Thursday, October 07, 2010

DAPSY Perak shall never allow nor tolerate dirty tactics employed by certain quarters in manipulating the opportunity to tarnish the image of DAP

Press Statement by Perak DAPSY Chief and Canning State Assemblyman YB Wong Kah Woh in Ipoh on Thursday 07.10.2010:

DAPSY Perak shall never allow nor tolerate dirty tactics employed by certain quarters in manipulating the opportunity to tarnish the image of DAP and the same shall not and should never be condoned by any of the DAPSY members.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was reported that the group of some 20 members gathered in front of the state DAP Perak Headquarter carrying banners yesterday in criticisms of the Perak DAP leadership were DAP Youth committees and members from Buntong. There were even being addressed as “PR youth group” by some writers.

As far as Pakatan Youth and DAPSY Perak are concerned, we have verified that none of the protesters are DAP members from the Buntong branches or Pakatan Youth in Perak.

I have further obtained the confirmation from the Perak Dewan Pemuda PAS (DPP) Chief Sdr. Zawawi Hassan and Angkatan Pemuda Keadilan (AMK) Chief YB Abd Yunus Jamhari that DPP and AMK had never consented to the said protest and none of their youth members were involved.

The purpose and genuineness of the protest is highly questionable and doubted. We have reason to believe this is one of the dirty tactics being employed by the opposite party to tarnish the image of DAP. Some of the protestors had portrayed themselves to be the committee of the DAP youth wing in Buntong. This clearly shows that the protestors do not even know who actually they are or purported to be. The DAPSY Statute provides that DAPSY Division is formed by the name of the relevant Parliamentary constituency and as far as Ipoh Barat Division is concerned, it was formed in 2008 in a meeting chaired by me and none of the protestors are seen to be the committee. There will also never be any DAPSY organization formed by the name of a branch or state constituency.

The Perak DAP issue is an internal matter to be resolved and shall be dealt with internally. We shall never allow nor tolerate dirty tactics employed by certain quarters manipulating the opportunity to tarnish the image of DAP. This dirty tactics shall not and should never be condoned by any of the DAPSY members.

The police shall conduct immediate investigation to identify the person portraying themselves wrongfully as DAP members and the Black Hand behind the scene.

DAPSY Perak shall never allow nor tolerate dirty tactics employed by certain quarters in manipulating the opportunity to tarnish the image of DAP

Press Statement by Perak DAPSY Chief and Canning State Assemblyman YB Wong Kah Woh in Ipoh on Thursday 07.10.2010:

DAPSY Perak shall never allow nor tolerate dirty tactics employed by certain quarters in manipulating the opportunity to tarnish the image of DAP and the same shall not and should never be condoned by any of the DAPSY members.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was reported that the group of some 20 members gathered in front of the state DAP Perak Headquarter carrying banners yesterday in criticisms of the Perak DAP leadership were DAP Youth committees and members from Buntong. There were even being addressed as “PR youth group” by some writers.

As far as Pakatan Youth and DAPSY Perak are concerned, we have verified that none of the protesters are DAP members from the Buntong branches or Pakatan Youth in Perak.

I have further obtained the confirmation from the Perak Dewan Pemuda PAS (DPP) Chief Sdr. Zawawi Hassan and Angkatan Pemuda Keadilan (AMK) Chief YB Abd Yunus Jamhari that DPP and AMK had never consented to the said protest and none of their youth members were involved.

The purpose and genuineness of the protest is highly questionable and doubted. We have reason to believe this is one of the dirty tactics being employed by the opposite party to tarnish the image of DAP. Some of the protestors had portrayed themselves to be the committee of the DAP youth wing in Buntong. This clearly shows that the protestors do not even know who actually they are or purported to be. The DAPSY Statute provides that DAPSY Division is formed by the name of the relevant Parliamentary constituency and as far as Ipoh Barat Division is concerned, it was formed in 2008 in a meeting chaired by me and none of the protestors are seen to be the committee. There will also never be any DAPSY organization formed by the name of a branch or state constituency.

The Perak DAP issue is an internal matter to be resolved and shall be dealt with internally. We shall never allow nor tolerate dirty tactics employed by certain quarters manipulating the opportunity to tarnish the image of DAP. This dirty tactics shall not and should never be condoned by any of the DAPSY members.

The police shall conduct immediate investigation to identify the person portraying themselves wrongfully as DAP members and the Black Hand behind the scene.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

The conundrum of freehold title of Perakians...

Press Conference by the State Assemblyman for Canning and DAP Perak Publicity Secretary YB Wong Kah Woh on 23.03.2010 (Tuesday) at DAP HQ Ipoh:

I have submitted a question to this coming State Assembly regarding the Barisan Nasional Perak Government stance on the issue of issuing freehold title to Rancangan Rumah Tersusun and Chinese New Village in the state. The original text of the question sounds:

“Ramai warga Negeri Perak yang mempunyai hartanah di Kampung Baru dan Kampung Tersusun telah menyerah balik suratan hakmilik hartanah mereka kepada Kerajaan Negeri pada tahun 2008 untuk tujuan pemberian hakmilik kekal oleh Kerajaan Negeri pada ketika itu.

(i) Sila nyatakan samaada Kerajaan Negeri berhasrat untuk meneruskan polisi pemberian suratan hakmilik kekal kepada warga Negeri Perak yang memegang hartanah di Kampung Baru dan Kampung Tersusun dan alasannya; dan

(ii) Apakah status pemberian suratan hakmilik kekal bagi mereka yang telah menyerah balik suratan hakmilik hartanah mereka kepada Kerajaan Negeri pada tahun 2008 untuk tujuan pemberian hakmilik kekal.”

Despite the fact that the current State EXCO Dato’ Mah Hang Soon had given his open concurrence and agreement, during the time he was in the opposition, over the issuance of freehold title and which he had even further suggested “for more” – a 90% discount on the Premium payable instead of 80% discount as adopted by Pakatan Rakyat, he has failed to walk the talk when turning into power and the Barisan Nasional State Government has refused to continue the implementation of the freehold title policy adopted by Pakatan Rakyat during the 10-months-regime.

The Barisan Nasional had in Decemer 2008 through its National Land Council objected to the freehold title policy in Perak, the Barisan Nasional especially UMNO had blamed that the then Perak Menteri Besar Dato’ Seri Mohd Nizar bin Jamaluddin for giving away lands to the Chinese community in Perak by adopting the freehold title policy, and the Barisan Nasional had eventually formally put a stop to the freehold title application in the State after the grabbing of power. All these clearly show that Barisan Nasional is still confining themselves in the racial circle, and has no Political Will to continue the good policies set up by Pakatan Rakyat.

If Barisan Nasional has no political will to do, we will do it after we come back into power. However, the refusal of BN in continuing this policy had caused uncertainties, difficulties and hardship for the Rakyat who had earlier surrendered their original title back to the State Government and submitted their application for freehold title and which the BN State Government is obliged to answer and resolve. We have received complaints and I quote 2 cases here:

Appendix:

Case 1:

A resident in Kg Simee had in the month of July 2006 paid the Premium of RM1705.00 for the extension of 60 years leasehold title. In January 2009, he has surrendered the title back to the State Government for the issuance of new freehold title at the estimated cost calculated at RM3285.00.

He received a letter from Ipoh Land Office 3 weeks back whereby the Land Office requested him to make an extra payment of RM1616.00 to procure a 99 years leasehold title. In other words, while the title is still with 57 years lease left, the BN Government had charged another RM1616.00 on the resident for another 42 years lease (because he will only get 99 years lease calculating from 2010, whereby the 57 years unexpired lease is considered burned). Bear in mind, the estimated cost for him in getting a freehold title with security of Property which no renewal in future is necessary, is around RM3285.00 only.

This has caused a dilemma on the resident. His intention from day one is to get the freehold title, and yet he was now offered 99 years which practically had made no difference with the leasehold title he is holding. It is only a matter of time for the lease be expired although both might not expired until after this resident passed away. The dilemma is that: if he wants back the title, with no choice he has to take the 99 years lease as offered and pay RM1616.00 for the title which is practically extended for 42 years; or he will have to face the risk of the title being retained or even forfeited by the State Government.

BN is to be fully responsible for this.

Case 2:

There is another case from Kg Simee. The leasehold was expired in year 2009. The landowner was given 2 choices: either he needs to pay an estimated cost of RM8000 ++ for a 60 years leaseholdor pay RM13000 ++ for a 99 years leasehold title. Comparing this figure with PR’s offer for freehold title, for the same piece of land, the landowner needs only to pay an estimated cost of RM11,000++.

If BN is for the People, why do they slash the People on this? Wouldn’t be it is ridiculous for a 99 years leasehold be more expensive than a freehold title?

Case 1: refer appendix Case 2: refer appendix

The above cases show that the Rakyat are not only not getting freehold title from the BN State Government, they will even need to pay more than what they are supposed to pay under the PR’s freehold tile, for only a 99 years old lease. Some of them who only wish to apply for freehold title and do not wish to have further leasehold as the current lease are still long way to expiry. They are stuck in between, whereby they cannot get their freehold title as wish, and they are facing the risk of their original being retained or even forfeited by the State Government if they do not pay for the premium f the extended lease as offered as the title had been surrendered.

The Rakyat want an explanation from BN over this issue. It is utmost important for Barisan Nasional to answer the questions on freehold titles and to allow more supplementary questions be asked in the assembly. Let’s walk the talk.

已申请永久地契的霹雳州子民该何去何从呢?

民主行动党桂和区州议员兼霹雳州宣传秘书黄家和律师于2010年3月23日(星期二)在怡保霹雳州总部新闻发布会上所发表的声明:

(怡保23日讯)民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和律师今天表示,他已经向州议会提呈提问要求国阵州政府解释拒绝发出永久地契的原因、以及如何处理已经呈交给州政府的永久地契申请,以解决因国阵霹雳州政府没有政治意愿、没有政治勇气延续民联推行的马来重组村以及华人新村永久地契政策,而导致已经呈交永久地契申请的市民给面对许多问题以及困扰。

也是民主行动党霹雳州宣传秘书的黄家和今天在一项新闻发布会上表示,自从霹雳州的政变事件后,许多在2008年以及2009年初将地契交回给州政府以重新申请永久地契的市民都感到十分的迷惑,不清楚国阵州政府在永久地契上的立场。

黄家和表示,国阵在政变后对于这个政策始终立场模糊,直到国阵高级行政议员拿督哈米达在去年12月终于宣布国阵州政府将只给于99年地契的时候。黄氏表示,国阵拒绝延续永久地契政策的宣布已经造成市民许多的不便,一些市民必须缴纳额外的费用但只得到延长数十年的地契、而一些更发现国阵给于的99年地契比民联推出的永久地契费用更来得昂贵而负担不起。

“由于国阵只颁发99年地契,使到已经将地契交回给州政府以申请永久地契的市民正面对进退两难的情况,要不必须无辜缴纳额外费用延长地位数十年、要不就面对地契被州政府被扣留甚至被没收的危机。”

有鉴于此,国阵必须严正看待这个问题,解释拒绝发出永久地契的原因、以及如何处理已经呈交给州政府的永久地契申请。

国阵没有政治意愿 延续利民政策

黄氏说,在民联掌权的时候,国阵特别是巫统已经多番提出反对永久地契政策,并在马来社群中煽动情绪、诋毁民联前任州务大臣拿督斯里尼查在土地政策上出卖马来族群。犹记得当时的马华州议员拿督马汉顺则对于政策表示认同,并表示民联州政府给于80巴仙折扣并不足够而要求更多,国阵在永久地契上的立场,已经印证了马华作为巫统奴才的事实,没有能力影响巫统的决定。

“从国阵巫统在作为在野党时多番反对、2008年12月时任副首相拿督斯里纳吉以国家土地理事会不批准为由打击永久地契政策、直到国阵在重夺政权后拒绝发出永久地契,显示出国阵还停留在狭窄的种族主义框框里,并没有政治意愿延续民联的利民政策。


附录1:


个案1:进退两难

一名来自狮美新村的市民在2006年7月缴纳1705令吉获得长达60年的新村地契复新;而在民联执政期间2009年1月间将地契交回给州政府以获得永久地契,当时的收费估计是3285令吉。

但是地主在今年3月收到土地局的来函,要求地主缴纳1616令吉的费用以获得99年的地契,换句话说在原本地契还有57年的时候,国阵州政府竟然为延长42年征收额外1616令吉收费,而相对永久地契的费用只是3285令吉。

由于国阵拒绝发出永久地契给华人新村地契,该名地主面对进退两难的情况:如果缴纳土地局要求的费用,他必须以1616令吉德费用延长地契42年,也不能取回2006年7月间所缴纳的1705令吉费用;但是如果不缴纳的话,在法律上土地将会被州政府没收。

进退两难,国阵拒绝落实永久地契是罪魁祸首!


个案2:国阵99年地契费用比民联永久地契高

同样来自狮美新村的一名市民,屋子地契在2009年末刚刚到期,在经过向土地局询问过后,他被告知必须为66年的地契缴纳估计超过8000令吉的收费、而99年的地契则必须缴纳估计超过1万3000令吉的费用。但是,在民联的永久地契计算方式下,该名屋主大概只需要缴纳1万1千令吉德费用。

如果国阵政府要落实亲民政策的话,为什么要向人民开刀?


附录2:

国阵在永久地契上立场演进表:

2008年3月: 民联州政府宣布颁发永久地契给霹雳州马来重组村以及华人新村。

2008年10月: 民联州政府州政府宣布转换永久地契费用计算方式、给于80巴仙折扣并颁发第一批永久地契。

2008年10月: 拿督马汉顺表示民联州政府必须展现体恤民情的胸襟,应该把原本折扣80巴仙的优惠提高到90巴仙。

2009年2月: 政变过后,州内土地局张贴告示停止接受永久地契申请。

2009年4月: 拿督马汉顺建议每10年给于99年地契以便10年付款一次

2009年12月: 拿督哈米达宣布州政府将给于华人新村一律99年地契

怡保道路破旧难堪 州政府应给予满意的答复



民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和律师于2010年3月22日(星期一)在怡保所发表的新闻稿:

(怡保22日讯)民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和律师今天促请国阵霹雳州政府在即将来临的霹雳州议会中,答复怡保市政厅是否准备落实惠民计划,重铺怡保区内的住宅区许多破旧的道路。

也是民主行动党霹雳州宣传秘书的黄家和日前在行动党白兰园支部主席郑亚财的陪同下,巡视白兰园一带破旧的道路后,向报界如此表示。

黄氏表示,怡保市政厅在去年耗巨资重铺市区内主要的道路,确实令人有焕然一新的感觉,但是同时市政厅也不应该忽略怡保区内许多住宅区的道路已经年久失修,包括白兰园、怡保花园、高尔夫球花园等住宅区内的道路,相对其去年获得重铺的道路更为破旧、路面凹凸不平已经出现路洞,危害市民尤其是摩托骑士的安全。

黄氏表示,他本身在去年12月与市长拿督罗斯迪会面时曾经反映选区住宅区道路破旧的问题,而后者当时表示市政厅将会在今年进行重铺工作。由于至今尚未见任何工程进行,他就此促请州政府在来临的州议会中,针对他所提出的问题给于一个满意的答复。

图:黄家和(右)在郑亚财的陪同下巡视白兰园36路破损的道路。

民主行动党

Friday, March 12, 2010

Exclusive: 马华党争燃烧到怡保? MCA internal fight burn till Ipoh?




I was on my way to my office at around 8.30a, yesterday, and I noticed these banners were hanged in my constituecy - Stadium Roundabout, perhaps put up by some anti-Chua's MCA group and managed to grab some photos of it.
---
The Banners were subsequently found to be taken down when i passed by the same area again at around 10.30 a.m.
---
Seems the MCA internal fight had burned until Ipoh...
---
Anyway, we just do our part in serving people, while watching all these things happening...
---
昨天上午我发现这两张横幅张挂在选区内的交通圈,看来马华党争已经燃烧到怡保,猜想应该是不满蔡派的马华内部的杰作吧?让利益互换的马华继续为个人利益斗争,火箭会继续服务人民,以人民利益为先。

Thursday, March 11, 2010

法院驳回安华上诉 黄家和:政治案件判决矛盾


民主行动党霹雳州社青团团长兼桂和区州议员黄家和律师于2010年3月11日(星期四)在武吉干当直弄所发表的新闻稿:

法院驳回安华上诉 黄家和:政治案件判决矛盾

(直弄11日讯)民主行动党霹雳州社青团团长黄家和律师表示,联邦法院三司日前驳回前副首相安华指他12年前遭革除副首相兼财政部长职位无效的上诉申请,显示出联邦法院在涉及国阵政治利益的案件上再度作出了矛盾的判决。

也是桂和区州议员的黄家和在日前受邀出席回教党在武吉干当直弄区主办的青年论坛座谈会上发表演说时表示,霹雳州双包大臣案件中,联邦法院没有根据已经拥有40多年历史的《史蒂芬卡隆宁甘》一案的案例,在州议会没有通过不信任动议下宣判国阵赞比里为霹雳州大臣,一夜间改变了40年来的法律。

“在安华的案件中,上诉失败意味着在君主立宪的制度下,最高元首没有权力对一名副首相或内阁部长的革职作出任何反对;但是在霹雳州双包大臣案中,法院5司却认为苏丹在委任或革除一名州首长中拥有绝对的权力,矛盾的判决已经使到人民对于国家的法律感到模糊和混淆。”

黄家和表示,这证明了国家的司法制度在巫统的强权下已经沦陷,再度在涉及国阵政治利益的案件中,无法给于公平和依据法律的判决。

黄氏同时也在其演说中以流利的国语向国阵和巫统多年来所实施的种族政治左右开弓,他表示民联已经给于人民一个打破种族政治的选择,其此番言论得到出席者报以掌声的共鸣。

当晚的座谈会吸引将近400名以马来同胞为主的群众出席,而回教党青年团总团长纳沙鲁丁、槟城州团长莫哈默尤斯尼以及太平区社青团团长郑国霖也出席参与座谈会。

Saturday, March 06, 2010



霹雳州社青团团长兼民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和律师于2010年3月6日(星期六)在武吉干当所发表的新闻稿:

(武吉干当6日讯)霹雳州社青团团长黄家和律师今天促请霹雳州国阵政府以霹雳州人民利益为大前提,果敢承认拿督甘尼申是不合法议长的地位,并与民联众议员一起让30日的州议会在合法议长的主持下顺利进行。

也是桂和区州议员的黄家和昨天在受邀与拿督斯里尼查一同出席回教党在武吉干当选区举办的政治座谈会上,发表演说时表示民联一众议员会在接到原任议长西华古玛的州议会公函后,出席本月30日的州议会。

黄家和说,联邦法院在宣判拿督斯里赞比里为霹雳州合法大臣后,并没有代表着拿督甘尼申的议长地位合法化,而去年5月7日在州议会所发生的原任议长西华古玛被强行拖出州议会的事件违反霹雳州宪法以及议会常规是铁一般的事实。

国阵将不惜一切 合法化甘尼申地位

黄氏指出,虽然民联依然不认同拿督甘尼申作为议长的地位,但是从过去13个月的经验看来,国阵将会不惜一切,运用一切的权力、便利以及手段, “合法化”甘尼申作为议长的地位,进一步摧毁霹雳州的民主法治精神。

黄氏表示,有鉴于此霹雳州民联将拟订最好的对策,以人民的利益作为最终的依归,并希望国阵以及赞比里可以抛开歧见,拿出诚意与民联一同合作,为霹雳州带来发展。

当晚出席座谈会并发表演说的尚有拿督斯里尼查、回教党武吉干当区部主席阿末诺丁、宣传主任沙希努丁等人,吸引了超过600名群众出席,而火箭行动队也成功兜售超过200份的马来文火箭报,深受马来群众欢迎。

图:600名群众席地而坐,聆听由拿督斯里尼查以及黄家和主讲的民联武吉干当的座谈会。
图2:拿督斯里尼查(右2)与黄家和(左2)一同出席座谈会向人民解说当今最新局势。
图3:黄家和表示,国阵将不惜一切手段合法化甘尼申地位。

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Singaporean's trust most - Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong... can Malaysia judges command a similar standing?

旧电话亭拆毁没有清理


民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和律师于2010年2月27日(星期六)在怡保所发表的新闻稿:

(怡保27日讯)民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和律师今天促请马电讯立刻清理白兰园一带已经拆毁的旧电话亭,而不是任由遗置路旁。

也是霹雳州社青团团长的黄家和日前在接获白兰园居民投诉后,连同行动党白兰园支部主席郑亚财作出巡视时,发现整个地区至少有6个地点发生旧电话亭拆毁但没有清理的问题。

黄氏对于旧公共电话亭拆毁却没有清理的问题深表不满,他说,当局在拆除旧电话亭后应该即刻载走电话亭“残骸”,“只做一半”任由遗置一旁在破坏市容之余也将会引起环境整洁问题。

郑亚财表示,居民原以为旧电话亭在拆毁过后会立刻获得处理,但是在等了一天又一天过后却没有见到行动,电讯局的办事能力令人失望。

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Sdr. SG: Lim Guan Eng

GEORGE TOWN: Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng today said it has never been his ambition nor ever crossed his mind to become the prime minister of Malaysia.

Lim stressed that as far as the DAP and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) are concerned, there would only be one candidate for the post from PR, Parti Keadilan Rakyat's (PKR) de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Lim was stunned and dumbfounded when he was asked to comment on a column written by constitutional expert Dr Abdul Aziz Bari in a Malay tabloid Monday which stated that even Lim could be Malaysia's prime minister.

The professor from Universiti Islam Antarabangsa was quoted saying that maybe a non-Malay or non-Muslim prime minister would be better than a Muslim Malay prime minister.

He went on to say that since Lim has made exceptional achievements in governing Penang, with the lot of Malays and Muslim being looked after, if the achievements could improve further, even Lim could become the prime minister.

Lim, who initially did not say much when asked for comment, later said he only wanted to perform his duties as Penang's chief minister.

"I already have a lot on my plate and being the chief minister is already so challenging and I am already becoming the centre of attraction including personal attacks so do not link me with such statements.

"My support is fully for Anwar to become the PR prime minister.

"All I wish to do is to make Penang a role model and the best governed state which can be emulated by other PR states," Lim said at a press conference at his office.

Meanwhile, Lim said later this year the state government would implement a penalty for those who used water excessively.

He said the proposal would be discussed at Penang Water Supply Corporation's board meeting sometime in March or early April for approval before being presented to the state executive council for approval.

Lim said since 2008, the state government has tried to gently remind Penangites to reduce water usage to no avail with Penangites now topping the national water usage with 285 liters per day each while the national average was 165 liters, with the recommended level by the United Nations at 157 liters.

He said the penalty would be imposed on those who used water excessively while those who conserved water would be rewarded but did not reveal how this would be implemented.

Penangites paid 31 sen for every 35 cubic meters while Singaporeans paid 10 times more at RM3.47 for their piped domestic water supply.

While many states in the country are facing acute water shortage, Penang has enough water supply to last for at least six months without any rain.

Lim said if the state government did not initiate any action now, the situation would only worsen in years to come with the water usage continuously increasing.

At the same press conference, local government committee chairman Chow Kon Yeow announced the endorsement of the executive council for Patahiyah Ismail as the new Penang Island Municipal Council president from March 1 while engineer Ang Aing Thye, who has been with the council since 1978, also will be appointed council secretary from the same date.

Perihal PM dan MB bukan Melayu by Prof Dr Abdul Aziz Bari

Perlembagaan tidak meletakkan syarat Melayu atau Islam dalam pelantikan PM atau KM

Soal Perdana Menteri (PM) bukan Melayu sering timbul. Sepanjang saya ingat, sejak 1999 hingga sekarang ia sering tenggelam dan timbul. Begitu juga dengan soal Menteri Besar (MB) di sembilan negeri beraja. Menariknya soal Ketua Menteri (KM) di empat negeri – Pulau Pinang, Melaka, Sabah dan Sarawak – tidak pula ditimbulkan. Hujung Januari lalu Ahli Exco Perak, Datuk Hamidah Osman menimbulkan keributan menegenai ketidakharusan wanita menjadi MB.

Walau apa pun elok kita halusi terlebih dulu peruntukan Perlembagaan yang menyatakan undang-undang mengenai isu-isu dibangkitkan itu. Apa yang jelas di situ sebagaimana di negara-negara Westminster lain, ketua kerajaan dilantik oleh ketua negara atau ketua negeri mengikut lunas-lunas tertentu. Meskipun kuasa melantik ini adalah budi bicara – yang di sesetengah negara dipanggil prerogatif, kuasa melantik ini bukanlah sesuatu yang boleh dilakukan dengan sewenang-wenang dan sesuka hati. Tegasnya ia perlu difahami dalam konteks demokrasi.

Inti pati undang-undang tentang pelantikan itu ialah orang yang hendak dilantik sebagai PM atau MB atau KM perlu banyak sokongan di dalam Dewan. Dalam konteks Dewan Rakyat sekarang orang itu hendaklah mempunyai sokongan minimum 112 Ahli Parlimen. Bagaimanapun sekiranya ada lebih dari dua kelompok di situ, orang yang mempunyai paling ramai penyokong hendaklah dilantik mengetuai kerajaan.

Sering dikatakan sekiranya kedudukan di dalam Dewan adalah jelas – yakni majoritinya - maka kuasa pelantikan oleh Yang di-Pertuan Agong atau raja atau Yang Dipertua Negeri - hanyalah satu formaliti semata-mata. Dalam kerangka demokrasi yang melatari Perlembagaan, hakikat ini adalah sesuatu yang lumrah. Sehubungan itu Yang di-Pertuan Agong, contohnya, tidak boleh mengada-ngada dan cuba mempengaruhi pelantikan.

Perlembagaan tidak meletakkan syarat Melayu atau Islam dalam pelantikan PM atau KM. Syarat itu cuma disebut dalam pelantikan MB di sembilan negeri tersebut, itu pun tidak mutlak. Ini kerana perlembagaan membenarkan raja untuk tidak melantik MB Melayu dan Islam sekiranya ia tidak dapat dilakukan.

Sokongan majoriti

Keharusan sedemikian sebenarnya tidak memeranjatkan kerana apa yang paling utama MB mesti dilantik daripada kalangan ahli-ahli Dewan. Syarat ini adalah satu kemestian. Dengan proses politik tidak mustahil di dalam Dewan berkenaan tidak ada ahli Melayu atau kalau ada pun ia mungkin tidak sesuai atau tidak mempunyai sokongan majoriti. Sokongan majoriti adalah syarat yang tidak boleh ditolak ansurkan. Ini kerana dalam sistem Westminster, kerajaan memerintah diwajibkan bertanggungjawab kepada Dewan: kerajaan tidak perlu berbuat demikian kepada ketua negara, baik Yang di-Pertuan Agong, raja atau pun Yang Dipertua Negeri.

Mereka yang bermati-matian mahukan PM atau MB mesti orang Melayu, tidak faham skema Perlembagaan dan demokrasi. Dalam konteks dan kerangka Perlembagaan kita, kedudukan Melayu dan Islam telah pun dikeluarkan dari kerangka politik. Dalam soal ini raja-raja adalah pelindung dan penjaga terakhir. Salah satu manifestasi sifat ini, hal-hal yang berhubung dengan Islam dan kemelayuan tidak boleh dipinda tanpa perkenan Majlis Raja-Raja.

Mereka yang berkeras mahukan PM dan MB Melayu perlu memahami Perlembagaan dalam konteks yang betul. Dalam keadaan sekarang PM memegang kata putus, termasuk hal berkaitan agama. Di sisi undang-undang sepatutnya Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan raja-raja mempunyai kuasa itu.

Dua tahun lalu saya pernah menyebut betapa Perlembagaan membolehkan pelantikan PM bukan Melayu dalam satu forum di Masjid Negeri Ipoh. Seorang berjubah dan berserban bangkit mengatakan “saya tidak redha!”. Saya tidak kisah kerana orang ini, selain tidak memahami selok-belok Perlembagaan sebenarnya tidak mahir sistem politik dan pentadbiran Islam. Sekiranya sikap ini berterusan sukar untuk bukan Islam melihat keindahan agama suci ini.

Kita suka bercakap betapa Islam ini tidak memandang bangsa, agama dan suku kaum. Betapa Islam itu adil dan sejagat. Tetapi apabila sampai masa membuktikan retorik-retorik itu kita sering gagal melakukannya. Jelas kita masih dipenjarakan oleh ketakutan, kejahilan dan kesempitan akal.

Pada saya mempunyai PM bukan Melayu dan bukan Islam mungkin lebih baik dari mempunyai PM Melayu yang secara rasminya beragama Islam. Saya katakan begitu kerana PM bukan Melayu dan bukan Islam itu akan ikut buku; maksudnya mengikut Perlembagaan. Saya tidak bimbang tentang Islam dan Melayu kerana kita masih ada raja dan mereka tidak perlu mendengar nasihat kerajaan dalam soal-soal itu. Saya fikir PM bukan Melayu tadi akan berusaha keras untuk membuktikan bahawa dirinya juga lebih baik.

Setakat ini Lim Guan Eng menampakkan pencapaian agak baik di Pulau Pinang. Kedudukan Islam dan Melayu tidaklah teruk sangat. Lagipun kita kenalah adil; kena tengok apa yang UMNO dan Gerakan buat di negeri itu sebelum beliau jadi KM. Kalau pencapaian itu dapat dipertingkatkan, Guan Eng mungkin mempunyai harapan untuk jadi PM Malaysia!


*Prof Dr Abdul Aziz Bari telah mengajar undang-undang selama lebih 20 tahun.

Sunday, January 31, 2010

民联在来届大选将面对两大挑战


霹雳州社青团团长兼民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和律师于2010年1月31日(星期日)在武吉干当所发表的新闻稿:

民联在来届霹雳州州选以及全国大选将面对两大挑战,希望人民可以将支持力量集中在民联身上,落实两线制让全民在民主政治精神下受惠。

武吉干当和十八丁选民在去年4月的武吉干当补选中给与民联大力的支持、85巴仙的华人票集中在原任大臣拿督斯里尼查,这股武吉干当的精神必须延续下去,以终结巫统过去50年在国家的政治霸权。

民联所面对的第1大挑战就是巫统玩弄的种族政治手段,拿督斯里尼查的开明施政虽然获得人民的认同,但是巫统却在马来同胞的社群内将尼查的开明妖魔化、说成尼查是华人的傀儡以及马来人的叛徒,而这类的种族政治已经在马来社群中取得效果,民联在马来社群中将面对巫统严峻的挑战。

同时,多年来成为国阵和巫统定期存款的邮寄选票制度也进一步恶化,选举委员会主席已经建议将邮寄选票的范围扩大到值勤的医生、护士以及记者,在不透明的邮寄选票制度下,国阵和巫统随时在一些势均力敌的选区依赖提升的邮寄选票微差过关,这是民联所面对的另外一个重大挑战。

Thursday, January 21, 2010

民主行动党桂和区州议员兼霹雳州社青团团长黄家和律师于2010年1月21日(星期四)在怡保所发表的文告:

(怡保21日讯)民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和律师今天发表文告,形容马来西亚选举委员会扩大邮寄选票范围的的建议,如同开民主倒车。

也是霹雳州社青团团长的黄家和表示,邮寄选票的不透明在近年来已经多次受到质疑,而怡保东区以及桂和州选区在2008年大选前的邮寄选票人数突然飙升就是一个例子。在今天废除邮寄选票的声浪不断的时候,选举委员会不但没有努力修改这个不完善的制度,反而计划将医生、护士以及记者纳入邮寄选票范围内,令人吃惊!

“邮寄选票可以说是国阵的定期存款,国阵过去多届的大选中在一些选区屡翻依靠邮寄选票过关,选举委员会这一次建议的目的高度令人质疑,是为了协助国阵确保在来届大选中获胜。”

黄氏表示,以军人以及警察选票为主的邮寄选票在一些选区期决定性的作用,而邮寄选票当中也包括军人以及警察的家眷,这些非居住在选区的选民将会成为胜负的关键,间接地剥夺了当地选民选出本身属意议员的权力。

民主行动党


Press Statement by YB Wong Kah Woh, State Assemblymen for Canning and Perak DAPSY Chief in Ipoh on 21.01.2010:-



It is shocked to learn that the Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya Raya is contemplating to widen the scope of coverage for Undi Pos and to include doctors, nurses and reporters as part of those who are eligible to vote by post.

This is an attempt by SPR to ensure the victory for Barisan Nasional as Undi Pos had all along been proven as the safe deposits for Barisan Nasional in certain areas.

The transparency of Undi Pos is highly questionable. There were doubts in the process of demarcating the number of voters and the boundaries, sending out of the ballot papers, the casting of ballot papers and the counting of the ballot papers. Prior to the 2008 election, the number of Undi Pos in Ipoh Timur and Canning had increased dramatically and drastically without the knowledge of the incumbent DAP’s representatives.

The SPR had not taken any initiatives to improve the system and to recapture the People’s losing confidence, and yet, they have now come out with this new ruling suggesting a higher number of undi Pos.

Can SPR furnish the Rakyat with a satisfactory explanation over the motive behind this move?

21.01.2010

Tuesday, January 19, 2010



(怡保19日讯)民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和形容,霹雳州国阵指示怡保市政厅在行动党全国代表大会当天清早拆除沿路张挂的行动党党旗是幼稚的行为。

也是行动党霹雳州宣传秘书的黄家和是于日前连同其特别助理丘俊良巡视选区,并在怡保花园一带分派2010年月历于市民后,向报界如此表示。

“任何政党在一些活动的`时候沿路挂上党旗是十分平常的做法,而当天行动党党旗也没有阻碍交通或视线,给于外地的代表路线指明之余也欢迎党代表来到霹雳州,为何国阵又反应过敏呢?”

黄氏表示,同样地在国阵或巫统主办任何活动的时候,党旗也在市区内飘扬,市政厅采取双重标准任由张挂,而民联也不曾做出任何投诉或反对,国阵的做法未免也太幼稚了。

黄氏同时也揶揄怡保市政厅在国阵的压力下表现得离奇地有效率,在假日清早可以出动大队拆除行动党党旗。他说,如果霹雳州的每个地方政府在处理民生问题上都如此有效率,将不会有这么多的民生问题投诉。

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

国阵没有政治意愿延续永久地契政策就算了!



民主行动党霹雳州社青团团长兼桂和区州议员黄家和律师于2010年1月13日(星期三)在怡保所发表的新闻稿:

(怡保13日讯)民主行动党霹雳州社青团团长黄家和律师表示,霹雳州国阵没有政治意愿延续民联的新村及马来重组村永久地契政策就算了,不需要给于诸多籍口推塘。

黄家和今天在怡保花园南区分发2010年桂和区行动党月历后,针对国阵霹雳州大臣拿督斯里赞比里表示国阵不愿公布一些半生不熟政策的言论,向报界做出上述评论。

也是桂和区州议员的黄氏说,赞比里表示给于永久地契将会加重人民负担的言论是不正确的,他不应该用这个籍口作为推翻永久地契政策的理由。

“霹雳州民联政府当初落实永久地契政策的时候,给于人民自行选择是否要申请转换,而在地价方面最高也不会超过1万5000令吉、在有些时候甚至比国阵给于的99年地契来得更为便宜。”

黄氏表示,在民联推出永久地契政策后,国阵曾经表示永久地契政策违反国家土地法典而不能够进行,但是在人民利益的大前提下,霹雳州民联成功在2008年末发出第一批永久地契,这也印证了只要有坚定的政治意愿,没有政策是因为程序上的问题而不能进行的。

图:黄家和(右)连同郑福基分发2010年月历于选民,深受欢迎。

Monday, January 11, 2010

民主行动党霹雳州社青团团长黄家和律师于2010年1月11日(星期一)在怡保所发表的新闻稿(2):

(怡保11日讯)霹雳州社青团今天一致议决,委任8名社青团团员为执行理事,并成立6个不同领域的政治局,并誓言以一个强大的团队出发,开创霹雳州社青团新的一页。

霹雳州社青团团长黄家和律师今天在一篇文告中表示,受委的社青团团员为蔡伟坤(怡保西区团长)、杨祖强(红土坎区团长)、郑国霖(太平区团长)、吴乃鸿(前怡保市议员)、陈韦铭(安顺区团)、钟金兰(丹绒马林区团)、苏古玛兰(怡保西区区团)以及薛行顺(红土坎区团),在加上党章中当然执行理事德宾丁宜区州议员黄文标,整个霹雳州社青团将会拥有29名理事成员。

黄家和表示,霹雳州社青团在经过去年12月13日的改选洗礼后,已经变得更为强大,在成立6个不同领域的政治局过后,期望可以协助母体行动党拉拢以及培育更多的年轻领袖参与党的斗争,迈向落实一个公正、平等、自由的马来西亚人的马来西亚目标。

霹雳州社青团领导层如下:

团长 : 黄家和
署理团长 : V 西华古玛
副团长 : 张志坚、林建松
秘书 : 徐初洪
副秘书 : 黄文标
财政 : 杨祖强
副财政 : 吴乃鸿
组织秘书 : 蔡伟坤
副组织秘书 : 谭国权、郑国霖
宣传秘书 : 吴国锋
副宣传秘书 : 岑伟翰
政治教育局主任: 苏古玛兰
执行理事 : 陈致恩、粘伟文、谢仰发、陈明辉、伍紫玲、丹那巴兰、甘尼申、
薛行顺、陈韦铭、钟金兰、克斯温达星、陈丽思、杨杰康、陈美燕、
叶汶建

法律局主任 : 克斯温达星
选民登记局主任 : 陈丽思
资讯及多媒体局主任 : 黄云龙
非政府组织局主任 : 杨杰康
妇女事务局主任 : 陈美燕
文化及体育局主任 : 叶汶建

图:霹雳州社青团新任领导层在第一次的社青团会议后合影,右起谭国权、张志坚、徐初洪、黄家和、林建松、吴国锋以及丹那巴兰。


霹雳州社青团