Pengikut

Nuffnang

Isnin, 15 Julai 2013

The Spirit of Lubok Kawah/Semangat Lubok Kawah

0 ulasan
sumber :-

The Spirit of Lubok Kawah/Semangat Lubok Kawah


MENAMATKAN PERKHIDMATAN DENGAN DEWAN BANDARAYA KUALA LUMPUR

Posted: 15 Jul 2013 04:31 PM PDT

Bukan senang untuk saya menamatkan perkhidmatan saya dengan Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur.  Saya mempunyai rakan-rakan sekerja yang baik dan saya nak namakan beberapa orang seperti Sdr Zaini Ismail, Sdr Mohamed, Sdr Raja Arif, Pn Asiah, Sdr Sidek, Sdr Khuzaimah, Sdr Abu Sujak.  Abu Sujak juga meninggalkan perkhidmatan Dewan Bandaraya dan beliau akhirnya menjadi Yang Di Pertua Perbandaran Kelang dan kemudiannya Shah Alam sebelum bertanding atas calon Barisan Nasional dan pernah menjadi Timbalan Menteri Besar Selangor dan kemudiannya Menteri Besar Selangor.

Saya amat sukar untuk meninggalkan Dewan Bandaraya kerana mengenangkan budi baik daripada Datuk Bandarnya, Tan Sri Yaakub Latiff.  Semasa berkhidmat dengan Dewan Bandaraya saya telah menyakiti hati Datuk Bandar dengan bertanding sebagai calon parti pembangkang tetapi Datuk Bandar yang baik budi itu tetap mengekalkan perkhidmatan saya, dan walaupun dia berkata bahawa dia akan tolak 20 hari gaji saya kerana gagal datang kerja, tetapi itu hanya cakap-cakap dia sahaja, gaji saya tetap juga dapat penuh.

Saya terasa menyakiti hati Datuk Bandar kerana Drama Hang Tuah yang sepatutnya menjadi persembahan pentas yang terbaik bertukar menjadi malapetaka apabila Pengarah/Pelakonnya menukarkan skrip untuk mempersendakan Datuk Bandar.

Walaupun Datuk Bandar marah, cukup marah, tetapi dia langsung tidak mengambil sikap berdendam terhadap saya.

Di Kuala Lumpur saya bersahabat dengan rakan-rakan satu sekolah dengan saya di Abu Bakar School, Temerloh iaitu Sdr Aziz, Sdr Annuarul, Sdr Choong dan Sdr Lee.  Kami membuat satu pakatan dan membuka sebuah syarikat Sama-Senang Sdn Berhad dengan mengadakan pejabat dan pusat jualan di Taman Midah, Kuala Lumpur.

Masing-masing mengeluarkan modal sebanyak RM70,000.00.  Saya memperolehi duit sebanyak itu dengan meminta pertolongan dari bapa mertua saya, Haji Jaafar Mohamed.  

Syarikat ini membawa masuk kereta-kereta Mercedes dan diimport direct dari Germany.  Pada bulan pertama, kedua dan ketiga, kami mendapat permit membawa masuk 5 buah kereta Mercedes setiap bulan.
Kena ingat bahawa Mercedes adalah keutamaan Syarikat Bintang, dan tindakan kami itu ialah memecahkan tradisi. 

Pada bulan-bulan seterusnya kami memohon sekurang-kurangnya kami memperolehi 20 buah Mercedes dapat dibawa masuk.

Menengukkan akan perkembangan syarikat ini, saya mengambil keputusan untuk melepaskan jawatan saya di Dewan Bandaraya dan bersama-sama dengan rakan-rakan saya yang lain menumpukan atas perniagaan menjual kereta Mercedes.

Setelah befikir panjang dan berbincang dengan isteri saya yang pada waktu itu adalah PA kepada pengarah sebuah syarikat besar yang mengendalikan perumahan di Subang Jaya, saya pun menyiapkan surat perletakan jawatan saya untuk diserahkan secara peribadi kepada Datuk Bandar.

Itulah kali pertamah saya melihat Datuk Bandar mengalirkan air mata.  Saya cukup terasa bahawa Datuk Bandar memang sayang kepada saya dan kata-katanya yang begitu lembut bahawa dia mahu saya kekal di DBKL untuk mengambil alih kedudukan En Zainul pegawai yang dipinjamkan oleh Kerajaan.

Bagaimanapun dia mengucapkan ribuan terima kasih kepada saya dan memberitahu saya bahawa jika ada apa-apa yang dia (DBKL) boleh tolong, datanglah berjumpa dengannya.

Saya ucapkan ribuan terima kasih kepada Datuk Bandar diatas baik budi/hatinya terhadap saya selama ini.

Saya merancang untuk berhenti dari perkhidmatan DBKL sejak hampir satu tahun.  Saya membuat persediaan untuk berhenti.  Saya memohon kepada DBKL supaya semasa saya bertugas di DBKL, saya dibenarkan membuat chambering selama 9 bulan dengan gaji penuh dan dalam tempoh itu saya banyak menghabiskan masa di firma undang-undang yang melatih saya iaitu firma guaman Daim & Gamany.  

Namun, segala tugas saya di Dewan Bandaraya tetap saya sempurnakan dengan bekerja hingga larut malam dengan meninggalkan arahan kepada kakitangan saya apa perlu dilakukan pada hari esuknya.

Setelah saya diterima masuk dan didaftarkan sebagai Peguambela dan Peguamcara di Mahkamah Tinggi, saya berbincang dengan rakan-rakan niaga saya samada syarikat kami sudah boleh menampung pendapatan paling minima RM3000.00 sebulan.  Pada waktu itu, syarikat mampu.

Permohonan syarikat untuk mendapatkan 20 AP sebulan telah ditolak oleh Kementerian.  Kami 5 orang ahli-ahli Pengarah pergi bertemu dengan Menteri Perdagangan Datuk Hamzah Abu Samah yang juga dari Temerloh untuk menimbangkan semula penolakan 20 AP sebulan kepada syarikat kami.

Dato Hamzah menyatakan bahawa permohonan itu akan dipertimbangkan kemudian tetapi tidak dalam jangka masa terdekat, dan dia meminta kami membawa masuk kereta-kereta dari Jepun, dan sebanyak mana AP pun dia boleh berikan, tetapi tidak kepada Mercedes.  

Aziz Sallehuddin yang menjadi Pengerusi kepada Syarikat kami, orang kuat UMNO, menjadi AJK Pemuda UMNO Pusat yang terkenal seorang yang mudah pemarah, pada waktu itu, menghentak meja Dato Hamzah.  Ini membuatkan Dato Hamzah naik angin dan terus meninggalkan kami dibiliknya.

Saya, Annuarul, Choong dan Lee meminta Aziz bersabar dan menerima saja nasihat Menteri supaya membawa masuk kereta-kereta Jepun disamping membawa masuk 5 buah Mercedes tiap-tiap bulan.
Pandangan kami ditolak bulat-bulat oleh Aziz, menyebabkan ahli-ahli pengarah tidak lagi menaruh minat dengan Syarikat itu.

Saya merasakan saya menjadi mangsa didalam isu ini.  Takkan saya nak kembali kepada DBKL!  Ho..ho..No!  Maka oleh kerana saya sudah diterima menjadi sebagai Peguambela & Peguamcara, maka saya terus membuka firma guaman saya diatas nama Suhaimi & Co.  Untuk beberapa bulan bolehlah saya dapat lebihkurang RM500.00 sebulan.  Dan dengan pendapatan isteri saya yang agak tinggi juga dapatlah kami meneruskan kehidupan kami dengan cara yang amat sederhana.

Pada suatu hari seorang rakan peguam datang menemui saya di pejabat bertanya hal dan bertanyakan  kerja-kerja yang saya lakukan.  Saya menyatakan bahawa saya tidak banyak mempunyai pelanggan sekadar yang datang itu mebuat surat-surat perjanjian.  Dia bertanyakan kenapa saya tidak memohon menjadi Panel Bank-Bank.  Dia tunjukkan cara-cara membuat permohonan itu, dan memberitahu saya jika saya kenal mana-mana pegawai tinggi Bank, hantarkan surat itu secara peribadi.

Saya pun buatlah seperti yang dinasihatkan.  Sasaran saya yang pertama ialah Bank Bumiputra kerana saya kenal Pegawai Undang-Undangnya ketika itu iaitu Sdr Syed Hamid Albar, yang hanya satu tahun senior dari saya semasa belajar di England dulu.

Walaupun diperingkat saya menemui Syed Hamid tu dia semacam memperli saya sebab semasa di London itu dia adalah orang kuat UMNO dan bergerak didalam KMUK (Kesatuan Melayu United Kingdom) manakala saya bergerak di dalam pertubuhan kiri iaitu MASS Forum, tetapi tidaklah perbezaan itu menghalangnya untuk meluluskan firma saya menjadi Panel Guaman kepada Bank Bumiputra.  Dia luluskan semua cawangan Bank Bumiputra di Wilayah Persekutuan dan Negeri Selangor.  Dia beri pulak surat recomendation kepada pengurus-pengurus cawangan untuk saya temui mereka.

Tidak lama selepas itu begitu banyak kerja-kerja bank datang kepada firma saya, dan dengan saya seorang disamping seorang kerani-cum-typist, tak sempat saya melaksanakan kerja-kerja itu.  Saya mengajak James Khor, peguam yang dulunya menasihatkan saya supaya memohon menjadi Panel Bank, datang bekerja bersama-sama saya sebagai seorang partner.  Dia setuju dan melepaskan jawatannya di firma guamannya 24 jam dan terus bekerja bersama saya.  

Kerja-kerja begitu rancak.  Banyak. Dan banyak pula mendatangkan pendapatan sehinggakan pada waktu itu saya dan James sudah masing-masing membawa pulang bulanan tidak kurang dari RM7,000 - RM10,000 sebulan.

Saya meneruskan usaha untuk menjadi Panel beberapa buah Bank yang lain seperti United Asian Bank, Affin Bank, dan Malayan Banking.  Semuanya menerima firma saya menjadi Panel dan menghantarkan kerja-kerja Bank kepada firma saya.  Pada masa itu saya sudah ubah nama firma saya dari Suhaimi & Co kepada Suhaimi & Khor (Khor itu ialah James Khor).

Saya memohon pula menjadi Panel Guaman kepada PKNS, DBKL, UDA, dan  Goodyear Management. Semua permohonan itu diluluskan.  Dan dengan kelulusan itu banyaklah kerja-kerja bersangkut dengan dokumentasi perumahan.  Kami mula terasa tak cukup peguam dan tak cukup kakitangan.  Maka pejabat kami di Bangunan MIC itu kami ambil 2 tingkat, dan saya menjemput Zulkifli Amin dan Chang, dua orang peguam, seorang yang terlibat secara ekstensif dengan kerja-kerja perumahan dan seorang lagi peguam yang terlibat dengan litigasi (civil dan criminal), dan saya ubah nama firma itu kepada Suhaimi, Khor, Zulkifli & Chang.

Firma Suhaimi Khor Zulkifli & Chang itu adalah salah sebuah firma guaman yang besar di Kuala Lumpur dan kekal dengan nama itu hinggalah sekarang walaupun saya sudah meninggalkan firma itu untuk menggerakkan frima saya sendiri di Jerantut dan Temerloh, mula-mula atas nama yang sama iaitu Suhaimi Khor Zulkifli & Chang dan kemudian kepada nama Suhaimi Tan Zamani & Rozilan.

Di suatu peringkat saya menggabungkan firma saya ini dengan Firma Guaman yang besar di Kuala Lumpur diatas nama Hisham Sobri & Kadir, tetapi setelah beberapa lama saya kembali semula ke Temerloh dan meneruskan firma saya sendiri diatas nama Suhaimi Tan Zamani & Rozilan.  Walaupun nama firma itu mengandungi nama peguam-peguam Tan, Zamani & Rozilan tetapi kini partnership didalam syarikat guaman itu hanyalah Surina dan Suhaimi, dan Surina menjadi partner utama didalam firma itu.

Dan selepas itu saya menumpukan 100% dari masa saya untuk kerja-kerja politik dan firma guaman saya dikendalikan oleh Surina dan LA dari masa ke semasa.

(..bersambuing..)

Anwar Ibrahim

0 ulasan
sumber :-

Anwar Ibrahim


Press Statement of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami against the verdict of Professor Ghulam Azam

Posted: 15 Jul 2013 07:07 PM PDT

Today the International Crimes Tribunal-1 has sentenced former Ameer of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, Professor Ghulam Azam to 90 years imprisonment for commission of genocide and Crimes against Humanity in 1971. We are shocked by the judgment of the Tribunal. We believe that the judgment of the Tribunal is perverse. It would be difficult to find such a judgment in the entire history of criminal jurisprudence. We want to make it absolutely and abundantly clear that the Prosecution has failed to produce any evidence to establish the charges against Professor Ghulam Azam.
This is a serious failure on the part of the Prosecution.

There are 6 allegations in the first charge against Professor Ghulam Azam – meeting General Tikka Khan, President Yahya Khan and Moulana Syed Abul Ala Moududi during 1971. However, the Prosecution has failed to produce any evidence of the contents of the discussions or any other details of the meeting. Merely meeting someone does not amount to commission of crimes against humanity or genocide. However, the Tribunal found Ghulam Azam guilty and sentenced him to 10 years. This is completely unacceptable.

The second charge against Professor Ghulam Azam comprises of three allegations relating to his alleged role in the formation of Central and local Peace Committees. Merely being involved with the formation of Peace Committees does not amount to commission of Crimes Against Humanity. To find Ghulam Azam guilty of Crimes against Humanity would require alteration in the definition of Crimes Against Humanity. We are shocked that the Tribunal has convicted Ghulam Azam for planning the commission of crimes against humanity and sentenced him to suffer 10 years imprisonment. This is a perverse finding by the Tribunal.

The third and fourth charges against Professor Ghulam Azam comprise of various speeches made by Professor Ghulam Azam in 1971. The Prosecution has not produced any evidence to establish these charges except news reports of such statements. The Investigating Officer of the case has clearly stated during cross examination that he has no information of commission of any offence by any person in 1971 upon hearing or reading any of the statements and speeches of Professor Ghulam Azam. It is clear from the deposition of the Investigating Officer that there is no nexus between Ghulam Azam and the commission of atrocities in 1971.

The Tribunal has also found Professor Ghulam Azam guilty of commission of murder of Siru Miah as crimes against humanity on the basis of a letter allegedly written by Ghulam Azam containing directions for the murder of Siru Miah. However, the Prosecution has failed to produce in evidence such letter allegedly written by Ghulam Azam. Nor has the Prosecution produced as witnesses before the Tribunal the person who allegedly carried the letter of Ghulam Azam to the perpetrator of the offence or the person who read the said letter. Even then, the Tribunal in its 'wisdom' decided to convict and sentence Professor Ghulam Azam to imprisonment for 30 years. In the 200 years history of criminal jurisprudence, there is no evidence of a judgment of conviction being passed on the basis of such flimsy evidence.

There is no doubt that Professor Ghulam Azam was a firm believer in the integrity of Pakistan. He worked for the sovereignty and integrity of united Pakistan. But the commission of genocide and crimes against humanity is not the same as supporting the integrity and sovereignty of united Pakistan. This is a fine distinction which many fail to understand.

We believe that no evidence has been brought on record to establish the charges of crimes against humanity and genocide against Professor Ghulam Azam. We will file an appeal before the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Tribunal.

The following is the link of the English website of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami. Here the daily update regarding the situation of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami can be found:

http://www.jamaat-e-islami.org/en/

Bangladesh awaits Azam verdict amid protests

Posted: 15 Jul 2013 07:01 PM PDT

Al Jazeera

Supporters of Jamaat-e-Islami party clash with police ahead of a court verdict against their spiritual leader.

Supporters of Bangladesh’s biggest Islamic Party clashed with police on Sunday ahead of a court verdict against their spiritual leader for allegedly masterminding atrocities during the 1971 liberation war.

Around 400 Jamaat-e-Islami supporters burnt a police van and hurled crude bombs in the capital Dhaka, according the police sources.

They are protesting what they say false charges against the spiritual leader of the party, Ghulam Azam, 90, who could face the death penalty if convicted by the war crimes court on Monday.

Previous sentences by the controversial court sparked the country’s worst political violence after the liberation war.

Azam was the head of the Jamaat-e-Islami party during the war in which the government says three million were killed, many by the militias he allegedly helped. Independent estimates put the death toll at between 300,000 and 500,000.

The International Crimes Tribunal, which was set up by the secular government in 2010, will deliver verdict against Azam on Monday, prosecutor Sultan Mahmud told to AFP.

Prosecutors have sought the death penalty for Azam, comparing him to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler. They describe him as a “lighthouse” who guided all other war criminals and the “architect” of the militias which committed many of the 1971 atrocities.

Call for nationwide strike

Jamaat, the country’s largest Islamic party and a key member of the opposition, has called a nationwide strike on Monday to protest the verdict.

Azam is no longer politically active but is seen as Jamaat’s spiritual leader. He faces five broad charges of planning, conspiracy, incitement, complicity and murder and torture, alleging a total of 61 crimes.

Azam’s lawyer Tajul Islam said that the prosecution had completely failed to prove any of the charges, which were based on newspaper reports.

The verdict against Azam will be the fifth to be delivered by the ICT. Three Islamists have been sentenced to death and one given life imprisonment.

The verdicts triggered nationwide protests by Jamaat supporters, leading to mass violence in which 150 people were killed in clashes with police.

Eight more opposition politicians, six from Jamaat and two from the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party, are also on trial.

The opposition has criticised the cases as politically motivated and aimed at settling old scores rather than meting out justice.

The government maintains the trials are needed to heal the wounds of the 1971 war.

Here’s an indelible record of that election ink

Posted: 14 Jul 2013 09:51 PM PDT

TMI

Nowhere in the world has there been so much controversy about ink. What did it contain? How much silver nitrate? Why did it come off so easily? Who supplied it?

These and other questions were raised as early as 2011, two years before the general election on May 5.

The Malaysian Insider reproduces the various statements made by the Election Commission on the indelible ink. Put together, it is easy to understand why the EC could not shake off the stench surrounding the ink.

 Dec 19, 2011: EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof announces that indelible ink will be used in GE13 to prevent multiple voting. He assures voters that the ink will contain at least four per cent to seven per cent silver nitrate and will last for at least seven days. EC' s announcement was the culmination of a long campaign by political parties and Bersih.

March 14, 2012: EC says the indelible ink will be in two different colours to distinguish advance voters from those voting on polling day.

May 24 2012: Bersih wants to know why rules made by EC with regard to use of ink was not extended to advance voters. Bersih also questions the efficacy of applying a single line on the finger of a voter rather than dipping the finger in indelible ink.

April 11, 2013: Abdul Aziz assures public that ink to be used in GE13 will be completely different from those available in the market, making duplication difficult.

April 30: Advanced voting takes place and numerous reports are lodged that the ink can be easily removed by using hand sanitiser gel and soap. Hearing this, Abdul Aziz says that as police reports have been lodged, it is for the police to investigate claims that the ink is easily washed off. This contrasts with earlier statement by Aziz that ink would last for seven days.

May 1: EC runs tests which reveal that stains marked on fingers with ink from bottles that had been shaken prior to use last longer than those which had not.

May 3: Tian Chua and Nurul Izzah Anwar, vice-presidents of PKR, ask the EC to send the ink for testing by an independent laboratory. EC refuses.

May 4: Abdul Aziz says ink to be used in Malaysia contains only one per cent silver nitrate.

On polling day on May 5, thousands of voters lodge police reports stating that the ink came off within hours of voting. EC deputy chairman Wan Ahmad Wan Omar says he could not confirm the quality of the ink. Abdul Aziz says the health ministry issued an official letter to the EC stating that the level of silver nitrate must not exceed one per cent for health reasons. This is denied by the health minister on June 6, 2013. Till today, the EC cannot produce the health ministry letter.

May 7: Wan Ahmad says that EC stored the ink bottles in police lock-ups for safe-keeping and due to the "long storage period, the ink content dropped and it became thinner”.

May 13: Abdul Aziz blames the failure of the ink on voters' fingers being oily.

May 21: Abdul Aziz says a special team had been set up to study the problem of ink being washed away. Till today, no reports have been released.

May 23: EC secretary Kamaruddin Mohamed Baria says some of the EC staff may have failed to use the ink properly during polling.

June 17: Abdul Aziz admits the failure of the ink.

June 26: Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Tan Sri Shahidan Kassim told Parliament that the EC had used food dye instead of silver nitrate in the indelible ink.

June 27: Wan Ahmad maintains that silver nitrate was used instead of food dye but now says that the content was four per cent, not one per cent.

June 28: Shahidan says the EC was not responsible for fixing the amount of silver nitrate to be used during GE13.

It’s official, Pakatan goes to court to dismiss all GE13 results

Posted: 14 Jul 2013 09:34 PM PDT

TMI

Pakatan Rakyat today went for the jugular – asking the High Court to set aside results of all 222 parliamentary seats in GE13, disband the discredited Election Commission and order fresh polls.

This unprecedented move, probably the first in any Commonwealth country, was made necessary because the indelible ink fiasco caused massive cheating, destroyed the integrity of GE13, and deprived the opposition pact of a legitimate opportunity to form the federal government of Malaysia, said Pakatan Rakyat in a suit which was filed this morning.

It noted that some 30 parliamentary seats were lost by Pakatan Rakyat by fewer than 10 per cent of the votes.

 "Therefore even if a small percentage of dishonest voters were able to wrongfully vote more than once because of the deliberate failure of the EC to implement indelible ink, they were sufficient to affect the results in a significant number of seats," said the opposition in a statement of claim.

Copies of the statement of claim were distributed to the media at a press conference in the Parliament lobby.

In addition to zooming in on the many instances in which the full-proof ink was washed away with relative ease, the plaintiffs PKR, DAP and PAS also trained their guns on seven members of the EC. Each of them is being sued in their personal capacity and will have to pay exemplary damages if they lose.

In addition to the three Pakatan Rakyat political parties, other plaintiffs to this action are opposition candidates Dzulkefly Ahmad, M. Manogaran, Saifuddin Nasution, Arifin Rahman and R. Rajoo, who all lost by narrow margins.

In a detailed claim, the plaintiff painted a picture of an EC whose partisanship and bias towards Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the Barisan Nasional in the run-up to the polls caused it to lose public confidence and stray far away from its stated objectives, as laid out in the Constitution, namely, to be independent and impartial to all political parties.

The plaintiffs argued that the EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof and his deputy, Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar, are accustomed to accepting instructions from the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet, thereby shattering any semblance of neutrality.

But the spine of Pakatan Rakyat's case against the EC was the indelible ink fiasco in GE13. It lay the blame squarely on the commission for the deliberate and fraudulent failure of the ink that allowed voters to vote more than once.

The plaintiffs noted that Abdul Aziz assured Malaysians that the ink would contain 4 to 7 per cent of silver nitrate and would last for at least 7 days. This assurance was especially important in the case of advance voting, which took place on April 30, five days before polling day.

"A key mechanism to prevent such multiple voting was the use of indelible ink on all advance voters which had to remain on their finger until 5 pm on May 5, 2013, when polls closed," the statement of claim read.

But numerous police reports were lodged that the advance voters easily removed the ink by using petrol, alcohol swabs and even soap. In addition, not a single EC returning office informed the EC Secretary of the systemic failure of the ink during the advanced voting phase and this "clearly infers that this was an instruction for the EC in order to cover up fraud'', the claim said.

Two days before the polls, on May 3, opposition politicians Tian Chua and Nurul Izzah visited the EC's office in Putrajaya and requested the list of those who had voted on April 30, to independently verify if any multiple voting was going to take place on May 5. They also wanted the ink to be checked by an independent laboratory. But the EC did not accede to the requests.

Instead, Abdul Aziz threw a curve ball, announcing that the ink in Malaysia contained only 1 per cent silver nitrate.

"The EC dishonestly, maliciously and willfully decided to reduce the level of silver nitrate in the indelible ink to enable it to be easily washed off so that dishonest voters could vote more than once," the plaintiffs contended.

Abdul Aziz and other defendants tried to explain the lower level of silver nitrate, saying that a higher level of the silver nitrate would cause internal organ failure. Therefore, herbal ingredients had been used. But the Health Minister Dr S. Subramaniam on June 6 denied that his ministry had been asked to provide a safety report on the ink as alleged by the EC.  In addition, a voter, a chemist by training, disputed that silver nitrate was a health hazard.

To top off this alleged double talk and half-truths about the silver nitrate, Tan Sri Shahidan Kassim, the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, said that food dye instead of silver nitrate was used in the indelible ink.

As a result of fraudulent or dishonest conduct on a massive scale, as many as hundreds of thousands of voters washing off ink from their fingers and re-voting completely changed and polluted the election process in all 222 constituencies, the plaintiffs said.

The EC aided and abetted voters to vote more than once.

In addition to wanting the High Court to nullify GE13 and call for fresh elections, it also sought that:

* all the EC members be removed from office because of their fraudulent behaviour.

* that until the results of a fresh general election are known, the Federal Government shall remain in office as a caretaker government.

* each of the defendants pay exemplary and general damages to the plaintiffs but without recourse to the Consolidated Fund.

Anak Muda Kampung Nak Senang

0 ulasan
sumber :-

Anak Muda Kampung Nak Senang


Bapa, anak 13 tahun parah ditembak di Kampar

Posted: 14 Jul 2013 08:51 PM PDT



Bapa, anak 13 tahun parah ditembak di Kampar
15 Jul 2013

Kampar: Dua beranak parah selepas ditembak dalam kejadian samun di Taman Sejahtera di sini malam tadi.

Dalam kejadian kira-kira 8.30 malam itu, mangsa lelaki berusia 51 tahun ditembak di perut dan peluru itu tembus ke belakang dan turut mengenai paha anak lelakinya berusia 13 tahun.

Kejadian dipercayai berlaku selepas tiga lelaki bertopeng menaiki Proton Wira gelap bersenjatakan parang dan pistol merampas telefon bimbit isteri mangsa yang berada di depan rumah.
  
Mangsa yang melihat kejadian itu membawa parang dan cuba melawan hingga berlaku pergelutan sebelum salah seorang suspek melepaskan tembakan dari jarak dekat.

Pimpinan

Angkatan Muda

Cabang