Unfair to deny Anwar’s defence access to documents, says Bar Council

Malaysia

Unfair to deny Anwar’s defence access to documents, says Bar Council

By Boo Su-Lyn

November 25, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 25 — The Bar Council has called the courts’ refusal to allow Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim access to documents in his Sodomy II trial a violation of his right to a fair trial.

Recently, the High Court here denied the Opposition Leader access to three Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) doctors’ medical notes, although the court subsequently granted him access yesterday to a proforma report prepared by HKL forensic pathologist Dr Siew Sheue Feng.

A proforma report is a form or a list prepared by a doctor before performing an examination on a patient.

In January, the Federal Court had also denied Anwar access to key documents he sought to prepare his defence, and ruled that he was only entitled to documents and materials related to the charge that had already been provided to him.

“Some of these recent court decisions...have been myopic and regrettably regressive,” said Bar Council president Ragunath Kesavan in a statement today.

“They have in fact whittled down the strength of this vital tenet, rendering it meaningless and subverting the accused person’s right to a fair trial,” he added, referring to section 51A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) that covers the production of documents and information in a trial.

Ragunath pointed out that section 51A of the CPC was meant to reduce inequalities between the prosecution and the defence.

“We believe that, in enacting section 51A of the Criminal Procedure Code to expand and strengthen the principle governing production of documents, the government made plain its intention to level the playing field between the prosecution and the defence, and to increase

transparency and fairness in the country’s criminal justice system,” he said.

Among the documents that the Federal Court had refused Anwar were chemist reports, medical notes, CCTV recordings, DNA samples, witness statements, and a witness list.

Ragunath pointed out that it was crucial for the prosecution to fully disclose information to all parties so that a judge could make an informed decision.

“It is the responsibility of all parties, including the judge, to ensure that the prosecution complies with full disclosure in terms of the information provided to the parties involved and produced in court,” he said.

“Only when all these elements are present can the judge make an informed decision on the credibility of the witnesses, and the weight to be given to their testimony,” he added.

Ragunath claimed that refusal to produce documents or information would mar public perception of the criminal justice system.

“Non-production of any documents and information merely gives rise to the perception, in the public mind, of a cover-up and would surely erode public confidence in the criminal justice system,” he added.

Anwar, the 62-year-old PKR de facto leader, is currently facing sodomy charges for the second time in his life.

The former deputy prime minister is charged with sodomising Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at Unit 11-5-1 of the Desa Damansara Condominium in Jalan Setiakasih, Bukit Damansara here between 3.01pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008.

Anwar has denied the charge, describing it as “evil, frivolous lies by those in power” when the charge was read out to him. He is charged under section 377B of the Penal Code and can be sentenced to a maximum of 20 years’ jail and whipping upon conviction.

The trial is taking place 18 months after Anwar was charged in court in August 2008.

He was charged with sodomy and corruption in 1998 after he was sacked from the Cabinet and was later convicted and jailed for both offences.

He was freed in September 2004 and later resurrected his political career by winning back his Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat in a by-election in 2008, which had been held in the interim by his wife.

He had two years ago led the loose opposition pact of PKR, DAP and PAS to a historic sweep of five states and 82 parliamentary seats in Election 2008.

“The Malaysian Bar urges the court to exercise its discretion...to preserve the rights of accused persons and in the interest of justice,” said Ragunath today.

“This concern is relevant not only to the Anwar Ibrahim case, but is applicable to the entire criminal justice system,” he added.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/unfair-to-deny-anwars-defence-access-to-documents-says-bar-council/

政府力阻柔佛千年古城浮面 为权力不惜篡改历史

时间：2010-11-22 16:16:05 来源：本报报道 作者：记者

Share72

（吉隆坡22日讯）原本和平进行的《残暴的内安法令下50年系列活动》昨日在光大大道举办首场讲座会时，遭一批由光大店商公会副主席甘尼的及巫青团的带领下的大约50人进行闹场。

著名博客MarGeeMar表示，这群示威者有被邀请参与讲座，但是他们却不肯，反而选择以不适当的方式来恐吓出席者，虽然这群示威者并没有准证，但是警方再次袖手旁观。

“这就是由巫统及国阵政权所制造出来的制度化种族主义，目的就是要捍倒受欢迎的槟州民联政府。这只会为回教蒙上污名，因为内安法令与回教教义是有冲突的，但是巫统及国阵却依然利用这种方式来阻碍反对党，让执政党可以继续掌权。”

柔佛州千年古城推翻国阵塑造的历史

MarGeeMar表示，巫统及国阵政权为了制造马来人特权而刻意更改历史的做法是错误的，因为在柔佛州出现的千年古城“Kota Gelanggi”就推翻了国阵的说法，但是这项发现却被政府掩盖着。

“Kota Gelanggi会不会比婆罗浮屠（Borobudur）和吴哥窟（Angkor Wat）更早存在？如果是真的话，那么马来人的历史就要被推翻了。”

根据博客网《National Express Malaysia》的博文指出，Kota Gelanggi这个被列为马来半岛最早期的文明的新闻会完全被封锁是因为这个古城的文化是佛教。

政府极力阻止Kota Gelanggi历史曝光

“这个记载着Srivijaya王朝和其佛教文化高峰的古迹曾经轰动一时，却被静悄悄地停止研究，主要原因是这个发现足以推翻马六甲王朝，一个500年后才成立的回教国为半岛最早文明的记载。”

“ 我在最近的讲座会中遇见了Lee Kam Hing教授， 一位新加坡马来亚大学的前历史博士，如今是 《星报》出版社编辑研究主任，他告诉我说他一直都在尽力的宣传Kota Gelanggi，可惜都被政府阻止。很明显地，政府不想让这个历史发现曝光，因为他们要后代深信半岛的历史是从公元1400的马六甲王朝开始。更甚的 是，他们也将历史改写，将拜里米苏拉（Parameswara）记载为信奉回教的马来人。事实上，拜里米苏拉是一名印度王子。”

“回顾历史， 希特勒的公关经理曾经说过：如果你不停重复一个谎言，这个谎言也会变成一个事实。因此，政府消灭了这位著名的马六甲王子是来自印度王朝Sri Vijaya的参考资料，突然之间，我们的博物馆及学校课本都称拜里米苏拉为一名马来王子了。”

“其实，我们的国家由哪一个种族控制政权都是次要的，不可原谅的是为了得到权力而私自更改历史记载的行为。就算一个人改信其他宗教，也该变不了一个人的原籍。拜里米苏拉很可能就是巫统马来人特权思维的始源。”

历史清楚记载拜里米苏拉是印度人

“ 如果真的如此，那么马来人特权的说法根本就不存在。马六甲王族拥有的是印度血统，不是马来血统。至于拜里米苏拉是一位来自印度的印度王子的记载也并非什么 秘密。历史很清楚地记载，拜里米苏拉不曾改信回教。他是一位从苏门答腊的巨港（Palembang）逃离出来的兴都教徒，于公元1400年发现马六甲。改 信回教的是之后的　斯里马哈拉惹（Sri Maharaja），他也是将马六甲法庭改为回教法庭的人，并于公元1435年后，将自己的封号改为苏丹莫哈末沙（Sultan Muhammad Shah）。”

“历史上最出名的印度国王是Raja Chola和他的儿子Rajendra Chola。他们于公元1000年占领了泰国南部、吉打、霹雳、柔佛和苏门答腊，并不是马来国王Raja Chulan，可悲的是马来西亚的年轻一代都被教导了。”

“我们被误导印度人和华人是在1850年才以粗工、农夫、采矿工人的身份踏入这个国家的土地上。”

http://www.therocknews.com/dama/local/21649.html

Rewriting History: Kota Gelanggi (the lost city)..

Rewriting History: Kota Gelanggi (the lost city)..

A small piece of History for our future generation.. Why Kota Gelanggi (lost city) touted as earliest civilization in Malay Peninsula news were banned as they were Buddhist The Johor find of 2005 which was quietly dropped was none other than Kota Gelanggi lost city reflecting Srivijaya and its Buddhist splendour.

But they deliberately disregarded it because that would have sidelined Malacca Empire and Islam which was smaller and came some 500 years later. I met Dr Lee Kam Hing, a former History prof at MU in Singapore recently at a seminar. Dr Lee, who is now Star research director, told me he was
trying his best to highlight Kota Gelanggi, but that the govt killed it off. This is clearly another case to cover up the real history of Malaya and fool the younger generations into believing that our history only began from Malacca

1400.. Not only that, they try to show Parameswara as Malay and Muslim, but actually he was Hindu! If one were to condemn these UMNO scumbags on how they distort history, it will never end....the condemnations will more than cover 10 PhD thesis!

A small piece of History for our future generation Hitler's public relations manager, Goebbels, once said, 'If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.'

Once again our government wiped out any references to a famous Melaka prince as being Hindu and
belonging to the powerful Hindu empire Sri Vijaya.

So all of a sudden our museums, school text-books etc. all refer to Parameswara as a Malay prince.
What race ruled or did not rule is besides the point. What is important is not butchering history to create your own truths. You cannot change your race even if you convert - Parameswara could have been responsible for Umno's proud heritage of ' Ketuanan Melayu '.

If this is what it is based on, there is no ' Ketuanan Melayu '. The lineage of Melaka Sultans are Indians, not Malays. It is no secret that Parameswara was an Indian and a Hindu prince. It is clear from records that Parameswara never converted to Islam. He was an Indian Hindu who fled Palembang in Sumatra to eventually found Melaka circa 1400 AD. It was Sri Maharaja who converted himself and the court of Melaka to Islam, and as a result took on the name of
Sultan Muhammad Shah sometime after 1435.

The most famous of Indian Hindu Kings were Raja Chola and his son Rajendra Chola who invaded Southern Thailand, Kedah, Perak, Johor and Sumatra about 1000 AD. This is Raja-raja Chola - the Indian/Hindu kings and not Raja Chulan - a Malay king. But what is really sad is that our children are
taught as though Malaysian history suddenly began in 1400 with an Islamic Melaka. We are led to believe that the Indians and Chinese first arrived on the shores of Malaysia in about 1850 as desperate indentured labourers, farmers and miners . Nothing could be further from the truth.

The cultural influences of India in particular, and China, in South East Asia span over 2,000 years,
starting with the arrival from India of the Brahmanical prince/scholar - Aji Saka in Java in AD78, through to Vietnam, Cambodia (Indo China), Thailand,Burma, Indonesia, Bali, Borneo, Brunei and beyond.

The findings at Bujang Valley speak of an ancient Indian/Hindu presence in Kedah. There were Chinese settlements in Pahang and Kelantan around the 13th-14th century and in 12th century in Singapore. The early Brunei Sultanate had a Chinese Queen. One need not ponder at length the implications of Angkor Wat and Borobudur or that 40%-50% of Bahasa Malaysia comprises Sanskrit/Tamil words.

To illustrate, some of these word are :
bumi = boomi
putra = putran

raja = rajah
desa = thesam
syakti = sakthi
kolam = kulam
bahaya = abahya
jaya = jeya
maha = maha
aneka = aneha
nadi = naadi
kedai = kadai
mahligai = maaligai
mantra = manthrum
tandas = sandas
(This list can go on)
An extremely important archeological find that pointed to one of the greatest empires in history

- the Raja Cholan empire that ruled from the Maldives through India, Sri Lanka and right down to South East Asia found deep in the jungles of Johor a few years ago and made headlines in the mainstream newspapers in 2005, suddenly disappeared from the news…..

The time has arrived for us to record our history as the facts tell us and not as we would like to wish it.

The truth will never hurt anyone. Lies, always will .

http://national-express-malaysia.blogspot.com/2010/01/rewriting-history-kota-gelanggi-lost.html

逐鹿问鼎∶大马组织性犯罪集团∶条条大路通布城

逐鹿问鼎∶大马组织性犯罪集团∶条条大路通布城

出处∶Malaysia Today
原题∶The Corridors Of Power∶Malaysia’s organised crime syndicate: all roads lead to Putrajaya
作者∶拉惹柏特拉
发表日期∶03-06-07
翻译∶CC LIEW


在欧洲，有一句老话叫：「条条大路通罗马」，在马来西亚，他们会说「条条大路通布城」。这个说法有根据吗？是真的还是假的？《今日大马》决定把答案给找出 来，至少了解一下这些欣欣向荣的高利润组织性犯罪活动，包括卖淫（尤其是中国大陆女郎）、毒品（四种设计的毒品）和非法搏栾活动（万字票和角子机）的相互 关系。

在2007年5月14日，反贪污局（Anti-Corruption Agency，ACA）新上任的总监阿末赛益（Ahmad Said Hamdan）以接替因为贪污丑闻而被迫退休的前总监袓基菲里（Zulkipli Mat Noor）的职位。袓基菲里因为涉嫌贪污和性丑闻被迫提早退休。这并不是不寻常的事件，在马来西亚，政府首脑在性或是贪污丑闻中被迫退休是常有的事。实际 上，今天如果一位马来西亚政府高官在退休后两袖清风的话反而让人觉得很可疑，这种少数的清廉正直的人都会被民众所怀念。

等等！也许我应该再说明一次：「实际上，今天如果一位马来西亚政府高官在退休后两袖清风的话反而让人觉得很可疑，这种少数的清廉正直的人都会被民众所怀 念。」是的！这就是关键字——『今天』。因为在过去这种现象很普遍，那些混球和人渣在马来西亚公务员中只是占很少的部分，大部分公务员还是非常的有教养 的，因此『辞职谢罪』是一种很普遍的规范。

全国总警长慕沙哈山（Musa Hassan）被誉为『清廉先生』（Mister Clean），这个称号出自反贪污局总监阿末赛益的口。反贪污局和警队都是在首相阿都拉的关系下。更加陪衬的是，他们两任的上司也被誉为『清廉先生』，当 然后者的这个外号是前首相马哈迪胡乱给他取的。

『清廉先生』这个外号用在慕沙哈山身上可以说是当之无愧的，因为他对袓基菲里的贪污和性丑闻展开了调查工作。照道理，应该是反贪污局调查警方才对，可是这 次倒过来了。警方向这个部门的头目张开调查，而这个部门本来就是抓贪污的。就说这条摇尾狗吧！为了更进一步加强这个『清廉先生』的形象，警方也开始调查他 们自己的副部长。在马来西亚，部长就是『神』，是否『秉公处理』能附加在这些『神』身上呢？答案是肯定的，他们在这个事件上就办到了这一点。这应该能够把 这些巫统政客给抓拿归案，再次的证明给大家看到底是谁在管理这个国家。

我们已经有了一位反贪污局『清廉先生』总监、一位『清廉先生』全国总警长还有一位『清廉先生』首相。虽然这些『清廉先生』已经开始在动作，可是目前的社会 局势还是需要一个非常大的关注。为何我们的犯罪率在飙升？这里我们不是在说摩托车偷窃案，或是手提袋掠夺案，更不是说发生在巴士上的扒窃案，我们是在说组 织性的犯罪活动。

我所说的组织性犯罪集团，包括包括卖淫（尤其是中国大陆女郎）、毒品（四种设计的毒品）和非法搏栾活动（万字票和角子机）。这些非法活动在慕沙哈山上任后 变得更加猖狂。这是否仅仅是个巧合，又或是说这些人借着警队的『内乱』，乘机大张旗鼓，以便在警队在新政府的重组前搜刮一笔呢？

看来目前有超过120名警员已经被调职，这个大动作被视为慕沙哈山企图在清算整个警队，以提高整个团队的效率。干得好！慕沙哈山。可是批评慕沙哈山的人却 不认为是这么一回事，他们声称慕沙哈山只是在铲除旧势力，以便把自己人安排在这些重要的职位上。故事通常都有两面性，要了解究竟几乎是非常难的，除非警队 中有人愿意出来敲锣打鼓的把里面的故事给爆料。

无论如何，无论这个大清算是好是坏，也只是停留在谈论阶段吧了。可是唯一非常清楚，而不是至于理论的就是「组织性犯罪集团」这件事。这些集团起初发迹于柔佛，过后逐渐的往北移，在占据了马六甲、森美兰、雪兰莪，以及巴生谷这个金矿后，目前已经在霹雳巩固了他们的势力。

根据黑道人士的说法，这个组织性犯罪集团的头目名字叫『BK陈』（BK Tan）※。我们在《今日大马》曾经说过，这些黑帮老大最糟糕的地方就是他们非常喜欢炫耀。他们几乎无法自拔的到处去跟人说自己是多么的『有办法』，就包 括夜总会的公关小姐和招待都知道这些事。他们也有超乎常人的自大狂，尤其是最爱被『加封』。《新海峡时报》在2003年11月14日的一篇报道就有提到马 来西亚有10个州属在出售『拿督』衔头。该报道是这样说的：
※陈文强（Tan Boon Kiong，BK Tan）

「很多商人说他们愿意付出五万令吉购买『拿督』衔头，一些人更加愿意以十五万令吉或是更高的价格购买那些更加显赫的头衔。他们希望通过这些衔头可以让他们 在生意上的地位更高。令人关注的是在近几年来，一些收封的拿督甚至不会国语或是英语。一些拿督在犯罪活动中被捕，据称这些拿督都有涉入华人帮派。这使得封 衔的价值已经变质。」

常言道：「升官发财」，起初想发财，发了财就想买官。就连一些混球和人渣（用肮脏手段）赚到肮脏钱后，也想要获得社会人士的『尊敬』。他们所用的手法就是通过收买『拿督』衔头，十五万令吉对这些人又算得了什么？这笔钱还不到他们操作淫窟、地下赌场和毒品集团一天的收入呢！

『BK陈』到处去和认识的人说他多么的『有办法』。他会吹嘘他是如何的把全国总警长玩弄在手掌心，他会和人说他可以在全国总警长家进出自如。他能够对那些 听得如痴如醉的听众们保证，他有调换警官的权力，甚至是警区主任（OCPD）。如果哪一个警区主任不愿意合作的话，『BK陈』对那些听他吹嘘听出耳油的听 众们说：他能够担保这些警区主任将会在24小时内被调走。如果还有谁任旧怀疑他的说法的话，他会大声的唬叫：「警察部队就是我管的！」

当然大家都在猜想，他是说真的还是在吹牛。很肯定是没人敢打个电话去和全国总警长确认那些暗窟、地下赌场和毒枭的说法到底是不是真的。如果「BK陈」可以 明目张胆的在全国搞他的「生意」的话，他们还需要去确认这个说法吗？虽然他是在干些地下勾当，可是却一点也不想是在干这一行的人，因为他竟然四处招摇他和 全国总警长的关系，就只差没有穿上一件「总警长是我的人」标语的衬衫吧了！很肯定的总警长也应该知道『BK陈』的大嘴巴，可是最大的疑问是为何总警长可以 容忍自己的名誉这样子被他糟蹋呢？又或者是没人敢把『BK陈』『出卖』他的名字的事情告诉总警长？又或者是，会不会……不！……不可能会有这种事！

『BK陈』的第二把交椅是林（Lim Een Hong），他是集团中的执行者，以确保所有『规矩』都有在正确运作。柔佛州的生意是由吴清宝（Goh Cheng Poh）打理，他的绰号叫『登姑』（Tengku）。那些调配好的毒品通过新山的『夜来香迪斯哥夜总会』（Platinum Disco）出售，而那些妓女大部分都是由中国大陆『进口』。至于地下博栾网络不只是限制于新山，也伸延到了麻坡（Muar）、巴株巴辖（Batu Pahat）、居銮（Kluang）、笨珍（Pontian）还有哥打丁宜（Kota Tinggi）。在柔佛的每个市镇都能够看到他们的地下万字票厂和角子机。

『登姑』也和『BK陈』没有两样爱吹嘘。他自夸自己是如何安排总警长去把整个柔佛的竞争者的生意给关掉的，以达到垄断整个市场的目的。『登姑』也提起有一 位名叫拉欣加化（Dato Rahim Jaafar）※的警官因为拒绝和他合作而被总警长调出柔佛的事。这些黑道老板应该学会把嘴巴给关紧。即使是真的人们也不该轻易的相信，更何况这些也许都 是吹牛呢？
※拉欣加化（Dato Rahim Jaafar）当时是柔佛州刑事调查局总监

马六甲的『生意』是由一位名叫『吉米』（Jimmy）的人负责，就像柔佛的黑帮一样，也是一样从事淫业、毒品和地下赌场的活动。他们的主要销售点是在福臨 門Red Square KTV和Joker nightspots。这些地下赌博活动包括万字票和角子机，我们记住，这些地下万字票和角子机的收入远远的比云顶高原赌场还要高，更别提他们收入都是没 有缴税的。

森美兰州的『生意』集中在Taman NST，而这里的头子全名不祥，只知道他叫『Y2K』。吉隆坡是由一位『Ah Sek』的人士领导，巴生则是『Sor Hon Kia』。你可以随意的在Red Square、Aloha、Kelab De Macau、Deluxe等等地点公开购买毒品和找小龙女拉皮条。这些都是有执照的合法夜店，可是所有形式的非法交易都是公开在台上交易的，不是台下。

预估在今年年尾，霹雳州的运作也将开发完成，过后这组织性犯罪集团就会移师到槟城。到了时整个网络将会完成，卖淫、地下万字票、老虎机和合成毒品的生意将 会有一个全国性的集团控制。当然私人小企业还是会继续存在的，就和其他的行业一样。可是他们将会逐步的被排挤出局，他们会被「鼓励」售卖给这些组织性犯罪 集团，否则他们将会遭受报复。其中有两个头子因为反抗而最终得逃到中国大陆去，不敢再回来马来西亚，当然他们的地盘也就这样给这组织性犯罪集团给吞没了。

马来西亚从来也没有脱离过华人黑社会和组织性犯罪组织，可是却没有见过像目前这样有组织的情况。令人惊讶的是华人黑社会竟然可以在警方的耳目下如此快速的 蔓延。警方内部指出内情，他们说这种情况不可能会发生，除非在内部有人在和这些人勾结，直接上所有的警察都涉及其中，如果看来只有一些人站出来大喊大叫， 说国内安全已经失控的话，可未必是这样了。

一些警官愿意在问起的时候站出来指证这件事，可是问题是没有人问他们，而且也没有人自愿出来除非有人先问起。一名警方的高级官员曾经给阿都拉写了一封信， 揭露整个活动的详细内情以及幕后人是中的黑白两道人物。在这封给首相的告密信中，一些响当当的大人物的名字都有在里头，如果不是亲眼看过这封信，人们是绝 对不会相信的。反贪污局后来很像是有根据信中的引述做了调查，而且也确认了都是事实，可是想当然的，过后事情就这样不了了知了。

令人感到困惑的是，即使这件事（即是给首相写的这份信件，这封信已经被反贪污委员所证实）已经被揭发，可是却没见当局对这件事做过了什么。一些人怀疑首相 很可能就连这封信也没见过，因为阿都拉从坏消息中被『隔离』和『孤立』，他只被允许听到好新闻，这是众所周知的秘密。是否一些在首相署办公室的人士，也许 是那些坐在四楼的人士不让阿都拉知道真相呢？嗯……我们是否已经发现到了布特拉再也和华人黑社会集团之间的联系呢？这很肯定的令人大吃一惊。

好的！假设首相并没有被及时告知国内发生的事，很肯定的，他的很多部长们，比方说内政部长一定知道其中的所有内情，他应该采取一些形式上的动作，或者至少通知阿都拉目前正在发生的事。

阿都拉的副内政部长佐哈里（Johari Baharum）曾经因为接受了五百五十万令吉的贿赂，以便释放因为地下赌场、妓院和毒品网络而被扣留的黑帮老大，可是最终佐哈里却洗脱了嫌疑，看来警方 错误的扣留了黑帮老大，或是没有根据正确的程序进行扣留，于是佐哈里在毫无选择之下签字并释放了他，实际上，如果这个案件被带上法庭的话，整件事将会被 『曝光』。但是反贪污局在当时并还没有宣布他已经被赦免，即使佐哈里挑战反贪污局说，如果他们找到任何证据，尽管公开宣布。为什么反贪污局撤回了他们的宣 布，不帮助佐哈里洗脱他在这宗案件中的嫌疑呢？这是另外一个谜。

是否佐哈里对华人黑社会组织毫不知情呢？每个人都在谈论着，甚至就连许多警官都在议论纷纷。纸已经包不住火，佐哈里为何不做点事来补救呢？是否发起一项调查把事情追根究底是这样的困难呢？很肯定的，无论千山万水，要把罪犯绳之以法并不是这样的困难。

这令人不禁的想起，佐哈里是否已经在祖基菲（Zulkipli）事件中吸取了教训呢？佐哈里曾经看过『以下犯上』的事，至高无上的反贪污局头目理应调查的 人士竟然反过来将他拉倒，佐哈里也几乎遭受同样的命运，可是却很幸运的死里逃生。一个仅有一篇文章的网站就足以让他下台，而这个网站的设立看来就只是为了 影射他的贪污罪行，它这个目的仅此而已。

佐哈里是否患了『视若无睹』症候群呢？当然。如果知道谁是他的米饭帮主的话，当然也不能怪他了。常言道：『一朝被蛇咬，十年怕井绳』①，把警方给『洗』一 次就已经足够，可是如果佐哈里可以做些小动作的话那还好，可是他却选择什么也不做，这导致事情变得更糟。他现在是前无去路，后有来兵。如果他动作的话，他 就只有死路一条，如果他什么也不做的话，他会被人用手指指着说他是华人黑帮组织的卧底。这将会使他看来更加的像个犯罪者，到时他被人指责包庇并在无审讯的 情况下释放黑帮头子更是跳进黄河也洗不清了。马来人形容这种局面叫『吞下去死娘，吐出来死爹』②。
①英文谚语：『当被咬过一次后，下次懂得闪避了』Once bitten, twice shy。等同谚语『一朝被蛇咬，十年怕井绳』
②马来谚语：『吞下去死娘，吐出来死爹』（Telan mati emak, ludah mati bapak），等同成语『左右为难』

佐哈里也许已经洗脱了罪名，反贪污局也已经还给了他一个清白，可是以今天在国内的情况来看，这不过是九牛一毛。娼妓、非法赌博和贩毒集团显然的在国内如入 无人之地，这只能在那些高官允许之下才可能发生的。阿都拉以迅耳不及的速度表示自己是清白的，如果人们开始指责阿都拉是妓院、非法赌场和毒品网络的保护人 和受惠者的话，这将会破坏他作为『文明回教』的发起人和『宗教导师』的形象和声望。

实际上，阿都拉和佐哈里两人的名誉正在赌注中，他们是否意识到横扫全国的组织性犯罪集团呢？他们是否直到现在还充耳不闻呢？又或者是，他们是幕后的操纵 人？如果他们不是背后的操纵人，也对此一无所知的话，那好！现在他们都知道了。今天，《今日大马》就把正在发生的事揭发出来了，我们可否看到一些行动呢？ 如果『文明回教』的意思就是当权者的脚下到处都是卖淫、非法赌场和毒品乱窜的话，那是极度可悲的。

***********************************************
英国广播电台自从2005年九月二十日起，播放了一个系列的专题节目，名叫【谁在掌管你的世界？】。乔纳森•肯特（Jonathan Kent）撰写了一篇【与大马恶名昭彰黑帮的会面】讲述了马来西亚恶名昭彰的黑帮。

在我试图挖掘更多有关黑帮的故事前，我一开始就拟出了明确的规矩，我不要特定的内容，我不要细节，当然，我不要任何人的名字，我只是要知道这些黑帮是如何 运作的。我不知道阿兴（Ah Hing）的真正名字，可是我知道他将走马上任，成为一名『大哥』（tai ko）（帮会成员对他们老板的称呼），这个黑帮活跃于北马一个小镇。

我们挑选了一家旧店屋的一间房间作为见面的地点。阿兴就像一般大马华裔中的就业人士，他穿金戴银，脚下是双俗不可耐的皮鞋，头上是尖刺般的头发，身上充满刺青。

「我们售卖迷幻药，这是我和我的朋友讨生活的方式」他说，「我们也带女孩子去卖淫，可是迷幻药比较容易，因为通常政府不会找我们麻烦。」

这黑帮和大马其他的犯罪组织一样，他们都涉及了不同的勾当，有些甚至走私含有鸦片成分的咳嗽药水。在大马，毒品贩卖的惩罚是死刑。吊刑执行官的薪金在今年 年初被调整了，政府对这个课题是很重视的。卖淫活动比较容易避过警方的注意，同样的还有高利贷以及制造和售卖赝品。马来西亚被认为是世界上最大的盗版光碟 生产地。

可是，阿兴拉皮条和售卖摇头丸，这些帮派必须花费七百五十美元至两千美元在购买一个女子，他们就像畜生一样被买卖，而皮条客要的是回本。「这些女子知道他 们必须工作，以偿还我们买下她们时的肉金」阿兴表示「我们也有发现一些女子不愿意工作，我们将他们关起来，让她们尝尝苦头，直到她们愿意工作为止。」

这些帮派的渊源可以追溯到十七世纪反清复明的时代，可是时代的变迁，他们已经变质成为了犯罪集团。一位在大马华社人面及广的刘女士（Jessica Lau）发现，在一些地区，他们还有保留着昔日的仪式。刘女士目前定居在纽西兰，她的邻居曾经是一位决定要退出江湖的香港黑帮老大。

「在他担任黑社会领袖的最后日子里，他把帮派内所有人都召集起来，在其他帮派领袖面前，他用一个金色的盆子洗手，以表示说从今以后不再介入帮派事务，现在他是个受人尊敬的老人，他获得了自由。」她说道。

和香港帮派比较起来，马来西亚的帮派组织相对的比较松散。仪式的元素已经不在，这些帮派都被当成是生意来运作。阿兴把他自己的帮派称为『我们的公司』，这是直达当局的协定，作为实务主义，他们知道这一类罪犯是无法扑灭的，于是他们给这些罪犯画上楚河汉界。

「如果我要在特定的街道经营的话，我会告诉政客去和当局交涉，要他们别来干扰我们，政客会说：『零逮捕是不可能的，你倒是可以在部分时间营业，我们会在其他时间才来巡逻』，这样就能够达到双赢的局面了。」阿兴说道。

如果有人冒犯了他，那就很肯定的不是『双赢』了，「如果有人私下背叛我的话……我会叫一些帮派中的成员一同殴打他，直到他昏死过去，或是变成植物人。可是 如果是大件事的话，我们会把他带到我的大哥面前接受审判，」他表示。「如果我的大哥叫我去和某人谈判，即使我们杀了那个人，我们也不会担心，因为如果警方 逮捕我们的话，我的大哥会把我救出来，」他补充。「上次我被带到（警局）牢房前面，马上我就由后门走出去了。」

大部分马来西亚人都没有参与帮派，可是有许多比较贫苦的人民在需要借钱的时候却求助无门。马华公共服务局主任张天赐（Michael Chong）表示这种现象已经习以为常，看看借贷者借钱后常发生的事。「我们也接到好些案例，他们无力摊还，于是就逃跑了，你知道吗？……带着全家……当 然，我们也接到一些被人袭击的案例，被人殴打直至躺在医院。」张天赐表示。

阿兴对自己的生活毫无怨悔。「我承认我是坏人，我是一个流氓。」他表示。

「那是谁在运作这个世界呢？」我问道，他给了我很简单的答复：「是政府，如果不是因为政府对我们如此宽宏大量的话，如果他们限制一切的话，我们是无法生存下去的，根本就没有工作可做。」阿兴说道。

当1998年金融风暴袭击亚洲时，许多大马人投入黑帮，这使得成千上万的人获得了生计。这也是一个充分的理由为何当权者放任这些帮派的活动，在共识上，这些帮派是在谋生计，而不是在制造麻烦。

他们也许是坏人，可是他们同时也是生意人。

***********************************************
这是刊登在《新海峡时报》志期2007年一月二十三日的一篇报道：

大马全国警察刑事调查总监拿督尹树基（Christopher Wan Soo Kee）两周前在雪兰莪北部的一个沿海小镇适耕庄（Sekinchan）对当地的四个赌档进行了扫荡行动，在行动中，他做了一次很不寻常的决定——即是不 通知当地警方。当地警方见证了一次成功的扫荡行动，这家被扫荡的商店就在距离警局一百米处。参与扫荡行动的警官破获了两百四十一台角子机，总值七十二万三 千令吉，同时逮捕了十一人。

全国总警长丹斯里慕沙哈山（Musa Hassan）在去年九月份上任后，委任尹树基担任刑事调查总监，尹树基被认为是非常专业的警官。慕沙哈山对适耕庄警局缺乏行动觉得不是一个玩笑的事。 「如果他们有涉及，或是放任非法活动的话，我们将会采取行动。」他在提到该地区的警员时这样表示。

在该突击行动后，尹树基马不停蹄的进行指挥和策划对全国各个小镇的地下赌场的扫荡行动，这些地下赌场通常不在国家的监视范围内。除了对这些由大马黑帮控制的地下赌场宣战外，这次的扫荡行动部分也是对那些与犯罪组织有裙带关系的警方人员放话。

当首相阿都拉的政府在2003年上台后，它把消灭贪污作为最优先处理的事项，可是已经过了三年有余，公众对公务员贪污，特别是警队内部的贪污行为的形象维持不变。

看来目前新上任的全国总警长正在和刑事调查总监携手合力打造警方的新形象。在尹树基发动的突击行动后，适耕庄警长已经被调回警察总部，目前正在进行纪律调查，该地区的警区主任也被质询是否有涉及其中。

突击行动的连带效应：该区的市议会主席也别调职，因为该赌档被发现并没有合法的商业执照。

「这次的行动很肯定能够帮助建立警方的威望，以及增强它给公众的印象。」国阵国会议员诺嘉兹兰（Nur Jazlan Mohamed）※对《新海峡时报》表示。他表示任何对警方和公共服务部门的净化运动都能够协助提高首相的形象。「可是，对付贪污是漫长的工作，现在最主 要的是逐步的改变警队的（贪污）文化。」他表示。
※诺嘉兹兰（Nur Jazlan Mohamed）柔佛蒲莱国会议员

上周五，尹树基带领他的队伍抵达吉打州的双溪大年（Sungei Petani），他们在七家『家庭式娱乐中心』破获了一百七十八台赌马机，其中一家的位置就在警局的五百米处。「我们要在三月底前关掉所有的非法赌档」他 最近这样表示。当被问及他有和解决方案时，他表示「非法聚赌会使人家破人亡」。

***********************************************
是的！没错，就是非法赌博，尤其是角子机在全马特别猖狂，他们就在警方咫尺之处经营着，重点是，这些场所都在警方走路就能到的距离，看来就像是和警察合伙 的样子。这不是《今日大马》说的，这是警察他们自己在《新海峡时报》说的。为何警方无法扫荡干净呢？他们不是不知道这些，他们都知道。

全马大约有五百台拥有制造的跑马机，每个档口至少有十五台。80%的市场有两个派系在控制，第一个派系包括陈志成（Danny Tan Chee Sing），他的兄长陈志远（Vincent Tan Chee Yioun），以及陈志远的长子陈永钦（Robin Tan Yeong Ching），第二的派系是又一名叫『拿督斯理华联』（Dato Seri Wazlian）※的人士所控制。他们从财政部获得了执照，而财政部就是阿都拉自己所领导的。无论如何，有执照和无执照的档口被『混』在一起，以让当局无 法分辨到底哪些是合法及非法的档口。有人说非法档口是合法档口的三倍，这就使得正在运作中的角子机总数高达三万台。对马来西亚这样小的国家来说，这是很可 观的数量了。
※陈志远只有一名弟弟，也就是成功集团（Berjaya Group）的副主席陈志成。他有两名儿子，长子名叫陈永钦（Robin Tan Yeong Ching），幼子名叫陈永硕（Rayvin Tan Yeong Sheik），目前是The Edge杂志的总编辑。
※华联（Wazlian）并非是一个人的名字，他指的大概是华联集团（Waz Lian Group），这家公司由拿督郑金炎（Ta Kin Yan）和新加坡商人傅宝联（Paul Poh Po Lian）所创办。表面上专门从事东南亚的电子赌博机的销售。据说许金炎是全马最大的盗版光碟制造商。

一个号称『文明回教』的马来西亚竟然比『大恶魔』——美国的拉斯维加斯拥有还要多角子机，也比禁止娼妓的『不信神』的中国拥有还要多的妓女？然而，一名马 来女子丽娜乔（Lina Joy）在很久以前改信基督教以后，现在她要求在她的身份证上修改她的宗教类别时，却被当局疯狂的抨击。那简直就是极度虚伪的动作！怪不得马来人是个罪大 恶极的民族。什么？你不同意吗？这样说好了！马来人保护华人犯罪组织集团，导致非法赌博、毒品和娼妓无法根除，不是吗？如果不是的话，你要如何说明华人黑 社会能够把这个国家当成是1920年的上海滩呢？无论如何，在《新经济政策》的精神下，马来人获得了这些地下企业的30%盈利，怪不得巫青团和马来商会认 为我是在小题大做了。


http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2007/06/blog-post_2324.html

Boy's pork lunch sparks religious tensions in Malaysia

Boy's pork lunch sparks religious tensions in Malaysia
("EarthTimes," November 12, 2010)

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia - The controversy surrounding the case of a boy who was caned for taking pork to school for lunch has threatened to spark religious tensions in mainly-Muslim Malaysia.

Earlier this month, a school's assistant principal caned 10-year-old Basil Beginda from the eastern state of Sarawak for taking fried rice with pork to school for his lunch.

Consuming pork is not permissible for followers of Islam, which is Malaysia's official religion, but there are no laws that forbid non-Muslim students from eating it in schools or public places.

The boy's outraged mother lodged a complaint with the state's education department, and the assistant principal - who is Muslim - subsequently issued an apology.

However, the case has sparked fierce debate on the rights of religious minority groups in Malaysia.

Non-Muslims, comprised mostly of Christians, Buddhists and Hindus, make up just over a third of Malaysia's 28-million population.

Basil's case has revived longstanding claims by minority religious groups that their rights to practise freely have been threatened under the Muslim-dominated government.

In the last two days, debates in Parliament have skirted around the legality of the assistant principal's act, and instead have been centred around Basil's religion.

Basil's father, Beginda Anak Minda, claimed he legally converted from Islam 1999. His wife, who is a Christian, raised their son as a Christian.

However, a lawmaker claiming to know Beginda said the man was legally still Muslim, resulting in the government calling on the National Religious Department to investigate Beginda's religious status.

If Beginda lacks the legal papers to show he had converted to Christianity, he will be considered still a Muslim, and according to Malaysia's Islamic decree, his son is automatically also a Muslim and therefore forbidden to consume pork.

The response in blogs and chat rooms to the case has been strong, with many Muslims and non-Muslims condemning the punishment and expressing outrage that no action has been taken against the assistant principal.

"The real issue here is not whether the boy is Muslim or not. The issue is the caning of a child for bringing the food of his choice to school," wrote an online commentator who identified himself as Colin.

"The antics of some extremists are bordering on the ridiculous, and now they are bringing it to the school," wrote Lynn, another reader.

While the government takes great pains to project an image of a moderate Muslim society, critics say there is a growing wave of radical Islamism.

Religious tensions reached their highest point earlier this year, when nine churches were fire-bombed or vandalized in one of the country's worst spates of religious violence.

Reports of Islamic authorities seizing the bodies of non-Muslims for Islamic burial rites based on claims that the deceased were Muslims - even when there was no proof of those claims - have also riled minority religious groups.

Earlier this year, the government set up an interfaith committee of religious leaders in the hope of easing the rising tensions, but critics said the panel is unlikely to resolve disputes as its recommendations are not legally binding.

http://wwrn.org/articles/34482/?&place=asia-pacific

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/news/353213,tensions-malaysia-feature.html

「猪肉课题」及「不参军代表不爱国」

「猪肉课题」及「不参军代表不爱国」在互联网也升温

时间：2010-11-14 20:13:30 来源：本报报道 作者：编辑

Share4

过去一週，在国会下议院议会中引起争辩的「猪肉课题」及「不参军代表不爱国」，触动大马社会对宗教、种族的「神经线」，在互联网也升温。

特别是东马一名10岁小学生被指因为携带猪肉饭盒到学校而遭到鞭打的新闻，一经国会议员朱基菲里诺丁的提起后，随即引起网民的热烈讨论，许多国内外新闻网站纷纷转载。

至于国防部长拿督斯里阿末扎希的「非土着不参军可能是因为不够爱国」的言论，则引起许多网民的不满，而在网站、部落格以及论坛中做出反驳。

-------------

一 盒猪肉香肠饭盒，不是引起体罚争议，而是扯到宗教争议，大马这等怪事让国际媒体如《地球时报》、《悉尼时报》、《圣战观察组织》、《怪物与评论家》及《全 球宗教新闻》等网站趋之若鹜，同时转载了《德国新闻社》（Deustche Presse-Agentur）的新闻，指有关事件导致我国宗教关系紧张。

有关报导详细转述了该名10岁学生携带母亲所准备的饭盒而遭到鞭打，在其母亲向相关部门提出投诉后曝光。

不过，该课题却在尔后被居林万达峇鲁区国会议员朱基菲里诺丁在国会议会内提及而掀起更大的风波。

在谷歌搜索引擎上键入「男孩猪肉午餐导致马来西亚宗教紧张」（Boy's pork lunch sparks religious tensions in Malaysia）的字眼，出现将近8000则搜索结果，而大部份都转载有关新闻的国内外网站或部落格。

在本地的新闻网站及部落格上，网民对朱基菲里在国会提及有关课题感到不满，他们认为朱基菲里刻意渲染有关课题，并将课题政治化。

《马来西亚记事》（http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/2010/11/zul-noordin-defends-caning-of-pork.html）上所转载有关朱基菲里言论的博文，引起许多读者的迴响。

在50则留言当中，绝大部分的读者都对朱基菲里的言论深表不满，并认为年仅10岁的小学生不应因此而被鞭打。

此外，在佳礼中文论坛上，小学生因在校内享用猪肉饭盒而被鞭打的新闻也引起用户的热烈讨论。

其中数名用户因为「马来西亚是不是回教国」、「在回教徒面前吃猪肉就是不尊重回教徒」等课题而掀起骂战，其中一些用户则因为言论过火而被论坛版主「屏蔽」。

无论如何，在社交网站「推特」上，有关新闻并未引起太大的舆论，而仅搜获约30则相关发言。

转载相关新闻的各大国际网站及网址：

1. 《地球时报》（www.earthtimes.org/articles/news/353213,tensions-malaysia-feature.html）

2. 《悉尼时报》的PerthNow网站www.perthnow.com.au/news/breaking-news/boy-caned-for-bringing-pork-to-school/story-e6frg13l-1225952978374

3. 回教研究权威史宾沙的《圣战观察组织》
www.jihadwatch.org/2010/11/malaysia-10-year-old-christian-student-caned-for-bringing-fried-rice-with-pork-to-school.html

4. 《怪物与评论家》（Monster and Critics）新闻网站（www.monstersandcritics.com/news/asiapacific/features/article_1598525.php/Boy-s-pork-lunch-sparks-religious-tensions-in-Malaysia-News-Feature）

5. 《全球宗教新闻》（wwrn.org/articles/34482/?&place=asia-pacific）

--------

●何解好男不当兵？
除了猪肉饭盒引起宗教舆论，国防部长拿督斯里阿末扎希指非土着不参军是因为不爱国的言论也在互联网上升温。

政策创议中心主任林德宜博士指出，在许多国家，种族并非人民参军的主要因素，相对地，真正影响人民参军的因素是社会经济阶级。

「我 们很难找到来自大马社会中上阶层的青年加入军队，这与他们来自什麽族群或是否爱国无关，无论是现在还是在未 来。」（english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article& amp;id=2066:non-malay-lack-of-patriotism-what-is-the-truth& catid=118:cpi-press-releases&Itemid=162）

他说，若要求证非土着的爱国情操是否比土着来得低，则必须通过慎密的研究，继而展开更开明的讨论及更深入的分析，才可得到正确的答案。

他强调，有关研究必须由可靠及独立的研究人员来进行，而我国在这方面拥有许多人才，或者将有关研究外包给拥有卓越表现记录的国外研究中心。

他主张我国不应该以消极的方式让这个课题沉寂下来，而是应该进行全面的民调，以确保我国的政治人物不再毫无根据地随意发表意见。

不过，一名自称为charleskiwi的网民却对本身的不爱国直认不讳，「为何非土着必须爱国，而这个国家却并未将非土着视为公民？」

一些网民则认为爱不爱国不是非土着不参军的因素，因此支持林德宜的建议，即展开详细的调查，以确定非土着参军率偏低的主要原因。

http://therocknews.com/dama/local/21451.html

Can there be justice for non-Muslims in Malaysia?

Case in point
Gooi, a lawyer by profession, was referring to one of his recent cases where Muslim convert, Fatimah Fong, 28, recently took away her seven-year-old daughter from school.

The child, Tan Yi Min, had been living with her father, Tan Cheow Hong, 36, since 2007, after the couple separated. During this period, the child’s mother had hardly visited her, and Yi Min has been under the care of her father, his mother and sister, who live in Butterworth. Fatimah resides in Kuala Lumpur.

Gooi said the teachers and principal of Yi Min’s school had tried to prevent the child from being taken away, but failed because the mother produced a Syariah Court order.

click here for details

Islamic Injustice: Snatching and Unilateral Conversion of Child

Parent uses Syariah Court order to 'snatch' her child

Parent Uses Syariah Court Order to ‘Snatch’ Her Child

Parent Uses Syariah Court Order to ‘Snatch’ Her Child

Susan Loone
Malaysiakini Nov 16, 2010 LINK

A worrying trend of child snatching has emerged in recent years, enabling a Muslim convert to ‘seize’ his or her child from a non-Muslim parent with help from different agencies. Making this claim, Kedah PKR Youth vice-chairperson Gooi Hsiao Leung said the child is then converted to Islam without the non-Muslim parent’s consent, leading to problems from the point of law.
“The Muslim parent is able to do this because he or she manages to secure a Syariah Court order, which encroaches on the constitutional and civil law rights of the non-Muslim parent over his or her child,” said Gooi (right).

He said this creates a constitutional problem because the rights of a non-Muslim parent are “subjugated” by the Syariah Court.
This forces a non-Muslim to submit to the authority of the Syariah Court when its jurisdiction can only apply to Muslims, he noted. Gooi also said incidents of child snatching are occurring with the help of other institutions, such as the police and state religious councils.

“All we are saying is, if a marriage has been contracted under civil law, any matrimonial dispute, including custody of children, should be decided by the civil court,” he said.

“The Syariah Court should stay out of it and not encroach into the jurisdiction of the civil court.
“It is a worrying trend that we’ve seen recent developments where the Syariah Court continues to challenge the jurisdiction of the civil court.”

Case in point
Gooi, a lawyer by profession, was referring to one of his recent cases where Muslim convert, Fatimah Fong, 28, recently took away her seven-year-old daughter from school. The child, Tan Yi Min, had been living with her father, Tan Cheow Hong, 36, since 2007, after the couple separated. During this period, the child’s mother had hardly visited her, and Yi Min has been under the care of her father, his mother and sister, who live in Butterworth. Fatimah resides in Kuala Lumpur.

Gooi said the teachers and principal of Yi Min’s school had tried to prevent the child from being taken away, but failed because the mother produced a Syariah Court order.
“The mother came with the Syariah Court order from Shah Alam and was accompanied and aided by representatives of the religious council and police,” he said.

“The father was never previously informed of the Syariah Court proceedings and there was absolutely no reason why the wife had acted in such secrecy and haste. The situation turned ugly but eventually the child was taken away. Since then, my client has filed for custody before the civil court and the hearing is on Nov 24.”

Gooi said the matter appeared to have been planned right from the beginning, where the Muslim parent took the “backdoor” approach to obtain the child from a non-Muslim parent.

He added that his client’s ex-wife only filed for divorce in the Syariah Court on Oct 26. The very next day, on Oct 27, Fatimah obtained an ex-parte order to get custody of the child.
“What is worse now is, it is learnt, that she has converted the child to Islam without the consent of the non-Muslim father,” Gooi said.

Rows over conversion

Rows over conversion, including ‘body-snatching’ cases, are common in Malaysia, where Islam is the official religion. This involves cases where Muslim authorities clash with relatives over the remains of the dead, whose religion is disputed.

Last year, Malaysia disallowed the “forced conversion” of children to Islam to subdue unease among non-Muslims.

De facto Law Minister Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz (left) had said then that the law would be changed so that children’s conversions would not be allowed without the consent of both parents.
The decision came in the wake of the highly publicised case of M Indira Gandhi, who estranged husband embraced Islam and then converted their children to the religion. She has since been granted custody of the children, although the youngest child has not been surrendered by her ex-husband. In addition, she has been given leave to challenge their conversion. Nazri said minors are to be bound by the common religion of their parents while they were married, even if one parent later becomes a Muslim. He also said that Islamic law would apply only from the point of a person’s conversion to the religion, and is not retrospective.

xxxxxxxxxxxx

Islamic Injustice: Snatching and Unilateral Conversion of Child

By nkw LINK

I noted in my last blog that the leading judge in the Malaysia’s Highest Court facetiously commented that it is not right if any party gains an unfair advantage in a court dispute. He added, “The Federal Court said it cannot adopt a “fugitive doctrine of heads I win, tails you lose” in deciding the basic rights for either parent.”

Well said indeed. Unfortunately, we are not convinced of the sincerity of such rhetoric (regardless of whether it comes from the top judge or the de facto Law Minister) so long as non-Muslims continue to suffer unfair disadvantage (an euphemism actually) in their legal disputes with Muslim (converts). We recall instances when the police, the Muslim authorities and court officials collude and contemptuously brushed aside the legitimate rights of non-Muslims in disputes over child custody, family inheritance and burial rights/rites. To use, an ugly American neologism – there is systemic discrimination against non-Muslims in the Malaysian legal system.

The question is: Can there be justice for non-Muslims under a shariah compliant/dominated legal system?