Space Events Not To Be Missed In 2017

(Yahoo News UK) – With a solar eclipse due on 26 February, there are plenty of celestial treats to keep stargazers happy in 2017.

Last year was packed with astronomical action including supermoons, Tim Peake’s history-making spacewalk and the arrival of NASA’s Juno probe at Jupiter and this year is set to be big just as big for space botherers. From meteor showers to solar eclipses, here are the space events you don’t want to miss in 2017…

  1. Annular solar eclipse – 26 February 2017
    At the end of February, the moon will pass in front of the sun, creating a bizarre halo effect. Unfortunately, this year’s eclipse will only be visible over South and West Africa and some of South America. 
  2. Jupiter at opposition – 7 April 2017
    The largest planet in our solar system will reach ‘opposition’ in April, meaning that it will slide into view as Earth moves into position between the sun and Jupiter. The massive planet’s face will be illuminated by the sun and will be visible through binoculars or a telescope. 
  3. Saturn at opposition – 15 June 2017
    In summer, Saturn will move into its closest position to Earth, giving us the best view possible. A telescope will be needed to see the huge planet’s famous rings while Saturn is fully lit up by the sun. 
  4. Perseid meteor shower – 12/13 August 2017
    One of the brighter meteor showers of the year, the Perseids happens annually between 17 July and 24 August, this year peaking 12-13 August. The best time to view the shooting stars is between midnight and dawn. 
  5. ‘Great American’ total solar eclipse – 21 August 2017
    For around two minutes, a 70-mile stretch between Oregon and South Carolina will be plunged into total darkness in a rare total eclipse as the sun will totally disappear behind the full moon. Stargazers elsewhere in the US will get a partial view of the stunning eclipse. 
  6. Cassini probe will crash into Saturn – 15 September 2017
    Launched in 1997, NASA’s probe finally made it to Saturn in 2004 and has been beaming back vital data to Earth ever since. The probe will be destroyed when it plunges through Jupiter’s atmosphere but not before sending back never-seen-before images. 
  7. Leonid meteor shower – 17/18 November 2017
    The Leonids meteors will be visible in the night sky throughout November, peaking between 17 and 18 November. The glowing pieces of comet debris will be visible to the naked eye. 
  8. Supermoon – 3 December 2017
    While 2016 saw stargazers treated to several supermoons, 2017 will see just one. December’s full moon, also known as the Full Cold Moon, will appear slightly bigger and brighter than normal. The best time to watch will be around sunset when the distinctive orange moon will appear.
  9. Geminid meteor shower – 13/14 December 2017
    Unlike most meteor showers, the Geminids are associated with an asteroid, rather than a comet. The glowing fireballs should be visible to the naked eye between December 7 and 16, but the best time to catch a glimpse is between 13 and 14 December. 

Mengarutnya Tun Mahathir… (Video)

Dalam satu sidang media selepas sambutan Tahun Baru Cina oleh PKR Bandar Tun Razak di Flat Seri Johor di Cheras, pengerusi Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (PPBM), Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamed membuat berberapa tuduhan yang amat mengarut tentang pindaan Akta 355.

Dalam sebuah video oleh KiniTV, Tun M sekali lagi membuat beberapa tuduhan liar seperti Himpunan 355 bermotifkan politik dan juga pindaan yang dicadangkan ini akan membolehkan perlaksanaan hukuman potong tangan dan lebih pelik lagi, penyembelihan orang.

“Tetapi nampak dia orang ni yang seronok sangat nak potong tangan orang, nak sembelih orang…”

~Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamed

Persolannya, adakah Tun M tidak faham tentang pindaan Akta 355 atau Tun sengaja mahu mengelirukan orang ramai dengan tuduhan yang tidak masuk akal seperti menyembelih orang?

Memang pelik bila Tun M seperti tidak faham tentang Akta 355, kerana hakikatnya, Akta ini telah dipinda dua kali semasa zaman Tun menjadi Perdana Menteri.

Malah Tun M sendiri telah menyokong usul pindaan Akta 355 pada tahun 1984 bertujuan untuk menaikkan had hukuman bagi Mahkamah Syariah pada ketka itu.

Seperti pindaan Akta 355 pada tahun 1984, pindaan yang dicadangkan ini juga hanyalah untuk menaikkan had hukuman kesalahan di bawah bidang kuasa Mahkamah Syariah dan bukannya menentukan hukuman kerana ini adalah di bawah bidang kuasa kerajaan negeri.

Malangnya, kini Tun sudah senada dengan kumpulan SIS Forum Berhad yang gagal memahami perkara yang mudah ini.

Hukuman berat atau ‘capital punishment’ seperti potong tangan tidak termasuk di bawah bidang kuasa Mahkamah Syariah, apatah lagi hukuman bunuh.

Tambahan, di bawah hukum Islam, pesalah tidak boleh dibunuh secara kejam seperti dengan cara sembelih apabila dihukum mati, dan Tun M sudah salah di situ.

Tun M juga nampaknya tidak faham akan cara perlaksanaan sebatan Syariah apabila menuduh bahawa perlaksanaan seratus sebatan akan membunuh pesalah.

“Ini nak sebat orang sampai seratus kali, mati kalau sebat seratus kali.”

~Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamed

Sebatan Syariah amat ringan berbanding sebatan sivil, dan sebatan akan dijalankan di bawah pengawasan doktor perubatan yang mengawasi keadaan pesalah semasa disebat dan sebatan akan ditangguhkan jika kesihatan pesalah tidak mengizinkan.

Kata Tun, “Melayu mudah lupa” tapi nampaknya Tun yang sudah lupa atau buat-buat lupa.

Related articles:

  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 Has Gone Too Far
  6. Is Tun M’s Rights Above The Rights Of Agong
  7. Tun M, Janganlah Menghina Nabi S.A.W.
  8. Tun M: “Perdana Menteri Buat Demonstration” (Video)
  9. Tun M: Jangan Menang Sorak, Kampung Tergadai
  10. Tun M and TMI vs Bukit Aman
  11. Video: Tun M Sings “Imagine”, Is He Okay?

PKR Claims Anwar Introduced Article 121 (1A)

In order to play safe and avoid losing Malay votes by saying “no” to PAS President’s Private Bill, PKR publishes a book named, “Strengthening Islamic Jurisprudence in Malaysia”, where apart from recycling irrelevant and out of context questions that were answered a long time ago, the party issued a very confusing statement regarding the Bill in order not to directly says that the party is against the Bill.

Please read:

  1. “Jawapan Kepada Kenyataan Mengelirukan Khalid Samad Tentang Pindaan Akta 355”
  2. “Akta 355: Poster Dangkal SIS Forum Tentang Akta 355
  3. Another Seditious Article by MMO’s Boo Su-Lyn

Worst, PKR tries to take the credit for the Federal Government’s effort in 1988 to upgrade the Syariah Courts by claiming that the move was “upon the initiatives of Almarhum Tan Sri Prof. Ahmad Ibrahim and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim”.

Written on page 20 of the book:

At the Federal level, upon the initiatives of the late Tan Sri Prof. Ahmad Ibrahim and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Article 121 (1A) was introduced to the Federal Constitution. The introduction upgraded the legal position of the Syariah Courts without infringing the civil on the court rights of non-Muslims. It must be stress that this initiative was discussed by the Islamic Consultation Body, the Islamic Centre (now JAKIM), and the Cabinet.

~Strengthening Islamic Jurisprudence in Malaysia

It is a known fact that Almarhum Tan Sri Professor Ahmad Mohamed Ibrahim Ahmad is the person who initiated the move but since I have not come across on Anwar’s specific role in fighting for the Article 121 1(A) together with Almarhum Professor Ahmad Ibrahim, I spoke to several senior lawyers and Constitution experts to clarify the claim made by PKR in the said book.

Contrary to what was claimed in the PKR book, the answers from the senior lawyers are that Anwar Ibrahim has nothing to do with the move to add the Article 121 (1A) to our Federal Constitution, neither in coming out with the idea nor the fight in pursuing the matter until it was accepted by the Federal Government.

I was told by the lawyers that it was the initiative of Almarhum Tan Sri Professor Ahmad Mohamed Ibrahim with the help from the then Chief Justice Tun Hamid Omar and the then Attorney General that made it possible to bring the matter to Parliament and that it has nothing to do either with Anwar Ibrahim or PKR.

Furthermore, after studying the Parliament Hansard, I found out that on March 17, 1988, it was not Anwar Ibrahim who tabled the Constitution (Amendment) 1988 Bill regarding Article 121 (1A) in the Parliament but it was the then Prime Minister, Dato’ Sri Dr. Mahathir Mohamed who tabled the Bill.

Below is a part of the Parliament Hansard on the Constitution (Amendment) 1988 Bill:

Penyampai : DATO’ SERI DR. MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD
Tajuk : MEMBENTANGKAN RANG UNDANG-UNDANG PERLEMBAGAAN (PINDAAN) 1988
Lokasi : DEWAN RAKYAT, KUALA LUMPUR
Tarikh : 17-03-1988

Tuan Yang di-Pertua,
Saya mohon mencadangkan iaitu Rang Undang-Undang bernama suatu Akta untuk meminda Perlembagaan Persekutuan dibacakan kali yang kedua sekarang….

…23. Perkara 118A menyatakan bahawa sesuatu aduan tentang tidak adanya dibuat pemilihan ke Dewan Rakyat hendaklah dianggap sebagai petisyen pilihanraya, dan Mahkamah Tinggi boleh membuat perintah untuk memaksa supaya pemilihan dibuat. Perkara itu juga menyatakan bahawa kegagalan membuat pemilihan dalam tempoh yang dinyatakan oleh Perkara 54 dan 55 tidak boleh dijadikan alasan untuk mengisytiharkan bahawa seseorang ahli itu telah tidak dipilih sewajarnya. Fasal 7 Rang Undang-Undang ini mencadangkan supaya Perkara 118A itu dipinda supaya ianya terpakai juga bagi pemilihan ke Dewan Undangan Negeri. PERKARA 121 ___________

24. Perkara 121 meletakhak kuasa kehakiman Persekutuan pada Mahkamah Tinggi dan mahkamah-mahkamah rendah. Ia juga meletakhak bidangkuasa tertentu pada Mahkamah Agung.

25. Fasal 8 Rang Undang-Undang ini mencadangkan supaya Perkara 121 dipinda dengan menghapuskan peruntukan tentang meletakhak kuasa-kuasa kehakiman pada mahkamah-mahkamah dan dengan memasukkan ke dalam Fasal (1) Perkara itu peruntukan yang menyatakan bahawa Mahkamah Tinggi dan mahkamah-mahkamah rendah hendaklah mempunyai bidangkuasa dan kuasa-kuasa sebagaimana yang diberi oleh atau di bawah undang-undang persekutuan. Dengan ini, Perkara itu tidak lagi akan memberi penekanan pada meletakhak kuasa kehakiman persekutuan pada mahkamah-mahkamah tetapi akan hanya memperkatakan tentang jenis-jenis mahkamah dan bidangkuasa serta kuasa-kuasanya.

~Office of the Prime Minister

Therefore, I have a few questions for PKR :

  1. What is the important role played by Anwar Ibrahim to justify his big role in Article 121 (1A) as claimed by PKR that, “At the Federal level, upon the initiatives of the late Tan Sri Prof. Ahmad Ibrahim and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Article 121 (1A) was introduced to the Federal Constitution”?
  2. Since the Clause (1A) was added to the Article 121 in 1988, on what basis can PKR take the credit by using Anwar’s name when;
    ——–i. PKR was then not yet existed.
    ——–ii. And Anwar Ibrahim who was then a leader of UMNO acted in the capacity
    ———–of an UMNO leader and in accordance with the principals of UMNO and by
    ———–the consent of  UMNO leadership?
  3. Are these concocted fictional claims are parts of PKR’s values and interpretation of the phrase “justice, humanity and based on the Islamic values of “rahmatan lil ‘alamin” (a mercy unto the world)” that was said in the book as what PKR is “committed in the struggle for”?

>>>Click here to read Strengthening Islamic Jurisprudence in Malaysia<<<

Related Posts:

Dato’ Naser Disa, Dato’ Zainul Rijal, Dr Yusri Di Himpunan 355

Anda masih belum betul-betul faham tentang apa itu Pindaan Akta 355?
Datanglah ke Himpunan 355 di Padang Merbok untuk mendengar penjelasan daripada peguam-peguam terkenal negara pada malam Sabtu 18 Februari 2016.

Aturcara tentatif:

Dato’ Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar (Presiden Persatuan Peguam Peguam Muslim Malaysia – PPMM)
9:16 P.M.

Dato’ Prof Hj. Mahamad Naser Disa (Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif Institut Kajian Strategik Islam Malaysia – IKSIM)
9:32 P.M.

Dr. Yusri Mohamad (Majlis Amal Islami Malaysia – MAIM)
10:10 P.M.

Will Dr. Kamarul Accept DAP Man’s Challenge To Deregister DAP?

mk-drk

Yesterday, MalaysiaKini reported that Johor DAP leader, Sheikh Omar Ali dares Mapan’s director Dr. Kamarul Zaman Yusoff to “try and get the party de-registered if their claims were true”.

MalaysiaKini wrote that the DAP man was referring to Dr. Kamarul Zaman Yusoff’s article with the title, “DAP Memang Anti-Islam”.

Johor DAP assistant publicity chief Sheikh Omar Ali said those accusing DAP of being anti-Islam should try and get the party de-registered if their claims were true.

He said this in reference to a commentary by Universiti Utara Malaysia’s Institute for Malaysian Political Analysis (Mapan) director Kamarul Zaman Yusuf titled ‘DAP memang anti-Islam’ (DAP is indeed anti-Islam).

~MalaysiaKini.

Sheikh Omar Ali then added:

“If Kamarul Zaman Yusuf is man enough to stand by his accusation that DAP is anti-Islam, then I challenge him to take legal action to get DAP deregistered as it (being anti-Islam) goes against the spirit of the Federal Constitution,” he said in a statement today.

~MalaysiaKini

Will Dr. Kamarul accept the serious challenge to “try and get the party de-registered” as dared by Johor DAP assistant publicity chief?

 

 

A Seditious Article From FMT

In a recent article posted by Free Malaysia Today (FMT), the author, an FMT reader, Ravinder Singh hit out at the Concerned Lawyers for Justice’s Aidil Khalid for his view on the vernacular schools.

In his article, “Unity has its roots in the people’s hearts”, Ravinder not only undermines and questions the use of the Bahasa Melayu as our national language but also our court rulings.

I have no idea why FMT publishes such an irrational piece of article with baseless, illogical slanderous, offensive, bias and racist arguments that can disrupt our national unity.

Below are some examples of what was written in the article:

  • Aidil cites legal authorities to support his view about the “destructive and damaging” effects of vernacular schools. He should be reminded that court decisions are made by humans who have sometimes been proven wrong.
  • National unity is not built by compelling everyone in a country to learn and use a national language.
  • A national language is a common language for administrative purposes. 
  • It is useless having everyone fluent in the national language when that same language is used to condemn and insult persons of different beliefs and cultures, creating walls between them.
  • On the other hand, you can have people of different religions, beliefs and cultures living happily together despite not being fluent in a national language. This was what Malaysia used to be.
  • Isn’t it sad that it is the abuse of the national language by politicians, self-appointed “defenders of the race”, vigilantes, school authorities and academicians that has disunited Malaysians?
  • There is no need to cite court judgments and or make academic pronouncements. They mean nothing when the reality on the ground is that it is the use of the national language itself that has brought about disunity.

Those seditious statements are uncalled for and are against the Section 3(1)(f) and the Section 3(1)(c) of the Sedition Act because such statements are part of elements that disrupt our national unity. 

The Section 3(1)(c) of the Sedition Act states:

A “seditious tendency” is a tendency— to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State;

And it is against the Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act to question the national language:

A “seditious tendency” is a tendency— 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.

National unity cannot be achieved unless the people understand the foundation and the history of our country.

Our national language, the Bahasa Melayu is the language that unites us as it is the language that breaks the language barrier of our multiracial society and enables us to communicate with people of all races. 

Hence it is wrong to undermine the Bahasa Melayu as merely “a common language for administrative purposes”.

One must learn to argue intellectually and give solid evidence to prove their points and not to resort to using lame, illogical and offensive arguments that prove nothing.

And they must be very careful not to go against the law due to offensive or seditious statements or remarks.

And lastly, the media must play their role to unite the people instead of publishing articles that instigate hatred among the people.

Why Was the Johor Flag Flown Upside Down at the Desaru Tunamaya?

Yesterday, as we drove in front of Desaru Tunamaya Beach & Spa Resort I saw something that really shocked me.

I just can’t believe my eyes when I saw the flag of the state of Johor being waved upside down in front of the building.

Flag of Johor flown upside down at Desaru Tunamaya Beach & Spa Resort
Flag of Johor flown upside down at Desaru Tunamaya Beach & Spa Resort

State flags are patriotic symbols of the state, therefore they must never be flown upside down.

By flying the flag of Johor upside down, Desaru Tunamaya Beach & Spa Resort is not only disrespecting the state of Johor but also belittling Islam as the religion of the State, the DYMM Sultan of Johor and the Johor Royal Institution because the white crescent and star represent Islam and the sovereignty of the Sultan of Johor.

When the flag is flown upside down, the crescent and star are placed in the lower part of the flag, which is wrong because the are supposed to be at the upper part of the flag as it symbolises the fact that the Sultan is the supreme leader of the state and that Islam is the religion of the state.

The upside down flag is belittling the position of the Sultan of Johor and Islam as the supreme leader and religion of the state respectively, hence, it is a humiliation to the Johor Royal Institution and Islam.

The question is, was the flag accidentally flown upside down, or did the resort or the staff purposely did it?

Both ways are wrong for even if it was an accident, it’s still wrong because the company must understand that the flag is an important symbol of the sovereign state which must be respected, therefore it should be taken seriously.

And worse if it is purposely done, for it symbolises bad intention to humiliate, belittle and a show of disrespect towards the Johor Royal Institution and Islam as the religion of the state.

Therefore, the Desaru Tunamaya Beach & Spa Resort must issue an official apology to the Sultan of Johor and the government of Johor.

Please click the photos for larger images:

Kebenaran Di Sebalik Sejarah Penubuhan Persekutuan Malaysia

JataNegara-681x443

Dibawah adalah artikel terbaru saya untuk Menara.my.


Persekutuan Malaysia ditubuhkan pada 16 September 1963, bilamana sebelas negeri dari Semenanjung Tanah Melayu bergabung bersama Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura untuk membentuk sebuah persekutuan baharu. Namun begitu,  sejarah Persekutuan Malaysia bukanlah hanya bermula pada tarikh tersebut, tetapi telah bermula sejak lama dahulu ketika negeri-negeri di Semenanjung Malaysia masih merupakan negara-negara Kerajaan Melayu Islam berdaulat yang berasingan kerana tanah air kita ini asalnya milik Raja-Raja Melayu.

ali-karim-petak-2-203x300Peristiwa demi peristiwa yang berlaku akhirnya membawa kepada persepakatan sembilan Raja-Raja Melayu untuk mengorbankan kuasa mutlak baginda semua ke atas negara masing-masing dan bergabung di bawah satu kerajaan yang baharu.

Dahulunya, rakyat bersatu, taat kepada Raja-raja dan setia kepada negara. Apabila orang-orang Melayu menyedari tipu muslihat licik British untuk menjajah kerajaan-kerajaan Islam di Tanah Melayu melalui Malayan Union, mereka telah bangkit membantah dan akhirnya berjaya membawa kepada pembubaran Malayan Union pada 31 Januarii 1948. British terpaksa menurut kehendak orang-orang Melayu yang bertindak melalui UMNO untuk membentuk Persekutuan Tanah Melayu yang membawa kepada kemerdekaan Tanah Melayu.

Sebenarnya, menurut pakar-pakar sejarah negara seperti Profesor Emeritus Tan Sri Dr. Khoo Kay Kim,  British tidak pernah menjajah seluruh Tanah Melayu, yang dijajah hanyalah Pulau Pinang, Melaka dan Singapura. Perkara ini dibuktikan oleh dokumen Pemasyhuran Kemerdekaan (Declaration of Independence) yang dengan jelas menyebut, “Melaka dan Pulau Pinang … tamat daripada menjadi sebahagian daripada jajahan takluk Baginda Queen, dan Duli Yang Maha Mulia Baginda Queen tidak lagi berhak menjalankan apa-apa kedaulatan baginda ke atas kedua-dua buah negeri yang tersebut itu”.

Dokumen Pemasyhuran Kemerdekaan merupakan sebuah dokumen persetujuan di antara Raja Inggeris, Queen, dan Duli-Duli Yang Maha Mulia Raja-Raja Melayu yang bersetuju bermula daripada tarikh 31 Ogos 1957, sembilan buah negeri di bawah Raja-raja Melayu bersama Melaka dan Pulau Pinang menjadi sebuah Persekutuan baharu bernama Persekutuan Tanah Melayu.

Menariknya, dokumen rasmi ini dimulakan dengan nama Allah, tahmid dan selawat kepada Nabi Muhammad S.A.W., menunjukkan ciri-ciri Islam jelas terpahat pada dokumen negara yang amat penting ini. Perkara ini membuktikan ketinggian agama Islam di dalam kerajaan kita sejak dahulu lagi. Malah, British sendiri telah mengiktiraf kedudukan Islam di negara ini, apabila moto negara yang tertulis pada Jata Negara bagi Negeri-Negeri Melayu Bersekutu yang dinaungi oleh Raja Inggeris pun menyebut nama Allah, iaitu, “Dipelihara Allah” yang ditulis dalam tulisan Jawi.

Kerajaan-Kerajaan Melayu di Tanah Melayu ialah kerajaan Islam. Maka atas asas inilah lahirnya Perkara 3(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia, yang menyebut, “Islam adalah agama bagi Persekutuan”, yang mana membawa maksud bahawa Malaysia ialah sebuah negara Islam. Hujah ni diperkuatkan lagi oleh Perkara 37 yang mewajibkan Yang Di-Pertuan Agong untuk bersumpah di atas nama Allah S.W.T. untuk memelihara pada setiap masa agama Islam, seperti apa yang tertulis di dalam Jadual Keempat Perlembagaan Persekutuan, sebelum memulakan tugas Baginda sebagai Yang Di-Pertuan Agong.

Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang merupakan asas kenegaraan kita dengan jelas meletakkan Islam di tempat yang sangat tinggi iaitu hanya selepas ‘Nama, Negeri-negeri dan wilayah-wilayah Persekutuan’, dan ‘Penerimaan masuk wilayah-wilayah baru ke dalam Persekutuan’. Perkara ini dengan sendirinya jelas menafikan fitnah jahat yang mendakwa bahawa Malaysia ialah sebuah negara sekular atau Perlembagaan negara bersifat sekular. Sejarah negara kita jelas membuktikan bahawa negara kita tidak pernah bersifat sekular.

Amat malang kerana pada hari ini, ramai orang bukan Islam dan golongan liberal yang buta sejarah, atau sengaja menafikan sejarah. Mereka melupakan Kontrak Sosial, pengorbanan Raja-Raja Melayu dan jasa pemimpin yang terdahulu. Mereka mendakwa bahawa Perlembagaan Persekutuan bersifat sekular dan Islam hanyalah sekadar agama rasmi sahaja. Malah mereka mahu memadam segala sejarah sebelum penubuhan Persekutuan Malaysia.

Di atas nama hak asasi manusia, mereka mendakwa boleh melakukan apa sahaja hatta menghina Agama Persekutuan, Raja-Raja Melayu, pemimpin negara dan hak rakyat Raja Melayu. Golongan ini menentang asas-asas agama dan asas-asas negara dan dengan sengaja menyalahtafsirkan Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Suara-suara sumbang ini membantah usaha untuk memartabatkan agama negara, contohnya dalam hal Pindaan Akta 355. Walhal, rakyat Malaysia sepatutnya bersatu dalam hal ini, kerana kita mesti ingat akan dua tiang kepada pembentukan Persekutuan ini iaitu Islam dan Kesatuan. Kita mesti bersifat patriotik, memahami asas negara kita dan menjunjung tinggi Perlembagaan Persektuan.

Janganlah kita leka sehingga kita lalai dan tertipu dengan agenda musuh yang mahu membinasakan negara kita. Kita tidak mahu melihat tragedi malang 13 Mei berulang kembali atau negara kita kembali dijajah.

logo-head

[BH] – Tiada Keperluan Rukun Negara Sebagai Mukadimah Perlembagaan

[Berita Harian}- KUALA LUMPUR: Cadangan menjadikan Rukun Negara sebagai mukadimah Perlembagaan Persekutuan berpotensi menyempitkan dimensi, sekali gus menyukarkan tafsiran kepada Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Sebaliknya, Rukun Negara yang hanya mencakupi sebahagian teks dan semangat Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang didakwa beberapa pihak dipinggirkan dan diketepikan memerlukan pemerkasaan menerusi sistem perundangan dan pendidikan.

Menyifatkan tiada keperluan untuk menjadikan Rukun Negara sebagai mukadimah Perlembagaan Persekutuan, Pakar perlembagaan, Prof Madya Dr Shamrahayu A Aziz, berkata peruntukan Perlembagaan Persekutuan mencakupi ruang lingkup yang luas dan Rukun Negara tidak meletakkan kesempurnaan terhadap teks Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Beliau yang juga Felo Utama Pusat Kajian Syariah Undang-Undang dan Politik Institut Kefahaman Islam Malaysia (IKIM), berkata Rukun Negara hanya menangani sebahagian perkara dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan, antaranya hanya menyebut Kepercayaan Kepada Tuhan tanpa pernyataan khusus mengenai kedudukan Islam sebagai agama Persekutuan, selain tidak menyatakan soal Persekutuan seperti termaktub dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Katanya, walaupun Rukun Negara bersumberkan Perlembagaan Persekutuan, ia hanya sebahagian daripada Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang tidak menggambarkan keseluruhan peruntukan, semangat dan sejarah Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

“Ideologi dan semangat Perlembagaan Persekutuan tidak sepenuhnya ada dalam inti pati Rukun Negara. Saya bimbang dalam perkembangan semasa, dunia luar menitik beratkan mukadimah sebagai sebahagian daripada Perlembagaan, bukan sebagai pengenalan semata-mata sehingga melangkaui niat sebenar

“Pada masa depan, mahkamah antaranya akan menggunakan mukadimah sebagai teks Perlembagaan yang nanti akan ditafsirkan melangkaui fakta dan dijadikan sebagai alasan penghakiman.

“Cadangan itu berpotensi menyukarkan tafsiran kepada Perlembagaan Persekutuan apabila peruntukan teks dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan mungkin didapati bercanggah dengan Rukun Negara,” katanya kepada BH.

Baru-baru ini, sekumpulan individu membabitkan ahli akademik, peguam dan aktivis dikenali sebagai Rukun Negara Mukadimah Perlembagaan (RMP) mengusulkan Rukun Negara dijadikan mukadimah Perlembagaan Persekutuan bagi mengatasi masalah yang timbul kerana Rukun Negara dipinggirkan dan diketepikan.

Pengerusi RMP, Dr Chandra Muzaffar dilaporkan berkata Rukun Negara perlu dikaitkan dengan Perlembagaan bagi membolehkan ia dirujuk secara tidak langsung sebagai garis panduan dalam penggubalan dasar dan undang-undang negara.

Ketika ini, Perlembagaan di 160 daripada 193 negara di dunia memiliki mukadimah, manakala Perlembagaan Persekutuan negara ini tidak memiliki sebarang mukadimah, sebaliknya bermula dengan peruntukan substantif.

Shamrahayu berkata, langkah terbaik untuk memastikan Rukun Negara menjadi lebih relevan ialah menjadikan peruntukan Rukun Negara sebagai sebahagian daripada peruntukan undang-undang lain termasuk undang-undang jenayah.

Selain itu, katanya Rukun Negara juga dijadikan sebahagian cara hidup tata negara kerana sebahagian lagi cara hidup sudah termaktub dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Beliau berkata, pemerkasaan Rukun Negara juga boleh diterjemahkan menerusi sistem pendidikan di semua institusi pendidikan rendah, menengah dan tinggi di negara ini.

“Jika kumpulan itu beranggapan mukadimah penting untuk Perlembagaan, ia perlu dibincang secara menyeluruh dengan mengambil kira kesan yang mungkin berlaku,” katanya.

G25: “Some Ulama Consider Khalwat Raids Un-Islamic”

In its article, “Khalwat Raids Make Malaysia Tougher Than Saudi Arabia”, Free Malaysia Today (FMT) wrote:

The way Malaysian religious authorities are policing khalwat (close proximity) is beyond anything in Saudi Arabia or other Gulf States today, warns a leading NGO. – FMT

FMT was reporting on comments made by G25 adviser Tan Sri Mohd Sheriff Kassim, “in response to the recent death and injuries of two policemen who jumped from buildings to escape raids by the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais).”

Birds of a feather flock together, like the G25’s spokesperson Dato Noor Farida Ariffin, Tan Sri Mohd Sheriff Kassim is also against khalwat raids.

Below are my answers (in blue) to FMT’s article (in red) regarding this issue.

G25 adviser Mohd Sheriff Kassim points out that even Saudi Arabia, the country which is home to Islam’s holiest site, has issued stern guidelines to limit the powers of the moral police to harass and arrest Muslims.

“The instruction is that the moral police should not take the law into their own hands and instead, it should advise those committing offences under the morality laws to change and repent,” he said In a statement today.

I cannot comment on the laws of Saudi Arabia because

  1. I have not studied the laws of the country
  2. I respect and do not want to interfere with the laws of the land.

But even if it is true that they do not implement such laws, as a sovereign country, we have our own constitutional rights to implement our own laws.

Anyway, if G25 adviser thinks that Saudi Arabia is doing a better job in dealing with Syariah offences, then G25 must fight for our country to follow the laws of Saudi Arabia, which means implementing the Hudud laws in our country.

His comments were in response to the recent death and injuries of two policemen who jumped from buildings to escape raids by the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais).

As policemen, they must know the laws and their rights, so if they chose to jump from the building in order to escape, the fault is theirs and it is not JAIS’ fault.

Would G25 blame the police if a burglar chose to jump from a building in order to avoid being arrested by the policemen who are carrying their duties? 

Just two months ago, Jais introduced a mobile phone app, called “Hotline Jais”, for people to report religious offences, including khalwat.

It is a good move by JAIS to use updated technology so that it is easier for the public to report religious offences in order for us to take care of our Muslim community.

Sheriff added that Malays who visited or lived in Arab states have not come across any country where so-called moral police raid private homes.

If we must follow the laws of Saudi Arabia, we must change our Federal Constitution and implement the Hudud laws.

He also pointed out that some ulama consider khalwat raids un-Islamic as it gave the impression that the religion used only punishment to uphold morals.

Khalwat raid is one of the ways to prevent the religious offence of khalwat and the Islamic authorities have their Standard Operating Procedure that must be followed by their enforcement officers when conducting the raids, so only the liberals would declare that our khalwat raids un-Islamic; not the ulama of Ahli As-Sunnah Wa Al-Jamaah.

Khalwat raids also tended to target the lower-income group as the “rich and powerful” had more resources to “get away with bigger sins”. Sheriff noted that khalwat laws could be easily exploited by a person’s enemies to “settle a score”.

G25 adviser has made a very serious allegation which I hope he has the proves to support it, and it is the duty of G25 to make police reports as soon as possible regarding this matter.

“Our authorities should learn from the failed experience of dictatorial regimes which criminalised personal thoughts and behaviour to discourage individualism and promote mass obedience to the state ideology,” he said.

What does khalwat raid have to do with “dictatorial regimes which criminalised personal thoughts and behaviour to discourage individualism and promote mass obedience to the state ideology”?

Islamic matters are not political matters and it is stated clearly in our Federal Constitution that the YDP Agong and the Royal Rulers are the Head of Islam, so the above statement is a malicious distortion of the truth and a humiliation to the Royal Rulers.

Article 3(2) of the Federal Constitution:

In every State other than States not having a Ruler the position of the Ruler as the Head of the religion of Islam in his State in the manner and to the extent acknowledged and declared by the Constitution of that State, and, subject to that Constitution, all rights, privileges, prerogatives and powers enjoyed by him as Head of that religion, are unaffected and unimpaired; but in any acts, observances or ceremonies with respect to which the Conference of Rulers has agreed that they should extend to the Federation as a whole each of the other Rulers shall in his capacity of Head of the religion of Islam authorize the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to represent him.

Article 3(3) of the Federal Constitution:

The Constitution of the States of Malacca, Penang, Sabah and Sarawak shall each make provision for conferring on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong the position of Head of the religion of Islam in that State.

Since G25 wants us to follow Saudi Arabia, G25 members must start fighting for our country to implement Hudud.

Related Posts: