An act of sedition

An act of sedition
24 Apr, 2009

Even renowned historians like Emeritus Professor Dato' Dr Khoo Khay Kim would find great difficulty in disagreeing that the line of succession for most of the nine Malaysian thrones has been broken and those who now sit on the throne are no longer the legitimate successors ‘appointed by God’.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Karpal sedition trial: Decision on discharge on April 28

(The Star, 22/04/09) - DAP chairman Karpal Singh will know on April 28 whether he will succeed in his bid to get a discharge not amounting to an acquittal of the sedition charge against him. The High Court here would make its ruling on that date, it said on Wednesday.

The veteran lawyer is alleged to have uttered seditious words during a media conference relating to Sultan of Perak Sultan Azlan Shah’s consent to remove Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin as mentri besar.

He allegedly committed the offence at his law firm Messrs Karpal Singh & Co between noon and 12.30pm on Feb 6.

If convicted he faces a maximum RM5,000 fine or three years jail, or both, under Section 4 (1) (b) of the Sedition Act.

He was initially charged in the Sessions Court on March 17, but the case was transferred to the High Court.

*************************************************

Karpal Singh will know in the next few days whether he would have to answer to the charge of sedition for the statement he made during a press conference in his office in February. What Karpal said, simply, was that the Sultans could be brought to court. And that, according to the government, is an act of sedition.

I remember, back in the 1990s, when Umno, in particular Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, criss-crossed the length and breadth of this country to inform the rakyat that the Rulers’ immunity had been removed and that they could now be brought to court if they commit any offence, criminal or civil. And, in fact, since then, some have had to face court action and have, sometimes, even lost the court case.

The Malay Rulers sold out this nation to the British in 1946, screamed Umno. The Sultans signed the document agreeing that Malaysia becomes the Malayan Union. Under the Malayan Union, the Rulers would lose all their powers. But Umno opposed the Malayan Union. So the British had no choice but to abort the Malayan Union and, in 1948, the Federation of Malaya was formed. Because of Umno, the position of the Rulers was restored whereas it was the Rulers who betrayed the nation but Umno saved them.

Yes, that was the song Umno was singing back in the 1990s after they removed the immunity of the Rulers in 1993 whereby the Rulers could now be dragged to court. But there was something in this song and dance routine that Umno did not mention. Umno kept this point well hidden. And that point is, under the Malayan Union, the immigrants would be given Malayan citizenship and all races would have equal rights and status. This, Umno did not dare mention, because this was the main reason why it opposed the Malayan Union. It had nothing to do with the fact that under the Malayan Union the Rulers would lose all their powers or that Umno wanted to restore these powers of the Rulers.

Umno did not hold its punches in the nationwide anti-Monarchy campaign. The traitors in the 1946 Malayan Union ‘conspiracy’ were the Rulers. They were the ones who sold out the nation and their race. In the same process, they, the Rulers, also lost all their powers. But Umno stepped in not only to save the nation and the Malay race but also to save the Rulers as well. Because of Umno, the Rulers got back all their powers, which the British took away and with the consent of the Rulers on top of that.

In short, the Rulers acted in a treasonous manner, even to the extent that they themselves lost all their powers. But Umno, the patriots, came in to save the day. And even those traitors and treasonous Rulers who had signed away all their powers by agreeing to the Malayan Union were saved by Umno.

But the nationwide campaign to inform the rakyat about how, in 1946, the Rulers had betrayed the nation and their own race, and about how Umno had saved the day, was not considered a treasonous act in spite of what they were saying made the Rulers appear really, really bad. It was not even considered seditious although this campaign turned the people against the Rulers and, for the first time in history, Malaysians were beginning to talk about abolishing the Monarchy and about turning Malaysia into a Republic.

You can criticise the Rulers, said the then Deputy Prime Minister Tun Ghafar Baba. In fact, you can even drag the Rulers to court. But you must not talk about abolishing the Monarchy and for Malaysia to be turned into a Republic. That would be seditious, explained Ghafar.

Sedition is an old and archaic law. It was a law at a time when the Rulers were considered God’s representative here on earth. To criticise the Rulers would tantamount to criticising God Himself. So it is seditious to criticise the Rulers as you would be criticising God. That was how it worked back in the days of jahiliyah (ignorance) when people did not know any better.

But how many of the Rulers, today, are legitimate Rulers? How many of the Rulers have been ousted from their throne and pretenders to the throne installed onto the throne in their place? We shall talk about all this in another article in another time. Suffice, at this point, that I say the legitimacy of many of the Rulers can be questioned. And if these Rulers are not the legitimate Rulers then how can they be considered as appointed by God? It was not God but the powers-that-be or the government-of-the-day who installed them onto the throne. Leave God out of this. It was man, not God, who gave the Rulers their throne, at least in many of the cases, if not all.

The crime of sedition no longer exists. It ceased to exist when man took over the job of God in appointing the Rulers. Even renowned historians like Emeritus Professor Dato' Dr Khoo Khay Kim would find great difficulty in disagreeing that the line of succession for most of the nine Malaysian thrones has been broken and those who now sit on the throne are no longer the legitimate successors ‘appointed by God’.

Karpal did not commit sedition in February. He did not commit sedition because the law should no longer exist. And it should no longer exist because it is impossible to commit a crime of sedition against God’s appointees on earth when God never appointed them His appointees in the first place.

But let us see what the court says on 28 April 2009. Maybe it will call in Emeritus Professor Dato' Dr Khoo Khay Kim to testify as to whether God was involved in the appointment of the Sultan of Perak and whether, therefore, Karpal did, in fact, commit a crime of sedition.

*************************************************

It’s in the Constitution

"Sultans and Rajas are constitutional monarchs and have powers determined by the Federal Constitution."

Brave New World (The Star)
February 19, 2009

I wish that all those people calling for Karpal Singh’s head would just take a minute and pick up the Federal Constitution. Turn to Article 182 and you will see provisions for a “Special Court”.

The job of this Special Court is to try civil proceedings brought against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or any of the Sultans.

This was not always the case. Before 1993, the rulers had absolute immunity. And before 1984, they actually had the power to veto legislation. These powers were taken away by the Barisan Nasional government headed by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

DAP chairman Karpal Singh’s desire for the Sultan of Perak to be brought to court is reasonable and allowed for by law. Besides, I think it is a good thing that the King and the Sultans can be brought to court.

You see, the days of the all-powerful king is gone now and that is, for me at least, progress. It shows that we are a society that values democracy.

Yes, we have Sultans and Rajas, but they are constitutional monarchs. This means that they have powers determined by the Constitution and not some divine power to do as they wish. This being the case, surely if they overstep their boundaries, if they behave in an unconstitutional manner, they should be challenged – respectfully, properly – in a court of law.

Now, did the Sultan of Perak act in a way that was unconstitutional when he appointed a new Mentri Besar? It is arguable.

The power to appoint a Mentri Besar is clearly at the discretion of the Sultan. This is one of the few real powers that he has. A power that he does not have is to dismiss an existing Mentri Besar.

Usually this does not raise many problems. During the last general election, we saw the Sultan of Perlis and the Sultan of Terengganu both deciding on who should be the new Mentri Besar of their respective states.

They made decisions that went against the desires of the majority party in both state legislative assemblies. The two monarchs thought that their choices commanded the confidence of the two Houses and were the best men for the job. It was their prerogative.

But the current case in Perak is different. The Sultan chose a new Mentri Besar while the old one was still in office. By appointing a new man, he was in effect sacking the old one. And sacking the Mentri Besar is not within his constitutional powers.

I think there is room for debate on this matter and, ideally, it should be settled in the Special Court.

Actually, I am rather curious as to why the Sultan did not just dissolve the state assembly when requested. All this party-hopping business was wreaking havoc on the public’s faith in the democratic system.

Surely, the clearest and fairest way out of the debacle was to have fresh state elections.

For the sake of continued faith in democracy, I would have thought the Sultan, who has spoken many times so eloquently about democracy and rule of law, would have just said “right, let the people decide again”.

After all, the greatest threat to political, and thus national, stability are a people who have lost their faith in the democratic system. It is only when such faith is lost that extreme behaviour emerges.

Anyway, what is done is done; legal battles are being fought over the Perak matter and that particular crisis will be settled in its own time.

Meanwhile, there is much that can still be achieved. The states ruled by Pakatan Rakyat must continue to push their agenda forward and live up to their election promises.

For example, I notice with a little dismay that the new Selangor government has yet to withdraw the case against Sagong Tasi.

In 2002, Sagong obtained a judgment in his favour by the Court of Appeal which held that his Orang Asli community had a propriety interest in their customary land. This meant that when the land was taken by the government, they should have been properly compensated.

This case was against the former state government and, of course, Datuk Seri Khir Toyo and his men appealed the decision.

Considering the fact that Pakatan Rakyat is concerned about justice and fair treatment to all Malaysians, and considering also that the last MB of Perak was making headway in granting proper titles to the Orang Asli in his state, the current Selangor government should just stop the action.

Yes, the battle of Perak must continue. But there are many other battles to be fought and won. Fairness and justice must be striven for on all fronts, continuously. It’s easy to forget this amid the shrill cries of “traitor” by the ill-informed.

Malaysia Politics in Turmoil

Malaysia Politics in Turmoil
19 Mar, 2009

The anointment of Najib Tun Razak as prime minister could hit some bumps in the road

Najib's candidacy has been badly bruised by an extraordinary speech to the Rotary Club in Kuala Lumpur by Zaid Ibrahim, who was appointed by Badawi last year as a minister in the prime minister's office with a mandate to clean out the country's scandal-ridden judiciary. However, Zaid was forced out of office by UMNO stalwarts

Asiasentinel.com

Against all odds, what has been the almost certain anointment of Najib Tun Razak as Malaysia's prime minister appears to be foundering as opposition over corruption, high-handedness and other issues mounts, with former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and others turning cool on him.

Najib, Malaysia's scandal-scarred deputy prime minister, had been all but selected as president of the United Malays National Organisation, the leading ethnic political party in the ruling national coalition after the current prime minister, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, was forced out as party leader late last year. Najib must go through the formality of being named party leader in intra-party elections scheduled from March 24 to 29.

The odds are strong that Najib will get the job. However, no date has been announced for his takeover from Badawi, suggesting that there is still uncertainty within the party over his primacy. The party also appears to be reaping a whirlwind by encouraging young outsider candidates to go against established leaders in an effort to clean the stables. The result, a member of an anti-coirruption agency told local reporters, is that there have been so many complaints of political bribery and corruption that the board doesn't have the manpower to investigate them all.

UMNO is increasingly in chaos, not just for that reason but because public objections are growing over massive scandals when Najib was defense minister, including the purchase of three French submarines that netted a company controlled by his controversial crony, Abdul Razak Baginda, 114 million euros in commissions. Other scandals included the purchase of Russian Sukhoi jet fighters and substandard patrol boats costing hundreds of millions of ringgit in overcharges from a company owned by another UMNO crony, Amin Shah Omar.

Najib's candidacy has been badly bruised by an extraordinary speech to the Rotary Club in Kuala Lumpur by Zaid Ibrahim, who was appointed by Badawi last year as a minister in the prime minister's office with a mandate to clean out the country's scandal-ridden judiciary. However, Zaid was forced out of office by UMNO stalwarts.

In the speech, which can be found in its entirety here, (see Text of Dato' Zaid Ibrahim's speech) Zaid said the country's political institutions are "hollowed out caricatures, unable to distinguish vested party interests from national ones, unable to offer the man in the street refuge from the powerful and connected. Our social fabric that took us from colony to an independent nation and on through the obstacle of nation-building has reached a point where it sometimes feels like we are hanging on by a thread."

Zaid pointed directly at Najib, accusing him of a "shameful power grab" by overthrowing the elected government in the tin-rich state of Perak, of using a "sledgehammer" in the detention of journalists and of complicity in the award of the military contracts.

However, Zaid's most damaging charge was to make a clear reference to the long-standing reports of Najib's complicity in the sensational murder of Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu, who was executed by two shots to the head in October of 2006 and her body was destroyed by military explosives. Two of Najib's bodyguards have been the subject of a long-running trial for her murder and Razak Baginda, his best friend, was acquitted under questionable circumstances. The trial has been concluded, but the verdict against the two has yet to be announced. Baginda has left the country for England.

UMNO, Zaid said, "is on a rampage to regain what it lost by any method available and the man who is expected to lead it to victory is the man who succeeds Abdullah: Najib Razak."

Zaid's speech has been studiously ignored by Malaysia's mainstream press, all of which is owned by the major political parties. But bloggers, who played a major role in the election disaster that cost the ruling coalition its two-thirds majority last March for the first time since Malaysia became a nation, have published the speech widely.

In addition, Raja Petra Kamaruddin, the most popular blogger in Malaysia, has published a series of devastating articles on his website, Malaysia Today, including one from the French newspaper Liberation that tied Najib closely to the murder of Altantuya. Raja Petra also published a Malay-language copy of the confession of Sirul Azhar Umar, one of the two men on trial for the murder, in which he named Najib's chief of staff, Musa Safri, as the man who ordered the two alleged murderers to pick up Altantuya from in front of the home of her jilted lover, Abdul Razak Baginda.

The rising concerns over Najib have led to the unlikely possibility that dissident elements within UMNO and the other parties, possibly led by the veteran politician Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, would seek to form a coalition government with elements of Pakatan Rakyat, the three-party opposition coalition headed by Anwar Ibrahim. Others have called on Badawi to stay on, although the king has already accepted his resignation. One opinion poll showed that Badawi has stronger support – a weak 46 percent – than Najib at 41 percent.

Either scenario is farfetched. But in the meantime, UMNO appears to be falling on itself in the factional battle for primacy between the remainder of Badawi's forces,Najib's allies and those aligned with Mahathir Mohamad, who has continued to hammer Badawi and lately has written uncomplimentary remarks about Najib as well, saying he has not been a success as deputy prime minister.

An anti-corruption committee has barred the Malacca chief minister, Ali Rastam, from contesting for the job of deputy president against Muhyiddin Yassin, who is believed to be backed by Najib, on charges of throwing money around to UMNO delegates. At the same time, Mohd Khir Toyo, who is the Najib-backed front runner for the job of leader of the influential UMNO youth wing, was acquitted of the same charges. Apart from Ali Rastam, anti-corruption officials are also investigating the Tourism Minister, Azalina Othman Said and Umno Youth FT head Norza Zakaria, all of whom are reputed to be Badawi supporters and close to Khairy Jamaluddin, who is seeking to become head of the youth wing against Mahathir's son, Mirzan, and Mohd Khir Toyo. That has raised allegations that the anti-corruption agency, installed last year by Badawi, has become politicized.

In addition to attempting to overthrow the state governments now in the hands of the opposition by luring opposition members to the ruling coalition, Najib and UMNO forces have fanned Malaysia's always touchy ethnic divisions by charging Karpal Singh, the national chairman of the opposition Democratic Action Party, of sedition after Karpal announced he would sue the sultan of Perak for appointing an UMNO chief minister after Pakatan lawmakers defected in February, resulting in a 28-28 tie. Karpal's threat of a suit against the sultan was taken by UMNO as a provocation against the Malay royalty. Karpal's son, also a member of parliament, didn't help, however, when he called Najib a murderer in parliament, which got him banned from the house for a year

"The charges against Karpal are ludicrous because it was during the Mahathir administration that they amended the constitution removing the immunity of the rulers," said a longtime Badawi ally. "During that period, the comments made by Mahathir and his Umno leaders and the editorials in Umno-controlled newspapers were so bad that they should all have been charged with sedition and put behind bars."

Friday February 13, 2009 MYT 7:06:00 PM

Karpal and the royals: ‘Blame Dr M’

By ANDREA FILMER

GEORGE TOWN: DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng defended Karpal Singh and blamed former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad for the uproar over the DAP national chairman’s plan to sue the Sultan of Perak.

He said Karpal was merely stating a matter of law that the Sultan could be taken to court.

Lim, who is Penang Chief Minister, said it was Dr Mahathir who was behind the 1993 constitutional amendment that allowed Rulers to be stripped of their immunity from prosecution.

“If we look at history, the person who made this law was from Umno itself. If you want to place blame, then blame the Umno person who is responsible for the deed,” he told pressmen before receiving a courtesy call from the Penang Bar Committee at his office in Komtar Friday.

Asked whether public support was waning for the DAP stemming from Karpal’s outburst against the Sultan, Lim retorted that it was only Umno who was angry with the party leader.

“What wrong has been committed by Pakatan Rakyat or Karpal Singh?” he asked.

Karpal: Use election to form government

Karpal: Use election to form government
30 Sept, 2008

(NST) GEORGE TOWN: Another DAP bigwig has warned that Pakatan Rakyat runs the risk of losing the support of the people in the next general election if it forms the federal government with crossovers. DAP national chairman Karpal Singh said the opposition coalition should seek the people's vote to form the government instead of relying on traitors and turncoats.

"PR should not depend on disloyal members of parliament.

"The people will not accept such betrayal," he said in a statement yesterday.

Last week, DAP vice-chairman Tunku Abdul Aziz Ibrahim said that it was unethical to don the mantle of government other than through the ballot box.

In disagreeing with the idea of forming a government by asking politicians to switch sides, he was quoted as saying:

"This is really a matter not so much of politics but really to do more with ethics in politics."

Tunku Aziz also warned that when one put ethics on the back burner instead of in the driver's seat, problems would happen.

Karpal said DAP's stand on crossovers had been consistent.

"Such acts (crossovers) are deplorable and unethical, and won't have the stamp of approval of all right thinking people."

He said that after the March 8 elections, he had even suggested that the DAP support the Barisan Nasional to amend the Federal Constitution to outlaw party hopping.

Karpal said it must be clearly understood that the DAP is against crossovers for any reason.

Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had claimed on numerous occasions that he has a list of more than 30 MPs crossing over to PR.

PKR president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail said recently that more and more MPs had shown their willingness to cross over to the opposition coalition.

Cracks emerge in Malaysia’s opposition coalition

Cracks emerge in Malaysia’s opposition coalition
29 July, 2008

(Radio Singapore International) - Cracks have begun to emerge in Malaysia’s three-party opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat.

The Chinese-based Democratic Action Party (DAP) has openly declared it wants the alliance to review Parti Islam SeMalaysia’s (PAS) membership in the grouping.

Recent speculation over a possible defection by PAS to join the ruling UMNO party has raised doubts over its credibility as a member of the opposition alliance.

Professor K S Nathan (KSN), Deputy Director of the Institute of Occidental Studies at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, tells Jason Tan that ideological differences between Pakatan alliance members continue to cause problems.

KSN: We have to bear in mind that Pakatan Rakyat is a combination that came together as a result of the elections. In other words, the post-election scenario has produced this Pakatan Rakyat. Now, whether they will be able to form the next government remains open, simply because there are serious ideological differences between the DAP on the one hand, which wants a secular-Malaysian Malaysia, and on the other hand PAS, which still wants the Islamic state. They have not been able to resolve this, so there are many questions that remain to be answered as to whether the Pakatan Rakyat will ever be able to cobble together a strong coalition that will be able to topple the present government.

DAP National chairman Karpal Singh has openly called for a review of PAS’ membership in the grouping. Based on their recent discussions with UMNO, is this altogether surprising?

KSN: No, it’s not surprising, simply because we know that the DAP and PAS have never at all seen eye-to-eye on the future direction of Malaysia, where religion is concerned. The DAP clearly wants to follow the federal constitution, that Malaysia is essentially a secular state, although there are of course visions for declaring Malaysia officially Islamic, in the sense that the constitution provides for Islam as the official religion. But that doesn’t make Malaysian an Islamic state, so there are very, very, sort of crucial legal differences between an Islamic state and Islam being the official religion of Malaysia. So I think they’re still not agreed on how this combination will work itself out to the mutual interests of both parties. That is to say, that while Islam enjoys official status, it does not necessary follow therefore, that the other religions are going to be sort of put aside, or the interests of the followers of other faiths will not be sufficiently considered. So I think they’re not sure what PAS’s stand is on this.

What impact would the expulsion of PAS from the Pakatan Rakyat alliance have on the five states they currently rule?

KSN: Well in the first place, I do not think they’ll be expelled. I think there is a lot of politic-ing that is going on. There are many side-issues that have also intervened in the main political scenario. So they may be just posturing and sort of indicating positions which they don’t really believe in. Clearly, I don’t think it is on the cards that PAS might abandon the Pakatan, or whether these Malay-unity talks will really result in something very concrete.

In related news, PAS has called for UMNO and PAS to dissolve and form a new Islam-based party which would unite all Malays in the country. Do you agree with UMNO’s assessment that this idea is premature?

KSN: Well I think in the first place, asking for just Malay unity at the expense of Malaysian unity could be pretty risky business because is you take even Prime Minister Abdullah’s own position when he came into power. He said he was a Prime Minister for all Malaysians. So if he is a Prime Minister for all Malaysians, and if he now focuses on the unity of just one particular race, whether it is Malays, Chinese or Indians, we might be missing the point about what the General Election results have proven. I think you are having a new generation of Malaysians and a new way of thinking about politics, that they would like to think Malaysian about all these issues, rather than sort of harp on these very pre-mordial sentiments which actually have got us where we are today, and leaving UMNO to sort of wonder what really happened to the magic that has been working for the last fifty years, which might not work anymore. So therefore, I think they have not quite resolved many many issues between them, because the operating ideology of UMNO and the operating ideology of PAS are two different things. And I would sort of not be so easily taken in by the fact that this is suddenly going to produce Malay unity. They have not shown any Malay unity for all this while you know, there has been PAS’ version of Islam and there has been the UMNO version of Islam. So they have disagreed very fundamentally on how they see the religion and the role of religion in politics and in society. They’re not going to solve it overnight just because of the election results of March 8.

Court throws out Karpal's application to call Najib as witness in murder trial

Court throws out Karpal's application to call Najib as witness in murder trial

SHAH ALAM, July 23 - Lawyer Karpal Singh's application to call Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib as witness and recall private investigator P. Balasubramaniam to the stand in the on-going Altantuya Sharibuu murder trial was thrown out this morning.

Speaking to the press outside of the court immediately after, he said he was surprised that DPP Tun Majid did not support it as the prosecution should have made the application in the first place but 'instead I had to do it'.

He reiterated that the police had said on July 19 that they would investigate everyone named in the two statutory declarations made by P. Balasubramaniam. 'How can the court make a finding on the credibility of Bala if investigations are still being carried out?'

Earlier in the court, judge Datuk Mohd Zaki Yasin had said, 'This court will only exercise that right when the need arises.' Karpal added later, 'I hope it does. The court should not just sit mutely.'

Karpal added that he might take this to the Court of Appeal.

Report on Dr M with ACA

2008/07/05

Report on former PM with ACA

GEORGE TOWN: Police have referred the report Karpal Singh lodged on May 23 to the Anti-Corruption Agency.

The report was in relation to former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's admission that some judges had lobbied him for promotions.

Karpal had claimed lobbying by judges for promotion or lobbying the prime minister for an appointment as a judge was an offence under the Anti-Corruption Act 1997.

He said Dr Mahathir may have fallen foul of Section 17 of the Act for not having lodged a report about the overtures of judges and others.

Yesterday, Karpal said he had asked in Parliament about the progress of police investigations into his report and was told that the matter was in the hands of the ACA because lobbying was categorised as an abuse of power.

Friday June 27, 2008 MYT 5:55:18 PM

Give Dr M a chance to say his piece, says Karpal

KUALA LUMPUR: Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad should be given every opportunity to defend himself over the allegations made by High Court Judge Datuk Ian Chin, said DAP chairman Karpal Singh.

In a statement, Karpal Singh said, according to Justice Chin, Dr Mahathir had threatened judges in 1997 to decide in favour of the Government, and had sent judges to boot camps.

He said Justice Chin had made serious allegations against Dr Mahathir during proceedings in an election petition in Sibu.

“However, these allegations have been made by the judge under the cloak of absolute immunity. Justice Chin should not abuse the process of court to make disclosures condemning Dr Mahathir,” he added.

He said Justice Chin should be brave enough to make statements against Dr Mahathir bereft of the cloak of absolute immunity to give the former premier an opportunity to take him on in a court of law.

“Dr Mahathir has now made certain allegations against Justice Chin and called for the setting up of a tribunal against him for judicial misconduct. There should be no discrimination. The law is no respecter of persons,” Karpal Singh said.

He said if Dr Mahathir's allegations had merit, then the necessary action should be taken against Justice Chin. “Dr Mahathir has every right to pursue the allegations he has made.”

Likewise, Karpal Singh said, the Government should not in any way act to give the perception to the public that Dr Mahathir did not anymore enjoy the rights of a citizen to clamour for justice.

Karpal: Probe Raja Petra's claims for fresh evidence

Karpal: Probe Raja Petra's claims for fresh evidence
24 June, 2008

Charles Ramendran, The Sun

DAP chairman and lawyer Karpal Singh said today the Attorney-General (A-G) should investigate the contents of blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin's statutory declaration on the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder if it helps bring new evidence to the on-going murder case.

"For him to make such claims in the affidavit makes me think he may know or have something (on the case)," he said in a press conference held in his law office on Jalan Pudu Lama with Altantuya's father Shaariibuu Setev.

Asked if Raja Petra's action to make the declaration public amounted to sub judice as claimed by police, Karpal said he did not see how this was so as the murder trial was ongoing and it made sense to include new evidence which may crop up to be made admissible in the case.

He said although the prosecution has closed its case in the trial, they should not be deterred from further probing the disclosures.

He added if the allegations were found to be true, the A-G can apply to the court to re-open the prosecution's case.

Karpal said he welcomed the A-G's assurance that he will probe to seek the truth as he views the allegations seriously.

He said it was important that every effort be made to see that the trial goes on fairly as it is not just the family of Altantuya and the Mongolian government who will need to be appeased but the international community.

The lawyer said he will go to the A-G's office at 10am tomorrow with Setev although an appointment had not been secured with the A-G.

Speaking with the help of a translator, Setev said he learnt about Raja Petra's affidavit after reading the newspapers and had sought Karpal's advice on it.

In his declaration, Raja Petra said he was informed that three people, including the wife of a VIP, were present at the crime scene on the day Altantuya was said to have beeen blown up with plastic explosives.

Following this, a police report was lodged by the A-G's Chambers.

The police were quoted as saying that they are scrutinising the report and are expected to call up Raja Petra and all those named in the affidavit for questioning.

Police had also said the blogger's actions to post the statutory declaration on his website was sub judice and he could face charges and imprisonment of up to two years for the offence.

In the Dewan Rakyat today, Deputy Speaker Datuk Dr Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar rejected a motion by Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) to defer proceedings to discuss Raja Petra's statutory declaration on the grounds that the murder trial was in progress in the (Shah Alam) High Court.

Lim said the credibility and legitimacy of the present administration will suffer a blow if the leaders remain silent on the allegations.

Opposition agrees on royal assent for Islamic matters

Opposition agrees on royal assent for Islamic matters

Alliance also calls for boycott of popular Malay daily

(Malaysian Insider) KUALA LUMPUR, May 28 — The three leaders of Pakatan Rakyat said yesterday they agree that the sultans' assent must be obtained prior to any action against officers associated with the state Islamic religious councils.

Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) president Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Ismail, PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said the stand of DAP chairman Karpal Singh on the matter was the personal opinion of the Bukit Gelugor Member of Parliament from the legal perspective.

"It was clarified to us by Karpal Singh that it was never his intention to insult the sultans," they said in a joint statement they signed and issued at the Parliament lobby.

The trio said Pakatan Rakyat was firm in its stand in upholding the position of the rulers as constitutional monarchs as provided for in the Federal Constitution.

Karpal Singh has been criticised of late for having made controversial statements against the sultans and other rulers In another statement, the three leaders called for the boycott of the Utusan Malaysia and Mingguan Malaysia newspapers from yesterday for allegedly carrying unfair and irresponsible reports.

They said the two newspapers criticised the Opposition parties of purportedly still conducting the election campaign which had ended prior to the general election on March 8.

"Although there are signs that the mainstream newspapers controlled by the Barisan Nasional and Umno have begun to change and were a little more open, they are generally still unfair and biased," they said. — Bernama

Is Malaysia a gangster/hitman country??

Is Malaysia to be run by gangsters who use hitman to achieve their ends? Doesn't speak well for anyone who thinks he/she is speaking so highly of the Malay Royalties. This angry man is definitely NOT giving a good personal fight against his own anger/hatred as taught by his religion. Threatening another person with death or actually performing the act is definitely not religious nor even protecting the Royal families. The Malay Rulers would not have approved of it either. So don't spoil their reputation with your gimmicks!!! For that matter don't ruin the reputation of Malaysia!!! Be civilised! There are many better ways to handle a conflict. The truth which comes out with patience will be known......

Karpal receives live bullet, warning note

Updated: Govt as well as Opposition MPs speak in one voice, condemning the threat sent to DAP chairman Karpal Singh

KUALA LUMPUR, May 21 — DAP chairman Karpal Singh received an envelope containing a live bullet and a warning note at his law firm in Jalan Pudu Lama here yesterday.

The envelope was delivered by a motorcyclist who wore a full-face helmet.

Karpal, who is MP for Bukit Gelugor, has lodged a report at the Dang Wangi police headquarters on the incident.

Accompanying him were Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo and DAP advisor Lim Kit Siang.

Karpal told reporters that the man had entered his firm about 12.30pm and handed over a yellow envelope containing the bullet and the note.

"I was at home when my clerk informed me that I had received the bullet and the note. According to her, the man kept silent and left immediately," he said, adding that he was worried for his safety.

He declined comment on whether the incident was related to his controversial remarks pertaining to the power of the Malay rulers.

Karpal said this was the second time he had received a live bullet. In 1981, he received an M-16 bullet which was delivered to his house in Penang. — Bernama

Monday May 19, 2008

Karpal: Who are the judges, Dr M?

PETALING JAYA: The remark by former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad that he would expose judges who came to him to lobby for promotion should not be ignored.

DAP national chairman Karpal Singh, who contacted The Star Sunday, said a tribunal should be set up to investigate these judges.

“I call upon Dr Mahathir to publicly identify the judges. If they are not identified, judges who are not guilty will be tainted with the same brush,’’ he said.

“On the other hand, those judges who are accused of lobbying should be given a chance to clear their name. In the public interest, he should let everyone know who are the judges involved.”

The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the V.K. Lingam video had recommended that Dr Mahathir and several other prominent figures be probed for allegedly being involved in a conspiracy to manipulate the appointment of judges.

Following the findings, Dr Mahathir said on Saturday that he was prepared to be charged in court so that he could reveal many things about the judiciary.

Disrespectful to Islam? Porah!

Disrespectful to Islam? Porah!
15 May, 2008

No, Karpal Singh was not disrespectful to Islam. Karpal Singh is as ‘Islamic’ as they come. Karpal Singh has done what 15 million Malay Muslims would not do. Karpal Singh has done what 15 million Malay Muslims should have done.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

'Karpal disrespectful to Islam'

IPOH: Insulting the Malay rulers is tantamount to being disrespectful to Islam, said Perak Mufti Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria.

He said this was because the Federal Constitution had stated that the sultans, or rulers, and the King are the heads of Islamic affairs.

"DAP chairman Karpal Singh, in questioning the authority of the Sultan of Perak Sultan Azlan Shah, was disrespectful to the Federal Constitution.

"As a citizen of the country, Karpal had been disloyal to the rulers and hurt the feelings of the Malays," he said.

Harussani said although the Bukit Gelugor Member of Parliament had a right to talk about laws, the Sultan had the power over religious matters and it was a sensitive issue to the Malays.

"The various ethnic groups in Malaysia live in peace and harmony and the action by Karpal would only anger the rakyat," he said. (The New Straits Times)

*************************************************

Govt decides to retain ISA without any amendment

The government reiterated Wednesday that the Internal Security Act (ISA) has to be retained, not for any political purpose but as a preventive measure to curb and handle activities threatening national security.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said that as such the government had decided to retain the ISA in toto without any change despite pressure from certain quarters including the Opposition.

"Malaysia is a cosmopolitan country comprising various races, religions and cultures, and this law has to be retained to thwart any threat before it emerges. As such, for the moment, the government has no plan to abolish the ISA," he said when winding up debate for his ministry on the motion of thanks for the royal address in the Dewan Rakyat.

Records show that the ISA had been used to contain threats posed by militant terrorism, falsification of Malaysian travel documents, smuggling by illegal immigrants, spying by foreign agents operating in Malaysia, and racial extremism.

Syed Hamid said detention under the ISA was not aimed at penalising but to rehabilitate the detainee.

He also said that the ISA was not a draconian law because it did not deny the detainee his or her fundamental rights.

Syed Hamid said the ISA had helped the country thwart activities threatening national security, which enabled the people to enjoy peace, economic growth and intensive development. (Bernama)

*************************************************

It is reported that when Abu Bakar took over as the First Caliph of Islam soon after Prophet Muhammad’s death (S.A.W.), he was asked: how would the people of Medina be assured that he would be a just and righteous leader? It is further reported that in reply to this question, Abu Bakar removed his sword from his person and placed it before him on the floor and then said that if he ever deviated one iota from his duty then they were to take his own sword and end his life.

That was the example of Abu Bakar, the First Caliph of Islam whom Muslims believe was one of the four ‘Rightly-Guided’ Caliphs. And if Abu Bakar is believed to be Rightly-Guided then surely he knows what he is talking about and it can only be God and no other that had guided him. Would Abu Bakar then be wrong in what he said and could he have instead been Wrongly-Guided? No, no Muslim would ever believe Abu Bakar had been Wrongly-Guided. They will swear with their life that Abu Bakar had been Rightly-Guided and that it was no less than God that had guided him.

Abu Bakar was one of the Companions of the Prophet. Muslims believe he can do no wrong and that he had already been assured a place in heaven even before he died. Yet Abu Bakar not only asked the people of Medina to take him to task if he erred. He asked them to take his life with his own sword, the Sword of Islam. Can anyone lesser than Abu Bakar be expected to do less than this? If Abu Bakar should be killed with his own sword if he did not rule justly and righteously, should any lesser fate befall those lesser than Abu Bakar?

This is not what I say. This is what Islam says. And would Islam lie? Would Islam mislead us? Would the Holy Scriptures be in gross error? Abu Bakar should be killed if he was not just and righteous. Abu Bakar is not infallible. Abu Bakar is not perfect. Abu Bakar is only human. And as a mere mortal, as one who can easily err, Abu Bakar wants to suffer execution by his own sword. That is what is expected of a Ruler of the Muslim faith. And would anyone lesser than Abu Bakar be above this First Caliph of Islam?

No, Karpal Singh was not disrespectful to Islam. Karpal Singh is as ‘Islamic’ as they come. Karpal Singh has done what 15 million Malay Muslims would not do. Karpal Singh has done what 15 million Malay Muslims should have done. Karpal Singh did what the First Caliph of Islam, Abu Bakar, said that God had Rightly-Guided him to do.

Yes, religion comes under the Rulers. The State Mufti is appointed by the Ruler. The State Director of the Religious Department is appointed by the Ruler. But not all men of the cloth are the example of Abu Bakar. Not all Rulers are the epitome of the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs of Islam. There are amongst them some with the scruples of the scum of the earth.

Some Directors of the State Religious Departments are crooks and scoundrels. RM200 million has disappeared from the Selangor State Religious Department. RM200 million in zakat money collected by the previous government has gone missing. RM200 million in money that Muslims paid in the name of God has passed into the hands of the devil.

Oh how I wish Malaysia practiced the Islamic law of Hudud. How I wish we could cut off both their hands for the crime of stealing RM200 million that Muslims paid in the name of God. No, hand cutting is not enough. Theirs heads should be removed from their shoulders and their bodies left to rot in the sun as an example that anyone who ‘steals from God’ should not be allowed to continue with their miserable lives.

No, taking Rulers to task is not disrespectful to Islam. Taking Rulers to task is the greatest respect one can give Islam. And it needed a man like Karpal Singh to do the Islamic thing. I am a Malay. I am not hurt by what Karpal Singh did. I am happy with what he did. The Directors of the State Religious Departments are not saints. Some have the characteristics of the devil. They must be removed. They steal from God. They should be punished according to the Islamic law of Hudud. Unfortunately this can’t be done.

Now they want to retain the Internal Security Act without any amendments. Who in Parliament voted in favour of this? This goes against Islam. This defies Islam. Islam forbids this. These Parliamentarians who voted in favour of the Internal Security Act are enemies of Islam. These Parliamentarians who voted in favour of the Internal Security Act are the enemies of God. But I will not declare their blood as halal. If I do that then I can be punished under a ‘kafir’ British law called the Sedition Act. But this is not God’s law. This is man’s law. This is a law that allows Rulers to defy God and allows Rulers to violate God’s law.

To insult or defy Rulers goes against Islam, say the men of the cloth. Is this so? Well, then Rosmah, the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister, has committed a serious crime and should be punished. Rosmah phoned His Highness the Sultan of Selangor and scolded him. Rosmah spoke to His Highness the way you would scold a dog that shit on your new carpet.

Rosmah is angry that Raja Petra Bin Raja Kamarudin wrote an article called Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell. And Rosmah phoned His Highness the Sultan of Selangor and shouted at him. That is worse than what Karpal Singh did.

Rosmah wants to become the ‘First Lady’ of Malaysia even though the First Lady is the Agong’s consort. But Rosmah has committed treason against the Ruler. 200 years ago Rosmah would have been put to death. Today she will be rewarded with a RM100 million budget to renovate the Prime Minister’s residence in Putrajaya when her husband becomes Prime Minister.

And Raja Petra Bin Raja Kamarudin now challenges Rosmah for her to deny this allegation. Or maybe she would like to make a police report instead. That is what they normally do anyway when they are not able to reply. Porah Rosmah. Please don’t phone my cousin His Highness the Sultan of Selangor. Please don’t shout at my cousin His Highness the Sultan of Selangor. The Perak Mufti said that if you do that then you are disrespectful to Islam. You are only the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister who shall never become the Prime Minister of Malaysia. This quarrel is between you and me. Leave my cousin His Highness the Sultan of Selangor out of it.

Karpal is not arrested, police urge public to ignore rumours

Karpal is not arrested, police urge public to ignore rumours
14 May, 2008

(The Star) PENANG: The public has been urged to disregard rumours that Bukit Gelugor MP Karpal Singh has been arrested.

Federal CID director Commissioner Datuk Bakri Zinin said the police are still investigating reports lodged against Karpal Singh over alleged seditious remarks made by him against the Sultan of Perak.

“There is no such thing (Karpal Singh arrested). Do not believe such rumours. Our investigations are still ongoing,” he said.

Meanwhile, George Town OCPD Asst Comm Azam Abd Hamid said Penang police had completed its investigations into the case.

He said the investigation papers were submitted to the Attorney-General’s chambers on Saturday. “It was also based on the statement recorded from Karpal Singh on the same day.

“Two police reports were made against Karpal Singh (in Penang). One of the reports was made by state Umno Youth secretary Ramlan Ishak on Friday,” he said.

Karpal Singh was alleged to have said that the Sultan of Perak had no jurisdiction over the transfer of Datuk Jamry Sury from the Perak Religious Department.

Defending The Defence Counsel

Defending The Defence Counsel

14 May, 2008

Who touched the Privileges of the Rulers in the first place? Not YB Karpal or any of the Rakyat. It was UMNO and even the then DPM

By K W Waran

I am writing this letter knowing fully well that I am unduly inviting brickbats from all those quarters who want him, The Cleanest Legal Icon Of This Nation, in jail today or even yesterday. He can also be best described as the WALKING ENCYLOPAEDIA as far as the LAW is concerned in Malaysia.

Well, I am not hiding behind a pseudonym, and hence, if any can cajole YM RPK or Bro Labisman to let you know of my contact details, I am prepared to face the brickbats face to face. But please go on reading and you might see what I am trying to part with here, for all to be in the know, for it is very pertinent.

YB Karpal Singh MP, is someone that a lot of us have always been admiring, and in yours truly’s case, since my varsity days and this admiration only grew stronger and stronger purely on the grounds of WHAT he had steadfastly stood for all these decades against all odds. There were many of those downtrodden in the lower strata of society for whom he had represented on a pro bono basis right up to the Federal Court and won the case whilst setting many a legal precedents. All he has to do is make a phone call and he has the Chief Justice’s Ears and Time.

He was never a materialistic man, otherwise, he would be worth at least 10 times his current worth in terms of Ringgit and Cents. That Lion King with his Lioness had also brought up his cubs very well and his cubs are doing pretty well too trying to carry on his legacy.

I know that for a fact because I had to seek legal advise and action on a legal dispute and I had met YB Jagdeep Singh Deo, a lion king in the making, albeit, a versatile CUB. This was way back when he was not even a YB. So, technically, the matter can only be resolved by filling it in the High Court. A mundane action in the lower courts would not only be a wastage of time, both ours and the courts but a wastage of resources as well. But the difference of filling it in the High Court is quite high.

Take note here. Filling it in the lower court would entail an initial upfront/deposit of at least RM2,000, whereas, in the High Court, you are talking about RM20,000 to start with. Of course, for most of us, we don’t go around having that much money to seek a legal redress when other priorities are jarring at and down our throats.

Anyway, to cut to long story short, that Lion’s Cub, told me, and I wish to quote here, “Don’t worry about the amount involved. We will try to adjust it. The most important thing is that your case has legal merits and therefore, we are ready to fight for your justice first in the High Court where it should be rightfully heard.” BOY, that felt like listening to the Lion, Himself. No wonder, whenever you go to any of his offices, its packed with people from all walks of life waiting patiently to see YB Karpal Singh or his children and they do so knowing that all that waiting will culminate in them ultimately getting justice done and served properly.

In the years of his presence in the legal fraternity, his reputation as lawyer has never been questioned. He has been through thick and thin all throughout his life including being a victim of Ops Lallang and had spent time under ISA.

Before, YB Nurul Izzah Anwar and her siblings experienced the wrath of the BN scorned, YB Jagdeep Singh Deo and his siblings faced it with their Mother who is another plucky lady with nerves of steel as I had described YM RPK’ s wife, Puan Marina much earlier in a comment.

YB Karpal Singh MP by virtue of his legal expertise and his principles has always been admired by the Rulers, more so by DYMM Sultan Azlan Shah, who as we all know, was the Iconic Lord President that this Nation had had and probably never would have in the future. Ampun Tuanku.

I, humbly and personally, never for a moment, even in the remotest possibility, can believe that YB Karpal had any deliberate or even a nefarious intention of embarrassing of all persons, The DYMM Sultan Of Perak. I am a Perak born and I would never take things lying down if I know that anybody were to fool around with OUR BELOVED DYMM SULTAN OF PERAK and HIS FAMILY. They are above board and nobody touches them and can go scot-free as far as Perakans are concerned.

Those fellows, who wants action to be taken against YB Karpal Singh, are merely seizing the opportunity to blow things out of proportion because they are merely seeking issues to delve into and blow it out of proportion so as to distract the Rakyat in their desperate attempt to survive, which will be proven to be totally Futile in due course of time.

They are not convincing anyone with their antics.

Who touched the Privileges of the Rulers in the first place? Not YB Karpal or any of the Rakyat. It was UMNO and even the then DPM,(Bless his Soul), spoke saying that it is ok to criticise the Royalty and all that followed after that in public knowledge. Suddenly, these lallangs are crying out loud when only as recent as two months back, they were singing a different tune altogether that was bordering on HIGH TREASON by any standards. Remember, the Terengganu and Perlis episode.

Enough, no point trying to reason or rationalise matters with these Lallangs. Pakatan Rakyat, get ready and moving to take over for the Rakyat are pretty cheesed off and acutely sick and tired with their self serving childish antics.

However, what puzzles and boggles me is the unusual DEAFENING SILENCE from many, such as the Bar Council, the PR, etc, etc. to lend support in his time of need when he is always there for whosoever need his services at any time.

Sad really.

Tuesday May 13, 2008 MYT 6:45:36 PM

Probe on Karpal Singh's alleged seditious remarks completed

By BERNARD SEE

PENANG: The police here have completed their investigations into the alleged seditious remarks made by DAP chairman Karpal Singh against the Sultan of Perak.

George Town OCPD Asst Comm Azam Abd Hamid said the investigation papers were submitted to the Attorney-General’s chambers on Saturday.

He said the report was also based on the statement recorded from Karpal Singh on the same day.

"Two police reports were made against Karpal Singh, who is also Bukit Gelugor MP. One of the reports was made by state Umno Youth secretary Ramlan Ishak on Friday," he said here on Tuesday.

Karpal Singh was alleged to have said that the Sultan of Perak had no jurisdiction over the transfer of Datuk Jamry Sury from the Perak Religious Department.

On Karpal Singh

Karpal: It's Umno which did not show respect to sultans
13 May, 2008

(NST) KUALA LUMPUR: Karpal Singh, member of parliament for Bukit Gelugor, said it was not he who had been disrespectful to sultans but Umno.

Debating the royal address in Parliament yesterday, he said he did not understand why he had been labelled treasonous and seditious when in 1993 Umno led a constitutional amendment to clip the powers of rulers.

He said in 1984 he had highlighted in the House alleged wrongdoings by the then Tengku Mahkota of Johor.

In 1987, when the Sultan of Selangor declared that no amnesty would be given to those found guilty of distributing drugs in the state, Karpal filed a case against him.

"Both times, no one said I was being treasonous or seditious. Now, 20 police reports have been lodged against me, including one by Umno secretary-general Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor at the behest of the prime minister."

Reiterating that he had not challenged the power of the Sultan of Perak as head of Islam and Malay customs, Kar-pal said he had only stated that the ruler had no right to direct the menteri besar to withdraw the transfer order given to state Religious Department director Datuk Jamry Sury.

Karpal's speech did not go down well with Razali Ibra-him, member of parliament for Muar, who cited standing orders and requested the chair to stop Karpal's speech.

Razali said: "He should not be allowed to go on as his statement was made without filing an emergency motion. This is not an appropriate forum to talk about it. As for the police reports, wait for the police to finish their investigations."

After being advised by Deputy Speaker Datuk Ronald Kiandee, Karpal said Terengganu state exco member Da-tuk Rosol Wahid and 22 assemblymen initially did not agree with the sultan's choice of menteri besar.

"Doesn't their action constitute a challenge to the sultan? Will the government take action against them? If not, doesn't this constitute double standards? Why am I being victimised?" he said.

Audience with Perak sultan may be the 'solution', Anwar said.

(NST) PETALING JAYA: Karpal Singh should have sought an audience with the Sultan of Perak to allay the accusations of sedition against him, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said.

"Generally, the Malays and non-Malays have the position that one should seek an audience to settle the matter amicably," the de facto Parti Keadilan Rakyat leader said.

"In this country, the constitutional monarchy is an institution to be respected and we have to mind the Rulers' position and sovereignty," he said at a press conference here yesterday.

He added that Karpal, the MP for Bukit Gelugor and DAP chairman, had clarified his position and said that he did not intend to "disrespect the Constitution and the Sultan of Perak".

Karpal had allegedly questioned the powers of Sultan Azlan Shah over the reinstatement of State Religious Department head Datuk Jamry Sury less than three days after he was transferred by Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin.

Anwar also urged the Royal Commission report on the Lingam video clip to be made public.

He said former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad should stop speculating on the "hidden agendas" behind the video clip.

"He should refrain and be more remorseful. This report will be viewed by the public and he should not be saying things as if he was still the prime minister."

On Sunday, Dr Mahathir had alleged that Anwar had exposed the recording in order to discredit Datuk V. K. Lingam.

The lawyer is counsel for Dr Mahathir in a defamation suit brought by Anwar.

Anwar repeated yesterday that he had enough Barisan Nasional defectors in hand for Pakatan Rakyat to form the government.

Press Statement by CSI-Parliament on alleged Sedition involving MP Karpal Singh

Respect for Loyal Opposition Essential for Democracy

The Civil Society Initiative for Parliamentary Reform (CSI-Parliament) stresses that a loyal opposition is a legitimate and necessary part of any system of democracy, including our constitutional monarchy.

We strongly criticise the threatened use of the Sedition Act 1948 and the leveling of accusations of treason against anyone who has a critical view of our political system, regardless of whether the person is a parliamentarian, a member of the royalty or an ordinary citizen, especially by those who would take offence for purely populist or politically-partisan purposes.

CSI-Parliament stresses that the democratic space for debate and deliberation on issues of national interest is now more important to protect as the country makes its ways through uncharted waters of deeper democratization and more extensive political plurality at the state government level.

The initial sacking of Perak Religious Department Director Datuk Jamry Sury by the Pakatan Rakyat state government, the subsequent order by HRH the Sultan of Perak to reinstate him, and the consequent criticism by Karpal Singh MP of HRH the Sultan of Perak’s order have resulted in different perspectives of the law and constitutional convention brought to public attention.

Let us not forget a similar situation faced by the Barisan Nasional in attempting to nominate its candidates for the post of Menteri Besar in Perlis and Terengganu. Political convention and processes in the latter cases - hitherto taken for granted - were then called into question by many, including Government and Barisan leaders. While at the end of the day there can only be one lawful position on the matter, there must be sufficient room for legitimate public discussion and deliberation of what exactly that position is.

In connection with the new controversy over various statements of Parliamentarian Karpal Singh, CSI-Parliament condemns political manoeuvres which are bent on manipulating a complex though legitimate difference of opinion on constitutional law and the position of the Malay Rulers into a so-called stand-off between the palace and the opposition. Just as dangerous is the attempt by some quarters to portray this incident as a potentially seditious and treasonous questioning of royal prerogatives, and consequently a perceived slighting of the position of one particular community.

CSI-Parliament is confident that wise counsel shall prevail and that the unacceptable attempt by certain parties to take advantage of this situation to promote ill-will and hostility between the races will fail miserably. It is these irresponsible parties who are the real threat to peace and stability in this country.

To ensure an inclusive process of democratization and the liberty to engage in healthy and open debate free from threats of sedition and accusations of treason, CSI-Parliament takes this opportunity to echo the longstanding call by the Bar Council and other civil society organizations to abolish the Sedition Act 1948. More pertinent legislation to bring genuine threats against the public order before the courts of our land is already available in our statute books.

Press Statement issued jointly by:

Dr Lim Teck Ghee

Wong Chin Huat

Edward Lee

Andrew Khoo

Haris Ibrahim

Kuala Lumpur

12 May 2008

It’s the Sultan’s right, says Selangor royal council

It’s the Sultan’s right, says Selangor royal council
KUALA LUMPUR, May 12 — The Elders of the Council of the Royal Court of Selangor said today the Sultan had the right under the state constitution to be consulted, to advise and to warn in matters pertaining to his subjects' interests.

The council said it was also within the constitutional parameters for the Sultan to express his views or make his opinions known in any issue which involved the people's interests.

"We are of the view that there is no legal constraint for the Sultan to express his opinions concerning any matter within the parameters of his domain, namely the state's affairs.

"Indeed, it is the Sultan's right to express his opinion on government policy," the council said in a statement to Bernama.

Among members of the council are Tan Sri Mohd Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Abu Hassan Omar, Jeneral (Rtd) Tan Sri Mohd Hashim Mohd Ali, Tan Sri Syed Yusof Syed Nasir, Datuk Abdul Halim Abdul Rauf and Datuk Paduka Raja Wan Mahmood Pawanteh.

They were responding to a recent statement by DAP chairman Karpal Singh that there was a disturbing trend of Rulers interfering in state government affairs.

Karpal, who is now under police investigation for his statement questioning the right of the Sultan of Perak over the transfer of the Perak Religious Department director Datuk Jamry Sury, had also implied that the Sultan of Selangor too was meddling in state administrative matters.

Perak and Selangor are among five states that are now under Pakatan Rakyat state governments. The other three are Penang, Kedah and Kelantan.

The council pointed out that Karpal's remarks were baseless, unfounded and irresponsible.

"The council believes that this statement was somewhat made to create a misconception in the minds of the people as to the role of His Royal Highness as the Sultan of Selangor, who is merely exercising his rights as enshrined in the State Constitution.

"It is within our knowledge that the Sultan of Selangor in his weekly meeting with the Menteri Besar of Selangor has always given his views and advice in matters of importance to the people of Selangor," the council said.

The council, however, stressed that the Sultan had always maintained his neutral stance as well as upheld his detachment of any political preference or interference on executive matters.

"We would like to emphasise that the Sultan is politically impartial," they said.

The council said the Sultan's sole concern was the people's well-being and the interests of the state to ensure his subjects would continue to enjoy peace, harmony and prosperity. — Bernama

Statement by Klang MP Charles Santiago on Karpal Singh

STOP TWISTING THE STATEMENT BY KARPAL SINGH

12 May, 2008

The MP for Klang, Charles Santiago calls on UMNO, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and the vernacular Malay newspapers to stop twisting the statement by Karpal Singh into a race-related issue.

All Malaysians regardless of ethnicity and faith see the Malay Rulers as the symbol of our nationhood and want our constitutional monarchy to function in a healthy manner.

He strongly condemns the seditious insinuations that non-Malays are disrespectful of the Rulers.

Whether or not anyone agrees with Karpal's perspective, his freedom of expression and the democratic space for debate must be protected.

He reminded BN that Attorney-General Abdul Ghani Patail's statement just two months ago that the King has no power to determine the Mentri Besar of Terengganu was a similar view.

Should the AG - and the PM who held the same perspective - be charged for sedition or accused of treason too?
Charles urges UMNO and the premier to instead look into the merits of Karpal's argument and stop devious attempts to gain political mileage by diverting peoples' attention from pressing issues in the country and the looming crisis within UMNO.

Karpal's statement did not question the prerogative of the Sultan as head of religion in Perak. He commented that Sultan Azlan Shah did not have jurisdiction over the transfer of the state Religious Department Director Datuk Jamry Sury.

Karpal's statement is in line with what is stipulated in the constitution. Although Sultan Azlan Shah is the head of Islam in his state, the power to transfer a civil servant lies with the state secretary, who in turn takes orders from the Mentri Besar of Perak.

Karpal Singh had also cited a decision made by the Federal Court in 1982 in the case of the Federal Territory Education Director and Others vs Loot Ting Yee. Here, the court ordered that "whether a civil servant should be transferred, and if so, where and when the transfer is to be made are matters for the government to decide."

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Charles Santiago

MP Klang

mpklang@yahoo.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

译文：

停止歪曲卡巴星的言论

巴生国会议员查尔斯.圣地亚哥呼吁巫统、首相阿都拉巴达维和马来报章停止把卡巴星的言论扭曲为种族议题。

所有马来西亚人，无论其族群和信仰为何，都视马来统治者为国家的象征，以及希冀君主立宪制以健康的方式运作。

他强烈批评指责非马来人对统治者不敬的煽动暗示。

任何人无论同意卡巴星的观点与否，他的表达自由和民主辩论空间必须被维护。

查尔斯提醒国阵，总检察长阿都干尼两个月前表示苏丹没有权力决定登嘉楼州务大臣的人选的言论，和卡巴星的评论如出一辙。

总检察长 – 以及持同样观点的首相 – 是否也该被控以煽动或叛逆？

查尔斯吁请巫统及首相应该正视卡巴星的议论的内涵，停止偏狭的攻击以逐获政治议程，以转移人民关心国内紧绷的问题和巫统的内部危机。

卡巴星的言论没有质疑苏丹作为霹雳州宗教首长的权限。他评论苏丹阿兹兰莎没有调动州宗教局总监拿督占利苏里的权力。

卡巴星的言论与宪法条文一致。即使苏丹阿兹兰莎是州宗教首长，调动公务员的属于州秘书权限，州秘书则需要听令于霹雳州务大臣。

卡巴星也引用了1982年联邦法庭的判决--联邦直辖区教育总监和陆庭谕案件。法庭的议决指出：“一名公务员调动与否，同样的，无论在什么地点和时刻，都是由政府来决定”

Monday May 12, 2008

Ibrahim questions silence of Opposition MPs

PASIR MAS: Datuk Paduka Ibrahim Ali questions why Malay members of Parliament from opposition parties are silent over the issue of Malay supremacy and the statement by Karpal Singh allegedly questioning the powers of the Perak Sultan.

However, DAP life adviser Dr Chen Man Hin sprang to Karpal Singh's defence, saying he was right in making his statement.

“The Malay MPs from PKR and DAP are silent when these issues are raised in Parliament,” claimed Ibrahim.

“Are they afraid to deal with it? Are they in cahoots since they are part of the Pakatan Rakyat alliance?” asked the independent MP from Pasir Mas.

He said the pin-drop silence from PKR and DAP had created suspicions.

“At least to a certain degree, senior leaders in PAS, such as Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, have presented their views,” he said.

Ibrahim felt that many MPs from the Opposition had gone overboard in questioning the sovereignty of the Malay rulers, and that they had not been duly reprimanded by their Malay leaders.

In light of the political developments, the Internal Security Act was needed to deter anarchy in the country, he added.

Dr Chen said it was legally correct for Bukit Gelugor MP Karpal Singh to say that the appointments in the state civil service are under the jurisdiction of the respective Mentris Besar and executive committees.

He said that since Karpal Singh had also said the full jurisdiction over religious and Malay custom matters was under the state ruler, he had not been disrespectful to the Perak Sultan.

“All the claims that Karpal Singh was disloyal are baseless and is the work of Umno plotting together with a few civil servants.

“It is an open secret that the civil service heads in Perak have been uncooperative and defiant of the state government,” Dr Chen said.