Apakah Ini Penerapan Nilai-Nilai Islam?

Tun Dr. Mahathir (in blue) with Hannah Yeoh (on Tun M’s left) with women DAP leaders.

As I wrote in, “Tun Dr Mahathir (Tun M), From A Statesman To A Street Demonstrator”, the former Prime Minister of Malaysia, who was once admired as a statesman, a nationalist and a man of principle has turned into an anti-government street demonstrator after he left UMNO.

Now, it seems like Tun M, whom by now is a seasoned street demonstrator is always ready to take to the streets for what ever reasons as long as he can protest against the government and UMNO, the political party that had brought him to power.

It is really odd to see the man who had once introduced ‘Penerapan Nilai-Nilai Islam’ into his government policies is now a close friend of his once nemesis, the DAP’s Lim Kit Siang who had arrogantly rebuked and condemned the holy Quran, claiming that the verse 120 of Surah Al-Baqarah causes religious hatred and blasted JAKIM for using the said verse in Khutbah Jumaat.

Recently, in a rally called Wanita #BantahPolitikToksik which was powered and supported by the oppositions parties and liberal movements that are fighting for anti-Islam agendas like COMANGO, G25, SIS Forum Bhd. Empower, WAMN and others, Tun was seen taking part in the what was advertised as a rally for women along side DAP leaders like Hannah Yeoh. 

Tun Dr. Mahathir was accompanied by his wife Tun Dr. Siti Hasmah and some of his immediate family members, and his wife was one of the speakers, hence indicating that not only both Tuns endorsed the demands made by the demonstrators but they are supporting the demands which includes LGBT rights as written on the poster carried by their granddaughter, Ineza Roussille who is also Marina’s daughter.

Also seen at the rally were the infamous Siti Zabedah, Ambiga, Teresa Kok, Marina Mahathir and those who constantly slander the ideology of our country by saying that Malaysia is a secular country, fighting against the Federal Constitution that enshrines Malaysia as an Islamic country, questioning the constitutional duties of the government to protect the religion of Islam, trying to lower the position of Islam in Malaysia to the same level as other religions, making baseless and malicious accusations towards the Islamic authorities, fighting for the rights of LGBT and a lot more of other things.

Now, apa dah jadi Tun? Tun dah sokong tuntutan COMANGO?

Perhaps, COMANGO may consider making one of the Tuns their spokesperson for the coming UPR in Geneva. 

I really wonder who is the real Tun; is he the person who he used to be or the person he is now?

Tun Siti Hasmah (centre) speaking, with her daughter Marina Mahathir (right) beside her.

A poster photographed at the rally site.

Tun Dr. Mahathir (in blue) with Hannah Yeoh (on Tun M’s left) with women DAP leaders.

Marina Mahathir’s daughter, Ineza Roussille

G25’s Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin speaking at the rally.

The infamous Siti Zabedah (centre) with her friends.

A protester holding up a poster demanding for equality in marriage.

Ambiga (centre, wearing a cap) with her fans and friends.

Related Posts:

1. Surat Balas Tun M Tidak Menjawab Persoalan
2. Perjanjian DAP, PKR, PAN, PPBM Untuk Meminda Perkara 3(1)?
3. Tun Dr Mahathir, From A Statesman To A Street Demonstrator
4. Tun Dr. Mahathir, “Kalau Marahkan Nyamuk Jangan Bakar Kelambu”
5. Tun M: “Perdana Menteri Buat Demonstration” (Video)
6. Tun M: Jangan Menang Sorak, Kampung Tergadai

Kuasa Pendaftar Pertubuhan Yang Kita Tak Ambil Peduli

Semakin banyak saya membaca, semakin bertambah pengetahuan saya dan semakin saya sedar begitu banyak pekara yang saya perlu saya pelajari.

Membaca tulisan salah seorang Uncle Naser Disa di portal Menara.my yang bertajuk, ‘ROS Boleh Batalkan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan-Pertubuhan Yang Menentang Agenda Islam Negara!’ telah membuka mata saya betapa tingginya kedudukan Islam sebagai agama bagi Persekutuan di negara kita, dan betapa lemahnya usaha kita dalam menggunakan peruntukan undang-undang yang sediaada untuk mempertahankan kedaulatan Islam.

Saya diminta oleh Menara.my untuk mengulas isu ini, dan setelah saya menghubungi Uncle Naser untuk mendapatkan keterangan lanjut tentang perkara ini, dan saya menulis satu artikel yang ringkas tentang isu ini.

Di sini saya lampirkan tulisan saya yang telah disiarkan oleh portal Menara.my.

---

Saya amat tertarik membaca kenyataan yang dibuat oleh Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif, Institut Kajian Strategik Islam Malaysia (IKSIM), Dato’ Prof. Hj Mahamad Naser Disa seperti yang dilaporkan oleh portal berita Menara di bawah tajuk, ‘ROS Boleh Batalkan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan-Pertubuhan Yang Menentang Agenda Islam Negara!’.

Seksyen 2A Akta Pertubuhan 1966 dengan jelas menggariskan bahawa setiap pertubuhan berdaftar mestilah mematuhi Perlembagaan Persekutuan dalam menjalankan urusan mereka.

Menara melaporkan bahawa menurut Dato’ Prof. Hj Mahamad Naser Disa, parti-parti politik dan pertubuhan yang menentang pemerkasaan Akta 355 boleh dibatalkan pendaftaran mereka.

Selain daripada mempersoalkan pindaan Akta 355, apakah tuduhan bahawa Malaysia ialah sebuah Negara Sekular oleh pemimpin sesebuah parti politik atau pertubuhan akan mengakibatkan terbatalnya pendaftaran pertubuhan mereka kerana perkara itu jelas bertentangan dengan Perkara 3(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan?

Persolannya, kenapakah sekarang ini pemimpin-pemimpin parti politik dan pertubuhan berlumba-lumba untuk dengan lantangnya mendakwa bahawa mereka bebas dan berhak menentang dan menghina hal-hal berkaitan agama Islam dan kedudukan istimewa orang Melayu? Malah, ada pemimpin yang sanggup menghina Raja-Raja Melayu dan mempertikaikan titah Raja-Raja kita. Apakah mereka terlalu jahil undang-undang atau sengaja mahu mencabar undang-undang dan kedaulatan Perlembagaan negara kita?

Akta Pertubuhan 1966 memperuntukkan bahawa setiap pertubuhan diwajibkan untuk menjalankan apa-apa aktiviti dan hal ehwal nya selaras dengan Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan Perlembagaan Negeri. Dan yang penting sekali, jika apa-apa yang dibuat oleh pertubuhan itu berlawanan dengan, atau berkurangan atau bertentangan terhadap, atau tidak mengambilkira mengenai kedudukan Islam sebagai agama Malaysia, maka pendaftaran pertubuhan tersebut boleh dibatalkan.

Kes-kes seperti kenyataan songsang oleh pemimpin-pemimpin parti politik, G25, COMANGO, Bersih, SIS Forum Berhad, dan lain-lain dengan jelas melanggar Seksyen 2A Akta Pertubuhan 1966.  Mereka dengan sengaja menyalahtafsirkan Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia untuk mengelirukan orang ramai dalam usaha untuk meruntuhkan asas-asas negara kita yang bertentangan dengan ideologi mereka.

Malah, COMANGO pula sudahpun membawa tuntutan-tuntutan yang bercanggah dengan Seksyen 2A Akta Pertubuhan 1966 kepada Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu (PBB) untuk Semakan Berkala Sejagat (Universal Periodic Review). Perkara ini telah membawa kepada tekanan oleh Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu keatas negara kita dan mendesak kerajaan Malaysia mematuhi piawaian UPR biarpun ianya jelas bertentangan dengan Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia.

Apakah ini bermakna bahawa tindakan boleh diambil ke atas pertubuhan-pertubuhan mereka?

Kini sudah sampai masanya pihak berwajib mengambil langkah yang lebih tegas dalam mengawal aktiviti-aktiviti parti-parti politik dan pertubuhan yang dengan bangganya menghina dan memperlekehkan agama Islam serta membuat kenyataan yang bertentangan denganundang-undang Malaysia. Perkara ini amat penting kerana ianya boleh mencetuskan perbalahan kaum dan agama yang boleh membawa kepada rusuhan seperti tragedi 13 Mei 1969. Jika ini terjadi, kestabilan ekonomi negara akan musnah dan akan membawa kepada kehancuran negara kita.

 

Congratulations JAKIM on Khutbah Jumaat, ‘Menangani Konsep Kebebasan’

Congratulations to  Department of Islamic Development Malaysia (JAKIM) for today’s Khutbah Jummat with the title, ‘Menangani Konsep Kebebasan’. It was a very good khutbah about Human Rights and freedom. The Khatib also spoke about Universal Periodic Review (UPR), United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) demands and COMANGO (Coalition of Malaysian Non-Governmental Organisations).

The UPR process is getting closer. As what was said by the Khatib, we must not accept the UNHRC demands that wanted Malaysia to legitimise LGBTIQ, abolishing some part of the Syariah Law and others that are against the Malaysian Federal Constitution. 

Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution stated that, “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation”. So, as Islam is the religion of the Malaysia, we cannot accept total freedom, in fact total freedom is bad for us. That is why every country has rules that must be obeyed by everybody in the country including the tourists and visitors from other countries.

This proves that COMANGO, does not represent Malaysian Muslims. COMANGO leaders are not Muslim, so how could they represent the Muslims on Islamic issues? COMANGO is lying when it claims that it represent most Malaysian. And after I read their reports, I know that they are lying about the situation in Malaysia and accusing the Malaysian government for things that are not true.

After all, most of the COMANGO leaders are Malaysian opposition parties’ DAP and PKR leaders who would blame the government for every thing that they can ever imagine.

Related articles

• COMANGO And Human Rights
• Malaysia And UNHRC Declaration
• What Is Universal Periodic Review 

• United Nations Human Rights Council’s UPR

Malaysia And UNHRC Declaration

Each country is unique, and there is no two countries that are totally the same. As a sovereign country has its own law and constitution, nobody can force a sovereign country to follow the universal rules made by other countries especially when the rules are against the values and the needs of its citizens. The same is with Malaysia.

Malaysia has it’s own Federal Constitution, laws and Rukun Negara (National Principles) that ensures the harmony of its citizens. So, Malaysia does not need to follow all of the UNHR declarations. Why? Because some of the declarations are against the Malaysian Federal Constitution, laws and Rukun Negara. And if Malaysia accept all UNHRC declarations, we must accept total Freedom of Religion, total Freedom of Expression, LGBTIQ and others that are not only against our Federal Constitution but also illegal by Malaysian law.

As I wrote before, Article 3(1) of the Malaysian Federal Constitution wrote that “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation”. That means, Malaysia is an Islamic country. So, Malaysia cannot accept any part of the UNHRC declaration that is against the Islamic teachings, for example SOGI or LGBTIQ rights. 

LGBT way of life is against the Malaysian law as well as against the Syariah law and the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. To declare the LGBTIQ rights means committing a huge crime, a violation of human rights of others and undemocratic because it gives the rights to people to commit crime and against the rights of the majority.

ICERD is also against the Federal Constitution as Article 153 of the Federal Constitution gives special rights and position of the Malays and the Bumiputras (indigenous people of the Sabah and Sarawak). Is Article 153 unfair? People need to study the history of Malaysia and not reading the reports from COMANGO to understand why Article 153 is fair.

Malaysians live peacefully and the government had been fair to the minorities, treat them well and not discriminating them. So Malaysia does not need to accept all of the UNHRC declarations because some are not suitable for Malaysia. What seems fair for the minorities may not be fair for the majorities. For the ones who support LGBTIQ and wants Malaysia to accept SOGI rights, can they understand that it is unfair and against the human rights of the majority to force others to follow them? When one wants to make it fair, he or she must look at the whole condition and situation and not being selfish and only wants things his or her way.

Is being a religious state unfair to others? Malaysia is not the only religious state in the world; Vatican City, Monaco, Argentina and lots of other countries are also religious state so why must Malaysia be forced to accept the idea of secularism?

Not all of the UNHRC declarations are suitable for every country because each country has different social values and ways of live. Human rights must not only means giving rights for total freedom; such as total freedom of expression and others to everybody but it must be about being fair to the whole community because humans do not live alone. For example, Muslims living in England cannot force the British government to ban the selling of alcohol for the reason that consuming alcohol is against the Islamic teaching.

UNHRC declarations should be about making people happy, protecting people and giving people a better quality of life. And human rights should not be about everybody can do things their way without thinking of others around them, the law and constitution of their countries and others.

UNHRC declaration must not be about making a country accept a universal rule that is against the law and constitution of the country that in the end, make most people miserable, unhappy, causing problems, havoc and instability in the country.

Related articles

• United Nations Human Rights Council’s UPR (ahmadalikarim.wordpress.com)
• United Nations Human Rights Council’s UPR (ahmadalijetplane.wordpress.com)
• COMANGO And Human Rights (ahmadalijetplane.wordpress.com)
• COMANGO And Human Rights (ahmadalikarim.wordpress.com)

What Is Universal Periodic Review

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a mechanism of the Human Rights Council (HRC) which is an intergovernmental body made up of 47 states, to review how far the members of the United Nations follow the Human Rights. (All About The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by SUHAKAM)

The UPR reviews all 192 United Nations (UN) Member States over a four-year cycle. The process consists of several steps. The review takes place at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, Switzerland.

Objectives:

1. Improvement of human rights of the people.
2. How far does the state fulfil the obligations and commitments of human rights, assessment of positive development and problems that are faced by the States in fulfilling the obligations.
3. Enhance the State’s capacity and technical assistance, in consultation with, and with the consent of, the State concerned.
4. Sharing the best practice of human rights among States and other stakeholders.
5. Support for cooperation in promotion and protecting of human rights.
6. Encourage full cooperation and engagement with the HRC, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and other human rights bodies.

Recommendations:

Recommendations are the final results of the UPR process, and are included in the final report. Although the recommendations are not binding, they act as a set of commitments by the State to improve the protection and promotion of human rights in their country. These recommendations will serve as benchmarks to the State, on what it must achieve until the next UPR cycle.

Related articles:

• COMANGO And Human Rights 
• United Nations Human Rights Council’s UPR(ahmadalikarim.wordpress.com)
• PPMM’s NGI Round Table Discussion On UPR Human Rights Council 2013

COMANGO And Human Rights

During the briefing for Muslim UPRo (Muslim NGOs in the UPR process) at Dewan Tun Rahah Memorial Tun Abdul Razak in Kuala Lumpur, Uncle Azril briefed us about the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) declarations. The review process will be held at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. 

Malaysia is a peaceful country where the minorities races and religions are not been discriminated by our government. And Malaysia has its own Federal Constitutions, Rules of Laws, Social Contract and National Principles. This is very important to ensure the stability of our country since the people in our country is multi racial.

Anyway a loose coalition of NGOs called COMANGO (Coalition of Malaysian NGOs in the UPR process) made some false accusations regarding human rights in Malaysia. It also demands Malaysia to sign the UNHRC treaties that are against the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, our Rukun Negara (National Principles) and the laws of our country.

COMANGO claims that it represents the majority of Malaysian, but they are not. Actually COMANGO only represents a minority of Malaysian citizens. They claimed to represent 54 NGOs but only 12 of those NGOs are legal, meaning most of the NGOs that COMANGO represented are illegal as they are not registered under the ROS or SSM.

Some of COMANGO’s demands are:

• Demands Malaysia to sign the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR) which said,“The Committee observes that the freedom to “have or to adopt” a religion or belief necsesarily entails the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right to replace one’s current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views, as well as the right to retain one’s religion or belief…”. ICCPR is against Article 3 (1) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia that says, “Islam is the religion of the Federation” and Article 11 (4) that says that state laws and federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among Muslims and also against the first principle of  Rukun Negara (National Principles) that says, “Believe in God”.

• Demands Malaysia to sign the International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). This is against Article 153 of the Federal Constitution that gives special rights and position of the Malays and the Bumiputras (indigenous people of the Sabah and Sarawak).

• Demands Malaysia to agree on the SOGI Rights (Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity) which means they want Malaysia to legalised LGBTIQ (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Intersex Queer). This is against Article 3 (1) of the Federal Constitution and also the law of Malaysia.

• Demands some enactments of the Syariah Law to be abolished. This is also against Article 3 (1) and against the second principle of the Rukun Negara that says, “Loyalty to the king and country,” because the king must protect Islam.

I do not agree on certain things that UNHRC declares as Human Rights because it is against my Rights as a Malaysian citizen according to the Federal Constitutions, Rukun Negara and the Rules of Laws of Malaysia. 

COMANGO does not respect the Federal Constitutions, Rukun Negara, Rules of Laws and the Social Contract of Malaysia. And COMANGO does not respect human rights because it claims that it represent the majority of Malaysian when it is not true. Cheating and making false accusations is a crime. Can we trust criminals to fight for other people’s Human Rights?

Related articles

• United Nations Human Rights Council’s UPR (ahmadalikarim.wordpress.com)

• PPMM’s NGI Round Table Discussion On UPR Human Rights Council 2013

Azril – Taklimat UPR kpd NGO Islam

United Nations Human Rights Council’s UPR

UPR stands for Universal Periodic Review. It is a process to review how far all the countries that are members of the United Nations follow the demands made by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

This year, our country, Malaysia will be reviewed by UNHRC. I think Malaysia is a very peaceful and fair country where all minority races are not being discriminated by our government.

Must all the United Nations members agree to all of the UNHRC demands? I feel that not every country needs to be the same as other countries and follow the same universal rules because every country and its citizen is unique and has different needs and values.

For example, Malaysia is an Islamic country while Roman Catholicism is the official religion of Monaco and Argentina. So, they are all different and each country has different social values and ways of live.

So, is it fair if we want all the countries in this world to follow a set of universal rules and values agreed by other countries whose needs and values are different? I think that not only it is wrong, in fact, it is against the human rights to force a country to accept any value or rule which is not suitable for the local people of the country, against their social values, religions or can cause lots of problems to the country. And it is not right to force a country to agree on something that is actually against their Constitutions and rules of laws.

Related articles:

COMANGO And Human Rights

PPMM’s NGI Round Table Discussion On UPR Human Rights Council 2013

PPMM’s NGI Round Table Discussion On UPR Human Rights Council 2013

Uncle Azril Mohd. Amin (L) and I (R) during the Forum Islam Dan Cabaran Semasa – Polemik Isu Kalimah Allah at the Auditorium Utama, Universiti Islam Antarabangsa.

I was very proud and honoured when the vice-president of Persatuan Peguam Muslim Malaysia (PPMM), Uncle Azril Mohd Amin invited us to a round table meeting organised by PPMM at the Putrajaya Marriott Hotel yesterday.

It was a closed discussion and lots of lawyers were there as well as some Islamic NGOs or  NGIs activists.

My siblings and I were the only kids and teens whom were invited to that important discussion.

It was a great experience but I am sad because I don’t really understand what Uncle Azril said in his speech as he was speaking  in Malay language, using difficult words.

And I can’t even read words on the English written slide show for I forgot to wear my glasses.

But fortunately Uncle Azril, my parents and my big sisters helped me to understand more about the it later on.

What was discussed was about the demands made by the Coalition of Malaysian NGOs in the Universal Periodic Review Process (COMANGO) and also about the treaty made by the United Nations regarding LGBT which Malaysia haven’t sign because Malaysia is an Islamic country.

I was shocked when I read the demands made by COMANGO.

I think that most of the demands are unfair and bias because lots of them are against the human rights of most Malaysian and also against our Federal Constitution.

Furthermore a lot of important NGOs are not part of COMANGO, so COMANGO does not represend the voice of the majority of Malaysian.

Is it fair to force a sovereign country to change parts of its Federal Constitution and to go against the human rights of the majority of its citizens or robbing their human rights; just to a make small group of people happy?

How about my human rights if their demands were accepted; because some of their demands are against my human rights.

As a citizen, I also want my human rights to be protected even though I am just a kid and I do not want my human rights to be robbed by others who fight for their own agendas.

The United Nations must understand that every country is unique and the values and the needs of its citizens is different from others so nobody must be forced to accept a universal value as the only standard of human rights.

If Malaysian eat rice, nobody must force us to eat bread instead of rice; so if Malaysia do not accept or recognise certain values, nobody must rob our rights by forcing Malaysia to accept the values.

I want to thank Uncle Azril for inviting me to the discussion because it was an important discussion about an interesting topic about Human Rights, and I learned a lot of thing from it.