• Print
Details
Category: Statutory Declarations
By CHELSEA L.Y. NG, MANJIT KAUR and ANDREA FILMER, The Star
Saturday July 5, 2008


 
PETALING JAYA: A statutory declaration is evidence given under oath which cannot be retracted, said a serving judge and several senior members of the legal fraternity.

They believed private investigator P. Balasubramaniam’s act of retracting his initial declaration, which made serious accusations against Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, could open the former to perjury charges.

According to the judge, who is an authority in criminal law, affirming a statutory declaration was akin to giving evidence in court.

“Under the normal rule of evidence, one cannot withdraw it unless he has very strong reasons. Those reasons must be included in the withdrawal or else he would be committing perjury,??? he said.


About-turn Balasubramaniam at a press conference held with his lawyer in a hotel in Kuala Lumpur after making a new statutory declaration. He claimed that his earlier declaration was made under duress. — Bernama

He said if one was citing duress as a reason for making false accusations in a statutory declaration, he must present proof of such pressure.

“He must show that the pressure was serious like it’s life-threatening to him or his family members.

“He cannot just say that he is withdrawing the statutory statement because he had earlier been forced to do it. Someone can now lodge a police report against him and he could face a perjury charge,??? he said.

Balasubramaniam announced yesterday that he had retracted the entire content of his statutory declaration that alleged police had omitted vital information in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case barely 24 hours after he made it public on Thursday.

Bar Council chairman Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan said a statutory declaration was basically evidence on oath that, once given, could not be retracted.

She, however, said a person could add or correct the statutory declaration to file a further declaration.

“Because it is evidence on oath, and if there are untrue statements, then there is the possibility of a person having given a false statement.???

Bar Council’s criminal law committee deputy chairman Datuk V. Sithambaran said that under the law, two inconsistent statements meant that a person had most likely committed perjury.

“Such an act under the case law suggests that a person is guilty of perjury,??? he said.

Senior lawyer Roger Tan said once a statutory declaration was made it could not be cancelled midway because it was a sworn statement of fact.

Tan said Section 3 of the Statutory Declarations Act 1960 provided that a false declaration was punishable.

Veteran lawyer Karpal Singh said the retraction amounted to an offence under Section 193 of the Penal Code.

“Under the section, making a false statutory declaration carries the penalty of not more than seven years' imprisonment or fine or both,??? said the DAP chairman.

He also urged the private eye to make public the nature of the alleged duress.

Related Stories:
Balasubramaniam retracts entire content of his first statutory declaration

Write comment (0 Comments)

  • Print
Details
Category: Statutory Declarations
document.write(parent.prscreen)

By SHAHANAAZ HABIB and PAUL CHOO, The Star

Saturday July 5, 2008


KUALA LUMPUR: Barely 24 hours after making it public, private investigator P. Balasubramaniam has retracted the entire content of his statutory declaration that alleged police omitted vital information in the Altantuya murder case.

In the first statutory declaration, Balasubramaniam had claimed that police omitted vital information, allegedly linking Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak in the Altantuya murder case.

Yesterday, Balasubramaniam revealed in a second statutory declaration that he was “compelled to affirm the (first) statutory declaration dated July 1, 2008 under duress???.

The document also read that all substantive statements made were “inaccurate and not the truth???.

Balasubramaniam kept mum when met by pressmen and his lawyer, Arulampalam Mariam Pillai, was the only one speaking during the brief press conference.

Arulampalam also refused to entertain questions from pressmen, giving only a brief statement that his client was under duress and that he was upset.

The statutory declaration withdrew all statements that Balasubramaniam had revealed during a press conference organised by PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Thursday.

This included the fact that he had informed police what political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda had purportedly told him prior to Altantuya’s murder.

The second statutory declaration dated July 4 said:

> At no material time did Razak inform Balasubramaniam that the former was introduced to Altantuya Shaariibuu by a VIP;

> At no material time did Razak inform him that Najib had a sexual relationship with Altantuya and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse;

> At no material time did Razak inform him that Najib instructed Razak to look after Altantuya, as he did not want her to harass him since he (Najib) was the Deputy Prime Minister;

> At no material time did Razak and/or Altantuya inform him that Najib, together with Razak and Altantuya, had met and all been together at a dinner in Paris;

> At no material time did Altantuya inform him that she wanted money in the sum of US$500,000 (RM1.65mil) as commission for a submarine deal she had assisted with in Paris;

> At no time whatsoever did Razak and/or Altantuya inform him that Najib met Altantuya in Singapore;

> At no time whatsoever did Altantuya inform him that she wanted Balasubramaniam to arrange to see Najib;

> At no time did he tell the police during the course of their investigations about any relationship between Najib and Altantuya, as no such relationship existed to his knowledge;

> At no time did Razak inform him that he had sent Najib an SMS the evening before he (Razak) was arrested; and

> At no time did Razak inform him that Najib had sent him an SMS on the day of his (Razak) arrest to the effect that he was going to see the IGP that day and that the matter should be resolved and for Razak to remain calm.

Meanwhile, Americk Singh Sidhu, who represented Balasubramaniam during the press conference with Anwar on Thursday, said he was unaware of Balasubramaniam's actions.

“Reporters have been calling me all morning and I myself have no information on this,??? he said, adding that he was unable to get in touch with Balasubramaniam.

Write comment (0 Comments)

  • Print
Details
Category: Town Development Plan
By Elizabeth John, New Straits Times



It’s the plan that will shape the face of Kuala Lumpur over the next 12 years and it’s also the most debated document that ever came out of City
Hall that is getting city folk mad.

FEW things scream anger like a demand for your money back.

And that's exactly what a Sri Petaling man did last week, silencing a crammed room of a hundred residents as he shouted:

"This document is rubbish, I want to claim back my money. You can take back this plan. Give me my RM150."

The plan was the Draft Kuala Lumpur City Plan 2020 and the noisy meeting brought to a sudden halt was debating its likely impact on residents in the Seputeh constituency.

From its launch, the draft plan has been a nothing short of a dartboard for criticism.

And in a city where people hardly know their neighbours it's even spawned a grouping of residents association out to save the city from the draft plan.

Chief among the public objections is towards the move to raise density from 6,840 people per sq km to 9,577 in just a dozen years.

Planners and residents are asking if the city has the infrastructure to support this; if it has enough roads, schools or even water for hundreds of thousands more.

Some, like the vocal planning lawyer Derek Fernandez, argues that it also snubs the directives in the country's paramount planning document, the National Physical Plan.

The NPP seeks to, as far as possible, keep density at 25 pph in the Kuala Lumpur conurbation - an area that stretches from the city to Seremban - although in many places, that figure has been surpassed.

But plan proponents argue that its intent is noble and that compact development puts people near amenities and is the only real option in a city with little space left to grow.

It maximises the use of existing land and infrastructure instead of having the city sprawl endlessly, explained Khairiah Talha, a consultant on the draft plan and a Malaysian Institute of Planners council member.

Filling-in and filling-up the spaces in the city helps free land for open spaces and agriculture, explained Khairiah one of the few brave to turn up at such public briefings and face tough questions.

"But that's no excuse for overcrowding," counters Fernandez, a recently appointed Petaling Jaya municipal councilor.

And residents are seeing scary glimpses of the "overcrowding" he talks about in details of the draft plan for many areas they call home.

Bukit Indah lies in the Bukit Jalil-Seputeh area that will see KL's highest population jump.

Long established housing areas here, like United Garden, have been re-zoned under the draft plan to become district commercial centres.

This opens quiet clusters of bungalows and terrace houses to entertainment outlets, theme parks, hotels and high-density apartments, says veteran planner Chandran Gopinath.

"How could they do this? Now someone can buy the neighbour's house and turn it into a funeral parlour.

"And the roads here are already clogged and the houses narrow, what more do they expect to put in?"

But there's even worse, says Chandran. Like Bamboo Garden, off Ipoh Road, where the density will increase to 400 people per acre.

There are other such examples in Segambut, Jinjang and Kepong, Chandran says.

"It's like they've given a kid a brush and asked him to paint the draft plan any colour he likes."

Residents are also finding things missing from the draft's maps like land previously allocated for schools, markets and kindergartens.

Some religious groups attending the numerous briefings are also worried that some of their places of worship have not been marked as such in the plan.

Representatives of one Buddhist organisation asked at the Sri Petaling meeting last week why there was no information in the plan about the allocation of space for religious buildings according to the ethnic or religious breakdown of the population in the area.

The environmental planning and allocation of open spaces under the draft plan has also been a flack magnet.

While the Lake Gardens will expand in size, what's taking centre stage is the fact that KLites will enjoy a measly 11.1 sq metres of open space per person in 2020.

"In a world class city like London, its 40 sq metres of open space per person," Fernandez says, making a jibe at the draft plan's world-class city aspirations for KL.

He's particularly annoyed that while open space has shrunk, gross commercial space has increased under the plan and the few green areas left in KL are being carved out for development.

Fernandez points to the chunk of 49 per cent of the city council's land on Bukit Gasing that's been earmarked for development as one example.

"It's not for public infrastructure but luxury houses on slopes with retention ponds and near a river bed.

"This violates the council's own policies, its earlier structure plan, and the National Physical Plan."

To make matters worse, the draft plan is quite confusing about what's allowed on the small part of Bukit Gasing that will be preserved as an open space.

The "permitted use" table in volume two says permitted uses of the land include for technology, research and development, sports and recreation facilities and secure residential institutions.

But under the "Zoning Schedule (General)" for public open spaces, the only permitted use is for sports and recreation facilities.

Another small, easy to miss point that many residents are waking up to is that the zoning allows with conditions, general retail and office and golf facilities in this kind of a public open space.

The plan also says that over 5,000 people were consulted before the draft was drawn up. Khairiah confirmed this, describing the focus groups her team talked to before they went to the drawing board.

But residents don't consider this consultation -- the angry Sri Petaling man who demanded his money back also wanted the draft plan frozen till the city council sought residents' views.

Residents associations are now considering getting the draft plan nullified on the basis that it has not fulfilled the legal requirement for public consultation.

City council, its planners and consultants have through dialogue and the media appealed to KL folk to keep an open mind while reading the plan and understand the difficulties of planning in a fast developing city.

But residents say that's difficult because they don't like what they see and the information they need just isn't there.

Residents who asked questions at a briefing at the Chinese Assembly Hall last week, for instance, were told that planners had not taken disaster risk management into account and they could not find specific reference to squatter issues in the plan.

The biggest problem of all perhaps, complained residents, was that the draft plan was very difficult to read.

It had a complicated format and maps often had no legends.

It wasn't just proposals that posed problems but also strange abbreviations like the "ppdph" which means passengers per direction per hour but would have left most just a that bit more frustrated.

Because Googling it would have given them this: Postural post-dural puncture headache.

Write comment (0 Comments)

  • Print
Details
Category: Town Development Plan

Monday, 28 July 2008 12:40am

MALACCA:

A conference on the Roadmap to Local Government Elections was jointly organized by the Malacca Bar Committee in cooperation with the Civil Society Initiative for Parliamentary Reform (CSI-Parliament) and the Centre for Policy Initiatives (CPI) on July 26th, 2008 at King’s Hotel. The aim of this conference was to serve as a platform to propel practical but exciting development options to hold elections in local government and to encourage further collaboration between the federal administration and local authorities in regards to civil society advocacy. The outcome of this conference will form the basis for wider public consultation and it is the fervent wish of the organisers that it would ignite institutional reform towards a democratic system of locally elected representatives.

About 60 participants had attended the conference.

In the opening speech, the Chairman of the Malacca Bar Committee, Mr. Ng Kong Peng commented that the implementation of local government elections was a virtual and complete exercise of democratic right by the people. Mr. Ng also recorded his appreciation for the hardwork and effort given by the Chairman of the Malacca Bar’s Human Rights and Contemporary Issues Sub-Committee, Mr. Anthony Chua and his sub-committee members, CSI-Parliament as well as CPI in organising this conference. Chief Executive Officer of CPI, Dr. Lim Teck Ghee told the audience that the authority had systematically tried to expunge local government elections from people’s memory. Before the general election results in March, 2008 were announced, restoration of local government elections was generally regarded as unthinkable. However, after the political tsunami of March, 2008, there is hope of having the elections again. Wong Chin Huat, a founding member of CSI-Parliament opined that the principle of “no taxation without representation??? should be upheld. As such, all taxing authority should be elected. He urged the five states governed by Pakatan Rakyat to set out a timetable for local government elections to be carried out in respective states soonest possible.

Session 1 of the conference was entitled “Why Local Democracy???. Moderator of this session was Mr. Ng Kong Peng. The first speaker was Mr. Derek Fernandez, a town planning lawyer and a member of the Petaling Jaya City Council. Mr. Derek gave a presentation on the topic of “An Assessment of the Status Quo Under the Current Laws.??? He commented that the will of Pakatan Rakyat state governments in having local government elections was eroding. This should not have happened as the most crucial factor of Pakatan Rakyat’s win in urban areas in the last election was due to its’ component parties’ promise of restoring local government elections. He further elaborated that the need to restore local government elections arises from the many issues concerning poor management and abuse of power in local authorities as highlighted by our local newspapers. People were angry by political interferences in the decision-making of the local councils and they want changes to be made. He also went through the statutory provisions governing local government with the participants, amongst others, section 9 of the Local Government Act 1976 (power of state authority to issue directions) and section 10(2) of the Local Government Act 1976 (criteria for councillors of the local authority to be appointed). The appointment of local councillors under the present scheme or system is a political appointment and certainly there is no transparency. Mr. Derek was of the view that section 1 (4) of the Local Government Act 1976, Article 95B(1)(a) and Article 113(4) of the Federal Constitution actually provided a way out for the state governments to abolish the present appointment scheme and call for the elections for local government. He also opined that certain emergency legislations which suspended the local government elections may be invalid. Article 150(5) of the Federal Constitution was also interpreted by Mr. Derek as requiring emergency laws to contain the express provision on emergency matters and if there is none then such emergency legislations should be invalid.

The next speaker was Mr. Edward Lee, the state assemblyman for Bukit Gasing, Selangor and the President of Resident Association Section 5 Petaling Jaya who spoke on the topic of “The Role of Civil Society in Local Governance.??? Mr. Lee shared about his personal experience of taking part in the community activities and assured the participants that he would use his official position to contribute to the restoration of local government elections. He also encouraged the participants to take more active role in local governance by taking step such as attending the local council meetings.

The last speaker for this session was Mr. Victor Oorjitham, a former local councillor serving from 1970 to 1975 in the Petaling Jaya Council. Mr. Victor shared with the participants about the historical background of the local councils. He outlined the differences between the local councillors in the 1970s and their successors since 1980s. In 1970s, when the local councillors were appointed, section 10 of the Local Government Act 1976 was followed strictly. He also gave examples of the types of persons who were appointed in the 70's. The Petaling Jaya Council included a Banker, the Legal advisor of the Employees Provident Fund, a senior police officer, a senior civil servant from the Treasury, a senior civil servant from the Ministry of Information, the Editor of a leading newspaper, a medical practitioner, himself (Legal Advisor to A.I.A ) and others who came within the guidelines. But, all these people, in addition to the professional expertise they brought to the post, were involved in community affairs. However, in 1980s, the local councillors began to change to be political appointees from component parties of the ruling coalition. Before 1980s, the local councillors were loyal to the public but after that, the local councillors were only loyal to their political masters. Since then, corruption had tarnished the service given by the local authorities whereby by-laws and guidelines were not followed strictly. This had then affected people’s lives and interests.

After a tea break, the conference resumed with Session 2 -“Reviving Local Elections:The State Solutions???. The moderator for the session was Dr. Lim Teck Ghee.

The first speaker for the session was Mr. Andrew Khoo, the Co-Deputy Chairperson of the Human Rights Committee of the Malaysian Bar. Mr. Khoo went through the statutory provisions passed for the purpose of suspending local government elections and the available statutory provisions for the state authorities to pave way for the local elections to be carried out. He concluded that state authorities may apply the “opt-out??? notifications provided by the provisions in their attempt to conduct the local government elections.
The audience then had Tan Sri Dato’ Dr Chin Fook Weng, a national speaker for Gerakan, to present Gerakan’s position with regards to the issue. Tan Sri Chin pointed out that Gerakan had actually included local government elections as one of its promises in their manifesto in 1969. However, after going through the state of emergency laws and having formed a coalition with their political partners in Barisan Nasional, it cannot be carried out as there were other issues to be considered. He was of the view that although there has been no local government elections since the suspension of the elections, people have been giving mandate to the elected state assemblymen forming the state authorities to appoint their councillors. As such, this is an indirect elections for local councils. He also stated that our society is fragile and the direct election for local government can only be restored when people become more mature. The Gerakan’s view presented by Tan Sri Chin triggered comments from the participants as they have doubts on the “immaturity??? of Malaysian society after 50 years of independence and question on the cause of such “immaturity???.

The next speaker for the session was Mr. Ronnie Liu, the Selangor Government Exco member for Local Government, Study and Research Committee. Mr. Liu began his presentation by making a stand that it was the intention of the Pakatan Rakyat government in Selangor to restore local government elections as there were advantages of doing so. However he mentioned that in view of the fact that the federal government does not propose to amend the laws to restore the local government elections, it may not be practical for the state government alone to conduct the elections at the moment. He was prepared to meet the federal minister who is in charge of the local government and the Prime Minister in order to persuade them to convince the cabinet so that such amendment may be tabled and passed in Parliament. During the Q & A time, Mr. Wong Chin Huat tried to get a confirmation from Mr. Liu on the preparation and timetable for the local government elections to be implemented by the Selangor government. However, Mr. Liu insisted that a thorough study needed to be carried out on the matter first. According to Mr. Liu, a special committee would be set up by the Selangor government in 6-month’s time, as proposed by the Menteri Besar of Selangor, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim. Nevertheless, the actual time needed for the process could not be confirmed now as the state government had other priorities to consider.
After session 2 ended, the participants took a break for lunch.

The third session discussed ways to revive local elections via federal solutions. Professor Abdul Aziz Bari addressed the fact that in the Federal Constitution, the conduct of elections is regulated by the Elections Commission. As long as it is under the prerogative of the federal government, the political will to conduct local council elections shall come from the federal government.

Mr. Sivarasa Rasiah, MP for Subang and Vice President of Parti Keadilan Rakyat spoke next on the parliamentary mechanisms to initiate local government elections via the private members’ bill and select committees. He believes that one should not separate the state and federal process. Clause 4 of Art.113 of the Federal Constitution provides that Federal or State law may authorise the Election Commission to conduct election. Thus the State Assembly could pass local elections law themselves by drafting the law and promulgating it to the public. Mr. Rasiah further mentioned on the difficulties to have the private members’ bills tabled in the Parliament. The Standing Order 15 provides for conduct of meetings in the Parliament and, as always the case would be, the governmental matters would always take precedence over private concerns. To have the private members’ bills discussed or passed at Parliament is an uphill task. Thus, according to him, there is an urgent need for Parliamentary reform. The problem of lack of supporting staff for individual members of parliament needs to be addressed . He compared our Parliament to that of Indonesia where an MP there would be designated five staffers; and in the Philippines, seven staffers would be designated to a single MP. In Malaysia, an MP does his duties without such assistance.

Dr Goh Ban Lee, a retired USM Associate Professor spoke on the National Council of Local Governments (NCLG). On November 28th, 1971, after NCLG deliberated on the Athi Nahappan Report in its meeting, it was held that the suspension of local government elections should continue to be in force. At another meeting held on September 30th, 1972, it was decided that local councils were incapable of running their own affairs satisfactorily. In the pre-independence period, Penang’s local councillors were fully elected. However, because of lack of understanding on the meaning of being councillors, in new Chinese villages, the elected councillors behaved without constraint and were above the law. Dr Goh thus holds the view that elections do not necessarily bring about a good government. Dr Goh said that it was possible to appoint an Independent Committee to select local councillors.

At the end of the conference, a joint press statement was issued and resolutions were adopted. They are as follows:-

Joint Press Statement issued by
Mr. Ng Peng Kong, Melaka Bar Committee Chairman
Dr. Lim Teck Ghee, Director, Centre for Policy Initiatives
Mr. Wong Chin Huat, Civil Society Parliamentary Initiative for Parliamentary Reform

This press statement is issued as the outcome of the “Roadmap to Local Government Elections??? Conference jointly organised by the Malacca Bar Committee, Centre for Policy Initiatives and Civil Society Initiative for Parliamentary Reform (CSI-Parliament) on July 26th, 2008 in Malacca.

Participants at the one day conference adopted the following resolutions:

1. the restoration of local elections constitutes an important step forward in reviving democracy, improving the standard of governance and checking the scourge of corruption, excesses and mismanagement presently plaguing the urban population in Malaysia;

2. the restoration of local elections lies clearly within the jurisdiction of the state government, as provided for by the Article 113(4) and Item 4, List II, Schedule 9 in the Federal Constitution. State governments, especially the Pakatan Rakyat ones which have made election promises on reviving local elections, should take immediate steps to formulate state laws to such effect;

3. the Federal Government should, at the same time, initiate consultations with the general public and hold negotiations with the state governments to formulate a comprehensive plan to have local elections that are clean, free, fair and representative.

Speakers at the conference included the following:

Professor Abdul Aziz BARI is lecturing at the Department of Public Law at the International Islamic University.

Tan Sri Dato’ Dr CHIN Fook Weng is a national speaker for Gerakan and a former senator and Associate Professor.

Mr Derek FERNANDES is a town planning lawyer and a member of the Petaling Jaya City Council.

Dr GOH Ban Lee is a retired USM Associate Professor interested in urban governance, housing and urban planning.

Mr Andrew KHOO is the Co-Deputy Chairperson of the Human Rights Committee, with interests running from parliamentary reform, electoral reform to Free Trade Agreements.

Mr Edward LEE is the state assemblyperson for Bukit Gasing and the President of Resident Association Section 5 Petaling Jaya.

Mr Ronnie LIU is the state assemblyman for Pandamaran, Selangor and the Selangor Government Exco member for Local Government, Study and Research Committee.

Mr Victor OORJITHAM is the Chairman of Maxwell Towers Resident Association (local joint action committee) and former local councilor for Petaling Jaya.

Mr Sivarasa RASIAH is the member of Parliament for Subang and the Vice President of Parti Keadilan Rakyat.

Write comment (0 Comments)

  • Print
Details
Category: Town Development Plan
Monday, June 23, 2008
 
 
KUALA LUMPUR: The Kuala Lumpur Draft City Plan 2020 makes no reference to the environment and makes no provision for green lungs and proper amenities in the city says an environmentalist.

The plan is too narrow in its focus and many important issues are looked at on a piecemeal basis, he said.

"The environment should be the sole platform of any plan," said Gurmit Singh, chairman of Environment, Technology and Development Malaysia (Cetdem) at the public forum on the future of Kuala Lumpur.

He said City Hall's vision of making Kuala Lumpur a world class city does not address certain prerequisites.


"A developed city is an international commercial and financial centre with an efficient and equitable city structure.

"By this I mean we should have good quality air and water and properly managed amenities, which in end will create a distinctive city identity administered by an efficient and effective government," he said.

Gurmit said Kuala Lumpur could only attain this if the Klang River is not polluted, all drains, roads and empty spaces are not cluttered with rubbish, traffic jams do not prevail and public transport is improved.

"Green lungs are shrinking and undispersed in the plan," he said, questioning whether the figure of 1.09 hectares of space per 1,000 people still holds true today when there is an urgent need for a multitude of well spread out mini-parks.

He said the environment is only looked on as a landscape issue, and matters like pollution and the increase in solid waste are not properly addressed

"One of the main issues here is that maintenance is ignored and the residents have to pay many environmental and economic prices of absent planning on comprehensive preventive maintenance," he said.

Public health and sanitation issues, such as bad drains and unhygienic food are good examples of this, he said.

He urged City Hall to look into minimising the ecological footprint; eliminating all forms of wastage; optimising energy efficiencies and switch to recycled materials that are efficient; and providing clean and affordable transport.

"The draft plan is very narrow in its outlook," he said.

City Hall now needs to restudy the environmental effects in relation to on housing and transport and heed the objections of the public, he said.
Write comment (0 Comments)

More Articles...

  1. Worried over KL's future
  2. KL Transport Blueprint: A messy plan
  3. CEO: Don't blame Petronas, it's a global problem
  4. Guan Eng to Petronas: We want full disclosure