Malaysian regulatory services tidurkah?

The recent disaster of the catamaran in Sabah is but one of several Malaysian disasters that points to a apathetic lack of regulatory oversight. 

Some years ago we had the same problem on ferries plying the sea route to Tioman. When fire broke out on the ferry or when its engines went kaput, there was no contingency in place to deal with those disasters, nor was there in the first place strict oversight of the ferry service to ensure such disasters did not happen. Far more disgraceful, the crew abandoned the passengers.

Tioman ferry fire: Passengers 'jumped after crew left them'

We also witnessed bus disasters killing people by the dozens, and of cranes falling down at building sites, or concrete blocks dropping from unfinished building to kill someone on the ground, or of stadium roof collapsing or of Ring roads breaking up.

Crane hook fell on car, killed driver

One dead, eight injured when tower on top of UMNO Penang building collapses and crushes seven vehicles 

Kuala Terengganu stadium

Four roads are affected by massive jams due to the collapse of a pedestrian bridge near Mid Valley Megamall on Jalan Kampung Haji Abdullah

The regulatory services in Malaysia seem to be sleeping.

I am not talking about MAS flights MH370 or MH17 which were extraordinary events outside the control of the DCA, but more on regulatory services over sighting constructions like DOSH, taxis, buses, ferries. 

lipstick? syariah-compliant?

wakakaka

But the DCA, though weren't blameworthy of MH370 and MH17, must keep n ever vigilant eye on airlines operations especially on those mushrooming overnight with promises of halal this and halal that to capture the Muslim market. 

The DCA is also responsible for helicopter flights but we saw two recent crashes involving the death of high profile politicians.

Fatal crash ... former Malaysian MP Jamaluddin Mohammed Jarjis was killed in the explosion

Jangan makan gaji buta, or worse, makan pungli, wakakaka.

Muslims massacred in Quebec

MM Online - Canadian PM: Mosque shooting a terrorist attack on Muslims:

Quebec

QUEBEC, Jan 30 — The shooting at a Quebec mosque during last night prayers which reportedly killed five people was a “terrorist attack on Muslims”, said Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“We condemn this terrorist attack on Muslims in a centre of worship and refuge,” Trudeau said in a statement.

Five people were killed after gunmen opened fire in a Quebec City mosque, the mosque’s president told reporters today.

A witness told Reuters that up to three gunmen fired on about 40 people inside the Quebec City Islamic Cultural Centre. — Reuters

While we've often heard of Islamist terrorists attacking non-Muslims particularly Westerners, the above news about a massacre of Muslims (by presumably Westerners) is not the first terrorist attacks against Muslims. There were plenty in Israel. I recall one, that by Baruch Goldstein on February 25, 1994.

Baruch Goldstein

I'll let Wikipedia tell you what happened:

The Cave of the Patriarchs massacre, also known as the Ibrahimi Mosque massacre or Hebron massacre, was a shooting massacre carried out by American-Israeli Baruch Goldstein, also a member of the far-right Israeli Kach movement.

On February 25, 1994, Goldstein opened fire on a large number of Palestinian Muslims who had gathered to pray inside the Ibrahimi Mosque at the Cave of the Patriarchs compound in Hebron, West Bank. 

It took place on February 25, 1994, during the overlapping religious holidays of both Jewish Purim and Muslim Ramadan.

The attack left 29 people dead, several as young as twelve, and 125 wounded.

Goldstein was overpowered, disarmed and then beaten to death by survivors.

While nearly 80% of Israelis, the Israeli government and most rabbis condemned that massacre and also Baruch Goldstein, a few rabbis praised Goldstein's horrendous act, calling his undertaking 'an act of martyrdom'. What arseholes some Israelis could be.

Wikipedia said: In eulogizing Goldstein, Rabbi Israel Ariel called him a "holy martyr", and questioned the innocence of the victims by claiming they were responsible for the massacre of Hebron's Jews in 1929.

Rabbi Dov Lior of Kiryat Arba said he was a saint whose "hands are innocent, his heart pure", and compared him to the martyrs of the Holocaust.

At the time, settler rabbi Yitzhak Ginzburgh was the only prominent Orthodox rabbi who praised the massacre. He has since been detained several times for espousing extremist views.

At Goldstein's funeral, Rabbi Yaacov Perrin perpetuated the hatred between Israelis and Palestinians by saying in a so-called eulogy to the killer-terrorist: "One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail".

When Goldstein's grave became a holy site for visits by extremist Israelis, the Israeli government destroyed the site.

I fear the inevitable horror of an Islamic reciprocation for the Quebec mosque massacre.

In such an eye for an eye retribution, Mahatma Gandhi warned us the whole world would soon turn blind.

There are quite a many Israelis like Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan (picture below). He is still a member of the Knesset (Parliament) and is also the Deputy Minister of Defense. Frightening, isn't it?

Datukship (3)

Five years ago, on 28 August 2012, I published a post on Datukship. And then fours year after that post, on 26 October 2016, I published a sequel to Datukship which I naturally titled Datukship (2), wakakaka.

Datuk Shah Rukh Khan

Yesterday in Malaysiakini, Stephen Ng penned Time to clean up the registry of Datuks? in which he wrote about some datuks including red-shirt leader Jamal Mohd Yunos who all misbehaved in worrying manners. He said:

It does not really matter whether the culprit is a Datuk or a Datuk Seri; even if he is without a title, the assault case involving a trucker in Ampang recently is still setting tongues wagging even one week after the incident.

Even until today, the person’s identity has not been revealed yet. As the employer, we would have expected him or her to stop the bodyguards from further injuring the truck driver. [...]

The other set of questions people are now asking are: “Who is the Datuk Seri who was caught on video carrying a bolt cutter, seemingly ready to attack the security guard at a condominium in Penang?”

Has he been charged over his act of aggression? What is happening after he was released on police bail?

In this post I will paste some of the material I had written in the two preceding posts on subject.

Datuk is the title that comes with an honorary knighthood awarded by the Malaysian King (Yang di-Pertuan Agong), or the sultan of a Malaysian state, or the Yang di-Pertuan Negeri (YDN) (ceremonial governor) of a Malaysian non-sultanate state, namely Penang, Malacca, Sabah and Sarawak.

In every society there are humorous stories and also jokes about virtually every facet of life, but the jokes associated with Malaysian honours award system have been unfortunately cruel, laced with cynical sneers and/or disdainful contempt.

The one currently in notorious vogue is that a Chinese or Indian in possession of a datukship could well be a crook or gangster who had shelled out plenty of moola to obtain the title, wakakaka. This joke seems to ring true of we consider the behaviour of some datuks who have behaved more like thugs.

[Oh, last year there was one shot dead in Penang].

Well, the Malaysiakini article has just proven the veracity of the joke. Some heads ought to roll, specifically those who had recommended datukships to people who behaved like gangsters.

Incidentally, are there Malay gangsters other than Mat Rempits, some 'uniformed people', or allegedly an UMNO minister? Think Red Shirts, wakakaka.

Another Malaysian joke about datukship is that if one were to spit in a crowded place, there is a high probability that one's expectoration would hit at least three datuks, wakakaka.

My uncle told me that this particular joke would be akin to the old English joke/sneer about the multitude of Italian counts - unlike Malaysian datuks, counts were/are hereditary titles - with some even working as waiters serving cappuccinos at cafes. Such was the snobbery of the English but then, such was the proliferation of Italian counts.

There is a state in Malaysia which has been reputed to churn out datukships like nobody's business, wakakaka, but alas, there is a market for the title so the datukship factory springs into action willingly to meet market requirements.

But in contrast to European nobility, we Malaysians certainly live up or, rather, down to our favourite national cry of Malaysia Boleh, in honouring even criminal hoodlums with knighthoods, wakakaka.

And guess who should we blame for this?

It's may be worthwhile following Dr Mahathir's example by blaming, as a start, foreigners specifically the British, wakakaka, or if we can't, then the local Chinese.

I want to remind my readers that there is a marked distinction, virtually a Grand Canyon-ish gulf between gallantry awards like the Seri Pahlawan Gagah Perkasa (SP) or the Panglima Gagah Berani (PGB) which are based on valiant and courageous actions for the nation and the honour awards like datukships. This post only covers the latter.

The allure of a knighthood, perhaps the glamour and recognition associated with it, has been irresistible for many Malaysians.

But some business-people (of all races) particular want such a title because it 'opens doors' to exclusive business circles for them, in the same way those business-people apply desperately for memberships to some very exclusive expensive 'elite' social-entertainment-sports (golfing-horse riding) clubs.

They want to be in the 'correct' crowd for business deals, contracts, the sort of money-making stuff which in Malaysia would be easier to secure when in the right company - not necessarily at the very top level but just where a datukship title could make some decent social impact and acceptability, and thus be useful to their business enterprise, wakakaka.

Thus there is also a practical element to being a datuk. It's not just for syiok-ness alone.

Given above, we shouldn't be surprised that the associated glitz, glitter, glamour (and business profit) of being a datuk have even motivated some people to foolishly pay for one from a so-called Sultan Kudarat of Mindanao, wakakaka.

The point I want to make is that many (though obviously not all) Malaysians would like to be a datuk, no matter how much they may profess republican proclivities or pretend they aren't interested.

The other and far more important aspect of the datukship story is the political-ethnic-social-cultural and judicious necessity for some Chinese and Indian politicians (specifically those in the DAP) to accept one when so honoured by a ruler, and not to emulate, in the case of the British system, author HG Wells, playwright George Bernard Shaw, actor Paul Scofield, and many more who declined the knighthood awards.

While it's okay to decline a knighthood in Britain or other Western Commonwealth countries, it's unwise to do so in our 'skin-coloured' and ampun-tuanku' conscious society.

By deferentially accepting the sultan's honours, the recipient would be sending a message that he or she (like republican Sean Connery) is not disrespectful of royalty.

This point was raised by the DAP ADUN for Sekinchan Selangor, Ng Suee Lim, as he was deeply concerned that DAP politician, in not accepting datukships as per now-cancelled party policy, could be maliciously mis-portrayed by the other side of politics (specifically UMNO) as being anti royalty and thus, anti Malay.

Ng Suee Lim

Our honours award system is highly prone to corruption where I have early mentioned that at times, unfortunately, money passes hands to get one. 

There is also another unpleasant factor. For this one, it's not so much corruption per se but look, when a datukship is awarded willy nilly to some people, the effect could, would be and has been seen as grossly unfair or abused. Virtually every senior civil servant and senior police/military officer are likely to get one sooner or later.

Stupidly we Malaysians have followed this annual honouring of civil servants and armed service officers to the extreme where now it would be the rare senior civil servant, police senior officer or military general who is NOT a datuk of some sort, awarded at federal or state level.

Unlike the UK, we forget that we have 14 award systems to Britain's one, and a 30 million population to Britain's 60 million.

And far far worse than its willy nilly excesses, where we heard just last year a 19-year old was made a datuk.

Equally culpable, the BN government had even allowed Tan-Sri-ships, which are supposedly of a higher order than datukships, to be awarded to people of highly questionable reputations or/and character, even those of alleged ill repute or associated with lamentable incidents.

I can easily count three such cases which would have undeniably caused HM the Agong to squirm in embarrassment and, probably in private, curse the various PMs for forcing his high office into the lamentable situation of handing the awards to such people.

On the honour awards, the rulers and YDN have only a minor role, to consent to the list of to-be datuks, Tan Sris and Tuns.

In the case of a state ruler, yes, there is a slim possibility that he could well be difficult and either tell the PM or Menteri Besar to f* off with the list or more politely, declare he won't award a datukship to, say, kaytee, wakakaka. But this would be very rare and only if the state ruler is very headstrong, wakakaka again.

So, the politicians are to be blamed for making gangsters, crooks and a 19-year old into datuks, for they (and their cohorts) would be the ones recommending candidates for awards, and vetting and approving the final list for the Agong, ruler or YDP to accept. Thus it's down at the lil' Napoleons' level where corruption takes place.

But I think it's time to consider the necessity of stripping a Datuk (or Tan Sri or even Tun, wakakaka) of his or her title when he/she has been found guilty of committing a crime or a disgraceful act. 

I came across stories of Datuks who committed crimes of one sort or another and who went into prison but emerged still as datuks, with their awards totally intact. I wonder how the wardens addressed those datuks?

OK, some examples - naturally first on the list by virtue of his so-called fame (or notoriety) would be Anwar Ibrahim. Should he be stripped of his title?

Apart from that, I wonder how he could still make political statements from behind bars?

I can hear tumultuous shouts of outraged protests from his adorers and supporters because they believe he has been framed for his crime of sodomy, a felon in Malaysia.

Then there was Datuk Harun Idris, a former MB of Selangor, who was once touted as a potential PM of Malaysia. Whether he had a direct inciting role in the May 13 riot remains an area of intense debate until today. Some Chinese called him a saint while others (Chinese) saw/see him as a devil. He left us for a better place. Al Fatihah.

There was another Datuk from Seremban who was sentenced to death for murdering another UMNO man for bonking his sister, but he was eventually pardoned. What about his Datukship?

Shouldn't they all be stripped of their datukships as Khir Toyo was of his when he went to prison for corruption?

Then there are still those who have been awarded Tan Sri's despite either committing a seditious act or low class crime when they should have been imprisoned - 'nuff said about the respectability of the federal awards.

Now, Najib Razak, Azmin Ali and Mahathir Mohamad have royal awarded titles. Say (hypothetically of course) if any of the three were to be arrested and imprisoned, then we wonder whether our society or royalty will act dunno again (except in the case of Khir Toyo, who incidentally, like the rumours about Moody, has remarried after being released, but to a Chinese sweetie - Congratulations, ex-Datuk).

But apart from instituting a remedying system to maintain the dignity of the honours award system, it's not just a matter of by stripping criminals of their datukship but far more importantly, also limiting the annual conferment of datuks.

HRH of states of course will exercise their royal prerogatives to award datukships to whoever they want, but the Royal Council of Rulers should consider this issue, in the same way the federal award of Tun-ship is limited to only 35 (or is it 50?).

All past PM with the sole exception of our first PM, our beloved Tunku Abdul Rahman, was conferred the title of Tun. I wonder when Ah Jib Gor will get his, wakakaka.

One final point, with all respect to their HRHs, ampun tuanku's, I wonder why on each state's annual awards, HRH of each state would confer very high honours to the members of their own family or to fellow royalty? This has always puzzled me!

Mahathir repeals GST just like BR1M?

MM Online - Economists rebuff Dr M’s pledge to repeal GST

Tidak, berita atas bohong
saya tidak sebut nak hentikan BR1M

sebenarnya kerajaan saya akan jamin BR1M khas untuk pribumi

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 28 — Economists have warned against Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s plan to abolish the Goods and Services Tax in the event Pakatan Harapan wins federal power, saying such a move would paint Malaysia as regressing on needed fiscal reforms.

Firdaos Rosli, a fellow of Economics at the Institute of Strategic International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia, went as far as saying it was “preposterous” to entertain the idea of abolishing the GST when the Budget deficit was again widening.

“I don’t think anyone in their right mind would want to do that. Maybe we should ask him (Dr Mahathir) what is he going to do with the economy when you are short by RM40 billion in revenue?” Firdaus told Malay Mail Online.

The consumption tax was among the measures that ratings firms had pressed Malaysia to adopt in order to diversify its revenue stream that had once been heavily dependent on petroleum income. [...]

“Having a robust indirect tax system such as the GST also means that the economy is not going to suffer badly when there is a shortfall in direct tax such as corporate tax and income tax during an economic crisis. Kind of like a buffer,” Firdaos said.

Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) Dr Jayant Menon held similar views against repealing the consumption tax, saying it would be detrimental to the government’s efforts to control its fiscal deficit.

GST is already a principal taxation mode in more than 160 countries including Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, UK (Britain), etc because it simplifies taxation on goods to only one single tax instead of multiple layers of taxes.

If correctly monitored, maintained and enforced it is the fairest form of taxation - anyone uses it, he or she pays taxes for it. In Malaysia it's 6%, while in other nations it is higher (10% in OZ, 15% in NZ and 20% in UK).

Don't conflate removal of government subsidy for oil as GST. They are different. GST is just replacing other forms of taxes while government subsidies like pocket money, when removed, will naturally see a rise in prices or some loss to the pocket.

Some portion of the GST collected should be returned to state governments as state revenue, and not kept just by the federal government. That's what is being done in OZ though richer states like New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria (Vic) have complained that their share of GST have gone to states like Western Australia (WA).

I personally and professionally support GST where every consumer pays. As for government subsidies, which is an entirely different issue, we need a separate post to avoid mistaking one for another.

Many in Malaysia might have misunderstood GST as an additional tax on top of the various taxes on goods employed previously. It is NOT.

In the Australian example which I presumed Malaysia's would more or less be similar to, the GST is meant to REPLACE (not add on to) those already-existing multi-layered taxes to make simpler the overall tax on goods and services.

In Australia, a 10% GST is imposed on goods like furniture, motorcars, clothing, processed food etc , and 'services' like car repairs, doctor services, char-kuat (massage, wakakaka), haircuts, plumbing or electrical works, etc.

Now tell me, what are your views on GST?

Errrr ... I'll tell you after you let go of me

wakakaka 

By the way, it does not replace income tax which is a separate tax altogether, which taxes one's income or revenue.

GST is a consumption tax. You 'consume' certain goods and services, you pay 6% tax in Malaysia, 10% in Australia, 15% in NZ and 20% in UK.

With GST, most things should become cheaper while some will be dearer.

How can it be cheaper, you may ask? Because GST replaces the existing taxes on the goods. Goods that had government taxes levied on it prior to GST should have been removed, thus making the goods either cheaper or at worst, the same price.

For example, if a product was previously taxed at or to a total of 10% then that product would become cheaper (by 4%) because it's now taxed by GST at only 6%. Some products which were previously not taxed at all would of course become dearer, by 6%.

And some goods are NOT subjected to GST, like most fresh food.

I wonder how much was 'white goods' (eg. fridge, washing machine, air-conditioner, microwave oven, western style stoves and ovens, etc) taxed at previously, ie. prior to GST?

One of the hypocritical or bizarre moronic outcome of our toxic politics is some Chinese taking an anti-GST stand, when the GST actually mitigates (solves) one of their age-long complaints, namely, that they (the Chinese) alone have been bearing most of the taxes in Malaysia.

To understand what I mean, please read my July 2013 post Food for thought (1) - GST. Bodoh punya Cina!

Chinese against GST

So don't listen to Mahathir. He talks cock on GST as he previously talked cock on BR1M which he now embraces so tightly you would think he personally conceptualised and implemented it.

That's the usual bullshit sprouted by Mahathir.

If his son gets into government as the PM of his Pribumi controlled Malaysia, dear Mukhriz will retain the GST on the advice of daddy Emperor Imperial and who knows, may even raise it from 6%. Additional revenue for Forex entertainment or build another Arabian-night Putrajaya No 2?

I won't be surprised if a new government under Mahathir may even re-categorise BR1M as exclusively for his pribumis and placed it under the NEP program which means the nons won't get it. He is that type of person.

As the experts (economists) say, Malaysia cannot do without the GST. The 'failed state' that you warned about will materialise if Mahathir removes the GST. 

But he won't; he only talks cock now, but will shaft you gullible hopefuls later when and if he gets back into power.

Back to the Future

MM Online on how Malaysia turned Forex into Genting Highlands (extracts):

keep your eyes on the ... er ... ball

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 28 — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad lost his credibility after he denied involvement in the foreign exchange scandal that reportedly cost taxpayers US$10 billion, Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak has claimed.

In a blog posting yesterday, the multimedia and communications minister said Dr Mahathir’s denial on the matter only exposed his hypocrisy.

“As much as he is attempting to explain away the issue and treat them as if they are not material, it invariably reveals his hypocrisy and double standards,” he said.

“Without question the CIA report exposes Mahathir’s responsibility in this mega-billion loss suffered by the country. And as usual Mahathir blames others except himself for this financial disaster,” he added.

“While Mahathir refuses to accept responsibility for the BMF and Forex scandals, he is using the 1MDB issue as an excuse to topple the Prime Minister,” he added.

The forex scandal made headlines again after state-owned paper New Straits Times published an interview with former BNM assistant governor Datuk Abdul Murad Khalid in which he claimed the central bank suffered foreign exchange losses of US$10 billion in the early 1990s.

US$10 Billion in 1990, based on both the US and Australian Reserve Bank inflation rate predicted for a number of years, would be worth approximately US$19 to 20 Billion if in cash. In property it may be higher. But let's say it is a round figure of US$20 Billion today in 2017.

US$20 Billion x 4.43 = RM88.6 Billion or in round figure RM88 Billion.

That's how much using the Forex in a hope to win money had cost Malaysian taxpayers, to reiterate, RM88 Billion.

All hush hush just like the loss of approximately RM2.5 Billion by BMF in 1983, or in today's term, RM5.6 Billion.

That's how much taxpayers' money was wasted.

In both BMF and Forex, no Malaysian official or minister was ever punished. The loss in both cases were never accounted for. Those were Malaysian taxpayers' money. 

In both cases, the PM was Mahathir.

The Forex scandal was especially scary when you think of it, to wit, the Reserve Bank of a supposedly responsible nation participating in a casino-like manipulation of world's foreign exchanges in a vain hope to make money, and more interestingly, make money for whom?

That was a very irresponsible gamble (pardon the unintended pun). But as usual he f**k it up.

And Lim Kit Siang plus some Pakatan supporters bizarrely want to bring Mahathir regime and/or his acolytes back.

As I had written many times before, 
In April 2015 the now-defunct TMI published a news report titled Working with Dr M to remove PM will be a ‘disaster’, Pakatan told.

In that report we read of Ramkarpal Singh Deo's opinion on working with Mahathir (extracts):

“The question of working with Dr Mahathir is an unimaginable disaster waiting to happen."

Ramkarpal said that working with Dr Mahathir would mean that PR would just be maintaining the status quo and allow “corruption to continue”.

“I am firmly of the view that saving Malaysia can only mean a new clean, accountable and transparent government."

We know of Mahathir's character, we survived his draconian regime, and we finally got rid of him, BUT now many of us Pakatan people want to bring him back again with all his evil ways and sheer utter hypocrisy (masked by his own Melayu mudah lupa and refusal to repent or acknowledge his terrible faults).

Some of Pakatan people argued that Mahathir's errors were in the past whereas Najib and his alleged crime is in the present

But isn't bringing him back via his new Pribumi Party (in alliance with Pakatan) the same as his old bad ways as also acceptable for the future?

Hadi Awang's hudud by stealth

Malay Mail Online - DAP, MCA, Gerakan can meet, so why not PAS and Umno? Hadi asks (extracts):

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 27 — Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang has written a scathing remark today against critics of his private member’s Bill calling for the upgrade of the Shariah courts, ahead of a rally in support of himself next month.

The PAS president has defended his party and Umno for coming together on the issue, comparing the cooperation to other purported meets between opposition party DAP and Barisan Nasional components MCA and Gerakan.

“It is very unfortunate for those who are uneasy with the meeting between two parties Umno, PAS and Islamic NGOs because of the discussion on the issue of RUU355, but is easy with the meeting between DAP, MCA, Gerakan and so on?” he said in a statement.

RUU355 is the Malay acronym for the Bill for Act 355, or the Shariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965, that Hadi aims to amend.

Of course you can, Pak Haji, but I thought I would remind you (as Maddy said Melayu mudah lupa, wakakaka) that the last time the DAP, MCA and Gerakan met in a significant manner was in October 1987 which as we all know, ended up in Ops Lalang, under Mahathir's government.

Thus those DAP, MCA and Gerakan did meet but Ops Lalang saw the ISA-ing of those Chinese leaders.

Yes, Lim Kit Siang was one of those who was incarcerated by Mahathir's government.

But I doubt when you and Najib meet, the current PM will ISA you and himself, wakakaka, though mind you, it may not be a bad idea, wakakaka again.

Secondly, the meeting you proposed to have with, in the words of your own party, the Iblis-ish party, wakakaka, has to do with your bill to amend Act 355, which allows the syariah courts to impose punishments on offenders of Islamic laws on social morality such as Khalwat, adultery, fasting, etc, and ...

... of course Muslim family laws such as inheritance issue eg. when a person who was supposedly a Hindu dies, but whose only brother, a Muslim, said the deceased covertly converted to Islam before he died, to wit, became a Muslim, do his properties go to his Muslim brother or his Hindu wife who has no idea of the deceased's conversion to Islam?

Anyway, your proposed Bill to amend Act 355 (in Bahasa UUC355) seeks to allow the subordinate syariah courts to award hudud style punishment (short of the death penalty which in Islamic countries is known to be either by decapitation or stoning). I have to admit I am not sure about amputation, but rest assure, a few Muslim doctors will do the necessary.

Currently the subordinate syariah court is only allowed to award limited punishments popularly known as 3-5-6, those being 3 years imprisonment, fines up to RM5,000 and no more than 6 stroke of the cane.

Your proposed Bill seeks to increase 3-5-6 to what will undeniably be a most unpopular 30-100-100.

Obviously you like to add noughts on to simple numerals. I wonder what Freudian hang ups you have had from your mathematics class or teacher?

The last time the Act was amended was about 20 years ago which saw no one interested in its amendment and which passed quietly, unlike your recent proposed private member Bill.

The reason being, as Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad, former chief justice of Malaysia, tells us, is that the 1st amendment to Act 355 was proposed by the judiciary, members of the bench who based their proposal twenty years ago based on their experiences on the bench.

Now in your case, you are NOT a member of the bench who has considerable experience on all sorts of crimes and offences and what punishments would be commensurate with those naughtiness. You are but a politician who, as we all know of most politicians, is either proposing the amendment for ulterior political purposes, as Mahathir did in 2002, when he arbitrarily declared Malaysia a fundamentalist Islamic nation (as was informed to us by Lim Kit Siang who is just another bloody politician today) or  ...

... (omigosh) for just wanting to punish people more and MORE. Related: PAS loves whipping Muslims kau kau?

Oh, one of your ardent supporters said you merely want to increase whipping from 6 to 100 lashes to conform to Islamic requirements. Does that mean you will NEXT ask for the syariah courts to also deal with criminal offences (which they are not allowed to currently as crimes are the domain of the civil courts while syariah courts are restricted to Islamic moral offences) including punishments such as amputation of limbs and stoning to death or by decapitation?

By the by, the Law Council stated: There is no need for the bill to specifically mention the term “Hudud”, or any other offence for that matter. As long as it provides for punishment that corresponds to Hudud offences, the State Legislative Assemblies are free to create Hudud offences ...

In other words, if the Bill is passed as amended, Kelantan can still proceed to implement three hudud offences. The Deputy Prime Minister was therefore wrong in saying that the Bill is not about Hudud. The Bill does not need to mention Hudud, to be about Hudud. All it has to do is to provide for the sentence as prescribed under the Quran and Sunnah.

Lastly but not least, when Act 355 is amended, it is not only Kelantan which can have hudud-type punishments but also other states (if they wish to) because Act 355 is a federal bill which applies to every state.