Malaysiakini :: Letters
Malaysiakini :: Letters |
| Nik Aziz is for hudud but also respects other religions Posted: 29 Sep 2011 01:32 AM PDT Those who are used to Kelantan Menteri Besar Nik Aziz Nik Mat, understand him as a person who sounds tough but can be quite humane when pressured for a fair deal. I remember when leading a Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism (MCCBCHS) delegation in early 90s at Kota Bharu, he was insistent for the most part of the meeting on the implementation of the hudud laws in Kelantan. However, he was quite cordial and respectful of our views. He kept on assuring us that the new laws would not infringe on our own respective religions and customs. We parted most amicably with him agreeing to consider our views whilst at the same time he requested us to study his proposal. Within a few weeks he had sent us the decision of his government not to impose the hudud laws and other Syariah Laws on non-Muslims. We were also aware of the fact that the Parliament must amend the federal constitution before Kelantan government can implement the hudud laws on non-Muslims. Our council then went on a nationwide campaign meeting all political party leaders to request them not to support any amendment to the constitution. The problem we have in this country is that our non-Muslim MPs from the ruling party from peninsular and East Malaysia voted in the year 1988 in favour of amendments to Article 121(1) and (1A) of the federal constitution to severely diminish the power of the Civil Courts. The irony was that Nik Aziz restored the freedom of non-Muslims to build temples and churches, and the demolition of places of worship was prevented and settled by discussion. Even the lion dances banned before was brought back again in the 90s in Kelantan. As religious organisation leaders we found it embarrassing to criticise the Kelantan Government's restrictions on alcohol, gambling and vice. However, it is my personal opinion that hudud laws and all other Islamic laws should not be implemented in Malaysia, given our multi-racial and multi-religious population. It is not healthy for there to be two sets of criminal laws, and for Muslims and non-Muslims to face different punishments for the same offences. A Vaithilingam is a former president of MCCBCHST. |
| Some are ready to retire at 55 Posted: 29 Sep 2011 12:47 AM PDT I read with concern the current proposal for a higher retirement age in Malaysia. The details of the proposal have not been publicised yet and most of us are in the dark about it. While the trade unions appear to be heavily consulted in the formulation of the policy, there are millions of other employees who are not members of trade unions and whose views may not be represented. For those of us who have planned for retirement at the age of 55, is it being fair to make it mandatory for us to work until 60 (if that's in the new policy)? Why should our EPF money be withheld until 60 (if that's the new policy)? There are those of us who have done our retirement planning with dedication and foresight. We have adequate funds in our EPF account, and personal savings and investments, to retire at the age of 55. We have planned our retirement for years, diligently doing our calculations, extrapolating the EPF contributions and dividends, carefully investing a certain percentage in mutual funds where applicable, spending modestly and never overextending ourselves. We work hard to pay off our loans whenever possible, while avoiding incurring additional loans as we approach our retirement age of 55. We are 100 percent sure that we have adequate funds for retirement at the age of 55. Why should we be asked to work until 60? Why should we not be allowed to withdraw all our EPF funds at the age of 55? In summary, for those of us who have planned for umpteen years, we demand that: 1. We are allowed to retire at the age of 55. 2. We are allowed to withdraw all our EPF monies at the age of 55. 3. We are allowed to withdraw one-third of our EPF account balance at the age of 50 (as the rules currently allow). Let the government be forewarned that any attempt to force through the policy changes, without reasonable consideration for the above demands, is potentially damaging to its electoral chances. There must at least be some room to allow for the above demands to be met, even though the policy to accommodate the higher retirement age is understandable in view of demographics and global trends. There must be a policy for those who need to work till 60, but at the same time, there must be justice for those who are financially capable of retiring at 55. The idea is not to force anyone to work one day longer than they need to. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysiakini :: Letters To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan