`

THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!
Image result for ramadan begins 27 May 2017

Friday, October 31, 2014

Tambang Bas Ekspress Bakal Naik 30 % - SPAD






Rakyat Malaysia bakal berdepan dengan kenaikan caj tambang bas ekspress sebanyak 30% dan Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) kini menunggu kelulusan daripada Putrajaya bagi memuktamadkan kadar perkhidmatan tersebut, lapor Utusan Malaysia hari ini.



Pengerusi SPAD Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar berkata, keputusan mengenai pelaksanaan caj tambang bas ekspress dijangka akan dimaklumkan dalam tempoh terdekat.



"SPAD sudah syorkan kepada kerajaan permohonan mereka ( pengusaha bas). InsyaAllah kita tunggu keputusan muktamad secepat mungkin," katanya seperti dilaporkan akhbar milik Umno itu.



Kajian kenaikan caj tambang itu susulan daripada gesaan pengusaha bas di negara yang terbeban dengan kenaikan harga harga minyak selepas Putrajaya memotong subsidi.

Syed Hamid menyifatkan ia merupakan satu cadangan yang munasabah.



"Permohonan daripada pengusaha bas adalah munasabah berasaskan kepasa keperluan yang mendesak terutama selepas penurunan subsidi minyak baru- baru ini," katanya.



Bagaimanapun beliau menjamin SPAD akan mencari kaedah sesuai untuk tidak membebankan pengguna sekiranya berlaku kenaikan.



Putrajaya‎ baru-baru ini mengurangkan subsidi RON95 dan diesel sebanyak 20 sen sebagai sebahagian daripada program rasionalisasi subsidi,

Kisah Gadis Cantik Menyesal Berkahwin Dengan Ustaz

Seorg gadis yg terlalu cantik hendak bernikah tapi dia tak nak couple-couple nih, tambahan lagi dia mahukan seorg suami yg 'ultra warak'. so dia pun buat hebahan yg dia sudi menerima sesiapa je yg ingin menikahinya dgn syarat:
1) lelaki tu kena puasa sepanjang tahun
2) lelaki itu kena khatam al Quran setiap hari
3) lelaki itu kena beribadah sepanjang malam setiap hari.
Tak ada seorg pun laki sanggup nak terima ketiga2 syarat tu kecuali seorg jejaka yang sederhana perwatakan dan penampilannya. Akhirnya bernikahlah si jelita itu dgn lelaki tersebut.Sepanjang perkahwinan mereka, perempuan tu perhatikan jejaka tu.
"Eh...tak puasa pulak laki aku hari ni. Mcmana nak puasa setahun?"
"Hmm..aku tak nampak pun dia baca Quran hari ni..."
"Tak nampak pun laki aku bangun malam pagi ni. Dia tak solat malam ke?"
Selepas sebulan akhirnya permpuan tu tak tahan dah. Dia anggap jejaka tu menipu dia. Dia pun memohon cerai kat mahkamah sambil menyatakan alasan "ditipu oleh suaminya"
"Masa nak nikah dulu dia setuju syarat2 yg saya letak. Dah kawin langsung tidak tunaikan. Penipu!" Rungut si pempuan pada hakim.

Hakim pun tanya kpd jejaka tu, "kamu ingat apa syarat2 nikah yg isteri kamu letakkan?""Ingat, yang arif. Puasa sepanjang tahun, solat malam non stop setiap hari, khatam Quran setiap hari.." Jawab jejaka muda dengan nada lembut.

Hakim bertanya lagi. "Habis tu kamu tak buat ?"
pemuda tu selamba jawab, "buat."
Hakim menjerkah, "Isteri kamu kata kamu tak buat. Mcm mana ni?"
Pemuda itu tak mau mengalah. "Sungguh saya buat yang arif. Takkan saya nak tulis report card nak bagi tahu saya buat apa hari ni? Nanti riak pulak !!!"Hakim tidak puas hati, "baik. Hari ni kamu puasa tak?"
"Tak."Hakim terus potong ayat, "hah! Kamu tidak puasa hari ni, habis mcm mana kamu kata kamu puasa sepanjang tahun?"

Pemuda itu selamba menjawab, " Rasulullah telah bersabda sekiranya seorg itu menunaikan puasa Ramadhan sebulan dan kemudiannya menyambung dgn puasa sunat syawal 6 hari, maka seolah2 dia telah berpuasa sepanjang tahun. Saya puasa Ramadhan dan puasa 6 setiap tahun, jadi saya seolah2 berpuasa sepanjang tahun."
Hakim tu tersentak. "Habis tu mcm mana kamu khatam Al Quran setiap hari? Saya nak baca 3 muka surat sehari pun susah nak cari masa.Pemuda itu terus menjawab, "saya baca Surah Al Ikhlas 3 kali setiap kali saya sebelum tidur.

Rasulullah bersabda sesiapa yg membaca surah Al Ikhlas 3 kali maka seolah2nya dia telah membaca keseluruhan Al Quran." sambil buat senyuman lebar kpd hakim.

Hakim itu makin tergamam. "Solat malam pulak, bagaimana kamu buat?"Pemuda itu sekali lagi senyum. 
"Saya solat Isyak dan solat Subuh berjemaah.

Rasulullah bersabda, barangsiapa yg berjemaah pada waktu Isyak dan Subuh maka seolah2nya dia telah beribadah sepanjang malam"


dia terus menyambung,"Islam itu indah, yang arif. Tetapi kita selalu mengukur kewarakan dan kealiman seseorg itu berdasarkan banyaknya amalan seseorg itu yg dizahirkan sedangkan Allah mementingkan kualiti berbanding kuantiti. 

Kita cuma diberikan Allah 24 jam sehari semalam, maka pandai2lah kita bahagikan masa selaku manusia yg menghidupkan dunia serta mencari akhirat. Bukankah mencapai kejayaan di dunia juga merupakan ibadah, dan apa gunanya jika melakukan ibadah tanpa istiqamah, semua itu hanya sia-sia.
Hakim terangguk2 lalu memerintahkan si isteri bangun. "Awak sepatutnya beruntung. Awak telah dinikahi oleh seorg lelaki yg bukan sahaja amat warak tetapi amat berilmu.Dengan ini saya isytiharkan kes ini dibatalkan..."

Si suami tersenyum puas.. 

* amalan 3 ini bukan hanya dikhususkan kpd lelaki , perempuan juga boleh mendptkan nye peringatan bersama.. Mari kita lakukan bersama..Subhanallah‬ Islam Itu Indah

Semoga amalan2 baik didatangkan kekuatan utk saya dan seluruh ummat beramal dgn nya... Baca tau Dgn Niat baik ..Bismillah hirahmannirahim innaka la minal mursalin a'la siratim mustaqim tanzilal azizir rahim litunzira qaumamma unzira aba uhum fahum ghafilun . Kita berbagi doa ke sesama muslim....


Read more: http://hmetroo.blogspot.com/2014/09/kisah-gadis-cantik-menyesal-berkahwin.html#ixzz3HlpWdPir

Mahasiswa Lakukan Aksi Beramai-Ramai


Mahasiswa ITN MALANG !

Inilah kejadian terbaru mahasiswa baru yang di orientasi secara keterlaluan di ITN Malang.
Mahasiswa diperlakukan tanpa berperikemanusiaan dan dengan cara memaksa mahasiwinya sesuka hati, seperti di perk0sa secara bergilir-gilir & beramai-ramai oleh para seniornya.

Apakah ini yang dinamakan kaum terdidik?

Perbuatan seperti ini tidak seharusnya berlaku pada zaman ini.


Foto ini diAmbil oleh salah SeOrang Senior Mahasiswa ITN yang tidak setuju dengan dengan sistem Ospek di ITN, tapi dia tidak dapat berbuat apa2..

Warga emas disamun depan rumah di Besut


Che Mek Wok menunjukkan bagaimana suspek menolak kepalanya sebelum dia terjatuh di tempat kejadian.

BESUT – Seorang wanita warga emas rugi kira-kira RM12,000 disamun seorang lelaki yang berpura-pura bertanya suami wanita itu dalam kejadian di Kampung Amer, Kampung Raja, kelmarin.

Kejadian kira-kira jam 10.50 pagi itu berlaku ketika Che Mek Wok Che Mat, 56, berada di kawasan pagar rumah adiknya sebelum didatangi seorang lelaki tidak dikenali yang menaiki kereta Proton Waja berwarna kelabu.

Menurut mangsa, ketika menghampiri pintu pagar halaman rumah tiba-tiba kereta bercermin gelap itu berhenti.

“Kemudian keluar lelaki berbadan agak besar dan berambut pendek dari tempat duduk penumpang depan menuju ke arah saya.

“Dia tanya sama ada pak cik (suami) berada di rumah atau tidak, tapi terlintas dalam hati saya, lelaki itu berniat buruk.

“Belum sempat saya jawab, dia tiba-tiba menolak kepala kiri sehingga saya jatuh di atas tanah lalu suspek merentap seutas rantai dan gelang tangan emas milik saya,” katanya.

Suspek kemudian melarikan diri dengan kereta yang dipercayai dipandu rakannya yang menunggu di dalam kereta.

“Saya jerit meminta tolong dan didengari oleh jiran yang berada berdekatan, namun lelaki itu telah melarikan diri sebelum saya menghubungi talian kecemasan,” katanya.

Che Mek Wok agak trauma dengan kejadian pertama kali berlaku dalam hidupnya itu, namun bersyukur kerana tidak mengalami kecederaan serius selain sakit pada bahagian rusuk kanan akibat terjatuh selepas ditolak suspek.

Dia kemudian membuat laporan di Balai Polis Kampung Raja untuk tindakan lanjut.

Sementara itu, Pemangku Ketua Polis Daerah Besut Deputi Superintendan Noor Halim Nordin yang dihubungi mengesahkan ada menerima laporan berhubung kejadian.

Beliau berkata, usaha mengenal pasti dan memburu suspek giat dijalankan, dan kes disiasat mengikut Seksyen 392 Kanun Keseksaan kerana merompak.

“Polis tidak menolak kemungkinan suspek menggunakan nombor pendaftaran palsu namun siasatan lanjut sedang dijalankan,” katanya.-SINAR HARIAN

Sarawak leader says Christian items grab reflects rising religious extremism

Pastor Maklin Masiau (in red shirt) serves the rural areas of Sabah and Customs seized 574 books and 419 CDs containing the word ‘Allah’. The move has angered leaders in Sabah and Sarawak who claim that Putrajaya is ignoring the 10-point solution on the use of ‘Allah’ in Christian literature. – Facebook pic, November 1, 2014.Pastor Maklin Masiau (in red shirt) serves the rural areas of Sabah and Customs seized 574 books and 419 CDs containing the word ‘Allah’. The move has angered leaders in Sabah and Sarawak who claim that Putrajaya is ignoring the 10-point solution on the use of ‘Allah’ in Christian literature. – Facebook pic, November 1, 2014.
While the latest seizure of Christian materials containing the word “Allah” at klia2 in Sepang last week appears to be resolved, Sarawak's outspoken minister Tan Sri Dr James Masing views the episode as ominous and portends growing religious extremism in the country.
The seizure is not the first in Malaysia, despite the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) government's pledge in 2011 to allow such materials in states where Islamic law was silent on the matter.
“Moderation and religious tolerance and respect have been cast at the wayside,” he said in reaction to the seizure of hundreds of books and CDs from Sabah pastor Maklin Masiau by Customs officials last Saturday.
He said it would be most unfortunate if Malaysia is heading towards becoming an Islamic state “where tolerance for other religious practices are ignored or banned”.
Masiau said in a Facebook posting that the books and CDs he was carrying were Christmas gifts for a church in Sabah.
He was returning to Kota Kinabalu from Medan, Indonesia, and was on transit at klia2.
Masiau is active in the area of Pitas, considered one of the poorest areas in Sabah and where poor Christians are allegedly often induced to convert to Islam with offers of money.
Masing (pic), who heads the second largest BN party in Sarawak, Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS), said in order to thwart fundamentalists and extremists, it was imperative that non-Muslims stand together and uphold the spirit of religious freedom as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.
Tan Sri Joseph Kurup, the minister in charge of unity, said yesterday that efforts were being made to return the seized books and CDs to Masiau as the Cabinet has unanimously pledged its support for the 10-point solution on the use of "Allah" in Christian literature.
Kurup also said the Cabinet wanted civil servants to comply strictly with the 10-point solution.
The 10-point solution drawn up before the Sarawak elections in 2011 provided for Bibles in all languages to be imported, including those in Bahasa Malaysia and Bahasa Indonesia which contained the word “Allah”.
The 10-point solution also allowed for the printing, importation and distribution of the Alkitab, the Bahasa Malaysia version of the Bible.
Sarawak PKR chief Baru Bian said such seizures only tested the patience of people in Sabah and Sarawak.
He believed the actions of the civil servants concerned amounted to “a calculated intimidation”.
“Are little Napoleons deliberately stirring trouble or have the relevant authorities not learned from the episodes we went through on this issue? “Whatever it is, I hope the minister in charge (Kurup) will do the right thing this time.
“We in Sabah and Sarawak have been very patient all this while,” he said, adding that if such actions continued, the people would run out of patience and “we don't want this to happen.
“Don't simply seize and confiscate without proof that these goods are to be used for unlawful purposes.”
A PKR branch leader, Boniface Willy Tumek, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak must not only show himself as the moderate leader that he claimed to be, but as the prime minister, he must also show that he was in charge.
“He must order the immediate release of the books and the CDs and revoke the order that caused these problems.
“Failure to do that will bring dishonour to Malaysia as a member of the United Nations Security Council and more disrepute to Malaysia in the eyes of the international community,” he said.
Social media users have also reacted to the seizure of the books and CDs, with Facebook user Alex Asing saying the Customs’ action as “really not a sensible thing to do”.
“Much has been said regarding the issue. At the end of the day, who gives a damn how you call your god,” he said.
One of DAP's Dayak leaders, Leon Jimat Donald posted “It's getting worse” on Facebook.
Another Facebook user, Apai Nyanggau (Father Nyanggau) asked if the Court of Appeal decision to uphold the ban on the use of the word “Allah” in the Catholic weekly Herald applied to CDs and books.
The Home Ministry said the seizure of the materials had nothing to do with their containing the word “Allah”, but because Masiau did not have an import permit, which is required by the ministry when foreign publications were brought into the country.
Hashimah Nik Jaafar, the ministry's publications and Quranic text division head told The Malaysian Insider yesterday evening that if a person was carrying one or two books, Customs would usually just let the person through.
“But he was carrying 574 books and 419 CDs in five to six boxes, so naturally the Customs officers checked.
"And it was just procedure for them to seize it for the purposes of referring the publications to us because they were brought in from another country in bulk without an import permit.
"It had nothing to do with the materials containing the word ‘Allah’," she said.
- TMI

UM hauls up student leader behind Anwar rally

Fahmi Zainol, president of the Universiti Malaya Undergraduates' Association, faces a disciplinary hearing at the university next Friday. – The Malaysian Insider pic, October 31, 2014.Fahmi Zainol, president of the Universiti Malaya Undergraduates' Association, faces a disciplinary hearing at the university next Friday. – The Malaysian Insider pic, October 31, 2014.Universiti Malaya has initiated disciplinary proceedings against student leader Fahmi Zainol for holding a rally with opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Monday.
Fahmi today said the letter stated he faced nine charges under the Universities and University Colleges Act.
"I received nine charges while eight other students who were with me also received letters from the UM management. However, the charges are different," Fahmi told The Malaysian Insider.
Fahmi, who is the president of Universiti Malaya Undergraduates' Association, told The Malaysian Insider that he faced the possibility of being expelled from the university.
He said the ‎board will decide if they have violated the university act and disciplinary action will be taken if they are found guilty of the charges.
Despite a shutdown by UM, hundreds on Monday forced their way through the university's main gates, allowing Anwar to enter his alma mater and address a crowd of about 2,000.
The event, “40 years: from UM to prison”, was declared illegal by UM deputy vice-chancellor of student affairs Professor Datuk Dr Rohana Yusof, as it would “damage the image” of the university.
Since the day of the gathering, Fahmi has been the target of much attention. He was among hundreds who stormed the university's main gates to allow Anwar to enter his alma mater and address the crowd.
The Public Service Department scholarship student said he was ready to face the consequences of his actions and hoped to finish his studies.
Yesterday, a gathering featuring Fahmi at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) was cut short by the university's authorities, which said it was an illegal assembly.
UKM student body Gabungan Mahasiswa alleged that each speaker at the Reformasi Perjuangan Mahasiswa event were only given two minutes to address the 300-odd crowd at the university's speaker's corner.
It said the university had even issued a letter warning students against attending the gathering as it was not registered with the institution of higher learning.
"Such an attitude is a reflection of the lack of maturity among the university's administration in preventing undergraduates from voicing their views.
"The university administration is also being arrogant and afraid of the rising spirit of UKM students when they moved in to prevent Fahmi from giving his speech."
- TMI

Pastor aims wrath at Gani and Nancy

Sabah church chief Dusing calls the two 'obnoxious' for defending Ibrahim Ali.
Jerry Dusing 300PETALING JAYA: A Christian leader today condemned Attorney General Abdul Gani Patail and de facto Law Minister Nancy Shukri for what he described as their “obnoxious” defence of Perkasa chief Ibrahim Ali’s call for the burning of Bibles.
The two must be held responsible for racial and religious tension that may result from their stand on the issue, said Jerry Dusing, president of the Sidang Injil Borneo or the Evangelical Church of Sabah.
“There are limits to what one can say against another religion,” said the pastor. “Asking for the holy scriptures of another religion to be burned violates the most basic of human decency.”
Dusing said Gani’s and Nancy’s failure to act against bigotry served only to embolden extremists to become more incendiary against non-Muslims.
“The views of both the AG and the law minister are both obnoxious and unacceptable,” he said. “It is clear under Article 8 (1) of the Federal Constitution that all persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.
“Even Muslim leaders in the government reject such extremism.”
Dusing welcomed the statement by Sabah Legislative Assembly Speaker Salleh Said Keruak that letting Ibrahim off was as good as telling Malaysians that it is right to burn Bibles.
Salleh also said that burning Bibles was not something that Muslims in Sabah and Sarawak would endorse.
Dusing ticked off former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad for defending Ibrahim, saying he should speak with a voice of moderation instead of encouraging extremism.
He said it was evident to Malaysians that racial and religious polarisation in the country had reached alarming levels.

The new politics of Khairy Jamaluddin

Is KJ positioning himself to one day be Prime Minister?
COMMENT
khairyKhairy Jamaluddin has come a long way from the days when he was known as the head of the Fourth Floor Boys.
These days, he sounds like the sole voice of reason amid increasingly shrill rhetoric from both the right and left wings of this country. Just this week alone, he took Perkasa President Ibrahim Ali to task over his controversial comments, and then turned against Anwar Ibrahim’s camp, thus walking that middle ground where most Malaysians reside as we go about our daily business.
This is far from the first time Khairy has rushed against the voices of the extreme. Earlier this year he told the notorious Zulkifli Noordin to “just shut up” when the latter decided to poke fun at the death of Karpal Singh. Since 2009, he has slowly but surely steered Umno Youth towards a more moderate platform and has built up a good rapport with the youths of Malaysia by creating initiatives and opportunities. He even opened Menara Belia dan Sukan for youths to organize a metal music festival earlier this year.
He is now organizing an open debate between Umno Youth Exco member Fathul Bari and a young man who tried to bring a little brightness to our lives with his “I Want To Touch A Dog” programme, Syed Azmi Alhabshi. The topic of the debate is “Prevalent Sensitivities vs Openness: Where is the Middle Point?”
It is this kind of discourse that is absolutely necessary in the high-temperature environment of Malaysian politics today. Instead of death threats, Syed Azmi deserves to be engaged in a civil manner that speaks well of us as a people. No religious teaching would call for a death threat on a man attempting to challenge the cultural stereotypes against an innocent animal. That Khairy has provided a neutral corner for him to discuss his points of view in a civilized manner is truly the sign of someone who wants to understand and not condemn for the sake of condemning.
Najib Tun Razak may shout “wasatiyyah” from the rooftops for the world to hear, but Khairy is the man walking that talk even as our Prime Minister jets off to parts unknown every other week.
Political reinvention is a difficult thing, especially here in a polarized Malaysia. The most vocal and ardent support base is inherently the extremist one. The majority prefer to be left well alone as long as the country functions as promised, and they are rarely given voice by NGOs or politicians. But the path of the moderates is the largest path, giving leeway to cater to both sides of the fence, though occasionally aggravating both.
Many who read this will be tempted to scepticism, citing Khairy’s “keris-waving days”, as Nik Nazmi so elegantly puts it, as reason to believe that KJ’s push to the middle ground is nothing more than a political facade designed to capture the attention of the moderates looking for a champion. And that may be true, but the only one who knows is the man himself. Still, Khairy’s move to the middle ground is unheard of for Umno Youth, and in itself is a bold and radical decision, a departure from the rhetoric and red-meat politics that the youth wing has been known for. It is a fact that even within his own party, KJ comes under criticism for not doing things the old way.
Bold new path
Khairy understands from the 2008 political tsunami that the old politics of Malaysia has forever changed, irreversibly. If his move to the middle ground is nothing more than cognizance of political reality, it is the only move he can make to continue being relevant, and by extension, keep Umno relevant. It is indeed the best move to make. He has begun to set the national conversation on a bold new path, and one that Umno has never trodden before, and it’s time we started paying attention and hoping that his influence will be enough to change the fundamentalistic and nationalistic mindset of Malaysia’s own “grand old party”, to quote Khairy himself.
That challenge of accomplishing such a reality, of fighting the perception that Umno Youth has abandoned its struggle, is one that he knows all too well, as he imparted to the youth leaders gathered at his Akademi Kapten Hussein and at the MCA Youth AGM. But as he revealed, the struggle has not been abandoned, but merely taking place in an arena more suited for our more cynical times. Khairy had pushed Umno Youth to focus less on rhetoric and bombastic actions to actually pay attention to the needs of the people.
He spoke no truer words at Akademi Kapten Hussein than when he said the younger generation does not care so much about parties and their political circuses as much as how those parties are going to tackles the issues that concern the youth—issues that run the gamut from human rights, to housing, to the ability to express creatively.
What else should be the function of a political party and its branches if not to serve the needs of the communities they represent? That Khairy grasps the importance of the middle ground and the evolution of politics among the youth of today is something that cannot be said of many people on either side of the political divide, and may be what sets him apart and above the dross.
All this seems to point to Khairy positioning himself as a future candidate for Prime Minister. He has all the qualifications, and a centrist, moderate approach that has a broad appeal to a wide section of Malaysians. But first, he must get past his biggest challenge yet. And that comes in the form of the grand old man of Malaysian politics, Mahathir Mohamad.
It’s no secret that Mahathir has long disdained Khairy. And while we may not have proof that Mahathir has softened his stance on Khairy, known Mahathir supporter Abdul Kadir Jasin has expressed a belief that Khairy is deputy prime minister material. This nugget of news would usually be dismissed as the personal ruminations of a veteran pressman, but Kadir’s opinions are usually held as reflecting those of Mahathir himself.
Time will tell if Khairy Jamaluddin could one day gain the trust of Malaysia’s penultimate power broker. But he is beginning to make headway among the youth and the moderates, who are slowly beginning to see him in a good light. As long as he balances his progressive image well with the demands made of him by his party base, he could one day claim the throne.

Unsworn statement from the dock is no evidence


During his sodomy trial at the High Court, Anwar had read a 32-page statement, in which he said the sodomy charge against him was a political conspiracy. The High Court and the Court of Appeal, however, had dismissed it, regarding it as a "bare denial" of the offence.

Anwar's lawyer N. Surendran this morning cited six case laws in support of evidence from the dock. Surendran had been asked yesterday by Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria to produce authorities so that the court could decide on the matter.

The lawyer told the judges that it was for the court to determine the weight to be attached when an accused person gave a statement from the dock.

"We hope the apex court will seize this opportunity to make a clear finding on unsworn statements given from the dock. At present, there is some ambiguity," he told The Malaysian Insider during a break at the hearing today. [Read the full MI report here

Is there really an ambiguity?

During their three allocated days, Anwar's defense was still trying to pick on the issues relating to DNA and the rest of the 42 issues for the purpose to "create doubt", as said by Ram Karpal Singh. One doubt accepted could hopefully be sufficient to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeal (COA).

However, those issues of facts are supposed to be dealt with at the High Court and Cout of Appeal. The Federal Court only deal with issues on the Point of Law i.e. the interpretation of the law [read here on Point of law or Question of Law].

Thus for Tan Sri Shafee Abdullah's comment that all have been heard before.

Though there are Point of Law issues raised, it must have been dealt before and the precedent is voluminous. That explains Shafee's subsequent comment that only 15% are new and 85% are old.  So he had to spend today to give a submission to give the right perspective to answer the 42 issues raised by defense.


He will put new issues on Monday and Tuesday. To remind Anwar's supporters, the prosecution appealed for sentence longer than the existing 5 years. It could go up to 20 years. 

Now, is the attempt by Surendran to raise a Point of Law on Anwar Ibrahim's unsworn statement from the dock filled with conspiracy accusation something new? 

Unsworn Statement as Evidence 


So, does unsworn statement from the dock, which are not cross examined by both sides, be accepted by the court as evidence?

Let's not play lawyer but hear what a lawyer has to say. Loyar Burok had an article written in 2011 [the link here] and extracts are taken below: 
.... the right of Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim, being an accused, to make a statement from the dock is not provided in anywhere in our Criminal Procedure Code or the Evidence Act. Rather, this is a common law right which originates from the English criminal law in the late 19th century, and which is now integrated as part of our criminal law.

As I stand to be corrected, this right is rarely exercised by any accused and thus there are few case law I can refer to. One of the earliest cases in Malaysia where an accused exercised his right to make an unsworn statement from the dock is that of Ip Ying Wah v Public Prosecutor [1958] MLJ 34. In the Ip Ying Wah case, Buhagiar J who heard the case held that when an accused makes a statement from the dock, he is not liable to any cross-examination by the prosecution team. Therefore, when an accused exercise this right, not only that he need not swear and give evidence under oath, he too will not be subjected to any cross-examination by the prosecution; a stage at which usually the credibility of any witness and/ or any contradiction in the testimony of the witness will be revealed.

Given the fact that the accused need not testify under oath and will not be cross-examined, should the statement of the accused then be admitted as evidence by the courts of justice?

Again, from my quick research, it appears that there are conflicting decisions on this issue. It is important to assess from two cases for the purpose of this article, namely the High Court cases of Wong Heng Fatt v Public Prosecutor [1959] MLJ 20 and Ng Hoi Cheu & Anor v Public Prosecutor [1968] 1 MLJ 53.

In the case of Wong Heng Fatt, at p. 21, Smith J who heard the case held as follows:
“I do not consider that a statement by an accused from the dock is evidence in view of the provision of s4(1)(a) of the Oaths and Affirmations Ordinance 1949 the essential part of which reads “… oaths shall be taken by witnesses, that is to say, all persons who… give evidence… before the court…”. Since the appellant was not sworn or affirmed he did not give evidence.” (my emphasis added)
Section 4(1)(a) of the Oaths and Affirmations Ordinance 1949 is now replaced by Section 6(1)(a) of the Oaths and Affirmations Act 1949, which reads:
“(1) Subject to section 7, oaths shall be taken by the following persons –

 (a) witnesses, that is to say, all persons who may be lawfully examined, or give or be required to give evidence, by or before any court or person having, as mentioned in section 4, authority to examine such person or to receive evidence.”
Then in the case of Ng Hoi Cheu & Anor v Public Prosecutor [1968] 1 MLJ 53, Chang Min Tat J (as his Lordship then was) disagreed with the view of Smith J relying on Section 3 of the Evidence Act 1950 which defines “evidence” as, inter alia, “all statements which the court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses in relation to matter of fact under inquiry: such statements are called oral evidence…”.

It also pertinent to note at this point that the English Court of Appeal had in the case of Shankley v Hodgson [1962] Crim. LR 248 held that an unsworn statement from the dock is NOT evidence and the view of the English Court of Appeal and Smith J has been followed in Malaysia by Hishamudin Yunus J (now JCA) in the case of Public Prosecutor v Shariff Kadir [1997] 5 CLJ 463.
Weightage  


The article continues:
On the basis that an unsworn statement by an accused from the dock is not evidence, what weight should a trial judge attach to such statement?

In the Shariff Kadir case, at pp. 469-470, Hismamuddin Yunus J (as his Lordship then was) held as follows:
“since, as a matter of law, an accused cannot be cross-examined on his unsworn statement made from the dock, such a statement cannot carry the same weight as evidence given in the witness-box under oath…

[T]he weight that should be given to such a statement must be such weight as the judge thinks fit.”
Given the little weight to be attached to an unsworn statement by the accused from the dock, if any, vis-à-vis a statement from a witness under oath, it is no surprise why the English Criminal Law Revision Committee recommended that “nowadays the accused, if he gives evidence, should do so in the same way as other witnesses and be subject to cross-examination”. As such, the Westminster Parliament has abolished the right of an accused to make unsworn statement from the dock vide Section 72 of the English Criminal Justice Act 1982.

Following from that, judges in Malaysia too have called for the abolition of this archaic right (since the right has been in existence in England since late 19th century) including Hishamudin Yunus JCA in the Shariff Kadir case.
Denial under oath 


The article see it as another Anwar Ibrahim's political game:
As a senior politician with a defence team comprising of the best and experienced criminal lawyers like Karpal Singh, I am surprised why Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim chose to exercise his right to make unsworn statement from the dock where such statement should not (NOT that it will not) carry as much weight as, amongst others, Saiful’s (the alleged victim) statement. In order to persuade and convince the Learned Trial Judge to hold in his favour and acquit him, in particular in a trial which is deemed by the Opposition leaders to be a persecution rather than a prosecution,  why didn’t Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim make a sworn statement which will, at least theoretically, carry more weight?

In the alternative, is this yet another move on the political chessboard? Is this a politically motivated move that will leave an avenue for the Opposition Leader to attack the judiciary as being biased should he be convicted? I do not know and I cannot say for certain. But one has to look at his statement from the dock.
Those following the case in the Federal Court would have been disappointed with leading counsel and ex-Federal Court judge, Dato Seri Gopal Sri Ram's easily debunked submission.

Essentially, all the days of arguments to raise doubts on DNA sample and KY Jelly stain; credibility of Saiful, Investigating Officer and Government Chemist; and Court of Appeal comes to none. Anwar Ibrahim had not denied sodomising Saiful Bohari under oath.  

Sri Ram may have joined the defense team for a reason or two. There is the believe that he has influence over his former colleagues. That may have contributed to  the hue and cry against Bar Council for their silence on Gopal's return as counsel. [Read MI here]

Many speculated that the strategy to create and raise the so-called 42 issues is for political deployment.

This case attracted support from the opposition (obviously), foreign government and NGOs coupled with the interest by 84 countries in the world supporting Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) rights [read in Amnesty International here ] i.e. LGBT as part of Human Rights.

On the other hand, there is room for religous rights as made at the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (1990) [read here].

Interestingly, the article ended with this statement:
And let us not kid ourselves, whilst our judicial system and us do not judge by oaths or swearing, any faithful follower of any religion will fear to swear in the name of God unless he/ she is telling the truth. The man has previously refused to swear in a mosque and the same man is now refusing to swear in the Courts of Justice. Are we not going to ask ourselves why? Perhaps, the fear of God?
The judges could give a little weight to his denial out of domestic and foreign political pressure. Furthermore, he did plead not guilty.

However, the judges could hardly give much weight to the issues he raised which was not cross examined. It does not take a Shafee to debunked his conspiracy theories. Thus, it could imply his denial are faulty or merely as "bare denial".   

Rest my case, Anwar. Avoir ....

-Another Brick in the Wall