Unconstitutional tax (Sustainability Tax) imposing by Pahang Government.

 

I would like to enquire under what pretext Pahang Government is empowered to impose Sustainability Tax to all hotel guest within Pahang state?(https://www.thestar.com.my/metro/metro-news/2021/12/14/pahang-tables-surplus-budget-of-rm597mil) Isn't it under Malaysia Constitution law article 67, 69 &110, any changes of tax imposing within Malaysia territory whether is collected by federal or state government must approved by Parliament before it can be effective and enforceable?

I've been paying the new Sustainability Fees(as attached) and staff in Resort World Genting have no idea what this tax is about. I would like to know where the Sustainability Tax will proceed into? And when did it approved by Parliament? 

I believe this is not the first time Malaysia government, whether state or federal government, violating constitutional law and public prosecutor has not take proactive action against the violation. The impartiality of Malaysia legal system is challenging one and this is exacerbated by the heavily corruption culture plaguing the country since independent. Although Malaysia had recently improved slightly by become the second highest cronyism country from the first in 2014 <https://cilisos.my/malaysia-ranked-2nd-to-russia-in-the-crony-capitalism-index-but-is-it-really-that-bad/>

 but violating of Constitution in such a conspicuous manner is literally eroding the country sovereignty where an independent sovereignty shall be govern by law enacted by people's representative (Member of Parliament), through legislative process and not created at will. Aside from Shariah Law which also divided the country into a possible dual legal system, God's law (need not go through legislation) and civil law. I do not know what is the basis of Sharia Law existence but law relating to taxation is obviously beyond family matter affecting the Muslim thus shall not construe as anything affiliating with Sharia law that need no legistration process.

Tengku Zafrul had abruptly introduced the Prosperity Tax without tender a bill through Parliament for approval and gazetted as law. This might be a violation of Constitution law and beyond the jurisdiction of his portfolio. Did any of you investigate on the matter?

Therefore, I would like stakeholders in the matter and Parliamentarian to enlighten me whether it is OK for government (the executive) to impose tax without going through due process of legislation? What is Federal Constitution means to the Malaysia government? 

Suggestion to change the name "Malaysia" to "SaDvSa".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Chersonese

Refer to the attached, I would like to suggest the name Malaysia (Federation of Malaysia) to be changed into SaDvSa, following the current effort in ratifying Constitution according to Malaysia Agreement 1963. 

The name SaDvSa is derived from combination of Sabah, Dvipa and Sarawak. The position of Sabah and Sarawak is interchangeable since both come with same syllable "Sa". This is also to stress that the three partner in the federation is equal because Dvipa could be in front or rear of both Sabah and Sarawak.

Dvipa in this context means Malaya or previously known as Survanadvipa because Malaya was known for its gold and silver mining. 

The reason to revert Malaya's name to its original name, Survanadvipa or golden chersonese is to be more accurately depict the country's topography as both Malaya and Survanadvipa we're derived from a toponym. Malaya means mountainous land (Malay is a Sanskrit word for mountain or mountainous whereas "a" means land). The same for Malaysia where "a" is a latin-greek language for land, thus Malaysia means the land of Malay. 

The reason why it should be changed is that an Austronesian sub-ethnic also adopted the Sanskrit word Malay since a German physician called Johann Friedrich Bluemenbach labeled the Austronesian race within the Malay archipelago as Malayo, which also coincide with the meaning of Chinese history record Malay race as people of Kulun, the people of hinterland. Therefore the word malay is not suitable to refer to the country because:

1. Malay means Mountainous in Sanskrit which denote undeveloped state and give a poor impression. 

2. Malay also synonymous with the Malay race which undoubtedly a major population of the land but this country is not only built by the single race. There's racist policy called NEP ruling since 1971 until now which openly violating constitution law article 8. Malay race also being obfuscated for a race that must profess in Islam under artice 160 in order to enjoy special privileges under article 153, regardless of phenotype. This is clandestinely islamize the country and thus compromised the secularity of the federation that is detrimental to the independence because it is clear that during the negotiation for independence, the British officer then, Lord Reid explicitly states that Malaya was ruled as a secular state and shall perpetuate the same. Islam was embedded into the Constitution as an official religion shall be innocuous to the freedom of religion of which it later accepted as official religion of the federation but Sabah and Sarawak maintain that the State do not have any official religion. 

3. Dvipa means Peninsula in Sanskrit thus more accurately depict the topography of the country. Since Malay also a Sanskrit word thus Dvipa should not have any issues. In fact, the first civilization that introduced into the land were the hindus which contributed enormously whether in terms of language, writing system, government system, social development, science and technology. 

Naming alone is superficial although it is politically important. Ultimately, the federation should be negotiated again to suit the context without Singapore in the formula. The aim is to make people's life better and all States in the federation shall grow equally and fairly. The exit of Singapore also give openings for other partners in the federation to consider the same. Notwithstanding that treaty of international treaty provide the same avenue for Sabah and Sarawak to seek independence from the federation if the Malaysia Agreement is to be made void. I personally is neutral in this regard, as I am happy with Sabah and Sarawak being part of the federation as it is otherwise. What I hope to see is development in Sabah and Sarawak equal to that of Kuala Lumpur and people live a better life as they should given the natural resources blessed by God.