Akhirnya Agong Perkenan Pelantikan Tommy Sebagai Peguam Negara Baharu

cmf_shalom

pyropura replied at 8-6-2018 06:29 PM
yuppp antara  ahli Reid Commission yg tak berapa setuju Islam dimasukkan dlm Perlembagaan adalah ...

Dari segi latar belakangnya, Hakim Abdul Hamid bersetuju memasukkan penyataan Islam agama Persekutuan setelah beliau menerima cadangan tersebut melalui memorendum dari Parti Perikatan yang terdiri daripada UMNO, MCA dan MIC. MCA dan MIC bersetuju memasukkan penyataan tersebut telah UMNO memberi jaminan bahawa penyatan Islam agama Persekutuan hanyalah bagi maksud simbolik sahaja (ini adalah contoh kontrak sosial yang sedang cuba dilanggar oleh sebahagian orang melayu sekarang). Hal ini ada disebut Joseph Fernarndo:


The UMNO leaders contended that provision for an official religion would have an important psychological impact on the Malays. But in deference to the objections of the Rulers and the concerns of non-Muslims, the Alliance agreed that the new article should include two provisos: first, that it would not affect the position of the Rulers as head of religion in their respective States; and second, that the practice and propagation of other religions in the Federation would be assured under the Constitution. The MCA and MIC representatives did not raise any objections to the new article, despite protests by many non-Muslim organizations, as they were given to understand by their UMNO colleagues that it was intended to have symbolic significance rather than practical effect, and that the civil rights of the non-Muslims would not be affected. MacGillivray personally felt that such a provision would be advantageous because the Yang di-Pertuan Agong could at the same time become the head of the faith in the Settlements of Penang and Malacca. The Colonial Office, while apprehensive at first, did not object after being assured by the Alliance leaders during the London Conference in May 1957 that they ‘had no intention of creating a Muslim theocracy and that Malaya would be a secular State’.


The Making of the Malayan Constitution” by Joseph Fernando (MBRAS), 2002


Sebab itulah bagi isu-isu sensitif ini, kita minta Dess buat study sendiri. Permulaan kepada study ini adalah paling mudah rujuk dokumen kerajaan dalam sesi Laporan Rasmi Perdebatan Majlis Perundangan pada tahun 1958, dimana ketika itu, Perdana Menteri Malaysia yang pertama telah memperincikan limitasi status Islam agama Persekutuaan yang terdapat dalam Perlembagaan.


Sebab itu juga saya minta beliau jangan baca sumber JAKIM, sebab definisi yan diberikan JAKIM adalah versi korup yang telah dimasukkan unsur-unsur asing, yang datang terkemudian. Kita sangat faham, bila JAKIM tidak dapat memberikan jawapan yang tepat, sebab wakil mereka tidak pernah wujud semasa sesi rundingan antara kerajaan prior pembentukan Malaysia dulu. Baru sekarang kita mendapat tahu bahawa JAKIM diasaskan oleh TUN untuk menyaingi parti PAS.


Sekarang ini, terdapat gerakan untuk meluaskan definisi Islam agama Persekutuan dengan menlangkui apa yang dibenarkan oleh Perlembagaam itu sendiri. Mereka cuba membawa sekali bersama kuasa pentadbiran dan perundangan ke dalam sistem pentadbiran negara. Jadi apa yang dirisaukan oleh ahli suruhanjaya Reid itu dahulu mempunyai sebab. Mungkin mereka pada masa itu telah dapat menghidu terlebih awal.

pyropura

cmf_shalom replied at 8-6-2018 07:17 PM
Dari segi latar belakangnya, Hakim Abdul Hamid bersetuju memasukkan penyataan Islam agama Persekut ...

... kalau tak kerana Judge Hamid tu yg menggatal, kita dah boleh aman2 aje Sekarang .... orang Paki memang otak bodoh kan, cash lah negara depa jadi gitu today.

cmf_shalom

pyropura replied at 8-6-2018 08:32 PM
... kalau tak kerana Judge Hamid tu yg menggatal, kita dah boleh aman2 aje Sekarang .... orang Pak ...

Heheh..

Saya tidak la berani hendak mempertikaikan tindakan Hakim Hamid sampai gatal nak juga masukkan penyataan Islam agama Persekutuan ke dalam Perlembagaan. Saya percaya, beliau sebagai seorang Hakim mempunyai kebijaksanaan untuk menilai apa yang terbaik. Lagipun, beliau mencadangkan idea tersebut setelah mendengar perjanjian kontrak sosial dikalangan Parti Perikatan, MCA dan MIC bersetuju dengan cadangan UMNO setelah UMNO menyakinkan mereka bahawa penyataan tersebut bagi maksud simbolik sahaja.

Hakim Hamid, dalam penghuraian beliau ada memasukkan rasional berdasarkan keaadaan pada masa tersebut setelah merujuk kepada Perlembagaan beberapa buah negara, baik dikalangan negara Kristian mahupun Islam.

[size=10.6667px]“It has been recommended by the Alliance that the Constitution should contain a provision declaring Islam to be the religion of the State.  It was also recommended that it should be made clear in that provision that a declaration to the above effect will not impose any disability on non-Muslim citizens in professing, propagating and practising their religions, and will not prevent the State from being a secular State.  As on this matter the recommendation of the Alliance was unanimous their recommendation should be accepted and a provision to the following effect should be inserted in the Constitution either after Article 2 in Part I or at the beginning of Part XIII.

[size=10.6667px]‘Islam shall be the religion of the State of Malaya, but nothing in this Article shall prevent any citizen professing any religion other than Islam to profess, practice and propagate that religion, nor shall any citizen be under any disability by reason of his being not a Muslim’.

[size=10.6667px]A provision like one suggested above is innocuous.  Not less than fifteen countries of the world have a provision of this type entrenched in their Constitutions.  Among the Christian countries, which have such a provision in their Constitutions, are Ireland (Article 6), Norway (Article 1), Denmark (Article 3), Spain (Article 6), Argentina (Article 2), Bolivia (Article 3), Panama (Article 36) and Paraquay (Article 3).  Among the Muslim countries are Afghanistan (Article 1), Iran (Article 1), Iraq (Article 13), Jordan (Article 2), Saudi Arabia (Article 7), and Syria (Article 3).  Thailand is an instance in which Buddhism has been enjoined to be the religion of the King who is required by the Constitution to uphold that religion (Constitution of Thailand, Article 7).  If in these countries a religion has been declared to be the religion of the State and that declaration has not been found to have caused hardships to anybody, no harm will ensue if such a declaration is included in the Constitution of Malaya.  In fact in all the Constitutions of Malayan States a provision of this type already exists.  All that is required to be done is to transplant it from the State Constitutions and to embed it in the Federal.”

[size=10.6667px]Hakim Hamid pada masa tersebut mungkin tidak terlintas dihati beliau berlaku revolusi dikalangan negara-negara Islam. Tapi apa sahaja perubahan Perlembagaan dalam negara Islam, ia mesti dirujuk berdasarkan senario tahun 1957. Pada masa tersebut, penyataan Islam agama Persekutuan bagi memboleh bacaan doa-doa Islam dibuat dalam majlis rasmi kerajaan Persekutuan, terutama dalam hal ehwal pertabalan SYDP. Namun saya juga yakin, bila Hakim Hamid dan ahli Suruhanjaya Reid melihat situasi yang berlaku ke atas Persekutuan Malaysia pada hari ini, mungkin mereka menyesal, bila pihak Kerajaan sendiri cuba menyelewengkan Perlembagaan dari maksud asal. [size=10.6667px]Aku juga yakin, bila mereka membaca risalah JAKIM, Hakim Hamid dan semua ahli Suruhanjaya Reid akan pengsan berjemaah!

[size=10.6667px]

pyropura

cmf_shalom replied at 8-6-2018 08:59 PM
Heheh..

Saya tidak la berani hendak mempertikaikan tindakan Hakim Hamid sampai gatal nak juga m ...

tu tipikel Paki bodo ler tuh, depa jual nama Islam diserata tempat, kat Parlimen, kat PM ofis  depa letak ayat Quran besau2, tapi semuanya raja koruptor, raja mafia, kaki tonggang arak no wahid dunia

mr_cool5885

Knp xlantik ghani patail balik? Adakah tony romas lebih better than ghani patail?

cmf_shalom

pyropura replied at 8-6-2018 09:16 PM
tu tipikel Paki bodo ler tuh, depa jual nama Islam diserata tempat, kat Parlimen, kat PM ofis  dep ...

Tak elokla kita terus marah orang yang dh tiada...aku percaya, sekiranya Tuan Hakim Hamid dan Ahli Suruhanjaya Reid lain mendengar penjelasan JAKIM pada hari ini, mereka pasti pengsan berjemaah..

Sebab kita masih ada orang yang masih hidup, yang menjadi punca kepada masalah ini makin Kronik, iaitu TUN.

Bermula dengan tindakan TUN menubuhkan JAKIM sehinggalah kepada tindakan beliau pada penghujung kareer beliua membuat pengumuman dalam Parlimen Malaysua ini negara Islam. Pada permulaan kareer TUN, beliau cuba membawa nilai-nilai Islam dalam sistem pentadbiran negara. Ia adalah sesuautu yang baik. Stahu aku, tiada non yang membantah. Perkara ini  bertambah,melalui penubuhan JAKIM.

Kesilapan terbesar TUN dibuat pada penghujung karrer beliau, bila TUN dalam Perlimen mengumumkan Malaysia ini negara Islam. Walaupun pengumuman tersebut tidak memberi kesan kepada Perlembagaan, tapi ia memberi kesan kepada pentdabiran negara selepas itu. Pihak-pihak yang berkaitan memulakan operasi mereka untuk membawa Islam ke dalam sistem pentadbiran termasuk juta cita-cita memperkasakan undang-undang syariah.

Apabila Pak Lah mengganti TUN, Pak Lah memperkenalkan konsep Islam hadari. Sekali, JAKIM telah diberi peranan besar, untuk mempromosikan aliran pemikiran Islam sederhana, bukan sahaja di malaysia, tapi diseluruh dunia, ekoran serangan 11 September. Bermula dari situ, peruntukan untuk JAKIM semakin bertambah, sehingga kita dimaklumkan, 1 bilion diperuntukan secara tahunan.Zaman Pak Lah la bermula bilik mesyuarat cendana ditukar kepada Al-Arab etc..

Bila Najib naik, penguasaan JAKIM semakin bertambah, dan cuba membawa unsur-unsur syariah dalam sistem pentadbiran negara.Malahan terdapat beberapa keputusan mahkamah juga mula dipengaruhi oleh unsur-unsur tidak berpelembagaan ini. Kerajaan juga tidak terkecuali daripada membuat tindakan yang membelakangkan Perlembagaan, sama seperti rakyat yang membuat kesalahan undang-undang.Mula la negara ini dikenali sebagai bolehland..!

Untuk makluman, dikalangan ketua-ketua Jabatan, sudah ada luahan tidak puas hati dilontar kepada JAKIM yang dapat peruntukan sangat besar. Zaman Najib, JAKIM umpama anak emas, sementara agensi lain bawah JPM, anak gansa. Semua yang JAKIM minta dapat.Semuanya dibuat dengan alasan memperkembangkan syiar Islam dalam pentadbiran, sesuai dengan Islam agama Persekutuan.

Kita tahu, dari masa ke semasa, YB-YB non dalam Parlimen, selalu mengungkitkan status penubuhan dan fungsi JAKIM. Kita maklum akan jawapan yang diberikan oleh JAKIM. JAKIM ditubuhkan berdasarkan perlembagaan. Bukan la sesuatu yang tidak sengaja bila YB-YB non ni selalu membangkitkan isu ini. Tapi, mereka setakat itu sahaja...Nak persoal leboh lanjut..timbul plak isu anti Islam...or mencabar Perlembagaan.

Namun status JAKIM kantoi, beberapa bulan sebelum PRU..Rupanya JAKIM ditubuhkan oleh TUN untuk menyaingi PAS. Hari pertama TUN dilantik PM terus tersebar khabar angin, JAKIM antara Jabatan yang akan dimansuhkan atau diswastakan. Bila Tun cakap fungsi JAKIM akan disemak, kita lihat JAKIM mulai risau. Terus keluar beberapa artikel tersebar di FB yang dikeluarkan oleh JAKIM: JAKIM tidak sejahat yang disangka. Fungsi-Funsgsi JAKIM. Sedangkan selama ini mereka selalu bercakap penubuhan mereka selari dengan Perlembagaan.


Diharap TUN mengotakan janjinya untuk membetulkan kesilapan lepas beliau. TUN sendiri dah nampak, apabila agama dan politik bergabung...negara akan musnah.

Sekiranya TUN tidak membetulkan kesilapan ini, rakyat Malaysia sampai bila-bila akan bergaduh pasal status negara ini

Maideen.

cmf_shalom replied at 8-6-2018 10:54 PM
Tak elokla kita terus marah orang yang dh tiada...aku percaya, sekiranya Tuan Hakim Hamid dan Ahli ...

Shabas Shalom. Semoga tugas Shalom untuk mengajar dan memberi petunjuk kepada pakar pakar aurat dan hukom cukor bulu dalam Isle, di permudahkan...

Btw, Tunku Abdul rahman pon banyak kali terangkan tentang Art 3(1)...

Ini ada lagi bahan bacaan:

Country was never an Islamic stateLJ  |  Published on 10 May 2006, 3:53 pm  |  Modified on 29 Jan 2008, 6:21 pm

A+     A-

[size=1.25em]I entirely agree with Umran Kadir of Islamic state term too nebulousand his ultimate conclusion that Malaysia is a secular (and not an Islamic) country. And he is right to point out that no lesser person than the father of Malaysia, Tunku Abdul Rahman, once famously stated in Parliament that Malaysia is a secular state.

[size=1.25em]Indeed, Tunku actually said the following in Parliament (in response to an assertion by an MP that Malaysia was an Islamic state): 'I would like to make clear that this country is not an Islamic state as is generally understood, we merely provide that Islam shall be the official religion of the State.' (Hansard, May 1,1958).

[size=1.25em]Fortunately, he was not alone in making such declarations. Hussein Onn also once declared that Malaysia was set up 'as a secular state with Islam as the official religion' as enshrined in the Constitution.

[size=1.25em]In the very first document which preceded and built up what is now the Federal Constitution, known as the Reid Commission Report (1956-57), it was observed that in the 'memorandum submitted by the Alliance it was stated that the religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle (as conceded by the Alliance itself) shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religions and shall not imply that the State is not a secular State.' [para. 169].

[size=1.25em]In the White Paper which introduced the Constitution ('Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals 1957') it was stated (para 57) that there 'has been included in the proposed Federal Constitution a declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation. This will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular state.'

[size=1.25em]In the Cobbold Commission (1962), which report was the spring board to the creation of Malaysia, two members of the Federation of Malaya conceded that [Para 48(e)(ii)] 'the Federation would be secular'.

[size=1.25em]In his work, The Malaysian Constitution, Hashim Yeop Sani SCJ, as regards Article 3(1) of the Constitution (which states that 'Islam is the religion of the Federation'), said that that article 'has no legal effect.'

[size=1.25em]Professor Ahmad Ibrahim once wrote that it was telling in respect of the question whether Malaysia was a secular state that the Alliance in its submission to the Reid and Cobbold commissions 'did not ask that the constitution should also declare, as it did the Pakistan Constitution, that the state shall be an Islamic State'.

[size=1.25em]In Che Omar Bin Che Soh v PP [1988] 2 MLJ 55 (Supreme Court), Salleh Abas LP observed that by 'ascribing sovereignty to the ruler ie, to a human, divine source of legal validity is severed and thus the British turned the system into a secular institution. Thus laws had to receive their validity through a secular fiat'.

[size=1.25em]The truth is that the inclusion of Article 3(1) was always hugely contentious. For example, it was recorded in the Cobbold Commission that there was outright opposition from non-Muslim communities in Sabah and Sarawak to the provision making Islam the religion of the Federation. However, there was a process of 'give and take' or 'quid pro quo', in which Article 3(1) was left to remain in the Federal (but not the state) Constitution in return for recognition that the Federation will always remain secular.

[size=1.25em]That was the 'modus vivendi' (or social contract, if you will) which was reached, but which is now being repudiated and negated by Mahathir and revisionist modern courts.

[size=1.25em]That this bodes ill for the Federation was presciently sketched (admittedly in respect of another provision, but the spirit runs parallel) by Raja Azlan Shah LP (as His Highness then was) in Dato Mentri Othman Baginda v Dato Ombi Syed Alwi Syed Idrus [1981] 1 MLJ 29 (Federal Court), where he observed that the Federal Constitution was enacted as a result of negotiations and discussions between the British Government, the Malay Rulers and the Alliance Party relating to terms on which independence should be granted.

[size=1.25em]One of its main features is the enumeration and entrenchment of certain rights and freedoms which pre-existed Merdeka, and the purpose of entrenchment is to protect them against encroachment.

[size=1.25em]In other words, according to the then Lord President, such provisions are graphic examples of the depth of our heritage and the strength of our constitutional law to guarantee and protect rights and freedoms which already exist against encroachment, abrogation or infringement.

cmf_shalom

Maideen. replied at 9-6-2018 01:27 PM
Shabas Shalom. Semoga tugas Shalom untuk mengajar dan memberi petunjuk kepada pakar pakar aurat da ...

Thanks..

Tp banyak info dari aspek perundangan, pun aku dapat dari Maideen..

Lagipun, isu ni bukan pertama kali muncul kat CI..