Wednesday 18 September 2013

DID CHIN PENG REALLY DIDN'T APPLY TO RETURN HOME, AS CLAIMED BY EX-IGP HANIFF OMAR??


Did Chin Peng REALLY REFUSE ticket home? 
http://tinyurl.com/lv86kw2

Photo: Did Chin Peng REALLY  REFUSE  ticket home?  OR Former IGP Tun Haniff Omar "JUGA MUDAH LUPA"?

http://tinyurl.com/lv86kw2

Tun Haniff Omar claimed yesterday  that Chin Peng had refused an offer to return home in 1989 and only applied in 2005. 

TunHaniff  said,

“When Chin Peng finally applied in 2005 to return to Malaysia, the boat had sailed and there was absolutely no reason to admit him back into the country, unless he could prove that he had applied to return within that one-year window, which he couldn’t."

But  MP Teresa Kok reminded  the former Inspector-General of Police (IGP) that he had said OTHERWISE  in previous media reports  and clearly contradicted what he said in a New Straits Times article in 1991.

 Teresa Kok demanded clarification today from Tun Haniff Omar over his claim.

In an   NST report  cited in a December 2009 article by online news portal The Malaysian Insider (TMI). Tun Haniff  was quoted as saying

"“Chin Peng submitted his application quite late ... towards the end of the period."

The report was referring to the one-year window given to former Communist leader Chin Peng and his followers to return home after signing the 1989 Hat Yai peace treaty. 

In  another NST report on September 9, 1991, then Special Branch director Datuk Zulkifli Abdul Rahman had said that Chin Peng’s application “was being processed” and would be given the same treatment as the rest.

The remarks were made after the first batch of 13 ex-CPM (Communist Party of Malaya) members were allowed to return home. Then the following day,  IGP  Haniff had also  said that Chin Peng’s application was being “studied”. 

MP Teresa Kok said,

"..Has Tun Haniff ever denied or can he deny that he never said what he said to NST in 1991, that is , Chin Peng had submitted his application quite late but obviously WITHIN  the stipulated one year period?.

"If Chin Peng had indeed submitted his application to return home within the stipulated one year period, then Tun Haniff  should explain why was his application rejected."

Teresa Kok pointed out that apart from contradicting himself, Haniff’s words were also spoken in CONTRARY  to Chin Peng’s own recollection of the past as written in his memoirs My Side of History.

Teresa Kok said,( quoting from the book): 

“In his final chapter, entitled ‘A continuing exile’, Chin Peng had said: ‘After meeting my end of the 1989 peace accords, I had looked forward to a homecoming. In late 1990 I made applications to settle down in Malaysia, but was rejected at the end of December 1991,” 

Teresa Kok also  noted that Chin Peng’s words appeared to be consistent with the NST report in 1991, particularly in as far as the date of his application is concerned.

“If Chin Peng had indeed submitted his application to return home within the stipulated one year period, then Tun Haniff  should explain why was his application rejected,” Kok said. 

 Chin Peng lost his lawsuit, which was filed in 2009, to be allowed back into Malaysia when the Federal Court ruled a year later that he needed birth and citizen certificates to re-enter.


Tun Haniff Omar claimed yesterday that Chin Peng had refused an offer to return home in 1989 and only applied in 2005.

TunHaniff said,

“When Chin Peng finally applied in 2005 to return to Malaysia, the boat had sailed and there was absolutely no reason to admit him back into the country, unless he could prove that he had applied to return within that one-year window, which he couldn’t."

But MP Teresa Kok reminded the former Inspector-General of Police (IGP) that he had said OTHERWISE in previous media reports and clearly contradicted what he said in a New Straits Times article in 1991.

Teresa Kok demanded clarification today from Tun Haniff Omar over his claim.

In an NST report cited in a December 2009 article by online news portal The Malaysian Insider (TMI). Tun Haniff was quoted as saying

"“Chin Peng submitted his application quite late ... towards the end of the period."

The report was referring to the one-year window given to former Communist leader Chin Peng and his followers to return home after signing the 1989 Hat Yai peace treaty.

In another NST report on September 9, 1991, then Special Branch director Datuk Zulkifli Abdul Rahman had said that Chin Peng’s application “was being processed” and would be given the same treatment as the rest.

The remarks were made after the first batch of 13 ex-CPM (Communist Party of Malaya) members were allowed to return home. Then the following day, IGP Haniff had also said that Chin Peng’s application was being “studied”.

MP Teresa Kok said,

"..Has Tun Haniff ever denied or can he deny that he never said what he said to NST in 1991, that is , Chin Peng had submitted his application quite late but obviously WITHIN the stipulated one year period?.

"If Chin Peng had indeed submitted his application to return home within the stipulated one year period, then Tun Haniff should explain why was his application rejected."

Teresa Kok pointed out that apart from contradicting himself, Haniff’s words were also spoken in CONTRARY to Chin Peng’s own recollection of the past as written in his memoirs My Side of History.

Teresa Kok said,( quoting from the book):

“In his final chapter, entitled ‘A continuing exile’, Chin Peng had said: ‘After meeting my end of the 1989 peace accords, I had looked forward to a homecoming. In late 1990 I made applications to settle down in Malaysia, but was rejected at the end of December 1991,”

Teresa Kok also noted that Chin Peng’s words appeared to be consistent with the NST report in 1991, particularly in as far as the date of his application is concerned.

“If Chin Peng had indeed submitted his application to return home within the stipulated one year period, then Tun Haniff should explain why was his application rejected,” Kok said.

Chin Peng lost his lawsuit, which was filed in 2009, to be allowed back into Malaysia when the Federal Court ruled a year later that he needed birth and citizen certificates to re-enter.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Why should we listen to criminals who have killed thousands of Malaysian after independence. He is a murderer.