'EC wrong to remove Dr M's image from election material'

Lawyer for Bersatu Mohd Haniff Khatri Abdulla today said the Election Commission could be considered as committing an offence in removing the images of Pakatan Harapan chairperson Dr Mahathir Mohamad from banners put up as election material.

He said that on Jan 7 this year Pakatan Harapan declared that Mahathir would be the prime minister if the coalition wins the coming 14th general election and this was declared in its election manifesto.

Haniff said anything in the manifesto could be reproduced as stipulated in the Election Ethics code and since Mahathir had been announced as the Harapan's prime ministerial candidate, then his image could be used.

"The action done by the EC and a local council to remove Mahathir's image and the images of candidates in Johor is illegal. Mahathir's photograph and pictures can be used on buntings for the GE14

"There is no law to prohibit this," he said.

Haniff further challenged EC chairperson Mohd Hashim Abdullah to point out under which law the EC could act.

He was commenting on an incident earlier today in Ayer Hitam, Johor where the authorities cut out Mahathir's image from a billboard after it was erected.

"We were told that our billboard cannot carry Mahathir's picture and the Election Commission's decision was to cut out Mahathir's picture," said Harapan's Ayer Hitamcandidate Liew Chin Tong.

'No need for 10-day notice'

The lawyer also reminded the media since that with the advent of the Anti- Fake News Act, they should not report false news.

Citing media reports regarding the Grab car issue, Haniff said Bersatu chairperson Dr Mahathir Mohamad did not say he wanted to abolish the service but wanted to study it.

Several media, he said, had wrongly reported him as saying “abolish”."I would like to warn the media to be careful in their reporting," he said.

The lawyer also said there was no requirement for parties to give a 10-day notice to hold a ceramah.

He said the requirement for 10 days was in the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) but Section 1 of the PAA stipulates that the provision does not carry during elections.

"Government agencies should not be used as a tool by caretaker prime minister Najib Abdul Razak," he added. - Mkini

Comic book lampoons ‘Mayday Madey’ and friends

GE14 | A comic book lampooning Dr Mahathir Mohamad and his Pakatan Harapan leaders is being distributed by some BN campaigners in Alor Setar.

Stacks of the book were sighted on an unattended counter just outside Dewan Seri Mentaloon yesterday, alongside more conventional election campaign materials, like t-shirts and button pins.

The hall is part of the Kedah menteri besar’s official residence. The caretaker MB Ahmad Bashah Md Hanipah was hosting a tea reception there with members of the press at the time.

The 20-page comic book is titled “Mayday! Mayday! Madey! Madey!” with “Madey” being a term sometimes used to refer to the Harapan leader.

The cover also featured a character bearing Mahathir’s likeness who is piloting a plane labelled “Bersatu” that is spiralling out of control. A speech bubble coming from the group below reads, “Oh dear! He is making a U-turn again!”

Apart from the former premier, book also depicted the likenesses of other Harapan leaders such as Bersatu president Muhyiddin Yassin, Amanah president Mohamad Sabu, DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang, PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, as well as Mahathir’s son, Bersatu vice-president Mukhriz Mahathir.

‘Facade of unity’

Most of the scenes in the comic depicted Harapan leaders either using, backstabbing, or scheming against one other – all while putting on a facade of unity against BN.

For example, one scene shows Lim shaking hands with Mahathir saying that DAP would support Mahathir in setting up a new party. A thought bubble above Lim, however, reads, “Split the Malays!”

Another scene shows Mahathir whispering to Mukhriz behind Muhyiddin’s back, saying, “Don’t worry, let him have it first. He’s already old; not much time left.”

Yet another scene shows Mahathir walking with a “Free Anwar” badge pinned to his shirt. An accompanying text reads “Before: Father of Modernisation. Now: Father of U-Turns.”

The back cover of the book states that it is published by a group dubbed Pertubuhan Anak Melayu Tak Pernah Lupa – Penginga” (Society of Malays who never forget).

However, this is more likely to be a play on Mahathir’s 2001 poem ‘Melayu Mudah Lupa’ (Malays are forgetful) rather than an actual organisation.

Accordingly, a search of the Registrar of Society’s (ROS) database did not turn up any matches, and an internet search was similarly futile. While some NGOs do register with the Companies Commission instead, these would not be allowed to use the word ‘pertubuhan’ in their name.

The book does not contain any contact information including that of its publisher, nor does it contain any information about its printer. There is also no indication on when it was published.

'These things turn up'

When asked about the provenance of the book at the tea reception, Bashah told Malaysiakini that he knows nothing about the book and is only seeing it for the first time.

“This is sent from KL. Who sent it, I don’t know. Maybe (KL) lah. I don’t know,” he said as he browsed a copy of the comic.

“Alright. Let the people read it. Whether they accept it or not, it is up to them. It’s an election, these things do turn up,” he said after flipping through a few more pages.

He admitted the campaign materials at the counter are for BN campaigners to pick up campaign materials to wear themselves and to distribute to others, particularly Umno youth’s campaigners.

He reiterated that he does not know where the comic came from and said he doesn’t know whether Umno youth will be distributing it.

The next morning, copies of the comic were seen to be distributed at the 'Jualan Harga Runtuh' eventorganised by Alor Setar Umno at the Pertubuhan Peladang Kawasan Tun Adam Malik complex.

A booth was set up at the event for BN campaigners to distribute their campaign materials, which included the comic book.

The other leaflets distributed include those promoting Kedah BN’s election manifesto and Alor Setar BN candidate Yoo Wei How, who was present at the event. -Mkini

Rectify it by Wed or we shall meet in court, Streram tells EC

Pakatan Harapan's Rantau candidate Dr S Streram has given the Election Commission until 5pm on Wednesday to rectify the nomination day fiasco of not registering him as a candidate, failing which a petition on the tort of misfeasance in public office will be filed in court.

He stated this in a letter of demand issue to the EC today.

In addition, Streram also lodged two police reports against the returning officer and the EC under Section 124B and 124C of the Penal Code for disrupting the process of parliamentary democracy by not allowing him to be a candidate in Rantau.

His lawyer Mohd Haniff Khatri Abdulla said EC should rectify the mistakes they have created as the law appears to disallow a challenge on the disqualification.

"The problem is not created by Streram as he had fulfilled all his conditions by paying the deposit on Wednesday, before nomination day, and also filled the forms as required.

"The requirement of not wearing an EC tag does not warrant a disqualification. It is just a procedure and it does not disqualify one from contesting," he said in a press conference held at his office in Kota Damansara.

Haniff stressed that his client was told that he could collect the EC pass at 8am.  

However, he added, nothing was forthcoming and the authorities instead prevented him from entering the nomination centre.

The lawyer said the letter of demand was sent to the EC headquarters in Putrajaya and its office in Seremban.

On the offences under the Penal Code, Haniff explained that the returning officer had prevented a democratic process by prohibiting his client to contest.

He said the bungle created by the EC has resulted in Streram seeking legal remedy instead of campaigning in the election.

"We can challenge the result through an election petition and I would like to warn the incumbent assemblyperson and caretaker menteri besar Mohamad Hasan that this is not over," Haniff added.

The lawyer also questioned the statement made by Mohamad yesterday that Streram's action smacked of a deliberately designed warfare strategy. 

"(The statement) defies logic. Why would Streram do that?" he asked.

Haniff and Streram also questioned the decision by PAS not to field a candidate against Mohamad, which led to the walkover.

In other seats, they argued, PAS' participation had led to three-way contests. -Mkini

Jet incident: BN tried to stop my Langkawi candidacy

The Civil Aviation Authority of Malaysia (CAAM) and Vista Jet have refuted my accusations that there was sabotage involved when the plane I was going to fly to Langkawi had problems with its front wheel.

But they admit there was some leakage of fluid from the front wheel which means that the front wheel cannot steer the plane.

This is a very serious thing, because it may result in the plane going off track when taking off or landing.

But fortunately, the pilot discovered the leak before the plane took off, and told me that he cannot fly in that condition.

He told me he would try to repair it but after some time, he said that it cannot be repaired.

The statement that another plane was offered is sheer nonsense, because after I found the plane could not fly, we tried to borrow from friends with private aircraft.

I contacted three friends. Normally they would lend me their aircraft.

But this time they refused to lend their aircraft, and one of them indicated that he is under pressure not to lend me his aircraft.

I also read that the plane was my private jet. That is also a lie. I do not have RM2.6 billion in my account to spend on a private jet or a yacht.

Neither did the CAAM do anything nor did it provide any alternative plane.

So combining the two facts – that the plane is damaged and cannot fly and I cannot get my friends to lend me their plane – it is logical to believe that there is a deliberate attempt to stop me from going to Langkawi.

If I had wasted more time I might not have been able to be nominated on April 28.

Fortunately, a friend had chartered a plane to go to Singapore.

I persuaded him to let the plane take me to Langkawi. That’s how I got a plane to Langkawi without any help at all from CAAM.

I have flown thousands of times in private jets; there has never been any serious incident that forced the plane to be grounded.

This is the first time I have to experience damage to the front wheel of the airplane.

At other times engine may not be functioning well, and they could be repaired in time, but this damage to the front wheel of the plane is very serious damage.

And it could have stopped me from flying to Langkawi.

That this should happen on this occasion is very significant. I’ve been flying in the same leased plane from the same charter company many, many times. I never had any problem.

But I am aware that one of the ways for BN to stop Pakatan Harapan to win the election is by stopping people from being named as candidates.

There are other attempts of course, where several of the Pakatan Harapan candidates could not be registered or nominated as candidates.

For example not having the Election Commission pass, which is not necessary at all.

I have never used the pass before and it is enough for you to show a blue IC for you to be nominated and named as a candidate.

But obviously, there were deliberate attempts to stop an opposition candidate from being nominated so that the (caretaker) Negeri Sembilan menteri besar wins uncontested.

And there’s the ease of Tian Chua (Harapan’s candidate for the Batu parliamentary seat) who has every right to be named as a candidate but again, on a flimsy reason was unableto be nominated.

When this happened to me and my plane tampered with, to me it is a very serious matter.

The denial by the CAAM is not the result of a proper investigation.

It is just a denial to say that what I’ve said is not true. I’m not accusing the CAAM of doing anything wrong.

I know the CAAM does not have a very tight security all over the country to ensure that planes are not tampered with.

That is a very big job to the CAAM, but we are dealing with a government party which is known to use all kinds of tricks in order to win the election.

And one of the tricks, of course, is to stop me from being nominated, and especially me, because I happened to be the leader of the opposition, and if I am not nominated as a candidate, this will have a negative effect on Pakatan Harapan.

So I maintain my belief that the plane was deliberately tampered with to stop me from going to Langkawi.

---

DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD is the chairperson of Bersatu and Pakatan Harapan, and former prime minister of Malaysia. - Mkini

Frivolous reasons for candidates' disqualification

The spate of disqualifications of candidates from Pakatan Harapan during nomination day was a distinct whiff of déjà vu for me.

More than two decades ago I was disqualified from the 1995 general election nominations on the technicality that a third duplicate form lacked my campaign manager’s witnessed signature, a technicality which the returning officer had the authority to remedy but chose not to.

We are still witnessing such skulduggery by some election officers to disqualify opposition candidates. In my case, my witness and campaign manager, Richard Yap – a staunch DAP supporter who had been hanging around the DAP HQ for years had signed two of the forms but unbeknown to me, had omitted to sign the third form.

In many such cases, the election officer would ask the candidate to complete the third form there and then. However, in my case. the returning officer (RO) was none other than president of the then MPPJ, Mohd Nor Bador, a BN appointee with whom I had had frequent clashes with in the Petaling Jaya municipal council in my capacity as the PJ member of Parliament.

Mohd Nor’s decision was clearly a violation of the principle of “free and fair elections” since the role of the returning officer is to act impartially and to ensure that the forms are in order. However, he accepted my forms without comment and then made it his business to point out my second witness’ missing signature to BN supporters at the gate!

As a matter of fact, on that nomination day in 1995 throughout the country, there were other cases similar to mine such as that of my comrade Chong Joon Kin who was standing in Kampar. In his case, the returning officer simply told him to rectify the mistake and accepted his forms.

Again, in the 2008 general election, incumbent Kuala Kangsar MP Rafidah Aziz left one of her forms unsigned during nomination. Nevertheless, the Kuala Kangsar returning officer Mohd Ghazali Jalal allowed her nomination without any fuss.

The returning officer called me up after the ‘bantahan’ (objections) period had lapsed to inform me that he was disqualifying me as a candidate. I protested vehemently but he would not have it any other way. At that very moment, I felt the full impact of BN dishonesty since the Elections Regulations (Conduct of Elections) clearly stipulate that such omissions are of no material significance:

“4.(6) Failure to comply with paragraph (3), (4) or (5) shall render the nomination paper liable to be rejected by the returning officer:

Provided that no nomination paper shall be rejected on account of:

(i) Any error or omission in the nomination paper in relation to the description of, or any particulars in respect of, the candidate, or his proposer, or his seconder, if the particulars contained in the nomination paper are sufficient to identify the candidate, or his proposer, or his seconder, as the case may be;

(ii) Any error or omission with regard to any place specified in the nomination paper, if such place is otherwise sufficiently identifiable from the particulars given in the nomination paper; or

(iii) Any error or omission which is capable of being corrected and is corrected upon being brought to the attention of the person presenting the nomination paper;

Provided further that the returning officer may direct that any clerical or printing error in the entries in the nomination paper be overlooked if the error is not of any material significance and does not affect the identification of the candidate, his proposer, or his seconder, or the identification of the constituency in respect of which the nomination paper is delivered …”

Note that the witness to the signature of the form is not even mentioned in the above regulation but only the proposer and seconder, who also accompanies the candidate into the nomination centre. The witness does not need to be present at the nomination centre at all.

Perhaps the best lawyer in the land, Raja Aziz Addruse agreed to be my legal counsel and a group of lawyers also volunteered to assist him in challenging the decision in court. They stressed that:

(i) My nomination was complete – The Regulations, Section 4.(1) refer to the nomination paper which is submitted in triplicate. In my case, the nomination paper and the second copy were complete, it was the third copy which contained the omission of the witness’ signature. It must be noted that the law stipulates ‘triplicates’ referring to “carbon copies” in which case the practice of “photocopies” would not apply.

(ii) Omission is not a basis for disqualification – “omission” on only one copy of the nomination paper, when the original and the second copy are complete, cannot be construed as “intending to mislead”. After all, all the relevant information is available in the first two papers. Therefore, omission is not a basis for disqualification as the courts found in the parallel case of Abdul Karim v Mohamed Taib & Anor (1960).

Small omissions only

But even in the case of an error or omission on the original nomination paper itself, a remedy is provided in Regulation 4.(6) (iii): “No nomination paper shall be rejected on account of any error or omission which is capable of being corrected and is corrected upon being brought to the attention of the person presenting the nomination paper.”

They cited the case of Khoo Kay Por v Ooi Kwong & Anor (1980) when the candidate had written his signature in the place where he should have written his name, for which he was disqualified. The court ruled that such an error was not calculated to mislead and therefore his nomination was valid.

(iii) Negligence of the returning officer – The lawyers further pointed out that after my nomination forms had been submitted, it became the responsibility of the RO to ensure that they were in order. The omission on the third copy of the form was “capable of being corrected”, yet the RO did not “bring this to the attention of the candidate”.

Consequently, the RO failed to allow the omission to be corrected. Thus, the serious question arises as to why the RO failed in his duty to have the omission corrected. There were many cases of returning officers discharging their duty responsibly.

All over the country, both small omissions and more serious mistakes in form completion were pointed out by them and duly corrected. In many instances, the ROs went out of their way to assist the candidate with their forms, for example allowing extra numbers to be deleted and the spelling of names to be altered.

This illustrates the point that the role of the returning officer is essentially to ensure the smooth running of the nomination process and not to disqualify political opponents unfairly.

The group of concerned lawyers referred to the Election Act Part II.5(1)(a) which says that election officers should display “fairness, impartiality and compliance with Part VIII of the Federal Constitution” in carrying out their duties.

This rests on the Federal Constitution Part VIII 114. (2) which stresses the importance of securing an Election Commission which enjoys public confidence. They found the decision by the returning officer in my case to be not only harsh, but it was also wrong in law:

“We further support the view that the candidate has every right to be allowed to offer his or her services to the people, a right which should not be determined by judgements on minor technicalities. We believe that this right should only be infringed in circumstances which could seriously affect the candidate’s ability to serve, such as being of unsound mind, having a criminal record or being a bankrupt.”

In fact, the Bar Council had raised another important principle of the enfranchisement of the citizens of Malaysia. Under the Federal Constitution Part VIII 119. (1), the right to vote is seen as a fundamental element in the democratic process.

Thus, my disqualification as a candidate in the 1990 general election not only denied me the opportunity to represent the voters of PJ Utara but also the voters of that constituency the opportunity to choose their candidate.

Judge writes letter

As my election petition approached, there was another precedent in August 1995 when Judge Azmel Maamor decided at the Kota Baru High Court that the rejection of the nomination paper is not mandatory. This would have guaranteed the success of my petition.

Thus, it was clear I had a good case when I filed my election petition against my disqualification as a candidate for the PJ Utara parliamentary constituency in the 1995 general elections and it was heard at the Shah Alam High Court before Judge Abdul Hamid Mohamed on 27 June 1995.

I felt confident of winning the case since perhaps the best lawyer in the land, Raja Aziz Addruse had undertaken to argue my case on a pro bono basis.

Unfortunately, before we could go into the merits of my case, the counsel for the respondent sprung a “preliminary objection” regarding the translation of my petition. My counsel Raja Aziz stood up to put forward his arguments why this “preliminary objection” should not be allowed.

First and foremost, the counsel for the respondent had failed to first put in a formal application or notice of motion. This “preliminary objection” had been raised at the eleventh hour without notice. It was completely unethical and deprived my counsel of the opportunity to prepare a counter- argument and quote authorities. This is an elementary procedural point and should have been followed.

The judge completely ignored this fundamental objection raised by Raja Aziz and decided to uphold this small technical point raised by the respondent’s counsel. The case was over before noon.

The next day, The Sun newspaper reported the case of my election petition under the banner headline: ‘Foiled again!’ Judge Abdul Hamid Mohamed took objection to this banner headline and wrote a letter of protest to The Sun on Sept 7, 1995, defending his Sept 4 judgement and attempted to explain “what happened that day”.

I replied with a letter to the same newspaper on Sept 9, 1995, stating that it was no business of the judge to protest against The Sun’s choice of banner headline: ‘Foiled again!’ I said there was nothing factually wrong with the headline. My attempt at being a candidate in the April 25, 1995, general election had been foiled by a BN-appointed returning officer over a trivial technical matter.

I further pointed out that in his letter, the judge had failed once again to mention my counsel Raja Aziz’ objection to the respondent’s counsel’s “preliminary objection”, the procedural point which was not followed by the judge. This was a fatal omission in the judge’s clarification. I ended my letter thus:

“The Sun’s report of the case correctly highlighted the astonishing fact that a principle of such great consequence to the system of parliamentary democracy in this country should be trivialised into nitpicking over small technical points of procedure.”

---

KUA KIA SOONG is human rights organisation Suaram's advisor. - Mkini

Rais: Communist leader's image okay, but not Dr M?

GE14 | Former cabinet minister Rais Yatim has joined the chorus of criticism against the removal of Dr Mahathir Mohamad's image from opposition billboards.

In a tweet today, Rais alluded that Mahathir was not being afforded equality before the law.

"The Election Commission allows the picture of the boss of China's Communist Party with MCA's president on their GE14 billboard but tears down Mahathir's picture.

"That's 'justice' now in Malaysia. Whatever EC regulation that is, strike it down under Article 8," he wrote.

It is believed that Rais was referring to Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, which stipulates that all Malaysians will be treated equally before the law, except in cases expressly authorised by the constitution.

Earlier today, the EC ordered the removal of Mahathir's image from a Pakatan Harapan billboard in Ayer Hitam, Johor. Another billboard was taken down in Seremban for the same reason.

The EC has previously ruled that billboards may only feature the faces of the top two party leaders.

This posed a challenge for Harapan, which has proposed Mahathir as their prime ministerial candidate, but are using PKR's logo on the ballot slip.

Harapan leaders have accused the EC of practising double standards because BN's campaign materials throughout Kuala Lumpur feature the image of Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor, the BN secretary-general. -Mkini

Shoppers praise BN grocery sale, but say it won’t sway their votes

GE14 | Shoppers browsing for discounted groceries at the 'Jualan Harga Runtuh' are singing the praises for the programme organised by the Alor Setar Umno division.

However, most shoppers interviewed by Malaysiakini said the programme is not something that would sway votes, while the rest were either coy on the matter, or believed that it would have an influence.

Some also expressed concern that the sale is merely a temporary measure for the election season, whereas the rising cost of living is an ongoing concern.

“If it is held once a week, that will be good. Or even twice a week. But perhaps it is being held because it is near the election and it will be no more after that. Perhaps,” said 64-year old pensioner Ghazali Taib.

He was speaking to Malaysiakini at the Jualan Harga Runtuh event at the Pertubuhan Peladang Kawasan Tun Adam Malik complex this morning, which is part of the Tandop polling district in Alor Setar.

The polling district casted 556 votes for BN and 445 votes for PKR during the last general election, when it was part of the Pengkalan Kundor state constituency in the Kuala Kedah parliamentary constituency.

Unlike other shoppers, who said they came to the sale because they each heard about it from their friends, Ghazali said he had been contacted by Umno directly.

‘Won’t sway votes’

Asked if the discounted goods would sway his vote, Ghazali said that it would not.

“It’s just shopping; nothing to it. It’s not like if I buy these things, then I’d have to vote for Umno. Nothing like that,” he said.

Another shopper, Maziyani Mansur, 50, also praised the Jualan Harga Runtuh programme.

“It’s good, because it’s cheap. The chicken just now was RM4 per kg, and the whole bird was RM5.80. So, it’s cheap. Normally how could we find deals like this?” she said.

When the issue of voting was raised, however, she said, “That’s for each person to decide.”

A construction worker who identified himself as Qin, 53, said he is adamant in voting for Pakatan Harapan, although he had consistently voted for BN in previous elections.

“It’s just to help poor people. Nothing else. We poor people go wherever things are cheap.

“I used to vote dacing all along, but things are really bad this time. There is nothing, no work. I work in construction by renovating houses, but people don’t have money to do it.

“As soon as GST is implemented, whenever I go buy cement, metal, and whatever else the prices have shot to hell. Everyone is complaining about it in my housing area,” he said.

Goods and campaign materials

Meanwhile, 49-year old janitor Fatimah Amit said the programme offers her a good deal, and allows her to buy more groceries. She said she hopes the programme is held more frequently, about once a month.

Asked if it will sway votes, she believes that it might.

“For example, if BN does it, BN might get more votes. And those who already support BN will continue to support BN,” she said.

The Jualan Harga Runtuh programme his morning featured goods such as mangoes, beef, chicken, duck, onions, rice, instant noodles, and more, as well as some food and beverage stalls.

A stall was also set up to distribute BN campaign materials.

The BN candidates for the Alor Setar parliamentary seat Yoo Wei How and Alor Mengkudu state seat Abdul Malik Saad were also present at the event.

The event was originally scheduled to be held from 8am to 12pm, but was postponed by about 40 minutes due to heavy rain and strong winds.

Some of the canopies that were already set up were lowered or partly disassembled or of concern that the wind might topple it over.

However, the canopies were set up again once the wind and rain died down somewhat, and the programme was in full swing by 9am.

People continuously streamed in and out although it continued to drizzle for hours, and there were at about 30 shoppers at the small market at any given time.

It is understood that the programme is held daily, but at a different location each time.

A man who admitted to being the organiser of the day’s event declined to be interviewed for this story. -Mkini