人遭開除，一些則被凍結職務。該電台共有20名全職主持人。政府在印裔大集會兩天後，宣佈成立特別委員會，而聯盟政府裏代表印裔的印度國大黨，被指派研究印裔社群面對的問題。國會下議院在野黨領袖林吉祥一語點破：“（巫統）把球踢給國大黨。”印度國大黨領袖三美維魯任政府閣員已有28年，既然他至今仍也無能力說服掌實權的巫統，解決低下階層印裔社群面臨的生活貧困、文化、高輟學率與犯罪率等問題，那麼，再成立三五個委員會也無濟於事。誠如“公民關懷組織”所言，印度國大黨當家不當權，它“甚至連把一分錢放進印度人的口袋的權力都沒有” 。

這個非政府組織強調，集會群眾是貧窮階級，也是馬來西亞人，而協助貧困階級並不只是印度國大黨的責任，而是政府的責任。它建議聯邦政府通過政策、機制和計劃來解決問題。感受嚴重被邊緣化的印裔集會群眾，大部分來自種植園丘的泰米爾草根族群。在公共領域服務達30年的約翰（K.J. John）指出，印裔社群走上街頭，或許正是 “缺乏社會認同與個人尊嚴被否定”的典型例子。
約翰指出，在馬來西亞的大規模工業化過程中，種植業不再是印裔社群當年的保護罩傘。在英殖民時期，在橡膠園或棕油園裏工作的印裔，雖然生活只夠溫飽，卻擁有固定的住所、泰米爾語學校與膜拜的廟宇。他們對這片土地擁有歸屬感。然而，當園丘被開發成住宅區域工業區，種植業勞力又被外國廉價勞工取代，失去工作的印裔社群在國家發展轉換過程中，已失去了依據的地方，也失去對傳統生活方式的掌握。迷失在價值觀快速遞變、生活成本遞增的他們，不僅無所適從，甚至貧困交加。

作者注：甘榜美丹位於八打靈再也南區， 7成居民是馬來裔， 2成印裔，另外1成華裔。它是一個處於大都會吉隆坡與其他城市夾縫中的鄉鎮，沒有完善水電供應，衛生條件欠佳。

恢復地方選舉,讓人民當老闆

2007-12-07T10:34:00.000+08:00

人民公正党古来区部主席刘顺强发表文告，对于武吉巴都区国阵州议员张震亮终于对武吉巴都新村油棕厂排放污水及废弃物，严重污染并影响村民生活的事件采取必要行动，表示这才是州议员应该做的。虽然每次都是在在野党揭发一些事情后，国阵国州议员才会加以关注，但是，这总比没有好，因此，刘顺强表示，如果张震亮需要他的协助，他将义不容辞给予配合，以期尽快协助村民免除环境污染的梦魇。

刘顺强强调，关心民瘼，身体力行，先天下之忧而忧，本来就是民选代议士的天职，千万不应在老百姓受苦后，还蒙然不知。过去4年来，本区许多的民生问题，如果不是在野党监督，恐怕人民的生活会更加困难。由于地方政府是由执政党委任，地方议员/市议员没有经过选举的洗礼，造成此类官委议员无须认真服务老百姓，只需得过且过的执行任务，散漫的态度应付日常工作，因此，许多地方上的问题都没有及时获得解决，往往需要在野党发现、揭发，或者人民群起反对后，才又花费更多公帑去解决，可谓劳民又伤财。

其实，人民公正党不止一次的重申，地方政府必须由人民直选，地方上才会有有效率、为人民服务的地方议会。此外，无论哪一个政党执政，都必须有另外一批人监督，而且人民一定要紧记，在民主的国家，各层级政府（包括中央、州及地方），都只是由人民选出，以便在五年内，为人民（老板）管理这个国家/州/地方。因此，当这些代议士没有做事，人民有绝对的权利要求，甚至教训他们；反之，如果他们执行了任务，人民当然可以赞赏，但绝对不是感激或感恩，因为那本来就是他们的职责，人民已通过缴税，付予他们应得的报酬。

刘顺强说，他过去4年来，在武吉巴都区，甚至整个古来国会选区，一次又一次的率领居民，揭发一个又一个的地方政府因效率不彰，甚至因官商勾结而产生的环保、污染、浪费公帑、规划欠妥、行政效率等等的问题，深深感觉到人民的疾苦。长期以来，柔佛州议会没有在野党议员监督、古来市议会（包括未来的古来再也县议会）也将长期以官委制度管理，本区人民长期受到不透明、缺乏效率、贪污、腐败的国阵政府宰制，实在是痛彻心扉。

刘顺强认为，如果来届大选继续让国阵的议员，无论是马华或民政党的议员当选本区代议士，上述情况将会持续下去，那么人民必须继续忍受过去数十年面对的问题。因此，他呼吁本区选民，敢于提出改变，让州议会里也有一些在野党议员代表人民监督政府，让更多人监督地方议会，尤其是古来市议会/古来再也县议会，那么，人民才有可能过更好的生活。如果人民有意愿一举让全国的地方议会由人民直选，那么，选民必须团结一致，让人民公正党执政，因为本党已经承诺，如果执政，将恢复实行地方议会民选制，让人民真正的参与管理这个国家。

政治與經濟講座會

2007-12-06T09:36:00.000+08:00

日前公選盟萬人大集會要求干淨選舉及與兴都权益委员会（HINDRAF ）申诉印度社群150 年处于边缘困境万人大集会, 事件引发各界关注, 為此柔州人民公正黨將於本月9 日, 主辦政治經濟講座會.

日期:09/12/07

政治講座:

地點: 新山世纪花园晶冠酒店(HOTEL CYSTEL GROWN)

時間: 晚上7:30-10:00

主講人: 人民公正黨全國宣傳主任蔡添強.

題目:2 大集會的反思

經濟講座

主講人: 北京人民大學吴以伦硕士

題目: 从深圳经验看柔南经济特区

吴以伦个人简历 : 宽柔中学，新纪元学院, 中国人民大学商学院本科，中国人民大学公共管理学院研究生, 擅长领域: 城市经济学、产业经济学、区域经济学、城市管理、城市交通, 曾参与2005 年北京市城市规划修编工作, 研究生论文曾获得中国人民大学优秀硕士论文奖

入場免費, 請踴躍出席. 有意者可聯絡劉順強0197553486, 陳仁明:0197184052

Seminar Memaju Kemenangan PRU12.柔州人民公正党大选工作营

2007-12-03T11:50:00.000+08:00

柔州人民公正党主办大选工作营,来自不同区部120党员出席.
大选工作营主要是培训党员在来届大选所要准备的工作及面对的问题.

武吉巴都新村投诉 ,疑棕油厂残渣飘异味

2007-11-30T23:01:00.000+08:00

（古来29日讯）武吉巴都新村村民近来经常闻到异味，经过村民及公正党古来区部主席刘顺强的实地考察，异味来源极有可能是1公里外棕油厂处理棕油残渣排放的气味。

最近3个月来，武吉巴都新村每逢上午及晚上即弥漫一股酸臭味，村民相信酸臭味的来源是与该新村遥遥相隔约1公里的棕油厂，自从该棕油厂于今年5月31日搬来拉央拉央新厂房后，村民即经常闻到异味。约千户居民受到影响。
刘顺强今早在1位村民的陪同下带领记者穿越大片油棕园，追查异味的源头，并实地了解棕油厂与武吉巴都新村的距离。

刘顺强在记者会上表示，他在过去数个星期接获村民的投诉，指新搬来的棕油厂又排出异味，造成空气污染，他于上个月联络该厂负责人，厂方表示将会调查污染的原因。

厂方将找出污染原因
“棕油厂负责人声称新厂与武吉巴都新村距离很远，污染情况不会太严重，不过，厂方将会找出污染的原因。”

他指出，虽然棕油厂与武吉巴都新村相隔一大片油棕园，实际的距离只有1公里，如果棕油厂排出异味，极有可能影响到武吉巴都新村。不过，根据他的实地调查，其中一个异味的来源相信是经过发酵处理后的棕油残渣，有关棕油残渣在发酵池发酵后，通过输送管输送到油棕园充当有机肥料，村民闻到的异味可能是棕油残渣发出的。

刘顺强表示，他将再度联络厂方与柔佛州环境局，希望尽快解决臭味污染的问题。

大馬警方驅散印度裔示威者

2007-11-26T16:45:00.000+08:00

BBC中文網報道，馬來西亞警方周日（25日）在吉隆玻與舉行抗議集會的印度裔示威者發生衝突。
馬來西亞警方試圖用催淚彈和高壓水炮，將聚集在英國駐吉隆玻最高專員公署外的五千多名示威者驅散。警方表示，已逮捕參與這次非法集會的人員約136人，年齡在20至25歲之間。有5名員警在執行任務時受傷，7輛警車被毀壞，一輛巴士被示威者拋汽油彈燒毀。
示威者表示，英國在一個世紀前將印度人送往馬來西亞充當合同勞工，現在他們要求英國對這些勞工的後代作出賠償。這些示威者還要求馬來西亞當局改善印度裔居民的生活水平。
至少有5000印度裔馬來西亞人周日聚集在吉隆玻地標建築——雙子塔大樓下面示威，示威者揮舞著馬來西亞國旗和抗議標語牌。
抗議組織者承諾示威活動將和平舉行，但馬來西亞當局禁止這次抗議集會的舉行，擔心示威將給種族緊張關係火上加油。吉隆玻警方從清晨開始與集會支持者對峙長達8個小時，最後警方展開逮捕行動，終於把人驅散。
這次集會的主要目的是敦促英國政府給那些在19世紀被送往馬來西亞充當合同勞工的印度人後裔支付多達4萬億美元（兩萬億英鎊）的賠償。這批印度勞工的後裔目前約有200萬人。
但BBC駐吉隆玻記者說，這次集會抗議的真正目的是為了讓當局解決馬來西亞的印度裔公民目前所受到的不公平待遇。馬來西亞政府否認對印度裔人士存在不公平的對待。
印度裔族群是馬來西亞最大的少數裔族群。集會組織者說，不少印度裔居民生活在赤貧中，部分原因是馬來西亞政府實行對馬來裔穆斯林族群提供更好的就業和經濟利益的政策。
馬來西亞政治家說，印度裔人士被當作三等公民對待。印度裔社區人士已在默默忍受中度過了幾十年。

兴都权益委员会大集会遭武力驱散的新闻

2007-11-25T20:41:00.000+08:00

Hindraf Peaceful Assembly d.i.y music video:

Al Jazeera Hindraf Protest Rally - 25 Nov 2007

King must act in Election Commission appointment

2007-11-23T10:21:00.000+08:00

Almost by stealth, the government has just quietly introduced a constitutional amendment that will have an important impact on Malaysia’s course of history.

On Nov 20, minister Nazri Abdul Aziz tabled for first reading the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2007 that seeks to extend the retirement age of members of election commission (EC) from 65 to 66. This bill will be tabled for second and third reading on Dec 11.

This lightning move to amend the constitution is obviously to enable current EC chairman Rashid Rahman - due for mandatory retirement on coming Dec 31 when he reaches 65 - to preside over a critical general election that may take place soon.

Rashid is a virtual UMNO functionary, having faithfully served to advance the political fortunes of UMNO led coalition Barisan Nasional through unabashed gerrymandering at every constituency re-delineation exercise in the past few decades. Our memories are still vivid of his shameful conduct as EC chairman in the Ijok by-election in April 2007 – an election so scandalized that it rendered election Malaysian style meaningless. Apart from committing every election sin imaginable in that by-election, BN’s open and massive bribery - spending tens of millions of public funds on a constituency of only 12,000 voters in a matter of days prior to polling – was virtually crying out for punishment. And yet, in the face of such blatant challenge to his authority, EC chairman Rashid not only fail to blow the penalty whistle as an umpire should, but instead had abetted the crime by endorsing such bribery as legitimate government expenses.

The mammoth street rally in Kuala Lumpur on Nov 10 to hand over a petition for electoral reforms to the King was the culmination of accumulated frustration and despair at the hopelessly biased electoral system that has gone from bad to worse, for which Rashid must bear major responsibility.

EC NEUTRALITY IMPERATIVE

Democracy cannot exist without elections. Similarly, a country with a critically defective election system that heavily favours one contestant to the deprivation of its opponent is not a democracy, for the simple reason that the winner is a fake. Such a fake does not represent the will of the majority – the very definition of democracy.

For the electoral system to work, it is imperative that EC remains neutral. For this reason, EC has been accorded the same degree of independence as the judiciary, by having its members’ terms of service decided by Parliament. Once appointed by the King, a EC member cannot be removed without going through the same elaborate process as that for the removal of a judge – by a tribunal appointed by the King.

In fact, our Constitution has shown even greater respect to the independent status of EC by having its members appointed by the King without the mandatory “advice” by the prime minister as in the case of appointment of judges. This ensures that the appointee is not obligated to the Exeuctive. In the appointment of chairman and members of EC, all the King needs to do is to consult the Conference of Rulers and to ensure that individuals so selected enjoy public confidence” (Article 114 of the Constitution).

Hence, there is enough constitutional protection to allow the EC to operate in comfort and security as an independent institution free from interference from the incumbent political power. There is certainly no justification for Rashid to adopt the mentality of being subservient to the Executive as revealed in his interview with Malaysiakini listed on 10th Oct 2003. When asked whether EC was meant to be an independent body, Rashid answered: “ No, never ever. You look at the constitution, what does it say? That there shall be a commission that enjoys the public confidence. It does not say ‘an independent commission’”.

With such mentality, is there any wonder why EC has always been regarded as an indispensable instrument to perpetuate the political hegemony of UMNO?

And without an impartial EC, how can we ensure that the power to rule is vested with the people and not hijacked by the entrenched incumbent?

Rashid’s impending retirement has offered the nation a golden opportunity to kick start serious reforms in our electoral system. We therefore appeal to the King to exercise his power to appoint a new chairman that truly commands public confidence who can detach the EC from the clutches of the ruling party. For that, we respectfully suggest that the King should not confine his consideration to only the prime minister’s candidate, but would also cast his sight over the wide spectrum of civil society to select the most suitable person, on whose leadership much of our hope on restoration of democracy depends.

TRIVIALISING THE CONSTITUTION

Turning now to the impending constitutional amendment, the present attempt by UMNO to trivialize the Constitution through gun-shot amendment for political expediency must be deplored in the strongest language. Today, we are asked to approve an overnight constitutional amendment to accommodate Rashid. What if a future EC chairman has fallen out of favour - another lightning constitutional amendment to cut short his service?

UMNO must be reminded that the Constitution is the solemn agreement cementing the consensus reached among the country’s founding fathers who represent various racial and religious factions. It should not be lightly altered. Where alteration is desirable and inevitable, it should only be done with consensus after the widest consultation possible, so as to preserve societal harmony.

For this reason, the constitutions of democracies are rarely amended. Take the case of US. In its 231 year history, it has only amended the constitution 27 times (mostly single amendment), the last being in 1992. And in Singapore, which has similar historical background as Malaysia, the constitution has been amended only 4 times, the last being in 1991. In contrast, Malaysia has already amended its constitution well over 40 times (mostly multiple amendments) consisting of not less than 650 individual amendments. These figures speak for themselves as to the low priority our successive BN leadership has placed on the sanctity of law and the preservation of rule of law.

COMING ELECTION CRITICAL

Why did I say earlier that the coming election is critical? This is because Malaysia has never descended so low as under the present leadership of Abdullah Badawi, while the opposition is well poised to mount the challenge for power under the leadership of Anwar Ibrahim who is generally accepted as a viable and more desirable alternative to the incumbent. An impartial EC at this moment will certainly help to reduce the extreme lop-sidedness of the present playing field, thus offering the country the first real chance in breaking off from antiquated corrupt rule of UMNO, which is gradually but surely bringing the nation to the precipice of calamity.

Just look at the incessant titanic scandals that have been bombarding our senses in recent days. To name a few, on the corruption front, we have the nation’s top crime busters – deputy home security minister, IGP & ACA chief - simultaneously investigated for corruption and exonerated dubiously; the RM 4.6 billion “Ghost Town” in Port Klang; the RM 6.7 billion naval vessel contract defaulted; Sarawak chief minister’s embroilment in logging corruption suits. At the judiciary scene, we were shocked by the release of Eric Chia of the RM 13 billion Perwaja losses fame, after one decade of investigations and trial; the grisly Mongolian murder with links to top political hierarchy and its subsequent sham investigations and trial; the Lingam video clip that reveals manipulation of justice and judges at the highest level.

While the nation is battered by an endless stream of scandals, the prime minister’s spin doctors are merrily spinning “economic corridors” everywhere – to the south, north and east coast, and very soon across the ocean to Sabah and Sarawak. With corruption and the rule of law deteriorating by the day, these “corridors” will eventually meet the same faith as their predecessors in the Mahathir era – evaporation into thin air. The only difference is: Abdullah calls these “corridors” while Mahathir called them “economic triangles” such as Johor-Singapore-Batam triangle to the south, Malaysia-Thailand-Sumatra triangle to the north, and Malaysia-Phillipine-Kalimantan triangle to the east. These “triangles” are of course never heard of nowadays.

Meanwhile, the quality of our education system continues its unrelenting slip, as for the first time, none of our twenty odd public universities could squeeze into the top 200 of the prestigious THES World Universities Rankings (Times Higher Education Supplement).

ECONOMY THREATENED

The ruling power may be unfazed by these bad news, nestling in the thought that they are well insulated from the wrath of public opinion through the protective shield of local press and TV, which often act as the regime’s propagandists. But market forces are merciless. They mete their punishment to a governance run foul through crippling economic competition and hollowing out of investment.

For the first time, Malaysia’s FDI outflow equals FDI inflow for 2006 (inflow USD 6.1 billion against outflow USD 6.0 billion), as reported in World Investment Report 2007 published by UNCTAD (United Nation Conference of Trade and Development) on 16th October 2007. This is most unusual for a developing economy, and it signifies the troubling scenario of capital flight arising from dwindling investment opportunity due to loss of competitiveness. In contrast, the FDI outflow/FDI inflow ratios for our neighbours are: 36% for Singapore, 8% for Thailand and 61% for Indonesia. It is pertinent to note that even in an advance economy like Singapore, its FDI outflow is only one third of FDI inflow, which stands at USD 24.2 billion – 4 times ours.

Malaysians who regularly get their ration of news from the Internet – as distinct from those only read the local press and watch the local TV - should have no problem understanding why Malaysia continues to slip against its neighbours in competitiveness. The inevitable conclusion is: the UMNO led anachronistic conglomerate of racial parties has long outlived its legitimate political life-span. It is time that we turn to a new leadership to check the present regression and steer the nation towards the path of genuine integration and growth.

And the restoration of neutrality to the election commission at this stage is one big step towards realizing this objective, for which we must put our full weight to ensure a competent EC chairman is appointed.

Kim Quek

廠商排出有味液體沙威河又混濁惡臭

2007-11-21T23:28:00.000+08:00

柔佛‧古來）位於加拉巴沙威的笨珍河上游（俗稱沙威河）在過去兩個星期，經常發出惡臭味，並出現河水混濁的現象。
人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強表示，他在兩個星期前接獲民眾的投訴，指25哩的這條河流經常發出惡臭味，特別是雨天更令人難受，且河水亦轉變為乳白色及黑色。
他指出，在接獲投訴後，他曾經與附近的廠商聯絡，廠商皆表示他們絕不會排出有惡臭味的液體。
“較後，我向環境局投訴，該局表示關注這項問題，但要求我們給予合作，提供相關的資料。”
民眾受促提供資料
有鑒於此，他希望，知情的民眾能夠提供資料，因為從流水受污染的程度來看，這些排泄出來液體肯定是不健康及違法的。
該黨柔州地方政府事務局主任陳仁明則表示，根據1976年地方政府法令第六十九條文，任何人污染水道、公共溝渠或河流，將被罰款不超過2000令吉或監禁不超過1年或兩者兼施，若違例者在收獲通知書要求停止有關活動後，仍繼續有關行為，將增加罰款每天不超過500令吉。星洲日報／大柔佛‧2007.11.21

古來夜間燒垃圾問題嚴重,10火點煙霧擾千戶

2007-11-21T22:46:00.000+08:00

（古來21日訊）古來一些建築工地與偏遠空地淪為垃圾焚化場，夜間出現十多個火點，方圓5公里地區煙霧瀰漫，逾千戶受影響。
空氣污染的地區包括古來莊園、公主城、優美城、太子城、吉隆花園與新村一帶等地。
人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強今早帶領記者，到一些焚燒現場瞭解情況。隨行者包括該黨柔州地方政府事務局主任陳仁明。

塑膠化學氣味嗆鼻

劉順強表示，近几個月來，公主城、莊園與吉隆花園一帶，午夜12時至凌晨4、5點時，天空非常混濁，當吹強風時，居民常可嗅到一股焚燒塑膠、嗆鼻的化學氣味。
他指出，公主城某資源回收廠上個月曾因露天焚燒，遭柔州環境局警告而沈寂一時，因此剛開始接獲投訴時，以為該廠又捲土重來，重新露天焚燒廢料。
惟他日前在當地居民陪同下，追查冒濃煙的地點和肇因，發現火點出自上述資源回收廠毗鄰的空地，與上述工廠無關。
“據居民透露，附近菜農與小型廠商，將果類、塑膠等廢料丟在這片空地與附近的小路旁，每天都有人露天焚燒，污染情況非常嚴重。”
他表示，據瞭解，附近小型廠商須自費，交由承包商傾倒垃圾，因此一些廠商直接將剩余廢料倒在空地並就地焚燒，以節省費用。
除了公主城外，劉順強也揭露古來某大型建築工地的工人，拆除模板后在夜間大量焚燒，附近的吉隆花園與新村一帶常可聞到一股濃郁的燒焦味。
“這個工地近一個月來，每晚都大量露天焚燒，到第2天就把焚燒物土埋。”
他聲稱，古來區近幾個月來，在晚上出現的火點大小共有10多個，遍佈多個花園住宅區，逾千戶受影響，情況令人關注。

市會受促設小組取締露天焚燒者

人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強促請古來市議會，成立環境小組，夜間巡視及取締露天焚燒的不法者，以全面解決露天焚燒。
他指出，有關環境小組在夜間出動，到煙霧出現的地方展開巡邏，一旦發現有工地露天焚燒，可及時採取行動，發傳票給有關工地的承包商。
此外，劉順強也呼吁本區居民給予合作，一旦發現有人露天焚燒，即刻聯絡古來消拯局。
若看到可疑羅厘進出空地，也應即刻報警或聯絡他（019-7553486），他將致電柔州環境局。

101 East- Malaysia protest

2007-11-20T16:53:00.000+08:00

阿拉伯半島電視台報導:

吉隆坡爆發十年罕見的黃潮大遊行

2007-11-15T12:20:00.000+08:00

撰文 Ioannis Gatsiounis
2007/11/13, 週二

吉隆坡---即便天氣惡劣、政府恐嚇，4萬名來自馬來西亞全國各地的集會群眾仍成功齊聚首都，要求進行選舉制度改革。這是該國近10年最大規模的示威遊行，醜聞纏身的巴達維（Abdullah Badawi）政府面臨來自反對派的新一輪嚴峻挑戰。

上週五，巴達維說政府不會允許街頭示威發生，他的女婿凱里（Khairy Jamaluddin）則把集會者稱作“猴子”，質問示威者是否想挑戰自獨立以來就當政的聯盟政府。此人不理會，或根本不理解這次集會的前提。那些參與遊行的人說，為了阻止示威者聚集，警方在進入吉隆坡，甚至北部吉打州（Kedah）的所有要道設置路障。上週六，當局出動數千名警察封鎖道路，將示威者分割、圍堵在不同的地點，目的是要阻止他們大規模聚集在一起。

在安努家么回教堂(An’nur Jamek Mosque)外面，警方用催淚瓦斯驅散靜坐的示威群眾。根據政府的新聞報道，有245人被捕，隨後又被釋放。身穿黃色T恤的集會者計劃從安努家么回教堂遊行至皇宮，向國家元首遞交選舉改革備忘錄，其中包括清理選民名冊、自由公正地使用國家控制的媒體。過去的選舉總是傳出買選票和不公正地劃分選區的醜聞。集會組織機構“乾淨與公平選舉聯盟”（淨選盟，Gabungan Pilihanraya Bersih dan Adil，BERSIH）說，選舉委員會沒有能力解決這些問題。淨選盟由26個非政府組織和在野黨組成。筆者上週六下午4點在打巴路（Tun Perak Road）親眼目睹了一起事件，它是瞭解馬來西亞不正常的民主發展的窗口。

防暴警察手持盾牌嚴陣以待，集會者開始走下人行道平行向他們靠近。一些人手持馬來西亞國旗，其他人友好地向警察揮手。突然，警察從側邊攻擊，示威者受驚奔跑起來。在被拖走之前，有些被捕的人還被幾名警官拽倒在地遭拳打腳踢。幾分鐘後，警方沖到安努家么回教堂後面商店林立的小胡同。便衣警察不准那些手持相機的人拍照，違者就有被捕的危險。

回到Tuangku Abdul Rahman路上，警察從慢慢靠攏在撤退的示威者的警車上開水炮。據集會組織者透露，估計有3萬名示威者最終抵達皇宮並遞交備忘錄。現年31歲、從北部檳榔嶼（Penang）趕來參加集會的顧問醫師舒克里（Fitri Shukri）說，他很受鼓舞：“這才剛開始。我們很清楚這需要時間。不過呆在家裏是不起作用的，馬來西亞人逐漸意識到這點。”2003年末上臺時，巴達維誓言增強透明度並狠刹普遍存在的腐敗歪風。然而，普遍認為他沒有兌現承諾，並日益感覺到他的權力已根深蒂固，根本無意改革。許多高級官員有貪污腐敗的劣跡，但巴達維仍留用這些人。

反腐機構仍受政府控制。批評人士還指控巴達維不重視司法腐敗、選舉舞弊以及官員濫用職權和瀆職問題。馬來西亞以種族劃分的政治局勢意味著各派的議程與其種族界限一致。大批來自馬來人控制的馬來西亞回教黨（Islamic PAS）成員參加了週六的示威遊行。除了希望建立一個廉潔的政府，馬來西亞回教黨還想把該國變成一個伊斯蘭國家。不過，除了馬來西亞回教黨成員，參加集會的還有活躍分子、普通百姓、年輕人、老人、印度人、馬來人和華人。國家媒體報道說，警方對大批孩童參與集會表示擔憂。活躍分子Tian Chua說，“這次公民集會涉及的是一個相當普遍的問題。”這種大規模抗議活動在馬來西亞相當罕見。

上一次大型示威活動發生在1998年安瓦爾（Anwar Ibrahim）被解除副總理兼財政部長職務之後。安瓦爾因為挑戰前總理馬哈蒂爾（Mahathir Mohamad）的權力而被解職，後來在監獄裏被警察局長努爾（Rahim Noor）打青了一隻眼睛。此舉引起民憤，改革運動隨之爆發。然而，改革運動之後，公眾參與政治進程的熱情大大減弱。結果政府利用這種激烈的事態變化讓許多馬來西亞人厭棄積極參與國家的發展進程。

統治精英常常給那些對政府政策表示不滿的人扣上目光短淺的搗亂者的帽子，說他們破壞社會穩定，因此許多馬來西亞人如今附和政府的政策路線。政府在週六集會期間再次危言聳聽。例如，援引巴達維的話說，“他們在挑戰那些希望國家保持和平穩定的人的耐心。”匿名信息警告人們遠離將舉行“反政府的非法集會”的自由廣場（Freedom Square）。

按規定，五人以上的集會就是非法的，必須向警察局申請批准，然而組織者很難獲批，政府總是以集會會阻塞交通、擾亂營商為由拒絕。不過，Tian說，儘管政府百般阻撓，但這次集會仍吸引了很多人參加（估計示威人數有4萬，當局出動警力4000），這充分表明民眾不滿巴達維的執政。這次集會是和平進行的，而國家安全官員卻採取暴力鎮壓。

國營《新海峽時報》（New Straits Times）周日卻刊登了題為“非法集會引起吉隆坡交通混亂”的文章。該報道放在報紙第四版，頭版是一名移植心臟的女孩的照片。政府暴力回應民眾的基本民主權利訴求，一些倡議者和分析人士因此把巴達維政權與緬甸軍政府相提並論。就在今年八月和九月，緬甸軍政府還武力鎮壓街頭示威。紐約的人權觀察組織（Human Rights Watch）發表聲明說，“如果馬來西亞自認為是一個民主國家，它可以從維護自由言論和集會的憲法權利開始。鑒於當前的體制，只有執政聯盟可以做到。”預計馬來西亞大選將在明年初舉行。當選舉進行時，改革呼聲或許只有在那些抗議這些選舉的示威者中才能聽到。示威者認為，這些選舉在體制安排上只對巴達維有利。

本文作者Ioannis Gatsiounis是一名常駐吉隆坡的紐約記者。編譯：楊柳

Saya Kepala Tak Betul

2007-11-15T09:44:00.000+08:00

Malaysian minister interviewed on Kuala Lumpur protests

2007-11-13T16:11:00.000+08:00

For those who hasn’t watch this interview before, I dare you to hear this by yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfpYZ4IGenY

“Why did you not break up this protest peacefully?”
“Why is this protest illegal?”

黃衫軍”要求選舉改革　大馬10年來最大示威

2007-11-13T10:01:00.000+08:00

撰文黃進發
2007/11/12, 週一
馬來西亞跨黨派的“乾淨與公正選舉聯盟”（淨選盟）號召十萬人身穿黃色服飾，於11月10日（周六）下午在首都集會，要求選舉改革。穩控國會91%多數的“國民陣線”（國陣）聯合政府卻如臨大敵，透過拒絕准證、封鎖新聞乃至設立路障等等手段，企圖使這場大集會流產。（編者按：馬來西亞於11月10日爆發近10年最大規模示威。外電指數萬民眾不顧政府反對立場﹐在首都吉隆坡示威﹐要求選舉公正廉潔﹐結果遭警方以催淚彈和水炮驅散。警方指有4000人參與集會，組織者則指有3萬人。警方扣留了245人。）

舉舞弊在馬來西亞絕非新聞。國陣及其前身“聯盟”從1955年自治選舉上台至今，贏取12屆大選，掌權52年。這固然是因為其主張多元族群協商的政治路線，和推動國家發展的經濟表現，受到大多數選民青睞，但也有相當部分是因為選舉程序並不公正與自由。觀察家一般把國陣的勝利因素歸為3M：金錢(Money)、選舉機器（Machinery）與媒體（Media）。然而，除了一邊倒的競選活動，投票與算票過程都出現過許多爭議，最嚴重的就是所謂仿冒已故選民投票的“幽靈選民”。由五個在野黨派和約70個公民社會組織所組成的“淨選盟”，要求選舉委員會立即推行四項改革：清理選民冊，以便去除已故選民、非法、錯誤登記的名字；使用不脫色油墨，以防止重複投票；廢除不透明、適用於軍警人員（執政聯盟的傳統票倉）的崗位投票，以避免舞弊；允許各政黨公平使用媒體。該聯盟同時提出，改革選舉制度、限制看守政府權利、管制選舉開支等長程目標。

淨選盟”從去年11月成立後，就在全國展開巡迴演講，甚至成立分支組織，不時通過媒體輿論對選委會施壓。理論上獨立、實際上受執政黨控制的選舉委員會，至今只答應不脫色油墨一項，對其他要求都表示力不從心。執政黨直接控制的其他機關（如警方等）更不友善。在馬來半島東北隅、主要在野黨回教黨盤踞的登嘉樓（舊譯“丁加奴”）州，警方就於9月9日阻止“淨選盟” 召開集會。一名被懷疑為假冒群眾鬧事的便衣警員，竟然以實彈射擊公眾，導致兩名集會者受傷就醫。施暴記錄纍纍的馬來西亞警方事後宣稱開槍者乃是自衛，民間黨團則紛紛要求另一個法定機構“國家人權委員會”（Suhakam）展開獨立調查，而後者的不作為，也招來輿論的批判。聯合政府中的最大執政黨“馬來民族統一陣線”（巫統，UMNO）的代表大會11月9日落幕，人們卻在期待著馬來西亞政治的另一個高潮──“淨選盟”號召十萬人身穿黃色服飾，於11月10日（周六）下午三時在吉隆坡市中心的獨立廣場集會，要求選舉改革。

吉隆坡市警方已經宣佈，基於安全考量，拒絕發出准證給這次大集會。根據媒體報道，警方表示擔心會有人乘機在集會時作亂，造成公眾恐慌，繼而影響國內的經濟活動，公物也會因而遭到破壞。市總警長祖哈斯南更恫言，屆時會出動四千名警員對付出席者。淨選盟預計，警方可能會封鎖道路，攔截穿黃衣者進入市中心。在此之前，該聯盟的網站www.bersih.org 也曾多次被黑客侵入，企圖誤導訪客這天集會已被取消。“淨選盟”早已有備而來，提醒參加集會的公眾人士，萬一警方封鎖獨立廣場，可到鄰近其他四個指定地點集合，包括崇光百貨公司、印度回教堂（Masjid India）、國家回教堂（Masjid Negara）及中央藝術坊（Pasar Seni），聽取集會領導人的指示。如何應付警方的法律指示、“示威”指南，早已在網上流傳。警方與“淨選盟”的對峙，其實已變成鬥智鬥勇的戰役。馬來西亞人在政治上相對保守謹慎，傾向協商，除了1998-9年前副首相安華被革除下獄引發的“烈火莫息”（Reformasi，“改革”）浪潮，多年來吉隆坡幾乎未曾發生政治示威。如果警方成功把數萬名示威者擋在門外，市中心一帶水靜河飛，國陣政府就可以宣稱，選舉改革議程是一小撮在野黨政客的動員手段。反之，如果示威者成功突圍，或者城內四處出現黃色人潮，馬來西亞政治的遊戲規則就改變了。警察可能要習慣以後常常面對示威的人潮了。

九月下旬，馬來西亞人被一周內兩次示威震撼了。第一場示威中，2000名律師與公眾在行政首都布特拉再也抗議最新爆發的司法醜聞。現在領導在野“人民公正黨”的安華，發佈了8分鐘的錄影短片，顯示一個與紅頂商人有密切關係的律師林甘，在電話上試圖安排司法界人事，涉事者竟是當時聯邦法院首席大法官阿末法茲魯。國陣政府試圖大事化小，但律師界與公共輿論並不持這一套。最終，在馬來西亞各州蘇丹們的影響下，政府同意讓阿末法茲魯在10月位退休，不再續任。第二場示威則是緬甸人為主、在緬甸大使館前的反軍人政府示威。相對於格魯吉亞的玫瑰革命、烏克蘭的橙色革命、吉爾吉斯的鬱金香革命、黎巴嫩的雪杉（Cedar）革命、緬甸的袈裟革命、甚至台灣的紅衫軍，馬來西亞的“黃色浪潮”不能說是驚天動地。然而，選舉改革的訴求可以形成風潮，卻暗示了馬來西亞在前首相馬哈蒂爾下台四年後的巨大變化。

雖然在野黨長期一直攻擊選舉程序的不公與不自由，但選舉改革乃至其他體制上的改革，一直未有成為主要政治議題。追根究底，這是由於族群與宗教的歧異，馬來西亞在野黨一直各自為政，並未能對國家的民主化議程達成共識。今天三大在野黨──回教黨、人民公正黨與非回教徒為主的民主行動黨，雖然還不能連成一線，但他們在“淨選盟”中的合作，以及民怨的展示，卻可能成為下一屆選舉的指標。這也是為什麼吉隆坡警方要不惜代價，阻止黃衫軍行使他們憲賦集會自由的原因。

大馬政客屢爆失言風波

2007-11-12T12:42:00.000+08:00

撰文 Ioannis Gatsiounis
2007/11/07, 週三
吉隆坡 --- 多年來，馬來西亞政客一直在向公眾展示他們“大放厥詞”的奇異天賦。當言論顯得缺乏深度或遠見時，他們總能找到掩飾自己真情實意乃至整個國家政治狀態的藉口。過去數月中，多位政客的言論引起了馬來西亞百姓的熱議。信息部長表示，雖然首相希望“聽到真相”，並這不適用於媒體身上；一名國會議員嘲諷另一名坐輪椅的議員，還說“這是上帝對你的懲罰”；負責法律事務的首相府部長阿齊茲（Nazri Aziz）認為，驅散1,000多名律師發起的呼籲司法改革大遊行，沒什麼大不了，並說：“律師公會有成員1.3萬人，區區一千人能代表多數嗎？”

在馬來西亞，種族、特權、濫權、腐敗、宗教、甚至性，都是被禁止談論的話題。然而，政客們不時會相當輕率地對待這些話題。在進步國家，口無遮攔很可能會對說話者的政治仕途帶來負面影響；但在也自稱是進步國家的大馬，由於其實行以種族和宗教為基礎的政治架構，同一做法卻可為政客贏得堅定擁護政黨的美譽，甚至還可為他們鋪就美好的政治道路。去年，教育部長希山慕丁（Hishammuddin Hussein）在執政巫統大會上揮舞傳統的馬來短劍，以警告該國的少數族群。這一舉動非但沒有遭到黨內人士的指責，反而被大加稱讚；他如今甚至有望成為未來大選中的首相候選人。即便言論引起了公眾指責，國營媒體也會幫忙善後。為“安撫”民眾情緒，主流媒體有時會乾脆對這些過激言論充耳不聞。

為何馬來西亞政客常常亂放厥詞呢？《馬來西亞政治人物的可笑言論》（Malaysian Politicians Say the Darndest Things）一書，緣何標注著該書只是“第一卷”呢？缺乏問責制，或許是這些問題的答案吧！獨立電影導演兼專欄作家穆哈邁德（Amir Muhammad）說，當初創作這本書，部分是因為內政部長去年以不夠暴力為由，禁止他的一部記錄片上映。書中收集的100個言論，時間跨越30年，既有愚蠢的、惡毒的，又有睿智的、悅耳的。有些，還需要帶著批判的態度去品味，如前文化、藝術及旅遊部長法齊爾（Kadir Sheikh Fadzir）曾說：“欺騙遊客的出租車司機，都應面對牆排成一列被槍斃。他們是新敵人，就像共產主義一樣。我可不是開玩笑，這種事很嚴重。

如果真能把他們槍斃，那最好不過了。”有些言論，還反映了一些政客們令人擔憂的世界觀。例如，新聞部長麥登（Zainuddin Maidin）在2003年撰文道：“印尼與菲律賓的百姓連肚子都填不飽，他們還想教我們如何實現新聞自由？我們似乎更有資格，因為我們已解決了肚子問題。”總的來說，該書用一種輕鬆的方式，記錄著這個國家但不可或缺的歷史，一段政客言行常被忘記或被原諒的歷史。偽善者也有了自知之明；用他們自己的話說，馬來西亞的政治精英們討厭批評聲音，總喜歡用嚴酷的法律來維護他們脆弱的傲慢。該書還收錄了不少政客們近期的言論，再次提醒人們馬來西亞的委任制度有多麼積重難返。儘管首相巴達維上台時，曾承諾增加政府透明度和毫無畏懼地打擊腐敗，但書中很多言論都是出自現任政府的。，例如，阿齊茲去年在為巫統辯護時說：“巫統成員只需對紀律委員會負責，並接受黨規的處罰。

除此以外的規章制度，對他們沒有約束力，因為他們在黨內的行為並不不牽涉公眾利益。”還有一位參議員，他的兒子捲入了醜聞，他竟遺憾自己沒有教曉兒子作假的心得。政客們語出驚人，並不是馬來西亞的獨特現象。美國總統布什的出言失誤，早可以編書了；伊朗總統內賈德曾說“將以色列從地圖上抹去”，烏干達前總統阿明說過“我想要你的心臟，我想吃掉你的孩子”。馬來西亞政客也許難以與這幾位前人相“媲美”，但教育部長希山慕丁卻有著相當的實力：今年8月，一名大學生在網上發放他創作的饒舌國歌，當中批評警隊腐敗和偏幫馬來裔的歧視政策。這位高官說，想從對方身上切下“一磅肉”。

馬來西亞政客們對外非常注重國家形象。他們花費了大量時間與金錢，去樹立馬來西亞“世界一流國家”的形象，但他們的言論往往令這些努力大打折扣。在前首相馬哈蒂爾的支持下，馬來西亞當年上馬了多個大型項目，如投資29億美元建設爭奪“世界最高建築”名銜的雙子塔，以期國家能擠入世界經濟強國的行列。然而，馬哈蒂爾的反西方言論，似乎更讓各國人士印象深刻。2003年，他在公開場合表示：“猶太人仰仗其代理人的支持主宰世界。”儘管馬來西亞極力將其打造為現代化穆斯林國家的典範，它的外長去年卻說，穆斯林國家應該為黎巴嫩真主黨提供武裝。今年是馬來西亞大力推廣旅遊業的“觀光年”，旅遊部長在3月卻將該國日益龐大的網絡博客隊伍，形容為“都是沒有工作的墮落婦女”。

這些言論，恰恰反映了理想中的進步，與該國的實際情況仍有很大差距。在5月一場獨腳戲中，喜劇演員、劇作家穆拉德（Jit Murad）扮演了一位出席記者招待會的政客，成功地將這種差距展現給大眾。這位政客說：“一些人對越來越多的暴力犯罪新聞表示不安。每天收到這麼多報道，我們也很擔心；因此，我們將會裁掉那些令我們感到不快的新聞。”事實上，巴達維政府更注重形象，而不是實質。在反腐運動中，警員們都配戴著“反對腐敗”的徽章，但腐敗在這個國家依然猖獗。司法、警察部隊、印刷媒體等部門，亟需一場改革。

巴達維在海外談到2004年發動的“文明伊斯蘭運動”時，形容這是宗教力量在教育與司法體系中影響力再次擴大的返祖現象。博客與門戶網站的增加，令政客們的言行舉止備受關注；儘管他們也意識到這一趨勢，但仍未認真對待。例如，新聞部長常常出言批評博客作者，結果令其本人與政府在網上屢遭炮轟。當然，人們看畢《馬來西亞政治人物的可笑言論》之後，也不應以為馬來西亞所有政客都缺乏頭腦。自獨立以來，馬來西亞的經濟發展遠快過周邊鄰國；毫無疑問，這其中有政客們的功勞。單從說話（特別是那些坦率言論）來評價一個人，可能會有失偏頗。馬哈蒂爾不僅有三寸不爛之舌，而且在長達22年的執政期間，也令馬來西亞經濟有聲有色。因此，儘管巴達維上台之初，作出了提高政府透明度等承諾，我們也不應責備他這四年裏不夠努力。奇怪的是，《馬來西亞政治人物的可笑言論》並沒有收錄巴達維的言論。這似乎表明，出版的言論能揭露真相，有時也能將其隱藏。

（章彊編譯)

Khairy Jamaluddin & Pak Lah: BERSIH Adalah Perhimpunan Haram

2007-11-12T11:24:00.000+08:00

Bersih

2007-11-11T12:58:00.000+08:00

大馬萬人抗議警方用水柱驅離

馬來西亞首都吉隆坡的街頭，昨天出現大規模的反政府示威遊行，數百名鎮暴警察全副武裝，分別在清真寺跟自由廣場等地，用水柱驅離抗議人群。
馬國警方嚴陣以待，以強力水柱跟催淚瓦斯，試圖驅散示威者，至少有10多人遭到逮捕。這場被稱為馬國10年來最嚴重示威的抗議行動，由反對黨領袖安華帶領，民眾走上街頭，要求當局選舉改革，有人穿著寫有肅清字眼的衣服、手舉拯救馬來西亞的標語，高喊改革。
這場抗議最後在遞交陳情書之後落幕，抗議民眾表示，要是當局無法做到要求，將發動下一波、更大規模的抗議行動。
新聞來源：TVBS

2007 Bersih rally

The 2007 Bersih Rally was a peaceful rally that occurred in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on November 10, 2007. The aim of its participants was to protest against corruption in the electoral process that heavily favoured the ruling party of the previous 50 years, UMNO. The rally began with the gathering of people at Dataran Merdeka square, before culminating in a march to the Palace gates to hand over a Memorandum to the King to ask for electoral reform.The rally was officially illegal, but early estimates put the number of attendees between 30,000 to 40,000
The name of the rally comes from the name of the organizers, BERSIH (Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections). The word "bersih" means clean in Malay.

Days leading up to the rally, the government warned Malaysians not to take part in the protest, as an official permit had not been granted. Citizens were also warned that anybody who turned up would be arrested. Local television channels which are mainly controlled by the ruling party also showed video footage of violence of other rallies from other countries and ending with a tagline "demonstration always end with violence." The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Abdullah Badawi, was quoted as saying he did not like being challenged. He has vowed to crack down on the protesters and gave his support to the police to break up the protest and arrest participants.

Police responseHours before the protest was due to occur, thousands of police were stationed in Merdeka Square, and traffic coming into Kuala Lumpur had to pass through security checkpoints.This has led to a widespread congestion of traffic throughout the entire Klang Valley.
During the protest, the police responded by firing water cannons and tear gas at the protesters, but only at the Masjid Jamek meeting point.245 people were arrested, but were released after their statements were recorded

THE PEOPLE MUST STAND UP

2007-11-10T18:55:00.000+08:00

The Prime Minister has vowed to crack down on peaceful demonstrators in Kuala Lumpur on 10th Nov on the ground that they break the law.

But who actually break the law? The Prime Minister and the police or the peaceful demonstrators?

The emphatic answer is: The Prime Minister and the police!

This is because the police have illegally invoked Section 27 (2) of the Police Act 1967 to ban the rally. As a result, the Prime Minister and the police have now violated the constitutional rights of citizens to peaceful assembly, specifically breaching Article 10 of the Constitution.

Section 27 (2) of the Police Act can only be invoked to over-ride Article 10 of the Constitution if, and only if, the mass rally resorts to violence or has criminal intent, as provided under Section 141 of Criminal Procedure Code. But the organizer BERSIH has already given every indication and every assurance possible that it is only a peaceful rally to appeal for clean and fair election. So, what crime do the peaceful demonstrators commit? What possible justification do the Prime Minister and the police have in turning the country into a war zone by setting up road blocks at all strategic locations and threatening to arrest demonstrators?

(Detailed legal analysis of the illegality of police ban is shown in Attachment A; and point-by-point rebuttal of the dubious grounds of police ban is shown in Attachment B).

The Prime Minister has challenged the demonstrators to fight the ruling party through the ballot box and not in the streets. But he has sadly missed the whole point. It is precisely because the present electoral system is crooked and fraudulent and the ruling party rejects meaning reforms that the people have no alternative but to go to the streets. By doing so, we will then let the whole country know that electoral reform is now urgent and imperative, if we want to restore democracy and good governance to the people.

The alternative to electoral reforms is condemnation of this country to corrupt and dictatorial rule in perpetuity, as the present electoral system is so lop-sided that, it is virtually impossible to unseat any incumbent power, particularly a corrupt and dictatorial one.

The arrogance and contempt for our Constitution displayed by the Prime Minister and the police in the intended brutal suppression of a legal assembly is an unforgivable affront on our entire people.

For this reason alone, the people, particularly those in Kuala Lumpur, should go to the streets and wear yellow, to show to the corrupt leaders who actually are the boss – the common people or the ruling elite?

Kim Quek.

烏魯山迪農作物被摧毀,非法農民索償

2007-11-07T11:30:00.000+08:00

大馬全球排名

2007-11-02T14:58:00.000+08:00

由倫敦泰晤士報公佈的二零零五年度世界二百名校排行榜，馬來亞大學由去年排名第八十九位，滑落到第一百六十九位。
無疆界記者”（Reporters without Borders）週二（16日）公佈的“2007年全球新聞自由指數”顯示，基於大馬設有限制媒體的法律，大馬的新聞自由狀況已嚴重惡化，從去年的92名滑落至124名，猛跌32位，是最嚴重的滑落！
馬來西亞隊在國際足聯最新公佈的世界排名榜再創新低，在208個國家及地區隊退居第166
大馬今年的貪污指數，排名第43，總算比去年的第44，進步了一個馬鼻雖然大馬最近在多項全球指數排名大幅度下跌，然而，國人在做愛的次數方面，卻以一年平均83次在全球排名第36，在亞洲名列第5！
亞太區流動電話使用情況研究顯示，香港流動電話擁有率獨佔鰲頭，逾8成3港人擁有手機，而馬來西亞則排名第10，有五十四巴仙。此外，大馬使用短訊的服務率在亞太區排名第5。
政經風險顧問公司根據亞洲12個國家及地區政府，過去應付危機表現進行的評估顯示，大馬對危機反應的能力排名第6，前3名為新加坡、日本及香港
根據世界銀行頃發布的2008年全球最佳商業環境指標調查報告顯示，大馬排名第24位，超越2006年及2007年之表現(均為第25名)，且超越韓國、台灣、中國大陸、法國及印度。
馬來西亞成為全球20個最吸引外來直接投資的經濟体之一，在聯合國貿易与發展會議組織（UNCTAD）最新的調查中排名第十四，在亞洲經濟体當中的排名僅此于中國、印度、越南及泰國之后。
聘请人才：KFI的亚洲太平洋总裁Charles Teng透露，马来西亚籍的人才在亚洲地区是世界银行在有关155个国家的经商易行度报告中，把马来西亚名列21，领先荷兰及南韩。有6个东亚经济体，包括马来西亚，在该报告的经商易行度指数中，世界第30名。
投資環境風險評比新加坡(78分、第2名)；日本(73分、第3名)；中國大陸（59分、第19名）、馬來西亞（59分、第19名）、南韓（58分、第21名）、泰國（50分、第26名）、菲律賓（43分、第36名）、越南（42分、第38名）、印尼(39分、第47名)
風險指標排名：台灣(72分第3名)；新加坡(73分，第2名)，優於日本（64分，第14名）、馬來西亞（57分，第21名）、南韓（51分，第25名）、中國大陸（51分，第25名）、泰國（48分，第28名）、菲律賓（41分，第38名）、越南（37分，第45名）、印尼（37分，第45名）。
政治風險指標：台灣12名（62分），新加坡(76分，第2名)，優於日本(60分，第15名)、馬來西亞（58分，第18名）、中國大陸（56分，第20名）、南韓（52分，第23名）、越南（49分，第25名）、泰國（47分，第28名）、菲律賓（43分，第34名）、印尼（34分，第49名）。
匯兌風險指標排名：日本(95分，第1名)，台灣（84分第3名），新加坡（84分第3名）南韓（72分，第9名）、中國大陸（70分，第11名）、馬來西亞（61分，第20名）、泰國（54分，第24名）、印尼（46分，第35名）、菲律賓（45分，第38名）、越南（41分，第42名）。
勞動力表現台灣（73第3名）分(，新加坡（87分，第1名）與瑞士（74分，第2名）。日本（72分，第6名），馬來西亞（59分，第17名）、南韓（58分，第20名）、泰國（56分，第22名）、菲律賓（55分，第23名）、印尼（45分，第38名）、中國大陸（45分，第38名）、越南（33分，第46名）
2007年觀光旅遊競爭力報告：台灣評比分數在亞洲排名第4，僅次於香港、新加坡和日本，馬來西亞的第31名、南韓第42名、泰國第43名
2007-2008年世界競爭力報告：大馬在全球排名21，而位列前10名的亞洲經濟體只有新加坡和日本，分別排名第7和第8。排在前10名的經濟體依次是美國、瑞士、丹麥、瑞典、德國、芬蘭、新加坡、日本、英國和荷蘭

向国会、向人民公布财产的“阳光法案”，才能真正让人民信服

2007-11-02T14:56:00.000+08:00

商业罪案调查组总监南利昨日被控上地方法院，不应是大选前的障眼法，以为阿都拉政府塑造清廉的形象。全体人民不得掉以轻心。

人民公正党柔佛州署理主席刘顺强今天发表文告强调，调查涉嫌贪污的人，应该只是反贪污局的例常工作，而不是大选前敲锣打鼓的动作，以便蒙骗人民，让人民以为政府真的是“大小鱼通抓”，为首相阿都拉制造“包青天”的形象。

人民不应该忘记，上一届大选前，国阵政府也曾大动作调查一名副部长、数名商贾富豪及高官，并以此向人民承诺将清廉治国。结果是，国阵在大选取得空前胜利，但是，大选后至今的3三年多以来，人民看到的却是，大选前提控的“大鱼”，不但一个又一个的因“证据不足”、“程序不对”、“完成调查”等理由不起诉，更糟的，一连串的贪污腐败案件陆续被揭发。自诩为“现代包青天”的首相阿都拉，在被媒体追问其儿子的财富与政府合约时，更曾以“前首相的儿子得到更多”回应而不打自招。

本届政府上台三年多，虽然一件又一件的舞弊事件被揭发，反贪污局一直都没有采取行动，尤其是牵涉高官部长的案件，例如国内安全部副部长的案件、全国警察总长慕沙哈山被指贪污的案件等，都因一句“证据不足以遭起诉”而草草结案，在国际上早已被评为“包庇”的做法，也显示出阿都拉政府缺乏肃贪的真正决心。如今，大选将至的时刻，为了挽回人民对他的信心，才开始采取行动，提控几个高官。这不是和上次大选同出一辙的做法吗？

刘顺强提醒公众，前事不忘，后事之师。南利是否有罪，需要法院冗长的审讯后才能够确定。人民必须吸取上届大选前的教训，这次千万不要再掉入国阵的圈套内，以为政府这次来真的了，反贪的决心“突然”坚决起来了。实际上，反贪污局调查任何人，包括高官显要、商贾富豪、平民百姓，都是他们的职责所在。南利被调查与提控的罪状中，许多实际也发生在其他部长、政府高官等身上，反贪污局应该老早就行动，逐个调查，尤其是许多人的收入、财富，远远与其收入来源不符。例如，一名州议员或市议员，何以可以累计数千万财富私建豪宅？数年前本党前青年团团长揭发国际贸工部长拉菲达的案件，证据确凿，但至今反贪污局仍未采取行动调查，原因何在？

刘顺强再次呼吁，人民必须团结一致，坚定的向国阵疾呼，我们不要贪污的政府，我们更不希望政府在大选前才做事，把人民当着可以任由摆弄的愚民。负责任，坚决反贪污的政府，必须立即通过所有部长、高级官员等，向国会、向人民公布财产的“阳光法案”，才能真正让人民信服。

Lingam Tape (subtitle:Eng/Chn) 大马司法丑闻短片 (中/英文字幕)

2007-11-02T11:10:00.000+08:00

走向共和之孫中山

2007-11-01T14:55:00.000+08:00

中國影視作品第一次以史詩般的藝術筆觸全景式地呈現了中華民族推翻帝制、走向共和這一波瀾壯闊的艱難歷程，氣勢恢弘地再現了甲午海戰、戊戍變法、庚子國變、立憲新政、辛亥革命、隆裕退位、締造共和等重大歷史事件，精心刻畫了封建統治者喪權辱國社會戰亂不斷、國家積弱積貧、人民飢寒交迫等血淚雜陳的屈辱歷史卷軸、濃墨重彩地勾勒了晚清封建統治的腐朽以及無數民族精英、仁人志士前赴後繼尋找救國救民出路的鬥爭和探索歷程

RIBUAN RAKYAT TUNTUT PILIHANRAYA ADIL DAN BERSIH

2007-10-30T11:14:00.000+08:00

棕油廠搬新址後疑再污染,酸臭糞味擾千戶

2007-10-24T19:40:00.000+08:00

（古來24日訊）自棕油廠于5月31日從加拉巴沙威遷往拉央拉央后，距離一公里外的武吉峇都新村，在過去一兩個月來皆瀰漫一股臭氣異味，近千戶村民受影響。該棕油廠在沙威已有60多年歷史，直到該廠搬遷后，沙威居民才擺脫長期污染帶來的困擾。
不過，棕油廠遷往拉央拉央后，與新廠房相隔著一片油棕園，距離逾一公里外的武吉峇都新村村民，成為“受害者”。
村民形容有關味道如“尿酸味”、“糞便味”，惡臭難忍；有些村民申訴地面出現許多黑屑。受污染情況與當年沙威如出一轍。人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強今早到武吉峇都新村，瞭解污染的情況。他說，兩星期前接獲當地居民投訴，指整個新村散發一股濃郁的的雞糞味。
“我實地調查幾次，證實有一些味道存在，但至今沒發現大量黑屑。這些臭味是隨風四處飄散，其中上午與夜晚氣壓低時，情況最嚴重。” 他今早也站在武吉峇都新村最高處，以空氣測量器測試空氣污染指數，惟發現空氣中未含有任何臭氣。
他懷疑有關臭氣是拉央拉央棕油廠在氧化過程中所發出，即殘油不能直接排進河裡，須囤積在氧化池進行氧化過程，轉化為普通的清水。如果此過程處理不當，將產生敗氣。
“我懷疑是這個過程出了問題，也于兩天前聯絡拉央拉央棕油廠的工程師，他證實廠內有3至4個氧化池，但不知道味道會飄到一公里外的武吉峇都新村，他承諾會檢查氧化池。”
劉順強指出，武吉峇都新村是一個盆地，村內約千戶家庭皆有聞到臭味，相信與地理環境有關。

莊仁漢已向市會反映

負責武吉峇都區的古來市議員莊仁漢說，他已向古來市議會提出棕油廠污染的問題，並向武吉峇都區州議員張震亮反映此事。
他今日受詢時，證實武吉峇都新村確有臭味飄散，其中上午與陰天情況最嚴重。
“我較早前也曾接獲村長告知，指村民投訴在掃院子時，地上出現黑屑。”
無論如何，他聲稱，已于本月5日市議會召開的一項會議上提及此事，要求當局關注；同時也向武吉峇都區州議員張震亮反映，后者說會向廠方瞭解情況。

早上傍晚最嚴重＊張玉梅(住在新村7巷)
近一兩個月開始聞到一股如糞便般的酸臭味，開始時以為是貓糞味，后來大家說起，才知是在拉央拉央剛投入運作的棕油廠所傳出的味道。我的住家與棕油廠隔著一片油棕園，距離超過一公里。
早上與傍晚情況最嚴重，臭味瀰漫整間屋子，上午7時左右到街上，也可聞到臭味。我在這裡住了27年，以前從來沒有聞到這種臭味。
關門後臭味仍不散＊許美麗(住在新村)
早上與晚上情況最嚴重，一開門就可聞到一股臭味；晚上關了門，臭味也久久不會散去。
這種臭味很像尿酸味，已有2個月了。
地板有一層黑屑＊蔡玉蓮(住在新村大街)
以前幾天沒抹地也無所謂，近一兩個月開始，早上剛抹二樓的地板，晚上便感覺得腳黏黏的，而且有一層黑屑。
我到附近的佛堂也聞到味道，感覺整個新村都瀰漫一股臭味，和沙威以前的棕油味一模一樣，后來想到沙威的棕油已搬到拉央拉央，大家才把廠與臭味聯想一起

中国报陈明燕报道

MALAYSIAN JUDGE MADE HISTORY

2007-10-21T22:05:00.000+08:00

For the first time in history, a Malaysian judge heavily punished the government for gross abuse of its draconian law – the first big slap on the face of the Executive, long accustomed to unrestrained and unconstitutional persecution of political dissidents with virtual impunity from compliant attorney general and judiciary.

In a judgment that is bound to illuminate the Malaysian judiciary for a long time to come, High Court Judge Hishamudin Mohd Yunus ruled on Oct 18 that the state has violated the Constitution and awarded political detainee Abdul Malek Hussin RM 2.5 million in total compensation.

Malek was arrested by the police under the dreaded Internal Security Act (ISA) in Sept 1998 in the tumultuous days of Reformasi (reform movement) following the sacking and imprisonment of former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim. During the 57 days of detention, Malek was subjected to - in the words of Judge Hishamudin - “vile assault, unspeakable humiliation, prolonged physical and mental ill-treatment”, and completely deprived of legal counsel.

In Mar 1999, Malek filed a civil suit, citing a police special branch officer Borhan Daud, the then Inspector General of Police Rahim Noor, and the government as correspondents.

In his judgment, Hishamudin found no evidence of Malek posing any threat to national security but every indication that the detention and torture was politically motivated arising from Malek’s support to Anwar Ibrahim and his reform movement. As such, Malek’s detention was unlawful, and a violation of his constitution right under Article 5(3).

In hard hitting language, the judge described the defendents’ behaviour as “inhuman, cruel and despicable”. He awarded an exemplary damage of RM 1.0 million “to show the abhorrence of the court of the gross abuse of an awesome power under the Internal Securtiy Act, and to ensure that the extent of abuse is kept to the most minimal, if not eliminated completely.”

In his 41-page judgment, Hishamudin pin-pointed several police officers for breaching the law and concocting evidence. He also expressed displeasure at the Deputy Public Prosecutor for having implicitly colluded with police officers in thwarting Malek’s complaints.

COURAGEOUS JUDGE

Justice Hishamudin is no stranger to human rights watchers, who have been impressed by his consistent record in delivering independent and impartial judgment - a remarkable feat in a judiciary perceived to often bend to the wishes of the high and mighty, in scant regards to the Constitution. His most notable judgment is perhaps his decision in May 2001 to free two Reformasi activists – N. Gobalakrishnan and Abdul Ghani Haroon – arrested under ISA at the height of repression against the Reformasi movement under former autocrat Mahathir Mohamad.

In the present judgment, Hishamudin’s courageous and righteous act has undoubtedly brought cheers to a nation long dismayed by unrelenting decline in judicial integrity and most recently shocked by the stunning revelation of the Lingam video clip. In this latest scandal, lawyer VK Lingam was allegedly conspiring with present Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz in a telephone conversation to “fix” judicial appointments, apparently inspired by their personal loyalty to then premier Mahathir Mohamad in 2002. Subsequent events had turned out to tally with the scenario outlined in the Lingam-Fairuz conversation, thus strengthening the credibility of this tape.

Such subjugation of judiciary to political manipulation has in fact been common knowledge, as evident from many cases of glaring perversion of justice whenever the interests of the ruling power so dictate. The deterioration of our judiciary has however hastened in recent years as seen in the rapid promotion of judges of dubious records in a process shrouded in secrecy. Some of these promotions are seen as rewards for having “delivered” in the shameful Anwar trials and appeals.

SKEWED JUDICIAL SYSTEM

A prominent example of this skewed system of promotion is seen in the contrast of fortunes between Justice Hishamudin and Justice Augustine Paul (of the infamous Anwar trial fame). While Paul, newly promoted to high court judge to handle the Anwar case in 1998, had leapfrogged to the nation’s highest court (Federal Court) by 2005, Hishamudin has remained stagnant as a high court judge since 1995, despite his illustrious judicial record. Another example is Court of Appeal judge Gopal Sri Ram, the most senior judge who has made Malaysians proud for his many impartial and courageous judgments, has been by-passed for promotion to the Federal Court 14 times by his juniors since his direct appointment to the Court of Appeal in 1994. Some of these promoted on the express train had stayed in the Court of Appeal for only one year, notably those who were seen to have “delivered”.

The moral of the story in our judiciary is obvious: fortune only smiles on those who are obedient and submissive, but woe to those who are steadfastly principled. Under such a system, is there any wonder why our judiciary has been traveling on a downward slippery way?

While our spirit is buoyed by the Hishamudin judgment, we must temper our joy with the realization that the likes of Hishamudin and Sri Ram are rare gems that numerically could not influence the course of our judiciary. As they say, one swallow does not a summer make. Judicial reform is a long journey, and we haven’t even started yet.

But start we must, as the Hishamudin judgment has already opened our eyes to the immense benefits that a just judiciary can bring to the nation.

JUDICIAL REFORM A MUST

Imagine our courts are filled mostly with judges of Hishamudin’s integrity – from high courts to court of appeal to federal court – and led by a chief justice of impeccable honesty and competence, wouldn’t that be the best deterrent against the rampant breeding of corruption and abuse of power that is raging in every strata and section of our government – the cabinet, judiciary, attorney general’s chambers, police, government departments, anti-corruption agency, election commission, statutory bodies and GLCs (government linked corporations)? In fact, a competent judiciary can act as a powerful agent to cleanse our political and administrative systems of corruption.

Corollary to that, wouldn’t a revamped judiciary bring about a more level playing field for political contests through restoration of citizens’ constitution rights while suppressing similar infringement by the incumbent power? Through such restoration of democracy, we will surely see the natural replacement of the corrupt and the incompetent by the bright and the dedicated to lead the nation.

In summary, a cleaner administration in a more vibrant democracy, served by a competent judiciary, is certainly the right recipe to restore investors’ confidence, which has seen steady decline in the last decade.

Judicial reform is therefore a crucial move that will bring about a turning point in our history - arresting the present decline in government quality, rejuvenating the leadership, while serving as a major catalyst to boost our economy.

It is for this reason that we cannot afford to compromise on our quest for a royal commission of enquiry to look into the judicial rot revealed by the Lingam video clip, as a first step towards full reform.

And you can contribute towards making this objective a reality by supporting a petition to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to set up such a royal commission. All you need to do is to email your name with IC number to: savethejudiciary@gmail.com. The full text of the petition can be read at: http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com.

Kim Quek.

疑資源回收公司燒有毒物質,煙霧籠罩害慘千戶

2007-10-20T22:08:00.000+08:00

（古來20日訊）疑附近資源回收公司夜間露天焚燒有毒物質，古來公主城與附近花園住宅區，近一個月來籠罩在煙霧瀰漫中，嗆鼻的惡臭味危害人體健康，逾千戶人家受影響。
受影響的住宅區除了毗鄰的公主城外，還包括附近的可可苑、莊園、埔來花園、新古來、大古來與親和園。初步估計，至少有千戶人家約5000人飽受煙害。
部分居民申訴，長期吸入惡臭味，不但喉嚨干燥，有者更常咳嗽及患鼻竇炎，尤其是小孩的健康令人關注。
傳出嗆鼻惡臭味

近百位受影響的居民，今早在人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強與柔州政府事務局主任陳仁明的陪同下，聚集在涉嫌露天焚燒的資源回收公司前，高舉抗議大字報宣洩心中的不滿。
劉順強指出，他在近1個月前接獲民眾投報，指古來公主城一帶夜間煙霧瀰漫，味道非常嗆鼻且難聞，約有千戶居民受影響。
“當地居民懷疑，附近某資源回收公司的員工，可能在夜間焚燒有毒物質，導致煙霧瀰漫，並傳出嗆鼻的惡臭味。”
他透露，在開齋節期間的夜晚，焚燒情況最為嚴重，他當夜即接到數10位居民來電指空氣污染惡化。
“我使用空氣測量器，測量當晚的空氣素質，發現空氣中二氧化氮百萬分0.4，二氧化硫百萬分0.4。”
他表示，空氣中是沒有二氧化氮與二氧化硫的，若有，即證明有人焚燒；如果這兩種氣體超過百萬分1，將會致命。
對此，劉順強聲稱，昨日已聯絡柔州環境局主任與古來市議會投訴組，反映上述問題的嚴重性，這兩個部門也表示將派員到現場調查及瞭解情況。
此外，他披露，約20位居民今早也一起發短訊給柔州旅遊及環境委員會主席龍莆天，希望他關注此事。劉順強表示，人民公正黨將繼續關注該區的空氣污染問題，確保人民的健康受到保障。陳仁明：釋放危險物體罪成將罰款坐牢
人民公正黨柔州地方政府事務局主任陳仁明指出，根據1974年環境與素質法令第22條文，控制空氣與污染，任何人不能釋放危險物體。
他說，若釋放危險物體，即觸犯同一法令第21條文。
他也說，一旦罪成，將被罰款不超過10萬令吉或坐牢不超過5年或兩者兼施；如果涉案者收到傳票后仍然冥頑不靈，環境局主任可罰款該公司每天不超過1000令吉。

劉順強：政黨黨要勸阻居民不要出席抗議集會

人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強揭露，部分公主城居民曾接獲某政黨勸阻，不要出席今早的抗議集會。
他指出，接獲部分居民投訴，指昨日接獲某政黨黨要的電話與手機短訊，要求居民勿出席今早的記者會。
“該名政黨的要員甚至恫言，如果居民出席今早的抗議集會，他將把有關投訴擱置在一旁，不加理會。”
女兒患鼻竇炎＊李燕安（43歲，汽車業者）
“我讀4年級的女兒在過去3個月看了3次專科醫生，醫生說是鼻竇炎，醫生也很奇怪為何吃了藥病還不會好，他還問我住在哪裡。
我們住在這裡已7年，這是從來沒有發生過的事，孩子每天聞到這種臭味，鼻子也出現問題。我的岳母來我家住了3個月，每天都咳嗽。
我已在上個月另外買了房子，計劃搬離公主城。”
健康深受影響＊張先生（39歲，商人）
“我住在公主城第8期，距離焚燒地點約1.5公里，近幾個月來，每天晚上七八點后開始出現刺鼻的異味，比燒垃圾還臭，喉嚨乾燥，其中2個孩子也生病。
我上午7時左右到附近操場運動時，天空灰蒙蒙的一片，開始還以為是濃霧，后才知道是露天焚燒的煙霧。
住家附近有煙霧又有難聞的臭味，居民健康受影響，可是卻投訴無門。”
孩子輪流生病＊陳人豪（42歲，保險業者）
“我住在公主城第2期，距離涉嫌露天焚燒的資源回收廠約1公里，近1個月來，每天晚上12時過后便會聞到一股比燒垃圾、燒芭還濃郁的臭味。
惡臭味無孔不入，關門也會嗅到，帶口罩也無濟于事。呼吸辛苦，常感覺喉嚨乾乾。
我3個年幼的孩子近1個月來也常咳嗽，輪流看醫生，花了不少冤枉錢，我太太（40歲）甚至患上鼻竇炎。”
計劃下月搬家＊彭先生（35歲，商人）
“我住在公主城第4期，距離焚燒地點不到半公里，可以看到煙霧是從某間資源回收公司傳過來，每天晚上8時到次日上午8時的情況最嚴重。
我在這裡住了10年，其實這裡附近常有煙霧瀰漫的問題，受氣嚴重污染，只是近2個月情況比較嚴重。我已在優美城購置新居，計劃下個月搬家。”

古來公主城店屋後巷,垃圾堆積飄惡臭

2007-10-20T22:06:00.000+08:00

（古來20日訊）疑附近外勞隨處丟棄，古來公主城第4期店屋后巷淪為露天垃圾場，各類垃圾堆積已2個多月無人清理。
人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強與柔州政府事務局主任陳仁明，今早接獲投訴后，到現場瞭解情況。
看到滿地一袋袋的垃圾及發出的惡臭味，讓他們兩人也忍不住掩鼻而過。
附近居民李燕安表示，這些垃圾相信是附近外勞所丟棄，堆積在后巷已有2個多月，未見當局派員清理。
他說，垃圾的惡臭味不但污染環境，也有礙衛生，希望當局關注

Forum Krisis Kehakiman Negara-林甘短片,引爆我國司法風波

2007-10-19T12:25:00.000+08:00

林甘短片,引爆我國司法風波座談會

日期:25/10/07(星期四)

時間:晚上7:30-10:00

地點:新山晶冠酒店4樓會議廳(4th,Hotel Crystal Crown)

主講人:安華(人民公正黨實權領袖)

:金格(政治評論員暨作家)

:西華律師(人民公正黨副主席)

入場免費,請踴躍出席

OBSESSION WITH WHISTLE-BLOWERS INDICATES AUTHENTICITY OF LINGAM TAPE.

2007-10-10T10:42:00.000+08:00

The government’s obsession at pursuing the whistle-blowers while meticulously avoiding mention of the two principal alleged culprits – lawyer V K Lingam and present Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz – is the surest tell-tale sign that the Lingam video clip is not only authentic, but is also known to the government to be authentic.

Significantly, three full weeks after the exposure of this explosive video clip (on Sept 19) which revealed political manipulation and illicit fixing of senior judicial posts, both alleged culprits have not openly denied the serious charges, and have also steadfastly remained incommunicado and invisible to the public.

Instead of going after the alleged culprits, de-facto law minister Nazri Abdul Aziz made a desperate attempt to dig at the whistle-blowers. Quoting a non-existent “Witness Protection Act”, he went to the extreme of offering a face change through plastic surgery as the ultimate protection to lure the anonymous source behind the video to come forward to the government.

Nazri warned that “a probe into the clip will come to nothing if the whistleblower does not come forward to verify its authencity.” He added that if the witness failed to appear, “we can conclude that they are lying”.

Nazri’s stipulation of the whistleblower’s appearance as pre-condition to this investigation defies all logic.

The evidence is the video clip. Authenticity should be built primarily upon a technical analysis of the clip - whether the person that appears in the video is actually Lingam himself or an actor impersonating Lingam, or whether the voice in the clip belongs to Lingam or dubbed from another person. These can be ascertained by analyzing Lingam’s mannerism, voice, tone, accent, linguistic expressions and vocabulary, and compare these with those found in the clip. Unless Lingam claims that the clip is a fake, there is even no necessity to go into these exhaustive technical details.

SOURCE OF WHISTLE-BLOWER IRRELEVANT

In the absence of a challenge from Lingam, Nazri’s insistence in hinging the whole investigations on the appearance of the video maker is all the more unreasonable, for there is still the question of credibility of any self-claimed video maker that may emerge. If a person emerges to claim he films the video, can we take his word as proof that the clip is authentic? Of course not, we still have to go through the technical analysis, if Lingam insists it is a fake. Finality is rested with the technical analysis, in case of dispute. Then why turn the video maker’s appearance into an absolute pre-requisite for the entire investigation?

That the original whistle-blower’s identity is not even relevant to the uncovering of a major scandal was amply illustrated in the Watergate scandal in US in the early seventies when the scandal was finally resolved with the resignation of former President Richard Nixon. Throughout the lengthy investigations, the identity of the mysterious whistle-blower codenamed “Deep Throat” was never revealed, and yet this non-revelation of the source did not prevent a fruitful conclusion of the entire investigations. Incidentally, the two Washington Post reporters, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, who first exposed the scandal, were honoured by the award of the nation’s top literary prize - the Pulitzer - to the newspaper, in recognition of their journalistic achievement. This is of course in contrast with the treatment received by our poor whistle-blowers – PKR vice-president R Sivarasa and Anwar Ibrahim’s political aide Sim Tze Tzin - who have been hounded by our Anti-Corruption Agency. They were served with notice under Section 29 (c) of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997 to reveal the source of the video clip to ACA within seven days from Oct 4, failing which they are liable to be jailed for two years and fined RM 10,000/-.

What a contrast in the way a genuine democracy handles a major government scandal with that adopted by a corrupted pseudo democracy like Malaysia! The former honours its whistle-blowers and punishes the culprits (even the chief executive of the nation), while the latter punishes its whistle-blowers, and protects the culprits.

VIDEO IS GENUINE

Why did I say earlier that the video clip is genuine and that the government knows that it is so? The answer is apparent from the conduct of the alleged culprits and from the government, elaborated as follows.

1. The alleged culprits have chosen to be in hiding and refused to publicly declare their denial or admittance on the serious allegation of illicitly “fixing” top judicial appointments, even three weeks after the eruption of scandal. If this prolonged silence is not prompted by guilt, then what causes the silence?
2. All the top political leaders including PM, DPM, Nazri and other ministers, ACA, police, and even the newly appointed three-men panel have meticulously avoided the mention of Lingam and Fairuz. Why? Shouldn’t these two alleged players be the first target of enquiry – unless everyone already knows the answer?
3. Nazri’s earnestness in seeking the video maker to the extent of offering plastic surgery reveals his subconscious acknowledgement that the source is a genuine video maker capturing the Lingam conversation, otherwise, how could Nazri in his wildest imagination have expected a criminal making a fake video to be so foolish as to appear himself just because there is assurance of full protection including face change?

4. Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi joined the chorus of support to seek out the source of this video clip. He was quoted in Penang on Sept 7 to have said that the video maker should know a lot more about this video clip which could enable the authorities to secure more comprehensive information and evidences for a fair investigation. Pak Lah appealed to the whistle-blowers and photographer to co-operate with the authorities. (Sin Chew Press, Sept 8). Now, if that is not an acknowledgement that the clip is genuine, then what is? Or is it conceivable that Pak Lah was persuading a con video producer to tell the truth to the government? Hadn’t Pak Lah already pre-supposed the authenticity of the video clip?

Since in reality no one is in doubt of the video, then why appoint an “independent” three-men panel to investigate the authenticity of the clip, if it is not an exercise to cover up the ugly truth?

LAME-DUCK PANEL SUPERFLUOUS

The lame-duck, morally deficient panel hardly concealed its role as a stooge of the ruling power UMNO on its first meeting with the press on Oct 3. Apart from confirming the panel’s total lack of legal power to carry out its task properly such as compelling evidences, panel leader Haider Mohd Noor emphatically rejected the suggestion to call Lingam to testify. When pressed further, he said: “If he wants to come …….I don’t know”. Isn’t that amazing - the investigator fighting shy to call Lingam when the latter should have been the most urgently sought witness to answer the prime question of whether he (Lingam) did or did not make that incriminating phone call? Haider’s telling answer to the reporters leaves one with no room for imagination as to whether he already knows the answer.

In the same press conference, Haider invited the public who have knowledge of the video clip to come forward to give evidence. But that invitation was swiftly slammed down by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, who appointed the panel a few days earlier, with the directive that the panel was not to interview anyone other than receiving reports from the ACA, police or other government agencies. With no power to investigate and no access to witnesses, the panel’s superfluous function is self-evident.

With Najib deliberately setting up a dummy panel on one end and Nazri frantically and irrationally pursuing an elusive whistle-blower at the other, we are left with no alternative but to conclude that the entire government strategy in dealing with the present crisis is imbued with dishonourable intentions – to cover up the scandal at all costs to preserve the status quo.

If that is not the case, an honourable government would otherwise have set up a fully empowered royal commission of inquiry in the first instance so as to get to the bottom of our judicial scourge, as a prelude to full judicial reforms.

And that is what all patriotic Malaysians must fight for, if we are serious about restoring independence and integrity to our fallen judiciary.

Kim Quek.

PS. You may make history by being signatories to the petition to Yang di-Pertuan Agong to set up a royal commission of enquiry. All you need to do is to email your name and IC number to: savethejudiciary@gmail.com. The full text of the petition can be read at: http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com.

槍桿子底下的政權.....緬甸

2007-10-09T10:06:00.000+08:00

耗資近1000萬令吉的小販中心,成为名副其實的蚊子館’

2007-10-03T12:03:00.000+08:00

古來訊）人民公正黨揭露，古來市議會近年來耗資近1000萬令吉興建209個小販中心單位，但平均使用率卻不超過30%，是古來最失敗的計劃。該黨古來區部主席劉順強說，根據2006年總稽查司報告書，這209個小販單位，原本在去年1月至9月，所獲得的出租收入應該是77萬令吉，結果市議會卻只收到6萬，即只佔7.2%。他表示，根據他所取獲的資料，該部門近年來大興土木，在轄區內興建了約16座小販中心（共209個單位），即古來約10座、士乃3座、沙令1座、加拉巴沙威1座及亞逸文滿1座。小販中心偏僻停車位不足他指出，小販中心成立的用意是要將流動小販或有興趣營業者，集中在一處營業。

然而由於現有的小販中心地處偏僻，交通不便，停車位不足，不符民眾使用需求及經營不善，加上規劃不當，導致許多座小販中心慘淡經營而出現荒廢或空置現象。只有古來21哩小販中心、古來19哩小販中心及古來黃金花園小販中心的使用率達近半的水平。“許多小販中心可說是蚊子的‘安樂窩’，名副其實的‘蚊子館’，甚至被破壞的情況非常嚴重。”

“古來市議會對許多民生和環境問題置之不理，卻對浪費民脂民膏的小販中心濫建工程如此熱衷。我想請問市議會，對這些濫建工程是否有作建前評估？以何種統計方式計算人流、商機、客源來發展這些濫建工程？”他認為，這些濫建工程是市議會監管不力所導致，但令人不明白的是為何當局只注重這些“大工程”，卻忽視了一些與民眾有切身關係的“小工程”。他希望當局能夠解釋這些濫建工程到底對區的發展有何助益？說明如何分配這些工程撥款，以確保撥款不遭濫用。

他也呼吁那些對2006年總稽查司報告書有興趣者，到http://www.audit.gov.my/閱讀。

星洲日報/大柔佛•2007.10.02

THREE-MEN PANEL NOW!

2007-10-01T15:00:00.000+08:00

No sooner had the spirit of the nation been elated by the historical “Walk for Justice” held in Putrajaya on Sept 26 than it was doused by the Malaysian Bar President’s hasty acceptance (on the same day) of the three-men “independent” panel hurriedly announced by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak on the previous day Sept 25.

Najib’s so called independent panel is a ploy designed to deflect the real target of cleansing our corrupt judiciary, which has been crippled by dictates of the executive.

By accepting the panel, the Bar has placed its own request for a royal commission of enquiry in abeyance, weakened the positions of other petitioners to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for the same commission of enquiry, and dampened the fervour for change that has rapidly gathered momentum across a wide spectrum society since the exposure of the Lingam video clip by Anwar Ibrahim on Sept 19.

Najib’s panel is a complete nonsense, for it not only misses the forest for the tree in its scope, it is also totally inadequate in respect of moral authority, legal power and impartiality of panelists. Let me elaborate.

SCOPE OF ENQUIRY

The panel’s term of reference is limited to ascertaining the authenticity of the video clip. But the nation is more interested in the hanky-panky that is going on between the prime minister and top judges as indicated in the Lingam – Fairuz telephone conversation. Lingam has given us a lead as to how judicial appointments and promotions (especially in top positions) are made based on personal loyalty to the political and financial interests of the prime minister as brokered by business and political cronies. We want to know the extent of political control exerted on the judges and how it has caused miscarriages of justice in the past. Only by finding out the truth can we rectify the wrong.

Authenticity is of course a pre-requisite to any enquiry, but in this case, it is almost a foregone conclusion as both Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz and lawyer V K Lingam have not openly denied such serious allegations two weeks after the video’s exposure .

Is it conceivable that in this day of instant communication and revolutionary technology that the government, having access to the video for two weeks just like the rest of the world, is so ignorant of the authenticity of the tape, that it has to appoint an “independent” panel to ascertain it while refusing to consider anything else? What conclusion can we draw other than it is a government tactic to diffuse public pressure and to buy time to wiggle its way out of this damning scandal?

MORAL AUTHORITY

This panel is appointed by the Deputy Prime Minister and presumably reporting to the same. But don’t forget that this video is about the prime minister manipulating the judiciary for personal and political gains – a serious breach of the Constitution by the head of the Executive, and by extension, the ruling party who stands to gain politically in this illicit relationship. So wouldn’t there by a conflict of interests if the deputy head of the Executive were to appoint a panel responsible to him to uncover the sins committed by the Executive? How would an administrative panel under the jurisdiction of the deputy prime minister be able to command the kind of moral authority required of it?

LEGAL POWER

This Najib panel is only an administrative body without the legal power to summon witnesses and compel evidences. It cannot even directly interview those implicated to obtain details from them. So its findings have to be based on those from the police, Anti-Corruption Agency and other government bodies.

So we do not expect the panel’s conclusion to differ from those of the police or ACA, and we don’t see how call such investigations “independent”.

IMPARTIALITY OF PANELISTS

The leader of the panel is Haider Mohd Noor, a former chief judge of Malaya, now chairman of Bumiputra-Commerce Bank Bhd, which is controlled by DPM Najib’s brother Nasir. Haider is also a trustee of Perdana Leadership Foundation, which is used by former premier Mahathir as his base to continue his political activities after he stepped down as premier. And as then prime minister, Mahathir is seen as the ultimate manipulator of the judiciary when the Lingam video was recorded in early 2002, and as such Mahathir should eventually be the prime target of investigation in the present scandal.

With these connections to the interested parties, Haider is already ill-suited to participate in this panel. However, Haider’s worst problem comes from his dubious role in the infamous judicial crisis in 1998, when Mahathir unjustly sacked then Lord President Salleh Abas and two other Supreme Court judges, resulting in the subjugation of the institution of judiciary to executive control until this very day. Haider, as Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court then, ordered the court seal and doors to the Supreme Court be locked, in defiance of Supreme Court Judge Wan Suleiman’s request, so as to prevent an emergency court hearing, which would otherwise have issued an injunction to stop the Tribunal that led to Salleh’s dismissal.

Panelist Lee Lam Thye is chairman of the National Service Council and reports directly to Najib who is also Minister of Defence. Lee is also a director of Media Prima Bhd which is UMNO’s media flagship that controls its vast media empire of newspapers, TV, radios, etc. It is mainly through Media Prima that UMNO exercises its stranglehold on information dissemination that has kept vast sections of the populace in the darkness with regards to the real crises confronting the nation precipitated by UMNO’s serious misrule. And UMNO, as the real political power controlling the country, is of course the beneficiary of the unholy politician-judiciary nexus, and therefore a hugely interested party in the present investigation of the Lingam video clip.

In addition to these questionable links to the interested parties, Lee is suffering from an image problem arising from his sudden and mysterious resignation as No.2 leader in DAP that caused a party crisis on the eve of 1990 election. Many continue to hold Lee in suspicion, citing his move against his party in 1990 as part of a plot that enabled then Prime Minister Mahathir to call a snap election at the enemy’s weakest moment. And of course, Lee’s subsequent elevation in social status (a Tan Sri now) and wealth (directorship of many companies), much of which through goodwill of the ruling power, does not help to shed his image as some one deeply beholden to the ruling party.

An important purpose of the enquiry is to restore confidence to the judiciary in particular and the government in general, whose image has been much tattered by a series of grave scandals in recent days. The appointment of a panel with such questionable backgrounds can only deepen the people’s mistrust of the entire establishment.

ROYAL COMMISSION

It will be seen that all the above weaknesses can be overcome, if the Yang di-Pertuan Agong exercises his power under the Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950 to appoint a royal commission of reputable individuals to probe the video clip. This commission, which will be vested with legal power to summon witnesses, compel evidences and provide protection to witnesses, will ascertain the extent of decadence of our judiciary and recommend appropriate remedies. The report will be submitted to the Agong for deliberation by Parliament.

There is of course no guarantee that a good royal commission report will lead to the salvation of the judiciary, as shown in the case of Royal Commission Report on the Police completed several years ago. Though the report on police is excellent, but our police force continues to deteriorate as reflected by continuing scandals and mounting crime rates, despite huge fortunes being spent in upgrading facilities and increasing manpower. This is due to the lack of political will to eradicate the root causes of rampant corruption and wanton human right abuses.

Nevertheless, a royal commission is an important first step, as effective exposure by a dedicated commission will open the eyes of the people to the gravity of our weaknesses, thereby giving impetus to the mass movement that will compel the hands of the government to initiate the necessary changes.

Allowing the status quo to continue is not an option, as a deteriorating judicial system will hasten the slide in investors’ confidence that was set in since the Asian financial crisis a decade ago. The consequential damage to our economy and national well being will only accelerate under the intensifying pressure of globalization. These mounting economic challenges in an ambience of worsening racial and religious tensions as has been taking place now under UMNO’s leadership will surely drive this nation towards disintegration.

It is therefore vital that all Malaysians treat the present judicial crisis as reflected by the Lingam video clip as a life-or-death issue that must be tackled with full force until it is resolved. In this respect, it is heartening to see that Parti Keadilan Rakyat already submitted its petition to the Agong for a royal commission on Sept 28, and there are indications that other bodies will follow suit. This is the time when the people must unequivocally exert their collective will to make this commission a reality.

Finally, it is hoped that the Malaysian Bar would urgently review its position with regards to Najib’s panel, and once again take the lead role, as natural guardians of law should, in a renewed charge towards thorough cleansing of our judiciary. And that means Najib’s panel must be rejected forthwith.

Kim Quek

ONLY A ROYAL COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY WOULD DO

2007-09-26T13:47:00.000+08:00

The hurriedly arranged three-man panel announced by DPM Najib on Mar 25 to investigate the explosive Lingam video clip is obvious a ploy to achieve 3 objectives, namely:

To take the steam off the proposed Malaysian Bar’s march in Putrajaya on the next day Mar 26.
To prevent a full scale investigation by a Royal Commission of Enquiry.
To close the case in the shortest possible time so as not to obstruct the imminent general election.

Najib’s denial that the panel’s formation was a reaction to the Bar Council’s move is easily demolished by the penal’s chairman Haidar Mohd Noor. Asked whether he has received his letter of appointment and terms of reference, Haider said: “I have not received anything as yet. I guess, because of the urgency, they called us up first.” Haider further said: “I was just informed today (Tuesday) of our appointment. We need to know what our role is.”

Now, if Najib’s announcement is not to pre-empt the Bar Council’s move, why should he have been in such a hurry - announcing the panel’s formation on the same day that the appointees were told of their appointment, even before the latter knew the terms of reference or receive the appointment letters? What is the reason for such indecent hurry, that the announcement must be made one day before the Bar Council’s march? If it is not to derail the march, then what is such hurry for?

According to the Star, the terms of reference are to “investigate the authenticity of the video clip”. The panel’s finding should be “based on police and other government agencies’ findings. It can probe further into the findings but cannot directly be involved in interviewing and obtaining details from those implicated. Findings will be submitted to the Cabinet, subsequently made public”.

It is obvious that Najib’s proposed investigation is totally unacceptable.

That the investigation is for ascertaining authenticity of the video is a clear demonstration of the government’s total lack of sincerity. Such investigation is a sheer waste of time, as no body is ever in doubt of the video’s authenticity, especially when both the Chief Justice and V.K.Lingam have chosen to be in hiding one full week after such serious accusations were leveled against them.

What we need is a total exposure of the treacherous politician-judiciary nexus that has existed since 1988 until this very day. It is this betrayal of our Constitution by top political leaders and top judges that is the root cause of countless cases of travesty of justice - including some heinous ones - that have ravaged our judicial system and defamed our country. Unless this terminal malignancy is properly diagnosed and effective remedial measures taken, how can we save this country from the inevitable slow death?

Only with the work of a Royal Commission of Enquiry appointed by his Majesty Yang di-Pertuan Agong, with full power to get to the bottom of this prolonged tragedy, can we hope to extricate this nation from the present mess.

Kim Quek.

RISING IN UNISON TO FORCE JUDICIAL REFOMS

2007-09-25T10:32:00.000+08:00

Congratulations to the Malaysian Bar Council for rising to the occasion in the face of naked assault on our judicial system as highlighted by the explosive video clip that exposes evil political manipulation of the judiciary.

The Council has called on the government to immediately set up a Royal Commission of Enquiry to get to the bottom of the depraved state of our judicial system. And to demonstrate the Bar’s resolve, it has unprecedentedly called on members to march from the Palace of Justice to the Prime Minister’s Department in Putrajaya to deliver the memorandum of request to the Cabinet (on Sept 26).

It is indeed heartening to see the Malaysian Bar living up to its role as vanguard in the defence of judicial integrity. Let this be the start of a determined nation-wide movement to cleanse our judiciary of entrenched political manipulation.

The Video Clip
The eight minute video clip exposed by Anwar Ibrahim on Sept 19, capturing lawyer V.K.Lingam in a telephone conversation with Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz held in 2002, is amazingly illustrative of the devilish practice that has corrupted the Malaysian judiciary for the past two decades. (Fairuz was then Chief Judge of Malaya, No.3 in judiciary).

The Lingam video reveals how the prime minister decides on senior judicial positions – not by consultation with the judicial fraternity but by listening to “whispers” by close business and political cronies, who function as agents for the prime minister’s personal financial and political interests (words in inverted comas in this article are the exact words used by Lingam in the video clip conversation). It also confirms that the criteria of selection are not based on judicial merits but on political and personal allegiance to the prime minister. Persons on the preference list are termed by Lingam as “key players” and “soldiers”. Judges favoured by the then independent-minded Chief Justice Dzaiddin Abdullah who often defied the PM’s wishes are classified as in “the other camp”. Judges loyal to the prime minister including “Eusoff Chin, Ahmad Fairuz” are said to have “fought for” the cause. Fairuz was even praised for giving “110% loyalty”.

In the telephone conversation, Lingam and Fairuz were discussing the strategy to outsmart Dzaiddin so that more judges loyal to the prime minister could be placed in key positions. Fairuz must have impressed on Lingam that central to this strategy was the prompt promotion of Fairuz himself to higher position and pressed Lingam to help out.

Lingam repeatedly assured Fairuz that he had been working hard on this, and Lingam even described how he managed to get Fairuz the Chief Judge of Malaya job through “brainwashing” Vincent Tan (then Prime Minister Mahathir’s business crony) into convincing Mahathir to give the job to Fairuz. (Fairuz was appointed CJM in late 2001).
Lingam also promised Fairuz that he would ask Vincent to remind the PM to bestow a Tan Sri ship to Fairuz so as to “elevate” the latter’s position.

Lingam ended the conversation with assurance to Fairuz that he would pursue hard on Fairuz’s promotion and would arrange for Fairuz to meet Vincent and Tenku Adnan (a minister and a political crony to Mahathir) confidentially, prior to a meeting with the PM.
As it turned out, Fairuz was made a Tan Sri in June 2002, promoted as President of the Court of Appeal (No. 2 in judiciary) in December 2002, and eventually as Chief Justice in March 2003.

Public fury

Despite the common knowledge that Malaysian judiciary has been under political manipulation for many years, nevertheless, the revelation of the video clip caused a firestorm of fury and protests. This is akin to a wife being shown a snapshot of the long suspected unfaithful husband caught with his pants down. Though the revelation is not new, its electrifying effect is still the same – enough to cause the wife to blow up in a state of frenzy.

It is encouraging to note that Malaysian society across the board, safe the ruling coalition, reacted instantly with indignation and a determined spirit that this hideous mutilation of our judiciary must be halted. All opposition parties, the Bar Council, numerous NGOs and individuals have voiced their anger and demanded the immediate setting up of an independent commission of enquiry to probe into the revelation of the video clip, with a view to seek long term solution to our much battered judiciary, in addition to meting out punishment to the culprits.
While the nation is at boiling point, where are the culprits – Lingam and Fairuz? A week has lapsed since the revelation, they are still no where to be seen. There has been no open denial of their role in this shameful episode.

Meanwhile, top guns of the establishment – PM, DPM, Minister in charge of law, and even the attorney general – seem to be pursuing the same well trodden path of smothering the fire set off by a high-level scandal. Their objective may be the same, but their tactics vary. Worthy of mention are those of the AG and the PM.

The strangest is from the AG who, as top law officer of the government, incredibly thinks that there is nothing wrong with the substance revealed by the tape.
The saddest is from the PM, who seems to aim his gun at the whistle-blower, instead of the culprits. The most revulsive part of his statement is his claim that “the video was released with the aim of getting the people angry with the country’s judiciary system” and his warning that “those who released the video, as well as those who lodged ACA reports” would be punished, if the video was found to be not true (The Sun, Sept 21).

To these leaders indulging in the denial syndrome to deceive the nation, let me ask this common sense question. If you are the alleged culprit, and the video is a fake, wouldn’t you have jumped up to declare your innocence in the first instance and reported the fraud to the police so as to nail the forgers? Being most knowledgeable of the law, the Chief Justice should not only do this for his own personal interest, but he is in fact absolutely duty-bound to do so, so as to defend the good name of the judiciary. Hence, instead of threatening the whistle blower, wouldn’t it be more appropriate for the PM to get the principals of the scandal to publicly declare their straightforward answers and to follow this up with an independent enquiry?

Strategy of Action
Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi flatly rejected the notion of an independent enquiry during a press conference on Sept 21; instead, he asked the police to investigate the case, starting with determining the authenticity of the tape. We know only too well what this will lead to, as we are very familiar with the government’s modulus operandi in dealing with scandals involving top officials in the ruling clique (the Chief Justice is undeniably one, according to the tape) – investigation by either police or the Anti-Corruption Agency, then long delay until public interests have waned, and eventually the attorney general emerges to declare case closed due to inconclusive evidence.

Knowing Adullah’s style of leadership, the Bar Council must brace itself to a disappointing response (or rather non-response) from Abdullah on the memorandum to be presented on Sept 26, and plan for alternative strategies to push the agenda ahead.

A silver lining in the cloud is our King, who is empowered under the Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950 (Revised 1973) to appoint a commission to inquire into any public matter as he deems fit to uphold public interests. In this connection, the people are encouraged by the righteous utterances of royalties in recent days and are confident that the King, with the backing of his fellow rulers, will not hesitate to exercise his constitutional power to protect the rights and interests of the people when the occasion so arises.

The Malaysian Bar as primary defenders of law, political parties, NGOs and the civil society at large should therefore seize this opportunity to forge concerted efforts in appealing to the King, as well as in organising other mass movements that would place the nation on-course to restoration of integrity in the judicial system.

Meanwhile, we should realise the serious constraints to spreading public awareness of the perils to our nation caused by a maimed judiciary, as the ruling BN still exercises complete stranglehold on the local press and TV channels. As of now, none of these has identified the culprits in the video clip or publicised Bar Council’s proposed march from the Palace of Justice to the PM’s Department on Mar 26.

It therefore falls upon the shoulders of those already enlightened through organized bodies and the Internet to work doubly hard towards achieving our aims. For a start, let us together make the proposed march on 26th a momentous event – one that is fitting to usher in a new era of judicial reforms.

Kim Quek.

燈光反射‧影響視線,60盞照明燈釀光害

2007-09-21T21:46:00.000+08:00

公正黨古來分部財政蔡傳茂（左起）、劉順強及執委三西所站的10尺位置，便安裝了路燈、照明燈及街燈。

（古來21日訊）強勁燈光反射，影響駕車人士視線，大古來聯邦大道南下路段逾60盞照明燈釀“光害”，惹起民怨！
人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強說，上述路段只有約一公里長，卻有3種路燈並排而設，包括主要幹道的路燈、大古來蘇素一路人行道的街燈及兩燈之間的照樹明燈。
他說，其中在兩盞路燈之間的100呎內，至少出現3盞照明燈，燈光射向樹木並反射到南下駕車人士的雙眼，影響到他們的視線，形成“光害”。 “街燈與路燈距離太近，兩燈之間又有照明燈，燈火過于通明，其實，很多新村更需要路燈或街燈。”
劉順強今早在一項新聞發佈會上，提出上述批評。陪同出席者包括人民公正黨古來區部財政蔡傳茂及理事山希。

光線充足可減少罪案
大古來聯邦大道南下路段逾60盞路燈強勁的反射燈光，影響駕車人士的視線。劉順強說，很多人在夜裡要以光線來增加安全感，並認為充足的光線可以減少罪案發生，可是錯亂的安全燈可能會適得其反，造成浪費與破壞環境，甚至造成光害。
“雜亂的路燈或照明燈所造成的現像，可能會造成混淆的雜光，使路人留意不到障礙物，進而釀成意外。”
他說，當光線並不是照射至預定目標時，便會浪費能量，如數10盞固定照明燈的光源，向老樹照射而不是向地面照射，不但不符合成本效益，也對治安沒作用。

劉順強也透露，大古來蘇素一路人行道上的多盞街燈，已脫落與破損多時，無法照明，可是卻未見當局派員維修。影響駕駛者視線★劉文峰（駕車人士）
照明燈是有美化的作用，但我覺得這條路不是很需要安裝，因為會讓駕車人士感到有點刺眼，影響視線。
大古來蘇素一路整條人行道，有許多盞街燈的燈管已脫落及損壞，卻沒有得到良好的維修，入夜后也不能照明。”

街燈壞了沒維修★瑪里慕古（商家）
以前照明燈的燈光是射向地面，比較低，會直接傷到眼睛，現在則是射向大樹，我覺得對視線影響不大。
這裡很多街燈壞了很久，都沒有人來維修；而清晨6時左右，雖然四周仍是漆黑一片，可是部分路燈與街燈卻已熄燈，擔心會發生罪案。”

資料庫
＊光化學煙霧

是造成光害的原因之一。在密集居住的都市，很容易發現都市的近空籠罩在一片“紅棕色”的薄霧之下，那即表示都市的上空聚集著許多二氧化氮氣體，正是光害的現象之一。
光化學煙霧指的是某些氣體，如氮氧化合物，會吸收光能而產生化學連鎖反應在大氣層中；平流層中的臭氧層，臭氧分子吸收紫外線分解成氧氣的過程，也是一種常見的光化學反應。

＊光害與環保問題

保育人士所提出的“光害”，導因于人類在夜間使用大量的燈光，除了影響具有趨光性的動物、昆蟲的行為外，也有可能因星相被遮蔽，影響靠星相做為導航系統而在夜間遷徙的動物。
光污染影響了動物的自然生活規律，受影響的動物晝夜不分，活動能力出現問題。此外，其辨位、競爭、交流的能力及心理皆會受到影響，更甚的是獵食者與獵物的位置互調。光害也會破壞黑夜的天空。
＊減少光污染
根據不同的光污染產生的問題，解決方法也有所不同。可能的解決方法包括：
★改善固定光源的照射，使其可以準確地照射到需要的地方，而不是向樹木漫射；
★改善光源的種類，使得光波較不容易產生光污染問題；
★重新評估或設計現在的照明計劃，使只有真正需要照明的地方才會受到光線照射，其他地方則盡可能關掉光源。

劉順強：綠化須考量環境,密集種樹不環保

2007-09-21T21:44:00.000+08:00

（古來21日訊）人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強非議大古來密集種樹，是離譜的綠化工程，也非常不環保。
他今午在一項新聞發佈會上指出，不苟同古來市議會所展開的大古來綠化工程，即在15呎的距離空地上，栽種3排紅棕櫚、1排有毒的變葉木及2排的其他植物。
他認為，綠化前必須考量樹種的強健，是否能適應生育環境與空間，否則有關樹種可能會因不適應而死亡；而景觀綠化的植物所要表現的是形、色和質感，必須定期做適度的修剪或整形的工作。
恐阻擋視線
“我們也要考慮到樹木的生長是否迅速、耐移植及容易存活，以便能早日發揮綠化效用；此外栽植時也必須考量周圍環境，例如樹間距離，以免樹木成長大樹后會阻擋視線。”
他說，待大樹栽種及成長后才視其情況來定奪，是非常離譜的說詞，也非常不環保。
他說，綠化工程不能即興，也不能為工程而找工程而浪費公款(完)
中國報陳明燕報導

馬來西亞和平集會變流血騷亂,大選前夕朝野政黨角力戰開鑼

2007-09-21T15:08:00.000+08:00

撰文郭華盈
2007/09/18, 週二

馬來西亞登嘉樓州峇都布洛海灘9月8日發生一場罕有的流血事件。警方在驅散集會群眾時，面向群眾開槍，導致兩名公眾受槍傷。
馬來西亞人權委員會宣佈將針對騷亂展開調查。和平群眾集會演變成兩人受槍傷、七人受傷以及23人被捕的騷亂，恐怕是馬來西亞獨立以來少有的警方真槍實彈對付集會群眾的流血事件。受傷的兩名民眾，分別是37歲與21歲的巫裔男子，前者胸部中彈，後者頸部與肩膀中彈。當時，約500名群眾準備出席一場由乾淨與公平選舉聯盟（Coalition for Clean and Fair Election， BERSIH，簡稱公選盟）主辦的講座，不過由於警方阻止集會進行，同時派出350名後備隊人員與便衣警探鎮壓，警方在鎮壓行動中，動用了水炮車與催淚彈驅散群眾。

兩天後，馬來西亞國內安全部發出指示，在下一屆全國大選前禁止所有公開群眾集會，目的是避免不愉快事件再度發生。這項禁令讓原本的 “警方自導自演說”不再停留在猜測階段。針對公開群眾集會禁令，時評人劉鎮東指出，禁止群眾會只是把原本已經處理得十分糟糕的流血事件，弄得更不堪。或許是察覺處理手法不當，國安部週四改口說只要符合特定的要求，警方還是會發出公開群眾集會准證。他指出，事件發生後，原本還不確定那是不是一場警方挑釁導致的流血事件，一經國安部發出禁止公開群眾集會，反而讓人選擇相信主辦當局的“事先策劃的暴力事件”指責。“讓人覺得那只是（政府）不要面對公選盟提出的議題的藉口而已，”劉鎮東指出。公選盟對媒體闡述事發經過說，由於發射實彈的便衣密探企圖煽動集會人群，結果被出席者發現其身份可疑，欲趨前逮捕時，就拔搶向人群射擊至少兩枚子彈，導致兩名回教黨黨員蒙受嚴重槍傷。

因此，警方先開槍傷人才引起公憤，導致情況陷入混亂，最後演變成一場騷亂。然而，警方有不一樣的說法。警方發言人事發隔天指出，一名後備隊人員向圍攻他的群眾開了一槍，之後糾正爲開槍者是便衣警探，他一共開了四槍。

警方還有以刑事法典第307意圖謀殺條文下調查兩位受槍傷的傷者。警方較早前指控20名公眾人士，包括兩位傷者企圖傷害開槍自衛的警員。公選盟成員之一的回教黨，指責騷亂經過執政聯盟成員之一的巫統策劃、警方挑釁下發生的，並且把矛頭指向首相阿都拉巴達維的政治秘書。製造騷亂的目的不外是在下屆大選來臨前破壞在野黨形象的同時，阻止民眾獲取關於執政集團國陣腐敗貪污與濫權的真相。阿都拉也不示弱，他反駁說在野黨慫恿群眾騷亂，皆因他們無法在過去執政的五年時間內爲登州帶來任何發展所致。阿都拉口中的在野黨就是在1999年至2004年在登州執政的回教黨。上週六的講座是公選盟的第七場巡迴講座，它之前的六場巡迴講座皆順利舉行，皆未遇上任何阻擾和騷亂。

公選盟是由31個公民社會團體及五個在野黨組成的組織，旨在促進乾淨、公平及符合民主標準的選舉。公選盟一直要求執政政府使用永久性墨水、整理選民手冊、廢除郵寄選票以及確保媒體機構公正與中立報道選舉消息。公選盟要求，國內安全部長(即首相阿都拉巴達維)與警察總長解釋，爲何在和平集會中擅用實彈，以及任何合法組織舉辦的集會都不需要警方發出准證，同時獲得警方給予全面合作。他們同時呼籲警方不再成爲巫統或國陣政治利益的棋子。

公選盟週四向人權委員會提呈備忘錄，要求調查便衣警探向和平集會群眾開槍、聯邦後備隊採取暴力手段驅散群眾的手法，以及警方禁止公開群眾集會已嚴重侵犯憲法賦予的集會自由等事宜。爲什麽回教黨會提出巫統策劃騷亂的說法呢？回教黨指出它在集會展開前，收集到警方有意煽動與挑釁群眾的情報，以及警方沒收了到現場採訪攝影記者的相機，採訪記者也在隔離現場，無法獲取第一手的資料。上述種種跡象令人懷疑該場流血事件是經過策劃的騷亂。

公選盟指出，報章上刊登的大多是警方向官方新聞社馬新社提供的照片，幾乎清一色是顯示街道起火燃燒、示威者向警方丟拋物品等，企圖把在野黨與其支持者描繪成暴力、製造騷亂、破壞公物的不法分子。公選盟強調，主流媒體不中立、盲目譴責在野黨支持者縱火襲警的報道，卻隻字不提警方如何以暴力打壓集會者，乖離了也扭曲了事實。在野黨與政治觀察家普遍認爲，執政政府採取暴力手段對付和平集會者，折射了當局擔憂本身在登州的影響力—可能無法在來屆大選繼續執政。

研究本土回教政治的劉鎮東不排除，目前在登州執政的巫統，面對一定程度的威脅，“現階段國陣當然不會倒臺，然而，即使是百分之十席位的更動，都可能讓（與巫統分庭抗禮的）回教黨獲取整十個席位。”巫統目前控制登州州政府全數32個議席中的28個，回教黨則贏得其餘4個。回教黨副主席胡桑慕沙日前指出，回教黨有信心在來屆大選奪下登州32個州席位中的24個，再度執政登州。胡桑做出上述推測，皆因回教黨2004年因爲近萬張的可疑或幽靈選票輸掉登州政權。他強調，回教黨會在下屆大選設法確保那一萬張可疑選票不再出現。

在野黨一直批評幽靈選民，即已故或不存在的選民投票，改變投選結果，讓他們敗陣下來。他們指出，幽靈選民問題在1999年與2004年全國大選特別嚴重。曾是執政聯盟成員之一、巫統爭取巫裔選票主要對手的回教黨，在1999年全國大選交出漂亮成績單，它在該次選舉中贏得27個國會議席，同時奪下登州與吉蘭丹州政權。在玻璃市、吉打、檳城、霹靂、雪蘭莪與彭亨州也有所斬獲。在野的人民公正黨顧問，也是前副首相安華依布拉欣指出，登州州政府在企圖阻止州內民眾獲取替代資訊的企圖與努力，可視爲州政府已失民心，2004年全國大選失去登州政權的在野回教黨，極可能重新執政的指標。

馬來西亞第11屆全國大選，在2004年3月舉辦。根據憲法至少每五年必須舉辦大選的規定，第12屆全國大選必須在2009年3月以前舉行。無論如何，不論是政治觀察家還是朝野政黨，去年已開始談論何時舉行大選，近月來大選近在眉睫之說更顯炙熱。劉鎮東表示，除了唯一的公開演講與集會，執政聯盟（國陣）之一的巫統，已經牢牢控制了馬來西亞主要人口—巫裔選民獲取資訊的所有管道，包括國內所有媒體機構。馬來西亞的英語（除了《太陽報》）與馬來語報章，甚至於電台與電視台，都由巫統或親巫統的集團控制。換言之，巫裔群眾獲取資訊的管道已被執政黨之一的巫統牢控。公開的群眾演說與網絡上的部落格與新聞網站，是目前僅有未被收編的消息來源管道。顯然，在野黨與非政府組織主辦的公開演講，特別是關於執政政府貪污舞弊的真相，對巫統政權而言，是一個不可等閑視之的威脅。也因爲如此，國安部發出的禁止公開群眾集會指示，才被在野政黨與非政府組織批評爲妨礙民眾獲取非主流，特別是不利政府的資訊，等於否定了憲法賦予的集會與言論自由。

在野政黨更直指國陣政府利用登州騷亂事件，作爲大選前禁止公開集會的藉口，事實上是爲了阻止反對黨與民間組織，繼續向人民揭發政府的失誤和弊端。安華指出，警方與主流媒體已經與執政當局同流合污—前者成爲捍衛執政聯盟權勢的工具，放棄保衛人民的專業與任務；後者在媒體上扭曲事實，企圖抹黑在野黨與非政府組織形象，阻止民眾知道真相。這位誓死不會重新加入已經“徹底腐敗”的巫統的巫統前署理主席認爲，登州流血事件恰巧出現在2006年國家總稽查司報告，揭露個政府部門數億元公帑被官員巧取豪奪出爐之際，似乎有企圖轉移民眾對公共機構舞弊濫權，以及浪費公帑注意的嫌疑。

Go to this site to check if your name is still in the electoral rolls.

2007-09-21T14:56:00.000+08:00

To contribute to the society, appended below is the website you can check whether you are still registered for the next coming election. Do your part, exercise your rights!

Go to this site to check if your name is still in the electoral rolls.

http://daftarj.spr.gov.my/daftarbi.asp

Please ask all your friends to check too...

請前往上述郵址查詢您是否下屆還能投票?

幫幫忙,尋找失蹤少女陳茗惠

2007-09-20T17:04:00.000+08:00

家住士姑來麗寧新鎮一名13歲少女出陳茗惠外逛街後與家人失去聯絡，陳爸爸,陳媽媽心急如焚，擔心愛女安危，看到女兒空蕩蕩的房間，陳爸和陳媽媽每晚總是難過地難以入眠.面對時間一天天流逝，陳爸爸和陳媽媽肯切呼籲各界能夠幫忙找尋.

茗惠於9月13日早上11時許，向母親陳媽媽羅森蘭表示欲與朋友到八星廣場逛街；她離家時身穿黑白色無袖汗衫和藍色牛仔褲。陳媽媽羅森蘭當天下午1時許見女兒出外許久未歸，她便撥打女兒的手機電話，結果女兒表示正在新山城中坊逛街。可是，當羅森蘭下午3時許再聯絡女兒時，卻再也聯絡不到女兒了。

網上認識服飾誇張組織成員

羅森蘭指出，洺惠在互聯網上認識到一個服飾誇張的組織的朋友,並與他們頻密地交往，而且還很嚮往該組織的生活。她由於擔心女兒誤入歧途，她便與該組織的負責人見面，可是對方的談話讓她很不放心，而且他們的裝扮酷似重金屬組織。她為了不讓女兒再與該組織成員交往，甚至限制女兒使用電話。

羅森蘭說，該成員服飾誇張的組織自稱通過活動讓學生減壓，活動時間從星期六早上至隔天上午結束，活動地點大多在新山城中坊及金海灣。“對方還聲稱該組織的活動獲得警方許可，因此可在晚間進行.

如果有民眾知道她的下落,可連絡陳爸爸:0127092089

kepada semua rakyat malaysia

tolong mencari seorang gadis kaum tionghua seorang gadis kaum tiong hua bernama tan ming hui,berusia 13 tahuntelah tidak dapat dihubungi oleh ibu-bapanya selepas keluar darirumahnya ,ibu-bapanya merasa bimbang keselamatan anak perempuan merekasehingga tidak dapat tidur lena dan berharap melalui pertolongan semualapisan masyarakat dapat mencari balik anak perempuan mereka.

pada 13/9/2007 pukul 11 pagi ming hui memberitahu ibunya (puan loh)bahawa dia dan kawannya ingin pergi ke skudai parade,pada hari ituming hui berpakaian kemeja tanpa lenggang berwarna hitam putih danjean warna biru,pada pukul 1 petang ibunya bimbang ming hui belumbalik dan cuba menghubungi ming hui dan dia beritahu ibunya berada dicity square jb tetapi pada pukul 3 petang ibunya menghubungi diatetapi kali ini tidak dapat dihubungi sehingga sekarang.

puan loh terus memberitahu anaknya mengenali seorang lelaki dari satukumpulan metaldan berpakaian aneh di satu laman web dan mula bergaulrumit dan anaknya sangat berminat kehidupan kawannya,puan loh merasabimbang anaknya mungkin menjelajah kegiatan haram dan cuba menghubungiketua kumpulan itu tetapi selepas itu puan loh tetep merasa bimbangdan melarang ming hui menghubungi kawan dari kumpulan steel itutambahan pula puan loh diberitahu oleh ahli kumpulan itu kumpulanmereka boleh membantu murid mengurangkan tekanan melalui aktivitimereka masa kegiatan bermula pagi hari sabtu hingga tengah hari hariahad di city square dan danga bay jb tambahan pula ahli kumpulanmenyatakan kegiatan mereka mendapat kelulusan pihak polis.

sesiapa mempunyai sebarang maklumat mengenai berita ming hui bolehmenghubungi bapanya ( encik tan ) 012-7092089 .

聯邦大道密集種樹,阻擋視線影響商機

2007-09-19T12:50:00.000+08:00

（古來18日訊）過度綠化帶來反效果，高聳大樹阻擋視線、影響商機！
大古來蘇素2路店屋前，面向聯邦大道北上路段的土地上，雖然只有區區20幾呎寬，卻有超過2000多棵各類樹木並排而種，密佈交錯，蔚為奇景。
這些樹木包括雨樹、檳榔、柔佛樹及最近剛種植的紅棕櫚。

大古來蘇素2路商家受詢時，肯定當局綠化環境的目的，惟擔心過于密集種植各類樹木，樹長高后會阻擋招牌，影響生意。
令他們費解的是，當局曾在該處種植椰樹后砍伐，現在又改種別的樹，有浪費款項之嫌。受影響的店屋約有60間。

人民公正黨古來區部主席劉順強接獲商家投訴后，今午召開一項新聞發佈會。陪同出席者，包括該黨柔州地方政府事務局主任陳仁明。
劉順強表示，大古來蘇素2路全程不到一公里，當局卻在聯邦大道北上路段旁種植了2000多棵雨樹、檳榔、柔佛樹及紅棕櫚。
“當局于80年代開始在這裡種樹，雨樹、檳榔與柔佛樹排排種，原已非常茂密，最近又開始種約600棵紅棕櫚，每棵紅棕櫚約需100令吉，種植600棵的成本超過6萬令吉。”
他形容有關當局在樹叢中密集種植紅棕櫚是“見縫插針”，且每棵紅棕櫚相距只有約5呎，不但破壞樹木的生態環境，影響綠化效果，也浪費錢。
他不否認，綠化是現代化城市建設的主要部分，能改善生態環境、美化生活、增進人民身心健康、創造良好投資環境及促進經濟發展。

惟他認為，大古來的綠化工程卻是一種浪費，因為大古來街道原本就種滿樹或有蓋長廊來遮蔭，在樹蔭下栽種紅棕櫚是不必要，也不符合商家的需求。
“棕櫚樹將阻擋公眾視線，影響商家的商機；而大古來兩旁綠色隧道已非常有特色，多栽種數排的紅棕櫚，沒有任何特色且浪費公款，商家與人民都得不到任何好處。”
劉順強非議此舉是為工程而栽種，並沒有良好規劃。

州憲報公佈才生效陳仁明質疑未核准
人民公正黨質疑密集種樹與砍樹，是否已獲州政府核准及在州憲報公佈。
柔州地方政府事務局主任陳仁明指出，根據1976年地方政府法令第102條文，地方政府當局有絕對權力安排、種植、照顧或清除一些零亂的花草樹木。
惟他表示，在同法令第103條文下，所有種植、照顧與清除樹木的行動，必須獲得州政府的核准，並在州憲報公佈才能生效。
對此，他質疑當局在大古來聯邦大道北上路段旁大量種樹的行動，是否有遵守上述法令。

樹木過密成障礙曾慶新：暗藏危機
大古來居民協會主席曾慶新認同，大古來聯邦大道北上路段旁的樹木過于密集，並已淪為障礙物。
他表示，綠化環境原是值得鼓勵的事，但種植的樹木不應太過密集，在大樹下種小樹，很不適合。
“這裡附近有銀行，樹木密佈，方便匪徒幹案后竄逃，有一定的危險性。”
他表示，已向古來市議員反映此事，但至今沒有下文。

蔡先生：擔心阻擋招牌:餐飲業者
種太多樹，很浪費，且樹與樹之間太密集了，會引來很多蚊子。
我們擔心紅棕櫚日后長高了，會阻擋招牌，影響到生意。

江先生：沒必要太密集:汽車裝飾商
樹木種起來是很美，有綠化的效果，但太密集了，沒有這個必要。
我營業到晚上七八點，有時有人躲在樹底下都不知道，也不知道是不是劫匪。
蔡先生：視線已被遮掩:餐飲業者
以前有種過椰樹，后來被砍伐掉，改種檳榔樹，現在又種紅棕櫚。
以前這裡的視線很好，能看到聯邦大道，現在都被大樹遮掩住，從大路看上來，也看不到有商店。

莊先生：種的樹太多了:汽車裝修商
以前曾種過椰樹，后來砍伐掉了；覺得種的樹太多了，也很靠近。
現在的情況還好，但擔心以后樹長高會阻擋招牌，影響到生意

新山300多渔民抗议金海湾工程污染海水

2007-09-14T19:52:00.000+08:00

新山讯）柔佛州新山大约300多名渔民展开海上控诉，分乘50多艘渔船在柔佛海峡举行别开生面的和平请愿行动，抗议金海湾工程污染海水，使沿海渔获锐减，严重影响渔民生计。
　　
马新社报道，来自9个渔村的渔民前天下午2时50分乘坐渔船驶近新山丽都海边的金海湾旅游中心，并排在海上，高举大字报，指责有关工程污染海水，并指发展商不遵守赔款承诺。金海湾（Danga Bay）已被归入柔南依士干达经济特区的旅游计划之一。
　　
这次请愿行动的首领马哈蒂（45岁）说，目前金海湾的发展工程已严重污染海水，使沿海的部分红树林被砍伐，同时也因受污染而逐渐枯萎，使海产如鱼、虾、螃蟹及淡菜等锐减，甚至无法生存繁殖。为了生计，他们须前往更深水域，如苯珍水域捕鱼。
当地一名村长班达称，金海湾还未开发前，渔民每天可捕获大约20公斤的虾，收入介于100至200令吉，但如今每天收入最多只有50令吉，严重影响生计。
　　
他声称，他们于2004年曾经要求500万令吉的赔偿，后来经过谈判后，同意降低赔偿额至320万令吉，发展商也承诺赔偿，并在2003年支付首期10万令吉给279名渔民。
　　金海湾公司一名不愿具名的负责人受询时表示，柔州政府拥有金海湾发展计划的30%股权，只有州务大臣阿都干尼才有权对外发言，而阿都干尼目前在中国访问，之能等他返国后，才能回答传媒的提问。

Turn Grief Into Strength *

2007-09-13T22:48:00.000+08:00

All who live must die. But the death of Abdul Razak Ahmad on 12 August was extremely sudden and sad to many. The last time I met him was at midnight that Sunday. He complained of back pain but refused to be persuaded to be taken to a clinic.

His wife, Kintan and beloved grand daughter, “Acang”, were with us at the time.
“Uncle, please take ‘papa’ to the hospital…”
“No, no…I’m ok,” he insisted.

He tried his best to convince us that he was well but asked me to help him sit down. I could not do anything except to sit by him and rub his chest and back. He said that he felt better. Before leaving, I said to call us if they needed anything. But God’s will none knows.

At 1.20 p.m. on the next day, Abdul Razak blew his last breath before his wife and children at Hospital Sultanah Aminah, Johor Bahru. At that moment, he left them and everything else that was temporary in the world.

Inna lillahi wainna ilaihi rajiuun…

I got to know Razak 41 years ago. At that time he was studying at University of Malaya in Singapore, and I in Kuala Lumpur.

The event that brought us together was the seminar on “Communalism and National Unity” in 1966 organised by the University Socialist Club where he was then the President. Our friendship became closer when both of us led the People’s Socialist Party of Malaysia (PSRM) in Johor during the early 70s – he as the Chairperson while I as the Secretary.

After the historic Tasek Utara event on September 1974, where many were arrested including members of PSRM, students and urban pioneers, Razak led a team of lawyers and came to our defence. Not long after, he himself was detained under the draconian ISA legislation.

The life of Razak Ahmad is filled with stories of fights for justice and truth. In a letter dated 9 December, 1995, to his daughter, Azlina, among others said:

“With this letter, I am sending you two copies of the ALIRAN Monthly which carries an article of my case against the Majlis Bandaraya Johor Bahru over the controversial Floating City project.

“I think the Judge who decided the case is very conservative and pro-Government – that was why he called me a trouble maker!”

What was said and fought for by Razak on the Floating City was proven right in the end. Now its only existence is parts of phantom buildings that are unoccupied. Only some rusting steel structures are left to bear witness.

The late Razak was also once the focus of the world news with his brave act of solidarity with the struggle for freedom of the Palestinians. In 1986, he led a team of demonstrators to protest the visit of President of Israel, Chiam Herzoq to Singapura. They were bent on preventing the KTM train’s journey to Singapore by lying down on the train tracks.

And so forth…

In this foreword, I do not intend to recite the entire glorious history of Abdul Razak’s struggle. Not only were I not qualified to do so but worried that I would not be able to do justice to him.

That was why, on my limited ability, I have only taken initiative to accept the task on behalf of keADILan Information, Johor to facilitate this small book. May this collection of expressions and deep felt hearts from individuals who represent various political beliefs and peoples will be read by all and generations to come.

Abdul Razak Ahmad has left us before seeing his ambition fulfilled. Nonetheless, the heavy task and responsibility left behind by him should be continued.

Therefore let us transform this grief into strength; be one and consolidate our wills to continue carrying on his ambitions – that is to stand for a Malaysian society that is just and prosperous.

If the work towards that aim can be burdened together, surely there is no better last tribute to this great person who goes by the name Abdul Razak Ahmad. Alfatihah!

Syed Hamid Ali
Head of Information, keADILan Johor

* Foward to the book Abdul Razak Ahmad: Hidup Berjasa Mati Mulia.