Perak-born Che Dat bin Anjang Abdullah, otherwise known as Abdullah CD, was a top ranking member of the Communist Party of Malaya. He was once captured during the early months of the First Emergency (1948-1960) in Pahang and was sent to an internment camp in Melaka. As the camp was new, Abdullah CD and other detainees were tasked as labourers to complete the construction of the camp. There he met with a Malayan Civil Service official who was transferred to the camp to supervise its construction. Abdullah CD became friendly with this official and they frequently had casual talks. That night, Abdullah CD escaped. He went on to form the 10th Regiment of the Communist Party of Malaya and continued to wreak havoc until the Hat Yai Peace Agreement was signed on 2 December 1989.
When Dr Mahathir commented on the issue of Chin Peng’s ashes being brought back to Malaysia he said that if the likes of Shamsiah Fakeh and Rashid Maidin could be brought back home without any hassle, why can’t Chin Peng’s ashes be brought back too? What could his ashes do? Mahathir is known for his display of malingering amnesia, usually seen in people who fake amnesia to commit insurance fraud or to avoid criminal punishment.
Shamsiah Fakeh joined the CPM after PKMM, API and AWAS were declared illegal by the authorities. After eight years of struggle, she was ordered to go to Beijing where she operated the Siaran Melayu Radio Beijing Antarabangsa, otherwise known as Suara Revolusi Malaya (I used to listen to it over short wave frequency when I was a teenager). In 1965, she was in Indonesia where she formed the Malayan National Freedom League, when Suharto launched a coup and Sukarno was deposed. As a result, Shamsiah Fakeh was arrested and spent two years in prison.
She returned to China in 1967 to find that the CPM had split into three – the CPM, the CPM Revolutioner and the CPM – Marxist Leninist. She and her husband Ibrahim became strong critics of the CPM and were eventually expelled from the organisation. This was probably one of the reasons that she was brought back by the Prime Minister’s Research Department on 23 July 1994; psychologically she was already against the CPM. Who was the Prime Minister who allowed her to return then?
Were Rashid Maidin and Abdullah CD allowed to return home as claimed by Mahathir? The answer is no. However, they were granted visit passes as agreed in the Hat Yai Agreement. Each time that they wanted to enter Malaysia to visit relatives they would have to inform the police first and a pass would be issued to them. Rashid Maidin died in Amphoe Si Sakhon, Changwat Narathiwat in September 2006 while Abdullah CD still lives in Amphoe Sukhirin, Changwat Narathiwat and is 96 years old. Who was the Prime Minister and Minister of Home Affairs who denied them citizenship and a chance to return to Malaysia?
Remember how Abdullah CD escaped from an internment camp in Melaka after speaking to the Malayan Civil Service supervisor? He would not have made it to the apex of the CPM if he cannot convince people and turn them over. Chin Peng was also good at psychological warfare.
It was in the mid-1980s when my father who was the Inspector-General of Police asked Sarawak Police Commissioner Yuen Yuet Leng if it was a good time to ask the CPM to surrender. Yuet Leng replied, “Sir, I believe the CPM is very tired. If you give them a pillow, they will go to sleep.”
It was around this time that Abdullah CD wrote a letter to then Encik Ghafar Baba asking to negotiate for peace. The police then assigned Rahim Noor who was the Director of Special Branch then to handle the issue. The police asked permission from Ghafar to assume his identity and correspond with Abdullah CD. In the end, the CPM agreed to receive someone who would be in the position to make decisions on behalf of the Malaysian government. For this, the police extended the service of a Chinese police officer who was on the verge of retirement (not Yuet Leng as the CPM knew him) to pose as this senior official. This senior police officer was then brought to Mahathir’s office for a photo of them together to be taken and shown to the CPM. The CPM took the bait and allowed Rahim and the Chinese police officer to negotiate with them, with Yuet Leng in the background advising.
Spending too much time with Chin Peng can make you sympathise with him easily, just as Abdullah CD was with the MCS supervisor. One day Rahim came to my father and asked if it would be okay for him to bring Chin Peng to speak directly to Mahathir as how he had spoken directly with Tunku Abdul Rahman in 1955.
“Who is Chin Peng to speak to Mahathir? Tunku was not a Prime Minister when Chin Peng spoke to him. Chin Peng is only at your level. That is why I sent you to speak to him,” said my father to Rahim.
Judging by Rahim’s attempt to get Chin Peng to meet with Mahathir, and his recent comment on the issue of the former’s ashes, it is of no surprise that Rahim could be suffering from the Lima Syndrome which is the total opposite of the Stockholm Syndrome. How can a former Inspector-General of Police who was also a former Director of Special Branch have forgotten the sacrifices of the men of the Royal Malaysian Police fighting with this monster? How could he, as the Director of Special Branch, allowed himself to be used by Chin Peng?
And as for Mahathir the political chameleon, it is evident that in order to score political points, he would say just about anything short of “come and lynch me”. It never matters to him who died, who had lost a husband, sons, brothers be they Malay, Chinese, Iban or Indian, fighting the communists, as long as he is seen ‘rationale’ in the eyes of those who had wanted Chin Peng back in this country. The epitome of dog-eat-dog.
I only have one word to describe Mahathir and Rahim – disgusting.
Tugu Negara merupakan suatu simbol untuk kita mengingati para veteran ATM khususnya dalam dua episod darurat menentang keganasan Parti Komunis Malaya.
Dalam Darurat Pertama (1948-1960) seramai 1,346 orang anggota tentera dan polis telah terbunuh manakala 2,406 lagi cedera. 2,478 orang awam juga turut terbunuh manakala 810 orang hilang menjadi mangsa komunis.
Dalam Darurat Kedua (1968-1989), pasukan keselamatan Malaysia kehilangan 155 orang pegawai dan anggota manakala 854 orang tercedera.
Sukar bagi para VATM dan rakyat Malaysia yang telah melalui kedua-dua fasa darurat tersebut untuk melupakan sejarah pahit dan hitam yang terpaksa ditempuhi hanya kerana para pengganas di bawah Chin Peng yang ingin menjadikan Malaysia sebuah negara komunis.
Ribuan anak para pegawai dan anggota tentera dan polis telah menjadi yatim akibat kekejaman Chin Peng dan pengganas-pengganas di bawahnya. Namun ada di kalangan mereka yang mengaku rakyat Malaysia pernah desak kerajaan untuk membenarkan Chin Peng pulang ke Malaysia walaupun beliau tidak pernah menjadi warganegara bukan sahaja Malaysia, tetapi Persekutuan Tanah Melayu sebelum ini.
Tujuan mereka tidak lain tidak bukan hanya ingin menjadikan Chin Peng idola kaum cina DAP selain Lim Kit Siang. Malah selepas mampusnya Chin Peng, Lim Kit Siang terus desak kerajaan untuk benarkan abu Chin Peng dibawa masuk ke Malaysia!
Sepertimana orang Melayu mempunyai Leftenan Adnan, Lim Kit Siang mahu jadikan Chin Peng idola bagi Cina DAP.
Terkini, orang yang kononnya telah berkhidmat untuk negara memerangi komunis kini berganding bahu dengan orang yang memuja Chin Peng untuk menjatuhkan kerajaan yang memelihara agama Islam sebagai agama Persekutuan, serta hak keistimewaan Bumiputera Semenanjung, Sabah dan Sarawak.
Orang tersebut ialah Arshad Raji yang sejak berhenti dari perkhidmatan sekitar tahun 2008/2009 tidak habis-habis menghentam kerajaan di dalam blognya ketika itu. Beliau sering menceritakan pahit maung bertugas sebagai seorang pegawai tentera dan mendesak kerajaan agar membantu kebajikan ATM. Adakah beliau lupa 22 tahun daripada jumlah perkhidmatan beliau dalam keadaan susah itu berada dalam zaman Mahathir?
Dan seperti yang saya nyatakan di atas, kerajaan yang ada sekarang ini telah banyak menambah bantuan kebajikan bukan sahaja untuk para anggota dan pegawai ATM yang masih berkhidmat, malah juga untuk mereka yang bakal bersara (termasuk bersara tanpa pencen), dan juga VATM.
Maka, kepada para veteran ATM dan rakyat Malaysia yang mahu mengenang jasa dan pengorbanan para VATM dan polis, serta pahit getir kehidupan yang terpaksa dilalui oleh balu serta anak mereka yang yatim, ketahuilah bahawa Arshad Raji ini hanyalah keldai DAP dan penjilat Mahathir.
Cakap berdegar kata beliau hanya setia kepada Raja dan Negara, tetapi diam apabila Mahathir bersikap kurang ajar terhadap Sultan Johor dan Sultan Selangor. Adakah kerana Sultan Johor dan Sultan Selangor bukan Yang DiPertuan Agong? Ini membuktikan Arshad Raji buta Perlembagaan kerana Raja-Raja Melayulah yang berkuasa melantik dan memecat Yang DiPertuan Agong. Yang DiPertuan Agong itu adalah dari kalangan Raja-Raja Melayu, maka kesetiaan kepada Raja dan Negara itu bermakna setia kepada semua Raja-Raja Melayu.
Apa yang keldai DAP dan Mahathir ini tahu? Beliau hanya sedap membalun kerajaan tetapi lupa beliau hanya orang awam yang sudah meniti usia senja tetapi masih ingat beliau seorang yang penting. Lim Kit Siang yang hendak menghapuskan kedaulatan Islam di Malaysia ini pun boleh beliau jadikan ketua.
Tolak Arshad Raji – pencacai DAP dan penjilat Mahathir yang sanggup membelot rakan-rakan terutamanya yang telah mati akibat Parti Komunis Malaya. Undilah pada hari Rabu ini untuk menolak para pemuja Chin Peng. Beliau bukan lagi patriot, sebaliknya pengkhianat!
Ingat! Satu undi untuk PKR/Pakatan Harapan bersamaan dengan satu undi untuk DAP yang memuja Chin Peng.
Setelah didapati bersalah melanggar undang-undang, khususnya Akta Bank dan Institusi-Institusi Kewangan, 1989 (BAFIA), Rafizi terus mencari simpati dan sokongan di media sosial dengan membuat satu bebenang mengenai isu NFC di Twitter. Beberapa soalan telah diajukan oleh Rafizi untuk menerangkan kenapa beliau melanggar undang-undang tersebut. Saya akan kongsikan di sini apa yag telah dituliskan serta pendapat saya mengenai setiap persoalan yang diajukan Rafizi.
Rafizi telah memulakan dengan mengfalsafahkan perbuatannya dengan mengajukan dua soalan:
“Apakah tanggungjawab saya apabila mendapat tahu mengenai skandal NFC?”
Apakah wajar melanggar undang-undang demi menyelamatkan wang rakyat?”
Beliau menjawab soalan pertama dengan mengatakan bahawa sekiranya beliau tidak berbuat apa-apa mengenai perkara tersebut, beliau pecah amanah sebagai seorang wakil rakyat dan pemimpin politik, serta amanah yang Allah kurniakan untuk memahami isu-isu tersebut.
Larangan Hasutan dan Pecah Rahsia serta Patuh Kepada Undang-Undang menurut Islam
Beliau mengutarakan bahawa undang-undang seperti BAFIA, Akta Rahsia Rasmi, Akta Hasutan adalah undang-undang yang telah digubal dengan niat buruk untuk melindungi pesalah yang berkuasa.
Undang-undang, di mana sahaja kita berada, sama ada di sebuah negara Islam, mahupun negara yang ditadbir oleh bukan Islam, adalah wajib dipatuhi, selagi ianya tidak menyuruh kepada melanggar hukum Allah SWT.
Surah An-Nisaa’ ayat 59 menyebut:
“Wahai orang-orang yang beriman, ta’atilah Allah dan ta’atilah Rasul (Nya), dan ulil amri di antara kamu.“
Ulil Amri di sini bermaksud ibubapa jika anda masih anak yang masih bergantung kepada ibubapa; suami kepada isteri seperti mana yang diwahyukan melalui surah An-Nisaa’ ayat 34; Majikan jika anda bekerja untuknya maka wajib mematuhi peraturan dan arahan bekerja; pemimpin yang dipilih, hakim-hakim mahkamah, polis dan lain-lain pihak berkuasa sekiranya anda adalah rakyat.
Sebuah hadith Sahih Muttafaqun Alayhi Bukhari dan Muslim (Bukhari 2796/Muslim 1839 menyebut:
“Menjadi kewajipan seorang muslim mendengar dan taat dalam melakukan perintah yang disukai atau pun tidak disukai, kecuali bila diperintahkan melakukan maksiat. Bila dia diperintah melakukan maksiat, maka tidak ada kewajiban untuk mendengar serta taat.“
Akta BAFIA diwujudkan untuk memelihara rahsia-rahsia peribadi, bukan untuk melindungi orang yang salah. Sekiranya tiada akta seperti ini diwujudkan, maka kandungan akaun anda boleh didedahkan kepada sesiapa sahaja. Bukan Malaysia sahaja yang mempunyai undang-undang seperti ini, bahkan Agensi Kewangan Saudi Arabia dan lain-lain negara di dunia juga ada mempunyai undang-undang yang sedemikian.
Akta Hasutan adalah undang-undang untuk mencegah dari perbuatan atau pertuturan yang menghasut orang ramai untuk memberontak atau bangun melawan pihak berkuasa, kerajaan mahupun Raja. Perbuatan menghasut ini sekali lagi bertentangan dengan dalil-dalil di atas. Iblis telah memberontak semasa diperintah oleh Allah SWT untuk sujud terhadap Adam a.s. dan mengeluarkan kata-kata berbaur hasutan yang mempersoalkan keperluannya sebagai malaikat Allah untuk sujud kepada kejadian Allah yang diperbuat dari tanah. Akibatnya Iblis telah diusir keluar dari syurga.
Akta Rahsia Rasmi pula diadakan untuk menentukan rahsia-rahsia kerajaan Yang DiPertuan Agong tidak disebarkan sewenang-wenangnya. Bayangkan walaupun adanya Akta ini, masih ada yang tidak memegang sumpah dan ikrar yang dibuat semasa diambil bekerja. Memelihara rahsia itu adalah satu perintah Allah SWT. Surah At-Tahrim Ayat 3 mafhumnya:
“Dan ingatlah ketika Nabi membicarakan secara rahasia kepada salah seorang isterinya (Hafsah) suatu peristiwa. Maka tatkala (Hafsah) menceritakan peristiwa itu (kepada Aisyah) dan Allah memberitahukan hal itu (pembicaraan Hafsah dan Aisyah) kepada Muhammad lalu Muhammad memberitahukan sebagian (yang diberitakan Allah kepadanya) dan menyembunyikan sebagian yang lain (kepada Hafsah). Maka tatkala (Muhammad) memberitahukan pembicaraan (antara Hafsah dan Aisyah) lalu (Hafsah) bertanya: “Siapakah yang telah memberitahukan hal ini kepadamu?” Nabi menjawab: “Telah diberitahukan kepadaku oleh Allah yang Maha Mengetahui lagi Maha Mengenal“
Akibat tidak memelihara rahsia tersebut, Hafsah binti Umar r.a dan Aishah binti Abu Bakar r.a tidak didatangi Rasulullah SAW selama sebulan lamanya. Itu adalah hukuman bagi kedua-dua isteri Rasulullah SAW itu (Sahih Bukhari 5191).
Anggapan Rafizi bahawa orang yang menggunakan logik bahawa jika anda langgar undang-undang maka anda harus dihukum adalah orang-orang yang otaknya terletak dilutut juga menunjukkan betapa beliau sendiri tidak percaya kepada perintah dan ketentuan Allah SWT. Dalil-dalil di atas telah menunjukkan beberapa contoh yang dipetik dari Al-Quran dan Hadith Rasulullah SAW mengenai hukuman yang dikenakan setelah perintah dilanggar.
Begitu juga tanggapan bahawa Mahatma Gandhi itu penjenayah – manakan sama perjuangan Gandhi dengan perjuangan Rafizi. Gandhi memperjuangkan kebebasan tanah airnya dari penjajahan British. Rafizi hanya memperjuangkan popularitinya.
Ingat – sebelum 2013, Rafizi tidak mempunyai apa-apa jawatan dalam exco PKR. Isu NFC telah memberinya nama dan populariti yang telah membolehkannya bertanding di kerusi Parlimen kawasan Pandan dan menang.
Wang NFC Itu Dana?
Wang yang NFCorp gunakan itu adalah wang yang dipinjam daripada kerajaan melalui Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani, yang ketika itu di bawah Menterinya iaitu Muhyiddin Yassin.
Yang dilaporkan oleh Jabatan Audit Negara ialah terdapat kelemahan-kelemahan dalam projek tersebut yang ditemui oleh jabatan tersebut. NFCorp telah menternak sebanyak 4,000 ekor lembu tetapi ini hanyalah merupakan 40 peratus dari jumlah yang telah disyaratkan. Maka, sebanyak 8,000 ekor lagi lembu telah dibawa masuk.
Masalah yang timbul adalah apabila Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani tidak memenuhi syarat perjanjian mereka untuk menyediakan tempt-tempat penyembelihan berkualiti untuk eksport, serta jalan-jalan untuk ke tapak projek NFC tersebut. Ini telah menyebabkan kelewatan pada pihak NFC untuk menjalankan projek tersebut. Malah, kelewatan yang disebabkan oleh Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani inilah yang menjadi perkara kritikal dalam laporan Jabatan Audit Negara tersebut dan bukan terhadap syarikat NFCorp.
Rafizi hanya menggunakan penyata akaun-akaun yang diperolehi dengan cara yang melanggar Akta BAFIA dan menghebahkan mengenai akaun-akaun tersebut dalam satu sidang akhbar yang diadakannya pada 12 Mac 2012. Beliau mengaitkan akaun-akaun tersebut dengan “penyelewengan” oleh NFC dan memfitnah beberapa orang dan syarikat.
Akibatnya, Rafizi telah disaman oleh NFCorp dan akibatnya didapati bersalah oleh mahkamah atas tuduhan memfitnah, dan diarahkan membayar RM300,000 kepada mereka-mereka yang telah difitnahnya. Bagaimana Rafizi membayar saman fitnahnya? Dia telah melakukan kutipan derma (crowdfunding) dengan meminta para penyokongnya membayar samannya. Beliau tidak perlu keluarkan barang satu sen pun. Kesalahan fitnahnya ditanggung oleh orang lain.
Jikalau apa yang diwar-warkan oleh Rafizi itu benar, sudah tentu dia tidak akan didapati bersalah.
Dana Telah Dilesapkan?
Rafizi juga berkata kerahsiaan bank bukan untuk melesapkan dana awam. Rafizi suka menggembar-gemburkan cerita. NFC membayar balik RM5 juta setahun termasuk faedah kepada kerajaan. Sehingga 2013, NFC telah membayar sebanyak RM34.98 juta.
Pembayaran ini terpaksa dihentikan kerana akaun mereka telah dibekukan kerajaan semasa disiasat. Siasatan oleh SPRM dan PDRM tidak menemui sebarang kesalahan yang dilakukan oleh NFC/NFCorp. Walau bagaimanapun, Pengerusi NFCorp telah dituduh melakukan jenayah pecah amanah dengan membuat pembelian hartanah untuk syarikat tersebut tanpa persetujuan lembaga pengarah. Oleh sebab bukti pihak pendakwaan tidak mencukupi, beliau telah diberi pelepasan dan pembebasan oleh mahkamah.
Jelas bahawa NFC ada membuat pembayaran balik pinjaman kepada kerajaan. Jika benar Rafizi pentingkan hak rakyat, kenapa beliau berdiam diri dalam isu pembayaran RM305 juta yang telah dibayar untuk laporan kajian kesesuaian projek terowong bawah laut Pulau Pinang tetapi sehingga kini masih belum nampak walau sehelai pun laporan tersebut walaupun telah 22 bulan berlalu?
Kenapa Rafizi Tidak Diberi Perlindungan Sebagai Pemberi Maklumat?
Rafizi menulis: “Kalau bising dalam media sahaja tidak cukup untuk sedarkan rakyat kerana bukan semua membaca laporan media. Kena masuk kampung ceramah. Kena buat video. sebab itu tidak ada cara lain: inilah caranya.”
Seksyen 6 Akta Perlindungan Pemberi Maklumat, 2010 terang-terang menyebut bahawa sesiapapun boleh membuat pendedahan mengenai kelakuan tidak wajar (salahlaku) KEPADA MANA-MANA AGENSI PENGUATKUASAAN YANG DIFIKIRKANNYA MUNASABAH DENGAN SYARAT BAHAWA PENDEDAHAN SEDEMIKIAN TIDAK DILARANG SECARA KHUSUS OLEH MANA-MANA UNDANG-UNDANG BERTULIS.
Seksyen 97(1) Akta Perbankan dan Institusi-Institusi Kewangan 1989 pula menyebut:
Rafizi telah menerima penyata akaun-akaun tersebut daripada seorang pegawai bank yang tidak diberi kebenaran oleh empunya akaun-akaun tersebut.
Rafizi kemudiannya mendedahkan penyata akaun-akaun tersebut kepada pihak media dalam sidang akhbarnya. Media bukanlah agensi penguatkuasaan yang ditakrifkan dalam Akta Perlindungan Pemberi Maklumat, 2010.
Dengan ini terang lagi bersuluh bahawa Rafizi telah melanggar undang-undang dan tidak layak diberi perlindungan sebagaimana diperuntukkan oleh Akta Perlindungan Pemberi Maklumat, 2010.
Rafizi tidak pernah hormat kepada agama Islam mahupun undang-undang. Beliau adalah merupakan seorang penghasut dan pemfitnah bersiri. Di antara siri hasutan dan fitnah beliau termasuk:
12 Januari 2013, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi yang ketika itu Menteri Pertahanan telah mengemukakan saman malu ke atas Rafizi kerana menerbit artikel fitnah dalam blog beliau. Rafizi telah menurunkan artikel tersebut dan memohon maaf kepada Zahid.
22 Nov 2014, Perdana Menteri dan isteri fail saman malu dan Rafizi balas dengan mengatakan fitnah beliau itu ‘hanya gurauan’ kerana memfitnah subsidi minyak masuk ke dalam akaun Perdana Menteri dan isteri untuk membeli cincin baru. Fitnah beliau tersebut terus dipercayai sehingga ke hari ini dan telah memberi kerosakan teruk kepada imej Datin Seri Rosmah.
Januari 2016, Rafizi didenda RM1,800 oleh mahkamah kerana mencetus ketegangan agama Islam-Kristian dengan memfitnah mengatakan ahli UMNO telah membaling bom petrol ke gereja.
Rafizi juga telah menabur fitnah kononnya Tabung Haji sudah kehabisan wang sebab dana Tabung Haji telah dirompak. Akhirnya, kerana percayakan fitnah tersebut, 3,954 pendeposit menutup akaun tabung haji manakala 3,105 telah membatalkan pendaftaran untuk menunaikan ibadah haji.
Rafizi juga menabur fitnah dengan mendakwa kos projek MRT sebanyak RM21billion bagi laluan sepanjang 21km sedangkan ianya untuk laluan sepanjang 51km.
Pada bulan Oktober 2016, Rafizi diarah membayar RM300,000 oleh mahkamah kerana memfitnah NFC mengenai pembelian hartanah.
Pada bulan November 2016, Rafizi didenda RM1,950 oleh mahkamah kerana himpunan haram “Blackout 505”.
Pada bulan November 2016 juga Rafizi dihukum penjara 18 bulan oleh mahkamah kerana melakukan kesalahan di bawah Akta Rahsia Rasmi.
Pada penghujung bulan November 2016, Rafizi telah diminta bertaubat oleh Abdul Hadi Awang kerana memfitnah PAS menerima dana 1MDB.
Inilah Rafizi yang masih diagung-agungkan oleh mereka yang tenggelam dalam kebencian yang tidak berasas. Kalau ada pun asas yang didakwa mereka, asas tersebut hanyalah berlandaskan pembohongan dan penipuan semata-mata tanpa usul periksa.
Rafizi menulis: “Hakim saya ialah Allah. Hanya hukumanNya yang saya benar-benar peduli, bukan hakim-hakim lain.”
Begitulah Rafizi cuba menunjukkan betapa alimnya beliau. Perintah Allah dilanggarnya, undang-undang diketepikannya. Kini, beliau cuba memperdayakan ramai dengan imej alim. Tak ubah seperti para perogol yang memakai songkok atau kopiah apabila dihadapkan ke mahkamah.
Biarlah Rafizi mengelembukan diri sendiri. Jangan terikut dilembukan olehnya. Ingat firman Allah SWT dalam surah Al-Buruuj ayat 10:
““Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang mendatangkan fitnah kepada orang-orang mukmin lelaki dan perempuan, kemudian mereka tidak bertaubat, maka bagi mereka azab Jahannam dan bagi mereka azab (neraka) yang sangat pedih.”
I am appalled that there still are those who deny the roles played by the non-Malays in defending this country, especially during the two Emergencies; that dark 33 years of fighting communism. The history books emphasised more on the 12-year First Emergency because of its relation to the independence of Malaya, thus many forget that not too long-ago bombs were going off in the middle of Kuala Lumpur while ordinary policemen were getting slayed.
The First Emergency broke out in June 1948 with the murder of three British estate managers in Sungai Siput. Fuelled by the progressive successes the Communist Party of China was having against the Kuomintang, the acts of banditry increased exponentially. Based on a priori the British found it best to both resettle the Chinese in camps while between 20,000 to 50,000 be sent back to China. The plan moved at a snail’s pace due to the objections by many, and with the total withdrawal of the Kuomintang to Formosa, the repatriation of the Chinese came to a halt in September 1949 when the Communist Party of China closed off all ports and beaches. Only 6,000 Chinese from Malaya were sent back (Anthony Short, 1975 pp 178-201). The rest were settled in new villages to curb them from supplying the Communist Party of Malaya with food and other essentials.
When Ismail Mina Ahmad, the chairman of the Ummah umbrella group for Muslim organisations, claimed that only the Malays fought against invaders and communists in this country, it shows the level of ignorance on his part (Syed Jaymal Zahiid – In fiery speech cleric tells forum only Malays fought invaders communists, Malay Mail Online, 13 January 2018). His claim is far from the truth.
At the peak of the First Emergency, the British had to not only bring in members of the Palestine Police Force who were experienced in counter-insurgency warfare, but also recruited a large number of Chinese residents of Malaya. Tan Sri Dr Too Chee Chew, more famously known as CC Too, headed the Psychological Warfare section. We had the likes of Tan Sri Jimmy Koo Chong Kong, Tan Sri Yuen Yuet Ling, Datuk Leong Chee Woh to name a few who spent most of their lives fighting the communists.
CC Too, Koo Chong Kong and Yuen Yuet Ling were among the ranks of the Malayan People Anti-Japanese Army (MPAJA) during the Second World War who chose to go against their former comrades and became targets of the Communist Party of Malaya. Jimmy Khoo Chong Kong, who was also a former member of the Sarawak Communist Party before surrendering to the authorities and joining the Royal Malaysian Police, paid with his life on 13 November 1975 in Ipoh, Perak, as did his driver Constable (awarded Sergeant posthumously) Yeong Peng Cheong who died with his gun blazing. Without hesitation, even with the knowledge that he was also on the hit list, Tan Sri Yuen Yuet Ling replaced Tan Sri Koo as the Perak Chief Police Officer.
When a Royal Malaysian Air Force Sikorsky S-61A Nuri helicopter was shot down in Gubir, Kedah on 27 April 1976, three Malaysian Chinese personnel were also among the 11 killed. They were Captain Choo Yeok Boo TUDM, Lieutenant Chung Ming Teck TUDM and Sergeant (Air) Leong Yee Heng. They were on a resupply mission from the Butterworth Air Base when they were shot down.
Captain Frank Chong Keng Lay TUDM (retired as Lieutenant-Colonel) flew his Nuri into a hot landing zone to rescue several infantrymen. His two commando escorts were killed as his Nuri took 22 heavy machinegun shots. The next day he flew into the same landing zone to repeat the task. Keng Lay was my Chief of Staff at the RMAF Air Training Command where I was a Staff Officer and later its Adjutant.
Inspectors Kamalanathan and Robert Cheah were inside a coffee shop meeting with informers when a terrorist threw a grenade into the shop. The explosion maimed Kamalanathan and for the rest of his life he walked with an obvious limp with a grenade shrapnel still embedded in his leg.
There were many other non-Malay police officers in particular those who served in the Special Branch who died as unsung heroes as they were not recruited nor trained with other policemen. They were the deep infiltrators, members of the community, who went on leading a double life that even their own family did not know they were all policemen. Their pay did not come from Bluff Road (Bukit Aman) directly. DSP Jeganathan was a Jabatan Talikom employee tasked with setting up the police’s VHF network and spent years jungle-bashing, building towers on mountain and hilltops with the communist terrorists hot on his heels so that the police could have a nationwide communications network.
There were those who were just roadside sweepers working for the municipal and town councils, collecting information. One had his cover blown when he was discovered in a different town by a neighbour asking him loudly what was he doing there sweeping the streets.
Another was on his death bed, ridden with cancer, when he sought the help of a Malaysian daily to contact my father to tell the latter of his condition. His real name was quoted by the daily to my father, which my father could not recall. My father asked the contact in the daily to ask him his Special Branch name. When the reply came, my father left his golf game and rushed to the hospital and after more than 50 years of being married, the wife and family finally knew the man-of-their-house was a hero fighting the communists, not just some small-time trader.
Let us not forget Chief Inspector Chin Chin Kooi. He was a Special Branch officer probing communist activities in Serdang, Kedah. At 9pm on 12 July 1973, six communist terrorists stormed into his home and let loose a volley of bullets. Mortally wounded, Chin returned fire until his last breath.
Across the South China Sea, Police Field Force Superintendent Joni Mustapha was a champion Sarawak hurdler from 1958 to 1959. Joni was watching a movie with his son in Sibu when a policeman relayed a message to him that his men were being pinned down by communist terrorists upriver Sungai Setabau. He asked the policeman to stay with his son in the cinema and left to rescue his men.
Constable Nuing Saling, an Iban policeman, was on a two-week leave to be with his wife Imbok Jimbon who was six months pregnant with their third child. Upon hearing that Joni was leaving for the jungle, hurriedly joined the team. Both Joni and Nuing had made a pact that they would help each other. They left by boat to get to the location. Upon arrival, they engaged the communist terrorists. Joni was felled by machinegun fire but remained conscious to direct the firefight until he died. Another constable friend, Abang Masri was already dead. Seeing his commander and friend die, Nuing unsheathed his machete and charged at the terrorists’ position firing at them, only to be mown down. He had been hit in the face by a bullet. Nuing refused to give up. He continued his charge and was hit several times more but kept on charging, killing and wounding many. He died inside the location of the communist terrorists.
Kanang ak Langkau is perhaps the most known warrior from Sarawak who shed blood and tears fighting against the communist terrorists. He was wounded several times but not once let his wounds stop him from fighting.
These are stories that we should all remember. Stories of our non-Malay brethren heroes who risked and gave their lives so that we can all enjoy the peace and prosperity that God has bestowed upon us. Many more have gone unsung, but they shall not be forgotten. Especially not by selfishly ignoring the sacrifices that have been made by them.
STUDENT activism in Malaysia peaked in December 1974, having started in September of the same year in Tasek Utara, Johor Bahru, when some 5,000 students demonstrated at the Selangor Club Padang (now Dataran Merdeka) and as expected, clashed with the Federal Reserve Unit (FRU).
As a result, the students retreated to Masjid Negara with the FRU hot on their heels. The demonstration was culled and 1,128 students arrested. The student leaders who were holed up on the University of Malaya campus were soon arrested and so were those who hid inside their rented rooms in nearby Kampung Kerinchi.
Three representatives of Kampung Kerinchi complained that the FRU had taken harsh measures to apprehend the students by firing tear gas and that had resulted in the death of a baby.
My father immediately summoned his then deputy, the late Tan Sri Mahmood Yunus, and then Director of Special Branch, the late (Tan Sri) Mohamed Amin Osman, and asked them if the FRU had indeed fired tear gas into Kampung Kerinchi. Amin was adamant the FRU did nothing as such.
When asked if he (Amin) had checked the allegations himself and also the report received from the FRU troop leader, Amin said no. So my father instructed Amin to go to Kampung Kerinchi to check himself.
“Celaka! Depa tipu saya!” (“Hell! They lied to me!”) exclaimed Amin when he saw the empty tear gas canisters that littered the lanes of Kampung Kerinchi, to which my father replied, “You fell for it because you did not check the information yourself!”
Fake news is a neologism that has entered the lexicon, used to collectively describe rumours, hoaxes, misinformation, propaganda and recycling of old rumours that had been debunked, that mislead people into believing that they are current and true.
Fake news caused the Barisan Nasional to lose its long-held two-thirds majority in 2008 because it was complacent and not quick enough to react and dispel these rumours. Back then, political discussions and dissemination of fake news or propaganda occurred in chat rooms, in SMS, and blogs which were only a handful then. Now there is Facebook, Twitter, Line, Telegram, WhatsApp, YouTube over and above the media available almost ten years ago.
Claire Wardle, Executive Director of First Draft a non-profit organisation dedicated to finding solutions to the challenges associated with trust and truth in the digital age housed at the Shorenstein Centre on Media, Politics and Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, categorised mis and disinformation into seven types:
Satire or parody – this type of misinformation has no intention to cause harm but has potential to fool. A good example of this is of a message purportedly sent by a passenger of the MH370 who said he managed to hide his iPhone5 up his anus! This had been debunked as a prank, but there are those who still believe that the person did manage to shove a five-inch by two-inch phone up his anus without any problem on the island of Diego Garcia.
Misleading content – most recent would be issues tweeted by two artistes that evolve around the rising cost of living, the weakening ringgit, a shambolic economy, designed to rile up anger in their followers. The tweets, not backed by published facts and figures, would do damage to those who have no inclination to check for the truth and to retweet or forward to others.
Imposter content – these are usually propaganda designed to use genuine sources but impersonated as theirs. A simple example would be of Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Azmin Ali’s recent event officiating the opening of the Rawang-Serendah Bypass, eight days after the bypass was opened by a minister.
Fabricated content – this type of content is 100 per cent false and is designed to deceive and cause harm. If you remember in July 2007, PKR’s Tian Chua admitted that he had fabricated a photo to show that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was together with Abdul Razak Baginda and now dead Mongolian-model Altantuya Shaaribu in Paris.
False connection – this is when headlines, visuals and captions do not support the content. The most famous example from recent times was of The Star’s headline that said “Malaysian Terrorist Leader” while having a huge photo of Muslims praying during the first night of Ramadan. Although The Star apologised for the error, it was not the first time it had made a similar mistake.
False context – this is when genuine content is shared with false contextual information. Artiste Fathia Latiff put up a screen capture of the price of fuel in various OPEC countries on Twitter, asking why Malaysia, as an oil producing country, charges very high for petrol? The screen capture is of oil prices back in 2014. The average value of fuel prices for Malaysia between September 4, 2017 and December 11, 2017, was RM2.23. For comparison, the average price of petrol in the world for this period was RM5.82!
Manipulated content – this is when genuine information or image is manipulated to deceive. Recently, there was a video of a skinny polar bear with muscle atrophy struggling to find food in a snowless land that was made viral. This was attributed to global warming. However, the video was filmed in August when the tundra was snowless. It was only published in December. Even the indigenous community living in the area thought it was a stunt to raise more funds and was doing a disservice to the war against climate change.
I don’t know why Malaysians are so gullible and eager to share fake news.
In WhatsApp groups, you can see how some people could post about something religious and then help spread fake news – something totally against religions. Nowadays, this fake news comes with a disclaimer – “Dari group sebelah”.
Every time we forward or share a post without double-checking or verifying, we add to the noise and confusion. We never consider the source, we never consider the supporting sources and worst of all, we never check our biases.
The late Tan Sri Amin learnt this the hard way.
Having seen that he was misled about the FRU not firing tear gas into Kampung Kerinchi, he went on to check about the claims of a baby that had died as a result of the tear gas. None of the three village representatives had themselves seen the dead baby and no one had actually reported to them of the death.
When asked where the information had come from, they replied, “From Anwar Ibrahim and the other student leaders!”
I received this copied in a Veterans’ WhatsApp group. I omitted some parts of the message as it was just gibberish talk:
_Copied from write up by Mej **** ***** TUDM (Rtd)_
Good afternoon to all. The fight for a free Malaysia must go on!
Let us get one thing clear – the country and the government are separate entities. Governments come and go, the country is eternal.
We owe our allegiance to the country, not to the government. Therefore, saying bad things about a bad government is not being anti-national. Most important of all, voting against a bad government is not being anti-national. A bad government does not deserve loyalty. Disloyalty to the government is not disloyalty to the country; in fact, voting out a bad government is being loyal to the country.
Right to dissent
Save our economy
Fine words they are, but for someone with some legal training to write as such shows how much understanding the author has of the Federal Constitution.
Let us address this “call”:
“Good afternoon to all. The fight for a free Malaysia must go on!
Let us get one thing clear – the country and the government are separate entities. Governments come and go, the country is eternal.
We owe our allegiance to the country, not to the government. Therefore, saying bad things about a bad government is not being anti-national. Most important of all, voting against a bad government is not being anti-national. A bad government does not deserve loyalty. Disloyalty to the government is not disloyalty to the country; in fact, voting out a bad government is being loyal to the country.”
The country and the government cannot be separated, neither can a state be separated from its state government. Yes, governments come and go, but a government is still a government. Officers and men of the civil service, the Armed Forces, the Police owe their allegiance to the King and Country. The King rules the Country, as do the Sultans their respective state, through a government that was picked by the people. Be they the Federal Government or the State Government, they administer the country and the states on behalf of the King and Sultans, as well as the Governors. This is prescribed by Article 39 of the Federal Constitution where the Executive Authority of the Federation is vested in the Yang DiPertuan Agong by him, or by the Cabinet, or by any Minister authorised by the Cabinet.
In the case of the Armed Forces, the King exercises his power through the Minister of Defence. Which is why the officers and men of the Armed Forces are required to salute the Minister of Defence who represents the King’s executive power over the Armed Forces, and the Prime Minister who is the King’s Chief Executive, representing the King.
Article 41 states that the King is the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces and therefore those representing the King as prescribed by Article 39 are performing their duties on behalf of the King.
Therefore, it is imperative that the Armed Forces, as well as the civil service and the Police, remain loyal to the government of the day as the government of the day represents the King – be it bad or otherwise. Whether or nor a member of the Armed Forces, or the civil service, or the Police subscribes to the government of the day politically is a secondary matter. The oath that was taken was to be loyal to the King and Country; therefore loyalty shall be given to the government of the day.
The Minister who represents the King in matters of defence is also made the Chairman of the Armed Forces Council which is responsible for the command, the discipline and the administration of the Armed Forces, except for matters relating to their operational use. This is prescribed in Article 137 of the Federal Constitution.
And it is the Parliament that passed an Act to amend and consolidate the law relating to the establishment, government and discipline of the Armed Forces is made which is called the Armed Forces Act, 1972.
It is also the Armed Forces Act, 1972 that gave the powers to the Armed Forces Council to enable Brigadier-General Datuk Fadzlette Othman Merican Idris Merican be promoted to Major-General while she is being seconded to a Federal Government Department. Section 5C of the Armed Forces Act, 1972 determines that she remains a member of the regular forces but her remuneration shall be paid by that Federal Government Department.
By the same token, even the ordinary people who are citiens of Malaysia must realise that the Federal Government represents the King, the state governments represent the resective state’s Ruler. These are governments chosen by the people but was appointed by the Rulers to administer the country and states on their behalf. The only way to change these governments is by a democratic process called ELECTIONS (unless you have not heard of that word before).
Since 1955, Pulau Pinang, Perak, Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu, Selangor and Sabah have all seen a change in government. If the elections were not clean, would it have been possible for the Opposition to have won cash cows such as Pulau Pinang and Selangor?
I must admit there are bad hats in the government, be it the Federal government or the states government. This is why we have seen people like Harun Idris, Mokhtar Hashim, Khir Toyo, Lim Guan Eng charged in court for corruption. All but Lim Guan Eng have served jail time. Guan Eng, who said that he is not afraid to go to prison, has been delaying his corruption trial using technical issues.
Many more state excos have also been arraigned in a court for corruption. This is not possible without agencies such as the Auditor-General’s Office and the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission which act as checks and balances to ensure that the Federal as well as states governments are run efficiently and cleanly.
Of course there are those who have yet to face the music. For example those responsible for the Maminco scandal in 1985 that saw a loss of RM1.6 billion (about RM2.56 billion in today’s terms); the Perwaja scandal in 1982 that saw a loss of about RM10 billion (RM18.73 billion in today’s terms); the BMF scandal of 1983 that had caused a loss of RM2.5 billion (RM4.5 billion today); the 1986 Deposit-Taking Cooperative Scandal that caused a loss of RM1.5 billion (about RM2.58 billion today); the RM30 billion loss by Bank Negara Malaysis through foreign exchange gambling in 1994 (RM45.25 billion today); the Malaysia Airlines scandal of 1994 with the loss of RM9.4 billion (RM14.18 billion today); the PKFZ scandal of 1999 with a loss of RM12.5 billion (RM13.5 billion in today’s terms).
The above all happened during the tenure of a certain former Prime Minister. The grand total of losses is RM67.5 billion (or RM101.3 billion in today’s terms). The amount shown does not include the bailouts reported in various books, Opposition leaders’ blogs and so on.
I do hope that the cry for a clean government will also call for the arraignment for the Prime Minister during whose tenure the financial scandals happened. Had the RM101.3 billion been put to good use during those 22 years, Sabah and Sarawak would have had SIX toll-free Pan Borneo Highways, or 1,013 80-bedded Government hospitals all over the country!
Instead, it enriched the few and killed one person.
“Right to Dissent”
I have not seen any Opposition-leaning media being taken off print or air, unlike during a certain 22-year period of my life. Malaysiakini et al are still spinning their version of what they call “balanced news” (read: news the way we want you to see it). The way these media operate reminds me of a character in Netflix’s limited series called “Godless” called A.T Grigg, a newspaper owner-editor who writes news the way he sees it, not how it truly happens.
The ISA was repealed six years ago by this present administration. Although replaced with SOSMA and POTA, it doesn’t give powers to the authorities to hold anyone without trial as the ISA did. And the ISA was being used a lot against political dissenters especially in the late 1990s during the tenure of a certain former Prime Minister.
This administration also introduced the Peaceful Assembly Act, 2012 that has allowed more freedom to assemble peacefully, unlike during those days of a certain former Prime Minister where at the slightest hint of a political dissent, you get whisked away to the University of Kamunting.
Has the author of the message been arrested yet? Of course not. Even when he actually committed sedition against Malaysia by encouraging Sarawak to secede from Malaysia.
Now, how is that seditious? If you look at Section 2 of the Sedition Act, 1948 it tells you the following:
This former Armed Forces officer also committed a crime of sedition under Section 3 (1) (b) of the same Act for encouraging Sarawak to leave Malaysia:
And you thought that the Federal Constitution protects freedom of speech? Yes, it does. But as with all other liberties, they are subjected to restrictions. Article 10(1) guarantees that every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression, but at the beginning of the Article it also says the following:
To dissent is okay. To dissent seditiously, or criminally, or dangerously, or incitingly, is not okay.
Any legal-trained person ought to know this, right? What more a former officer of the Armed Forces!
“Save Our Economy”
In April 2017, the World Bank forecasted that Malaysia’s GDP would be at 4.3 percent. This was revised in June 2017 to 4.9 percent due to an acceleration in domestic economic activities (people in Malaysia are actually spending more) by 5.7 percent year-on-year. The GDP growth was revised again in October 2017 to 5.2 percent.
Let me quote several reports here by the World Bank.
World Bank Group lead economist Richard Record said at a media briefing on the update that Malaysia’s robust GDP growth in the first half of 2017 was largely underpinned by strong private-sector expenditure, with additional impetus from an improvement in external demand.
“Private consumption expanded firmly this year, supported by favourable income growth amid stable labour market conditions, and improved consumer confidence. Private investment also sustained rapid growth rates during the period, reflecting mainly continued capital spending in the manufacturing and services sectors,” said Richard Record.
“On the external front, gross exports rebounded strongly from the subdued growth experienced in 2016, supported by double-digit growth in commodity and manufactured exports,” he added.
Economic watchdogs are generally bullish on the Malaysian economy’s performance, buttressed by strong expansion in private consumption and private investment. In the latest update on its World Economic Outlook, the International Monetary Fund has upped its GDP growth projection for Malaysia in 2017 to 4.8 percent from 4.5 percent previously.
Apart from that, the Asian Development Bank has also upgraded its 2017 growth outlook for Malaysia to 4.7% from 4.4%, and indicated that the two-year slowdown in economic growth is likely to have bottomed out last year.
Richard Record also predicted Malaysia’s economy for 2018 and 2019.
“We are forecasting Malaysia’s GDP to grow by 5 percent next year (2018) and 4.8 percent in 2019. Our prediction reflects how we are seeing the country’s macroeconomic fundamentals’ performance and the baseline scenario,” he said.
Online economics portal ‘Focus Economics’ also said the following:
“Economic momentum remained robust in Q3 as confirmed by more complete data. Export growth expanded by a double-digit pace in September, underscoring thriving external demand for Malaysian goods. Household spending was buoyed by a low unemployment rate in September and by higher wages, which were propped up by a thriving manufacturing sector, the key driver of industrial production growth in the quarter. The 2018 budget passed on 27 October is focused on fiscal consolidation and is expected to narrow the fiscal deficit from 3.0 percent in 2017 to 2.8 percent in 2018. Despite the tightening, the budget has consumer-friendly components that will increase disposable income. These include lower income tax rates, especially for middle-income earners; higher public wages; and increased assistance spending.”
Of course, with the oil prices continue to stay below the USD70 per barrel level, Malaysia as well as other countries will continue to experience some sluggishness in the economy. However, good fiscal policies have allowed us to grow unlike a neighbour of ours that is often quoted as being a model economy. That country’s growth have been at 2 percent in 2016, and 2.5 percent this year.
The outlook for the construction sector has taken a sharp turn for the worse, with poll respondents tipping a contraction of 4.2 per cent. The previous survey, released in June, had respondents forecasting 0.2 per cent growth in the sector.
The outlook for the accommodation and food services sector in this model country has also worsened – it is now expected to shrink 1.5 per cent, from previous estimates of a 1 per cent expansion.
Economists polled expect overall economic growth of 2.5 per cent next year for this model country, the same pace as this year.
Perhaps the author of the message we are discussing here should go down South and help revive the economy of that model country.
So, there have you. I really do not know what the fuss is about. All I can deduce is that the author of the message is all hot air – you can feel it blowing on your face, but there is no real substance there. This is the same as BERSIH, and the recycling of petty but stale issues by the Opposition just so that they can remain relevant, and justify for the allowances they receive from the pockets of the rakyat.
You can express your dissatisfaction, but always do so constructively. Especially if you are a member of the Malaysian Armed Forces and Malaysian Armed Forces Veterans.
THIS would be my mellow version of the Ops Lalang.
The Internal Security Act, 1960 or the ISA, was probably the most draconian law to ever exist in Malaysia. Prior to having the ISA, preventive detention was done through the Emergency Regulations Ordinance of 1948 aimed at combatting the communist threats.
With the end of the first Malayan Emergency in 1960, the Ordinance of 148 was done away with but was replaced with the ISA. The mood of the period must be understood to see the reason for having such law.
Although the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) had lost the fight, the struggle was continued from across the Thai border by cadres, as well as their supporters (Min Yuen) in Malaya. They penetrated unions, the press, as well as associations, causing occasional racial tensions in the country.
Pre-1970 Malaysia was not all dandy when it came to race relations. The economic power was held by the Chinese since the days of the British administration while the Malays had been relegated to being farmers or lower ranking civil servants.
The Chinese immigrants first came to the Malay states in 1777, and first settled in the state of Perak in 1830 (Patrick Sullivan, 1982: 13). Within 44 years, they numbered 26,000 in Perak alone. In 1921, the number of Chinese immigrants in the Malay states numbered 1,171,740. Ten years later, it was 1,704,452. In 1941, it became 2,377,990 while the Malays were at 2,277,352 (Paul H Kratoska, 1997:318). The Malays remained as a minority until the census of 1970.
During the war, the Malays did not face much hardship as the Chinese did at the hands of the Japanese.
After the war, the CPM/MPAJA and their Chinese supporters took revenge on the Malays. In Batu Pahat, Muslims were forbidden from congregating at mosques or suraus to perform the Terawih prayers (Hairi Abdullah, 1974/5: 8-9).
The same occurred in Perak and some parts of Batu Pahat where Muslims were gunned down and burnt together with the mosque they were in during Friday prayers.
Mosques and suraus were often used as places of meeting for the Chinese community (WO 172/9773, No.30: 478) and were tainted by incidents such as slaughtering of pigs, and mosques’ compound was used to cook pork, where Malays were forced to join the larger Chinese groups. Pages were torn from the Quran to be used by the Chinese using these mosques as toilet paper.
Racial clashes had begun in September 1945 where Malays and Chinese clashed in Kota Bharu, Selama, Taiping, Sitiawan, Raub.
This culminated in the slaughter of Malays early one morning in a hamlet near Kuala Kangsar called Bekor where 57 men and women, and 24 children were killed by about 500 members of the CPM aided by 500 Chinese villagers from Kelian in March 1946 (CO 537/1580: 21 and Majlis, 24 Februari 1947:5).
All in all, 2,000 lives were lost.
Such was the mood and the ISA was introduced to also prevent further racial clashes by preventing instigators from achieving their objective whatever that may be.
Therefore, it was an Act of Parliament that was used to preserve public order and morals. If one is to read the ISA thoroughly, then it would be easier to see that the Act was not just about detention without trial, but also as a weapon for the Royal Malaysian Police to nip any cancerous threat to public order and morals in the bud.
Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad was Prime Minister as well as Home Minister when Ops Lalang was executed on Oct 26 1987 (arrests were made in the early morning of Oct 27).
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was Umno Youth chief and also Education Minister in Dr Mahathir’s Third Cabinet.
Anwar had made several unpopular moves that earned the wrath of the MCA such as the removal of crucifixes from missionary schools, introduction of Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction for Tamil and Chinese studies at the University of Malaya, as well as the introduction of non-Chinese educated senior assistants and supervisors to Chinese vernacular schools.
Deputy MCA president Datuk Seri (now Tan Sri) Lee Kim Sai who was also Selangor MCA chief, on the other hand, had also uttered words implying that the Malays were also immigrants.
A 2,000-strong gathering by the Dong Jiao Zong that was also attended by the DAP, MCA and Gerakan was held and a resolution was made to call a three-day boycott by Chinese schools.
Umno Youth responded with a 10,000-strong gathering at the TPCA Stadium in Kampung Baru. It is said that Dr Mahathir then instructed Datuk Seri (Tan Sri) Sanusi Junid, who was Umno secretary-general then, to organise a rally of 500,000 members in Kuala Lumpur.
I remember feeling the tension in the air, especially when an army personnel, Private Adam Jaafar, ran amok with his M-16 in Kampung Baru, adding more fuel to a potentially explosive situation.
The senior police management met in Fraser’s Hill to plan and then launched Ops Lalang to prevent bloodshed.
Whether or not Dr Mahathir disagreed with the police for Ops Lalang to be launched, it must be remembered that even if the police had wanted to launch the operations unilaterally, Section 8(1) of the ISA specifically mentions that it is the Home Minister who, upon being satisfied that the detention of any person is necessary, may make an order for the person to be detained for a period of not more than two years.
According to Section 73 of the Act, the police were not given the power to detain a person for more than 30 days unless the Inspector-General of Police had reported of the detention and its reason to the Home Minister.
Nowhere does the Act mention that the Home Minister SHALL or MUST act as advised by the police. The police provided the names in a list, with reasons why they should be or were detained, but only the Minister could sign the detention order.
Dr Mahathir may now claim that Ops Lalang was the police’s idea, which may be true. But as mentioned at the beginning of this article that the ISA is an Act of Parliament giving powers to the police to diffuse potentially explosive situations and also to protect and preserve public safety and morals.
The police used the ISA during Ops Lalang as it was intended to be used (there were also detainees from Umno during the sweep), but the Home Minister was the one who played God, and decided whom to be released before the 60 days was up, and whom to hold up to two years.
And that Home Minister is the same unrepentant person now touted to become the next PM by the DAP.