Posted By ~ 8th May 2012
KEADILAN MULAKAN TINDAKAN MENGIKUT PERLEMBAGAAN UNTUK MEWUJUDKAN TRIBUNAL MEMECAT PENGERUSI DAN TIMBALAN PENGERUSI SPR
Pendedahan yang dibuat oleh Setiausaha Agong KEADILAN, Dato’ Saifuddin Nasution Ismail bahawa Pengerusi dan Timbalan Pengerusi Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya (SPR) adalah ahli Umno mempunyai kesan yang besar di sisi Perlembagaan Persekutuan.
Bukti yang dikemukakan oleh Dato’ Saifuddin Nasution Ismail mengenai keanggotaan Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Yusof di bahagian Umno Ampang sehingga kini tidak disanggah. Timbalannya Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar pula mengaku secara terbuka beliau pernah menjadi ahli Umno. Sejak pendedahan dibuat dua minggu lalu, kedua-dua mereka tidak pernah menyatakan bahawa mereka telah membatalkan keanggotaan mereka.
Peruntukan Perlembagaan Persekutuan mengenai perlantikan dan keanggotaan SPR adalah jelas seperti termaktub di dalam Perkara 114, terutamanya Fasal 2 dan Fasal 4A seperti berikut:
(2) Pada melantik anggota Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya, Yang di-Pertuan Agong hendaklah mengambil perhatian tentang peri mustahaknya suatu Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya yang mendapat kepercayaan awam.
(4A) Sebagai tambahan kepada apa-apa kehilangan kelayakan yang diperuntukkan di bawah Fasal (4), pengerusi Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya hilang kelayakan untuk memegang jawatan itu jika selepas tiga bulan pelantikannya ke jawatan itu atau pada bila-bila masa selepas itu dia ialah atau menjadi anggota mana-mana lembaga pengarah atau lembaga pengurusan, atau pegawai atau pekerja, atau melibatkan diri dalam hal ehwal atau urusan, mana mana organisasi atau badan, sama ada diperbadankan atau selainnya, atau mana-mana pengusahaan komersil, perindustrian atau pengusahaan lain, sama ada atau tidak dia menerima apa-apa saraan, hadiah, untung atau faedah daripadanya.
Dengan syarat bahawa kehilangan kelayakan itu tidaklah terpakai jika organisasi atau badan itu menjalankan apa-apa kerja kebajikan atau sukarela atau tujuan yang berfaedah kepada masyarakat atau mana-mana bahagiannya, atau apa-apa kerja atau tujuan lain yang bersifat khairat atau sosial, dan anggota itu tidak menerima apa-apa saraan, hadiah, untung atau faedah daripadanya.
Keanggotaan kedua-dua pegawai tertinggi SPR ini di dalam sebuah parti politik secara jelas melanggar Perkara 114, Fasal 2 dan Fasal 4A. Apatah lagi apabila kedua-dua mereka mengaku menjadi ahli atau tidak menafikan mereka pernah menjadi ahli.
Tuntutan yang dikenakan oleh Perkara 114 adalah jelas; iaitu dalam masa tiga bulan dilantik ke jawatan Pengerusi atau Timbalan Pengerusi SPR, mereka perlu menarik diri dari semua badan yang termaktub di bawah Fasal 4A dengan membatalkan keahlian mereka. Sebagai pegawai tertinggi SPR, kecuaian mereka tidak menyemak dan membatalkan keahlian parti politik adalah satu kesalahan besar yang melanggar peruntukan Perlembagaan.
Oleh yang demikian, KEADILAN akan memulakan tindakan bersesuaian dengan Perlembagaan untuk memecat kedua-dua mereka dari SPR. Mengikut peruntukan Perlembagaan, sebuah tribunal perlu ditubuhkan untuk membicarakan kecuaian dan pelanggaran peruntukan Perlembagaan seperti yang didakwa seterusnya mengambil tindakan memecat kedua-duanya jika didapati bersalah.
KEADILAN akan menulis secara rasmi kepada Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak bagi menggesa penubuhan tribunal ini. Surat rasmi ini akan diserahkan secara tangan ke Pejabat Perdana Menteri Khamis 10 Mei 2012 ini.
Kebebasan pilihanraya umum akan datang bergantung kepada kredibiliti SPR. Maka, Dato’ Seri Najib sewajarnya tidak melengah-lengahkan penubuhan tribunal ini.
YB SIVARASA RASIAH
AHLI PARLIMEN SUBANG
MOHD RAFIZI RAMLI
PENGARAH STRATEGI KEADILAN
8 MEI 2012
Posted By ~ 2nd April 2012
Ahad 1hb April, Sivarasa bersama Sdr Khairuddin Othman telah hadir di Program Kesihatan anjuran Pakatan Rakyat Subang di Bandar Baru Sungei Buloh.
Penduduk penduduk tempatan berpeluang untuk mendapat pemeriksaan kesihatan percuma samping bersalaman dengan Ahli Parlimen dan pimpinan masyarakat setempat.
Sivarasa bersama Penyelaras DUN Paya Jaras, Sdr Khairuddin Othman
Posted By ~ 2nd April 2012
Sivarasa supported the Earth Hour Walk 2012 @ Giza, Kota Damansara.
Over 60 children and youth took part in a 5.5km walk around Kota Damansara to help create awareness of the necessity to Protect our Planet.
The walk was followed by awareness programmes held at the concourse of GIZA with performances by local PPRT Section8 Drummers and others.
At the Earth Hour, lights were turned off at GIZA for 60minutes as a symbolic support and commitment to Protect the Planet.
The children and youth went around the mall, distributing flyers and educational materials to shoppers and diners.
Also present at GIZA was YB Nasir Hashim, ADUN Kota Damansara
An specially prepared Earth Hour Cake
[gallery]
Posted By ~ 26th March 2012
Sivarasa telah bersama penduduk-penduduk Subang Suria, U5 Shah Alam dalam satu sessi dialog yang dianjurkan Persatuan Penduduk.
Berbagai masalah telah dibangkitkan termasuk isu baucer air percuma, masalah kekurangan parking dan kekurangan peralatan dan infrastruktur surau.
Sivarasa akan memanjangkan masalah mereka kepada pihak-pihak yang berkenaan dan berharap isu-isu tersebut dapat diberi tumpuan yang sewajarnya atau diselesaikan secepat mungkin.
Sivarasa mendekati penduduk semasa berucap
[caption id="attachment_822" align="alignright" width="150" caption="Bersama pemimpin komuniti dalam sesi dialog"]
[/caption]
Banner Program yang disediakan pengajur
Posted By ~ 26th March 2012
Sivarasa turun memberi sokongan moral kepada kumpulan NGO REFLEX (Return Effingham Land).
Kumpulan ini menuntut kembali 3 ekar tanah Sekolah Rendah Tamil Effingham di Bandar Utama, yang telah dicuri oleh MIC. Pihak pemaju Bandar Utama telah memperuntukan 6 ekar tanah untuk SRJK Effingham. Sekolah tersebut telah dibina atas 3 ekar tanah sahaja dan baki 3 ekar telah ditukarmilik kepada MIC.
Kumpulan ini telah membuat lapuran polis serta lapuran kepada Suruhanjaya Pencegah Rasuah Malaysia.
Pada setial hari Sabtu, jam 8:00malam, di Brickfields, kumpulan ini akan mengadakan vigil lilin untuk menuntut kembali tanah ini daripada MIC. Vigil Lilin ini juga bertujuan untuk menghebohkan penyelewengan MIC mencuri tanah sekolah.
Sivarasa di Vigil Lilin
[caption id="attachment_817" align="aligncenter" width="300" caption="Sivarasa memberi ucapan sokongan beliau"]
[/caption]
Antara anak-anak muda yang turut hadir memberi sokongan
Posted By ~ 26th March 2012
Sivarasa bersama Ahli Majlis James Ng di Parlimen
[caption id="attachment_812" align="alignright" width="150" caption="Sivarasa bersama YB Tian Chua dan YB Fuziah"]
[/caption]
Sivarasa dalam sidang akhbar Parlimen
Posted By ~ 22nd March 2012
KENYATAAN MEDIA OLEH PAKATAN RAKYAT – 19hb Mac 2012
PAKATAN RAKYAT MEMINTA KERAJAAN MENYOKONG RESOLUSI BERKENAAN SRI LANKA DI MAJLIS HAK ASASI, BANGSA-BANGSA BERSATU.
Beberapa hari lagi, Majlis Hak Asasi Manusia, Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu yang kini sedang bermesyuarat di Geneva akan membincangkan resolusi berkaitan Sri Langka yang menimbulkan dan menyentuh isu-isu berikut:
a. Menggesa kerajaan Sri Lanka melaksanakan semua syor-syor dalam laporan 2010 daripada Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and pastikan tindakkan bebas dan adil dilaksanakan demi mencapai keadilan untuk semua warga Sri Lanka; dan
b. Meminta kerajaan Sri Lanka membentang satu pelan tindakkan komprehensif yang memperincikan langkah-langkah yang telah dan akan dilakukan untuk melaksanakan laporan LLRC dan menangani kelanggaran undang-undang antarabangsa
c. Menggesa Pejabat Pesuruhjaya Hak Asasi Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu member dan kerajaan Sri Lanka menerima semua bantuan untuk melaksanakan langkah-langkah tersebut dan melaporkan balek pada persidangan ke 22.
Walaupun resolusi ini tidak sekuat dan lemah kalau disbanding dengan versi asalnya, Parti Keadilan Rakyat menggesa agar kerajaan menyokong resolusi di atas.
Pengabaian terhadap pencabulan hak asasi manusia, jenayah peperangan dan jenayah terhadap kemanusiaan yang dilakukan pada peringkat terakhir peperangan 2009 adalah perkara yang tidak boleh diterima dan dibiarkan begitu sahaja dengan pelakunya mengambil manfaat daripada daripada budaya ketiadaan kebertanggungjawaban atau “culture of impunity” yang kian wujud.
Dokumentari ‘The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka” yang telah disiarkan melalui Channel 4 pada 14 Jun 2011 di United Kingdom dan seterusnya menerima publisiti luas di dunia telah memberikan bukti-bukti visual yang mengejutkan yang menyokong hakikat jenayah perang dalam bentuk laporan-laporan saksi, bahagian filem amatur, gambar-gambar dan video-video telefon bimbit.
Panel Pakar-Pakar (POE) yang telah dilantik oleh Setiausaha Agong Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bnagsa Bersatu, Ban Ki Moon telah menyimpulkan di dalam laporannya pada 2010 bahawa terdapat bukti-bukti kukuh jenayah peperangan dan menggesa agar Kerajaan Sri Langka “menjalankan siasatan bebas segera terhadap perkara tersebut dan lain-lain pencabulan terhadap Undang-Undang Kemanusian dan Hak Asasi Manusia yang telah dilakukan oleh kedua-dua pihak yang terlibat dengan konflik bersenjata”. Laporan tersebut juga menyarankan agar Setiausaha Agong “mewujudkan satu mekanisma antarabangsa yang bebas dengan segera”.
Kelulusan resolusi yang dicadangkan oleh Majlis Hak Asasi PBB ini adalah penting bagi penyelesaian jangka panjang terhadap situasi yang berlaku di Sri Langka.
Kerajaan Malaysia telah bertindak secara tepat sewaktu menyokong tindakan terhadap pencabulan hak asasi manusia yang berlaku di Bosnia pada 1990-an dan mengkritik tindakan yang sama ketika dilakukan oleh Israel terhadap rakyat Palestin. Kami menyokong tindakan sedemikian. Walaubagaimanapun kerajaan haruslah bertindak secara konsisten terhadap isu pencabulan hak asasi manusia yang disifatkan sebagai yang terburuk berlaku di Sri Langka – hak asasi manusia bagi mangsa-mangsa yang terkesan samada mereka adalah Tamil, Singhala, Hindu, Kristian atau Muslim tidak boleh dikorbankan demi untuk menjaga kepentingan ekonomi pihak-pihak tertentu.
Malaysia tidak seharusnya mengabaikan tanggungjawab sebagai anggota Majlis Hak Asasi sebagaimana yang telah dilakukan ketika menyokong resolusi yang menyebelahi Kerajaan Sri Langka pada tahun 2009.
Kami menggesa Perdana Menteri supaya menasihatkan Menteri Luar dan wakil-wakil kami di Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu agar menyokong resolusi tersebut dan menyatakan pendirian umum kerajaan dalam hal ini dengan segera.
DATO’ HAJI MUSTAFA ALI
Parti Islam SeMalaysia
YB DR TAN SENG GIAW
Parti Tindakan Demokratik
YB DATO’ SAIFUDDIN NASUTION ISMAIL
Parti Keadilan Rakyat
19 MAC
Posted By ~ 22nd March 2012
ELECTION COMMISSION EXPLANATION FOR SHIFTING TAN SRI KHALID IBRAHIM PLACE TO VOTE FROM PJ SELATAN TO LEMBAH PANTAI IS A SHOCKING CONFESSION TO AN ILLEGAL ACT
Election Deputy Chairperson Wan Ahmad Wan Omar when asked to explain how Tan Sri Khalid became a voter in Lembah Pantai without his knowledge said as follows “ he has not been moved. He is still registered at the same address but the boundaries have been moved in accordance with the Elections Act 1958 ( our emphasis )( quote from Malaysiakini 15 March 2012 ).
In my view Wan Ahmad has just confessed to performing an illegal act. Is this simply incompetence or a deliberate cover-up of illegality?
The Election Commission is NOT allowed to move boundaries of state or parliament constituencies unless it is done pursuant to a delimitation of constituency exercise pursuant to the 13th Schedule of the Federal Constitution which is done at minimum intervals of 8 years (also called “redelineation”).
In between such redelineation, NO movement of voters across state or parliament constituency boundaries as inflicted on the Selangor Menteri Besar is allowed under the law.
The EC has referred to Section 7(1) of the Elections Act 1958. However this section is about the process of creating voting districts in each constituency AFTER delimitation of a constituency including altering or creating new constituencies. Section 7(2) then provides that the division of a constituency into polling districts may be altered as occasion may require. This alteration is clearly limited to the polling districts WITHIN the constituency.
This is confirmed in the Election Commission’s own website under the section “Persempadanan Bahagian Pilihanraya” and the sub-section “Belah Bahagi Daerah Mengundi” where it is categorically stated that it is NOT ALLOWED to move a voter across a state constituency boundary, let alone a parliament constituency boundary. All examples given there of modifications to voting districts or daerah mengundi given on the EC website do NOT involve moving voters across constituency boundaries
It is clear therefore that voters can only be moved WITHIN a state constituency to different voting districts ( or daerah mengundi ). Any move across a constituency boundary requires the permission of the voter if done in between redelineation exercises.
The EC’s explanation that it is done “to synchronise electoral maps with the country’s official map” is a confession to ignorance of their own legal framework. Such so-called “synchronisation” must be done in accordance with the law.
What the EC is doing now allows it to secretly move voters across boundaries without their knowledge. This is what the electoral law does not allow to prevent manipulation of boundaries outside a proper delimitation exercise.
In Subang, we have after checking the electoral roll gazetted up to September 2011 found at least 208 voters moved from other Parliament seats and state seats into Subang, again in complete breach of the electoral law.
Yesterday afternoon I lodged a report on this at the EC office in Shah Alam and also a report at the MACC office in Shah Alam requesting investigation into the EC’s abuse of power and illegal acts.
The EC should disclose in full to the public how many more illegal transfers of such voters it has performed in reckless and irresponsible ignorance of the law. The Parliamentary Select Committee on Electoral Reform should investigate this to the fullest. Is the EC doing this deliberately knowing that it is illegal?
Sivarasa Rasiah, Ahli Parlimen Subang
Anggota Majlis PImpinan Pusat, Parti Keadilan Rakyat 21st March 2012
PENJELASAN SURUHANJAYA PILIHANRAYA BERHUBUNG PEMINDAHAN KAWASAN MENGUNDI TAN SRI KHALID IBRAHIM DARI PJ SELATAN KE LEMBAH PANTAI ADALAH PENGAKUAN YANG MENGEJUTKAN TERHADAP TINDAKAN MENYALAHI UNDANG-UNDANG
________________________________________________________________________
Apabila diminta mengulas bagaimana Tan Sri Khalid secara tiba-tiba menjadi pengundi kawasan Lembah Pantai tanpa pengetahuannya, Timbalan Pengerusi Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya Wan Ahmad Wan Omar menyatakan “Beliau tidak dipindahkan. Beliau masih didaftarkan di alamat yang sama, tetapi sempadan telah diperbetulkan selaras dengan Akta Pilihan Raya 1958,” ( petikan dari Malaysiakini 15 March 2012 ).
Pada hemat saya Wan Ahmad secara terbuka telah mengaku melakukan perbuatan yang menyalahi undang-undang. Adakah puncanya cuma tidak berkebolehan atau secara sengaja melindungi tindakkan haram?
Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya tidak dibenarkan mengubah sempadan mengundi bagi negeri dan parlimen melainkan dilakukan persempadanan semula selaras dengan Jadual 13, Perlembagaan Persekutuan, perkara tersebut hanya boleh dilaksanakan sekali dalam tempoh 8 tahun.
Di antara tempoh 8 tahun ini, pengundi tidak boleh dipindahkan merentasi sempadan kawasan negeri atau parlimen sebagaimana yang terjadi kepada Menteri Besar Selangor.
SPR telah merujuk kepada Seksyen 7(1) Akta Pilihanraya 1958. Walaubagaimanapun peruntukan tersebut hanya terpakai bagi proses pembentukan daerah mengundi bagi setiap kawasan SELEPAS persempadanan semula kawasan mengundi termasuk mengubah atau membuat kawasan baru. Seksyen 7(2) pula memperuntukkan bahawa pembahagian kawasan mengundi kepada daerah-daerah pengundian boleh diubah sekiranya diperlukan. Walaubagaimanapun perubahan ini hanya berlaku DI DALAM kawasan pengundian yang sama.
Perkara ini boleh disemak di dalam laman web Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya sendiri di bawah seksyen “Persempadanan Bahagian Pilihanraya” dan di bawah sub-seksyen “Belah Bahagi Daerah Mengundi” yang mana dinyatakan bahawa seseorang pengundi tidak boleh dipindahkan merentasi kawasan pilihanraya negeri apatah lagi sempadan pilihanraya parlimen. Kesemua contoh-contoh yang ditunjukkan di dalam laman web SPR adalah berkaitan dengan pengubahsuaian daerah mengundi dan ianya tidak langsung menyentuh pemindahan pengundi merentasi sempadan kawasan pengundian.
Justeru, adalah jelas pengundi hanya boleh dipindahkan ke daerah mengundi yang berbeza dalam kawasan pengundian negeri yang sama. Sebarang perpindahan merentasi kawasan pengundian negeri memerlukan kebenaran pengundi sekiranya ia dilakukan di luar daripada persempadanan semula.
Penjelasan SPR kononnya ia dilakukan “bagi menyelaraskan peta pilihanraya dengan peta rasmi negara” adalah pengakuan yang menampakkan kejahilan SPR terhadap kerangka undang-undangnya sendiri. “Penyelarasan” tersebut sekiranya dilakukan hendaklah mengikut kaedah-kaedah perundangan yang digariskan.
Apa yang dilakukan SPR sekarang membenarkan pemindahan pengundi-pengundi merentasi kawasan pengundian secara rahsia tanpa pengetahuan daripada pengundi. Perkara sebegini adalah salah dan bertentangan dengan undang-undang pilihanraya dan membuka ruang kepada SPR untuk memanipulasi sempadan pilihanraya di luar pelaksanaan persempadanan semula.
Di kawasan Subang, selepas semak daftar undi yang diwartakan oleh SPR untuk akhir September 2011 telah mendapati sekurang-kurang 208 pengundi yang telah dipindah kawasan ke Subang dari kawasan parlimen dan DUN yang lain, satu kelanggaran undang-undang yang jelas.
Petang semalam, saya telah buat satu lapuran berkenaan perkara ini dengan pejabat SPR di Shah Alam dan juga buat suatu aduan di pejabat SPRM di Shah Alam memohon satu siasatan terhadap penyelewengan dan tindakkah haram ini.
SPR perlu mendedahkan sepenuhnya kepada umum berapa ramai lagi pengundi-pengundi yang menjadi mangsa perpindahan sempadan secara tidak sah yang dilakukan secara tidak bertanggungjawab dan melulu tanpa menghiraukan undang-undang. Jawatankuasa Pilihan Parlimen- Pembaharuan Pilihanraya harus menyiasat perkara ini sepenuhnya. Adakah SPR dengan sengaja dan sedar melakukan perbuatan ini walaupun mengetahui ianya bercanggah dengan peruntukan undang-undang?
to download the memorandum submitted,click here:
http://www.sivarasa.com/doc/MEM-KPD-SPR.doc
http://www.sivarasa.com/doc/MEMO-KPD-SPRM.doc
Sivarasa Rasiah, Ahli Parlimen Subang
Anggota Majlis PImpinan Pusat, Parti Keadilan Rakyat 21hb Mac 2012
Posted By ~ 12th January 2012
Click on this link to watch R. Sivarasa discussing Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s acquittal, the political considerations and the implications for PKR.
http://mobtv.my/talkshow-679.html
Posted By ~ 12th January 2012
Raja Petra’s scurrilous and dishonest accusations
I refer to his comments on January 6 in the blog Malaysia Today titled “Just do it, not DUIT!” and the consequent report in the news portal Free Malaysia Today “RPK reveals cases of graft, power abuse in S’gor”.
Raja Petra’s comments show he is rapidly descending to the level of the likes of Nallakaruppan, Ezam and Zulkifly Nordin the way he is prepared to make completely unsubstantiated scurrilous and mischievous allegations.
He purports to produce what on the surface look like believable stories with flourishes of lurid detail. When you examine them closely, we find that key assertions are false. Other assertions remain simply that – pure allegations without evidence. However he is fully aware that the intent of his written comments is to attempt to damage reputations of individuals and smear PKR and Pakatan Rakyat.
Let me reproduce his allegations in respect of myself, Surendran, Derek Fernandez and Latheefa Koya. “Through the influence of Lateefa (sic) and Derrick (sic), a good chunk of the legal work in MBPJ is diverted to the firms of Sivarasa, Surendran and Derrick.” “legal work dished out by MBPJ legal department is given exclusively to a group of lawyers who are all PKR leaders”. “a large amount of legal work to these chosen few” . In one breath, he alleges “exclusivity” to these firms, and then contradictorily says “a good chunk” and “a large amount”.
He then suggests that this is corrupt practice or at the very least reflects a conflict of interest.
His assertions that Derek Fernandez and Surendran are doing work for MPBJ are completely false. He can’t even get Derek’s name and the name of the name of his firm correct. Derek Fernandez is not even a member of PKR.
Since 2009, my firm M/s Daim & Gamany have been retained by MBPJ to defend it in 4 cases. Two cases involved judicial review challenges brought by advertising companies unhappy with its new billboard policy. Two other cases involved a judicial review challenge initiated by a developer unhappy with stop work orders issued by MBPJ and a related civil suit. The firm is paid according to a scale of fees applicable to all firms retained by it. I believe there are about 14 firms on that list. 4 cases does not amount to the”large amount” or “a good chunk” or the “legal work dished out exclusively to PKR leaders” that Raja Petra alleges
I believe I am retained by MBPJ to defend it in these cases because judicial review is one of my areas of practice and as a lawyer of 24 years experience, they believe I am competent to defend their interest.
I have no executive role in MBPJ or in the Selangor State government. No question of any conflict of interest arises at all.
Similarly with Latheefa Koya. She practices as a legal assistant with Daim & Gamany. She is also a councillor of MBPJ. Hence she ensures she stays OUT of all meetings and decision making in respect of cases that are referred to my firm.
These issues about my firm receiving work from MBPJ and Latheefa’s role were raised two years ago by Wee Choo Keong after he left PKR. MBPJ clarified then that there was no conflict of interest on the part of Latheefa and myself. A simple check would have verified that.
Raja Petra insinuates scurrilously that I seem to have suddenly increased my personal wealth as a result of being given huge amounts of legal work by MBPJ. His evidence is “ Daim & Gamany has moved from their humble office in ‘slum’ Masjid India area to a new swank office near MBPJ.
Again, he has got it completely wrong. My firm was in PKNS Wisma Yakin in Jalan Masjid India up to 2005. In that year we moved to Megan Avenue II in Jalan Yap Kwan Seng. Then in May 2011, we moved to a smaller office in the Maris Brothers premises next to Catholic High School in section 10 PJ. We currently occupy office space in the form of 2 rooms about 300 sq ft each.
The “new swank office” that Raja Petra describes that Daim & Gamany have can only exist in his malevolent imagination ( Nathaniel Tan has published some useful photos of our office at http://jelas.info/2012/01/07/rpks-accusations-of-selangor-corruption-proven-to-be-bunk/ ). I say malevolent because these are matters that are simple to verify by any responsible writer and should have been verified before they were falsely and scurrilously published.
Raja Petra lied similarly when he described Surendran’s change of car ( again non-existent ) as connected to the non-existent huge work allegedly received from MBPJ post 2008. Language such as “talk about rags to riches in a blink of an eye” is malicious in intent when asserted either knowingly or reckless that it was false.
.These issues about my firm receiving work from MBPJ and Latheefa’s role were raised two years ago by Wee Choo Keong after he left PKR. MBPJ clarified then that there was no conflict of interest on the part of Latheefa and myself. A simple check would have verified that.
Raja Petra insinuates scurrilously that I seem to have suddenly increased my personal wealth as a result of being given huge amounts of legal work by MBPJ. His evidence is “ Daim & Gamany has moved from their humble office in ‘slum’ Masjid India area to a new swank office near MBPJ.
Again, he has got it completely wrong. My firm was in PKNS Wisma Yakin in Jalan Masjid India up to 2005. In that year we moved to Megan Avenue II in Jalan Yap Kwan Seng. Then in May 2011, we moved to a smaller office in the Maris Brothers premises next to Catholic High School in section 10 PJ. We currently occupy office space in the form of 2 rooms about 300 sq ft each.
The “new swank office” that Raja Petra describes that Daim & Gamany have can only exist in his malevolent imagination ( Nathaniel Tan has published some useful photos of our office at http://jelas.info/2012/01/07/rpks-accusations-of-selangor-corruption-proven-to-be-bunk/ ). I say malevolent because these are matters that are simple to verify by any responsible writer and should have been verified before they were falsely and scurrilously published.
Raja Petra lied similarly when he described Surendran’s change of car ( again non-existent ) as connected to the non-existent huge work allegedly received from MBPJ post 2008. Language such as “talk about rags to riches in a blink of an eye” is malicious in intent when asserted either knowingly or reckless that it was false.
Many PKR lawyers are successful practitioners in their own right and are entitled to the income they generate for themselves in that capacity. What is Raja Petra’s motive in wilfully making such malicious accusations?
Raja Petra again lies when he says I am paid “tens of thousands a month” as a director on the board of Kumpulan Perangsang Selangor. I am certainly not paid “tens of thousands a month”. That would be immediately obvious from the published accounts of the company. I am paid the same as any other director. We are paid as professionals for the services we render on the board and in board committees for the responsibilities of helping to manage a public listed company with assets worth several billion ringgit; the amounts we are paid are similar to that paid in similar sized companies or possibly even less.
Look carefully at the allegations, insinuations and innuendo made against Azmin Ali without a shred of real evidence for something his brother has allegedly done. What is the intent here? Compare the way Rafizi produced documented fact after fact regarding Sharizat and the National Feedlot Corporation scandal. Raja Petra, if you have credible evidence of corruption in Selangor, produce it and I am sure Tan Sri Khalid and the PR leaders will deal with it.
Raja Petra has said subsequently as follows “PKR needs to prove me wrong. And if I am wrong then I will tender a public apology. Maybe my Deep Throats are wrong. Or maybe they intentionally set me up with a Red Herring.”
No. Petra, it is not so simple. You cannot get it so wrong and then wriggle out of it blaming someone else. As I said above, you maliciously knew it was false or were reckless as to whether it was false.
What you have done since your TV3 interview timed for release just before the 2011 Sarawak State Elections and your recent attacks timed for 1st January 2012 just before the 9th January Anwar verdict shows clearly now a malicious agenda with regard to PR and Anwar. Would you like to tell us in some detail what is your part of the deal?
What’s happening to you now is truly a pity. I still remember arguing for your freedom in the habeas corpus case we filed on your behalf in April 2001 after your first ISA arrest with Tian Chua and others.
It’s a timely reminder to us that along the difficult road we will all travel in our struggle and battle for justice and democracy that that there will be casualties. We will also have those who will betray the cause.
Sivarasa Rasiah
8th January 2012
