When 4 Professors Were Too Coward To Meet Students...

4 Professors and A Crown Prince

By now, it’s as clear as crystal that the four law university professors and a big shot crown prince were nothing but a bunch of cowards who had chosen to hide instead of attending a forum to defend their case – Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Despite widespread publicity and invitations extended, the so-called top brains of universities did not turn up for the event.

The Tun Suffian Auditorium in Universiti Malaya was reportedly packed to the brim for the public forum titled “Malaysia dan Statut Rom (Malaysia and the Rome Statute)” on Saturday (April 27), with some even sitting on the floor and on the steps leading to the seats. Unlike the controversial professors, Attorney General Tommy Thomas was there to take the bull by the horns.

The four disgraced academics are Universiti Teknologi Mara’s (UiTM) deputy vice-chancellor and the dean of its Faculty of Law Professor Rahmat Mohamad, International Islamic University of Malaysia’s (IIU) law lecturer Assoc Prof Shamrahayu Abdul Aziz, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia’s (USIM) law lecturers Fareed Mohd Hassan and Hisham Hanapi.

During his political campaign, PM-in-waiting Anwar Ibrahim loved calling local university professors, largely appointed by the previous Barisan Nasional government as running dogs of the regime, as “professor kangkung (water spinach)” – a derogatory, demeaning and deplorable words fit for the professors who were actually empty vessels without substance.

As university academics of the highest rank, the four professors of UiTM, IIU and USIM should lead by example. Unfortunately, their absence at the forum has lent credence to the allegations that the supposedly intellectuals of institution of higher learning aren’t that intelligent after all. The cowardice of the four professors essentially legitimized them being labelled “professor kangkung”.

The gang of four who had apparently ill-advised the Conference of Rulers when they used the tribunals set up against Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany and Emperor Hirohito of Japan – two monarchies who were involved directly in World War I and World War II, respectively – to conclude that the Malay Rulers in the country were not immune from prosecution by the ICC (International Criminal Court).

Rome Statute - ICC International Criminal Court Building

One doesn’t need a rocket scientist to tell that the “consultation” given to the monarchies was extremely suspicious and fishy from the beginning. It was done with the utmost secrecy. It would take nine student activists to expose how some biased justification papers on Rome Statute were drafted and presented to the Conference of Rulers – leading to the rejection of the Rome Statute.

So, why none of the four law university professors dared show their face in the forum to explain, argue and defend what they had written in the papers presented to the Malay Rulers? With four top brains against Tommy Thomas, should not the four professors – Rahmat Mohamad, Shamrahayu Abdul Aziz, Fareed Mohd Hassan and Hisham Hanapi – have little trouble crushing the Attorney General?

Exactly how the professors could continue lecturing students in their respective university after their mind-boggling cowardice is beyond comprehension. In fact, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) law graduate Asheeq Ali Sethi Alivi, who was one of the nine student activists who leaked the paper, openly criticised the four academics’ paper as nothing but “stupid”.

But the biggest star was Tommy Thomas. The Attorney General explained that the “Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King)” will not be charged or held responsible for any war crimes even if Malaysia commits them after accepting the Rome Statute. He used UK as an example. There were no calls for Queen Elizabeth to be charged for any war crimes as she is a constitutional monarch like the Agong.

Mr. Thomas  said – “The Yang di-Pertuan Agong is a constitutional monarch who must act on the advice of the elected prime minister who represents the democratic will of the majority of voters. So for example, if war is declared, although the Agong (King) is the supreme commander of the armed forces, the decision to go to war is always made by the prime minister and the Cabinet and the minister of defence.”

Asheeq Ali Sethi Alivi - Coalition for Academic Freedom

A.G. Tommy Thomas also lectured those attending the forum that the Rome Statute was created following some of the world’s worst crimes such as genocide and the Holocaust that occurred in then Hitler-led Nazi Germany. Thomas questioned the objection against acceptance of the Rome Statute, noting the four crimes are practically non-existent crimes in the country.

The jurisdiction of the ICC covers four international crimes – genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. Since the country’s independence in 1957, the Parliaments and lawmakers, including all past prime ministers and attorney generals did not require the four international crimes to be legislated simply because such crimes are non-existent.

To argue that the four international crimes might happen in the future could only mean one thing – one or some of the Malay Rulers have an evil plan to conquer the world, the same way Emperor Hirohito of Japan or Dictator Adolf Hitler of Germany slaughtered millions during the World War II. But if that’s true, then the more reason for Malaysia to sign the Rome Statute.

Responding to allegations that Malaysia’s Malay Rulers or Sultans would not be immune to prosecution in the ICC once the treaty is signed, Thomas pointed out that their legal immunity was long lost. True, the Article 181 of the Federal Constitution initially stated that the monarchs cannot be sued or charged in court – in their official capacities as a Malay Ruler or personal wrongdoing.

Thanks to the Johor Crown Prince Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim’s grandfather, who beat up hockey coach Douglas Gomez in 1992, not to mention the murder of a golf caddie in 1987 while serving as Agong (King), then-PM Mahathir Mohamad amended the Artile 181 in 1993 to create a Special Court where the rulers can be charged with any personal wrongdoing.

The Special Court, established under Article 182, is the only place where both civil and criminal cases against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King) and the Ruler of a State in his personal capacity may be heard. Such cases can only proceed with the consent of the Attorney General. Therefore, the Malay Rulers or Sultans have already lost their immunity since 1993.

 

Tommy Thomas, Noor Farida and Shad Saleem Faruqi

A.G. Tommy Thomas also dropped a bombshell – that the former Barisan Nasional government had actually decided in March 2011 to ratify the same Rome Statute that they are now rejecting. Noor Farida Mohd Ariffin, who was directly involved in the preparation of the cabinet paper for Malaysia to ratify the statute in 2011, has confirmed that the paper was sent to all relevant agencies for feedbacks.

Noor Farida, who was also the Ambassador of Malaysia to the Netherlands, said – “All agencies (that received a copy of the cabinet paper) agreed, except for the AG’s Chambers at the time, who were vehemently against it. Unfortunately, the foreign minister at the time never signed the instrument until he left office after the defeat of BN on May 9 (14th general election) last year.”

Clearly, A.G. Tommy Thomas was right to slam the previous Barisan Nasional government as a hypocrite for criticising against the Pakatan Harapan government’s move in March to sign the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, when the previous regime had itself decided that Malaysia would accept the international treaty.

Comically, fellow forum panellist Shad Saleem Faruqi pointed out that 14 other countries with a constitutional monarchy system – including the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Spain, Sweden and Japan –  had signed the Rome Statute without experiencing the same “false fears” like Malaysia, suggesting monarchies such as the Sultanate of Johor should stop embarrassing itself unnecessarily.

Yes, not only opposition Barisan Nasional has demonstrated its highest hypocrisy condemning the signing of the Rome Statute, the four “professor kangkung” have lost their integrity and reputation in the eyes of university students and should be sacked. More importantly, the crown prince looks incredibly dumb for believing some stupid papers prepared by the half-baked professors.

However, Constitutional law expert Shad Saleem was absolutely correct in recommending that enforcement authorities such as the army, police, and others should be briefed on the Rome Statute. After decades of feudalistic mindset and 60 years of racism, bigotry, intolerance and extremism indoctrination by UMNO, the backbone of the Barisan Nasional, it’s wise not to underestimate their blind loyalty and ignorance. - FT

Si tukang sihir yang bijak...

Ahli politik itu lebih bijaksana daripada Tukang Sihir atau Tukang Silap Mata. Tukang sihir hanya boleh menyilapkan mata penonton beberapa minit sahaja ketika penonton terpukau dan ralit, tetapi orang politik boleh menjadikan mata penonton dan pendengarnya tersihir dan tersilap mata hingga ke rumah.

Para penonton dan pendengar syarahan Najib Razak ini, mungkin menerima apa sahaja penafian Najib terhadap semua pertuduhan ke atasnya sebagai fitnah. Mereka pun akan mempercayainya. Cara Najib untuk menyihir dan memterbalikan mata mereka, senang sahaja, sesekali sebut ayat Quran dan bersandarkan kepada nama Abdul Hadi Awang.

Semasa PR bersama2 melawan kleptokrat BN dulu tiba2 

sebuah parti dlm PR buat hal.. beginilah lebih kurang keadaannya..

Dengan mengaku dia secara senyap-senyap menjalankan kerjasama dengan Abdul Hadi, adalah merupakan seni sihir yang hebat di mana kerjasama itu menunjukkan Abdul Hadi secara tidak langsung telah menafikan yang Najib melakukan jenayah. Sekiranya Hadi ketika itu mempercayai atau menyedari yang Najib melakukan jenayah, menyonglapkan wang syarikat 1MDB SRC International tentu kerjasama sencara senyap itu tidak dilakukan.

Apakah Abdul Hadi juga tersihir sama dan matanya telah tersilap oleh permainan Najib.

Nafi sana, nafi sini. Walaun menjerit kata fitnah. Rupanya memang betul usaha senyap Najib dgn Hadi bersenyawa menipu ahli masing² masing. Solat hajat Perdana bagai mendoakan UMNO mampus.Tuhan pun korang kelentong? - MSO

Imagine, when Najib was in power and when the RM 2.6 billion "donation" and SRC scandals were first exposed, the bank branch Mgr, Uma Devi knew EXACTLY what was going on in Najib's banking transactions, but she had to keep her mouth shut because the #Malaysian Crook was at the helm.Kalau tidak, guaranteeeee 1000% dah kena simen!!! - f/bk

Dulu bukan main,la ni baru tau...

cheers.

Lopak raja lain, ruang politik lain...

Ketua Bersatu Negeri Sembilan, Tan Sri Dr Rais Yatim meluahkan rasa kurang senang dengan kenyataan ‘lebih baik tukar perdana menteri’ dititahkan Tunku Mahkota Johor (TMJ), Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim.

Menerusi ciapan di laman Twitter beliau, bekas menteri kanan itu mendakwa Tunku Ismail banyak berbicara perihal politik.

Bahkan, Rais turut meminta baginda menghentikan sindiran mahukan Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad diganti kerana ia adalah hak rakyat biasa.

“Kalau mahu cakap politik, sila daftar masuk parti politik. Lopak raja lain. Ruang politik lain.

“Jangan campur aduk ikut selera anak raja saja. Nanti huru-hara rakyat. Tolong waras,” tulis beliau.

Baru-baru ini, tular satu rakaman video memaparkan kenderaan TMJ beredar meninggalkan Stadium Tan Sri Dato’ Haji Hassan Yunos, Larkin, Johor, selepas perlawanan bola sepak membabitkan JDT dan kelab dari China, Shandong Luneng.

Ketika kenderaan baginda melalui sekumpulan penyokong JDT, seorang individu melaungkan ‘Tukar Mora’ yang merujuk kepada Jurulatih JDT, Benjamin Mora.

Kenderaan yang membawa TMJ kemudian berhenti seketika dan dari dalam kenderaan tersebut, baginda kemudian bertitah: "Daripada tukar Mora baik tukar Perdana Menteri." - SH

Mahathir to make way 

for Anwar on 20.2.20?

When Dr Mahathir Mohamad announced that he was stepping down during his first term as prime minister that fateful afternoon on June 22, 2002, it came as an extreme shocker because no one had expected it. Even Dr Siti Hasmah Mohamad Ali told the media the following day that she gasped in disbelief at her husband’s announcement, because he did not inform her earlier of his intention.

We can all recall the drama of tears and pleadings that took place at the Umno general assembly 17 years ago. That was the Mahathir of old, and no one should expect the new Mahathir to change. He was 77 then and 93 today. Is there a new Mahathir, by the way? 77 or 93 is still old. There is only an older Mahathir. I doubt I would be shocked today even if he announced his intention to step down tomorrow.

Immediately after the pandemonium that erupted at the Putra World Trade Centre, and anguished cries of disbelief from party loyalists, Mahathir was persuaded to adopt a prolonged transition period, which he accepted. Malaysia’s fourth prime minister eventually stepped down in October 25, 2003, and passed the baton to his anointed successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

In recent days, talk about Mahathir stepping down has been making its rounds. I don’t believe there was anything sinister in it this time. In fact, it was Mahathir himself who started it by saying that he wanted to resign, in a fit of anger perhaps.

All present at the Bersatu meeting last Monday could see that the prime minister was one unhappy man that day over the Johore exco debacle and his constant exchanges with the state royalty. Thankfully, Muhyiddin Yassin  was able to defuse the tense situation and he did the right thing by being apologetic to Mahathir over the Johor exco issue.

However, I think Muhyiddin’s aide went over the top in the defence of his boss by stating that an “influential person” offered Muhyiddin the prime minister’s job soon after Pakatan Harapan won last year's general election.  That was unnecessary and out of line because, even if it was true, Muhyiddin was never a contender for the premiership. A case of an overzealous and overenthusiastic aide!

I was in Parliament early this month and over tea in the cafeteria, an MP friend asked me whether I’ve heard that Mahathir will be stepping down in November this year. “No” was my reply, because I had not heard anything about it and told my friend that he should know better since he is within ear-shot of decisions made at the top. He is a Harapan MP.

As he elaborated, I began to see where he came from and thought what he said was logical and sensible. The MP said that Mahathir probably had informed those in his inner circle that he had had enough as the prime minister and that he has done whatever he could. There was nothing more he could do even if he were to carry on as prime minister.

The other thing, as all are aware, is the age factor. It is a fact, as stated by Mahathir himself, that he did not expect Harapan to win GE14.  Returning as prime minister at 93 is not something anyone would have wished for in a thousand years. But as fate would have it, it happened. Harapan’s victory was nothing short of a miracle.

I then asked my friend, “Why November?” "That would be exactly a year and a half from May 2018. The agreement is two years for Anwar Ibrahim (below) to succeed him. 

"Mahathir would probably bring Anwar into the cabinet as a senior minister over the course of this year in preparation for the transition,” he said. While I was aware that the MP was merely speculating, it makes sense to me too.

I have no doubt that Mahathir will honour his promise to Anwar. He had repeatedly assured that the PKR president will succeed him. I honestly do not see a U-turn by Mahathir on this one. It would be a mortal sin to renege on this all-important promise that is known to all.

Whether we think highly or have little respect for Mahathir or Anwar is irrelevant. Anwar is the anointed eighth prime minister of Malaysia of the Harapan coalition, not just of Mahathir this time. All must accept this as Harapan was duly voted into power and democracy demands that this decision of the government in power be respected.

If there is anyone out there, within or outside Harapan, who attempts to curtail Anwar’s ascension to the premiership, let him or them be forewarned that such a dirty move would incur the wrath of many right-thinking Malaysians, irrespective of whether they support Harapan.

I would not be surprised if certain quarters were to make life difficult for Anwar when he is prime minister. I believe Anwar is aware of people lurking behind the dark shadows, watching his every more and ready to fault his every misstep.

Meantime, Anwar must be prepared and ready to step into Mahathir’s shoes any time. After the June 2002 shocker, no one should be taken by surprise anymore if the prime minister suddenly announces his resignation.

Assuming that Mahathir does so in November, as speculated by my MP friend, perhaps a three-month transition period would be good. This will give Anwar enough time to pick his own team in the cabinet and plan what he intends to do during his first 100 days in office, at least.

That will take us to February 2020, the year Mahathir had proudly declared for Malaysia to be an industrialised nation in his “Vision 2020”. It appears that ‘2’ and ‘0’ are his preferred numbers. Mahathir also chose June 22, 2002, as the date when he announced his first resignation from the premiership.

If that is so, then the date of his second departure as PM will be more significant if he chooses Feb 20 next year – it will be 20.02.2020. That will be a date few will forget. Let me declare that this is just a speculative story and a harmless one. It can happen or will never ever take place.

What is true and void of any speculation is that Mahathir will make way for Anwar within two years from May 2018. He has said that “a promise is a promise." February 2020 is just three months earlier and there is nothing to prevent my speculation from turning into reality.

Hey, Mahathir also kept Siti Hasmah in the dark of his intention to step down in 2002. If he did not even inform his wife, what makes us think that he would tell any of us? Only Mahathir himself knows when he wants to step down.

Meanwhile, Anwar Ibrahim, get ready! Putrajaya should beckon within the next nine months. This time, it’s for real! - Francis Paul Siah,mk

Tun Daim Shares His Takes On The ECRL

Sudah lama usaha mereka! Ketika almarhum TG Nik Abdul Aziz masih hidup sudah ada deal, dan sudah tentu kita boleh katakan Hj Hadi ialah pengkhianat kepada almarhum. Di depan pijak semut pun tak mati, tapi di belakang berselingkuh dengan musuh politik.Beberapa kali Hadi menafikan dia terlibat dlm penyatuan ini, siapa berbohong sebenarnya, Hadi atau Najib berbohong, atau kedua2nya sekali berbohong. Takkan lebai pun kaki berbohong...


2 calon bebas iaitu HAMZAH BIN ABDULLAH dan 
SULAIMAN BIN AB SAMAD,bukan org Melayu Islam kot...

Hoooray...atok dah balik...

cheers.

Tukaq Mora atau tukaq PM...

Video di atas memaparkan Tunku Ismail sedang beredar meninggalkan Stadium Tan Sri Dato' Haji Hassan Yunos Stadium di Larkin, Johor selepas pasukan bola sepak JDT 1-0 tewas kepada Shandong Luneng pada perlawanan Kejuaraan Liga AFC pada malam Rabu. 

Ketika kenderaan SUV berwarna hitam yang membawa TMJ lalu, peminat JDT melaungkan "hidup TMJ" tetapi ada seorang yang berkata "tukar Mora" merujuk jurulatih JDT, Benjamin Mora. 

Tunku Ismail duduk di bahagian depan kenderaan SUV yang kemudiannya tiba-tiba berhenti dan pewaris takhta kesultanan Johor itu mengeluarkan kepala baginda dan bertitah: "Daripada tukar Mora baik tukar Perdana Menteri."

Ini mengundang tawa peminat JDT, yang mana Tunku Ismail ialah pemilik kelab bola sepak itu.

Dalam suatu kenyataan, Mohd Rafiq berkata pihak istana akan dihormati sekirangnya menghormati hasrat rakyat.

"Parti-parti politik yang menang pilihan raya berkuasa dan berhak memutuskan kedudukan perdana menteri.

"Semua orang, termasuk institusi diraja perlu menghormati pilihan rakyat pada pilihan raya lalu," katanya. - mk

Dr.M - TMJ pun boleh ditukar, tapi 
hanya rakyat boleh tukar PM...

Hanya rakyat boleh memutuskan untuk menukar perdana menteri Malaysia, kata Dr Mahathir Mohmad.

Dr Mahathir juga mengimbas peristiwa Allahyarham Sultan Mahmud, yang pernah ditarik status Tunku Mahkota Johor.

"Dulu kita ingat, pada suatu masa dulu, ada Tunku Mahkota Johor (TMJ) yang telah ditukar,

"Dulu la, bagi kepada adik dia (untuk menjadi Tunku Mahkota Johor).

"Jadi TMJ boleh tukar. Perdana menteri cuma rakyat saja boleh tukar," kata Dr Mahathir pada sidang media ketika kunjungan rasmi di Beijing hari ini.

Dr Mahathir membuat kenyataan itu sebagai menjawab soalan pemberita yang bertanya berhubung klip video yang tular di media sosial (di atas) baru-baru ini yang memaparkan Tunku Ismail menyebut: "Daripada tukar Mora baik tukar perdana menteri." Mora yang dimaksudkan dipercayai adalah Benjamin Mora, iaitu jurulatih JDT.

Klip video itu dirakam ketika Tunku Ismail beredar meninggalkan Stadium Tan Sri Dato' Haji Hassan Yunos Stadium di Larkin, Johor selepas pasukan bola sepak JDT tewas 1-0 kepada Shandong Luneng pada perlawanan Kejuaraan Liga AFC pada malam Rabu.

Dr Mahathir pula dipercayai merujuk peristiwa melibatkan Allahyarham Sultan Mahmud pada 1961, yang ketika itu merupakan Tunku Mahkota Johor ditarik statusnya dan digantikan oleh adiknya.

Ayahandanya, Sultan Ismail bagaimanapun mengembalikan semula status Tunku Mahkota Johor kepadanya pada 1981 sejurus sebelum meninggal dunia, dan seterusnya membolehkan Sultan Mahmud menjadi pengganti Sultan Johor. Sultan Mahmud merupakan datuk kepada Tunku Ismail.

Dalam sidang media itu juga, Dr Mahathir berkata, Tunku Ismail boleh cuba mengundi jika mahu menukarnya sebagai perdana menteri.

"Dia (Tunku Ismail) bukan orang besar, dia orang kecil. Kalau dia boleh nak undi, dia undi lah bagi saya jatuh," katanya. - mk

Only rakyat can decide who will be PM

Campur tangan diraja dalam politik, 

ekonomi dan perniagaan semakin luas...

Ahli politik veteran dan bekas pemimpin PKR mendakwa campur tangan institusi diraja dalam perkara berkaitan politik, perniagaan dan ekonomi di negara semakin luas sehingga menyebabkan ia ditentang pihak tertentu.

Syed Husin Ali berkata, disebabkan keadaan itu instititusi diraja pada ketika ini akan menyokong mana-mana pihak yang dilihat masih berpegang pada kepercayaan feudal dan mengangkat golongan berkenaan.

“Raja sekarang ini makin banyak menentang dan menceroboh perlembagaan, sedangkan raja tidak boleh campur tangan dalam politik, perniagaan dan ekonomi, tetapi itulah yang banyak dilakukan. Makin bertambah campur tangan politik.

Syed Husin mengingatkan, berdasarkan keadaan tersebut semakin ramai dalam kalangan generasi muda yang mempersoalkan keperluan institusi beraja di negara ini.

Berucap pada forum awam bertajuk “Malaysia dan Statut Rom” di Fakulti Undang-Undang Universiti Malaya (UM), Syed Husin berkata, sebahagian masyarakat Melayu juga bimbang dengan kedudukan mereka sebagai golongan majoriti di negara ini akan tergugat.

“Perkara ini tertanam dalam diri kita dan disebabkan itu kita percaya kepada kuasa raja-raja. Tentang perkauman, kita dapati walaupun orang Melayu paling ramai, tapi malangnya mereka dalam keadaan ketakutan.

“Segelintir pemimpin terkapai-kapai untuk beri kekuatan kepada rakyat dan juga dirinya sendiri. Itu sebab mereka gunakan isu perkauman, agama dan sekarang ini soal Statut Rom. Mereka gunakan ini untuk kuatkan raja dan diri mereka,” katanya.

Jelas Syed Husin, penentangan di antara rakyat biasa terhadap golongan beraja bukanlah perkara baru dan bukan dilakukan Perdana Menteri Dr Mahathir Mohamad seorang, sebaliknya pernah dilakukan pemimpin terdahulu.

“Penentangan raja dan menteri besar sudah berlaku di Johor. Apabila Onn Jaafar tidak setuju, penentangannya menyebabkan beliau dilucutkan kerakyatan dan dibuang negeri ke Singapura.

“Di Pahang, menteri besar Abdul Rahim Bakar tidak bersetuju dengan sultan berhubung isu balak. Beliau menentangnya dan sultan pula cuba menyekat bajet kerajaan. Apabila Dr Mahathir jadi perdana menteri, dia lucutkan jawatan Abdul Rahim.

“Di Perak, menteri besar Ghazali Jawi pula tidak disukai sultan. Sultan memutuskan untuk menyimpan janggut dan tidak akan mencukurnya kecuali Ghazali meletakkan jawatan,” katanya.

Bagaimanapun, Syed Husin berkata, tentangan Dr Mahathir terhadap golongan diraja lebih memberi impak, sehingga Mahkamah Khas bagi membicarakan kesalahan dan salah laku kerabat diraja ditubuhkan.

“Tentangan Dr Mahathir lebih besar kesannya. Dahulu Mahkamah Khas sudah dibentuk untuk raja-raja. Kemudian misalnya kalau ada keputusan Parlimen yang ditolak raja, ia akan dihantar semula ke Dewan Rakyat.

“Kemudian apabila ia dihantar semula kepada raja, sama ada raja terima atau tidak, ia akan menjadi undang-undang yang dikuatkuasakan. Ertinya, kuasa raja semakin kurang,” katanya.

Tengku Mahkota Johor Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim sebelum ini lantang mempersoalkan kewajaran penyertaan Malaysia dalam Statut Rom yang dikhuatiri boleh menggugat kedudukan Yang di-Pertuan Agong selaku pemerintah tertinggi di negara ini.

Tambahnya, Putrajaya melakukan perkara yang tidak berperlembagaan berhubung isu ratifikasi Statut Rom apabila instrumen itu ditandatangani tanpa mendapat perkenan Majlis Raja-Raja.

Sehubungan itu, pada 4 Mac Dr Mahathir memaklumkan bahawa kerajaan Persekutuan pimpinan Pakatan Harapan (PH) menarik diri daripada meratifikasi Statut Rom yang telah ditandatangani.

Bagaimanapun Kementerian Luar Negeri berkata, kerajaan masih belum mengalah dalam usaha meratifikasi Statut Rom Mahkamah Jenayah Antarabangsa (ICC) meskipun terdapat pihak yang cuba memanipulasi perjanjian tersebut.

Menteri Luar Negeri, Saifuddin Abdullah berkata, kementeriannya akan mendedahkan usaha pihak terbabit yang menakut-nakutkan masyarakat dengan menyebarkan fakta yang salah mengenai perjanjian itu.

Dalam perkembangan berkaitan, sekumpulan aktivis pelajar mendedahkan imej satu dokumen yang dikemukakan kepada Raja-raja Melayu yang menurut mereka mungkin bertanggungjawab menggagalkan langkah kerajaan meratifikasi Statut Rom.

Imej didedahkan pelajar berkenaan dikatakan menunjukkan kandungan satu memorandum 10 halaman yang disediakan oleh 4 ahli akademik yang menggariskan peranan dan fungsi Yang di-Pertuan Agong serta liabiliti baginda di bawah Statut Rom.

Empat penulisnya mendakwa, ratifikasi Statut Rom akan menyebabkan Agong boleh didakwa di Mahkamah Jenayah Antarbangsa atas peranan sebagai pemerintah tertinggi tentera Malaysia.

Menurut mereka, Agong memegang tanggungjawab operasi sebagai pemerintah tertinggi tentera dan melampaui peranan sebagai ketua lambang atau istiadatnya. - fmt

Rome Statute cannot be used against constitutional monarch

BN started Rome Statute ratification process 8 years ago

4 academician mislead the king...

Queen Elizabeth not blamed for 'war crimes'...

Attorney-General Tommy Thomas today said that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, though the supreme commander of the armed forces, would not be held responsible for any decision by the prime minister, the Cabinet and defence ministry on a declaration of war.

Thomas said this in reference to a British inquiry into the Iraq war where former British prime minister Tony Blair was called up instead of Queen Elizabeth II, the constitutional monarch and the commander of the armed forces.

“So, if war is declared, although the Agong is the supreme commander of armed forces, the decision to go to war is always made by the prime minister, the Cabinet and the minister of defence and, operationally, the general who runs the war or the admiral in the navy.

“If Malaysia commits a war crime, the people who are vulnerable to ICC (International Criminal Court) prosecution will be the prime minister, the Cabinet, the minister of defence, the generals but never the King because he is a constitutional monarch,” he said at a public forum on Malaysia and the Rome Statute.

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said Malaysia would withdraw from ratifying the Rome Statute because of political confusion among the people.

The ICC is aimed at ending immunity to the most serious criminal offenders considered a threat to the international community involving genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity and crimes of aggression, such as invasion.

The forum featured prominent panellists such as G25 member Noor Farida Ariffin, constitutional law expert Emeritus Professor Shad Saleem Faruqi and lawyer Lim Wei Jiet.

None of the four academics - International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) law professor Shamrahayu Abdul Aziz, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (Usim) law lecturers Fareed Mohd Hassan and Hisham Hanapi, as well as Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) law professor Rahmat Mohamad - were present during the half-day forum.

Responding to a question from the floor during the Q&A session, on why he could not convince the Conference of Rulers to support the government decision, Thomas said that he was not in the same room with four academicians who presented a memorandum on the Rome Statute to the Rulers.

“If the five of us were in the room, the way the dialogue would happen is each of us would have commented on the other, and if I heard the arguments of the other four, I would have the chance to comment on them and they have the chance to comment on mine…but that opportunity did not happen,” he said.

The four academics have been partly blamed for allegedly misleading the Conference of Rulers on the Rome Statute with a biased paper on the treaty.  - fmt

cheers.

Profesori...don't 'run away', attend Rome Statute forum...

Student activist Asheeq Ali Sethi Alivi has challenged the four academics, who co-authored a paper which purportedly convinced the Conference of Rulers to reject the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), to attend a forum on the matter.

He said the four must be bold in defending their arguments.

“I urge them to attend as panellists to engage in a healthy discussion, answer questions from the audience and to defend themselves.

“I call on them to muster the courage to defend what they presented to the rulers. Don't run away and hide behind politicians who want to confuse the people. Be professional,” he told Malaysiakini.

Asheeq is the spokesperson for a group of student activists who leaked the executive summary of the paper and accused the four academics of being biased in their argument.

The group is also organising tomorrow's forum at Universiti Malaya, which would feature Attorney-General Tommy Thomas as one of the panellists.

Asheeq noted that since the group leaked the executive summary, the four academics have remained tightlipped.

Earlier, he told Malaysiakini that two of them had rejected the invitation to attend the forum whereas two more have not responded.

"The two who rejected are International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) law professor Shamrahayu Abdul Aziz and Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (Usim) law lecturer Fareed Mohd Hassan.

"The two who have not responded are Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) law professor Rahmat Mohamad and Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (Usim) law lecturer Hisham Hanapi," he said.

Asheeq said apart from Thomas and himself, others who would be speaking at the forum are constitutional expert Shad Saleem Faruqi, Noor Farida Ariffin of G25 and lawyer Lim Wei Jiet.

The student activist also clarified there were no formal attempts to invite Johor crown prince Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim to the forum despite the group earlier welcoming his attendance on the grounds that the prince was also “confused” about the Rome Statute.

"At that time I was just responding to a question from a reporter... maybe there can be another engagement (with the Johor palace) after the forum," he said.

Tunku Ismail was one of the vocal opponents of the Rome Statute, arguing that it would threaten the position of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad announced that Malaysia would withdraw from the Rome Statute.

Yesterday, the attorney-general dismissed the allegation that he had failed to convince the rulers regarding the Rome Statute.

Thomas and Shad Saleem had presented a working paper to the Conference of Rulers on behalf of the government.- mk

One year after GE14...

Sebab Lebai dan Penyamun UMNO dok hasut rakyat jadi bodoh.

Najib punya loyar Penyangak kata Najib was "MISLED" by bankers dan akaun² Najib telah dimanipulasi. Dan kononnya Najib telah "ditipu" bankers dan Sheikh Jho Low. Loyar Penyangak juga mengatakan BUKAN Najib yang mengarahkan pemindahan wang itu ke akaun²nya, sebab kononnya tandatangan tak sama. 🤣

"Shafee berkata demikian selepas mendakwa terdapat bukti bahawa Najib tidak mengeluarkan arahan perbankan seperti yang didakwa dan tidak menyedari mengenainya kerana 'manipulasi'.

Ini termasuk e-mel yang dikatakan percubaan untuk menghalang penyata bank Najib dihantar ke pejabat dan kediamannya."

Tapi ... Tapi ... The Bank Branch Manager kata, TAK sekali pun Najib komplen kat Bank jika ada benda yang tak kena dengan akaun² dia. Dia juga kata penyata Bank diberi setiap bulan dan mereka BOLEH buat komplen dalam tempoh 14 hari JIKA ada percanggahan. 🤣

Betul juga, sebelum sign atau issue sebarang cek, tentu Najib nak tau berapa banyak duit ada dalam bank. Takkan sign membuta aje macam dia buat² bodoh dalam kes 1MDB. Nanti kena pulak "bounced cheque". 

Bila duit berpuluh² juta masuk akaun² Najib, Najib happy aje.. Tak terkejut pun ! Tak komplen pun ! Boleh belanja aje macammm duit mak-bapak dia. 😂

Dan apabila Najib yang kononnya TAK terima penyata Bank, TAK pernah sekali pun Najib komplen kat Bank. 😆 - f/bk

Nik Abduh sendiri telah membuat pengakuan bahawa pemimpin Pas termasuk Hj Hadi mengambil duit dari Umno dan diakui sendiri oleh Takiyuddin Hassan. Selepas menarik balik saman terhadap Clare, Hj Hadi mengesahkan juga bahawa Nik Abduh wajar menipu dengan tidak mengaku pada awalnya demi maslahat parti.

Ini semua berlaku ekoran pendedahan Hj Husam Musa bahawa Pas terima wang RM90 juta dari Umno. Ugutan Pas mahu Husam juga tidak kelihatan sehingga kini.

Kenapa isu RM90 juta? Apa sebenarnya yang menjadi jenayah sosial melalui penyaluran dana RM90 juta dari Umno kepada Pas?

Kerana jenayah penyelewengan yang dilakukan oleh Umno sendiri. Hal ini mempunyai kaitan dengan penggubahan wang haram yang dilakukan mereka dengan beberapa tujuan. Satu, untuk menutup isu penggubahan wang haram; dan keduanya, mahu membeli jiwa pemimpin Pas supaya bekerjasama dengan Umno yang korup.- f/bk

cheers

Era of absolute monarchs dah tadok...

Amid the ongoing debate between Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and the Johor palace, constitutional expert Shad Saleem Faruqi pointed out that the time when monarchs possessed absolute power had passed.

The Universiti Malaya emeritus law professor noted how some, including scholars, were still dwelling in this bygone era.

"We are a constitutional monarchy, not an absolute monarchy. There are people who are talking about 'kuasa mutlak' (absolute power). There is no 'kuasa mutlak' anymore," he told Malaysiakini.

Shad Saleem also said that Malaysian states are not sovereign, but "units of the federation" that are subject to one Federal Constitution.

"So, all this talk of state sovereignty is more (about) politics than law," he added.

Although he said Mahathir might have "overstated" his latest claim that the Johor and Terengganu state constitutions were nullified with the formation of the Federation of Malaya, he, however, agreed with the prime minister on the supremacy of the Federal Constitution.

'Void to the extent of inconsistency'

He explained that provisions in state law, and not the entire document, were void only if they contradicted the Federal Constitution.

"In essence, the prime minister's stand is correct, but he overstated the case that the (state) constitutions are nullified.

"We have to bear this in mind, he is a doctor, he is not a law graduate. So, I don't think he should be [judged] by the standard of a lawyer," he added.

Shad Saleem cited Articles 4 (1) and 162 (6) of the Federal Constitution, which stipulate that the document is the supreme law of the country and how every inconsistent law was “void” and needed to be fixed.

Should a state law not be in line with the Federal Constitution, he said, Article 71 (4) stated that the Dewan Rakyat had the power to change it.

"That means if the state constitution is either violating the federal constitution or if the state constitution has gaps, the federal parliament can enter the picture by ordinary law at the federal level and amend the state constitution to ensure compliance with the federal constitution," he added.

Federal provisions for state constitutions

Shad Saleem also drew attention to the Eighth Schedule of the Federal Constitution, which contains a list of provisions for state constitutions.

Among the provisions were that monarchs are to act on the advice of the state's executive branch of government, namely the menteri besar and the executive council.

"The appointment of the executive council is on the advice of the menteri besar, it is not the discretion of the sultan," he added.

Meanwhile, lawyer New Sin Yew also agreed with Shad Saleem regarding Mahathir's use of the term "nullified".

"I am not sure if 'nullified' is the right word to use. The Johor and Terrenganu state constitutions are still there, though with significant changes post-independence," he told Malaysiakini.

Johor's constitution was established in 1895, while Terengganu's constitution was drawn up in 1911.

However, New said the prime minister was correct in stating that the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

"It is important that everyone concerned respects the constitution and abides by it. Failure to do so would negate the rule of law," he added.

Rulers used to preside exco meetings

Before Aug 31, 1957, New said state constitutions contained provisions where the ruler presided over an executive council.

He added that the ruler was advised by an executive council and by a council of state which the menteri besar presided over.

"The menteri besar was appointed and is responsible to the ruler. The ruler had the power to overrule the executive council and the council of state. In this sense, rulers pre-Merdeka were not constitutional rulers.

"However, this changed at independence," he noted.

When the Federal Constitution came into force on Aug 31, 1957, New said all states, including Johor and Terengganu, were required to bring their respective state constitutions in line with the Federal Constitution.

"Article 71 of the Federal Constitution requires state constitutions to contain essential provisions as set out in Part I of the Eighth Schedule. Among the essential provisions are - ruler to act on advice, proceedings against the ruler, the executive council, and the legislature of the state.

"The purpose of Article 71 is to transform the role of the rulers into constitutional rulers who have limited powers and are bound to accept and act on the advice of the menteri besar or executive council.

"If a state constitution does not contain the essential provisions or if a state constitution contains provisions which are inconsistent with the essential provisions, Parliament may make law to give effect in that state to the essential provisions or to remove the inconsistent provisions in the state constitution.

"As a result, all states must have the necessary amendments to their state constitutions post-independence. All state constitutions now contain essential provisions and all rulers are now constitutional rulers," he added.

New said this was the bargain struck at independence and with the agreement of all rulers where a system of constitutional government would be introduced. - mk

Saya PM. Saya tak tahu saya juga Menteri Kewangan. 

Saya lupa saya juga Pengerusi 1MDB...

KES NAJIB DI MAHKAMAH 2...

1. Mana pergi macai2 najib yg selama ni meroyan kata tak ada bukti?

2. Kini satu2 bukti didedahkan di mahkamah.

3.  Setakat  ini peguam Najib tidak menafikan duit2 itu masuk ke akaun najib personel.

4. Jika pun utk csr, kita telah ditunjukkan ianya bukan utk tujuan itu semata2. 

4.1 Beliau telah gunakan untuk parti umno, telah gunakan utk kemudahan peribadi beliau & politik beliau. 

4.2 Nak kata beliau tak tahu. ada perbelanjaan personel yg direct dengan beliau, rumah dll.

5. Sumber dana?

5.1 SRC anak syarijat 1mdb asalnya.

5.2 Kemudian dgn pinjaman rm4 bil melalui Kumpulan Wang Amanah Pencen (kuasa pada najib) ,  src telah memperolehi dan mengunakan duit itu.  SRC TIADA SUMBER LAIN SELAIN DUIT KWAP.

5.3 Setakat ini, 1mdb dan Src adalah syarikat MOF.  MOF di terajui oleh Najib. 

5.4 Syarikat SRC merupakan anak syarikat MOF,  telah memindahkan RM 40 juta ke satu.lagi anak syarikat MOF iaitu  Gandingan Mentari Sdn Bhd,  pada 24 Dec 2014.

5.5 Pada hari yg sama, Gandingan Mentari ini memindahkan pula dana rm40 juta ini ke satu syarikat  bernama Ihsan Perdana. 

5.6  Pada 26 hb Dec 2014 (hanya 2 hari kemudiannya) , Ehsan Perdana pindahkan 2 transaksi ke 2 akaun personel najib dgn amaun rm32 juta dan rm5 juta.

6. Semua duit2 ini digunakan oleh Najib atas perkara2 yg beliau sedang dituduh di mahkamah sekarang ni .

7. Di mahkamah sekarang..semua saksi dr pihak bank dan dokumen2 kemasukan duit ke akaun najib ini tidak di tentang oleh peguambela...maknanya sah !!!

8. Akhbar NST  2015..begitu yakinnya Managing Director Ihsan Perdana menafikan duit dr sykt itu masuk ke akaun personel najib. - Haji Mn@sir 

Podcast - The People v Najib Razak Day 9 : Devil's in the detail 

Story kat sini...

Malaysia dan China menandatangani MOU bagi membeli tambahan 1.9 juta tan minyak sawit Malaysia dengan anggaran nilai RM4.56 bilion bagi tempoh lima tahun 2019-2023.

cheers.