Monday, 20 February 2017

Sejauh mana anda memahami Hudud (re RUU35) ?

Hope my readers will give this a good read on the RUU355, it will be worth your while:

Satu forum yang telah dianjurkan oleh Angkatan Amanah Merdeka Malaysia (AAMM) bertajuk 'Sejauh Mana Anda Memahami Hudud' di Dewan Rumah Kelab Persatuan Alumni Universiti Malaya (PAUM) pada Ahad 12 Februari 2017 dimana forum tersebut telah menyaksikan beberapa hujahan yang menyokong dan juga menentang RUU355.

Antara panel forum tersebut adalah; Mufti Perlis Dr Mohd Asri Zainual Abidin, Pensyarah Undang-undang Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) Profesor Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi dan juga Pensyarah Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) Profesor Dr Ahmad Fauzi Abd Hamid.

Presiden PAS Abdul Hadi Awang sebelum ini telah membentangkan Rang Undang-Undang (RUU) Persendirian Pindaan Kuasa Dewan Rakyat bertujuan meminda Akta Mahkamah Syariah (Bidang Kuasa Jenayah) 1965.



PERLIS Mufti Datuk Dr Asri Zainul Abidin spoke bluntly at a recent forum on religion.

“Gossiping is a big sin in Islam but are there (syariah) laws against gossiping? Do you see the religious authorities sending officers out to haul up those who gossip?’’

He points out that while some things are haram (forbidden) and sinful in Islam, that does not mean that Allah demands for all of these to be punished in a court of law.

In the case of adultery, for example, he says, if there are only three witnesses of good character present and not four as required by the religion, the adulterer would have to be let off.

“Not all sins have to hauled up to court. The religion doesn’t ask us to go and check up on people, from room to room or car to car, asking for their surat nikah (marriage licence) to find out if they are married or not.’’

Citing another example, he says, a powerful and rich person who commits a crime might be able to afford a good lawyer who cleverly argues the case and gets it thrown out of court.

“But that doesn’t mean that because they got away with it in a court of law, they will get away with it in the Court of the Hereafter. God knows everything.

“Muslims believe we will be tried for all our sins. Drinking alcohol, adultery, stealing are all sins. When we die, we will have to face God and answer for whatever we did. There is no escape.’’

Dr Asri was speaking at the “How Much Do you Know About Hudud” forum organised by Angkatan Merdeka Malaysia.

Touching on PAS president Datuk Seri Dr Hadi Awang’s motion before Parliament for the amendments to the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction ) Act 355 (popularly referred to as RUU355), Dr Asri said there are concerns it is all part of a political game.

Dr Asri stresses that while the Quran and Sunnah (tradition of the Holy Prophet) are divine, the interpretations are not.

He points out that while hudud (Islamic Penal Code) is mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah, it is not spelt out in great detail with regards to the context and conditions.

So it was left to scholars to deliberate on these.

“Scholars do not always agree so they have different interpretations of things. So which interpretation should you favour? These are not divine.’’

On RUU355, Dr Asri says, the politicians supporting it keep saying it is not the hudud.

“If it is not hudud, then surely we Muslims are allowed to criticise and give our views. So why is it that whoever criticises RUU355 is labelled as going against Islam? How is it that if you oppose the amendments you are said to oppose Allah’s Laws?

“And what are Allah’s Laws? Does it mean that if you increase the penalty for an offence from RM5,000 to RM100,000 that it now becomes Allah’s Law?’’

Dr Asri says even within the country, there are differences from state to state in the way Islamic matters, including polygamy, is dealt with, “so we must be very careful about calling something ‘Allah’s Law’.’’

For him, discussion and debate are essential when looking into the dimension of punishment, because it is not only about implementation but also the conditions, the context, and suitability.

He points out that in the Quran, there is a verse, Surah Al Anfal, which talks about the spoils of war and how they should be distributed, with fighters entitled to their share of them too. But he points out that this is not implemented today, because even though it is in the Quran, the wars of today are different from those in the early days; and soldiers now are paid salaries and allowances.

“Defending the country is jihad (a noble struggle) but we don’t hear any political party in the country asking for a spoils of war law to be implemented because the context in today’s world is different.’’

In a jibe at PAS, he says, “tens of years ago’’ they used to label other Muslims who were not with them as “infidels’’, they described the Federal Constitution as a “Jahiliyah” Constitution (Constitution of Ignorance) and warned Muslims against wishing non-Muslims during their religious festivals because for them that was tantamount to leaving the Muslim faith.

But, he says, PAS has backpedalled now on what it said previously and today it says it upholds the Federal Constitution.

“Allah’s Law should never be politicised. It is difficult when political parties come in and play a role in what they deem is Islamic law.

“When religion is politicised, the discussion is no longer fresh and not the sort that can stimulate rational thinking and a healthy discourse.’’

Dr Asri questions: Why do Muslims have a mentality that says, in order to be Islamic the hand of someone who steals has to be amputated?

This kind of mentality is wrong, he says, adding that these kinds of Muslims understand Islam in a closed-off, secluded and non-holistic manner.

“It is like the IS (Islamic State) mentality, where they think of only punishing and not about developing the place.’’

For him, it is wrong to give the world the impression that justice in a Muslim country is served “when we cut off the hands of those who steal, whip those who commit adultery and punish those who drink alcohol’’ and that “this is what showcases the beauty of Islam’’.

Dr Asri says Islam is all about better welfare for the people, spiritual development, strengthening family bonds, and ensuring peace and harmony in society.

And he points out that the Government has already taken action to do a number of these, such as building schools and universities and giving people an education, which is something sought by the religion.

He says there are many things which could have been brought before Parliament, such as how to inculcate the beauty and mercy of Islam into education and the economy.

“But in tens of years in parliament, they (PAS) never even brought these up and focused instead on labelling other Muslims infidels, and having two imams during prayers (because they refused to be led in prayers by an Umno imam).”

He points out that Muslim countries with renowned scholars such as Egypt, Kuwait and Qatar have never discussed implementing hudud, and countries like Pakistan, Sudan and Nigeria that tried to implement it have stopped, because in today’s world, people and conditions are different.

He also says that in Islam there should never be double standards in implementing a law.

“I fear that a person who steals a car will get his hand amputated but a nobleman who steals millions will not get his hand amputated.’’

He questions what such a thing would do to the fabric of society and the image of Islam.

Dr Asri says if a Muslim faces amputation for a theft and non-Muslims do not, that would not help create harmony and peace within society because there are two sets of laws for the same crime.

He fears if such laws are enacted and implemented in an unjust manner, it will cause Muslims to leave the faith.

“Muslims don’t need this right now.

“There are many other issues that we should be looking into, such as the issue of good governance, the environment and corruption. We should also be looking at issues that help women, such as expediting divorce cases, because there are a number of cases where women in the midst of getting a divorce are left hanging for years without their cases being resolved. I think all these matters should be sorted out first otherwise people will feel that Islam is unjust to women.

“For me, if the amendments to RUU355 are not going to result in good, let us postpone them and focus on our priorities.’’

Read in full from TheStar here.



IT has been quite a busy week for those interested in the issue of amendments to the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965, commonly referred to as RUU355.

The week started with a “How Much Do you Know About Hudud” forum last Sunday with eminent speakers and people from both sides of the divide giving their views. On Thursday, retired Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof gave his views in a lecture at the Law faculty in Universiti Malaya (UM). And yesterday, those in support of and those against RUU355 held their separate rallies on the issue.

At his talk at UM, Mohamad Ariff said he has no doubts the amendments to RUU355 that PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang put before Parliament in November are constitutional – but he has reservations about them because he fears abuse.

“Yes, they can do it constitutionally. But should it be done the way it is being done? No! I believe the upper limits are simply too high,’’ he says.

Hadi is proposing the fine for syariah offences be hiked up to a maximum of RM100,000 from the current RM5,000; the jail sentence be increased to 30 years from the present three years; and the number of strokes in whipping be allowed to go up to 100 instead of the current six.

For Mohamad Ariff, the current limits are already very high. He says, for instance, religious authorities are able to fine someone teaching religion without certification RM5,000 in some states and RM3,000 in others, which is already very high.

“What else do you want? Imprisonment for 15 years? What do you require a jail sentence of 30 years for? Or whipping? You don’t whip someone for teaching without a tauliah (accreditation)!’’

“If you don’t approach this in the right way, it can lead to all kinds of abuses.’’

Mohamad Ariff cited the case of an MP (Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad) who went to a surau to deliver a talk about the plight of people suffering in Gaza at the invitation of the surau: the religious authorities in the state went after him and (the Klang Lower Syariah Court) fined him RM2,900 for “teaching without accreditation’’.

“He was there to give a talk by invitation! And now this poor MP is going to lose his Parliament seat. This is a lesson to highlight this entire problem. You can create offences in the Syariah Court and increase upper limits but if you don’t approach it properly and you don’t have the right people to apply it, it can lead to all kinds of abuses.’’

(Under Article 48 of the Federal Constitution, an elected representative will lose his seat if he is convicted of an offence and fined RM2,000 or more, or receives a jail sentence of a year or more).

Mohamad Ariff also pointed out that when the maximum fine is low like at present and capped at RM5,000, the discrepancies for the offences are not so great from state to state.

“But if you have a RM100,000 limit, you can imagine what can happen!”

For him, it is just not logical to argue that there is a need to increase the upper limits by such a huge quantum solely on grounds that the Syariah Courts have been neglected all this while and need to be upgraded to the level of the Civil Courts.

He points out that the Civil Courts have to deal with the Penal Code and all kinds of offences, while the Syariah Courts have only limited jurisdiction.

And he says that the Federal Constitution makes it clear that the Syariah Court cannot encroach into areas covered by civil law and the Penal Code.

He believes the framers of the Federal Constitution would be simply “aghast” at what is happening with regards to syariah law and the direction the country is taking.

So, he says, civil society and “politicians of saner minds” should really ask for the justifications for the amendments to RUU355 and ask why the fines and punishments have to be so high?

“Don’t simply vote in favour of it just because it is constitutional.

“I have a feeling they (those pushing for the amendments) can’t justify it.’’

Mohamed Ariff notes that there is already some overlapping of criminal offences in the Penal Code with syariah law, for example laws regarding sodomy.

When there is such an overlap, he says, the offence under syariah law is probably invalid because the offence should be tried under the Penal Code.

“We have all the expertise, all the prosecutors necessary, the judges and everything else that can do justice. Can you trust the same to be done in the Syariah Courts?’’

He praises the Syariah Court for being good in dealing with family law.

He says it can improve its efficiency in dispensing justice in the areas of marriage, family and the inheritance laws of Muslims, “which are the staple of syariah personal laws of Malaysia, rather than being too preoccupied with imposing the harshest punishments for syariah criminal offences’’.

At the forum earlier in the week discussing “How Much Do you Know About Hudud’’, constitutional law expert Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi said, according to the law, Syariah Courts have powers over offences that are against the “precepts” of Islam but “sadly’’ the Federal Constitution doesn’t define what these precepts of Islam are.

“So many states are abusing their power by treating anything they like or don’t like as a precept of Islam.

“If you question a fatwa (religious edict), no matter how respectfully, that is a criminal offence. If you give a discourse on Islam without a tauliah (credentials) that is against the precepts of Islam.

“I don’t know which Islam we are talking about. It is not the Islam I was born into and not the Islam I practise. This is an attempt by some to arrogate a monopoly of power to themselves.’’

He says some of the religious laws the states are passing are being done very unthinkingly, citing as an example the law that stipulates that speakers need credentials from that state to be able to speak on religion.

“So if a lecturer gives a talk to a class on Islamic law, I am not sure if it is legal any more because they would need to be bertauliah (accredited by the state).’’

He says the tauliah law states that people can only discuss religion with their family at home.

“So if I am in a car with my family on the way to Kota Baru, I cannot talk about religion because that is not my house. Or if I am at home and someone by chance visits me, then I cannot talk because it is not just my family any more.

“This kind of law is unthinking and needs to be reviewed. It makes us look like fools! I don’t know how the law even got through!’’

Dr Shad says that syariah law is not a blank cheque for states to do whatever they want with in regards to religion, stressing that the power of states to punish Islamic crimes is subject to Federal control and must be conferred on the states by Federal law.

Which means that despite the Kelantan State Assembly passing the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code Enactment (1993) and the amended Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code II (2015), the state cannot carry out punishments such as stoning, crucifixion, execution, or amputation because these are outside its jurisdiction.

For him, the Syariah Courts are supposed to punish offences that are relatively minor in nature such as khalwat (close proximity), drinking alcohol, abuse of halal signs; also, syariah offences must not be matters already in the Federal list.

“But unfortunately, most states are trespassing on the Federal Constitution by punishing crimes like homosexuality, incest, participating in lotteries, betting, and gaming which come under Federal law.’’

Dr Shad points out that some civil judges do not seem to know the Federal Constitution and they abdicate their responsibility to interpret and enforce the law whenever there is even “a smallest whiff of Islam”, even though it is clearly stated that when it is a matter concerning a Muslim and a non-Muslim, it has to go before a Civil Court because a non-Muslim is not eligible to go to the Syariah Court.

“Barring a few honourable exceptions, our courts get cold feet whenever there is an issue of Islamic law. They bend over backwards to expand the horizon of the power of the syariah parties.’’

Dr Shad believes that Hadi’s private member Bill is “clearly a clever attempt to revive the Kelantan Criminal Code II which has been lying dormant because of constitutional hurdles’’.

Saying that the punishment must be proportionate to the offences committed, he points out the penalties in Hadi’s motion calling for 100 lashes, 30 years jail, and a maximum RM100,000 fine are for some crimes that are victimless.

“If someone drinks, if someone doesn’t say his prayer, or doesn’t fast, there is no real harm to national security and public order.

“Some of the punishments in the Penal Code are lesser (for more serious crimes). But for not saying your prayers you can get 30 lashes!’’

He says experts in Islam will tell you that there is a difference between sin and crimes, and that not every sin needs to be criminalised – “This law (RUU355) tends to do that (criminalise every sin).’’

He says as this is a matter of national importance, it would be quite in line for the Malay Rulers as the heads of religion in their states to discuss the law and give direction.

Saying that he is all for genuine dialogue, Dr Shad notes that while the Quran is divine, the interpretations are human.

“As a student of law I have to say there is no word that is not capable of multiple interpretations. Those of us who are Muslims have a duty to paint our religion in the best possible light. So if there is an interpretation that is available that is kinder, gentler and more merciful, what’s the harm in trying to promote it?’’

(Dr Shad writes the fortnightly Reflections On The Law column in The Star.)


Read in full from TheStar here.

Saturday, 18 February 2017

Tak logik lah kalau semua salah Uncle Kit kan?

Artikel ini diambil sepenuhnya dari blog saudara Shahbudin.com:


Semua isu-isu yang timbul sejak Dato' Seri Najib menjadi Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Kewangan tidak melibatkan Lim Kit Siang. 

Apakah isu-isu tersebut? 

1. Lim Kit Siang tidak mencadang atau menyokong pengenalan GST yang membebankan rakyat jelata.

2. Lim Kit Siang tidak mencadang atau menyokong keputusan menghapuskan subsidi sehingga naik harga barang dan toll.

3. Lim Kit Siang tidak mencadang atau menyokong kenaikan harga minyak petrol dan diesel.

4. Lim Kit Siang tidak pernah bersetuju untuk menggunakan wang KWAP untuk melabur dalam perniagaan atau perusahaan yang tidak menguntungkan.

5. Lim Kit Siang tidak pernah dirundingi untuk menukar surat hak-milik tanah peneroka Felda yang sangat bernilai dan tidak turun harganya dengan sijil saham yang tidak menentu harganya dan kini harga sahamnya merudum turun kerana dilanda kerugian.

6. Lim Kit Siang tidak pernah menjadi perajurit dalam angkatan tentera dan tidak tahu menahu mengenai Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera; beliau tidak terlibat dalam keputusan menggunakan wang tabung LTAT untuk membiayai projek yang tidak menguntungkan. 

7. Lim Kit Siang tidak pernah pinjam duit Mara untuk berniaga atau sebagai biasiswa waktu beliau belajar; beliau juga tidak pernah merestui penyelewengan yang kini dikatakan berlaku dalam MARA.

8. Lim Kit Siang belum memeluk ugama Islam dan beliau tidak pun tahu mengenai salahguna wang Lembaga Urusan dan Tabung Haji untuk pelaburan yang merugikan. 

9. Lim Kit Siang, kerana belum memeluk ugama Islam, tidak pernah membayar zakat itulah sebabnya dia tidak tahu bahawa pejabat ugama mengadakan lawatan ke Paris sebagai salah satu acara dalam 'Kursus Pernikahan'.

10. Lim Kit Siang bukan seorang Melayu/Bumiputera dan dia tidak merasa penderitaan, dan bukan sebab kepada penderitaan, maka biasiswa anak-anak Melayu dikurangkan jumlahnya oleh kerajaan. 

11. Bukan Lim Kit Siang yang menamatkan khidmat Peguam Negara.

12. Bukan Lim Kit Siang yang menukar pegawai MACC kerana menyelidiki kes yang melibatkannya.

13. Bukan Lim Kit Siang yang mencadangkan dikenakan label OSA atas semua hasil penyelidikan atas sebarang salahlaku dalam apa jua syarikat, badan dan agensi kerajaan.

14. Bukan Lim Kit Siang yang menghalang Bank Negara Malaysia dari mengambil tindakan atas penyelewengan dalam institusi kewangan  dalam dan luar negara.

15. Bukan Lim Kit Siang yang mencadang untuk membeli kapal selam Scorpine; dan bukan dia yang suruh Sirul dan rakannya untuk membunuh Altantuya.

16. Bukan Lim Kit Siang yang suruh SPRM untuk menyelidik dan tangkap perasuah-perasuah kecil supaya perasuah yang lebih hebat kelihatan tidak rasuah.

17. Bukan Lim Kit Siang yang mengarah media perdana supaya setiap hari mengutuk Tun Dr. Mahathir walaupun beliaulah yang telah mengharumkan negara Malaysia di zaman pemerintahannya selama 22 tahun menjadi Perdana Menteri.

18. Lim Kit Siang tidak pernah terbabit dalam sebarang skandal seks.

19. Lim Kit Siang tidak pernah terlibat dalam sebarang skandal kewangan. 

20. Lim Kit Siang tidak menjadi pengeluar filem lucah di Hollywood dengan memakan belanja wang yang disalurkan dari syarikat milik negara.

21. Lim Kit Siang tidak pernah melabur wang negara yang dicurinya di Singapura, Hongkong, New Zealand, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Amerika Syarikat dan namanya tidak pernah disebut sebagai penjenayah dalam mana jua mahkamah didunia. 

22. Lim Kit Siang tidak pernah merancang untuk membawa 1.5 juta rakyat dari Bangladesh sehingga rakyat Bangladesh melebihi jumlah rakyat keturunan India yang ada dalam negara sekarang ini.

23. Lim Kit Siang juga bukan perancang untuk membenarkan ratusan ribu Cina dari negara Komunis China untuk membeli harta milik tetap (freehold) dan tinggal di negara ini.

24. Lim Kit Siang juga tidak boleh disalahkan jika harta-harta yang sangat bernilai seperti Lapangan Terbang Sungai Besi dijual kepada syarikat dari negara Komunis China.

25. Lim Kit Siang tidak boleh disalahkan jika kos pembangunan satu-satu projek, seperti keretapi di Pantai Timur dinaikkan harganya sehingga Negara terhutang sejumlah yang sukar untuk dibayar dari hasil projek berkenaan.

26. Lim Kit Siang menyokong RUKUNEGARA dan tidak pernah menentangnya.

27. Lim Kit Siang menyokong dan tidak pernah menentang PERLEMBAGAAN. Justeru itu, Lim Kit Siang turut mendaulatkan RAJA-RAJA MELAYU, Lim Kit Siang menyokong BAHASA MELAYU SEBAGAI BAHASA KEBANGSAAN. Lim Kit Siang menyokong ISLAM MENJADI UGAMA PERSEKUTUAN. Lim Kit Siang menyokong HAK ISTIMEWA ORANG-ORANG MELAYU DAN BUMIPUTERA, walaupun Lim Kit Siang tidak menegur apabila Hak Istimewa ini tidak dinikmati secara keseluruhan bangsa Melayu/Bumiputera.

28. Lim Kit Siang menyokong serampang dua mata DASAR EKONOMI BARU iaitu untuk MEMBASMI KEMISKINAN dan MENYUSUN SEMULA MASYARAKAT, tetapi Lim Kit Siang menegur apabila terlalu ramai orang Melayu dan kaum-kaum lain yang masih ramai kekal miskin dan Lim Kit Siang juga menegur apabila peroses menyusun semula masyarakat tidak mencapai matlamat kerana cara pelaksanaannya. 

29. Lim Kit Siang tidak bertanggungjawab, malah tidak tahu menahu mengenai penubuhan 1MDB; tidak pernah menjadi penasihat atau ahli lembaga pengarah, pegawai atau pekerjaa di 1MDB. 

Oleh itu, patutkah Datuk Zaid Ibrahim untuk takut berkawan dengan DAP dan berjuang menentang rasuah dan ketidakadilan bersama mereka? 

Alangkah baiknya jika ramai pemimpin Melayu seperti LIM KIT SIANG.

Salahkah Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad untuk bergabung tenaga dengan Lim Kit Siang, dan mereka yang sejenis sikap dengannya,  untuk sama-sama menentang penyelewengan, rasuah dan pengkhianatan kepada negara?

Salahkah Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad untuk membetulkan kesilapannya kerana telah salah menanam budi dan memilih pengganti2nya yang beliau tidak sangka menjadikan negara dipandang hina seperti sekarang dan rakyat jelata menderita kerana beban hutang negara yang bertimbun dan tidak mungkin selesai dibayar oleh anak, cucu dan cicit kita semua.  

(Artikel diatas adalah sebahagian tulisan terbaru Tan Sri Sanusi Junid yang dipetik daripada blognya, sanusijunid.blogspot.com - SH 18/02/2017)

Yup, tak logik lah kalau semua salah Lim Kit Siang kan, kan, kan?

Monday, 6 February 2017

Berjaga-jaga ungkit perkara lama

From Sinar Harian: Berjaga-jaga ungkit perkara lama

A KADIR JASIN

KEBELAKANGAN ini beberapa saluran propaganda arus perdana telah membangkitkan semula peristiwa yang berlaku masa lampau.

Dua daripadanya adalah skandal Bumiputra Malaysia Finance (BMF) dan pembabitan Bank Negara dalam perniagaan tukaran mata wang.

Dalam kes BMF, saya adalah antara wartawan terawal membuat berita yang kemudiannya didapati tidak benar. Apabila berita skandal itu mula dilaporkan oleh agensi berita antarabangsa dan media serantau, saya bertanya seorang pegawai kanan Bank Bumiputra mengenainya.

Bank Bumiputra adalah induk kepada BMF yang berupa sebuah syarikat pinjaman yang beribu pejabat di Hong Kong.  

Pegawai itu menafikan berita yang BMF mengalami masalah kewangan akibat hutang lapuk. Saya menyiarkan berita itu dalam akhbar saya, Business Times.

Laporan saya itu ternyata songsang dan krisis MBF akhirnya meledak menyebabkan kerugian besar kepada Bank Bumiputra.

Pokok pangkal skandal itu bermula sekitar tahun 1979-80 ketika mana Perdana Menteri ialah Allahyarham Tun Hussein Onn dan Menteri Kewangan, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah.

Sebelum dilantik Menteri Kewangan pada tahun 1976, Tengku Razaleigh adalah Pengerusi Bank Bumiputra.

Beliau juga pernah menjadi Pengerusi Perbadanan Nasional (Pernas), Petronas dan Kumpulan Fleet yang memiliki New Straits Times Press Berhad.

Skandal itu bermula apabila BMF memberikan pinjaman besar dan mudah kepada seorang jurutera Singapura bernama George Tan.

Dengan pinjaman BMF itulah Tan membeli pencakar langit Gammon House dan harta-harta lain di Hong Kong. Dalam sekelip mata Tan menjadi wunderkinder atau budak ajaib dunia korporat Hong Kong. Waktu itu Hong Kong masih tanah jajahan Inggeris.

Siasatan yang dilakukan di Malaysia, Hong Kong dan United Kingdom akhirnya menyebabkan tiga rang pegawai kanan Bank Bumiputra dan BMF dipenjarakan di England dan Hong Kong. Salah seorang daripadanya adalah pegawai yang memberitahu saya bahawa BMF tidak menghadapi sebarang masalah.

Mereka yang didapati bersalah dan dipenjarakan adalah pengerusi Bank Bumiputra, Lorraine Esmi Osman; Pengarah Urusan Hashim Shamsuddin dan Ketua Pegawai Ekonomi, Dr  Rais Saniman. Lorraine meninggal tahun 2011.

Apabila Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad menjadi Perdana Menteri, sebuah jawatankuasa penyiasat yang dianggotai oleh Ketua Juruaudit Negara, Tan Sri Ahmad Nordin, juruaudit bebas Ramli Ibrahim dan peguam Chooi Man Sou telah ditubuhkan. Antara fakta yang muncul ialah lembaga pengarah Bank Bumiputra enggan memberi kerjasama.

Berikutan meledaknya skandal itu, Tengku Razaleigh ditukarkan dari Kementerian Kewangan ke Kementerian Perdagangan dan Perindustrian. Ahli perniagaan dan bekas majistret Tun Daim Zainuddin dilantik menggantikan beliau.

Kes kedua ialah kerugian perniagaan tukaran asing Bank Negara pada tahun 1990-an yang berjumlah AS$12 bilion atau kira-kira RM30 bilion pada kadar tukaran waktu itu.

Tujuan tersirat operasi itu adalah mempertahankan nilai ringgit dan, kalau nasib baik, buat keuntungan luar biasa tetapi ia berakhir dengan kerugian. Gabenor Bank Negara waktu itu, Allahyarham Tan Sri Jaffar Hussein, mengambil tanggungjawab dan meletakkan jawatan.

Pegawai yang bertanggungjawab terus dalam operasi tersebut, Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yackop, diarahkan berhenti.

Ironinya orang yang digunakan untuk mengungkit peristiwa tersebut iaitu Datuk Abdul Murad Khalid adalah penolong gabenor yang bertanggungjawab ke atas peraturan perbankan dan kawal selia ketika krisis itu meletus.

Apatah lagi Abdul Murad sendiri kemudiannya disiasat dan dituduh di mahkamah kerana gagal mengisytiharkan aset berjumlah hampir RM24 juta. Soalnya bagaimanakah seorang pegawai Bank Negara yang baru berusia dalam lingkungan 50 tahun boleh mengumpul harta sebanyak  itu? Beliau didapati bersalah dan didenda RM500,000.

Isu-isu ini diungkit oleh saluran propaganda yang tidak pun tahu keadaan sebenar atau yang berasa generasi muda boleh dibohongi kerana mereka tidak tahu apa-apa dan generasi lama sudah lupa.

Seperkara lagi, wujud perbezaan besar di antara kerugian perniagaan tukaran mata wang Bank Negara dengan skandal BMF tahun 1980-an dan 1MDB sekarang.

Dalam kes perniagaan tukaran mata wang Bank Negara, tujuannya baik iaitu mempertahankan nilai ringgit dan tidak ada duit haram yang masuk ke dalam akaun peribadi sesiapa.

Tetapi skandal 1MDB ada persamaan dengan BMF kerana ia membabitkan orang tengah - George Tan dalam kes BMF dan Jho Low dalam kes 1MDB. Dalam kedua-dua kes, banyak duit yang mengalir keluar dan tidak mengalir masuk semula. Unsur-unsur jenayah dan penipuan amat jelas. 

Wallahuaklam.

..and the latest news in The Edge:



Saturday, 4 February 2017

Memori 28 tahun...

Memory
All alone in the moonlight
I can dream of the old days
life was beautiful then
I remember the time I knew what happiness was...



Sesungguhnya jodoh dan mati itu ALLAH SWT yang  tentukan. 

Thank you for being a great Mama to our son Arif and thank you for those memories when we were together in happier times.





Semuga dipermudahkan dan diberkati Allah perjalanan hidup kita semua seterusnya.

Ayah
Johor Bahru
4 Februari 2017

Wednesday, 25 January 2017

....And we were told that the Grand old man is senile and no longer relevant.

....and we were told that the grand old man is senile and no longer relevant.


hmm....

Wednesday, 18 January 2017

I like being old actually

Took this post straight from Tuan Hussein Hamid's Blog here.

Really captures how I feel now that I am 3 months away from my 56th birthday this year.

Kalibiru, Jogjakarta, Indonesia Dec. 2016

I Like Being Old.

Author Unknown

As I've aged, I've become kinder to, and less critical of, myself. I've become my own friend.

I have seen too many dear friends leave this world, too soon; before they understood the great freedom that comes with aging. 

Whose business is it if I choose to read, or play on the computer until 4 AM? I will dance with myself to those wonderful tunes of the 60s , 70s and 80s and if I, at the same time, wish to weep over a lost love, I will.

I will walk the beach, in a swim suit that is stretched over a bulging body, and will dive into the waves, with abandon, if I choose to, despite the pitying glances from the jet set. They, too, will get old.

I know I am sometimes forgetful. But there again, some of life is just as well forgotten. And, eventually, we remember the important things.

Sure, over the years, my heart has been broken. How can your heart not break, when you lose a loved one, or when a child suffers, or even when somebody's beloved pet gets hit by a car? 

But broken hearts are what give us strength, and understanding, and compassion. A heart never broken, is pristine, and sterile, and will never know the joy of being imperfect.

I am so blessed to have lived enough to have my hair turning gray, and to have my youthful laughs be forever etched into grooves on my face. So many have never laughed, and too many have died before their hair could turn silver.

As you get older, it is easier to be positive. You care less about what other people think. I don't question myself anymore. I've even earned the right to be wrong.

So, to answer your question, I like being older. It has set me free. I like the person I have become. I am not going to live forever, but while I am still here, I will not waste time lamenting what could have been, or worrying about what will be. And I shall eat dessert every single day (if I feel like it).

Tuesday, 17 January 2017

Dr M gave his side of the story on the Forest City issue


I DON’T know if it is true about HRH the Sultan of Johor throwing a challenge to me over the development of Johor Baru.

Maybe it is only The Star which is interpreting what HRH says as a challenge to me.

But unless HRH denies he is challenging me, I will take the report of The Star as the truth.

I admit I am at a disadvantage here. While people can say what they like about me, and I welcome their freedom to say so, I hope that in responding to HRH’s challenge I will not be arrested and jailed without trial.

If it is with trial, I welcome the arrest.

Now, what did I say? Nothing more than repeating a report by Bloomberg in the press. But I appreciate why Bloomberg is not challenged nor denied.

What did Bloomberg say in its report on Nov 22 last year?

It said that a China Chinese company will build Forest City in JB which can accommodate 700,000. It went on to say that planeloads of China Chinese are being flown in to view the man-sized model (with pictures) and they have and will buy most of the properties in Forest City.

I doubt if many Johor Malays and Chinese are buying or going to buy these apartments. There just aren’t that many Malaysians to buy all these properties.

Bloomberg, in the same report, mentioned 60 other developments similar to Forest City, and these are also being sold to mainland Chinese.

Looking back to 1819, when Sultan Ali of Johor did not lease Singapore to the British, the Temenggong signed the lease. And look at Singapore today. A part of Johor is now a foreign country – well developed no doubt, but a foreign country.

There will be in all more than a million foreigners living in JB Forest City and the 60 other deve­lopments. These new places will not become a foreign country but they will have an inordinate percentage of foreign people. If they stay long enough, they will be entitled to become citizens of Malaysia.

Yes, I promoted foreign direct investment. But it was not about buying land in Malaysia, developing them and selling them to foreigners who will stay here.

FDI is about investment in the manufacturing industry. Malaysian companies will construct the building and Malaysians will work in the industries. They will acquire skills and start their own manufacturing business.

Malaysian contractors are completely capable of building all kinds of buildings and develop land. We don’t need foreigners to do this. Look at Malaysia today. Ninety per cent or more of these new buildings and development are by Malaysian companies. Majority of the buyers are Malaysians, and they are the people who stay there.

But when foreigners buy land, there is not even an inflow of capital. Much of the money will be borrowed locally. And they can do their business with their own banks.

Whatever foreign companies earn will be expatriated, and will result in outflow of capital. When the scheme is introduced wherein you can buy property in China and get one flat or house free in Malaysia, no profit will be made in Malaysia, therefore no taxes will be paid to the Malaysian Government.

Let all transactions be transpa­rent. Publish all documents about the investments, the number of workers, their home countries, the buyers, the banks which finance and all expatriation of funds. Do this honestly. No hiding.

So let the truly international Transparency International examine the exposed official documents. Let the people see the documents to prove their genuineness.

Looking East is not about asking the countries of the East to buy land in Malaysia, develop and sell to the people from these countries. Yes, we have encouraged foreigners to make Malaysia their second home. But their numbers are very small. Looking East is not about mass immigration of hundreds of thousands. It is about Malaysians learning about how these Eastern countries developed themselves.

It is easy to accuse me of being a racist. I have been called a Malay ultra before.

This labelling, this demonising actually exposes the lack of credible arguments against what I do or say. It reflects a fundamental lack of basis for the arguments against me.

This is a multiracial country. People of different ethnicity, language, religion, culture and even economic wellbeing have lived in this country in peace.

In many countries, even a slight difference in the interpretation of their common religion has resulted in violent conflicts and wars. But relatively speaking, Malaysia is stable and peaceful.

It is stable and peaceful because we accept each other as we are. During my 22 years as PM, there were no significant racial clashes. Differences, yes, but no violence. And the country grew.

Had I been a racist, my period would have seen turmoil and regression in this country.

You can dispute what I say. That is your democratic right.

I dare The Star to publish what I say in full. It is a measure of the Government fear of the truth that the mainstream media is strictly controlled.

I will accept this article being totally blacked-out because we are living in a kleptocratic country where truth is anathema, only to be whispered but never said aloud.

I am a Malaysian born in Kedah. Malaysia is my home and the object of my loyalty. If I have to be accused of lese majeste for what I say, so be it.

DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD

Now in Malay:

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

PEMBANGUNAN J.B.

 As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on January 17, 2017

1. Saya tidak tahu samada benar atau tidak cabaran yang dilontarkan oleh DYMM Sutan Johor terhadap saya berkenaan pembangunan JB.

2. Mungkin hanya akhbar The Star yang mentafsirkan apa yang dititah DYMM Tuanku sebagai melontarkan cabaran terhadap saya.

3. Tetapi selagi DYMM Tuanku tidak menafikan mencabar saya, saya akan anggap laporan The Star sebagai benar.

4. Saya mengaku bahawa saya berada di dalam keadaan yang agak lemah. Sementara sesiapa sahaja boleh berkata apa-apa terhadap saya, dan saya mengambil sikap terbuka terhadap kebebasan mereka berbuat demikian, saya harap di dalam menjawab terhadap cabaran DYMM Tuanku, saya tidak akan dipenjara tanpa bicara. Jika perbicaraan dapat diadakan, silalah tangkap saya.

5. Apakah yang telah diperkatakan oleh saya? Tidak lebih daripada apa yang dilaporkan Bloomberg di dalam akhbar. Tetapi saya boleh terima kenapa laporan Bloomberg tidak akan dicabar atau dinafikan.

6. Apakah yang diperkata oleh Bloomberg di dalam laporannya pada 22hb November lepas? Ia mengatakan yang sebuah syarikat dari China akan membangunkan Forest City yang akan memuatkan 700,000 penduduk. Ianya juga melapor bahawa orang Cina dari China diterbangkan untuk melihat pameran model sebesar manusia (bergambar) dan mereka ini sudah, malahan akan membeli kebanyakan hartanah di Forest City.

7. Saya tidak fikir ramai Melayu atau Cina Johor telah beli atau akan beli apartment ini. Malaysia tidak mempunyai penduduk yang begitu ramai untuk membeli kesemua hartanah ini.

8. Bloomberg, di dalam laporan yang sama turut menyatakan tentang 60 pembangunan lain yang mirip Forest City, dan ini juga sedang dijual kepada rakyat tanah besar China.

9. Melihat kembali pada tahun 1819, apabila Sutan Johor, Sultan Ali tidak mahu memajak Singapura kepada British, Temenggung telah menandatangani pajakan tersebut. Lihatlah Singapura hari ini. Sebahagian daripada Johor kini adalah negara asing – memanglah ia dibangun dengan mudah, tetapi ia tetap negara asing.

10. Lebih sejuta rakyat asing akan tinggal di Forest City JB dan 60 pembangunan lain disekitarnya. Semua tempat baru ini tidak akan menjadi negara asing tetapi akan mengandungi peratus orang asing yang tinggi. Jika mereka tinggal untuk satu tempoh yang lama yang ditetapkan, mereka layak untuk menjadi rakyat Malaysia.

11. Ya, saya yang mempromosi Pelaburan Langsung Asing (FDI – Foreign Direct Investment). Tetapi ianya bukan bertujuan membeli tanah di Malaysia, membangunkannya dan menjualnya kepada rakyat asing, yang akan tinggal di sana.

12. FDI ialah berkenaan pelaburan di dalam industri pembuatan. Syarikat Malaysia akan membina bangunan dan rakyat akan bekerja di dalam industri-industri tersebut. Mereka akan mempelajari kemahiran dan akan memulakan perniagaan pengeluaran barangan mereka sendiri.

13. Kontraktor Malaysia berkebolehan membina pelbagai jenis bangunan dan memajukan tanah. Kita tidak perlu orang asing untuk ini. Lihatlah Malaysia hari ini. Sembilan puluh peratus atau lebih daripada bangunan baru ini dan pembangunan lain dibuat oleh syarikat Malaysia. Majoriti pembeli juga rakyat Malaysia dan mereka juga bermastautin di situ.

14. Tetapi apabila rakyat asing beli tanah, tidak terdapat aliran masuk wang pun. Kebanyakan sumber kewangan dipinjam dari dalam negara. Dan mereka juga boleh berniaga dengan menggunakan bank mereka sendiri.

15. Apa sahaja pendapatan syarikat asing ini perolehi akan dihantar pulang dan menyebabkan pengaliran keluar wang. Apabila diperkenalkan skim di mana pembeli boleh beli hartanah di negara China dan mendapat satu unit rumah pangsa atau rumah secara percuma di Malaysia, tidak akan ada keuntungan yang dibuat di Malaysia dan Kerajaan Malaysia tidak akan mendapat hasil cukai.



16. Benarkanlah semua transaksi dibuat dengan telus. Terbitkanlah semua dokumen berkaitan pelaburan, jumlah pekerja asing, negara asal mereka, pembeli, bank yang menyediakan pinjaman serta kesemua penghantaran balik wang keluar. Keluarkanlah ini dengan jujur. Jangan berselindung. Janganlah pulak disuruh seseorang yang bernama Tunku Aziz untuk mengesahkannya. Mungkin dia ini pada satu masa mengetuai Transparency International, tetapi dia menerima tanpa belah bagi rompakan dan rasuah yang terjadi dalam 1MDB.

17. Jadi biarlah Transparency International yang benar-benar “International” memeriksa dokumentasi rasmi yang dikeluarkan. Biarkan rakyat meneliti dokumen tersebut untuk buktikan kesahihannya.

18. Pandang ke Timur bukan bermakna mengajak negara-negara di Timur membeli tanah di Malaysia, membangun dan menjual kepada rakyat dari negara-negara mereka. Ya, kita menggalakkan orang asing untuk jadikan Malaysia rumah kedua mereka (Malaysia My Second Home). Tetapi jumlah mereka ini sedikit. Dasar Pandang ke Timur bukan untuk membenarkan migrasi secara besar-besaran melibatkan ratusan ribu. Ianya adalah untuk rakyat Malaysia mempelajari bagaimana negara-negara di Timur ini membangun dan memajukan negara mereka.

19. Mudah sekali untuk menuduh saya ini racist, atau bersikap perkauman. Sebelum ini pun saya pernah digelar Malay ultra.

20. Label atau panggilan serta usaha untuk memburukkan imej ini lebih menunjukkan kegagalan untuk mematahkan apa yang saya buat atau katakan.

21. Ia mencerminkan ketiadaan asas untuk hujah bagi melawan hujah saya.

22. Ini adalah negara berbilang kaum. Rakyat berlainan keturunan, bahasa, agama, budaya dan pencapaian ekonomi telah tinggal dengan aman.

23. Di banyak negara, hanya kerana perbezaan interpretasi yang sedikit pada agama yang dianuti bersama menyebabkan pergaduhan dan peperangan. Tetapi Malaysia stabil dan aman.

24. Ianya stabil dan aman kerana kita terima keadaan sesama kita. Selama 22 tahun saya jadi Perdana Menteri, tidak terdapat pergaduhan kaum yang serius. Konflik ada. Tetapi tanpa keganasan. Dan negara dapat dibangun.

25. Jika saya amalkan perkauman, zaman saya akan terlihat ketidaktentuan dan kemuduran di negara ini.

26. Sesiapa boleh pertikai apa yang saya katakan. Itu hak demokratik sesiapa.

27. Saya cabar The Star untuk siarkan apa yang saya katakan ini secara keseluruhan. Tanda ketakutan Kerajaan terhadap kebenaran boleh digambarkan dengan sejauhmana media arus perdana dikawal.

28. Saya terima jika penulisan ini tidak disiarkan sama sekali kerana kita hidup di dalam sebuah negara kleptocratic di mana kebenaran merupakan satu bala, hanya boleh dibisik tetapi tidak boleh diperkatakan secara terus terang.

29. Saya rakyat Malaysia yang dilahirkan di Kedah.

30. Malaysia adalah rumah saya dan objek kesetiaan saya. Jika saya harus dituduh sebagai penderhaka kerana apa yang saya perkatakan, tuduhlah.

Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad
16 Januari 2017

P/s: Di dalam kes Hong Kong and Macau, Pondicherry, Goa dan lain-lain wilayah Peranchis dan Portugis di India, sebaik sahaja penjajah melepaskan empayar mereka, tempat-tempat ini terus dilepaskan dan dipulangkan semula kepada negara asal. Demikian juga semua tanah jajahan dikembalikan kepada pemilik asal wilayah-wilayah ini.


Surat asal yang disunting telah disiarkan di dalam akhbar The Star bertarikh Jan 17, 2017, di ruangan surat.


Monday, 16 January 2017

I miss Dr Mahathir the Prime Minister

Dr Mahathir in his elements....focused...thoughtful speech...no need to shout to be heard.


I don't know about you, but I sure miss the grand old man.

Monday, 2 January 2017

Gurindam Dua Belas ditulis oleh Raja Ali Haji (1847)

Saya mahu berkongsi gurindam lama oleh Raja Ali Haji yang maknaya amat mendalam sekali buat diri saya:

Gurindam Dua Belas ditulis oleh Raja Ali Haji di Pulau Penyengat, Riau, pada tarikh 23 Rajab 1263 Hijriyah atau 1847 Masehi dalam usia 38 tahun. Karya ini terdiri atas 12 Fasal dan dikategorikan sebagai “Syi‘r al-Irsyadi” atau puisi didaktik, karena berisikan nasihat dan petunjuk menuju hidup yang diridhoi Allah.  Selain itu terdapat pula pelajaran dasar Ilmu Tasawuf tentang mengenal “yang empat” : yaitu syari‘at, tarikat, hakikat, dan makrifat. Diterbitkan pada tahun 1854 dalam Tijdschrft van het Bataviaasch Genootschap No. II, Batavia, dengan huruf Arab dan terjemahannya dalam bahasa Belanda oleh Elisa Netscher.

Satu

Ini Gurindam pasal yang pertama:

Barang siapa tiada memegang agama,
Sekali-kali tiada boleh dibilangkan nama.

Barang siapa mengenal yang empat,
Maka ia itulah orang yang ma’rifat

Barang siapa mengenal Allah,
Suruh dan tegahnya tiada ia menyalah.

Barang siapa mengenal diri,
Maka telah mengenal akan Tuhan yang bahri.

Barang siapa mengenal dunia,
Tahulah ia barang yang teperdaya.

Barang siapa mengenal akhirat,
Tahulah ia dunia mudarat.

Dua

Ini Gurindam pasal yang kedua:

Barang siapa mengenal yang tersebut,
Tahulah ia makna takut.

Barang siapa meninggalkan sembahyang,
Seperti rumah tiada bertiang.

Barang siapa meninggalkan puasa,
Tidaklah mendapat dua termasa.

Barang siapa meninggalkan zakat,
Tiadalah hartanya beroleh berkat.

Barang siapa meninggalkan haji,
Tiadalah ia menyempurnakan janji.

Tiga

Ini Gurindam pasal yang ketiga:

Apabila terpelihara mata,
Sedikitlah cita-cita.

Apabila terpelihara kuping,
Khabar yang jahat tiadaiah damping.

Apabila terpelihara lidah,
Niscaya dapat daripadanya paedah.

Bersungguh-sungguh engkau memeliharakan tangan,
Daripada segala berat dan ringan.

Apabila perut terlalu penuh,
Keluarlah fi’il yang tiada senonoh.

Anggota tengah hendaklah ingat,
Di situlah banyak orang yang hilang semangat

Hendaklah peliharakan kaki,
Daripada berjaian yang membawa rugi.

Empat

Ini Gurindam pasal yang keempat:

Hati itu kerajaan di daiam tubuh,
Jikalau zalim segala anggotapun rubuh.

Apabila dengki sudah bertanah,
Datanglah daripadanya beberapa anak panah.

Mengumpat dan memuji hendaklah pikir,
Di situlah banyak orang yang tergelincir.

Pekerjaan marah jangan dibela,
Nanti hilang akal di kepala.

Jika sedikitpun berbuat bohong,
Boleh diumpamakan mulutnya itu pekung.

Tanda orang yang amat celaka,
Aib dirinya tiada ia sangka.

Bakhil jangan diberi singgah,
Itulah perampok yang amat gagah.

Barang siapa yang sudah besar,
Janganlah kelakuannya membuat kasar.

Barang siapa perkataan kotor,
Mulutnya itu umpama ketor.

Di mana tahu salah diri,
Jika tidak orang lain yang berperi.

Lima

Ini Gurindam pasal yang kelima:

Jika hendak mengenai orang berbangsa,
Lihat kepada budi dan bahasa,

Jika hendak mengenal orang yang berbahagia,
Sangat memeliharakan yang sia-sia.

Jika hendak mengenal orang mulia,
Lihatlah kepada kelakuan dia.

Jika hendak mengenal orang yang berilmu,
Bertanya dan belajar tiadalah jemu.

Jika hendak mengenal orang yang berakal,
Di dalam dunia mengambil bekal.

Jika hendak mengenal orang yang baik perangai,
Lihat pada ketika bercampur dengan orang ramai.

Enam

Ini Gurindam pasal yang keenam:

Cahari olehmu akan sahabat,
Yang boleh dijadikan obat.

Cahari olehmu akan guru,
Yang boleh tahukan tiap seteru.

Cahari olehmu akan isteri,
Yang boleh dimenyerahkan diri.

Cahari olehmu akan kawan,
Pilih segala orang yang setiawan.

Cahari olehmu akan ‘abdi,
Yang ada baik sedikit budi,

Tujuh

Ini Gurindam pasal yang ketujuh:

Apabila banyak berkata-kata,
Di situlah jalan masuk dusta.

Apabila banyak berlebih-lebihan suka,
Itulah landa hampirkan duka.

Apabila kita kurang siasat,
Itulah tanda pekerjaan hendak sesat.

Apabila anak tidak dilatih,
Jika besar bapanya letih.

Apabila banyak mencela orang,
Itulah tanda dirinya kurang.

Apabila orang yang banyak tidur,
Sia-sia sahajalah umur.

Apabila mendengar akan khabar,
Menerimanya itu hendaklah sabar.

Apabila menengar akan aduan,
Membicarakannya itu hendaklah cemburuan.

Apabila perkataan yang lemah-lembut,
Lekaslah segala orang mengikut.

Apabila perkataan yang amat kasar,
Lekaslah orang sekalian gusar.

Apabila pekerjaan yang amat benar,
Tidak boleh orang berbuat honar.

Delapan

Ini Gurindam pasal yang kedelapan:

Barang siapa khianat akan dirinya,
Apalagi kepada lainnya.

Kepada dirinya ia aniaya,
Orang itu jangan engkau percaya.

Lidah yang suka membenarkan dirinya,
Daripada yang lain dapat kesalahannya.

Daripada memuji diri hendaklah sabar,
Biar dan pada orang datangnya khabar.

Orang yang suka menampakkan jasa,
Setengah daripada syirik mengaku kuasa.

Kejahatan diri sembunyikan,
Kebaikan diri diamkan.

Keaiban orang jangan dibuka,
Keaiban diri hendaklah sangka.

Sembilan

Ini Gurindam pasal yang kesembilan:

Tahu pekerjaan tak baik, tetapi dikerjakan,
Bukannya manusia yaituiah syaitan.

Kejahatan seorang perempuan tua,
Itulah iblis punya penggawa.

Kepada segaia hamba-hamba raja,
Di situlah syaitan tempatnya manja.

Kebanyakan orang yang muda-muda,
Di situlah syaitan tempat bergoda.

Perkumpulan laki-laki dengan perempuan,
Di situlah syaitan punya jamuan.

Adapun orang tua yang hemat,
Syaitan tak suka membuat sahabat

Jika orang muda kuat berguru,
Dengan syaitan jadi berseteru.

Sepuluh

Ini Gurindam pasal yang kesepuluh:

Dengan bapa jangan durhaka,
Supaya Allah tidak murka.

Dengan ibu hendaklah hormat,
Supaya badan dapat selamat.

Dengan anak janganlah lalai,
Supaya boleh naik ke tengah balai.

Dengan kawan hendaklah adil,
Supaya tangannya jadi kapil.

Sebelas

Ini Gurindam pasal yang kesebelas:

Hendaklah berjasa,
Kepada yang sebangsa.

Hendaklah jadi kepala,
Buang perangai yang cela.

Hendaklah memegang amanat,
Buanglah khianat.

Hendak marah,
Dahulukan hujjah.

Hendak dimalui,
Jangan memalui.

Hendak ramai,
Murahkan perangai.

Duabelas

Ini Gurindam pasal yang kedua belas:

Raja mufakat dengan menteri,
Seperti kebun berpagarkan duri.

Betul hati kepada raja,
Tanda jadi sebarang kerja.

Hukum ‘adil atas rakyat,
Tanda raja beroleh ‘inayat.

Kasihkan orang yang berilmu,
Tanda rahmat atas dirimu.

Hormat akan orang yang pandai,
Tanda mengenal kasa dan cindai.

Ingatkan dirinya mati,
Itulah asal berbuat bakti.

Akhirat itu terlalu nyata,
Kepada hati yang tidak buta.

Tamatlah Gurindam yang duabelas pasal yaitu karangan kita Raja Ali Haji pada tahun Hijrah Nabi kita seribu dua ratus enam puluh tiga likur hari bulan Rajab Selasa jam pukul lima, Negeri Riau, Pulau Penyengat.