poobalan.com

I’m wondering if NST wrote this wrongly. It says that Dr Xavier said the state government had approved a policy whereby religious structures of any religion other than Islam must not exceed 10,000 sq ft in size .

This seems to be a ridiculous rule indeed. Why would there be a limit? Logically, the community that wants to build a place of worship will know its own financial strength and the viability of such places. Secondly, religious buildings/structures can double up as tourist attractions. So, limiting the size is inappropriate.

Secondly, those owners of illegally built places of worship will be fined continuously until government recognition is received. This is also illogical. If the owners are in the dark about existence of such places on their lands, or if such places are in process of getting recognition, the fines should be waived.

The Selangor government in July instructed all local authorities in the state to fine owners of houses of worship built illegally, said State Health, Plantation Workers, Poverty and Caring Government Committee chairman, Dr Xavier Jayakumar.
The fines needed to be settled continuously until the owners received government recognition for the houses of worship, he said when answering a question from Sulaiman Abdul Razak (BN-Permatang) in the State Assembly here today.

By the way, I’m still waiting for Jayakumar et. al.’s reply to my email on temple demolition report.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Popularity: 1% [?]

Malaysiakini reports more details from the PR-led state government and a PR MP emerges. Earlier Ronnie Liu gave his points, and now we have Xavier (state EXCO) and Zuraida (MP for Ampang).

According to Xavier, the MPAJ ordered the demolition without the knowledge or directive of the state government. Secondly, the temple is not registered with the state council. He also tries to argue that it is not a temple but a shrine!!!! The size is immaterial. The issue is giving due respect. Don’t tell me can demolish a surau but not a mosque.

“We have a format prepared for temples in Selangor to register with the state but this temple was not on the list of registered temples. And it is not a temple, it is a shrine which it is located on a forest reserve,” he said.

Xavier also denied the accusation by MIC on PR breaking its promise. Instead he said MIC was trying to politicise the issue. (Well, what you expect a political party to do? Crazy fellow!). He says the focus is now to find a way to restore the temple. (OBVIOUSLY!).

“Pointing fingers at another is not going to solve the problem,” he said. “It was actually demolished in 2002 but the temple committee had it rebuilt when the opposition came into power March this year. But they failed to register it.”

So, giving failure to register as an excuse?

Ampang MP, Zuraida Kamaruddin adds more confusion by saying that its was probably a result of misunderstanding between the municipal authorities and the temple committee. How many times have we heard this kind of reasons? Why not just get rid of people who always misunderstand?

The incident happened following a misunderstanding between MPAJ and the temple management on renovation works and documentations relating to management procedures,” said Zuraida in a statement today.

According to Zuraida, some MPAJ councillors had already met with the council’s vice-chief to resolve the matter. Some documents have already been prepared and were under consideration, she added.

She also pointed out that (temple chairman) Murugiah had previously complained the temple’s problems had not been resolved by the previous Barisan Nasional state government even after 19 years.

Finally, Zuraida blasted the MIC for trying to take advantage of the current situation, accusing it of trying to create backlash for the Pakatan Rakyat government.“The component BN party is taking this opportunity to try and restore its organisation and their reports were made to attract attention,” she said.

But Malaysiakini noted that the MP never did explain how and why the temple was demolished. So, she beat around the bush, but could not answer the question.

Meanwhile, the temple’s chairman S Murugiah has demanded to know who was responsible for tearing down the temple. The 37-year old told Malaysiakini that he suspected someone had reported on the shrine and this had led to its demolition.

I also don’t understand the chairman’s comments. If its just documentation or registration problem, surely the MPAJ would have sent letter or warning first. Not straightaway demolish.

So, this is a peculiar case. Who authorised the demolition. Let’s wait for MPAJ boss to answer.

Popularity: 1% [?]

According to Waytha, this was one of the temples that sparked HINDRAF into action. This particular Kaliamman temple in Kampung Tasik, Jalan Baru in Ampang was tried to be demolished a few times, and on 9th Sptember 2008 (two weeks ago), MPAJ officials demolished most of the temple. After that, I remember reading Selangor EXCO (can’t remember who) saying that the state government viewed this seriously and action will be taken against the officers because never consult with the councillors/committee/EXCO first.

Then, we have the following action from MIC:

Samy Vellu condemns the demolishment and took a swipe at the state goverment because it failed to uphold its promise not to demolish any temples. He said the state should have ordered the local council not to demolish it.

Well, I think the local council did not heed the state government ruling. So, we expect to see some heads to roll. Pakatan leaders must talk their words and get rid of such troublemakers in the local council. Having said that, let’s count how many officials were reprimanded or disciplined while MIC was in power via BN prior to this. Anyone with any figures?

Obviously its careless and an injustice to remove demolish the temple without relocating it first. so, stiff punishment is expected.

A very “fast” action from MIC is that after reading in the papers about the demolishment which happened two weeks ago, its Selangor Youth Chief went to make a police report. They are able to take action after two weeks, which is relatively fast, though not as fast as the old opposition. Looks like the opposition party MIC must be a bit more faster in the future and get news from the grassroots immediately.

While Samy is blaming the state goverment over the actions of the local council, I think this shows the lack of authority and cooperation between this two entities. Local councils come under the Housing and Local Government Ministry. If a new state government faces such disobedience from local council, just imagine what respect MIC got in the last decade from these councils. I guess DBKL, MPAJ etc. don’t even give face to MIC leaders, that’s why we had many cases of temple demolishment. So, we can say that MIC is powerless to stop this problem and its not their fault? And now when the new party takes over, same problem. So who is to blame? the local council, the state government or the federal government?

I remember the Selangor state government saying that no more places of worships will be demolished, and establishment of some committees (just like BN style). the EXCO in charge of local government, Ronnie Liu says:

Ronnie Liu, who is chairman of the state’s local government, study and research committee, said the state had issued a directive to all local councils to halt action against places of worship when it came into power but the officers defied the order.

He said that in taking the action last month the officers also bypassed the committee on non-Muslim affairs headed by state executive councillors Teresa Kok, Dr Xavier Jayakumar and himself.

“I contacted the council president a day after the incident and asked him to investigate the matter and identify those involved,” he said.

“I was told that he has submitted a preliminary report to my office but I have not read it since I am away in China now so it would be unfair for me to comment further.”

Liu had said a day after the incident that he was upset with the council officers’ actions and threatened that they would face stiff action.

A day after the incident. Not two weeks.

Popularity: 1% [?]