Posted in DAP MENGKHIANATI KAUM INDIA

Kuil Hindu: Mahu Pakatan ia dibina semula bersebelahan kawasan loji rawatan kumbahan?

‘Mengapa tidak persoal pembangkang roboh tujuh kuil?’ (Utusan, 22 April 2013)

NajibTempleDemolition

‘Khalid denies demolishing Hindu temples in Selangor’ (TMI, 24 April 2013)

The Selangor MB and his Chinese right hand, left hand women
The Selangor MB and his Chinese right hand, left hand women

Kata Khalid Ibrahim, rumah-rumah ibadat penganut Hindu yang didakwa Najib sebagai telah dirobohkan oleh kerajaan negeri Selangor sebenarnya hanya dipindahkan ke tapak yang lebih bersesuaian (Actually ah, “we relocated the temples to a better place”).

Oh ya kah? Mengikut aduan masyarakat India setempat, kuil India Taman Sentosa itu dibina semula di tepi kawasan loji rawatan kumbahan Indah Water.

Sebuah lagi pula kuil yang terpaksa dialih telah dianugerahkan tanah tapak pembinaan yang berada dalam lingkungan arus voltan elektrik tinggi yang berbahaya di Kota Kemuning.

Betulkah ni? Boleh tak blogger-blogger MIC tolong beri sedikit pencerahan?

Puan Speaker Selangor yang begitu sayangkan Little India itu tidak prihatin atau ada pernah menimbulkan apa-apa bantahan?

***  ***  ***

Mengikut rencana Malaysiakini hari ini bertajuk ‘Waytha to Ku Nan: You’ve no business in Hindu affairs‘, kuil di Bukit Bintang itu telah dibina sekitar tahun 1970-an manakala tempat berhala Sri Muneswarar Kaliyaman didirikan pada tahun 1912.

Pada tempoh hari, DBKL telah merobohkan bangunan tepi (dapur, bilik air, bilik tidur sami dan bilik mesyuarat) tetapi kawasan tempat sembahyang belum dirobohkan lagi.

Sri Muneswarar Kaliyaman

Author:

I have no Faceook or Twitter.

49 thoughts on “Kuil Hindu: Mahu Pakatan ia dibina semula bersebelahan kawasan loji rawatan kumbahan?

  1. Mengikut rencana Malaysiakini hari ini bertajuk ‘Waytha to Ku Nan: You’ve no business in Hindu affairs‘…..

    Masalah dengan Waytha ni, seolah-olah Hindu affairs tu dibina di tanah milik mereka sendiri…

    Ibarat datang ke rumah orang, tidur atas katil tuan rumah. bila tuan rumah halau, dia akan kata…you have no business in my affair…!

    Bagaimana dengan seorang hindu yang mempersoalkan tentang penyembelihan korban di sekolah?

    Bukankah beliau juga have ‘no business in Muslim’s affairs?

    Orang India pun dah jadi kaduk naik junjung!

    1. re: “Bagaimana dengan seorang hindu yang mempersoalkan tentang penyembelihan korban di sekolah?

      Kalau penyembelihan korban itu dijalankan di sekolah agama, tidak akan ia dipersoalkan.

      Ini ia dijalankan di sekolah kebangsaan yang dikongsi semua kaum.

      Bukan upacara Islam yang dipertikaikan hanya kebersesuaian ia dijalankan di sekolah. Nanti boleh tak ia disempurnakan di lain-lain tempat awam seperti di perkarangan mahkamah, balai bomba, dsb?

      1. Kita tunggu Raya Haji tahun depan. Saya pasti mereka tidak lagi berani untuk sembelih lembu di Sekolah Kebangsaan. Tapi kalau mereka memeriahlan lagi sembelih lembu di Sekolah Agama, atau di banyak lagi tempat terbuka dan abattoir jangan pula ada yang komplain.

        Bina Kuil atas tanah orang adalah perkara lain. Ini sudah jadi macam setinggan, bina rumah haram. Bila tuan tanah suruh pindah, di minta pula ganti-rugi. Lepas satu masa yang lama, tanah itu di anggap pula kepunyaan mereka.

        1. re: “tanah itu dianggap pula kepunyaan mereka”

          Kebanyakan kes yang kita baca, kuil-kuil tersebut akhirnya terpaksa berpindah juga ke kawasan lain yang lebih terpencil. Namun ada jugalah mereka (lembaga kuil) diberi pampasan tanah dan rumah ibadat itu dibina semula yang baru.

          Pada hemat saya, ini tidak salah. Sepertimana juga masjid dan surau baru selalu dibina untuk menampung keperluan penduduk Muslim yang bertambah, maka kuil-kuil juga harus disediakan bagi kaum-kaum minoriti.

          Lebih baik mereka digalakkan menjadi orang beriman mengikut cara mereka daripada terbiar akidah, bukan?

          1. jadi kelaziman Surau/masjid diroboh utk beri laluan kpd projek awam. Tapi kuil haram tabley diusik. Fakta : alignment monorail KL terpaksa dianjak utk elak 1 kuil dan ini telah meningkatkan kos puluhan juta.

                  1. Thank you Helen. It sure was. I’m all for other religion place of worship. I even agreed with Imran N Hosein calls for Haghia Sophia be returned to, perhaps now, Russia and be made Christian place of worship.

                    But to call a full fledged functioning warong a kuil is not right. How is that good for hubungan sesama kaum?

                    Of course, some are just glad, as we can read here, because now it seems more and more reasons for them to hate UMNO and the Malay gomen!

                    1. On this particular kuil, I’d have to agree with you that it was profit-making and the temple caretakers only took advantage.

                      Also Ku Nan was technically correct to say that the main hall and the gopuram structure was left intact. And furthermore, the temple should indeed be “beautified”.

                      And since the ‘temple’ was only constructed in the 1970s, it doesn’t meet my suggested cut-off date of 1957. If the Indian politicians want to make their last stand at OK Corral, this site/dispute is not a good choice to prove their cause.

                      However acknowledging all of the above does not negate that some irregularities took place, such as: Why is the gomen so kind as to gift the developer Hap Seng with that strip of DBKL land?

                      Other valid points raised by B Nantha Kumar @ http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/11/13/temple-wreck-more-than-what-meets-the-eye/

                      Nantha wrote:

                      “why would the Federal Territories Ministry choose to ‘beautify’ the temple at 7am on a weekend, with about 300 officers from five government agencies being present there.

                      The agencies involved on the day were from DBKL, Land and Mineral Department, TNB, Syabas and the police.

                      Now, can anyone recall when was the last time five government agencies got involved in a temple issue, unless a demolition is taking place?

                      The unusual thing about the whole ‘beautifying’ process is that the police cordoned all main roads leading to the temple, Jalan Raja Chulan, Jalan Sultan Ismail and Jalan P Ramlee, to ensure no one approached the area.”

          2. Re. maka kuil-kuil juga harus disediakan bagi kaum-kaum minoriti.

            The problem is they keep building without even getting approval from the GOMEN or even the owner of the land. Very often than not, the GOMEN has been very lenient to them. The issue becomes a big brouhaha when the rightful owner of the land wants to develop it. When this happens, the Hindu will start to cry victims, it has been like that over and over again. Same Plot different Location.

            Calvin Sankaran (correct me if I am wrong) once commented about the case of a temple in Padang Jawa, Kelang where the developer has actually paid compensation to the temple committee members, but they SONGLAP the money, the new committees members then demanded another compensation which resulted in another brouhaha. The incident has resulted in “MUSHROOMING” of new temples around the area for the same MO, to extort money from future and potential developers.

            And this what you call ” Lebih baik mereka digalakkan menjadi orang beriman mengikut cara mereka daripada terbiar akidah, bukan?”

            Helen, the Indian is a very conniving community, that is why there is proverb that says ” Kalau Jumpa …. dengan Ular……..?” (Fill in the blank). They have been riding on the religious sensitivity and got away with it, most of the time.

            Again by looking at the yellow color structure in the given photo, it was never near that in the 90’s. It was just a small room inside a Kedai Makan.

            If you are talking about serving and giving the Indian the opportunity to practice their religious belief in Bukit Bintang area, how many Indians are there actually residing within the location? I understand and will accept the fact if the “Temple” in Jalan P. Ramlee is catered for the Hindus who are residing there currently. But the truth is. how many of them are there and it is not even their area.

            Let’s call a spade a spade, the fact is the temple is located in a prime area and there is a tendency of “opportunistic behavior” behind all this among the Indian community. If they are sincere, why don’t they ask for a replacement somewhere else where the majority of the residents are Hindu?

            As it is now, there are 3 known temples in the area, one is nearby Menara Maybank, another in Jalan Hang Tuah and behind Flat sri Serawak.

            Please do not compare this issue with the Mosque construction, as I have said before all mosques and surau construction required approval from JAKIM and majority were built on Tanah Waqaf e.g. Masjid Al Bukhary in Jalan Hang Tuah, the temporary Mosque for the purpose of Friday prayer inside Bank Islam Headquarter in Jalan Perak. Most of the time, construction costs are funded through cash waqf, donation and zakat. The Gomen doesn’t just simply give money for that purpose.

            1. It crossed my mind today that the biggest preoccupation of the Chinese community is our SJK(C)s and that of the Indian community is their temples. These two minority groups are living so much in their own bubble that they do not have a realistic idea as to how the majority community regard them and their twin preoccupations.

              But tell me more about wang wakaf please. How does it work and to what use is it put?

              1. Re. Waqaf Tunai/Cash Waqaf

                It is basically cash donation made by individual or organization for social, community purpose, and the underprivileged among the Muslims. Unlike zakat which is compulsory, waqf is optional.

                In the past, waqf came in the form of landed property such as land and building. Now more and more cash waqf is being promoted.

                Here is a good site that explains about waqf.

                WAKAF TUNAI DALAM PERSPEKTIF HUKUM ISLAM

                http://wakaftunai.wordpress.com/makalah-wakaf-tunai/sarmin-m-h/

                  1. There are Waqf Hotel, Waqf Bazaar, Waqf Commercial Building, Waqf Resiential Bulding, Clinic Waqf over all the country now. Except for Waqf Clinic which is FOC for patients, the rest of the assets are built on Waqf land and generate sustainable income where certain percentage will be used for operations costs, another portion for reinvestment purposes and the remaining for religious, social and community purposes.

            2. “Helen, the Indian is a very conniving community, that is why there is proverb that says ” Kalau Jumpa …. dengan Ular……..?” (Fill in the blank). They have been riding on the religious sensitivity and got away with it, most of the time.”

              wow, you are a first class bigot!. i can say the same thing about the malay community. hitler must be proud of you !

              1. 1. big·ot·ry – bigoted attitudes; intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

                vs

                2. hy·poc·ri·sy – the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.

                The later is much akin to your community. The caste system is one to start….

                1. There is caste system in Malaysia too, Bumiputera and Non-Bumiputera. Malays too contain a hypocrites. Just like the Indian caste system, religion plays a part here as well. As non-Muslim Chinese and Indians are not accepted as the Bumiputeras and therefore excluded from many government subsidies/facilities.

                  1. RBNSN,

                    The quota system is enabled by Article 153 on the Malay ‘special position’ which contains the mechanism for reserving a certain but unspecified number of scholarships, permits/licences etc for the Malays and the native of Sabah and Sarawak.

                    (Pls note that the invented term “Bumiputera” is not contained in the Federal Constitution.)

                    If DAP is promising equality, then the party is required to address Article 153. This the DAP has not done but instead the party has gone the opposite direction by increasing the quotas to make a show as if they’ve finally shed their anti-Malay outlook.

                    So if you’re talking about hypocrisy and entrenching the Bumi and non “caste system”, then the DAP 3.0 evangelistas are without doubt the biggest hypocrite of all.

      2. Helen,

        What is good for goose must be good too to gander. Meaning if you expect laws to be enforced o others, you too must submit to the very same law.

        If sacrificing cow in schools done once a year is deemed insensitive to Hindus, then be prepared to Muslims to question why Hindus must crash coconut on streets during Thaipusam.

        and we all will start arguing non stop.

        The habit of creating shrine under trees, on pavement, on government land, must stop.

        Which reminds me that there is a shrine on a pavement outside a hospital in Penang. You will not find in other countries. So appreciate the tolerance of the government of the day.

        Remember at time when British brought Hindus into then malay states, the Malays have been practising sacrificing cows on hari raya Korban. In no way we meant to insult hindus.

        It irritates Muslims when suddenly it becomes an issue. If that is the logic, all pig farming must cease to exist as the waste is very distasteful to all people.

        1. Shamshul,

          “What is good for goose must be good too to gander.”/ “If sacrificing cow in schools done once a year is deemed insensitive to Hindus, then be prepared to Muslims to question why Hindus must crash coconut on streets during Thaipusam.”

          Aiyah, why lah you compare apples to coconuts?

          Let’s compare apple to apple: If cows are to be slaughtered in national school, then pigs can also be slaughtered in Chinese schools (which have a 10 percent non-Chinese enrolment) as a roast offering to our gods. So if there are Muslim pupils in the SRJK(C), how? Cannot be sensitive ya.

          re: “The habit of creating shrine under trees, on pavement, on government land, must stop.”

          I agree. It must stop. And the gomen must start building temples for the minorities in a proper, organized manner so that this business of illegality can be overcome. (Or approve the permits if the faith community itself is willing to raise their own funding.)

          re: “Which reminds me that there is a shrine on a pavement outside a hospital in Penang. You will not find in other countries.”

          True. You will also not find shoplot churches in the developed Western countries. The fact that the shrine sits on the pavement reflects the neglect perpetrated by the gomen on the minorities.

          re: “So appreciate the tolerance of the government of the day.”

          Likewise appreciate the tolerance of the worshippers who are willing to pray at the pavement and in dingy shoplots. Do you think if given the choice between a praying in a beautiful temple or church, that these devotees are going to say they’d rather pray at the pavements and climb up 2 storeys of stairs to a small room?

          re: “Remember at time when British brought Hindus into then malay states, the Malays have been practising sacrificing cows on hari raya Korban.”

          Who is preventing Muslims from sacrificing cows on Hari Raya Korban?

          re: “In no way we meant to insult hindus.”

          And when the Hindus say that it hurts their sensitivities for their kids to be inadvertently exposed to the slaughter of cows in school, it is in no way meant to insult the Muslims either. Just do it in a more appropriate venue, that’s all.

          1. Helen,

            What I see that there are many temples. As an example drive through several flats in Sentul, I see numerous temples but only one mosque . And that place has Malay majority area.

            To say that restriction on temples, churches is misleading. The problem often starts when someone create a shrine on government land that becomes bigger over time.

            And the slaughter of cow in this Puchong incident was done on Hari raya, a public holiday. which part of it that hurts the sensitivities?

            as for pig, there is no such celebration in any religion that do that. Not that I know of.

            1. Shamshul,

              re: “What I see that there are many temples. As an example drive through several flats in Sentul, I see numerous temples but only one mosque.”

              I wouldn’t use Wiki for any academic-purpose citation but since this is a casual blog thread exchange, I’ll copypaste from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentul,_Kuala_Lumpur

              Sentul: “The Malayan Railway train depot is located here. Many Hindu temples and churches can be seen in this town because many Indian workers have been working in the train depot since the Federated Malay States was founded by the British in 1896.”

              re: “but only one mosque”

              Masjid Amru Ibni Al ‘As, Bandar Baru Sentul
              Masjid Al-Hidayah, Sentul Pasar
              Masjid Saidina Ali K.W., Kg. Padang Balang, Sentul
              Masjid Jamek Jalan Haji Salleh, Sentul
              Surau At-Taqwa, Taman Sentul Utama

              re: “To say that restriction on temples, churches is misleading.”

              The Herald editorial quoted below tells of how church and temple construction is blocked by the authorities

              “In the allocation of land for places of worship, Muslims are allocated a ratio of 1:800 in the population with a spatial requirement of 0.4 hectare for a mosque, and 1:250 and 0.1 hectare for a surau.

              With non-Muslims the ratio is 1:4000 with a spatial requirement ‘suitable for a church or temple’. In other words the bureaucrats will decide what you get – not what you need.

              Even if you have the land to build your place of worship you are made to jump through hoops to get what you want and only if you are lucky.””

              http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/Burial-land-lacking-13845-3-1.html

              What The Herald details above are two different set of standards applied to Muslims and to non-Muslims.

              Meaning the local authorities will not give you permission (permit) to build unless you can prove that there are for example 4,000 Hindus in your area who want to use the temple. Whereas for the Muslims, you’re only required to show that you have a qariah of 800 to build a mosque, and 250 ummah to build a surau.

              More often than not, new houses of worship of the other religions fail to get council approval, e.g. the long protracted saga of the Church of the Divine Mercy in Shah Alam, objections to the building of the Sacred Heart Cathedral in Kota Kinabalu, and to the building of the Hindu temple in Shah Alam, in relation to the ugly “Cow Head” protest by the Muslim extremists.

              re: “The problem often starts when someone create a shrine on government land that becomes bigger over time.”

              Agree that the illegal shrines grow into temples. But to turn the problem around, if the authorities had provided proper facilities (i.e. build temples for the Indians in an organized manner), then the problem will be curtailed. We don’t hear of illegal mosques being demolished every now and then, do we?

              re: “And the slaughter of cow in this Puchong incident was done on Hari raya, a public holiday. Which part of it that hurts the sensitivities?”

              What you’re saying is that it was a public holiday and the non-Muslim kids were not supposed to be in school as it was an off day. However what the MP of Puchong said is that he received a number of complaints from Hindu parents. Now if their kids were not in school, then how did the parents know that the slaughter took place?

              re: “as for pig, there is no such celebration in any religion that do that. Not that I know of.”

              Roast pigs are offered to the Chinese gods, http://essayzoo.com/research-paper/apa/history/why-is-a-roast-pig-so-important-in-chinese-celebrations.php

              1. Helen,

                I am referring to flat Seri Trengganu.

                As for pig and cow slaughtering,

                Once I attended the insurance trip for qualifying agents. The venue was ChiengMai/chiangrai. After the cruise on Mekong river right up to Laotian border, we were treated to a sumptous banquet.

                To the surprise of muslim agents (most of the agents are non Muslims), the main dish was “babi panggang”. It was put on the main table, effectively making almost all Muslim agents choose to out outside the hall.

                But ChiengMai is located in Thailand, a country ruled by Buddhist. So we accepted that pork will be served as the main dish.

                JUst like when I went in insurance trip again to Korea. Sandwich with bacon are mixed with vegetable sandwich. So we just have to be wary about that.

                So, if there is as story of pigs slaughtered in a school in Manila, Muslims In Malaysia will not object or get surprise. Philipines is not a Muslim country.

                But Malaysia is a Muslim ruled country. The Minister of Education will be getting “maki hamun” if pig are slaughtered in school.

                What you fail to realise is that Islam is the stare religion. It is treated differently than other religions. Just like Buddhism is accorded special position in thailand.

                What irritate muslim is that they feel only they(Muslims) are expected to respect the sensitivities of others. But the same expectation is not expected to other religion.

                “Orang bising pasal azan. Orang bising pasal sembelih lembu. Tapi depa tak kata apa bila ada perarakan Cina mati yang buat jalan sesak. Orang islam cuma Raja atau Ketua kerajaan dapat buat perarakan bila meninggal. tapi orang Cina orang biasa pun nak buat perarakan. Tapi kami tak bising sebab kami faham budaya mereka.

                Mereka datang negara ini. Dapat kewarganegaraan . kini complain azan ganggu. Buat kuil sana sini . Dah jadi macam penduduk majoriti Hindu pula”.

                And that was what my mother in law said.

      3. Alahai, kenapa sensitip sangat?

        Every CNY depan kedai saya dua ekoq singa melompat pontot terketar2 tak renti2, bunyi gendang macam nak pecah kepala berjam2. Dah tu singa2 dibiar main bola tendang “buah ibunda” , bakar mercun sampai bersepah kertas2 dan bau sap masuk kedai kami. All simply just to panjat tangga to collect angpow packets yg Apek2 hang kat pintu kedai mereka… dah dekat 16 tahun, saya tak kata ape pun!

        Apa salahnya e-bank saja wang donation terus masuk akaun ni nak kena hantaq singa telan paket tu? Mujuq singa kain, kalo bawa singa betoi habis orang semua kena baham!

        1. Lagi kesian tengok budak2 sekolah 10-15 tahun terbongkok2 dalam kain kena jadi singa olok olok menari dan melompat tak renti2, tengah panas pulak tu. Sya selalu tolong sediakan cool drinks for them.

      4. Sejak bila SK jadi sekolah milik semua kaum? Ada ke rasa pemilikan bersama? SJKT dan SJKC pun hak milik kerajaan. Kenapa ada pula upacara keagamaan di situ? Boleh jelaskan? Kalau rasa milik bersama tutup ajalah SJKC dan SJKT.

        1. re: “Sejak bila SK jadi sekolah milik semua kaum?”

          Bukankah cogankata kempen SSUS berbunyi “Satu Sekolah Untuk Semua”?

          Lagipun nama sekolah pun SK juga — “kebangsaan” sepertimana ia digelar skuad badminton kebangsaan, ataupun BM berpangkat bahasa kebangsaan dan suka tak suka, pelat tak pelat pun terpaksa juga Kit Siang dan Teresa terpaksa menggunakannya apabila berucap di Dewan.

          re: “SJKT dan SJKC pun hak milik kerajaan”

          Sekolah Cina bukan milik kerajaan kerana ia tidak duduk atas tanah kerajaan dan tidak juga dibiayai penuh oleh kerajaan. Sekolah-sekolah Cina sekadar menerima bantuan. Sebab itu, pilihanraya kecil Sg Limau ibarat durian runtuh bagi sekolah-sekolah tersebut kerana menerima habuan yang tidak diduga.

          re: “Kalau rasa milik bersama tutup ajalah SJKC dan SJKT.”

          Ni kena tanya politikus Firster DAP.

          null

  2. “Lebih baik mereka digalakkan menjadi orang beriman mengikut cara mereka daripada terbiar akidah, bukan?”

    …kelakar laa you…, pandai buat lawak…! Bersembor hingus i…

  3. Seperti biasa.. jika ianya dilakukan oleh kerajaan pakatan, its for benefit of rakyat.. no hu ha hu ha..

    Ku Nan patut keraskan sikit telor dia dan start acting like a minister..

    Helen.. tokong ni bukan terletak di Bukit Bintang sebaliknya di off Jalan P.Ramlee (Jalan Tengah).

    1. You’re right, it’s Jalan P. Ramlee. I did not mean Jalan Bukit Bintang. What I had in mind was BB’s Golden Triangle.

  4. Hindu ni dah makin melampau. Populasi ciput tapi kuil berlambak termasuklah SHRINE. Gila apa suka mak bapak diorg bina atas tanah org. Bina tepi sungai, sungai kena alih, bina atas jalan , jalan kena alih (Maran).. Dei tambi, Surau dan Masjid kalau mau bina pun kena kelulusan. Sudah2 la gunakan isu agama .. Kalau salah tetap salah. Cubalah buat perangai mcm ni kat Singapore.

  5. Re:”Why is the gomen so kind as to gift the developer Hap Seng with that strip of DBKL land?”

    there’s no report to suggest that the land had been awarded/handed over Hap Seng.

    The land remained in the custody of DBKL, which is the landowner, and the landowner had decided to developed this land into walkaway.

    This is not a private walkaway i.e. everyone can use this public property either Hindu or non-Hindu.

    The right of the landowner, to utilise his land must be respected.

    1. Okay, I accept your teguran for imprecise language.

      I was being sarcastic when I said ‘gift’ and did not imply that the gomen had transferred the land title to Hap Seng.

      I meant why is the gomen being so kind as to allow DBKL land to be put to use for the benefit of Hap Seng (through the 8-foot walkway) so that developer’s 30-storey building can obtain its CF.

      re: “The right of the landowner, to utilise his land must be respected.”

      It goes back to my point that the landowner DBKL, while admittedly possessing the right to utilise its land in whatsoever way its pleases, has chosen to use it to the benefit of a rich developer.

      On the other hand, if Hap Seng had used a portion of its own land to make that 8-foot walkway, then the DBKL land could have retained its 8-foot width to do some other DBKL project. So even though there was no legal transfer of ownership for that strip of land, it is an opportunity cost and loss to the gomen.

      1. Re. It goes back to my point that the landowner DBKL, while admittedly possessing the right to utilise its land in whatsoever way its pleases, has chosen to use it to the benefit of a rich developer.

        My reading is that the rich developer is a tax payer, while the temple “dahlah duduk tapak haram, kutip derma dari pengikut dan organisasi perniagaan India dah tak bayar tax pulak tu”. Fyi, temples when there are big and popular, they become money making machine.

        Maybe that’s the argument from the developer which sounds fair to me i.e. why should I “beralah” when I pay taxes and they don’t.

        1. (1) Multinationals pay hefty taxes too but the gomen doesn’t owe these companies a living.

          (2) Between entities (A) and (B) – let’s say that A pays x amount of tax (more) and B pays y amount of tax (less) – it still does not mean that the gomen should cater to the needs of A over B.

          Let’s let the tussle is between Hap Seng walkway and something called KL Library (gomen building) for that 8-foot strip. The library doesn’t pay taxes but it is a public good. There is no obligation on the part of DBKL to put its land to use that benefits a private company. It’s not a tarred road for traffic. It is a ‘walkway’ for the commercial building.

          Indians form 10.3 percent of the KL population, according to the 2010 census. I don’t see anything wrong for the gomen to construct a Hindu temple in that locality in the same way that it constructs a mosque.

          1. (1) i believe that temple is exempted from paying quit rent or any other taxes, but Hap Seng building will pay.

            (2) Minimal investment needed by the gomen to construct walkaway vs millions needed for library, temple or any other structures. Construction cost is one thing, operation and maintenance are another. As resources is scarce, those minimal will be ticked. It may be zero in this case, apart from the land itself.

            1. Continuing with the scenario of my ‘KL Library’, I would still hypothetically prefer (I’m not a KL-ite, so I don’t really have a voter voice but just sayin’) for that 8 feet of land belonging to DBKL to be used as a carpark for library users than the land be utilized for a purpose to benefit a private developer.

              Bottomline: In principle, I do not see why the gomen should pander to a private company if there were to be a competitor for the utility (in this case, prime real estate). This Indian temple may not be the most lovable of candidates but it doesn’t matter. In its place – again hypothetically speaking – can be a public library or some other public building, say a police beat base.

          2. 1. Multinational doesn’t operate on the same term as local company;

            2. The Temple Like the Church of Jerusubang don’t pay taxes;

            3. ” I don’t see anything wrong for the gomen to construct a Hindu temple in that locality in the same way that it constructs a mosque.”

            Is there is a sizable Hindu population in the said area that merits such temple? I have never recalled a big procession and even prayer in masses conducted in that so called “temple” in the past.

            Unlike mosques and surau that have obtained approval and based on feasibility study, the temple wasn’t built that way, to be exact it is an illegal temple which squatted on prime land that belongs to DBKL. My issue with them is that, dah buat salah sekarang nak “play victim”. Mengutuk UMNO/BN macam-macam lagi lepas tu…

            I am not siding Hap Seng fyi, I am merely giving a scenario that may led to the current brouhaha.

            So macam mana sekarang ni, GOMEN beri Salah, GOMEN tak beri Salah. Kalau Gomen paksa Hap Seng suruh buat walkway, nanti kata GOMEN balas dendam pada kaum Cina sebab Tusnami Cina.

            1. re: “I am not siding Hap Seng fyi, I am merely giving a scenario that may led to the current brouhaha.”

              Neither am I siding with the temple. But I’m persuaded by the Subang MP’s (YB Sivarasa Rasiah) concern that the gomen is suspiciously bending over backwards to benefit the developer.

              Like the FMT reporter claims, the gomen deployed 300 enforcement officers from 5 separate gomen agencies to oversee the demolition of the temple at 7am, and at the same time, the police cordoned all main roads leading to the temple (Jalan Raja Chulan, Jalan Sultan Ismail and Jalan P. Ramlee).

              That’s going the extra mile for Hap Seng, innit?

              re: “Kalau Gomen paksa Hap Seng suruh buat walkway, nanti kata GOMEN balas dendam pada kaum Cina sebab Tusnami Cina.”

              The building is already completed, or almost. Which raises another suspicion/contention — Why did Hap Seng build right up to their land’s edge? Were they so confident that the 8-feet would be surrendered for the purpose of the walkway?

              1. Yang dirobohkan bukan “temple” atau shrine yang diperbesarkan tu, tapi the remaining illegal structure that the temple has occupied. As you can see from the picture, the yellow color structure is quite a distance away from the makeshift structure that has been demolished.

                Re. Why did Hap Seng build right up to their land’s edge? Were they so confident that the 8-feet would be surrendered for the purpose of the walkway?

                I have written about this before. Tanah dia orang lebih untung jika dijadikan sidewalk cafe, to be in tune with the rest of Jalan P. Ramlee down the road, the like of beach club i.e opportunistic behavior.

                Re. Like the FMT reporter claims, the gomen deployed 300 enforcement officers

                For precaution. You will never know what the said community might do in such event. Don’t you remember the guy who burnt himself on top of the temple for protest sometime back.

                Re. That’s going the extra mile for Hap Seng, innit?

                I gave you the scenario above, the choice between “the tax payer” and “non tax payer”. In business world, who would you choose?

                Re. In its place – again hypothetically speaking – can be a public library or some other public building, say a police beat base.

                Or just leave it as greenbelt.

      2. 8-foot width of DBKL vs 8-foot Hap Seng

        Should 8-foot width of Hap Seng land being surrendered to DBKL for walkaway, that 30-storey building may not be there, as a setback requirement is not suffice.
        (note:setback is the distance which a building or other structure is set back from a street or road)

        Opportunity Cost vs Potential Benefit

        -the owner of this 30-storey must pay quit rent every year and any other charges,
        -the construction itself generate employments and other benefit
        -employment opportunities (various companies that rent the spaces)

        1. re: “8-foot width of DBKL vs 8-foot Hap Seng”

          And Hap Seng wins, score 8-0!

          re: “Should 8-foot width of Hap Seng land being surrendered to DBKL for walkaway, that 30-storey building may not be there, as a setback requirement is not suffice.”

          Heh-heh-heh. No 30-storey big building (and alternatively a smaller, shorter building instead), then Hap Seng will get less profits lah.

          But on the other hand, since DBKL has generously decided to oblige the developer, then its a win situation for Hap Seng and a lose situation for the public. Okay, okay, granted that nobody cares about the Indian public and that’s why they can so easily shot dead on suspicion of gangsterism.

          re: “Opportunity Cost vs Potential Benefit -the owner of this 30-storey must pay quit rent every year and any other charges”

          But bigger than DBKL’s quit rent collection is the huge, huge profits accruing to the building owner.

          re: “the construction itself generate employments and other benefit”

          Huge, huge profits accruing to the building owner.

          re: “employment opportunities (various companies that rent the spaces)”

          Huge, huge, huge profits accruing to the building owner! Wow, all that money floating around. The poor Indian non-taxpayer (too poor to even fall under the lowest tax bracket) stands no chance.

          1. is there any problem in making profit? we need profitable business, as they are paying taxes, thus contributing to public fund.

            we need construction, we need building spaces, as we need employment.

            500,000 school leavers every year, plus hundreds thousands of Diploma and Degree holder. these people need job.
            (Guardian:Youth unemployment in Spain has reached a new high of 56.1%)

            The classic competition between social benefit vs economic benefit.

Comments are closed.