Locally produced movie definition

/* August 31st, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


If we say Bahasa Malaysia (or Bahasa Melayu) is national language, then obviously it should enjoy some privileges (and it does). But then, we also have other languages widely used in Malaysia. What happens if a local Tamil or Chinese or English movie is produced. Its a locally produced movie of course, but it doesn’t fit the requirement of being local movie if 40% or more the script is not in Bahasa. When its category is not locally-produced movie due to this language requirement, it doesn’t enjoy some benefits (like tax EXEMPTION!). So, should we change the rules as suggested by Rais Yatim below (wonder what is “good content”) to consider locally produced Tamil/Chinese/English movies as local movies even if its not using Bahasa Malaysia?

Do you think this is discrimination or implementation of privilege?

I can imagine what PERKOSA will say. What about you guys? Your comments?

LOCALLY produced English, Tamil or Mandarin movies with good content should be classified as local movies so that they can enjoy tax exemption and other benefits, said Information, Commu nication and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim.

He was quoted by Sin Chew Daily as saying that the content of such films need not be in Bahasa Malaysia.

Dr Rais said he would raise the matter in the Cabinet so that the existing policy on the definition of a local movie would also include films in other languages, provided they were produced locally.

He said the movie must also have good content and a box-office hit to qualify for tax exemption.

The daily noted that locally produced Chinese movie Ice Kacang Puppy Love, which was a box-office hit after raking in RM4mil, did not enjoy entertainment tax rebate as it had been classified as a foreign movie.

It was considered a foreign movie as less than 60% of the movie script was in Bahasa Malaysia.

The movie was directed by Tan Kheng Seong or popularly known as Ah Niu who made his name in Taiwan with his pop songs.

Ah Niu, who shot to fame in Taiwan with his hit song Look Over Here andGirl Across the Street, directed and produced his maiden movie under his newly set up film production company Very Good Pictures.

Respect or fear?

/* August 25th, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions 1 comment »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Ex-PM Mahathir: “And respect only comes if we are strong and in power.” – from Malaysian Insider.

Me says: “fear comes if we are strong and in power”.

Reinvention of meritocracy deserves Nobel Prize

/* August 25th, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Someone, please, nominate ex-PM Mahathir for Noble Prize! Reinventing (or misleading) the meaning of a word surely deserves some sort of accolade. We can put an entry in our Malaysia Book of Record for a start. Can also contact dictionary publishers to update their dictionary with new meaning for meritocracy. Malaysia Boleh!

I really feel pity to hear him say this which is putting down his own adapted race:

“It implies dominance by the race with the greatest merit in every field; in education, in business and in all fields of human endeavour “

Really, the statement should be nominated for joke of the year!

Meritocracy allows for change and competition. There’s no guarantee that meritocracy means one race will prevail in all fields of human endeavour, all the time.  By saying the above, is he saying that the Malays are genetically weak? not able to compete in any field? Always going to need a stick to stand properly? That one race (presumably the Chinese) are always superior to the rest? What kind of finding is this?

There’s a reason why we have “sell-by” date. Things don’t usually work well after that.

As for the use of religion as political tool, well, the focus on Malay first itself already going against the religion. On one hand you say you are Muslim with all the good virtues/values of your religion, and on the other hand, you discriminate by putting your race above others, which doesn’t look like fair to me. Really contrast like white and black. Hope you guys can clarify this part because it doesn’t gel.

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad mocked proponents of meritocracy today, calling them racist and decried Malays who support meritocracy as having misplaced pride.

Dr Mahathir also described his Umno party as weak and mismanaged.

The former prime minister blasted advocates of meritocracy, calling them “meritocrats” who are pushing for dominance by one race in all aspects of the country.

Mahathir’s diatribe will likely embolden supporters of conservative Malay NGOs such as Perkasa which has already threatened several times to punish the Najib government over potential reforms intended to make Malaysia a developed high income nation.

“Today we see a lot of Malay NGOs trying to defend the Malay position. Invariably they have been labelled racists,” said Mahathir (picture) on his blog today. “The unfortunate truth is that those who labelled them are equally racists because of their advocacy of meritocracy.”

“If ‘Malaysian Malaysia’ conjures equality between races, ‘Meritocracy’ implies something stronger,” he added referring to the DAP’s old slogan.

“It implies dominance by the race with the greatest merit in every field; in education, in business and in all fields of human endeavour.”

Dr Mahathir said that the campaign for meritocracy is not a campaign against racism but a campaign by racists against racists.

“The meritocrats are as much racists as the Malay NGOs, and Perkasa,” he said. “Incidentally by writing this I know the meritocrat racists will condemn me as racist. So be it.”

The attack on meritocracy by Dr Mahathir comes as the nation grapples with a brain drain that has seen talent from all races abandon the country out of frustration due to decades of government administration that favoured ethnicity and political connections over ability.

The lack of a meritocratic culture and loss of talent is widely acknowledged as the main reason the country has fallen behind its regional peers such as Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan in terms of development and per capita income and is caught in a middle income trap.

Bloomberg columnist William Pesek recently blamed four decades of affirmative action for Malaysia’s  lack of competitiveness.

Dr Mahathir also took a swipe at his party Umno, calling it “weak” and “mismanaged”.

“That is why today we have Perkasa and other Malay NGOs who are as openly concerned about the Malays as Umno once was,” he said. “The condemnation by those said to be advocating meritocracy is because they see the racism of the meritocrats, just as the Malays of 1964 saw the racism of ‘Malaysian Malaysia’.”

Islamist party PAS also did not escape coming under fire from the veteran politician who said that it was using religion for political gain.

“There are quite a large number of Indian Muslims in Malaysia but they do not figure in the political party said to be Islamic,” he said.

“The party, by using Islam, knows full well they are appealing to Malays almost exclusively. But the intention is not to defend the Malays but merely to gain their support. One can say they are not Malay racists. Rather they are Malay political opportunists.”

Dr Mahathir said that Malays who protested against meritocracy were condemned as racists and many therefore dared not support the race based New Economic Policy (NEP).

“Some, perhaps due to mistaken pride have begun to support meritocracy, undermining the Malay position further,” said Dr Mahathir.

Banggarma and Rani ask for divine intervention

/* August 24th, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


These two ladies literally challenged the stated religion’s authorities. I wonder what the body snatchers are going to do now. Probably haul them to syariah court or order counseling? This will be considered as apostasy I guess, so may be fine, jail and rehabilitation.

We can see that most of the problems faced is due to their parents. I guess this gives an idea of the perils of converting due to marriage. I hope our makkal will think carefully before making the fateful decision, so that the chance of our children suffering will be reduced. No point making wrong decision and regret later.

Two women seen in the eyes of the law as Muslims but who consider themselves as Hindus took part in the Timithi Vizla (annual fire walking ceremony) at the Sri Muthu Mariamman Kovil temple in Parit Buntar last Friday.

NONEAccording to Parit Buntar district Human Rights Party Malaysia (HRP) chief M Sivakumar, S Banggarma (left), 28, (Muslim name Siti Hasnah Vangarama Abdullah) had carried the milk pot for a kilometre from Muneesuarar temple to the Sri Muthu Mariamman temple praying for a swift solution to her conversion dilemma.

Rani @ Jamillah Abdul Kadir, 46, also attended the temple function asking for the same favour.

At the religious function, the HRP also went on a signature campaign to highlight the plight of four women trapped in a religious twilight zone.

Besides Banggarma and Rani, M Indira Gandhi and Regina Mohd Zaini, are also attempting to seek royal intervention to solve their conversion dilemmas.

They have exhausted their legal avenues including the religious departments, courts, registration departments and the police.

Their last resort is to appeal for royal intervention from the Sultans of Perak, Johor and the Agong who are heads of Islamic matters in the country.

NONETheir contention is that they have the right to freedom of religion as enshrined in Article 11 of the federal constitution.

Indira is from Ipoh and Banggarma is from Tanjong Piandang, while Rani is from Malacca and Regina from Johore.

According to Perak HRP chief P Ramesh, these four are members of his party, which has collected about 5,000 signatures in support of them.

HRP will present the first memorandum of appeal to Sultan Azlan Shah at Istana Kinta in Ipoh on Sunday at 11am.

They will then approach the Johor Sultan on the case of Regina, followed by the Agong for Rani as Malacca does not have a sultan.

Given away

According to HRP national information officer and Hindraf information chief S Jayathas, Rani’s parents, due to financial difficulties, had given her away to their Hindu neighbour by the name of Kandasamy.

NONEHer Muslim mother Aminnah Ahmadu had married her converted father Abdul Kadir @ Krishnan.

When Rani (right) was 16, she married her Hindu husband who was later forced to convert to Islam as Mustapha @ M Muniandy and they have four children – two daughters and two sons.

Their eldest daughter, 27, is named as Aishah bt Mustapha Muniandy in her birth certificate but the parents managed to change her name to Vijaya Letchumy A/P M Muniandy in her identity card.

However, the other three children, Abdul, 26, Hamzah, 24, and Citra Devi, 16, still carry their Muslim names in their identity cards.

According to Jayathas, Rani had made declarations before a commissioner of oaths that she wanted Abdul to be known by his Hindu name as Ganesan and Hamzah as Nagendran, but the registration department has allegedly refused to make the changes.

Application turned down 

As for Banggama’s conversion case, on Aug 4 the Penang High Court had turned down her application for a court order that would nullify her conversion to Islam when she was seven.

Judicial Commissioner Yaacob Sam had found that Banggama is a Muslim since her parents had converted to Islam in 1983 together with their children and said the civil court has no jurisdiction to hear a case involving conversion to Islam.

NONEBanggama is living in Tanjong Piandang with her fisherman husband, S Sockalingam and their two children Kanagaraj, eight, and Hisyanthini, two.

Banggama’s contention is that she has always been a Hindu and will die one even after the High Court ruled against her.

Banggarma claimed that she was unwittingly converted by the state Islamic religious authorities at the age of seven while she was staying in a welfare home in Kepala Batas, Penang.

Banggarma’s birth certificate revealed that she was born a Hindu on Aug 13, 1982, in Keratong, Pahang, to plantation workers B Subramaniam and Latchumy Ramadu.

She has practised Hinduism even though her identity card stipulated she is a Muslim.

Meanwhile Regina’s father Mohd Zaini @ Krishnan, who had earlier married a Malay woman, had taken her Hindu mother as a second wife and they have three children – two daughters and a son.

The elder daughter was able to convert to Hinduism but not Regina and her younger brother who are still classified as Muslims.

The father died when Regina was four years old and her mother died about five years ago.

Regina had married a Hindu and her problem started when her son Thinas was born and she was unable to register his birth with the registration department.

As for Indira, she had obtained an Ipoh High Court order on March 11, for the custody of her third child Prasana Diksa but is unable to enforce the ruling on her converted husband Mohd Riduan Abdullah @ K Pathmanathan who is hiding in Kelantan with the child.

On July 31, Indira had lodged a police report against her husband for criminal intimidation over using abusive words against her during a phone conversation on July 29 and for refusing to surrender the child to her according to the court order of March 11.

Church gets approval after 20 years!

/* August 24th, 2010 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Nope, this is not a movie or story in Talibanesque settings. It right here in our own Bolehland, errr, TakBolehland in this case.  I guess the RM200k donation will go a small way to alleviate the misery of those rakyat.

Maybe PERKOSA can highlight to us how this delay is justifiable or tramples on those rights they always talk about. Maybe they didn’t get any contract from this?

Just reading this article shows you the gap between ideal and reality. And we are expected to be thankful and grateful???

It remains one of the non-Muslims’ gravamina that they find it increasingly difficult to build their places of worship. But recently, the Johor state government not only approved the building of a church, it also contributed RM200,000 to its construction.

ON Aug 1, the congregation of my church, the Holy Light Church (English), Johor Baru (HLCE), was elated to learn at a special fund-raising service that Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman had granted a sum of RM200,000 towards the construction of our first church building.

A member of the congregation, Suzie Teo, who shed tears of joy upon hearing the announcement, said: “We are overwhelmed by the Mentri Besar’s kind gesture. What was initially a pipe dream is now a dream come true.

“I am so touched to learn that after waiting for 20 years, the Johor state government has not only approved our application but has also decided to partially contribute towards the construction cost of RM3mil.”

Indeed, the Mentri Besar’s thoughtful gesture in our time of need, which is not given at election time, will go a long way to assure the HLCE congregation that the state government is not just a government of one particular race or religion, but that of all Johoreans.

In fact, as we look back at the last 20 years, the entire journey is one of faith, which is obviously not suitable for the faint-hearted lacking any tenacity to persevere from the application stage to the final approval.

It was in September 1989 that HLCE acquired this piece of agricultural land in Pandan, next to the Ponderosa Golf Resort, measuring 8.925 acres. As the HLCE congregation has been worshipping on rented premises since 1952, it is hoped that a permanent place of worship would be erected on this land.

In 1991, the HLCE applied to the Johor state authority to convert the land use from “agriculture” to “religious use”, but this was turned down in 1993. In August 1993, the HLCE received notice that the land would be compulsorily acquired for a joint-venture project between a state agency and a private developer. The HLCE then filed a suit in 1995 against the state government challenging the validity of the acquisition. At this time, I had already moved from Kuala Lumpur and started worshipping at the HLCE.

When I brought to the attention of then Mentri Besar Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin that the land belonged to a church, Muhyiddin immediately instructed that the land acquisition be withdrawn. When Ghani became the Mentri Besar in 1995, he arranged for the withdrawal of the acquisition to be officially gazetted on Sept 3, 1996.

Being only too aware that it would be near impossible for the state authority to convert the land use to religious use over a piece of property measuring about nine acres, the HLCE then had it sub-divided equally into two plots.

Over the years, the HLCE applied for the two plots to be separately converted for institutional and religious purposes. In 2000, the state government approved the piece meant for institutional use. It was not until April 2008, and that also only after the personal intervention of Ghani, that the other piece was converted for religious use.

In June 2010 and early this month, the state security committee and the Johor Baru City Council respectively approved the building plans for the new church sanctuary. Piling work is expected to commence in October.

As shown above, the application and approval process for the erection of non-Muslim places of worship is most cumbersome. As it is almost unheard of that state governments would alienate lands for building non-Muslim places of worship, most lands involved are private lands. Hence, the necessity of having first to convert the land use to religious use before a place of worship can be erected thereon.

Only after the land conversion is approved can one submit the building plan for approval by the local authority. It must be emphasised that when applying for both the land conversion and building plan approvals, the entire approval process is repeated in that the approvals of the district and state security committees are mandatory for both stages. It is also open knowledge that representatives from the Islamic Affairs Department would sit in these committees.

It follows that it is not unusual to take at least five to 10 years from the time the application is submitted until the project finally comes to fruition. Perhaps what creates the most resentment among non-Muslims is the fact that the erection of their places of worship is treated as a security threat.

In the last general election and even today, it remains one of the non-Muslims’ gravamina that they find it increasingly difficult to build their places of worship. They are upset that the approving authorities have scant regard to Articles 3 and 11(3) of the Federal Constitution which guarantee them the right to profess and practise their religions as well as to establish and maintain institutions for religious purposes.

In the case of the HLCE, it had to seek the assistance of various high-ranking government officials and politicians in the last 20 years. While I find them most understanding and helpful, the same cannot be said of the junior and local government officers. As the civil service is almost mono-religious and often devoid of multi-religious sensitisation, it is understandable if they feel that it is against their religion to support the erection of other places of worship.

So when applications are so frequently turned down and approvals are so difficult to obtain, it is axiomatic that the only human reaction is, of course, to convert, albeit illegally, houses, shoplots and commercial premises into worship places.

In the true spirit of the Federal Constitu tion, I wish to reiterate my calls made over the years on the need to establish a non-Muslim Affairs Committee/Department in each state to deal with all matters relating to non-Muslim places of worship.

I understand this has been done in Selangor and Penang. In fact, it was reported that since Pakatan Rakyat took over Selangor, the state government has approved 86 non-Muslim places of worship, comprising 42 Hindu temples, 26 Chinese temples, 13 churches and five gurdwaras.

So if the Barisan state governments want to capture the hearts and minds of non-Muslims, this is one area of contentment which needs their serious and immediate attention.

As a start, the federal government should ensure that any guidelines on non-Muslim places of worship imposed by the National Council for Local Government under Article 95A of the Federal Constitution are adhered to and implemented properly by the respective state governments and local authorities.

There should be relaxation with regard to limitations placed on size, height, length and width of all places of worship, regardless of the religion.

In my opinion, we should also not have too wide a buffer zone between two different places of worship if we want to encourage tolerance and understanding in our multi-racial and multi-religious society, particularly among our young people.

At state level, the state governments should allocate sufficient development funds and ensure that it is built into the structure/local plans and planning approvals requiring developers to set aside ample lands for the erection of places of worship in new housing townships.

If I am not mistaken, the current permitted ratio for the number of non-Muslim places of worship in a housing development is one house of worship for every 2,600 followers of that faith.

This formula should be reviewed because it is neither equitable nor constitutional as it ought to be needs-based, that is, according to the needs of each religious community in that area.

One must also take into account that unlike the Muslims who are homogeneous, followers of Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism and Christianity are not, and within them, there are different sectors and denominations.

In this regard, I am confident that many of our Muslim brethren are sympathetic to the predicament faced by non-Muslims. It is hoped that those in high places will appreciate that withholding and delaying the approval for the erection of non-Muslim places of worship is both unjust and unconscionable.

In fact, all religions teach their followers to be good. It is, therefore, in the national interest to have a society which is religious as this will in turn bring about a healthy nation imbued with the highest moral and ethical standards.

A fortiori, at this Internet age, having a religious society founded on strong spiritual values is the elixir to corruption of morality and mores among our young people.

As a matter of record, it will not be complete without my expressing on behalf of the HLCE congregation our gratitude to Ghani for the financial grant and his kind assistance. Thank God too, for a moment, I thought our church building would not even materialise during my lifetime!

> The writer is a senior lawyer. He can be contacted at Twitter@rogertankm or www.roger tan.com.