The Action Committee Condemning Batang Kali Massacre hold a Press Conference on 30 January 2009 in response to the British Government's reply on the petition. Following is the full text press statement:
1. Following the petitions submitted by the Action Committee Condemning the Batang Kali Massacre on both 25 March and 12 December 2008, the British High Commissioner, HE Boyd McCleary, being the representative of HM Queen Elizabeth II in Malaysia, has been directed to reply to the petitions on 21 January 2009.
2. The British Government claims that they have carefully considered the petitions and concludes that “in view of the findings of 2 previous investigations that there was insufficient evidence to pursue prosecutions in this case, and in the absence of any new evidence, regrettable we see no reason to reopen or start a fresh investigation.” It is understood that the 2 previous investigation referred to the 1949 and the 1970 investigations.
3. The Action Committee is disappointed and absolutely not convinced with the British Government reply because the latter has not taken into account the inherent unsatisfactory and incomplete nature of the previous 2 investigations. Instead, the British Government has taken into account an irrelevant consideration of pursuing criminal prosecution, which is not intended or demanded by the surviving families of the massacre.
4. There were 4 sworn statements from the soldiers involved confirming that they had misled the 1949 investigation. The soldiers admitted there was an intentional killing and the unarmed civilians were not trying to escape. The sworn statements were not rebutted. As such, the credibility of the 1949 investigation has been put into doubt.
5. As for the 1970 investigation, the then Director of Public Prosecution, who instructed to halt the 1970 investigation prematurely, admitted that there was a substantial conflict of evidence amongst the soldiers involved, and no statement or interview was ever taken from the Malaysian witnesses, such as the survival of the massacre, Chong Foong and his wife Tham Yong. In addition, no process of body exhumation and forensic examination were ever conducted. We submit that the 1970 investigation is incomplete and certainly inconclusive.
6. In view of the above, we can’t help but to conclude that the British Government has failed to read and consider the petitions submitted by the Action Committee carefully and with due weight. They have used the “1970 standard format reply”, which is obviously outdated. We have the statements from the Malaysian eye-witnesses. Further, the remains of the massacre were lying at the cemetery of Ulu Yam, Batang Kali. These are credible evidence for the case which have never been considered by the British authorities.
7. Let’s be very clear. The surviving families are not seeking any criminal trial of the soldiers involved. They are requesting a thorough and an independent investigation via the setting up of a public inquiry so that the historical truth can be discovered. The surviving families, who lost their bread earners for the past 60 years, have been living in a dismal plight. It is only reasonable for them to request an official apology, compensation and construction of a memorial for their love ones from the authority who had committed an atrocity.
8. The surviving families’ lawyer in UK will write a formal letter to the British Government (known as Pre-Action Protocol letter) setting out the reasons that the decision taken by the British Government is unlawful, and inviting them to reconsider their position before we ensue with legal proceeding.
9. Meanwhile, the Action Committee will be seeking a meeting with the Malaysian representative of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association for purpose of persuading the Malaysian MP to seek redress for the surviving families within the Commonwealth network.
10. We sincerely hope that in the interest of both UK and Malaysian community, the British Government will accede to the request of setting up a public inquiry on the Batang Kali massacre.
Quek Ngee Meng
Coordinator, Voluntary Lawyers
The Action Committee Condemning the Batang Kali Massacre
30 January 2009
1. Following the petitions submitted by the Action Committee Condemning the Batang Kali Massacre on both 25 March and 12 December 2008, the British High Commissioner, HE Boyd McCleary, being the representative of HM Queen Elizabeth II in Malaysia, has been directed to reply to the petitions on 21 January 2009.
2. The British Government claims that they have carefully considered the petitions and concludes that “in view of the findings of 2 previous investigations that there was insufficient evidence to pursue prosecutions in this case, and in the absence of any new evidence, regrettable we see no reason to reopen or start a fresh investigation.” It is understood that the 2 previous investigation referred to the 1949 and the 1970 investigations.
3. The Action Committee is disappointed and absolutely not convinced with the British Government reply because the latter has not taken into account the inherent unsatisfactory and incomplete nature of the previous 2 investigations. Instead, the British Government has taken into account an irrelevant consideration of pursuing criminal prosecution, which is not intended or demanded by the surviving families of the massacre.
4. There were 4 sworn statements from the soldiers involved confirming that they had misled the 1949 investigation. The soldiers admitted there was an intentional killing and the unarmed civilians were not trying to escape. The sworn statements were not rebutted. As such, the credibility of the 1949 investigation has been put into doubt.
5. As for the 1970 investigation, the then Director of Public Prosecution, who instructed to halt the 1970 investigation prematurely, admitted that there was a substantial conflict of evidence amongst the soldiers involved, and no statement or interview was ever taken from the Malaysian witnesses, such as the survival of the massacre, Chong Foong and his wife Tham Yong. In addition, no process of body exhumation and forensic examination were ever conducted. We submit that the 1970 investigation is incomplete and certainly inconclusive.
6. In view of the above, we can’t help but to conclude that the British Government has failed to read and consider the petitions submitted by the Action Committee carefully and with due weight. They have used the “1970 standard format reply”, which is obviously outdated. We have the statements from the Malaysian eye-witnesses. Further, the remains of the massacre were lying at the cemetery of Ulu Yam, Batang Kali. These are credible evidence for the case which have never been considered by the British authorities.
7. Let’s be very clear. The surviving families are not seeking any criminal trial of the soldiers involved. They are requesting a thorough and an independent investigation via the setting up of a public inquiry so that the historical truth can be discovered. The surviving families, who lost their bread earners for the past 60 years, have been living in a dismal plight. It is only reasonable for them to request an official apology, compensation and construction of a memorial for their love ones from the authority who had committed an atrocity.
8. The surviving families’ lawyer in UK will write a formal letter to the British Government (known as Pre-Action Protocol letter) setting out the reasons that the decision taken by the British Government is unlawful, and inviting them to reconsider their position before we ensue with legal proceeding.
9. Meanwhile, the Action Committee will be seeking a meeting with the Malaysian representative of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association for purpose of persuading the Malaysian MP to seek redress for the surviving families within the Commonwealth network.
10. We sincerely hope that in the interest of both UK and Malaysian community, the British Government will accede to the request of setting up a public inquiry on the Batang Kali massacre.
Quek Ngee Meng
Coordinator, Voluntary Lawyers
The Action Committee Condemning the Batang Kali Massacre
30 January 2009
Related reports:
Posts
4 comments:
义民兄，很高兴能认识到你。
u scratch his back, i scratch ur back！
哈哈！
以后请多多指教！
致我党尊贵的同志们，
党的区会主席之位应该要马上改为党员直选制
当今，我党要在来届大选牛扭权坤的话那保住基层党员的选票是必行的首要工作。为了保住基层党员的选票，党的区会主席之位应该要马上改为党员直选制。总会长直选制固然好，但它对基层的震撼度是不够彻底。在政党内不民主机制下的一些我党领导为了保住发财正位，不顾三七二十一，出言＃出＄·出力#出玄*出色和出卖良心来伤害*加害和误导同志们与热爱马华的选民。要铲除以上的恶习，党的区会主席之位改为党员直选制是必行的党内改革運动。
党的区会主席直选制所能带来的改革：
1。每一位党员的一票的比重相对增加。
2。让党走向民主而不是走向专制。
3。提高了每一位党员的基本参政权。
3。拉近了基层党员和区会主席的关系。
4。否定幽灵党员的投票。
5。否定有官位候选人的不法拉票活动。
6。让党员走向自由而不是成为奴隶。
7。否定PLP型的候选人。
8。敢于反对贪官权贵的横行霸道。
9。敢于反对这个组织不合理的制度。
10。增加候选人对自己自我提升能力速度。
11。培养基层党员对候选人的爱戴度。
12。为领导层捐躯的同时也不忘为基层党员捐躯。
最后恳请总会长，总团长三思以上出血贞论。同时也恳请我党的爱党同志们不管你同意或不同意请提供宝贵意见。
且听呤鸣，吾党长存。
馬華加埔區巴生市区支会団長
林伯芳
吉年吉月吉日
义民老弟你好，很久没来拜访你了，近来好吧？
此次前来是有一事相托，不知你是否办到？
你是读法律系的，手上应该由国家宪法的资料，什么时候有空，希望你能把宪法中关于“马来人特权”的部分在此鉴述一下。最好是有原文，而后加翻译。
谢谢！
Dipetik dari Suara Keadilan (dari markas Angkatan Muda Keadilan) (http://www.suarakeadilan.com/sk/beritautama/2009/04/4408)
Cadangan penalti RM50,000 bagi anggota dewan undangan negeri dan RM100,000 bagi anggota parlimen yang melepaskan jawatan tanpa sebab munasabah adalah satu cadangan keanak-anakan kerana tidak masuk akal kata Timbalan Angkatan Muda (AMK) KeADILan Faris Musa.
Berikutan kenyataan Ketua Pemuda Gerakan Kedah Tan Keng Liang yang mahu penalty itu di kenakan keatas mana-mana Adun atau Ahli Parlimen yang mahu meletak jawatan tanpa sebab manasabah.
Beliau juga mencadangkan jika perletakan jawatan itu atas alasan bagi mendapat mandat baru daripada pengundi bagi Adun terbabit untuk menyertai parti gabungan, penalti itu perlu dikurangkan separuh.
Sementara itu, satu lagi kenyataan yang dibuat oleh Ahli Parlimen Jerlun, Mukhriz Mahathir menyokong supaya Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya (SPR) mengenakan hukuman terhadap wakil rakyat yang meletak jawatan sesuka hati tanpa alasan yang kukuh.
Katanya, perbuatan meletak jawatan dalam kalangan Anggota Parlimen atau Anggota Dewan Undangan Negeri pembangkang dengan sewenang-wenangnya, kini seolah-olah menjadi trend bagi memastikan parti mereka sentiasa mendapat perhatian.
Perbuatan itu katanya merugikan rakyat dan negara kerana pilihan raya kecil memerlukan perbelanjaan besar setiap kali diadakan, selain mewujudkan suasana tidak selesa dalam kalangan penyokong parti-parti yang bertanding.
Faris membidas kenyataan Tan dan Mukhris sebagai tidak masuk akal kerana amalan perletakan jawatan adalah perkara biasa yang diamalkan di negara-negara berasakan demokrasi.
“Kenyataan itu amat tidak masuk akal serta agak keterlaluan dan memihak kepada kerajaan Barisan Nasional sahaja tanpa mengambil kira pendapat pihak lain,” jelas Faris kepada Suara Keadilan.
Post a Comment