Check Your Voting Status

Saturday, June 9, 2012

Ambiga countersues Putrajaya over Bersih rally

By Debra Chong | TMI

Bersih chief Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan is seeking damages from Putrajaya for allegedly violating her constitutional rights over the April 28 electoral reform rally, in a countersuit filed at the High Court this morning.

The prominent lawyer-activist accused the Najib administration of abusing its power in ordering the police and the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) to block the sit-down rally from taking place in the national capital, which she said would have been as peaceful as those held elsewhere in the country.

Last month, Putrajaya took the unprecedented step of suing Ambiga and nine other Bersih steering committee members, as the rally organisers, for damages worth RM122,000.

“The plaintiff, whether acting through its agencies (including the police, DBKL and mass media) or otherwise, wilfully and deliberately took all measures to prevent or thwart the holding of the assembly by Bersih at Dataran Merdeka on 28th April,” Ambiga said in her statement of defence and counterclaim, which was made available to The Malaysian Insider.

She added: “It follows that the sole cause for the way in which the assembly in Kuala Lumpur on 28th April unfolded was due to the conduct of the police, for which the plaintiff, as employer, is liable in law.”
The police had no reason to mobilise so heavily for the rally, according to Ambiga.
Ambiga said the newly-enforced Peaceful Assembly Act does not “expressly or impliedly” empower the federal government to sue for damages to public property as it is “not a member of the class of persons intended to be protected under the Act”.

She also said the demonstrators who took part in the rally did so as “free agents” and that neither she nor Bersih as the organisers were liable for events that happened after she had announced it over at 2.40pm and asked them to disperse.

Conversely, the police had a “positive duty in law” to ensure that lawful assemblies could take place, which she accused them of having failed.

“The police had wilfully and deliberately started using water cannons, firing tear gas and then taunting, mocking and provoking the people present and carrying out other acts of intimidation and violence against persons who were in the process of dispersing,” she said in her statement.

The decorated former Bar Council president pointed out that the authorities had been aware of Bersih’s plan from early on to hold a peaceful public sit-down demonstration at the city’s historic Dataran Merdeka, based on the election watchdog’s press releases on April 5 and further official letters to the mayor and police dated April 16 — more than a week before the event.

She pointed out that DBKL had rejected Bersih’s request for Dataran Merdeka without offering an alternative venue, noting that the decision ran counter to the federal territory’s local government by-laws.
DBKL’s move to offer Stadium Merdeka — Bersih’s venue of choice for the July 9 rally last year — as an alternative was only made at a meeting on April 25, three days before the demonstration, she said.
Ambiga said Bersih had to turn it down due to the “extremely short notice”.

“However, Bersih made it clear (and had at all times made it clear) that they were ready to co-operate with the authorities to ensure a peaceful assembly.

“At no time did either the police or DBKL call for a meeting to discuss the logistics of the assembly,” she said in her statement.

The police had also rejected Bersih’s bid to carry out the assembly without providing a reason, Ambiga said, adding that it was “wrong in law”.

“Although it was public knowledge by at least 5th April that Bersih was holding an assembly in Kuala Lumpur on 28th April, the police, acting in bad faith and wrongfully, made the application for the said Magistrate’s order on an ex-parte basis a mere two days before the assembly and served only one day before the assembly, thereby denying the First Defendant an opportunity of opposing the granting of the said Order or applying to set it aside.”
People look at a police patrol car that was flipped onto its side, in Kuala Lumpur April 28, 2012.
She said the police also had no “objective reasons” to assemble a large force in the city on the day of the rally and “no legal grounds” to erect barbed-wire barricades encircling Dataran Merdeka to prevent anyone from accessing the public square. Ambiga is also challenging assembly law’s constitutionality, specifically Section 6, for restricting her right to assemble.

The government filed its suit against Ambiga last May 23 under Section 6(2)(g) of the law, which states that organisers must “ensure that the assembly will not endanger health or cause damage to property or the environment.”

“The plaintiff charges that the defendants failed to carry out their statutory responsibility when the assembly went out of control and turned into a riot, causing damage to vehicles owned by the plaintiff,” the writ said.
The government’s statement of claims lists 15 vehicles, mostly belonging to the police, that had to be repaired at a cost of RM122,000.

The government also wants general damages, interest and a declaration that Bersih breached Section 6(2)(g) of the assembly law.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had said when tabling the law in Parliament last year that it would be “revolutionary” and allow Malaysians to participate in public gatherings “in accordance with international norms.”

The case is set for mention on June 13 before Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Justice Prasad Sandosham Abraham.

The April 28 rally that saw tens of thousands gather at six different locations before heading to Dataran Merdeka was peaceful until about 2.30pm when Ambiga asked the crowd to disperse.

But her call was not heard by most of the crowd who persisted around the historic square, which the courts had already barred to the public over the weekend.

Just before 3pm, some protestors breached the barricade surrounding the landmark, leading police to disperse the crowd with tear gas and water cannons.

Police then continued to pursue the rally-goers down several streets amid chaotic scenes that saw violence from both sides over the next four hours.

Several dozen demonstrators have claimed that they were assaulted by groups of over 10 policemen at a time and visual evidence appears to back their claim but police also point to violence from rally-goers who also attacked a police car.

The police car then crashed into a building before some protestors flipped it on its side.

Malaysia: UN experts call for protection of civil organizations seeking electoral reforms

UN News Center

7 June 2012 – United Nations independent experts today called on the Malaysian Government to protect the members of a group of civil society organizations campaigning for electoral process reform, who have been the target of harassment and intimidation.

The members of the umbrella group Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (also known by the Malay name Bersih) have received threats because of their advocacy work, which calls for reform of the electoral process ahead of the country’s general election, set to take place in April next year. The director of the organization, Ambiga Sreenevasan, has been particularly threatened.

“I am seriously concerned by these disturbing acts of harassment against a prominent woman human rights defender who is being targeted because of her legitimate human rights activities in Malaysia,” said the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, Margaret Sekaggya. “I urge the authorities to investigate thoroughly these allegations, hold the perpetrators accountable, and effectively protect Ms. Sreenevasan, and more generally, Bersih members.”

Ms. Sekaggya was joined in her call by the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of opinion, Maina Kiai, and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue.

According to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Ms. Sreenevasan has received credible threats against her life in the past months, and has been labelled by various groups as an enemy of the State and a traitor, who should be expelled from the country, because of her work with Bersih. Effigies of Ms. Sreenevasan have also been set alight, and recently, she had to cancel her participation in a public event because of fears for her safety.

In addition, Ms. Sreenevasan, along with other organizers from Bersih, has been sued by the federal Government in relation to property which was allegedly damaged during a rally organized by the coalition of non-governmental organizations in April.

“Holding assembly organizers liable for the alleged unlawful conduct of others is not compatible with standards governing the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, and has a detrimental effect on the exercise of this right,” said Special Rapporteur Kiai. “I urge the Government of Malaysia to withdraw the complaint against her.”

“The Government of Malaysia should fully guarantee the right to freedom of opinion and expression of those advocating for electoral reform, and should ensure a safe and conducive environment for journalists and those monitoring and reporting on demonstrations,” added Special Rapporteur La Rue. “The rights to freedom of opinion, expression and peaceful assembly are fundamental pillars of democracy.”

Mr. Kiai and Ms. Sekaggya also reminded the Government of their requests to visit the country given the urgency of the situation.

Independent experts, or special rapporteurs, are appointed by the Geneva-based Human Rights Council to examine and report back on a country situation or a specific human rights theme. The positions are honorary and the experts are not United Nations staff, nor are they paid for their work

Friday, June 8, 2012

How long more, Malaysians?

 By Lucius Goon | TMI

Question: when do we know that a government policy or decision is dumb and ill-conceived?

When Muhyiddin Yassin and Noh Omar are in agreement that the decision is brilliant!

I am of course referring to the decision by the Higher Education Ministry to freeze PTPTN scholarships to Unisel students. The Umno government thinks that this move will turn students against Pakatan Rakyat and lay bare the opposition’s plan to scrap the PTPTN scheme if it wrests control of Parliament.

The thinking (if you can call it that) is that the students and their desperate parents will be so upset that they will turn out in droves to vote against Khalid Ibrahim’s government.

The freeze is wrong on so many levels that it ultimately tells us that Umno is desperate, bankrupt of ideas, deeply vindictive and morally wanting. More shockingly, it shows us that this government will go to extreme lengths to cling to power, even stir up violence should poll results not go its way.

Khaled Nordin, Muhyiddin and Noh refuse to accept certain facts: they serve the rakyat; that when the opposition put up alternative suggestions, they must counter these ideas through persuasion and that government funds belong to the rakyat.


Pakatan says that if it comes to power, it will abolish the PTPTN scheme, BN says it cannot be done. So go out there and convince Malaysians why Pakatan’s scheme is not doable.

Instead they decide to punish the students. What a morally deficient bunch of ministers we have! So are we to expect that various communities will be punished if they don’t support Umno in the polls?

Will Chinese areas be neglected? Will the Indians be marginalised?

More importantly, will Malaysians continue to suck up all the punishments and morally-suspect decisions by a government which has lost its ability to discern between right and wrong.

Thursday, June 7, 2012

What is the meaning of 'Anything' in ABU?

I usually brush off people that complain my poor English in articles that I wrote because 1Malaysia has the best education system in the world so how could my 'England' be that bad.

But today I realised indeed my 'England' is really bad because I do not understand the meaning of  'Anything'. I blindly follow the meaning from the dictionary which to some Malaysians' interpretation was wrong.

Definition from dictionary: Anything -  any thing whatever; something, no matter what

Let me try to understand the meaning of  'Anything' as perceived by some people.

An organiser is promoting the biggest fruit fair  in the country, a fair that everyone must buy 1 type of fruit. Pamphlets were distributed widely with the first paragraph boldly highlighted in red, "You can buy and eat anything but the big red apple" with explanation that the big red apple is poisonous from the day the seed was planted right up to the bearing of the fruit itself. The planter of the apple trees does not bother to find out what was wrong and keep producing it for over five decades. All in all the advice and warning is not to eat the poisonous big red apple.

On the day of the fruit fair huge crowd were seen at stalls selling bananas, papayas, durians..etc with only a handful of people wondering around the big red apple stall. Suddenly the organiser shouted out to the people 'Do not buy nor eat the bananas, papayas, durians etc because of speculation that those trees were poisoned 14 years ago' The sellers tried to explain that the trees that were poisoned 14 years ago were uprooted, replanted and well taken care and now they are not poisonous anymore but the organiser won't listen and insisted that they are still poisonous and must be rejected at all cost.

Everyone was shocked but they still need to buy 1 type of fruit and which one should they buy? All fruits are now poisonous, so what the heck, lets go for the poisonous big red apple!

We, Malaysians are really bad, we do not like to give people a chance to prove their worth even if they are showing good credential now over what they might have done wrong decades ago.

The fact that we are not giving a chance to the poisonous big red apple is simply because they have proven to be poisonous till today after 5 decades and not willing to look into how to rid of the poison.

The other fruits may be poisonous decades ago but they have proven lately that they are cleansed of the poison and willing to prove it by encouraging you to taste it but the organiser that promoted the 'anything but the big red apple' wanted to tell you the different meaning of 'anything'

The rakyat is rising up against an evil corrupt regime and as promoted by a certain NGO they are willing to go for anything but the evil corrupt regime. The war plan is put in place with generals taking charge of the assault against the enemy with their latest war equipments whom are already at the doorstep to annihilate the uprising.

The generals are working and planning hard and used whatever ancient weaponry they have at hand to  help the rakyat fight against the enemy modernised weapons. Coincidentally a few generals were previously aligned with the enemy decades ago but have changed side to be with the rakyat and fighting to win this war.

The enemy sense that they are losing the war and start spreading all sorts of speculation of misdeeds, corruptions, sex stories of a few generals while they were still aligned to them decades ago to create a civil war among the generals and rakyat.

Upon receiving these speculations the NGO that promoted the anything but the evil corrupt regime started to call upon the rakyat to turn their guns and kill off the generals. To them a general must be pure and still a virgin in order to lead the war and now it becomes anything but the generals must die, even if the the war is lost, because of their past sins that were speculated to have happened decades ago.

For God sake, we are now at war and a win is not an option, why now, questioning the generals of their past misdeeds, true or otherwise. Why are they not accessed base on their present performances with the four states under their rule. Are they still practising and doing what they were speculated to have done decades ago?

Giving the excuse that we do not want to replace the evil corrupt regime with another is just lame without  giving them a chance to prove their capability. How worst or corrupt can a new regime be compared to the present one. When ABU was launched it is very clear of the path that it will be taking, no excuses, unless ABU is now on reverse gear just like RPK. That is my fear!

So what does anything in ABU means? Any hidden clause or exception must be revealed earlier to let the rakyat decide whether they can accept it and not when we are half way through fighting a very serious war.

If  ABU or anyone can provide facts and figures that Pakatan Rakyat is performing worst than Umno/BN in the states under PR rule I will give my vote to umno/bn without hesitation. Please don't try to act like an angel, free of sins to dig out decade old speculated misdeeds just to spice your good friends turned enemy. SPEAK UP and Don't Talk Cock







Wednesday, June 6, 2012

428 Bersih 3.0 The Truth: Bersih 3.0 Semangat Bersih, Harapan Negara, Video


Viewer Discretion Is Advised


Judge yourself by viewing this video if possible over and over again and study carefully:

Are the people there planning and getting ready to overthrow the government?

Are they communists?

Do they look like rioters, gangsters or hooligans?

Are they what the Prime Minister, IGPs (present and former), Home Minister and top leaders claimed what they are? 

No police brutality, they are just doing their jobs?






LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails