Page 1 of 3

首名部落客被控!

Posted: 10-05-08 Sat 11:05 am
by 老黄
据报道,《今日马来西亚》(Malaysia Today)主编,拉惹柏特拉(Raja Petra Kamaruddin)因为在2008年4月25日在其网站发表题为《把杀害阿旦杜亚的凶手送入地狱》(Let's Send Altantuya's Murderer to Hell)的文章而被提控。八打灵再也地庭将此案订在今年10月6日至10月10日开审。

拉惹是因为在文章中点名副首相纳吉夫妇涉及阿旦杜亚命案,而遭警方援引《1948年煽动法令》起诉。他也是首名在煽动法令下被提控的部落客。

拉惹一度因为拒绝交保而被送入双溪毛糯监狱扣押。直到5月9日,在其妻子玛丽娜李代办好一切保释手续后,才保释出外候审。

有关事件的前后经过,拉惹本人在出狱后便有交待:

http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/cont ... w/7156/84/

Posted: 03-06-08 Tue 11:45 pm
by 老黄

Posted: 17-07-08 Thu 10:04 pm
by 老黄
[转贴]《独立新闻在线》
http://www.merdekareview.com/news.php?n=7219

成首名被控刑事诽谤部落客
拉惹柏特拉拒表态是否认罪
■日期/Jul 17, 2008 ■时间/10:34:45 am
■新闻/家国风云 ■作者/本刊陈慧思

【本刊陈慧思撰述】擅揭内幕的《今日马来西亚》主编拉惹柏特拉被政府提控刑事诽谤副首相纳吉的妻子罗斯玛等三人,成了我国首名被控刑事诽谤的部落客!

拉惹柏特拉(Raja Petra Kamaruddin)在6月18日立下法定声明(Statutory Declaration),宣称罗斯玛曾在蒙古女子阿尔丹杜雅命案现场见证这宗谋杀案,而在阿尔丹杜雅身上放置炸弹者是C4炸弹专家、代上校阿兹布永(Aziz Buyong);此外,罗丝玛的随扈,即阿兹布永的妻子诺哈雅蒂(Norhayati)也在现场。

拉惹柏特拉今早10时被传召到吉隆坡警察总部问话,约11时,他的两名代表律师嘉亚詹德拉(Jaya Chandra)及亚曼吉星(Amanjit Singh Sidhu)步出警局,告诉在场驻守的记者,警方已逮捕拉惹柏特拉,且随即将在首都大使路的吉隆坡推事庭援引《刑事法典》第500条款(刑事诽谤)提控他;如果被判罪名成立,刑罚是最长两年监禁或罚款,或两者兼施。

在同一罪名下被控三项控状的拉惹柏特拉三度拒绝回应是否认罪,且一度拒绝接受交保候审,只愿意接受个人担保(personal bond)。最终推事纳斯兰(Nasran Mohd Sham)裁决让拉惹柏特拉以马币两千元交保候审,经妻子及律师一番劝告后,拉惹柏特拉终于同意交保候审。

上午11时30分,拉惹柏特拉被押到吉隆坡法院,记者在中午12时走入推事庭时,他神情淡漠地坐在法庭内,见到记者走入时还牵起嘴角跟记者打了个眼色。开庭时,拉惹柏特拉则被安排坐在犯人栏内。

开庭后,法庭职员逐一念读三项控状,第一项控状是诽谤罗斯玛、第二项则是诽谤代上校阿兹布永、第三项则是诽谤诺哈雅蒂,随之问拉惹柏特拉是否认罪。一般上被告的答复只有“认罪”或“不认罪”,但行事每每出人意表的拉惹柏特拉三度被问是否认罪时,一概回答:“我拒绝回应,因为这个控状含有恶意(I refuse to respond with a plea on grounds that the charges are both defective and mala fide)。”

由于拉惹柏特拉拒绝表态,主控官安森查尔斯(DPP Anselm Charles Fernandis)试图诠释为“不认罪”,要求推事庭审讯;不过,拉惹柏特拉当庭高声说:“我不是不认罪,我是拒绝回应控诉!”他还说,假设他的代表律师代他回应控状,他将撤换律师,自己抗辩。

安森查尔斯告诉推事庭,根据《刑事程序法典》第173(C)条款,即使被告拒绝对控状表态,或没有表态,推事庭仍可开庭审讯。他也建议推事庭结合三项控状一起审讯。

此案另一名主控官阿米尔(DPP Amir Nasruddin)。柏特拉的四人律师团成员是嘉亚詹德拉(Jaya Chandra)、亚曼吉星(Amanjit Singh Sidhu)、哈里斯(Haris Ibrahim)和林立迎。

接着,安森查尔斯建议以马币一万元让拉惹柏特拉保释候审,其代表律师嘉亚詹德拉反建议马币五千元,拉惹柏特拉随即插口说:“我要开除我的律师,我要自辩!我反对受保,没有必要交保!”

年轻的推事要他放慢速度,因为他来不及把他的话记录下来;推事还斥责拉惹柏特拉不尊重他,拉惹柏特拉即刻回应说,没有不尊重推事之意,只是他一开始就以准确英语清楚表达了拒绝回应控诉的想法(按:我还是第一次听到mala fide这个词,不诚实,含有恶意的意思)

一阵纷扰之后,拉惹柏特拉的代表律师嘉亚詹德拉要求推事休庭。经主控官和推事的同意,推事庭在下午一时休庭约30分钟,随之才又开庭商讨保释一事。

休庭时,拉惹柏特拉告诉其律师,他拒绝接受保释,只愿意接受个人担保(personal bond);站在犯人栏内的他盛气凌人地说:“没有妥协的余地,根据我的方法,否则就不干。”(Absolutely no compromise. My way or no way)

下午1时30分重新开庭时,詹德拉告诉推事柏特拉拒绝保释,只愿意根据《刑事程序法典》第387(2)条款,要求推事批准无需担保人的个人担保。

詹德拉告诉推事,两个月前拉惹柏特拉被控煽动罪时也拒绝保释,因而在双溪毛糯监狱呆了三天,扣留期间他拒绝饮食,需要劳动监狱高层联络其妻子,要她到监狱劝告他接受保释;扣留期间,拉惹柏特拉的人身安全也受到威胁。

他补充,现在推事需要斟酌的是原则的问题,而非保费多少的问题。拉惹柏特拉说这项提控具有恶意,他质疑的是,为何警方援引《刑事程序法典》第112条款向他录口供,可是却援引《刑事法典》第203条款调查此案,且警方出示的报案书也注明第203条款?最终为何警方又援引《刑事法典》第500条款提控他上庭?

《刑事法典》第203条款注明,任何人知道或有理由相信一宗罪案发生了,可是却提供虚假情报,可被罚监禁最长两年或罚款,或两者兼施。

詹德拉提出以上各项论据,要求推事批准拉惹柏特拉个人担保,但主控官查尔斯反驳说,推事该斟酌的是保释金数额,詹德拉提出的论点与此程序毫无关联。

詹德拉再站起说,拉惹柏特拉是我国著名部落客,他也和警方充分合作,今早他还先于负责盘问的警官抵达警局。

也是拉惹柏特拉四人律师团成员之一的林立迎也站起补充,拉惹柏特拉有胆立下法定声明,就已作好上庭准备,因此拉惹柏特拉未来没有现身法庭的问题并不存在,他只是基于个人安全理由拒绝保外候审。

查尔斯站起反驳说,此案并不适合以个人担保,因为此案因被牵连的人,而成了一项严重的指控。他也指出,第387(2)条款需与第387(1)条款同读,第 387(1)条款注明惟有在没有逮捕令的情况下逮捕嫌犯,387(2)条款才可以同读,而拉惹柏特拉是警方以逮捕令逮捕归案的。为此,他坚持,推事不应批准拉惹柏特拉个人担保。

詹德拉指出,第387(1)条款注明,被告在没有逮捕令下被捕的情况下,法庭可以批准保释,而第387(2)条款则是说,法庭有权决定是否批准保释、不批准保释,或批准个人担保。

也是吉隆坡泗岩末区国会议员的林立迎也说,英国、印度等法庭皆有权决定是否批准个人担保,而保释的用意只在于确保被告在审讯时出庭,可是这个问题并不存在。他重申:“拉惹柏特拉有胆立法定声明,就有胆上庭。”

推事听了双方的辩词之后,在2时05分宣布休庭,接着在2时12分重新开庭时聆听陈词,最后裁决拉惹柏特拉可以马币两千元保释,过堂日期订在8月15日

拉惹柏特拉听了判决之后,还是一脸昂然傲气。他步出犯人栏时,还交出双手,作状要警察为他戴上手铐。一度拒绝交保的他向律师和警察说:“如果交保的原因是确保他出庭,那么把他送进双溪毛糯监狱扣留岂非更有保障?”无论如何,经妻子和律师苦劝,终于同意保外候审,令众人松了一口气。

Posted: 15-08-08 Fri 2:52 pm
by 老黄
要看过堂结果的,却来了支插曲:

[转贴]《当今大马》
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/87833

法庭上当面递交诉状被拒
沙菲宜怒斥柏特拉是懦夫
李永杰 | 8月15日 上午11点29分

著名部落客拉惹柏特拉被警方提控诽谤的案件,今早在吉隆坡推事庭过堂,案件还未开始,却迎来了一名“不速之客”,即前日起诉拉惹柏特拉诽谤的著名律师沙菲宜阿都拉(Muhammad Shafee Abdullah),并在法庭上演了一出“闹剧”。

拉惹柏特拉是被警方提控诽谤副首相夫人罗斯玛、C4炸弹专家兼代上校阿兹布勇(Aziz Buyong)以及罗斯玛的随扈诺哈雅蒂(Norhayati),触犯《刑事法典》第500条文下的刑事诽谤罪名。

接到今日案件审讯消息的沙菲宜,今日一大早就到了位于吉隆坡大使路的刑事推事庭等候拉惹柏特拉,以便亲自把其诽谤案的庭令与诉状交给柏特拉。

当拉惹柏特拉於上午11点进入法庭后,沙菲宜马上起身拿着有关文件要交给拉惹柏特拉,但是后者却拒绝接受。沙菲宜一怒之下,把有关文件丢掷在地上,并且对拉惹柏特拉抛下一句话说,“已经交给你了(you are served)”。

不过,拉惹柏特拉依然不理睬沙菲宜,径自走向观众席坐下来,而心有不甘的沙菲宜却拿起相机,猛拍拉惹柏特拉,然后才坐回本身的位子。

沙菲宜是在前天入禀吉隆坡高庭,成功获得法庭发出单方面庭令,谕令拉惹柏特拉撤下3篇涉嫌诽谤的文章,并且公布其消息来源与文章留言的访客身份。

较早时,当沙菲宜在法庭上等候时也向记者痛骂拉惹柏特拉,指责后者是一名骗子和懦夫。

他认为,拉惹柏特拉早已知道被他起诉诽谤的案件,但是却不敢做出任何回应,不但没有在家,也没有接听电话。

他挑战拉惹柏特拉亲自出庭,应对被他起诉诽谤的案件,否则后者就是一名懦夫。

“无论需要需要多久时间,我都会坚持起诉他。引述我这句话,拉惹柏特拉是一名骗子,他不单止对我,也在其他案件骗人,我将会做出证明。”

“他找错对象了,我不会像其他政治人物有所顾忌,我不一样,我只是一名普通人。”

另一方面,丢在地上的文件却在推事庭审讯结束后,被发现不知所踪。记者向出庭观众询问也没有得到确定的答案,有者宣称沙菲宜的人拿走了。

但沙菲宜在随后受访时却断然否认自己拿回了文件,并斩钉截铁地宣称,“是拉惹柏特拉的人拿了。是三个印度人。我还有拍照。”

对于沙菲宜宣称文件被拉惹柏特拉的人拿走一事,后者的代表律师阿玛吉(Amarjit Singh Sidhu)在较后受访时则宣称,不知道文件到那里了。

阿玛吉在推事庭结束后表示,沙菲宜在法庭内递交控状文件的做法是不恰当的,有藐视法庭之嫌。

“文件决不能够在法庭内呈交的,应该在法庭外,这不是正当的程序。如果程序正当,我们是会接受的。但绝不是在法庭内。”

询及是否对沙菲宜采取法律行动,阿玛吉表示,他们将研究后才做决定。

相对于7月17日上庭时,有惊人发言和动作的拉惹柏特拉(左图左)今日显得安静和冷淡。面对沙菲宜的咄咄逼人,他反而没有任何的反应。

他地庭审讯结束后受访时表示,法庭内不是一个递交控状的地方,应该在法庭外进行,否则有藐视法庭之嫌。

另一方面,他一再强调,事情应该交由律师来处理,他不要讲太多话。他笑着指出,他的妻子和律师都已事先警告他,在法庭上必须乖乖坐着,闭嘴不出声。

“否则他们(律师)要炒我的鱿鱼。上次是我要炒掉他们,现在是他们要炒掉我。我的老婆也会罢工一个月,那我就惨了。”

推事庭推事纳兹兰莫哈末山(Nazran Mohd Sham)今日在检控官要求下,并且辩方律师无异议的情况下,决定将案件移交地庭审理。

检方提出的理由是,这些案件涉及公众利益,拉惹柏特拉提出的宣誓书涉及了有名的公众人物。

地庭在中午12点左右开审,法官默哈末瑟克里(Hj Mohamad Sekeri bin Mamat)宣布三宗案件将订于11月24和25日一并审理。

对于诽谤副首相夫人罗斯玛、C4炸弹专家兼代上校阿兹布勇(Aziz Buyong)以及罗斯玛的随扈诺哈雅蒂(Norhayati),触犯《刑事法典》第500条文下的刑事诽谤的控罪,拉惹柏特拉重复了上次在地庭的立场,即“我拒绝表态,因为这些控状皆是无效及有恶意(mala fide)。”不过,这次他表现得十分平淡,毫无上次的激昂情绪。

沙菲宜在地庭审讯后再次接受媒体访问时,否认自己有藐视法庭之嫌,强调自己并非在法庭开审的时候递交文件和拍照。

“我是在法庭空间(court room)内交给他,但是那里不是法庭(court)。当时并没有案件在审理,所谓的法庭是指有法官和文员出席的情况。”

也是人权委员会委员的他指出,自己所以在法庭内递交控状是因为,在其他地方,拉惹柏特拉必然会躲避他。

接着,沙菲宜也再次厉声指控拉惹柏特拉是懦夫,逃避接受和面对控状,并且提出一些废话来掩饰自己没有证据支持所言,

“他并不是要保护消息来源,而是在保护自己的屁股。该有人告诉他停止讲废话。我会曝露这一些东西,让他在地上爬。”

“他是一个骗子,只会在部落格骗人,他不是什么新闻工作者。若在美国,他会被视为一个媒体恶棍。”

沙菲宜甚至向记者喊话,要报章媒体大胆地报导他所讲的话,若发生任何诉讼问题,他将负责给予媒体赔偿。

Posted: 15-08-08 Fri 3:07 pm
by 老黄
Raja Petra’s defamation case transferred to High Court

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 15 — The case of blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, who is charged with defaming Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and two others in his statutory declaration, was transferred from the magistrate's court to the Sessions Court today.

Magistrate Nazran Mohd Sham allowed deputy public prosecutor Amir Nasruddin's application for the transfer on the ground that it involved a well-known personality.

Besides the deputy prime minister's wife, Raja Petra is also alleged to have defamed acting Colonel Abdul Aziz Buyong and his wife, Colonel Norhayati Hassan.

Raja Petra is charged with committing the three offences at civil High Court 5 on the fourth floor of the Court Complex in Jalan Duta here at 10.25am on June18.

If convicted, he faces up to two years in jail or a fine, or both, on each charge under section 500 of the Penal Code. — Bernama

Posted: 15-08-08 Fri 3:11 pm
by 老黄
老黄 wrote:要看过堂结果的,却来了支插曲:

法庭上当面递交诉状被拒
沙菲宜怒斥柏特拉是懦夫
李永杰 | 8月15日 上午11点29分

这个插曲让我好奇,去追看到底是什么事儿。

[转贴]The Malaysian Insider
http://themalaysianinsider.com.my/index ... ne-stature

Shafee latest challenger to RPK’s online stature
ANALYSIS

AUG 14 — Nearly every day last week, Datuk Shafee Abdullah had to field calls from friends, colleagues and fellow lawyers. All the conversations started in the same vein, sans the small talk, with a question: have you read the articles on you by Raja Petra Kamarudin?

After dismissing the articles — which alleged that he was the hidden hand behind the sodomy case against Opposition icon Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim — the prominent lawyer promised to enter unfamiliar territory to clear his name and turn the tables on the blogger who runs the popular website Malaysia Today.

He delivered half of his promise yesterday by seeking and obtaining a rare order from the High Court, so rare that lawyers could not remember the last time any journalist/blogger in Malaysia was directed by the courts to reveal the source or sources of his reports. The order for Raja Petra to reveal the identities of readers who commented on the offending reports is unprecedented.

There have been cases in the United Kingdom and United States where bloggers have been ordered to reveal the identities of those who made defamatory postings on websites. But not in Malaysia.

Justice Datuk Tee Ah Sing also ordered Raja Petra to remove the articles titled "Shafee Abdullah: Sodomologist Extraordinaire''; "Money, Power and Sex: What Motivates Man''; and "The Real Dalang Behind the Anwar Sodomy Allegation.''

His order asking Raja Petra to reveal the sources and identities of those posted comments on his blog will have far-reaching consequences, and could signal a move by the courts here to spell out clearly the boundaries for commentary and comments on blogs and websites. It also comes at a time when government ministers and officials have been calling for closer monitoring of bloggers and tougher action against defamatory articles on the Internet.

Tee's decision will provoke a gush of criticisms in blogosphere, where the prevalent view is that the Bill of Guarantees under the Multimedia Super Corridor provides a shield against any censorship or restriction against the freedom of speech. Lawyers have noted that the laws of defamation apply equally in any sphere, as long as the key ingredients in a defamation charge are made out.

They also believe that Shafee is relying on the Norwich Pharmacal principle to compel Raja Petra to reveal his sources and the identities of those who posted allegedly defamatory comments about him. In 1974, the House of Lords devised the principle to compel individuals or companies to reveal the identities of infringers so that the aggrieved party could take action against them.

By taking this route, Shafee is going for broke and is inviting a fight from Raja Petra, who already has a clutch of court appearances before him. In a statement to the newspapers yesterday, he said: "I have not seen anything more defamatory than what this man has written. None of what he said is true.

"Even someone with a pea-sized brain would realise the preposterousness of the stories Raja Petra has posted on his blog.''

These comments are unlikely to force the blogger into submission. Indeed, it could embolden him and force a standoff.

In the past, he has accused Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak and his wife of being involved in the murder of Mongolian model Altantutya Shaariibuu; has accused the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan of being involved in criminal activities and the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail of wrongdoing in the first sodomy case against Anwar in 1998.

He has been charged with criminal defamation for alleging that Datin Rosmah Mansor and two others were present when C4 explosives were used on Altantuya, and has said that the prospect of going to jail does not frighten him.

It is difficult to envisage him yielding to the High Court order and revealing the sources of the three articles or the identities of those who posted comments on his blog by Saturday. It will be seen as nothing less than a capitulation for someone who has built a reputation of taking on all comers.

Posted: 15-08-08 Fri 3:16 pm
by 老黄
被视为疯子的人的回应:

http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/cont ... /11393/84/

Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said it very aptly last month when the allegation of sodomy against Anwar Ibrahim first broke. Of course he will deny it, said Abdullah. No one will admit it. That would be the normal reaction of anyone being accused of something.

Okay, that was not exactly the way he put it but he said, more or less, this: it is normal for someone accused of something to deny it and that no one would admit it. And that is exactly my response to Shafee Abdullah as well: would he admit it and would it not be normal for him to deny it?

He knows what I am saying is true and that is why he is demanding that I reveal my sources of information. It is actually six sources of information to be exact. Three of these sources are Datuks who were in that very meeting room in Shafee’s office that I wrote about. They saw the whiteboard and listened to the conversation between Aziz and his three or four police officers. The whiteboard had Anwar Ibrahim’s and my name on it with notes, charts and scribblings below it. And Aziz and his police officers mentioned Anwar’s and my name many times with sodomy the main topic of discussion.

I also have other witnesses who told me how Shafee bragged about how he is behind the sodomy allegation against Anwar and about how he is going to fix Anwar up. He also bragged that he is going to be appointed the next Attorney-General and that he will be selling off his law firm once that happens. These same people even wanted to give me the names of all the women -- and it was one hell of a long list -- whom Shafee is screwing around with but I told them that I am not interested in that part of his misdeeds because that is between him and the women he is screwing.

These informers know what they saw and heard. And I too know what they told me. And whatever I wrote about Shafee is the gospel and no court order is going to transform a devil into an angel. That I am very clear about, as clear as my name is Raja Petra Bin Raja Kamarudin.

The Malaysian Insider piece above also said:

In the past, he has accused Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak and his wife of being involved in the murder of Mongolian model Altantutya Shaariibuu; has accused the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan of being involved in criminal activities and the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail of wrongdoing in the first sodomy case against Anwar in 1998. He has been charged with criminal defamation for alleging that Datin Rosmah Mansor and two others were present when C4 explosives were used on Altantuya, and has said that the prospect of going to jail does not frighten him,

Well, Anwar Ibrahim has already lodged a police report about the IGP and AG fabricating evidence against him in 1998. Did they charge Anwar with the crime of making a false police report? Furthermore, Anwar also furnished the evidence to support his police report. Anwar even called a press conference to reveal the evidence and to announce the police report he made. So, is what I wrote a lie?

With regards to the IGP story, I attached Statutory Declarations from half a dozen or so senior police officers plus another two from underworld bosses that confirmed the links between the IGP and the crime syndicate headed by BK Tan. We are talking about Statutory Declarations here, not idle conversation and whispers in the night. If these six police officers and the two underworld bosses lied and signed false Statutory Declarations why were they not charged like I was when I too signed a Statutory Declaration? I have actually seen many other documents as well but I decided not to publish them because I want to protect the source. But at least these documents helped convince me that the IGP is guilty as hell and not a victim of slander.

The same goes for the allegation against Rosmah and the husband and wife Lt Cols as well. Initially, the police wanted to charge me for the crime of making a false Statutory Declaration. Then, during my two-hour interrogation, when the police realised that I do really have reliable sources as I claim I have, they decided to drop the false declaration charge and instead charge me with criminal defamation.

The police and AG realised that if I am charged for making a false declaration I would be able to produce witnesses who will testify that they did give me information based on Military Intelligence reports -- which was the basis of my Statutory Declaration. This frightened them and they backed off.

“How well do you know this informer?” the police asked me.

“45 years. Longer than I know my wife who I have known for only 40 years,” I replied.

I caught the police glancing at each other. They then tried squeezing more information out of me such as the identity of the informers(s) but they got nothing. I then challenged the police to charge me for the crime of making a false declaration and then the informer(s) will come forward to take the stand. That will not only demolish their entire case against me but the truth will also surface and my story will be confirmed.

I goaded the police and dared them to take me to court. “Charge me!” I told the police with a cheeky smile on my face. “Charge me and my informers will come forward. That will be the end of Najib. He will never become Prime Minister.”

And that is the very reason why they dropped the false declaration charge and instead charged me for criminal defamation. They want to make sure that I would have no opportunity to bring my witnesses to court. In a charge of false declaration I will need my witnesses to testify that they in fact did give me information. The truth of the information is not that crucial. It is whether you were, as you claim, informed. In a criminal defamation charge it no longer matters whether you told the truth or you lied or whether someone did or did not give you that information. Even if you told the truth and someone did give you that information you would still be guilty.

Smart people these police and AG, are they not? And that is the same reason why they charged me under the Sedition Act. Under the Sedition Act it also does not matter whether you told the truth or you lied. Even if you told the truth you are still guilty -- as what happened to Marina Yusoff when the court ruled that the truth has nothing to do with the matter. Even if you told the truth it is still sedition.

Can you see how they carefully chose the charges so that they need not prove I lied? I also will have no opportunity to prove that I told the truth, as the truth is not material to the charge. The charge is about whether I did say or write all those things and not about whether there is any truth in what I said or wrote.

In short, they can send me to jail for telling the truth as long as they can establish that I did say or write whatever I am being charged for saying or writing. They hope that once I am convicted then the public perception would be I have lied because most people would not comprehend I am being sent to jail for telling the truth.

So I am not going to bother accepting any challenges to prove what I wrote or to reveal my sources. Even if I produce 100 witnesses who will swear on their mother’s grave that what I said and wrote is true I will still end up in jail. And if I am going to be sent to jail anyway, why sacrifice my Deep Throats? Once I expose even just one of my Deep Throats no one will come forward any more after this.

For example, one of my Deep Throats, who is a very senior Umno man and who can be regarded as one of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s advisors, told me that all my allegations in the Statutory Declaration are true.

“What you said in your SD is true,” he told me. “Yes, Rosmah was there when they blew Altantuya up and Najib has been fucking Altantuya. We all know about it. Most Umno people know about it, even the PM.”

So what do I do with this information? Sign another Statutory Declaration and name my informer? If I do, will he ever see me again, let alone tell me all those things? That’s right, they trust me enough to tell me all those things because they know I will go to jail rather than finger them. And that is why I am able to get information no one else can.

Oh, by the way, the Military Intelligence boys told me not to worry. “We will never let them put you in jail,” they said. “We will make sure that we will do anything it takes to keep you out of jail.”

Hey, as I told the police in my cautioned statement under Section 112, I have known my wife for only 40 years. I have known these people for 45. Would I not trust them with my life? Okay, maybe not with my life, but at least with my freedom.

Okay, so now let the games begin. You wanna tango, let’s tango. But this might be your last tango if you’re not careful because, for sure, I do not plan for it to be my last, as I have many more revelations to offer the Malaysian public.

What’s that? You think I am taunting them? You can bet your sweet ninny I am.

Posted: 27-08-08 Wed 8:26 pm
by 老黄
[转贴]《当今大马》
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/88695

政府违背不过滤互联网承诺?
多媒体委会封锁《今日大马》
8月27日 傍晚6点15分

马来西亚通讯与多媒体委员会(MCMC)罕有的下令,封锁著名异议网站《今日马来西亚》(Malaysia-Today),理由是该网站一些留言触及煽动成分。

通讯与多媒体委员会首席执行员莫哈末沙里尔(Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi)是在今午向《当今大马》证实,当局已指示所有供应商封锁《今日马来西亚》网站。

他解释,当局封锁《今日马来西亚》的原因,是因为该委员会发现有关网站的一些留言触及敏感课题,并且具有煽动成分。

截至今日傍晚7点,我国主要互联网服务供应商包括马电讯(TMnet)、明讯和时光(Time)都已经封锁《今日马来西亚》网站。目前只能Jaring用户能够登录该网站。

《今日马来西亚》相信是第一个遭到对付的非色情网站,不禁令人质疑,政府是否违反不过滤互联网的承诺。大马政府在推行多媒体超级走廊时,曾保证不会过滤互联网。

《今日马来西亚》的网域名(domain name)—http://www.malaysia-today.net,已被列入封锁的黑名单,马电讯用户从昨日傍晚开始就无法登陆该网站。

不过,上述用户依然可以通过《今日马来西亚》的IP位址,或替代网址登录。

《今日马来西亚》网站是由著名部落客拉惹柏特拉负责,后者最近卷入多宗诽谤案官司。

莫哈末沙里尔表示,该委员会是因为收到许多公众关于该网站的投诉,因此指示所有互联网服务供应商封锁《今日马来西亚》网站。

询及当局封锁《今日马来西亚》网站的行动,是否违背政府的互联网自由承诺,莫哈末沙里尔表示,此事可以拥有不同的诠释。

“我们是受到1998年通讯与多媒体法令的管辖,允许我们采取防范措施,并且劝告执照持有者(例如互联网服务供应商),关于特定服务使用者违反国家法律的情况。”

在该法令第263条文下,所有执照持有者必须尽力避免其设施遭到利用,以进行抵触国家法律的行动。

他说,多媒体委员会将与《今日马来西亚》及其他部落客沟通,以遵守“部落格操守”。

“我们不是反对部落格,但是我们希望有操守的撰写部落格。”

另一方面,拉惹柏特拉指出,他不清楚该网站被封锁的理由。

“我不想去提出抗议,你希望我怎么做?你认为他们会听吗?”

首相阿都拉在308大选后曾经公开承认,国阵忽视了“网络战争”是本届大选的最大败笔,导致面临有史以来最大的选举败绩。

此外,根据英文网站《马来西亚内幕者》日前报道,数名内阁部长与高官,包括副首相纳吉在内上周开会决定,对部落格展开严厉行动。

政府发现每年共有40万人登记为新选民,假设来届全国大选在5年后举行,届时将有200万名新选民,当中大部分将从网络与部落格获取资讯,而并非主流媒体。因此,国阵政府决定未雨绸缪对付部落格,以免部落格在网上散播不确实的消息。

该网站引述一名匿名政府官员的话说,政府内已经达至共识,必须要确保部落格与网站业者对言论负责任,并且将对那些诽谤与散播不实消息者采取法律行动。

“否则所有人将可以任何做出各种没有根据的指责。有关当局担心,如果坐视不理,国阵的公信力将越来越低。”

Posted: 27-08-08 Wed 8:46 pm
by 老黄
[转贴]The Malaysian Insider
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com.my/i ... phere-next

Government to target blogosphere next

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 26 — Next up: a crackdown on bloggers. This possibility looms large after the government reached a sober assessment that it could all end in tears for the Barisan Nasional at the next general election if tough action is not taken to counter allegations on the Net and hold owners of blogs accountable.

This conclusion was reached during a meeting last week involving several Cabinet ministers and senior government officials, including Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

Government officials noted that some 400,000 new voters are registered each year. Assuming that the next polls are in five years, there would be two million new voters the next time the BN seeks a fresh mandate. A large chunk of these two million voters are likely to obtain their news and information from websites and blogs, and not from the mainstream media.

Several ministers noted that if the government followed its current policy of allowing allegations by bloggers to go unchallenged, this would create the perception that the information being posted is accurate.

"There is a growing consensus in government that those who run websites and blogs should be held accountable and this means that laws should be used to take action against those who defame and spread disinformation.

"If not, we are going to have a situation where everyone will be free to make all sorts of allegations with no downside at all. There is a fear that the trust level with BN would be very low if nothing is done, '' said a senior government official familiar with details of the meeting.

The prevailing mood in the government against the alternative media is one of frustration. After decades of being able to control newspapers and television stations through a raft of legislation, government officials and politicians are finding that their tools are useless in setting boundaries for new media.

At last week's meeting, an official of the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) explained that the authorities have not come down hard on websites and bloggers because Section 3 of the Communications and Multimedia Act prohibits any form of censorship.

But government officials corrected him and said that the guarantee that the Internet would not be censored did not preclude legal action from being taken against bloggers for defamation and sedition.

They pointed out that the Singapore government had hauled several bloggers to court for a series of offences and suggested that the Malaysian government should follow suit. In the aftermath of Election 2008, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said that the government paid a heavy price by allowing accusations and reports on the Internet to go unchallenged.

He said that the BN underestimated the power of the Internet and committed a serious misjudgment by relying on the mainstream media in the run-up to the general election. His comments resulted in the Information Ministry reaching out to some prominent bloggers and giving them some air-time on television but by and large the relationship between the alternative media and the government has remained testy.

In recent months, Raja Petra Kamaruddin, the country's best-known political blogger, has had a running battle with Najib and his wife, implicating both of them in the October 2006 murder of Mongolian model Altantuya Shariibuu. The DPM has also been on the receiving end of other damaging allegations.

His supporters in Umno have been pushing for a more hardnosed approach in dealing with bloggers and operators of news portals, arguing that the softer touch by the Abdullah administration has resulted in daily attacks on ministers and BN politicians.

Critics of the government said that instead of focusing on bloggers and the alternative media, they should strive for more accountability and transparency, and remove the shackles on the mainstream media.

Posted: 28-08-08 Thu 10:04 pm
by 苏政毅
指部落格诽谤需面对法律制裁
赛哈密支持封锁《今日大马》

郭史光庆 | 8月28日 下午1点52分
syed hamid albar经管负责互联网的能讯部长沙兹曼尚未开腔,但是内政部长赛哈密(左图)却率先通讯与多媒体委员会护航,力挺委员会封锁著名异议网站《今日马来西亚》(Malaysia-Today)的决定,辩称说政府仅是运用合法权力禁止诽谤言论。

他指出,法律面前人人平等,只要是发出诽谤性言论,就算是在虚拟世界也必须受到法律的制裁,加上委员会已多次发出警告,对方却屡劝不听。

多次发出警告却屡劝不听

malaysia today website 270808 “他们(委员会)是在法令下行使权力,我认为最重要的就是法律面前人人平等,就算是操作网站与部落格都必须受法律限制。”

“我想我们没有意图要禁止公众提供资讯与展开辩论的自由与权利,但是却有人发表诽谤与污蔑性的内容,因此我想(委员会)运用其权力来维持国内的法治与秩序之很自然的。”

“若他们认为有必要,就让他们采取行动。我想已给予这么多的机会与警告,但是却没有受到遵守。”

赛哈密今早在国会走廊接受记者询问时如是表示。

不过,《今日马来西亚》已经安排了替代网址(http://mt.harapanmalaysia.com/2008/)及公布IP位址(http://202.75.62.114/2008/),让读者能够绕过多媒体委员会的封锁,继续登陆这个以踢爆内幕而著称的政治网站。

不属权限新闻部长不评论

malaysia today blocked by tm net proof 270808 另外,新闻部长阿末沙比里仄在国会走廊受询时,以此事不属于其部门权限为由,不愿评论。

“那是不同部门的决定,我不想评论,我想他们有自己的理由。”

新闻部在308大选后一改过去与部落客对抗的作风,积极与部落客进来联系,包括邀请他们上国营电视台节目接受访问。

受询及封锁《今日马来西亚》的举动是否与新闻部的政策有所违背时,阿末沙比里仄也没有正面回应。

“我们还是有很多法律,由不同的部门所执行,每个人都必须遵守。我不是说我的部门比较开放,人们就可以触犯任何法。”

他表示,自己也是从手机短讯知道委员会的决定。

管辖通讯与多媒体委员会的能讯部长沙兹曼目前身处巴厘岛,明日才会回国。

其副手约瑟沙冷(Joseph Salang)今早在国会走廊透露上述消息。他表示,自己对封锁一事不并知情。

纳兹里:闭门谈敏感课题

首相署部长纳兹里则指出,人们在讨论敏感课题时必须守法,应该通过闭门的方式进行。

他在国会走廊受询及《今日马来西亚》网站被封锁时,引述律师公会早前受到激烈反对而流产的“改教论坛”,并形容律师公会针对改教这项敏感课题进行公开论坛,是“愚蠢与笨蛋”的做法。

纳兹里表示,律师公会不是穆斯林因此不理解他们的感受,不理解该论坛会伤害穆斯林的感受。

摘自:http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/88734