Former CM explains significance of Mazu statue

Joe Fernandez | Apr 23, 09 2:06pm

The construction of the Goddess of the Sea (Mazu) statue in Kudat was not meant as a shrine or as a temple but primarily meant for its significance to the tourism value that it can bring to Sabah.

Former Sabah Chief Ministersaid this yesterday during questioning by counsel Mohammad Shafee Abdullah for Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman and three other defendants in a civil suit.

"It (the statue) obviously has a religious significance being a Taoist statue," Chong told the court.

"However, it would not be correct to suggest that the non-erection of the statue would deprive the followers of the religion from performing their prayers."

Chong also denied suggestions by Shafee that the Mazu statue had something to do with the Kudat Moral Uplifting Society.

Chong is a member of the Kudat Moral Uplifting Society besides being the chair of Kudat Thean Hou Charitable Foundation (KTHCF) which initiated the Mazu statue project in early 2005.

"I received divine instructions from Mazu - the Goddess of the Sea - through the Taoists, especially mentioning my name, that I should take the lead to put up a statue in Kudat for the good and prosperity of the people in Kudat," Chong told the court.

Chong's civil suit has been brought forward from its original May 5 date after judicial commissioner Yew Jen Kie threw out an attempt by the defendants on Tuesday to strike out the suit on technicalities.

The trial started on Jan 12 and the plaintiff has so far called three witnesses, of whom two have already been cross-examined.

Chong, in his capacity as the chairman of the KTHCF, initiated legal action on Feb 6 last year against the Sabah government for forcing work to halt on the construction of the statue despite a letter of approval from the Kudat Town Board dated Feb 8, 2006.

A second suit pending

The judicial commissioner has ruled that she will be hearing Chong's originating motion after she finishes hearing the civil suit.

In his originating motion filed on Dec 12 last year, Chong is seeking a court order to revoke the withdrawal of the letter of approval issued by the Kudat Town Board on Nov 15, 2007.

He is also seeking a declaration the letter of approval issued by the Kudat Town Board on Feb 8, 2006 is valid and binding on all parties.

In the originating motion, Chong named the Kudat Town Board and the Central Town and Country Planning Board as the first and second respondents respectively.

Asked by Shafee whether the statue would be a massive structure, Chong replied: "Not in particular if you compare to other statues in Malaysia."

The Mazu project, Chong told the court, would be a platform 20 feet high, topped by the 88-feet-high statue, giving a total height of 108 feet for the entire structure.

On both sides of the platform would be a staircase with an entrance to a void in the platform for conversion into a storage compartment, a meeting room, and an office for the foundation.

Further, 60 percent or so of the empty space around the structure within its 2.3 acre site will consist of parking bays for tourist coaches, other vehicles and toilet facilities.

"The size of the space in front would less than a quarter of a football field," said Chong.

"The deity would be facing the direction of the South China Sea about 15 to 20 kilometres away. At the back would be the Marudu Bay.

"There is a golf course in front of the proposed statue but no immediate building or structure to obstruct and the deity has a clear view of the South China Sea. There is no beach. There is just a steep rocky incline falling away to the sea."

Chong dismissed suggestions by Shafee that his statue was the usual, run of the mill structures common in Malaysia but admitted that he had not seen many of similar size in the country.

He gave some examples, upon being asked to cite, the 100-feet-high Sitting Buddha in Kelantan, the 100-feet-high Standing Buddha also in Kelantan and the 140-feet-high statue of Lord Muruga at Batu Caves in Selangor, just outside Kuala Lumpur.

CM Musa knew about the project

Chong also replied, upon being questioned by Shafee, that he did not know that his statue was the subject of discussion and serious controversy in the state cabinet.

Also, he admitted he did not raise his statue project in the state cabinet because he did not see the need for it. He reiterated that the project was a private endeavour.

"I did inform Musa (the first defendant) about the project but in that instance no one else was present," said Chong dismissing Shafee's suggestion that the chief minister only heard about the project for the first time from Kudat Umno division head Masrani Rahman.

Shafee referred to Section 15 of the Town and Country Planning Ordinance which authorises a local authority such as the Kudat Town Board to give an interim approval to a development plan subject to proper approval from a central board.

Chong replied that he left the matter to the Foundation's consultants, TPM Konsultant, and was not aware whether his project received the central board's approval or whether it was his responsibility to inform the relevant authorities about his application to the Kudat Town Board.

"It is not the job of the consultant to distribute the notices and to my understanding, all applications go direct to the local authority whose duty it is to acknowledge the application and inform the other relevant authorities," said Chong.

Chong is represented by counsel Ansari Abdullah (photo), assisted by Erveanna Ansari.

Lawyers Richard Barnes and Hassan Murtaza are assisting Shafee.

Chong, in his suit, is seeking a declaration from the court that Musa had in giving directions and orders to the other defendants, acted mala fide and/or in abuse of his power as the chief minister and/or ultra vires the Local Government Ordinance and the Town and Country Planning Ordinance.

Chong is also seeking a declaration that a "fatwa" issued by the state mufti on July 7, 2006 - against the construction of the Mazu statute - was unconstitutional as it infringed upon Article 11 of the Federal Constitution; and a declaration that the letter of approval dated Feb 8, 2006 by the fourth defendant, the Kudat Town Board, is valid.

The trial continues.