Lawsuit seeks to declare BM version of Constitution as authoritative text
He cited Article 160B of the Constitution stating that where the Constitution has been translated into Bahasa Malaysia, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may prescribe it to be the authoritative text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
Batik gaffe: PAS MP apologises to PM, says not defending a mistake
SHAH ALAM: PAS' Kuala Terengganu MP Datuk Ahmad Amzad Hashim has apologised to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim after claiming that the batik shirt worn by the premier while presenting the 13th Malaysia Plan (13MP) on Thursday (July 31) had an Indonesian design, Sinar Harian reports. The Malay language daily said that Ahmad Amzad had, in a Facebook post, acknowledged his mistake and removed his earlier post after receiving feedback from several batil entrepreneurs, including the producer of the batik shirt worn by Anwar. "The owner of Bujins Batik clarified that it was their product. I will not defend my mistake and was only made aware of it just now by my officer because I was in transit from Kuala Lumpur back to Kuala Terengganu and did not follow the development of that post. "That was indeed my fault and I need to correct it immediately," he said. Earlier, Ahmad Amzad had posted a message advising the Prime Minister to be careful in choosing appropriate attire during the 13MP presentation in the Dewan Rakyat. In that post, he also questioned Anwar's decision to wear a batik shirt with an Indonesian design, arguing that the attire on Thursday was meant to highlight the uniqueness of Malaysian batik as a heritage and national identity before deleting his statement. Ahmad Amzad expressed his gratitude to all parties who provided feedback and clarified that his intention was simply to offer a perspective as a concerned representative for the local batik industry. "To the Prime Minister, I apologise. My intention was merely to provide a viewpoint because, as a representative from Terengganu who frequently interacts with many Malaysian batik entrepreneurs, one of the issues often raised is the fate of the Malaysian batik industry. "I apologise once again. Respectfully," he said.
The Star
3 hours ago
- The Star
Impeachment almost impossible if Philippine Supreme Court doesn't revise its verdict, says rep Terry Ridon
MANILA: Impeaching any high-ranking official may be almost impossible if the Supreme Court (SC) does not revise its decision on Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment case, Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon said on Thursday (July 31). Ridon, in an ambush interview at the Batasang Pambansa complex, explained that with the SC decision, an impeachable official can just ask a friend in the House of Representatives to file a weak impeachment case against him or her, and this will automatically kick in the one-year prohibition period on impeachment proceedings. On July 25, SC spokesperson Camille Ting announced that the Articles of Impeachment forwarded by the House to the Senate was deemed unconstitutional by the high tribunal for violating the 1987 Constitution's one-year ban rule. 'I think this sentiment was played out in the last couple of days – the actual objections of lawyers, lawyers' groups, people's organisations and our esteemed luminaries – about the effects of this particular decision, and I will reiterate it today. If the Supreme Court stands on this decision and it does not reconsider the ruling, nobody in the Philippines would be impeached,' Ridon, a lawyer by profession, told reporters. 'Because any high-ranking official — a president, vice president, Supreme Court justice – if they have a friend who is a House member, they will endorse a complaint, ask them to file a complaint against me. Whether or not the House addresses that, the one year ban period starts,' he added. According to Ridon, it is an 'unfortunate situation which we hope that the Supreme Court will reconsider.' On February 5, Duterte was impeached after 215 House lawmakers from the 19th Congress filed and signed a fourth complaint, which was hinged on allegations of confidential fund misuse within her offices, threats to ranking officials, and other possible violations of the Constitution. The Articles of Impeachment were immediately forwarded to the Senate on the same day, as the 1987 Constitution requires a trial to start forthwith if at least one-third of all House members — or just 102 out of 306 — have signed and endorsed the petition. In February, two petitions seeking to stop the impeachment complaints were filed before the SC. The first was from Mindanao-based lawyers who claimed that the House did not observe the Constitution's rules, which require it to act on filed impeachment complaints within 10 session days. The first impeachment complaint was filed in December 2024 and was only referred to the House committee on rules on February 5. The House, however, asserted in its reply to the SC that all the impeachment complaints were addressed within 10 session days, noting that the term 'session days' should not be mistaken with 'calendar days' or 'working days.' In its explanation, the House presented a table showing when the sessions were held. The day that the first complaint was submitted to House Secretary General Reginald Velasco's office, December 2, was the 26th Session Day of the 19th Congress' Third Regular Session. On the other hand, the three impeachment complaints were forwarded by Velasco to House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez on February 5, and these were brought to the plenary on the same day — which was the 36th Session day of the Third Regular Session. The House believes this means it took exactly 10 session days before the first complaint was transmitted. While the Articles of Impeachment were deemed unconstitutional, SC clarified that it does not absolve the vice president, adding that the next impeachment complaint can be filed against the vice president by February 6, 2026. The House is expected to file a motion for reconsideration on the SC's decision regarding the impeachment. The Senate, on the other hand, is scheduled to tackle the matter on Wednesday (Aug 6). - Philippine Daily Inquirer/ANN
Focus Malaysia
4 hours ago
- Focus Malaysia
Of flying passports and counter-settings
THE integrity of a nation's border is fundamental to its sovereignty, security, and reputation. In Malaysia, however, recent revelations have highlighted troubling systemic vulnerabilities within immigration and border enforcement practices particularly through covert and corrupt mechanisms known as 'passport terbang' and 'counter-setting'. These practices not only compromise lawful migration processes but also facilitate serious transnational crimes, including human trafficking and the smuggling of migrants. 'Flying passport' (or 'pasport terbang' in Malay) refers to the unauthorised practice of submitting a passport to immigration authorities for renewal, visa endorsement, or extension without the physical presence of the passport holder. This contravenes official procedures which mandate in-person attendance for identity verification, often through biometric means. In many of these cases, passports are collected and transported by intermediaries on behalf of the holder in exchange for illicit fees. Counter-setting, on the other hand, involves immigration officers at entry or exit points such as Kuala Lumpur International Airport intentionally manning specific counters to facilitate the unlawful passage of foreign nationals without proper documentation or scrutiny. These activities are typically arranged through clandestine networks and are executed in exchange for bribes. Though seemingly procedural deviations, both practices signify entrenched corruption within parts of the immigration system, threatening not only Malaysia's border control efficacy but also the country's international standing in law enforcement, anti-trafficking efforts, and governance. A critical enabler of these corrupt practices is the role played by a wide range of intermediaries including employment agents, taxi drivers, freelance 'runners', and even certain members of airport staff. In trafficking-related cases, passports belonging to victims are often seized by traffickers and handed to these intermediaries, who in turn bribe immigration personnel to process renewals or extensions without the victim's awareness or consent. This shadow network enables the formal legalisation of an illegal or exploitative presence, allowing trafficked persons to remain in the country with official documentation while being subjected to labour or sexual exploitation. Victims are thus rendered invisible to protective institutions, as their legal status on paper conceals the coercion and abuse they endure in practice. These practices raise pressing legal and policy concerns because they violate several laws such as Section 55E of the Immigration Act 1959/63, which criminalises harbouring or employing undocumented migrants. It also contravene the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007, particularly where visa fraud is used to facilitate continued exploitation. In addition, these practices undermine the standard operating procedures of the Immigration Department which mandate physical presence and biometric identity confirmation, and risk compromising Malaysia's compliance with international legal instruments, including the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC) and the UN Trafficking Protocol. Moreover, these practices significantly erode public confidence in enforcement agencies, perpetuate a culture of impunity, and hinder the nation's efforts to combat organised crime and protect vulnerable populations. To address these challenges, a multi-pronged strategy is required which targets both systemic weaknesses and individual accountability such as mandating biometric and in-person verification for all immigration procedures. First, strict enforcement of in-person biometric verification for all passport, visa, and permit applications. Digital systems should automatically flag and suspend applications submitted without such verification. Second, implement real-time surveillance and tamper-proof digital logs. In this instance, it would be useful to install CCTV with live monitoring at immigration counters and visa-processing units. All entry and visa transactions should be recorded in tamper-proof systems accessible only to authorised personnel, with audit trails built in. Third, identify, blacklist, and prosecute facilitators and middlemen involved in these activities. In this instance, it is recommended to maintain a registry of blacklisted intermediaries suspected or convicted of engaging in corrupt immigration practices. Fourth, enforcement action should extend to all parties involved including agents, syndicates, and complicit civilians. Fifth, enforcement of a system of regular staff rotations across immigration offices and entry points to disrupt entrenched corrupt networks and prevent collusion between officers and external actors. Sixth, strengthen awareness among foreign nationals who are residing or working in Malaysia. They should be educated on lawful immigration procedures, the risks of using unauthorised intermediaries, and the legal consequences of engaging in document fraud. Multilingual outreach materials should also be made readily available. Flying passport and counter-setting are not mere administrative lapses but are manifestations of systemic corruption that threaten the rule of law, embolden transnational crime, and endanger human security. Malaysia's commitment to border integrity must be matched by the political will to root out these practices and strengthen the accountability of its immigration enforcement framework. Just as immigration officers are duty-bound to uphold the law, foreign nationals must also respect and comply with Malaysia's immigration regulations. Any attempt to bypass due process whether through bribery, fraud, or intermediary collusion undermines the legitimacy of the nation's legal system and puts both individuals and the broader public at risk. Malaysia stands at a critical juncture: ensuring that its borders are not only efficient and accessible but also just, secure, and corruption-free. ‒ July 31, 2025 Dr Haezreena Begum Abdul Hamid is a Criminologist and Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Law, University of Malaya. The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia. Main image: Unsplash/Nahrizul Adib Kadri
