Police Report On Lim Guan Eng’s False Statements

whatsapp-image-2016-11-24-at-11-54-16-am

Yesterday, as a loyal citizen of Malaysia, I filed a police report on Lim Guan Eng’s blog article regarding Act 355 at the Ampang Jaya Police Station.

In the article, the Pulau Pinang’s Chief Minister (CM) made four seditious false accusations:

  1. DAP opposes the hudud-like laws because it is contrary to the Federal Constitution.
  2. Our Federal Constitution is secular in nature with Islam as the religion of the Federation. Raising the punishment cap so that it can come closer to Hudud provisions would contravene the Federal Constitution in both spirit and substance.
  3. MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP deserve public condemnation for betraying their principles and promises to uphold and defend the Federal Constitution but also for their political expediency to continue to deceive the people by supporting UMNO that is willing to work together with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution to allow these laws to take effect.
  4. DAP reiterates that the failure of MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP to leave BN now is seen as a form of tacit approval of the unconstitutional measures adopted by UMNO to support PAS’ move to raise the punishment cap of Islamic laws that moves closer to Hudud-like laws.

DAP opposes the hudud-like laws because it is contrary to the Federal Constitution.

This is a recycled accusation that I’ve answered many times before.

Neither the Act 355 nor the amendment of the Act is contrary to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia and the amendment of Act 355 it is not about implementing hudud-like laws as falsely accused by the CM of Pulau Pinang.

The fact that the Federal Constitution recognises the institution of Syariah Courts as stated in the Article 121 (1A) and the Part 1 List II  of the Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution, proves that the Act 355 is not contrary to the Federal Constitution.

Furthermore, the Act 355 is an existing Act and it is already part of the laws of Malaysia.

“Our Federal Constitution is secular in nature with Islam as the religion of the Federation. Raising the punishment cap so that it can come closer to Hudud provisions would contravene the Federal Constitution in both spirit and substance.”

In his above accusation, he made two contradicting statements, saying that the “Federal Constitution is secular in nature” and “with Islam as the religion of the Federation”.

How can our Federal Constitution that states Islam as the religion of the Federation be secular in nature, when George Jacob Holyoake who is the creator of the term secularism, defines secularism as separating government and religion?

In fact, if our Federal Constitution is secular in nature, the Act 355 cannot be part of the laws of Malaysia and the Syariah Courts cannot be part of our judicial systems.

And if our Federal Constitution is secular in nature, the flag of Malaysia must not have any symbol of religion, such as the crescent and star in our flag that represents the religion of Islam.

“MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP deserve public condemnation for betraying their principles and promises to uphold and defend the Federal Constitution but also for their political expediency to continue to deceive the people by supporting UMNO that is willing to work together with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution to allow these laws to take effect.”

What a defamation and malicious falsehood!

The amendment of Act 355 is not contrary to the Federal Constitution and it is a lie made in bad faith to accuse UMNO as “willing to work together with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution to allow these laws to take effect”, when everything was done according to the law.

“DAP reiterates that the failure of MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP to leave BN now is seen as a form of tacit approval of the unconstitutional measures adopted by UMNO to support PAS’ move to raise the punishment cap of Islamic laws that moves closer to Hudud-like laws.”

It is clearly said in the Act 355 that the Act only affect the Muslims, so why must the CM who is non-Muslim politicise the issue?

By calling MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP to leave BN, and accusing the two biggest Muslim parties, PAS and UMNO as working together to bypass the Federal Constitution, Lim Guan Eng is trying to create religious and racial tension among the citizens of Malaysia.

Not only that, Lim Guan Eng’s words are against the call made by the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong’s in the parliament on the 7th of March, 2016:

“Beta berharap langkah-langkah ke arah memperkukuhkan institusi agama dan kecekapan perlaksanaan undang-undang pentadbiran agama Islam melalui pemerkasaan Mahkamah Syariah dapat disegerakan.”

Lim Guan Eng has gone against four parts of the Sedition Act 1948, Section 3(1)(a), Section 3(1)(c), Section 3(1)(e), and Section 3(1)(f), an offense which is punishable under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act 1948.

Section 3(1)(a) of the Sedition Act 1948 states:

Sesuatu “kecenderungan menghasut” ialah kecenderungan—bagi mendatangkan kebencian atau penghinaan atau bagi membangkitkan perasaan tidak setia terhadap mana-mana Raja atau Kerajaan;

The CM of Pulau Pinang’s seditious words which contradict to the call made by the Yang Di Pertuan Agong can be seen as a “seditious tendency” that could “bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government.”

Section 3(1)(c) of the Sedition Act 1948 says:

Sesuatu “kecenderungan menghasut” ialah kecenderungan—bagi mendatangkan kebencian atau penghinaan atau bagi membangkitkan perasaan tidak setia terhadap pentadbirankeadilan di Malaysia atau di mana-mana Negeri;

Accusing the amendment of Act 355 is a hudud-like law that “would contravene the Federal Constitution in both spirit and substance”, is an insult to the Syariah Courts, hudud law and Islam as well as giving bad impressions to the hudud law and Syariah Courts which could “bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State”.

Section 3(1)(e) of the Sedition Act 1948 states:

Sesuatu “kecenderungan menghasut” ialah kecenderungan—bagi mengembangkan perasaan niat jahat dan permusuhan antara kaum atau golongan penduduk yang berlainan di Malaysia; atau

By making statements that:

  • MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP deserve public condemnation for betraying their principles and promises to uphold and defend the Federal Constitution but also for their political expediency to continue to deceive the people by supporting UMNO that is willing to work together with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution to allow these laws to take effect.
  • Calling MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP to leave BN because of the “unconstitutional measures adopted by UMNO to support PAS’ move”,

Lim Guan Eng is playing a religious and racial games by falsely accusing the Malay Muslim PAS and UMNO “bypass the Federal Constitution” and “taking unconstitutional measures” which could “promote feelings of ill will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia”.

This will cause the non-Muslims to think that the government and the Muslims are up to something bad and doing things against the law which can cause anger and disharmony among the people of different races and religions.

Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act says:

bagi mempersoalkan apa-apa perkara, hak, taraf, kedudukan, keistimewaan, kedaulatan atau prerogatif yang ditetapkan atau dilindungi oleh peruntukan Bahagian III Perlembagaan Persekutuan atau Perkara 152, 153 atau 181 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

The Yang Di-Pertuan Agong is the head of religion of Islam of the country and “to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal Constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution is against the Sedition Act.

It is the rights of the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong to make decisions on matters concerning the religion of Islam as stated in the Federal Constitution thus making statements against the statement made by the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong regarding this matter is interfering with the rights of the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong.

<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-13316" src="https://ahmadalijetplane.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/whatsapp-image-2016-11-24-at-11-23-30-pm.png" alt=""whatsapp-i

Related Posts:

Lim Guan Eng Pleads Not Guilty

DAP’s Lim Guan Eng pleaded not guilty and claimed trial to two charges under Section 23 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Section 165 of the Penal Code at the Penang High Court.

Judicial Commissioner Azmi Ariffin sets bail at RM1millon with one surety and ordered Lim to notify the court and Attorney-General’s Chambers two days before he plans to travel outside the country.

Earlier, the prosecution team which was led by the Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali, applied for the case to be transferred to the High Court.

 

Is Muhyiddin Racist?

Please watch the video of Tan Sri Muhyiddin’s speech on Article 10 of the Federal Constitution : “Muhyiddin: Tiada Pihak Boleh Persoalkan Pembentukan Negara Malaysia (Video)”.

The opposition parties are very busy complaining about everything that they can think of instead of working to solve the problems in Selangor, Penang and Kelantan.

Now they and some human rights activists are fighting for a total freedom of speech because they want to be free to say everything they wish, including matters related to sensitive issues such as the Federal Constitution, the Royal Institution and others.

Like when Lim Kit Siang humiliate the Khutbah Jumaat that reminded the Muslims of the Surah Al-Baqarah: verse 120.

Insider 9

Tony Pua also humiliated JAKIM’s Khutbah Jumaat (about Valentine’s day.)

Hannah Yeoh went against the Sultan of Selangor’s decree on Allah issue as well as Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988,  and Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

I wonder if Khalid Ibrahim would obey Hannah Yeoh.

PAS’s Wan Ji made lots of rude statements against the teaching of Islam, Islamic authorities and the Royal Institution.

Wanji 1

And lots of human rights activists do not respect the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

Insider 10

They use Article 10 of the Federal Constitution as the reason why they are free to say anything they wish; claiming that Article 10 Clause 1 (a) granted them total freedom of speech’.

Article 10 Clause 1 (a) says:

“every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression”

Is it true that the Article 10 of the Federal Constitution gives us a total freedom of speech?

No, because Article 10 of the Federal Constitution says:

“10. (1) Subject to Clauses (2), (3) and (4)—
(a) every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression;”

That means Article 10 (1) of the Federal Constitution is subjected to Clauses (2), (3) and (4).

And Clause 2 (a) of the Article 10 says:

“Parliament may by law impose— on the rights conferred by paragraph (a) of Clause (1), such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, friendly relations with other countries, public order or morality and restrictions designed to protect the privileges of Parliament or of any Legislative Assembly or to provide against contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to any offence;”

So, the oppositions and human rights activists who support them, only use Article 10 (1) (a) and purposely ignore Article 10 (1) which says that the article is subjected to Clauses (2), (3) and (4).

That means, they just skipped the part of the article that says there are restrictions to freedom of speech.

That is wrong because we cannot use only a part of an article of the Federal Constitution and skip the rest of the article as we wish. 

They did the same when they refer to Article 11 (1) of the Federal Constitution by purposely leaving the part saying, “subject to Clause (4), to propagate it”.

Anyway, freedom of speech that they are fighting for is only a total freedom for them to say what ever they want but not for others.

Does Anwar respect freedom of speech if he wanted to sue the reporter who asked him a question that he is not happy with?

Another example is the issue between the Chief Minister of Penang, Lim Guan Eng and PAS’s Nasruddin Hassan Tantawi.

Is freedom of speech respected by people who always talk about freedom of speech in the above examples?

I am tired of the opposition’s tactics to destroy the stability of our country with the help of those human rights activists who support them.

They must look at themselves before telling others what to do.

They are worse than the pot calling the kettle black.

Lim Guan Eng: DAP Says No To Hudud

DAP’s Lim Guan Eng said that hudud can’t be implemented without consensus.

That was his respond to the Kelantan MB’s statement, saying that PAS will implement hudud laws in Kelantan.

The Star reported that:

The issue of Pakatan supporting hudud, he said, did not arise as DAP was against the implementation of the Islamic law.

He also said, “Pakatan’s position has not changed because DAP’s position in opposing the implementation of the hudud has not changed.” 

Lim pointed out that the opposition pact’s common policy platform and its 2013 General Election manifesto did not mention the implementation of hudud.

He added that neither did it make any mention of the setting up of an Islamic state.

This, he said, had been agreed to by PAS, DAP and PKR – STAR.

Opposition Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) leaders especially its deputy president, Mohamad Sabu always says that DAP’s Lim Guan Eng understands Islam better than UMNO’s Muslims leaders.

So what will PAS’s leaders say when LIm Guan Eng speak out his stand on the hudud issue?

Are they going to blame it on UMNO as another UMNO’s conspiracy?

DAP, PKR, PAS And Hudud

Proudly designed by Ahmad Ali JetPlane
Proudly designed by Ahmad Ali JetPlane

Ustaz Azhar Idrus: “Islam Dan Kristian Bertuhankan Allah?”

nn
Is this really written by Ustaz Azhar Idrus? Screenshot from Paneh Miang.

I do not really understand the above conversation but I was shocked to read the part written by Ustaz Azhar Idrus saying:

“Islam dan Kristian bertuhankan Allah…Isa adalah Nabi umat Kristian dan Nabi umat Islam..”

When Ustaz Azhar wrote that both Islam and Christian worship Allah; does he mean that both  Islam and Christian share the same god that is Allah?

That statement is totally wrong and it is an example of Pluralism of Religion.

Christian’s god is not Allah; Muslims and Christian do not share the same god.

Is Ustaz Azhar confused because Lim Guan Eng suggested the Christians to use the word “Allah” in the Malay version of bible to refer to the Christian’s god or gods? (Please read: PAS Says, “Yes” For The Word “Allah” In The Malay Version Bible)

Ustaz Azhar always says that UMNO is really bad because UMNO do not fight for Islam and Muslims must not vote for UMNO. (Pease read: Ustaz Azhar Idrus, A PAS Candidate for PRU 13?)

So now if this screenshot is real, who are the better Muslims?

That is why the Christians in Malaysia are not allowed to call their god Allah as what the Pakatan Rakyat wanted because some people may get confused. (Please watch: Video: Naser Disa Polemik Isu Kalimah Allah)

And the Pakatan Rakyat supporters are always confused; please read: Himpunan KL112′s Most Popular Photo.

Or does he really believe that both Islam and Christian worship Allah?

What will PAS leaders say about this as Ustaz Azhar is PAS’s favourite religious speaker?

Can we trust PAS and Pakatan Rakyat to take care of our country?

*Please read: ‘Azhar Idrus Mesti Bersumpah’ by Paneh Miang*

PAS Says, “Yes” For The Word “Allah” In The Malay Version Bible.

The Sultan of Selangor has expressed his shock and regret, and the Sultan is very disappointed over the statement made by DAP’s Chief Minister of Penang, Lim Guan Eng about using the word “Allah” in the Malay version of bible.

It was reported that, Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah had called for an emergency meeting with members of the Selangor Islamic Affairs Council (MAIS), Selangor mufti as well as high-ranking officials of MAIS and Selangor Islamic Affairs Department (JAIS) on Jan 6 over the matter.

Mais secretary Datuk Mohd Misri Idris said in a statement Tuesday that, “The Sultan of Selangor has made a decision and decreed that the word Allah is a sacred word specific for Muslims and prohibited to be used by any non-Muslim religion in Selangor as stated in a fatwa and gazetted on Feb 18, 2010.”

I am very proud and happy to know that the Sultan of Selangor is a very good leader who we can trust to protect the word Allah from being used by the non-Muslim to refer to their gods.

I am very sad but not surprised on PAS president, Haji Hadi Awang’s and PKR’s Anwar Ibrahim’s stand on the issue.

After all, I do not think that the opposition parties understand Article 3(1) and 11(4) of the Federal Constitution.

Please read:

  1. Seminar Mendaulatkan Islam Agama Negara

  2. Is PR Trying To Abrogate Article 11 (4)?

PAS leaders and members said that UMNO leaders and members are unIslamic but just look at what their leaders are doing.

I just cannot understand how PAS members who are all Muslims can accept such humiliation to Islam and still think that they are better Muslims than others.

Now I understand how important it is to have Sultans to protect the Malays and Islam. (Please read: Sultan Not Invited To Selangor Merdeka Celebration, Who’s Fault?)

Who Will Be Pakatan’s PM; Anwar Or Haji Hadi?

BERNAMA reported that:

PAS’s president Datuk Seri Haji Abdul Hadi Awang welcomed the suggestion for him to be appointed as the Prime Minister (PM) if the the opposition wins the 13th General Election.

So now some of PAS’s members suggested that Haji Hadi should becomes the PM instead of Anwar Ibrahim!

Do all of the opposition leaders agree with the suggestion?

Now let’s see what did some of them say about it:

Datuk Seri Haji Abdul Hadi Awang (PAS’s President)

“Sometimes, it can be ‘syok’ (a thrill) (to be proposed for PM post) but I ask God that Islam be the winner. After that (I) can be anything, or even die,” he said in his winding-up speech at PAS’ 58th Annual Muktamar (General Assembly), here, Sunday – BERNAMA.

Mohamad Sabu (PAS’s Deputy President)

PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu, meanwhile, said the party’s central committee had never en­­dorsed Hadi for the post. “(PKR adviser Datuk Seri) Anwar Ibrahim is the chosen one, even if Pakatan has not endorsed his candidacy in black and white,” he said. Mohamad also described the call to nominate Hadi as prime minister as merely Ulama representative Hairun Nizam’s “personal view”. “Even Lim and his son (DAP secretary-general) Guan Eng have agreed that Anwar is the choice. But we do not know what the scenario will be like 100 years from now,” he said – The Star.

Why does the senior PAS leader do not want his party’s president to become the PM?

If the Deputy President of PAS does not support his own party’s president to become the PM, then why should he be in PAS?

Dr. Tan Seng Giaw (DAP Deputy Chairman)

The consensus from all three parties in the Opposition pact was that Anwar was the candidate for prime minister. “So, whether the Ulama wing in PAS says otherwise, it makes no difference,” he said – The Star.

PAS always claims to its supporters that PAS is the strongest party in the Pakatan Rakyat.

Then if they are really the strongest party; why doesn’t their ally party, DAP supports the idea of Haji Hadi as the PM?

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (Opposition Leader/ de facto of PKR)

Anwar said he would discuss the matter with his Pakatan colleagues.“It’s okay. No problem. We will discuss in a nice manner”, he said and quickly got into his car after launching a convention on national education at Universiti Selangor – The Star.

I think Anwar tried to avoid from answering by quickly getting into his car because Anwar feels that he should be the Prime Minister and not Haji Hadi.

Now that some of PAS’s members had named Haji Hadi as Pakatan Rakyat’s PM, I wonder who else will be named as Pakatan Rakyat’s PM before the 13th General Election?

So, who’s next?

Did Lim Guan Eng Said The Malays Are Moron?

I read an article by Helen Ang about Mr. Lim Guan Eng saying that the Malays are morons.

Is it true that Malays are morons?

Should a leader like Mr. Lim Guan Eng calls other people moron just because he does not like them?

We should not call other people names or say that they are stupid and humiliate them just like that even if we don’t like them.

We should respect other people and not humiliate others.

And I am sure that the Mr. Lim Guan Eng will not be very happy if UMNO’s senior leaders do the same to him or to other opposition leaders especially the Chinese.

He also accused Utusan for lying 9 times on October 7.

He tweeted that Utusan lies everyday.

How about MalaysiaKini and Harakah, they never lie?

Mr. Lim Guan Eng is very angry with Utusan because PR still cannot control Utusan like what PR did to MCA’s The Star.

Is this freedom of press and freedom of speech for DAP and the opposition parties?

And they accused the government for controlling the press …

They claimed that they are fair and they support press freedom …

They took part in demonstrations like Bersih 3 that caused riot and destroyed things including plants, left rubbish around, overturned a police car and other crazy things, saying that they fight for press freedom.

And what PAS leaders will say about this?

PAS leaders are Malays so what will they say when their ally humiliate the Malays?

They’ll support their ally, won’t they?

Just as what happened after Ngeh’s statements

PR’s Shadow Cabinet, Or Is It PKR’s?

Pakatan Rakyat’s Shadow Cabinet

Perdana Menteri: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (PKR)

Timbalan Perdana Menteri I: Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang (PAS)

Timbalan Perdana Menteri II: Lim Guan Eng (DAP)

Timbalan Perdana Menteri III: (Pemimpin dari Sabah dan Sarawak)

Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri:

Dr Tan Seng Giaw (DAP)

Datuk Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail (PKR)

Datuk Mustafa Ali (PAS)

Menteri Kewangan I: Tony Pua (DAP)

Menteri Kewangan II: Rafizi Ramli (PKR)

Menteri Pertahanan: Salahuddin Ayub (PAS)

Menteri Pelajaran: Datuk Seri Ir Mohamad Nizar Jamaludin (PAS)

Menteri Dalam Negeri: Azmin Ali (PKR)

Menteri Penerangan Komunikasi dan Kebudayaan: Fuziah Salleh (PKR)

Menteri Tenaga, Teknologi Hijau dan Air: Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (PAS)

Menteri Kemajuan Luar Bandar dan Wilayah: Dr Mohd Hatta Ramli (PAS)

Menteri Pengajian Tinggi: Chong Chieng Jen (DAP)

Menteri Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri: Datuk Husam Musa (PAS)

Menteri Sains, Teknologi dan Inovasi: Dr Che Rosli Che Mat (PAS)

Menteri Sumber Asli dan Alam Sekitar: R Sivarasa (PKR)

Menteri Pengangkutan: Khalid Samad (PAS)

Menteri Pelancongan: Elizabeth Wong (PKR)

Menteri Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani: Tian Chua (PKR)

Menteri Kerja Raya: Datuk Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man (PAS)

Menteri Kesihatan: Dr Lee Boon Chye (PKR)

Menteri Belia dan Sukan: Yusmadi Yusoff (PKR)

Menteri Sumber Manusia: Gobind Singh Deo (DAP)

Menteri Perdagangan Dalam Negeri, Koperasi dan Kepenggunaan: S Kulasegaran (DAP)

Menteri Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan: Anthony Loke (DAP)

Menteri Pembangunan Wanita, Keluarga dan Masyarakat: Zuraida Kamarudin (PKR)

Menteri Luar Negeri: Datuk Saifuddin Nasution (PKR)

Menteri Wilayah Persekutuan dan Kesejahteraan Bandar: Nurul Izzah Anwar (PKR)

Menteri Perusahaan Perladangan dan Komoditi: Teresa Kok (DAP)

This list was given out by a Selangor PKR leader, YB  Shuhaimi Shafiei.

Anyway, a DAP senior leader and PAS senior leader had made statements complaining about the above list. 

DAP, PAS and PKR ally parties in Pakatan Rakyat.

So, is this a PR’s Shadow Cabinet, or is it PKR’s or is it just a make believe Shadow Cabinet to please PKR supporters?