Archive for September, 2008

More on the Race Relations Act

September 19th, 2008
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


A bit more on the proposed Race Relations Act, as quoted by Syed Hamid:

Speaking to reporters after addressing ministry staff at a monthly gathering yesterday, Syed Hamid said both ministries would also have to collect input from non-Governmental organisations and individuals on the contents and scope of the Act.

The Act would include provisions on punitive action while using the Federal Constitution as the guideline, he said.

He added that the Act would also touch on race relations through the economic, education and distribution systems.

“There is a great need to work on the mindset of Malaysians and ways to strengthen the relations among all races in the country,” said Syed Hamid.

“We need to give priority on our diverse cultures and on the sensitivity of each race in order to create an ideal environment to live in,” he said, adding that similar Acts in other countries would be used as reference in drafting it.

While MCA youth thinks of the Act as a deterrent to ensure various communities are not belittled, reading Syed Hamid saying that the  “Act would also touch on race relations through the economic, education and distribution systems” implies that it will hinder progress on equal rights. It may well serve to silence any voices that ask about distribution of scholarships, bumiputra equity, company ownership etc. Well, equal does not mean its equal. 🙂

MIC reps wont jump ship

September 19th, 2008
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


MIC’s Saravanan claims that MIC representatives (Human Resources Minister Dr S Subramaniam (Segamat), Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department SK Devamany (Cameron Highlands) and Deputy Federal Territories Minister Saravanan (Tapah)-himself) would not cross over to Pakatan Rakyat following statement by Perak PAS commissioner Ahmad Awang as saying that several MPs from the MIC and MCA would join Pakatan soon.

“Switching camps has never crossed the minds of any MIC MPs. We will not cross over to the opposition. We are staying put and no matter what happens, we will be with BN in good as well as bad times.

“I have spoken to the other two MPs and they have denied that the thought had even crossed their minds,” he was quoted as saying in Bernama today.

7 days in ISA and only 3 main questions?

September 19th, 2008
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


That works out to a question for every two days, with a day to spare. No wonder she wants to sue the goverment. Really waste of time and money.

Kok’s press statement in full
Sep 19, 08 4:21pm
http://malaysiakini.com/news/90052

MCPX

The following is the press statement issued by Teresa Kok who was released after being detained for seven days under the ISA.

I have been released after being detained in solitary confinement in a 6-by-8 holding cell for seven days under the Internal Security Act (ISA). I was informed by the police that they detained me under section 73(1) of Internal Security Act 1960, which means I have incited racial and religious tension and conflict.

After being detained for seven days under the guise of so-called investigations, the police failed to produce any evidence or proof of me being involved in the activities of causing racial and religious tension. They were only able to ask me few questions based entirely on the false and malicious article written by Zaini Hassan under the topic ‘Azan, Jawi, JAIS, UiTM dan ba-alif-ba-ya’ that was published in Utusan Malaysia on Sept 10, 2008.

The three main questions that the investigation officers asked me were:

  1. whether I have mobilised a group of residents at Bandar Kinrara to present a petition to oppose to the azan at the Bandar Kinrara mosque;
  2. whether I have made a statement that 30 percent of the Selangor Islamic Department (JAIS) allocation is to be given to other non-Islam religious bodies; and
  3. whether I have opposed to the Jawi-wording road signages in Kuala Lumpur.

I denied the first two accusations as I did not do any such things as accused. I also told them that the issue of opposing Jawi road signages in Kuala Lumpur were done in January/February 2008 at the request and following the pressure of resident associations.

The resident associations, particularly in Taman Seputeh, were most unhappy because many of the road signages were changed arbitrarily by DBKL a few months before and changed again soon after, this time with Jawi wordings. They were strongly opposed to this kind of wastage of public funds by DBKL.

I was quite surprised that there were no other questions posed to me besides these few main questions.

The ISA is meant to detain people who threaten national security. The three issues stated above have nothing to do with national security. If the police wanted to carry out investigation on me, they can always ask me to give statements in any of the police station and there was absolutely no need to detain me under the ISA for seven days. This is a phenomenal abuse of the power of police under the ISA.

Besides, it is nonsensical for the police to detain me under the ISA merely based on the unsubstantiated article written by an irresponsible columnist in Utusan Malaysia. How can they regard that article as the gospel truth without investigating the writer in the first place? How can Utusan Malaysia publish it without verifying the facts?

I wish to ask the police whether they have called Zaini and Utusan Malaysia’s editors for questioning before and after my detention.

I know that the imam of Bandar Kinrara mosque has publicly denied that I was involved in the Puchong residents petition against azan of his mosque on Sept 13. I am also quite surprised to read in the New Straits Times dated Sept 19 that the official of the Bandar Kinrara mosque was called by the Dang Wangi police for statement recording only yesterday afternoon.

Why did the police do it so late, one week after I was arrested? Why didn’t they check their facts first before they arrest me and put me behind bars?

I see my detention as a ploy by Umno to try to cover up the embarrassment and the outrage of the racist statements made by (ex-Bukit Bendera Umno division chief) Ahmad Ismail in Penang. I wonder why did they choose an innocent person like me as I have never made any racist statements or racist speeches in the past?

I have lodged the police report on Sept 17, 2008 against Utusan Malaysia, Zaini and Dr Mohd Khir Toyo for criminal defamation. I would therefore urge the police to investigate Utusan Malaysia’s editors, those racist bloggers and Khir Toyo under the Penal Code.

As I have mentioned in my previous lawyer’s visit, I will sue Utusan Malaysia, Zaini and Khir Toyo. I have also instructed my lawyers to sue the Malaysian government for my unlawful arrest and detention.

As I am free from ISA detention today, I also call for the release of Raja Petra Kamarudin, the Hindraf Five and all other 60 over detainees under the draconian ISA.

I would also like to thank all politicians in the ruling parties as well as in the Pakatan Rakyat, NGOs, churches and all social organisations who have campaigned and prayed for my release.

TERESA KOK
Seputeh MP
Selangor senior exco
Kinrara state assemblyperson

Isn’t it plain fair for the police to call the other parties – Khir Toyo, Utusan columnist and editors as well?

Race Relations Act?

September 18th, 2008
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


What is Race Relations Act? I found a similar named Act in UK, the 1976 version which was updated in 2000:

The Race Relations Act 1976 was established by the British Parliament to prevent discrimination on the grounds of race.

Items that are covered include discrimination on the grounds of race, colour, nationality, ethnic and national origin in the fields of employment, the provision of goods and services, education and public functions.

The Act also established the Commission for Racial Equality with a view to review the legislation.

The Act incorporates the earlier Race Relations Act 1965 and Race Relations Act 1968 and was later amended by the Race Relations Amendment Act 2000, notably including a statutory duty on public bodies to promote race equality, and to demonstrate that procedures to prevent race discrimination are effective.

In 2003 additional regulations made certain forms of discrimination due to religious belief illegal also.

The Act (2000) is found here.

Back in Malaysia, MCA Youth proposed the setting up of the Act on 14th September, following the arrest of Sin Che journalist Tan Hoon Cheng, but the letting off of Ahmad Ismail:

The MCA has proposed to the government to draft a race relations act to strenghten relations among multi-ethnic Malaysians.

Youth chief Datuk Liow Tiong Lai said such an act was relevant and necessary, in view of racial issues resurfacing and plaguing the nation, of late.

He said the proposed act could also reinforce efforts taken by the unity, culture, arts and heritage ministry to promote unity and solidarity among the people.

“We will propose to the ministry. Such act is needed to look into race relations, (and) how to engage a multi-racial community into postive relations and avoid discrimination.

“Some countries have in place, such an act, where you can’t discriminate or belittle other races,” he told reporters after opening The Federation of Malaysian Clans and Guild Youth Association’s annual meeting here today.

Barely 5 days after that, this is the response from Home Minister Syed Hamid (NST):

The Cabinet has agreed to enact an Act on race relations to prevent possible racial conflicts.
Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said Malaysia still had to cope with sensitive issues relating to racial problems and relationships despite having achieved its independence 51 years ago.

Syed Hamid said his ministry would be working closely with the Culture, Arts and Heritage Ministry in formulating the Act.

He was also quoted on Malaysiakini:

Responding to queries, the home minister said Shafie Apdal’s ministry will be drafting the law after consultations with various groups.

The Home Ministry is tasked with giving feedback on the penalties if the law is infringed.

On the need for the act, Syed Hamid said: “Even in the European nations, a law governing race relations is now important as they too are becoming ‘rainbow’ nations. What more for us?

“But the law is still in the early stages of drafting and it will be take some time before it is ready to be looked at.”

The minister also said that the cabinet will look at other countries’ race relation laws before deciding on Malaysia’s.

Basically, such Acts are to avoid discrimination in services, employment, public functions etc. But in Malaysia, it may also incorporate clauses to ban questions special rights of Malays, nationality of citizens, economic allocations etc.

Uthaya’s appeal rejected again

September 18th, 2008
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Habeas Corpus application by Uthayakumar to be released from ISA due to medical neglect reason have been rejected by the KL High Court. According to the judge, Justice Suraya Othman:

…the claim by the applicant that he was denied proper medication, treatment and proper diet by the Taiping Hospital and officials of the Kamunting detention camp was not true and without merit.

She said the respondents, the Home Ministry and the camp officials through numerous affidavits had stated that all complaints by Uthayakumar were throughly investigated, diagnosed and proper medications were prescribed by doctors at the hospital.

Secondly, the judge noted that vegetarian diet was provided as recommended by a dietician:

According to Bernama, Suraya said the affidavits also revealed that even the camp officials prepared a suitable vegetarian diet for Uthayakumar, who was diabetic, after being recommended by a dietician.

The NST wrote that:

In the application filed on May 22, Uthayakumar claimed he was denied his medication for diabetes between mid-February and April 6.

Prior to that, Uthayakumar, 46, was taking the medicine that was given to him by his fiancee, S. Indradevi, 36, when she visited him at the Kamunting camp.

Uthayakumar also claimed that he had been denied the diabetic diet he requested. Instead, he was given rice and curry which was sweet.

Suraya said Uthayakumar and another detainee, lawyer R. Kengadharan, had scheduled a meeting with a dietician, but Uthayakumar refused to go at the last minute, while Kengadharan kept the appointment.

The dietician prescribed a diet plan for Uthayakumar which was similar to Kengadharan’s despite him not turning up.

“The court is satisfied that all which could be done within the confines of the law was done by the doctor, dietician and prison wardens to assist Uthayakumar,” she said.

She then highlighted that Uthaya changed his appeal from IJN to overseas treatment citing that local doctors will be subjected to manipulation and pressure from authorities.This she says is alarming and insult to the doctors.

She said in his initial notice of motion on May 22 this year filed via Messrs Edwin Lim & Suren, Uthayakumar, besides seeking his release from ISA detention, or in the alternative (second order) to be admitted to the National Heart Institute (IJN) immediately to seek treatment for his diabetes and heart condition.

However, in his affidavit on July 30, he decided not to seek treatment at IJN and wanted the court to substitute the order to allow him to seek overseas treatment from a medical practitioner of his own choice.

Suraya said the applicant in the affidavit had claimed that he had absolute right to choose medical treatment since local doctors would be subjected to manipulation and pressure from the authorities.

Suraya said the court found the reason given by Uthayakumar to be very alarming since he alleged that he could not trust doctors at the government hospitals and IJN.

“He had alleged that these doctors were incompetent, where the court believes this is an insult to their professionalism.”

She said even Dr GR Letchumanan of Taiping Hospital acceded to Uthayakumar’s request to be sent to IJN immediately although the doctor did not feel his (Uthayakumar) condition merited to be referred to IJN.

“Despite two appointments being made to allow him to be seen by two prominent heart specialists at IJN, the applicant, in the eleventh hour, changed his mind and refused to attend.

“This court feels the sudden change in mind by the applicant showed that he was not serious in seeking medical treatment at IJN,” added Suraya.

No independent medical reports? Wonder why Uthaya’s lawyers never asked for independent medical examination. Or was it rejected?