Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Press Statement by M Kula Segaran, DAP National Vice Chairman and MP for Ipoh Barat in Ipoh on 25thJanuary, 2017
Call on the government to seriously consider an amnesty programme to resolve the long standing issue of stateless Indians born before Independence
Indians being stateless is a long standing issue that has not been addressed and resolved by the BN government and thus the pains suffered by these people have continued.
Many felt relieved when on August 7 last year, the Prime Minister Najib Razak gave his assurance that he would work towards resolving the issue of citizenship faced by stateless Indians  who were born before the country’s Independence.
“We will solve this in appreciation of the sacrifice of the Indian community who have contributed to the development of the country,” he said when launching MIC’s 70th anniversary celebrations
However, a few days ago,  the Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister Datuk Zahid Hamidi said that there will not be flexibility for the stateless Indians to obtain citizenship.
Zahid’s remarks are most disappointing and demoralizing for those who have been waiting to become citizens. I have responded by saying that Zahid should treat the applications on a case to case basis.
There are cases which involve technical issues and they certainly require flexibility. The fastest way to resolve the long standing plight for those stateless Indians born before Independence will be via an amnesty programme. I call on the government to seriously consider such a programme.
I am most shocked that Pusat Aduan Rakyat Malaysia (PAR) Malaysia President Datuk A. Chandrakumanan has claimed that I have taken Zahid’s speech out of context to provoke and instigate the Indians against the government.
Could he explain firstly how have I taken Zahid’s remarks out of context and secondly since when has he become spokesperson for the Deputy Prime Minister?
I must strongly condemn Chandrakumanan’s accusation that I had raised the issue to provoke the Indians.
As a Member of Parliament who has been bringing up this issue inside and outside the Parliament, I must speak up when Zahid has taken an approach that will not be able to effectively, massively and quickly resolve the long standing issue.
It is Chandrakumanan’s right and choice to want to suck up to the Home Minister, but he must not in doing so, make baseless and unfair allegations and attacks against me or the Opposition
On his accusation that DAP has done nothing on the issue, let me inform Chandrakumanan that the DAP led Penang state government has got a special unit to assist stateless Indians and those who are red IC holders. This was set up to tackle the issue although it is a Federal Government obligation.
I will advise him not to simply open his mouth in future.

Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Press Statement by M Kula Segaran, DAP National Vice Chairman and MP for Ipoh Barat in Ipoh on 24thJanuray, 2017
Indian citizenship applications should be dealt with on a case to case basis

Recently, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said that no flexibility will be given to the Indian community in this country who are not citizens to obtain the identity card.

His statement is uncalled for and insensitive. What he said makes one wonder if he knows the problems of Indians without identity cards.

Does he think that the issue which has caused long sufferings to many could be solved if the government takes a no flexibility stand? Is he sincere in wanting to correct the injustice inflicted on many for so long?

Is he aware that many were denied citizenship wrongly? I myself was a non citizen at age 12 and was given a red IC.
My grandparents and father were born in Malaya and yet I could still be denied citizenship. What more others?
I fought my way and was granted citizenship eventually but many others are not that fortunate as me.

The minimum that Zahid should say is that all applications will be considered on a case to case basis.
Zahid’s no flexibility stand is actually not in tandem with the statement made by the Prime Minister in August last year.
On August 7 last year, the Prime Minister Najib Razak gave his assurance that he will work towards resolving the issue of citizenship faced by members of the Indian community who were born before the country’s Independence.
Najib said the time had come for those who had yet to obtain citizenship to redeem their right.
“We will solve this in appreciation of the sacrifice of the Indian community who have contributed to the development of the country,” he said when launching MIC’s 70th anniversary celebrations.
There have been reports that there are hundreds of thousands of stateless Indians in the country and I have raised their plight and the urgency to solve the issue in Parliament but without avail.
Justice delayed is justice denied. If necessary, the Prime Minister should intervene if Zahid is not doing what should be done in appreciation of the contribution and sacrifices by the Indian community.

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Press Statement by M Kula Segaran, DAP National Vice Chairman and MP for Ipoh Barat in Ipoh on Wednesday, 11th January 2017.

There must be no moral policing on dress code for Thaipusam festival. Neither must there be any violent threat or act 

Many religious places in the world implement dress code for visitors because appropriateness is a requirement for religious site. 

Thaipusam is a religious event and it is therefore necessary that devotees and visitors be appropriately dressed for the event as a mark of respect. 
There is no doubt that over the years there are devotees who have neglected the emphasis that appropriate dress code is necessary when attending Thaipusam event at Batu Caves and elsewhere in our country. 

Batu Caves and other Hindu temples are holy sites for Hindus. Thaipusam is a religious event. It is therefore understandable the failure of some in dressing appropriately for Thaipusam at Batu Caves and other Hindu temples has become an issue of concern among some people.

Last week at the main Hindu temple in Ipoh I was told that tourists who were in shorts (men and women) and some others were in revealing dresses were disallowed to enter the temple. Malaysians and tourist must abide by the temples dress code. 

A few days ago, a Facebook group has warned Hindu women to expect being sprayed with paint should they be "inappropriately dressed" at Thaipusam events.

While I agree that there should be increased awareness among devotees to be appropriately dressed for Thaipusam festival, there must be no moral policing on such an issue. Neither must there be any violent threat nor act against any one failing to abide by appropriate dress code requirement. 

Increased awareness must only be done via education and publicity and not by violence or any form of threat. What more when such spray painting is obviously against the law. No one should take the laws into their own hands.

Thaipusam is a big religious event in Malaysia. It is also a major tourist attraction event. However it must not be marred by unpleasant happenings which can tarnish the event and even the country’s image internationally.
HP- 012-5034346

Wednesday, January 4, 2017

Media statement by M. Kula Segaran MP Ipoh Barat and DAP National Vice Chairman in ipoh on 4th January 2017
CLP’s 4 Year Rule is Absurd, Childish and Uncalled for
The Legal Profession Qualifying Board had on 21st December 2016 release a statement that they have amended the rules with regards to the limitation in the number of attempts that a student may attempt to sit for the Certificate of Legal Practice (CLP) exams. It is absurd that the Board has decided that students will be limited to a 4 year period to complete their CLP.

The sole purpose CLP was established is so that students who can’t afford to do their Bar in UK, could still become a lawyer in Malaysia via the CLP examinations. However, the exams have now become a huge burden for students in order to qualify to become a lawyer.

I have been pursuing for a Common Bar Examinations for the past 10 years in Parliament, yet the Board chose to keep silent about it and till to date is not able to that this happens. Even in the UK when a student studies either in Oxford University or a polytechnic, all of them have to go through the same BPTC exams to become a Barrister. Yet here, local universities have different exams, semi- government universities have different exams, and then there is the CLP for foreign law graduates. Where is the uniformity in this?

How is the Board ensuring that every student prior to starting their pupillage have the same quality? Isn’t that what the Board is supposed to ensure? The quality of the students.

The Board should realise, that till to date, none of the Chairperson has qualified via the CLP examination. Making decisions in air-conditioned rooms without knowing the real effect of their decision on students is outright childish. How many students come from difficult families who have to work part-time and pursue this exam and suddenly now all their dreams have been dashed without even a reasonable notice.

The AG being the Chairman of the Board has to answer as to what is the rationale for this decision? Is the AG implying that local law graduates who evidently don’t have to repeat their examinations many times as compared to the CLP, who mainly are working people, are in par or better then CLP graduates? Is he implying that just because students repeat a professional paper many times they are not qualified?

The AG should be reminded that many great lawyers have sat for their exams numerous times, notably the late Mr. Karpal Singh being one of them. Entry for non-bumi’s in local universities is limited. The greater majority of aspiring lawyers don’t get into local universities and this is their only way into the profession, but now it seems like a roadblock for many of those who don’t get into local universities.

The Board has done nothing in the past 30 odd years or so to make the exam more practical like the UK Bar, and many will agree with me that this exam is nothing more then a memorization marathon rather than a practical professional exam.

This also in no way means that local graduates are of no quality, but the playing ground is tilted highly towards the local graduates compared to students who sit for the CLP. I come from a family of cow-herding and subsequently am a lawyer for more then 33 years and an MP. I understand the plight of many students who don’t come from a fortunate background but yet have aspiring dreams to become a lawyer.

It is shameful that the Board has not proven to make any attempts to improve the quality of all law graduates equally but all they have done is get more and more stringent rules for students sitting for the CLP exams.

I will bring this matter up in Parliament in the next sitting and I hope the by then, the Board makes a rationale decision to make decisions to improve the quality of all law graduates.