It is About Sharing

Knowledge is for sharing. Do not keep your knowledge to yourself alone. Let it grows. The more you share, the more you learn and in the end you become a better person.

Surah Yaasin Amazing Recitation



Monday, August 10, 2009

You Sue Me, I Sue You

I must say that I read with disgust the report in Mingguan Malaysia entitled "Tengoklah berapa ratus juta pula Anwar mahu saman" ("Let's see how many hundred million Anwar wants to sue").

In the news report, the Johor UMNO was reported to have said that they will be organising a realy big gathering in the near future of which they believe that tons of thousand of UMNO members will take part in the gathering. The gathering is to be held solely for the purpose of shouting the word "traitor" to Anwar Ibrahim and they want to see how many hundres of millions Anwar wants to sue them.

I believe this stupid idea of UMNO Johor was in response to Anwar's legal cation against Muhyiddin Yassin whereby the former threatened to sue the latter of RM100 million for saying that Anwar is a traitor.

This is a further evidence of the level of mentality of mentally retarded politicians that we are having at the moment. While the government does not encourage gathering of large scale at the moment in an attempt to curb the spread of A(H1N1), the UMNO Johor on the other hand was planning to have this gathering, which I do not see its benefit to any party in any manner whatsoever. Not only that, it will be a total waste of money and time. I believe that a lot of money will be spent unnecessarily during this useless gathering oragnised by a bunch of brainless people. The money that thes bunch of idiots are willing to spentcan be channeled for a much better purpose. The time they are going to spent for the gathering can be used for a much beter purpose.

As for myself, I do not disagree with Muhyiddin but seriously this stupid idea by a bunch of idiot people is totally not a need at all..

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

More Mature Politicians please!!!

I read the news report this morning at The Star online about assemblmen in Melaka shouting at each other during the debate in the Dewan Undangan Negeri. It all started when DAP assemblyman was asking a BN rep about whether the government would cancel all big gathering to avoid the spreading of A(H1N1) among the people. Before the BN rep could answer the question, another BN rep stood up and tchided the opposition for the recent sreet rally. Thereater, both parties started to shout at each other and some were calling names like "YB pendek" and "YB gemok"

I wonder if these idiot politicians thought that the people voted for them and paid for their salary for them to behave as an idiot and like small kids?

Children at the kindergarten behave better than them. Why can't they just simply let the BN rep to answer the question and take it from there. By interrupting in the Q&A sessions, there were just wasting their time and our money.

People said that Malaysia has first class infrustructure but third class mentality. It is simply because we have politicians who are mentally retarded.

Now, those idiot politicians, please get back to work!!!

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Pi Mai Pi Mai Tang Tu

Prior to 17th April 2008

The issuance of halal certification was entrusted upon JAKIM.

17th April 2008

Cabinet under the leadership of Dolah Badawi (ooops, he is a Tun?) shifted the task of issuing the halal certification from JAKIM to Halal Industry Development Corporation.

JAKIM's website in commenting about the move to transfer the issuance of halal certification from JAKIM to HDC stated as follows: -

Pada 17 April 2008 yang lalu, satu lagi kemajuan dicapai ke arah memartabatkan lagi pembangunan industri halal di Malaysia. Perkembangan ini adalah sejajar dengan aspirasi kerajaan...Transisi pengurusan pensijilan halal di Malaysia daripada Bahagian Hub Halal JAKIM kepada Halal Industry Development Corporation (HDC) adalah sesuatu yang kena dan tepat pada masanya...

That was last year when Dolah Badawi was still the PM.

9th July 2009

Barely 1 year after Malaysia reached another milestone in upholding the development of halal industry in Malaysia (as quoted above), the Cabinet (of course under Najib as the PM) reversed the previous Cabinet's decision (under Dolah Badawi) decided that the management and issuance of halal certificates has been transferred back to the Islamic Development Department (Jakim) from the Halal Development Corporation (HDC) and the same was to take effect immediately.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Jamil Khir Baharom said “The Government felt that it was better to separate the role of the issuance of halal certificates and the development of the regional and global halal market between the two agencies".

Can someone explain to me what is happening here? If the move from JAKIM to HDC (as far as the issuance of halal certification is concerned) 1 year ago was described as "kemajuan", am I right to assume that the recent Cabinet's decision to give back the task to JAKIM from HDC as "kemunduran"?

I thought Najib is a great believer of Islam Hadhari? At least that was what he said before he became the PM. Read here.

Is the issue of halal certification in Malaysia now can be regarded as purely religous matter? I do not think so. To me, it is purely political matter.


It has been more than 2 months I have not been posting anything in this blog. My sincere apology for not updating this blog for that long. It is not that I want to give up writing blog but it is just that time is not on my side. There were a lot of issues that I want to share with you guys but could not find the suitable time to pen it down (or perhaps that ws just an excuse).

After more than 2 months leaving this blog without any new issues, I have been thinking of what should I do with this blog. I love this blog and it means a lot of things to me. After so much of thinking, I have decided no matter what, I need to keep this blog breathing at least once a week with new posting.

Wish me luck please. I need istiqama.

Monday, May 4, 2009

Surau Al-Ansar - Satu Amal Jariah

Nabi Muhammad s.a.w bersabda, maksudnya, "apabila matinya seseorang anak Adam itu, maka terputuslah segala amalannya kecuali 3 perkara, amal jariah, ilmu yang dimanfaatkan oleh orang lain dan doa anak yang soleh".

Pada ketika ini, surau di kawasan kediaman saya masih dalam pembinaan. Surau yang sepatutnya dapat digunakan untuk solat tarawih dan solat sunat eidul fitri tahun lepas masih dalam pembinaan dan belum dapat disiapkan.

Kelewatan menyiapkan projek pembinaan surau ini ada hubung kaitnya dengan kekurangan dana. Pelbagai usaha telah dilakukan di antaranya ialah kutipan bulanan, kutipan rumah ke rumah, pengkreditan terus ke dalam akau bank dan majlis makan malam namun dana yang dikumpulkan masih belum mencukupi. Ini jelas melambatkan proses pembinaan surau tersebut.

Sehubungan dengan itu, saya menyeru rakan-rakan pembaca yang budiman agar dapat sama-sama menghulurkan sumbangan wang ringgit ke dalam tabung dana pembinaan surau ini dengan mengkreditkan wang sumbangan ke dalam akaun bank seperti berikut: -

Bank Mualamat 1207 0003737 71 8; atau

Maybank 5 64856 10769 7

Sasaran terbaru ialah untuk menyiapkan surau ini sebelum bulan Ramadhan tahun ini. Anda mungkin tidak akan menggunakan surau ini untuk tujuan beribadah tetapi ingatlah bahawa selagi mana surau ini masih wujud dan digunakan untuk tujuan beribadah, pahala anda akan terus berjalan walau anda sudah tiada di dunia ini lagi. Inilah yang dikatakan sebagai "amal jariah" yang disebut dalam hadis Nabi.




Monday, April 20, 2009

Najib v Mahathir???

There has been talked about another by-election at Penanti, Penang, the seat currently held by Fairus, the Penang Deputy CM 1 who went on early retirement recently.

If the by-election is happening, it means that Malaysians are having 6 by-elections since March 2008. While 3 by-elections were inevitable (Kuala Terengganu, Batang Ai and Bukit Gantang) due to the death of its MPs and Assemblyman, the other 3 was not necessary. Millions of our money were wasted to hl this unnecessary by-elections. We are lucky that Elizabeth Wong did not made to vacant her seat.

Now, after 5 by-elections of which BN had managed to only retain 1 seat while losing the Kuala Terengganu seat and failed to repossess the other 3 seats from the opposition it really suggests that BN's position at the moment is very fragile. Out of 5, BN lost 4 and won only 1.

I do not think that Najib as the new PM and UMNO President can afford to lose another by-election. He needs to feel good about having the support of the grassroots. Losing the Penanti by-election is a signal that Najib may not want to receive. And for that, Najib said that BN may not contesting the Penanti by-election as it is a waste of fund. I can understand where Najib came from. As I said earlier, holding unnecesary by-election is a real waste of fund. That millions of ringgit can be used to benefit the rakyat as a whole. Every single sen that we have needs to be spent wisely. However, I do not really buy Najib's excuse for not contesting the Penanti by-election. If BN is in a very strong position and the likelihood is that BN ay be able to repossess Penanti from PKR, do you think that Najib will let this golden opportunity go just like that? I do not think so because he needs to contest to win and with the win he can show to the people that he has got the suport from the grassroots. So, to me, the reason Najib does not want BN to contest in Penanti is not because of money but more on his popularity.

While Najib is thinking of not contesting in Penanti by-election, his Mentor Tun Mahathir has different idea. Tun was quoted by The Star as saying that "Barisan Nasional should not throw in the towel and withdraw from contesting the Penanti by-election as it would give the impression that the party is weak".

So now we have Najib vs Mahathir. I am very sure if Pak Lah is still the PM and he decided not to contest the by-election, he will get whacked from Mahathir. Now, will Najib listens to Tun's advice? Will Mahathir whack and criticise Najib if Najib confirmed that BN is not contesting in Penanti? Let us wait and see what happen.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Najib in Pekan

The Star reported Najib's return to Pekan was welcomed and chereed by around 40,000 people yesterday. In the article titled "40,000 give rousing reception at Najib’s homecoming", Naib was quoted as saying that: -

“I have come to Pahang countless times but this time around, the feeling is so different."
“I am so touched and choked with emotion because with Allah’s will and your prayers, I have returned to Pahang as the sixth Prime Minister,”
However, the sms that I received from my sister who is living in Pekan tells me different story. Her sms was as follows: -
"PM Balik Pekan. KC (my niece) bratur tpi jalan. Walk fr sek, 1.5km at 9am. Around 12, bry PM lalu. Komen KC: *lama tunggu, panas, muka KC burn, itam. PM lalu dgn kete, lmbai mcm org x btulang. KC ingt dato najib jln kaki, salam2 kita*. Jln 1.5km blk k sek smula"

Thursday, March 19, 2009


Nowadays, issue on corruption becomes one of the hottest topics of discussion. From the Khalid Ibrahim’s cows and car issues to the money politics in UMNO that led to Ali Rustam being barred from contesting the UMNO’s No. 2 post (which by convention will make the incumbent the Malaysia Deputy Prime Minister).

In my discussion here, I am going to talk about the corruption in general perspective without pointing to any particular individual.

In Islam, corruption is illegal (haram) as the Prophet Muhammad pbuh said in his hadith, “arraasyi walmurtasyi finnar” which means “the person who gave bribe and the person who received it, both will be in the hell”.

In Malaysia, though we do not apply Islamic law, corruption is also an offence and punishable under the relevant laws. In fact, I believe that corruption is an offence everywhere. I also believe that corruption is very dangerous in the sense that it can cause a nation’s fall down.

We may have the relevant laws to counter corruption but it may not solve the problem because we do not find its root cause. The law is there to punish the offenders but it does not necessarily stop others from committing the same offence. I do not need to prove my point, as this fact is a judicial notice (known to the public without the need to prove it in court). We do hear people say “prevention is better than cure” but what do we need to do to prevent corruption instead of curing it though punishment? The answer is simple as we need to recognize the root cause of the problem.

What is/are then the root cause of corruption? Musa Hassan (the IGP) felt that low salary was the cause of corruption in police force as it was reported that Musa Hassan has called on the government to pay his officers properly saying it would help tackle the problem of corruption in theforce.

With due respect I do not agree with him. I’ll discuss at the later part of this posting.

We also do hear that education starts at home. I do agree that education starts at home but there are good education and bad education. Corruption starts at home. Just to give a quick understanding of what I meant by “corruption starts at home”, corruption, in my own understanding is a practice of giving unnecessary reward or unnecessary additional reward to someone for doing something, which is his/her responsibility to do it. When I have the responsibility to do something, no matter what, I have to do it because it is my responsibility. However, when someone starts to pay me to do what is already my responsibility, there is a strong tendency that I will be asking for money before I perform my responsibility and that is corruption. So, corruption is a bad education.

Parents nowadays give money to their children to fast, to pray, to study and a lot more things that has become the duty of the children. Some parents said that the money is to encourage and to instill interest in their children to pray, fast, etc and it is sort of incentive. It may sound logic and workable but then again, “the end does not justify the means”. At the end of the day, we will have children who pray, fast, etc for material reward and not because they feel that it is their duty to do so. The same thing goes to helping parents with the house chores. Parents should not pay their children to do the house chores. Make it upon them (the children) that it is their responsibility to help their parents with the house chores. The same thing goes to academic achievements. It has become a trend nowadays for parents to promise this and that to their children if they achieve the target set by their parents in the examination. In the end, they study because of the promise made by the parent and not because they feel that it is their responsibility to study and excel in their examination. It has come to the stage whereby a friend of mine told me that his eldest son asked him beginning of the year of what would he (the father) give to him (the son) as a present if he manage to be the top student in his class?

So, if children have been taught at home that it is nothing wrong for them to demand for reward to do something that is obliged upon them to do, what make you think that they will feel that it is wrong for them to ask for money before they do their job when they enter working era?

Now, the reason why I do not agree with Musa Hassan on his view how to fight corruption in the police force is because it is the nature of human being that what they get will never be enough (in general) for them. Low salary is not the factor to corruption. You may have someone earning 5 figures salary but still practice corruption because what they get is never enough for them. You may earn low salary but if you can live within your means, then your salary should be enough. So, salary is not the factor here. It depends very much on the person’s upbringing at home.

And we always hear parents said that “children nowadays…” when in actual fact, the phrase should be “parents nowadays…” Can we say, “parents nowadays teach their children to be materialistic” than “children nowadays are materialistic”?

Saturday, March 7, 2009

A Note of Thanks

This blog was first created on 16th February 2008 with the first posting was Election Was Just Around the Corner. Which means, my blog is already 1 year old.
I started my blog without any proper plan. I was reading my niece's blog when suddenly I felt like I wanted to have my own blog. So, I simply created my blog and decided to write on any topic that interests me.
At first, I was wondering whether there would be readers to my blog. I mean what is the point of having a blog if nobody reads it except the owner. Whether what i write is enough to invite people to leave their comment? A lot of thing were in my mind. But I decided to give myself a year period and thereafter to decide whether or not this blog should be continued.
And after slightly more than a year now, my blog has been visited at least 4021 times (because I started the hit counter on 7th April 2008), which means in average, my blog was visited 12 times a day. I take that as an unexpected achievement and for that I am grateful to Allah. I just want to convey and share what I have in mind with others. And I sincerely hope that some of my readers (if not all) have benefited from reading my blog.
And for that, from the bottom of my heart, I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to all visitors to my blog for all the support that I received this far. I hope to receive continous support from you guys. So, do continue to drop by at my blog and your comment/suggestion is most welcomed.
Thank you very very much.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Perak Power Struggle - The Datuk Amir Kahar's Case Revisited

In a turning of event in Perak, the Speaker has called for an emergency sitting, which 3 motions were passed: -

(a) motion of confidence on Nizar as the legal Perak MB;
(b) agreement to seek Royal consent for dissolution of state assembly; and
(c) the adoption of the suspension of MB Zambry Abdul Kadir and his Excos by the Rights and Privileges Committee.

Before we discuss further and to get a better overview of the matter, let us have a look at the media statement issued the office of the Sultan of Perak, which is reproduced below:

Yang Amat Berhormat Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin was granted an audience by Duli Yang Maha Mulia Paduka Sultan of Perak Darul Ridzuan on Feb 4, to ask for his Royal Highness’s consent to dissolve the Perak State Assembly.

Yang Amat Berhormat Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Razak, Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, also requested for an audience with his Royal Highness in his capacity as the Perak Barisan Nasional chairman and consent was granted to be present before his Royal Highness on Feb 5.

Yang Amat Berhormat Datuk Seri Mohd Najib informed that the Barisan Nasional and its supporters, now comprising 31 state assemblymen, had the majority in the State Assembly.

On the order of the Duli Yang Maha Mulia to ascertain that the information given was accurate, all the 31 state assemblyman were to present themselves before Paduka Seri Sultan.

After meeting all the 31 assemblymen, DYMM Paduka Seri Sultan of Perak was convinced that YAB Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin had ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the State Assembly members.

DYMM Paduka Seri Sultan of Perak had also considered thoroughly YAB Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin’s application on Feb 4, 2009 for his Royal Highness’s consent to dissolve the Perak State Assembly.

His Royal Highness had used his discretion under Article XVIII (2)(b) of the Perak Darul Ridzuan State Constitution and did not consent to the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly.

YAB Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin was summoned to an audience with the Sultan to be informed of his Royal Highness’s decision not to dissolve the State Assembly, and in accordance with the provisions of Article XVI(6) of the Perak Darul Ridzuan State Constitution, DYMM Paduka Seri Sultan of Perak ordered YAB Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin to resign from his post as Perak Mentri Besar together with the members of the state executive council with immediate effect.

If YAB Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin does not resign from his post as Perak Mentri Besar together with the state executive council members, then the posts of Mentri Besar and state executive councillors are regarded as vacant.

This statement is issued with the consent of Duli Yang Maha Mulia Paduka Seri Sultan of Perak Darul Ridzuan.

From the above statement issued by the Palace, it is crystally clear to us of what happened that led to the Barisan Nasional (BN) to take over the Perak State Government from Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

Despite the above statement, many people especially the PR supporters cannot accept the Sultan of Perak’s decision to use his discretion confereed upon him under the Perak Darul Ridzuan State Constitution (Perak Constitution). It is a judicial notice as to how those unhappy with the Sultan’s decision expressed their unhappiness. I am not going to discuss on that issue here.

Consequent to the Sultan of Perak’s decision to pass the state administration to BN, there have been legal tussle between BN and PR with the issue on the legality of the appointment of the BN Menteri Besar is pending in Court, the suspension order issued by Perak Speaker is under investigation and the legality of the emergency sitting called by the Perak speaker is being challenged. I shall leave those issues out of my discussion here and let the relevant authorities deal with it.

What is the legal status of the discretionary power exercised by the Sultan of Perak, as mentioned above, as conferred by Article 18 (2) (b) of the Perak Constitution? Before I answer the question, I would like to draw your attention to the provisions of Article 16 (6) and Article 18 (2) (b) of the Perak Constitution.

Artcile 16 (6) of the Perak Constitution states as follows: -

If the Menteri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly, then, unless at his request, His Royal Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council

Article 18 (2) of the Perak Constitution states as follows: -

His Royal Highness may act in his discretion in the performance of the following functions…

(a) the appointment of the Menteri Besar; and

(b) the withholding of consent to a request for the dissolution of Legislative Assembly

Now, to answer the question I posed above, I would like to revisit the case of Datuk (Datu) Amir Kahar Tun Datu Mustapha –v- Tun Mohd Said Keruak & Ors [1195] 1 CLJ 184. The fact of the case is briefly as follows: -

In February 1994, there was a state election in Sabah offering 48 seats. At the end of the election, Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS), led by Joseph Pairin Kitingan defeated Barisan Nasional (BN), led by Sakaran Dandai by 25 to 23 seats. Accordingly, Pairin Kitingan was appointed as the Chief Minister of Sabah. However, in March the same year, 3 of PBS Assemblymen defected to BN, thus causing BN to have better majority to that of PBS. As a result of the defection, Pairin Kitingan decided to tender his resignation as the Chief Minister. Immediately after Pairin Kitingan tendered his resignation, the Governor of Sabah appointed Sakaran Dandai as the Chief Minister. Subsequent to Sakaran’s appointment as the Chief Minister, 7 new Ministers were duly appointed to be in Sakaran’s cabinet. The issue in this case was pertaining to the legal status of the Ministers under the leadership of Pairin Kitingan as well as the validity of the appointment of 7 cabinet members under Sakaran Dandai.

What happened was, upon the defection of his 3 Assemblymen to BN, Pairin had sought the consent of the Governor to dissolve the State Legislative Assembly. This was made in line with Article 7(1) of the Sabah State Constitution, which has the same effect as in Article 16 (6) of Perak Constitution. The Governor however, withheld the request made by Pairin Kitingan pursuant to Article 10(2) which is nonjusticiable (can’t be challenged in Court), which has similar effect to Article 18 (2) (b) of the Perak Constitution.

Subsequent to that, the Governor received a petition signed by 30 people said to be the member of the State Legislative Assembly to show support for the BN and no confidence in Piairin Kitingan. Based on what happened, the Governor decided to appoint Sakaran Dandai as the new Chief Minister. As to what happened in Perak, as we can see from the media statement above, 31 State Assemblymen had an audience with the Sultan of Perak to show their support in BN, which automatically means that Nizar had ceased to have confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly. Accordingly, a new MB from BN (Zambry) was appointed by the Sultan upon the power conferred to him pursuant to Article 18 (2) (a) of the Perak Constitution.

The point raised by the Plaintiff was that the resignation of Pairin Kitingan was personal to him and it does not affect the legality of the appointment made on the cabinet members of Pairin Kitingan. This is because there has been no concrete evidence that Pairin Kitingan has ceased to have confidence of the majority of the members of the State Legislative Assembly (as the Plaintiff deemed the petition signed by 30 Assemblymen is not acceptable in law to show the non-confidence in Pairin). The only distinguishing factor between the case in Perak and Sabah is that in Sabah, upon realizing that he has ceased to have the confidence of the majority and that his request for the dissolution was withheld by the Governor, Pairin tendered his resignation while in Perak, though Nizar realized that he has lost the confidence of the majority and that his request for dissolution was withheld by the Sultan, Nizar did not tender his resignation.

However, the Court, after considering the relevant facts and authorities presented before it by counsels of both parties, concluded as follows: -

On the issue of whether the petition signed by 30 Assemblymen is a sufficient proof to show that Pairin Kitingan has lost confidence of the majority, the Court held that the evidence to establish that a Chief Minister ceases to command the confidence of a majority of the members of the Assembly…need not necessarily be dependent upon the actual motion to be tabled in the State Legislative Assembly. It may be available from sources outside the Legislative Assembly depending on circumstances of each case. In other words, the Judge was of the opinion that the petition signed by 30 Assemblymen is a sufficient proof that Pairin Kitingan had no longer has majority confidence and that it did not necessarily to have proper vote of no-confidence through a proper sitting.

On the issue of whether Pairin Kitingan’s resignation affect the position of his cabinet members, the Court was of the view that the resignation of Pairin Kitingan as the Chief Minister was a resignation pursuant to him ceasing to command a confidence. As a result, upon his resignation being accepted, the his Cabinet was dissolved and with it goes the appointments of the other members of that Cabinet. Consequently, the appointments of Pairin Kitingan’s cabinet members made on 21 February 1994 would not any longer subsist in law.

So, based on the case of Datuk Amir Kahar, it is crystal clear upon us that the Sultan of Perak was right in withholding Nizar’s request to dissolve the Legislative Assembly. However, the issue of whether the Sultan has the power to ask Nizar to resign was not decided in Datuk Amir Kahar’s case, as it was not an issue in that case.

In my opinion, Article 16 (6) of the Perak Constitution is very clear that if the MB ceases to command the confidence of the majority, he will need to tender his resignation (in view that his request for dissolution was not granted by the Sultan).

It is my opinion also that since Article 18 (2) (a) of the Perak Constitution empower the Sultan to appoint the Menteri Besar, he should have the power to retract his appointment, though it is not clearly stated under the same Article.

So, when the MB (Nizar) refused to tender his resignation, in my opinion, the Sultan of Perak was right is asking Nizar to tender his resignation and to appoint the new Menteri Besar, as provided under Article 18 (2) (a) of the Perak Constitution read together with Article 16 (6) of the same Constitution. In that sense, the Sultan of Perak did not have to wait for Nizar to tender his resignation. By the Sultan requesting Nizar to resign and by him appointing Zambry as the new MB, indirectly, it can be said that the Sultan has revoked the appointment of Nizar as the MB.

What then happened to the Executive Councils under Nizar’s administration? As clearly pointed out in Datuk Amir Kahar’s case, with the revocation of the appointment of Nizar as the MB, those Executive Councils under Nizar’s administration have to leave the office simultaneously.

In a nutshell, with the appointment of Zambry as the new MB, Nizar has ceased to become the MB of Perak and the same goes to his Exco members.

Notwithstanding the above, the Perak Legislative Assembly has passed 3 resolutions during their “under the tree emergency sitting” yesterday. The first 2 motions were on the show of confidence of majority towards Nizar and the second was the agreement of the majority to have the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly to give way for fresh election.

With my discussion above, the show of confidence by the majority towards Nizar does not hold water. However, assuming that Nizar is still the legal MB of Perak (and assuming that the appointment of Zambry was illegal), Article 16 (6) of the Perak Constitution clearly stated the pre-condition that must be fulfilled by Nizar as the MB before he can request to the Sultan of Perak for the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly and the pre-condition is THE MB CEASES TO COMMAND THE CONFIDENCE OF THE MAJORITY. Now, during the said emergency sitting, the first motion that was passed was a MOTION OF CONFIDENCE towards Nizar and NOT THE MOTION OF NO CONFIDENCE AGAINST NIZAR. So, when the majority still have confidence in Nizar as the MB of Perak, Nizar has not fulfilled the precondition set out in Article 16 (6) of the Perak Constitution and as such, any request by Nizar for the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly pursuant to the motions passed during the emergency sitting does not hold water. With that, the second motion passed yesterday does not hold water as well.
The case of Datuk Amir Kahar was decided by the High Court and till today, there is no case that overruled that case. However, the position may change if the Federal Court differs its opinion from Datuk Amir Kahar's case, as it has the power to do so. But for now, Datuk Amir Kahar's case stands.
Enough with the above, I would like now to reproduce the press statement made by Pairin Kitingan on 17th March 1994 (and how I wish that Nizar would follow Pairin's footstep in stepping down gracefully) (the bold is mine): -
Events in the last few days have forced a situation where we must tread carefully to avoid a further deterioration of the political situation. The turn of events have brought about a situation much different from that of 21 February 1994 when I was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Sabah after the Parti Bersatu Sabah had won 25 seats. With the appointment of the six nominated Assemblymen the total was brought to 31 seats. The situation is now reversed with the Barisan Nasional having the majority of 33 seats to PBS's 21 thus paving the way for it to form the next government.

By convention, the Chief Minister will have to resign if the ruling party no longer has the majority support of the Assemblymen. Under the present circumstances, where the PBS majority is greatly reduced with the mass exodus of its Assemblymen to the BN, my position as Chief Minister is no longer tenable. Having taken all matters into consideration, I have, therefore, decided to resign from the post of Chief Minister.
It is a sad decision for me but nonetheless I truly feel this is the most honourable thing to do under the present circumstances. I would like to take this opportunity to thank each and everyone of you for your full support to ensure Parti Bersatu Sabah's victory in the just concluded state elections.
We truly appreciated your mandate to give us another chance to govern the state.
In the context of what has transpired over the last few days, it is clear that some changes have occurred that tipped the balance of support in favour of the BN. I am now acknowledging the need to respond honourably to the situation. I made this decision to resign with a clear conscience and in the knowledge that I had tried to do my best for the people and the state in the past nine years.
As I offer my thanks and appreciation to the people of Sabah for giving us their trust and confidence, I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate the new Chief Minister and his government which will be formed today.
It is my hope too that the new government will continue to look after the interests of the people and the state and world to ensure a developed, progressive and just society.
I would also like to assure the new Chief Minister and his government that I will cooperate and do my part to serve the people and the state. I sincerely wish him all the best.

Monday, March 2, 2009

Big Blunder by Syed Hamid

Well, I must say with great relief that the gazette on the Internal Security (Prohibition on use of specific words on Document and Publication) Order 2009 has been revoked, effective today.

The Home Minister, Syed Hamid Albar admitted that there were mistakes made in the drafting of the Feb 16 gazette which stated that Christian publications could use the word “Allah” provided the words “For Christians” were clearly printed on the front cover.

Ok, Syed Hamid admitted that it was a mistake. However, it is still mind boggling how such a mistake could happen? It is a shame. A big blunder on the part of the Home Ministry in particular and the government in general. I wonder if Syed Hamid Albar will be reprimanded by his boss? Hmmm...even his boss made blunder...flip flopping.

Take a look at the exact wording of the Feb 16th gazette here:

Prohibition on use of specific words on document and publication 2. (1) The printing, publication, sale, issue, circulation and possession of any document and publication relating to Christianity containing the words “Allah”, “Kaabah”, “Baitullah” and “Solat” are prohibited unless on the front cover of the document and publication are written with the words “for christianity”.
(2) The words “for christianity ” referred to in subparagraph (1) shall be written clearly in font type Arial of size 16 in bold.
1. Well, looking at the exact wording of the gazette made me really wonder whether Syed Hamid read carefully the gazette before signing it or he just blindly signed it?

2. While Syed Hamid admitted his blunder, I wonder what was the purpose of having such a gazette at the first place?

3. If there were mistakes in the drafting of the gazette, what is the correct version?

To Syed Hamid, whatever excuse you may want to offer to the people, the damage has been done. The mistake is not in the drafting, but in having the stupid idea to issue the gazette at the first place.
In my previous posting, the title was "First Ban, Then Uplift with Condition, Next What? The answer to the question is Next Ban Again...

Saturday, February 28, 2009

First Ban, Then Uplift with Condition, Next is What???

First, the Home Ministry banned The Herald from using the word “Allah” in their Malay publication.

Next, The Herald brought the issue to Court and was granted to leave to apply for Judicial Review.

Then, The Herald filed application for a judicial review against the decision by the Home Ministry to ban the use of the word “Allah” in their Malay publication.
The Decision on the judicial review heard by before High Court Judge, Justice Lau Bee Lan will be delivered on 5/5/2009 .

In the meantime, The Herald ignored the ban from the Home Ministry and continued to use the word “Allah” in their Malay publication pending the disposal of the judicial review.

In response to the above, the Home Ministry issued a stern warning.
The Home Ministry ban The Herald from publishing its Malay publication pending the disposal of the judicial review.

Then, there were a lot of discussion on the issue from various parties. Mine is here and here.

Suddenly it was reported that through the newly gazetted Internal Security Act, The Herald was allowed to use the word “Allah” in their Malay Publication with strict condition to have “For Christians Only” printed on the publication. Sad to say that the gazette was signed by none others than the Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar, the person who used to talk very firmly against the use of the word “Allah” in The Herald Malay publication. This was confirmed by the Home Ministry’s Qur’an Publication Control and Text Division Secretary, Che Din Yusoh.

Then the government was urged to remove the condition.

I thought the Home Ministry through its Minister Syed Hamid Albar was very firm in their decision to ban the use of the word “Allah” in The Herald Malay publication.

I thought the Home Ministry through its Minister Syed Hamid Albar’s firm stance in the issue will last long, if not perpetual.

I thought the Government would wait for the Court to decide on the outcome of the judicial review.


I thought for once, I could trust this Syed Hamid Albar.


I wonder why did the Home Ministry suddenly granted permission for The Herald to use the word “Allah” in its Malay publication. With or without condition, that doesn’t matter.

I wonder if the Home Ministry and especially its Minister Syed Hamid Albar knows the phrase – the more you give the more they ask.

During a training that I attended on Effective Collective Bargaining (it is a negotiation process between employer and the employees union for the purpose to conclude the Collective Agreement), the trainer told the participants to be extra careful in granting the Union what the Union asks for. He told us to know the trick. So during a mock collective bargaining, I was the lead negotiator for the company. One of the items requested by the Union rep was car loan. This car loan has not been in the previous Collective Agreement. So, my team and I had a discussion and finally we agreed to grant them the car loan but we make it almost impossible for them to apply for the car loan. We offered them very low margin and very short repayment term. The reason for doing that was because we wanted to get the buy in for other items. Yes we managed to get their buy in. we were happy and thought that we were smart. After we finished our mock collective bargaining, the trainer told my team that granting the car loan is a big mistake and may cause the company to close business in the future. We asked him, why? He said since the Collective Bargaining is done every three years, granting the Union the car loan (though impossible to get) was just a starting point. In the next round of Collective Bargaining, the union will be asking for an increase in the margin and the repayment period. If the employer refuse, the union can make life difficult for the employer. So, may be the union may not be able to take car loan for the first few years, but once they get what they want, it is the company that is going to suffer. So, he said, when you give the union the car loan, you have just opened the flood gate.

So, does the case here. When Syed Hamid signed the gazette (in allowing The Herald to use the word “Allah”) he has just opened the flood gate and he doesn’t have to wait long, as the next day, many quarters have called for the removal of such condition.

Brainless you, Syed Hamid Albar!!!

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Reduced but Increased. Not Reduced and Increased

They reduce but they increase.
They retract but they give back.
Worst still, they do not reduce but they increase.
The Works Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Zin Mohammed said the increase was minimal and hoped the public understood that the increase was stipulated in the concession agreements that the government had signed.

“The increase was actually due in January last year but we had postponed it until now. This means the government has been paying compensation for 14 months.”

Really? Is it inevitable?

1. I wonder if the concession agreement signed between the toll operators and the government allows the government to abolish the two (2) tolls collection at PJS 2 and Salak Jaya recently.

2. If the agreements do not contain such provision, I wonder on what basis the government made the decision to abolish the toll collection at PJS 2 and Salak Jaya

3. And I wonder if the government’s action in increasing the toll collection at five (5) highways is in compliance with the concession agreements.

4. And I wonder if the concession agreements do not contain provision for abolishment and yet the government went ahead and abolish it, I wonder if the government could avoid the toll collection from increasing despite having such clause to increase it in January 2008.

5. And I wonder if the increase is to absorb the “losses” suffered by the toll operators as a result of the abolishment of toll collection at two (2) toll plazas (this is purely out of my curiosity).

6. And I wonder if the government was sincere in abolishing the toll collection at PJS 2 and Salak Jaya

7. And I wonder if the increase between RM0.10 and RM0.50 is not a burden to the people.

8. And I wonder from which college/university our Works Minister graduated from for making statement No. 7 above.
9. And I will keep on wondering.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009


I went to pay my last respect to someone who passed away. I went straight to the mosque where the body was bathed and clothed before it was prayed.

When I reached the mosque, I extended my condolence to the husband of the deceased and I was told by the husband that his wife body was being clothed, which means it has been bathed. I saw a lot or people in the mosque’s compound as well as in the mosque itself. I went with my non-Muslim friend. So, I thought it would just be appropriate for me to accompany him for a while outside the mosque before I took my ablution and proceeded to the main prayer hall. So, while I was with my friend, he asked me lots of questions about Muslims funeral. So, I explained to him a little bit here and there like the process between the moment the person passed away and until the body is buried. While I was explaining to my friend about the process, I saw people in small groups were talking to each other, some smiled while talking and some even laughed. I did not nee to be next to them to hear them laughing. Frankly I do not know what they were talking about but the fact that they had good laugh, I do not think they were talking about death. People do not laugh about death.

After I finished explaining to my friend, I went to take my ablution and proceeded to the main prayer hall to recite Surah Yaasin for the deceased. While walking to the main prayer hall, I passed by few small groups of people. I could here what they were talking about. They were talking about their business, they were talking about their common issues, which has got nothing to do with death.

That made me wondering…what was the purpose of them being present at the mosque? I thought we go and visit the deceased’s family to “sedekah” Al-Faathihah and recite Surah Yaasin. The least if we do not want to recite Al-Faatihah and Yaasin, in my opinion is to show sympathy and respect by remain silent. Talking to each other and laughing certainly does not show any sympathy to the deceased’s family, what more respect. In fact, that was rude. People should not discuss their common issues, their business or their golf activity while attending a funeral. They have more than ample time to talk about it but certainly not during funeral time.

After all, laughing and talking about worldly affairs in the mosque certainly shows that those people do not respect the mosque.

Saturday, February 14, 2009

Between BN and PR? Who is More Trustworthy?

Much has been said about the political crisis in Perak. BN claims that the takeover was legal, as they have got the royal consent from the Sultan of Perak, thus calling the people to respect the choice and decision made by the Sultan of Perak. PR on the other hand, dissatisfied with the decision made by the Sultan of Perak, thus decided to have demonstration on the street last Friday, which many people view it as disrespectful to the Sultan. The act by one guy who lied down on the road to stop the convoy of Raja Nazrin Shah was uncalled for. Then there was Karpal Singh who made a statement that a suit will be filed against Sultan of Perak and the new MB of Perak, which has caused unhappiness to many especially the Malays and in particular the UMNO people (note that UMNO is very selective in this issue as they did not condemn their President, Si Bedol when he insisted to have Idris Jusoh as the MB instead of Ahmad Said).

Let us take a look at the issue rationally and impartially without being clouded by emotion and feelings. Let’s compare apple with apple, then we will be able to see who is more reliable, trustworthy and with integrity.


Nizar was said to commit treason towards the Sultan of Perak when he refused to give up his MB post. His act in still going to his office and staying in the MB official residence (Nizar has later agreed to vacate the official residence) serve as proof.

Now, when the Terengganu Palace wanted Ahmad Said as the new MB, the untouchable President of UMNO wanted his own candidate, the then incumbent Idris Jusoh. As much as the Palace insisted in having Ahmad Said as the new MB, the UMNO President was hesitated to accept him and adamant to have Idris Jusoh instead. Ahmad Said was threatened with possibility of facing disciplinary action within UMNO for going against the wish of UMNO President. Only after much hesitation the UMNO President agreed with the Palace’s choice of Mohd Said as the new MB.

So, if Nizar is said to have committed treason, what about Abdullah, the untouchable UMNO President? Do you see any difference in the case of Nizar as compared to Abdullah? They are alike.

Frogging Activities

I am totally and without any hesitation condemning any act of party hopping regardless of the political party involve. It is just unethical though legal. I am supporting to have the law of party hopping but I wonder why our politician especially the government refused to have such a law.

Our politicians must understand that majority of the voters vote the party instead of the candidate. Like in my case. I do not know the background of the candidates contesting in my area but I have to vote anyway. So, if I can’t judge the candidate, I will have to judge the party. So, my vote goes to the party and not the candidate.

Now, when the candidate jump ship and hopping to another party, do not you think that he/she has betrayed the trust majority of voters put in him/her? Do not you think that if he/she had contested under the banner of his/her new party that he/she hopped into during the election, he/she may have lost the election?

From another aspect, when candidates contest in any election, they are being supported morally and financially by their party. Now, is it fair to the party if after investing so much resources to their candidates only to have their candidates hop to another party?

So, party hopping, no matter from any angle you look at it, is not ethical and not acceptable. Even Abdullah said that party hoppers have no integrity (wonder why now he accepted the 3 independent friendly assemblymen and accepting back the Bota Assemblyman).

Anwar Ibrahim made a big huha about taking over the federal government from BN through MPs crossover (the nicer word for party hopping). It did not materialize. BN leaders condemn like hell the initiative made by Anwar. I disagree with Anwar. The it happened in Perak when the shameless and the “no-pride” BN assemblyman from Bota hopped to PKR citing loss of confidence in BN leadership as his cause. About 10 days later, that very same guy switched back to UMNO and at the same time, 2 PKR and 1 DAP assemblymen chose to become a “friendly independent” assemblymen to BN. So, while BN leaders condemned Anwar for resorting to party hopping vis-à-vis the 16th September date, they do the same. The fact that Anwar initiated the party hopping does not justify the BN to follow suit. The 3 “independent friendly” assemblymen to BN, in my opinion are now taking a break at R&R before proceeding with their journey to their destination (BN). It is just a matter of time for them to join BN. Don’t believe me? Then are you going to believe those politicians?

Majority Support

While BN now has the majority support after taking into consideration of the 3 “friendly independent” assemblymen, the issue that is still not clearly answered is whether the BN has the majority support of the people in Perak? The fact that they have got enough support to be able to topple the PR government in Perak, does not in any way whatsoever indicates that they too have the majority support of the Perakians. So, if we were to look back at the principle of democracy that BN has been barking all these while, is this democracy?

PR Government

They have Nizar as the MB and another Pas assemblyman as an EXCO being in charge of Islamic affairs. Apart from these 2, they also have the 2 PKR assemblymen who has chosen to become “independent friendly” to BN (note that 1 of them was a postman). Other than these 4 assemblymen, the rest in the team were non-Malays and the majority was actually from the DAP. So, do you think Nizar has control over his line of EXCO? Please remember that the DAP wanted their own MB, as they have the most seat among the PR component party. They even, at one time wanted to boycott the swearing in of Nizar as the new MB. So, though Perak had Nizar as the MB, I strongly believe that the government was being controlled by the DAP. Remember about the new village in Grik? Does not that tell you of anything?

So, now, the wisdom behind the decision made by the Sultan of Perak not to dissolve the State Assembly to give way for fresh election should be viewed by the Malays, regardless of their political party in a more broad way for the benefit of the Malays. Look here. If the State Assembly was being dissolved. A fresh election were to be called. Considering the current political situation, who do you think will win the election? Obviously the PR. So, it will go back to status quo where the Perak people will have a government that is being controlled by DAP though they may have a Malay MB from either PAS or PKR. As such, if we look from this angle (benefit of the Malays), we should now start to appreciate what Sultan Azlan Shah has done. After all, he is a brilliant Sultan and was out former Lord President. Do you still think that he made decision without thinking the consequences? I don’t think so.

Disrespect the Sultan

So many police reports were lodged against Karpal for making a statement that the Sultan of Perak can be sued in his official capacity. Karpal is said to have shown his disrespect towards the Sultan. There was also called by several parties for Karpal to be banned from entering Perak.

Now, let us take a look what happened shortly after the 12th General Election. As I said earlier, Abdullah couldn’t accept the fact that the Terengganu Palace had its own candidate for MB post as opposed to Abdullah’s own choice. And as I said earlier, to certain extent, Abdullah had shown his disagreement with the Terengganu Palace over the latter’s choice of MB. There were also police reports lodged against Abdullah for treason. Now, why was it no one requested the Terengganu Palace to ban Abdullah from entering Terengganu? What difference was it between Karpal’s case and Abdullah’s case. To me, none. So, so much so that people think that Karpal has disrespected the Sultan of Perak, so did Abdullah towards the Sultan of Terengganu.

As I said in my previous posting, if we do not know how to respect our parents, do not expect others to respect them.

Protest against the Sultan

There was really massive street demonstration in Kuala Kangsar in front of the Palace opposing the Sultan’s decision to hand over the state government to BN. The protesters were said to be the opposition supporters from PR. However, if you watched the news in TV on the protest (where 1 guy lied down on the road to block the convoy of Raja Dr. Nazrin Shah), can you see any Chinese or DAP supporters. I do not recall seeing any. What I remember seeing was PAS and PKR supporters marching and said “lailahaillallah” and “Allahu Akbar”. So, who is the stupidest among the PR component party and who is the most brilliant one? DAP was smart enough not to be involved in the street demonstration and left it to PAS and PKR (the specialists in street demo). At least, for that, it was PAS and PKR (I mean the Malays) who were being rude to the Sultan and not DAP (non-Malays).

So, now who is more reliable? BN or PR? To me both are not reliable. Both have made politics dirty and both are dirty people. Sometimes we hear people said, “if you can’t choose the better one, choose the one that is less evil”. However, in this case, both parties are equally evil. So, which party are we supposed to choose. Easy question but hard to answer.

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Frogging Activities in Perak

What is happening in Perak at the moment is very embarrassing. The whole world is watching and laughing at us. While most countries are fighting and planning to revive their economic, our leaders are busy fighting to form government through legal but immoral way. Thanks to all the “frogs” that are jumping from one side and stop at the R&R before reaching their destination and many thanks to the “King of Frogs” who has been actively frogging lately jumping from UMNO to PKR and back to UMNO. Thick skin!!! Any “stimulus package” involved? Of course the parties involved will deny the existence of the “stimulus package” but do the people in majority believe that these party hoppers do the jumping for the sake of the people and not for the RM? Come on!!!

By now, we know that it is now up to the Sultan of Perak to decide whether to dissolve the State Assembly, thus fresh election or to let the BN takes over from PR as the new government. The fate of the Perak government lies in the hand of the Sultan. Let us not touch about what the Sultan is supposed or not supposed to do. It can be very sensitive.

However, let us look from ordinary people’s point of view of whether or not BN should just take over the government from PR or should a fresh election be called. To answer this issue, we need to answer the following question first i.e. under the democracy system, who should decide who should become the government? The answer is THE PEOPLE, THE VOTERS. If majority of the people voted for Party A, then Party A will become the government. It is as simple as that. Now that BN wanted to form the new government in Perak, has they got the majority support from the people of Perak, the voters? The fact that they have got the required number of the Assemblymen/women to form the new government DOES NOT AT ALL show that they have got the support of the majority of the people/voters of Perak.

Many people blame Anwar Ibrahim for the frogging trend but to me, he may have started it but that does not justify the BN to follow suit. 2 wrongs do not make 1 right. The end does not justify the means.

Anwar was condemned like hell by many BN leaders when he wanted to form the new Malaysian government by the infamous date of 16/9/2008 through frogging exercise. I just do not see why the BN leaders should keep quiet this time around when Najib do the same like what Anwar planned to do. Wonder why? Let me tell you…the BN leaders have got no “ball” (or in Malay, we call it “tak dak telur) to speak up against Najib, who is going to be the PM of Malaysia is less than 2 months time.

So, in conclusion, if BN really follow the spirit of democracy as what they have been yelling and barking all these while, they should have the courage to opt for a fresh election in Perak and let the voters decide who will be the next government of Perak.

2 reasons that I can think of, why BN wanted to avoid fresh election: -

They have lost the Permatang Pauh (expected) and Kuala Terengganu (not expected) by election recently; and

UMNO leaders will be busy with their own internal party election in March, which is more important as compared to the election in Perak. If a fresh election is to be called, it must be held within 60 days from the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly, which should be held latest in April 2009. Too close to the UMNO election right? Bearing in mind, the UMNO election is about themselves and the Perak election is about the people. So, which election do you think they will give priority? LU PIKIRLAH SENDIRI (think for yourselves).

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Rukun Wilayah Anyone???

“Maka kami rakyat Wilayah…” or should we say it, “Maka kami rakyat Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, Labuan dan Putrajaya…”? You don’t get it? Read here.
The outgoing Prime Minister, Si Bedol has proposed that the Federal Territories should have its own tenets similar to Rukun Negara and it will be known as Rukun Wilayah. I wonder what other craps this old man is going to do before he leaves office. Can't he just leave without making all these craps?!!
The old man called on the Federal Territories Ministry to work on the tenets as soon as possible. How soon? Before March 2009?
This is why the old man thinks that the FT should have it own Rukun Wilayah - is envisaged as a set of principles for the people in the three Federal Territories to hold on to and remember their city, be proud of it, and to make it a better place for everyone.
“The successful development of the Federal Territories lies in the efforts of the people who live in the cities, and they should carry out tasks and services with a concern for high quality delivery,”.
That is for the FTs and what about other states?
Does not that old man thinks that people in Melaka, Kelantan, Selangor, Kedah, Negeri Sembilan, Sabah, Sarawak, Perlis, Perak, Pulau Pinang, Johor, Terengganu and Pahang also need a set of principles for the people to hold on to and remember their states, be proud of it, and to make it a better place for everyone just like the people in the FT?
Does not the old man think that the successful development of each state lies in the efforts of the people who live in the state just like the people in the FT?
Does not the old man think that the people at each state should carry out tasks and services with a concern for high quality delivery just like the people in the FT?
We already have Rukun Negara. Why do we need Rukun Wilayah? If we need Rukun Wilayah, we also need Rukun Negeri.
To Si Bedol,
if you want people to remember you after your retirement, then you will get it. People will remember you but not for the reason that you wanted but for some other reasons.

Can the Word "Allah" be Translated? - Part 2

I thought of writing this as a reply to the comments that I received on my posting entitled “Can the Word Allah be translated?”. However, I think it is better for me to post it as a new article as a continuation of the earlier posting as mentioned above.
Readers may go to the earlier posting to read the comments from other readers.
I have written an email to the editor of the Herald, Lawrence Andrew SJ asking him few questions and he had responded accordingly, which is appended below.
It is obvious that the Herald only use the word “Allah” to denote “God” in their Malay publication. They do not use the word “Allah” in their English, Tamil or Chinese publication.
So, it is obvious and safe to say that in this case, the Herald uses the word “Allah” in their Malay publication not on the basis that they believe in the story of Prophet Adam, Prophet Ibrahim, Prophet Musa and all other Prophets but they do so just because they claimed that the translation for the word “God” in Malay is Allah. If they really do believe in Allah and all those Prophets, they should also use the word “Allah” in their English, Tamil and Chinese publication.
I do not have the dictionary as mentioned by the Herald Editor, so I am not really in a position to comment on that. However, since my primary 1, I was taught that the word “God” in Malay in “Tuhan” and never that I was taught that the word God” in Malay is “Allah”.
I do not really understand the co-relation between the Qur’anic verses (Al-ankabuut:46 and Ali-imran:64) and the ban by the Malaysian Government on the Herald from using the word “Allah” in their Malay publication.
In both verses, Allah mentioned ahlul kitab and not the non-Muslims. Who is ahlul kitab? Ahlul kitab is those Jews and Nasrani that lived during the Prophet Muhammad pbuh time and hold firmly on the teaching of the original Injil and Taurat and their descendants who also hold firmly on the teaching of the original Injil and Taurat. So, I do not see the relevance of the 2 verses that you mentioned with the current issue unless you consider the Christians as ahlul kitab, which should not be the case.
Here are the Qur'anic verses mentioned by Arah: -
All the Prophets and the Messengers of Allah including Prophet Muhammad were sent by Allah to the people to teach them about Islam and the oneness of Allah. So, I can safely say that the word “Allah” belongs only to Muslims and non-others. The fact that there are Christians and Jews who believe in other Prophets than Prophet Muhammad does not make them a Muslim, hence using the word "Allah".
The fact that the Christians or non-Muslims in Arab countries use the word “Allah” does not tell anything. It does not make a wrong to become right. “Allah” does not belong to the Arabs. It belongs to Islam.
This is the email from the editor of the Herald to me. The red denotes my questions and the green denotes the answers from the Editor. The contents of the email shall only be used as a reference in this discussion and shall not be used by any party for any of the purpose other than as mentioned herein: -
From: Lawrence Andrew SJ
Date: Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Subject: Herald - resendingTo: Rozaimi Mohd Said
Dear Mr Rozaimi,
Thank you for your e-mail. I will quickly respond to your questions. I noticed some words were repeated. So I am resending this. Thanks and sorry for the untidiness, LA
When the publication uses the word "Allah" as a translation to "God", who are you referring to? Are you referring to Jesus?
We are not translating. We are writing in Malay. The word for God in Malay has been for centuries ALLAH. In our prayers in Malay we use the word ALLAH to refer to God and this has been so for centuries. Look at the Malay dictionaries of the past and you will easily notice that the word for God in Malay is ALLAH.
We normally say TUHAN Yesus Kristus.
Apart from the fact that Munshi Abdullah, in translating the Bible into Malay language more than 100 years ago using the word Allah for God, do you have any other reasons for not using the word "TUHAN", which is the most accurate and direct translation for the word "God" in Malay instead of "Allah"?
Even before Munshi Abdullah we have been using the word ALLAH to refer to God. We have a MALAY-LATIN Dictionary, even before Malaysia had a dictionary and the word ALLAH is Deus (in Latin and its English meaning is GOD). This Dictionary was printed in 1631.
In our Holy Book Al-Kitab the word Tuhan denotes LORD. So when we say Lord God, we use the words TUHAN ALLAH.
The current problem is politically motivated. Check the earlier Malay Dictionaries. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka began to shift the meaning unilaterally some time in the early 1980's. Check for the meaning of ALLAH in Kamus Umum (Indonesia).
I have lived in Indonesia for four years. The citizens of Indonesia, both Muslims and Christians, use the word ALLAH for God.
Do you use the word "Allah" in your English or Chinese or Tamil publication?
We do not use the word ALLAH in English, Chinese or Tamil sections of HERALD. For your information the Al Koran in English uses the word GOD for Allah.
I hope this has answered your questions.
With every good wish and God's blessings,
Yours sincerely,
Lawrence Andrew, SJ

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Can the Word "Allah" be Translated?

Much has been debated on the issue of the Catholic newspaper, Herald using the word “Allah” as a translation for the word “God” in their weekly publication (Malay version). The government had banned the newspaper from using the word “Allah” in their weekly publication but the newspaper had filed a civil suit against the government.
Among the arguments by the newspaper/its Editor to support their usage of the word “Allah” in their weekly publication is: -
(a) the newspaper has been using the word “Allah” as a translation for God for centuries in Malaysia;
(b) Munshi Abdullah, the father of modern Malay literature translated the bible into Malay in 1852 and he also translated “God” as “Allah”.
There a lot of people who gave their opinion with mostly find it nothing wrong for the newspaper to use the word “Allah” as a translation for the word “God”. This is because they claimed that the word “Allah” is an Arabic translation for the word “God”. I feel sorry for these people for their ignorance in this subject matter.
The fact that Islam was revealed through Prophet Muhammad, who was an Arab and Al-Qur’an was revealed in Arabic transcript does not at all mean that Islam is only for the Arab people. As such, there are terms in Islam which does not belong to Arab people but it belongs to Islam such as “Allah” and “Al-Qur’an”. There is no translation for these 2 words in any other language. That is why when you see the translation for azan (calling for prayer) in television, “Allahu Akbar” is translated as “Allah Maha Besar” (Allah the Greatest) and not “Tuhan Maha Besar” (God is the Greatest).
As a simple comparison, the Prime Minister of Malaysia is Abdullah. While the phrase “Prime Minister” may be translated into any other language, the name “Abdullah” should remain as it is. It should not be translated as “Hamba Allah” (the servant of Allah). So, the same thing goes to the word “God” and “Allah”. “Allah” is the God for Muslims. While you can translate the word “God”, you can’t translate the word “Allah”.
“Allah” is a PROPER NOUN and PROPER NOUN should not be translated into any other language. It is special. Do we call “George Bush” as “George Semak” in Malaysia? Would you understand if I say that I watched a film entitled “Pelabuhan Mutiara”? People will ask me, what movie is that? I will say, it is “Pearl Harbour”. So, a PROPER NOUN should remain as it is and should not be translated into any other language.
By the way, for the benefit of those who are ignorance of the Arabic word for “God” (since I said earlier, it is not “Allah”), the correct word is “Rabb”.
My question to the publisher of Herald and its Editor, Lawrence Andrew – Since the publication is in Malay, why do not you use the word “Tuhan” which is the direct translation for the word “God”? Unless you have other hidden motive, you will agree with me that you should use the word “Tuhan” and not “Allah”.
Read also a posting by Calvin Ngan entitled “God, Allah, Tuhan and The Catholic Weekly’s Herald Print”. He presented good points except on the translation of the word God” in Arabic. Click here
And after reading Calvin Ngan, you will be ashamed to read Marina Mahathir who, despite her ignorance, has confidently and ignorantly said that “Allah” is the Arabic translation for the word “God”. She said this in response to the following comment by Buyung Adil in her blog : -
Hi Kak Marina, what is your opinion on whether we should allow our east malaysian christian friends to use their bible in the malay language? Do you think it's dangerous that they continue using words that are also found in the Quran?
And this is her reply: -
Buyung Adil, two separate things there. I agree that Allah is the Arab word for God and that it is mostly Muslims who use it. In Malay, the word is Tuhan, just as in French, the word is 'Dieu'.
However, I don't think it is dangerous to have similar words given that firstly, both Holy Books came from the same cultural origin. And secondly and most importantly, I believe Muslims do know which is which and should not get confused based on a few familiar words. If Muslims do not know that the first Surah is Al-Fatihah, then I don't know really....
What!!! It is not dangerous to have similar words? What does she mean by "mostly Muslims who use it???!!! What!!! The Bible and Al-Qur’an came from the same cultural origin? What does she mean by that “same cultural origin”? We all know that (perhaps Marina does not know) Bible is not the divine revelation from Allah. Allah revealed Injil and not Bible. Unfortunately, there many people out there who believe in what Marina has to say or what she has said.

Monday, January 19, 2009

The Question Has Matured

During the KT by-election campaign period, the BN candidate, Wan Ahmad Farid was interviewed by The Nut Graph. Click here for full interview
After answering the first question of the interview and refused to answer the final question of the interview, which he described as “premature”. I guess, now he should be able to answer the question is now matured.
The first question and answer: -
TNG: If you become MP, how do you propose to eradicate poverty and improve living conditions for the poor in Kuala Terengganu?
Wan Farid: I have discovered while on the campaign trail that people want more opportunities. They do not know that we have so many facilities and so many things they can participate in. My concern is to make sure they are well informed of these opportunities.
The last question: -
TNG: If you lose, what are your plans?
Wan Farid: I'm not going to talk about that. It's premature.

Thursday, January 15, 2009

Read the Qur'an Campaign

There is a campaign in the blogsphere, initiated by Marina Mahathir and 3 of her friends called “Let’s read the Qur’an”. I have read the campaign and though it sounds like a good effort, it is not the right campaign and it must be stopped. I urge the readers in my blog to spread it over to all your friends, colleagues, family members, etc not to participate and support such a campaign. You can also link this posting to your blog of forward this posting in email form.
Among others, the campaign is about encouraging the people, regardless of their religion status to start reading Al-Qur’an in whatever language that they are familiar with. Meaning to say, if you can’t read the Arabic transcript, then you read in Malay language and the same goes to Chinese, Indians and others. You can read the Qur’an in your own language. That is what the campaign is all about and more and more bloggers have participated in such a campaign, and come to think about it, it is very scary in deed. Marina has also, to certain extend, associated the campaign vis-à-vis the Qur’an and the celebration of Valentine’s Day, as the campaign period started from 15/1/09-14/2/09 and she even wish “Happy Valentine’s Day”. It is indeed an insult to Islam and Al-Qur’an in particular and the Muslims community as a whole for Marina Mahathir to associate Islam and Al-Qur’an with Valentine’s Day, which is totally unIslamic.
Below is my explanation as to why such a campaign should be called off immediately. The same has also been posted as my reply at Marian Mahathir’s blog. You may also go to to see for yourself such a campaign but please, please and please do not fall for it.
Dear Marina,
It is good to have such a campaign to encourage the people to read the Qur’an. However, some of your suggestions need to be revisited because to understand the Qur’an better, you need to have an in depth study on Al-Qur’an (‘ulumul Qur’an). By mere reading of the Qur’anic translation and try to understand what it means may lead to deviation from the true meaning of the Qur’anic verse.
In Qur’anic studies, to interpret and get the true meaning of the verse, we need to know few things such as the reason of revelation (asbabun nuzul), the type of verse (makkiah or madaniah), the repealed verse and the verse that repealing (nasikh mansukh) as well as good linguistic (arabic) knowledge (to determine whether the verse is an instruction or a mere statement, etc).
Another thing is that there is only one (1) language for us to read the Qur’an i.e. the Arabic language. Other than the Arabic language, we call it translation. As such, it is wrong for you to encourage people to read the Qur’an in any language that they understand most because there is no such thing in Islam.
To give you a simple example is the Qur’anic verse where Allah said, “la ikraha fiddin” which means “there is no compulsion in religion (Islam)”. If we are to translate it literally (and that is what most people have been doing), the verse would mean that in Islam, we are given the freedom and choice whether or not to do what is obligated upon us to do such as praying, fasting, paying zakat etc and no one can force us to do those obligations. However, there is a reason for revelation of the said verse as reported by an acceptable Qur’anic verses translator (al-mu’tabar) by the name of Imam Mujahid whereby he reported that the reason for the revelation was that there was a man from the Ansar tribe
Who owned a slave by the name of Subaih. The man (Ansar) has forced the slave (Subaih) to convert to Islam, thus the verse was revealed. So, based on the reason the verse was revealed as explained above, the true meaning of the verse is that in Islam, we can’t compel the non-Muslim to convert to Islam. This is also in line with another Qur’anic verse i.e. “lakum diinukum waliyadiin” which means, “for you your religion and for me is mine”.
There are also various verses in the Qur’an which have been repealed by other verses and the repealed verses are no longer has any effect. However, they still remain part of the Qur’an. As such, it is wrong for us to rely on the Qur’anic verses that have been repealed. It is like a provision of the law which has been repealed. Once the said provision has been repealed, it is no longer has any effect.
So, whether one is Muslim or non-Muslim, you can’t get the true meaning of the Qur’anic verse by just reading the translation and try to understand its meaning.
As such, I strongly suggest that you and your friends, as the initiators of the campaign to call off the campaign in the name of Allah and for the sake of the Muslims community. I also suggest that you request those bloggers who have put in the campaign in their blogs to remove such a campaign.
As an alternative, if you really want to learn about Al-Qur’an, go and learn it from the Ulama’ and not to learn it all by yourself.
Below, is one of the reasons why such a campaign should not exist and should not be opened to the non-Muslims.
Michelle said: I decided sometimes last year that I’d read the Qur’an too. Good to know about this campaign. Looking forward to many interesting posts from you guys.
CKGord said: I’m joining this campaign. Already posted the ICON. What’s the limit of our discussion??? Can I tell joke accompanying it?
These two comments can be found at the blog below: -
I wonder if what Michelle means by her starting to read Al-Qur’an sometimes last year is that she was just reading the translation part of the Qur’an. That is not reading the Qur’an, that is reading the translation of the Qur’an. As for CKGord, realize it or not, it is just not ethical and insensitive for him/her to think that he/she can make joke out of Al-Qur’an.
There was also another respond by Michelle (perhaps different Michelle) in Marina Mahathir’s blog which says, “Those who are bent on splitting hairs and those who are unable to counter an argument would insist that the mortals should always use the correct interpretation in the original Arab script as if Islam is only for those literate in Arabic.”
My reply is, Al-Qur’an was revelead in Arabic transcript and as such, we need to understand it from Arabic transcript perspective. As such, it is not a matter of people’s inability to counter argue any argument, it is about Al-Qur’an. That’s it and full stop.
So, Marina, it is you and me, as Muslims to stop this misunderstanding and confusion among Muslims as well as non-Muslims on the contents of the Qur’an. If you think that you know nothing about Qur’an, it is better for you to remain silent than proposing something that could cause misunderstanding, confusion, deviation and whatever you call it. As the Prophet said in his hadith, “man kaana yu’ minu billahi wal yaumil aakhir, fal yaqul khairan au liyasmut” which means, “whoever among you believe in Allah and the day of hereafter, say good things or keep quiet”.

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Boycott US Products? Part II

This is what was reported in the Star today. Statement made by Najib serves as an answer to my questions in the previous posting i.e. “Boycott US Products?” In my “Boycott US Products?” article, I have asked the following questions to determine whether or not we, the government and the Malaysians at large are ready to punish the US and should the answers are in negative, it means that we are not ready or perhaps the people are ready but not the government: -

1. Is our government prepared to revoke the licence to sell their products?
2. Is our government prepared to severe ties with the US?
3. Is our government prepared to act without fear and favour in “punishing” the US and helping the innocent Palestinian?

Najib has answered all the questions above in negative.

In the report, Najib was also quoted as saying that “we can have demonstrations, make statements but it may not necessarily have any impact”.

So, Najib is fully aware that even the resolution passed by Parliament yesterday will not have any impact, so, I wonder whether the government is really serious in tackling this issue or is it just a formality to show that we are a “caring and concern” citizens.

I reproduce the report by The Star below: -

KUALA LUMPUR: It is up to the individual whether or not to boycott Israeli and US goods, said Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
As a consumer, you have to make the decision,” he said after opening the Third Islamic Economic Congress here yesterday.

Some people, he said, would feel strongly about supporting the call to boycott Israeli and US goods because of Israel’s military action in the Gaza Strip but others would view the matter as a grey area.

“Some of the American products are in the franchise system. Some of the franchisees here are Malaysian companies and even bumiputra companies,” he said.

He said the economy existed in a “very complex and very intertwined” world.

“For a small nation, what do you do? We can have demonstrations, make statements but it may not necessarily have any impact.

As consumers, they want to show unhappiness (over the Gaza situation). But let that be an individual choice,” he said.