Selasa, 8 Mei 2012

Anwar Ibrahim

Anwar Ibrahim

Major Protest Prompts Attacks On Journalist, Censorship And Missing Media Replaced By Civil Society

Posted: 08 May 2012 07:32 PM PDT

Reporters Without Borders

Reporters Without Borders condemns the use of violence against journalists during a major civil society demonstration in Kuala Lumpur on 28 April, and the censorship of foreign TV coverage of the protest. The organization is also concerned about the scant coverage that the protest received in Malaysia's mainstream print media such as Utusan Malaysia, New Straits Times and The Star.

Called Bersih 3.0 because it was the third of its kind organized by the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections (Bersih) in protest against the lack of government transparency about the next parliamentary elections, the demonstration was attended by a Reporters Without Borders representative, who witnessed the media freedom violations.

The Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) said coverage of the protest highlighted the print media's lack of independence. Their inadequate and inaccurate reporting contrasts with Malaysia's rise in international media freedom rankings and the promise of more media freedom in recent amendments to the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA).

The media's attitude is all the more disturbing in the run-up to such important elections, as it shows the degree to which they are still susceptible to pressure from the government and the political parties that own them.

Protest organizers and observers

The CIJ is one of the civil society organizations in the Bersih coalition, which also includes the Malaysia Youth and Students Democratic Movement and the Bar Council. The venue for its third demonstration was to have been Independence Square (Dataran Merdeka) in the centre of Kuala Lumpur. Smaller demonstrations were organized in other cities.

Bersih's leaders had wanted to stage a sit-in (Duduk Bantah) in Independence Square from 2 to 4 p.m. but, two days before the protest, the Kuala Lumpur city authorities obtained a court order banning them from the square. On the eve of the protest, the police took up position on the main streets leading to the square, and barbed wire and plastic street barriers were used block access. Wearing the yellow Bersih T-shirt was not, however, banned this time.

On the day, a large crowd assembled at a nearby location and set off towards the square at 1:40 pm, led by Bersih members, journalists and Bar Council observers. Clashes broke out as they neared the square. When some of the demonstrators pushed past the barricades, the riot police on the other side used their water cannon, hosing them with a mixture of water and chemical irritants of the kind used in tear gas.

Violence and arrests

Police violence, attacks on demonstrators and arrests ensued. The Bar Council's observers described the attitude of the police as "punitive." In a statement the next day condemning the police violence as unjustified, Bar Council vice-president Christopher Leong pointed out that the interior minister had said before the demonstration that it did not pose a security threat.

As regards violence against the media, the Bar Council statement said: "The reported attacks by the police on members of the media, both local and international, and the confiscation and/or destruction of their photographs and video recordings, speaks to police action in covering up or preventing a full and accurate record of the Bersih 3.0 rally and the responses of the police."

Al Jazeera reporter Harry Fawcett was forced to cover the protest using his iPad's Skype app after the police damaged his crew's camera. Describing the scenes of violence, he reported that the police "kicked, slapped and punched" demonstrators.

The Reporters Without Borders correspondent suffered no physical attack herself, but she was prevented from accessing an elevated position from which she could have taken photos of the crowd. Bar Council members, on the other hand, reported several cases of violence, including the clubbing of a lawyer inside a police truck after his arrest. A girl received several blows to the head before being rescued by a Bar Council member.

According to the CIJ, one journalist was badly hurt, sustaining a broken rib and possible internal injuries.

Merdeka Review reporter Chen Shaua Fui told Reporters Without Borders told Reporters Without Borders she was attacked by police when she tried to take photos of two demonstrators being beaten by police officers.

"Two men in yellow T-shirts were dining in a small restaurant on Jalan tun Perak Street," she said. "It was 7 p.m. and most of the demonstrators had already dispersed. I was on the other side of the street when I saw two policemen go up to them and begin hitting them. I pulled out my camera but I was told not to use it. When I said I was a journalist, the policemen threatened me. I entered a nearby alley and saw a similar scene. I was already holding my camera and began taking photos.

"Four policemen approached me. One insulted me. Two others tried to grab my phone and camera from me. A fourth pulled violently at my backpack. They all insulted me although, in the confusion, I don't remember what they said. I shouted several times that I was a journalist. In response, they snatched my press ID and threw it to the ground. I asked them several times if I was arrested but they did not reply to this. I think they just wanted to teach me a lesson. I finally succeeded in getting away and had the courage to pick up my press ID. I don't think I will file a complaint. That serves no purpose here."

Medical personnel reported that a total of 417 arrests were made and 117 people were taken to hospital.

Scant coverage, disinformation

On the whole, the violence was widely covered and commented in the alternative media and blogs even if they did not report all of the incidents.

But the CIJ reported in apress release on 26 April that coverage of protests in the print media had fallen dramatically compared with a similar period last year. Coverage of demonstrations was meagre in the leading Malaysian newspapers, and virtually non-existent in the newspapers that support the ruling coalition.

According to the CIJ release, there has been a 60 per cent fall in coverage by The Star and the Sun, and a 97 per cent fall in coverage by Utusan Malaysia and the New Straits Times. Such coverage as there was in these two newspapers was overwhelmingly negative, the release added.

Anticipating scant coverage by the main newspapers, the Bar Council mobilized around 80 lawyers and law students to monitor the demonstration. Many of these observers reported witnessing violence, including the use of tear-gas grenades and water cannon against demonstrators who had not provoked the police.

The lack of media coverage was compounded by government disinformation and attempts to minimize the size of the protest. It is not unusual for organizers and authorities to give different turnout figures but in this case only deliberate disinformation can explain the difference. On the one hand, the organizers estimated that 250,000 people took part and the CIJ estimated 100,000. On the other, the police put the turnout at 30,000 while a government press office went to so far as to claim that only 4,000 people participated.

BBC censored

The Sarawak Report, a news website run by investigative journalist Clare Rewcastle Brown, reported that Astro Malaysia, a satellite TV service owned MEASAT Broadcast Network Systems, censored the BBC World News' coverage of the demonstration, eliminating more than 30 seconds of footage showing police water cannon hosing protesters and participants criticizing the government and Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

According to the Sarawak Report, the BBC is investigating Astro's alleged censorship of its broadcast. Astro received the Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia prize in 2009 for its contribution to pay TV in the region. The Sarawak Report said Al Jazeera's coverage may also have been the victim of similar censorship.

The ruling Barisan Nasional coalition wants to prolong its decades-old control of the government in the general elections that must be held by April 2013. Prime Minister Najib's party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), the coalition's dominant member, is meanwhile due to hold its annual national congress in July.

Headed by former Bar Council president Ambiga Sreenevasan, Bersih is not a political coalition. It is a campaign for electoral reform that is supported by civil society organizations and opposition parties. The authorities banned it on the eve of its first big demonstration in 2011 and its current status is unclear.

Takziah Kepada Keluarga Allahyarham Pak Anjang Osman

Posted: 08 May 2012 06:39 PM PDT

Pak anjang Osman, mantan Ketua Cabang Nibong Tebal Pulang Kerahmatullah semalam. Allahyarham adalah reformis tegar, gigih bergerak mengasaskan Keadilan dan menjadi tunggak pergerakan sekian lama. Saya sempat menziarahinya di hospital seberang jaya bukan lalu, kagum dengan semangat tinggi.

Takziah kepada mak anjang Dan keluarga, kami mendoakan semuga ruh allahyarham di semadikan bersama para solihin.

Anwar Ibrahim

Marina Mahathir: If We’re Not Egypt, Why Fear Bersih?

Posted: 08 May 2012 09:57 AM PDT

Harakah

May 8: Marina Mahathir, daughter of former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, has launched a stinging attack on UMNO leaders who accused participants of the Bersih 3.0 rally last month of wanting to topple the government through street protests.

"What is this obsession with us not being Egypt anyway? If we're not, then why worry? Besides, who needs to worry about the Arab Spring unless they identify themselves with Ben Ali, Mubarak, Gadaffi and Assad?" she wrote in a blog posting, referring to the Arab dictators.

UMNO leaders, including her father, had earlier said that Bersih protesters were imitating the people’s uprising in the Middle East, collectively known as the ‘Arab Spring’, and wanted to replace the current government through street protests and foreign interference.

Marina (pic), who also joined the Bersih 3.0 rally on April 28, defended the right to peaceful assembly and said there was nothing wrong when the Egyptian people assembled at Tahrir Square to press for democratic reforms.

"They want a greater say in the policies of the government. They want an end to corruption. They want proper elections with many candidates to choose from, not just those handpicked by the rulers. They want an end to military interference in politics," she wrote.

"Aren't these reasonable? But our government will not acknowledge that these demands are quite normal. Well maybe they're not in an undemocratic country."

Marina also took to task those who argued that Malaysians need not protest as their country was “not Egypt.

"If Malaysia is not Egypt and our leaders are not Mubarak, then why are Malaysians who went to Bersih treated like Egyptian protestors?" she asked.

"If anyone had gone down to Dataran on the Sunday after Bersih 3.0, apart from the barbed wire, everything was back to normal… Made our point, now let's go eat. This is why we are not Egypt. In this we agree with our government. We are NOT Egypt. But then why respond in such Mubarak-like fashion?"

On the recent declaration by the National Fatwa Council that demonstrating against the government was forbidden in Islam, Marina reminded of a similar ruling made by Egypt’s Al-Azhar University Fatwa Committee in the days leading to Mubarak’s resignation on February 11, 2011.

"So getting the NFC ( hmmm…dubious initials…) to issue such a fatwa seems very Mubarak-like, doesn't it?" she quipped.

BERSIH 3.0: Marina Mahathir Syor Suruhanjaya Diraja

Posted: 08 May 2012 09:36 AM PDT

Harakah

KUALA LUMPUR, 8 Mei: Aktivis sosial Marina Mahathir berpendapat kerajaan perlu menubuhkan sebuah Suruhanjaya Siasatan Diraja (RCI) berhubung insiden yang berlaku dalam perhimpunan Bersih 3.0 Duduk Bantah pada 28 April lalu.

Katanya, kerajaan perlu menubuhkan suruhanjaya itu bagi membersihkan namanya dan rakyat akan menyokong kerana mereka mempunyai kepentingan di dalamnya.

“Saya tidak fikir sesiapa yang benar-benar akan tahu lagi yang bertanggungjawab. Kita mungkin perlu sebuah Suruhanjaya Siasatan Diraja (RCI) untuk sampai kepada mereka bawah ini.

“Kerajaan harus merasa insentif untuk menubuhkan sebuah suruhanjaya untuk membersihkan namanya, dan semua orang patut menyokong kerana setiap orang mempunyai kepentingan di dalamnya,” katanya dipetik daripada temubual Free Malaysia Today (FMT).

Beliau yang mengikuti perhimpunan Bersih 3.0 tidak menyaksikan apa-apa provokasi dari penyokong himpunan itu.

Katanya, perhimpunan itu bertukar huru-hara apabila melihat polis menembak kanister gas pemedih mata dan meriam air ke arah orang ramai, selepas peserta himpunan merempuh penghadang di sekitar Dataran Merdeka.

“Tiada siapa yang telah menjadi provokatif. “Terdapat semangat yang tinggi, ramai orang muda dan pihak polis sangat sabar.”

“Tetapi mereka tiba-tiba membawa trak, dan orang bertopi keledar dan perisai. Kami tidak benar-benar memahami mengapa. Saya fikir ia adalah satu faktor ugutan,” katanya.

Rabu lepas, Persatuan bagi Penggalakan Hak Asasi Manusia (Proham) telah juga menggesa Putrajaya untuk melakukan perkara yang sama dalam laporan yang bercanggah mengenai keganasan antara polis dan peserta himpunan dalam Bersih 3.0.

Bagaimanapun, pihak polis telah mempertahankan tindakan mereka mengatakan bahawa keadaan akan bertambah buruk jika mereka hanya berdiri tepi.

“Perkara yang Dahsyat berlaku (pada hari itu) kerana mereka melemparkan gas pemedih mata. Tidak mahu orang memasuki Dataran Merdeka kemudian dilepaskan gas pemedih mata,” katanya.

Orang Muda Menentukan Lanskap Politik Baru Di Malaysia & Di Dunia

Posted: 08 May 2012 07:30 AM PDT

BERSIH 3.0: Kebebasan Dan Musuhnya

Posted: 08 May 2012 07:17 AM PDT

Malaysiakini
Oleh Amin Ahmad

Minggu lalu berlangsung perhimpunan menuntut pilihan raya bersih dan adil untuk kali ketiga, dikenali sebagai BERSIH 3.0. Seperti perhimpunan pertama dan kedua, ia ditandai dengan sejumlah insiden yang cukup menyedihkan dalam proses demokrasi di Malaysia.

Kita dapat lihat melalui banyak rakaman dan laporan semasa perhimpunan ini yang menunjukkan bagaimana terjadinya keganasan serta halangan kepada media. Ini adalah musuh kebebasan.

Oleh kerana berada di luar negara, saya tidak menyertai perhimpunan ini. Justeru, saya mengikuti berita serta perdebatan awam mengenainya di ruang maya, khususnya Facebook. Terlihat banyak isu asas yang perlu dijelaskan kepada orang ramai.

Hak kebebasan berhimpun

Sebenarnya hak kebebasan berhimpun sedia termaktub dalam Perkara 10(1)(b) Perlembagaan Malaysia. Ia juga disebut dalam Artikel 20(1) Deklarasi Sejagat tentang Hak Asasi Manusia 1948 serta Perjanjian Antarabangsa Hak Sivil dan Politik 1966.

Perkara 10(2) Perlembagaan Persekutuan memperuntukkan bahawa Parlimen boleh dengan undang-undang menggunakan ke atas hak-hak yang diberi oleh perenggan (a) Fasal (1) apa-apa sekatan yang didapatinya perlu dan mustahak demi kepentingan keselamatan Persekutuan.

Secara asasnya haruslah difahami di sini bahawa dalam mana-mana aspek perundangan akan sentiasa ada apa yang disebut pengecualian. Ini penting kerana manusia itu bersifat dinamik.

Justeru, secara umumnya satu ketetapan diperlukan di samping pengecualian yang boleh diambil atas faktor keadaan. Sebagai contoh, secara umumnya semua orang bebas bekerja dan melakukan pelbagai aktiviti.

Namun, Parlimen boleh membuat satu keputusan untuk tidak membenarkan sesiapa bekerja atau melakukan aktiviti lain dengan mengisytiharkan darurat atas faktor tertentu bersabit keselamatan negara misalnya ada ancaman serangan bersenjata oleh pihak tertentu.

Oleh yang demikian, peruntukan perlembagaan dalam hal ini perlu dibaca dengan jelas bahawa ketetapan umumnya ialah jaminan kebebasan sementara sekatan ke atasnya adalah berdasarkan situasi – yang dinyatakan sebagai kepentingan keselamatan Persekutuan.

Polis dan peranannya

Seksyen 27 Akta Polis 1967 juga digunakan untuk menjustifikasikan tindakan polis semasa perhimpunan berlaku. Akta ini mensyaratkan kelulusan pegawai polis daerah berkenaan jika perhimpunan mahu dibuat dan kelulusan adalah atas budi bicara pihak polis.

Ketika menjadi Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim pernah berkata Seksyen 27 Akta Polis 1967 ini tidak wajar dipakai kerana ia boleh mengelirukan undang-undang itu sendiri.

Meskipun beliau tidak menjelaskan bagaimana ia boleh mengelirukan, saya fikir ini boleh dilihat dalam konteks bagaimana polis mempunyai lebihan kuasa berbanding Parlimen dalam isu kebebasan asasi dan pengecualiannya.

Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia (SUHAKAM) dalam Laporan Tahunan bagi tahun 2010 telah mencadangkan sejumlah pemansuhan sub-seksyen dalam Akta Polis tersebut dan mengesyorkan polis menggunakan cara yang sederhana dan tanpa keganasan dalam menangani perhimpunan aman.

Dalam laporan yang sama SUHAKAM turut menegaskan hak berhimpun secara aman dan menekankan bahawa polis tidak patut bertindak secara syak wasangka, spekulasi, takut atau imaginasi. Perlu ada bukti jelas bahawa ketidakteraman awam dan kecenderungan ke arah keganasan berlaku.

Dalam kata lain bersabit dua perkara di atas, meskipun kerajaan mempunyai tugas memastikan keamanan dan keselamatan, kebebasan berhimpun tidak harus disekat secara arbitrari (ditentukan sewenang-wenangnya tanpa satu piawaian dan sebab yang munasabah, misalnya berlaku tindakan luar kawal yang memaksa sesuatu tindakan diambil).

Alternatif penyelesaian

Saya juga tidak mahu meremehkan hujah kemungkinan huru-hara berlaku dan satu situasi tidak aman yang boleh menjejaskan perniagaan.

Justeru, bagaimana perhimpunan ini boleh diteruskan dan persoalan ini dapat diselesaikan?

Saya fikir beberapa langkah boleh diambil iaitu:
(1) Pihak penganjur hanya perlu memaklumkan dan bertemu dengan pihak polis untuk berbincang tentang isu kawalan keselamatan untuk mencapai kedua-dua objektif – hak berhimpun dan memastikan keamanan. Kedua-dua pihak harus memberikan kerjasama untuk membolehkan ia berjalan dengan lancar.

(2) Satu keputusan boleh diambil misalnya perhimpunan boleh dibuat di Dataran Merdeka pada satu tempoh masa sehingga empat jam termasuk pergerakan secara tertib untuk ke lokasi dan beredar daripadanya.

(3) Tidak ada alasan menghalang penggunaan Dataran Merdeka sebagai lokasi berhimpun. Semasa Bersih 2.0, penggunaan Stadium Merdeka dihalang tetapi ia ditawarkan untuk BERSIH 3.0. Ini menunjukkan sikap tidak jelas kerajaan.

(4) Tidak sepatutnya ada kekangan daripada pihak polis untuk menghalang pergerakan masuk dan keluar Dataran Merdeka. Polis hanya perlu mengawasi jika ada limpahan peserta ke jalan raya. Jika ada, pihak polis boleh menutup jalan tersebut sebagaimana dilakukan untuk program-program hiburan dan sambutan yang lain.

(5) Pihak polis tidak perlu mengadakan sekatan trafik sejauh misalnya sekitar Perhentian Serdang untuk melambatkan pergerakan trafik.

Saya percaya dengan makluman laluan perhimpunan pada tempoh tertentu; orang ramai boleh membuat perancangan sendiri tentang kegiatan mereka, sama ada bersifat perniagaan atau tidak.

(6) Tangkapan dan tindakan kasar polis kepada mereka yang dianggap menyokong perhimpunan BERSIH 3.0 adalah cukup memalukan.

Ada rakaman menunjukkan ia berlaku selepas perhimpunan telah bersurai, termasuk di kedai makan. Malah banyak kekasaran pihak polis dibuat dalam situasi peserta perhimpunan tidak melawan atau menunjukkan sebarang tindakan ganas.

(7) Jika ada kekacauan timbul, pihak polis boleh menangkap individu atau kumpulan individu yang terbabit sahaja. Ini boleh dilakukan dengan bantuan peserta perhimpunan melalui rundingan awal tadi supaya disiplin perhimpunan dapat diwar-warkan.

Selepas proses awal itu dibuat dan masih terdapat peserta yang tidak berdisiplin, jelaslah bahawa individu terbabit mungkin hadir untuk membuat sabotaj.

Sepanjang pengalaman menyertai perhimpunan, saya berani katakan bahawa peserta perhimpunan cukup berdisiplin selagi tidak ada gangguan tidak munasabah seperti pancutan air kimia atau gas pemedih mata.

Saya sangat percaya bahawa secara umumnya rakyat Malaysia sangat cintakan keamanan. Namun, itu tidak bermakna keamanan mewajarkan rasuah dan salah guna kuasa dibiarkan.

Ketidaktenteraman awam juga boleh berlaku apabila rasuah dan salah guna kuasa berlaku tetapi didiamkan, malah suara yang menentang kebobrokan ini ditindas.

Banyak negara boleh terus maju dengan jaminan hak asasi rakyat untuk berhimpun dan juga bersuara terus dipelihara. Ada juga negara yang berdepan dengan tuntutan asasi untuk berhimpun dan juga bersuara kerana mereka kemunduran dan ketidaktentuan ekonomi dan politik di sana berlaku akibat rasuah dan salah guna kuasa.

Sebagaimana ungkapan Karl Popper: “Kita mesti merancang untuk kebebasan, bukan hanya untuk keselamatan, kerana hanya dengan kebebasan maka keselamatan menjadi lebih terjamin.”

AMIN AHMAD, 30, Felo Penyelidik di IDEAS.

Najib, Selamat Datang Ke Perancis

Posted: 07 May 2012 09:01 PM PDT
Dicatat oleh di

Tiada ulasan:

Catat Ulasan

Langgan: Catat Ulasan (Atom)