Isnin, 22 Ogos 2011

Kerabu Bersuara ®

Kerabu Bersuara ®

Kos perjudian atasi hasil pendapatan

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 06:00 AM PDT


SM Mohamed Idris

Persatuan Pengguna Pulau Pinang (CAP) menyokong sepenuhnya kenyataan Menteri Kesihatan baru-baru ini bahawa kementerian itu menganggap perjudian satu penyakit dan ketagihan yang serius, sesuatu yang telah lama CAP perjuangkan.

Kami merasakan bahawa ini adalah satu permulaan yang baik dan satu langkah untuk menuju ke arah yang betul tetapi perundangan yang tegas diperlukan untuk mengelakkan orang ramai mendekati dan mudah untuk berjudi.

CAP ingin menarik perhatian terhadap kesan perjudian dan menggesa kerajaan menangani dengan segera masalah ini. Kami kesal dengan tindakan 'tunggu dan lihat' atau sebarang inisiatif yang menangani simptom atau kesan negatif perjudian dengan tidak mempedulikan sumber atau faktor penyebab.

Ketagihan terhadap perjudian merentasi etnik, usia, status sosioekonomi dan jantina. Berjudi untuk keseronokan atau untuk menghabiskan masa lapang dengan mudah boleh menjadi ketagih, yang kemudiannya dikaitkan pula dengan bahaya terhadap mental, sosial dan fizikal.

Wang yang sepatutnya digunakan untuk membayar bil, cukai, dan untuk lain-lain keperluan keluarga sebagai ganti digunakan untuk berjudi. Ketagihan itu telah menyebabkan hilangnya wang simpanan, tabungan pendidikan anak-anak, bayaran perumahan, tabungan persaraan, dan wang untuk urusan penting yang lain.

Mereka terpaksa berbohong kepada sesiapa sahaja atau meminjam daripada keluarga dan rakan atau lebih malang lagi meminjam daripada along untuk mengekalkan tabiat berjudi mereka.

Perjudian boleh menghancurkan atau memusnahkan hubungan, dan membawa kepada kekecewaan yang menyebabkan mereka bertindak secara haram seperti mencuri daripada perniagaan, pelanggan atau majikan mereka.

Penagih judi juga mungkin melakukan jenayah untuk membiayai perjudian mereka, menyebabkan bahaya kepada mangsa dan keluarga mereka serta diri sendiri dan melibatkan kos dalam sektor keadilan jenayah.

Kos sosial perjudian amat besar dan jauh mengatasi faedah ekonomi kepada kerajaan. Dikatakan bahawa masalah seorang penjudi memberi kesan kepada 7 - 17 orang yang lain, menunjukkan sebahagian besar penduduk menghadapi bahaya daripada masalah perjudian seperti kemusnahan kewangan, kehancuran perhubungan, keganasan rumah tangga, aktiviti jenayah, kemurungan dan bunuh diri. Kesan penagihan judi amat luas dan dalam.

CAP juga mengalu-alukan rancangan penubuhan majlis negara pada tahun ini untuk melihat pelbagai layanan dan program kesedaran pendidikan untuk menangani "masalah perjudian" di negara ini.

Bagaimanapun kami merayu kerajaan agar melaksanakan langkah yang berikut:

Tarik balik cabutan khas

Menggalakkan perjudian bukanlah jawapan kepada rangsangan ekonomi atau mengumpulkan sumber hasil kerajaan daripada cukai aktiviti perjudian.

Kerajaan perlu mengurangkan loteri dan cabutan mingguan empat nombor ekor (4-D), Toto dan lumba kuda oleh syarikat perjudian serta cabutan khas untuk mengurangkan tabiat berjudi. Kerajaan perlu dilihat menangani masalah ini sebagai ganti menghasilkan dan membolehkan ketagihan berjudi.

Pendekatan kesihatan awam

Kita perlu mempunyai pendekatan kesihatan awam yang digunakan untuk mengatasi bahaya perjudian termasuk masalah judi. Contohnya di New Zealand, Kementerian Kesihatan di sana mempunyai 'Program Kesedaran dan Pendidikan Masalah Perjudian' untuk meningkatkan kesedaran dan menggalakkan bagi mendapatkan bantuan untuk mereka yang memerlukan.

Melalui program kesihatan awam, kerajaan boleh menyedarkan masyarakat untuk memahami bahaya perjudian dan membina sokongan awam bagi langkah mencegah dan mengurangkan perjudian, bagi menghasilkan komuniti dan keluarga yang lebih selamat.

Pada masa yang sama, kaki judi perlu diberi kaunseling dan sokongan untuk mencegah atau menguruskan tabiat perjudian mereka yang berisiko. Ini akan membantu menghapuskan bahaya yang dicetuskan oleh individu atau keluarga oleh perjudian.

Perundangan

Kita memerlukan peraturan dan perundangan yang lebih ketat dan tegas terhadap pelbagai bentuk perjudian yang telah menular dalam masyarakat moden termasuk perjudian dalam talian. Hampir kepada kasino dan amalan perjudian lain secara langsung berkaitan perjudian.

Peraturan perlu dikuatkuasakan untuk melindungi orang ramai daripada kemudahan untuk memuaskan tabiat berjudi sama ada melalui kasino, mesin judi atau melalui cabutan.

Matlamat utama 'kerajaan rakyat' seharusnya adalah untuk mengurangkan insiden perjudian dan masalah perjudian dan kesan ketagihan judi terhadap kehidupan individu dan masyarakat.

Kita perlu menimbangkan bagaimana ramainya rakyat Malaysia yang kerugian akibat berjudi - kos terhadap setiap orang tidak dapat diukur dan pertimbangan peningkatan kedai judi yang boleh didapati dan kekurangan perlindungan terhadap tabiat itu.

Kerajaan telah mewujudkan kaki judi yang telah menjadi ketagih kepadanya setiap minggu dan cabutan khas yang dibenarkan. Adalah tidak benar perjudian memacu pembangunan ekonomi dan kosnya terhadap keluarga, masyarakat dan negara mestilah dipertimbangkan dengan serius.

Lebih banyak kemudahan untuk berjudi akan menimbulkan masalah yang lebih besar, kami amat berharap kerajaan akan meletakkan kesihatan rakyat negara ini lebih utama mengatasi faedah daripada perjudian.
Penulis adalah presiden, Persatuan Pengguna Pulau Pinang (CAP)

Majlis Syura Untuk Cari Penyelesaian Isu Pemeriksaan JAIS di Gereja

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 05:15 AM PDT


Kerajaan Selangor akan menubuhkan Majlis Syura dalam usaha menyelesaikan pertikaian berhubung pemeriksaan di Gereja Methodist Damansara Utama (DUMC) oleh Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS) pada 3 Ogos lalu.

Majlis Penasihat Syura ini akan dianggotai Menteri Besar, Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim, Mufti Negeri Selangor, Dato' Setia Mohd Tamyes Abd Wahid dan Timbalannya, Dato' Abd Majid Omar.

"Idea penubuhan Majlis Penasihat Syura ini dicadangkan oleh DYMM Sultan Selangor ketika kami mengadakan perbincangan pada minggu lalu. Saya menghargai nasihat baginda agar mencari jalan terbaik untuk menyelesaikan isu ini secara berhemah dan memuaskan," kata Menteri Besar.

"Saya juga telah berjumpa dengan Mufti Negeri Selangor dan kami telah merumuskan formula untuk dirujuk oleh Majlis Syura," kata beliau lagi.

Majlis ini akan mengkaji isu-isu yang membimbangkan masyarakat Islam dan komuniti bukan Islam di Selangor untuk dibangunkan garis panduan demi memastikan sikap hormati menghormati dan harmoni pelbagi kaum dan agama terus terpelihara.

Menteri Besar juga berkata majlis ini akan mendapatkan maklumat daripada JAIS dan penganjur majlis makan malam itu, Harapan Komuniti. Sekiranya perlu, Majlis Syura juga akan memanggil DUMC dan 12 orang Islam yang menghadiri majlis makan malam di gereja berkenaan ketika pemeriksaan itu dilakukan.

Majlis ini juga akan mendengar dan meneliti sedalam-dalamnya laporan penuh oleh JAIS termasuk memeriksa maklumat, bukti dan pita rakaman mengenai pemeriksaan itu.

"Keutamaan Kerajaan Selangor ialah memastikan setiap aspek pentadbiran mematuhi prinsip keadilan, telus, amalan pentadbiran yang baik dan berintegriti," kata Menteri Besar.

Kerajaan Selangor mengulangi kesediaan untuk berbincang dan berdialog untuk menjaga keharmonian dan keamanan yang telah lama wujud di kalangan masyarakat berbilang kaum dan agama di negara ini.

Dikeluarkan oleh

SEKRETARIAT AKHBAR

PEJABAT DATO' MENTERI BESAR SELANGOR
____________________________________________________________________

PRESS STATEMENT

AUGUST 23, 2011

SYURA CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL TO FIND SOLUTION ON CHURCH EXAMINATION BY JAIS

The Selangor Government will establish a Syura consultative council in its efforts to resolve the matter regarding the examination of Damansara Utama Methodist Church last Aug 3 by Selangor Islamic Religous Department (Jais).

The council will consist of three members; Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim, state mufti Dato' Tamyes Abdul Wahid and his deputy Dato' Abdul Majid Omar.

"The idea to form this Syura council came from DYMM Tuanku Sultan when we had a discussion over the matter last week. I appreciate Tuanku's advice regarding how best to resolve this matter satisfactorily," said the Menteri Besar.

"I have also met the Mufti and we have formulated the term of reference for the council."

The council will explore areas of concern to both Muslim and non-Muslim communities in Selangor as well as develop guidelines to ensure mutual respect and harmony between people of different races and religion.

He also said the council will be seeking input from Jais and the host of the thanksgiving dinner, NGO Harapan Komuniti. If necessary, the council will also call the Damansara Utama Methodist Church and the 12 Muslims who were questions by Jais during the examination.

The council will also hear out Jais' full report on the examination as well as examine related documents and evidence, including video tapes of the incident.

"The state's priority is to ensure that every aspect of our administration adheres to the principles of justice, transparency, good governance and integrity," said the Menteri Besar.

The state government reiterates that it is always open to engagement and dialogue regarding the harmonious and mutually respectful coexistence of different religious communities.

PRESS SECRETARIAT

OFFICE OF DATO MENTERI BESAR SELANGOR

Syoknya Puasa! - "Muhasabah Ramadhan" (bersama Tuan Guru Nik Abd Aziz Nik Mat)

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 05:00 AM PDT



Muhasabah Ramadhan disampaikan oleh Ulama' Terkenal, Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat.

Follow us on:
http://oneheartsolution.com/
http://www.facebook.com/oneheartsolution
http://www.facebook.com/syoknyapuasa

Anwar Seru Kerajaan Malaysia Siasat Pengambilalihan ESSO

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 04:00 AM PDT


SHAH ALAM 22 OGOS : Kerajaan Malaysia perlu menyiasat pengambilalihan aset hiliran Esso Malaysia oleh San Miguel Corp dari Filipina baru-baru ini jika mereka benar-benar serius mahu memupuk budaya urus tadbir korporat yang tegas dalam negara ini.

Menurut Penasihat Ekonomi Selangor, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim membuat gesaan itu susulan pengambil alihan aset hiliran Esso Malaysia pada harga USD610 million yang jauh lebih rendah daripada nilai pasarannya.

Malah, Anwar turut menggesa agar Suruhanjaya Sekuriti dan kumpulan pemerhati pemegang saham minoriti meneliti urusniaga itu untuk memastikan kepentingan pemegang saham minoriti tidak diabaikan.

Menurut Anwar, San Miguel Corp sebelum ini mempunyai Mirzan Mahathir, anak mantan Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir sebagai salah seorang pengarahnya selepas Mirzan memperolehi 19.9 peratus saham dalam konglomerat itu pada harga RM2.9.

Walaupun Mirzan kini bukan lagi pengarah dalam syarikat itu, beliau kekal sebagai Pengarah Petron Corporation, syarikat bersekutu

San Miguel Corp yang memiliki rangkaian loji penapis dan pengedar petrol di Filipina.

"Oleh itu, persoalan akan timbul samada pengambilalihan aset hiliran Esso itu berlaku pada harga yang sebegitu rendah bagi pihak Mirzan?

"Ini menjadi lebih penting kerana abangnya, Mokhzani Mahathir memperolehi sekian banyak manfaat daripada sektor huluan industri gas dan minyak melalui Kenchana Petroleum; terutamanya apabila bapa mereka merupakan penasihat Petronas," kata Anwar dalam kenyataan medianya.

Tambahnya lagi, sektor korporat Malaysia perlu bebas dari amalan urusniaga 'bawah meja' yang dibudayakan BN DAN menjejaskan kepentingan orang ramai.

Penguasaan Mirzan dalam sektor korporat tanahair dengan bantuan kerajaan Umno BN bukan satu perkara baru.Beliau juga adalah Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif Kumpulan Kencana Petroleum yang memperolehi subsidi daripada kerajaan Umno sebagai pembekal tenaga bebas (IPP) dalam negara.

Kalau benar Najib dan Muhyiddin tidak sehaluan, atasi secara demokrasi sebenar

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 03:00 AM PDT


Saya pernah mendengar sedikit tentang masalah yang dihadapi oleh Najib dan Muhyiddin yang mengatakan mereka sudah tidak sehaluan dan tidak selenggang lagi. Pada mulanya tidak pula saya mengambil apa yang saya dengar itu sebagai isu besar kerana saya berpendapat yang mereka tidak akan berpisah kerana UMNO sekarang ini sudah pun di dalam keadaan yang mencemaskan.

Cerita awal perbalahan di antara Musa Hitam dengan Dr Mahathir dinafikan oleh semua pihak tetapi beberapa bulan selepas itu Musa meletakan jawatan sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan telah terbongkar segala masalah yang ada di antara beliau berdua. Cerita Anwar tidak bersetuju juga dengan Dr Mahathir dinafikan oleh kedua-dua belah pihak, malahan semasa perayaan kemerdekaan di P Pinang mereka berdua membuat kenyataan yang mereka masih bersatu dan tidak ada perbalahan.

Tetapi hanya tiga minggu selepas itu pemecatan Anwar sudah hampir menjadi kenyataan dan akhirnya Anwar benar-benar dipecat. Semasa isu Mahathir Musa, bekas Timbalan Perdana Menteri itu telah meletakan jawatan pada Februari 1986 dan kembali menentang Mahathir selepas beliau berada di luar kerajaan.

Tetapi jika benar pergesiran di antara Najib dan Muhyiddin,ianya tentulah berkaitan dengan perselisihan faham tentang cara Najib mengendalikan negara dan kerajaan yang kian hari kian lemah. Berdasarkan kepada pengalaman lama, mereka tentulah tidak akan mewujudkan keadaan yang boleh diragui rakyat kerana Muhyiddin dan ahli jemaah Menteri sepatutnya mengambil 'accountability' bersama. Kelemahan Najib adalah juga kelemahan Muhyiddin dan semua jemaah Menterinya. Mengeluarkan kenyataan-kenyataan yang bercanggah di antara Najib dengan Muhyiddin merupakan satu perkara yang amat merbahaya untuk perpaduan rakyat dan negara.

Najib hanyalah seorang pemimpin yang mengetuai kongregasi kepimpinan yang sepatutnya menegur dan membina kerajaan dan negara secara bersama. Jika berlaku juga keadaan yang seperti ini maka kita masih lagi tidak menerima konsep tanggungjawab bersama. Jika ada usaha Muhyiddin dan orang-orangnya untuk menurunkan Najib untuk mengambil alihnya maka ini merupakan keadaan yang tidak sepatutnya wujud.Tindakan itu adalah tindakan 'insubordination' yang amat serius.

Dalam semangat demokrasi, jika seorang ahli jemaah kabinet itu tidak bersetuju dengan cara Najib mengendalikan negara atau apa-apa dasar yang telah dilaksanakan, maka ahli kabinet itu wajar meletakan jawatan seperti yang dilakukan oleh Musa Hitam dahulu.

Selagi Muhyiddin tidak meletakan jawatan maka tanggungjawab bersama itu tetap dipikul oleh beliau. Jika Najib pula yang mengambil tindakan berhenti dahulu maka seluruh kabinetnya mesti meletakan jawatan bersama beliau (Najib) kerana mereka semua adalah pilihan dan jemaah Najib dalam mentadbir negara. Perletakan jawatan Najib itu bermakna perletakan seluruh kabinet lantikan beliau.

Jika Muhyiddin benar-bernar tidak bersetuju dengan Najib beliau harus melepaskan jawatan beliau untuk memisahkan beliau dari tanggungjawab bersama tadi. Muhyiddin tidak boleh melakukan perkara seperti yang dikatakan sebagai telunjuk lurus kelengkeng berkait di belakang Najib. Ini merupakan satu tindakan yang sangat buruk untuk parti UMNO yang mereka ketuai itu dan selanjutnya akan menjejaskan BN yang sudah sedia lemah pada masa ini.

Jika Muhyiddin melakukan tindakan politik peribadi seperti yang dicakapkan oleh beberapa pihak maka tindakan itu merupakan tindakan 'insubordination' terhadap kerajaan dan ini merupakan kesalahan yang amat serius. Jika benar Muhyiddin mempunyai sebab yang kukuh untuk menurunkan Najib beliau perlu melakukannya secara demokrasi dan semangatnya sekali.

Apakah dia demokrasi dan semangatnya itu?

Muhyiddin perlu berterus terang dangan bossnya itu. Berbincang segala masalah dengan baik dan jika perlu desak beliau (Najib) untuk bersara dan memberikan peluang mentadbir kepada beliau. Muhyiddin perlu terbuka dalam perbincangan dan minta Najib supaya mengubah cara beliau untuk memperbaiki imej kerajaan di mata rakyat.

Sesudah berdepan dengan telus dan Najib masih lagi tidak berubah maka tindakan selanjutnya jika Muhyiddin serius untuk memperbaikkani keadaan ialah dengan meletakan jawatan untuk menunjukan kepada ahli UMNO dan rakyat keseluruhannya tentang ketidak yakinan beliau terhadap kepimpinan Najib. Muhyiddin dan semua jemaah Menteri yang sama-sama tidak bersetuju itu patut meletakan jawatan.

Setelah melakukan itu barulah Muhyiddin terlepas dari tanggung jawab bersama tadi. Sebagai seorang nombor dua dalam kepimpinan parti maka UMNO boleh mengadakan persidangan tergempar kerana ini perlu untuk mempastikan parti dibawa bersama di dalam proses penyelesaiannya.

Musa Hitam telah meletakan jawatan beliau sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri pada awal 1986 dahulu. Semasa perletakan jawatan Musa itu banyak pihak telah mendesak Dr Mahathir untuk memanggil satu perhimpunan khas termasuk bekas Perdana Menteri Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra dan Husein Onn. Tetapi Mahathir tidak mengindahkan seruan ini kerana Mahathir takut jika perhimpunan Khas itu akan mengambil keputusan untuk Musa menarik balik keputusan bersara itu.

Jika keputusan itu berlaku maka Musa akan menjadi kuat dan jika Musa kembali kepada kedudukan beliau sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri ianya akan menjejaskan kedudukan Dr Mahathir pula. Oleh kerana Mahathir bukan seorang yang mempunyai semangat demokrasi yang tinggi Mahathir tidak berganjak dengan keputusan untuk tidak memanggil perhimpunan agong khas itu. Maka ahli-ahli UMNO telah berpecah belah kerana tidak di selesaikan dengan mandat perhimpuan agong khas itu.

Perpecahan yang di hasilkan oleh isu inilah bermulanya UMNO berpecah sehingga membawa kepada pertandingan bersejarah pada tahun 1987 yang membawa Dr Mahathir untuk menubuhkan UMNO baru tajaan beliau sendiri pada tahun 1988.

Dalam kes Muhyiddin ini, jika beliau benar-benar merasakan yang Najib sudah tersasar dan akan menjejaskan parti serta kerajaan, beliau harus berhadapan dengan Najib dan memberikan pandangan bagaimana Najib patut lakukan untuk berubah, Jika itu gagal dan Najib masih berada di tempat dan jawatannya itu maka satu-satunya tindakan yang beliau perlu lakukan ialah dengan meletakan jawatan bersama mereka yang sehaluan dengan beliau dari jemaah kabinet.

Jika Muhyiddin melakukan ini maka beliau akan nampak bermain-main dengan semangat demokrasi yang tulin. Sesungguhnya bukan tidak ada asas untuk Muhyiddin melakukan gerakan untuk memperbetulkan keadaan dalam UMNO. Hanya beliau perlu melakukannya secara yang betul tanpa melakukan 'insubordination' terhadap Najib dengan 'intrigue' dan helah politik yang tidak beretika. Lakukan secara gentleman. Jika dilakukan secara gentleman tentulah ada risiko untuk gagal dan itu merupakan fenomena biasa dalam politik berdemokrasi.

Jika Muhyiddin lakukan secara ini, kalah menang adalah biasa tetapi nama beliau akan terpahat sebagai seorang yang serius untuk melakukan kebaikan untuk partinya. Setiap tindakan mesti ada harganya, Tidak ada yang percuma.

Najib di sebaliknya pula perlu juga sensitif terhadap keadaan yang menimpa beliau, Perdana Menteri itu patut meletakan jawatan secara sukarela. Bukan tidak ada contoh yang berlaku dalam sejarah kepimpinan negara. Husein Onn telah mengumumkan yang beliau tidak akan mempertahankan jawatannya sebagai Presiden UMNO setelah beliau dicabar oleh Sulaiman Palestin.

Husein menganggapnya sebagai petanda yang beliau tidak lagi mendapat sokongan bulat dari ahli-ahli di bawah dan jika beliau terus berada di kerusi PM itu beliau takut akan memecah belahkan kepimpinan negara. Contoh ini merupakan contoh yang berlaku di kalangan keluarga Najib sendiri kerana Husein adalah bapa saudara kepada beliau. Tidak ada sebab kenapa Najib tidak mahu menerima contoh yang baik ini semata-mata untuk perpaduan kepimpinan dan rakyat yang ramai ini.

Bagi Muhyiddin jika beliau mahukan semuanya secara percuma, itulah yang menyebabkan politik kita berkecamuk kerana untuk mendapat secara percuma tidak ada jalan lain selain dari melakukan 'insubordination' tadi bagi memaksa Najib meletakan jawatan untuk beliau mengambil alih. Itulah yang selalunya menyebabkan parti berpecah belah sehingga menjejaskan rakyat yang ramai.

Kita mesti laksanakan demokrasi dengan semangatnya sekali. Hentikan bercakap tentang demokrasi acuan sendiri untuk menghalalkan tindakan mencemari demokrasi itu untuk kepentingan politik peribadi. Mengambil demokrasi sebenar separuh dan membuang separuh yang tidak memihak kepada kita akan hanya melumpuhkan sistem itu akhirnya.

http://aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com/2011/08/kalau-benar-najib-dan-muhyiddin-tidak.html

BN kering idea, terpaksa tiru Pakatan Rakyat

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 02:00 AM PDT


Komentar Roketkini

22 OGOS – Dalam keadaan serba daif tanpa mempunyai peruntukan dana berbilion ringgit, Jawatankuasa Bajet Pakatan Rakyat berjaya menghasilkan kajian untuk membebaskan rakyat daripada belenggu ekonomi, dengan menumpukan kepada 60 peratus isi rumah Malaysia yang berpendapatan kurang daripada RM3,000 sebulan.

Dua minggu setelah jawatankuasa Pakatan tersebut membuat pengumuman itu, kerajaan Barisan Nasional tanpa segan-silu telah meniru pendekatan itu.

Semalam, kerajaan BN mengumumkan Unit Pengurusan Prestasi dan Pelaksanaan (Pemandu) sedang mengenal pasti langkah terbaik bagi membantu golongan berpendapatan kurang RM3,000 sebulan.

Media melaporkan Menteri Kewangan Kedua, Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Mohamad Hanadzlah menyatakan kerajaan BN memandang serius perkara itu kerana mendapati golongan yang berpendapatan kurang RM3,000 sebulan menerima kesan secara langsung ekoran kenaikan harga barang.

Pandai tiru, malu mengaku

Walau pun BN malu untuk mengakui ia meniru cadangan pembangkang, ini tidak menjadi hal kepada Pakatan kerana ia adalah sebahagian usaha untuk mewujudkan satu budaya baru, iaitu budaya berbincang dasar dan persaingan dasar yang sihat dan ilmiah supaya kesimpulan yang baik dapat dicapai.

"Dan yang terbaik itu perlu dilaksanakan oleh mana-mana kerajaan demi kebaikan rakyat," kata Ahli Parlimen Bukit Bendera Liew Chin Tong yang menganggotai jawatankuasa bajet alternatif Pakatan.

Beliau menambah, Pakatan telah pun bersedia bersikap terbuka jika BN berhasrat untuk meniru bajet Pakatan, asalkan yang beroleh faedah ialah rakyat jelata.

Liew turut berharap BN meniru idea Pakatan secara lebih meluas lagi, termasuk mengubah dasarnya kerana tumpuan masa kini terhadap kroni mereka sahaja telah menjejaskan kehidupan rakyat.

Apa pun, walau pun memang baik untuk BN meniru perkara-perkara yang baik demi kebaikan rakyat, ia agak memalukan kerana BN terpaksa mencuri idea orang lain tanpa memberi pengiktirafan yang sewajarnya.

Apatha lagi apabila disedari bahawa berbilion ringgit wang rakyat dan hasil negara digunakan untuk mewujudkan pelbagai entiti yang semakin sukar untuk dihafal nama-mana mereka seperti Program Transformasi Ekonomi (ETP), Program Transformasi Kerajaan (GTP), Aktiviti Ekonomi Utama Nasional (NKEA), Bidang Keberhasilan Utama Negara (NKRA) dan banyak lagi.

Begitu juga dengan program-program ekonomi yang berbunyi seperti kedai cenderamata, contohnya kedai barang 1Malaysia di bawah Projek Transformasi Kedai Runcit (Tukar), yang mana ia pula diletakkan di bawah Projek-Projek Permulaan (EPP).

Apa guna kedai 1Malaysia jika kroni bermaharajalela

Jadi apa peranan kedai 1Malaysia jika masalah ekonomi yang berpunca daripada kemelut ekonomi cpitaan BN melalui kronisme dan salah guna kuasa terus berleluasa?

Masalahnya ialah walau pun puluhan singkatan nama diwujudkan dengan belanja yang amat besar, pembaziran, salah guna sumber kewangan dan member keutamaan kepada kroni masih menjadi amalan lumrah kerajaan BN.

Liew menjelaskan monopoli yang wujud sekarang menyebabkan rakyat menderita kesan kenaikan harga dan tekanan belanja keluarga, dan ini akan berterusan bagi bulan-bulan mendatang.

Sayangnya, apabila rakyat berdepan dengan masalah serius ini, kerajaan BN bersikap seperti melepaskan batuk di tangga. Selain program-program bersifat kosmetik yang indah dengan singkatan-singkatan nama, BN seperti mana biasa apabila gagal menyelesaikan masalah rakyat, hanya mampu menyalahkan pihak luar.

Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop, dipetik media sebagai berkata, kerajaan BN tidak mempunyai kuasa menentukan kenaikan harga barang kerana ia "ditentukan oleh pasaran dunia".

Persoalannya ialah, adakah pasaran dunia bertanggungjawab dengan keputusan kerajaan BN memberi monopoli padi dan beras kepada Bernas atau monopoli kartel MAS- Air Asia yang bakal menghadkan pilihan rakyat dan seterusnya menghadapi kemungkinan kenaikan tambang udara?

Persoalannya ialah, adakah pasaran dunia bertanggungjawab dengan keputusan kerajaan BN untuk memotong subsidi bagi barang dan perkhidmatan keperluan rakyat sedangkan subsidi untuk kroni-kroni dikekalkan?

Persoalannya ialah, adakah pasaran dunia bertanggungjawab dengan masalah korupsi, kronisme dan salah guna kuasa kerajaan BN yang menyebabkan ekonomi terbantut?

Mangsanya tetap rakyat jelata

Yang telah, sedang dan akan terus menjadi mangsa jika BN kekal berkuasa ialah rakyat jelata. Malah kalangan Melayu, khususnya yang berpendapatan rendah dan sederhana rendah, yang menyangka UMNO dan BN adalah pelindung mereka buat selama-lamanya adalah antara yang paling teruk dilanda kesan kemelut ekonomi negara.

Justeru, Timbalan Presiden PAS Mohamad Sabu, sewaktu melancarkan kempen anti-harga barang naik atau "Protes BN" semalam, telah meminta orang Melayu mengikis sikap acuh tak acuh berhubung isu rasuah dan salah guna dana awam.

Beliau berharap orang Melayu meniru sikap positif kaum Cina yang berani bertegas dalam pilihan raya untuk menolak calon-calon dari parti pemerintah yang tidak menunaikan amanah sebagai kerajaan yang bertanggungjawab.

Beliau turut meminta orang Melayu tidak terlalu emosi dengan bergantung kepada isu perkauman dan keagamaan yang telah dipolitikkan, sebaliknya perlu lebih sensitif kepada isu-isu pembaziran dan rasuah.

Sama ada BN mahu terus meniru idea Pakatan atau tidak, ia bukan persoalan utama. Isunya ialah sejauh mana rakyat sanggup menahan derita dibohongi BN, dan apabila BN terdesak, difitnah pula dengan isu-isu kaum dan agama. – Roketkini.com

Yang teraniaya akan beroleh kemenangan akhirnya – Oleh Amaluddin Zhafir

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 01:00 AM PDT


19 OGOS – Sebagai orang Melayu yang budayanya terkenal dengan sifat lemah lembut dan berbudi bahasa, ditambah pula dengan agama Islam yang menuntut umatnya melakukan kebaikan di muka bumi; apabila mendapat tahu tentang kejadian kebakaran di ibu pejabat DAP Pulau Pinang pagi semalam, mungkin yang pertama terdetik dalam fikiran kita ialah, "Aduh… Kenapa sampai begini sekali?"

Tentunya perasaan yang sama dikongsi oleh mereka dari kaum-kaum dan agama lain di bumi tercinta ini – manusia mana yang sanggup melakukan perbuatan terkutuk itu?

Apakah mereka yang melakukannya tidak sedar bahawa pejabat yang kecil itu berada sebaris dengan rumah-rumah rakyat jelata yang mungkin menjadi mangsa kebakaran jika api merebak pantas?

Daripada kejadian itu, tragedi yang menimpa pejabat parti politik yang telah menyumbang banyak jasa kepada warga Pulau Pinang itu terlalu ganas dan keji perbuatannya, dan seharusnya tidak patut dilakukan oleh mana-mana mereka yang waras akal fikirannya.

Alangkah bagusnya kalau masa dapat diputar kembali sebelum kejadian berlaku?

Bagaimana pun, kejadian itu tetap telah terjadi dan tidak mungkin sama sekali dipatah balik.

Empat hari sebelum kebakaran, pejabat itu telah disimbah cat berwarna merah. Merah, selalunya dikaitkan dengan semangat, atau dalam konteks membaling cat merah, ia bolehlah secara simboliknya dianggap sebagai 'kebencian yang terlalu mendalam terhadap DAP.'

Benci tanpa punca?

Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat Pulau Pinang, dalam tempoh tiga tahun telah memberikan pelbagai manfaat kepada semua kaum terutamanya Melayu yang sebelum ini dikatakan telah dianaktirikan oleh Gerakan-UMNO yang mewakili Barisan Nasional.

Tuduhan Melayu dipinggirkan itu datangnya dari UMNO sendiri walau pun ia sama-sama dalam gabungan pemerintah negeri sejak beberapa dekad lalu. Hanya selepas pilihan raya umum 2008, yang dipersalahkan adalah DAP dan Pakatan Rakyat.

Sudah berkali-kali dijelaskan tentang pencapaian hebat Pulau Pinang sejak pertukaran kerajaan negeri. Bukan sahaja ekonomi yang membabitkan pelaburan, pembangunan, peluang pekerjaan dan perniagaan; malah sumbangan kepada pegawai dan kakitangan awam termasuk guru-guru agama dan para hafiz serta mereka yang memerlukan seperti golongan miskin, orang kurang upaya, ibu tunggal dan warga emas sentiasa diberikan dari semasa ke semasa.

Jadi apa punca masalah kepada parti politik yang menjadi sebahagian daripada gabungan kerajaan negeri yang prihatin kepada keperluan rakyat yang dibenci begitu rupa sehingga dibakar pejabatnya?

Adakah kerana sifat masyarakat Malaysia yang emosi tak kena tempat sekarang ini mudah sangat terpengaruh dengan media harian di bawah kawalan UMNO-BN?

Mungkin anak-anak muda yang lebih selesa dengan budaya pop dapat memahami apa yang diperjuangkan oleh kumpulan-kumpulan rakyat prihatin yang mahu membebaskan Malaysia daripada cengkaman kejahilan politik dan budaya katak bawah tempurung.

Di sini, benarkan saya memetik lirik John Mayer bertajuk "Waiting For The World To Change" yang sesuai menggambarkan mainan media yang sudah lama gersang kewartawanan dan hanya mampu menawarkan propaganda murahan, yang mungkin membawa kepada kejadian ganas itu.

And when you trust your television

What you get is what you got

Cause when they own the information, oh

They can bend it all they want.

Dan terjemahan kepada lirik ini terbuka untuk tafsiran individu, malah boleh disalahtafsirkan jika mahu. Bukankah itu juga satu amalan biasa media kawalan UMNO-BN?

Kejamnya golongan yang taksub politik semata-mata, dengan menolak toleransi sesama kaum untuk Malaysia yang lebih majmuk.

Membakar bangunan itu bagai mencurahkan lagi minyak ke dalam api.

Masyarakat yang tidak berdosa akan takut. Mungkin apa yang bakal terjadi selepas ini akan membawa lebih banyak kecelaruan perpaduan, walau pun Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak kononnya ingin menyatukan kesemua kaum di bawah 1Malaysia – slogan yang semakin lama semakin hilang erti dan hasratnya.

Kenapa DAP selalu dianiaya?

DAP adalah parti yang paling lantang memperjuangkan keadilan tanpa mengira kaum dan agama demi kebaikan masyarakat Malaysia.

Terlalu banyak sumbangan mereka yang tidak dicatatkan melalui media besar yang sekian lama dijadikan perkakas UMNO-BN, malah beberapa pimpinan DAP dianggap sebagai 'bahaya.'

Apa yang bahayanya itu bermaksud bahaya kepada parti pemerintah yang takut perjuangan yang bertunjangkan keadilan manusia sejagat akan menumbangkan pemerintahan yang tidak melaksanakan tanggungjawab terhadap rakyat.

Bahaya itu juga disampaikan melalui mesej tersirat – oleh kerana ramai pemimpin DAP dari kalangan bukan Melayu dan bukan Islam, maka media serta lidah rasmi UMNO seperti Utusan Malaysia cuba mencipta 'bahaya' yang kononnya menimpa Melayu jika mendengar saranan DAP dan rakan-rakan Pakatan Rakyat yang kini sebulat suara mahukan perpaduan kaum dan toleransi antara agama.

Dalam maksud singkat, politik kotor lawan politik jernih.

Iltizam untuk keadilan dan keamanan

Selepas kejadian pembakaran ibu pejabat DAP Pulau Pinang itu, kita memohon agar rakyat Pulau Pinang khususnya kekal dengan kesabaran dan tidak terbuai dengan emosi perkauman.

Sejak lebih tiga tahun, kumpulan-kumpulan rasis telah mengadakan beberapa demonstrasi haram dan aksi ganas untuk menghasut rakyat bangun menentang kerajaan negeri yang sah tetapi mereka gagal kerana anak negeri Pulau Mutiara tahu membezakan yang bathil dengan yang benar.

Biarlah individu atau kumpulan tersebut terjun dengan labi-labi mereka. Sementara kita rakyat Malaysia berterusan melawan kejahatan dan kekejian sistem melalui reformasi untuk pilihan raya yang adil dan bersih.

Biarlah orang berniat jahat itu, jika ditahan polis nanti, diberikan keadilan yang sama rata mengikut undang-undang yang termaktub oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan 1957.

Apa-apa pun, mereka yang teraniaya diakhirnya akan mencapai kemenangan. Doa dan harapan orang-orang yang dizalimi dan dianiayai akan dimakbulkan akhirnya. – Roketkini.com

SU Agung PAS: Saya tidak akan minta maaf, jumpa di mahkamah

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 12:18 AM PDT



Oleh Syed Mu'az Syed Putra

KUALA LUMPUR, 22 Ogos — Kekal dengan pendirian mempunyai bukti mengaitkan Umno dalam pemeriksaan Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (Jais) ke atas sebuah gereja di Petaling Jaya awal bulan ini, Setiausaha Agung PAS Datuk Mustafa Ali menegaskan, beliau bersedia untuk bertemu parti Melayu terbesar itu di mahkamah.

Ketika dihubungi The Malaysian Insider, Mustafa yang kini berada di luar negara berkata, beliau tidak akan memohon maaf atau menarik balik dakwaan dilemparkan terhadap Umno sebelum ini.

Sebaliknya beliau dengan tegas mempertahankan dakwaannya itu.

"Kita jumpa di mahkamah, kalau nak saman itu hak dia (Umno Selangor), saya tidak akan minta maaf dan saya kekal dengan pendirian saya sebelum ini, kita jumpa di mahkamah," jawabnya.

Mustafa juga secara tegas berkata akan mengemukakan bukti itu ke mahkamah.

"Saya akan kemukakan bukti ke mahkamah jika dibawa ke mahkamah," katanya ringkas.

Hari ini, Umno Selangor berkata pihaknya akan memfailkan saman RM10 juta terhadap Mustafa berhubung dakwaan kononnya parti itu memainkan peranan dalam tindakan Jais ke atas pemeriksaan di Gereja Methodist Damansara Utama pada 3 Ogos lalu.

Menurut Setiausaha Umno Selangor Datuk Seri Ir Mohd Zin Mohamed, selain Mustafa, pihaknya juga akan mempertimbangkan pihak-pihak lain dalam saman yang akan difailkan selepas Aidilfitri.

Awal minggu lalu, Mustafa dalam satu sidang media di Kuala Terengganu mendakwa Umno berperanan dalam pemeriksaan yang dilakukan oleh Jais ke atas Gereja Methodist Damansara Utama.

Beliau juga mengatakan Umno memainkan peranan dalam mempolitikkan isu itu ekoran tindakan Jais yang sehingga kini belum mendedahkan hasil siasatan mereka ke atas gereja itu.

Tambah Mustafa, beliau sedia mendedahkan maklumat campur tangan Umno kepada Pengarah Jais Marzuki Hussin pada satu pertemuan yang dijadual untuk diadakan minggu lalu.

Tetapi ia ditangguhkan buat sementara waktu sehingga siasatan Jais selesai.

Gereja Methodist Damansara Utama menjadi tumpuan sejak beberapa minggu lalu selepas Jais melakukan pemeriksaan ke atas satu majlis makan malam muhibah anjuran Harapan Komuniti di premis itu.

Jais berkata tindakan mereka hanya bersifat pemeriksaan tetapi pengurusan gereja mendakwa agensi itu melakukan serbuan.

Kenyataan Penuh DS Anwar Ibrahim Di Mahkamah Tinggi Dalam Kes Tuduhan Liwat II

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 11:00 PM PDT

Diakhir hujah pembelaan DSAI mengingatkan hakim dengan ingatan Allah SWT dari Surah An-Nisa'-58 yang bermaksud : Sesungguhnya Allah menyuruh kamu supaya menyerahkan segala jenis amanah kepada ahlinya (yang berhak menerimanya), dan apabila kamu menjalankan hukum di antara manusia, (Allah menyuruh) kamu menghukum dengan adil. Sesungguhnya Allah dengan (suruhanNya) itu memberi pengajaran yang sebaik-baiknya kepada kamu. Sesungguhnya Allah sentiasa Mendengar, lagi sentiasa Melihat.


DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI DI KUALA LUMPUR

DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN

PERBICARAAN JENAYAH NO: 45-9-2009


PENDAKWA RAYA


LAWAN


DATO' SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM


STATEMENT FROM THE DOCK

My name is Anwar bin Ibrahim. I am the leader of the Opposition in Parliament. In the 1990s, I was the Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister until September 1998 when then Prime Minister Dato' Seri Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad sacked me after I had refused to resign. He had told me to resign or face dire consequences including criminal prosecution for alleged sexual and corruption offences. I refused and all hell broke loose. My unceremonious and grossly unjust dismissal simultaneously orchestrated with a trial by media under Mahathir's complete control triggered mass and widespread demonstrations throughout the country and launched the movement for change and reform known in our history as the Reformasi era.

After a series of show trials during which every rule in the book on evidence and criminal procedure was violated with impunity at the hands of the prosecution and the courts, I was convicted and sentenced to a total of 15 years.

THE CHARGE AGAINST ME

First and foremost, I categorically deny the charge against me. I want to state in no uncertain terms that I have never had any sexual relations with the complainant Mohamed Saiful. His allegation is a blatant and vicious lie and will be proved to be so.

This is a vile and despicable attempt at character assassination. In this regard, let me reiterate that they can do all they want to assassinate my character and sully my reputation and threaten me with another 20 years of imprisonment but mark my words, they won't be able to cow me into submission. On the contrary, it only serves to fortify my conviction that the truth will eventually prevail. Come what come may, I shall never surrender. With apologies to Jean Racine in Phaedra:

"You know how well your tyranny favours my temperament and strengthens me to guard the honour of my reputation."

Yes indeed, I will guard it with my life if I have to. And if I may bring the message closer to home, let me quote the words of Nelson Mandela in his speech made from the dock in the famous Rivonia show trial of 1963 under the Apartheid regime:

"I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."

Back in 1998, blindfolded and handcuffed, I was beaten senseless by the Inspector General of Police and left to die in the lock up at the Federal Police headquarters. However, it was by the grace of God that a few of the rank and file of the police took pity on me and nursed me to recover from the near lethal blows. There was then a cover up by Gani Patail (now the Attorney-General) and Musa Hassan (the IGP at the time that I was charged in this new episode) with the full knowledge and connivance of Dato' Yusuf, the current chief prosecutor in this trial. All these personalities were linked in one way or the other with the 1998 show trial and more insidiously with the suppression of evidence in respect of the black eye scandal and attempts to pervert the course of justice. These are the same personalities who are now actively involved in the current prosecution against me. Res ipsa loquitur, as they say, but in this regard I'm not talking about negligence but rather proof of criminality in this heinous plot betraying indeed "the deep damnation" of the conspiracy.

The circumstances are compelling that I elect to make a statement from the dock. And in this statement I shall attempt my utmost to place the truth ahead of the web of lies and deceit that has been spun thus far. To quote Shakespeare:

"And let us once again assail your ears,
That are so fortified against our story…"

Which has set me from the outset of the trial to have been deprived of a level playing field and subjected to inequality of arms vis-a-vis the prosecution.

The Prosecution's Failure to Discharge its Duties Professionally

1) Even though these matters are done as a matter of routine in criminal proceedings, the Prosecution has consistently refused to disclose material critical to my defence, including: (a) prosecution witness list;

(b) primary hospital examination notes written by the medical examiners of the complainant at HBKL; (c) witness statements (including that of complainant); and (d) forensic samples and exhibits for independent examination and verification. All this has caused considerable prejudice to my defence and occasioned grave injustice. The only conclusion that one can reasonably draw from the prosecution's persistence in this act of perversity is that unseen hands are at work and it is certainly not the hand of God.

2) Your failure to respond during the course of the trial to several attempts by persons hostile to me to discredit me by commenting on aspects of the trial. These included whether I should provide samples of his DNA; blaming the defence for the delay of the proceedings; and reporting on matters that were the subject of a suppression order. These public comments were made either in defiance of your orders that they not be made. They were made by UMNO officials and politicians, including Dato' Seri Najib orchestrated through the controlled electronic and print media, such as Utusan Malaysia, Berita Harian, the New Straits Times and TV3. The constant comments by the Prime Minister and UMNO officials in the media and adverse comments on the progress of the trial were clearly calculated to influence you and illustrates the political motive behind the charge.

3) The latest act of blatant disregard occurred just last Tuesday and Wednesday over TV3 which broadcasted a pre-recorded interview with the complainant saying things which are clearly in contempt of the proceedings in respect of the trial. In particular, the audacious portrayal of himself as the victim who is a pious and God fearing Muslim who has sworn on the Quran that he is a witness of truth.

4) But the truth is that even as the trial was in progress, the complainant who was engaged to someone else was shamelessly having an affair with a member of the prosecution team. Quite apart from the consequences of such an affair on the conduct of the prosecution, the complainant's facade of moral rectitude is shattered by this scandalous affair with the lady prosecutor who herself was also engaged with another man.

5) In spite of all this, the complainant, assisted by the full force of the UMNO propaganda machine, via their media, has gone to town to vilify me. The point is that all comments were calculated to discredit me, adversely influence the course of the proceedings and to intimidate the witnesses at the trial. In spite of all these blatant transgressions, you have persistently refused to respond to any of these acts of contemptuous behaviour.

The solemn duty of a judge is not to sit mute when the law provides for a court of its own motion to issue show-cause notices against those who interfere in the administration of justice. I am reminded of the maxim Judex Habere Debet Duos Sales, Salem Sapicutiae, Ne Sit Insipidus, Et Salem Conscientiea, Ne Sit Diabolous, the English translation of which is,

'A judge should have two salts, the salt of wisdom, lest he be insipid; and the salt of conscience, lest he be devilish'.

The office of a judge is one of the most honourable in the country; he is the voice of the legislator and the organ for dispensing justice; he holds the balance between the executive and the subject.

Even more significantly, in the discharge of his duties, the judge should be mindful of Allah's command:

"…and let not hatred of others

Swerve you into error

And depart from justice.

Be just, that is nearer to piety

Fear Allah, For Allah is

well acquainted with all that you do"

Surah al-maidah: 8

In the middle of the Second World War in 1942, Lord Atkin, in Liversidge v Anderson, had occasion to say in the House of Lords,

'It has long been one of the pillars of freedom…that the judges are no respecters of persons and stand between the subject and any attempted encroachment on his liberty by the executive, alert to see that any coercive action is justified by law'

In my case, Y.A., presiding in an adversarial trial, had the residual power and the jurisdiction to have invoked Y.A.'s powers relating to contempt of court. Y.A. chose not to do so for reasons best known to Y.A.. What has happened is not in the best traditions of the Judiciary. In the ongoing Banting murder trial, the learned trial judge in that case, Y.A. Datuk Akhtar Tahir, took it upon himself to summon a local television producer over a clip it aired during its prime news slot relating to the defence in the murder trial of Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya and three others. A newspaper clipping of that report is annexed herewith. Y.A. Datuk Akhtar Tahir has courageously demonstrated judicial activism in the name of human rights and the essential requirement of a fair trial.

To compound the position to incredulity, the open scandal relating to DPP Farah Azlina Latiff having an affair with PW1 did not concern Y.A. This invidious relationship should have alerted Y.A. in that I was been denied a fair trial for the simple reason that Farah Azlina Latiff would have had access to the investigation papers being a member of the prosecution's team and, therefore, PW1 would, through this relationship, would have had knowledge of the statements given by witnesses, including my alibi witnesses in the course of the investigation.

Y.A. did not even chastise Farah Azlina Latiff for the illicit affair with SP1. All that was done was that Farah Azlina Latiff was taken off the prosecution team at the behest of the prosecution which was an open confirmation of the existence of that illicit affair. Farah Azlina Latiff did not deny the allegations against her. Neither was PW1 recalled by the prosecution to deny the existence of this unsavoury affair.

The Attorney-General had publicly stated the reasons would be given later to account for the sordid affair. That has yet to eventuate.

Yet, in the face of this, Y.A., at the close of the prosecution case, made a finding that PW1 was a truthful witness from this passage in the judgment as follows,

'Nothing came out from the lengthy cross-examination of PW1 or from the evidence of other prosecution's witnesses that could suggest what PW1 had told in his evidence was something which was not probable. I find PW1's evidence remains intact. He had truthfully and without embellishment or exaggeration in his evidence narrated in minute detail how he was sodomised by the accused on the date and at the place stated in the charge. I find him to be truthful witness and his evidence is reliable and if accepted would establish all the facts required to prove the charge against the accused.'

My lawyers had clearly made the submission that Y.A. had made a prejudgment when Y.A. ought to have only made findings as to who was telling the truth at the conclusion of the defence, in which event, I would have given evidence under oath. My lawyers did not, at any time, advert to the passage above in isolation. They zeroed in on the obvious, namely, whether a witness was truthful or not had to be decided at the close of the defence case. The provisions of section 182A(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code provided the judge with that guidance but to no avail. That section bears repeating. It states:

'At the conclusion of the trial, the court shall consider all the evidence adduced before it and shall decide whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.'


Pursuant to what I have stated above, I have been denied the benefit of putting up my defence under oath. That amounts to deprivation of a fair trial and the existence of a level playing field.

The Court of Appeal going out of line

My appeal to the Court of Appeal over the recusal of Y.A. on account of prejudgment, following which would have resulted in biasness was heard on 6th July, 2011. A copy of the order is annexed herewith. No written judgment was handed down by the Court of Appeal on 6th July. The appeal was dismissed summarily on the preliminary objection taken by the prosecution that the order appealed against was not a final order. Those were the reasons given in open court. Nothing more, nothing less. The Court of Appeal took no more than five minutes to dispose of the appeal.

Unbeknownst to me or my lawyers, there was at the same time a 40-page judgment under the hand of Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak also dated 6th July, 2011. A copy of that judgment is annexed herewith.

Why did the Court of Appeal not read out the 91 paragraphed grounds of judgment dated 6th July on 6th July itself? Obviously, this judgment was at hand on 6th July but had surreptitiously been concealed from my knowledge and the knowledge of the public. The letter dated 11th August, 2011 supplying a copy of this judgment to my lawyers is annexed herewith. As is usual, Y.A. must have had the benefit of reading this judgment which will further exacerbate your bias against me. The judgment is an open and flagrant attack on me to which I will advert in due course. Suffice to say at this juncture that here is a judgment of the Court of Appeal written after 6th July, 2011 which contains harsh criticism against me without my being given the opportunity to reply.

But that begs the question: the appeal had been dismissed in limine on the ground that the order appealed against was not a final order. That should have been the end of the matter because it followed that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. [Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak sat mute during the course of submissions on the preliminary objection]. The matter did not go beyond into the merits. That is what the Court of Appeal announced on 6th July without going an inch further. The preliminary objection is adverted to, not as the main part of the judgment. The major part of the judgment goes beyond. It is a frolic of his own used for the purpose of hitting out at me.

If that was so, why did Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak embark upon a relentless attack on me in the rest of the judgment? In fact, he had no jurisdiction to do so. This is a blatant abuse of judicial power, perhaps in a surreptitious attempt to curry favours of the political masters? Otherwise, how else can one explain as to why he embarked upon such a scurrilous attack on me by stating in the following paragraphs as numbered:

'[5] This case will fall in history. It will be chronicled as the only known case in our country or for that matter within the Commonwealth enclave where the appellant as an accused person persistently and consistently filed one application after another in an attempt to recuse the learned trial judge from hearing and continuing to hear the sodomy trial which is ongoing.


[6] It seems that the appellant here is trying his level best to scuttle his sodomy trial for reasons best known to him, much to the chagrin of the prosecution and the exasperation of the members of the public at large.


[15] It was certainly an uncalled for criticism [against the learned judge] bent to deceive and confuse the uninitiated. It is easy to criticise but it is always difficult to justify it.

[18] It is also difficult for us to accept that the Notice of Motion was filed out of a genuine belief that the learned trial judge had been biased against the appellant.


[49] The charge graphically described what the appellant did to Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan [PW1.] [It is elementary that it is the evidence, not the charge, which proves an offence].

[50] The trial was unduly prolonged. It received wide media coverage.


[56] After such a fine display of judicial impropriety, Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak now has audacity to patronize us about a sound judicial system by stating, in what sounds like a broken symbol, as follows:

'The perquisites of a sound judicial system are independence and impartiality. For an effective and a strong judicial system, the impartiality of its judges are of paramount importance. But it cannot be denied that the public's confidence in the judicial system is shaped and moulded more by appearances.


Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak rather ungraciously, and without jurisdiction, took a swipe at the judgment of his brother judges of the Court of Appeal including Richard Malanjum, now Chief Judge (Sabah and Sarawak), with the obvious purpose of humiliating them when stating:

'[72] Rowstead did not consider the "real danger of bias" test in determining whether the learned JC should have recused himself notwithstanding the Federal Court had earlier on applied the said test in:


(a) Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang v Syarikat Bekerjasama-sama Serbaguna Sungai Gelugor dengan Tanggungan [1999] 3 MLJ 1, FC; and


(b) Mohamed Ezam bin Mohd Nor & Ors v Ketua Polis Negara [2002] 1 MLJ 321, FC

[73] Consequently, Rowstead's suggestion that the request for recusal to be heard

by another judge is quite radical. We categorically say that the recusal request, like the present matter, was rightly heard at the first instance by the learned trial judge and followed by this court.


[74] Rowstead did not consider nor ventilate on section 3 of the CJA read with section 50(1)(a) of the CJA and the Explanatory Statement thereto.


[75] The recusal application housed in the Notice of Motion concerned a long protracted trial that saw the legal manoeuvrings activated by the appellant at every nook and corner in an attempt to scuttle the criminal trial of the appellant for an offence of sodomising PW1. It is the mother of all trials in Malaysia.'

[I had every right to exhaust all legal remedies open to me. No attempt has been made by anyone, or any quarter, to prevent me from doing so by seeking an order to declare me a vexatious litigant].

As alluded to earlier in this statement, Y.A. would have had the advantage of reading this judgment after it was distributed by letter dated 11th August, 2011. This, in effect, amounts to placing, by Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak, alleged bad character evidence on my behalf.

In view of this, how can I get a fair trial or even the semblance of one before the trial judge now who has been further put in a position to compound biasness against me?

How can I possibly give evidence under oath when the DPP has, in his possession, the same judgment which could be used against me in cross-examination? Y.A. cannot be disabused of what has been fed to Y.A. by Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak when delivering a judgment dated 6th July, 2011 which obviously, having regard to the length thereof, must have been prepared well before 6th July, 2011.

This is scandalous.

Then again, why wasn't the judgment which, even if written after midnight on 5th July, 2011 read out in open court so that I could counter and demolish all the allegations made against me by Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak?

It is elementary no one should be condemned, unheard. This is axiomatic. As far back as 12th August, 1999 the Federal Court, the highest court in the land, in Insas Bhd and Anor v Ayer Molek Rubber Company Bhd and others had occasion, after adverting to the authorities on the position to rule,

'The offensive remarks made by the Court of Appeal against the High Court, the applicants and their counsel ought to be expunged from the judgment of the Court of Appeal, as it had a tendency to bring the whole administration of law and order into disrepute. Judicial pronouncements should be judicial in nature and should not depart from sobriety, moderation, and reserve. It also should not display emotion and intemperance, as displayed in the judgment of the Court of Appeal.'

Adverting to an Indian Supreme Court case of State of Uttar Pradesh v Mohd Naim, the Federal Court had occasion to adopt what was said there as follows;

'If there is one principle of cardinal importance in the administration of justice, it is this: the proper freedom and independence of judges and magistrates must be maintained and they must be allowed to perform their functions freely and fearlessly and without undue interference by anybody, even by this court. At the same time it is equally necessary that in expressing their opinions, judges and magistrates must be guided by considerations of justice, fair play and restraint. It is not infrequent that sweeping generalizations defeat the very purpose for which they are made. It has been judicially recognized that in the matter of making disparaging remarks against persons or authorities whose conduct comes into consideration before courts of law in cases to be decided by them, it is relevant to consider: (a) whether the party whose conduct is in question is before the court or has an opportunity of explaining or defending himself; (b) whether there is evidence on record bearing on that conduct justifying the remarks; and (c) whether it is necessary for the decision of the case, as an integral part thereof, to animadvert on conduct. It has also been recognized that judicial pronouncements must be judicial in nature, and should not normally depart from sobriety, moderation and reserve.'


In Insas, the Federal Court adopted what was said in AM Mathur v Pramod Kumar Gupta & Ors when dismissing an apparently unsustainable review petition which had certain derogatory remarks against Mr AM Mathur, a senior advocate and also the ex-Advocate General of the State. The Court had occasion to hold,
'Judicial restraint and discipline are as necessary to the orderly administration of justice as they are to the effectiveness of the army. The duty of restraint, this humility of function should be a constant theme of our judges. This quality in decision-making is as much necessary for judges to command respect as to protect the independence of the judiciary. Judicial restraint in this regard might be better called judicial respect, that is, respect by the judiciary. Respect to those who come before the court as well as to other co-ordinate branches of the State, the executive and the legislature. There must be mutual respect. When these qualities fail or when litigants and public believe that the judge has failed in these qualities, it will be neither good for the judge nor for the judicial process. The Judge's Bench is a seat of power. Not only do judges have power to make binding decisions, their decisions legitimate the use of power by other officials. The judges have the absolute and unchallengeable control of the court domain. But they cannot misuse their authority by intemperate comments, undignified banter of scathing criticism of counsel, parties or witnesses. We concede that the court had the inherent power to act freely upon its own conviction on any matter coming before it for adjudication, but it is a general principle of the highest importance to the proper administration of justice that derogatory remarks ought not to be made against persons or authorities whose conduct comes into consideration unless it is absolutely necessary for the decision of the case to animadvert on their conduct.'

Chief Justice of India, Bhagwati, in State of Madya Pradesh & Ors v Nandlal & Ors, in expressing his strong disapproval of the strictures made by the judge, stated:

'We may observe in conclusion that judges should not use strong and carping language while criticizing the conduct of parties or their witnesses. They must act with sobriety, moderation and restraint. They must have the humility to recognize that they are not infallible and any harsh and disparaging strictures passed by them against any party may be mistaken and unjustified and if so, they may do considerable harm and mischief and result in injustice. Here, in the present case, the observations made and strictures passed by BM Lal J were totally unjustified and unwarranted and they ought not to have been made.'


How could I under these circumstances give evidence under oath?

Y.A., when making the order for the witnesses offered to the defence for interview in court, gave a lifeline to the witnesses in stating in open court that they could refuse to be interviewed. Y.A. did not in doing so evenly handle the scales of justice. Y.A. created and perpetuated an imbalance unbecoming anyone holding the mantle of justice. In fact, the Prime Minister, Dato' Seri Najib Tun Razak, and his wife, Datin Seri Rosmah binti Mansor, former Inspector General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, and SAC Dato' Rodhwan bin Ismail who featured prominently in the evidence of PW1 came to the interview room echoing similar protests namely, "We are not prepared to be interviewed" with the Prime Minister saying Y.A. suggested this could be done. These were material witnesses compelling the defence now to resort to causing subpoenas to be issued for their presence.

Y.A. has created a position under which I cannot give evidence under oath. I say, with all the force at my command, that I would have been prepared and willing to give evidence under oath but for the handicaps foisted on me, in the manner Y.A. has conducted the trial and in the manner in which the Court of Appeal judgment dated 6th July, 2011 would have come to the notice of Y.A. with regard to what I have stated herein before.

My trial is an adversarial one and Y.A. ought not to have descended into the arena by suggesting witnesses offered to the defence could deny to be interviewed. It did not come within the province of Y.A. to do so.

My alibi witnesses made known to the prosecution were in fact included in the prosecution list of witnesses which was not supplied to my lawyers. They were defence alibi witnesses. I am informed this is the first time this has been done.

In fact, the owner of the unit 11-5-2, Haji Hasanuddin bin Abd Hamid, had been harassed by the police for a total of thirty hours in the recording of his statements which were all video recorded. This was obvious when he was interviewed by the defence lawyers in my presence. The police investigation has scuttled my defence.

To make a mockery of the situation, the prosecution offered at the close of their case an alibi witness named, Fitria binti Dipan, who by their own admission cannot be traced.

THE COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATIONS ARE PURE FABRICATION

As I have said at the outset, I categorically deny the allegations made against me by the complainant.

The complainant stated in evidence on 26th June, 2008 he arrived at Kondominium Desa Damansara at 2.45 p.m. to discuss work matters and hand-over documents given to him by one Ibrahim Yaakob [my Chief of Staff] to myself. He says he stopped his van at the security post and mentioned the code name 'Mokhtar' to the guards at the condominium before being allowed in. He parked his vehicle and took the lift to Unit 11-5-1 where I was allegedly seated at a dining table in the living room. He says he sat down at the same table and started the discussion. He told the court of the crude manner in which I had allegedly asked for sex.

The following appears in his evidence thereafter (as attached)

When questioned, he answered that he was angry and scared and that he was not prepared to do it but purportedly because I had appeared angry, he eventually obliged. It has to be observed at this stage the complainant could have, on his own admission in examination-in-chief, left the room as there is no evidence of any attempt by me to latch the door from inside.

He had further alleged that he was ordered into the bedroom and that he did enter out of fear. Even at this stage, the complainant had the opportunity to leave the living room. He did not do so. The rest of the evidence in this regard clearly showed that the complainant had every opportunity on every occasion to flee but he did not do so. His reason was that he was petrified by fear. But such a reason flies against the facts. Here is a man in his early twenties, a six-footer, physically fit and robust and with powerful connections in the top police brass as well as the political elite with access to the very inner sanctum of power. Additionally, he has also been a key UMNO student operative, having undergone the rigorous training conducted by the Biro Tats Negara of the Prime Minister's Department. And here I was a 60-year-old man with a history of back injury who had undergone a major back surgery holding no position of power. If indeed I could have exercised any kind of undue influence or mental pressure on him, this could have been easily neutralized by a quick phone call to his connections. As regards the fear of physical harm, it would take a great stretch of the imagination to suggest that I could pose any physical harm to him.

Under cross-examination, the following significant evidence was elicited from the complainant. He admitted that he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it. He claimed that carnal intercourse took place and that it was painful and coarse. However, this was clearly not borne out in the medical evidence in the prosecution case suggesting fissures or tears. After the alleged act, he testified that he had a drink and engaged in a friendly conversation with me. Startlingly, no attempt was made by the complainant to seek immediate medical attention. Instead, he attended a PKR function the following day. In the evening, he joined a meeting of the Anwar Ibrahim Club at my house without showing any sign of either emotional or physical discomfort let alone trauma. On the contrary, he was going about matters in a calm and confident manner. His conduct therefore is totally inconsistent with having been violated. In any event, he neither made a police report nor sought medical attention, notwithstanding that two days prior to the alleged act, he had met with Najib and Rosmah as well having talked on the phone with Musa Hassan and met with Rodhwan at a hotel.

It is obvious, from the evidence above, that the complainant was lying through his teeth although Y.A., despite the compelling evidence to the contrary, found him a truthful witness at the close of the prosecution case. This defies logic, let alone the law.

Then again, the expert evidence with regard to DNA led in the course of prosecution case through PW4, Dr. Seah Lay Hong and PW5, Nor Aidora bt Saedon was highly questionable in that crucial information pertaining to the DNA analysis of both the said witnesses which they were obliged to furnish to the court was suspiciously withheld despite them confirming the existence of such information. The real possibility that the samples analyzed were contaminated and even planted were completely disregarded despite such possibilities coming clearly within guidelines set by the international forensic community which were completely ignored, if not, blatantly disregarded by PW4 and PW5 to fit the prosecution's case. It is obvious had the said possibilities been explored, the conclusions reached would have been very different in that the complainant's own semen was found in his own anus, there was ample evidence of contributors other than Male Y around the complainant's perianal, lower and higher rectal region and there was clear evidence of the samples having been tampered with before they were sent for analysis. In such circumstances, the integrity of the said samples was surely compromised. Furthermore, the impartiality of PW4 was highly questionable having regard to the way in which she completely dismissed the very high possibility that the samples sent to her would have degraded to a certain degree by the time they reached her which such degradation was completely absent from all samples in this case. This clearly points to the obvious reality that the samples sent for analysis could not have been what were extracted from the complainant's person.

Trial within a Trial

The Gestapo-like manner in which I was arrested and the subsequent detention and interrogation by the police all betrayed the hands of the political masters at work. What was the need to send in balaclava clad commandos to effect the arrest if not to attempt to flex political muscle and to display pure vindictiveness? These startling facts were completely ignored by Y.A.

Y.A. had made an earlier ruling to exclude the recovery of certain items including water bottle, Good Morning towel, tooth paste from the lock-up at IPK, Kuala Lumpur where I had been detained overnight from 16.7.08 to 17.7.08. However, you reversed this ruling subsequently which is something most shocking and unprecedented.

Although in the Trial Within a Trial, I had adverted to the role of Taufik and Supt. Jude Pereira, the prosecution elected only to call Taufik in rebuttal in the Trial Within a Trial. Taufik attempted to produce a photostat copy of the warrant of arrest which was only marked as an ID and, therefore, could not be considered as evidence in the Trial Within a Trial. A photostat copy of a document is not admissible as evidence in a court of law. It was in the Trial Within a Trial that primary evidence of the document ought to have been given if the original record had been lost or destroyed.


The prosecution could not, by producing the original warrant of arrest in the main trial, cure the infirmity. It is in evidence that 3 copies of the warrant of arrest were in the possession of Supt. Jude Pereira. The evidence of the warrant of arrest was available during the Trial Within a Trial.

Even Supt. Jude Periera, whose role was adverted to by me during the Trial Within a Trial, chose not to take the stand despite having had the opportunity to have produced the original copy of the warrant of arrest in the Trial Within a Trial.

It was during the Trial Within a Trial that Supt.Jude Periera should have testified. It was clearly unlawful for the court to accept Supt. Jude Periera's evidence in the general trial for the purpose of rebutting my evidence in the Trial Within a Trial that the DNA profiling from the Good Morning towel, toothbrush and mineral water bottle had been obtained by unfair methods and unfair means and my arrest, therefore, had been procured unlawfully.

In fact, Supt. Jude Periera's evidence in the general trial confirms that there had been non-compliance with Rule 20 of the Lock-up Rules, 1953 in that I, after my arrest on 16.7.08, had not been placed in the lock-up from 6pm to 6am the following day. The provisions of Rule 20 are mandatory.

If this was the position in our case, which it was, then, clearly, my being taken to the HKL in breach of Rule 20 reflected unfair means and unfair methods being employed by the police to obtain the DNA profiling from the items set out hereinbefore. The position is further compounded by the evidence of Supt. Jude Periera in the general trial that he did not direct police personnel in charge of the lock-up not to touch the said items despite the police personnel in the general trial before the Trial Within a Trial, clearly, saying that Supt. Jude Periera had done so.

So the position comes to this, Supt. Jude Periera, in his evidence on oath in the main trial, supports the defence case that unfair methods and unfair means had been used by the police to obtain DNA profiling from the items set out hereinbefore.

From the ruling made by the court to exclude the items, it is clear it was based on unfair means and unfair methods employed by the police meaning it was by trick and deception that the police attempted to introduce the DNA evidence.

In any event, from the evidence of DSP Taufik given in the Trial Within a Trial and the general trial, the grounds of arrest could not have been given by him to me in Segambut as this is, clearly, contradicted by the evidence of S.N. Nair and myself.

The question of challenging evidence given in the main trial by DSP Taufik and Supt. Jude Periera does not arise. It was the assertions made under oath by me that my arrest was unlawful and unfair methods and unfair means had been used to obtain his DNA profiling in the Trial Within a Trial stood unchallenged by the prosecution by leading lawful evidence in rebuttal of those assertions. In fact, Y.A. should have drawn an adverse inference against the prosecution for not having done so.

FORENSIC EVIDENCE

The prosecution case rests on the evidence of the DNA and so called "findings of seminal fluid" or "sperm" as they claim. As a matter of fact, this is the only forensic evidence upon which the foundation of the prosecution's so-called proof rests. Yet, this foundation is erected on shaky grounds though this has not prevented them working in hand in glove with the powers that be to mount an insidious and relentless campaign to vilify me.

The fact is that there is not an iota of evidence, DNA or otherwise, that has ever been found in the premises of the alleged act, not in the wash room, bed room, carpets or anywhere else where such evidence ought to have been found.

Supt. Pereira, despite being instructed to keep the HKL samples (marked B1 to B10) in a freezer, deliberately defied the instruction of Dr Siew Sheue Fong (HKL Forensic Doctor) and also admitted that he was in serious breach of the IGSO, (he even stated he took full and personal responsibility for breaking of the IGSO), when he deliberately kept the HKL samples in his office cabinet for about 43 hrs before delivering them to the Chemist. One must not forget that the alleged act was supposed to have occurred two days prior to the said samples having been extracted. Coupled with this 43-hour delay in delivery to the Chemist, it would mean that the samples were already at least 90 hours old by the time they were examined by the Chemist. Undoubtedly, the samples would have totally degraded. Yet evidence by the prosecution claimed that no degradation of any consequence had occurred.

In any event, even the 43-hour delay alone would have seriously compromised the integrity of the samples in terms of its deterioration due to bacterial action. Also, by not storing the samples in the police exhibit store (which will accord access only to him), his deliberate omission of such strict rules of the IGSO has by his very act, presented an opportunity and possibility of tampering of the samples as access to others was made easier. This was disregarded.

There are also no cogent or compelling reasons both in law and practice for Supt Jude Pereira to cut open P27 (the big tamperproof bag containing all the HKL samples which was sealed and handed over to him), ostensibly to remark them (B1 to B10). It is clear that this act was just a convenient excuse to get access to the individual samples which by themselves were clearly not tamperproof as they were deliberately "sealed" with ordinary and easily removable tapes and easily removable HKL paper seals.

Dr Siew Sheue Fong , as evident in court, was most reluctant to refer to his medical notes during cross examination despite being unable to remember details. During the break he was caught surreptitiously taking a sneak peek of his notes. This dishonest act of a professional doctor who ought to have conducted himself in a fair and independent manner was blatantly ignored. Many a time Dr. Siew and Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim deliberately chose not to answer pertinent questions put to them by my counsel. Instead Dr Siew and Dr Razali's evidence was accepted without reservation.

Dr Seah Lay Hong (the Chemist) gave evidence that when she received the 12 HKL samples there were 2 samples that were marked as taken on very different dates, she testified she did nothing to seek clarification from Dr Siew . She further testified that she "gave the benefit of doubt" to Dr Siew. My lawyers submitted strenuously that such acts and/or omissions amount to a serious breach of the cardinal rules of international lab protocols and those of the Jabatan Kimia Malaysia. Despite such blatant exposures and abject failures of non observance of strict rules, Dr Seah's evidence was well received and in totality when it ought to have been jettisoned in totality for reasons of incompetence and gross negligence.

The defence evidence will show that the prosecution claim to have proof of the presence of "seminal fluid" or "sperm" is completely unfounded. In fact, this purported proof is nothing but pure fabrication, a fact which is not that unusual considering the past history of the prosecution in this regard. If they had had any such forensic evidence, they would have guarded it for dear life rather than let it being handled in such a sloppy manner.

SUMMATION

Your Lordship has failed to ensure a fair trial as demonstrated, inter alia, by the following instances:

1. Your refusal during the course of the trial to order disclosure of material critical to my defence, most of which you thought was sufficiently relevant and which fairness required that you should order it to be disclosed before the trial. Your failure to fairly and properly exercise his judicial discretion to order disclosure was not only contrary to Malaysian laws but violated the international standards expected of a modern state which purports to practice the rule of law.

2. Your refusal to act accordingly either to take cognizance or to hold to account those responsible for the flagrant acts of leaking and publishing in the media of prosecution submissions before the matter was heard in court; your utter indifference to my protestations about these transgressions has wittingly or unwittingly facilitated the conspiracy to vilify me in the court of public opinion even as the trial is in progress.

3. Your failure to order that witnesses critical to my defence attend the trial to testify, in circumstances where their involvement was patently material to the issues at trial and recorded under oath in the complainant's testimony and admitted by statements made by these witnesses to the media. These witnesses relate to the circumstances in which the complainant came to make his early complaints against me. Nothing could be more material to the credit of the complainant.

4. Your finding the complainant to be "a truthful witness" at the close of the prosecution case clearly amounted to prejudgment demonstrating in the process a clear bias against me. Consequently, you have deprived me of my constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair hearing the effect of which is to entitle me to an unconditional release with the charges leveled against me falling to the ground. Notwithstanding this, you have not only failed to order my release but have adamantly refused to recuse yourself from further presiding at the trial.

5. Your arriving at the conclusion that the complainant was a witness of truth without first hearing the evidence of the defence would render the continuation of this trial an exercise in futility. What use would there be for me to adduce evidence to show that the complainant is in fact a liar if you have already found "him to be a truthful witness" and that his evidence is reliable and conclusive and by virtue of that irrefutable? It is untenable and the law does not allow you to do what you have done.

6. Your finding that the complainant has corroborated himself by complaining to the medical doctors of sexual assault was a glaring error of law apart from it being in gross disregard of a finding of fact, that is, that the clinical finding had indicated no evidence of penetration. Additionally, your failure to question why the prosecution has for no apparent reason refused to call in the first medical officer who had examined the complainant to testify. Did it not cross your mind that this failure was prompted by the need to suppress evidence that might be unfavourable to the prosecution?

7. Your accepting without hesitation the forensic evidence as corroborative of the complainant's account in circumstances where there were obvious concerns about how those samples were obtained, labelled, stored and analyzed.

CONCLUSION

This entire process is nothing but a conspiracy by Prime Minister Dato' Seri Najib Razak to send me into political oblivion by attempting once again to put me behind bars. I therefore declare that I have no faith whatsoever that justice will prevail in these proceedings notwithstanding the valiant efforts made by my defence team. As I have said at the outset, this is not a criminal trial. It is a charade staged by the powers that be to put me out of action in order that they remain in power.

In 1998, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad did just that and by his Machiavellian use of all the organs of power of the State, succeeded in getting me convicted for fifteen years for offences that I had never committed. Such was the tyranny and injustice done to me then. And such is the tyranny and injustice being perpetuated today.

Najib Razak is doing the same thing as his mentor did, which is to employ all means within his power through the media, the police, the Attorney General and the judiciary in order to subvert the course of justice and to take me out of the political equation.

This relentless conviction to send me back to prison became all the more imperative because of the major victories gained by the opposition Pakatan Rakyat in the March 2008 elections. Their worst fears were confirmed when it became clear that once my legal disqualification was over I would be contesting for a parliamentary seat and if I won, would be elected leader of the opposition.

It was therefore no coincidence that this new conspiracy surfaced three months after the March 2008 victories and the formal charge against me was made just one month prior to my contesting the Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat. The sequence of events that unfolded prior to the formal charge appeared to be lifted from the plot of 1998 minus, in this latest episode, the black eye affair and the purported victims being led into court as partners in crime. In this second episode, the conspirators have tweaked the plot to make the complainant take on the role of a helpless victim, having realized that the 1998 method of employing Stalin-like confessions and the portrayal of the alleged victims as remorseful and repentant sexual deviants were just too much for the public to believe.

Hence, during the entire examination of the complainant, the prosecution left no stone unturned in their attempt at painting the picture of a helpless, naive and innocent young man who is a witness of truth and whose testimony should be believed regardless of any evidence to the contrary. The fact is that in the entire scheme of things, the complainant, who was just a university drop out working part time helping out my chief of staff, is essentially a pawn being employed by the shady plotters to achieve their devious ends in the conspiracy. And yet it was the decision of the court after the close of the prosecution case that he indeed is a truthful witness.

The preparation entailed in this conspiracy was most elaborate and went all the way to the Prime Minister himself and his wife Rosmah Mansor both of whom by the complainant's own admission had met him in their residence where he purportedly complained of being sexually assaulted. The initial statement by Najib that he had met with the complainant merely to discuss about a scholarship was a blatant lie only to be retracted later after various exposes were made via the social media and the internet blogs. It was obvious that neither Najib nor Rosmah would not want to be seen to be part of the conspiracy being themselves embroiled in a series of other scandals the details of which have been raised in Parliament which to date have never been categorically refuted. But the stakes in this conspiracy are so high that nothing can be left to pure chance for indeed the prospect of the UMNO led Barisan Nasional losing power to Pakatan Rakyat is becoming more real by the day.

The main thrust of the conspiracy was to fabricate this sodomy charge in order to inflict maximum damage to my character in the run-up campaign to the by-elections. Towards this end, an intense and virulent media blitz was launched concurrently with the staging of rallies and ceramahs where the focus of the debate was not on any social, economic or even political issues but purely on my person and my morality. The plotters for reasons known only to themselves became privy to information which would be used subsequently by the prosecution and went to town in an orgy of character assassination calculated no doubt to ensure a humiliating defeat for me in the polls. But Allah is Great and instead of losing, I won the Permatang Pauh seat with a thumping majority of 15,000 votes.

But the zeal to consign me to political oblivion continues unabated. Najib seems to think that by destroying my political future, it would also destroy the prospects of Pakatan Rakyat ever coming to power.

Hence, nothing is spared to ensure that I will be convicted in order that the UMNO led Barisan government continues to rule.

Having regard to all the above, I now wish to state that this trial is for all intents and purposes a show trial. I say this not to mock your Lordship nor with animosity towards anyone personally but I sit before you in the dock only to speak what I know and what I believe with conviction to be the truth. And this conviction is borne by having been in public service for more than forty years a quarter of which was spent within the walls of incarceration in Kamunting and in Sungai Buloh. The fact remains that I was condemned to imprisonment not because of any crime that I had committed but for my political beliefs and convictions and more significantly because back in 1998 I had posed a clear and present threat to the more than two decades of autocratic rule of Mahathir.

I say it because as I've stated earlier, the court's integrity has been completely compromised and bears all the classic symptoms of a show trial where the script has been effectively written and the outcome a foregone conclusion. I say it because as a presiding judge you have demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt your complete lack of impartiality. I say it because you have consistently refused to recuse yourself even in the face of mounting evidence of your bias against me. I say it too because you have persistently turned a blind eye to the gross violations of protocol and procedure committed by the prosecution while at the same remaining impervious to my protestations about these blatant irregularities that would have without more alerted any impartial judge as to the malice and bad faith of the prosecution.

In the matter of the duty of a judge, the Holy Qur'an commands:

"And when you judge between mankind

Then you judge justly"

Surah An-Nisaa:58

ANWAR IBRAHIM

Isu gereja: Umno Selangor mahu saman SU Agung PAS RM10 juta

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 10:42 PM PDT


SHAH ALAM, 22 Ogos — Umno Selangor akan memfailkan saman RM10 juta terhadap Setiausaha Agung PAS Datuk Mustafa Ali berhubung dakwaan kononnya parti Melayu itu memainkan peranan dalam tindakan Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (Jais) ke atas sebuah gereja awal bulan ini.

Menurut Setiausaha Umno Selangor Datuk Seri Ir Mohd Zin Mohamed, selain Mustafa, pihaknya juga akan mempertimbangkan pihak-pihak lain dalam saman yang akan difailkan selepas Aidilfitri.

"Kita akan memulakan langkah permulaan saman iaitu saman tuntutan ganti rugi dan saman malu terhadap fitnah yang dibuat Datuk Mustafa Ali terhadap Umno Selangor dengan jumlah RM10 juta.

"Ini adalah tindakan yang terpaksa dilakukan demi mempertahankan maruah dan hak, kami akan hantar notis kepada beliau dan pihak-pihak tertentu dan jika tiada jawapan, kita akan failkan saman selepas Aidilfitri," katanya pada sidang media di sini.

Mustafa sebelum ini mendakwa mempunyai bukti kononnya Umno berperanan dalam pemeriksaan yang dilakukan Jais ke atas Gereja Methodist Damansara Utama pada 3 Ogos lalu.

PM, isteri diperintah beri keterangan kes liwat Anwar

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 10:37 PM PDT


Oleh Debra Chong

KUALA LUMPUR, 22 Ogos — Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak dan isterinya yang baru-baru ini enggan ditemu bual merupakan antara tujuh orang diberi sepina agar memberi keterangan dalam kes liwat Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

"Enggan ditemu bual berbeza daripada disepina," kata peguam utama Ketua Pembangkang Karpal Singh kepada pemberita hari ini selepas Anwar memberi keterangan dari kandang tertuduh.

Kes peringkat pembelaan bermula hari ini.

Karpal berkata sebaik sahaja mahkamah mengeluarkan sepina, mereka yang dinamakan dalam perintah mahkamah perlu datang.

Kata beliau, perintah mahkamah telah diberi Jumaat lalu.

Pada 12 Ogos lalu, Najib dan isterinya Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor (gambar) muncul di Mahkamah Tinggi untuk bertemu dengan pasukan peguam Anwar.

Bagaimanapun kedua-dua mereka enggan ditemu bual dan tidak akan memberi apa-apa kenyataan melainkan mahkamah mengeluarkan sepina.

Bekas Ketua Polis Negara Tan Sri Musa Hassan, yang turut dinamakan sebagai saksi pembela, juga memberikan jawapan yang sama.

Karpal juga berkata mereka yang diarah memberi keterangan ketika prosiding pembelaan masih boleh memohon untuk mengetepikan perintah mahkamah.

"Ya, mereka masih boleh (memohon) mengetepikan sepina," katanya.

Bagaimanapun jelas Karpal, beliau belum dimaklumkan apa-apa mengenai permohonan sedemikian.

Raja Petra menyebut – ada serangan ke atas NAJIB?

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 09:06 PM PDT


Laman web http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/from-around-the-blogs/42964-ada-batu-rocky-dalam-selimut turut mendakwa Datuk Ahiruddin Atan – yang dikatakan pakar blog negara akan memulakan langkah menyerang Datuk Najib – PM kita hari ini. Tindakan ini sama dengan tindakan sebelum ini – menyerang dan membunuh kerjaya politik Pak Lah – menghambat beliau sehingga tergelincir dari kerusi PM. Hari ini Najib jadi sasaran.

UMNO punyai masalah. Masalahnya, laman-laman blog mereka mempunyai kekuatan untuk menyerang kepimpinan UMNO tetapi gagal membuat senario perubahan dalam politik negara khususnya untuk menjadi pemangkin kepada media alternatif yang memihak kepada pembangkang. UMNO punyai kepimpinan penerangan yang gagal berfungsi – melihat bahawa sekiranya blog itu menyerang Anwar Ibrahim – khususnya dengan kata-kata kesat dan kotor MAKA itu adalah laman yang akan di nobat sebagai laman pro UMNO dan mereka yang mengendalikan laman ini akan jadi wira UMNO. Kepimpinan ini tidak punya strategik khusus dan baik. Mereka lebih suka membuat percaturan untuk singkat – DAPATKAN KEPIMPINAN PEMBANGKANG MASUK UMNO DAN INI MENUNJUKKAN KEMENANGAN – hampas. Kepimpinan Tertinggi ini terseronok dengan cara ini – untuk menunjukkan mereka juga wira – bergambar dengan kepimpinan pembangkang yang menyertai UMNO dan memberi mereka ini pengiktirafan lebih dari ahli yang memang setia kepada UMNO. Mereka tidak bijak menggunakan laman sosial – media alternatif sebagai senjata membentuk idealisme dan membentuk penerangan sebenar – memulakan langkah yang lebih kemas dalam usaha menjajah minda dan persepsi rakyat di luar sana. Peneraju perang saraf UMNO – biar siapa pun termasuk mereka yang dalam label Penerangan UMNO masih tandus menyuarakan perencanaan untuk menjejaki aspirasi pengundi yang ada – membentuk persepsi politik yang sihat dan bermaruah dalam mengukuhkan UMNO sendiri.

Hari ini, Najib sendiri akan melihat bagaimana laman-laman pro UMNO yang mahir hanya untuk membelasah kepimpinan dalaman UMNO untuk cita-cita politik kepimpinan dalaman UMNO akan menjadikan beliau serangan baru. Mereka dijangka memulakannya dengan peneraju yang sama – dikatakan membelasah Pak Lah. Najib akan mula merasakan cubitan demi cubitan dalam serangan media alternatif ini dan tidak mustahil PM kita akan juga tergelonsor.

Umno Reform

Betul Ke Dengar Citer Blogger Pro Umno, Rocky's Bru Nak Tibai Najib? Muhyiddin Di Belakang?

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 08:00 PM PDT

Jika spekulasi ini adalah benar.. mampukah Najib bertahan dalam menghadapi serangan yang dikira akan menjadi bersepadu dari Blogger Pro Pakatan Rakyat dan juga dari Blogger Pro UMNO/BN sendiri?

Adakah Najib bakal tersungkur dan dipaksa berundur dari jawatan yang dipegangnya lantas mengukir nama dalam sejarah Malaysia sebagai Perdana Menteri yang paling pendek tempoh pemerintahannya?

Najib juga dikatakan kini sedang diasak kedinding dan dalam masa yang sama memerangkapnya oleh Muhyiddin dan juga sepupunya sendiri iaitu Hishamuddin..

Masa akan menentukan segalanya..

Spekulasi mengatakan Rocky's Bru atau Datuk Ahiruddin Atan sekali lagi akan menjadi pemain utama dalam kempen politik setelah beliau meninggalkan Redberry Group pada penghujung Mei lalu setelah kontraknya tamat.

Beliau dikatakan merancang sebuah Blog baru dan beliau juga dikatakan merancang untuk membangunkan sebuah Website baru bagi menggerakkan kempennya itu.

Blog barunya itu dikatakan akan mengepalai media online dalam melakukan serangan terhadap Najib Tun Razak, Presiden UMNO yang juga Perdana Menteri Malaysia yang kini kelihatan semakin lemah dan tidak menentu hari demi hari.

Nama Rocky dikatakan telah meningkat naik setelah beliau dan rangkaian Blogger dan penulis menjalankan kempen menentang Kerajaan Abdullah Ahmad Badawi dan the New Straits Times.

Itu adalah sebahagian terjemahan dari artikel di bawah..



Ada Batu (Rocky) Dalam Selimut
Posted on August 20, 2011 oleh catoutofbag

Ada sejumlah orang di Pejabat Perdana Menteri yang tertanya-tanya mengapa PM bertindak aneh akhir-akhir ini. Adakah kerana tekanan dari Bersih? Adakah beliau bimbang tentang pilihan raya?

Mungkin. Tetapi sebab-sebab sebenar adalah sejarah mempunyai caranya tersendiri untuk berulang.

Pada tahun 2006 dan 2007 Batu tertentu dengan nama Rocky alias Datuk Ahirudin Atan telah memulakan langkah beliau terhadap PM Pak Lah si Kaki Tidur. Akibat tidur nyenyak Pak Lah langsung tidak sedar apa yang sedang berlaku.

Rockybru, tai ko blogger SoPo yang diisytihar sendiri telah menyusun serangan penuh terhadap si Kaki Tidur. Disokong oleh Dr M, Rocky mempengaruhi pendapat awam terhadap Pak Lah, dan membantu menyingkirkan PM yang tidur lena.

Dalam langkahan PM sekarang Datuk Seri Najib.

Ini adalah bahagian yang menjadi semakin menarik. Rocky sedang melakukan perkara yang sama sekali lagi. Tetapi kali ini terhadap PM kita sekarang.

Menjelang bulan depan Rocky akan mempunyai set-up blog berita yang baru. Beroperasi dari pejabat yang bagus di pinggir bandar KL, Rocky akan dibantu oleh pembantunya, Shamsul Akmar Musa Kamal.

Perhatikan bagaimana Rocky dalam blognya telah meletakkan asas pada blognya dengan menyerang perkara-perkara tertentu.

Elok tunggu usaha barunya ini.

Tetapi perkara yang paling menarik adalah, siapakah yang membiayai usaha barunya ini.

Jika anda ingin mengetahuinya, anda mungkin terfikir bahawa mereka ini beberapa sekutu rapat Najib.

Lagipun ia termasuk orang-orang yang dikaitkan dengan, tunggu, ... Hishammuddin Tun Hussein dan Muhyiddin Yassin - dua orang lelaki yang telah menolak Najib ke kanan, menghimpit PM, dan pada dasarnya memerangkap PM.

Oh, dan jika anda ingin mengetahui lebih lanjut mengenai perikatan Hisham-Muhyiddin bacalah biometricscandal.wordpress.com

Kisah seterusnya - saya akan memberitahu kalian tentang plot untuk mengawal media ala Mat King Leather.

Pecaturan telah dirangka dan Najib adalah mangsanya ...



Dan siapakah Cat Out of The Beg? Dalam perkataannya sendiri:


Melepaskan kucing keluar dari beg
Posted on August 20, 2011 oleh catoutofbag

Selamat datang ke blog baru saya catoutofbag.wordpress.com.

Dalam pada Malaysia sedang melangkah ke arah pilihan raya umum yang akan datang, saya mendapati diri saya berada di dalam kedudukan yang istimewa, jadi, lepaskan kucing itu keluar dari beg bila bercakap tentang masa depan politik dan situasi di Putrajaya dan mereka yang berharap untuk menguasai kerusi kuasa di negara kita.

Ini akan menjadi tapak tanpa perkhidmatan lebih lah, macam AirAsia ... lagi pun anda semua hanya mahu tahu apa yang berlaku kan?

Siapakah saya?

Saya adalah penjawat awam di Putrajaya, juru runding di Pejabat Perdana Menteri, ... anda tidak benar-benar fikir saya akan memberitahu anda siapa saya yang sebenar kan?

Pastinya sifat tanpa nama saya akan membawa anda untuk mengesyaki motif saya dan pendedahan saya, tetapi saya akan membiarkan anda menghakimi sendiri kredibiliti tulisan saya.

Ini bukan blog untuk menyerang orang tertentu. Tetapi saya fikir rakyat Malaysia perlu tahu serba sedikit tentang apa yang sedang berlaku di sebalik tabir politik lah.

Anda tidak mungkin berfikir membaca The Star, Utusan ataupun Insider atau Kini sudah mencukupi kan?

Apapun lihatlah ruang ini untuk pendedahan pertama saya.

Panas! Isu Artis Nanu Pegang Anjing, Mari Kita Jelaskan Apa Hukumnya Bagi Anda Faham

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 07:00 PM PDT

Kami telah mengeluarkan artikel berkaitan artis malaysia, si Nanu ni pegang anjing.



Rujuk:

http://kerabubersuara.blogspot.com/2011/08/lagi-kisah-artis-malaysia-nanu-pegang.html

Maka ramai la yang tak faham. Kita Islam ada 4 Mazhab.

MAKLUMBALAS BERKAITAN HUKUM MENYENTUH / MEMEGANG ANJING DAN KEPEKAAN UMAT ISLAM TERHADAP MAKANAN HALAL

1. PENDAHULUAN

Tulisan ini dikemukakan untuk tatapan awam sebagai menjawab aduan awam berkaitan
tindakan seorang wanita Melayu memegang anjing dan isu kepekaan masyarakat Islam
terhadap kepentingan mengambil sumber makanan halal lagi baik.

2. LATAR BELAKANG

2.1. Bahagian Penyelidikan dan Pembangunan, Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS) telah menerima aduan awam mengenai satu artikel dalam Akhbar The Star bertarikh 24 April 2010 (Sabtu) menyiarkan seorang wanita Melayu yang giat aktif menyertai secara sukarela satu pertubuhan menyelamatkan binatang terbiar seperti anjing iaitu Society, Prevention, Cruelty dan Animal(SPCA). Aktiviti seorang wanita Melayu Islam memegang seekor anak anjing telah menimbulkan isu kurang senang di kalangan pembaca akhbar tersebut.

2.2. Pengadu iaitu Nora mendakwa Akhbar The Star dianggap telah menghina Islam melalui aktiviti yang telah dilakukan oleh seorang wanita Melayu Islam. Bertitik tolak dari itu, penjelasan lanjut diketengahkan menjurus kepada isu orang Islam memelihara anjing, isu berpegang kepada sesuatu mazhab di samping kepekaan orang Islam termasuk golongan saudara baru terhadap pengambilan makanan halal terutamanya di hotel-hotel.

3. PENJELASAN BERKAITAN HUKUM ORANG ISLAM MENYENTUH / MEMEGANG ANJING MENGIKUT MAZHAB SHAFIE

3.1 Mengikut pandangan Mazhab Shafie, binatang anjing adalah termasuk dalam kategori najis mughallazah (najis berat). Kalau terkena air liur dan najisnya perlu disamak dengan air mutlak 7 kali dan sekali dengan air bercampur tanah. Menyentuh atau memegang anjing tidaklah berdosa atau menyalahi hukum Islam.

3.2 Berkaitan hukum memelihara anjing mengikut pandangan Mazhab Shafie adalah seperti berikut :

a) Diharuskan memelihara anjing untuk tujuan berburu, memelihara keselamatan rumah daripada dimasuki oleh pencuri, menjaga tanaman, rumah, harta benda dan sebagainya.

b) Tidak dibolehkan memelihara anjing untuk tujuan hobi (pet) atau dijadikan sebagai binatang hiasan di rumah. Berdasarkan syarah Imam Nawawi dalam Kitab Majd al-Musyarah wa Muhadzah, juz 9, halaman 9 menjelaskan bahawa tidak boleh memelihara anjing kecuali untuk berburu binatang, menjaga binatang ternakan, menjaga tanaman dan
menjaga keamanan rumah.

3.3 Jika dirujuk kepada pandangan Yusuf al-Qaradawi, (kitab al-Halal wa al-Haram fi al-Islam) beliau mengatakan hukum memelihara anjing sebagai binatang kesukaan adalah haram. Hal ini berdasarkan hadith Rasulullah S.A.W. yang bermaksud dari Abi Sufian bin Abu Zuhair, bahawa Nabi S.A.W. bersabda antara lain maksudnya : "Barang siapa yang memelihara anjing bukan untuk menjaga ladang atau ternakan, maka setiap hari
pahalanya berkurangan satu qirot". Erti qirot hanya Allah sahaja yang mengetahui kurangnya. Hadith ini disepakati oleh Bukhari dan Muslim.

4 . PENJELASAN ISU ORANG ISLAM MENGAMBIL JALAN MUDAH TERHADAP SESUATU MAZHAB (BERKAITAN MENYENTUH ANJING / MEMELIHARA ANJING)

4.1 Pada umumnya para ulama berpendapat bahawa orang awam diharuskan berpindah-pindah mazhab dengan syarat-syarat yang tidak menyimpang daripada al-Qur'an dan al-Hadith. Ini kerana dalam kes-kes tertentu ulama - ulama Mazhab ini berbeza mengenai perkara yang furu' (cabang) dan bukan perkara asas. Bahkan Imam-Imam Mazhab juga tidak memaksa pengikutnya hanya berpegang kepada pegangannya sahaja. Lazimnya
mereka berpindah dari satu mazhab ke mazhab yang empat kerana ada sesuatu kesulitan (masyaqqah) dan ada juga yang berpindah mazhab secara berterusan atau secara sekejap sahaja (kemudian kembali semula ke mazhab asal) adalah diharuskan.

4.2 Isu berpindah-pindah mazhab adalah dibenarkan dengan syarat tidak berlaku talfiq yang diharamkan (berlaku perkara yang tidak diiktiraf oleh ulama Islam). Apakah yang dimaksudkan dengan talfiq? Talfiq di sini bermaksud diharamkan mengumpulkan atau menghimpunkan pendapat ulama di dalam satu masalah. Jika dihimpunkan dua atau tiga pandangan ulama dalam satu masalah, para pelopor mazhab tidak membenarkan dan tidak diakui oleh mazhab tersebut. Contoh, menghimpunkan cara mengambil wuduk mengikut Mazhab Syafie, Hanbali dan Maliki dalam satu ketika adalah tidak dibenarkan. Contoh lain yang lebih mudah difahami. Bolehkah dalam satu waktu seseorang itu memakai tiga jenis pakaian tradisional iaitu Cina, Melayu dan pakaian Panjabi. Ketiga-tiga pelopor
pakaian tradisional tersebut tidak mengiktiraf cara pemakaian baju tradisional tersebut.

4.3 Memahami Mazhab Syafie secara umum adalah suatu kewajipan bagi yang berpegang dengan mazhab tersebut. Adapun isu yang timbul dalam masyarakat Islam masa kini ialah mereka tidak mendalami serta memahami sesuatu mazhab itu. Sehingga apabila timbul sesuatu kesulitan, mereka terus berpindah ke sesuatu mazhab (Hanafi) contohnya, tanpa memahami dengan lebih mendalam. Akibatnya mereka terperangkap dalam kekeliruan dan kejahilan di antara dua mazhab tersebut. Situasi ini tidak dibolehkan
sama sekali dalam konteks bermazhab.

4.4 Berbalik kepada isu seorang wanita Melayu yang memberi pandangan dibolehkan mengikut Mazhab Maliki ketika menyentuh anjing walaupun terkena air liurnya, adalah bertentangan dengan prinsip berpindah mazhab seperti yang dijelaskan di atas. Di dalam Kitab Majmu' Fatawa, halaman 382 secara jelas dinyatakan bahawa tiada seseorang perlu mengikut orangorang yang tertentu sama ada larangan dan cadangan, selain dari Rasulullah S.A.W. Seorang Islam hendaklah merujuk soalan mereka kepada ulama dan bukan mengikut citarasa tersendiri berdasarkan kecenderungan-kecenderungan tertentu yang tidak bertepatan dengan Syarak. Jumhur ulama Islam membenarkan seseorang itu mengambil keputusan atau pandangan seseorang Imam terhadap sesuatu perkara yang mana dia rasakan lebih baik dari segi komitmen agamanya atau lebih
tepat dalam hal-hal yang diselisihkan itu.

4.5 Sementara itu, Syeikh Abd al-Karim al-Khudayr mengatakan bahawa seseorang itu tidak boleh menukar pendapatnya semata-mata kerana sesuatu pandangan itu menyenangkannya atau memilih sesuatu pandangan kerana rukhsahnya (keringanan) semata-mata. Sebaliknya umat Islam boleh memilih sesuatu pandangan berdasarkan dalilnya yang terbaik di kalangan yang lain atau pandangan yang lebih benar. (Lihat Majmu' Fatawa, halaman 23).

4.6 Sebagai penegasan berdasarkan kenyataan di atas, umat Islam tidak dipaksa mengikut sesuatu pandangan sahaja tanpa mengetahui nas-nas yang memerintahkan untuk melakukan demikian. Mereka dibenarkan memilih pandangan (nas) yang lebih baik dari kalangan Imam (mazhab) yang bersesuaian. Demikian juga umat Islam tidak boleh memilih sesuatu pandangan mazhab kerana rukhsahnya / keringanannnya semata-mata.
Jika tidak membuat pemilihan, ikutilah Imam (pemimpin) yang lebih taqwa dan berilmu pengetahuan. Umat Islam dilarang memilih pandangan yang mudah dan sesuai dengan naluri tanpa melihat kepada nas-nasnya terlebih dahulu.

5. KEPEKAAN ORANG ISLAM TERMASUK GOLONGAN SAUDARA BARU TERHADAP KEUTAMAAN MENGAMBIL / MEMILIH MAKANAN HALAL

5.1 Adalah menjadi kewajipan umat Islam memilih makanan yang diyakini dan disahkan halal lagi baik termasuk premis makanan / restoran yang menyelenggarakannya. Islam mengambil berat aspek pemakanan bukan sahaja dari khasiatnya sahaja tetapi juga dari mana sumber asalnya dan daripada apa serta bagaimana ianya dihasilkan bertepatan dengan konsep halalan toyyiba (Surah al-Baqarah 2 : 168, Surah al-Maidah 5 : 88, Surah al-Anfal 8 ; 69 dan Surah al-Nahl 16 : 114). Ini kerana, daripada makanan
yang dimakan akan menjadi darah daging dan memberi kesan kepada perlakuan atau tindakan individu. Jika umat Islam tidak prihatin dalam soal memilih jenis makan minum termasuk premis makanan yang disahkan halal, dikhuatiri boleh menimbulkan fitnah di kalangan umat Islam kerana tidak menjaga status makanannya halal atau haram.

5.2 Sebagai sebuah agensi Kerajaan, Jabatan Agama Islam mempunyai bidang kuasa untuk memberi penerangan dan dakwah dari semasa ke semasa kepada umat Islam dan mengingatkan mereka supaya sentiasa berhati-hati dalam urusan pengambilan sumber makanan yang halal lagi baik. Tidak terkecuali kepada golongan saudara baru yang dilihat perlukan sokongan moral yang kuat daripada seluruh umat Islam. Namun, nasihat dan teguran secara hikmah daripada orang ramai amat diperlukan dalam pelbagai aspek supaya semua orang Islam dan termasuk golongan saudara baru memahami aspek-aspek Syariah mengikut cara yang sebenar. Oleh itu, perlu ditegaskan adalah menjadi satu tanggungjawab dan kewajipan kepada semua orang Islam untuk melaksanakan kerja-kerja dakwah sama ada melalui tulisan, secara lisan atau melalui teladan yang baik. Kerana sesungguhnya kerja-kerja dakwah tidak hanya dibebankan kepada Jabatan
Agama Islam sahaja. Sebaliknya semua orang Islam berhak melaksanakan usaha dakwah dengan apa cara sekalipun sehingga ajaran Islam tersebar ke seluruh pelusuk alam.

6. PENUTUP

Sebagai sebuah agensi agama yang menjaga kemaslahatan umat Islam di Negeri Selangor, JAIS menggesa supaya:

6.1 Media massa dan media cetak khasnya Akhbar The Star untuk tidak mengulangi paparan isu-isu yang boleh menyentuh sensitiviti agama Islam dan yang berkaitan orang Islam secara semberono. Kerana sesungguhnya tulisan yang boleh menimbulkan sensitiviti umat Islam tidak menguntungkan semua pihak. Malah jika tidak dibendung, ianya boleh menggugat keharmonian masyarakat majmuk di Malaysia.

6.2 Para ulama yang mempunyai autoriti dalam mengemukakan pandangan perlu dirujuk dalam menanggapi persoalan semasa dan tidak sewenangwenangnya setiap individu mengemukakan idea dan pandangan tanpa berlandaskan nas atau keterangan yang tepat, jelas dan berwibawa lebihlebih lagi dalam hal-hal yang bersangkutan dengan taklid mazhab.

6.3 Umat Islam diingatkan berhati-hati dalam konteks pengambilan sumber makanan yang halal lagi baik supaya menjamin kesihatan dan mendapat keberkatan dalam hidup.

Disediakan oleh :

Bahagian Penyelidikan dan Pembangunan
Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor
18 Mei 2010 / 4 Jamadilakhir 1431H

http://www.jais.gov.my/rnd/2010/mei/MaklumbalasTheStar.pdf
Dicatat oleh di

Tiada ulasan:

Catat Ulasan

Langgan: Catat Ulasan (Atom)