Abducted, raped, robbed, tortured & C4ed (reprise)

These are indeed extremely troubled times. I don't recall any other era in Malaysian politics when the situation felt so hopelessly mired in a morass of moral murk - apart from the May 13 period, and just before Mahathir launched his cynical Ops Lalang on 27 October 1987, effectively turning Malaysia into a rogue police state.

More and more I find myself struck dumb, numb and speechless by the sheer audacity of those who cling desperately to power. The vicious cruelty and sheer wickedness that have insidiously crept into the national psyche and taken possession of our collective soul, holding ransom our public conscience, our sense of decency and justice.

The horror stories wafting like the stench of putrefaction from our refugee camps.


Human beings routinely and arbitrarily forced to endure hellish conditions - even painful and meaningless death - when their only crime is to be driven by economic necessity to find employment as domestic help in a foreign country seemingly inhabited by wannabe tinpot despots.

There is no way we can escape the conclusion: a land where even a market vendor displays such ruthless tyranny and inexcusable cruelty must have had a long history of raksasa rule. What are raksasa? Wikipedia defines raksasa as "supernatural humanoids who tend toward evil. Powerful warriors, they resort to the use of magic and illusion when unsuccessful with conventional weapons."

Magic and illusion, otherwise known as voodoo and media spin.

I'm at a complete loss for words, seeing what has become of our once promising nation, and utterly appalled by the fact that - going by the percentage of pro-BN comments left on blogs and news portals - some 50% of the population remain blind to the evil nature of the power structure they prop up with their ethnocentric ego insecurities. Below are some snippets gathered from news portals and forwarded emails that amply demonstrate that "peace and stability" are unsustainable and illusory in the absence of justice and freedom...

ONLY IN MALAYSIA! 

Posted on ArtisProActiv, 28 Oct 2009:

Unbelievable! All within a week...

Unbelievable #1 - Tian Chua sentenced to jail because judge was convinced cop who admitted punching Tian Chua told the truth about his biting.

Unbelievable #2 - Lingam case dropped because no evidence of judicial interference notwithstanding the Royal Commission findings.

Unbelievable #3 - Anwar Ibrahim's case against Tun Dr Mahathir thrown out because filing was not in Bahasa.

Unbelievable #4 - Gobind Singh Deo's challenge against suspension denied because court has no jurisdiction although the opposite was said in the Perak fiasco.

Unbelievable #5 - Local pathologists completely overlooked body injuries that point to homicide as revealed by Thai forensic expert Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand.

Unbelievable #6 - At Najib's instigation Ong Tee Keat and failed porn star Chua Soi Lek shake hands suddenly after months of bitter fighting.

Unbelievable #7 - Loss of over RM 1.4 billion in Rawang-Ipoh double-tracking project.

Unbelievable #8 - Mara paid RM84,640 for two units of Acer notebooks plus millions for other overpriced computer equipment.

Unbelievable #9 - Government guarantees failed Prasarana bonds of over RM 7 billion.



PERAK TURNED INTO A BARBARIC STATE
Friday, 30 October 2009 11:44

BN must make up its mind once and for all. Does it still want to put up the pretence that Malaysia is a democracy? If it does, should it continue to bombard our senses with such disgusting scenes and bare to the world the ugly truth of what Malaysia truly is?

By Kim Quek

After the nonsensical assembly sitting in Perak on Oct 28, Barisan Nasional should deeply reflect whether it is worthwhile to prolong its farcical rule in the Silver State.

To say the least, the session was a complete wash out.

First, police control and intervention inside and outside the assembly was so heavy and so overpowering that it has completely destroyed the image of our legislature as an independent and the highest institution in our system of government.

Second, the slipshod manner with which BN’s budget motion was rushed through makes us wonder whether the budget was legally approved.

Let us start with the budget approval.

BN’s Mentri Besar Zambry Kadir started his budget speech at 1120 hrs, and thirty minutes later, he had not only completed his speech, but had moved his budget motion through three readings, each time approved by the BN assemblymen present, under vocal protests from Pakatan assemblymen. There was no debate and no one seemed to have heard any detailed figures – if figures were read out then, these were not carried in many newspapers the next day anyway. Pakatan assemblymen walked off the assembly immediately after the approval of the third reading.

A budget proposal is a statement of revenues and expenditures as well as major policies that encompass the entire government which is made up of many departments. So, it is normally a lengthy speech, followed by debates that take place during each of the first, second and third readings. It is hence a real marvel how the assembly could have compressed such elaborate process of proposal, deliberation and decision in all the three stages in the short interval of half an hour.

Through such shotgun approval, the voices of the people who speak through their representatives are muted. Isn’t this a mockery of our democratic process and betrayal of the trust of the people?

Was the budget legally approved?

On top of that is the questionable legality of Ganesan’s position as speaker. His election as speaker on May 7 was deemed a fake, as the assembly session on that day was so chaotic and violent that it was not possible to conduct any business except the delivery of the opening speech by the Regent. Compounding this now is Ganesan’s breach of the Perak Constitution Article 36 A (5) which stipulates that a speaker must relinquish his private practice immediately or in any case not later than three months after his appointment, failing which he shall be disqualified. So, even if Ganesan’s appointment on May 7 was legal (which is not at all the case), he was already disqualified on Aug 7.

With an illegal speaker presiding in the assembly, can any business be conducted legally, least of all the all important agenda of the state budget approval?

No doubt, BN may be least worried about matters of illegality, confident of its iron-grip on the entire government machinery to serve its parochial interests. After all, isn’t BN Mentri Besar Zambry, who was appointed while incumbent Mentri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin was still serving, also illegal if the courts have been upholding the constitution? Isn’t the entire state cabinet, which was selected by Zambry, also illegal?

But can BN afford the massive loss of popular support every time the police manhandle and bully elected representatives from the opposing camp or judges dishing out blatantly unconstitutional rulings?

Barbaric police intervention

According to PR assemblymen, the scuffle was violent and turned into a fist fight as some in the group of 28 attempted to protect Sivakumar from being harassed. Simpang Pulai assemblyman Chan Ming Kai was dragged on the floor when two policemen grabbed on to both of his hands and tried to pull him away. (The Malaysian Insider, 29 Oct 2009; image from Malaysiani.tv)

Take the ridiculous scenario of the Perak assembly of Oct 28. The entire assembly compound was turned into a virtual war zone, with the entrance being protected by the kind of barbed wire seen only in war time. Hundreds of policemen and riot squad who had been milling inside and outside the building manned the five checkpoints stretching from the gate to the door of the assembly hall. Pakatan assemblymen complained of harassment every inch of their way to the last check point where they were subjected to the humiliation of a body search and metal scan and their personal effects of hand phones, laptops, cameras. etc., being forcibly removed before they entered the hall.

On his way to the assembly hall, Speaker Sivakumar was lured to an area not visible to reporters and the public where he was pounced upon by scores of police personnel who forcibly disrobed him. In the melee, he was punched and strangulated with an arm lock, and his colleagues roughed up for trying to protect him.

Image from Malaysiakini.tv

Pray, where in the world can you see such barbaric acts? Not even in the pariah state of Zimbabwe!

The picture inside the assembly hall is not any prettier. Scores of police personnel were there to man the entire assembly, with twenty of them forming a protective wall in front of the BN speaker Ganesan. And video cameras were transmitting live the activities of Pakatan assemblymen to the state police headquarters and the national headquarters at Bukit Aman, according to a Malaysiakini report.

Now, isn’t this the ultimate humiliation and insult to the highest and the most sanctimonious institution of a democracy, with the police contemptuously treating our Pakatan law makers as a bunch of criminals?

BN must make up its mind once and for all. Does it still want to put up the pretence that Malaysia is a democracy? If it does, should it continue to bombard our senses with such disgusting scenes and bare to the world the ugly truth of what Malaysia truly is?

[First posted 30 October 2009]

Worse than Mossad, worse than the Japs... (reprise)

By Joseph Sipalan | Malaysiakini
July 12, 2010 2:59pm

A solitary bulb hangs from the ceiling, barely lighting the blackened walls of the cell that trap him like a rat.

In the tiny, windowless room, he battles madness from within and relentless chill from without.

He has lost all sense of time, of how long he has been left to freeze in this hole, how long he has gone without sleep.

A loud rap or a kick against the door ensures he is kept on the brink of consciousness and reason.

Ironically, he holds on to his fragile sanity by virtue of the physical pain visited upon him by the man whom, to the victim, has come to embody fear itself.

Fear runs down his spine with every blood-curdling scream he hears from beyond his confines, every sickening thud that echoes through the walls. It's only a matter of time before 'he' comes back for more

A year has passed, but N Tharmendran, 42, can vividly recount every detail of the internal military investigation that he claims he was subjected to, as if it was just yesterday.

Tharmendran, a former RMAF sergeant who has been charged over the theft of two jet-fighter engines, claimed he was detained and tortured by military intelligence for three weeks in connection with the case.

Tharmendran alleged that the favourite method of his interrogators - allegedly led by a major and his assistant, also a major - was to make him wear a crash helmet and repeatedly hit him as hard as possible.

“They used a golf stick and something long like a cricket bat. The reason is that when you hit me with a helmet (on), there's no mark. You can't find any mark, but the pain is internal pain,” he told Malaysiakini.

“That's what Major (name withheld) told me. (He said) 'I can hit you how hard I want, but there won't be any mark. Even (if) you go to the doctor he will say you only have (a) headache'.'”

And because of the physical abuse, Tharmendran said he suffered severe pain in his neck and shoulders and was barely move his left arm for a few days after the interrogation ended.

He also claimed that he was repeatedly stripped to his underwear, made to stand on a block of ice for up to an hour at a time, and threatened with death.

“I was told by this major, he has friends in the UTK (special forces) and KDN (Home Ministry) and it won't take him much time to get some men to shoot and kill me.

“Another thing he said was that nobody would believe me (if I report the torture), because he is the IO (investigating officer) and he has the authority. He said that, even if I go to the hospital and say I was being tortured by these people, he said nobody would believe me.”

Tharmendan said he was not allowed to contact anyone to inform them of his whereabouts during the three weeks of his detention.

His father N Nagarajah filed a police report last month to report Tharmendran's alleged torture while under military detention.

'Lost pride, dignity'

Tharmendran said he lost 20kg after being tortured and during the six months he was detained in the Sg Buloh Prison for not being able to post the initial bail of RM150,000 in connection with the charge.

He believes he is not the only one being tortured by the intelligence officers, claiming at least 30 others were also experiencing the same ordeal for reasons unknown to him. He does not know what has happened to them.

Tharmendran said he is grateful for his release on reduced bail of RM50,000, but that adjusting to life after six months of detention is hard.

“I've lost my dignity, my pride... I'm very, very embarrassed to face the public because it's been (publicised) that I am the one who was involved in the theft of the engine(s), but actually I am not the one,” he said.

He expressed his gratitude to prison officers and warders who had taken care of him and helped him with his problems.

Now that he is back in society, Tharmendran said he needs to pick himself up and deal with the debt facing his family, who had to borrow money to post bail.

“They (his family) were very happy to see me, but now I have to look for a job. I'm jobless now, and it doesn't matter what (kind of work)... I can do anything,” he said soberly.

“As long as I can get a job... I need to pay back whatever money my family borrowed. My mom's jewellery has all been pawned and it's not fair to my relatives.”

Tharmendran said he feels most for his daughter, who deserves an explanation for his absence.

“I have to go and see my daughter, but I don't know how I am going to face (her). She's 12 years old. I'm divorced so she's living with my ex-wife in Ipoh,” he said.

“I saw her last November during the school holidays. I used to get her for the holidays and she'll be with my mom for three weeks... I need to do a lot of explaining to her.”

Tharmendran has been charged with company director Rajandran Prasad Kusy over the theft of two F-5E engines at the air movement section of the Subang air force base in December 2007.

If found guilty on charge under Section 380 of the Penal Code, he faces up to 10 years in jail and whipping.

He faces another charge of abetment under Section 109 of the Penal Code for allegedly collaborating with senior airman Mohamad Shukri Mohamad Yusop to steal the engines from the Sungai Besi air force base.

Mohamad Shukri was not charged with the theft and is likely to be one of the main prosecution witnesses.


Take a good look at this man's face. Does he look like an engine thief? Does he strike you as a compulsive liar? I'm a face reader and in my opinion this gentleman is telling the truth. If I'm correct about this, what does it say about the country we live in? Do we have the moral standing to point fingers at other human rights abusers - whether they be the CIA, Mossad, Mugabe's thugs or the Burmese Military Junta?

How did two jetfighter engines get stolen and shipped off to Uruguay? Isn't the defence minister ultimately responsible for the conduct of our armed forces personnel? If he didn't know what was going on, he deserves to be sacked for utter incompetence. If he knew, and ordered the brutal interrogations, then he belongs behind bars for his inhuman cruelty. Now who was defence minister when this disgraceful incident occurred? According to Malaysiakini the crime was discovered in May 2008 but no report was lodged until August 2008. Why?

During this period, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was still the prime minister and finance minister. Najib Tun Abdul Razak was deputy prime minister and defence minister. On October 19, 2006, when Altantuya Shaariibuu was abducted, most probably tortured, shot twice in the head, and then blown to pieces with C4 military grade explosives, Najib was head of the defence ministry. Military intelligence would have been answerable to him as well as the prime minister and nobody else.

Isn't it interesting that almost every serious and unsolved crime committed in this country in the last few years somehow leads to the same address?

[First posted 13 July 2010]

Art Harun apologizes to Mukhriz Mahathir for being "a stupid Malaysian" (repost)

Pic courtesy of The Nut Graph

SORRY, DATUK, I HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD THE ISA!

By Art Harun | Monday, August 03, 2009

Finally, I am in agreement with an UMNO leader. On the issue of the Internal Security Act, no less. In a Malaysian Insider report titled "Mukhriz defends ISA, says it's misunderstood," Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir has apparently lamented that the public has failed to see the benefit of the ISA. He was quoted as saying:

“The people cannot really see the benefits from ISA but if we realise that we are able to send our children to school and shop safely then we can see that all of these are from a government policy to provide protection to the people.”

One of the people whom Datuk Mukhriz was unknowingly referring to was, I must say, myself. Over the weekend I was thinking about what Datuk Mukhriz has said. And today, Monday the 3rd of August 2009, I conclude that all this while I have been a stupid Malaysian. I have been wrong all this while. Yes. I have to confess. I have misunderstood the ISA. Datuk Mukhriz, I bow in all humility to your wisdom and I must say I am not worth it. I am sorry.

All this while, I thought that a citizen's liberty is guaranteed by our Federal Constitution. And as I understood it, the Federal Constitution says that a citizen's liberty cannot be taken away other than in accordance with the due process of the law. And of course the law says that a person cannot be sent to prison until he or she has been found guilty by the Court and sentenced to imprisonment. That was what I understood.

I understood this from a year learning the Malaysian Constitution. And from another year of learning Comparative Constitutional Law where I studied the Indian, English and American Constitutions. And another year learning Administrative law. Also from a year of learning the subject of politics.

As I understood it too, when the ISA was debated in the Parliament, Tunku Abdul Rahman, our first Prime Minister as well as our Father of Independence, said this:

“My cabinet colleagues and I gave a solemn promise to Parliament and the nation that the immense powers given to the government under the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silence lawful dissent."

That was a promise, solemnly made to the Parliament. And the late Tunku was of course also the UMNO President at that time.

So, in my gullible and naive mind, I understood that the ISA would not be used to stifle opposition and silence lawful dissent. Furthermore, the then Home Minister, Tun Dr Ismail said:

"I am convinced that the Internal Security Act as practiced in Malaysia is not contrary to the fundamentals of democracy. Abuse of the Act can be prevented by vigilant public opinion via elections, a free Press and above all the Parliament."

I must admit therefore Datuk Mukhriz, that I was under the impression that the Malaysian public - and that includes me and other Malaysians - could criticise any abuse of the ISA by the Government. We could express our unhappiness in a free Press as well as the Parliament.

I was also under the impression that what Tun Dr Ismail had meant was that the public would have the freedom to express their displeasure over what they perceive as abuses of the ISA freely too. After all, what is the use of vigilance without the freedom to express the result of that vigilance?

Datuk Mukhriz, due to the above, I understood that the ISA would not be abused. I also understood that the ISA was to be used solely for the purpose of protecting the security of our nation. And if it was abused, I understood that I would have the right to protest against such abuse.

I also understood that the Court would have the power to check and balance out any abuse of the ISA by the government. This the Court could do by issuing a writ of habeas corpus in order to release a person who has been wrongfully detained under the ISA by the government. The Court could look into the exercise of the government's power under the ISA and decide whether such power has been correctly exercised or whether such power was exercised in good faith.

That was what I had understood all these while. And Datuk Mukhriz, sadly, I had been proven wrong. You are right. I have misunderstood the ISA all this while.

First of all, your father, Tun Mahathir Mohammad, had taken away the powers of the Court to look into the exercise of the power under the ISA and decide whether such power was exercised correctly or in good faith.

Your father changed the law and the Federal Constitution to render the Court lame and impotent. The Court could now only look into whether the government has filled in the right form before a detention is made. Or whether the Home Minister has used a comma and a full stop at the correct place in such a form. Your father has rendered the Court to be an instrument of checking only instead of an instrument of checks and balances. Your father had deemed it fit to render the Court as a proof reader. That is your father's idea of a democratic society.

So, I am sorry, I have misunderstood the ISA.

Then I found out that the ISA actually could also be used, and was in fact used, to detain immigration document forgers, counterfeiters, opposition leaders and the likes. As at the end of 2007, a staggering 10,711 persons have been arrested under the ISA and a total of 4,370 detention orders have been issued pursuant to the ISA. A total of 46 detainees continue to be detained at the Kamunting Detention Camp as at 5th December 2008.

I also learned that your father had orchestrated Operasi Lalang under which 106 persons were arrested and 40 were detained. I also learned that while anybody deemed as a threat to national security from the opposition parties must be arrested or detained under the ISA, such arrest or detention is not necessary if the threat to national security comes from a member of or leader from UMNO or the BN.

I have also learned that the ISA could be used to detain anybody for no reason whatsoever. Teresa Kok, for instance, was arrested under the ISA for apparently protesting to a mosque for reciting the azan too loudly. She was arrested although she said she did not do so. Even the mosque committee said she did not do it. But she was arrested under the ISA and was detained for about a week anyway. Then she was released without any further action.

Then Raja Petra Kamaruddin was also arrested and later, detained under the ISA for insulting Islam and for writing an article deemed seditious. He was so arrested and detained even though the police admitted that his article was not investigated upon to ascertain the truth of the contents or otherwise. That was a new lesson for me.

Luckily a brave Judge, in Justice Datuk Syed Helmy of the Shah Alam High Court, freed him.

Around the same time, I also learned that the ISA could also be used to arrest people in order to protect their personal safety. Remember a journalist by the name of Tan Hoon Cheng?

Your father also had detained a Malay man whose name was Hilmi Noor for some odd and strange reason. He was said to have converted to Christianity and by doing so he was accused of "disrupting the Malay culture by being a Christian.” Datuk, that was also a new lesson for me about the ISA.

On top of all that, I had always understood that the ISA's purpose was to arrest and detain people from carrying out whatever plans they have which threaten national security. It is preventive in nature and not punitive. But later, I learned that detainees could be tortured while under detention under the ISA.

A learned High Court Judge, Justice Datuk Hishamuddin Mohd Yunus (now a Court of Appeal Judge, finally, after years and years of service and being stepped over many many times by his juniors), in a case known as Abdul Malek Hussin v Borhan Hj Daud & Others [2008]1 CLJ 264, found as follows:

"On this issue, upon a careful evaluation of the entire evidence before me, it is my finding of facts that the plaintiff has succeeded in proving to the court on a balance of probabilities that he had been assaulted in the manner he alleges and by the individuals that he has named or identified. The plaintiff alleges that he was first assaulted by the first Defendant after the arresting team moved him from his home. He was arrested in front of his home after which a search of his home was done and various documents and a personal computer removed. He describes the assault in his evidence. He says he was slapped three times by the first Defendant after he was unable to take the first Defendant to the location of his (the plaintiff's) car. The plaintiff also said that he was blindfolded, and his head was forcibly covered with a T-shirt and forced to bend forward down between his legs in the car as he was taken to the IPK, Kuala Lumpur. The first Defendant denies these allegations. He only admits that he instructed L/Cpl Johari to place "cermin mata gelap" on the plaintiff, and that the purpose being "adalah bertujuan untuk menutup penglihatan plaintiff bagi mengelirukan plaintiff". The plaintiff then describes the circumstances of the second assault. In summary, he describes how in an air-conditioned room on the first floor of the IPK he was stripped naked, blindfolded, verbally abused and then physically assaulted. He was hit several times on the face and head. Most of the blows and kicks were directed at his body and legs. His legs were hit with a hard object. He fell over several times as a result of the blows. At one instance when his blindfold slipped, he identified one of the assailants as the second Defendant in person - Tan Sri Rahim Noor. The plaintiff also said that after the episode of physical assault, some urine-smelling like liquid was poured into his mouth while his mouth was forced open. Throughout the ordeal he was forced to remain naked. His penis was hit and an object pushed against his anus. He was made to stand in front of an air-conditioner and drenched with water - this treatment was done for almost an hour. The ordeal finally ended at about 4am. According to the plaintiff when the blindfold was removed he saw the first Defendant and other Special Branch officers in plainclothes. The first Defendant warned him not to make a police report regarding what had happened. The plaintiff also asked for medical treatment from the detaining officer but access to a doctor was only provided three days later on 29 September 1998... In my judgment, based on the evidence before the court, on a balance of probabilities, the plaintiff's case is more credible and ought to be accepted."

It is clear as daylight dear Datuk, I have misunderstood the ISA. I am sorry.

Last weekend, between 20,000 to 30,000 people came out to show their unhappiness over the ISA. They had wanted to demand the ISA to be abolished by presenting a memorandum to our King. Yet, they were met with water cannons, tear gas, batons and riot police with full gear, ever ready to shout and scream, even to beat them up and arrest them. Even 16 and 13 year olds were arrested and detained.

I thought Tun Dr Ismail already said that the public may be vigilant about the ISA and may express their opinion peacefully.

Again, I have misunderstood the ISA. And I am sorry.

[First posted 5 August 2009]

Teoh Beng Hock ~ five years down the line, still no closure!

Teoh Beng Hock (1979-2009)

Beng Hock, a former journalist with the Chinese press, became political aide 
to Selangor exco member Ean Yong Hian Wah (DAP) after 8 March 2008. 
Teoh wanted to make Malaysia a healthier, happier place for everybody.

A dedicated worker who enjoyed a good laugh, Beng Hock was well loved 
by friends and colleagues.

Beng Hock was engaged to 28-year-old Soh Cher Wei, a schoolteacher,
and they had planned their wedding for 17 July 2009.

Teoh Beng Hock was found dead at Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam, 

around noon on 16 July 2009, after being brutally "questioned" for 9 hours 

by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) over 

a RM2,400 discrepancy in the office accounts.

Malaysians were outraged. We knew why Teoh Beng Hock was dead.  

Shortly after his appointment as crime minister, Najib Razak boasted 

he would wrest Selangor back from Pakatan Rakyat - 

just as he stole Perak back through means entirely foul.

Former Selangor chief minister Khir Toyo has close friends in the MACC more than willing to help their UMNO buddy frame a few Pakatan Rakyat state exco members.

Teoh Beng Hock's unforeseen death forced UMNO to abort 
its dastardly plot to topple the Pakatan Rakyat state government. 
In a way, Beng Hock died to save Selangor from falling back 
into the clutches of a grimy, slimy bunch of hardened criminals.

The Teoh family, unhappy with the clumsy cover-up by MACC as well as PDRM, 

demanded a second autopsy, this time observed by renowned 

Thai forensic pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand who stated, 

after viewing photos from the first post-mortem, 

that she was 80% positive that Teoh had been murdered.

The whole nation was angered and saddened by Teoh's unnecesssary death. Few have faith in the MACC's political neutrality - indeed, most view the corrupt law enforcement agencies as UMNO's gestapo. Anger at Beng Hock's cruel mistreatment cut across the social spectrum. In an attempt to placate the public, Najib ordered a coroner's inquest which dragged on for 18 months and ground to a grating inconclusion: Teoh Beng Hock's death was neither homicide nor suicide, the coroner announced. The loud public outcry finally forced Najib to accede to a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the case. During the RCI, almost all the MACC officers revealed themselves to be totally incompetent and unprofessional - in fact, they came across as no better than salaried thugs, compulsive liars, and sadistic psychopaths. When the Royal Commsssion's findings were finally made public on 22 July 2011, the public was outraged by the RCI's politically expedient conclusion that "Teoh Beng Hock was driven to suicide due to the aggressive interrogation methods used by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officers." Despite the fact that three MACC officers (Selangor deputy director Hishamuddin Hashim, Mohd Anuar Ismail, and Mohd Adhraf Yunus) were held responsible for their tyrannical and unnecessarily malicious interrogation methods, not one has been prosecuted or even fired. Meanwhile, on 6 April 2011, another mysterious death occurred at the hands of MACC - that of customs officer Ahmad Sarbaini Mohamed.

On 22 February 2010, the son of Teoh Beng Hock 

was born at Pantai Hospital, Batu Pahat.

Watch this fantastic video produced in honor of 
Teoh Beng Hock!

[First posted 15 July 2013]

AN OBSCENE TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE (reposted in loving memory of Irene Fernandez)

From Malaysiakini: 
Court documents 'incomprehensible', 
appeal put off
Oct 28, 2008 12:58pm

The 13-year court battle of migrant worker activist Irene Fernandez has again run into problems as parts of the 9,000 court documents on the case are said to be ‘incomprehensible.’

Fernandez’s lawyer M Puravalen said that portions of the notes written by the trial judge were unclear.

The judge decided to postpone the appeal hearing to November 24 when the defence is expected to submit its objections to the court documents.

Fernandez, 62, was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment in 2003 after being found guilty by the Kuala Lumpur Magistrate's Court of maliciously publishing false news. She was allowed bail pending appeal.

In 1995, Fernandez exposed the poor conditions at immigration detention centres in a memorandum entitled ‘Abuse, Torture and Dehumanised Conditions of Migrant Workers in Detention Centres.'

She was arrested and charged under Section 8A (1) of the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 a year later.

The maximum penalty upon conviction is three years' imprisonment or a fine not exceeding RM20,000, or both.

The appeal mention date has been postponed four times due to several technical glitches since April, when papers containing her appeal went missing.

Her case has become the longest-running trial in Malaysian history.

ABOUT THE TRIAL OF IRENE FERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR OF TENAGANITA, MALAYSIA

14 October 2003

Day for judgement brought forward

The day for the Judgement on the trial of Irene Fernandez, the longest running trial in Malaysian legal history was abruptly brought forward to 14th October 2003.

When the defence wound up its case in March this year, the Magistrate asked the prosecution and defence counsels to make written submissions and set March 17, 2004, as the day when the verdict would be delivered.

However, on Friday, 10th October 2003, the defence lawyers were informed that judgement would be delivered on Tuesday 14th October 2003 and asked that the written submission be handed in by Saturday, 11th Oct 2003.

The sudden change of date has placed Irene and Tenaganita in a difficult situation; The leading counsel for Irene is abroad on a fact finding mission and her other lawyer is engaged in another matter in the high court. Therefore it has not been possible for the defence to make its written submission and furthermore Irene's lawyers will not be able to be present in court on 14th October when the verdict is delivered. The abrupt decision to conclude the trial in this manner appears to constitute a miscarriage of justice.

Background

* Irene Fernandez was arrested by the police at her home on 18th March 1996. She was charged under Section 8A(1) of the Printing and Publications Act 1984 for "maliciously publishing false news" through the issue of a memorandum entitled, "Abuse, Torture and Dehumanised Treatment of Migrant Workers at the Detention Camps". The maximum penalty for this offence is imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or a fine not exceeding RM20,000 or both.

* Bail was posted at RM3,000 and her passport was impounded as part of the bail condition. Each time she wants to leave the country for any reason she has to make an application to the court for the release of her passport.

* The Memorandum, "Abuse, Torture and Dehumanised Treatment of Migrant Workers at the Detention Camps" was released by Tenaganita in August 1995. The findings in the Memorandum comprises information that Tenaganita received from interviews with more than 300 ex-detainees during the course of its research on "Migration, Health and HIV/AIDS."

* The interviews with the ex-detainees showed consistent abuse, torture, denial of access to lawyers, denial of proper medical care, widespread diseases, lack of food and water and even deaths in the detention camps due to negligence on the part of the authorities. The Memorandum describes treatment of detainees in a manner which violates Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The facts contained in the memorandum gave rise to expressions of concern by individuals and organisations locally and internationally. The Malaysian authorities, instead of investigating the allegations, promptly denied that anything was amiss and instituted criminal proceedings against Irene.

"On the first day of my trial, I had stated to the press that since the government had refused to conduct its own independent inquiry, this trial will then become the public inquiry I asked for. We hope that through the trial, the truth will be revealed. As far as we are concerned, we raised, in a legitimate way, with authorities, issues of public concern, e.g.:- problems faced by migrant workers, inside and outside detention centres." (Irene Fernandez, June 1997)

* On May 30th, 1996, on the advice of her lawyers, Irene made an application to transfer the case from Magistrate Court to High Court. One of the reasons for the application for transfer is that the case will be best adjudicated in the High Court. This is because Section 8A of the Printing and Presses and Publications Act, 1984, under which Irene is charged, seems to negate Article 10 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to freedom of expression. And the key issue of the treatment of migrant workers at the detention centres has become a national and international concern. However, on 05 June 1996, judge Hashim Yusof, dismissed the application for transfer to High Court.

To date, the trial of Irene Fernandez is the longest running trial in Malaysian legal history. During this period, Irene has been in court for over 310 days of full hearing and she has made over 30 applications for the release of her passport to travel to foreign countries to represent the organisation and for medical treatment.

The trial of Irene Fernandez was postponed for about two years as the court would not provide a Bengali interpreter. It reconvened on 14th January 2003.

On 17th March 2003 the defence lawyers for Irene wound up the defence case. The decision by the defence to conclude its case was made after it had made several unsuccessful attempts to get women witnesses who had been detainees more than seven years earlier. On the same day the Magistrate set March 17th, 2004 as the day the judgement would be given after receiving the submissions from the defence and prosecution.

However the day of judgement was suddenly brought forward to 14 October 2003.

THE TESTIMONIES

During the trial, Tenaganita brought five former detainees from Bangladesh to testify on her behalf. They testified on conditions in four different detention camps: Semenyih, Kemayan, Tanah Merah and Langkap. The testimonies of the five former detainees were much more graphic and painted a picture of the conditions in the detention centres that were far worse than what was described in the Memorandum. Almost all the former detainees were in tears describing the torture and sexual abuse that they had experienced. Although these witnesses were rigorously cross-examined by the prosecution their testimony was unshaken. On the other hand, the prosecution claimed that the police had interviewed 36 former detainees during the course of its investigations but not a single detainee was produced in court to testify on behalf of the prosecution.

Golam (former detainee): Golam says he will never forget the repeated beatings they suffered in the camp. "The police always beat us with a police stick. They beat us on our heads, bodies and legs for no reason. Sometimes they just came and beat up everybody - it was an everyday routine. They would beat us if they found us talking, not sleeping at night or for any reason at all."

The detainees lived in constant fear, their hearts always tense. "We became unconscious after the beatings. There was no bleeding but we were in serious pain all the time. No police came to help us, but we helped each other. I never found a doctor in the camp." [Source: March 11, 2000 Malaysian 'death camps': A survivor recounts, Ajinder Kaur, Malaysiakini]

Mozumder (former detainee): Mozumder told the court that 120 Burmese inmates were forced to perform oral sex on one another.

"Police were watching how was their penis size, how they (the inmates) were performing, whether they were sucking the penis or just putting it in their mouth," he said, in reply to a question by the defence counsel.

He added that the inmates who were forced to suck the penis immediately rushed to the toilet after the act was over.

"Most of them closed their mouth with their hand and ran towards the toilet to vomit. Those who had oral sex performed on them stayed standing in the field. Their faces were pale, shamed. Most of them started crying. Some of them covered their eyes with their hand and some of them looked down to the ground," he recalled. He testified that he could not eat his meals after witnessing the incident. [Source: Friday, May 12, 2000, Sick inmate died after being kicked by police, Ajinder Kaur, Malaysiakini]

Zakir Hossain (former detainee): "His whole body was swollen - his arms, legs, knees, face and stomach," said Zakir Hossain, 37, who was detained in Kajang's Semenyih camp for illegal immigrants six years ago.

"When I told the police, the reply was, "If the doctor comes, you can explain to him." The policeman knew how sick he was because he had seen him. The sick inmate told the police, "I'm very sick, I can't move my hands and legs. Please call a doctor..."

Zakir told magistrate Juliana Mohamad that he asked the police to get a doctor about a week before the sick inmate passed away.

"He was in pain and he sometimes screamed, "My whole body is painful, please help me". He cried. I couldn't do much, but gave some consoling words that he would get well one day. I didn't think he would die because I thought the doctor would visit him," he added.

"Seven to eight days before he died, he could move his body slightly but with a lot of effort. He could eat with other's help. Someone had to carry him to the toilet," he recalled.

Zakir said that the sick inmate's condition got worse, and he was told of his death five to seven minutes after he passed away.

"He died in Block C, late in the evening. I saw his body. It was lying on the floor. His face was not covered. [Source: - June 28, 2000, Inmate died without medical help, says witness, Ajinder Kaur, Malaysiakini]

TENAGANITA
Penthouse, Wisma MLS
31 Jalan Tunku Abdul Rahman
50100 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: 6 03 26913681 Fax: 6 03 26913681
Email: tenaganita@yahoo.co.uk

Posted on 2004-01-09

WHO IS ANSWERABLE FOR THESE ATROCITIES?


Mahathir Mohamad, Minister of Home Affairs (1986-1999) and Megat Junid Megat Ayub, Deputy Home Minister (1986-1997).

I recall that in 1995, when Irene Fernandez submitted the Memorandum from Tenaganita on the unbelievably cruel treatment suffered by migrant workers detained by the Immigration Department, it caused the Mahathir administration acute embarrassment.

There was talk in the streets that then deputy home minister Megat Junid (right) was personally implicated in the whole ugly affair as his brother (or brother-in-law) owned an employment agency responsible for importing Bangladeshi and Burmese workers and cruelly mistreating them. Which explains why the police were ordered to launch a vicious attack against Irene Fernandez - "wicked messenger" and bearer of bad tidings - rather than investigate the serious allegations documented in the Tenaganita memorandum and prosecute those responsible for these inhuman acts.

In those days there was no Malaysiakini or Malaysia Today - and no bloggers too - and so the shameful matter was easily ignored or played down by the BN-controlled mainstream media. Only Aliran and the international press kept the Irene Fernandez case in the news. Megat Junid died of prostate cancer on 24 January 2008, leaving a long wake of scandals; but his boss Mahathir Mohamad is still alive and stirring up a whole load of shit.

After 13 years, it's high time the Malaysian government apologized to Irene Fernandez by dropping all charges against her and awarding Tenaganita RM13 million in long overdue compensation - one million for each year the stupid trial has dragged on.

But first we shall have to boot out that pea-brained poison-toad Umno politician in the Home Ministry who goes by the name Syed Hamid Albar - son of Syed Jaafar Albar, the infamous "Malay Ultra" from Yemen who, in 1965, suggested arresting Lee Kuan Yew under the ISA and imposing martial law on Singapore for the PAP's opposition to "Ketuanan Melayu." Bapa borek anak rintik (like father, like son).

[First posted 28 October 2008. Irene Fernandez was recalled to Heaven on 31 March 2014]

Is this the end of the line for wannabe Dick Taters?

Former US Vice-President Dick Cheney, once a leading candidate for the title of "Most Evil Man In America"

Cheney gets heart transplant, in intensive care
March 25, 2012 | The Malaysian Insider

Dick had an enormous heart; too bad it wasn't ticking
right. It was a real problem finding the right organ to
replace his dysfunctional heart. Finally a farmer in Idaho
offered this mutant potato, which perfectly fit a man
of Dick Cheney's stature.

WASHINGTON, March 25 — Former US Vice President Dick Cheney was recovering yesterday after undergoing heart transplant surgery, a once risky procedure whose survival rates have improved over the years.

The 71-year-old Republican, who wielded unprecedented power as vice president during the George W. Bush administration’s war on terrorism, was in the intensive care unit at Inova Fairfax Hospital in Falls Church, Virginia.

Cheney, who has suffered five heart attacks, the first at age 37, had been on the cardiac transplant list for more than 20 months before he received the heart from an anonymous donor.

“Although the former vice president and his family do not know the identity of the donor, they will be forever grateful for this lifesaving gift,” the spokeswoman, Kara Ahern, said.

According to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, about 88 per cent survive the first year after heart transplant surgery and 75 per cent survive for five years. The 10-year survival rate is about 56 per cent.

Cheney’s transplant followed a series of procedures in recent years to extend the use of his heart. Cheney had bypass surgery in 1988 and later had two angioplasties. In 2001, he had a defibrillator implanted in his chest.

He had a heart pump implanted in 2010 to compensate for worsening “end-stage” congestive heart failure. He said after the operation he was considering whether to seek a full heart transplant.

Waitlist

During Cheney’s eight years as vice president from 2001 to 2009, he pushed a “go it alone” world view that enraged his critics and dogged him long after he left public life.

Cheney was a strong advocate for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and was among the most outspoken of Bush administration officials warning of the danger from Iraq’s suspected stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. No such weapons were found.

In recent years, Cheney has appeared increasingly frail in public.

[Read the rest here.]

So, this is Cheney's idea of "a change of heart"? Dick, you shoulda listened to your mama and become a poet. Now, all you'll get is a million Iraqis dancin' on your grave.... and everyone who died on 9/11 will be waiting to greet you on the other side.

FOUR LITTLE, FIVE LITTLE, SIX LITTLE INDIANS...

The Malaysian Police are Prosecutor, Judge and Executioner, all in one
Sunday, 22 February 2009 | Malaysia Today
By Naragan N.

Today, I tagged along with our Human Rights Activists who have been fighting Police Abuses for a long time – S. Jayathas, S. Surendran, Manickavasagam (MP for Kapar) and M. Manohar (MP for Teluk Intan), to find out what actually transpired when the 6 were killed by the Police in Kulim.

Ever since their killing the other day, I have been very bothered by the event. The media shouted out "criminals" – as if that was the foregone truth. The Police had executed all 6 of them as if they were the Prosecutor, Judge and Executioner all in one and utterly above the law. It was not one, not two; it was six -and it seems with impunity. Every one had their own view of the episode. But I needed some answers.

At the outset, let me say that I am not condoning crimes or criminals; but there are so many questions that this incident raises that we need some good answers, and fast, as this situation seems to be spinning out of control – before the ink dries on one, another seems to happen. Kugan's case before Prabakaran's settled, and now the six before Kugan's case is settled.

We visited the shootout site, the families of 3 of the deceaseds and spent some time with the neighbour at the shootout site. The picture that emerges is different than what the mainstream media has been putting out. The MSM paints a picture that the Police only returned fire after being shot at and that this turn of events was totally unavoidable and that they were dealing with a bunch of unscrupulous criminals.


Let me detail some of the facts we gathered before commenting on them. The scene of the shooting was in a small town of Karangan some 15km from Kulim. It was in a small house which was being renovated in one of the backroads of Karangan, a little off the main road of the town. The fence around the house was a tall wall made up of corrugated sheet – something you would do to cut off from view what was going on inside.

A very forthcoming neighbour told us that when he returned home from work that rainy night at around 10 or so, he was met with a large group of policemen in front of his house, who had already packed his family into the prayer room of his house in the event of stray bullets during the impending ambush. He was asked to get in with them. He only heard the frightening shootout that dreadful night from within his prayer room.

The shootout took place at around 10.30, a very noisy and frightening episode, narrated that neighbour. There did not seem to be any attempt by the Police to try to get the people they were seeking out from the premises, by summoning them out first using hailers or some such device, before the shoot out. The shooting just happened. The neighbour knew nothing more till the bodies of the killed men were removed at somewhere between 4 and 5 am the next morning.

The first of the killed men, the one that the Police probably had a reason to get, the owner of the house where the shootout happened, was shot in the middle of the top of his head, top down it appeared. The family of this victim mentioned he had several more shots on the front side of his body – as if someone shot at him from the front. This individual, we were told by the family had no prior police record.


The second victim that we visited was someone who was actually working in Singapore for a company called SBS (maybe the Singapore Bus Company) who had come back to Kulim for a holiday. He was due to go back shortly and had a return ticket for that. His death certificate also indicated death due to shots in the chest. Apparently he had several shot wounds on the front side of his body also, as if shot from the front. He appeared to be a friend of the first victim.

It is not clear from the little information we got that this person was at all a close accomplice or even a participant in any crime that may have been in the works. Of course, I am concluding this with very little information, but these are the facts as we got them from the family. The family was distraught, because this had damaged the standing of the family in the community, having their dead son branded a criminal. This victim also has no past criminal record, we were told by the family.


The third family we visited was that of a young chap of about 20. His family lives in a dilapidated little estate house in Padang Serai. He had seven siblings and it was obvious the family was just existing. This young chap, it appears, was working for the first victim assisting in the renovation of the house where the shootout happened. The parents did not seem to know much more about what he did. He was obviously not being paid very much, as he had just 2 days before the incident asked one of his family members for 20 ringgit.

He had shot wounds on the forehead and it looked like the back of his head was all bloodied as if from an exiting bullet. He was dressed only in a towel at the time of his death. His parents even had difficulty putting together some money to buy him a shirt and a dhoty for his burial. 36 ringgit was all they had. They could not even afford the coffin in which he was ultimately buried. The Police disallowed the victims' kin to examine the body when they tried to. The body was all bloodied in the front. This victim also had no past record, we were told.


To say the least, this was a carnage. It appears like we are in Gaza or in Iraq or in Afghanistan or even in Sri Lanka – the scale and method of killing suggests nothing short of this. Let me ask, are we in one of these countries or is Malaysia descending there?

It looks like Indian lives have become very cheap, very cheap in this country – the lives of anjing keling, yes that's what it is, the cheap lives of the anjings - that they can be wasted in this manner. Uthayakumar was so right!

By all of this, I am in no way saying crime is alright. What I am saying is the way the problems of crime are being dealt with. Let me lay out some perspectives for you all to consider:

1) What was the need to kill these people? They were not terrorists. They had no previous records. They were not murderers, surely not the mafia. They could have been easily arrested. In fact, where the first victim regularly stays is just a stone's throw from the Police Station. Why were they not apprehended? Or why were they not given a chance to come out with their hands up to surrender themselves for arrest – even in war this is done. Why were they not given this chance?

2) We understand there were a number of sharp shooters from around the country on hand for the job for the Police. This seem to indicate that this was a planned kill event.

3) Why was it that the shot wounds were all in the front side of the victims – not any location on the body, but systematically on the front side?

4) One victim was shot on the top of the head. How could that happen in a normal exchange of fire? That seems to suggest some crouching position and a shot into the head, from the top.

5) Why were the victims not shot at on their legs or where they will not be killed but disabled on being shot?

6) Why were the kin of one of the victims denied their right to inspect the body?

7) If it was a shootout between the Police and the victims, only two could have had the guns, as the police produced two guns; why were the shot wounds so systematic in the chest and the heads on all three of the victims? We do not know about the other two victims – but I suspect they will show similarities.

In summary, this ugly incident in the series of incidents of police killing and atrocities seem to emphasise the following issues:

a) The Police in Malaysia continue killing Indian crime suspects with impunity – taking upon themselves the role of Prosecutor, Judge and Executioner all in one. I am sure that the powers be know exactly what they are doing. So, we have to take it that they are trying to provoke a response from us so they can slam emergency rule or something like that and set us all back?

b) The Police very urgently need to be Policed. That looks like a very remote possibility, as long as UMNO rules this country of ours. See what's happening to the reform-driven MACC, it has become just another tool of UMNO. Any IPCMC will probably end up in that same rubbish bin. In any case, this UMNO regime seems to be promoting Police brutality as a means of maintaining their hold on the levers of power.

c) So many crime suspects in Malaysia are from among the Indian community. I think the answer to this has been already abundantly answered by Uthayakumar – this underclass of Indians are a direct result of the UMNO policies over the last 50 years of marginalizing Indians – neglecting the development of the Indian community. There does not yet seem to be any serious effort to get to the bottom of this problem.

d) The way the Police are shooting Indian crime suspects seem to give additional credence to the racist line of UMNO – the anjing keling line. They seem to be wittingly or unwittingly creating a stereotype of the Indians in the country – despicable, troublecausing and uncouth Indian. What do you think the jibes of children in school reflect – when little Indian children are called "anjing keling" by their Malay classmates.

e) Poverty seems to be intertwined with all of this. Take the case of the third victim that we visited - what kind of money was he making for him to be lumped up and shot. Does this make sense, 20 years old, barely making a living and then shot in the middle. These are the youth of the country who should be nurtured and built up into the the human potential we so much need.

This is all very infuriating.

There comes a time when all of this has to stop. This cannot continue. UMNO , stop playing games and get on with doing something positive about the problem. If you do not know how, then get expert help. I am sure there are agencies around the world that can help. Or are we to take it that you just do not want to, and then the only way we can find some resolution to the problem is by replacing you, UMNO.

UNITED WE MUST STAND... UNITED WE MUST ACT!!!!!