Know your rights: Read the RED BOOK

What do you do when confronted by police? The Malaysian Bar has a simple 6-page RED BOOK detailing your basic rights when:

1. Police stop you
2. Police question you when stopped
3. Questioning by police without arrest
4. Police arrest you
5. Your rights after arrest & during detention
6. Remand order by magistrate after arrest
7. Body search without arrest
8. Body search upon arrest
9. Questioning by police after arrest

Download the RED BOOK. The site shows only 30,000 copies have been downloaded. That just means more people need to know what their basic rights are.

Temporary reprieve for Subashini

Subashini won an injunction, albeit a temporary one, against her estranged, sneakily converted husband Saravanan - to the effect that he cannot apply to the Syariah court to end their marriage and convert their child. Subashini's counsel argued that the injunction was critical and necessary, pending her appeal to the Federal Court.

And indeed it is. As her lawyer said:

...the injunction was important because even if the Federal Court were to decide in her favour later, the judgment would be rendered academic if the husband, T. Saravanan, was allowed to get a final order of divorce from the syariah court first.

“All I am asking for is the preservation of status quo."

As a non-Muslim layman, it has always appeared to me the Syariah Court seemed to be obsessed with a "first past the post" mentality. When it comes to conversions, as long as the convert is able to complete the necessary rites of passage and sign the papers, he/she (and whichever child is unfortunate enough to be party to it), will immediately be considered Muslims in the eyes of the Syariah Court.

Never mind that the convert still has messy ties & relationships with non-Muslims, or has unresolved non-Muslim obligations or that the conversions of children were done in deliberate secrecy and ill intent to deceive the other parent. The fact that the convert is legally unfit / incapacitated / restricted or morally undeserving appeared to hold no water with the Syariah Court. To a casual observer, it sometimes seemed that mere rituals, rites and paperwork was sufficient for the court, even when confronted with fact that the prior and subsequent conduct & lifestyle of the convert were "un-Islamic" in nature. This was shown in several cases, the most spectacular of them being the corpse-snatching Moorthy case

Consequently, non-Muslims can only draw a perception that the Syariah Court subscribes to the "nasi sudah menjadi bubur" (rice has become porridge) thinking. That the FORM (ritual) of the conversion is more important and binding, than the SUBSTANCE (faith and sincerity) of the convert. Perhaps it is this same preoccupation with 'form over function' that results in the religious authorities having task forces and armies of storm troopers to catch people holding hands in public places - but remain deafeningly silent and violently motionless on the real issues like corruption and racial discrimination, for instance.

Therefore, even though a Federal Court appeal is pending... if Saravanan was somehow able complete the rites and rituals to divorce his wife and convert the child - the Syariah Court will find itself helpless but to uphold the divorce and conversion... paving the way for yet another round of Civil vs Syariah court showdown.

Here's where I think Justice Suriyadi is being unreasonable:

Justice Suriyadi then asked: “Has there been any attempt to convert the second child since the day we gave judgment?”

Malik: “Not that we know of. Perhaps my learned friend for the respondent can shed more light on this.”

Justice Suriyadi: “This is your case. You show me. I am looking at things in a rather clinical manner. You want an injunction you must show to me why it should be granted. I do not want to be set by external factors. I asked, are there any changes, and you said 'No'. So, status quo is the same.”

My dear Mr Justice, perhaps you could enlighten us laymen as to what injunctions are for? I always thought they were to PREVENT the status quo from changing.

If you require that the status quo to HAVE CHANGED FIRST, before actually issuing the injunction - wouldn't that already be too late (nasi sudah menjadi bubur) and render the injunction useless and moot before it even sees the light of day?

I mean no disrespect, but perhaps you would allow me to sneak a peek at the law degree hanging on your office wall. I've got a funny feeling that the name of university on the parchment might have a spelling error... like 'UNIV3RSITI OF LUNDUN' or something.

Haniff Khatri Abdulla, who acted for Saravanan, said that the panel could not grant an injunction now since it had earlier affirmed the setting aside of an interim injunction granted to Subashini when it dismissed her appeal on March 13.

Haniff: “It amounts to the court reviewing its own decision.”

Justice Sri Ram: “Nonsense. This is a fresh application. We are not reviewing. We are asking you to prevent the husband from pursuing his case in the other court pending his wife’s appeal to the Federal Court.”

Heh heh... I'm beginning to like Justice Sri Ram more and more.

Nonsense indeed. In fact I think that aptly describes the judgement of this panel to send Subashini, a non-Muslim, to the Syariah Court.

Previous blogposts:

- Non-Muslim wife's appeal dismissed in favour of Muslim husband
- Islamic experts tell non-Muslims not to be prejudiced against syariah courts

Press articles on the injunction hearing below.

Stay against Syariah proceedings
By CHELSEA L.Y. NG
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/3/31/courts/17314381&sec=courts

PUTRAJAYA: R. Subashini, who was told to go to the Syariah Court to fight for her matrimonial rights, obtained a temporary injunction from the Court of Appeal to preserve her civil rights pending her appeal to the Federal Court.

In a majority judgment, Justices Gopal Sri Ram, Suriyadi Halim Omar and Hassan Lah, who heard Subashini’s application yesterday, granted an injunction preventing her husband, who had converted to become a Muslim, from initiating or continuing with any proceedings in the syariah courts or converting their younger son. Justice Suriyadi dissented.

Subashini’s lead counsel Malik Imtiaz Sarwar had argued that the injunction was important because even if the Federal Court were to decide in her favour later, the judgment would be rendered academic if the husband, T. Saravanan, was allowed to get a final order of divorce from the syariah court first.

“All I am asking for is the preservation of status quo. The Syariah Court orders, if not stopped, will cause my client severe prejudice,” said Malik.

Justice Suriyadi then asked: “Has there been any attempt to convert the second child since the day we gave judgment?”

Malik: “Not that we know of. Perhaps my learned friend for the respondent can shed more light on this.”

Justice Suriyadi: “This is your case. You show me. I am looking at things in a rather clinical manner. You want an injunction you must show to me why it should be granted. I do not want to be set by external factors. I asked, are there any changes, and you said 'No'. So, status quo is the same.”

Justice Sri Ram then asked Malik whether there was any custody issue involved, to which the counsel said that his client was a mother who would be deprived of her right to custody of her children if her husband succeeded.

Haniff Khatri Abdulla, who acted for Saravanan, then said the injunction bid was “another attempt to restrain the husband from reaping the fruits of a judgment in his favour”.

Haniff then said that the panel could not grant an injunction now since it had earlier affirmed the setting aside of an interim injunction granted to Subashini when it dismissed her appeal on March 13.

Haniff: “It amounts to the court reviewing its own decision.”

Justice Sri Ram: “Nonsense. This is a fresh application. We are not reviewing. We are asking you to prevent the husband from pursuing his case in the other court pending his wife’s appeal to the Federal Court.”

On March 13, the same panel had in a majority judgment ordered Subashini to battle out her divorce and custody claims at the Syariah Court.

Earlier on Sept 25 last year, Judicial Commissioner Aziah Ali set aside the injunction granted to 28-year-old Subashini a month earlier, which had enabled her to temporarily restrain Saravanan, 31, from commencing with the proceedings in the Syariah Court.

The couple, who has yet to finalise their divorce, has two children, Dharvin Joshua, three, and one-year-old Sharvin.

Saravanan, whose Muslim name is Muhammad Shafi Abdullah, claims that the elder child had converted to Islam with him in May.

Later yesterday, Subashini’s solicitor K. Shanmugam filed her application for leave to appeal to the Federal Court.

Subashini granted temporary injunction to stop husband from syariah court action
R. Surenthira Kumar
http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=17465

PUTRAJAYA (March 30, 2007): R. Subashini's Muslim convert husband has been temporarily prevented from using the syariah court to dissolve their civil marriage, seek custody of their children, and unilaterally convert one child.

In a majority decision today, the Court of Appeal granted Subashini an interim injunction to restrain T. Saravanan, now known by his Muslim name of Muhamad Shafi Saravanan Abdullah, from proceeding with his case at the syariah courts pending the disposal of her application to the Federal Court to hear her appeal of the appeal court's earlier decision.

On March 13, the same Court of Appeal bench, in a majority decision with Justice Gopal Sri Ram dissenting, had dismissed Subashini's appeal to stop Saravanan from dissolving their marriage, seeking custody of their children and unilaterally converting their children to Islam, saying she could seek recourse through the Syariah Appeal Court.

The three-person bench was chaired by Sri Ram, and also comprised Justices Datuk Hasan Lah and Datuk Suriyadi Halim Omar.

Today's injunction order prevents Saravanan from converting his second child, one-year-old Sharvind, to Islam.

The formerly Hindu businessman converted the first child, Dharvin Joshua, to Islam without Subashini's knowledge.

Sri Ram and Hasan allowed the injunction, while Suriyadi dissented but no reason was given for his decision.

Lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, representing Subashini told the court their application for leave to appeal against the March 13 Court of Appeal decision would become pointless if Saravanan proceeded and succeeded with his actions in the syariah court.

"This would render the application for leave and the subsequent appeal nugatory, and deprive Subashini of the fruits of her litigation," said Malik Imtiaz.

He said the effect of the Court of Appeal's majority decision on March 13 was so momentous, in that for the first time the civil courts have told a non-Muslim that she must submit to the syariah courts to be adjudicated according to Islamic law.

The Federal Court, Malik Imtiaz said, ought to be given an opportunity to properly consider the application to appeal.

"It would, therefore, also be in the public interest for the status quo to be preserved," he added.

Suriyadi asked Malik Imtiaz if there had been any attempts by Saravanan to convert the second child.

Malik Imtiaz said, as far as they knew, there was none.

Suriyadi then said, since there was no change to the status quo on the matter, Malik Imtiaz had to provide concrete reasons for his argument.

"You want an injunction, you establish to me the reasons for it. Likewise, I want to approach the case in a clinical manner and not be influenced by external factors," said Suriyadi.

Sri Ram asked if there was still a tussle between Saravanan and Subashini over custody of their children, to which Malik Imtiaz said it has yet to be decided on.

Suriyadi pointed out that an ex-parte interim order had been issued by the Syariah High Court giving custody of the elder son to Saravanan on May 23, 2006.

Lawyer representing Saravanan, Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla, said Subashini's application was an attempt to restrain her husband from proceeding to seek recourse through the syariah courts following the March 13 Court of Appeal decision.

Mohamed Khatri Haniff also argued that it should be the Federal Court that heard today's application, but his argument was shot down by Sri Ram who said the Court of Appeal had the authority to do so.

The lawyer also said the move was akin to the court attempting to review its previous decision.

Sri Ram said there was no such attempt.

"This is a very serious encroachment of her rights. Injunctions are normally granted by the courts on the basis of preventing injustice," said Sri Ram.

He also noted that there were no circumstances to show that Saravanan planned to convert Sharvind.

But Malik Imtiaz said there was no guarantee that would not happen, hence the threat still existed.

Following today's interim injunction, Subashini later filed the leave application to the Federal Court.

Haris Mohd Ibrahim, K. Shanmuga and Richard Wee Thiam Seng appeared together with Malik Imtiaz while Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar appeared with Mohamed Haniff Khatri.

Meera Samanther held a watching brief for the Women's Aid Organisation, Women's Centre For Change, Women's Development Collective, Sisters In Islam, All Women's Action Society and the Bar Council, and Ng Chek for the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism.

Police reform requires stick as well as carrot

Recently, the Inspector General of Police (IGP) floated the idea to increase the salaries and benefits of police personnel. He also unveiled a new vision and mission for the police force. These initiatives are largely to create a better, more professional police force - one that is, amongst other objectives, more resistant to the taint of corruption.

And it came as no surprise that this salary initiative was hotly debated by all and sundry - whether a pay increase would do the trick to curb corruption. The IGP's logic is that poor salaries make for poor policemen. He believes policemen are FORCED to resort to taking bribes in order to supplement their meagre incomes. In other words, they are corrupt so that they & their dependents have sufficient means to lead normal, otherwise wholesome lives.

I, for one, don't dispute this logic as it is indeed intuitive and reasonable. For a policeman to be able to resist a bribe, the incremental value of that bribe must be minimised versus the value of his legitimate income. This reduces his motivation to take bribes.

However, REDUCING THE UPSIDE of bribery is only half the fight.

It must be complemented by INCREASING THE DOWNSIDE of bribery. This means that the consequences and penalties of accepting bribes must be swift and severe. Otherwise, the "motivation" to accept bribes remains unaffected. In fact, the bribes will now have to be larger (versus his now-higher legitimate income) in order to make it worth his while.

Remember..., NEED is not the biggest motivation for corruption. GREED... is.

To increase the consequences and penalties, 2 things must be in place.

1. The chances of getting caught & punished must be high!
2. The punishment must be severe!

Therefore, sean the man recommends that:

a) A body independent of the police force, reporting directly to Parliament - must be set up to accept complaints from the public, whistle-blowers and witnesses. Remember the IPCMC, anyone?

b) All complaints must be investigated and given due regard. Just as there is no presumption of guilt, the circumstances demand that there can be no presumption of innocence as well.

c) All penalties for corruption must be severe regardless of the level of corruption. For eg. accepting RM50 for a traffic offence or embezzling RM1,000,000 should carry the same penalty. Therefore, there should be only one penalty for any level of corruption. Compulsory dismissal, forfeiture of pension, benefits & employer's portion of EPF and prosecution in a criminal court.

These punishments must be deliberately much more substantial compared to hereto perennial favourites like: "transfers" to another police station or into desk jobs, reprimands, demotions, resignations and retirements.

WHY THE MALAYSIAN PUBLIC GIVES BRIBES:

Then, idealistic simpletons always argue that - IF the public doesn't offer bribes, the police will have none to accept. Voila, corruption problem gone. Their perception is that the public offers bribes as a tool of convenience.

To an extent, that is indeed undoubtedly true. Many bribes are paid to avoid the inconvenience of having to queue up at the police HQ payment counter (no, you can't pay at just any police station) or make a court appearance (if you want to dispute the offence). And the amount of the bribe is usually only a fraction of the official fine or penalty - thereby providing an economic incentive on top of the convenience.

To counter it, the penalties on the public for offering bribes must be toughened significantly.

However, the trouble of paying fines and court appearances are not the only inconveniences that makes the public feel compelled to offer bribes. There is also the inconvenience of being arrested and spending 24 hours in police detention. We need to remember that police powers of arrest are very, very wide. And in being so, vulnerable to abuse by bad cops.

Here is an article in PDRM's website that details out the variety of statutes that a person can be arrested under. The gist of it is that our Criminal Procedures Code and Police Act allow for arrests without warrant for a host of offences. And this article from the Malaysian Bar details out what happens after a person is arrested. All in all, the "inconvenience" amounts to 24 very uncomfortable hours of your life, or more.

Now, I won't pretend to be a lawyer or police officer and know definitively exactly what offences one can be arrested for. But I do understand that it all boils down to "non-seizable" offences which require a warrant for arrest, and "seizable" offences which do not require a warrant. Seizable offences are listed in the First Schedule of the Criminal Procedures Code (which I simply could not find a copy online).

I'm sure seizable offences are very serious crimes and deserve to be arrestable without a warrant. However, the concern is how seemingly minor, non-criminal and obviously non-seizable offenses... can sometimes lead to seizable ones.

Here's a case in point: A car driver who was stopped by the police for excessive tinting on his car windows... was subsequently arrested for "obstructing justice" because he argued with the cops... http://blog.limkitsiang.com/?p=101

And here's a well-circulated story where a young man was arrested after failing a urine test. He was locked up & abused for several days, only to proven innocent by another independent urine test... http://corrupted-malaysia.blogspot.com/2005/10/drug-bust-jails-22-innocents.html

These incidents may seem extreme and improbable to many of you, but my personal sense is that they are neither. I've had my share of experiences with police "procedures" from being detained at traffic road blocks, forced off the road by off-duty policemen on their personal motorbikes and as an "illegal spectator" who happened to be walking past a road being used for illegal races. Many of these incidents would have quickly deteriorated from a half hour chat into a night in the lockup, had I been less agreeable in expressing my admiration for our boys in blue.

Added: 6 April 2007 - Link to the Bar Council's Red Book which details your basic rights when stopped, arrested and questioned by police.

The danger is that the some seizable offences are too wide ranging and depend too much on the subjective judgement of the police officers. Yardsticks like 'suspicion' or 'probable cause' and 'obstructing justice' are simply too wide and prone to abuse.

To complicate matters, there are no penalties and consequences for the arresting officer if the arrest is subsequently found to be unjustified. Even if a public complaint is lodged, the police are less than transparent with their investigations, if any were indeed conducted. Has anyone heard of the officers in the nude squat incident being punished? Or the officer who was caught on video beating up a handcuffed protester during the price hike protest?

What then, prevents the bad apples in the police force from abusing these weaknesses in the current laws and procedures and use their discretionary power of arrest to intimidate and extort the public? These discretionary powers must be curbed and strictly guided.

Petty powers invested in men who cannot live on their salaries is an invitation to misuse those powers.

- Lee Kuan Yew, From Third World to First World.

Therefore, sean the man recommends that:

a) clear comprehensive guidelines for police procedures and applicable statutes must be published with the express objective to increase public awareness and ensuring objectivity.

b) all arrests and confiscation of private property (eg. impounding vehicles) for, and arising from an escalation of - a NON-CRIMINAL offence (eg. how window tinting became obstructing justice), be automatically subject to an independent investigation. The objective of the investigation would be to determine how and why a simple misdemeanour can escalate to become an arrestable seizable offence and whether the abuse of police power occurred.

c) the post-arrest procedures (ref here) must be strictly complied with. Any deficiency to this process must immediately impose an automatic & compulsory penalty / punitive action on the arresting officer, investigating officer, officer in charge and responsible magistrate. This penalty is for failure to follow police procedure, and not related to the original circumstances of the arrest.

It is also interesting to note that the car in the tinted windows example above, was also impounded for "suspected" illegal tinting. The police of course, don't have the equipment to check this. Which brings up the pertinent question why they targetted the car in the first place... knowing full well they couldn't possibly tell how much tinting it had. This case lends itself to the hugely pervasive belief amongst Malaysians that corrupt policemen do in fact, ACTIVELY create situations to entrap the public. Entrap them into thinking that an "offence" might have taken place, and that a hefty fine or detention / confiscation of property (ostensibly for further investigation) is imminent. Unless of course, they pay the "on-the-spot" fine ie. bribe.

Who amongst us does not have an anecdote about off-duty policemen patrolling the streets enforcing traffic laws? I can't recall how many times I've been stopped by policemen for driving a noisy car or an oversize spoiler, when they had neither a decibel meter nor measuring tape handy.

Therefore it is my view that the battle against police corruption needs to be fought on multiple fronts. The salaries of policemen must undoubtedly increase, but only in tandem with higher standards of policing and more checks and balances to restore the public's confidence. This means they must use both the carrot as well as a big, farking stick.

Mark Webber testdrives Singapore F1 Street Circuit

Red Bull Racing's Mark Webber took a leisurely drive today, around the proposed Singapore F1 street circuit in a black Renault Megane Coupe convertible. He had this to say about the plan for a night street circuit race:

[He] said organisers would have to look into lighting and the effect of rain, which could create glare in dark conditions.

"There's a few unanswered questions which need a bit more research, but that happens when you have something very exciting and something very new which is what we have here."

On whether such a race could be held here next year, Webber quipped: "If there's people walking on the moon, you can make things happen very quickly these days."

Previous blogpost on the Singapore F1 Street Circuit saga here and video + report from Channel News Asia on Webber's Saturday drive below.

Formula One: More work needed on Singapore night race - Webber
31 March 2007 1757 hrs
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/267641/1/.html

SINGAPORE: Formula One's Mark Webber praised a proposed Singapore street circuit after driving it on Saturday but said more research was needed into a plan to race here at night.

The Red Bull driver from Australia said organisers would have to look into lighting and the effect of rain, which could create glare in dark conditions.

"They are talking about the night concept which again is very, very new and pioneering and something which has not been done before in Formula One," said Webber, 30, who is also director of the Grand Prix Drivers Association.

"The question of whether it rains has been mentioned," he added.

"It requires a lot of research and development into actually understanding how that could take place in terms of the amount of lighting required to make the event safe for the drivers, for marshals and (other) people taking part.

"There's a few unanswered questions which need a bit more research, but that happens when you have something very exciting and something very new which is what we have here."

Webber took a "leisurely" morning drive in a non-race car round the 4.8-kilometre (three-mile) route proposed by designer Hermann Tilke.

Despite the potential risks, Webber said "all the drivers are very, very keen to race on a new street circuit, which is definitely going to be the case here in Singapore."

"It's a very clean and beautiful city and I think it's a real signature event if you can have a Formula One Grand Prix here," he added.

"I can see the enthusiasm and the excitement to have an international sporting event such as the world Formula One championships here and it's something which looks exciting, no questions about it."

Webber's test drive comes after the Singapore government said negotiations were under way to host a Formula One event in the affluent Southeast Asian island-nation and that it was prepared to offer support.

It has been reported that Formula One supremo Bernie Ecclestone held talks in the city-state with a tycoon who is bidding for the right to host an F1 race here.

Ecclestone was believed to have had dinner with Singapore hotel magnate Ong Beng Seng, one of two local parties jockeying to host the event.

Singapore's founding father Lee Kuan Yew said two years ago that he regretted not having built a Formula One race track to generate more money for the local economy.

Monaco hosts the circuit's only other street race, and there is no night race on the calendar.

Formula One organisers have made clear their intentions to stage night races to take advantage of time zone differences and boost TV audiences.

On whether such a race could be held here next year, Webber quipped: "If there's people walking on the moon, you can make things happen very quickly these days." - AFP

Destruction of non-Muslim worship centers riles faith minorities in Malaysia

An interesting article from AP about the current religious tensions. Seems like I'm not the only person who's heard of "bureaucratic" problems like delays and outright rejections when it comes to getting approvals to build non-Muslim places of worship. They are not spared even when they are to be built with PRIVATE money, on PRIVATE land.

Meanwhile, grand, sprawling mosques costing millions are built with money from taxpayers (of all races), and each new housing estate must have at least one surau, built by the developer (meaning the cost of the surau is spread to all housebuyers... yes, even the non-Muslim ones). And we haven't even begun to talk of the religious departments, state muftis, mosque clerics, snoop squads etc. all funded by tax money.

Is this the religious equality and freedom guaranteed by the Constitution?

Destruction of non-Muslim worship centers riles faith minorities in Malaysia
Sean Yoong - Associated Press
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/newsncom.php?itemid=3505

The cavernous pink Putra Mosque with its soaring minaret is one of the most commanding sights and popular tourist photo backdrops in the new city of Putrajaya.

A house of worship for thousands of Muslims in the 8-year-old administrative capital of Malaysia, it is a showcase of the nation's dominant faith — Islam.

But the mosque also highlights the fact that Putrajaya doesn't have a single church or temple — a fact that minority Buddhists, Hindus and Christians see as one example of the second-class treatment other faiths get in this Muslim-majority country

Religious minorities have long complained about obstacles in getting the government's permission to build places of worship in Malaysia. But their frustrations have grown amid recent accusations by religious rights activists that authorities are destroying non-Muslim shrines, heating up racial bitterness that has simmered for decades beneath a veneer of multicultural harmony.

"There is much disillusionment" among non-Muslims, said P. Uthayakumar, a Hindu lawyer who has launched a court battle to prevent authorities from demolishing temples. "Every time a temple is demolished, the people's confidence is shaken further."

The issue of churches and temples is part of a wider debate in Malaysia regarding racial and religious rights. Majority ethnic Malays, who are exclusively Muslim, enjoy a host of privileges, while other groups struggle with issues such as a perceived lack of recourse when they get into legal disputes with Muslims over religious matters.

"The debate and conflict over places of worship for non-Muslims is one of the results of the radicalized communitarian politics," says Farish Noor, a Malaysian Muslim political analyst.

"Thus far the Malaysian government has been talking about being a government for all Malaysians, but sadly we see that the Malay-Muslim agenda still dominates politics at a major level."

Some observers say the destruction of temples reflects the government's failure under Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who took power in 2003, to curb attempts by some Malays to assert their influence and privileges.

Abdullah, who espouses a philosophy of progressive moderate Islam, warned in November that he would not allow anyone to "hijack Islam in Malaysia in order to breed intolerance and hatred."

However, there has been an increasing perception among non-Muslims over the past year that some politicians and religious authorities have become overzealous in trying to ensure that the status of Malays and their religion remains unthreatened.

Malaysia has not seen major racial violence since May 1969, when hundreds were killed in riots between Malay Muslims — two-thirds of the country's 26 million people — and ethnic Chinese who are 25 percent of the population.

Most Chinese are Buddhists or Christians. Ethnic Indians, the smallest minority, are largely Hindus.

Racial harmony between the three groups is a fine balance, maintained mainly because the minorities have not made a fuss about Islam's primacy, and are accepting and thankful for the relative freedom they have to practice their faith.

But critics say that although religious freedom is a constitutional right, minorities are being indirectly victimized by laws and arcane rules.

Among them, religious conversion of ethnic Malay Muslims is illegal; authorities have strict guidelines that limit the number of non-Muslim places of worship, partly based on whether there are enough non-Muslims in an area to justify having a church or temple.

According to Town Planning Department guidelines non-Muslim places of worship can only be built after taking into account racial "harmony ... and not touch on the sensitivities of other faiths."

Laws also allow for the demolition of temples and churches built on sites deemed unsuitable by city officials.

In the past year, activists allege there have been increasing demolitions, especially involving Hindu temples. The Hindu Rights Action Force lobby group claims more than 70 Hindu temples were razed or threatened with such action in 2006.

Many Hindu temples were built by plantation laborers, without official approval, before the country's independence from Britain in 1957.

The Hindu coalition has urged the government to declare temple locations as religious land reserves, which would protect them. It filed a court application in December seeking an injunction to halt any further demolitions.

Malaysia is one of Southeast Asia's most placid countries, and there is no immediate alarm that the issue will trigger serious unrest. Nevertheless, some demolitions sparked violent confrontations that could be a sign of simmering tensions.

In November, police fired warning shots to quell a fracas between dozens of protesters and demolition workers who flattened part of a Chinese temple deemed to have been built illegally in northern Penang state.

The main problem for Christians, meanwhile, is getting approval to build new churches; a Roman Catholic church, for instance, was held up 18 years. Many Protestant churches are forced to occupy commercial shop and office premises because they cannot obtain government consent.

The government rejects claims of discrimination, pointing out that the demolished temples were built illegally and that its policies allow for sufficient non-Muslim places of worship.

"Planning rules will definitely take care of all religious needs," Housing and Local Government Minister Ong Ka Ting, a Chinese, told The Associated Press.

"Under the planning guidelines, all the new development must provide for non-Muslim places of worship. All (authorities) should abide by this and implement this accordingly."

Such assurances, however, sometimes seem slow to be translated to action. Catholic Malaysians have been working since 2005 to set up a church in Putrajaya, but church officials say they are still awaiting the government's blessings for the church design.

The Rev. Julian Leow, a priest involved in the project, estimates hundreds of Catholics in Putrajaya, a city of 50,000, currently have to travel to neighboring districts for Mass.

"It would be very significant to have a church in the administrative capital," Leow said. "It would be a showcase (for religious diversity) that Malaysia can present, not only to Catholics but to the whole world."

First Look: Sony Vaio UX-27GN UMPC

You wouldn't believe how hard it is to find a Sony Gallery or Sony dealer who actually has a Vaio UX-27GN UMPC (Ultra Mobile Portable Computer) on display. But I did manage to get my hands on one yesterday. What I didn't realise was that Sony doesn't allow customers to take photographs in their stores. So, since the staff chased me out quick smart... this will be a very brief first look.


For a list of specifications, go to Sony's dedicated Vaio website. Lot's of information there, so I won't go into much detail about the specs. I will tell you though that it's rather thick... as thick as a normal 10 or 12 inch notebook. So, while it's not quite a 'pocketable' piece of kit, it feels quite solid and robust.

The 4.5" widescreen LCD was very good at it's native 1024x600 resolution. Clear, bright (hence the Sony moniker of 'Clearbright' LCD) and very sharp. In the photo above, the normal Windows Vista desktop is UN-magnified. I had no trouble seeing what each icon was (including the tiny ones in the systray at the lower right corner), but I did have to squint to read the pop-up balloons when you hover your cursur above the systray icons.

All in all, I think there should be no problem surfing regular internet webpages without any magnification.


In the limited time I had before I was summarily reprimanded by Sony staff, Vista seemed to be acceptably fast. That's not surprising since the UX-27 is specced pretty much the same as a current average notebook computer. Intel Core Solo CPU, 1GB of DDR2 SD-RAM, 40GB Ultra-ATA 5,400rpm HDD (recovery partition takes away 5GB), Intel GMS 945 chipset, blah blah blah. What is amazing though, is it all fits into a 520gm package.

In terms of software, it is spartan. It comes installed with a meagre selection of programs... Norton AV, IE browser and a multi-media suite. There is no productivity software at all. I would have liked a light version of MS Office. Makes me wonder what kind of logic Sony employed to leave that out... since the only people who can afford to buy the UX are people who have to work all the time.

There seems to be 3 ways to navigate.

One, using the fully featured keypad which slides out like a slider phone. I found the keys rather stiff though, so no touch-typing here.

Two, using the trackpoint. The big grey, square button on the upper right side of the UX-27 is the trackpoint. Put your right thumb there and use pressure to move the cursur around. Use it exactly as you would an IBM/Lenovo Thinkpad trackpoint. The 2 buttons (for the left thumb) on the upper left side are the left & right mouse buttons. It took me a few minutes to get used to coordinating both thumbs to make single point and click actions.

The bigger implication of putting the mouse controller on one side and the mouse buttons on the other side however, is that you can't use the UX with one hand. Think about it, the ramifications could be larger than you'd think. For eg, you can't use this standing in a bus or train, and hold on to the support pole / hand straps at the same time. And you're pretty much screwed if you happen to have only one thumb... or none at all.

Three, using the nifty touch screen. Here's me dragging out a highlight box with my finger. Apparently there's a stylus pen supplied, but I couldn't find it.


But when I tried double clicking on icons by tapping the screen, nothing happened. I guess I was ejected before I could read the instruction manual.

A final verdict would be that this is a great gadget. Fully featured (if they include some productivity software), little compromise on computing power and memory (compared to a regular notebook), and provides a full range of connectivity options. Besides, it's an unrivalled head turner and conversation piece. You'll be a geekybabe-magnet if you turn up at your neighbourhood Starbucks and wifi using one of these.

On the downside, it still doesn't fit in your pocket, has no memory upgrade options and the price. It's a testicle shrinking S$3,499 (USD 2,300 or RM8,000).

Nokia N95's price is an exorbitant S$1288 in Singapore

According to the Today newspaper, the Nokia N95 finally has a price in Singapore... S$1,288 (USD 850 or RM3,000).

Way, waaayyy too expensive if you ask me. That's Mickey Mouse pricing... for now. With the Apple iPhone coming next year, I would expect no less than for the N95's price to drop considerably during the latter part of this year.

I definitely won't be an early adopter like I was for the SonyEricsson K800i.

Malays will become slaves if quotas scrapped

Tun M

Aren't many Malays already slaves to the quotas and NEP?

And as long as they are not made to stand on their own 2 feet, won't they remain slaves... led by rings through their noses by the powerful elite, propped by crutches, unable to stand up straight and look people in the eye?

You said so yourself... not so long ago, in a flood of tears, snot and spit. Why the sudden change of tune? You should really try not to contradict yourself so.

Airport terminal security detain woman and 13 year old child for sarcasm

Security officers at Singapore's Budget Terminal detained a woman and her 13 year old daughter just because the lady sarcarstically uttered the word "bomb" after having her boots removed for inspection.

For god's sake... I honestly don't think it's even humanly possible to be more ridiculous, over-zealous, paranoid, constipated and customer-unfriendly than that.

Believe it or not, Singapore has a govt-sponsored, highly publicised Customer Service Training Programme and GEMS (Go the Extra Mile for Service) campaign... and you know what, it's NOT WORKING!

VW scraps tie-up with Proton

Updates posted to the comments section of this blogpost.

This appeared in today's Straits Times in Singapore.

Also have a read of NST Online's coverage of this story.

You'll notice that NST made their report sound as bland - as sex in the missionary position with an Englishman with sore knees... - by leaving out all the "spicier" remarks from the original report, like the ones below:

"...this is a major setback and could hurt investor sentiment"

"...the govt will need to come up with a solution quickly"

"...clearly they don't want to pour any resources into turning Proton around"

"...getting the locals to lead Proton's turnaround is not what the govt wants. But it looks like it doesn't have a choice"

Related blogposts: The Problem with Proton