Posts Tagged ‘Crime’

Twists and turns as voting day looms in Hulu Selangor

April 24th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Just less than one hour left before campaign period ends. Voters in Hulu Selangor will make the important act tomorrow and results are expected by late night.

There was some doubts about Bn candidate Kamalanathan’s academic qualifications after RPK said Edith Cowan didn’t have such records. The issue was clarified later by Olympia College and a search at Edith Cowan website.

I was listening to Minnal FM news in the evening and all I heard was this school got RMxxx, that school got RMxxx, This deputy minister solved this issue, that deputy minister solved that issue and so on. Quite a long list. Hulu Selangor Indians are are lucky lot this month. Err..not forgetting the Chinese and also the Felder settlers.

Felda folks get R 50,000 each as compensation for the land taken over by government. Selangor government immediately appoints Zaid to oversea the Felda issues. Even Works minister don’t want to be left out, announcing the elevated highway interchange project to start in 2011 (and nope, its not a sudden project he says). Felcra folks and Orang Asli community also got something from DPM Muhyiddin. Chinese school, Tamil school, all get something.

Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim announces the set up of a Selangor Felda Task Force – headed by Zaid – to look into and tackle the problems of Felda settlers in the state.

Zaid has been given a three-months’ timetable to complete the task force’s terms of reference.

Khalid also announces that the state government has plans for a housing project for second-generation Felda settlers in Selangor. PKR vice-president Mohd Azmin Ali will head this development project in collaboration with state development agency PKNS.

Most humiliating and incriminating is promises of “more goodies to come” if the voters vote for them. Isn’t this inducement?

Everyone get something courtesy of BN (mainly) and PR.  I really wonder if the residents will decide on their vote based on the longevity of the candidate since death brings some much good news. Kamalanathan is in his 40s while Zaid is in his 60s I think.

Ong Kian Ming predicts PR to win with 1000 to 1500 votes while one survey says PR is leading by about 3%, but I still stand by initial  view that the seat is for BN to lose.

Interview with Indira Gandhi

April 16th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Reproduced from Malaysian Insider article.

By Clara Chooi

Indira with her daughter Tevi (left) and son, Karan (right) at their home in Ipoh. — Pictures by Choo Choy May

KUALA LUMPUR, March 25 — Unlike most traditional Indian marriages, kindergarten teacher Indira Gandhi married K. Pathmanathan out of love.

Theirs was not the stuff of novels; it was just a run-off-the-mill high school romance that eventually resulted in an exchange of wedding vows.

What they did not know was that three children and 14 years later, their marriage would be torn apart by a highly-publicised inter-religious custody battle that, until today, remains unsolved.

In an exclusive interview with The Malaysian Insider in her home city of Ipoh recently, Indira vented her frustrations over the ambiguity of the country’s religious laws, and recalled the many trials and tribulations of the past year that had very nearly caused her to give up Hinduism just to keep custody of her children.

The drama, said Indira, actually began from the day after she and Pathmanathan became Mr and Mrs Pathmanathan. Once a doting boyfriend and first-love, Pathmanathan wasted no time in shedding his sheep’s clothing, she said.

“Shortly after we got married, he began to beat me. Over and over again. Most of the time over small, petty arguments,” she claimed. Her allegations cannot be independently verified and is not a subject of her legal case.

Indira, however, said she kept quiet about the beatings, not wanting to blow the problem out of proportion and praying daily that her high school sweetheart would soon return.

And so the couple moved on with their lives without much fanfare. In 1997, Indira gave birth to her first baby girl, Tevi Darsiny. A year later, a baby boy, Karan Dinish, joined the growing family.

The couple struggled through difficult years as financial problems eventually began to cause serious dents in their marriage.

“I took a job as a kindergarten teacher. My husband switched from job to job and we had to move around Malaysia quite a bit. I hardly got to see my family members, not even during Deepavali,” said Indira.

To top it off, she had to settle the household bills and take care of the children all by herself, as Pathmanathan was frequently on the road.

Indira claimed she had to put up with abuse and infidelity.

“Not only that… he began to have an affair with a Thai woman. I knew about it but what could I do?

“Even my children knew about this. Imagine what it felt like when my daughter came home one day and told me — `Amma, I saw daddy with another woman’,” said Indira.

Still, like many broken marriages, Indira and Pathmanathan stayed married for the good of the children.

It was in March last year that the real drama really exploded, she explained, barely a year after she had delivered her third child, Prasana Diksa, a chubby little baby girl who should have been the uniting factor in a disintegrating marriage.

“He came home that day, telling me he wanted to talk to me. When we got the chance, he told me `Why not we all become Muslims? Life would be easier, we would get better opportunities, money would come easier’. He said `Come to Kelantan with me, they will give us land’. I was shocked,” she said.

“I refused and so did my two older children. We fought and he got angry… he began to beat me. My daughter yelled at him, saying `Don’t you ever lay your hand on Amma’. He got angry with my daughter but he did not beat her. He is a very good father to them,” said Indira.

In the midst of the argument, she said, Pathmanathan grabbed 11-month-old Prasana and stormed off.

“The other two did not want to come with him so he just took Prasana,” she said.

Losing Prasana was just a harbinger of worse to come.

At the police station later, Indira was dealt with a stunning revelation — that Pathmanathan had already embraced Islam earlier in the month and had become “Mohd Ridzuan Abdullah”.

“I was shocked because he has always been the religious… he would even go with us to the temples on occasions,” she said.

It was the first mile of a long, bad road from that day onwards, said Indira.

Mohd Ridzuan had even converted all three children into Islam without the presence or knowledge of their mother, after taking the children’s birth certificates from the family home.

“He changed all their names and even informed their schools they were now Muslims,” she said.

It was then that Indira discovered the flaws in the country’s religious laws and just how sticky a custody battle could be when it involved a Muslim-convert and a non-Muslim.

With little choice in her hands, Indira was forced to take her struggle to the courts, and until today, her dilemma has not been solved.

She sought two things — that her children remain as Hindus and that she gets to keep custody of all three.

Since her husband absconded with Prasana, Indira has been living with her two older children in Ipoh.

To date, two conflicting custody orders have been granted to the couple — one to Mohd Ridzuan from the Syariah Court last April and one to Indira from the civil High Court on March 11 this year.

Which order should prevail, however, is still unknown as the country’s laws are silent on that matter.

Meanwhile, Indira’s application to seek leave for judicial review to quash the conversion of her three children to Islam has been set for April 3.

Indira contemplated embracing Islam, in order to be allowed to keep her children.

“I was happy when I was granted custody but yet a part of me also knew that the fight was far from over. I just wish that this never happened. I do not know why he has to do this. If he has found happiness in another religion, I do not care, go ahead with it, but leave the children out of it. I want my baby girl back…” she said.

Indira said that the last time she had caught a short glimpse of Prasana after a year-long separation was in January this year, when Mohd Ridzuan was ordered to bring the toddler to court to meet with High Court Justice Wan Afrah Wan Ibrahim.

Although she had been forewarned by her lawyers, the sight of her 21-month-old baby girl weighed down by a large tudung (Malay headscarf) had moved her to tears.

She voiced frustration at having missed out on so many firsts in Prasana’s growing years, like her first words, her first steps, and even her first birthday.

“I just missed so much… I missed so much. She was taken when she was just 11-months-old. I missed everything. She was such a pleasant child, very easy to care for and we all loved her. As a mother… and a kindergarten teacher, I see children everyday but I can’t see my own baby. Now, I do not know anything about her, how long her hair is, what she likes… I miss my child,” she said.

In fact, Indira said she had very nearly given up at one point and had even toyed with the idea of converting to Islam for the good of the family.

“It was my two older children who stopped me. My son said `If you want, you can go ahead. I do not want to be a Muslim’. He is a bold child… but my children were right… why should we convert?” she said.

She lashed out at the glitch in the country’s religious laws and condemned the government for not acting quickly on the matter.

To date, the government has given no indication on when it would amend the laws governing such religious conflicts.

Indira’s lawyer, M. Kulasegaran, recently said that he would bring the battle back to Parliament again soon, and blamed the legislative body for not moving fast to solve the deadlock.

In the meantime, Indira’s fight continues in the courts.

Today, the Ipoh High Court will hear Mohd Ridzuan’s application for a stay of the custody order granted by the civil High Court to Indira.

But the feisty 35-year-old said she was ready to do just about anything to win custody of her children, especially baby Prasana.

“There is no fight too difficult for me to handle, I will not give up, not surrender because my children’s futures are at stake here. I love them too much,” she said.

She said that she intended to fight this to the very end, even if it meant challenging the country’s 52-year-old system.

The system, Indira firmly added, may fail, but never the love of a mother for her children.

Malaysiakini clarifies on Muhyiddin small fry phrase

April 15th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I’m not sure if the below is an apology or a thinly veiled explanation. Thus their title of “clarification” is justified kot?

On April 12, Malaysiakini had attributed certain remarks to Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin in a report on the interfaith panel, in particular the phrase ‘small fry’.

In denying he had used the phrase, Muhyiddin clarified that he had not spoken in English during the event – a press conference in Rawang.

We wish to clarify that the phrase ‘small fry’ was our translation of his comments in Bahasa Malaysia, interpreted in the larger context of his statement that (paraphrased here):

  • the committee is not a council or commission;
  • it has no decision-making power; and
  • it has an administrative role under the Prime Minister’s Department.

In fact, the Utusan Malaysia online report of April 13 quotes the DPM as saying (our emphasis in bold):

“Sambil menasihatkan semua pihak supaya tidak bimbang dengan penubuhan berkenaan, Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin berkata, ia hanya sebuah jawatankuasa kecil yang tidak akan memutuskan sebarang keputusan berhubung undang-undang atau dasar berkaitan semua agama yang ada di negara ini.

“Ia dibuat di bawah pentadbiran Jabatan Perdana Menteri (JPM) supaya wakil di dalamnya boleh duduk berbincang. Saya tidak fikir ia akan mengamalkan dasar mengutuk perkara berhubung keagamaan. Ia cuma membuka ruang untuk semua bertukar pandangan.

“Tujuan pokoknya untuk mewujudkan persefahaman. Jawatankuasa ini tidak boleh memutuskan sebarang perkara kerana hasil perbincangan akan dibawa semula ke JPM untuk dijadikan panduan penambahbaikan perpaduan antara agama dan kaum,” katanya.

The DPM has since accused Malaysiakini of ‘acting with bad intentions’ and of ‘twisting the facts’.

We wish to put on record that there is no hidden motive in our coverage of events or in presenting the facts. Any misinterpretation of the DPM’s statement is regretted.

For me, they just summarised in few words what the DPM said in few sentences. The meaning is same but I do agree however that the summary (small fry) sounds like acting with bad intentions. Wrong choice of words by MK this time, and should apologise.  The impact is quite bad as religious leaders feel offended by the words. It can be easily spun out of control and thought as insulting religions. Another show cause letter for MK on the way?

Koh Tsu Koon already mentioned that the panel/committee will only discuss issues and put forth suggestions/findings to cabinet. So, what can we do the fellows in PERKASA still have problem understanding things? Laugh at them? Cry for them? Thank God we are not like them?

Business or Principle

April 9th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Today, we went for breakfast at a relatively new Indian restaurant along LDP highway. Its Raj and True, located in the shoplots next to new McD, before Seri Kembangan exit.

I noticed there was plenty of “no smoking” stickers pasted on the walls, and yet there were ashtrays on the dining tables. One patron was smoking in the restaurant (it is a middle unit, so there’s lack of ventilation).

As I was paying the bill, I asked the lady at the counter why there’s conflicting things in the restaurants (no smoking sign and the ashtrays). She said its just a requirement by local council to display such signs, but not followed since don’t want to offend customers. Well she certainly offended me. Her excuse is that will be having an air-cond section soon so non-smokers can sit in there. Furthermore, since everyone does it, so no big deal. Right, like if everyone eats shit, you would too.

Two things here:

1. Restaurants that are closed dining area are considered non-smoking zone. Normal restaurants are not. So, why need to display stickers? Unless the rules changed recently. There’s a list of places provided by MOH and its says only air-conditioned restaurants. I didn’t ask her in detail because she says its local council ruling (I think it falls under MPSJ).

2. If you display such rules, don’t you want to enforce it? If you can compromise on this, one wonder one what else can be compromised in the name of running business. Cleanliness? Bribery? Quality?

So, business comes first for you folks? If you have some principles, better make sure they are aligned to your business because I think business erodes ethics and principles.

Terminating tender without reason clause

March 1st, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


While it may be seen as something which is common or acceptable, the clause (number nine) in PDC’s tender application forms which says contract can be terminated at any time without any reason given upon the order of the Chief Minister or PDC chairman is not appropriate for the CAT policy of the Penang state government. You must walk your talk. At least the reason must be provided, and the contractor must have an avenue to appeal or state his case. Then only fair, right?

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has come under fire for having the power to terminate any contract awarded by the Penang Development Corporation (PDC) at any time without giving any reason.

Umno Youth information chief Datuk Seri Reezal Merican Naina Merican said the insertion of this clause in the PDC’s tender application forms recently was a “psychological threat” to contractors bidding for projects.

He said clause nine in PDC’s Tender Form A stated that contractors could have their contracts terminated at any time without any reason given upon the order of the Chief Minister or PDC chairman.

“How could anyone have the absolute power to overrule the decision made by the state Tender Board?

“This move is not in line with the Treasury’s tender procedures as observed by the Federal Gove rnment,” he told reporters at the Kepala Batas parliamentary-level Juara Rakyat programme launch in Dewan Bakar Kapor here yesterday.

Lim is PDC chairman as well as chairman of the state Tender Board.

Reezal said four contractors had highlighted the problem to him last week.

He said Lim should explain the reasons for introducing the clause and not brush it aside.

Earlier, state opposition leader Datuk Azhar Ibrahim, lashed out at Lim, saying that he hardly showed his face in Kepala Batas but expected the people to continue supporting him like he was their saviour.

When contacted, Penang Malay Contractors Association chairman Datuk Mohamed Fadzill Hassan said he has not received any complaint from his 500-odd members about the clause.

I don’t know anything about this. If there is indeed such a clause, it is not fair because Lim cannot terminate contracts just like that without giving reasons.

“Where is the transparency? The affected party can take him to court,” he said.