Isytihar harta idea komunis, kata Hadi
Presiden PAS, Abdul Hadi Awang menyifatkan isytihar harta sebagai konsep ataupun idea komunis dan sosialis. Beliau berkata, dalam konteks negara ini, cadangan untuk mengisytiharkan harta dibayangi oleh pengaruh DAP dalam kerajaan Pakatan Harapan (PH).
"Isytihar harta secara umumnya teori komunis dan sosialis. Mungkin dibayangi DAP yang mempengaruhi kerajaan kita hari ini.
"Sosialis ini dia kononnya hendak menghadkan kekayaan, ternyata negara-negara sosialis yang bertukar liberal, pemimpin sosialis itu paling kaya sekali," katanya ketika sidang media di Rusila, Marang, hari ini.
Isnin lalu, PAS dilaporkan berpendapat bahawa pengisytiharan harta akan menjejaskan keselamatan harta dan individu tersebut, di samping akan menimbulkan rasa dengki terhadap pihak lain. Perkara itu disuarakan Timbalan Presiden PAS Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man berkata demikian sebagai merujuk usul yang akan dibentangkan kerajaan di parlimen.
“Ia melibatkan isteri, anak-anak.. kalau kita lihat dalam Islam, hadis nabi sebut, Tuhan bagi kamu harta, jangan kamu heboh kepada orang ramai kerana dengki orang ramai.
“Soal keselamatan bila kita isytihar, keselamatan harta dan invididu perlu diambil kira,” katanya kepada pemberita di lobi parlimen.
Mengulas konsep isytihar harta menurut perspektif Islam, Abdul Hadi berkata ia tidak bersifat mutlak sebaliknya bergantung kepada situasi. Jika seseorang itu memiliki harta dan berisiko untuk mengelak daripada membayar cukai misalnya, ia adalah wajib bagi individu berkenaan untuk mengisytiharkan harta.
"Dalam Islam ikut realiti, isytihar harta ada masa wajib, ada masa haram, ada masa sunat.
"Kalau isytihar harta pada individu yang boleh menyebabkan berlaku rasuah, penyelewengan percukaian, itu wajib bagi orang macam ini.
"Ada orang hendak berbangga dengan harta dia, nak bermegah dengan isytihar harta, itu haram," jelas Abdul Hadi.
Katanya lagi, jika seseorang itu sudah diketahui tidak memiliki harta, tiada keperluan untuk berbuat demikian. - mk
Isytihar harta pun sangkut dgn komunis. Ooi Hadi negara komunis mana ada harta nak declare semua rakyat bekerja untuk kerajaan tak ada gaji di bayar hanya saja bagi makanan sebagai contoh Korea Utara.sikit2 kaitkan dgn komunis parti Taliban. - Eric Tan
Isytihar harta pun nak salah DAP jugak? Dulu siapa kata, "Wajib sokong DAP, haram sokong Umno hingga kiamat"? Kemedian, sampai komunis, sosialis pulak. Apa yang buruk sangat dengan isytihar harta tu? Dulu sebelum kawin dengan Umno PAS selalu suruh Umno isytihar harta. Waduuuuhhhh!! Pening amat. Ulama apa ini? DAP takkan nak diam.- Azlan Md.Noor
Kalau nak bayar zakat kena kira tak harta. - Mohd.Azman
Lebai tak habis2 nak menggambarkan DAP sbg parti yg paling brkuasa dlm PH dan DAP sbg komunis agar orang Melayu akan sentiasa bencikan DAP.Dia juga sering eksplotasikan Islam utk kepentingan sendiri. Dulu baik dgn DAP, dia gunakan alasan utk mghalalkan kerjasama tu. Kini UMNO yg dikafirkannya dan jadi teman sekatil PAS pula. Orang mcm ni layak ke dipercayaikah? Tak istihar harta sebab apa? Dedak trbongkar ke? - Chan Cheng Huat
Sistem komunis sosialis, semua harta milik negara termasuk anak anak. Pekerjaan seseorang pun ditentukan olih kerajaan. Justeru, penyelewengan kewangan tidak menjadi isu. Jika ada pun, pelaku akan ditembak mati. Tidak mahu istihar harta akan hanya menggalakkan pencuri dan perasuah. - Firefly Villa
Demokrasi pun idea barat..Idea orang Kafir...Kalau mcm tu tak perlu join Pilihanraya lah yer...sbb idea orang Kafir...Dan tak perlu declare harta sbb idea komunis..Pilihanraya kau tak payah join..harta kau tak payah declare...baru win. - Awang
Declaring assets with God's will...
We don’t give PAS deputy president Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man enough credit. Although we remember him for saying that the declaration of assets is unIslamic, that wasn’t the only thing he said. He said many more confusing things that only the highest among us would be able to decipher.
I couldn’t, but I could raise my confusion.
First, the quick change in position. As Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail recalls, Tuan Ibrahim was a staunch advocate for asset declaration in 2015. After The Wall Street Journal exposed the billions that were transferred to the former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s accounts, Tuan Ibrahim asked Najib and his wife Rosmah Mansor to declare their assets.
He said that asset declaration is the only effective response against the allegations. But now it’s different.
2015 Tuan Ibrahim vs 2019 Tuan Ibrahim
When it’s his turn to declare assets, Tuan Ibrahim calls it unIslamic, since asset declaration is tantamount to the flaunting of wealth. The deliberate misinterpretation here is stark.
Asset declaration is not an opportunity to flaunt your wealth; asset declaration is a curtailment of opportunity to obtain illicit wealth. Tuan Ibrahim understood this in 2015, but he refuses to extend the same logical reasoning to 2019.
Everyone knows that asset declaration matters at this juncture because of what happened the past few years. Corruption was systemic and endemic; it was normalised and made a culture.
Whenever we see a politician, we immediately assume they have “taken some money” from somewhere. We don’t trust them to be clean and upright - they are the number one enemies of integrity.
To uproot this, the starting point is an asset declaration. We need every politician to put their cards on the table so that we could have an explanation on any suspicious wealth, and to track any disproportionate increase or decrease in wealth in the future.
Asset declaration is not to find out whether a politician is rich or poor, asset declaration is to find out if our money in government is secure.
But I sense that the Tuan Ibrahim (photo) of 2015 is not lost. Because after saying that asset declaration is unIslamic, he said that PAS politicians were still ready to declare their assets.
Legislation vs special motion
The only problem, he said, was the manner of declaration. He supported his colleague, PAS secretary-general Takiyuddin Hassan, who said he wouldn’t declare his assets because there was no force of law to compel such declaration.
What they are suggesting is that they would only support a full legislative measure to compel asset declaration, rather than a halfway house of a special parliamentary motion.
This is strange.
If they are, in principle, in agreement to asset declaration, why would a lesser measure disincentivise them to declare their assets? Regardless of which measure compels them to declare their assets, they have to do the same thing: To state how much they and their family own in total, and to make a statutory declaration claiming it is true and valid.
It doesn’t matter whether it is a law or a special motion, the presentation of the asset declaration is the same for every politician. The fundamental principle also doesn’t alter.
That is why the opposition to asset declaration by Tuan Ibrahim and Takiyuddin (photo), based on the manner of the declaration, is confusing.
Security risk
To a certain extent, Tuan Ibrahim did relay his concern: He was worried that the asset declaration exercise would expose him to security risks. This is a common excuse used by many BN politicians in the past.
The question of security risk is overblown because most people could estimate how much a politician is worth based on what he has done in the past, and their salary now – information that is publicly available. This typically worries politicians who have enormous wealth, or wealth levels that are disproportionate to what people expect.
Additionally, the argument is flawed because politicians who have declared their assets previously did not face any additional security risk. Public figures already receive additional protection from the authorities, and a mere asset declaration wouldn’t put them to grave risk. Their public profile cancels off security risks.
However, I wouldn’t pretend to know what Tuan Ibrahim truly believes in. Because he also said that the entire practice is pointless as politicians, like the common people, would have declared their assets to the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) every year.
'Pointless'
That means it is unlikely that these politicians are corrupt. This is highly confusing because our experience has shown us that such declaration by no means guarantees that politicians are all clean and incorruptible. In fact, the behind-closed-doors nature of declaring to IRB adds more layers of secrecy to the wealth of a public figure who’s in charge of public funds.
More important is the explicit denial of the principle of asset declaration. Tuan Ibrahim seems to overturn once and for all his old beliefs that accountability and integrity matters among politicians.
By saying that a principled practice of asset declaration is “pointless”, Tuan Ibrahim meant that the right time for such implementation is “never”. That is disappointing – and confusing. - James Chai
Yang Saddiq menghadap dengar temberang Najib kenapa?Lupa bagaimana dulu rejim kleptokrat menindas musuh politik pengkritik termasuk wartawan dan rakyat biasa yg memberi komen kes beliau? Rakyat bayar gaji korang bukan untuk bersama penyamun tapi bersama rakyat!
