Human rights violated

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) is regarded as the authority when it comes to the universal standard of civil and political rights in the world.

The substantive rights protected in it are found in Part III (Articles 6 – 27) of the Covenant.

In the past few weeks, Malaysia has violated almost all the rights contained in the ICCPR. Quite an achievement?

Article 6

1. Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.

There were many death threats made against the leaders of Bersih, especially against Ambiga. Perkasa has clearly insinuated that non-Malays will be killed when he made reference to the May 13 incident.

Yet no action seems to be taken to protect the right to life. Najib even endorse the silat group who threatened to wage war against Bersih – war meaning to go and kill.

Yesterday, an individual was reported to have died while trying to run away from the police shooting tear gas in his direction.

Article 7

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The detainees under the Emergency Ordinance have given evidence of how they have been tortured and treated inhumanely while in custody.

Article 9

1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law.

Clear example will be again those held under the EO. And the many others arrested today.

Article 10

1. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.

See Article 7 above.

Article 12

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

91 people including the leaders of Bersih have had this freedom restricted.

Article 13

An alien lawfully in the territory of a State Party to the present Covenant may be expelled therefrom only in pursuance of a decision reached in accordance with law and shall, except where compelling reasons of national security otherwise require, be allowed to submit the reasons against his expulsion and to have his case reviewed by, and be represented for the purpose before, the competent authority or a person or persons especially designated by the competent authority.

This needs to be verified but I heard that a foreigner has been deported due to allegations of his/her involvement in funding Bersih.

Article 14

1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

See Article 9 above – detained without a hearing.

Article 15

1 . No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed.

The government has outlawed the wearing of certain t-shirts!!! How can it be a criminal offence?

Article 16

Everyone shall have the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

This is basically the right to a legal personality – which involves the right to the protection of the law and be equally protected everywhere by law and in practice. See Articles 6, 7, 9, 10, 14 above.

Article 17

1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.

See Articles 6, 7, 9, 10 above.

Article 18

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

Bersih has been outlawed.

Article 19

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

See Article 18 above.

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Propaganda for war by the silat groups against Bersih has been endorsed and supported by our PM directly and/or indirectly.

Article 21

The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

The Bersih rally had not been allowed – in fact, the police had threatened Bersih not to go on with their rally.

Article 22

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Bersih is considered an illegal organisation.

Article 23

1. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

The right to family life of those detained (mentioned above) has not been protected.

Article 24

1. Every child shall have, without any discrimination as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, national or social origin, property or birth, the right to such measures of protection as are required by his status as a minor, on the part of his family, society and the State.

The rights of the children of those detained have not been protected.

Article 25

Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions:
(a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives;
(b) To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors;

This is the whole purpose of Bersih! But they are not allowed to exist.

Article 26

All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

People are discriminated because they agree with the objectives championed by Bersih.

Article 27

In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language

.
Ambiga has been labelled as “anti-Islam” allegedly due to the views she held about the Lina Joy’s case and other things she did when she was the President of the Bar Council.

Rights not mentioned:-

Article 8 which talks about slavery

Article 11 which talks about imprisonment for failure to fulfil a contractual obligation

Not bad - almost a clean sweep! No wonder Malaysia has continued to resist ratifying the ICCPR!

Malaysia boleh!

We facilitate illegal activities!

The Home Minister* said that Bersih is still deemed illegal in this country (see here).

But the strange thing (or to a lot of us, these kind of things are not "strange" anymore) is that he said that if Bersih succeeds in applying to gather in a stadium, "the government would facilitate the gathering".

So putting it together, the conclusion is that our givernment doesn't mind facilitating what it deems to be illegal activities (activities of an illegal group should be illegal activities, no?).

Malaysia boleh!

*Him again!!! Maybe i should make a special label just for him!!!

Living up to expectations!

Influential and prominent people (who speak the truth fearlessly) from entering the state.

NRICs not issued to the Penans who have suffered much - this way, they cannot vote.

Certain websites were "interfered" with.

Ceramahs cut short.

I won't mention about the postal votes, the money used to buy "stuffs", the threats etc.

Well done, BN. Once again, you lived up to expectations. And the super filthy rich person is once again the CM (one wonders tho how he gets so rich when the State is so poor in comparison despite making billions of Ringgits in timber, timber products, crude oil, natural gas, pepper).

Pic taken from the Star Online

Malaysia boleh!

Oops... i stamped it!

"(Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein) said his officials had no intention to deface the bibles."

Pic taken from MI

The line is taken from this following article in the MI - Hisham: Alkitab stamping standard move.

I actually read this interview in The Star - but when i looked for it again, it had been amended (see here).

I initially wondered if it was a mistake - or was someone told not to publish it. I am thinking it is the latter.

But this is utter nonsense!!!! No intention???? So is he saying that his officials are so thick that they stamped the Bibles recklessly? But there were over 5,000 copies if i am not mistaken! Negligently? Accidentally????

Malaysia boleh!

Anti-rasuah?

I hate corrupt cops!!!!!!!

Really?

This is a true account. I was driving home from outstation today. My sister was driving her car and she was directly behind me all the way until this incident took place.

Somewhere along the highway, there was a police road block. I slowed down and the cop signaled for me to go. I drove off, expecting my sister to be told the same thing. But no!!!!! The cop told her to pull her car over to the road side.

Now here is what happened - the cop told her that she was speeding in a 80 km/h stretch along the highway. Now there was no such stretch along the part of the highway that we traveled on. I am sure of it as i kept an eye out for the speed limit all the time. My brother who was in my sister's car also did not notice such a stretch. My sister was sure there was no such stretch too.

But the cop insisted that she was speeding along the 80 km/h stretch. My sister pointed out that i was ahead of her all the time but yet they did not pull me over. He ignored that.

Seeing that there was no way and no point to argue, my sister told him to just issue her the summons. He refused and told her to drive off!!!!!

This is purely my personal take on the incident - my sister was not speeding and the cop was trying to get her to bribe him. Think about it:-

• My brother, my sister and i did not notice such a 80 km/h stretch along that part of the highway. I have also driven pass that stretch many times and never noticed it;

• If there was indeed such a stretch, and if my sister was speeding, then it would mean that i was too. So why wasn't i pulled over and my offense pointed out? I think it could be because I was driving a car with the license plate of that particular state we were driving in while my sister's car's license plate was from another state. So perhaps, the cop thought he could fool her as she was from out of the state but could not fool me?

• If my sister indeed was speeding, then why didn't he issue her a summons when she did not want to argue with him anymore? Was he scared that we would contest the matter in court and he would have to show proof of such a stretch and that my sister was speeding?
  

My sister was not speeding. My personal view is that the cop was looking for a bribe, thinking that since she was from another state, she would have wanted an easy way out. Well, my sister had principles - but i dun think that the cop did.

This angered me so much - with the high number of crimes reported in our country, policemen appear to me to be setting up road blocks along the highway to try to get bribes instead of doing real police work.

Malaysia boleh!

Interference (?)

The former Inspector-General of Police of Malaysia (the top cop of the country) said that there was excessive interference in police work. He was quoted saying "All kinds of people interfere. People from the ministry itself, outsiders and people with vested interest who want to do things that are not right". He went on to say "The ministry I mentioned is the Home Ministry, of course".

Pic obtained from UMNO online

The Home Ministry interfering with the police?

Well, dun take my word for it - the top cop should know best! Read the news report here.

The Secretary General of the Home Ministry has denied this in a later news report (see here).

OK. Something is not right here. I do not know what is the real story but it HAS to be one of these:-

1. The former IGP is a liar; or
2. The Sec-Gen of the Home Ministry is a liar; or
3. The Sec-Gen has no idea of the interference that is going on; or
4. The former IGP had been mistaken.

I can't think of any other possibilities. Can you? Let me know - it'll be appreciated.

The first 3 possibilities are worrying. The last one? Well, worrying too - the IGP has been serving all this time under the impression of there being interference by the government?

Malaysia boleh!

Learning = anti-constitution?

Kelab Belia Graduan 1Malaysia lodged a police report recently against the Bar Council. It was regarding its MyConstitution campaign and distribution of the accompanying Rakyat Guide (RG) booklets that describe the Constitution in simple, layman terms.

There was a comment about it in today's newspaper - "The Citizen and the Constitution". You can read it here. here is an excerpt from that article:-

"Its (the Kelab) secretary-general Ezaruddin Abd Rahman said they were concerned the RGs that were being distributed to the public and available over the Internet (www.perlembagaanku.com) touched on ways to amend the Constitution".

Ezaruddin (taken from the club's website)

Yes, that's true. So what is wrong with that?

Worse still, how is it "inciting hatred and feelings of being “anti” the Constitution and rejecting it as being irrelevant today"?

I only want echo the writer's last line - "A campaign giving people knowledge and helping them to think for themselves is certainly not sedition".

Are they afraid that people will start learning their rights and begin to exercise it? Is that not a good thing - or do they feel threatened by it?

It appears then that this Kelab think that helping people learn their rights under the law is sedition.

Oh, go to the Kelab's website and see who is the Club's patron:-

Malaysia boleh!

A lawyer?

Is it any surprise that the witness asked if he was really a lawyer (see here).

But apparently, he is. He is a Deputy Public Prosecutor with over 20 years of experience!

Malaysia boleh!

Forced patriotism

It's gonna be the Independence Day celebration here in Malaysia soon. You'll be seeing the Malaysian flag all over the place, giving the impression of the spirit of patriotism.

Pic taken from The Star

But does it really reflect how the people feel? I would think most of the people who fly the flag are doing so not because they are patriotic. I have my reasons to think so. I for one will have to admit and confess that in all my adult life, i never felt the urge to fly the flag.

But there is now proof that some people are forced to fly the flag. Traders were told to fly the flag or lose their trading license!!!!! No kidding. You can read the report here.

I am told that this threat directive has been withdrawn. If it has, it still does not change the fact that we've got leaders who think in this manner!!!

I have to say that with all due respect, the Ipoh mayor has really lost the plot. What is the purpose of flying the flag? There are things which you cannot force people to do - for it would lose its meaning and be pointless. Like you cannot force someone to love you.

Missed the point!

But this is how it is in this country. If the leaders want the people to show their love for the country, they threaten the people!!!!!

Malaysia boleh!

Bullet

PJ Utara MP, Tony Pua received a death threat recently:-

Pics taken from The Malay Mail online

"Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng said police believed the threat could be over Pua's statement calling for the abolishment of the bumiputra discount for houses costing more than RM500,000 and commercial property costing more than RM2mil" (taken from The Star newspaper - read the report here).

If the police are right, then it is really sad. Such discounts are clearly acts of discrimination - some may say racism as it (arguably) considers people of a race more superior.

In our country, when someone speaks out against discrimination, they get a death threat.

Maybe i may get one too...

Malaysia boleh!

A note, a statement and many questions

How are you gonna justify this? (Pic taken from online)

I have reproduced here the statement made by the Attorney General and published in The Star today. I have also asked certain questions which i hope - but doubt - will be answered satisfactorily.

IN Teoh Beng Hock’s death inquiry today, the officers representing the Public Prosecutor, in assisting the said inquiry, intended to put in a note found in the deceased’s sling bag which contains an indication that may throw some light regarding his death.

However, the existence of the note was disputed on the grounds of delay in disclosure, failure to furnish a copy of the said note to the counsel representing the deceased’s family and suppression of evidence by the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers vehemently denies any suppression of evidence (and) instead was equally startled when the discovery of the note was made known and thereafter caused further investigation to be carried out.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers was informed of the discovery of the note by the investigating officer, ASP Ahmad Nazri bin Zainal, on Oct 7, 2009, some two over months after Teoh Beng Hock’s death.

So at their own admission, they knew of this note for around 10 months (around 300 plus days) but only decide to reveal it NOW!!!! Why??????

According to the investigating officer, it was not found when he first searched the deceased’s sling bag after the incident.

Not found???? So how did it mysteriously and miraculously appear then? Why should we even bother about it?

The note was immediately translated and there was sufficient cause to send it to be analysed by a document examiner of the Chemistry Department.

The said note was sent on Oct 9, 2009 and subsequently on Oct 20, 2009.

The document examiner prepared his reports and they were considered by the Attorney-General himself where the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, was not convinced of the authenticity of the note due to insufficient samples to verify the handwritings, in particular the Chinese characters.

So if he was not convinced then, why is he trying to tender it now?

In addition, the note was said to be discovered some two over months after the death and that this would raise suspicion over its authenticity and discovery.

I FULLY agree with this statement! Very, very suspicious. So again, why??????

Having considered these factors, Tan Sri Abdul Gani was of the view that the note should not be tendered until and unless the investigating officer could provide satisfactory explanation as to its discovery.

So by wanting to tender it now, can i conclude that the IO provided a satisfactory explanation? Still, if he did, then why wait til now???? Did it take him SO LONG to come up with an explanation? More suspicious...

As regards the note, the Attorney-General’s Chambers was earlier briefed by the investigating officer that he conducted a thorough search after being advised by the psychiatric (sic) that ordinarily there would be a note left in a suicide case.

However, recently, the investigating officer owned up by admitting that he did in fact find the note when he searched the sling bag on July 17, 2009 but did not realise the significance of it as there were other documents found and that they were written in both Chinese and Roman characters.

Wait a minute - so he discovered it when he searched the bag? Teoh's body was found on the 16th June 2009. Why was his bag only searched by the IO 1 MONTH LATER??? If this was not the first time he searched the bag, i asked the same question i did earlier - how did the note suddenly appear?????

And the IO did not realise the significance of it????? Why??? The AG's statement said he did not realise it "as there were other documents found". WHAT?????????????? And the IO did not realise it could have been significant because it was "written in both Chinese and Roman characters"?????? So? Is it because he did not understand it? How and why could he have not bothered with it????????

As a result of this, the Attorney-General decided to put the note in and directed the investigating officer to explain this in court to avoid any repercussion in future and let the coroner decide on its weight after considering the explanation by the investigating officer and the document examiner’s report.

Therefore, there is no suppression or withholding of evidence and that the decision for not tendering it earlier was made based on the document examiner’s report as well as the discovery of the note which gave rise to suspicion.

If the decision not to tender it earlier was for those reasons, so WHY is the AG tendering it only NOW?????? What has happened since then????????

The Attorney-General’s Chambers will tender a document as evidence only and until it is satisfied that any shroud of suspicion surrounding it is lifted.

Unfortunately, all this only raises more suspicion.

Jabatan Peguam Negara
9 August 2010

I teach my students every year that it is only in the movies that you see lawyers tendering important letters late in a court case, catching everyone by surprise. From next year onwards, i will have to tell my students this only happens in movies AND in Malaysia.

Malaysia boleh!

A slap on the wrist

Last year, a group of men did something totally disrespectful and utterly disgusting - they brought a cow's head to protest against the relocation of a Hindu temple.

Pic taken from Malaysian insider

To most of us, it would not be so bad. Furthermore, everyone has a right to voice their opinion - but it was the manner they went about doing it. A cow is sacred to Hindus. what they did was surely contemptuous.

Rightly, they were charged under the Sedition Act. Eyzva Ezhar Ramly, 31 was charged under the Section 4(1)(a) of the Sedition Act 1948 for “inciting racial animosity with carrying a cow-head”. Mohd Azmir was also charged under the same act for carrying and stepping on a cow-head with “the intention to create racial tension” (see here).

They both pleaded guilty. Therefore, Azmir admitted that he INTENDED TO CREATE RACIAL TENSION.

When i heard the news, i asked some of my students how much they would sentence these people if they were the judges, bearing in mind the charge involved 'intention' and not a strict liability offence. Most said around 5 years in prison. They were all shocked to hear that Eyzva only got one month while Azmir got off with a fine of around 600 quid!!!!

WHAT??????????????????????????????????????????????

This is a serious offence!!!!! They INTENDED to offend and provoke racial tension. A lot of people were asking if it would have been the same a group of Indians or Chinese were to offend the sensitivities of the Muslims. Do you think they would be let off this lightly. i doubt it.

The learned(?) Judge even had the cheek to say "In a multiracial country, we need to take care of the sensitivity of others" (see here). But then she lets them off lightly? Do you think this will serve as a lesson to them? Yes, it's a lesson that if i want to offend and cause racial tension in Malaysia by provoking the Hindus, i will get off lightly.

This is all the more a mockery of our justice system when one considers that Eyzva has got a criminal record and not a first time offender.

Furthermore the rest of those involved were let off. It was reported as follows:-

Defence counsel Afifuddin Hafifi, in applying to the court to acquit and discharge the four, said: “The culprits (Eyzva Ezhar and Mohd Azmir) have pleaded guilty, hence there is no reason for the prosecution to pursue the case.”

Right!!!! So if 10 people went and murder a family, killing them all, and 3 of them has been found guilty, it is ok to let off the rest. There is 'no reason' to pursue the case. What bullsh*t. if they are guilty of a crime, they should be punished accordingly.

But the judge agreed. It was reported that they were all hugging each other in joy (see here) - celebrating no doubt that in Malaysia, you can get off for certain offences!!!!

Malaysia boleh!

1805

Today, we know from a ministerial reply in Parliament and subsequent cases that, between 2003 and 16th July 2009, there were 1805 deaths in custody. This translates into an average of 3 deaths every 4 days. And if the trend continues, even as you are reading this, another body is probably being sent to the morgue and with formalities dispensed with, it becomes yet another body packed up, wrapped up and buried, never to be seen or mentioned again.

(Excerpt taken from here).

The memorial which was held last Saturday

3 deaths in custody every 4 days!!!!!!

Malaysia boleh!

Jail is the safest place

So what happens if your safety is threatened? If you believe some people are going to abduct you? You have a very good reason for believing that. After all, you have accused their people for torturing you (see here).

So what can you do?

Lodge a police report.

Done that.

Go to the courts to apply for a protection order.

Done that.

The results? The police apparently haven't finished their investigations. the court apparently has no power.

So for N Tharmendran, the only option is for him to to go jail!!!!!! You can read all about it here.

Pic obtained from The Star

Malaysia boleh!

Endorsing racism?

So Malaysia has a racist association (meaning it is legal!!!!) - Perkasa. Everyone know about them - and both government and opposition MPs have been speaking out against them.

Perkasa basically tries to champion the rights of the Malay race. This is blatantly discrimination and even racist!

So it was shocking that when a suggestion to for an association to champion the rights of the Chinese race, the Deputy Prime Minister, Muhyiddin said that the people are free to do so!

“We can have Chinese Perkasa and even Indian Perkasa,” he was quoted to have said!!!! You can read about it here.

Shocking! The DPM allowing people to form racist associations. Surely this is against what the government has been saying all along - 1Malaysia. Why segregate the people further? Are we not all Malaysians? Should not everyone then have equal rights? Why do we need associations to fight for the rights of particular race groups?

In fact, in the article linked above, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz has been quoted to say that such a suggestion is “ridiculous,” saying a Chinese Perkasa would only fan racial tension.

He said also that it does not gel with the PM’s 1 Malaysia concept.

Sir, you just endorse something which is ridiculous, will fan racial tension and which does not gel with the PM's view!
No, i din say that - one of your ministers did.

So a minister is contracting the Deputy Prime Minister, saying that the DPM is endorsing something which is ridiculous, will fan racial tension and did not gel with what the PM has said earlier. The funny thing is that i dun think he know wat he did!!!!! He was just criticising the idea without knowing the fact that the DPM endorsed it.

Did he say that what our DPM said is ridiculous and does not gel with what the PM wants?

Malaysia boleh!

Yes means no?

The Bible Society of Malaysia had a shipment of Al-Kitabs (Bibles in the Malay language) held at Port Klang.

On the 17th June 2010, I have been informed that they received a letter from KDN (The Home Ministry) which translated reads as follows:

"This is to inform that after due consideration given to your request, the KDN Putrajaya has made the decision to release the said publication."

However, when they went to KDN Port Klang on the 24th June 2010 to collect the bibles, they were told that the bibles are to be released only to be returned to the exporter. The writer of the letter, Encik Suniranto said that another letter will be issued.

Malaysia boleh!

Why? Well, why not?!

Prof Ramlah Adam from UiTM asked “Why challenge the NEP which was working so well?” You can read about it here.

Well, why not, i ask? After all, isn't the NEP unfair? Isn't it based on principles of discrimination? Doesn't it offend basic human rights principles? I would answer all these in the affirmative - and think that that itself is good enough reason to challenge it.

Furthermore and/or in the alternative, i would like to ask the learned prof what makes her think it is 'working so well'? Is it because it benefits the people of the Malay race and she is from that race? Perhaps she is not in a position to make such a decision then. (Altho some think that altho it attempts to help the Malays, it doesn't in reality. Not for all of them).

Anyways, if it really has been working so well, why do we need to keep it anymore? If it worked so well, it should have achieved its goals long ago.

Malaysia boleh!

Promises fulfilled

So the promise has been fulfilled. What promise? "Najib made a pledge to approve the allocation (of RM3 million) for the school (SRJK (C) Rasa)a day after the by-election on Sunday, provided the Barisan won".

You can read about it here.

Wait a minute - he promises before the b(u)y-election that he will give the voters RM3 million if his party wins???? I dun have to have comment much. Res ipsa loquitor - the facts speak for themselves.

When some innocent person heard about this, she immediately asked if they can do such a thing. It sounds so wrong. I agree. Doesn't it sound so wrong?

If BN is truly concerned for the people there, they would give the money irrespective whether BN wins or not. BN is after all the ruling government.

What kind of ruling government do we have? They will only help the people if they win. If they dun, NO HELP (like the RM3 million) would be given!

A lot have told me that this is politics. Yeah, i know. And i'm glad i'm not involved in it.

The MCA (a component party of the BN) President (Dr. Chua) was quoted in the aforementioned news report to have said that "the Prime Minister’s action proved that the Barisan had not dangled the allocation as a 'bargaining tool' to fish for votes in Hulu Selangor".

I'm afraid i cannot comprehend his allegation. Sure, the PM kept his promise - but how does that not prove it was not used as a 'bargaining tool' (some might even say a bribe)? Doesn't it just confirms it?

Malaysia boleh!

Reckless

It was reported today that Road Transport Department (JPJ) director-general Datuk Solah Mat Hassan was 'shocked' at the 'lawless behaviour of motorists'.

You can read the news report here.

I was curious as to what are the terrible things the motorists are doing to shocked Datuk Solah. As i read the article, i was shocked myself - but more at Daruk Solah's reaction!!!

Among the things that were allegedly shocking were drivers overtaking along double lines or jumped queue using the emergency lane or the road shoulder.



Among other things pointed out were failure to stop at traffic lights, drivers using their handphones and failure to buckle up or motorcyclists who failed to put on a helmet.

I was like 'Hello????' I see these things happen on almost a daily basis!

It is surprising that Datuk Solah was shocked - and it is really sad that drivers in Malaysia drive in such a reckless way.

Malaysia boleh!

Caned for what?

Malaysia made it to BBC News Online again - and as usual, it was not in a flattering light. The headlines read "Malaysia Canes Three Women For Extra-Marital Sex". You can read it here.

It was reported in the local papers here.

Please do not get me wrong - i am NOT blogging to comment about the Syariah Law. I am merely commenting on what Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein was quoted saying regarding this matter in the local news article linked above.

Here is what was reported:-

Hishammuddin said he decided to bring to public attention the punishment meted to the three women because there had been "too much hype" over Kartika’s sentence.

"People are saying that no woman has been caned before and that Kartika should not be caned.

"Today I am announcing that we have already done it."

Pic taken form The Star Online

Earlier in the news report, it was said that the 3 women "...were the first women in Malaysia to receive such punishment under syariah law".

Wait a minute. It seems to me then that these unfortunate 3 women were caned so that people cannot complain against Kartika's sentence (who has been sentenced to caning for drinking beer). Now, according to the Home Minister, no one can say that 'no woman has been caned before'.

When i teach my students on the purposes of punishments imposed by law, it is never a reason that it is to prevent others from complaining about another's sentence!

Malaysia boleh!