Pertahan Identiti Dari Globalisasi dan Hegemoni Barat
Fri Jun 02, 06 01:11:17 PM
Oleh Dr. Shafie Abu Bakar
1. Antara Dasar dan Amalan
agi Malaysia, untuk mengatakan ianya tidak mempunyai dasar pelajaran Negara, tidak dapat dikatakan, kerana sekurang-kurang wujudnya dasar yang dikenali dengan `Dasar Pelajaran Kebangsaan` yang berasaskan `Dasar Pelajaran Razak` dan disempurnakan dengan berbagai-bagai penyata seperti Penyata Rahman Talib, Hussein Onn dan sebagainya.
Dasar Pelajaran Kebangsaan ini bertujuan untuk menyatupadukan rakyat yang berbagai kaum dengan menggunakan bahasa Melayu dan kurikulum bersepadu. Tetapi dari segi praktiknya, walaupun dasar ini berjalan, terdapat polisi-polisi mendatang yang menjadi hambatan-hambatan dan dipersoalkan. Dasar ini terumbang ambing dikocakkan oleh desakan kepentingan golongan elit, koporat, penswastaan, komersialisme, politik, perkauman dan globalisme. Desakan-desakan ini mencabar dasar pelajaran kebangsaan. Pihak pelaksana dasar pelajaran (Kementerian Pelajaran) kelihatan menerima tekanan dengan menyelitkan polisi-polisi yang kontradiksi tanpa penelitian dan penilaian yang mendalam dan matang.
2. Sekolah Antarabangsa
Sebagai contohnya polisi baru yang diumumkan oleh Kementerian Pelajaran mulai Rabu 17 Mei 2006 bahawa:
``The Education Ministry announced on Wednesday that Malaysian students will soon be allowed to attend international schools, doing away with the former stringent enrolment criteria
Pada asalnya sekolah antarabangsa didirikan biasanya di ibu-ibu kota bagi menyediakan pendidikan terbuka bagi anak-anak pegawai-pegawai kedutaan luar dan anak-anak para ekspertis luar menghantar anak-anak mereka belajar yang melayakkan anak-anak tersebut menyambung pelajaran di sekolah-sekolah seumpamanya di Negara mana keluarga mereka bertukar tanpa terganggu dari segi pelajaran.
Bagi rakyat Malaysia tidak dibenar belajar di sekolah seumpama ini kecuali mendapat keizinan Kementerian Pelajaran dengan syarat keluarganya adalah rakyat luar Negara dan pernah tinggal di luar negera sekurang-kurangnya tiga tahun berturut-turut.
Tindakan Kementerian Pelajaran bercadang membenarkan pelajar-pelajar Malaysia belajar di sekolah antarabangsa, bererti memberi peluang lebih banyak lagi sekolah-sekolah antarabangsa didirikan di Negara ini yang setakat ini jumlah sekolah sedemikian di Negara ini sebanyak 32 buah dengan jumlah pelajar seramai 10,603 orang. Dari jumlah ini 20% daripadanya adalah merupakan pelajar-pelajar Malaysia. Dengan keizinan ini kelak makin bertambahlah sekolah-sekolah antara bangsa di Negara ini pada masa akan datang. Tindakan Kementerian Pelajaran ini atas alasan-alasan antaranya menjadikan Malaysia `hub` pendidikan bertaraf antarabangsa, memberi peluang bagi ibubapa menghantarkan anak-anak mereka ke sekolah elit dan bermutu tinggi, mengelak dari berlakunya `brain drain` anak-anak terpilih dari belajar ke luar Negara untuk mendapat pendidikan terbaik, mendidik anak-anak dengan budaya dan nilai antarabangsa yang tidak terdapat pada sekolah-sekolah kebangsaan di Malaysia, memudahkan anak-anak yang terdidik di sekolah antarabangsa ini menyambung pengajian ke mana-mana pengajian di luar Negara, memenuhi egoisme golongan elit dan hartawan memperlihatkan kemampuan mereka menghantar anak-anak mereka ke sekolah ternama dan termahal yang membezakan status mereka dengan rakyat biasa dan marhaen yang tidak mampu menghantar anak-anak mereka belajar di sekolah-sekolah elit dan ternama `International School` biarpun otak dan prestasi anak-anak mereka tidak lebih baik dari otak anak-anak dari kalangan rakyat biasa dan marhaen. Dan kes khusus bagi membendung ibubapa di Malaysia dari menghantar anak-anak mereka belajar di Negara jiran yang dianggap bermutu sebagaimana tindakan diambil setengah ibubapa di Johor Bharu menghantar anak-anak mereka belajar di Singapura, walaupun anak-anak ini keletihan kerana terpaksa bangun diawal pagi menghadapi kesesakan lalu lintas pergi dan balik petang dan malam, demi kononnya untuk mendapat didikan di sekolah yang dianggap mereka sebagai `standard` dan bermutu.
3. Memperlekehkan Dasar Pendidikan Negara
Tindakan Kementerian Pelajaran untuk membuka ruang dan memberi peluang kepada ibubapa menghantarkan anak-anak mereka belajar di sekolah-sekolah antarabangsa secara langsung atau secara tidak langsung adalah memperlekehkan Dasar Pendidikan Negara lantaran dengan membuka peluang sedemikian Kementerian Pelajaran seolah-olah menerima hakikat bahawa pendidikan di sekolah antarabangsa lebih bermutu dari dasar pendidikan kebangsaan. Apakah ertinya usaha kerajaan selama ini meningkatkan mutu sekolah kebangsaan dengan berbagai-bagai kemudahan seperti makmal, computer, perpustakaan dan perkeranian, meningkatkan latihan perguruan dari maktab-maktab perguruan kepada institute perguruan, menghantar guru-guru lepasan ijazah dan perguruan mengajar di sekolah-sekolah kebangsaan, mempromosi guru besar, pengetua dan guru-guru pakar, menyediakan bangunan-bangunan yang lebih selesa dan bersesuaian dan mengubah kaedah penilaian dari berorientasikan peperiksaan semata-mata kepada lebih bersifat ko-kurikulum, kreatif dan inovatif
Dengan membuka peluang belajar di sekolah antarabangsa adalah menggugat dasar pelajaran kebangsaan yang menyatukan pelajar-pelajar di Negara ini dengan satu dasar pelajaran. Kita harus akui anak-anak yang dididik melalui dasar pelajaran kebangsaan telah berjaya ditanam ke dalam jiwa mereka rasa kebanggaan terhadap negera dengan rasa ke Malaysiaan Generasi yang terdidik dengan dasar pelajaran kebangsaan tidak lagi kekok untuk berkomunikasi antara mereka dari berbagai kaum melalui penggunaan bahasa kebangsaan. Melalui sekolah antarabangsa, walaupun mungkin diwajibkan mempelajari bahasa kebangsaan kelak sebagai salah satu mata pelajaran, tetapi penekanan terhadap bahasa tersebut tidaklah sebagaimana di sekolah kebangsaan dan mereka tidak menggunakan di dalam komunikasi sehari-hari dan mungkin memandang rendah terhadapnya. Pengakuan pelajar di sekolah antarabangsa berikut dapat dijadikan ukuran bahawa:
``I was only exposed to English and other foreign languages. For along time I did not use Bahasa Malaysia and it was hard for me to speak properly
Dengan membenarkan sekolah antarabangsa memperluaskan operasi mereka di Negara ini akan menggugat Dasar Pelajaran Kebangsaan. Oleh kerana kurikulum sekolah antarabangsa yang kelak akan berkembang akan mewujudkan dua aliran yang bertentangan dan melahirkan pelajar-pelajar yang berlainan orientasi, budaya dan nilai yang tidak membantu penyatuan dan integrasi kaum yang mengukuhkan perpaduan bangsa Malaysia. Jika pihak kementerian beranggapan bahawa pendidikan di sekolah antarabangsa ini lebih bermutu dan masyarakat diorientasi dengan pandangan ini, maka ianya menghakiskan keyakinan rakyat terhadap keunggulan dasar pelajaran kebangsaan.
Dengan membuka peluang pelajaran di sekolah antarabangsa mewujudkan jurang pemisah antara golongan elit dan berada dengan rakyat biasa. Pengajian di sekolah antarabangsa memerlukan biaya yang tinggi. Seorang pelajar memerlukan bayaran sebanyak RM4,000/= sebulan bagi bayaran persekolahan, iaitu melebihi bayaran pengajian peringkat ijazah lanjutan universiti tempatan. Perbelanjaan sedemikian tidak mampu ditanggung oleh rakyat biasa. Ini mewujudkan jurang kemampuan belajar di antara golongan elit dan berada dengan rakyat biasa. Keadaan ini tidak wajar dilihat dari segi keadilan dan memasyrakatkan pendidikan.
4. Apa Kurangnya Persekolahan di Malaysia ?
Pandangan tinggi terhadap sekolah antarabangsa lebih bersifat psikologi dan ilusi. Kerana nama (International School) dan elitnya sekolah ini (kerana bayaran mahal), dan di luar kemampuan orang biasa, maka ianya dianggap bermutu dan ada kelas, sedangkan hakikat sebenarnya tidak lebih baik dari sekolah-sekolah biasa yang sederhana baik, apa lagi yang baik-baik di Negara kita. Ibu bapa Malaysia yang mau menghantar anak-anak mereka ke sekolah antarabangsa, kerana anak mereka tidak cemerlang yang melayakkan mereka terpilih ke sekolah-sekolah yang baik di Negara ini.
Hakikat sebenarnya pendidikan di Negara kita tidak kurang baiknya, bahkan lebih baik dari sekolah antarabangsa. Sekolah-sekolah cemerlang di Negara ini seperti sekolah-sekolah asrama penuh, sekolah sains, sekolah menengah kebangsaan agama, sekolah Mara, sekolah yayasan, sekolah agama dan sekolah harian biasa yang juga tidak kurang mengeluarkan pelajar-pelajar cemerlang. Telah beratus ribu pelajar cemerlang yang dihasilkan oleh sekolah-sekolah sedemikian yang dihantar ke universiti-universiti terkemuka luar Negara di dalam berbagai-bagai bidang dan mereka telah pulang dengan kejayaan dan mencurah khidmat baktinya pada Negara. Lebih kurang 50,000 orang pelajar keluaran dari sekolah-sekolah sedemikian setiap tahun juga terpilih belajar di universiti-universiti tempatan di dalam berbagai-bagai bidang dan mereka berjaya dan tidak berkurang mutunya juga berkhidmat di dalam berbagai bidang dan sektor di dalam Negara ini.
Adalah diakui hak memberi pelajaran kepada anak-anak dan memilih corak pengajian yang diingini adalah hak kebebasan ibu bapa. Bagi mereka yang tidak menyetujui dengan pendidikan yang disediakan di negara ini dan mereka berkemampuan dari segi material, mereka boleh menghantar anak-anak mereka belajar bukan saja di Singapura, tetapi di England, Amerika, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, German, Perancis, Rusia dan sebagainya. Biarlah mereka dengan ideal dan ilusi mereka. Tidak banyak mereka yang sedemikian. Mereka yang melihat apa yang sukar dan dikejauhan sebagai indah bermutu dan lupa yang dekat dan berhampiran adalah lebih bermutu. Sebenarnya tidak berlaku apa yang dikatakan sebagai `brain drain`, kerana berapa jauh mereka mengembara dan terpesona, akhirnya mereka akan kembali menjejak bumi nyata. Jumlah mereka ini jauh lebih kecil dari jumlah pelajar cemerlang yang melalui persekolahan Negara.
Sebenarnya pengajian peringkat sekolah- rendah hingga menengah, penting di dalam memupuk nilai, budaya, integrasi, kecintaan dan penyatuan bangsa. Hasrat ini dapat dikatakan hampir tercapai, walaupun tidak dapat dikatakan sepenuhnya. Sekiranya beberapa polisi kerajaan misalnya mewujudkan sekolah-sekolah integrasi antara kaum setakat ini tidak/belum mencapai kejayaan, adalah dibimbangkan pembukaan sekolah antarabangsa akan lebih melebarkan jurang antara kaum dan antara yang berada dengan yang tidak berada. Untuk menguasai bahasa-bahasa dan memahami berbagai budaya peringkat ini boleh dicapai pada peringkat selepas pengajian persekolahan, iaitu pada peringkat pengajian tinggi baik di dalam maupun di luar Negara.
5. Usaha Me`Malenglish`kan Malaysia ?
Kita melihat usaha membuka ruang kepada perkembangan sekolah antarabangsa di Negara ini adalah merupakan rangkaian teratur dari pihak yang mempunyai agenda khusus yang tidak menyenangi dasar pendidikan Negara dan mau me`Malenglish`kan dasar pendidikan Negara dan kalau boleh menjadikan Negara ini sebagai `Little England` atau `Little America` yang kononnya melambangkan Malaysia sebagai Negara maju.
Sebenarnya selepas merdeka, khususnya selepas 1970an dasar pendidikan negara telah berada di atas landasan yang betul. Hasil dari dasar ini telah mewujudkan 7 universiti terunggul di Negara ini dan mengeluarkan pelajar yang bermutu setanding kalaupun tidak lebih baik dari pelajar-pelajar yang terus dihantar ke luar Negara. Namun senario perubahan ekonomi dan politik berlaku selepas separuh kedua zaman pemerintahan Dr. Mahathir yang memperkenalkan dasar pengkoporatan dan penswastaan. Politik Umno bertukar dari pejuang-pejuangnya yang tulen kepada penguasaan secara langsung atau tidak langsung oleh kalangan koporat dan penswastaan. Kewangan menjadi perhitungan utama dalam politik lantaran itu berlakulah politik wang (rasuah politik). Wang menguasai pemilihan kepimpinan. Atas faktor komersil dari golongan koporat, swasta dan hartawan yang menguasai media melakukan tekanan agar polisi dan dasar bahasa diubah atas kepentingan komersil dan alasan globalisasi. Kehendak mereka berjaya apabila polisi menggunakan bahasa Inggeris bagi matapelajaran metametik dan sains dilaksanakan di sekolah-sekolah atas kehendak Dr. Mahathir dan diluluskan cabinet pada pertengahan 2002. Ianya dituruti penggunaannya secara bertahap hingga kepada peringkat pengajian tinggi. Polisi ini tidak saja melanggar dasar pelajaran, tetapi untuk jangka panjang melumpuhkan bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa ilmu yang telah berjaya dilaksanakan selama ini. Pada masa akan datang memperkatakan sesuatu ilmu secara akademik hatta bagi mata pelajaran sastera dan agama tidak dianggap ilmiah dan berprestage kalau tidak disampaikan di dalam bahasa Inggeris. Maruah bahasa Melayu akan menurun sebagai bahasa rakyat kelas bawahan. Perubahan polisi dari menggunakan bahasa Melayu di dalam Matematik dan Sains ke dalam bahasa Inggeris mendapat tentangan sebahagian dari rakyat. Seminar dan kongres diadakan bagi menyuarakan penentangan ini. Seperti Kongres Pendidikan Melayu ke 2 yang disertai lebih dari 1,000 cendikiawan yang menegaskan bahawa:
``Kongres Pendidikan Melayu Kedua menggesa kerajaan mengkaji semula penggunaan bahasa Inggeris sebagai kaedah pengajaran matapelajaran Matematik dan Sains di sekolah, kerana ia boleh mengancam kedaulatan bahasa dan jati diri bangsa Melayu.
Penggunaan bahasa Inggeris dalam Matematik dan Sains adalah kehendak politik, golongan elit koporat dan swasta. Di dalam hal ini dilihat usaha membuka peluang belajar di sekolah antarabangsa yang pada dasarnya menggunakan bahasa Inggeris adalah bagi mengukuhkan kedudukan bahasa Inggeris di dalam pembelajaran di Malaysia. Ianya merupakan pertambahan ruang bagi bahasa tersebut di dalam pendidikan di Malaysia. Sudah tentulah banyak lagi ruang akan dibuka bagi mengukuhkan bahasa Inggeris sebagai sistem pendidikan di Malaysia yang secara tidak langsung melumpuhkan bahasa Melayu yang akhirnya bertarap bahasa rakyat yang tidak berdaya ilmiah.
6. Globalisasi dan Hegemoni
Dengan tidak bersetuju dibuka sekolah antarabangsa kepada rakyat Malaysia, bukan bererti kita menentang peluang untuk rakyat mempelajari keilmuan, khususnya melalui bahasa Inggeris, kerana ada alternative yang lain di Negara ini bagi mereka mempelajarinya. Di dalam keadaan dunia tanpa sempadan dan pengaruh Negara yang kuat dengan kemajuan teknologi, intelektual, ekonomi, budaya dan telekomunikasi, kita dan bahagian dunia lain tidak dapat menolak kemaraan mereka dan terpaksa menerima, tetapi sewajarnya dengan pendekatan terbaik bagi kepentingan kita. Kemaraan secara globalisasi mereka. kita terima, umpamanya kita terpaksa mengakui akan kepentingan bahasa Inggeris sebagai bahasa dunia yang penting dan kita jadikannya sebagai part and parcel di dalam kurikulum pendidikan kita. Kita juga menerima pengaruh mereka di dalam bidang-bidang yang lain seperti teknologi, ekonomi, telekomunikasi dan sebagainya, tetapi kewaspadaan kita, jangan sampai kehadiran pengaruh luar secara globalisasi ini bersifat hegemoni terhadap kita. Membicarakan persoalan hegemoni ini Chandra Muzaffar mengatakan:
``… hegemony at the global level is sustained by a network of military, political, economic, cultural, media and academic elites functioning within different societies.`` (Global Ethic Or Global Hegemony ?, 2005: 118).
``This hegemonic worldview shaped by the West is further reinforced by ideas, concepts, standard and benchmarks which are rooted to a greater or lesser degree in the Western, more specifically, the American experience. Consequently, the non-Western intelligentsia have got into the habit of imbibling and absorbing, almost uncritically, the leading ideas on democracy and govermence, the market and the economy, education and health, art and architecture and indeed every other facet of life from western sources because we are psychologically convinced of their innet superiority. A defeated, dominated civilization has the tendency to try to imitate the hegemonic civilization
Pokoknya hegemony barat yang lebih superior di dalam berbagai bidang adalah satu bentuk penjajahan baru yang amat sukar ditangkis, bahkan terpaksa diterima bagi survival. Namun penerimaan kita seharus secara bijaksana dan terpilih dan penyesuaian agar dengan cara sedemikian kita dapat menyelamatkan identiti Negara, budaya dan bangsa kita. Seharusnya kita menyedari bahawa globalisasi dan dunia tanpa sempadan adalah:
``Globalisation is more than the spread of neo-liberalism. Thre are also other processes embedded within it. One of these is cultural, i.e. the homogenization of cultures which often threatens the national identities of many countries that have difficulties in coping with it. This is not to say that national cultures would be wiped out by the globalizing processes. However, there is the strong tendency of their marginalization and commodification, thus creating an identity crises.
7. Pertahan Identiti
Di dalam hal ini kita tidak menyetujui dibuka sekolah antarabangsa kepada rakyat Malaysia secara bebas, kerana ianya mengundang kontradiksi dengan dasar pelajaran Negara, melahirkan golongan pelajar elit yang marginal dan ego dengan pengajian mereka dan asing dari didikan dan budaya masyarakat Malaysia. Kita juga tidak setuju dengan mewajibkan penggunaan bahasa Inggeris di dalam matapelajaran Matematik dan Sains, kerana ianya membunuh kemampuan bahasa Melayu di dalam bidang-bidang berkenaan yang ternyata selama ini berkemampuan. Pengukuhan bahasa Inggeris dapat dilakukan dengan berbagai-bagai pendekatan yang lain. Kita perlu mengukuhkan dasar pelajaran yang bersifat Malaysia, beridentiti Malaysia dan tidak dihegemoni oleh Barat. Kalau pelajar luar datang ke Malaysia, mereka perlu dapat menikmati pelajaran secara menu Malaysia, bukan sebagai citarasa barat berada di bumi asing hasil dari globalisasi dan hegemoni Barat. Kita tidak patut melayan kehendak segelintir golongan elit dengan mengorbankan dasar pelajaran Negara yang bersifat Malaysia yang berakar pada rakyat dan Negara ini.
Bangi,
5 J. Awal 1427
2 Jun 2006.
`` (Globalisation Culture & Inequalities, Bangi, 2004: 20)..`` (Ibid. pp. 120-121).Secara lanjutnya beliau mengatakan:`` (MM, Ahad 27 Mac 2005: 11). Berbagai fakta dikemukakan termasuk pendapat UNESCO bahawa penggunaan bahasa Ibunda paling sesuai digunakan bagi pembelajaran anak-anak dan setengah juta pelajar akan tercicir. Namun atas kemahuan golongan elit, koporat dan kuasa politik suara dan desakan rakyat disepikan. Dasar ini masih dipersoalkan. Kajian secara ilmiah di atas kemampuan, keberkesanan dan kemahiran pelajar menggunakan bahasa Inggeris tidak dilakukan. Keputusan peperiksaan yang dijalankan tidak boleh dijadikan ukuran, kerana lebih dari 80% murid-murid memilih membuat jawapan di dalam bahasa Melayu yang dibolehkan. Manakala keputusan berdasarkan graft yang angkubahnya berdasarkan peratusan pencapaian, bukan pada tingginya jawapan yang betul. Jika peratusan jawapan serendah 19%, maka pencapaian 19 markah katakan matematik sebagai pencapaian gred A + dan makin menurun ke bawah..`` (NST, Friday May 19, 2006: 6). .`` ((NST, Friday May 19, 2006: 6).
Saturday, June 24, 2006
SEMINAR KEBANGSAAN 50 TAHUN MERDEKA
SEMINAR KEBANGSAAN 50 TAHUN MERDEKA :
PERSPEKTIF ISLAM
TEMA:
"MENEKUNI IKTIBAR SEJARAH, MEMAHAMI REALITI
DAN MENYUSUN STRATEGI MASA DEPAN "
ANJURAN
Persatuan Ulama Malaysia (PUM)
dan
Yayasan Dakwah Islamiyah Malaysia (YADIM)
TARIKH
29 dan 30 Julai 2006
Sabtu dan Ahad
TEMPAT
Hotel Putra, Jalan Tun Abd. Razak, Kuala Lumpur.
PERASMIAN
Y.B Dato' Dr. Abdullah Md. Zin
Menteri Di Jabatan Perdana Menteri.
PEMBENTANGAN
Kedudukan Islam Dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia
Prof. Dr. Abdul Aziz Bari (UIAM)
Pelaksanaan Perundangan Islam di Malaysia (50 Tahun): Satu Penilaian
Prof. Datuk Dr. Abd. Munir Yaacob (APIUM)
Wanita Islam Di Malaysia Selepas 50 Tahun Kemerdekaan: Pencapaian dan Cabaran
Prof. Madya Dr. Raihanah Abdullah (APIUM)
Keharmonian Antara Kaum di Malaysia Pasca Merdeka.
Dato' Mustaffa Ma (MACMA)
Kedudukan Ekonomi Orang Melayu & Islam: Satu Penilaian
Tan Sri Dato' Abdul Khalid Ibrahim (Sektor Korporat)
Krisis Kependidikan: Cabaran Membina Generasi Muslim Berjiwa Merdeka
Dato' Dr. Siddiq Fadzil (Kolej Dar al-Hikmah)
Peranan Institusi-institusi Islam & NGO Dalam Mengisi Kebangkitan Islam: Satu Penilaian
Datuk Haji Mohd Nakhaie bin Haji Ahmad (YADIM)
Gerakan Dakwah & Peranan Ulama Mengisi Kemerdekaan
Hj. Abd. Ghani Samsudin (SHURA)
YURAN PENYERTAAN
-Peserta Institusi: RM200.00
-Peserta Individu: RM150.00
-Pelajar: RM 75.00
Tarikh tutup pendaftaran : 27 Julai 2006
Untuk maklumat lanjut dan pendaftaran sila hubungi:
Sekretariat Seminar Kebangsaan 50 Tahun Merdeka : Perspektif Islam
Persatuan Ulama' Malaysia
8-4, The Right Angle,
Jalan 14/22, Seksyen 14,
46100 Petaling Jaya,
Selangor Darul Ehsan
Tel : 03-79554300 / 03-79540316
Faks : 03-7955 4300 / 03-7958 4450
Email : pumpusat@yahoo.com
PERSPEKTIF ISLAM
TEMA:
"MENEKUNI IKTIBAR SEJARAH, MEMAHAMI REALITI
DAN MENYUSUN STRATEGI MASA DEPAN "
ANJURAN
Persatuan Ulama Malaysia (PUM)
dan
Yayasan Dakwah Islamiyah Malaysia (YADIM)
TARIKH
29 dan 30 Julai 2006
Sabtu dan Ahad
TEMPAT
Hotel Putra, Jalan Tun Abd. Razak, Kuala Lumpur.
PERASMIAN
Y.B Dato' Dr. Abdullah Md. Zin
Menteri Di Jabatan Perdana Menteri.
PEMBENTANGAN
Kedudukan Islam Dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia
Prof. Dr. Abdul Aziz Bari (UIAM)
Pelaksanaan Perundangan Islam di Malaysia (50 Tahun): Satu Penilaian
Prof. Datuk Dr. Abd. Munir Yaacob (APIUM)
Wanita Islam Di Malaysia Selepas 50 Tahun Kemerdekaan: Pencapaian dan Cabaran
Prof. Madya Dr. Raihanah Abdullah (APIUM)
Keharmonian Antara Kaum di Malaysia Pasca Merdeka.
Dato' Mustaffa Ma (MACMA)
Kedudukan Ekonomi Orang Melayu & Islam: Satu Penilaian
Tan Sri Dato' Abdul Khalid Ibrahim (Sektor Korporat)
Krisis Kependidikan: Cabaran Membina Generasi Muslim Berjiwa Merdeka
Dato' Dr. Siddiq Fadzil (Kolej Dar al-Hikmah)
Peranan Institusi-institusi Islam & NGO Dalam Mengisi Kebangkitan Islam: Satu Penilaian
Datuk Haji Mohd Nakhaie bin Haji Ahmad (YADIM)
Gerakan Dakwah & Peranan Ulama Mengisi Kemerdekaan
Hj. Abd. Ghani Samsudin (SHURA)
YURAN PENYERTAAN
-Peserta Institusi: RM200.00
-Peserta Individu: RM150.00
-Pelajar: RM 75.00
Tarikh tutup pendaftaran : 27 Julai 2006
Untuk maklumat lanjut dan pendaftaran sila hubungi:
Sekretariat Seminar Kebangsaan 50 Tahun Merdeka : Perspektif Islam
Persatuan Ulama' Malaysia
8-4, The Right Angle,
Jalan 14/22, Seksyen 14,
46100 Petaling Jaya,
Selangor Darul Ehsan
Tel : 03-79554300 / 03-79540316
Faks : 03-7955 4300 / 03-7958 4450
Email : pumpusat@yahoo.com
KeADILan gesa kerajaan tidak naikkan harga gas asli
KeADILan gesa kerajaan tidak naikkan harga gas asli
Wed Jun 21, 06 10:46:42 AM
Oleh Wan Nordin Wan Yaacob
KUALA LUMPUR, 21 Jun (Hrkh) - Parti Keadilan Rakyat (KeADILan) menggesa kerajaan agar tidak menaikkan harga gas asli kerana ia akan memberi kesan negatif kepada pasaran ekonomi negara serta membebankan rakyat yang sudahpun merana ekoran kenaikan harga bahan bakar dan tarif elektrik.
Menurut satu laporan media versi online, Menteri Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi, Dato' Seri Lim Keng Yaik dilaporkan sebagai berkata, kerajaan akan mempertimbangkan kenaikan harga gas asli bagi meringankan beban Petronas.
KeADILan berpendapat bahawa kenaikan harga minyak sebanyak 18.5 peratus pada bulan Februari lalu dan tarif elektrik sebanyak 12 peratus tidak lama dahulu telah memberi kesan negatif kepada seluruh rakyat, kata Naib Presiden KeADILan, Lee Boon Chye.
Beliau berkata demikian semasa dalam kenyataannya kepada Harakahdaily semalam dalam mengulas kenyataan Keng Yaik baru-baru ini.
Malah, terdapat banyak kilang dan syarikat yang terpaksa mengurangkan jumlah pekerja bagi meminimumkan kos pengeluaran yang tinggi ekoran kenaikan harga minyak dan tarif elektrik, katanya.
Permintaan Petronas menaikkan harga gas asli akan mengakibatkan peningkatan kos dalam bidang yang berasaskan sumber asli seperti penjanaan kuasa elektrik, kereta, gas masakan, baja dan bahan-bahan buatan gas asli lain, yang seterusnya memburukkan lagi keadaan ekonomi sedia tenat, ujarnya.
KeADILan berpendirian bahawa beban Petronas sebenarnya adalah hasil daripada pembaziran dan ketidaktelusan kerajaan selama ini, khususnya dalam menaja projek mega dan menyelamatkan syarikat kroni, tegasnya.
Tambahan pula, salah urus Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) dan perjanjian pembelian tenaga juga menjadi faktor penyumbang kepada kemerosotan dalam keuntungan Petronas, katanya.
Keputusan samada harga gas asli dinaikkan atau tidak akan dibuat selepas perbincangan antara kerajaan dengan penjanakuasa elektrik persendirian (IPP), ujarnya dengan merujuk kepada satu laporan akhbar versi online.
Walaupun Petronas memberi potongan harga bahan api kepada penjanakuasa elektrik persendirian, namun TNB tetap perlu menanggung semua kos kenaikan bahan api, samada elektrik terjana digunakan atau tidak, katanya.
Kenaikan kos ini pula akan ditanggung oleh seluruh rakyat Malaysia pada akhirnya, katanya.
Oleh yang demikian, KeADILan menggesa agar Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi mengkaji semula perjanjian yang ditandatangani TNB dan IPP serta memastikan semua projek kerajaan dijalankan secara telus dan berhemah, katanya./wann
Wed Jun 21, 06 10:46:42 AM
Oleh Wan Nordin Wan Yaacob
KUALA LUMPUR, 21 Jun (Hrkh) - Parti Keadilan Rakyat (KeADILan) menggesa kerajaan agar tidak menaikkan harga gas asli kerana ia akan memberi kesan negatif kepada pasaran ekonomi negara serta membebankan rakyat yang sudahpun merana ekoran kenaikan harga bahan bakar dan tarif elektrik.
Menurut satu laporan media versi online, Menteri Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi, Dato' Seri Lim Keng Yaik dilaporkan sebagai berkata, kerajaan akan mempertimbangkan kenaikan harga gas asli bagi meringankan beban Petronas.
KeADILan berpendapat bahawa kenaikan harga minyak sebanyak 18.5 peratus pada bulan Februari lalu dan tarif elektrik sebanyak 12 peratus tidak lama dahulu telah memberi kesan negatif kepada seluruh rakyat, kata Naib Presiden KeADILan, Lee Boon Chye.
Beliau berkata demikian semasa dalam kenyataannya kepada Harakahdaily semalam dalam mengulas kenyataan Keng Yaik baru-baru ini.
Malah, terdapat banyak kilang dan syarikat yang terpaksa mengurangkan jumlah pekerja bagi meminimumkan kos pengeluaran yang tinggi ekoran kenaikan harga minyak dan tarif elektrik, katanya.
Permintaan Petronas menaikkan harga gas asli akan mengakibatkan peningkatan kos dalam bidang yang berasaskan sumber asli seperti penjanaan kuasa elektrik, kereta, gas masakan, baja dan bahan-bahan buatan gas asli lain, yang seterusnya memburukkan lagi keadaan ekonomi sedia tenat, ujarnya.
KeADILan berpendirian bahawa beban Petronas sebenarnya adalah hasil daripada pembaziran dan ketidaktelusan kerajaan selama ini, khususnya dalam menaja projek mega dan menyelamatkan syarikat kroni, tegasnya.
Tambahan pula, salah urus Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) dan perjanjian pembelian tenaga juga menjadi faktor penyumbang kepada kemerosotan dalam keuntungan Petronas, katanya.
Keputusan samada harga gas asli dinaikkan atau tidak akan dibuat selepas perbincangan antara kerajaan dengan penjanakuasa elektrik persendirian (IPP), ujarnya dengan merujuk kepada satu laporan akhbar versi online.
Walaupun Petronas memberi potongan harga bahan api kepada penjanakuasa elektrik persendirian, namun TNB tetap perlu menanggung semua kos kenaikan bahan api, samada elektrik terjana digunakan atau tidak, katanya.
Kenaikan kos ini pula akan ditanggung oleh seluruh rakyat Malaysia pada akhirnya, katanya.
Oleh yang demikian, KeADILan menggesa agar Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi mengkaji semula perjanjian yang ditandatangani TNB dan IPP serta memastikan semua projek kerajaan dijalankan secara telus dan berhemah, katanya./wann
Kerajaan perlu kaji semula kongsi raya
Kerajaan perlu kaji semula kongsi raya
Sat Jun 17, 06 02:46:50 PM
Oleh Khairul Arifin Mohd Munir
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM) turut menyokong kenyataan Dato' Seri Harussani Zakaria, Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Kerja Muzakarah Ulamak 2006 agar kerajaan mengkaji semula beberapa amalan rasmi kini seperti perayaan kongsi Raya bagi mengelakkan kekeliruan timbul dalam masyarakat.
Abim berpandangan bahawa mengiktiraf perayaan agama lain dengan cuti umum telah mencerminkan semangat toleransi, kesefahaman dan perpaduan berbilang kaum, tetapi tidaklah wajar sehingga meraikan perayaan agama lain.
Semangat perpaduan dan toleransi berbilang kaum boleh diterjemahkan dalam sambutan-sambutan seperti sambutan Hari Kemerdekaan, Sambutan Tahun Baru dan lain-lain. Oleh itu Abim sebelum ini pernah menghantar Memorandum kepada Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan bagi menyatakan kebimbangan Abimterhadap fenomena “Kongsi Raya” ini.
Fenomena muktahir
Perayaan-perayaan keagamaan telah disambut secara besar-besaran sejak kebelakangan ini, bukan sahaja di peringkat individu, bahkan juga oleh pihak Kerajaan. Sambutan ini diasaskan kepada pertimbangan semangat toleransi, kerjasama dan perpaduan antara pelbagai kaum di Malaysia. Malah, ia sudah menjadi semacam sebuah agenda nasional, bertujuan untuk menarik para pelancong asing ke Malaysia.
Namun, di dalam keghairahan masyarakat Malaysia menganjurkan apa yang disifatkan sebagai “Kongsi Raya” ini, beberapa aktiviti yang dianjurkan telah menimbulkan kemusykilan sama ada ianya dibenarkan oleh syarak atau tidak.
Tidak juga dapat dipastikan sama ada aktiviti-aktiviti ini dilakukan secara sukarela atau kerana terpaksa. Antara aktiviti-aktiviti yang dimaksudkan ini ialah keperluan pekerja-pekerja beragama Islam di kedai-kedai tertentu memakai pakaian a la “Santa Claus”, acara di mana pembesar-pembesar negara khususnya yang beragama Islam dikehendaki merasmikan pokok Krismas tertinggi dengan lambang salib di puncaknya dan majlis-majlis lain seumpama ini.
Kedua-dua contoh yang diutarakan ini adalah perlambangan (simbolism) kepada perayaan Krismas. Di dalam perayaan Tahun Baru Cina pula, anak-anak muda Islam sama-sama menarikan tarian naga.
Persoalannya sekarang, apakah semua ini diharuskan syarak tanpa sebarang panduan? Ataupun ada perkara-perkara yang menyentuh akidah perlu dihindarkan. Oleh itu amatlah diharapkan agar satu panduan yang jelas dapat dikeluarkan agar masyarakat secara umumnya memahami dengan jelas perkara ini, seterusnya masyarakat bukan Islam juga akan lebih menghormati agama Islam sebagai agama rasmi negara dan juga penganutnya.
Dengan kata lain, akidah umat Islam akan lebih terjaga dan dalam masa yang sama, semangat toleransi antara kaum dan agama dapat dimantapkan.
Konsep kongsi raya bagi umat Islam
Anas bin Malik telah berkata::
"Nabi s.a.w. telah datang ke Madinah, sedangkan mereka (penduduk Madinah) mempunyai dua hari yang mereka bermain-main padanya. Maka Rasulullah s.a.w. bersabda: “Sesungguhnya Allah telah menggantikan untuk kamu dua hari yang lebih baik dari keduanya, iaitu ‘Eid al-Adha dan ‘Eid al-Fitr.”
(Diriwayatkan oleh Abu Dawud dan al-Nasa’i dengan sanad yang sahih).
Berdasarkan kepada hadith di atas, jelas bahawa kaum Muslimin hanya dituntut untuk merayakan dua jenis perayaan sahaja. Ini dijelaskan lagi oleh sabda Rasulullah s.a.w. di dalam hadis yang lain yang maksudnya: “Sesungguhnya bagi setiap kaum itu perayaan dan inilah perayaan kita” (merujuk kepada dua hari raya di atas).
Oleh yang demikian, di atas alasan apakah kaum Muslimin dibolehkan merayakan hari-hari kebesaran masyarakat-masyarakat agama lain?
Merayakan perayaan selalin dua hari raya
Adalah juga jelas di dalam Islam bahawa masyarakat bukan Islam mempunyai hak untuk merayakan perayaan agama mereka. Sebagaimana maksud firman Allah SWT.:
Bagi kamu agama kamu dan bagiku agamaku
Dan maksud firman Allah:
Tiada paksaan dalam agama
Cuma persoalannya sekarang, apakah umat Islam harus sama-sama merayakannya dengan beralasankan toleransi dan perpaduan masyarakat majmuk? Sehubungan ini, adalah dicadangkan agar beberapa perkara berikut diberi perhatian:
a) Niat dan Tujuan: Tidak dinafikan bahawa perayaan merupakan syiar kepada sesuatu agama dan kepercayaan. Jika tujuan menyertai perayaan tersebut adalah untuk sama-sama meninggikan syiar agama dan kepercayaan tersebut, maka dikhuatiri akan menjejaskan akidah orang Islam, kerana secara tidak langsung ianya merupakan pengiktirafan terhadap agama lain selain Islam. Ini adalah bertepatan dengan kaedah fiqh yang masyhur dan diterima oleh para fuqaha:
(Natijah) Setiap sesuatu perkara (adalah bergantung) kepada niatnya
b) Di dalam perayaan tertentu, terdapat amalan yang disifatkan sebagai ritual atau upacara peribadatan seperti menyerah makanan kepada berhala, membakar colok dan sebagainya. Penyertaan di dalam amalan yang sebegini juga dikhuatiri akan menjejaskan akidah seseorang.
c) Adat yang bukan bersifat ritual dan ibadat tetapi telah diterima dan terkenal sebagai syiar kepada agama dan kepercayaan tertentu. Contohnya, pakaian “Santa Claus” dan pokok krismas bagi perayaan Krismas. Hal begini juga mesti dielakkan oleh penganut agama Islam dan majikan bukan Islam tidak harus memaksa pekerja Muslim mereka memakainya kerana ianya menyumbang kepada tertegaknya syiar tersebut.
d) Suatu kebiasaan yang tiada kena mengena dengan agama, syiar dan kepercayaan seperti majlis makan minum dan sebagainya. Perkara sebegini seharusnya dibenarkan penyertaan berbagai jenis dan lapisan kaum di dalam usaha mengeratkan hubungan dan perpaduan di antara mereka.
Cadangan
Suatu fatwa dan garis panduan yang jelas perlu dikeluarkan demi menjaga akidah umat Islam dan sensitiviti masyarakat berbilang kaum. Sesungguhnya penganut bukan Islam tidak dituntut mengamalkan perkara-perkara (a) hingga (c) di atas di dalam merayakan Hari Raya Haji dan Puasa bersama-sama Kaum Muslimin.
Orang bukan Islam tidak dituntut untuk bersembahyang sunat Hari Raya, sama-sama bertakbir, berkorban dan sebagainya. Oleh itu, umat Islam juga sepatutnya dihormati akidah mereka dan tidak dituntut melakukan perkara yang menjejaskannya.
Adalah amat diharapkan semoga penjelasan yang jelas mengenai perkara ini, terutamanya dari pihak yang dihormati kewibawaannya seperti Majlis Muzakarah Fatwa Kebangsaan akan dapat dijadikan panduan oleh masyarakat Islam dan bukan Islam. Apa juga acara yang diatur di dalam menyambut perayaan masing-masing, terutamanya yang melibatkan pembesar-pembesar negara yang beragama Islam dan bukan Islam, hendaklah mengambil kira sensitiviti ini.
Abim berdoa semoga masyarakat majmuk di Malaysia ini akan terus hidup di dalam suasana keamanan dan meningkatkan lagi sikap saling hormat-menghormati antara satu sama lain.
Khairul Arifin Mohd Munir
Setiausaha Agung
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM)
Anjung Rahmat, Gombak
Sat Jun 17, 06 02:46:50 PM
Oleh Khairul Arifin Mohd Munir
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM) turut menyokong kenyataan Dato' Seri Harussani Zakaria, Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Kerja Muzakarah Ulamak 2006 agar kerajaan mengkaji semula beberapa amalan rasmi kini seperti perayaan kongsi Raya bagi mengelakkan kekeliruan timbul dalam masyarakat.
Abim berpandangan bahawa mengiktiraf perayaan agama lain dengan cuti umum telah mencerminkan semangat toleransi, kesefahaman dan perpaduan berbilang kaum, tetapi tidaklah wajar sehingga meraikan perayaan agama lain.
Semangat perpaduan dan toleransi berbilang kaum boleh diterjemahkan dalam sambutan-sambutan seperti sambutan Hari Kemerdekaan, Sambutan Tahun Baru dan lain-lain. Oleh itu Abim sebelum ini pernah menghantar Memorandum kepada Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan bagi menyatakan kebimbangan Abimterhadap fenomena “Kongsi Raya” ini.
Fenomena muktahir
Perayaan-perayaan keagamaan telah disambut secara besar-besaran sejak kebelakangan ini, bukan sahaja di peringkat individu, bahkan juga oleh pihak Kerajaan. Sambutan ini diasaskan kepada pertimbangan semangat toleransi, kerjasama dan perpaduan antara pelbagai kaum di Malaysia. Malah, ia sudah menjadi semacam sebuah agenda nasional, bertujuan untuk menarik para pelancong asing ke Malaysia.
Namun, di dalam keghairahan masyarakat Malaysia menganjurkan apa yang disifatkan sebagai “Kongsi Raya” ini, beberapa aktiviti yang dianjurkan telah menimbulkan kemusykilan sama ada ianya dibenarkan oleh syarak atau tidak.
Tidak juga dapat dipastikan sama ada aktiviti-aktiviti ini dilakukan secara sukarela atau kerana terpaksa. Antara aktiviti-aktiviti yang dimaksudkan ini ialah keperluan pekerja-pekerja beragama Islam di kedai-kedai tertentu memakai pakaian a la “Santa Claus”, acara di mana pembesar-pembesar negara khususnya yang beragama Islam dikehendaki merasmikan pokok Krismas tertinggi dengan lambang salib di puncaknya dan majlis-majlis lain seumpama ini.
Kedua-dua contoh yang diutarakan ini adalah perlambangan (simbolism) kepada perayaan Krismas. Di dalam perayaan Tahun Baru Cina pula, anak-anak muda Islam sama-sama menarikan tarian naga.
Persoalannya sekarang, apakah semua ini diharuskan syarak tanpa sebarang panduan? Ataupun ada perkara-perkara yang menyentuh akidah perlu dihindarkan. Oleh itu amatlah diharapkan agar satu panduan yang jelas dapat dikeluarkan agar masyarakat secara umumnya memahami dengan jelas perkara ini, seterusnya masyarakat bukan Islam juga akan lebih menghormati agama Islam sebagai agama rasmi negara dan juga penganutnya.
Dengan kata lain, akidah umat Islam akan lebih terjaga dan dalam masa yang sama, semangat toleransi antara kaum dan agama dapat dimantapkan.
Konsep kongsi raya bagi umat Islam
Anas bin Malik telah berkata::
"Nabi s.a.w. telah datang ke Madinah, sedangkan mereka (penduduk Madinah) mempunyai dua hari yang mereka bermain-main padanya. Maka Rasulullah s.a.w. bersabda: “Sesungguhnya Allah telah menggantikan untuk kamu dua hari yang lebih baik dari keduanya, iaitu ‘Eid al-Adha dan ‘Eid al-Fitr.”
(Diriwayatkan oleh Abu Dawud dan al-Nasa’i dengan sanad yang sahih).
Berdasarkan kepada hadith di atas, jelas bahawa kaum Muslimin hanya dituntut untuk merayakan dua jenis perayaan sahaja. Ini dijelaskan lagi oleh sabda Rasulullah s.a.w. di dalam hadis yang lain yang maksudnya: “Sesungguhnya bagi setiap kaum itu perayaan dan inilah perayaan kita” (merujuk kepada dua hari raya di atas).
Oleh yang demikian, di atas alasan apakah kaum Muslimin dibolehkan merayakan hari-hari kebesaran masyarakat-masyarakat agama lain?
Merayakan perayaan selalin dua hari raya
Adalah juga jelas di dalam Islam bahawa masyarakat bukan Islam mempunyai hak untuk merayakan perayaan agama mereka. Sebagaimana maksud firman Allah SWT.:
Bagi kamu agama kamu dan bagiku agamaku
Dan maksud firman Allah:
Tiada paksaan dalam agama
Cuma persoalannya sekarang, apakah umat Islam harus sama-sama merayakannya dengan beralasankan toleransi dan perpaduan masyarakat majmuk? Sehubungan ini, adalah dicadangkan agar beberapa perkara berikut diberi perhatian:
a) Niat dan Tujuan: Tidak dinafikan bahawa perayaan merupakan syiar kepada sesuatu agama dan kepercayaan. Jika tujuan menyertai perayaan tersebut adalah untuk sama-sama meninggikan syiar agama dan kepercayaan tersebut, maka dikhuatiri akan menjejaskan akidah orang Islam, kerana secara tidak langsung ianya merupakan pengiktirafan terhadap agama lain selain Islam. Ini adalah bertepatan dengan kaedah fiqh yang masyhur dan diterima oleh para fuqaha:
(Natijah) Setiap sesuatu perkara (adalah bergantung) kepada niatnya
b) Di dalam perayaan tertentu, terdapat amalan yang disifatkan sebagai ritual atau upacara peribadatan seperti menyerah makanan kepada berhala, membakar colok dan sebagainya. Penyertaan di dalam amalan yang sebegini juga dikhuatiri akan menjejaskan akidah seseorang.
c) Adat yang bukan bersifat ritual dan ibadat tetapi telah diterima dan terkenal sebagai syiar kepada agama dan kepercayaan tertentu. Contohnya, pakaian “Santa Claus” dan pokok krismas bagi perayaan Krismas. Hal begini juga mesti dielakkan oleh penganut agama Islam dan majikan bukan Islam tidak harus memaksa pekerja Muslim mereka memakainya kerana ianya menyumbang kepada tertegaknya syiar tersebut.
d) Suatu kebiasaan yang tiada kena mengena dengan agama, syiar dan kepercayaan seperti majlis makan minum dan sebagainya. Perkara sebegini seharusnya dibenarkan penyertaan berbagai jenis dan lapisan kaum di dalam usaha mengeratkan hubungan dan perpaduan di antara mereka.
Cadangan
Suatu fatwa dan garis panduan yang jelas perlu dikeluarkan demi menjaga akidah umat Islam dan sensitiviti masyarakat berbilang kaum. Sesungguhnya penganut bukan Islam tidak dituntut mengamalkan perkara-perkara (a) hingga (c) di atas di dalam merayakan Hari Raya Haji dan Puasa bersama-sama Kaum Muslimin.
Orang bukan Islam tidak dituntut untuk bersembahyang sunat Hari Raya, sama-sama bertakbir, berkorban dan sebagainya. Oleh itu, umat Islam juga sepatutnya dihormati akidah mereka dan tidak dituntut melakukan perkara yang menjejaskannya.
Adalah amat diharapkan semoga penjelasan yang jelas mengenai perkara ini, terutamanya dari pihak yang dihormati kewibawaannya seperti Majlis Muzakarah Fatwa Kebangsaan akan dapat dijadikan panduan oleh masyarakat Islam dan bukan Islam. Apa juga acara yang diatur di dalam menyambut perayaan masing-masing, terutamanya yang melibatkan pembesar-pembesar negara yang beragama Islam dan bukan Islam, hendaklah mengambil kira sensitiviti ini.
Abim berdoa semoga masyarakat majmuk di Malaysia ini akan terus hidup di dalam suasana keamanan dan meningkatkan lagi sikap saling hormat-menghormati antara satu sama lain.
Khairul Arifin Mohd Munir
Setiausaha Agung
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM)
Anjung Rahmat, Gombak
Mahathir loyalist blasts Abdullah's supporters
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Mahathir loyalist blasts Abdullah's supporters
PM's son-in-law and NST deputy chairman corrupt, Matthias Chang charges
By Leslie Lau
The Straits Times
The political temperature in Kuala Lumpur was raised further yesterday when a long-time loyalist of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad lashed out at Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's aides and his ministers.
Lawyer Matthias Chang, a former political secretary to Tun Dr Mahathir, launched a blustering, often rambling attack at an hour-long press conference, at times shouting out challenges to the former premier's detractors.
His main targets were the Prime Minister's son-in-law, Mr Khairy Jamaluddin, and Datuk Kalimullah Hassan, the former group editor-in-chief of the New Straits Times, whom he charged were corrupt.
He provided little evidence to support his allegations, except to say that the two men were 'powers behind the throne', who also held interests in an investment bank. He called them cowards, and dared them to a public debate, accusing them of using the newspaper to demonise his former boss.
Mr Chang claimed the newspaper had published stories to make it appear that Datuk Seri Abdullah was bending over backwards to respect Tun Dr Mahathir. He said such stories were pure 'spin', but he provided no examples.
'You are the cobra doing the work of our enemies. You are a traitor,' he said of Datuk Kalimullah, who is now deputy chairman of the New Straits Times.
Showing a flair for the dramatic, he placed five holy books, including the Quran and the Bible, in front of him, and swore he was telling the truth in speaking for Tun Dr Mahathir, or 'may lightning strike me now'.
He sought to paint a picture of his old boss as being a sterling retired leader under siege from ungrateful successors and their aides.
On Sunday, Datuk Kalimullah issued a sharp rebuke to Tun Dr Mahathir's criticisms and claims that Datuk Seri Abdullah had betrayed him in reversing his policies.
He wrote in his weekly column that Tun Dr Mahathir's attacks against his successor were irrational and had caused him to lose the goodwill of Malaysians.
Taking up cudgels for his former boss, Mr Chang accused Mr Khairy, who is also the deputy Umno Youth chief, of planning to demonise Tun Dr Mahathir just months before he handed power over to Datuk Seri Abdullah in 2003.
'There was a supplement in the Economist that attacked Tun Mahathir. It was arranged by Khairy,' he charged.
For good measure, he also lobbed potshots at various ministers, such as Education Minister Datuk Hishammuddin Hussein and Sports Minister Datuk Azalina Othman, for daring to speak out against Tun Dr Mahathir, a man he described as a 'Malay hero'.
'I spit in the face of those Malays who show disrespect for this Malay hero,' he declared.
Mr Chang, a little known lawyer, does not belong to any political party, and had been appointed a political secretary to Tun Dr Mahathir in the waning years of his administration.
Three years after returning to his legal practice following Tun Dr Mahathir's retirement, he remains loyal to his old boss.
In April, he had also been vocal in his criticism of the current administration for scrapping the project to replace the Causeway.
He was equally venomous in speaking for the former premier yesterday.
While he maintained that his remarks had not been sanctioned by Tun Dr Mahathir, he reflected the feelings of those in his former employer's camp.
At least one current aide of the former prime minister was present at the press conference held at Mr Chang's office.
The accusations that were levelled by Mr Chang appeared to be the latest escalation in the Mahathir versus Abdullah saga that is being played out to a riveted audience here.
'This man has always been a little volatile, but he is through and through a Mahathir man. What he says clearly reflects at the very least the frustrations of Tun Mahathir's supporters,' an Umno MP who declined to be named told The Straits Times.
Mahathir loyalist blasts Abdullah's supporters
PM's son-in-law and NST deputy chairman corrupt, Matthias Chang charges
By Leslie Lau
The Straits Times
The political temperature in Kuala Lumpur was raised further yesterday when a long-time loyalist of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad lashed out at Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's aides and his ministers.
Lawyer Matthias Chang, a former political secretary to Tun Dr Mahathir, launched a blustering, often rambling attack at an hour-long press conference, at times shouting out challenges to the former premier's detractors.
His main targets were the Prime Minister's son-in-law, Mr Khairy Jamaluddin, and Datuk Kalimullah Hassan, the former group editor-in-chief of the New Straits Times, whom he charged were corrupt.
He provided little evidence to support his allegations, except to say that the two men were 'powers behind the throne', who also held interests in an investment bank. He called them cowards, and dared them to a public debate, accusing them of using the newspaper to demonise his former boss.
Mr Chang claimed the newspaper had published stories to make it appear that Datuk Seri Abdullah was bending over backwards to respect Tun Dr Mahathir. He said such stories were pure 'spin', but he provided no examples.
'You are the cobra doing the work of our enemies. You are a traitor,' he said of Datuk Kalimullah, who is now deputy chairman of the New Straits Times.
Showing a flair for the dramatic, he placed five holy books, including the Quran and the Bible, in front of him, and swore he was telling the truth in speaking for Tun Dr Mahathir, or 'may lightning strike me now'.
He sought to paint a picture of his old boss as being a sterling retired leader under siege from ungrateful successors and their aides.
On Sunday, Datuk Kalimullah issued a sharp rebuke to Tun Dr Mahathir's criticisms and claims that Datuk Seri Abdullah had betrayed him in reversing his policies.
He wrote in his weekly column that Tun Dr Mahathir's attacks against his successor were irrational and had caused him to lose the goodwill of Malaysians.
Taking up cudgels for his former boss, Mr Chang accused Mr Khairy, who is also the deputy Umno Youth chief, of planning to demonise Tun Dr Mahathir just months before he handed power over to Datuk Seri Abdullah in 2003.
'There was a supplement in the Economist that attacked Tun Mahathir. It was arranged by Khairy,' he charged.
For good measure, he also lobbed potshots at various ministers, such as Education Minister Datuk Hishammuddin Hussein and Sports Minister Datuk Azalina Othman, for daring to speak out against Tun Dr Mahathir, a man he described as a 'Malay hero'.
'I spit in the face of those Malays who show disrespect for this Malay hero,' he declared.
Mr Chang, a little known lawyer, does not belong to any political party, and had been appointed a political secretary to Tun Dr Mahathir in the waning years of his administration.
Three years after returning to his legal practice following Tun Dr Mahathir's retirement, he remains loyal to his old boss.
In April, he had also been vocal in his criticism of the current administration for scrapping the project to replace the Causeway.
He was equally venomous in speaking for the former premier yesterday.
While he maintained that his remarks had not been sanctioned by Tun Dr Mahathir, he reflected the feelings of those in his former employer's camp.
At least one current aide of the former prime minister was present at the press conference held at Mr Chang's office.
The accusations that were levelled by Mr Chang appeared to be the latest escalation in the Mahathir versus Abdullah saga that is being played out to a riveted audience here.
'This man has always been a little volatile, but he is through and through a Mahathir man. What he says clearly reflects at the very least the frustrations of Tun Mahathir's supporters,' an Umno MP who declined to be named told The Straits Times.
Bubarkan institusi agama, mansuhkan jawatan mufti
Bubarkan institusi agama, mansuhkan jawatan mufti
Sat Jun 17, 06 01:28:15 PM
Oleh Abu Bakar Rahman
KUALA LUMPUR, 17 Jun (Hrkh) - Bubarkan sahaja institusi agama Islam di dalam kerajaan dam mansuhkan jawatan mufti di semua negeri yang dikuasai Barisan Nasional jika kerajaan tidak mahu mengambilkira dan menghormati pandangan mufti-mufti dan pihak berkuasa agama.
Ahli Jawatankuasa PAS Pusat, Ustaz Idris Ahmad menyarankan perkara itu ketika mengulas kenyataan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi yang mahu program rumah terbuka dan kongsi raya diteruskan kerana ia adalah acara sosial yang diterima baik masyarakat pelbagai kaum dan bukan upacara keagamaan yang boleh menggugat keimanan.
Sambil menjadikan acara di Sabah sebagai contoh, Abdullah berkata tarian, pementasan dan adat resam yang berhubung kait dengan kepercayaan seperti semangat padi juga bukan sesuatu yang boleh menggoncang keimanan seseorang.
"Itulah pendirian kerajaan dan ia seharusnya tidak dijadikan polemik kerana boleh menimbulkan pelbagai tanggapan yang akan mewujudkan keadaan tidak menentu," kata Perdana Menteri.
Idris menolak pandangan Perdana Menteri itu dan mempersoalkan apakah kelayakan dan atas kapasiti apa di sisi Islam yang membolehkan beliau membuat kenyataan bahawa perayaan-perayaan itu hanya acara sosial dan bukan upacara keagamaan yang boleh menggugat keimanan.
PM angkuh dan bongkak
"Persoalan di sini bukan soal sama ada kita boleh hadir atau tidak hadir, tetapi apa yang lebih berbahaya ialah sikap angkuh dan bongkak Perdana Menteri yang membuat pandangan berdasarkan agakannnya sendiri sahaja tanpa menunjukkan pihak berkuasa Islam yang manakah yang menjadi rujukan beliau," kata beliau yang juga Timbalan Ketua Pemuda PAS.
Idris mengecam kegelojohan Abdullah membuat kenyataan sedangkan sebelum ini Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Razak berkata, kerajaan bersedia menimbang saranan Muzakarah Ulama 2006 untuk mengkaji semula amalan kongsi raya dan rumah terbuka bagi memastikan ia tidak bercanggah dengan hukum Syarak.
"Kenyataan Abdullah itu hakikatnya menunjukkan perangai bongkak dan angkuh seolah-olah beliau layak dan mempunyai kewibawaan untuk membuat keputusan dalam soal agama Islam dan ini bukan kali pertama Abdullah bertindak mencabar pihak berkuasa agama," kata beliau.
Antaranya, kata beliau, ialah apabila Abdullah begitu berang dengan tindakan Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (Jais) menahan 53 orang termasuk 31 orang di bawah Seksyen 10 Enakmen Jenayah Syariah (Selangor) 1995 pada 10 Jun 2000.
Hasil penentangan Abdullah itu, pada 28 Jun tahun yang sama, kerajaan Selangor mengaku Jais telah melakukan kesilapan ketika menahan 31 orang kerana disyaki melakukan kesalahan di bawah Seksyen 10 Enakmen Jenayah Syariah (Selangor) 1995 berikutan pemeriksaan Jais di Restoran The Ship, China Town Nite Club dan LC Pub & Cafe.
Penentangan Abdullah itu juga membantu kesemua 31 yang ditahan itu bersama 22 orang yang lain di mana mereka tidak didakwa atau dihadapkan ke Mahkamah Syariah.
Dalam operasi Jais itu, sebanyak 53 tangkapan dibuat iaitu 30 lelaki dan 23 wanita termasuk penyanyi Azlina Abbas.
Mengulas lanjut sikap Abdullah itu, Idris berkata, tindak-tanduk Abdullah sejak dahulu lagi jelas membuktikan beliau tidak menghormati pihak berkuasa agama dan tidak menghormati ulama.
"Abdullah jelas tidak menghormati dan menghina pihak berkuasa agama yang membuat keputusan itu sedangkan mereka bukan ulama PAS.
"Para mufti dijatuhkan taraf mereka oleh kerajaan Abdullah dan dihina seolah-olah mereka adalah singa tua yang tidak ada gusi," kata beliau. Idris juga menggesa para mufti mempertahankan maruah dan harga diri mereka dan bersikap tegas dengan keputusan yang dibuat berdasarkan hujjah yang sahih di sisi Islam.
Sebelum ini, Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Kerja Muzakarah Ulama 2006, Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria mahu kerajaan mengkaji semula amalan kongsi raya dan rumah terbuka bagi memastikan tidak bercanggah dengan hukum Syarak.
Rosak akidah, syirik
Kajian itu dikatakan perlu kerana Jawatankuasa Fatwa Kebangsaan sudah membuat keputusan bahawa meraikan perayaan agama lain adalah merosakkan akidah dan boleh menjurus kepada perbuatan syirik.
Bagaimanapun, Menteri Kebudayaan, Kesenian dan Warisan, Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim kelmarin ketika mengulas perkara itu, berkata pihaknya akan meneruskan penganjuran program itu seperti yang dilaksanakan sejak beberapa tahun lalu.
Rais berkata, sebelum ada keputusan rasmi berhubung isu itu daripada badan agama yang bertauliah seperti Institut Kefahaman Islam (IKIM), Jabatan Kemajuan Islam (Jakim), Majlis Fatwa dan Majlis Raja-Raja supaya acara rumah terbuka diteruskan.
Sementara itu, di Ipoh, Mufti Perak, Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria, berkata adalah tidak salah bagi orang Islam hadir pada majlis perayaan agama lain yang dianjurkan jiran atau rakan bukan Islam sebagai tanda persahabatan, perpaduan atau muhibah tetapi tidak dibenarkan untuk bersama-sama merayakannya atau menganjurkan majlis berkenaan.
Menjelaskan dengan lebih lanjut, beliau berkata, adalah menjadi kesalahan apabila orang Islam sendiri yang begitu beria-ria meraikannya seperti memberi hadiah atau memakai pakaian baru merayakan perayaan agama lain.
"Pada zaman permulaan Islam, ada umat Islam yang merayakan perayaan Gahambas daripada fahaman Zoroastrisme kerana ia sudah menjadi amalan masyarakat Arab Jahiliah ketika itu.
"Zoroastrisme adalah agama menyembah api yang berasal dari Parsi dan tersebar luas sehingga Tanah Arab sejak 2,000 tahun lalu.
"Berikutan itu, Nabi Muhammad s.a.w. bersabda bahawa umat Islam ada perayaannya iaitu Aidilfitri dan Aidiladha yang mesti disambut, bukannya perayaan agama lain," katanya ketika menjadi tetamu rancangan Soal-Jawab Agama Radio Perak FM pagi Jumaat lalu. - mks.
Sat Jun 17, 06 01:28:15 PM
Oleh Abu Bakar Rahman
KUALA LUMPUR, 17 Jun (Hrkh) - Bubarkan sahaja institusi agama Islam di dalam kerajaan dam mansuhkan jawatan mufti di semua negeri yang dikuasai Barisan Nasional jika kerajaan tidak mahu mengambilkira dan menghormati pandangan mufti-mufti dan pihak berkuasa agama.
Ahli Jawatankuasa PAS Pusat, Ustaz Idris Ahmad menyarankan perkara itu ketika mengulas kenyataan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi yang mahu program rumah terbuka dan kongsi raya diteruskan kerana ia adalah acara sosial yang diterima baik masyarakat pelbagai kaum dan bukan upacara keagamaan yang boleh menggugat keimanan.
Sambil menjadikan acara di Sabah sebagai contoh, Abdullah berkata tarian, pementasan dan adat resam yang berhubung kait dengan kepercayaan seperti semangat padi juga bukan sesuatu yang boleh menggoncang keimanan seseorang.
"Itulah pendirian kerajaan dan ia seharusnya tidak dijadikan polemik kerana boleh menimbulkan pelbagai tanggapan yang akan mewujudkan keadaan tidak menentu," kata Perdana Menteri.
Idris menolak pandangan Perdana Menteri itu dan mempersoalkan apakah kelayakan dan atas kapasiti apa di sisi Islam yang membolehkan beliau membuat kenyataan bahawa perayaan-perayaan itu hanya acara sosial dan bukan upacara keagamaan yang boleh menggugat keimanan.
PM angkuh dan bongkak
"Persoalan di sini bukan soal sama ada kita boleh hadir atau tidak hadir, tetapi apa yang lebih berbahaya ialah sikap angkuh dan bongkak Perdana Menteri yang membuat pandangan berdasarkan agakannnya sendiri sahaja tanpa menunjukkan pihak berkuasa Islam yang manakah yang menjadi rujukan beliau," kata beliau yang juga Timbalan Ketua Pemuda PAS.
Idris mengecam kegelojohan Abdullah membuat kenyataan sedangkan sebelum ini Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Razak berkata, kerajaan bersedia menimbang saranan Muzakarah Ulama 2006 untuk mengkaji semula amalan kongsi raya dan rumah terbuka bagi memastikan ia tidak bercanggah dengan hukum Syarak.
"Kenyataan Abdullah itu hakikatnya menunjukkan perangai bongkak dan angkuh seolah-olah beliau layak dan mempunyai kewibawaan untuk membuat keputusan dalam soal agama Islam dan ini bukan kali pertama Abdullah bertindak mencabar pihak berkuasa agama," kata beliau.
Antaranya, kata beliau, ialah apabila Abdullah begitu berang dengan tindakan Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (Jais) menahan 53 orang termasuk 31 orang di bawah Seksyen 10 Enakmen Jenayah Syariah (Selangor) 1995 pada 10 Jun 2000.
Hasil penentangan Abdullah itu, pada 28 Jun tahun yang sama, kerajaan Selangor mengaku Jais telah melakukan kesilapan ketika menahan 31 orang kerana disyaki melakukan kesalahan di bawah Seksyen 10 Enakmen Jenayah Syariah (Selangor) 1995 berikutan pemeriksaan Jais di Restoran The Ship, China Town Nite Club dan LC Pub & Cafe.
Penentangan Abdullah itu juga membantu kesemua 31 yang ditahan itu bersama 22 orang yang lain di mana mereka tidak didakwa atau dihadapkan ke Mahkamah Syariah.
Dalam operasi Jais itu, sebanyak 53 tangkapan dibuat iaitu 30 lelaki dan 23 wanita termasuk penyanyi Azlina Abbas.
Mengulas lanjut sikap Abdullah itu, Idris berkata, tindak-tanduk Abdullah sejak dahulu lagi jelas membuktikan beliau tidak menghormati pihak berkuasa agama dan tidak menghormati ulama.
"Abdullah jelas tidak menghormati dan menghina pihak berkuasa agama yang membuat keputusan itu sedangkan mereka bukan ulama PAS.
"Para mufti dijatuhkan taraf mereka oleh kerajaan Abdullah dan dihina seolah-olah mereka adalah singa tua yang tidak ada gusi," kata beliau. Idris juga menggesa para mufti mempertahankan maruah dan harga diri mereka dan bersikap tegas dengan keputusan yang dibuat berdasarkan hujjah yang sahih di sisi Islam.
Sebelum ini, Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Kerja Muzakarah Ulama 2006, Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria mahu kerajaan mengkaji semula amalan kongsi raya dan rumah terbuka bagi memastikan tidak bercanggah dengan hukum Syarak.
Rosak akidah, syirik
Kajian itu dikatakan perlu kerana Jawatankuasa Fatwa Kebangsaan sudah membuat keputusan bahawa meraikan perayaan agama lain adalah merosakkan akidah dan boleh menjurus kepada perbuatan syirik.
Bagaimanapun, Menteri Kebudayaan, Kesenian dan Warisan, Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim kelmarin ketika mengulas perkara itu, berkata pihaknya akan meneruskan penganjuran program itu seperti yang dilaksanakan sejak beberapa tahun lalu.
Rais berkata, sebelum ada keputusan rasmi berhubung isu itu daripada badan agama yang bertauliah seperti Institut Kefahaman Islam (IKIM), Jabatan Kemajuan Islam (Jakim), Majlis Fatwa dan Majlis Raja-Raja supaya acara rumah terbuka diteruskan.
Sementara itu, di Ipoh, Mufti Perak, Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria, berkata adalah tidak salah bagi orang Islam hadir pada majlis perayaan agama lain yang dianjurkan jiran atau rakan bukan Islam sebagai tanda persahabatan, perpaduan atau muhibah tetapi tidak dibenarkan untuk bersama-sama merayakannya atau menganjurkan majlis berkenaan.
Menjelaskan dengan lebih lanjut, beliau berkata, adalah menjadi kesalahan apabila orang Islam sendiri yang begitu beria-ria meraikannya seperti memberi hadiah atau memakai pakaian baru merayakan perayaan agama lain.
"Pada zaman permulaan Islam, ada umat Islam yang merayakan perayaan Gahambas daripada fahaman Zoroastrisme kerana ia sudah menjadi amalan masyarakat Arab Jahiliah ketika itu.
"Zoroastrisme adalah agama menyembah api yang berasal dari Parsi dan tersebar luas sehingga Tanah Arab sejak 2,000 tahun lalu.
"Berikutan itu, Nabi Muhammad s.a.w. bersabda bahawa umat Islam ada perayaannya iaitu Aidilfitri dan Aidiladha yang mesti disambut, bukannya perayaan agama lain," katanya ketika menjadi tetamu rancangan Soal-Jawab Agama Radio Perak FM pagi Jumaat lalu. - mks.
Richest South East Asians
http://www.theswanker.com/macammacam/the_chinese/index.html
April 27, 2005
Richest South East Asians
Via a comments thread on The Javajive, I found this: Forbes' 2004 List of South East Asia's Richest People. What do you see? Alot of dollar signs, absolutely. But also alot of Chinese names.
It has always been a common complaint of anti-Chinese bigots throughout South East Asia about how the greedy Chinese accumulate their wealth at the expense of "locals" and "natives". Let me just make one point. The Chinese have been in South East Asia for centuries. The mere fact that their cultural motherland is elsewhere does not make them any less "South East Asian". You think Thais just popped up on the banks of the Chao Phraya suddenly, one day long ago? Or that Malays simply appeared on the shores of the Malacca Straits? If you're going to get into a discussion about who is more "native" by virtue of the length that their ethnic group has been in the region, then perhaps the Negritos are perhaps the only real South East Asians. Everyone else? Well you're just a migrant.
So here's my theory behind why the Chinese seem to dominate so much of South East Asian business.
One.
The Chinese got a head start. All newborn babies are born equally vulnerable and impressionable. So perhaps Chinese babies get a headstart because more of them grew up amongst people in business, in an atmosphere of hard work and enterprise. After all, the China of the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries was one of the world's great military and commercial powers. The various kingdoms of South East Asia, for all their impressive development, had nothing on the scale of the great merchant classes of China's trading cities.
Two.
South East Asia tended to attract the hard-working Chinese. One would presume that the person who bothers to make the tricky sea journey from the coast of southern China to the various nations of South East Asia in search of a new life is likely to possess the very attributes to help them succeed. If you were lazy and unambitious, why bother? You don't tend to see many lazy migrants - the sacrifices they have made give them the greatest incentive to succeed.
Three.
The former European colonial masters found it most useful to use the Chinese as their agents. They got them to do the dirty work like collect the taxes. They did their business with the Chinese. They implicitly trusted the Chinese more because they knew they formed a minority and could thereby have no political aspirations of their own (think Indians in the African colonies of the British Empire or further back, the Jews of western Europe). The Dutch in the East Indies (now Indonesia) were masters of this strategy. After all, why empower the major ethnic groups like the Malays or Javanese by making them wealthy and influential? This was a lesson that former Indonesian dictator Suharto learnt very well. His most favoured cronies were Chinese - there was no way men like Lim Sioe Liong or Bob Hasan could ever challenge him politically.
Accidents of history and a sense of being very much different from others - probably the main reasons why the Chinese have come to dominate so much of South East Asia's commerce.
April 27, 2005
Richest South East Asians
Via a comments thread on The Javajive, I found this: Forbes' 2004 List of South East Asia's Richest People. What do you see? Alot of dollar signs, absolutely. But also alot of Chinese names.
It has always been a common complaint of anti-Chinese bigots throughout South East Asia about how the greedy Chinese accumulate their wealth at the expense of "locals" and "natives". Let me just make one point. The Chinese have been in South East Asia for centuries. The mere fact that their cultural motherland is elsewhere does not make them any less "South East Asian". You think Thais just popped up on the banks of the Chao Phraya suddenly, one day long ago? Or that Malays simply appeared on the shores of the Malacca Straits? If you're going to get into a discussion about who is more "native" by virtue of the length that their ethnic group has been in the region, then perhaps the Negritos are perhaps the only real South East Asians. Everyone else? Well you're just a migrant.
So here's my theory behind why the Chinese seem to dominate so much of South East Asian business.
One.
The Chinese got a head start. All newborn babies are born equally vulnerable and impressionable. So perhaps Chinese babies get a headstart because more of them grew up amongst people in business, in an atmosphere of hard work and enterprise. After all, the China of the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries was one of the world's great military and commercial powers. The various kingdoms of South East Asia, for all their impressive development, had nothing on the scale of the great merchant classes of China's trading cities.
Two.
South East Asia tended to attract the hard-working Chinese. One would presume that the person who bothers to make the tricky sea journey from the coast of southern China to the various nations of South East Asia in search of a new life is likely to possess the very attributes to help them succeed. If you were lazy and unambitious, why bother? You don't tend to see many lazy migrants - the sacrifices they have made give them the greatest incentive to succeed.
Three.
The former European colonial masters found it most useful to use the Chinese as their agents. They got them to do the dirty work like collect the taxes. They did their business with the Chinese. They implicitly trusted the Chinese more because they knew they formed a minority and could thereby have no political aspirations of their own (think Indians in the African colonies of the British Empire or further back, the Jews of western Europe). The Dutch in the East Indies (now Indonesia) were masters of this strategy. After all, why empower the major ethnic groups like the Malays or Javanese by making them wealthy and influential? This was a lesson that former Indonesian dictator Suharto learnt very well. His most favoured cronies were Chinese - there was no way men like Lim Sioe Liong or Bob Hasan could ever challenge him politically.
Accidents of history and a sense of being very much different from others - probably the main reasons why the Chinese have come to dominate so much of South East Asia's commerce.
Menanti pertembungan terbuka luar jangka
Menanti pertembungan terbuka luar jangka
Thu Jun 15, 06 06:15:06 PM
Oleh Mohd Rashidi Hassan, Pengarang Harakahdaily
mplikasinya amat besar kepada politik negara. Pertelagahan bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad dengan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi hakikatnya mencetuskan suatu polemik yang lebih besar dari apa yang dijangkakan.
Secara terbuka Mahathir menuduh Abdullah mengkhianati kepercayaannya dengan membatalkan banyak keputusannya, malah menyifatkan yang beliau memilih orang yang salah untuk menerajui Malaysia.
Mahathir menunjukkan sikap tidak senangnya terhadap kepimpinan Abdullah dalam beberapa siri kenyataannya kepada media masa dalam dan luar negara dengan mengkritik serta mempertikaikan polisi pentadbiran negara.
Kritikan tajam Mahathir disusuli dengan dakwaan keras seperti 'Abdullah bukan pilihan utama saya', 'janji teruskan dasar dan projek saya tidak ditunaikan', 'saya ditikam dari belakang', 'saya tidak memperoleh jawapan, sebaliknya diminta diam', 'saya dituduh belanja duit kerajaan berlebihan untuk projek mega' dan lain-lain lagi
"Saya tidak faham, saya bangkitkan soalan mengenai Proton, tentang AP, Agusta, tapi tidak satupun dijelaskan.
"Mungkin mereka tidak punyai jawapan, itu sebabnya mereka cuba memburuk-burukkan saya," kata Mahathir.
Apa yang dialami oleh bekas PM begitu dirasai anaknya, Dato' Mukhriz Mahathir yang turut menyuarakan rasa kecewa kerana ada di kalangan kepimpinan Umno cepat dan mudah emosi mengecam bapanya dari memberikan jawapan kepada isu-isu yang dibangkitkan.
"Kalau dijawab dengan baik, isu-isu ini lambat laun akan tertutup... apa yang beliau (Mahathir) utarakan pun rasional, jawablah (dengan) rasional," kata Mukhriz.
Mahathir-Abdullah sudah menjadi persengketaan lebih besar. Ternyata Abdullah tidak berkemampuan menjawabnya hingga terpaksa mengheret seluruh anggota Kabinet , Menteri Besar, 78 Ahli Parlimen Umno termasuk kelab Setiausaha Politik pun digerakkan untuk berhadapan dengan Mahathir.
Persoalannya, mampukah Menteri Besar, mahupun Menteri yang kebanyakkannya dipercayai mempunyai 'fail BPR' (dalam tangan Mahathir), sanggup bertembung dengan bekas mentor mereka? Cukupkah perisai mereka jika bekas PM yang terkenal dengan 'mulut celuparnya' menyerang balas?
Apakah kelemahan Abdullah hendak dipertahankan sehingga terpaksa mengbongkar 'tahi-tahi' mereka? Ini persoalan yang mereka harus pertimbangkan.
Apapun, Abdullah bukan merupakan 'regu tinju' buat Mahathir. Pertarungan tercetus di gelanggang terbuka, isu ini sukar untuk dileraikan. Cuma yang harus dicongak ialah sejauhmana isu ini memberi kesan kepada Umno dan Barisan Nasional pada Pilihan Raya Umum ke 12 akan datang.
'Perang' Mahathir-Abdullah ternyata membabitkan banyak pihak, selain media NST yang konsisten menyerang Mahathir, bekas TPM, Tun Musa Hitam juga turut terbabit.
Mahathir menyelar Musa yang dilaporkan akhbar sebagai berkata, bahawa Mahathir amat keras dalam kritikannya dan bertindak membelakangi 'tradisi dan protokol'.
"Tun yang baru tidak ikut tradisi Umno. Dia (Musa) seharusnya sedia maklum kerana dialah orangnya yang menuruti tradisi Umno seperti berundur dari kerajaan dan menyerang saya serta menggesa Tengku Razaleigh (Hamzah) menentang saya," katanya.
Mahathir punyai strateginya sendiri. Saya percaya kalaupun mungkin dia tidak membuat 'political comeback', dia masih menyimpan semua fail-fail peribadi menteri.
Ada rakan-rakan memberitahu, setahun sebelum Mahathir bersara (2003) beliau sudah 'scan' dan menghimpunkan maklumat yang perlu sebagai perisai.
Politik 'blackmail' ini bukan perkara baru dalam arena politik negara kita.
Sejak beberapa tahun lepas difahamkan Mahathir begitu ligat mengadakan pertemuan secara senyap-senyap dengan ketua-ketua bahagian Umno tertentu sama ada bertemu di pejabatnya di KLCC ataupun Yayasan Kepimpinan Perdana, Putrajaya.
Malah, baru-baru inipun semasa di Sabah, bekas PM itu dilaporkan membuat pertemuan dengan ketua-ketua bahagian Umno sehingga menyebabkan Ketua Menteri, Dato' Musa Aman melenting.
Umumnya orang-orang Umno tahu Mahathir bukannya jenis duduk diam, sebab itu pada saya, ramai yang tidak berani bertembung secara terbuka dengan Mahathir.
Walaupun Abdullah hingga kini masih membisu di atas cabaran Mahathir, beliau seolah-olahnya sengaja membiarkan juak-juaknya ligat mengatur strategi .
Yang paling menariknya sehari dua ni, media massa tempatan seolah-olahnya begitu 'terbuka' memuatkan berita mengenai bekas Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
Jika secara mendatar Anwar tidak ada kena mengena dengan pertelagahan Mahathir-Abdullah.
Sebenarnya ada 'udang di sebalik batu.'
Selama ini, Anwar merupakan 'kambing hitam' politik media massa sama ada menyiarkan berita buruk mengenai beliau ataupun menggelapkan terus sebarang berita yang bersumberkan bekas banduan politik tersebut.
Kelmarin media massa menyiarkan mengenai mengenai Cherie Blair (isteri PM Britain, Tony Blair) sebagai Queen's Counsel mewakili Fawziah Holdings dalam kes kontroversi seperti Metramac.
Kemudiannya menyiarkan secara positif pertemuan Cherie dengan Anwar (yang menghadiri kes berlainan) di Mahkamah Persekutuan di Putrajaya.
Hari ini akhbar The Star pula menyiarkan keputusan Mahkamah Rayuan mengetepikan hukuman terhadap adik angkat Anwar, Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja yang didakwa terbabit dalam kes sodomi dan sekaligus mengarahkan perbicaraan diadakan semula kerana terdapat bukti bahawa Sukma tidak bersalah.
Gambar besar Sukma diletak di muka hadapan, manakala gambar Anwar diletak di muka surat tiga. Apabila meneliti akhbar The Star saya turut pelik kerana cara pembawaan pemimpin akhbar tersebut terhadap Anwar sama seperti NST.
Kedua-dua kes Metramac dan Sukma ini secara tidak langsungnya membabitkan Mahathir!
Metramac dikaitkan dengan Tun Daim Zainuddin iaitu orang yang terbabit menjadi konspirator Mahathir menjatuhkan Anwar. Kejayaan mengheret Daim ke mahkamah, seolah-olahnya memecahkan tembelang Mahathir.
Kes Metramac harus dilihat sebagai salah satu usaha Abdullah untuk mencantas 'pillars' Mahathir yang terdiri dari kalangan orang-orang korporat. Siapa lagi kalau bukan Daim dan juak-juaknya yang menjadi antara punca perbalahan Mahathir-Anwar.
Syed Mokhtar al Bukhari, Vincent Tan dan Ananda Krishna yang amat terkenal rapat dengan Mahathir bagaimana? Episod ini masih banyak yang harus dicaturkan.
Kes Sukma, adalah berpunca daripada tindakan Mahathir ketika itu untuk menghukum dan menjatuhkan maruah Anwar pada mata rakyat dengan mendakwa bekas TPM itu sebagai pelaku sodomi yang menjijikkan.
Ramai yang tahu berapa marahnya Mahathir terhadap Anwar. Begitu juga kemarahan beliau kepada Abdullah, sehingga ada yang mendengar Mahathir mendakwa sebenarnya Abdullah yang membebaskan Anwar.
Dan di dalam kotak pemikiran ahli-ahli Umno, sehingga kini mereka tidak boleh melupakan bagaimana menantu PM, Khairy Jamaludin boleh berkunjung ke rumah Anwar sejurus dibebaskan September 2004 yang lalu. Persoalan ini sering bermain difikiran mereka bahawa Abdullah ada peranan membebaskan Anwar.
Justeru, Abdullah tidak perlu berlaga dengan Mahathir. Guna sahaja isu Anwar, biar Anwar yang lawan. Lagi pun Anwar selalu kata, dia boleh maafkan Mahathir, tetapi dia tidak akan lupa apa yang Mahathir buat kepadanya. Lawan tetap lawan!
Oleh itu, pendedahan positif kes membabitkan Anwar dalam media massa (selalunya negatif sebelum ini) harus dilihat sebagai suatu bentuk 'tempelak' terhadap Mahathir!
Apabila Abdullah tidak mampu bertembung secara berdepan dengan Mahathir, maka jalan terbaik untuk 'menekan perasaan' Mahathir adalah dengan membongkarkan kes-kes lama. Ini boleh menyebabkan Mahathir terseksa.
Selama ini sejak 1998, Mahathir dan orang-orang Umno begitu bangga dengan kejayaan Mahathir membunuh karier politik Anwar dan melondehkan maruah bekas timbalannya dengan pelbagai dakwaan salah laku sehingga ramai rakyat yang terpedaya dengan fitnah tersebut.
Tidak hairanlah jika hari ini, sebagai balasan pertembungannya dengan Abdullah, maka rakyat akan diberitahu pula bahawa segala tuduhan Mahathir terhadap Anwar adalah palsu dan Anwar akan dibersihkan daripada segala tuduhan.
Anwar akan bebas untuk bertanding dalam pilihan raya akan datang. Di mana posisi Anwar, bagaimana beliau hendak 'placing' dirinya, harus diperhatikan mulai sekarang. Apapun sekarang Najib harus mula menghitung harinya.
Malah dikatakan, inilah waktu yang terbaik buat Abdullah 'mengusahakan' kes saman RM100 juta Anwar terhadap Mahathir. Abdullah boleh mencuci tangannya dengan berkata, " ini semua kerja Mahathir, biar dia jawab sendiri di mahkamah."
Jika ini berlaku, bukan sahaja tuduhan Mahathir terhadap Anwar dibuktikan sebagai palsu, malah segala serangan Mahathir terhadap Abdullah juga akan dimusnahkan. Bila-bila masa Mahathir akan dirudumkan.
Hakikatnya, Mahathir terpaksa berperang sendirian, beliau tiada jentera, tiada media. Tidak ada siapa orang Umno yang duduk dalam kerajaan berani menyokong Mahathir.
Walaupun seluruh anggota Kabinet dan pemimpin Umno 'naik' dengan jasa Mahathir, kedudukan, semuanya ini tidak akan merubah takdir bahawa BN/Umno sudah tidak diperlukan Mahathir lagi.
Sudah tentu orang yang paling gusar sekarang bukannya Abdullah, bukan Mahathir, bukan Anwar, tetapi Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Mohd Najib Tun Razak!
Apabila Abdullah bukan pilihan kedua, sudah tentu Najib pilihan pertama Mahathir. Najib ternyata amat gusar, bagaimana dia hendak 'position'kan diri amat diperhatikan oleh Abdullah dan juak-juaknya. Setidak-tidaknya, jika Najib tersilap langkah, Khairy ada ruang mencatasnya.
Kedudukan Najib dalam bahaya. Tambahan pula dia anak didik Mahathir yang amat rapat dengan bekas PM itu. Walaupun Najib mengeluarkan kenyataan menyokong Abdullah, apakah juak-juak Abdullah akan mempercayai beliau?
Ataupun untuk selamatkan kedudukan, tak apalah tidak jadi PM pun, asalkan tetap duduk dalam kerajaan dan bekerjasama dengan Abdullah? Ataupun 'reconcile' dengan Anwar?
Saya percaya dalam keadaan sekarang Anwar juga terbuka untuk menerima kembali Najib sebagai rakannya.
Apapun Mahathir harus sedar bahawa Umno dan kerajaan tidak memerlukannya. Mereka harus patuh kepada Abdullah yang menerajui kerajaan hari ini. Sewaktu Mahathir berkuasa, dia juga mahu 'authority' , dia mahu seluruh anggota kerajaan, BN dan Umno mematuhinya.
Sama juga dengan Abdullah sekarang, 'authority' itu haknya kerana dia berkuasa pada waktu ini, soal bagaimana Mahathir hendak 'manoeuvre' dan hendak membuat 'political comeback' itu beliau harus hadapi seluruh jentera BN dan kerajaan.
Yang diperhatikan rakyat sekarang ini, apakah Mahathir kini, terpaksa 'menjilat ludahnya sendiri'?
Apakah Mahathir akan sedar bahawa, apa juga bentuk salah laku kepimpinan, pengkhianatan janji, pembatalan projek dan pelbagai kepincangan pengurusan ekonomi, dilakukan oleh anak didiknya yang diasuh dengan 'tangan kotor'nya sendiri selama lebih 22 tahun pemerintahan?
Episod seterusnya amat ditunggu-tunggu.
Thu Jun 15, 06 06:15:06 PM
Oleh Mohd Rashidi Hassan, Pengarang Harakahdaily
mplikasinya amat besar kepada politik negara. Pertelagahan bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad dengan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi hakikatnya mencetuskan suatu polemik yang lebih besar dari apa yang dijangkakan.
Secara terbuka Mahathir menuduh Abdullah mengkhianati kepercayaannya dengan membatalkan banyak keputusannya, malah menyifatkan yang beliau memilih orang yang salah untuk menerajui Malaysia.
Mahathir menunjukkan sikap tidak senangnya terhadap kepimpinan Abdullah dalam beberapa siri kenyataannya kepada media masa dalam dan luar negara dengan mengkritik serta mempertikaikan polisi pentadbiran negara.
Kritikan tajam Mahathir disusuli dengan dakwaan keras seperti 'Abdullah bukan pilihan utama saya', 'janji teruskan dasar dan projek saya tidak ditunaikan', 'saya ditikam dari belakang', 'saya tidak memperoleh jawapan, sebaliknya diminta diam', 'saya dituduh belanja duit kerajaan berlebihan untuk projek mega' dan lain-lain lagi
"Saya tidak faham, saya bangkitkan soalan mengenai Proton, tentang AP, Agusta, tapi tidak satupun dijelaskan.
"Mungkin mereka tidak punyai jawapan, itu sebabnya mereka cuba memburuk-burukkan saya," kata Mahathir.
Apa yang dialami oleh bekas PM begitu dirasai anaknya, Dato' Mukhriz Mahathir yang turut menyuarakan rasa kecewa kerana ada di kalangan kepimpinan Umno cepat dan mudah emosi mengecam bapanya dari memberikan jawapan kepada isu-isu yang dibangkitkan.
"Kalau dijawab dengan baik, isu-isu ini lambat laun akan tertutup... apa yang beliau (Mahathir) utarakan pun rasional, jawablah (dengan) rasional," kata Mukhriz.
Mahathir-Abdullah sudah menjadi persengketaan lebih besar. Ternyata Abdullah tidak berkemampuan menjawabnya hingga terpaksa mengheret seluruh anggota Kabinet , Menteri Besar, 78 Ahli Parlimen Umno termasuk kelab Setiausaha Politik pun digerakkan untuk berhadapan dengan Mahathir.
Persoalannya, mampukah Menteri Besar, mahupun Menteri yang kebanyakkannya dipercayai mempunyai 'fail BPR' (dalam tangan Mahathir), sanggup bertembung dengan bekas mentor mereka? Cukupkah perisai mereka jika bekas PM yang terkenal dengan 'mulut celuparnya' menyerang balas?
Apakah kelemahan Abdullah hendak dipertahankan sehingga terpaksa mengbongkar 'tahi-tahi' mereka? Ini persoalan yang mereka harus pertimbangkan.
Apapun, Abdullah bukan merupakan 'regu tinju' buat Mahathir. Pertarungan tercetus di gelanggang terbuka, isu ini sukar untuk dileraikan. Cuma yang harus dicongak ialah sejauhmana isu ini memberi kesan kepada Umno dan Barisan Nasional pada Pilihan Raya Umum ke 12 akan datang.
'Perang' Mahathir-Abdullah ternyata membabitkan banyak pihak, selain media NST yang konsisten menyerang Mahathir, bekas TPM, Tun Musa Hitam juga turut terbabit.
Mahathir menyelar Musa yang dilaporkan akhbar sebagai berkata, bahawa Mahathir amat keras dalam kritikannya dan bertindak membelakangi 'tradisi dan protokol'.
"Tun yang baru tidak ikut tradisi Umno. Dia (Musa) seharusnya sedia maklum kerana dialah orangnya yang menuruti tradisi Umno seperti berundur dari kerajaan dan menyerang saya serta menggesa Tengku Razaleigh (Hamzah) menentang saya," katanya.
Mahathir punyai strateginya sendiri. Saya percaya kalaupun mungkin dia tidak membuat 'political comeback', dia masih menyimpan semua fail-fail peribadi menteri.
Ada rakan-rakan memberitahu, setahun sebelum Mahathir bersara (2003) beliau sudah 'scan' dan menghimpunkan maklumat yang perlu sebagai perisai.
Politik 'blackmail' ini bukan perkara baru dalam arena politik negara kita.
Sejak beberapa tahun lepas difahamkan Mahathir begitu ligat mengadakan pertemuan secara senyap-senyap dengan ketua-ketua bahagian Umno tertentu sama ada bertemu di pejabatnya di KLCC ataupun Yayasan Kepimpinan Perdana, Putrajaya.
Malah, baru-baru inipun semasa di Sabah, bekas PM itu dilaporkan membuat pertemuan dengan ketua-ketua bahagian Umno sehingga menyebabkan Ketua Menteri, Dato' Musa Aman melenting.
Umumnya orang-orang Umno tahu Mahathir bukannya jenis duduk diam, sebab itu pada saya, ramai yang tidak berani bertembung secara terbuka dengan Mahathir.
Walaupun Abdullah hingga kini masih membisu di atas cabaran Mahathir, beliau seolah-olahnya sengaja membiarkan juak-juaknya ligat mengatur strategi .
Yang paling menariknya sehari dua ni, media massa tempatan seolah-olahnya begitu 'terbuka' memuatkan berita mengenai bekas Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
Jika secara mendatar Anwar tidak ada kena mengena dengan pertelagahan Mahathir-Abdullah.
Sebenarnya ada 'udang di sebalik batu.'
Selama ini, Anwar merupakan 'kambing hitam' politik media massa sama ada menyiarkan berita buruk mengenai beliau ataupun menggelapkan terus sebarang berita yang bersumberkan bekas banduan politik tersebut.
Kelmarin media massa menyiarkan mengenai mengenai Cherie Blair (isteri PM Britain, Tony Blair) sebagai Queen's Counsel mewakili Fawziah Holdings dalam kes kontroversi seperti Metramac.
Kemudiannya menyiarkan secara positif pertemuan Cherie dengan Anwar (yang menghadiri kes berlainan) di Mahkamah Persekutuan di Putrajaya.
Hari ini akhbar The Star pula menyiarkan keputusan Mahkamah Rayuan mengetepikan hukuman terhadap adik angkat Anwar, Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja yang didakwa terbabit dalam kes sodomi dan sekaligus mengarahkan perbicaraan diadakan semula kerana terdapat bukti bahawa Sukma tidak bersalah.
Gambar besar Sukma diletak di muka hadapan, manakala gambar Anwar diletak di muka surat tiga. Apabila meneliti akhbar The Star saya turut pelik kerana cara pembawaan pemimpin akhbar tersebut terhadap Anwar sama seperti NST.
Kedua-dua kes Metramac dan Sukma ini secara tidak langsungnya membabitkan Mahathir!
Metramac dikaitkan dengan Tun Daim Zainuddin iaitu orang yang terbabit menjadi konspirator Mahathir menjatuhkan Anwar. Kejayaan mengheret Daim ke mahkamah, seolah-olahnya memecahkan tembelang Mahathir.
Kes Metramac harus dilihat sebagai salah satu usaha Abdullah untuk mencantas 'pillars' Mahathir yang terdiri dari kalangan orang-orang korporat. Siapa lagi kalau bukan Daim dan juak-juaknya yang menjadi antara punca perbalahan Mahathir-Anwar.
Syed Mokhtar al Bukhari, Vincent Tan dan Ananda Krishna yang amat terkenal rapat dengan Mahathir bagaimana? Episod ini masih banyak yang harus dicaturkan.
Kes Sukma, adalah berpunca daripada tindakan Mahathir ketika itu untuk menghukum dan menjatuhkan maruah Anwar pada mata rakyat dengan mendakwa bekas TPM itu sebagai pelaku sodomi yang menjijikkan.
Ramai yang tahu berapa marahnya Mahathir terhadap Anwar. Begitu juga kemarahan beliau kepada Abdullah, sehingga ada yang mendengar Mahathir mendakwa sebenarnya Abdullah yang membebaskan Anwar.
Dan di dalam kotak pemikiran ahli-ahli Umno, sehingga kini mereka tidak boleh melupakan bagaimana menantu PM, Khairy Jamaludin boleh berkunjung ke rumah Anwar sejurus dibebaskan September 2004 yang lalu. Persoalan ini sering bermain difikiran mereka bahawa Abdullah ada peranan membebaskan Anwar.
Justeru, Abdullah tidak perlu berlaga dengan Mahathir. Guna sahaja isu Anwar, biar Anwar yang lawan. Lagi pun Anwar selalu kata, dia boleh maafkan Mahathir, tetapi dia tidak akan lupa apa yang Mahathir buat kepadanya. Lawan tetap lawan!
Oleh itu, pendedahan positif kes membabitkan Anwar dalam media massa (selalunya negatif sebelum ini) harus dilihat sebagai suatu bentuk 'tempelak' terhadap Mahathir!
Apabila Abdullah tidak mampu bertembung secara berdepan dengan Mahathir, maka jalan terbaik untuk 'menekan perasaan' Mahathir adalah dengan membongkarkan kes-kes lama. Ini boleh menyebabkan Mahathir terseksa.
Selama ini sejak 1998, Mahathir dan orang-orang Umno begitu bangga dengan kejayaan Mahathir membunuh karier politik Anwar dan melondehkan maruah bekas timbalannya dengan pelbagai dakwaan salah laku sehingga ramai rakyat yang terpedaya dengan fitnah tersebut.
Tidak hairanlah jika hari ini, sebagai balasan pertembungannya dengan Abdullah, maka rakyat akan diberitahu pula bahawa segala tuduhan Mahathir terhadap Anwar adalah palsu dan Anwar akan dibersihkan daripada segala tuduhan.
Anwar akan bebas untuk bertanding dalam pilihan raya akan datang. Di mana posisi Anwar, bagaimana beliau hendak 'placing' dirinya, harus diperhatikan mulai sekarang. Apapun sekarang Najib harus mula menghitung harinya.
Malah dikatakan, inilah waktu yang terbaik buat Abdullah 'mengusahakan' kes saman RM100 juta Anwar terhadap Mahathir. Abdullah boleh mencuci tangannya dengan berkata, " ini semua kerja Mahathir, biar dia jawab sendiri di mahkamah."
Jika ini berlaku, bukan sahaja tuduhan Mahathir terhadap Anwar dibuktikan sebagai palsu, malah segala serangan Mahathir terhadap Abdullah juga akan dimusnahkan. Bila-bila masa Mahathir akan dirudumkan.
Hakikatnya, Mahathir terpaksa berperang sendirian, beliau tiada jentera, tiada media. Tidak ada siapa orang Umno yang duduk dalam kerajaan berani menyokong Mahathir.
Walaupun seluruh anggota Kabinet dan pemimpin Umno 'naik' dengan jasa Mahathir, kedudukan, semuanya ini tidak akan merubah takdir bahawa BN/Umno sudah tidak diperlukan Mahathir lagi.
Sudah tentu orang yang paling gusar sekarang bukannya Abdullah, bukan Mahathir, bukan Anwar, tetapi Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Mohd Najib Tun Razak!
Apabila Abdullah bukan pilihan kedua, sudah tentu Najib pilihan pertama Mahathir. Najib ternyata amat gusar, bagaimana dia hendak 'position'kan diri amat diperhatikan oleh Abdullah dan juak-juaknya. Setidak-tidaknya, jika Najib tersilap langkah, Khairy ada ruang mencatasnya.
Kedudukan Najib dalam bahaya. Tambahan pula dia anak didik Mahathir yang amat rapat dengan bekas PM itu. Walaupun Najib mengeluarkan kenyataan menyokong Abdullah, apakah juak-juak Abdullah akan mempercayai beliau?
Ataupun untuk selamatkan kedudukan, tak apalah tidak jadi PM pun, asalkan tetap duduk dalam kerajaan dan bekerjasama dengan Abdullah? Ataupun 'reconcile' dengan Anwar?
Saya percaya dalam keadaan sekarang Anwar juga terbuka untuk menerima kembali Najib sebagai rakannya.
Apapun Mahathir harus sedar bahawa Umno dan kerajaan tidak memerlukannya. Mereka harus patuh kepada Abdullah yang menerajui kerajaan hari ini. Sewaktu Mahathir berkuasa, dia juga mahu 'authority' , dia mahu seluruh anggota kerajaan, BN dan Umno mematuhinya.
Sama juga dengan Abdullah sekarang, 'authority' itu haknya kerana dia berkuasa pada waktu ini, soal bagaimana Mahathir hendak 'manoeuvre' dan hendak membuat 'political comeback' itu beliau harus hadapi seluruh jentera BN dan kerajaan.
Yang diperhatikan rakyat sekarang ini, apakah Mahathir kini, terpaksa 'menjilat ludahnya sendiri'?
Apakah Mahathir akan sedar bahawa, apa juga bentuk salah laku kepimpinan, pengkhianatan janji, pembatalan projek dan pelbagai kepincangan pengurusan ekonomi, dilakukan oleh anak didiknya yang diasuh dengan 'tangan kotor'nya sendiri selama lebih 22 tahun pemerintahan?
Episod seterusnya amat ditunggu-tunggu.
REPORT ON GERBANG PERDANA SDN BHD
REPORT ON GERBANG PERDANA SDN BHD
Raja Petra Kamarudin
(1) Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd, the Johor-Singapore ‘Crooked’ Bridge or ‘Half-Bridge’ contractor, is 20% owned by (2) DRB-HICOM Berhad (3,680,000 shares), 20% owned by (3) Detik Nagasari Sdn Bhd (3,680,000 shares), and 60% owned by (4) Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd (11,040,000 shares).
(3) Detik Nagasari Sdn Bhd is 100% owned by (5) Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad (Change of name from Transwater Bina Sdn Bhd to Transwater Corporation Sdn Bhd on 03.04.1986, and to Transwater Corporation Berhad and to Hyundai Berjaya Corporation Berhad on 21.07.2003, and to Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad on 26.04.2005).
(4) Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd is 50% owned by (6) Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn Bhd and 50% owned by (7) Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd.
(5) Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad is 46.6% owned by Tan Sri Dato' Seri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun, 10.62% owned by Dato' Dr Tengku Retwan bin Tengku Mansor, 6.32% owned by Datuk Tengku Adnan bin Tengku Mansor, and 5.85% owned by The Estate of Dato' Wan Adli bin Dato' Wan Ibrahim (see full list below).
(6) Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn Bhd (suspected to be the nominee company of the previous Menteri Besar of Johor) is 65% owned by Dato’ Yahya bin A. Jalil and 35% owned by Datin Mahmudah bte Md Ali.
(7) Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd is 99% owned by DYAM Tunku Ibrahim Ismail ibni DYMM Baginda Al-Mutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj (The Tengku Mahkota of Johor) and 1% owned by Raja Zarith Sofia bte Raja Idris (his consort).
The full corporate and financial details of the above are as follows:
(1) Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 469478-X
Registration Date: 26-09-1998
Registered Address:
3374, GF Jalan 8/31
Taman Sri Serdang
Seri Kembangan
Selangor
Business Address:
3, Jalan 222
Petaling Jaya
Selangor
Type of Business: Design and Build Contractor for the Gerbang Selantan Bersepadu Project
Authorised Capital: RM50,000,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM18,400,000.00
Directors:
Name & Address (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) Dato’ Yahya Bin A. Jalil (560819-01-6437) - Managing Director -02-01-1999
13, Jalan 12/10
46200 Petaling Jaya
Selangor
(Also owns 65% of Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn Bhd that owns 50% of Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd and that owns 60% of Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd)
2) Mohd Musthafa Bin Lathif (590608-71-5147) - Alternate Director - 23-12-2003
26 Medan Athinahapan 2
Taman Tun Dr. Ismail
Kuala Lumpur
3) Yoong Hoi Shing (521121-01-5115) - Director - 06-01-2000
61 Jalan SS1/19
47300 Petaling Jaya
Selangor
4) Kamal Hisham Bin Jaafar (700301-01-5853) - Director - 03-05-2002
6 Lorong Mutiara
Kampang Melayu
Johor
(Also Director of Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd and Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd)
5) Tan Sri Dato’ Razali Bin Ismail (390414-02-5037) - Director - 02-01-1999
1802, Desa Kudalari
3, Lorong Kuda
50450 Kuala Lumpur
6) Azahar Bin Abdul Aziz (550518-07-5397) - Director - 02-01-1999
27G, Jalan Pandan Indah 1/17
Pandan Indah
56100 Kuala Lumpur
7) Chock Eng Tah (571023-10-5227) - Director - 14-07-2003
38, Jalan USJ 2/51
UEP Subang Jaya
Selangor
8) Mohd Redza Shah Bin Abdul Wahid (630127-01-6269) - Director - 31-03-2006
6, Lorong PJU 7/21B
Mutiara Damansara
47800 Petaling Jaya
Selangor
9) Kong Seng Huat (590327-06-5117) - Director - 28-08-2003
65, Jalan SS 26/9
Taman Mayang Jaya
Selangor
10) Datuk Mohd Khamil Bin Jamil (560120-08-6175) - Director - 31-03-2006
Lot 2929, Jalan 5
Kemensah Heights
Ulu Kelang
68000 Ampang
Selangor
11) Anand Pon A/L Ponnudurai (561230-01-5351) - Director - 9-04-2002
7-08-4, Pantai Hill Park
Blok 7, Fasa 5
Jalan Pantai
5920 Kuala Lumpur
Shareholders:
Co. Reg. No. - Name of Company - Total Shares
1) 203430-W - DRB-HICOM Berhad - 3,680,000
2) 339525-W - Detik Nagasari Sdn Bhd - 3,680,000
3) 463227-X - Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd - 11,040,000
Financial Highlights (December 2003):
Fixed Assets RM7,147,914.00
Current Assets RM152,861,746.00
Total Assets RM -613,682.00
Issued Capital RM7,609,000.00
Paid Up Capital RM7,609,000.00
Unappropriated Profit RM -10,668,353.00
Long-Term Deffered Liabilities RM2,445,671.00
Current Liabilities RM160,623,342.00
Operating Revenue RM201,078,016.00
Profit Before Taxation RM -3,123,252.00
Profit After Taxation RM -3,155,055.00
Profit Attributes to Shareholders RM -3,155,055.00
Unappropriated Profit Carried Forward RM -10,668,353.00
Unappropriated Profit Brought Forward RM -7,513,298.00
(3) Detik Nagasari Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 0339525-W
Registration Date: 10-04-1995
Registered Address:
11th Floor, Menara Berjaya
KL Paza, 179, Jalan Bukit Bintang
Kuala Lumpur
Business Address:
83, Jalan SS 25/2
Taman Bukit Emas
Petaling Jaya
Type of Business: Construction & Infrastructure Business
Authorised Capital: RM100,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM100,000.00
Directors:
Name & Address (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) Kong Keng Ling (561105-08-5865) - Director - 25-09-1998
2) Datuk Wan Lokman Bin Dato Wan Ibrahim (460525-02-5129) - Director - 05-09-1996
Shareholder:
Transwater Corporation Bhd (Company no. 0067617-M) -100%
(Change of name from Transwater Bina Sdn Bhd to Transwater Corporation Sdn Bhd on 03.04.1986, and to Transwater Corporation Berhad and to Hyundai Berjaya Corporation Berhad on 21.07.2003, and to Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad on 26.04.2005).
Financial Highlights:
Fixed Assets RM 1,321,800.00
Current Assets RM 94,382.00
Total Assets RM 1,416,182.00
Current Liabilities RM 1,606,440.00
Total Liabilities RM 1,606,440.00
Paid Up Capital RM 100,000.00
Rev. & Other Reserves RM -290,258.00
Net worth RM -190,258.00
Total RM 1,416,182.00
Turnover RM -3,588.00
Profit Before Tax RM -130,153.00
Profit After Tax RM -130,153.00
Profit & Loss for the Year RM -130,153.00
(4) Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 0463227-X
Registration Date: 30-05-1998
Registered Address:
3374, FG Jalan 18/31
Taman Sri Serdang
Sri Kembangan
Selangor
Business Address:
3, Jalan 222
Petaling Jaya
Selangor
Type of Business: Property Development
Authorised Capital: RM1,000,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM 600,002.00
Directors:
Name (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) Anuar Hakim Bin Abdul Rahim (671127-06-5483) - Director - 09-12-1998
2) Kamal Hisham Bin Jaafar (700301-01-5853) - Director - 24-09-2002 (Also Director of Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd and Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd)
3) Dato’ Yahya Bin A. Jalil (560819-016437) - Director - 30-05-1998
Shareholders (company no.) - % of shares:
1) Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn. Bhd (0065712-X) - 50%
2) Ibzi Holdings Sdn. Bhd. (0483228-P) - 50%
Financial Highlights (December 2000):
Fixed Assets RM417,235.00
Other Assets RM12,304,537.00
Current Assets RM132,798.00
Total Assets RM12,854,570.00
Current Liabilitites RM9,555,270.00
Long Term Liabiltites RM244,163.00
Total Liabilitites RM9,799,433.00
Paid Up Capital RM600,002.00
Shares Reserves RM -44,,865.00
Net Worth RM555,137.00
Minority Interest RM2,500,000.00
Total RM12,854,570.00
Profit Before Tax RM -7,661,183.00
Profit After Tax RM -44,865.00
Profit & Loss for the Year RM -44,865.00
(5) Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad (Change of name from Transwater Bina Sdn Bhd to Transwater Corporation Sdn Bhd on 03.04.1986, and to Transwater Corporation Berhad and to Hyundai Berjaya Corporation Berhad on 21.07.2003, and to Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad on 26.04.2005).
Authorised Capital: RM500,000,000.00
Paid-Up-Capital: RM182,563,000.00
Directors:
Name - Position - Appointed
1) Yeoh Choon San - Managing Director - 28-11-2003
2) Dato' Mohd Salleh Bin Ahmad - Independent Non-Executive - 07-07-2003
3) Lim Hock Chye - Independent Non-Executive - 7-7-2003
4) Yip Jon Khiam Non-Independent Non-Executive - 6-12-2004
5) Dato' Ahmad Zubair bin Haji Murshid - Non-Independent Non-Executive - 06-12-2004
6) Dato' Kalsom binti Abd. Rahman - Independent Non-Executive -01-03-2005
7) K Shekhar a/l S Krishnan – Non-Independent Non-Executive - 31-03-2005
Shareholders:
Shareholders - Shares Held - %
1) Tan Sri Dato' Seri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun - 52,654,550 - 46.6%
2) Berjaya Group Berhad - 52,654,550 - 46.6%
3) Bizurai Bijak (M) Sdn Bhd - 52,276,550 - 46.26%
4) Dato' Dr Tengku Retwan bin Tengku Mansor - 12,000,000 - 10.62%
5) Batumadu Sdn Bhd - 12,000,000 - 10.62%
6) Arbaain bin Bakar - 12,000,000 - 10.62%
7) Yeoh Choon San - 11,000,000 - 9.73%
8) Datuk Tengku Adnan bin Tengku Mansor - 7,139,000 - 6.32%
9) The Estate of Dato' Wan Adli bin Dato' Wan Ibrahim - 6,608,750 - 5.85%
10) Angsana Embun Sdn Bhd - 6,608,750 - 5.85%
Financial Highlights (April 2004):
Fixed Assets RM39,336,055.00
Other Assets RM4,407,956.00
Current Assets RM264,419,305.00
Total Assets RM318,163,316.00
Current Liabilities RM126,641,947.00
Long Term Liabilities RM20,087,511.00
Total Liabilities RM146,729,458.00
Turnover RM1,013,598,578.00
Profit Before Tax RM132,716,083.00
Net Worth RM171,322,588.00
(6) Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 0065712-X
Registration Date: 19-12-1980
Registered Address:
Bangunan Ash Hiani, 3374, Jalan 18/31
Taman Sri Serdang
Sri Kembangan
Selangor
Business Address:
3, Jalan 51A/222
Petaling Jaya
Selangor
Type of Business: Property Renting
Authorised Capital: RM5,000,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM2,000,000.00
Directors:
Name (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) Dato’ Yahya Bin A. Jalil (560819-01-6437) - Director - 19-12-1990
2) Datin Mahmudah bte Md Ali (700301-01-5853) - Director - 04-12-1986
Shareholders:
Name - % of shares
1) Dato’ Yahya Bin A. Jalil - 65%
2) Datin Mahmudah bte Md Ali - 35%
Financial Highlights (December 1998):
Fixed Assets RM6,041,716.00
Other Assets RM677,280.00
Current Assets RM2,488,599.00
Total Assets RM9,207,595.00
Current Liabilities RM9,319,847.00
Long Term Liabilities RM3,381,483.00
Total Liabilities RM12,701,330.00
Turnover RM1,061,035.00
Loss Before Tax RM1,729,031.00
Net Worth –RM3,493,735.00
(7) Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 0483228-P
Registration Date: 11-05-1999
Registered Address:
157A Jalan Sri Pelangi
Taman Pelangi
Johor Bahru
Johor
Business Address:
Bukit Pelangi
Jalan Pasir Pelangi
Johor Bahru
Johor
Type of Business: Investment Holding Company
Authorised Capital: RM5,000,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM 250,000.00
Directors:
Name (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) DYAM Tunku Ibrahim Ismail ibni Duli Yang Maha Mulia Baginda Al-Mutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj (5811220-01-5621) - Director - 01-08-2002
2) Raja Zarith Sofia bte Raja Idris (590814-08-5254) - Director - 01-08-2002
3) Kamal Hisham bin Jaafar (700301-01-5853) - Director - 01-02-2003 (Also Director of Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd and Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd)
Shareholders:
Name - % of shares
1) DYAM Tunku Ibrahim Ismail ibni DYMM Baginda Al-Mutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj - 99%
2) Raja Zarith Sofia bte Raja Idris - 1%
Financial Highlights (not available - presumed DORMANT)
Raja Petra Kamarudin
(1) Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd, the Johor-Singapore ‘Crooked’ Bridge or ‘Half-Bridge’ contractor, is 20% owned by (2) DRB-HICOM Berhad (3,680,000 shares), 20% owned by (3) Detik Nagasari Sdn Bhd (3,680,000 shares), and 60% owned by (4) Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd (11,040,000 shares).
(3) Detik Nagasari Sdn Bhd is 100% owned by (5) Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad (Change of name from Transwater Bina Sdn Bhd to Transwater Corporation Sdn Bhd on 03.04.1986, and to Transwater Corporation Berhad and to Hyundai Berjaya Corporation Berhad on 21.07.2003, and to Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad on 26.04.2005).
(4) Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd is 50% owned by (6) Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn Bhd and 50% owned by (7) Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd.
(5) Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad is 46.6% owned by Tan Sri Dato' Seri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun, 10.62% owned by Dato' Dr Tengku Retwan bin Tengku Mansor, 6.32% owned by Datuk Tengku Adnan bin Tengku Mansor, and 5.85% owned by The Estate of Dato' Wan Adli bin Dato' Wan Ibrahim (see full list below).
(6) Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn Bhd (suspected to be the nominee company of the previous Menteri Besar of Johor) is 65% owned by Dato’ Yahya bin A. Jalil and 35% owned by Datin Mahmudah bte Md Ali.
(7) Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd is 99% owned by DYAM Tunku Ibrahim Ismail ibni DYMM Baginda Al-Mutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj (The Tengku Mahkota of Johor) and 1% owned by Raja Zarith Sofia bte Raja Idris (his consort).
The full corporate and financial details of the above are as follows:
(1) Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 469478-X
Registration Date: 26-09-1998
Registered Address:
3374, GF Jalan 8/31
Taman Sri Serdang
Seri Kembangan
Selangor
Business Address:
3, Jalan 222
Petaling Jaya
Selangor
Type of Business: Design and Build Contractor for the Gerbang Selantan Bersepadu Project
Authorised Capital: RM50,000,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM18,400,000.00
Directors:
Name & Address (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) Dato’ Yahya Bin A. Jalil (560819-01-6437) - Managing Director -02-01-1999
13, Jalan 12/10
46200 Petaling Jaya
Selangor
(Also owns 65% of Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn Bhd that owns 50% of Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd and that owns 60% of Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd)
2) Mohd Musthafa Bin Lathif (590608-71-5147) - Alternate Director - 23-12-2003
26 Medan Athinahapan 2
Taman Tun Dr. Ismail
Kuala Lumpur
3) Yoong Hoi Shing (521121-01-5115) - Director - 06-01-2000
61 Jalan SS1/19
47300 Petaling Jaya
Selangor
4) Kamal Hisham Bin Jaafar (700301-01-5853) - Director - 03-05-2002
6 Lorong Mutiara
Kampang Melayu
Johor
(Also Director of Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd and Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd)
5) Tan Sri Dato’ Razali Bin Ismail (390414-02-5037) - Director - 02-01-1999
1802, Desa Kudalari
3, Lorong Kuda
50450 Kuala Lumpur
6) Azahar Bin Abdul Aziz (550518-07-5397) - Director - 02-01-1999
27G, Jalan Pandan Indah 1/17
Pandan Indah
56100 Kuala Lumpur
7) Chock Eng Tah (571023-10-5227) - Director - 14-07-2003
38, Jalan USJ 2/51
UEP Subang Jaya
Selangor
8) Mohd Redza Shah Bin Abdul Wahid (630127-01-6269) - Director - 31-03-2006
6, Lorong PJU 7/21B
Mutiara Damansara
47800 Petaling Jaya
Selangor
9) Kong Seng Huat (590327-06-5117) - Director - 28-08-2003
65, Jalan SS 26/9
Taman Mayang Jaya
Selangor
10) Datuk Mohd Khamil Bin Jamil (560120-08-6175) - Director - 31-03-2006
Lot 2929, Jalan 5
Kemensah Heights
Ulu Kelang
68000 Ampang
Selangor
11) Anand Pon A/L Ponnudurai (561230-01-5351) - Director - 9-04-2002
7-08-4, Pantai Hill Park
Blok 7, Fasa 5
Jalan Pantai
5920 Kuala Lumpur
Shareholders:
Co. Reg. No. - Name of Company - Total Shares
1) 203430-W - DRB-HICOM Berhad - 3,680,000
2) 339525-W - Detik Nagasari Sdn Bhd - 3,680,000
3) 463227-X - Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd - 11,040,000
Financial Highlights (December 2003):
Fixed Assets RM7,147,914.00
Current Assets RM152,861,746.00
Total Assets RM -613,682.00
Issued Capital RM7,609,000.00
Paid Up Capital RM7,609,000.00
Unappropriated Profit RM -10,668,353.00
Long-Term Deffered Liabilities RM2,445,671.00
Current Liabilities RM160,623,342.00
Operating Revenue RM201,078,016.00
Profit Before Taxation RM -3,123,252.00
Profit After Taxation RM -3,155,055.00
Profit Attributes to Shareholders RM -3,155,055.00
Unappropriated Profit Carried Forward RM -10,668,353.00
Unappropriated Profit Brought Forward RM -7,513,298.00
(3) Detik Nagasari Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 0339525-W
Registration Date: 10-04-1995
Registered Address:
11th Floor, Menara Berjaya
KL Paza, 179, Jalan Bukit Bintang
Kuala Lumpur
Business Address:
83, Jalan SS 25/2
Taman Bukit Emas
Petaling Jaya
Type of Business: Construction & Infrastructure Business
Authorised Capital: RM100,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM100,000.00
Directors:
Name & Address (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) Kong Keng Ling (561105-08-5865) - Director - 25-09-1998
2) Datuk Wan Lokman Bin Dato Wan Ibrahim (460525-02-5129) - Director - 05-09-1996
Shareholder:
Transwater Corporation Bhd (Company no. 0067617-M) -100%
(Change of name from Transwater Bina Sdn Bhd to Transwater Corporation Sdn Bhd on 03.04.1986, and to Transwater Corporation Berhad and to Hyundai Berjaya Corporation Berhad on 21.07.2003, and to Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad on 26.04.2005).
Financial Highlights:
Fixed Assets RM 1,321,800.00
Current Assets RM 94,382.00
Total Assets RM 1,416,182.00
Current Liabilities RM 1,606,440.00
Total Liabilities RM 1,606,440.00
Paid Up Capital RM 100,000.00
Rev. & Other Reserves RM -290,258.00
Net worth RM -190,258.00
Total RM 1,416,182.00
Turnover RM -3,588.00
Profit Before Tax RM -130,153.00
Profit After Tax RM -130,153.00
Profit & Loss for the Year RM -130,153.00
(4) Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 0463227-X
Registration Date: 30-05-1998
Registered Address:
3374, FG Jalan 18/31
Taman Sri Serdang
Sri Kembangan
Selangor
Business Address:
3, Jalan 222
Petaling Jaya
Selangor
Type of Business: Property Development
Authorised Capital: RM1,000,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM 600,002.00
Directors:
Name (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) Anuar Hakim Bin Abdul Rahim (671127-06-5483) - Director - 09-12-1998
2) Kamal Hisham Bin Jaafar (700301-01-5853) - Director - 24-09-2002 (Also Director of Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd and Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd)
3) Dato’ Yahya Bin A. Jalil (560819-016437) - Director - 30-05-1998
Shareholders (company no.) - % of shares:
1) Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn. Bhd (0065712-X) - 50%
2) Ibzi Holdings Sdn. Bhd. (0483228-P) - 50%
Financial Highlights (December 2000):
Fixed Assets RM417,235.00
Other Assets RM12,304,537.00
Current Assets RM132,798.00
Total Assets RM12,854,570.00
Current Liabilitites RM9,555,270.00
Long Term Liabiltites RM244,163.00
Total Liabilitites RM9,799,433.00
Paid Up Capital RM600,002.00
Shares Reserves RM -44,,865.00
Net Worth RM555,137.00
Minority Interest RM2,500,000.00
Total RM12,854,570.00
Profit Before Tax RM -7,661,183.00
Profit After Tax RM -44,865.00
Profit & Loss for the Year RM -44,865.00
(5) Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad (Change of name from Transwater Bina Sdn Bhd to Transwater Corporation Sdn Bhd on 03.04.1986, and to Transwater Corporation Berhad and to Hyundai Berjaya Corporation Berhad on 21.07.2003, and to Hyundai-Sime Darby Berhad on 26.04.2005).
Authorised Capital: RM500,000,000.00
Paid-Up-Capital: RM182,563,000.00
Directors:
Name - Position - Appointed
1) Yeoh Choon San - Managing Director - 28-11-2003
2) Dato' Mohd Salleh Bin Ahmad - Independent Non-Executive - 07-07-2003
3) Lim Hock Chye - Independent Non-Executive - 7-7-2003
4) Yip Jon Khiam Non-Independent Non-Executive - 6-12-2004
5) Dato' Ahmad Zubair bin Haji Murshid - Non-Independent Non-Executive - 06-12-2004
6) Dato' Kalsom binti Abd. Rahman - Independent Non-Executive -01-03-2005
7) K Shekhar a/l S Krishnan – Non-Independent Non-Executive - 31-03-2005
Shareholders:
Shareholders - Shares Held - %
1) Tan Sri Dato' Seri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun - 52,654,550 - 46.6%
2) Berjaya Group Berhad - 52,654,550 - 46.6%
3) Bizurai Bijak (M) Sdn Bhd - 52,276,550 - 46.26%
4) Dato' Dr Tengku Retwan bin Tengku Mansor - 12,000,000 - 10.62%
5) Batumadu Sdn Bhd - 12,000,000 - 10.62%
6) Arbaain bin Bakar - 12,000,000 - 10.62%
7) Yeoh Choon San - 11,000,000 - 9.73%
8) Datuk Tengku Adnan bin Tengku Mansor - 7,139,000 - 6.32%
9) The Estate of Dato' Wan Adli bin Dato' Wan Ibrahim - 6,608,750 - 5.85%
10) Angsana Embun Sdn Bhd - 6,608,750 - 5.85%
Financial Highlights (April 2004):
Fixed Assets RM39,336,055.00
Other Assets RM4,407,956.00
Current Assets RM264,419,305.00
Total Assets RM318,163,316.00
Current Liabilities RM126,641,947.00
Long Term Liabilities RM20,087,511.00
Total Liabilities RM146,729,458.00
Turnover RM1,013,598,578.00
Profit Before Tax RM132,716,083.00
Net Worth RM171,322,588.00
(6) Ibex Corporation Amalgamated Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 0065712-X
Registration Date: 19-12-1980
Registered Address:
Bangunan Ash Hiani, 3374, Jalan 18/31
Taman Sri Serdang
Sri Kembangan
Selangor
Business Address:
3, Jalan 51A/222
Petaling Jaya
Selangor
Type of Business: Property Renting
Authorised Capital: RM5,000,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM2,000,000.00
Directors:
Name (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) Dato’ Yahya Bin A. Jalil (560819-01-6437) - Director - 19-12-1990
2) Datin Mahmudah bte Md Ali (700301-01-5853) - Director - 04-12-1986
Shareholders:
Name - % of shares
1) Dato’ Yahya Bin A. Jalil - 65%
2) Datin Mahmudah bte Md Ali - 35%
Financial Highlights (December 1998):
Fixed Assets RM6,041,716.00
Other Assets RM677,280.00
Current Assets RM2,488,599.00
Total Assets RM9,207,595.00
Current Liabilities RM9,319,847.00
Long Term Liabilities RM3,381,483.00
Total Liabilities RM12,701,330.00
Turnover RM1,061,035.00
Loss Before Tax RM1,729,031.00
Net Worth –RM3,493,735.00
(7) Ibzi Holdings Sdn Bhd
Company Reg. No. 0483228-P
Registration Date: 11-05-1999
Registered Address:
157A Jalan Sri Pelangi
Taman Pelangi
Johor Bahru
Johor
Business Address:
Bukit Pelangi
Jalan Pasir Pelangi
Johor Bahru
Johor
Type of Business: Investment Holding Company
Authorised Capital: RM5,000,000.00
Paid Up Capital: RM 250,000.00
Directors:
Name (IC No.) - Position - Appointment
1) DYAM Tunku Ibrahim Ismail ibni Duli Yang Maha Mulia Baginda Al-Mutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj (5811220-01-5621) - Director - 01-08-2002
2) Raja Zarith Sofia bte Raja Idris (590814-08-5254) - Director - 01-08-2002
3) Kamal Hisham bin Jaafar (700301-01-5853) - Director - 01-02-2003 (Also Director of Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd and Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd)
Shareholders:
Name - % of shares
1) DYAM Tunku Ibrahim Ismail ibni DYMM Baginda Al-Mutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj - 99%
2) Raja Zarith Sofia bte Raja Idris - 1%
Financial Highlights (not available - presumed DORMANT)
MALAYSIA TODAY SPECIAL REPORT
MALAYSIA TODAY SPECIAL REPORT
Raja Petra Kamarudin
The time on the clock showed four in the morning. Former Deputy Prime Minister Musa Hitam just couldn’t close his eyes and fall asleep. The heat of the day was still bugging him in spite of the full blast of the air conditioner hanging over his bed. At 72, Musa had long left the world of politics, shying away from the dangers that he courted when he dared challenge the might of his boss, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, nearly 20 years ago. Since failing to wrest power from Mahathir, Musa has slipped quietly into oblivion, reaping scraps from corporate tables and pretending to be a diplomat. There were many nights before this when Musa could not sleep, but none were like this particular one. Cold sweat dripped from his forehead. It was as if some nightmare was haunting him and preventing him from falling into slumber-land. Alarm bells kept ringing in his head, harking back to the days when not only his political career but the fate of the nation hung in balance.
Earlier that day, Musa had attended the great fete celebrating UMNO’s 50th Anniversary. As a former top leader of the party, he had been placed on the dais together with other veterans lined up like ancient Chinese ancestral portraits. They looked down from the heights of the stage onto the current actors singing the sacrifices of leaders past and drawing all the credit they could for their own future benefits. Musa had been placed like a precious avatar next to the grandest UMNO deity, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the only living former UMNO President, a man with an almost god-like status amongst the ranks of the former leaders. But it was not the celebration that day that kept Musa from sleeping. It was what Mahathir had whispered to him throughout the day that was nagging him and prevented him from sleeping.
Actually, you could not really call it a whisper. It was obvious that Mahathir was unhappy, maybe even angry. And the brunt of his anger was the man who stood on the steps of the grand palace of Johor Bahru, his anointed successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Mahathir could scarcely hide his contempt for the man; cursing Abdullah’s recent actions which he felt undermined not only his legacy but the future of the nation itself. Mahathir hissed. Finally, apparently quite perturbed with the constant needling of the man standing beside him, Musa asked Mahathir what he was going to do about it. And it was Mahathir’s reply that shocked Musa so much that now he could not fall asleep. Mahathir told Musa his plans for deposing Abdullah.
Musa knew what Mahathir had told him was a decision that the UMNO giant had no intention of reversing. Like Caesar crossing the Rubicon, Mahathir had cast all his doubts aside and was determined to pursue a final battle that would either mark him as the saviour of the nation or stamp his skin with the scarlet word ‘Traitor’. Mahathir had decided he would take up the role of chief conspirator in the great plot to kill the political career of Abdullah Badawi, once and for all. Only thus can he be assured that he will not be dying with his eyes wide open.
Musa reached for his phone and dialled a number, reaching a certain Member of Parliament from Johor who could be counted on to deliver a certain message to Abdullah. While he did not completely agree with what Abdullah was doing -- in fact, Musa was one of the first to voice his concern to Abdullah that his son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, was becoming too powerful and too rich an advisor -- Musa did not want Malaysian politics to again be embroiled in the cutthroat savageness that he witnessed in 1987 and again in 1998. As a Johore Malay of the old school, Musa’s mantra, rightly or wrongly, has always been to yield to the lesser of two evils -- the other alternative being a full-blown war where both parties suffer casualties and every top leader gets killed. It was better, Musa felt, to be called timid and cautious rather than die fighting a battle that everyone will come out of fatally wounded.
So Musa decided to tip off the Member of Parliament and, in no uncertain terms, convey this most crucial message to Abdullah. The message was simple and came in three parts. First, Mahathir was about to strike and his aim was to remove Abdullah from power. Second, it was a decision that Mahathir had fully considered and any effort to mitigate the situation by trying to mediate would be fruitless. Third, he (Musa) had chosen his side, and his side is with Abdullah against the might of Mahathir from which he once shirked in terror.
Abdullah Badawi got the message later the next morning. He did not understand why Musa felt the attack was imminent. After all, he had gone out of his way to try and assuage Mahathir’s anger with the most subtle moves that would usually soothe the anger of the Grand Old Man. But Abdullah had long played a double game. While he tried portraying what Musa was later to call ‘ an elegant silence’, his underlings from the most sycophantic cabinet minister to the littlest of UMNO branch leader have been constantly told that many of Mahathir’s policies were no longer working and Abdullah was in repair mode, trying to make things better for everyone before it was too late.
The press under the control of Kalimullah Hassan Masheerul Hassan had been dressed up to appear more open in preparation for the day when they could, like a self-fulfilling prophecy, declare that they were freer and more critical now than they ever had been under Mahathir. Even so, when the attack finally came, the Khairy-controlled press scrambled to vilify Dr Mahathir. Some of the attempts were actually quite comical. For example, Datuk Kamarulzaman of TV3 went so far as to interview ketua kampungs and penghulus to voice their support for Abdullah. Even the often-erudite Rehman Rashid could do no more than write a so-called open letter to Dr Mahathir, nauseatingly praising Abdullah’s so-called ‘open press policy’ without declaring of course that this policy gave him back the job from which Abdullah Ahmad had dismissed him before. In other words, the small bit players came out with their little pen-knives to scratch Mahathir’s skin and laugh gleefully as it bled a little. The truth was that the efforts to undermine Mahathir began from day one of Abdullah’s administration. It was a deliberate and cohesive strategy devised by Khairy, presented many months before the handover to the team he had formed to play the role of Abdullah’s crutches.
In the first Khairy Chronicles, we had outlined how Khairy was going to demolish Mahathir’s legacy piece by piece. It has taken two years, but the plans that were hatched those many months before have now come to a boil. Mahathir’s engineered downfall will be disguised as a reform movement spearheaded by Abdullah, or at least tacitly endorsed by his administration.
The first fruits have already ripened. Mahathir’s blatant misuse of the judiciary, his favouring of certain business interests, the usage of government funds for grand projects, and other perceived abuses, have now been brought to the surface and laid bare for all and sundry to feast their eyes on. The next stage would be as Khairy himself remarked earlier to his close friends (and what these Chronicles had stated before): that certain figures from the Mahathir administration would now be hauled in front of show trials where their ‘sins’ would be exposed and ‘appropriate’ punishment meted out. The verdict would be a direct indictment of the middle leadership under Mahathir, but the actual target would be the Grand Architect himself. Mahathir’s name will be dragged through courts all over the land and he will be described as the evil genius who directed the corrupt and abusive actions of his underlings in his 22 years as Malaysia’s Prime Minister.
Eventually, Khairy’s target would be to put at least one or two former and key Mahathir underlings in jail. Prominent amongst these targets are the group of people who served as poster boys of Mahathir’s corporate agenda -- in other words, those who are closest to former Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin. Daim has always been Khairy’s most obvious target. Although many credit him as being the planner of Malaysia’s economic growth in the 1980s and 1990s, because Daim had always attributed the credit to Mahathir, it is easy to tar Daim as the bad boy without feeling too guilty about it. Obviously, Daim’s record is not clean if compared to other Finance Ministers, with the possible exception of Anwar Ibrahim, Daim was known to have a circle of trusted lieutenants whom he fed with money, positions and contracts.
But surely Mahathir knows all this. Indeed he does. One of the factors that triggered Mahathir’s outburst was a recent discovery brought to his attention by one of his former political secretaries. It seems Khairy had had a meeting with several former judges who were planning an attack upon their more corrupt ‘brothers’ who had been promoted by Mahathir mainly for their subservience. Of course, some of Khairy’s new ‘friends’ were sincere in wanting to reform the judiciary. But let there be no doubt about it -- most of the others are as corrupt as their future victims and they only want to support Khairy in order to save their own skins. There is no black and white in the Malaysian judiciary, only shades of grey. All the clean judges have already been kicked out along with Salleh Abbas while many others had either died, depressed and broken, or have slipped into obscurity.
Can anyone say that Abdullah’s reforms are supported only by clean hands? It doesn’t take a genius to realise that the many voices speaking out in support of the Prime Minister against Mahathir are those whose life and career have been built on ill-gotten gains. These include almost all the current cabinet ministers, mere residue (saki-baki) from the Mahathir days. These people are not clean. Some like Nazri Aziz are so obviously corrupt you can smell the corruption like a dog that can smell a bitch in heat as he saunters into the room. Others, notably Muhyiddin Yassin, are as guilty of money politics as the deposed Isa Samad -- and who was spared execution only because he is perceived as a puerile nobody and not deemed dangerous to Khairy’s political career. It is laughable that these people now support Abdullah’s ‘reforms’. They would support any Prime Minister in office for that matter. If Hadi Awang was the Prime Minister, they would be clapping like seals, yelping his name.
What worries all these people is that they can no longer pretend to be the loyal sons of Mahathir while serving as Abdullah’s men. Now that the battle has begun, they must be seen to be the undivided loyal soldiers of the current commander-in-chief. That is expected of them and has always been the UMNO culture. Nevertheless, at least three of them have given secret support to Mahathir. Let’s call a spade a spade so that life can be more interesting. The three who have called Mahathir to give their support are Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor, Azmi Khalid and Mustapa Mohamad.
But this of course comes as no surprise. The surprise instead lies in Mahathir’s reaction and counter moves. Surely no one is stupid enough to think that Mahathir is having an off day, having swallowed too much Panadol when he gave that watershed comment. Like the Anwar episode, Mahathir had thought long and hard about it. And this is the next move Mahathir will make. Mahathir toppled Anwar by having other people bell the cat. This time, however, he will do it himself. He himself has told everyone as much. Even his son Mukhriz admitted to the press that his father was now so angry he is making his own moves and is not delegating that responsibility to others.
First of all though, a no-confidence movement within UMNO needs to emerge. Like in the past, Mahathir will rely on the state UMNO machineries to do this. Of the many Menteris Besar, only two remain in Abdullah’s camp. These are Mahadzir Khalid of Kedah and Mohamad Hassan of Negeri Sembilan. Mahadzir Khalid is a non-entity in Kedah. He is too new to have any strong grassroots support and has ready-made enemies such as Ahmad Lebai Sudin, Aziz Sheikh Fadzir and even former Menteri Besar Syed Razak Syed Zain to contend with. In addition, his extravagance over these last few months where he has become the only Menteri Besar to use a private jet for overseas visits has further riled up the UMNO leaders in Kedah. He also openly scolds them as if they were children -- perhaps reminiscent of the days when he used to scold his wife’s pupils during his time in the political wilderness. He is scarcely someone who could be relied upon to deliver the important state of Kedah.
Mohamad Hassan, the Menteri Besar of Negeri Sembilan who resembles a baddie from a bad 1970s Tamil movie, is another non-entity placed as a puppet by Khairy to warm the seat until he is ready to assume the political leadership of Negeri Sembilan. Mohamad has ready-made enemies in Isa Samad, the Menteri Besar he displaced, and other Exco Members with many more years experience compared to his. He knows as much about running the state as the next car mechanic you see in Seremban -- and throwing his support behind Abdullah is the only way he can keep his job.
Of course, there are those like Idris Jusoh of Terengganu and Musa Aman of Sabah who will support anyone they think will win -- and if they think Mahathir is going to win they will abandon Abdullah like a hot potato and jump on Mahathir’s bandwagon. Of the rest, two have already given veiled support to Mahathir -- Shahidan Kassim, the arch-opportunist, who believes himself to be God’s gift to arbitration, and Adnan Yaakob, who is still sore at Khairy for not backing his efforts to stand as a Vice President during the last UMNO elections. But these two are clowns. Mahathir is relying on someone else to be his campaign manager for the states. That man is someone who already has a long-standing grudge, not only against Abdullah, but against Khairy. During the last General Election he had been on the list of those to be removed. Furthermore, Khairy had belittled him in his efforts during the last UMNO elections. More importantly, Khairy has gone over his head in allocating projects in his state. There were times he had been told by businessmen that Khairy had personally given them certain concessions -- for which he is forbidden from protesting. His anger at Khairy has good reasons and the removal of Abdullah and his son-in-law would be the culmination of the ideal dream.
Mahathir will rely on this person to move UMNO slowly but surely towards removing Abdullah. By whatever means, UMNO will be made ready for a contest that will see either Abdullah in triumph over Mahathir or Mahathir’s new man in place at the leadership of Barisan Nasional before the 12th General Election. Since Mahathir is so ardent in his efforts to remove Abdullah and Khairy, Malaysia Today will not spoil it by revealing his plans just yet. Suffice that we call Mahathir’s weapon ‘MB X’. And MB X will make himself known to the public soon enough....
Raja Petra Kamarudin
The time on the clock showed four in the morning. Former Deputy Prime Minister Musa Hitam just couldn’t close his eyes and fall asleep. The heat of the day was still bugging him in spite of the full blast of the air conditioner hanging over his bed. At 72, Musa had long left the world of politics, shying away from the dangers that he courted when he dared challenge the might of his boss, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, nearly 20 years ago. Since failing to wrest power from Mahathir, Musa has slipped quietly into oblivion, reaping scraps from corporate tables and pretending to be a diplomat. There were many nights before this when Musa could not sleep, but none were like this particular one. Cold sweat dripped from his forehead. It was as if some nightmare was haunting him and preventing him from falling into slumber-land. Alarm bells kept ringing in his head, harking back to the days when not only his political career but the fate of the nation hung in balance.
Earlier that day, Musa had attended the great fete celebrating UMNO’s 50th Anniversary. As a former top leader of the party, he had been placed on the dais together with other veterans lined up like ancient Chinese ancestral portraits. They looked down from the heights of the stage onto the current actors singing the sacrifices of leaders past and drawing all the credit they could for their own future benefits. Musa had been placed like a precious avatar next to the grandest UMNO deity, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the only living former UMNO President, a man with an almost god-like status amongst the ranks of the former leaders. But it was not the celebration that day that kept Musa from sleeping. It was what Mahathir had whispered to him throughout the day that was nagging him and prevented him from sleeping.
Actually, you could not really call it a whisper. It was obvious that Mahathir was unhappy, maybe even angry. And the brunt of his anger was the man who stood on the steps of the grand palace of Johor Bahru, his anointed successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Mahathir could scarcely hide his contempt for the man; cursing Abdullah’s recent actions which he felt undermined not only his legacy but the future of the nation itself. Mahathir hissed. Finally, apparently quite perturbed with the constant needling of the man standing beside him, Musa asked Mahathir what he was going to do about it. And it was Mahathir’s reply that shocked Musa so much that now he could not fall asleep. Mahathir told Musa his plans for deposing Abdullah.
Musa knew what Mahathir had told him was a decision that the UMNO giant had no intention of reversing. Like Caesar crossing the Rubicon, Mahathir had cast all his doubts aside and was determined to pursue a final battle that would either mark him as the saviour of the nation or stamp his skin with the scarlet word ‘Traitor’. Mahathir had decided he would take up the role of chief conspirator in the great plot to kill the political career of Abdullah Badawi, once and for all. Only thus can he be assured that he will not be dying with his eyes wide open.
Musa reached for his phone and dialled a number, reaching a certain Member of Parliament from Johor who could be counted on to deliver a certain message to Abdullah. While he did not completely agree with what Abdullah was doing -- in fact, Musa was one of the first to voice his concern to Abdullah that his son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, was becoming too powerful and too rich an advisor -- Musa did not want Malaysian politics to again be embroiled in the cutthroat savageness that he witnessed in 1987 and again in 1998. As a Johore Malay of the old school, Musa’s mantra, rightly or wrongly, has always been to yield to the lesser of two evils -- the other alternative being a full-blown war where both parties suffer casualties and every top leader gets killed. It was better, Musa felt, to be called timid and cautious rather than die fighting a battle that everyone will come out of fatally wounded.
So Musa decided to tip off the Member of Parliament and, in no uncertain terms, convey this most crucial message to Abdullah. The message was simple and came in three parts. First, Mahathir was about to strike and his aim was to remove Abdullah from power. Second, it was a decision that Mahathir had fully considered and any effort to mitigate the situation by trying to mediate would be fruitless. Third, he (Musa) had chosen his side, and his side is with Abdullah against the might of Mahathir from which he once shirked in terror.
Abdullah Badawi got the message later the next morning. He did not understand why Musa felt the attack was imminent. After all, he had gone out of his way to try and assuage Mahathir’s anger with the most subtle moves that would usually soothe the anger of the Grand Old Man. But Abdullah had long played a double game. While he tried portraying what Musa was later to call ‘ an elegant silence’, his underlings from the most sycophantic cabinet minister to the littlest of UMNO branch leader have been constantly told that many of Mahathir’s policies were no longer working and Abdullah was in repair mode, trying to make things better for everyone before it was too late.
The press under the control of Kalimullah Hassan Masheerul Hassan had been dressed up to appear more open in preparation for the day when they could, like a self-fulfilling prophecy, declare that they were freer and more critical now than they ever had been under Mahathir. Even so, when the attack finally came, the Khairy-controlled press scrambled to vilify Dr Mahathir. Some of the attempts were actually quite comical. For example, Datuk Kamarulzaman of TV3 went so far as to interview ketua kampungs and penghulus to voice their support for Abdullah. Even the often-erudite Rehman Rashid could do no more than write a so-called open letter to Dr Mahathir, nauseatingly praising Abdullah’s so-called ‘open press policy’ without declaring of course that this policy gave him back the job from which Abdullah Ahmad had dismissed him before. In other words, the small bit players came out with their little pen-knives to scratch Mahathir’s skin and laugh gleefully as it bled a little. The truth was that the efforts to undermine Mahathir began from day one of Abdullah’s administration. It was a deliberate and cohesive strategy devised by Khairy, presented many months before the handover to the team he had formed to play the role of Abdullah’s crutches.
In the first Khairy Chronicles, we had outlined how Khairy was going to demolish Mahathir’s legacy piece by piece. It has taken two years, but the plans that were hatched those many months before have now come to a boil. Mahathir’s engineered downfall will be disguised as a reform movement spearheaded by Abdullah, or at least tacitly endorsed by his administration.
The first fruits have already ripened. Mahathir’s blatant misuse of the judiciary, his favouring of certain business interests, the usage of government funds for grand projects, and other perceived abuses, have now been brought to the surface and laid bare for all and sundry to feast their eyes on. The next stage would be as Khairy himself remarked earlier to his close friends (and what these Chronicles had stated before): that certain figures from the Mahathir administration would now be hauled in front of show trials where their ‘sins’ would be exposed and ‘appropriate’ punishment meted out. The verdict would be a direct indictment of the middle leadership under Mahathir, but the actual target would be the Grand Architect himself. Mahathir’s name will be dragged through courts all over the land and he will be described as the evil genius who directed the corrupt and abusive actions of his underlings in his 22 years as Malaysia’s Prime Minister.
Eventually, Khairy’s target would be to put at least one or two former and key Mahathir underlings in jail. Prominent amongst these targets are the group of people who served as poster boys of Mahathir’s corporate agenda -- in other words, those who are closest to former Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin. Daim has always been Khairy’s most obvious target. Although many credit him as being the planner of Malaysia’s economic growth in the 1980s and 1990s, because Daim had always attributed the credit to Mahathir, it is easy to tar Daim as the bad boy without feeling too guilty about it. Obviously, Daim’s record is not clean if compared to other Finance Ministers, with the possible exception of Anwar Ibrahim, Daim was known to have a circle of trusted lieutenants whom he fed with money, positions and contracts.
But surely Mahathir knows all this. Indeed he does. One of the factors that triggered Mahathir’s outburst was a recent discovery brought to his attention by one of his former political secretaries. It seems Khairy had had a meeting with several former judges who were planning an attack upon their more corrupt ‘brothers’ who had been promoted by Mahathir mainly for their subservience. Of course, some of Khairy’s new ‘friends’ were sincere in wanting to reform the judiciary. But let there be no doubt about it -- most of the others are as corrupt as their future victims and they only want to support Khairy in order to save their own skins. There is no black and white in the Malaysian judiciary, only shades of grey. All the clean judges have already been kicked out along with Salleh Abbas while many others had either died, depressed and broken, or have slipped into obscurity.
Can anyone say that Abdullah’s reforms are supported only by clean hands? It doesn’t take a genius to realise that the many voices speaking out in support of the Prime Minister against Mahathir are those whose life and career have been built on ill-gotten gains. These include almost all the current cabinet ministers, mere residue (saki-baki) from the Mahathir days. These people are not clean. Some like Nazri Aziz are so obviously corrupt you can smell the corruption like a dog that can smell a bitch in heat as he saunters into the room. Others, notably Muhyiddin Yassin, are as guilty of money politics as the deposed Isa Samad -- and who was spared execution only because he is perceived as a puerile nobody and not deemed dangerous to Khairy’s political career. It is laughable that these people now support Abdullah’s ‘reforms’. They would support any Prime Minister in office for that matter. If Hadi Awang was the Prime Minister, they would be clapping like seals, yelping his name.
What worries all these people is that they can no longer pretend to be the loyal sons of Mahathir while serving as Abdullah’s men. Now that the battle has begun, they must be seen to be the undivided loyal soldiers of the current commander-in-chief. That is expected of them and has always been the UMNO culture. Nevertheless, at least three of them have given secret support to Mahathir. Let’s call a spade a spade so that life can be more interesting. The three who have called Mahathir to give their support are Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor, Azmi Khalid and Mustapa Mohamad.
But this of course comes as no surprise. The surprise instead lies in Mahathir’s reaction and counter moves. Surely no one is stupid enough to think that Mahathir is having an off day, having swallowed too much Panadol when he gave that watershed comment. Like the Anwar episode, Mahathir had thought long and hard about it. And this is the next move Mahathir will make. Mahathir toppled Anwar by having other people bell the cat. This time, however, he will do it himself. He himself has told everyone as much. Even his son Mukhriz admitted to the press that his father was now so angry he is making his own moves and is not delegating that responsibility to others.
First of all though, a no-confidence movement within UMNO needs to emerge. Like in the past, Mahathir will rely on the state UMNO machineries to do this. Of the many Menteris Besar, only two remain in Abdullah’s camp. These are Mahadzir Khalid of Kedah and Mohamad Hassan of Negeri Sembilan. Mahadzir Khalid is a non-entity in Kedah. He is too new to have any strong grassroots support and has ready-made enemies such as Ahmad Lebai Sudin, Aziz Sheikh Fadzir and even former Menteri Besar Syed Razak Syed Zain to contend with. In addition, his extravagance over these last few months where he has become the only Menteri Besar to use a private jet for overseas visits has further riled up the UMNO leaders in Kedah. He also openly scolds them as if they were children -- perhaps reminiscent of the days when he used to scold his wife’s pupils during his time in the political wilderness. He is scarcely someone who could be relied upon to deliver the important state of Kedah.
Mohamad Hassan, the Menteri Besar of Negeri Sembilan who resembles a baddie from a bad 1970s Tamil movie, is another non-entity placed as a puppet by Khairy to warm the seat until he is ready to assume the political leadership of Negeri Sembilan. Mohamad has ready-made enemies in Isa Samad, the Menteri Besar he displaced, and other Exco Members with many more years experience compared to his. He knows as much about running the state as the next car mechanic you see in Seremban -- and throwing his support behind Abdullah is the only way he can keep his job.
Of course, there are those like Idris Jusoh of Terengganu and Musa Aman of Sabah who will support anyone they think will win -- and if they think Mahathir is going to win they will abandon Abdullah like a hot potato and jump on Mahathir’s bandwagon. Of the rest, two have already given veiled support to Mahathir -- Shahidan Kassim, the arch-opportunist, who believes himself to be God’s gift to arbitration, and Adnan Yaakob, who is still sore at Khairy for not backing his efforts to stand as a Vice President during the last UMNO elections. But these two are clowns. Mahathir is relying on someone else to be his campaign manager for the states. That man is someone who already has a long-standing grudge, not only against Abdullah, but against Khairy. During the last General Election he had been on the list of those to be removed. Furthermore, Khairy had belittled him in his efforts during the last UMNO elections. More importantly, Khairy has gone over his head in allocating projects in his state. There were times he had been told by businessmen that Khairy had personally given them certain concessions -- for which he is forbidden from protesting. His anger at Khairy has good reasons and the removal of Abdullah and his son-in-law would be the culmination of the ideal dream.
Mahathir will rely on this person to move UMNO slowly but surely towards removing Abdullah. By whatever means, UMNO will be made ready for a contest that will see either Abdullah in triumph over Mahathir or Mahathir’s new man in place at the leadership of Barisan Nasional before the 12th General Election. Since Mahathir is so ardent in his efforts to remove Abdullah and Khairy, Malaysia Today will not spoil it by revealing his plans just yet. Suffice that we call Mahathir’s weapon ‘MB X’. And MB X will make himself known to the public soon enough....
Interview with Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid
Santha Oorjitham
New Straits Times, 11 June 2006
AFTER suffering in silence for 10 years, Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid Syed Abdullah has lifted the lid on the report he wrote alleging serious corruption in the judiciary. His report was dismissed as a poison letter by the authorities and he was vilified by the Press, including the New Straits Times, and treated like an invisible man by his friends.
TODAY, he is ready to speak with candour on the case. TODAY, for the first time he says that he was forced to resign from the Bench. TODAY, for the first time, he says that the allegations were never really investigated.
On July 1, 1996, Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid Syed Abdullah walked away from his position as a High Court judge. That was the fallout after writing an anonymous letter about corruption and abuse of power in the judiciary.
On July 9, then Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, without naming names, said no further action would be taken against the author since the resignation was ‘a strong punishment’.
Syed Ahmad, who was appointed the director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration in 2004, tells what it costs to be a whistleblower.
Q: The Bar Council has been calling for a Judicial Commission to look at appointments, transfers, promotions, remuneration, training and continuing education of judges. They say this would improve the quality of judges. Similar commissions have been set up in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Indonesia and Hong Kong. What do you think?
A: They are just following what I suggested at the 12th Malaysian Law Conference in December 2003. I had raised this matter, first of all, after what had happened to me.If there had been a commission, I think it would have looked into what exactly happened. But there was no commission.
Q: You have never confirmed, on record, what happened in 1996.
A: What happened to me is well known by those who investigated but the decision was perverse. (Laughs.)No one can say who is right and who is wrong. That is not my line but I do wish that the truth would come out.
Q: At the time, you said you resigned because you felt "quite tired, a general debility ...and I needed a change." Were you forced to retire?
A: If you ask me a direct question, I’ll give you a direct answer. Yes, I was forced to resign and at that time, my health was also suffering because of the pressure on the heart.
Q: How would you describe the poison-pen letter?
A: If you want to use the modern (term), ‘poison-pen letter’, it poisoned the writer. It poisoned the whistleblower.It poisoned the right people who have got something to inform the Government and they were poisoned by the process.I would call it, as Datuk Shaikh Daud Md Ismail (former Court of Appeal judge, in The Sunday Interview, June 4) has called it, a petition to the Chief Justice (Tun Mohd Eusoff Chin) because he was supposed to know what was going on about improving the standards of the judiciary.
Q: The late Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah said in July 1996 that the 12 judges implicated in the letter were interviewed by the authorities. He said he and his officers had read the investigation papers of the ACA and the police, and that the allegations were "wholly untrue and baseless".
A: I will leave it to what he wants to say. When I attended the prayers for the funeral of Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim (in 2000), he approached me and offered his hand. He said: "We are still friends?" I said: "Yes, we are friends."Of course I shook his hand because I knew he was doing a duty and he was forced to do a duty.But I asked him, "Was there a pistol at your neck when you did what you did to me?" He replied, "No, it was a cannon." We laughed.The huge machinery was used against an individual. Actually, there were elements who urged that I be placed under the ISA but the police, being professionals, ignored them. No statement was ever made by the police or the ACA, only the Press, like the NST, went ‘raving mad’.It all depends on the standard of investigation. You can go and ask somebody, "Did you commit a crime?" and he says "No". Then you say "Thank you" and so you say it is baseless.But if you then go and find out, checking accounts, background information, who has been where for the last three months, you will unearth the worms.
Q: Datuk Shaikh Daud recommended that to tackle allegations of corruption in the judiciary, protection should be provided for whistleblowers. From your own experience, would you support this?
A: Not only from my own experience. After the Enron case, the US Government now protects whistleblowers because through whistleblowers you can unearth a lot of crimes.And that should be the objective of every Government.
Q: What happened to you, when you blew the whistle?
A: I lost everything. I lost my pension. I lost several years of my life. After I resigned, I became the Invisible Man.Some of those who knew me just passed by as if I did not exist.I could see only nice people who stuck with me. My true friends, relatives and, surprise, surprise, even a busload of religious people met me to offer prayers for my safety and good health.I am perpetually grateful to all and to Allah. I also became a barometer for incorruptibility.Those who were and are clean (judges and others) continued to associate with me. The rest just slithered away.Not once in my ordeal did I waver in my loyalty to Malaysia. There were two chances for me to migrate but my wife, children and I had no qualms whatsoever that Malaysia must remain our home and the focus of our loyalty.It was an individual or two who did me in and so I cannot blame the country or the Government.
Q: Why was your poison-pen letter anonymous?
A: It was not a poison-pen letter. It was points for the Chief Justice to investigate and where evidence was clear, to prosecute those involved.Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman said (to Mingguan Malaysia, June 4) that the allegations were not investigated; on the other hand, the poor judge who wrote it was investigated.This is coming from a former attorney-general. I think he knew what he was talking about.It seems to have been the thoughts of many judges, so I shouldn’t take credit for writing something which was actually contributed by several judges.
Q: Does a lack of protection for whistleblowers prevent people from coming forward?
A: I am sure because the message then was: If you tell something about wrongdoing, then you are wrong.Whereas people who inform about what is wrong are not against the Government, but against the wrongdoers and criminals.
Q: Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim said on May 30 that he had forwarded poison-pen letters on the issue of corruption to the ACA. He said the judiciary had found no "credible evidence" for these allegations.
A: I would call upon not only the judiciary but the ACA and police to have better quality investigators, and that they be given proper equipment and full powers to look up records.In other words, you really investigate and I think you are bound to get somewhere and quite speedily, too.
Q: What do you think of the suggestion by the Chief Justice that corruption could be prevented by having more than one judge presiding over a trial?
A: I have mulled over that statement and I have found that while it sounds possible to eradicate the possibility of corruption that way, there is nothing to stop all three being corrupted. The quality of human beings is the most important. That is something you can’t buy. Remuneration is part of it but sometimes, what is OK for some is not enough for others. It is the selection.
New Straits Times, 11 June 2006
AFTER suffering in silence for 10 years, Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid Syed Abdullah has lifted the lid on the report he wrote alleging serious corruption in the judiciary. His report was dismissed as a poison letter by the authorities and he was vilified by the Press, including the New Straits Times, and treated like an invisible man by his friends.
TODAY, he is ready to speak with candour on the case. TODAY, for the first time he says that he was forced to resign from the Bench. TODAY, for the first time, he says that the allegations were never really investigated.
On July 1, 1996, Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid Syed Abdullah walked away from his position as a High Court judge. That was the fallout after writing an anonymous letter about corruption and abuse of power in the judiciary.
On July 9, then Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, without naming names, said no further action would be taken against the author since the resignation was ‘a strong punishment’.
Syed Ahmad, who was appointed the director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration in 2004, tells what it costs to be a whistleblower.
Q: The Bar Council has been calling for a Judicial Commission to look at appointments, transfers, promotions, remuneration, training and continuing education of judges. They say this would improve the quality of judges. Similar commissions have been set up in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Indonesia and Hong Kong. What do you think?
A: They are just following what I suggested at the 12th Malaysian Law Conference in December 2003. I had raised this matter, first of all, after what had happened to me.If there had been a commission, I think it would have looked into what exactly happened. But there was no commission.
Q: You have never confirmed, on record, what happened in 1996.
A: What happened to me is well known by those who investigated but the decision was perverse. (Laughs.)No one can say who is right and who is wrong. That is not my line but I do wish that the truth would come out.
Q: At the time, you said you resigned because you felt "quite tired, a general debility ...and I needed a change." Were you forced to retire?
A: If you ask me a direct question, I’ll give you a direct answer. Yes, I was forced to resign and at that time, my health was also suffering because of the pressure on the heart.
Q: How would you describe the poison-pen letter?
A: If you want to use the modern (term), ‘poison-pen letter’, it poisoned the writer. It poisoned the whistleblower.It poisoned the right people who have got something to inform the Government and they were poisoned by the process.I would call it, as Datuk Shaikh Daud Md Ismail (former Court of Appeal judge, in The Sunday Interview, June 4) has called it, a petition to the Chief Justice (Tun Mohd Eusoff Chin) because he was supposed to know what was going on about improving the standards of the judiciary.
Q: The late Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah said in July 1996 that the 12 judges implicated in the letter were interviewed by the authorities. He said he and his officers had read the investigation papers of the ACA and the police, and that the allegations were "wholly untrue and baseless".
A: I will leave it to what he wants to say. When I attended the prayers for the funeral of Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim (in 2000), he approached me and offered his hand. He said: "We are still friends?" I said: "Yes, we are friends."Of course I shook his hand because I knew he was doing a duty and he was forced to do a duty.But I asked him, "Was there a pistol at your neck when you did what you did to me?" He replied, "No, it was a cannon." We laughed.The huge machinery was used against an individual. Actually, there were elements who urged that I be placed under the ISA but the police, being professionals, ignored them. No statement was ever made by the police or the ACA, only the Press, like the NST, went ‘raving mad’.It all depends on the standard of investigation. You can go and ask somebody, "Did you commit a crime?" and he says "No". Then you say "Thank you" and so you say it is baseless.But if you then go and find out, checking accounts, background information, who has been where for the last three months, you will unearth the worms.
Q: Datuk Shaikh Daud recommended that to tackle allegations of corruption in the judiciary, protection should be provided for whistleblowers. From your own experience, would you support this?
A: Not only from my own experience. After the Enron case, the US Government now protects whistleblowers because through whistleblowers you can unearth a lot of crimes.And that should be the objective of every Government.
Q: What happened to you, when you blew the whistle?
A: I lost everything. I lost my pension. I lost several years of my life. After I resigned, I became the Invisible Man.Some of those who knew me just passed by as if I did not exist.I could see only nice people who stuck with me. My true friends, relatives and, surprise, surprise, even a busload of religious people met me to offer prayers for my safety and good health.I am perpetually grateful to all and to Allah. I also became a barometer for incorruptibility.Those who were and are clean (judges and others) continued to associate with me. The rest just slithered away.Not once in my ordeal did I waver in my loyalty to Malaysia. There were two chances for me to migrate but my wife, children and I had no qualms whatsoever that Malaysia must remain our home and the focus of our loyalty.It was an individual or two who did me in and so I cannot blame the country or the Government.
Q: Why was your poison-pen letter anonymous?
A: It was not a poison-pen letter. It was points for the Chief Justice to investigate and where evidence was clear, to prosecute those involved.Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman said (to Mingguan Malaysia, June 4) that the allegations were not investigated; on the other hand, the poor judge who wrote it was investigated.This is coming from a former attorney-general. I think he knew what he was talking about.It seems to have been the thoughts of many judges, so I shouldn’t take credit for writing something which was actually contributed by several judges.
Q: Does a lack of protection for whistleblowers prevent people from coming forward?
A: I am sure because the message then was: If you tell something about wrongdoing, then you are wrong.Whereas people who inform about what is wrong are not against the Government, but against the wrongdoers and criminals.
Q: Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim said on May 30 that he had forwarded poison-pen letters on the issue of corruption to the ACA. He said the judiciary had found no "credible evidence" for these allegations.
A: I would call upon not only the judiciary but the ACA and police to have better quality investigators, and that they be given proper equipment and full powers to look up records.In other words, you really investigate and I think you are bound to get somewhere and quite speedily, too.
Q: What do you think of the suggestion by the Chief Justice that corruption could be prevented by having more than one judge presiding over a trial?
A: I have mulled over that statement and I have found that while it sounds possible to eradicate the possibility of corruption that way, there is nothing to stop all three being corrupted. The quality of human beings is the most important. That is something you can’t buy. Remuneration is part of it but sometimes, what is OK for some is not enough for others. It is the selection.
Sunday, June 04, 2006
Tragedi Tanah Runtuh di Lembah Klang Mei 2006
Lagi Mengenai Tragedi Tanah Runtuh di Lembah Klang
Pada hari Rabu. 30 Mei 2006 yang lalu berlaku kejadian tanah runtuh menyebabkan 4 orang meninggal dunia. Kejadian tersebut melibatkan perkampungan pendatang Indonesia di Kampung Pasir, Hulu Klang. Berikutan kejadian tersebut, berlaku “perang” mulut, tuduh-menuduh dan tuding-menuding di antara pihak berkuasa, pemimpin, penduduk dan pemaju. Drama ini tidak ubah seperti yang berlaku di dalam kejadian-kejadian yang lalu. Dan adalah tidak keterlaluan jika dikatakan bahawa ia akan terus berlaku sehinggalah kita benar-benar belajar dan sejarah ini. Inilah yang mewajarkan tulisan ini direkodkan.
Sepertimana biasa laporan demi laporan akan dibuat. Kali ini, menurut Menteri Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan, isu ini akan dibincangkan di dalam mesyuarat Kabinet. Sebuah jawatankuasa teknikal dibentuk untuk menyiasat punca kejadian. Jawatankuasa tersebut dipengerusikan Unit Cerun JKR, Jabatan Alam Sekitar (JAS), Jabatan Mineral dan Geosains, Kumpulan Ikram Sdn Bhd dan MPAJ. Laporan lengkap akan dikemukakan kepada TPM selaku pengerusi Jawatankuasa Pengurusan dan Bantuan Bencana Pusat sebelum mesyuarat Kabinet.
Berita Minggu pada 4 Jun 2006 mengetengahkan penjelasan pakar tentang kemungkinan kejadian tanah runtuh di Kampung Pasir, Hulu Klang pada hari Rabu, 30 Mei 2006 yang lalu. Menurut penjelasan tersebut, air bercampur tanah yang terkumpul di bahagian cerun yang ditarah, yang lemah strukturnya menyebabkan tekanan kuat di bahagian bawahnya. Campuran air dan tanah ini lalu menolak bawah tembok penahan cerun lalu menyebabkannya runtuh.
Setelah cerun ditarah dan ditambak, air mengalir melalui saluran yang terjadi daripada bentuk muka bumi dan bertakung di bawah kaki bukit yang ditambak. Cerun yang ditarah, ditambak menggunakan tanah dan batu yang dipercayai dijadikan laluan untuk kerja pembinaan projek perumahan di kawasan berkenaan. Selepas kejadian tanah runtuh, pergerakan tanah terus berlaku hingga menyebabkan ada kali lima dan lantai sebahagian rumah di Taman Zoo View (yang berhadapan dengan Kampung Pasir) kini dalam keadaan “tergantung”. Sebanyak 16 buah rumah yang terlibat.
Pergerakan tanah yang berlarutan itu menyebabkan lantai balkoni dan sebahagian ruang tamu beberapa rumah dalam keadaan tergantung. Kebanyakan pagar belakang rumah berkenaan runtuh sejak tragedi Rabu lalu.
Menariknya, ketika inipun, tiada usaha dari MPAJ atau pemaju untuk mengambil langkah segera menstabilkan cerun. Yang ada hanya beberapa pekerja menutup cerun runtuh dengan plastik.
Akhbar tersebut juga menceritakan bahawa MB Selangor, Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo mengakui Exco serta kakitangan jabatan dan agensi kerajaannya tidak turun padang memantau pembangunan di Selangor. Menurut MB Selangor lagi, “pembangunan di Selangor kini tertumpu di kawasan sensitif kerana semua kawasan tidak sensitif sudah dibangunkan, jadi pemantauan sangat penting”.
MB menjelaskan lagi bahawa kerajaan Selangor mempunyai bukti kukuh kesalahan pemaju, kontraktor dan jururunding projek pembangunan di kawasan itu. Ia termasuk pemaju Taman Zoo View yang gagal menyediakan sistem perparitan ketika memajukan kawasan berkenaan lebih 25 tahun lalu. Beliau difahamkan bahawa MPAJ sudah memanggil pemaju projek perumahan Ukay Bestari supaya mempercepatkan pembinaan tembok penahan, tetapi pemaju menyatakan bahawa mereka tiada dana, melainkan diberikan oleh Kerajaan.
Yang pasti mendapat untung ialah mereka yang membuat laporan teknikal hasil siasatan dan kontraktor-kontraktor yang diperlukan untuk melaksanakan cadangan-cadangan yang dikemukakan di dalam laporan.
Sikap kita?
Pertama, barangkali dah beratus kali kita mendengar pandangan dan perintah pemimpin untuk tidak lagi melakukan pembangunan di cerun bukit. Semuanya hanyalah mainan mulut. Seorang penulis emel menulis kepada TV3 pada Jumaat 2 Jun 2006 lalu bahawa MPAJ tidak akan mempunyai insentif untuk memperbaiki keadaan memandangkan bahawa dalam kes Highland Towers pada 1993 lalu, Mahkamah Persekutuan memihak kepada MPAJ. Yang menanggung kemalangan tetap anak bangsa kita.
Kedua, kelulusan projek dikatakan perlu diperketatkan. Soalnya apakah ini akan kekal sebagai mainan penyedap mulut atau benar-benar satu komitmen? Kerana dalam kelam-kabut kejadian ini, kita didedahkan dengan beberapa pembangunan cerun dan lereng bukit yang telah diluluskan. Pada Sabtu, 3 Jun 2006, kira-kira 1,00 orang penduduk di Taman Bukit Mas, Hulu Klang menyuarakan kebimbangan terhadap pembinaan projek pembangunan di lereng bukit berhampiran. Projek tersebut diluluskan oleh DBKL dan melibatkan pembinaan satu blok pangsapuri tujuh tingkat dan satu blok villa bandar enam tingkat merangkumi 74 unit kediaman di lereng curam dan lembut. Tanah di Hulu Klang bersifat granit terluluhawa yang mudah peroi dan menyimpan air menyebabkannya berisiko tinggi untuk tergelincir, tetapi pembangunan masih dibenarkan.
Ketiga, tiada sebarang runtuhan kecil yang tidak berbahaya kerana ia adalah simptom kepada tragedi yang mungkin lebih besar. Inilah kesimpulan yang dibuat oleh laporan awal Bahagian Kejuruteraan Cerun Bukit JKR, menurut Menteri Kerja Raya. Menurut laporan tersebut, tembok penahan bumi dikesan dibina pada bahagian yang lembut dan dasarnya tidak mencecah tanah yang keras. Aduan dari pihak penduduk perlu disiasat dan diambil tindakan sewajarnya, bukannya diketepikan. Pergerakan tanah dikesan sejak setahun, tetapi benteng penahan hanya baru siap minggu lalu.
Lentera 4 Jun 2006
Pada hari Rabu. 30 Mei 2006 yang lalu berlaku kejadian tanah runtuh menyebabkan 4 orang meninggal dunia. Kejadian tersebut melibatkan perkampungan pendatang Indonesia di Kampung Pasir, Hulu Klang. Berikutan kejadian tersebut, berlaku “perang” mulut, tuduh-menuduh dan tuding-menuding di antara pihak berkuasa, pemimpin, penduduk dan pemaju. Drama ini tidak ubah seperti yang berlaku di dalam kejadian-kejadian yang lalu. Dan adalah tidak keterlaluan jika dikatakan bahawa ia akan terus berlaku sehinggalah kita benar-benar belajar dan sejarah ini. Inilah yang mewajarkan tulisan ini direkodkan.
Sepertimana biasa laporan demi laporan akan dibuat. Kali ini, menurut Menteri Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan, isu ini akan dibincangkan di dalam mesyuarat Kabinet. Sebuah jawatankuasa teknikal dibentuk untuk menyiasat punca kejadian. Jawatankuasa tersebut dipengerusikan Unit Cerun JKR, Jabatan Alam Sekitar (JAS), Jabatan Mineral dan Geosains, Kumpulan Ikram Sdn Bhd dan MPAJ. Laporan lengkap akan dikemukakan kepada TPM selaku pengerusi Jawatankuasa Pengurusan dan Bantuan Bencana Pusat sebelum mesyuarat Kabinet.
Berita Minggu pada 4 Jun 2006 mengetengahkan penjelasan pakar tentang kemungkinan kejadian tanah runtuh di Kampung Pasir, Hulu Klang pada hari Rabu, 30 Mei 2006 yang lalu. Menurut penjelasan tersebut, air bercampur tanah yang terkumpul di bahagian cerun yang ditarah, yang lemah strukturnya menyebabkan tekanan kuat di bahagian bawahnya. Campuran air dan tanah ini lalu menolak bawah tembok penahan cerun lalu menyebabkannya runtuh.
Setelah cerun ditarah dan ditambak, air mengalir melalui saluran yang terjadi daripada bentuk muka bumi dan bertakung di bawah kaki bukit yang ditambak. Cerun yang ditarah, ditambak menggunakan tanah dan batu yang dipercayai dijadikan laluan untuk kerja pembinaan projek perumahan di kawasan berkenaan. Selepas kejadian tanah runtuh, pergerakan tanah terus berlaku hingga menyebabkan ada kali lima dan lantai sebahagian rumah di Taman Zoo View (yang berhadapan dengan Kampung Pasir) kini dalam keadaan “tergantung”. Sebanyak 16 buah rumah yang terlibat.
Pergerakan tanah yang berlarutan itu menyebabkan lantai balkoni dan sebahagian ruang tamu beberapa rumah dalam keadaan tergantung. Kebanyakan pagar belakang rumah berkenaan runtuh sejak tragedi Rabu lalu.
Menariknya, ketika inipun, tiada usaha dari MPAJ atau pemaju untuk mengambil langkah segera menstabilkan cerun. Yang ada hanya beberapa pekerja menutup cerun runtuh dengan plastik.
Akhbar tersebut juga menceritakan bahawa MB Selangor, Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo mengakui Exco serta kakitangan jabatan dan agensi kerajaannya tidak turun padang memantau pembangunan di Selangor. Menurut MB Selangor lagi, “pembangunan di Selangor kini tertumpu di kawasan sensitif kerana semua kawasan tidak sensitif sudah dibangunkan, jadi pemantauan sangat penting”.
MB menjelaskan lagi bahawa kerajaan Selangor mempunyai bukti kukuh kesalahan pemaju, kontraktor dan jururunding projek pembangunan di kawasan itu. Ia termasuk pemaju Taman Zoo View yang gagal menyediakan sistem perparitan ketika memajukan kawasan berkenaan lebih 25 tahun lalu. Beliau difahamkan bahawa MPAJ sudah memanggil pemaju projek perumahan Ukay Bestari supaya mempercepatkan pembinaan tembok penahan, tetapi pemaju menyatakan bahawa mereka tiada dana, melainkan diberikan oleh Kerajaan.
Yang pasti mendapat untung ialah mereka yang membuat laporan teknikal hasil siasatan dan kontraktor-kontraktor yang diperlukan untuk melaksanakan cadangan-cadangan yang dikemukakan di dalam laporan.
Sikap kita?
Pertama, barangkali dah beratus kali kita mendengar pandangan dan perintah pemimpin untuk tidak lagi melakukan pembangunan di cerun bukit. Semuanya hanyalah mainan mulut. Seorang penulis emel menulis kepada TV3 pada Jumaat 2 Jun 2006 lalu bahawa MPAJ tidak akan mempunyai insentif untuk memperbaiki keadaan memandangkan bahawa dalam kes Highland Towers pada 1993 lalu, Mahkamah Persekutuan memihak kepada MPAJ. Yang menanggung kemalangan tetap anak bangsa kita.
Kedua, kelulusan projek dikatakan perlu diperketatkan. Soalnya apakah ini akan kekal sebagai mainan penyedap mulut atau benar-benar satu komitmen? Kerana dalam kelam-kabut kejadian ini, kita didedahkan dengan beberapa pembangunan cerun dan lereng bukit yang telah diluluskan. Pada Sabtu, 3 Jun 2006, kira-kira 1,00 orang penduduk di Taman Bukit Mas, Hulu Klang menyuarakan kebimbangan terhadap pembinaan projek pembangunan di lereng bukit berhampiran. Projek tersebut diluluskan oleh DBKL dan melibatkan pembinaan satu blok pangsapuri tujuh tingkat dan satu blok villa bandar enam tingkat merangkumi 74 unit kediaman di lereng curam dan lembut. Tanah di Hulu Klang bersifat granit terluluhawa yang mudah peroi dan menyimpan air menyebabkannya berisiko tinggi untuk tergelincir, tetapi pembangunan masih dibenarkan.
Ketiga, tiada sebarang runtuhan kecil yang tidak berbahaya kerana ia adalah simptom kepada tragedi yang mungkin lebih besar. Inilah kesimpulan yang dibuat oleh laporan awal Bahagian Kejuruteraan Cerun Bukit JKR, menurut Menteri Kerja Raya. Menurut laporan tersebut, tembok penahan bumi dikesan dibina pada bahagian yang lembut dan dasarnya tidak mencecah tanah yang keras. Aduan dari pihak penduduk perlu disiasat dan diambil tindakan sewajarnya, bukannya diketepikan. Pergerakan tanah dikesan sejak setahun, tetapi benteng penahan hanya baru siap minggu lalu.
Lentera 4 Jun 2006
Saturday, June 03, 2006
Muslims are trading respect for fear
The Sunday Times February 12, 2006
Muslims are trading respect for fear
Minette Marrin
Respect is not a right. Almost anything one can think of these days
is, supposedly, a right, and judging from the angry demands on all
sides for respect, one might easily be bamboozled into thinking
respect is somehow a right as well. Not so, rightly not.
Yet all the terrifying Muslim uprisings across the world in response
to the Danish cartoons have all been about a demand for respect, as
of right. They are demanding respect for religion, or at any rate for
their own religion and their own religious sensibilities. The same is
true of the more moderate demonstrations in London yesterday. Worse,
many westerners are penitentially admitting that Muslims do indeed
have a right to respect for their faith, and that it is wrong to
express disrespect for a religion. This is disastrous.
Yesterday’s demonstrations were organised by the new Muslim Action
Committee, which claims to represent more than 1m Muslims. They may
indeed be moderates, as they claim, yet what they say sounds anything
but moderate. They demand changes in the law and a strengthening of
the Press Complaints Commission code to outlaw any possible
publication of the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad in the UK. “What
is being called for,” said Faiz Siddiqi, the committee’s convenor,
“is a change of culture. In any civilised society, if someone says,
‘don’t insult me’, you do not, out of respect for them.”
Here in one sentence lies the entire, tangled problem; it is all
entwined round several different uses of the word “respect”. First of
all there is a tendentious conflation of respect for one’s religion
and respect for oneself. It may be true that in traditional Muslim
thought a perceived insult to the Prophet is an insult to the
believer, but in western culture there is a crucially important — and
highly prized — distinction. Freedom of speech depends on people
accepting that criticism of a belief, even aggressive, satirical or
offensive criticism, is not necessarily intended to insult a person
or an ethnic community.
Even in cases where perhaps it might be — where the criticism of a
belief is quite clearly disrespectful — then putting up with that is
the price of freedom of speech, and a price well worth paying.
Freedom of speech is the keystone of western civilisation, of
individuality, of scientific discovery, of wealth and of democracy;
without it, the entire edifice would collapse.
Indeed it is arguable that it has been the lack of freedom of speech,
along with an excessive respect for authority and religion, that has
for centuries held back and impoverished the once great civilisation
of Islam. Faiz Siddiqi’s call for a change of culture is indeed
nothing less, and a very destructive and retrograde one at that.
Of course, Siddiqi is right in saying that in any civilised society,
most people do generally avoid insulting other people’s beliefs, but
that is not necessarily out of respect for them, or for their
beliefs. It is very often out of an overriding respect for something
impersonal — for the benefits of civility in a civil society and
above all for the ideal of tolerance.
I personally have always been enraged by Catholic teachings, or by
Maoist doctrines but I have no desire to insult Catholics or Maoists
personally, merely a temptation to argue with some of them. I have
been to parties where thumping crooks have been treated with great
civility by other guests, for a similar reason. But it would be wrong
to mistake that sort of civility for respect.
Respect cannot be demanded, or imposed by a free state. It can only
be freely given. The demand of Muslims for uncritical — and legally
binding — respect for their beliefs is simply not one that can be met
in a society like ours. And the failure, by some Muslims at least, to
perceive these distinctions is, without exaggeration, tragic.
It is a failure for which we in the West — we in this country — bear
a great deal of responsibility. Until very recently, the doctrine of
multiculturalism reigned supreme here. For at least 15 years public
services and the liberal media have been riddled with the idea that
all cultures are equally deserving of respect, and that the values of
the host culture are not supreme, but on the contrary, rather racist
and oppressive (so possibly not equally deserving of respect). At
last this has come to be understood. There are countless examples:
the finding of the Climbie report that social workers were inclined
to apply different standards to different cultures, and therefore
overlooked or explained away what was happening to the wretched
Victoria; a similar lack of will to question religious practices such
as exorcism.
Others include the decision of HM chief inspector of prisons not to
allow the English flag in English prisons, in case the red cross
might be offensive to Muslims; the blind eye that is turned to
physical punishment of young children and long hours in some
madrasahs; the shameful tolerance here of domestic violence and
arranged marriages of convenience to highly unsuitable strangers, in
the name of religion; the public library in Buckinghamshire that
banned a notice of a Christian carol service and yet held a party to
celebrate Eid at the end of Ramadan. These things are done,
apparently, out of a desire to show equal respect to all faiths.
Quite why large sections of the host culture here were taken in by
the confused claims of multiculturalism remains a mystery to me. But
the consequence is that many Muslims (among others) have come to
believe that we agree that their religion and culture are entitled to
unquestioning respect. They must have seen that the post-Christian
majority, especially in the state sector, has been mired in an
unthinking relativism, and has lost the conviction to stand up for
essential western values.
What’s more these state organisations have humbly accepted the charge
that they are institutionally racist, which has further demoralised
them. This is a very extreme form of trahison des clercs — the
betrayal of the functionaries. It is hardly surprising, now, that the
more extreme and politicised Muslims and their unthinking hangers on
feel entitled, in defiance of our greatest freedoms, to demand
respect from us, as of right. The tragedy is that what they are now
getting from the rest of us is not respect at all, but fear, posing
as respect.
Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.
Muslims are trading respect for fear
Minette Marrin
Respect is not a right. Almost anything one can think of these days
is, supposedly, a right, and judging from the angry demands on all
sides for respect, one might easily be bamboozled into thinking
respect is somehow a right as well. Not so, rightly not.
Yet all the terrifying Muslim uprisings across the world in response
to the Danish cartoons have all been about a demand for respect, as
of right. They are demanding respect for religion, or at any rate for
their own religion and their own religious sensibilities. The same is
true of the more moderate demonstrations in London yesterday. Worse,
many westerners are penitentially admitting that Muslims do indeed
have a right to respect for their faith, and that it is wrong to
express disrespect for a religion. This is disastrous.
Yesterday’s demonstrations were organised by the new Muslim Action
Committee, which claims to represent more than 1m Muslims. They may
indeed be moderates, as they claim, yet what they say sounds anything
but moderate. They demand changes in the law and a strengthening of
the Press Complaints Commission code to outlaw any possible
publication of the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad in the UK. “What
is being called for,” said Faiz Siddiqi, the committee’s convenor,
“is a change of culture. In any civilised society, if someone says,
‘don’t insult me’, you do not, out of respect for them.”
Here in one sentence lies the entire, tangled problem; it is all
entwined round several different uses of the word “respect”. First of
all there is a tendentious conflation of respect for one’s religion
and respect for oneself. It may be true that in traditional Muslim
thought a perceived insult to the Prophet is an insult to the
believer, but in western culture there is a crucially important — and
highly prized — distinction. Freedom of speech depends on people
accepting that criticism of a belief, even aggressive, satirical or
offensive criticism, is not necessarily intended to insult a person
or an ethnic community.
Even in cases where perhaps it might be — where the criticism of a
belief is quite clearly disrespectful — then putting up with that is
the price of freedom of speech, and a price well worth paying.
Freedom of speech is the keystone of western civilisation, of
individuality, of scientific discovery, of wealth and of democracy;
without it, the entire edifice would collapse.
Indeed it is arguable that it has been the lack of freedom of speech,
along with an excessive respect for authority and religion, that has
for centuries held back and impoverished the once great civilisation
of Islam. Faiz Siddiqi’s call for a change of culture is indeed
nothing less, and a very destructive and retrograde one at that.
Of course, Siddiqi is right in saying that in any civilised society,
most people do generally avoid insulting other people’s beliefs, but
that is not necessarily out of respect for them, or for their
beliefs. It is very often out of an overriding respect for something
impersonal — for the benefits of civility in a civil society and
above all for the ideal of tolerance.
I personally have always been enraged by Catholic teachings, or by
Maoist doctrines but I have no desire to insult Catholics or Maoists
personally, merely a temptation to argue with some of them. I have
been to parties where thumping crooks have been treated with great
civility by other guests, for a similar reason. But it would be wrong
to mistake that sort of civility for respect.
Respect cannot be demanded, or imposed by a free state. It can only
be freely given. The demand of Muslims for uncritical — and legally
binding — respect for their beliefs is simply not one that can be met
in a society like ours. And the failure, by some Muslims at least, to
perceive these distinctions is, without exaggeration, tragic.
It is a failure for which we in the West — we in this country — bear
a great deal of responsibility. Until very recently, the doctrine of
multiculturalism reigned supreme here. For at least 15 years public
services and the liberal media have been riddled with the idea that
all cultures are equally deserving of respect, and that the values of
the host culture are not supreme, but on the contrary, rather racist
and oppressive (so possibly not equally deserving of respect). At
last this has come to be understood. There are countless examples:
the finding of the Climbie report that social workers were inclined
to apply different standards to different cultures, and therefore
overlooked or explained away what was happening to the wretched
Victoria; a similar lack of will to question religious practices such
as exorcism.
Others include the decision of HM chief inspector of prisons not to
allow the English flag in English prisons, in case the red cross
might be offensive to Muslims; the blind eye that is turned to
physical punishment of young children and long hours in some
madrasahs; the shameful tolerance here of domestic violence and
arranged marriages of convenience to highly unsuitable strangers, in
the name of religion; the public library in Buckinghamshire that
banned a notice of a Christian carol service and yet held a party to
celebrate Eid at the end of Ramadan. These things are done,
apparently, out of a desire to show equal respect to all faiths.
Quite why large sections of the host culture here were taken in by
the confused claims of multiculturalism remains a mystery to me. But
the consequence is that many Muslims (among others) have come to
believe that we agree that their religion and culture are entitled to
unquestioning respect. They must have seen that the post-Christian
majority, especially in the state sector, has been mired in an
unthinking relativism, and has lost the conviction to stand up for
essential western values.
What’s more these state organisations have humbly accepted the charge
that they are institutionally racist, which has further demoralised
them. This is a very extreme form of trahison des clercs — the
betrayal of the functionaries. It is hardly surprising, now, that the
more extreme and politicised Muslims and their unthinking hangers on
feel entitled, in defiance of our greatest freedoms, to demand
respect from us, as of right. The tragedy is that what they are now
getting from the rest of us is not respect at all, but fear, posing
as respect.
Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)