Malaysiakini

Bekir's spending can feed 1,000 Penans for 100 days

VOXPOP ‘Shahnaz should replace the MACC head. She is doing a much better job in tracing Mahmud Abu Bekir Taib's wealth!'

'Bekir spent RM780,000 in 6 months, using charge card'

vox populi small thumbnailMushiro: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) will keep quiet, PM Najib Abdul Razak will keep quiet, Umno will keep quiet, Perkasa will keep quiet and the mainstream media (MSM) will ignore this news.

The fact is that poor Sarawakians are getting raped by the Abdul Taib Mahmud family and this is being openly endorsed by Najib and Umno.

This is no more about being filthy rich or stinking rich - we are reaching the levels of Ferdinand Marcos, the Shah of Iran and our own Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Daim Zainuddin.

NH Gong: All that spending in six months? Not much, only RM130,000 per month. It can only feed 1,000 Penans for 100 days.

Now have we all forgotten the RM24 million diamond ring legally smuggled in for someone ‘richer' than rich?

Eddie 50: No work, No sweat... but lots and loads of Sarawakians' money in his wallet, and this guy is touted as the next chief minister (CM).

Anonymous #69337042: The rakyat can no longer 'tahan'.They are boiling mad with all the power abuse, corruption by all these bastardised political leaders who have robbed, cheated and stolen the wealth of the nation and made it their own.

The nation and the people have been severely impoverished by their dastardly self-serving misdeeds. They should be punished and their stolen wealth must be returned to the people. Enough is enough.

Justice Seeker: Most Sarawakians live by "kais pagi makan pagi, kais petang makan petang". But the Chief Timber Robber's family are living in heaven on earth.

I have a friend who said the Malaysian government is one of the best in the world. This person who is an engineer by profession is unaware of the facts of what is really happening in the country. I was really shocked by his apathetic attitude despite his level of education.

Hence it is no surprise that most Sarawakians, who either are illiterate or semi-literate, are not bothered about the means the timber robbers obtained their wealth. Just throw some crumbs and BN will continue to be in power.

BujangSenang: Shahnaz A Majid should replace the MACC head. She is doing a much better job in tracing former husband Mahmud Abu Bekir Taib's wealth. As for Perkasa, it has lost its you-know-what.

'Presumption' in 114A is not 'automatically guilty'

Pemerhati: After carrying out selective prosecutions and farcical trials, such as Anwar Ibrahim's two sodomy trials on trumped-up charges while completely ignoring Chua Soi Lek's equally punishable sex case, where video evidence is everywhere to obtain an easy conviction, an officer of the Attorney-General's Chambers, Anselm Charles Fernandis, has the audacity and cheek to say, "(The people) should have faith in us."

By the above actions and as a result of the ‘sandiwara' and equally farcical Altantuya Shaariibuu and Ling Liong Sik trials conducted by deputy solicitor-general II Tun Majid Tun Hamzah, the AG's Chambers and the criminal justice system have lost all credibility.

Anonymous #8211967: Even though a person could possibly win the case despite the presumption, the fact that you can be presumed to be guilty is a kind of threat to prevent people from saying what they want to say without fear or favour.

The purpose of this Section 114A is very evident from this point of instilling fear into the Internet-using public.

The arguments put forth by the learned person from the AG's Chambers carry logic similar to that of of our former home minister that putting someone under ISA was to protect her safety.

Joker: The AG's Chambers defending Section 114A? Why does it not surprise me? Come on, everyone knows in a court proceeding, for a conviction to happen, you need to prove that the deed is indeed a crime and who had committed it.

The AG's Chambers is saying Section 114A will not presume guilt because the prosecutors still need to prove that a crime did happen. But as usual, they did not answer the question.

Section 114A is presuming the 'who dunnit' portion. We all know the 'crime' proving part is very easy using the sedition law as what is defined as sedition is defined by the home minister.

Swipenter: I am no lawyer. As far as I am concerned no room must be given for any law to be abused and that is the ideal situation.

In this case Section 114A can be abused first and then correct the abuse in court later? What bullsh*it is this?

You cannot charge a person based on presumption first and then try to prove that she/he was guilty of committing the offence. You can only charge a person based on facts, not presumption of guilt.

Wong Jiang Fung: This is just like saying, "Although this law has the potential of being abused, we promise we won't abuse this law."

If you don't intend to abuse it, why not fix it so that you can't?


The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.