E-Hailing

Policeman who assaulted deaf driver escapes jail with RM1,000 fine in long-delayed 'justice'

A 32-year-old police officer has been fined RM1,000 after pleading guilty to assaulting a deaf e-hailing driver, more than five months after the incident that sparked protests and a debate on the rule of law in the country.

Taufik Ismail, who arrived in court in the presence of several police officers who appeared to shield him from the press, pleaded guilty to a charge under Section 323 of the Penal Code.

He was accused of assaulting deaf Grab driver Ong Ing Keong at the lobby of the St Regis Hotel in Kuala Lumpur on May 28, in an incident which was recorded on Ong's dashcam.

The video showed Ong waiting for passengers when a man shouted at him to move his car to make way for an entourage of Johor regent Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim, better known as TMJ.

Ong then rolled down his car window to speak to the man before he suddenly attacked him with a hard punch on the face.

He was later treated at Kuala Lumpur Hospital for a soft tissue injury.

Public outrage increased when it was revealed that a "palace representative" had asked Ong to withdraw his complaint lodged with the Brickfields police station.

Ong rejected a claim by city police chief, Rusdi Mohd Isa, that he had withdrawn his police report as it was a "misunderstanding".

Instead, Ong disclosed that an officer had given him the choice of either accepting a sum of money from the palace representative or having his phone confiscated if the case went to court.

The delay in taking action was also criticized by the government's Human Rights Commission (Suhakam), which questioned Attorney-General Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh over his silence. - MalaysiaNow, 4 Nov 2024

GISB

Wrong to consider GISBH an ‘organised criminal group’ in the likes of triads, crime gangs

THE Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET) has expressed utmost concern of cult-linked Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings Sdn Bhd (GISBH) being touted as an “organised criminal group” by Malaysia.

To prevent the setting of a precedent, the NGO further contended that “it is best and reasonable” that such term be limited to “triads and criminal gangs that engage in serious crimes of violence, extortion, murder, etc”.

“It’s not right and dangerous to define it broadly as crimes committed by more than one of any Penal Code offences,” opined MADPET co-founder Charles Hector in a media statement.

This came about after GISBH CEO Datuk Nasiruddin Mohd Ali and his wife were among the 13 men and nine women who were charged in the Selayang Sessions Court on Wednesday (Oct 23) under Section 130V (1) of the Penal Code for being members of organised crime group.

If found guilty, offenders can be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than five years and not more than 20 years.

Delving further, Hector who is also a human rights activist and lawyer argued that Section 130U of the Penal Code has defined “organised criminal group” to mean “a group of two or more persons acting in concert with the aim of committing one or more serious offences in order to obtain – directly or indirectly – a material benefit, power or influence”.

“Serious offences were previously defined in that law as ‘…any offence punishable with imprisonment for a term of 10 years or more…’ but that definition was deleted by Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2014, where the amending provision read, ‘The Code is amended in Section 130U by deleting the definition of ‘serious offence’,” explained Hector.

“This means that if anyone commits any crime today, however small, risks being charged as a member of an ‘organised crime gang’ under Section 130V of the Penal Code.

“Moreover, since that Chapter VIB (Organised Crime) in the Penal Code is listed as ‘Security Offence’ in the First Schedule in Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA), then SOSMA applies.”

Following this, MADPET is unhappy with the 2014 re-definition of the term “organised criminal groups” which is just too broad, hence can easily be abused by the government of the day.

“This term should be restricted to triad groups, Mafia-like groups and criminal gangs that commit serious criminal offences involving violence or extortion,” asserted Hector.

“As it is, two or more persons engaging in a consensual act of sodomy, theft, murder, illegal assembly or any crimes whatsoever are at risk of being charged for organised criminal group-type of crimes whereby SOSMA will apply. The other crimes listed under this Chapter VIB include assisting, harbouring and consorting, among others.”

Stating that there is no merit for GISBH to fall under the “organised criminal group” category, MADPET is of the view that such definition “should not be made by the police alone but possibly some independent body that would include parliamentarians”.

“When any group is listed as ‘organised crime gang’, their crimes will not only be SOSMA offences but they also risk becoming victims of the Detention Without Trial laws like Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA),” Hector warned.

He added: “As GISBH is also allegedly a case of Islamic deviants, one wonders whether Muslim police or law enforcement officers are able to act independently when it comes to investigation of the other crimes not religious crimes or it’s better that the investigations are led by non-Muslim officers to ensure a more professional investigation.

“After all, religion and other prejudices are known to impact investigation and prosecution.” – FocusM Oct 25, 2024

IJN

Keep fees reasonable to prevent heart patients from flooding govt hospitals, IJN told

MCA has called for the National Heart Institute (IJN) to keep its proposed hike fee to a maximum of 5% to not to burden patients especially those from B40 households struggling with rising living costs, in particular, private healthcare and insurance premiums.

This is following IJN’s announcement on Oct 11 that it is targeting to raise fees by between 10% and 40% for public patients covered by the government and that the cardiac centre’s charges have been unchanged for more than two decades since 2003.

IJN is owned by the Minister of Finance (MOF) Incorporated (MOF Inc.).

According to party deputy president Datuk Dr Mah Hang Soon, any spike in fees should be capped at a maximum of 5% and must be accompanied by a commitment and exercise to improve medical care and resources for patients and better remuneration for staff.

“Our concern aligns with the Health Ministry’s view that rising fees may cause more heart patients to seek treatment at government hospitals, further straining an already overworked system,” he remarked.

“The current waiting lists as reported on July 17 are alarming: Sultan Idris Shah Serdang Hospital has approximately 1,000 patients waiting for urgent, life-saving heart surgeries, while Penang General Hospital has about 850 patients in the same situation.”

Mah said the situation is exacerbated by the limited number of cardiothoracic surgeons available to serve the public – currently, there are only 14 surgeons across the seven public hospitals performing heart surgeries in Malaysia.

“Notably, three of these hospitals – located in Kota Bharu, Kuantan, and Kota Kinabalu – have only one surgeon each, which significantly limits our capacity to meet the needs of heart patients,” he stated.

“In light of these challenges, we urge IJN to consider the broader impact of its proposed fee increase and prioritise a sustainable solution that supports both patient care and the well-being of our healthcare professionals.” – FocusM Oct 16, 2024

Perak

Police hunt for suspects in molotov cocktail attack in Pantai Remis

PERAK police are actively searching for three suspects involved in a Molotov cocktail attack at a house in Taman Bintang, Pantai Remis, early yesterday morning.

Manjung District Police Chief, Assistant Commissioner Hasbullah Abd Rahman, said the attack, which occurred at around 3:08 a.m, saw nine Molotov cocktails thrown at the victim’s house.

The attack caused significant fire damage to a Honda HR-V and a Yamaha LC motorcycle parked on the premises.

“Three suspects were seen in a white Toyota Altis wearing face masks during the attack,” he said in a statement today.

He added that the victim’s father noticed the fire and rushed out, shouting at the suspects, who immediately fled the scene. The father managed to extinguish the fire before further damage could occur.

Further investigation revealed five pieces of paper with Chinese writing outside the house, demanding repayment of a debt.

However, the victim denied having any involvement with unlicensed money lending (loan sharks) or holding any grudges.

The case is being investigated under Section 435 of the Penal Code for mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage.

Hasbullah urged anyone with information about the incident to contact the Investigating Officer, Inspector Amir Hafiz Mohd Rosli, at 011-24057360, or the District Police Operations Room at 05-688 6222 to assist with the investigation. – FocusM Oct 6, 2024

GISB

Tun M questions the government over its actions against GISBH

FORMER premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has voiced concerns over the government’s ‘heavy-handed’ actions against GlSB Holdings Sdn Bhd (GISBH), stating that the treatment appears aimed at eliminating the organisation rather than addressing specific wrongdoings.

Speaking in an exclusive interview, Dr Mahathir compared the current situation to his administration’s handling of the Al-Arqam group in 1994.

“We were aware Al-Arqam were deviants. Our actions were to correct their understanding, not to jail them outright. We explained Islam to them, and they accepted our explanations.”

Dr Mahathir suggested that while there may be legitimate issues, such as possible criminal activities, the government should focus on addressing those specific offences.

“Take action against what they do wrong, but do not take action against what they are not doing wrong,” the nonagenarian added.

He noted that GISBH is a successful business operating in 20 countries and warned against punishing those not involved in any crimes.

On the issue of tax arrears, he said, “In the case of income tax arrears, the people are not jailed, but an investigation is launched, and then a decision is made.” – FocusM Oct 5, 2024

Gerakan

Gerakan is in no position to question Malay voting trend considering its own struggles to remain relevant

IN A recent statement, Gerakan president Datuk Dr Dominic Lau expressed concern over the shift in Malay votes towards Barisan Nasional (BN) in the Nenggiri and Mahkota by-elections. He called for Perikatan Nasional (PN) to review this trend ahead of future elections.

But one has to ask: Is Gerakan, a party that has been on the decline for over a decade, in any position to critique its coalition partners?

And does Gerakan even have the credibility to speak on Malay voting trends when it struggles to maintain relevance in any voter demographic?

Gerakan’s failure to secure a voter base, particularly among the Chinese, has been glaring when compared to the overwhelming success of DAP.

Over the years, DAP has solidified its dominance among Chinese voters by positioning itself as a credible alternative to Gerakan or MCA, effectively capitalising on urban discontent and issues affecting minority communities.

To date, what has Gerakan done to rebuild itself? The answer is simple: almost nothing. It has failed to win back seats in Penang and has been consistently sidelined in national politics.

If Gerakan ever hopes to recover, it must first acknowledge that it is no longer a competitor in this crucial demographic.

Lau’s call for PN to review the Malay vote is curious, given that Gerakan has done little to contribute to PN’s success.

The party holds no parliamentary seats and hasn’t made any significant electoral breakthroughs since its fall from grace.

Gerakan’s departure from BN in 2018 did not spark a revival, nor did its entry into PN give it the boost it so desperately needed.

So, what exactly does Gerakan bring to PN? The party’s lack of influence is crystal clear, especially compared to Bersatu and PAS, which have strong grassroots support and electoral machinery.

If Gerakan has been largely invisible within PN, what right does it have to critique the coalition’s performance?

Lau’s sudden focus on Malay voting trends also raises questions. When PN won the Sungai Bakap by-election with a strong margin of votes, there was no mention of the importance of Malay votes from Gerakan.

But after defeats in Nenggiri and Mahkota, Lau is now sounding the alarm. Why the selective outrage? Is Gerakan genuinely concerned about PN’s prospects, or is this an attempt to shift attention away from its own lack of progress?

Gerakan cannot cherry-pick issues to suit its narrative, especially when it has contributed so little to PN’s overall performance.

Dominic’s concerns also oversimplify a complex issue. There is no singular “Malay vote” that can be easily categorised.

Voting behaviours differ across regions and constituencies, influenced by local issues, candidate strength, and control of state governments. Gerakan’s narrow focus on recent losses overlooks the fact that the Malay electorate is, and always has been, divided.

Moreover, the shift towards BN in recent by-elections is not a new phenomenon. Malay voting patterns have always been fluid, and UMNO’s rebuilding efforts, along with PN’s weakened appeal, are key factors behind this trend.

While PAS and Bersatu are working tirelessly on the ground to build voter bases and secure support, Gerakan remains missing in action. It’s easy to critique the performance of coalition partners from the sidelines, but where is Gerakan’s own contribution?

If Gerakan wants to be taken seriously, it needs to do the hard work of reconnecting with voters rather than merely issuing statements from the political periphery.

Dominic’s concerns may hold some merit, but Gerakan is in no position to offer critiques without first addressing its own failures. Since 2008, the party has been on a downward spiral, unable to regain its footing in Penang, national politics, or even within PN.

Dear Dominic, for over a decade, Gerakan has failed to regain any electoral relevance, and your leadership has yet to produce any meaningful results.

Criticising the voting trends within PN is easy, but where is Gerakan in all of this? What exactly has your party contributed?

Instead of pointing fingers, perhaps it’s time to ask: What is Gerakan’s role in PN, and why should anyone care about what your party thinks?

Without clear answers and decisive action to revitalise Gerakan, your party will continue to be viewed as political baggage – a burden that PN may soon find no reason to carry. – Oct 1, 2024

Dr Mahathir Mohd Rais is the Federal Territories Bersatu state secretary.

The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.

Classifying Cigarettes

A divisive move in classifying cigarettes in non-halal section

I WRITE to express my concerns regarding the recent proposal to place cigarettes in the non-halal section of stores, aligning them with alcohol and pork.

While I understand the importance of accommodating religious beliefs, I find this approach problematic, particularly from the standpoint of the rights and needs of non-Muslims in a multi-religious society.

First and foremost, classifying cigarettes as non-halal creates a slippery slope. If every product is to be classified as halal or non-halal, what does this mean for other goods that are used for medical purposes but may not be considered halal by some religious scholars?

For example, medications like morphine or other opioid-based painkillers are essential in hospitals and pharmacies. Would they too be relegated to a non-halal section, further stigmatising their use despite their critical role in healthcare?

Moreover, the question arises about the rights of non-Muslims in such a system. Cigarettes, though harmful, are legal and widely consumed by adults across the country, including non-Muslims.

By placing them in a non-halal section, are we indirectly imposing religious standards on the entire population?

It is vital that we remain mindful of the diverse makeup of Malaysia, where laws and regulations should reflect the needs and rights of all citizens, regardless of religion.

Additionally, the move seems more symbolic than practical. Cigarettes are already regulated, with age restrictions and health warnings clearly outlined.

They are not marketed as a food product and unlike alcohol and pork, there is no risk of accidental consumption or cross-contamination. Thus, what is the practical benefit of placing them in a separate section?

Finally, this approach could set a precedent for future measures that may limit personal freedoms and choice in a society that prides itself on its diversity and coexistence.

If cigarettes are deemed non-halal, what about other products with controversial or harmful aspects?

Will we start dividing goods based on subjective religious interpretations, rather than science, law and public health?

While the health risks of smoking are well-established and should be mitigated through public health campaigns, taxation, and education, categorising cigarettes as non-halal is neither a practical solution nor a fair one.

It risks creating division and confusion in a society where inclusivity and respect for all beliefs should remain at the forefront.

I urge the government to consider the broader implications of such a move and to prioritise policies that respect the rights of all Malaysians, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

Thank you and Selamat Hari Malaysia! – Sept 13, 2024

 

Jeganathan Munusamy

Kuala Lumpur

The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.