Follow by Email

Loading...
"Pandangan Dalam Laman Ini Tidak Semestinya Menunjukkan Sikap WebMaster & Lain-Lain Penulis. Dasar Kami : Menyiarkan semua posting para penulis jemputan tanpa sebarang edit dari segi bahasa dan ejaan (Mungkin ada bahan yang tidak begitu menyenangkan). Berfikirlah dalam menerima sebarang maklumat). ©1422 Hakcipta Tak Terpelihara. Anda digalakkan untuk mengambil apa-apa bahan di dalam laman ini untuk tujuan penyebaran, tanpa perlu memberitahu kepada pihak kami. Email: poji2ya@gmail.com

"Mengikut Perjanjian itu, tiap-tiap Negeri akan menerima 5% daripada nilai petroliam yang dijumpai dan diperolehi dalam kawasan perairan atau di luar perairan Negeri tersebut yang dijual oleh PETRONAS atau ejensi-ejensi atau kontrektor-kontrektornya".
- Tun Abdul Razak, Dewan Rakyat (12hb. November, 1975)

Friday, November 13, 2009

The Return Of Bala: "Bala" Kepada Najib..!

Reactions: 
Penyiasat Persendirian, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal tampil dalam satu klip video untuk mendedahkan bahawa dirinya telah ditawarkan RM5 juta oleh seorang peniaga bernama Deepak, agar menarik balik akuan sumpahnya yang mengaitkan Najib Abdul Razak dengan kes pembunuhan Altantuya.

Klip video ini disiarkan dalam Malaysia Today hari ini, dengan sarikata yang menyatakan bahawa Deepak ialah pengarah (director) Carpet Raya, sebuah syarikat yang dilaporkan berpendapatan RM122 juta. Syarikat tersebut dikatakan mendaftarkan alamatnya di Dataran Palma Ampang, Selangor, sementara pejabatnya beralamat di Mahkota Taman Maluri.

Malah, sari kata yang terpampang dalam klip video ini cuba mengaitkan Deepak dengan Rosmah Mansor, isteri Perdana Menteri. Balasubramaniam mendakwa bahawa Deepak datang berjumpa dengannya, selepas dirinya mengumumkan akuan sumpah pertamanya pada 3 Julai 2008.

Menurut Balasubramaniam, Deepak mahu Balasubramaniam menarik balik akuan sumpahnya. Malah, Deepak suruh Balasubramaniam mengikutnya ke Putrajaya, namun tidak menyebut siapa yang mahu Balasubramaniam ke Putrajaya. Seterusnya, Deepak menawarkan RM 5 juta untuk Balasubramaniam supaya menarik balik akuan sumpahnya.

Balasubramaniam (gambar kanan) ialah penyiasat persendirian yang diupah oleh Abd Razak Baginda, tertuduh yang ketiga dalam kes pembunuhan seorang wanita Mongolia, Altantuya Shaariibuu. Balasubramaniam telah membuat akuan sumpah pada 1 Julai 2008, mendedahkannya kemudian pada 3 Julai, dengan kandungan yang menggemparkan apabila mengaitkan Timbalan PM ketika itu (PM sekarang), Najib Razak dengan Altantuya.

Walau bagaimanapun, Balasubramaniam membuat akuan bersumpahnya yang kedua pada 4 Julai 2008, secara dramatiknya menarik balik tujuh perkara dalam akuan sumpah pertama yang berhubung kait dengan Najib Razak. Apa yang lebih mengejutkan, Balasubramaniam telah hilang bersama keluarganya selepas itu.

Abdul Razak Baginda yang selama ini dilihat sebagai orang rapat Najib Razak, dituduh bersubahat dalam kes pembunuhan Altantuya. Walau bagaimanapun, beliau dibebaskan setelah didapati tidak bersalah oleh mahkamah pada 31 Oktober 2008.

Najib Razak, Perdana Menteri ke-6 dipertikaikan oleh pembangkang ketika membincangkan kes pembunuhan Altantuya. Walau bagaimanapun, beliau pernah bersumpah dan mendakwa dirinya tidak mengenali Altantuya. Isterinya, Rosmah Mansor, juga berkali-kali menafikan bahawa dirinya terlibat dalam kes ini, malah menganggap tuduhan tersebut berunsur fitnah.


Sumber - (MerdekaReview)
STATUTORY DECLARATION

I, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal (NRIC NO: xxxxxx-xx-6235) a Malaysian Citizen of full age and residing at [deleted], Selangor, do solemly and sincerely declare as follows :-

1. I have been a police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force having joined as a constable in 1981 attached to the Police Field Force. I was then promoted to the rank of lance corporal and finally resigned from the Police Force in 1998 when I was with the Special Branch.

2. I have been working as a freelance Private Investigator since I left the Police Force.

3. Sometime in June or July 2006, I was employed by Abdul Razak Baginda for a period of 10 days to look after him at his office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang, between the hours of 8.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. each working day as apparently he was experiencing disturbances from a third party.

4. I resigned from this job after 2 ½ days as I was not receiving any proper instructions.

5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the 05-10-2006 as he had apparently received a harassing phone call from a Chinese man calling himself ASP Tan who had threatened him to pay his debts. I later found out this gentleman was in fact a private investigator called Ang who was employed by a Mongolian woman called Altantuya Shaariibuu.

6. Abdul Razak Baginda was concerned that a person by the name of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a Mongolian woman, was behind this threat and that she would be arriving in Malaysia very soon to try and contact him.

7. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that he was concerned by this as he had been advised that Altantuya Shaariibuu had been given some powers by a Mongolian ‘bomoh’ and that he could never look her in the face because of this.

8. When I enquired as to who this Mongolian woman was, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that she was a friend of his who had been introduced to him by a VIP and who asked him to look after her financially.

9. I advised him to lodge a police report concerning the threatening phone call he had received from the Chinese man known as ASP Tan but he refused to do so as he informed me there were some high profile people involved.

10. Abdul Razak Baginda further told me that Altantuya Shaariibuu was a great liar and good in convincing people. She was supposed to have been very demanding financially and that he had even financed a property for her in Mongolia.

11. Abdul Razak Baginda then let me listen to some voice messages on his handphone asking him to pay what was due otherwise he would be harmed and his daughter harassed.

12. I was therefore supposed to protect his daughter Rowena as well.

13. On the 09.10.2006, I received a phone call from Abdul Razak Baginda at about 9.30 a.m. informing me that Altantuya was in his office and he wanted me there immediately. As I was in the midst of a surveillance, I sent my assistant Suras to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office and I followed a little later. Suras managed to control the situation and had persuaded Altantuya and her two friends to leave the premises. However Altantuya left a note written on some Hotel Malaya note paper, in English, asking Abdul Razak Baginda to call her on her handphone (number given) and wrote down her room number as well.

14. Altantuya had introduced herself to Suras as ‘Aminah’ and had informed Suras she was there to see her boyfriend Abdul Razak Baginda.

15. These 3 Mongolian girls however returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang again, the next day at about 12.00 noon. They did not enter the building but again informed Suras that they wanted to meet Aminah’s boyfriend, Abdul Razak Baginda.

16. On the 11.10.2006, Aminah returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office on her own and gave me a note to pass to him, which I did. Abdul Razak Baginda showed me the note, which basically asked him to call her urgently.

17. I suggested to Abdul Razak Baginda that perhaps it may be wise to arrange for Aminah to be arrested if she harassed him further, but he declined as he felt she would have to return to Mongolia as soon as her cash ran out.

18. In the meantime I had arranged for Suras to perform surveillance on Hotel Malaya to monitor the movements of these 3 Mongolian girls, but they recognized him. Apparently they become friends with Suras after that and he ended up spending a few nights in their hotel room.

19. When Abdul Razak Baginda discovered Suras was becoming close to Aminah he asked me to pull him out from Hotel Malaya.

20. On the 14.10.2006, Aminah turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights when I was not there. Abdul Razak Baginda called me on my handphone to inform me of this so I rushed back to his house. As I arrived, I noticed Aminah outside the front gates shouting “Razak, bastard, come out from the house”. I tried to calm her down but couldn’t so I called the police who arrived in 2 patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.

21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.

22. When I was at the Brickfields police station, Aminah’s own Private Investigator, one Mr. Ang arrived and we had a discussion. I was told to deliver a demand to Abdul Razak Baginda for USD$500,000.00 and 3 tickets to Mongolia, apparently as commission owed to Aminah from a deal in Paris.

23. As Aminah had calmed down at this stage, a policewoman at the Brickfields police station advised me to leave and settle the matter amicably.

24. I duly informed Abdul Razak Baginda of the demands Aminah had made and told him I was disappointed that no one wanted to back me up in lodging a police report. We had a long discussion about the situation when I expressed a desire to pull out of this assignment.

25. During this discussion and in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that :-

25.1. He had been introduced to Aminah by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore.

25.2. Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Aminah and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse.

25.3. Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak wanted Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Aminah as he did not want her to harass him since he was now the Deputy Prime Minister.

25.4. Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had all been together at a dinner in Paris.

25.5. Aminah wanted money from him as she felt she was entitled to a USD$500,000.00 commission on a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris.

26. On the 19.10.2006, I arrived at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights to begin my night duty. I had parked my car outside as usual. I saw a yellow Proton Perdana taxi pass by with 3 ladies inside, one of whom was Aminah. The taxi did a U-turn and stopped in front of the house where these ladies rolled down the window and wished me ‘Happy Deepavali’. The taxi then left.

27. About 20 minutes later the taxi returned with only Aminah in it. She got out of the taxi and walked towards me and started talking to me. I sent an SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda informing him “Aminah was here”. I received an SMS from Razak instructing me to “delay her until my man comes”.

28. Whist I was talking to Aminah, she informed me of the following :-

28.1. That she met Abdul Razak Baginda in Singapore with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

28.2. That she had also met Abdul Razak Baginda and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a dinner in Paris.

28.3. That she was promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris.

28.4. That Abdul Razak Baginda had bought her a house in Mongolia but her brother had refinanced it and she needed money to redeem it.

28.5. That her mother was ill and she needed money to pay for her treatment.

28.6. That Abdul Razak Baginda had married her in Korea as her mother is Korean whilst her father was a Mongolian/Chinese mix.

28.7. That if I wouldn’t allow her to see Abdul Razak Baginda, would I be able to arrange for her to see Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

29. After talking to Aminah for about 15 minutes, a red Proton Aeroback arrived with a woman and two men. I now know the woman to be Lance Corporal Rohaniza and the men, Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azahar. They were all in plain clothes. Azilah walked towards me while the other two stayed in the car.

30. Azilah asked me whether the woman was Aminah and I said ‘Yes’. He then walked off and made a few calls on his handphone. After 10 minutes another vehicle, a blue Proton Saga, driven by a Malay man, passed by slowly. The driver’s window had been wound down and the driver was looking at us.

31. Azilah then informed me they would be taking Aminah away. I informed Aminah they were arresting her. The other two persons then got out of the red Proton and exchanged seats so that Lance Corporal Rohaniza and Aminah were in the back while the two men were in the front. They drove off and that is the last I ever saw of Aminah.

32. Abdul Razak Baginda was not at home when all this occurred.

33. After the 19.10.2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. the next morning, as he had been receiving threatening text messages from a woman called ‘Amy’ who was apparently ‘Aminah’s’ cousin in Mongolia.

34. On the night of the 20.10.2006, both of Aminah’s girlfriends turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house enquiring where Aminah was. I informed them she had been arrested the night before.

35. A couple of nights later, these two Mongolian girls, Mr. Ang and another Mongolian girl called ‘Amy’ turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house looking for Aminah as they appeared to be convinced she was being held in the house.

36. A commotion began so I called the police who arrived shortly thereafter in a patrol car. Another patrol car arrived a short while later in which was the investigating officer from the Dang Wangi Police Station who was in charge of the missing persons report lodged by one of the Mongolians girls, I believe was Amy.

37. I called Abdul Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. He then called DSP Musa Safri and called me back informing me that Musa Safri would be calling my handphone and I was to pass the phone to the Inspector from the Dang Wangi Police Station.

38. I then received a call on my handphone from Musa Safri and duly handed the phone to the Dang Wangi Inspector. The conversation lasted 3 – 4 minutes after which he told the girls to disperse and to go to see him the next day.

39. On or about the 24.10.2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields Police Station as he had been advised to lodge a police report about the harassment he was receiving from these Mongolian girls.

40. Before this, Amy had sent me an SMS informing me she was going to Thailand to lodge a report with the Mongolian consulate there regarding Aminah’s disappearance. Apparently she had sent the same SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda. This is why he told me he had been advised to lodge a police report.

41. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that DPS Musa Safri had introduced him to one DSP Idris, the head of the Criminal division, Brickfields Police Station, and that Idris had referred him to ASP Tonny.

42. When Abdul Razak Baginda had lodged his police report at Brickfields Police Station, in front of ASP Tonny, he was asked to make a statement but he refused as he said he was leaving for overseas. He did however promise to prepare a statement and hand ASP Tonny a thumb drive. I know that this was not done as ASP Tonny told me.

43. However ASP Tonny asked me the next day to provide my statement instead and so I did.

44. I stopped working for Abdul Razak Baginda on the 26.10.2006 as this was the day he left for Hong Kong on his own.

45. In mid-November 2006, I received a phone call from ASP Tonny from the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah asking me to see him regarding Aminah’s case. When I arrived there I was immediately arrested under S.506 of the Penal Code for Criminal intimidation.

46. I was then placed in the lock up and remanded for 5 days. On the third day I was released on police bail.

47. At the end of November 2006, the D9 department of the IPK sent a detective to my house to escort me to the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah. When I arrived, I was told I was being arrested under S.302 of the Penal Code for murder. I was put in the lock up and remanded for 7 days.

48. I was transported to Bukit Aman where I was interrogated and questioned about an SMS I had received from Abdul Razak Baginda on the 19.10.2006, which read “delay her until my man arrives”. They had apparently retrieved this message from Abdul Razak Baginda’s handphone.

49. They then proceeded to record my statement from 8.30 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. every day for 7 consecutive days. I told them all I knew including everything Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had told me about their relationships with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak but when I came to sign my statement these details had been left out.

50. I have given evidence in the trial of Azilah, Sirul and Abdul Razak Baginda at the Shah Alam High Court. The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Datuk Seri Najib Razak and/or his wife.

51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30 a.m. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak an SMS the evening before as he refused to believe he was to be arrested, but had not received a response.

52. Shortly thereafter, at about 7.30 a.m., Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows :- “I am seeing IGP at 11.00 a.m. today …… matter will be solved … be cool”.

53. I have been made to understand that Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested the same morning at his office in the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang.

54. The purpose of this Statutory declaration is to :-

54.1. State my disappointment at the standard of investigations conducted by the authorities into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu.

54.2. Bring to the notice of the relevant authorities the strong possibility that there are individuals other than the 3 accused who must have played a role in the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu.

54.3. Persuade the relevant authorities to reopen their investigations into this case immediately so that any fresh evidence may be presented to the Court prior to submissions at the end of the prosecutions case.

54.4. Emphasize the fact that having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years I am absolutely certain no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.

54.5. Express my concern that should the defence not be called in the said murder trial, the accused, Azilah and Sirul will not have to swear on oath and testify as to the instructions they received and from whom they were given.

55. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act 1960.

SUBCRIBED and solemnly )

declared by the abovenamed )

Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal ]

this 1st day of July 2008 )

Before me,

………………………………….
Commissioner for Oath

Kuala Lumpur

TGNA Batal Tunai Haji...

Reactions: 
Dalam kuliah jumaat di Dataran Ilmu pagi tadi, TGNA telah menyatakan kepada hadirin yang hadir akan pembatalan hasratnya untuk menunaikan Haji di Mekah pada 18 Nov nanti.

TGNA tidak nyatakan secara jelas sebab-sebab pembatalannya itu.
Dipercayai pembatalan hasrat TGNA untuk menunaikan Haji di Mekah ada kaitannya dengan beberapa tuduhan yang tidak baik dari pihak pembangkang di Kelantan.

Disebalik Kejadian Keganasan Di Stadium Bkt Jalil

Reactions: 
Tahniah diucapkan kepada Pasukan Negri Sembilan kerana menjuarai Piala Malaysia edisi yang ke 84 pada 7hb November 2009. Saya sebagai pemerhati bolasepak ingin memberi komen terhadap kejadian yang berlaku di Stadium Bukit Jalil pada hari tersebut.

Saya berada disekitar stadium seawal pukul 11 pagi kerana ingin melihat sendiri kemeriahan suasana sebelum pertandingan. Apa yang dilihat, pihak FAM, Pengurusan Stadium dan Polis yang dari awal mengetahui tiket sudah terjual 85,000 keping tidak mengambil kira kedatangan penonton yang datang dari jauh.

Penonton yang kebanyakan nya datang dengan keluarga, ada yang membawa anak kecil. Selain daripada khemah untuk gerai yang menjual jersi dan cenderamata, tiada khemah atau tempat yang tertutup lain di luar stadium disediakan untuk penonton berteduh. Semua sudah maklum yang tiap-tiap petang hujan lebat akan berlaku di Lembah Kelang.

Suasana yang tenang pada mula nya telah bertukar menjadi sedikit tegang apabila petir dan kilat sabung menyabung tepat jam 3.30 petang. Penonton yang tiada tempat yang hendak dituju terpaksa berasak-asak kearah pintu masuk stadium dengan harapan pintu dibuka segera. Tiada tujuan lain selain untuk berteduh daripada hujan lebat.

Pihak polis dan pengurusan stadium macam buat tak Nampak saja apa yang berlaku diluar sana. Padahal anak-anak kecil terpaksa berasak-asak ditengah-tengah lautan manusia. Hujan turun selebat-lebatnya pada jam 4.00 petang. Semua berada didalam risiko disambar petir atau pun lemas dipijak. Semua pihak yang tengok dari dalam stadium hanya memandang sinis hanya kerana mereka tersebut adalah penonton Kelantan yang sememangnya dianak tiri dalam segala hal.

Pada pukul 4.30 petang suasana tidak berubah, hujan makin lebat, penonton tiada pilihan selain menggoncang dan merempuh pagar. Pagar yang dirempuh akhirnya terbuka dan seramai kira-kira 5000 penonton bolos. Pada ketika itu, hanya ada 3 orang polis yang bertugas.

Tidak seperti yang digembar-gembur kan dalam berita TV dan Radio sehari sebelum nya yang kira-kira 1500 polis akan bertugas. Disitulah “turning point” kesilapan terbesar yang berlaku, penonton yang masuk tanpa diperiksa oleh pihak pengurusan stadium, FAM, polis dan rela, membawa segala-galanya.

Suka saya bertanya, siapa yang salah dalam hal ni dan siapa yang menjadi tuan rumah didalam perlawanan akhir ini?

Pintu akhir nya berjaya ditutup kembali oleh pihak polis pada pukul 5.00 petang. Mulai daripada pukul 5.00 petang baru lah penonton yang berada diluar dibenarkan masuk melalui “official gate”. Tetapi apa yang menyedihkan, beg-beg tidak diperiksa. Ini tidak seperti Perlawanan Akhir Piala FA tempohari di mana beg-beg diperiksa dengan begitu rapi, air mineral berbotol tidak dibenarkan masuk. Tapi pada malam tersebut, bukan setakat tidak memeriksa botol air mineral, beg dan mercun, malah air mineral dijual terbuka di dalam stadium.

Tindakan pro-aktif dari pihak FAM dan Pengurusan Stadium Bukit Jalil perlu, berdasarkan pengalaman yang lepas semasa Pertandingan Akhir Piala FA dimana ianya juga membabitkan Pasukan Kelantan. Atau pihak FAM menunggu perkara ini berlaku dan akan menuding jari serta-merta kepada pihak KAFA.

Apa salahnya “official gate” dibuka seawal jam 3.00 petang untuk mengelakkan kejadian buruk berlaku. Bayangkan 85,000 manusia berada diluar stadium, dan pihak pengurusan Stadium bercadang membuka “official gate” pada pukul 5.30 petang. Kalau lah “official gate” dibuka seawall jam 3.00 petang maka ia memberi ketenangan kepada semua pihak yang terlibat. Pihak polis dan Rela akan mempunyai masa yang cukup untuk memeriksa penonton secara teliti dan ini akan mengelakkan kejadian membawa masuk mercun dan botol air.

Apa yang dilihat, pada pukul 8.45 malam di mana perlawanan sudah hendak bermula, beribu-ribu lagi penonton masih berbaris diluar. Di dalam hati setiap penonton yang berbaris tersimpan “eagerness” yang tinggi untuk menonton perlawanan tersebut. Ini menimbulkan “creating un-necessary tension” terhadap penonton yang masih berada diluar dikala wisel perlawanan dibunyikan. Kenapa perkara ini tiada langsung dibenak mereka-meraka yang bertanggungjawab menguruskan perlawanan ini.

Apabila penonton yang bolos akibat dari rempuhan pintu pagar tadi sudah berselerak di dalam stadium, apa lagi yang boleh dibuat oleh pihak pengurusan stadium, FAM dan polis. Mereka hanya menunggu untuk menyalahkan pihak lain.

Pihak yang selalu disalahkan ialah KAFA.

Kejadian ini adalah 100% diluar kawalan KAFA. Pihak KAFA tidak boleh dipersalahkan kerana mereka bukan yang menguruskan stadium dan mereka juga bukan tuan rumah.

Memang semua pihak yang hadir termasuk saya sendiri tidak selesa dengan dentuman mercun yang tiada henti dari permulaan sehingga akhir perlawanan. “Semacam berada di Baghdad” kata pengulas sukan Zainal Abidin Rawop. Tetapi apakan daya, bak kata pepatah, membenteras lebih baik dari mengubatinya.

Sekarang, tiada pilihan lain, selain menyalahkan 100% kejadian ini kepada KAFA. Mereka akan didenda tidak kurang dari RM100,000, atau bermain stadium yang kosong atau tidak dibenarkan langsung dari menyertai MSL musim depan.

Apabila dilihat dari sudut yang berbeza, “contribution” oleh penonton Kelantan dari segi kutipan tiket, kalau mengambil kira jumlah penonton 65,000 orang, RM 1,300,000 telah berjaya dikutip pada malam tersebut. Tidak termasuk penonton Kelantan yang membeli tiket yang dikhaskan kepada penyokong Negri Sembilan, dan tidak termasuk “consequences cost” seperti jualan jersi, cenderamata, makanan dan minuman pada hari tersebut.

Penyokong Kelantan dan KAFA adalah pihak yang kalah dalam segala hal, walaupun kejadian ini boleh dibendung oleh pihak berwajib.

Saya sebagai pemerhati sukan ingin memberi gambaran tindakan yang diambil oleh FAM terhadap KAFA dilihat sentiasa berat sebelah. Contohnya kejadian membakar trak polis di luar perkarangan Stadium Kota Bharu, yang tiada kena mengena dengan penonton (peniaga yang bergaduh dengan polis), pihak KAFA juga disalahkan. KAFA didenda lebih RM100,000 dan tidak dibenarkan beraksi di stadium tersebut untuk beberapa perlawanan.

Kerugian setiap perlawanan semasa beraksi di Kuala Lumpur juga ditanggung oleh KAFA. Berbanding kejadian penonton masuk ke padang dan ingin menumbuk pengadil di Stadium Ismail Nasirudin Shah di Kuala Terengganu, pihak PBNT hanya didenda RM 5,000 sahaja.

Kejadian lontar mercun terhadap pemain Selangor (T. Surendran) ketika meraikan jaringan oleh peminat Terengganu, PBNT hanya didenda RM 6,000 sahaja. Tahap keselamatan pagar stadium tersebut juga tidak melepasi tahap FAM, serta kualiti padang yang teruk seperti yang dikomen oleh jurulatih mereka sendiri (Ken Worden) dan Peter Butler, tetapi pihak FAM masih membenarkan perlawanan diadakan di Stadium tersebut.

Kalau lah perkara ini berlaku di Kota Bharu, tindakan berlainan akan dilakukan. Kenapa tidak disuruh pasukan Terengganu beraksi di Kuantan yang mempunyai Stadium bertaraf antarabangsa?

Kenapa FAM berdiam diri semasa kejadian memecah cermin kereta dan bas penyokong Kelantan di Perlis?

Kenapa FAM berdiam diri apabila pemain Kelantan (Farisham) yang menunggu rawatan ditepi padang tercedera dibaling mercun di kepala oleh penonton Perlis ketika perlawanan separuh akhir tersebut, dimana ianya berlaku terang-terangan di saluran TV1 yang dipancarkan diseluruh Malaysia?

Kenapa dilihat “in-consistency” berlaku?

Dilihat terdapat keputusan yang “bias” dan bertindak hanya untuk “pleased” kan pihak atasan sahaja. Kelemahan sendiri ditutup rapi.

Harus diingat, fenomena bolasepak Malaysia kini kembali diwarnai kerana “turning point” yang dilakukan oleh pihak pengurusan KAFA yang menguruskan secara professional ala EPL dan sokongan peminat-peminat bolasepak Kelantan. Sehinggakan pihak pengurusan Tentera dan KL Plus juga berterima kasih kepada Kelantan kerana peningkatan hasil “gate collection” mereka semasa bertemu Kelantan di Stadium Selayang dan Cheras.

Saya berharap pihak FAM membuat pertimbangan yang sewajarnya dan mengkaji dari segenap sudut sebelum menjatuhkan apa-apa hukuman terhadap KAFA.

Sekian, terima kasih.

Ir. Azizan Razak, Jurutera Professional,
Managing Director,
LFG Engineering and Services Sdn Bhd
(http://www.lfg- engineering. com)
Hp : 012-2050538