NGEREPAK

Kawan,

Nak molah keputusan sik senang. Manas ngan Nganok urang gik senang dari ya. Camyalah. Camtoklah. Maok juak ati nak madah tapi malas eh. Urang jak sik nyaga atiku. Mun ku dah berbunyi mesti banyak yang kecik hati. Mun sik cayak tanyak Bini ngan urang yang nak lamak tauk ngan perangei ku. Mun ku ngerepak kompom imam ke masjid terkejut nengar. Apa sik sangka tek eh. Pandei “berzikir” juak paduhal. Mun ku dah manas, terpaksalah sidak ya napok mancis apa takut aku nunok uM. Sebab ya mun dolok berkelae di skolah ku sik embak barang, takut terlanjo antu abis pecah lubang perut. Telepon nenek ku nun. Mestinya nyawab camtok. “Free hand, bukuk lima, ujung kaki” sik duli. Mun dah manas, relax ajaknya mecah cermin ya. Sebab ya bertanda banyak gilak di badan. Sigek jak nya sik suka molah. Ngantok dirik ke dinding. Kedak tambi. Tapi terer-terernya sik sempatnya ngelek ditumpu Matdom sampei biru mata. Sbenarnya sik sempat sebabnya main tipu. Aku gik klaka bah. Belum berjarah lalu dibante. Baruk nak balas balit dah rami urang nahan. Apa boleh buat. Paling jaik nyambung “berzikir” balitlah.

Sebab ya kinek tok, mun dapat, aku sik maok malas balit apa-apa yang sik bertempat. Komen negatif ka, lawak negatif ka, sindir negatif ka, dsb. Tapi kadang-kadangku terlepas juakla. Tapi paling sik pat ku control mun aku terkejut. Mesti darahku nait palak terus. Terus jadi sik “cool”kedak urang jahilliah. Jahiliah pun jahilliahlah. Janji ku puas. Mun sik cayak tanyak miak LAW UM, siapa miak yang ngepong tambi embak bertumbok segal kenak “tackle” main bol. Tanyak juak sidak midvalley munnya ada rakam miak nganok miak ompuan sampei nangis nyaga parking segal duit sik sampei tiga ringgit. Pegi sabah nun nanyak kawan ku siapa ngannya “so-called” gi ngugut miak kat kolej 8 (esen gilak. Segal dapat berkawan ngan “kajol”)-12 (beraninya muka speaker besa-besa) dolok kedak dirik kuat gilak. Gi Sandakan nun, mesti kawan askar ku tauk perangei ku.

Aku paling sik suka urang esen. Iboh lawa gilak nganok urang sukati. tua kah. mudak kah. Aku sik duli. Aku sik berbunyi pun ada sebab musabab. Ada “ati” yang perlu dijaga. Kadang-kadang lupak diriknya bukan lawan tapi suka ninggi dirik. Mun aku masuk “neraka” belum tentunya masuk syurga. Mun aku dah start “esen” mesti rami urang sik suka. Ko suka kah?

p/s kelak ku nyambong balit ngerepak.

Yang Benar,

Enam Ringgit

As posted at Lawyerstalk

Dear my learned friend and members of the bar,
The answer for the question is self explanatory. If this country called Melayu-sia, instead of Malaysian you are now Melayusian. Sometimes sound good to me but sometimes not.
Whether it Malay-sia and/or Melayu-sia and/or Planet of the Apes, I believe the rights of Melayu-sian and Non Melayu-sian should be protected.
As Melayu-sian I will try to safeguard my rights at the very best of my ability  but I shall not forget of article 8 of Federal Constitution which says that there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender except as expressly authorised.
We may argue and re-write history but I personally think it serve no purpose especially if may cause chaos. "Jangan kerana mendengar guruh dilangit habis air ditempayan dicurahkan" and " jangan kerana nila setitik habis susu sebelanga".
As my friend rightly said, "stamford bridge is falling down, falling down falling down, stamford bridge is falling down!

Aku BUKAN RACIST

Aku bangsa Melayu
Aku ber"bin"kan orang Melayu

Aku lafazkan dua kalimah syahadah

Aku Islam

Aku bercakap bagi bangsaku, aku racist

Aku bercakap tentang bangsamu, aku racist

Aku memperlekehkan bangsaku, aku populist

Aku mengkritik bangsamu, aku populist

Bangsaku miskin

Bangsamu kaya, mungkin benar

Bangsaku makan rasuah

Bangsaku gila harta

Bangsaku kaki perempuan

Bangsamu begitu juga

Cerita ini bukan pasal bangsamu

Cerita itu pasal bangsaku

Cerita tentang Aku yang sedang cuba

Cerita tentang bangsaku

Regards,
Roy

---

Sent: Thu, February 10, 2011 2:57:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Lawyers Talk:4653] Fwd: RAJA ZARITH IDRIS' on goodwill

Does "Malay"-sia imply that only English-speaking Malays own this land, otherwise surely it would have been called "Melayu"-sia?

Just wondering ;-)

Kheng Hoe

Wahai anakku,

d'cinun duduk tak mengapa

d'cini berlari tak mengapa 

disinun duduk mengapa?

disini berlari tak mengapa

tidak mengapa duduk jika terguris d'cinun

berdiri jika terhiris pun tidak mengapa d'sini

namun janganlah duduk dan janganlah berdiri

kalau hanya disinun dan tidak disini

kasehmu disini tidak mengapa

dipandang mulia takkan dicerca

kasehmu dicinun bagaimana

dipandang mudah hati binasa

yang mudah itu hati

yang susah itu nafsu nafsi

yang disinun sudah mengerti

yang disini menjadi saksi

 

Bukan nak cakap besar

Hi,

Dah lama bebenor rasanya tak menulis. Dah takde idea camne nak menulis. Lagipun terlalu busy ngan hal kerja. Hari-hari kerja. Tak jugak abis-abis. Sekejap pi penang..sekejap gi johor...lepas tu pi penang balik...lepas tu gi johor balik...

Dalam masa yang sama kena meeting ngan clients. Kalau mereka yang menghadap kita kat opis..oklah jugak tapi nasib badan kena jugak melangkah kaki berjumpa mereka! Aku kena pegi sebab yang nak dijumpa ni bukan calang-calang orang. Bak kata ore kelate celup “boh-boh belako”.

Oleh kerana mereka ni berpangkat Dato dan agak berusia...kenalah aku mengalah (kononnyalah)...mentang-mentang aku masih lagi takder title..yang ada pun LLB..Lemak-Lemak Berisi(terpaksa diedit dari ayat asalku).

Percaya atau tidak, sepanjang lebih kurang 5 tahun kat tempat kerja aku ni.., aku terpaksa deal directly with the Dato, Directors, MD and so on and so forth. Jarang benar aku deal ngan their assistant or staff. Kalau ada pun, banyak kali aku tengok mereka-mereka ini diperkotak katikkan. Acap kali role mereka ni limited untuk call aku dan beritahu “Dato nak bercakap”, menuang dan menghantar air. Bukan nak cakap besar tapi itu kenyataannya (i).

Sekarang ni...berjumpa dan bercakap dengan klien sebegini bukan satu masalah walaupun I’m still in the process of improving my skills. “butterfly in my stomach” masih hidup lagi. Bukan nak cakap besar tapi itu kenyataannya (ii).

Walaupun bukannya satu masalah yg besar tapi ianya tidak mudah. Macam-macam perangai. Ada yang kerek dan ada yang crack.  Ada yang rasa hebat, pandai, keras kepala dll attitude problems. Tapi ada juga yang baik dan berkongsi rahsia kejayaan walaupun takler banyak..Bukan nak cakap besar tapi itu kenyataannya (iii).

Tapi aku perasan satu benda, mereka ini berkongsi persamaan berikut terutamanya (dato-dato) iaitu duit banyak tapi rupa biasa jer. Bila aku cakap "biasa" maksudnya memang literal. Baju, seluar dan kasut yang mereka pakai, mcam staff ofis biasa-biasa..Mungkin pasal tu mereka kaya kot...

Tapi yang mengejutkan, reputasi dan kedudukan yang mereka pegang bukan calang-calang. Ada yang merupakan bekas Dean for Medical Faculty (1st Dean) salah satu Universiti tempatan. Bahasa yang digunakan "berabok". Patut aku yang interview dia, aku pulak yang kena interview! According to him, he has a straint and intense relationship ngan Dr. M. Lantak pegilah. Aku cuma berminat dengan cara dia bercakap dan berbahasa. Teratur dan mudah. Mungkin sistem persekolahan  dulu banyak memainkan peranan.
Sorang lagi merupakan “accountant by profession and previously was the MD” kepada satu Company besar yang terletak berdekatan A&W PJ. Sekarang dia merupakan pemaju yang terlibat di dalam pembinaan premis perniagaan bukan sahaja di kolumpo tapi seluruh negara. Setiap kali meeting ngan  dia ni, aku dilayan macam "orang ada-ada" depan staff dia.  Ini permudahkan kerja aku buat "presentation and argument".  Samada treatment tu ikhlas, itu belakang kira. Pengalaman yang paling yang berguna bagi aku ialah apabila aku diminta buat presentation (tanpa kehadiran my big boss) dalam meeting board room di mana mereka-mereka yang hadir semuanya "orang yang telah berjaya" pada mata kasar aku. Memang rasa "kecik" tapi aku rasa aku "berjaya". 
Sorang lagi yang aku pernah buat meeting ialah bekas super senior “IR”. Pernah menjadi Presiden kepada persatuan engineer Malaysia. Company beliau amat berjaya dan amat dikenali pada satu ketika tapi kini menurutnya, " this is purely a commercial decision. It is my stand to let the company go bust". Menurut cerita , dia ni pernah kononnya duduk satu bilik ngan current PM. Betul atau tidak "wallahuallam".

Persamaan yang paling berharga wujud dalam diri mereka ini ialah, “they started from humble beginnings”. Mereka faham apa maksud "kesusahan", "keperitan" dan "kepayahan". Mendengar cerita mereka, memberikan motivasi kepada aku untuk menjadi orang yang berjaya.

P/s bukan nak berlagak and with due respect, ramai juga dato yang aku jumpa "ting-tong".
Live from Senai Airport- 11.53 pagi

Janji Ajim

fuh kanan fuh kiri

takkan begini

takkan begitu

kerna kami masih ingat lagi

fuh kanan fuh kiri

takkan begini

takkan  begitu

kan berjanji sehidup semati

fuh kanan fuh kiri

takkan begini

takkan begitu

kasih sayang beraja di hati

 

fuh kanan fuh kiri

takkan begini

takkan begitu

walaupun berlaki walaupun berbini 

fuh kanan fuh kiri

depan belakang

bawah atas

biar hati berbekas jiwa jangan berkeras

 

Jan?I @zIm M#qRy

I'm happy

During the mediation process, Y.A Dato Suraya Othman said this to me and my learned opponent “You can’t make people completely happy otherwise you will die young. Also, if we are completely happy, bad things happen. From my own experience, when I was too happy, next day I got transferred to another place (to Kuantan). When I was promoted to be Judicial Commissioner, I was then transferred to KL Court. Later, I was transferred again to Shah Alam. It applies to good people. Good people won’t last long. As long as we are happy although not completely happy, I think it is good enough. I don’t think that my husband is completely happy with me (she smiled at us).

Our case before her can be summarized as follows:-

(a) My client started her employment with the Defendant in 1979.

(b) In 1986, the Defendant sent a letter informing my client that she was now offered a new job with one of the Defendant subsidiaries (X) and her employment with the Defendant will automatically ceases.

(c) In 1992, the Defendant’s issued a letter promoting her to Senior Clerk and put her under probation. This letter was signed by Tengku Z.

(d) In 1993, Company X issued a letter to confirm the position. It was also signed by Tengku Z.

(e) Company X was voluntarily wound up in 2000. All the employees of Company X (including my client) lost their only jobs.

(f) According to the terms of the employment, our client was entitled for a retrenchment benefits for the sum of 90k.

(d) Upon our advice, my client filed this claim seeking the declaration that the Defendant was still the employer of my client and therefore liable to pay 90k to her.

During mediation (technically we were not supposed to argue during mediation), it was my learned opponent’s argument that my client’s claim was frivolous and should not be made in the first place. He argued that if my client thinks that she was still the employee of the Defendant and not with Company X, why she did not report back to the Defendant when Company X was wound up. In any event, he contended that my client’s employment was mutually terminated in 1986 and she joined Company on the basis of “new employment. 1992 was unintentionally issued.

I submitted that the Defendant was still the employer on the grounds:-

(a) 1986 letter was not a valid termination because my Client was never given an opportunity to decide whether to work with the Defendant or with Company X.

(b) Besides that, the Defendant’s action in 1986 letter was tantamount to force labor because My Client had no say at all.

(c) There was no necessity for my client to report back to the Defendant because it is clearly stated in 1986 letter that my client’s employment ceased automatically. It does not make any different even if my client gone to see them.

(d) The Defendant’s argument that 1992 letter was unintentionally issued was lame excuse.

(e) The Defendant has no business to issue 1992 if they think my client was not their employee.

(f) There are evidence to show that from 1986 up to 1995, my client’s salaries were paid by the Defendant and its marketing’s arm.

I humbly believe that the above argument was one of my best especially against experient practitioner (my opponent graduated from University of Malaya in 1979 when I was not even born). He has many cases reported in Malayan Law Journal and etc. He was not alone but assisted by another lawyer. It was like David versus Goliath!

Yesterday was my lucky day. I felt that I was in heaven when the Judge asked both parties whether we have watched the movie titled “THE RAINMAKER”. It was icing on the cake. I had watched the movie. It is about junior lawyer against senior lawyer. It is about bad insurance company who refused to allow the claim by its own client (insurer) without looking into the merits. It is about good versus evil. As expected, justice prevails.

Y.A Dato Suraya was on my side although not 100%. She believed that my client had a case against the Defendant. But she did say that there was no guarantee that she will decide in my favor should the matter tried. It could be the other way around.

In “Rain Maker” the insurance company through its lawyer arrogantly offered a small sum of money but rejected. Similar to my case, during the mediation, my client was only offered only 10% from the amount claimed. I did not think much. I told my client not to accept it because it was an insult and it was not genuine offer. She agreed.

So, I asked her how much she wants. I was not happy with her answer. She wanted 90% of the amount claim. I told her to forget about settling this matter outside the court because it was irrational. “You are greedy. Any Defendant’s lawyer will advise their client to try their luck by way of full trial upon hearing the demand.” I told her the most she can get is between 50%-60%. Finally she listened to me.

I then made my counter offer to the Defendant’s solicitors. “Mr. CSN, my client willing to settle at 70%”. “I don’t think my client will agree to that. My mandate is only up to 15%.” He replied back.

Both of us agreed that we had no alternative but to proceed with the trial. Till now, I strongly believe that it was his advice to his client not to settle this matter. From his demeanor and the way he speak, I think he was confident that he can nail me.

Later in the afternoon, the Judge called all the parties to her chamber. She wanted to know how much the offer and the counter offer. I told her that the amount offered was a peanut. It was our stand the amount offered should be between 50%-70%.

She started to talk about “happiness” as adumbrated in first paragraph of this article. She indirectly advised the Defendant’s Managing Director Tengku Zar (lady) to revise the offer after taking into account all the legal aspects raised by me and its merits. She reminded the Defendant of its moral obligation. Also, She reminded my client to more open to listen to any reasonable offer.

It was worthwhile waiting. The Defendant’s MD came up with final offer although his solicitors were not happy. The MD agreed to pay 50%.

I convinced my client that it was a good deal. “You either take it or lose it”. Finally, she accepted the offer.

To be honest, if this matter proceeded, although I was extremely confident that I can handle it well, there is a good chance for my client not to get a single cent. By the way, it is now academic.

I am a lucky guy because:-

(a) I managed to discharge my duties towards my client at the very best of my ability;

(b) I was at the right time (watching the right movie), place and before the right Judge;

(c) My client was happy (though not completely) for securing at least half of the amount claimed. She can now celebrate Christmas with style.

(d) The Defendant’s Managing Director did not listen to his solicitor’s advice causing him unhappy

What I can tell you is that I am really happy.

-The end-

P/s I am afraid to say that I am completely happy. Bad things happen

Aku yang fening ka Hakim yang fening!

Last Month, @ku ada bicara kat Penang Court utk satu kes yang bagi aku mudah..Dalam keadaan biasa “or in the ordinary course of business”...normally aku akan succeed dalam kes-kes sebegini..

Ku sangka panas hingga ke petang rupanya hujan batu yang melanda...ku sangka ku menang rupanya jatuh tersungkur dek Hakim yang membuat keputusan menolak tuntutanku...

Kalah menang sudah menjadi kelaziman. Itu aku faham....Setau aku no lawyers in town yang berani menjanjikan kemenangan..silap-silap boleh kena slashed to death.

Kalah tak mengapa tetapi mesti berasaskan alasan-alasan yang boleh diterima akal or at least make sense..Dalam kes aku ni berbeza sikit..itu yang aku tengah fening lalat membaca alasan yang diberikan..

Untuk memudahkan pemahaman, aku ringkaskan dengan seberapa ringkas yang boleh fakta kes dan hujahan aku..

1. Anak guam aku tuntut hutang barang yang dihantar kepada Defendan berjumlah 70k

2. Defendan menafikan keberhutangan. Defendan tak hutang satu sen pun... Namun di dalam masa yang sama menyatakan Plaintif yang sebenarnya berhutang RM30k dengannya. Jumlah 30k tersebut diperolehi setelah Defendan tolak RM100k (kerugian yang kononnya dialami) dengan 70k yang dituntut.

Aku dengan bongkaknya menghujahkan bahawa Kalau Defendan tak hutang satu sen pun kenapa Defendan nak tolak RM100k dengan 70K..kan tak masuk akal...kerugian yang dituntut tak pernah dibangkitkan sebelum ini. [Ambil perhatian para pembaca bahawa isu kerugian ini tidak relevan dengan perbincangan di sini]

Defendan menghujahkan bahawa Defendan berhak kepada 30k setelah ditolak tuntutan Plaintif dengan tuntutan kerugian Defendan sebanyak RM100k..back to square one

Keputusan Hakim

(a) Plaintif gagal buktikan Defendan hutang RM70k

(b) Defendan berjaya buktikan bahawa Plaintif kena bayar RM30k kepada Defendan. Jumlah ini diperolehi dari jumlah 100k tolak RM70k (jumlah yang dituntut)

Keputusan ini aku pertikaikan atas alasan yang mudah yang merupakan argument aku dari mula lagi...KALAU AKU GAGAL BUKTIKAN DEFENDAN HUTANG 70K SEPERTI YANG DIPUTUSKAN, WHY ON EARTH, MAHKAMAH TOLAK 100k dENGAN MY PRECIOUS 70K YANG KONONNYA TIDAK DIBUKTIKAN! TAK BOLEH DITERIMA DEK AKALKU..MUNGKIN AKAL KORANG kot

Pendapat anda?