"Sekarang ni kita bercakap tentang hukum itu,hukum ini...nak potong tangan...nak dera,nak rejam dengan batu...ini sebenarnya rejam dengan batu takda dalam quran walaupun ada dalam hadis...tapi dalam nak potong tangan pun kita kena fikir,negara kita ini mempunyai penduduk beragama islam dan bukan islam...kalau kita potong tangan orang islam...tapi bukan orang islam mencuri dia hanya dapat dua bulan jel..lama-lama orang islam tak ada tangan..jadi adil ataupun tidak.?? Kalau tak adil itu tak boleh kita laksanakan" -Dr.Mahathir.
Rakan UMNO tentang hasrat Pas laksana hudud...
Walaupun mereka adalah minoriti dalam parlimen, tetapi akan berusaha sedaya mungkin akan menentang pelaksanaan hukum hudud itu. Ketegasan ini menunjukkan kebencian mereka kepada hukum Islam.
Dalam sidang akhbar bersama yang diadakan di Wisma MCA hari ini, seperti dilapor Bernama, kumpulan itu yang diketuai Presiden MCA, Liow Tiong Lai memberi alasan perlaksanaan undang-undang itu (hudud) bercanggah dengan Perlembagaan negara dimana jika ia dilaksanakan akan menjejaskan masa depan negara.
Beliau bimbang sekiranya sistem kehakiman mempunyai dua set undang-undang ia akan mencetuskan kekalutan (imbrologi) perlembagaan yang tidak boleh berpatah balik lagi.
Hadir sama dalam sidang akhbar menentang hukum hudud itu, ialah Presiden Gerakan, Mah Siew Keong, Presiden SUPP Peter Chin Fah Kui, dan Naib Presiden LDP, Chin Shu Ying.
Jelas pendirian itu bukan saja tidak menghormati hak-hak orang Melayu dalam kepentingan agamanya (Islam) tetapi cuba menimbulkan kekeliruan dan kebimbangan di kalangan rakyat. Bukankah tindakan Tiong Lai dan rakan-rakannya itu sebagai menghasut?
Menghairankan sehingga jam 7:00 malam ini tidak ada pula mana-mana pemimpin "shawat" NGO fanatik Melayu mempersoalkan tindakan empat rakan Umno itu, tidak seperti mana mereka mengecam pemimpin DAP apabila menyatakan bantahan kepada hukum hudud.
Alasan diberikan Tiong Lai itu boleh dianggap prejudis kerana ia tidak berpijak dibumi nyata. Tidak timbul akan berlaku kekalutan dalam Perlembagaan dengan adanya dua set undang-undang. Selama ini pun sudah ada pertindihan atau dua bentuk keadaan (pegangan dan amalan) dimana ia tetapi ia tidak menganggu Perlembagaan negara dan rakyat hidup aman damai.
Misalnya mengenai sekolah, bukan saja sekolah beraliran Melayu yang dibenarkan, tetapi aliran Cina, India, Arab dan Inggeris juga dibenarkan. Bukankah ini melebihi daripada dua set aliran persekolahan, mengenai pegangan dan amalan? Ternyata walaupun ada berbagai aliran ia berjalan dengan baik dan tahap pendidikan negara juga berkembang.
Pendirian diambil empat parti komponen itu bertentangan dengan kenyataan yang diberikan oleh pihak Umno yang menegaskan pihaknya sedia memberi laluan kepada Pas. Timbalan Presiden Umno, Muhyiddin Yassin semalam juga menyatakan yang BN sedia menimbangkan hasrat Pas dan akan meneliti sebaik mungkin sebelum memberi kata putus. Katanya Muhyiddin sebagai orang Islam, dia tetap menerima hukum hudud. Alahai...
Manakala menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Jamil Khir Bahrum juga menyatakan hal yang sama. Menurutnya BN tidak halang hasrat Pas untuk laksanakan hudud.
Sehingga ini Najib Razak masih belum mengeluar apa-apa komen berhubung perkara ini. Beliau telah diberitahu oleh Menteri Besar Kelantan Ahmad Yaakub mengenai hasrat kerajaan Kelantan itu semasa kunjungan Ahmad ke atas Najib beberapa bulan lalu.
Janganlah hendaknya Najib memberi alasan untuk menolak hasrat kerajaan Pas itu semata-mata mendengar rasa bimbang yang tidak munasbaah dari empat rakan kongsinya dalam BN itu. Najib harus melihat dari sudut kepentingan dan juga tuntutan agama berhubung pelaksnaan hudud.
Sekiranya Najib tunduk kepada kebimbangan tidak munasbaah MCA dan tiga rakannya itu, jelaslah Najib tidak mampu melatakkan Umno sebagai parti yang unggul dan transformasi yang hendak dilakukan sudah melayang dan tidak membawa apa-apa makna.
Kita tunggu apakah Najib berani atau pun tidak. - MSO@msomelayu.blogspot
Has Khalid overstayed his welcome as Selangor MB...
The Selangor DAP assemblymen who had been Khalid’s strongest supporters after the 13th general election are now publicly reprimanding him for his lack of political will to resolve issues in Selangor.
The second-term menteri besar may thus see the exit door sooner than he thinks.
This shifting of alliances could not be more apparent with the statements made by Selangor DAP chairman and Petaling Jaya MP Tony Pua and deputy chairman and Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo on Khalid’s supposed lack of gumption to tackle sensitive issues afflicting the state.
The state DAP leadership had refrained from making any public criticism of the state administration following the controversial raid on the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM) premises by the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) on Jan 2.
But when BSM announced that it would be moving from Selangor to Kuala Lumpur, seemingly for better protection of minority faiths, Pua was forced to take Khalid to task for a lack of appropriate response to the news.
“Since the January raid and seizure of Bibles conducted by Jais, which reports to the Selangor Religious Council (Mais) headed by the Sultan, the state government had issued various vague promises to help resolve the crisis. There was, however, a distinct lack of urgency or pro-active responses to deliver an acceptable solution for all parties, or at the very least, defend the rights of the victims.
“BSM’s decision to move thus embarrassed not only the state government but also Pakatan and our ability and sincerity to uphold the rights of minorities in a multi-cultural, multi-racial and multi-religious Selangor and Malaysia,” Pua said in a press statement.
Gobind also said Khalid must be fully responsible for the state’s failure to resolve Jais’ illegal raid and seizure. “He cannot push all the responsibility to the federal government.”
“The menteri besar has displayed a total lack of interest and political will in handling the issue and this has resulted in a serious loss of faith of not only the Christians but other Malaysians in his leadership in Selangor.
“It goes without saying that incidents like these demonstrate Khalid’s inability to understand and solve problems that need political courage and strength, and that begs the question as to whether or not he is politically fit and able enough to continue as Selangor MB,” Gobind said in a press statement.
Coming from a political ally, these are strong words indeed. This marked a major shift in the DAP leaders’ stand compared with their statements in January when Khalid was reported to be in danger of being replaced.
Khalid does not enjoy full support from within his party but he had the backing of DAP and PAS due to his good track record as MB in terms of financial management.
Criticisms levelled at him mostly centred on his strict adherence to the regulations and his inability to be more flexible when dealing with business corporations.
This does not seem like a bad leadership quality for an MB who’s more prudent with the state coffers.
However, party insiders lamented that Khalid’s propensity to miss important party meetings and make decisions without consulting party leaders had convinced the PKR leadership that he needed to be given the boot.
However, the idea of having him replaced by Selangor PKR chief Azmin Ali was not viewed favourably by DAP and PAS.
It would seem that with the entry of Datuk Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail in the Selangor assembly, DAP has become more vocal in its criticism of Khalid’s administrative style, especially when dealing with sensitive issues.
Wan Azizah recently won the Kajang state by-election in what was purportedly part of a move to strengthen the Selangor PKR and Pakatan leadership.
It should be noted that DAP’s Sekinchan assemblyman Ng Suee Lim lambasted Khalid in the state assembly last week for distrusting his Exco members and not delegating responsibilities to them.
It was not usual of Ng to use the state assembly to harshly criticise Khalid, even labelling him a “one-man show”.
It has also not escaped notice that the recent outbursts against Khalid came so close to the PKR polls next month where Khalid is vying for the deputy presidency.
Although the public criticisms were from leaders of another party in Pakatan, Khalid would do well to take heed.- Cindi Loo,Antdaily
Karpal Singh, who died in a car accident in the early hours of April 17th at the age of 74, was a rarity in the venomous world of Malaysian politics: a man respected by many of his opponents as well as those on his own side.
That side, for all of a long career in politics, was the opposition to Malaysia’s ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, which has held power ever since independence in 1957. Yet on Facebook and on Twitter condolences to his family have poured in from across the political spectrum, including from the prime minister, Najib Razak, who paid tribute to a “formidable opponent”. Known as “the Tiger of Jelutong” after the constituency on the island of Penang he long represented, Mr Karpal was indeed formidable.
Anwar Ibrahim, leader of an opposition coalition, of which Mr Karpal’s Democratic Action Party (DAP) forms part, mourned the passing of “my brother-in-arms for freedom and democracy, an inspiring symbol for the struggle against oppression and injustice and a man of unimpeachable moral integrity."
For most of Mr Karpal’s political career, opposition politics has been a mug’s game, offering virtually no chance of winning power, and endless trouble, from petty harassment to, in Mr Karpal’s case, imprisonment.
He was one of 106 critics of the BN government who were locked up in 1987 under Malaysia’s Internal Security Act by the government of Mahathir Mohamad, a long-serving prime minister. The act itself was repealed in 2012. Mr Karpal also campaigned long and hard against the death penalty in Malaysia, which still remains on the books.
But Mr Karpal was no mug. He was recognised as a fine lawyer, even if he often found himself on the losing side. In one of his recent defeats, in March, an acquittal that had been won for his client, Mr Anwar, was overturned; a charge of sodomy was reinstated against him. Mr Anwar was sentenced to five years in jail, though he is appealing against the verdict.
A few days later Mr Karpal himself was found guilty—of sedition. Mr Karpal escaped with a fine rather than a jail term, but the conviction caused outrage. His crime was a remark he made during a press conference in 2009, when he merely expressed his legal opinion on a political dispute in Perak, one of the states in the Malaysian federation.
The conviction meant Mr Karpal had to give up his chairmanship of the DAP, the ethnic-Chinese-dominated party that led the charge for the opposition in last year’s election. Their coalition actually won the popular vote. Gerrymandered constituencies mean it has something far short of a parliamentary majority, but death has taken Mr Karpal at a time when prospects for the Malaysian opposition look better than ever before in his long career.
It will be tested, however, by the loss of Mr Karpal, and perhaps of Mr Anwar, too, if he is again removed from the political fray and put behind bars.
Mr Karpal’s popularity was due to more than his tigerish courage and tenacity. His dignity, modesty, humour and courtesy, all played their parts. A BBC radio interview in 2011 demonstrated also the remarkable lack of rancour with which he accepted his life’s many travails—including an earlier road accident, in 2005, that left him in a wheelchair.
It was also a reminder that, though his death has been greeted with respect and regret (some nasty political jibes notwithstanding), that is not how Malaysia's opposition politicians are treated when alive. Mr Karpal had described taunts about his disability and even death threats, in the form of bullets sent in the post. All this he dismissed as "professional hazards". Many people, he said, wanted him dead. “I tell them 'You have to join the queue'.” - the economist.