Image of the PJM Medal
Banner Text = Fight For the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
Email to Richard Coney at the MoD
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post Email to Richard Coney at the MoD 
Attn: Mr Richard Coney MoD

Can you please update me on the number of applications the MoD have received from Organisations/Associations regarding the issueing of the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal offered to Veterans of The Malayan Confrontation/Confrontasi 1957-1966

Could you also please inform me when the applications are being returned to the Malaysian High Commission for approval.

Thank you for your help, in the event of you not being able to assist can you please pass this email on to someone who would know and could I please have confirmation that you have received this enquiry and acting upon it

John Cooper
Address supplied


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Emails between Coney and I 
Richard,
I must admit even though we have not met I do like you, but could you tell me at which university you got your PHD in “inclino”.

I must inform you that English Law is based on “PRECEDENTS” and not on fairness. If it was based on fairness we would not be having this discussion because the PJM would have been passed with full honours.

So just because the HD Committee say they will not be restrained by precedents does not make it legal, a first year student could successfully argue that one.

Once again I thank you for your time and I must say the MoD is keeping me young, only about 20 more years to go before my sons take up the fight.
All the very best
from
Paul Alders

-----Original Message-----
From: Coney, Richard Mr [mailto:Richard.Coney506@mod.uk]
Sent: 26 June 2006 11:09
To: Paul Alders
Subject: Internet-Authorised: RE: Veterans day

Mr Alders,

Thank you for your e-mail. You asked two questions:

1. The HD Committee has made it clear on a number of occasions that it is not restrained by any so-called precedents from the 19th Century. Their rules on non-retrospection have been in place for over 50 years and have been reaffirmed in writing as recently as February 2002. Cases which refer to medals instituted in the Victorian and Edwardian periods, prior to the First World War, have no relevance.

2. You are correct in stating that the British Korea Medal and the United Nations medal for Korea do recognise similar service. I understand that the reason for this was that plans for the introduction of the British medal were already far advanced at the time that the UN announced that British Service personnel could qualify for their new medal for service in Korea. As this was the first time that British citizens could qualify for a UN medal it was decided that the medal could be both accepted and worn so that no snub was made to the fledgling United Nations organisation. The Cabinet Office may be able to advise you further.

3. The Accumulated Campaign Service Medal (ACSM) does not double medal at all. While the majority of recipients will have received the medal having accumulated the required 36 months aggregated service as a result of repeat tours in Northern Ireland (NI), other service for which a campaign medal is (or was) in issue qualified towards the medal. It was not intended exclusively for service in the Province.

The medal was introduced because it was recognised that many Service personnel were carrying out repeat medal-earning tours, but had no medallic recognition for this, after receiving the General Service Medal 1962 with the appropriate clasp for their first tour. Individuals may also accrue time towards the ACSM for repeat tours where the Operational Service Medal (OSM) is awarded.

As a result, someone who, for example, over a full Service career with an infantry Regiment, might have served separate tours in NI seven or eight times, would only have the GSM 1962 with a single clasp. In contrast, someone who over a period of years had been to NI, the Gulf, Kuwait, Northern Iraq or Southern Turkey, Cyprus with the United Nations, the Balkans with the United Nations, NATO or the Western European Union, Iraq, Sierra Leone and Afghanistan would have several medals and clasps to wear. The two careers could have been equally difficult and dangerous, but one man would have little to show for his experience and dedication, whereas the other would have a chest full of medals.

The ACSM was instituted to redress this imbalance, but it is not double-medalling any specific period of service. If an individual had received the GSM with a clasp and the ACSM for the same period of service, it would have been double medalling. The rules do not allow this to happen.

I hope that this makes matters clearer.

R T Coney
DS Sec – Honours 1
MOD
London

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Further to my email to Mr Coney above I received this in reply

Dear Mr Cooper,



In answer to your questions:



I cannot tell you haw many applications we have so far received, as no records are being maintained. However, I estimate that at least 5,000 application forms have been seen, the vast majority having been sent by Mr Burden of the National Malaya and Borneo Veterans Association.



All applications received so far have been checked to ensure that they were verified by the appropriate veterans’ organisation and have been sent on to the Malaysian High Commission for further action.



I hope this is helpful.



R T Coney

DS Sec – Honours 1

MOD


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Coney 
Email to RC

Richard,
I am a member of the National Malaya & Borneo Veterans Association but I am not on any committee for that association and I do not have any influence over the contents of its web site but I synthesize with the frustration of its PJM Members.
You have to appreciate the debacle that surrounds this Honourable Medal and the complete bolognaise that has resulted by the erroneous decision of the HD Committee.
All of this could have been avoided if the correct decision had been taken in the first place but the use of myths have clouded the issue, the time has come for the decision makers to put their hands up and admit their mistake.
This no wear rule will be changed the question is when? So why not now?
Now there is one law from 1215 that will never go out of date and is still in force today and that’s the “rights of the free man”.
I am a free man and I do have rights, I have the right to wear any Honour that is awarded to me and I shall do so.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Paul,
I like that.

Bob Bryant

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
bob_bryant wrote:
Paul,
I like that.

Bob Bryant


Bob,I too recieved an e-mail from Richard Coney telling me that as we are civillians we are not breaking any laws by wearing the PJM,So by that rule we can wear it where ever we like and when ever.


_________________
Hold the line steady boys.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum