There will be a Rome Statute protest to be held tomorrow Saturday May 4th at Sogo, Jalan Tunku Abdul Rahman Kuala Lumpur. It will the begin with a parade after zohor prayers at Masjid Jameq.
Come in WHITE!
The crowd may not be as large as the anti-ICERD gathering several months ago, because similar gatherings are being held throughout the country since last week. In Johor, there were gatherings held district-to-district with regard to both the Rome Statute and Johor Constitution.
Nevertheless, the protest is expected to attract a significantly more sizeable crowd than any gathering by the pro-Rome Statute "elite Bangsar type" liberals.
Even the political party supporters of the current ruling government has insufficient followers and incapable of gathering sufficient number as show of support. They do not have PAS to be exploited anymore.
Pro-Rome Statute have resorted to abuse their power and are contravening their own manifesto and liberal stance to celebrate differing views, freedom of speech and academic freedom.
At UiTM, Prof Shad Salem Faruqi suppress the voice of Rome Statute opposition.
One event meant for UiTm was cancelled.
A member of group of pensioned civil servants, G25, Tan Sri Alwi Jantan indirectly advocated in Malaysiakini the four lecturers to be dismissed for providing advise to the Royal Council or in other words, exposing areas the government hidden from the Malay rulers.
Quite typical PTD bossy mindset.
The grouping name should be changed to M&A25 or Museum pieces and Archaic 25.
Academics are to be debated and engaged, not strong armed and bullied using power.
It proves these liberals are both hypocritical and incapable to holding their own in an intelligent debate. They seldom could go beyond rhetorics and being dreamy.
Despite being in position of power, they are still unable to articulate their point of view in the perspective of governance. They are still unable to make good their rhetorics into any practical applications.
The argument of Tommy Thomas, Dato Noor Farida, and Prof Shad Saleem Faruqi have been heard.
But, the point of wonder is why are these people voicing out their defense for Rome Statute when it is the government that they supported that made a bunkum of Malaysia to accede and withdraw within a month!
All three basically argued the other side were speaking the untrue and swayed from the truth. The fact is they failed to convince is that Rome Statute and ICC is a worthless cause lacking support and enforcibility.
And, they not dare put up a line-up of debaters of equal numbers. Not one represent the opponents to Rome Statute.
Typical liberals, Noor Farida lied
Tommy and Noor Farida claimed the previous government as hypocrit for now changing their stance on the Rome Statute.
Well .... the previous government do not view the legal knowledge and expertise of Noor Farida as relevent.
If her legal reference is Tommy Thomas, the defective AG can't put a decent case together on SRC and 1MDB?
The truth as Dato Anifah Aman explained:
PRESS STATEMENT BY YB DATO' SRI ANIFAH HAJI AMAN ON THE RECENT STATEMENTS MADE BY NOOR FARIDA MOHD ARIFFIN AT A RECENT FORUM AND TO THE LOCAL MEDIA WITH REGARDS TO THE STATUTE OF ROME.
2 MAY 2019
I wish to refer to the statement of the G25 spokesperson, Noor Farida Mohd Ariffin, in an article of the Malaysian Insight dated 7 April and in a recent forum.
The assertion that I did not sign the instrument of accession to the Rome Statute in March 2011 is an over-simplified and inaccurate misrepresentation of the whole situation then.
In 2011, I did not sign the instrument of accession based on the advice of the Attorney General Chambers at the time, whom did not agree for Malaysia to accede to the Rome Statute.
The Cabinet revisited the issue (of accession to the Rome Statute) in 2015 and it was decided for Malaysia to accede to the Rome Statute and for the Attorney General Chambers to prepare the necessary papers that could then be tabled during the Cabinet meeting towards this end. However, the Attorney General Chambers never prepared the Cabinet Papers.
Although during that particular period Noor Farida had recommended for Malaysia to accede to the Statute of Rome, it was clear there were a number of grey areas which needed to be addressed such as the concerns raised by the Attorney General Chambers which legally is one of the highest form of authorities. These concerns needed to be dealt with, which was why we waited for the Attorney General Chambers papers to be submitted to Cabinet.
When signing any statute or anything on behalf of the country, I have always been very careful as any wrong move may cause negative repercussions domestically or internationally. Should I have listened to Noor Farida only or dismissed the Attorney General Chambers concerns? I believe I owed it to the people and my country to be thorough and not dismiss the Attorney General Chambers concerns.
Furthermore, Noor Farida being a senior officer at the time should know that when it comes to legal instruments the Government will follow the advice of Attorney Generals Chambers and in this instance concerns were raised which needed attention. Noor Farida speaks as if I should solely listen to her and dismiss everyone else especially the Attorney General Chambers.
On the recent decision made by the current Government and Cabinet with regards to the Statute of Rome, perhaps the Government should have taken more time to explain the issue to the people.
I hope that my explanation above clarifies the matter.
YB DATO' SRI ANIFAH HAJI AMAN
2 MAY 2019
In your face, Noor Farida!
The FM and cabinet heard the legal opinion of Tan Sri Gani Patail. Why didn't Tommy and Prof Shad made noise then?
Prof Shad claimed the four lecturers lied, but why did he censored them from speaking in UiTM? Is he afraid his arguments could not hold water? His own lies exposed?
If nothing to worry, why Tommy lied to Agong?
The problem with these liberals is that they are rhetorical and tend to generalise.
But when it comes to putting their finger on problems, they cannot get to specific. See how shallow and merely scratching the surface is Tommy's argument at the Forum!?
If their arguments can hold up to any scrutiny, they would not have to resort to lying the Agong, Royal Council and Sultan Johor.
TMJ revealed that they said different things to different royal audience. Tommy Thomas withheld information from Royal Council and outright lied to Sultan Johor.
When the royal parties seek alternative views of others, they resorted to character attack.
By nature, acadamics do not lie. Academics insistent on their rights to academic freedom will tell it as they see it.
Between the Forum on Rome Statute and the four lecturers, the Forum has only one professor, nevertheless quite an authority, and merely a students voice.
Some politicians and more so Malaysian liberal activists lie incessantly. The lawyers and activists are people with agenda thus skewed by their personal belief.
Back to the gathering tomorrow.
The gathering tomorrow is also called the gathering to defend the sovereignty of Islam.
It will be quite appropriate that it be held two days before ramadhan for Muslims to spend the month reflecting on the situation of the ummah under the failed state of Mahathir Mohamed.
The main trust of tomorrow's gathering will be on issues threatening the status of Islam as the religion of the federation and actions of PH, including Minister in charge of Islamic affair under PM Department that is compromising it.
Then there is the Rome Statute. It is important to continue to cause against Rome Statute because the Foreign Minister who ratify without getting PM and cabinet clearance is believed to let the withdrawal dateline on June 1st lapse.
Saifuddin is the most idiotic Kolet to ever left Kuala Kangsar. He is stupid but arrogantly believe he is right and intellectually superior.
Thread Adib issue carefully
Justice for fireman Muhammad Adib campaign was given prominence too.
The manner the Inquest is going it is meets the suspicion that it is a Tommy Thomas manouvre to hold back police investigation on the Seafield Temple ruckus.
The DPP coordinating the Inquest oddly made his affidavit submission before witness have completed making their testimonies.
Apparently, it is allowable under the law but not the norm. However, the Inquest looks likely to end up inconclusive in the same outcome as the Teoh Beng Hock inquest.
Adib being beaten up was established. There is the possibility he was knocked by the firetruck vehicle. However, the cause of death remain a mystery.
The Inquest is made complicated by the UKM forensic expert, Dr Shahrom who seemed to have a personal vendetta against his two former students and government forensic experts.
Dr Shahrom is of the view Adib died from the beating, but his attitude may result in his view not able to hold up.
The Adib issue have to be thread carefully. The Inquest is still on-going.
Finally, issues of UEC, PPSMI and ICERD. Language issue not forte and of interest. ICERD have been covered before.