RAM KARPAL ADALAH AMANAH MENDIANG KARPAL SINGH, APAKAH DAP AKAN TUNAIKAN?

Kerusi Parlimen Bukit Gelugor (P051) telah kosong setelah kematian Karpal Singh dalam satu kemalangan 17 April lalu. Kini, bagi mengisi kekosongan kerusi P051, satu pilihanraya kecil bakal diadakan dalam tempoh 60 hari.

Terdahulu, bagi pihak BN kerusi parlimen tersebut adalah kouta MCA dan semenjak 2004, mendiang Karpal Singh yang mewakili DAP telah memenangi pada pilihanraya umum dengan majoriti sebanyak 775 undi pada tahun 2004, 21,015 pada tahun 2008 dan pada 2013 dengan majoriti 42,706.

Melihat kepada majoriti yang menjunam naik pada tahun 2008 dan 2013, pasti DAP tidak akan menghadapi sebarang kesukaran untuk menang semula kerusi parlimen ini pada pilihanraya kecil yang bakal diadakan nanti.

Namun yang menjadi persoalannya adalah seperti biasa, siapakah calonnya kali ini?

Bagi mengekalkan momentum kemenangan mendiang Karpal Singh di PRU lalu, nampaknya telah terdengar-dengar calonnya mestilah dari pewaris mendiang yang terdiri dari ahli keluarganya juga walaupun ramai mengetahui DAP akan dapat mengekalkan majoriti dengan undian simpati.

Ramkarpal juga dikatakan anak yang telah dipilih mendiang Karpal untuk mengganti kerusi parlimennya seandai beliau disabitkan dengan kesalahan di mana mendiang telah dijatuhkan hukuman penjara kerana disabitkan mengeluarkan kata-kata menghina dan menghasut dalam krisis perlembagaan di Perak apabila di pejabatnya di Jalan Pudu Lama, Karpal Singh telah mengeluarkan kenyataan bahawa DYMM Sultan Perak perlu diseret ke mahkamah untuk dibicarakan kerana memberikan perkenan kepada perlantikan Zambry Abdul Kadir setelah Pakatan Rakyat kehilangan majoriti di DUN Perak.

Satu lagi nama dan juga anak Karpal iaitu Jagdeep Singh Deo, ADUN Datuk Keramat telah disebut-sebut sebagai calon P051 tetapi oleh kerana pendirian DAP untuk tidak bertanding di 2 kerusi Parlimen dan ADUN, kecuali diberikan kepada Lim Guan Eng, maka Jagdeep bukanlah calon pilihan. Cadangan ini juga telah diutarakan oleh mendiang Karpal.

Persoalannya sekarang, apakah DAP akan menunaikan wasiat Karpal nanti, kita sama-sama tunggu setelah SPR membuat pengumuman tarikh PRK P051 Bukit Gelugor.

MALAYSIA INSIDER AND MAJLIS FATWA ON 'RIP'... MUSLIM LAWYERS REBUT

In Malaysian Insider's article titled 'Muslims not encouraged to us 'RIP', says National Fatwa Council' is obviously with malice intentions and it was not what was correctly referred to the blog as claimed by MI.

National Fatwa Council was reported by MI to be prohibiting Muslims from using the expression “rest in peace" to condole the death of non-Muslims but in actual, such was written in the blog;

If a speech is given with the intention of allowing a religious belief that is against Islam, then it is prohibited. As if it were uttered just honor in general, then it is a must.

The issue went viral and broadly disseminated over social medias locally and internationally following Karpal Singh's accident that caused death on 17th April, lately.

Upon this, Muslim Lawyers Association of Malaysia in their press statement cleared the air, duly in their researches with reference to lists of fatwas that was published by National Fatwa Council.


What concerned us is the impact given to Islam in Malaysia as non-tolerant, extremist and too dogmatic thus created further hatred against Islam and how the religion is being managed in Malaysia.

PRESS RELEASE
MUSLIM LAWYERS ASSOCIATION OF MALAYSIA

RE: INCITING HATRED AGAINST THE FATWA COUNCIL

PPMM condemns The Malaysiain Insider (TMI) for inciting hatred against the National Fatwa Council based on false allegation through its report dated 17th April entitled “Muslims not encouraged to use ‘RIP’, says National Fatwa Council”. Such report has caused further consternation and division between muslims and non-muslims in the country. 

In the report of 17th April, TMI states: "Hours after the death of Karpal Singh, Muslims were told by the National Fatwa Council today they were not encouraged to use the phrase “Rest in Peace" (RIP) to a non-Muslim because the term had Christian connotations." Pictures of the late Mr. Karpal Singh and his wake was inserted to relate the National fatwa council decision’s to the late Mr Karpal Singh. The source was expressly stated in the article as coming from the National Fatwa Council sitehttp://www.e-fatwa.gov.my/.

Upon perusal of the website, PPMM found that there was never listed in any of the “Senarai Fatwa Malaysia” be it either at national or state level, a fatwa on this issue by the National Fatwa Council. PPMM however have found that there was an opinion issued by the bloghost dated 12 December 2013 in a question and answer column. 

TMI has thus used an old non fatwa opinion to falsely accuse that the National Fatwa Council issued a statement hours after death of the late Karpal Singh. It has created much scorn against, specifically, the National Fatwa Council and, in general, the Muslims, in the social media.

After causing much dissension among the public with its inaccurate report, TMI then amended its original report without a separate public notice and apology. They did this by amending the original article hiding their inciteful remarks. Those who have read the earlier report would not know it’s been amended unless one refers back to the previous article. Even then they would not be able to determine the original wordings as it has been deleted. TMI claimed that they have amended to correct the wrongful implication. 

This is indeed an unethical manner of amending the article. The amendment changed the tone and premise of the article. The editor justification was also dishonest. The original article clearly with the picture and wordings put the blame on the National Fatwa Council and not by way of implication. 

PPMM highly condemns this unethical dishonest reporting of TMI in inciting hatred not only against the National Fatwa Council but also against the Muslims in general. 

Dato Haji Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar
President
Muslim Lawyers Association of Malaysia

Date: 21st April 2014

A LONG HISTORY OF KARPAL SINGH

 

• 1940, June 28: Karpal Singh was born in Georgetown, Penang to Ram Singh, a Punjabi immigrant who was a watchman and part-time herdsman.^[1] (Ram had moved from India to Penang in 1921.) ^[2]
• Unknown:
  • Karpal Singh studied at St. Xavier's Institution, Penang.
  • Karpal Singh obtained his law degree from the University of Malaya in Singapore. During his time there, he also served as president of the student's union. Karpal was barred from the hostel for protesting against the university's decision to mandate the "certificate of political suitability" for enrolling students. He said he took 7 years to graduate, admitting that he was "playful" and "didn't attend lectures". After failing his final year courses, the dean made him sit at the front of the class, and according to Karpal, "I couldn't play the fool anymore and I passed my exams accordingly!" ^[1]
• 1969 (age 29): Karpal Singh was called to the Penang Bar and joined a firm in Alor Setar, Kedah.
• 1970 (age 30):
  • Karpal Singh started his own legal firm. (Well-known for his expertise in the field of litigation, he has been praised for "defending the little man" and has been called "a friend to the oppressed and marginalized". Karpal is a leading opponent of the death penalty in Malaysia, and has successfully defended at least 10 foreigners on serious drug charges which carry a mandatory death sentence. Nonetheless, in July 2010, he called for convicted child rapists to be sentenced to death.)
  • Karpal Singh joined the Democratic Action Party (DAP), citing the party's multiracial political platform following the 1969 race riots.
  • July: Karpal Singh married Gurmit Kaur whose family was from Narathiwat, Thailand. (Her family moved to Penang when she was 7. Karpal met her, while herding his father's cows.)
• 1974 (age 34):
  • Karpal Singh visited his ancestors' village of Samna Pind, near Amritsar, in the Punjab region, when his father was killed in an accident there.
  • Karpal Singh was due to contest in the 1974 general elections in Penang, but withdrew as a result of his father's death. Following the persuasion of DAP national organising secretary Fan Yew Teng, he ran for the Alor Setar parliamentary seat and Bandar Alor Setar state seat. He lost in the parliamentary contest but won the state seat to become the first DAP candidate to stand for and win a seat in Kedah.
• 1977 (age 37): Karpal Singh managed to persuade the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to pardon a 14-year old Chinese boy sentenced to death under the Internal Security Act for firearm possession, apparently by suggesting that to let the boy be hanged would be "politically explosive".^[3]
• 1978, July 8 (age 38): Karpal Singh was first elected to parliament in the general elections, representing Jelutong in Penang. (He would go on to hold the seat for 21 years (5 terms) until 1999.) Karpal was also the state assemblyman for Bukit Gelugor between 1978 and 1986.
• 1985 (age 45): Karpal Singh defended Australian heroin trafficker, Kevin Barlow, who, together with fellow Australian, Brian Chambers, were convicted by the Penang High Court in July 1985. Even after the execution in 1986, Karpal continued to fight to clear Barlow's name.
• 1986 (age 46): Karpal Singh filed a lawsuit against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Iskandar of Johor, on behalf of one of the allegedly assaulted men. He lost and the Sultan allegedly named one of his dogs after him.^[3]
• 1987 (age 47):
  • Karpal Singh defended New Zealanders Lorraine Cohen and her son, Aaron, against heroin trafficking charges. They were both convicted, with Mrs. Cohen sentenced to death and Aaron to life imprisonment. Mrs. Cohen's death sentence, however, was commuted to life imprisonment in 1989. Both of them were subsequently pardoned and freed in 1996.
  • October 27: Karpal Singh, along with many other opposition politicians, were detained without trial under the Internal Security Act during Operation Lalang for "inciting" racial tension in the country. (He was released briefly for a few hours in March 1988 in response to a habeas corpus application, but was rearrested and remained in prison until January 1989. Amnesty International deemed him a prisoner of conscience.)
• 1989 (age 49): Karpal Singh accused Deputy Speaker D.P. Vijandran of acting in pornographic videotapes. The allegations were dismissed, due to lack of evidence, but Vijandran resigned as deputy speaker in 1990.
• 1990 (age 50):
  • Staunchly opposing the notion of Malaysia as an Islamic state, Karpal Singh said "an Islamic state over my dead body" during a political speech in Sungai Pinang.^[4] This led to him to be portrayed as an enemy of Islam. (He claimed to have apologized for the matter.) ^[5]
  • October 21: Karpal Singh successfully defended his Jelutong parliamentary seat but failed to be elected as state assemblyman in Sungai Pinang which he also contested.
• 1992 (age 52): Karpal Singh produced in parliament the alleged videotape of Deputy Speaker D.P. Vijandran acting in pornographic videotapes, and handed it over to Deputy Speaker Ong Tee Keat. (Vijandran was convicted in May 1994 for fabricating evidence in an affidavit which sought a court order to stop his nephew from allegedly distributing pornographic video tapes featuring him. He was acquitted in 1998, after appeal.)
• 1993 (age 53): Karpal Singh commented that "political life is not what it used to be in Malaysia," specifically criticizing Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad's restriction on media coverage of the opposition.^[3]
• 1998, September (age 58): Karpal Singh represented former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim during the latter's sodomy trial. During the first trial, he produced a pathological report confirming high levels of arsenic that had been detected in Anwar's body, and accused the authorities of poisoning Anwar, charging: "It could well be that someone out there wants to get rid of him... even to the extent of murder... I suspect people in high places are responsible for this situation". This accusation in court led to Karpal being charged under the Sedition Act in January 2000.
• 1999 (age 59):
  • November 29: Karpal Singh lost his Jelutong parliamentary seat in the general elections, a seat which he had held for 21 years. (Lim Kit Siang also lost his seat in this general election. The DAP had joined Barisan Alternatif, an opposition alliance with Parti Keadilan Nasional (PKN) and Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS), a move strongly advocated by both Karpal and Lim.) Despite the setback, Karpal was retained as party deputy chairman, while Lim was elevated to chairman, after the resignation of long-serving chairman Chen Man Hin.
  • Karpal Singh was one of the strongest opponents of Parti Islam Se-Malaysia's (PAS) plan to introduce hudud (Islamic codes of behavior) into the Terengganu state legal system, even threatening to take the state government to court.
• 2000 (age 60):
  • January: Karpal Singh was arrested under the Sedition Act along with 4 other opposition politicians and the editor of the Harakah Daily, the newspaper published by the opposition Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS). He was charged for making seditious remarks in court during Anwar's first corruption trial. (This was the only known charge of sedition in any country in the Commonwealth brought against a lawyer for remarks made in court in defence of a client. The charges were dropped in 2002.)
  • Karpal Singh again acted as the defence's lead counsel in Anwar Ibrahim's 2nd sodomy trial, following fresh allegations. After a 2-year trial, Anwar was acquitted on 10 January 2012.
  • Karpal Singh was ordered to pay D.P. Vijandran RM500,000 (later reduced to RM100,000 on appeal) in damages for defamation, after accusing the latter of deliberately issuing a cheque to him from a closed account.
• 2004 (age 64):
  • March 21: Karpal Singh was elected Member of Parliament for the newly-created Bukit Gelugor in Penang with a 1,261-vote majority. (The DAP regained its position as the largest opposition party in parliament.)
  • September 4: Karpal Singh was appointed National Chairman of the Democratic Action Party (DAP).
  • September 7: Karpal Singh was sanctioned for "misleading parliament", after claiming that Members of Parliament had to raise their right hand, while taking the oath of office on 17 May. A report by the Parliamentary Rights and Privileges Committee gave him 3 days to apologize or face a 6-month suspension. Karpal refused to apologize and served the suspension.
• 2005, January 28 (age 65): Karpal Singh met with a motor vehicle accident which left him wheelchair-bound. A car rammed into his taxi from behind, causing severe contusion to his thoracic vertebrae. As a result, Karpal suffers sensory impairment and reduced motor strength, is unable to walk, or raise his right arm a few centimeters. Many people around him, including his best friends, suggested he would have been better off dead.^[6] Despite this, Karpal continues his legal and political careers.
• 2007, March 27: Karpal wrote to former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, asking him to make an unqualified and unconditional personal apology to Tun Salleh Abas, as well as Supreme Court judges Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh and Datuk George Seah, and their families for removing them from office during the 1988 constitutional crisis.^[7]
• 2008 (age 68):
  • March 3: Karpal Singh was elected Member of Parliament for Bukit Gelugor in Penang with a whopping 21,015-vote majority. (The election saw historic gains for the opposition which managed to deny the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) a two-thirds majority in parliament for the first time. The 3 main opposition parties subsequently formed Pakatan Rakyat, a formal coalition.)
  • March 24: Karpal Singh called for former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad to apologize for the latter's role in the 1988 constitutional crisis.^[8]
  • April 3: In response to Karpal's letter of 27 March 2007, former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad replied: "You are moved by pure hatred and I cannot respond to people who can never accept reality... My conscience is clear. I have done what was my duty and I owe nobody any apology. I am sure you will make use of this letter to dirty my name further. That is your right. I think you are the most contemptible of politicians and individuals". Karpal had asked Mahathir to apologize to the 3 ex-judges who had been removed from office during the 1988 constitutional crisis.^[7]
  • May: Karpal Singh was at the center of a controversy during a parliamentary sitting, when he called fellow parliamentarian Bung Mokhtar Radin the "bigfoot from Kinabatangan". Moments later, he was mocked by Ibrahim Ali for not being able to stand up while speaking, which provoked a furore among opposition MPs.
  • June: Karpal Singh received a death threat in the form of a bullet delivered to his law firm.
  • October: Karpal Singh received a 2-day suspension from parliament for calling Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia "not serious" and "playful".
• 2009(age 69):
  • March: Karpal Singh was charged under the Sedition Act for allegedly uttering seditious words against the Sultan of Perak at his legal firm in Jalan Pudu Lama, Kuala Lumpur between noon and 12.30pm on 6 February 2009. He was alleged to have said that the Sultan's removal of Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin as Menteri Besar of Perak could be questioned in a court of law.^[9]
  • July: Karpal Singh was listed as the DAP's representative on Pakatan Rakyat's Shadow Ministry of Home Affairs Committee.
• 2010 (age 70):
  • April: Karpal Singh was suspended from parliament for 10 days, after calling the speaker a "dictator".
  • June 11: Karpal Singh was discharged and acquitted by the High Court on a charge of uttering seditious words against the Sultan of Perak at his legal firm in Jalan Pudu Lama, Kuala Lumpur, between noon and 12.30 pm on 6 February 2009. He was alleged to have said that the Sultan's removal of Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin as the Perak Menteri Besar and Datuk Seri Dr. Zambry Abdul Kadir's appointment to the position could be questioned in a court of law.^[10]
  • December: Karpal Singh was suspended again for 6 months, along with opposition Members of Parliament Anwar Ibrahim, Azmin Ali, and Sivarasa Rasiah. (Anwar was suspended for stirring up controversy over the government's links with APCO Worldwide, while the rest were punished for making public the report by the Rights and Privileges Committee which found Anwar guilty before the report was presented to parliament.)
• 2011, December (age 71): Karpal Singh and Penang's 2nd deputy chief minister, P. Ramasamy, feuded over the latter's purported accusation that dissidents within the DAP were plotting against him for not handing them projects and favors. Karpal labeled Ramasamy a "warlord" and asked for him to resign as deputy chief minister. Ramasamy retorted by asking the party to remove its "godfathers", in apparent reference to Karpal. The feud was resolved internally, with Ramasamy later denying ever making the plot accusation. (At the DAP national conference in January 2012, Karpal closed ranks with Ramasamy and asked the party's "warlords and godfathers [to] stand together against Barisan Nasional".)
• 2012 (age 72):
  • January 20: The Court of Appeal reversed the High Court's 11 June 2010 decision to acquit Karpal of a sedition charge, after the prosecution appealed the matter.^[9]
  • August 17: Karpal Singh said that he would filing a defamation suit against PAS's Nasharuddin Mat Isa in view of the seriousness of his allegation that "Karpal Singh is not only against hudud but also against Islam".^[11]
  • August 30: The Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed Karpal Singh's application to issue subpoenas against former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, former Attorney-General Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman and current Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, in his application to strike out a sedition charge.^[12] Justice Datuk Azman Abdullah also dismissed his notice of motion to drop the sedition charge against him on the ground that the AGC's office was bias in exercising its "prosecutorial discretion" in charging him. With the court's decision, Karpal Singh would take the witness stand on 2 November on the charge of uttering seditious words against the Sultan of Perak on 6 February 2009. Karpal said he would file a notice of appeal against the High Court decision on Monday, 3 September.^[12]
• 2013 (age 73):
  • July 15: Karpal Singh withdrew his appeal against a High Court's dismissal of his application to subpoena 3 witnesses, including former prime minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, to testify in his sedition trial. He also withdrew his appeal against the refusal of the High Court to grant his application to strike out the sedition charge against him.^[9]
  • September 26: Utusan Malaysia promised to retract and apologize to DAP over an article, "Cuba sembunyi kebiadaban DAP" (Try to hide DAP's rudeness), that accused Lim Guan Eng of having a hidden agenda in banning the controversial Tanda Putera film from being screened in Penang in order to hide the rude action of a DAP leader. Karpal Singh, as DAP Chairman, said that this was the last time the party will accept an apology from Utusan. "We accepted their apology but Utusan cannot go on lying. We will give them this opportunity to turn over a new leaf," he said. Karpal said the newspaper now had to display its apology in the same size and prominence as the offending article. He also took Utusan to task, saying that the paper must practise responsible journalism. "You have gone for gutter journalism as far as responsible journalism is concerned. The lies heaped on Guan Eng and Kit Siang are unimaginable by a national paper", adding, "It should be ashamed of itself. I hope it will turn out to be better and start reporting the truth," Karpal said. He warned that the party will not be "compassionate" if similar accusations were published in future. In echoing's Karpal's sentiments, Lim Kit Siang said, "We don't expect them to be in favor of DAP or Pakatan Rakyat but they have to be honest and truthful and stop publishing lies".^[13]
  • November 5: Karpal Singh said professional bodies set up along religious or racial lines should be deregistered when he slammed the Muslim Lawyers Association (MLA) for its criticism of the Bar Council. He also urged the Bar to lodge a police report against MLA for threatening it not to side with Catholic weekly Herald in its appeal on the October 14 Allah ruling. According to Karpal, the time had come for all racial and religious political parties and professional organisations which operate along racial and religious lines to be deregistered. "Unfortunately, this also includes PAS. We have to be practical because if we want a united country we need parties that are multi-racial", he said, while noting that PAS was DAP's partner in Pakatan Rakyat (PR).^[14]
  • November 6: Responding to Karpal's call to disallow bodies operating along racial and religious lines, PAS information chief Datuk Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man described the proposal as dangerous and unfounded. "What is the danger of PAS to multi-racial Malaysia? People should evaluate for themselves how PAS has ruled Kelantan for over 23 years, Terengganu in 1999 and Kedah in 2008 in promoting racial unity and protecting the rights of both the Muslim and non-Muslim people. Were there any non-Muslim who was sidelined?" he asked, adding that the statement should not be coming from a Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leader at a time when the public was rejecting Barisan Nasional (BN). "He should have been more wise and not come out with a statement that can affect the good relations in Pakatan Rakyat and the people's support. This type of statement also does not benefit DAP," said Tuan Ibrahim, adding that PAS would leave it to DAP to deal with Karpal over the statement.^[14]
  • November 8: Karpal denied ever calling for the deregistration of Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS). "It is true that I had stated that race-based political parties and professional bodies should open its doors to other races which unfortunately included PAS but I was quick to add that PAS had acknowledged the necessity of multi-racialism by having a non-Muslim supporters' wing", he said. Karpal pointed out that PAS had established the non-Muslim PAS Supporters Congress, prior to the 2004 general election and also agreed to field non-Muslim candidates in the 2013 general election. Karpal also pointed out that in the 2008 general election, PAS fielded an Indian candidate to contest the Tiram state seat in Johor.^[15]
• 2014 (age 74):
  • March 11: Karpal was found guilty of sedition for questioning Sultan Azlan Shah, the Sultan of Perak, on his decision to remove former Perak Menteri Besar Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin from his post in February 2009. He was fined RM4,000 by the Kuala Lumpur High Court under Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act, which he described as an "outdated and irrelevant legislation that is 66 years old and a sad relic of British colonialism".^[16]
  • March 29:
    • Karpal stepped down as DAP Chairman, pending the outcome of his sedition appeal.^[16]
    • DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said that Karpal's position in the DAP Central Executive Committee (CEC) would be vacant for as long as necessary.^[16]
  • April 17: Karpal died on the spot in a car accident shortly before 1:00am at KM301.6 of the North-South Expressway near Gua Tempurung, Kampar in Perak. He was believed to be traveling from Kuala Lumpur to Penang to attend a court hearing. There were 3 other occupants in Karpal's Toyota Alphard, which had the iconic number plate KS9898. His long-time assistant Michael Cornelius Selvam Vellu also died, while Karpal's son, Ramkarpal, and the driver were injured. Police said the multi-purpose vehicle was badly damaged, after losing control, following a collision with a lorry

DAP HALAL UNTUK HINA PAS?

DAP buatlah apa saja... katalah apa saja terhadap PAS namun kerana ada perjanjian syaitan di antara mereka... PAS TETAP SAYANG DAP!

Masih ingat kek yang dihidangkan kepada Tok Guru mreka? 

Google saja ... Karpal kek Nik Aziz.... MERIAH!

Adakah kerana kek tersebut, maka DAP halal untuk menghina PAS? Murah sungguh maruah pemimpin-pemimpin dan ahli-ahli PAS. Dengan harga kek, maka Karpal Singh minta PAS diharamkan...

Berikut adalah transkrip kenyataan Karpal Sing supaya dibatalkan pendaftaran PAS....

Ok, I think we can start.
(Ok, saya fikir kita boleh mula).

The Muslim Lawyers Association has threatened the Bar Council for its support given to The Herald in the Allah issue.
(Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim telah mengugut Persatuan Peguam di atas sokongan yang diberikan olehnya kepada The Herald dalam isu Allah.)

The President of the Muslim Lawyers Association, Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, says that the association will not hesitate to take further action.
(Presiden Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim, Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, berkata bahawa persatuan itu tidak akan teragak-agak untuk mengambil tindakan lanjut.)
This is an idle threat, unwarranted, and one which should not have been uttered by the President of the Muslim Lawyers Association.
(Ini adalah satu ugutan senyap, tidak berasas, dan suatu yang tidak sepatutnya dituturkan oleh Presiden Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim.)

The Muslim Lawyers Association is a very divisive board.
(Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim adalah sebuah badan yang sangat memecah-belah.)
It is the Bar Council which represents lawyers in the country, and that includes all lawyers, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, everybody.
(Persatuan Peguam yang mewakili peguam-peguam dalam negara ini, dan ini merangkumi semua peguam, peguam-peguam Muslim, peguam-peguam Hindu, peguam-peguam Buddha, peguam-peguam Kristian, semua sekali.)

In fact, the registration of the Muslim Lawyers Association, if at all it has been registered, ought to be cancelled.
(Malah, pendaftaran Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim, itupun sekiranya ia telah didaftarkan, mestilah dibatalkan.)

The government cannot allow associations which operate on racial lines, which operate on religious lines, in this case it is religious line, Muslims.
(Kerajaan tidak boleh membenarkan pertubuhan-pertubuhan yang bergerak di atas garis perkauman, yang bergerak di atas garis keagamaan, di dalam kes ini ia adalah garis keagamaan, orang-orang Islam.)

It is a very serious matter, because Muslim lawyers can be allowed to form a separate association, with the Bar Council think they represent them, and we do not want the position where others may want to have Hindus Lawyers Association, Buddhist Lawyers Association, which of course will not happen, it is just somehow rather that the Muslim lawyers have decided to form their own association.
(Ini adalah satu perkara yang sangat serius, sebab peguam-peguam Muslim boleh dibenarkan untuk menubuhkan sebuah persatuan yang berasingan, dengan Persatuan Peguam fikir ia mewakili mereka, dan kita tidak mahu kedudukan di mana orang-orang lain mungkin hendak mewujudkan Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Hindu, Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Buddha, yang memang tidak akan berlaku, hanya entah bagaimana peguam-peguam Muslim telah memutuskan untuk menubuhkan persatuan mereka sendiri.)

In fact most Muslim lawyers do not support the Muslim Lawyers Association, it is just a handful, handful of troublemakers.
(Malah kebanyakan peguam Muslim tidak menyokong Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim, hanya sebahagian kecil, sebahagian kecil pembuat kacau.)

And I hope that serious action will be taken against the threat by the President of the Muslim Lawyers Association to the Bar Council, what they did mean when they said they will not hesitate to take further action, I think it is criminal intimidation here.
(Dan saya berharap agar tindakan serius akan dikenakan ke atas ugutan yang dibuat oleh Presiden Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim kepada Persatuan Peguam, apa yang mereka maksudkan bila mereka berkata mereka tidak akan teragak-agak untuk mengambil tindakan lanjut, saya fikir ia adalah ugutan jenayah di sini.)
I call upon the Bar Council to lodge a police report so that necessary action can be taken against this so-called president of this so-called association.
(Saya menggesa Persatuan Peguam membuat satu laporan polis bagi membolehkan tindakan sewajarnya diambil ke atas presiden persatuan ini.)

Are there any question on this, because I think this is a deliberate attempt to divide lawyers in the country?
(Adakah terdapat apa-apa soalan mengenai perkara ini, kerana saya fikir ini adalah satu cubaan terancang untuk memecahbelahkan peguam-peguam dalam negara ini?)


Question: How many lawyers in the Bar Council?
(Soalan: Berapa ramai peguam dalam Persatuan Peguam)

Answer: In the Bar Council, I think they are reaching nearly 13,000.
(Jawapan: Dalam Persatuan Peguam, saya fikir mereka mencapai hampir 13,000.)
Question: When was this Muslim Lawyers Association formed?
(Soalan: Bila Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim ini ditubuhkan?)

Answer: This was formed somewhere rather I think at the late 1980s, late 1980s.
(Jawapan: Ia ditubuhkan sekitar saya fikir penghujung 1980-an.)

Question: How many members are in their association?
(Soalan: Berapa ramai ahli dalam persatuan mereka)
Answer: I think you should ask them how many members they have.
(Jawapan: Saya fikir kamu perlu tanya mereka berapa ramai ahli mereka ada.)

Question: A handful only?
(Soalan: Sebahagian kecil sahaja?)

Answer: I think a handful of troublemakers. Very unbecoming of these lawyers to form such an association.
(Jawapan: Saya fikir sebahagian kecil pembuat kacau. Sangat tidak wajar bagi peguam-peguam ini untuk menubuhkan sebuah persatuan begini.)

Question: Is there a worry that this type of association can undermine the Bar Council, is there a worry there?
(Soalan: Adakah terdapat satu kebimbangan bahawa persatuan begini boleh menjejaskan Persatuan Peguam, adakah terdapat satu kebimbangan di sini?)

Answer: It could, of course, as I said earlier, you know. Operating along religious, racial lines, is a very dangerous thing in a multi-racial and a multi-religious society like ours. I think the time has come perhaps for all racial parties to be deregistered, that will include unfortunately even PAS. We have to be practical, we have to be practical, if we want a united country then we must have parties which are multi-racial.
(Jawapan: Ia boleh, memang, seperti saya katakan sebelum ini. Bergerak di atas garis-garis keagamaan, perkauman, adalah satu perkara yang sangat membahayakan di dalam sebuah masyarakat berbilang kaum dan berbilang agama seperti masyarakat kita. Saya fikir masanya mungkin sudah tiba bagi semua parti perkauman untuk dibatalkan pendaftarannya, ini malangnya merangkumi PAS juga. Kita perlu bersikap praktikal, kita perlu bersikap praktikal, jika kita mahu sebuah negara yang bersatu-padu maka kita mesti mempunyai parti-parti yang berbilang kaum.)
Question: Were you once with the Bar Council?
(Soalan: Adakah kamu pernah bersama Persatuan Peguam?)

Answer: Yes, I was in the Bar Council in the 1970s until I protested against the ESCAR, the Essential Security Cases Regulations.
(Jawapan: Ya, saya berada di dalam Persatuan Peguam pada 1970-an sehingga saya membuat protes kepada ESCAR, the Essential Security Cases Regulations.)

Question: Penang?
(Soalan: Pulau Pinang?)

Answer: No, I was a member from Kedah. Oh no, sorry, I was elected at that time from the floor. I was a member from Kedah earlier.
(Jawapan: Bukan, saya adalah seorang ahli dari Kedah. Oh tidak, maaf, saya telah dipilih pada waktu itu oleh ahli, saya adalah seorang ahli dari Kedah sebelum itu.)

Question: Now?
(Soalan: Sekarang?)

Answer: And what had happened then was that Legal Profession Act was amended to exclude me from the Bar Council, deliberately done for the purpose, an amendment was brought to the Legal Profession Act to disallow the members of, rather elected representatives, which is Members of Parliament and State Assemblymen, I was State Assemblyman at that time, from holding office in the Bar Council, so I was legislated out of the Bar Council.
(Jawapan: Dan apa yang berlaku selepas itu ialah Akta Profesion Guaman telah dipinda bagi mengeluarkan saya dari Persatuan Peguam, dibuat khusus untuk tujuan itu, satu pindaan telah dibuat ke atas Akta Profesion Guaman bagi menghalang ahli-ahli, sebenarnya wakil-wakil rakyat yang dipilih, iaitu Ahli-Ahli Parlimen dan Ahli-Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri, saya adalah Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri pada waktu itu, dari memegang jawatan dalam Persatuan Peguam, jadi saya telah ditendang keluar dari Persatuan Peguam secara perundangan.)

Question: Until now?
(Soalan: Hingga sekarang?)

Answer: Yes, the amendment is still there.
(Jawapan: Ya, pindaan itu masih di situ.)

Question: You said earlier that any association formed with the religious line is dangerous for the country, how about PAS?
(Soalan: Kamu menyatakan sebelum ini bahawa mana-mana pertubuhan yang bergerak di atas garis keagamaan adalah membahayakan kepada negara, bagaimana dengan PAS?)
Answer: That was what I said, unfortunately includes PAS.
(Jawapan: Itulah yang saya katakan pun, malangnya merangkumi PAS.)

Question: So are you suggesting that…
(Soalan: Adakah kamu bermaksud bahawa…)

Answer: I didn’t say that, I called it like this, yes.
(Jawapan: Saya tidak berkata begitu, saya panggil ia seperti ini, ya.)

Question: So you were saying even PAS…
(Soalan: Jadi kamu berkata walaupun PAS…)

Answer: Even PAS I think should open its door to all races.
(Jawapan: Walaupun PAS saya fikir perlu membuka pintunya kepada semua kaum.)



Question: But PAS will not be happy with your statement, they are part of your Pakatan Rakyat, right?
(Soalan: Tetapi PAS tidak akan gembira dengan kenyataan kamu, mereka adalah sebahagian daripada Pakatan Rakyat kamu, bukan?)

Answer: They may be part of the Pakatan Rakyat but it does not mean we cannot say things which are in the interest of the country.
(Jawapan: Mereka mungkin sebahagian daripada Pakatan Rakyat tetapi ini tidak bererti kita tidak boleh memperkatakan perkara-perkara yang berada di dalam kepentingan negara.)

Question: Is there any complaint to the…
(Soalan: Adakah terdapat apa-apa komplen terhadap…)

Answer: I think PAS already have some sort of non-Muslim, there are some arrangement, isn’t it? If I am not mistaken, the supporters group or something, I think they do have, although a handful, but they are not members of PAS, not direct members. Ban all racial political parties, what’s the problem?
(Jawapan: Saya fikir PAS telah mempunyai satu kumpulan bukan Islam, ada persetujuan, bukan begitu? Jika saya tidak silap, kumpulan penyokong-penyokong atau sesuatu, saya fikir mereka ada, walaupun sebahagian kecil, tetapi mereka bukan ahli-ahli PAS, bukan ahli-ahli terus. Haramkan semua parti politik perkauman, apa masalah?)

Question: But any conflict with this freedom of expression in the Constitution?
(Soalan: Tetapi apa-apa konflik dengan kebebasan bersuara dalam Perlembagaan?)

Answer: I don’t think so, in fact, on the other hand, I think it enhances the concept of, you know, unity, on the people.
(Jawapan: Saya tidak fikir begitu, malah, sebaliknya, saya fikir ia meningkatkan lagi konsep, kamu tahu, kesatuan, pada rakyat.)
Question: Ban all racial political parties?
(Soalan: Haramkan semua parti politik perkauman?)
Answer: Yes, ban all racial political parties.
(Jawapan: Ya, haramkan semua parti politik perkauman.)
Question: Umno?
(Soalan: Umno?)

Answer: Ya, ya, I say Umno, MCA, of course Gerakan is spared, that does not make any difference.
(Jawapan: Ya, ya, saya kata UMNO, MCA, Gerakan memang terkecuali, ia tidak membawa apa-apa perbezaan.)

Question: You were saying ban all racial political parties or ban all racial associations and groups?
(Soalan: Kamu menyatakan haramkan semua parti politik perkauman atau haramkan semua persatuan dan kumpulan perkauman?)

Answer: I am talking about political parties and of course associations like the Muslim Lawyers Association and so forth.
(Jawapan: Saya bercakap mengenai parti-parti politik dan juga persatuan-persatuan seperti Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim dan sebagainya.)

Question: Professional groups?
(Soalan: Kumpulan-kumpulan profesional?)

Answer: Professionals are all, you know, ought to be multi-racial. There is no problem there, the medical, I think include all, otherwise we will have Muslim Doctors Association, and we might need to have, to allow precedents like this, it is a very serious matter the government has to look at, otherwise I think it is a serious setback, you know, to ultimate unity among the people in the country.
(Jawapan: Profesional-profesional semuanya, kamu tahu, mestilah berbilang kaum. Tiada masalah di sana, kumpulan perubatan, saya fikir termasuk semua, jika tidak kita akan ada Persatuan Doktor-Doktor Muslim, dan kita mungkin perlu ada, untuk benarkan yang terdahulu seperti ini, ia adalah satu perkara yang sangat serius kerajaan mesti lihat, jika tidak saya fikir ia adalah satu ancaman serius kepada, awak tahu, perpaduan di kalangan rakyat dalam negara ini.)

Question: You have no front in making such a statement?
(Soalan: Kamu bukan sesiapa untuk membuat kenyataan ini?)
Answer: No front?
(Jawapan: Bukan sesiapa?)

Question: Is that an unwarranted call?
(Soalan: Adakah itu satu kenyataan yang tidak wajar?)

Answer: I think a warranted call.
(Jawapan: Saya fikir ia satu kenyataan yang wajar.)

Question: You don’t see any repercussion from your statement?
(Soalan: Kamu tidak lihat satu kesan negatif dari kenyataan kamu?)

Answer: What repercussion can there be?
(Jawapan: Apa kesan negatif yang boleh timbul?)

Question: What is the danger when you say that party or professional they are on the racial line or religious line…
(Soalan: Apa bahaya bila kamu berkata bahawa parti atau profesional mereka bergerak atas garis perkauman atau garis keagamaan…)

Answer: Even Mahathir is on record as stating that ultimately there should be no racial political parties in the country, ultimately, he had said that.
(Jawapan: Mahathir sendiri pernah direkodkan sebagai berkata bahawa pada akhirnya hendaklah tidak ada parti-parti politik perkauman dalam negara ini, pada akhirnya, dia berkata begitu.)
Question: When, about when he said that?
(Soalan: Bila, lebih kurang bila dia berkata begitu?)
Answer : Long ago, when he was a Prime Minister, it was quoted in the Asiaweek.
(Jawapan: Lama dahulu, bila dia seorang Perdana Menteri, ia telah dipetik dalam Asiaweek.)

Question: Where was the danger, I mean, having so long, all the while, where was the danger behind?
(Soalan: Di mana bahaya, maksud saya, setelah begitu lama, selama ini, di mana bahaya sebelum ini?)

Answer: But having been too long doesn’t mean we can’t do it. Something must be done. It should have been done long ago. It is not too late. Especially a call like this, that they will take further action, what is all these?
(Jawapan: Walaupun setelah begitu lama tidak bermakna kita tidak boleh lakukan. Sesuatu mesti dilakukan. Sepatutnya ia telah dibuat lama dahulu. Masih belum terlambat. Khasnya satu kenyataan seperti ini, bahawa mereka akan mengambil tindakan lanjut, apa semua ini?)

Question: You are ascribing this for political parties and professional associations like the Muslim Lawyers Association?
(Soalan: Kamu menyatakan ini untuk parti-parti politik dan persatuan-persatuan profesional?)

Answer: Yes, yes. I think it is all wrong.
(Jawapan: Ya, ya. Saya fikir semua itu salah.)

Maklumat : Sebastianphiu

P/S : DAP pasti kata itu kenyataan peribadi Karpal. Yang penting, kenyataan ini bukan dibuat oleh Gurindam Singh atau Kepala Singh tetapi ia adalah kenyataan Pengerusi DAP yang telah menang dalam pemilihan CEC dan ia adalah kenyataan rasmi DAP!