Tuesday, April 17, 2012

The Security Offences (Special Measures) Bill 2012 to replace ISA 1960

The Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) is a preventive detention law in force in Malaysia. The legislation was enacted after Malaysia gained independence from Britain in 1957. The ISA allows for detention without trial or criminal charges under limited, legally defined circumstances.

Preventive detention was first implemented in Malaya by the British in 1948 to combat the armed insurgency of the Malayan Communist Party during the Malayan Emergency. The Emergency Regulations Ordinance 1948 was enacted by the British High Commissioner Sir Edward Gent.

Section 73(1) Internal Security Act 1960: "Any police officer may without warrant arrest and detain pending enquiries any person in respect of whom he has reason to believe that there are grounds which would justify his detention under section 8; and that he has acted or is about to act or is likely to act in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to maintenance of essential services therein or to the economic life thereof."

Section 8 ISA: Power to order detention or restriction of persons. "(i) If the Minister is satisfied that the detention of any person is necessary with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to the maintenance of essential services therein or the economic life thereof, he may make an order (hereinafter referred to as a detention order) directing that that person be detained for any period not exceeding two years."

Section 8(1) theoretically restricts detention to a period not exceeding two years but this limit is readily circumvented because under Section 8(7), the duration of the detention order may be extended indefinitely in increments of up to two years The extension of the detention order may be made on the same grounds as those on which the original order was based or on different grounds. In delivering the judgment of the Court, Steve L.K. Shim CJ (Sabah & Sarawak) in Kerajaan Malaysia & 2 Ors. v Nasharuddin bin Nasir (2003) 6 AMR 497 at page 506, ruled that the powers extended to the Home Minister are valid under the Malaysian Constitution. In addition, preventive detention is also now allowed by the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 and the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969. The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) has recently recommended that the ISA be repealed and replaced by new comprehensive legislation that, while taking a tough stand on threats to national security (including terrorism), does not violate basic human rights.

A detenu can make representations against his/her detention if an order of detention has been made against the detenu by the Minister under Section 8(1) of the ISA but under Section 73 however, the detenu seems to have no such right. Generally, the attitude of the Malaysian courts in respect of detention under Section 73 is that the courts have jurisdiction only in regard to any question on compliance with the procedural requirements of the ISA and they seldom grant any substantive rights to the detenu.

Article 151 of the Malaysian Constitution gives to any person detained without trial (under the special powers against subversion) certain administrative rights. By the terms of Article 151 the authority, on whose order a person is detained, shall, as soon as may be, inform the detainee of the grounds of detention and the allegations of fact on which the order is based. The detainee shall also be given an opportunity within three months, of making representations against the order to an Advisory Board . The Advisory Board as the name implies is not a court. Its determinations are also mere recommendations that the government is under no obligation to accept. It may also be handicapped in its deliberations by the discretionary power of the government to withhold facts, the disclosure of which would, in the executive’s opinion be against national interest.

Any person may be detained by the police for up to 60 days without trial for an act which allegedly threatens the security of the country or any part thereof. After 60 days, one may be further detained for a period of two years each, to be approved by the Minister of Home Affairs, thus permitting indefinite detention without trial. In 1989, the powers of the Minister under the legislation was made immune to judicial review by virtue of amendments to the Act, only allowing the courts to examine and review technical matters pertaining to the ISA arrest.

Yesterday, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak had tabled the second reading of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Bill 2012 which will replace the 52-year-old Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) in the Dewan Rakyat.

The new bill will replace the unpopular ISA and at the same time recognise the grave risks to internal security and public order from threats like terrorism, sabotage and espionage.

However the new bill will still hold the three principles which will be retained in any evolution of the new legal framework dealing with seditious acts or words :

- can create hatred, contempt or disaffection towards the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or any of the rulers;
- can promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between the different races in the country;
- question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal Constitution or Articles 151, 153 and 181 of the Federal Constitution.

Any peace loving Malaysians will love the ISA or the new bill which will later replace ISA because we have nothing against the government.

Only people who have mala fide towards the government will feel threatened by the bill which is to safe-guard the security of the majority.

Monday, April 16, 2012

Don't Ask For PTPTN Loan If You Are Unclever

The PTPTN Education Loan Scheme was set up with the aim of providing education loans to students pursuing their studies in local institutions of higher learning (IPT). This loan will enable students to fully or partially pay their fees and their subsistence for the duration of their study in the IPT. Thus, this scheme provides greater opportunities to students to continue their tertiary education.

The scope of the PTPTN education loan facility is open to students pursuing studies at the diploma, first degree, master, doctorate and professional courses levels in IPTs established under the following acts:

Universities and Universities Colleges Act 1971

Institut Teknologi MARA Act 1976

Private Higher Education Institutions Act 1996

Education Act 1996

Starting March 1st, 2007, students pursuing long distance or part-time studies in IPT's at the diploma, first degree, master, doctorate and professional courses levels are eligible to receive PTPTN education loan.

The education financing will be approved if the applicant fullfills the conditions and specified requirement.

Second financing will only be considered if the application meets the following conditions:

Meets the requirements and method of financing applications;
Students who received education financing for prior studies but failed to complete their studies or received other forms of sponsorship may apply for a second financing upon full settlement of the previous financing;
Students who received education financing and successfully completed their prior studies may apply for financing to continue their education to a higher level. Application for the same level of education will not be considered;
Second financing is subject to availability of funds; and
Financing period approved will be effective from the current semester. i.e. when the complete application received by PTPTN..

The financng offer is valid for only 90 days from the date of approval. The agreement documents need to be completed and returned to PTPTN within the validity period, otherwise the offer will be revoked.

The agreement document will be deemed completed only if it is affixed with a revenue stamp. Please ensure that two revenue stamps worth RM10 each are provided.

The offer will be revoked or withdrawn in the event of error/mistake in the offer or falsification of information.

Hence those who joined in the illegal rally should repay the loan in full as soon as possible since they are all for free education.

Tun Dr Mahathir put it in the best way possible when he said that the loan is to help those who are unable to pay for good education or to help the poor.

Therefore, if the students who joined in the illegal rally to demand for the abolishment of PTPTN, they should just reject the loan if they feel like they can pay for the fees on their own accord.

Moreover, it is quite perplexing that the same person who initiated PTPTN when he was in government, namely DSAI, is the same person instigating students to go against it now.

I am sure he is trully mentally unstable.

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Reject Zionism and Communism

There was an announcement for a peaceful demonstration last night, on the 27th of March 2012 at 8 p.m. in Ampang to shun DSAI's presence in Ampang.

The peaceful demonstration started at UMNO Ampang and ended at Tupai-Tupai Restaurant.

This proves that the younger generation still accepts UMNO and rejects the Zionism and communism propogated by PKR, DAP and PAS.

Only fools will join Ambiga in Bersih and Seksualiti Merdeka because this is a blatant act to promote hedonisme and liberalism under the guise of human rights.

I think this had something to do with DSAI's bullshitting in Ampang last night.

An article by Beruang Biru

RADIO Kedah yesterday aired an interview with PKR's MP from Sungai Petani Johari Abdul who claimed that Pakatan Rakyat could still maintain its power in Kedah, even without votes from the Indians.

The statement showed how arrogant and proud Johari Abdul is with the current power of PKR in Kedah that he looked down on the capabilities of Indian voters and their contributions towards the development of the state.

We all know that Kedah is one of the states that would come back to Barisan Nasional, not because of BN's power, but it is due to the failure of both PAS and Pakatan Rakyat in keeping a good record, to be compared to BN during the previous years.

They sure did talk a lot, but nothing was ever done as everyone were fighting to be the Chief Minister.

Back when they were the opposition, sure, they could say just about anything. But when they do became the government, then they knew how hard it is to run a state.

Even if there is any 'contribution' that is worth remembering made by PAS in Kedah, rakyat could have thanked them with the constant flash floods due to rampant forest clearing (especially timbers) in Kedah since PAS took over.

Even though we knew that the statement made by Johari Abdul was triggered by his rage over Padang Srai's MP, N. Gobalakrishnan who announced that he quits from PKR in the previous year, but it is not wise for him to inflict his rage over the Indian community in Kedah.

Even a single votes would make a lot of difference during an election at that area.

Johari Abdul did realize that his case along with the trio, Datuk T during the case of the sex clip that involves Anwar Ibrahim, his image was slightly scratched, for supporting Anwar that is. He may seemed 'loyal', but he is quite sneaky behind Anwar.

This is why the value of Johari Abdul from being nominated as a candidate for MP for the coming General Election has decreased. He is aware of that, so that is why he is making statements that could put damage over PKR from both the inside and the outside.

But, it is sad that the Indian community became part of the subject for him to sabotage PKR.

Indians from the state of Kedah should consider the statement made by Johari Abdul to evaluate on who should they choose during the coming GE. It is sad if they are looked down by the ruling party when the fact is, the Indians play such big role in this nation, and this of course, include Kedah as well - even if their population at the state is small.