MAB owes six an explanation

THE MALAY MAIL
FRIDAY DECEMBER 21, 2007

HOT NEWS

NINE YEARS TO TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OF FLATS

"MAB owes six an explanation"
By Dawn Chan

THE Malaysian Association for the Blind must explain to the six blind house-buyers why the transfer of ownership of their Pantai Baru flats in Section 20, Shah Alam, took nine years.

That was the view of RC Deaf Missons Malaysia, Independent Living and Training Centre and Women’s Collective Develop- ment on the plight of Leong Tak Keong and Wan Zainun Wan Mohamad, who paid in 1998, RM25,000 each for two low-cost flats in Shah Alam, in 1998.

The Malay Mail on their front page yesterday, 52-year-old Leong, Wan Zainun, 48, and four other blind friends who opted to pay instalments for their flats, were given the keys to the flats the following year (1999) and have been paying utility bills, insurance and quit rent. After nine years, the ownership of the flats remained under MAB. The six said the association turned a deaf ear to their pleas to transfer ownership.

RC Deaf Missons Malaysia director Agnes Peter, when contacted, questioned why the transfer took so many years when the keys to the flats were handed to Leong, Wan Zainun and their friends in 1999.

She said MAB has a lot to explain to regain the confidence of Leong and his friends. Peter added that if MAB’s executive dir- ector George Thomas claims he has been facilitating the process all along, he should prove the claim.

“Does it take that long to complete a sales and purchase agreement?

“This case did not have to reach the level where it needed the intervention of MCA Public Services and Complaint De- partment head Datuk Michael Chong and The Malay Mail to be solved.

“Shouldn’t the transfer be executed at the time the keys were handed to them? It is unfair,” she said.

Claims by Thomas that there was a communication breakdown between the as- sociation and the blind is not enough as an excuse.

“The six people have been victimised. It is sad that instead of having their trust in MAB to help them, they have to resort to putting pressure to see the progress of their house ownership transfer.

They should not be made to wait any longer,” said Peter.

Independent Living and Training Centre secretary Gurdip Kaur echoed Peter’s view.

“The six deserve an explanation as to why it took so long. Those involved in the buying of the flats for them should step in and settle the matter,” she said.

“They are not living in their flats for free, or have the support of MAB. They should rightfully have the ownership of flats. MAB should be helping them,” said Gurdip.

Gurdip added that MAB, being a big non-governmental organisation, has the power to quickly transfer ownership.

Gurdip said time should not be wasted and hoped the six would gain ownership of the flats soon.

After reading the plight of Leong and his friends, Women’s Collective Development executive director Maria Chin Abdullah was concerned if the documents that they had signed to buy the house, through MAB, provided any guarantee on the property.

Chin added that MAB should ensure that the welfare of the six is taken care of.

“They are the vulnerable ones who are relying on the association. If there are more delays in the transfer, perhaps PKNS could ensure there are follow-ups with the association, ” she said.

In 1998, Leong and Wan Zainun, who paid in full for the flats, along with four others who paid via instalments were assured that once the flats were ready, own- ership would be transferred to them.

After they were handed the keys to the flats in 1999, they agreed with MAB’s request that the flats be put under MAB’s trust for a few years until the sales and purchase agreement is executed.

They were assured that the ownership would be transferred to them. However, till today, this promise has not been kept. Leong, who also spoke on behalf of Wan Zainun, felt that since they paid for the flats in full, they deserved to get ownership immediately.

“We feel that it is not right for the flats to remain under MAB. For the past few years, we have asked MAB to give us ownership of the flats but they turned a deaf ear on us,” he said.

Despite countless lawyers’ letters and endless calls, Leong claimed MAB refused to budge and he had to seek the help of Chong in February. The six subsequently filled ownership transfer forms, given by PKNS to MAB on March 30 and signed the documents at the commissioner of oaths. MAB submitted the documents to PKNS on April 9.

“We later learnt that PKNS had, in Au- gust, returned the documents to MAB be- cause they were incomplete.

Sadly, MAB decided to sit on it and not inform us,” said Leong.Leong also said they were misled by MAB into believing that they got the flats cheap, at RM25,000 each, instead of RM41,000. He said a friend, who is also blind, bought a unit at the same price (RM25,000), which was the price set by PKNS.

Leong and Wan Zainun lamented that if they had known that the price was the same, they would have bought the units directly from PKNS and got the ownership immediately.

Expressing his disappointment with MAB and with their patience running thin,Leong said he has lost confidence in the association.

My Unfinished Speech On OKU

My Unfinished Speech On OKU
by Teresa Kok

December 19th, 2007

The Disabled people from some organisations for the disabled (OKU) have been hanging around in Parliament for about 3 days. They came on the day when Shahrizat presented the bill on Persons With Disabilities 2007 in Dewan Rakyat last Thursday. They then waited till today afternoon then only have chance to observe the MPs debate in Dewan Rakyat.

I have been very busy in the past few days over series of other issues. I was a bit relaxed when I was told that the Parliament will not debate on the Special Complaint Commission in this sitting. After the press conference with NGOs in the afternoon, I then spoke to some OKU and took some points from them.

I also spoke to my friend Honey Tan and took some points from her over the phone, when I opened my Facebook, I noticed a blogger emailed me his piece on OKU and expressed his concern over OKU bill. I then quickly combined all these points into the speech below. I did it when Shahrizat started her presentation on the introduction of the bill in Dewan Rakyat.

As usual, the speaker allowed BN MPs to speak first. When it came to MP for Kinabatangan, he asked all MPs not to take too much time to debate this bill because the OKU have been waiting for too long in the Parliament, and all MPs should just support and pass the bill and should not waste time on the debate. I tried to interrupt his speech but he didn’t give me chance. I then whacked him in my speech after that.

However, the Deputy Speaker Dr Yusof did not allow me to deliver the speech below. I tried to argue with him to allow me more time to speak but he said he has to limit our time to speak. I then passed the remaining part of my speech to Chow Kon Yeow who sits next to me, ask him to speak on my behalf as I have to rush to Seremban to attend a DAP dinner there.

Below is my speech on the Disabled Persons Bill:

Ucapan YB Teresa Kok, Ahli Parlimen Seputeh Dalam Perbahasan Rang Undang-Undang Orang Kurang Upaya 2007

Datuk yang diPertua, kenyataan yang diluahkan oleh YB Kinabatangan dan Sri Gading yang menyeru Dewan yang mulia ini untuk mempercepatkan perbahasan rang undang-undang ini adalah amat tidak munasabah, ini menunjukkan kedua-dua mereka tidak faham tentang kehendak OKU. Para wakil OKU telah datang ke Parlimen sebanyak 3 hari, mereka datang untuk mendengar perbahasan Ahli Parlimen dan mereka tidak akan puas hati sekiranya Dewan Rakyat meluluskan rang undang-undang ini secara tergesa-gesa. Sekiranya kita sayang pada OKU, Parlimen kita haruslah meletakkan rang undang-undang ini sebagai agenda pertama supaya mereka tidak perlu datang ke Parlimen selama 3 hari.

Tema bagi International Day of Disabled Persons (IDDP) 2007 is “Decent Work for Persons with Disabilities.” Ini adalah kerana 80% daripada Orang Cacat ataupun OKU ialah penganggur. Pada umumnya, 10% daripada jumlah kependudukan atau populasi kita ialah OKU, sekiranya peratusan ini dipakai dalam Malaysia, maka 2.16 juta OKU yang menganggur di negara kita.

Banyak faktor yang menyebabkan OKU tidak dapat bekerja, khususnya faktor pengangkutan awam. Tanpa pengangkutan awam yang mudah diguna oleh OKU, maka memang amat susah bagi OKU untuk bekerja dan belajar di sekolah. Selain itu, banyak bangunan dan kemudahan publik di negara kita adalah amat tidak mesra kepada OKU dan susah bagi mereka untuk beroperasi di sesuatu tempat. Selalunya majikan pilih tidak mengupah OKU untuk bekerja dengan mereka kerana mereka kurang faham tentang isu berkenaan OKU. Selain itu, terdapatnya majikan yang mengupah OKU demi “corporate social responsibility” dan bukan kerana kepakaran OKU dalam bidang tertentu yang boleh menyumbang kepada syarikat ataupun sesuatu organisasi. Keadaan ini merupakan kejahilan orang ramai terhadap kepakaran OKU.

Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi OKU – Kenapakah tidak ada perwakilan OKU?

Dari segi keanggotaan Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi OKU ini, saya merasa hairan bahawa rang undang-undang ini langsung tidak sebut tentang perwakilan OKU, manakala rang undang-undang ini adalah mengenai OKU. Dalam rang undang-undang mengenai wanita, perwakilan wanita haruslah dimasukkan dalam keanggotaan Majlis Kebangsaan Wanita kerana wanitalah yang paling tahu tentang masalah wanita, jadi macam manakah rang undang-undang OKU tidak memasukkan perwakilan OKU dalam keanggotaan Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi OKU?

Selain itu, kenapakah Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan tidak dimasukkan dalam senarai anggota Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi OKU? Bukankah ini merupakan kementerian yang paling penting memandangkan struktur bangunan dan kerajaan tempatan yang selalu merupakan halangan bagi OKU untuk bekerja dan beroperasi?

Di sini, saya juga ingin mencadangkan supaya jabatan bagi OKU di Kementerian Wanita, Pembangunan Keluarga dan Masyarakat haruslah menggaji OKU untuk berkhidmat di jabatan ini kerana golongan OKU yang paling faham tentang masalah mereka dan cara penyelesaian masalah mereka.

Sehubungan dengan itu, kenapakah Kementerian Wanita, Pembangunan Keluarga dan Masyarakat tidak mengadakan rundingan dengan para persatuan OKU di negara kita sebelum rang undang-undang ini digubal dan dibentangkan? Saya difahamkan bahawa para NGO OKU ini hanya dijemput untuk menghadiri taklimat tentang rang undang-undang ini sebelum ia dibentangkan di Parlimen sahaja. Kenapakah mereka tidak dirundingi sebelum ini?

Bagi perlantikan Prof Dr Ismail Salleh sebagai senator pula, saya ingin mengucapkan tahniah kepada professor ini, walau bagaimanapun, senator ini dilantik kerana kepakaran dan kebolehannya di bidangnya tetapi beliau bukan merupakan pejuang bagi OKU. Jadi sekiranya kerajaan serius untuk memberi keutamaan bagi OKU, selain daripada Prof Dr Ismail Salleh, kerajaan juga harus melantik lagi pejuang atau jurucakap OKU untuk menjadi senator dan pemegang jawatan tinggi di kerajaan.

Pemaju Harus Diwajib Untuk Melakukan Penyesuaian Munasabah

Di sini saya ingin menyentuh tentang “penyesuaian munasabah” ataupun “reasonable accommodation” yang termaktub dalam bahagian tafsiran dalam rang undang-undang ini berbunyi: pengubahsuaian dan pelaran yang perlu dan sesuai tanpa mengenakan bebanan tidak seimbang atau tidak wajar, jika diperlukan dalam hal tertentu untuk memastikan orang kurang upaya menikmati atau menjalani kehidupan yang berkualiti dan sejahtera atas asas kesetaraan dengan orang upaya.

Soalan saya ialah, apakah maksud “pengubahsuaian dan pelaran yang perlu dan sesuai tanpa mengenakan bebanan tidak seimbang atau tidak wajar” ataupun “ necessary and appropriate modifications and adjustments not imposing a disproportionate or undue burden”? — setiap pemaju akan cari jalan keluar di bawah fasal ini dan tidak membuat pengubahsuaian yang wajar bagi OKU. Kita tidak harus membiarkan pemaju untuk mengelakkan tanggungjawab daripada rang undang-undang ini. Kerajaan harus memastikan supaya keadilan sosial ataupun “Social Justice” dilaksanakan oleh pihak pemaju dan ia tidak harus berkompromi atas isu ini.

Dalam rang undang-undang ini, isu “diskriminasi” tidak wujud dalam rang undang-undang ini. Jadi sekiranya seseorang OKU mendapati sesetengah pihak ataupun bangunan tidak mesra kepada OKU, mereka hanya boleh membentangkan aduan kepada Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi OKU, Majlis ini kemudian menyampaikan aduan kepada authority yang berkaitan, tetapi rang undang-undang ini tidak memberi kuasa kepada kerajaan untuk mengambil tindakan undang-undang terhadap pihak yang gagal menjaga kebajikan dan memberi kemudahan kepada OKU.

Masalah Penguatkuasaan
Memang tidak dapat dinafikan, selepas rang undang-undang ini diluluskan, ia akan menjadi tanda penting bagi OKU. Walau bagaimanapun, saya ingin tanya, macam manakah kementerian dapat memastikan isu penguatkuasaan dilaksanakan? Penggubalan sesuatu rang undang-undang tanpa penguatkuasaan adalah tidak berguna langsung. Misalnya Uniform Building By-Law 34A dalam Street, Drainage and Building Act adalah contoh yang paling nyata, yang mana kerajaan tempatan yang sepatutnya bertanggungjawab untuk menguatkuasakan pihak terlibat untuk mencapai standard menjaga OKU selalunya merupakan pihak yang melanggari undang-undang sendiri.

Misalnya, Sdri Gurdip Kaur, setiausaha bagi Independent Living and Training Center, beliau menerima saman daripada Majlis Perbandaran Klang dan didakwa ke mahkamah kerana tidak membayar tiket meletak kereta. Gurdip Kaur berkata, sebab dia tidak membayar tiket perletakan kereta ialah kerana pihak kerajaan tempatan tidak menyediakan petak letak kereta bagi OKU, selain itu, mesin pembayaran tiket letak kereta adalah terlalu tinggi bagi OKU yang duduk dalam kerusi roda, jadi beliau pun tidak bayar tiket letak kereta. Kesemua ini merupakan isu kecil bagi orang yang normal seperti kita tetapi ia merupakan masalah yang amat releven bagi OKU yang harus dipentingkan oleh kerajaan.

Seksyen 17 dalam rang undang-undang ini adalah “Tindakan Susulan” ataupun “follow up”, yang mana menghendaki kementerian, agensi, badan atau pertubuhan kerajaan mengemukakan laporan tentang langkah yang diambil dalam mematuhi peruntukan akta ini sebagaimana yang ditentukan oleh Majlis. Masalahnya ialah, sekiranya rang undang-undang ini tidak mengenakan hukuman ataupun “sanction” kepada pihak yang tidak mematuhi akta ini, apa yang akan dibuat oleh kerajaan sekiranya pihak terlibat tidak ikut akta ini?

Seksyen 19 dalam rang undang-undang ini adalah menghendaki Majlis untuk membentangkan laporan tahunan kepada Parlimen. Di Kanada, kerajaannya amat mementingkan isu kesaksamaan gender, jadi Menteri yang menjaga hal ehwal wanita dihendaki membentangkan laporan tentang kemajuan wanita di Parlimen negara itu. Jadi, sekiranya kerajaan adalah serius tentang perlaksanaan rang undang-undang ini, kerajaan mestilah mengadakan satu mekanisme untuk mewajibkan Menteri yang menjaga kebajikan OKU untuk membentangkan laporan tentang kemajuan OKU kepada Parlimen.

Teresa Kok

A Realistic Bill, says Shahrizat

NEWS - Parliament

Wednesday December 19, 2007

A realistic bill, says Shahrizat

PROVISIONS included in the Persons With Disability Bill 2007 were those which could be implemented for the disabled, Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil said.

“We do not want to have a bill which is nice to look at but can’t be implemented. This is a realistic bill for the disabled.”

She was replying to points raised during the debate on the bill.

Shahrizat said the Persons With Disability Bill 2007, which was later passed, was the ministry's way to fulfil its pledge to the disabled.

She said the bill took into account the needs in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Disabled and was also in line with the national policies and action plan to ensure that the disabled lived freely and had equal rights.

She said Malaysia would sign the convention in February.

On the issue of compulsory registration of the disabled, Shahrizat said making it compulsory would be a violation of their rights.

“We respect those who do not wish to register. Perhaps one day they will be comfortable with it and then come forward to do so,” she said in encouraging them to do so.

Up to June, a total of 209,208 persons with disability were registered with the Welfare Department.

On punishment for those who breached a disabled person’s rights, Shahrizat said the bill was not punitive in nature.

“There are by-laws which we can use to take action for non-compliance,” she said.

On whether mentally ill patients were included in the bill, Shahrizat said the ministry was still in discussion with Health Ministry over the matter.

Earlier when debating the bill, Wong Nai Chee (BN – Kota Melaka) expressed disappointment that an anti-discrimination law against the disabled was not included.

“I suggest having another bill for the disabled, namely an anti-discrimination bill to protect their rights,” he said.