Sabtu, 13 Ogos 2011

Anwar Ibrahim

Anwar Ibrahim

Dekan UM: Alasan SPR Tolak Tuntutan Bersih 2.0 Memalukan

Posted: 13 Aug 2011 12:20 AM PDT

The Malaysian Insider

Seorang dekan Universiti Malaya hari ini membidas alasan Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR) untuk menolak lapan tuntutan Gabungan Pilihan Raya Bersih dan Adil (Bersih 2.0) sambil menyifatkan ia satu keputusan "memalukan."

Dekan Fakulti Sastera dan Sains Sosial Prof Dr Redzuan Othman berkata tindakan SPR menolak untuk melaksanakan tidak wajar kerana kesemua tuntutan itu boleh dilakukan badan pengurusan pilihan raya itu.

Lapan tuntutan Bersih 2.0 adalah agar SPR membersihkan daftar undi, mereformasikan undi pos, gunakan dakwat kekal, akses media yang bebas dan adil, tempoh kempen minimum 21 hari, diperkukuhkan institusi awam, hentikan rasuah dan hentikan politik kotor.

"Jawapan yang diberikan tidak melambangkan satu intelektual dalam SPR yang mana SPR kata tidak boleh (laksanakan), akses media dia (SPR) kata parti politik boleh gunakan media elektronik, tempoh kempen… SPR kata melibatkan soal keselamatan.

"Dalam pilihan raya umum di Malaysia, saya lihat sejak 1974 tidak ada satu pergaduhan dan tiada pertumparan darah, kalau ada pun disebabkan kemalangan semasa pilihan raya," katanya pada forum Reformasi Pilihan Raya dan Pemurnian Demokrasi anjuran Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (Abim) di Kolej Dar Al-Hikmah, Sungai Ramal Dalam di sini.

Justeru tegas Redzuan, SPR perlu memandang serius tuntutan yang dikemukakan Bersih 2.0 sehingga membawa perhimpunan aman pada 9 Julai lalu di ibu negara.

"Isu keselamatan bukan alasan untuk kurangkan tempoh berkempen, undi pos pula SPR kata ramai pelajar kita di luar negara tapi dulu, semasa saya masih belajar di luar negara, semasa tiba pilihan raya saya pergi ke kedutaan (untuk mengundi) tapi tiada, saya tidak mahu sebut tuntutan lain…hujah yang diberikan SPR memalukan.

"Proses pilihan raya harus melambangkan rakyat merasakan keadilan, peranan SPR, saya lihat dalam soal tempoh berkempan dulu sejak 1955 tempoh berkempen selama 42 hari, kemudian pada 1969 35 hari, pada 2004 tempoh dipendekkan kepada lapan hari ini benarkan Barisan Nasional (BN) menang besar begitu juga dengan akses media, pembangkang tidak dapat akses media," katanya.

Selain Redzuan, turut menjadi ahli panel adalah Timbalan Menteri Pengajian Tinggi Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah dan Pengarah Institut Hal Ehwal Demokrasi dan Ekonomi (Ideas) Wan Mohd Firdaus Wan Mohd Puaad.

Sebelum ini Timbalan Pengerusi SPR Datuk Wira Wan Ahmad Wan Omar berkata pihaknya tidak boleh melaksanakan tuntutan Bersih 2.0 dengan alasan tidak mempunyai kuasa.

Justeru beliau meminta Bersih 2.0 yang dipengerusikan Datuk Ambiga Sreenevesan agar mengemukakan lapan tuntutan berkaitan pembaharuan sistem pilihan raya kepada Putrajaya, bukannya kepada agensi itu.

Jelas Wan Ahmad, SPR tidak mempunyai sebarang kuasa untuk melaksanakan lapan tuntutan itu kerana ia terikat dengan undang-undang dan peraturan yang ditetapkan.

Lebih menjurus kepada lapan tuntutan Bersih 2.0 terutamanya akses media yang bebas dan adil, Redzuan meminta agar Putrajaya mencontohi Singapura yang membenarkan semua calon bertanding mendapat kebebasan media termasuk melalui televisyen.

"Kenapa kita tidak ikut Singapura, parti-parti politik diberi peluang untuk mendapat akses media, walaupun sehari sebelum hari mengundi semua calon tidak dibenarkan berkempen, namun mereka diberi peluang untuk bercakap di televisyen.

"Tapi di Malaysia media menggambarkan suasana pilihan raya sebagai perang, media memberikan gambaran yang tidak elok tentang pembangkang… tuntutan adalah tuntutan rakyat Malaysia, masyarakat sekarang tidak sama dengan masyarakat dulu… masyarakat hari ini tidak mahu diperbodohkan," katanya.

Isu pengurusan pilihan raya semakin hangat baru-baru selepas Pakatan Rakyat mendedahkan banyak kepincangan dan penyelewengan dalam daftar pemilih termasuk tindakan menukar status kewarganegaraan pemastautin tetap kepada warganegara dalam tempoh yang singkat.

Bagaimanapun perkara itu dinafikan oleh Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara (JPN) dan SPR.

Pakatan Rakyat turut meminta Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak mengadakan sidang tergempar Parlimen bagi membahaskan perkara itu.

Pada sidang media semalam, SPR menafikan dakwaan bahawa badan pengurusan pilihan raya itu sengaja membenarkan pemastautin tetap menjadi pengundi yang sah.

Sebaliknya, Pengerusi SPR Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof berkata, ia hanya kesilapan teknikal yang berlaku semasa proses pendataan JPN namun dikecam PAS.

Bar Warns GLCs Over Tajudin Affair

Posted: 12 Aug 2011 11:34 PM PDT

Malaysiakini

The Bar Council has warned the board of directors of government-linked corporations that they can be subject to negligence and legal suits by shareholders if found to have failed in their duties in the handling of an out-of-court settlement with Tajudin Ramli.

NONECouncil chairperson Lim Chee Wee said the board in determining whether to discontinue legal proceedings against the one-time Malaysia Airlines executive chairperson or otherwise, must take into account whether such a decision (if taken), is in line with their duties as GLC directors. 

“If they fail in their duties, these directors will be exposed to suits for negligence by any shareholder or the next set of directors, as we have seen in recent cases. 

“Therefore, withdrawal of a suit against Tajudin may constitute a breach of duties on the part of the directors of the GLCs,” warned Lim, adding that as directors’ they are also responsible to shareholders.

“However, if the shareholders pass a resolution to ratify the breach or to say that there was no breach, then arguably the directors may have to withdraw the suit, unless there are elements of fraud or illegality,” Lim told Malaysiakini.

Going against what Minister in the PM’s Department Nazri Abdul Aziz had directed in a letter earlier this week to GLCs wanting them to look into settling Tajudin’s drawn out saga, Lim reminded that theproper person to give instructions for the commencement of an action to enforce any right of the company, or to obtain redress or to recover its property and to withdraw a suit, are the directors.

‘Directors not servants for shareholders’

“Even a resolution of a majority at a general meeting of the company (i.e. shareholders) cannot impose its will upon the directors, when they (directors) have control of the company’s affairs. 

“Directors are not servants to obey directions given by the shareholders as individuals, they are not agents appointed by and bound to serve the shareholders as their principals. 

“Directors are persons who may by the regulations be entrusted with the control of the business, and if so entrusted they can be dispossessed from that control only by the statutory majority which can alter the articles or remove the directors,” he said.

The only way, Lim said that the general body of shareholders could control the exercise of the powers vested by the articles in the directors was by altering the articles, or, if opportunity arose under the articles, by refusing to re-elect the directors whose actions they disapproved.

Lim, an experienced corporate lawyer, said the shareholders general meeting by itself could not usurp the powers which by the articles were vested in the directors, any more than the directors could usurp the powers vested by the articles in the general body of shareholders.

“Thus, the power to decide as to whether a company will initiate or discontinue with legal action against another party (which lies with the directors), cannot be usurped by the shareholders, regardless of whether one is a holder of golden share or otherwise.

“This is provided that the Articles of Association of the GLCs does not provide for specific powers to the holder of golden share to decide on such matters,” he said.

Best interests of the company

The Bar Council chairperson reminded it is also trite law that company directors shall at all times exercise their powers for a proper purpose and in good faith in the best interest of the company.

He added that to act in the best interest of the company is also a statutory duty under Section 132 of the Companies Act 1965. 

“Further, a director owes fiduciary duties to the company and shall at all times act honestly and use reasonable diligence in the discharge of the duties of the office,” he stressed.

That is why if they fail, these directors will be exposed to suits for negligence by any shareholder or the next set of directors, he said.

Lim added that the government may have a golden share in the GLCs which gives shareholders (basically the government) veto power over changes to a company’s articles of association. 

“This share gives the government the right of decisive vote, thus to veto all other shares in a shareholders-meeting. It is a type of share with special voting rights that gives it peculiar power over other shares.”

“The purpose of a golden share is as a means of protecting key national interests, and are limited to certain matters specified in the company’s articles of association, and confer no right to interfere on other issues,” he said.

He further explained that golden share features may include:

  • The holder does not have the ability to influence the day to day management of a company but has power to assert influence in major decisions;
  • The share(s) is usually retained by the government to enable it to have a say in companies which deal with public infrastructures, utilities, mining operations, national defence and the space industry.
  • This allows government to block business moves and counter management decisions, which may be detrimental to national security, economy, or to the provision of public services (especially where markets fail);
  • A golden share may also enable the government to regulate the prices of certain basic goods and services – such as energy, food staples, sewage, and water; and,
  • A golden share is often retained only for some defined period of time to allow a newly privatised company to become accustomed to operating in a public environment, unless ownership of the organisation concerned is deemed to be of ongoing importance to national interests, for example for reasons of international security.

Program Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim Di Penang 13hb Ogos 2011 (Sabtu)

Posted: 12 Aug 2011 11:12 PM PDT

1) 3ptg sumbangan fakir miskin lokasi rumah Pakatan Rakyat Penanti (berhadapan Masjid Kubang Semang)

2) 6 ptg lawatan pasar ramadhan Parit Busuk Kubang Semang.

3) 7mlm berbuka puasa /solat maghrib Masjid Mengkuang Semarak.

4) 8.30mlm solat Isyak dan solat terawih di Masjid Timah Seberang Jaya

di

Tiada ulasan:

Catat Ulasan