PEMBOHONGAN TERBESAR ABAD INI OLEH YB NIZAR JAMALUDDIN

Friday, Februari 2, 2013

Nizar PANIK Kerajaan Jepun CARI PENYEBAR FITNAH RM207 BILION

Tuntutan RM207 Bilion Mangsa Perang : Jepun Desak Malaysia Siasat Penyebar Fitnah. KUALA LUMPUR 19 Jan. - Dakwaan bekas Menteri Besar Perak Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin mengenai pampasan RM207 bilion kepada mangsa buruh paksa semasa pendudukan Jepun di Tanah Melayu akhirnya mendapat maklum balas tegas dari Jepun . Menurut Menteri Kewangan Kedua Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah  kerajaan Jepun meminta Malaysia menyiasat dan mengambil tindakan tegas terhadap pihak yang menyebarkan dakwaan palsu itu . Perkara itu terkandung dalam surat dihantar Pejabat Kedutaan Jepun kepada Malaysia. Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni juga memaklumkan pihak yang terbabit juga telah memalsukan memo yang dikeluarkan pegawai perbendaharaan negara. Nizar dalam laman 'twitter' beliau seolah-olah cuba memberikan respon berhubung perkara ini dengan mengeluarkan 'posting' yang dilihat agak terpesong dengan kenyataan asal beliau mengenai pampasan berjumlah RM 207 billion . Nizar dalam laman 'twitter' beliau seolah-olah cuba memberikan respon berhubung perkara ini dengan mengeluarkan 'posting' yang dilihat agak terpesong dengan kenyataan asal beliau mengenai pampasan berjumlah RM 207 billion

Japanese WWII Reparations: Are PR Politicians on LSD?

Pembangkang Tahap Longkang - MEMO Pun Di Palsukan Bagi Puaskan Nafsu Sendiri ?!

 MEMO Hanyalah Untuk Kegunaan Dalaman Sahaja, Manakala   TIDAK WUJUD BAHAGIAN PENGELUARAN BAYARAN DI KEMENTERIAN KEWANGAN & TIDAK WUJUD JAWATAN KETUA SETIAUSAHA KEMENTERIAN KEWANGAN MALAYSIA.

 "MEMO" Gabenor BNM Berkaitan  100 Billion Fitnah Untuk Permulaan Membuka Maybank ~ PAKATAN HAPRAK 

"MEMO"  Pejabat Peguam Negara    -    ATTONEY?        
Jabatan Kerajaan   Berurusan dengan surat menyurat

Kedutaan Jepun: Wang pampasan landasan maut  sudah diserahkan

January 4, 2013 Sekretariat Jejak meminta pihak negara Jepun memberi maklumat bila dan berapa jumlah pampasan kepada buruh binaan itu di hantar ke negara ini. KUALA LUMPUR: Kedutaan Jepun di Malaysia mengesahkan kerajaan negara itu telah menyerahkan sejumlah wang pampasan kepada kerajaan Malaysia untuk diserahkan kepada buruh paksa pembinaan landasan keretapi Thailand-Myanmar. Setiausaha Kedua Kedutaan Jepun ke Malaysia, Takaharu Suegami, ketika mengesahkan penyerahan wang itu berkata, “Berdasarkan maklumat yang dikaji, kami dapati wang tersebut diserahkan sekitar tahun 1990an. “Kami akan merujuk kepada Tokyo selepas ini (untuk maklumat lanjut),” kata beliau semalam. Ketika ditanya, siapa penerima pampasan ini, pegawai kedutaan Jepun itu berkata, “Kami tidak tahu macam mana kerajaan Malaysia mengagihkan wang pampasan itu.” Bagaimanapun, Takaharu berjanji akan merujuk balik dengan Tokyo berdasarkan dokumen yang diberikan. Sekretariat Jejak mencari bekas buruh paksa dan waris landasan maut Siam-Burma yang diketuai oleh Datuk Seri Mohamad Nizar Jamaludin mengunjungi Kedutaan Jepun di Kuala Lumpur semalam bagi mendapatkan maklumat lebih mendalam tentang pampasan itu. Turut bersama dalam kunjungan itu, Naib Ketua Pemuda PAS Dr Raja Iskandar Al-Hiss, Ketua Operasi Jejak Safarizal Saleh, Penolong Pengerusi Persatuan Kebajikan Bekas dan Warisan Binaan Landasan Kereta Api Siam Burma 1942-1946 dan beberapa orang lagi wakil dari Jejak. Dalam sidang Dewan Rakyat sebelum ini, Nizar mendakwa, kerajaan Jepun telah membayar RM207 bilion kepada kerajaan Malaysia sebagai pampasan kepada buruh paksa pembinaan keretapi itu. Namun sehingga kini, tidak ada sebarang wang diberikan oleh kerajaan Malaysia kepada mangsa atau waris mereka. Dalam kunjungan hari ini, Sekretariat Jejak juga meminta pihak negara Jepun memberi maklumat bila dan berapa jumlah pampasan kepada buruh binaan itu di hantar ke negara ini dan siapa yang mengesahkan penerimaan itu. Dalam pertemuan sejam itu, Nizar turut meminta pihak Jepun menyerahkan senarai nama rakyat Malaysia yang menjadi buruh binaan landasan kereta api Siam-Burma 1942 hingga 1946 itu. “Kita jumpa dengan pihak kedutaan Jepun petang ini, untuk mengesahkan maklumat yang kita perolehi itu benar atau sebaliknya. “Sekiranya pihak Jepun masih menyimpan senarai buruh atau mangsa-mangsa dari Malaysia ini sila majukan kepada kami,” katanya ketika ditemui. Dokumen rasmi Nizar yang juga Ahli Parlimen Bukit Gantang turut mendedahkan beberapa surat pengesahan dan dokumen rasmi kepada wakil Kedutaan Jepun berkenaan. Salah satu surat tersebut dari Kementerian Kewangan bertarikh 29 Mac 2011 menjelaskan, “kertas pertimbangan bagi kelulusan pengeluaran wang pampasan kepada buruh paksa ke Burma 1942 hingga 1946. Sukacita dimaklumkan peruntukan sejumlah RM207 billion telah diangkat oleh kelulusan kerajaan di mana prosesnya dimaklumkan kepada pejabat Peguam Negara dan di peringkat Kementerian Sumber Manusia”. Menurut Nizar, pihaknya sehingga kini tidak tahu di mana pampasan itu berada sama ada masih disimpan di dalam Perbendaharaan Negara atau Amanah Raya kerana tidak ada sebarang penjelasan dibuat kerajaan sehingga kini. “Kita tidak tahu. Kalau wang itu masih ada dalam simpanan kerajaan kenapa tidak diberi balik kepada mangsa. Mangsa ada 30,000 yang boleh balik semula ke Malaysia walaupun ada yang meninggal dunia tetapi mereka masih ada waris melalui Persatuan Kebajikan Bekas dan Warisan Buruh Binaan Landasan Kereta Api Siam Burma 1942-1946″. Mengikut rekod persatuan bekas buruh paksa ini, jumlah 30,000 buruh ini melibatkan 60 peratus bangsa Melayu, 20 peratus India, 15 peratus Cina dan 5 peratus bangsa lain. Nizar yang juga Ajk PAS Pusat berkata, dengan jumlah RM207 bilion itu setiap keluarga dianggarkan layak menerima sehingga RM3 juta wang pampasan. “Banyak! pemberian pampasan ini kepada mangsa lebih baik dari ETP yang dibuat oleh kerajaan, sekurang-kurangnya dapat mengatasi sedikit masalah ekonomi orang Melayu,” katanya. Sejak didaftarkan secara rasmi pada 11 Januari 2011, persatuan terbabit telah memohon beberapa kali untuk mendapatkan wang pampasan dari kerajaan Malaysia tetapi hingga kini masih gagal. -Harakahdaily Di Sini

Ini satu lagi kes bangang tahap longkang ~ agaknya waktu jadi Menteri Kesihatan banyak telan Panadol

Who hijacked the Death Railway money? January 6, 2013 The money - RM207 billion - is believed to have been transferred by the Japanese government to Malaysia in the 1990s. What has happened to it? COMMENT By Chua Jui Meng Is Dr Mahathir Mohamad going to take the same “silence is golden” stand as Najib Tun Razak and his infamous diamond-loving wife Rosmah Mansor when cornered by an issue? The revelation by the Japanese Embassy that it had paid compensation to the Malaysian government for families of victims of the so called “Death Railway” project in the 1940s is shocking. The sum of RM207 billion or whatever the amount must be revealed by Mahathir. He was close to the Japanese government and corporate sector when he promoted his Look East Policy aimed at enhancing trade with Japan. The money, believed to be amounting to RM207 billion, was meant to be distributed to some 30,000 Malaysians who had been recruited as forced labourers by the Japanese to build the Thai-Burma rail link. This means each affected family is entitled to receive between RM2.8 million and RM3 million as compensation. The stinking part of the Umno-led Barisan Nasional federal government is that the public is today unaware of the compensation payment by the Japanese. We would have thought Mahathir would have brought the money back from Japan in triumph, like a victorious Roman general. Umno would have organised a huge gathering of the victims or their families and distributed the money. No, it was all covered in secrecy. National probe needed The money rightfully belongs to the victims of the “Death Railway” project and their families and to rob them is despicable. The money is believed to have been transferred by the Japanese government to Malaysia in the 1990s. This means it happened during Mahathir’s 22-year reign. Who then has hijacked or stolen the money? It is no small sum and surely Mahathir cannot expect us to accept his infamous “I cannot remember” or “I am unaware of such compensation money from Japan”? This time, Malaysians cannot accept his “selective loss of memory” or “selective amnesia”. Whoever stole the money from the 30,000 dead Malaysians is/are worse than animals, hitting the depths of greed. The government must immediately set up a national probe team to track down the thief/thieves to recover the money and for prosecution. Surely there are paper trails, beginning with the transfer/s from the Japanese to the Malaysian government. Meanwhile, Japan can do further justice to the 30,000 Malaysian forced labourers who died in the “Death Railway” project by revealing their identities so that their families are traced. Ultimate danger.. Di Sini

Kesian Ramai Abang-abang Pak Cik Pak Cik   kena kencing....semua di heret ke Kedutaan Jepun  dan  sana sini.....

Jom Baca Kenapa Jepun Kena Bayar....

Looking substantively at the issue, first, Article 14 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty states, “It is recognized that Japan should pay reparations to the Allied Powers for the damage and suffering caused by it during the war.” This authorizes reparations by recognizing war responsibility. Other claims rights and settlement of property rights, return or compensation for Allied property, compensation for Japanese mistreatment of Allied prisoners of war, resolution of the claims rights of neutral nations, and debt return from the prewar period, etc., are minutely specified in Articles 15 to 18. This may differ slightly from the war responsibility being debated today, but Japan here indicated an attitude to deal sincerely with war responsibility and resolving the various problems arising from the war. Based on the peace treaty, Japan concluded reparations agreements with the Philippines and South Vietnam and concluded individual peace treaties and reparations agreements with Burma and Indonesia, which were not parties to the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Cambodia and Laos were parties to the San Francisco Peace Treaty but forfeited their right to claim indemnities, so Japan concluded grant capital aid cooperation agreements with these two countries in return. (This type of aid is classified as “quasi-reparations” in Japan, and in the domestic budget is included not in the general account but in the special reparations account.) With another non-participant in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, India, Japan concluded a peace treaty in June 1952, ending the state of war and confirming India’s renunciation of indemnities from Japan. 6 Japan recognized its war responsibility and agreed to pay indemnities in these various peace and reparations agreements.

In the reparations agreements with the Philippines and South Vietnam, there is no clear reference to war responsibility, but given that these treaties were based on Article 14 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, in which “it is recognized that Japan should pay reparations to the Allied Powers for the damage and suffering caused by it during the war,” obviously there was no need to repeat these provisions. In the individually concluded peace treaty with Burma, Japan recognized its responsibility by stating that “Japan is prepared to pay reparations to the Union of Burma in order to compensate the damage and suffering caused by Japan during the war.” There is a similarly worded article in the peace treaty with Indonesia, based upon which a reparations agreement is concluded. Although not specifically reparations, Japan concluded so-called grant capital aid agreements in the 1960s and provided grant loans as a form of quasi-reparations to Malaysia and Singapore, whose ethnic Chinese communities strongly demanded redress for damage suffered from Japanese occupation. These agreements state,“Japan recognizes that the (early and total) resolution of problems arising from unfortunate incidents during World War II in Malaysia (Singapore) would contribute to promoting its friendly relations with Malaysia (Singapore).” They thus recognize Japan’s responsibility, and further state that the contracting parties “agree that all problems arising from unfortunate incidents during World War II are hereby totally and conclusively resolved.”  

 “Historical Issues” in Japanese Diplomacy Toward  Neighboring Countries by Shuji Shimokoji 2002-2003 Fellow Weatherhead Center for International Affairs Harvard University May 2003 

Shimokoji joined Japanese Foreign Ministry in 1970...in case you're wondering jepun sesat mana ni...

That agreement he mentioned was done in 1967

Sila Lihat "Bilateral Diplomacy" dari Kementerian Luar....

Sumber Di Sini

So what actually happened to that money?

After the separation of Singapore and Malaysia in 1965, it was at first decided that the two governments would take their claim to the Japanese Government separately. The Malaysian Government, however, argued that since both Singapore and Malaya were under British rule, and since Britain had obtained a war indemnity from Japan of which $455mil was meant for Malaya and Singapore, the governments of Malaysia and Singapore no longer had rights to make such claims. But the Malaysian Government’s view was not shared by the people who were making the claim. They maintained that war indemnities were meant for war victims and the rehabilitation of the economy; these monies were disbursed through the Allied War Damage Fund and the War Victims Fund. The claimants did not feel such compensation covered the $50mil the Chinese communities in Malaya and Singapore was forced to donate. The issue was to drag on for a few years before the Singapore and Japanese Governments reached an agreement in 1967: the Japanese would make a gift loan of S$25mil to Singapore. The money was to be used to purchase shipping material and to set up a ground station for satellite communications. In Malaysia’s case, a separate agreement was reached in July 1967: a sum of M$25mil (Malaysian ringgit) was presented to be used to purchase two ocean-going vessels from Japan. There was, however, some wangling before the agreement was actually signed. The Japanese Government demanded that the Malaysian Government guarantee it would make no further demands. This was rejected by the Malaysian Government. It was not until September 1967 that the agreement was signed after Japan withdrew that demand. The two governments, however, did agree that the gift of M$25mil would be the final and complete settlement of the unpleasant events of the Japanese Occupation. Source Danny Wong Tze-Ken Department of History, Universiti Malaya. Sumber : Di Sini

Pembelian 2 Buah Kapal  Untuk Pelancaran MISC

Compensation issue for "Death Railway" workers settled: Malaysian official The Malaysian government considers that it has settled the issue of compensation for those who were forced to work on the Japanese "Death Railway" during the World War II, an Malaysian official said Thursday. The Malaysian and Japanese governments inked a pact on the issue on Sept. 21, 1967, Malaysian Foreign Ministry parliamentary secretary Ahmad Shabery Cheek was quoted as saying by Malaysia's national news agency Bernama. Under the deal, the Japanese agreed to pay "blood money" to the Malaysian government, he told the parliament here. The money was used to set up the Malaysia International Shipping Corporation, he said. The official also noted that Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi told a cabinet meeting on April 27, 2005 that the issue had been settled. The Malaysian Foreign Ministry considered the matter had been closed from the perspective of the Malaysian government, he said. However, he stressed that the Malaysian Foreign Ministry would not stop any individuals or organizations from filing compensation claims with the Japanese. Sumber : Di Sini

Jom kita tengok how much Japan has been sending money to us..

SUMBER : Di Sini

Sumber : Di Sini

The money being paid by Japan to the Government of Malaysia does not waive the rights of individuals to make claims.T

Remember what our Foreign Ministry Official said?

The Malaysian Foreign Ministry considered the matter had been closed from the perspective of the Malaysian government, he said. However, he stressed that the Malaysian Foreign Ministry would not stop any individuals or organizations from filing compensation claims with the Japanese

This is where we need to look at the Korean Comfort Women cases...

Japan has argued that the Settlement of Claims with Korea completely resolved the issue of reparations.  The text of the agreement, however, represented a state-to-state economic settlement. This intergovernmental diplomatic exchange cannot alleviate Japan's obligations to compensate individual victims. Historically, a state could waive the presentation of a claim of its national, because states alone used to be the subjects of international law. Eventually, international law recognized that individuals were not mere "objects" of state relations, and hence extended opportunity for redress to individuals. In light of these considerations, Japan cannot maintain that Korea waived the claims of its nationals. Hence, Japan has a continuing duty to provide reparations for individuals. Since the Settlement of Claims did not account for individual reparations, it cannot be regarded as "final and complete". Mr. Kim Yong-sik, the former Foreign Minister of Korea who participated in the negotiations for the normalization, stated that Japan provided financial assistance to meet claims for restoration and not to address reparations for individual victims of war.  Furthermore, when Japan signed the treaty, it did not acknowledge having inflicted crimes against humanity on the Korean people. Mr. Kanichiro Kuboda, the chief negotiator for Japan during the normalization talks, promised that Japan would pay compensation for its atrocities, if there had been any such cases.  Although the treaty representing the final settlement does not reflect Mr. Kuboda's remarks, his comment provides helpful insight as to the limited scope of the treaty.  Moreover, his comment suggests additional settlements in the event mistakes of fact surfaced in the future. At the time of signing the Settlement of Claims, the Japanese government had not conceded its involvement in the forced prostitution of Korean women. If this fact had been admitted at the time, Korea and its nationals could have waived their rights to present further claims by signing the Settlement of Claims. Since this is not the case, the individual victims are entitled to make their claims now. The Multilateral Treaty of Peace with Japan  sheds light on why the Settlement of Claims was so limited in scope. Regarding reparations, the Treaty of Peace reads:

It is recognized that Japan should pay reparations to the Allied Powers for the damage and suffering caused by it during the war. Nevertheless it is also recognized that the resources of Japan are not presently sufficient, if it is to maintain a viable economy, to make complete reparation for all such damage and suffering and at the same time meet its other obligations.

 The decision of the Allies reflected the resolve not to re-live the repercussions of Germany's burden of reparations after World War 1.1 Nevertheless, a nation should not be completely absolved of its crimes until it has fulfilled its obligations. Today, Japan has the means to compensate the individual victims  and hence the opportunity to resolve the issue of wartime reparations. A treaty which only speaks to nation-to-nation redress cannot remove the rights of individuals. Governmental representatives have no legal authority to discharge individual human rights. A person's right to compensation is fundamental. The International Bill of Human Rights explicitly states: "Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law."' A treaty by which a State abandons the individual right to compensation is null and void. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) agrees that individuals who suffered violations of their human rights are not bound by the actions of their government.  The ICRC states: ... a State remains responsible for breaches of the Convention and may not absolve itself from responsibility on the grounds that those who committed the breaches have been punished. For example, it remains liable to pay compensation. Therefore, the Settlement of Claims did not abrogate the rights of individual victims to seek redress, and Japan remains liable to address the claims of the comfort women. International humanitarian law affins this conclusion. Article 3 of the Fourth Hague Convention recognizes that States have the obligation to pay compensation for breaches of the laws and customs of war.  All four Geneva Conventions of 1949 pronounce that no State may absolve itself of any liability incurred by itself with respect to grave breaches listed in the Conventions.  Japan is subject to the principles of these conventions and it cannot absolve itself without first meeting its obligations. Sumber Di Sini

Lain-lain info berkaitan sila lihat pautan seperti di bawah ; 

http://www.gwu.edu/~memory/data/treaties/Malaysia.pdf

http://www.realityofaid.org/userfiles/roareports/roareport_b1af02104e.pdf

http://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20683/v683.pdf

Nizar kena banyak belajar sejarah looo. Ini menunjukkan  Nizar tidak bertanggungjawab yang sengaja ingin memburuk-burukkan serta menjatuhkan imej dan kepercayaan rakyat terhadap kerajaan dan Kementerian Kewangan.

Untuk rekod pada tahun 1967, kerajaan Malaysia yang pada ketika itu masih dibawah kepimpinan Perdana Menteri Tunku Abdul Rahman , melalui perjanjian dengan kerajaan Jepun yang bersetuju memberi RM 25 juta kepada Malaysia untuk pembelian 2 buah kapal dagang dari negara Jepun. Pembelian kapal dagang ini merupakan titik tolak penubuhan syarikat perkapalan negara MISC yang baru 10 tahun mencapai kemerdekaan.

(rujukan penulisan Danny Wong Tze-Ken Department of History, Universiti Malaya )