Archive for May 28th, 2013
Malaysians wants IPCMC to end deaths in custody as they have no confidence in any police special committee even if it is headed by the IGP himself
The announcement by the Bukit Aman management director Mortadza Nazarene that the police will be setting up a special committee headed by the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar to curb incidents involving deaths in police lock-ups is totally unsatisfactory and completely unacceptable, as what Malaysians want is an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) as recommended by the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission of Inquiry eight years ago in 2005 to put an end once and for all to the scandalous and endless spate of deaths in police custody.
After demonstrating himself in his first week as the most “political” IGP in history whose first priority is to protect the regime rather than the safety of Malaysians from crime and fear of crime, with scant regard to the human rights of Malaysians to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, Malaysians have no confidence in the IGP or in any police special committee even if it is headed by the IGP to put an end to deaths in police custody.
Khalid had been the Deputy IGP since April 2011 and Malaysians are entitled to know what he had done the past two years as the No. 2 in the police force to put and end to deaths in police custody, a scandalous state of affairs which had been highlighted by the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission of Inquiry way back in 2005?
Even now, despite another two deaths in police lockups – N. Dharmendran, 32, at the KL police headquarters on May 21 and R. Jamesh Ramesh 40 at the Penang police headquarters on May 26 – the police announcement appears to be more of a PR or public relations exercise, as the setting up of the special police committee had not been done but is still in the future tense!
How many deaths in police custody have occurred in the past eight years since the report and recommendations of the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission of Inquiry in 2005? Read the rest of this entry »
Zahid best example of being “own victim” of UMNO/BN 13GE “war room” lies about DAP spending more than a billion ringgit in past six years to employ 3,000-strong “Red Bean Army” cybertroopers to demonise him and other UMNO/BN leaders
The new Home Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi is the best example of being “own victim” of the lies of UMNO/BN 13GE “war room” about DAP spending more than a billion ringgit in past six years to employ a 3,000-strong “Red Bean Army” of cybertroopers to demonise him and other UMNO/BN leaders.
This is again illustrated by today’s Utusan Malaysia, one of the chief instruments of UMNO/BN propangada in the 13GE, which carried a report headlined “Red Bean Army serang kerajaan – Ekoran DAP gagal peroleh kuasa di Putrajaya”, which states:
“Kuala Lumpur 27 Mei – Kecaman serta penghinaan berterusan yang dihamburkan oleh Red Bean Army terhadap kerajaan jelas membuktikan tentera siber DAP itu gagal menutup rasa kecewa kerana tidak berjaya memperoleh ‘kuasa’ di Putrajaya.
“Menteri Dalam Negeri, Datuk Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi berkata, walaupun beliau sendiri tidak terlepas daripada serangan tentera siber berkenaan, perkara itu adalah lumrah bagi mereka yang bergelar ahli politik.
“Meskipun tidak menyatakan bentuk tindakan yang akan diambil terhadap pihak terbabit, beliau dengan nada sinis memberitahu, mereka merupakan jenis manusia yang hanya tahu menyalahkan pihak lain berbanding diri sendiri.”
I do not believe Zahid suffers from any hallucination about the DAP spending more than a billion ringgit in the past six years to employ a 3,000-strong “Red Bean Army” of cybertroopers to demonise him and other Umno/BN leaders.
The kindest thing one can say about Zahid is to regard him as an “own victim” of UMNO/BN 13GE “war room” lies about DAP spending more than a billion ringgit in the past six years to employ 3,000-strong “Red Bean Army” cybertroopers to demonise him and other UMNO/BN leaders. Read the rest of this entry »
Open letter to the EC
― Tessa Houghton
The Malaysian Insider
May 27, 2013
May 27 ― Dear EC Deputy Chairman Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar,
I wish to comment on your recent statements in an interview reported in The Malaysian Insider, dated May 27, 2013 (reproduced below):
According to Wan Ahmad, the electoral system used in Malaysia is also used by developed countries that have been practising democracy for a long time.
“Britain, already a few hundred years practising democracy, until now it uses first past the post… Australia, first past the post. New Zealand first past the post mixed a bit with the proportional representation (PR) system. India, the largest democratic country in the world, 800 million voters, first past the post,” he said.
The EC deputy chairman said it would not be possible for PR to win so many seats, including a few states, if the “first-past-the-post” system was unfair.
New Zealand does not, as you state, utilise FPP “mixed a bit” with PR. It utilises the Mixed Member Proportional system (MMP), which is distinct from simple/’single winner’ FPP. New Zealand used to suffer under the same simple FPP system as Malaysia currently suffers from, which resulted in the right-wing National Party consistently gaining power despite a majority of New Zealanders voting for the left-wing Labour Party, and in a lack of recognition of smaller parties. Wide-scale electoral reform was undertaken in 1992 in response to huge dissatisfaction with the system, through a referendum that allowed NZ citizens to decide on their preferred voting system.
Almost 85 per cent of New Zealanders voted to throw out FPP, with over 70 per cent voting to replace it with MMP. A 2011 referendum held to re-gauge New Zealander’s voting preferences found almost 60 per cent of New Zealanders in favour of retaining MMP, and less than half of the 42 per cent wanting change expressing a desire to return to FPP.
As such, your claim that NZ “uses FPP” and conflation of the two systems is a grave misrepresentation of New Zealanders’ opinions on the system of FPP used in Malaysia. Read the rest of this entry »
National reconciliation or retaliation?
Posted by Kit in 1Malaysia, Elections, Najib Razak, nation building on Tuesday, 28 May 2013
Lim Ka Ea
The Malaysian Insider
May 27, 2013
Lim Ka Ea is a traveller who sees travel as the answer to all the world’s woes. Writing is a grand love. Ka Ea has had NGO and legal experience.
MAY 27 — There was no cry of jubilation. Neither were there tears of joy.
If you had been in a coma during the past few weeks and were suddenly awakened to the image of the Barisan Nasional’s victory speech on television, you would have thought that someone important had died and the whole nation had gone into mourning mode. Why wouldn’t you when Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his sidekicks looked as if the apocalypse was upon them?
Before you could even make out the hazy details that had preceded such collective sombreness, you found yourself being hit by a train of confusion. “Chinese tsunami” quickly followed by “national reconciliation” — two terms coined together only mere minutes after the announcement of the election results were enough to make me want to crawl back into that coma. Ignorance is after all bliss during moments like this.
As I begin to hear comments pouring in from different public figures and the public, of what they thought of the proposed national reconciliation, I felt sheepishly stupid. Am I the only one who doesn’t understand what it means or what it’s for?
The coma must have impaired my intellectual capacity. Full stop. Read the rest of this entry »
-
You are currently browsing the archives for Tuesday, May 28th, 2013
