Police response failed to explain vast double disconnect as safest country in Southeast Asia with double-digit reductions in crime rate yet with worst fear of crime suffered by Malaysians in nation’s 55-year history

While the weeklong belated reply by the PDRM (Royal Malaysian Police) public relations officer ACP Ramli Mohamed Yoosuf refuting  the “whistleblower” expose “Crime statistics: Let the truth be told” on doctoring of crime statistics is being studied, the bleak and undeniable fact is that the police response failed to explain the vast double disconnect of Malaysia as the safest country in Southeast Asia with double-digit reduction in crime rate yet with the worst fear of crime suffered by Malaysians in the nation’s 55 year history.

Recently, the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said Malaysians should be proud of the country’s position as the safest country in Southeast Asia in the Global Peace Index.

This was echoed in the 2011 Government Transformation Programme (GTP) Annual Report on Reducing Crime NKRA, which said:

 “In the fifth edition of the Global Peace Index (GPI) released in May 2011, Malaysia was declared the most peaceful country in Southeast Asia and the 4th safest in the Asia Pacific region behind New Zealand, Japan and Australia. The country rose three spots to 19th place, supplanting Singapore as the highest-ranked Southeast Asian nation. In its GPI rankings, the Sydney-based Institute for Economics and Peace also placed Malaysia as the 19th safest and most peaceful country out of 153 nations worldwide. This is the fifth successive year that Malaysia has improved on its GPI score.” (p 55)

In his foreword to the 2011 GTP Annual Report, the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein wrote:

“In 2011, we delivered another year of solid results with lower crime rates reported nationwide…..The journey may be a long and arduous one, but we are committed to ensuring that the rakyat in any part of our nation are safe at all time.”

Do Najib and Hishammuddin really believe not only that Malaysians “in any part of our nation are safe at all time”, but that we have become “the safest country in Southeast Asia”?

Hishammuddin’s home town is Johore Baru and he himself would know what is the answer to the question: Whether one feels safer from crime and the fear of crime in JB or when crossing the causeway to Singapore?

If the answer – and there could only be one answer – is that one would feel safer from crime and the fear of crime when in Singapore than in Johore Baru, how can the Prime Minister and the Home Minister rely on the Global Peace Index (GPI) claiming that Malaysia is the “safest country in Southeast Asia” when crime and safety constitute only one-third of the 23 sub-indicators of the GPI?

The 2011 GTP Annual Report claimed many “Big Wins” in its Reduce Crime NKRA – most importantly:

“39.7% Drop in Street Crime and 11.1% Drop in Index Crime – Malaysia Experiences Back-to-Back, Double-Digit Reductions in Crime Nationwide.”

The GTP and the Reducing Crime NKRA has promised Malaysians “a new era of crime fighting”.  Malaysians want assurance that what is really delivered is not “a new era of crime fighting statistics”.

This is why the Prime Minister and the Home Minister must convince Malaysians why there is the the vast double disconnect between on the one hand, the government claim of Malaysia as the safest country in Southeast Asia with double-digit reductions in crime rate yet with the worst fear of crime suffered by Malaysians in nation’s 55-year history!

DAP National Publicity Secretary and MP for PJ Utara Tony Pua has pointed out that from the PDRM response to the “whistleblower” allegation of manipulation of crime statistics, although “index crime” had dropped from 209,572 in 2007 to 157,891 in 2011 or 24.7% over the period, “non-index crime” had increased from 42,752 to 72,106 or a massive 68.7% over the same period.

Based on PDRM data, “non-index crime” is increasing annually as a proportion of total crime since 2007 – increasing from 16.9% of total crime in 2007 to 21.9% (2008) to 22.8% (2009) to 29.8% (2010) to a record of 31.4% in 2011.

Is this the result of data manipulation or what the “whistleblower”  has charged as a systematic re-classifying of “index crime” to “non-index crime” cases.

What Malaysians would want to know is why the PDRM and PEMANDU have not published any information whatsoever about non-index crime prior to the “whistleblower” expose.

The authorities should release full details about the “non-index crime” for every year for the past 15 years going back to 1997 to enable a verification exercise to be carried out to check on the veracity and authencity of the GTP and NKRA crime statistics.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 29 August 2012, 3:14 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Let all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region or politics, celebrate 55th Merdeka Day as one Malaysian people

55th Merdeka Day Message

Merdeka Day should be an overarching national celebration uniting Malaysians regardless of race, religion, region or political affiliation in a common purpose to develop a more democratic, just, competitive and prosperous nation  – and any partisan attempt to hijack the Merdeka Day which  can only result in greater division, dissension and disunity must be deplored.

It is sad many Malaysians feel depressed by this year’s 55th Merdeka Day not only because they have never felt so unsafe in public places and the privacy of their homes, but also because of the increasingly negative and discordant voices sowing distrust and hatred in our plural society and  seeking to polarise and divide Malaysians particularly along race and religious lines.

Merdeka Day is a national celebration not just for any individual, group, community or political party. It is not for Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat. It is for all Malaysians.

Let all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region or political affiliation rise above their differences to celebrate the 55th Merdeka Day as one Malaysian people to forge a common national destiny where freedom, justice, integrity and good governance flourish in our land and enjoyed by all our citizens.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 30 August 2012, 4:43 pm and is filed under
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A new dawn?

 — May Chee

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 31, 2012

AUG 31 — Woke up around 7am today, after about five hours of sleep. By the way, “Selamat Hari Merdeka” folks!

My husband and I went for the Janji Demokrasi Merdeka Countdown at the clock tower in Malacca last night. Again, it was another heartwarming experience. Syabas to all those who gathered there and elsewhere for the Janji Demokrasi!

This time around, no untoward incidents, I hear. That’s good, really good. See, if we have everyone’s good intentions in mind, all would be swell.

We left our house at 9pm. There was ample parking around the designated area. As we walked towards the clock tower, we could see cops and Rela personnel already in position. Since we were early, we walked towards Jonker, hoping to join some people at the stage. Along the way, we met some friends, so we headed for the stage together. Some yellow shirts were walking in the opposite direction. They were heading towards the clock tower. All youths. Good, I thought!

At the stage, there was a handful of yellow shirts and a group of around 15 members from the Unit Amal PAS. By 9.30pm the group had swelled to quite a huge number. After taking a group photograph at the foot of the stage, our Unit Amal youngsters led us to the clock tower. Before that, we were told to be at our best behaviour, not to provoke nor hamper the traffic. We walked on the pavement and at all times, the Unit Amal boys made sure traffic for the public was smooth. Though the folks along Jonker were burning incense and some other stuff (Ghost Month?), the Unit Amal boys admirably braved the ashes (some flying into their faces) to guide us.

I just love these Unit Amal boys. I’ve seen how selfless they can be during my Bersih 2 experience. Now and then when I see some fools pitting us non-Muslims against our Malaysian brothers and sisters from PAS, I feel so irritated. I may run when I see some people but definitely not when I see these boys from the Unit Amal. I bet my last ringgit they will lay down their lives for me, a Chinese Christian, but not their detractors! So I say to these detractors, don’t waste your time spewing such venom. Our PAS brethren have my vote, any time!

At the clock tower, by 10pm, the group was huge. The whole place was swarmed with yellow shirts and others. Again, it was heart-warming to see Malaysians from all walks of life gathered there. Young and old, even kids, armed with the Jalur Gemilang waving, chanting in unison, while waiting for the clock to strike midnight. I saw so many familiar faces, and at the same time made some new friends. A friend remarked that at events like this, you cannot escape the fact that we, Malaysians, are united in wanting the best for our country. I’m so proud of my fellow Malaysians. I really am.

Again, my Malacca cops did us proud. Some guided traffic while some lined themselves along the road to prevent the exuberant ones from rushing into the traffic. We were around the clock tower and also on the opposite side of the road as there wasn’t enough room to house all of us around the clock tower. Apart from the chanting of slogans like “Hidup ,Hidup, Hidup Rakyat”, “Janji, Janji, Janji Demokrasi”, etc, there were also some trumpeting of vuvuzelas. We also sang the “Negaraku”. Now and then, when some motorists honked their vehicles as a mark of solidarity with us, the crowd went into a frenzy, waving their flags and started chanting again.

I saw how the younger cops wore faces of great restrain amidst the din. They were unsmiling, only because, I think, they were taking their duties seriously. However, there was this tall, fair, policewoman who walked along the road smiling broadly. She made a pretty picture! I also noticed how some guy who at one moment could be chanting “Negara Bersih, Rakyat Sihat” and the next bantering away with this senior policeman. I heard that the latter was the leader of the team deployed at the clock tower. Great chap; was smiling throughout. Really, I love my Malacca cops!

At a quarter to midnight, a group of people made their way to the balcony of the Stadhuys opposite the clock tower. They took turns to lead us in chanting those slogans. One of them read out the “10 Tuntutan Janji Demokrasi” which went like this:

Membersihkan senarai pengundi

Mereformaiskan undi pos

Menggunakan dakwat kekal

Minima 21 hari berkempen

Ases media yang bebas dan adil

Kukuhkan institusi awam

Hentikan rasuah

Hentikan politik kotor

Pihak SPR harus meletak jawatan

Menjemput pemantau dari luar negeri

When the clock struck midnight, shouts of “Merdeka” verberated throughout the whole area. After that, Shamsul Iskandar read out A. Samad Said’s poem “Janji Demokrasi”. A few more rounds of chanting, some greetings, then, we were asked to disperse peacefully.

Away we went, smiling happily and laughing. A good and productive outing, I thought.

While celebrating “Hari Merdeka”, I cannot help but think of our brothers and sisters in Sabah and Sarawak. About 15 years ago, I went to a neighbouring country for a holiday. I left thinking that they had a sinful government. How can I not but feel that way when I see boys as young as five or six years old jumping into the sea, performing a trick or two, just so we tourists would buy their wares for an equivalent of a ringgit or two. I remember relieving a boy of a bunch of bananas. They should be in school but here they were, risking their lives for just a ringgit or two. Everywhere I went, I saw their menfolk just hanging around their coffeeshops, smoking away with nothing better to do. (Cigarettes must be cheap there, I thought.) No school for the little ones and no jobs for what should be the breadwinners! And this was a country blessed with an abundance of natural resources. How come?

You know what was sadder? Some years later I went to Sarawak. I saw exactly the same situation there. It broke my heart to see how hard my brethren there had to slog in order to earn the same ringgit or two. Sarawak, the Land of the Hornbills, abundantly blessed, yet the majority live in poverty. How can this be? Only five per cent royalty from their oil? You got to be kidding me! Daylight robbery or what? They joined us on September 16, 1963 to be enslaved? Don’t think that was their intention at all! The best democracy in the world or aping colonial masters of old? Or worse? Come on, there’s more than enough for everyone. Why so greedy? I wonder how some people go to sleep at night? Really, this is more than sinful!

I believe our brethren in Sabah also suffer the same fate. Honestly, how could anyone in their right mind, enslave their own brethren? Even animals behave better!

“Merdeka” for whom? Definitely not for our brethren in Sabah and Sarawak. If we in the peninsula think we have it bad, they in east Malaysia have it a lot more worse! They toil their land day and night but do not get to taste the fruits of their labour. Is this justice? Is this equality? Do we ever see them as fellow Malaysians? Or do we think we are masters and they slaves? Come on, “Merdeka” for whom?

If the powers-that-be still refuse to grant Sabahans and Sarawakians their liberty and accord them the dignity they deserve, I don’t see why they should be with us and what’s there to celebrate, come the so-called “Malaysia Day”.

My friends in Sabah and Sarawak, please educate your people and tell them, each and every one of you deserve a lot, lot better. Arise and claim back your birthright. Enough of slavery. You didn’t ask for this. It was forced onto you. Be brave and arise. Life can be a lot, lot better. You choose.

My fellow Malaysians, till the day each and every one of us enjoy the same liberty and dignity, we are not one. Till the day we are accorded the same privileges, we will always view each other with suspicion. Let’s work towards that day. We can do this if we all think, truly as one. And this must include our brethren from Sabah and Sarawak. Best we stop this charade and call them Malaysians when they cannot even begin to live the Malaysian dream. For so long, it has been only a nightmare for them. Enough, please, enough.

Hopefully, with the change that will come soon enough, we can usher in a new dawn. One, where we are truly all Malaysians. Work on it. Work hard.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 August 2012, 9:13 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
nation building
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Merdeka!

by Allan Goh

Merdeka! Merdeka! Merdeka!

The voices that reverberated,

Rousted the birth of a new Nation,

Unshackled, no more subjugated.

It was a new dawn, a new era,

For people’s hope and aspiration,

To build a shared common destiny,

With one soul and one inspiration.

Mereka! Merdeka! Merdeka!

That call united all the races,

In the pursuit of independence,

Free from the forced colonial braces.

People wanted to live their own lives,

And form their own common destiny.

They eschewed any exploitations,

Hoped for a nation of harmony.

Merdeka! Merdeka! Merdeka!

The shouts will soon make that famous boom,

To commemorate history again,

As another Merdeka Day looms.

It’s time for a progressive Nation

To pause in deep deliberations,

Of the country’s achievements and faults,

To chart better aims and directions.

Merdeka! Merdeka! Merdeka!

The loud clamour for Merdeka Day

Should also honour all Malaysians,

Who preserve the Nation from decay:

People who place nation before self,

Citizens who serve with selflessness,

Malaysians who stand for true values,

United to march towards greatness.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 August 2012, 2:43 am and is filed under
nation building
,
Poem
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PAS dan Umno, hudud dan perlaksanaan: Realiti semasa

— Pak Sako

CPI

Aug 31, 2012

Mahathir Mohamad telah mempelawa PAS untuk melaksanakan hukum hudud di bawah payung Barisan Nasional (BN).

Nyata bahawa pelawaan ini cuma sebuah taktik politik yang kecil.

Namun begitu, satu pertimbangan yang ringkas boleh dilakukan mengenai kemungkinan PAS bersekutu dengan Umno, sama ada untuk tujuan melaksanakan hukum hudud atau untuk sebarang sebab yang lain.

Kesimpulannya perpaduan atau kerjasama seperti itu tidak realistik dan ditakdirkan gagal kerana tiga faktor yang fundamental.

Faktor pertama, kemunculan PAS sebagai pemain politik baru bersama Umno akan menggoyahkan formula perkongsian kuasa BN yang berpandukan kaum. PAS dengan 23 kerusi parlimennya mempunyai mandat kuasa yang lebih signifikan berbanding parti Cina MCA (15 kerusi Parlimen), parti India MIC (3 kerusi), Gerakan (2) atau ketiga-tiganya sekali.

Ini menimbulkan dilema politik kerana MCA, MIC dan Gerakan perlu dikebelakangkan untuk memberi ruang kepada PAS. Hasil ini tidak akan diterima oleh penyokong BN terutamanya yang bukan Melayu, apatah lagi niat PAS dan Umno untuk berhudud apabila MCA menolak hudud.

Sebaliknya jika pengagihan kuasa mengikut kepentingan kaum dikekalkan, amanah para pengundi PAS dan prinsip demokrasi perlu dikebelakangkan. Kemungkinan PAS dan Umno bertelingkah mengenai hal perkongsian kuasa dan penentuan polisi sesama mereka juga tidak boleh ditolak.

Faktor kedua ialah pemahaman dan pendekatan politik yang bercanggah. Justeru itu kerjasama PAS-Umno akan mengundang konflik dari sudut-sudut yang sukar didamaikan. Misalnya PAS sejak 1980-an telah menolak penonjolan kaum dan menekankan pendekatan politik yang berpolakan Islam.

Pendekatan Umno masih berlandaskan nasionalisme Melayu. Di sebalik retorik Islam yang lantang, pada pokoknya pandangan dan tatalaku para pemimpin Umno masih moderat dan sekular berbanding kepimpinan PAS, terutamanya faksi ulama. Kepimpinan Umno pasti juga akan kurang selesa dengan pendirian PAS terhadap isu ketelusan dan korupsi.

Faktor ketiga yang tidak memungkinkan kerjasama PAS dan Umno berkait dengan kehendak rakyat.

Sebilangan besar rakyat mahukan satu alternatif kepada budaya politik dan cara pembangunan Umno-BN yang amat bersandarkan kaum, kapitalis dan sistem naungan (patronage). Undi masyarakat untuk PAS dan parti-parti pembangkang yang lain mencerminkan keinginan untuk sebuah paradigma baru. Sekiranya PAS mengkhianati kepercayaan masyarakat, akibatnya ialah bunuh-diri politik (political suicide) buat PAS.

Secara keseluruhan, kos bagi PAS untuk berdempet dengan Umno terlalu tinggi, kecuali kalau timbul suatu kecemasan.

Perselisihan di antara PAS dan DAP berkenaan hudud pula sebenarnya bukan satu jalan mati. Ianya boleh diselesaikan. PAS perlu bersifat lebih pragmatik. PAS perlu memberi tumpuan kepada matlamat dan bukan kaedah semata-mata. Kalau dilihat di dalam konteks asalnya, matlamat hudud ialah untuk mengatasi jenayah-jenayah tertentu yang berlaku di Tanah Arab yang khusus kepada budaya dan zaman tersebut.

Rumusan hudud yang diwujudkan itu tertakluk kepada kelemahan-kelemahan keinstitusian yang berleluasa pada masa itu. Pendek kata, ia muncul daripada proses pencarian langkah-langkah untuk mengatasi jenayah dengan kebolehan dan sumber terhad yang ada.

Oleh yang demikian soal pelaksanaan apa-apa undang-undang, termasuk hukum hudud, memerlukan ijtihad atau tafsiran yang sesuai dengan situasi zaman sekarang. Ia perlulah berdasarkan keadaan, kebolehan dan keperluan semasa, perundangan yang sudah sedia ada, penerimaannya oleh segenap lapisan masyarakat dan perlu memperhitungkan sifat dan semangat negara Malaysia yang pluralistik yang berbeza dengan keadaan dan kebiasaan negara-negara Timur Tengah.

Selain perkara-perkara di atas, pengadilan yang saksama untuk setiap warga Malaysia — tidak kira Muslim atau bukan Muslim — merupakan satu aspek yang perlu diambil serius. Para pemimpin juga harus menerima hakikat bahawa bukan seluruh kaum Muslimin di Malaysia mahukan supaya hukum hudud dilaksanakan, termasuk mereka-mereka yang cukup terdidik mengenainya. Aspek demokratik ini tidak harus diremeh-temehkan.

Ini selari dengan pandangan yang diberikan bekas mufti Perlis Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin baru-baru ini (rujuk sini, “Baru insaf belum tentu faham Islam, pesan Dr Maza kepada Abby”, The Malaysian Insider, 30 Ogos 2012).

Kesediaan PAS untuk melangsungkan dialog berdasarkan pemahaman seperti di atas jauh lebih bermakna dan mampu membuahkan hasil.

Jika PAS berhasrat memegang tampuk pemerintahan negara, parti tersebut perlu mengamalkan pendekatan baru kepada falsafah Islam yang selaras dengan hasrat ini.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 August 2012, 7:59 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Islam
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Regime change looms in Malaysia

— Liew Chin Tong

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 30, 2012

AUG 30 — A very young demographic profile, a high urbanisation rate, ever increasing access to the Internet and extreme longevity in power, among other factors, will be working against the ruling coalition in Malaysia’s coming election.

There are many reasons for the international community to be deeply cognisant of this fact, and to prepare for a regime change in that country for the first time since it gained independence in 1957.

Soon after the government suffered severe setbacks in elections held on March 8, 2008, the country went into a permanent campaign mode, and has remained that way ever since.

A general election have to be called soon, since the Malaysian Constitution requires that Parliament be dissolved by 28th April 2013 upon the completion of its five-year mandate.

It may be true that the government won 140 of 222 seats in the Lower House while the opposition managed to secure the remaining 82. But a closer look shows that the actual gap between the two coalitions to be much smaller.

The ruling Barisan Nasional actually won only 51.4 per cent of the votes while the opposition gained 48.6 per cent. Of the 7.9 million effective votes, BN and the three national opposition parties were separated by a mere 313,509 ballots.

As of the end of June 2012, there are 12.9 million Malaysians on the electoral roll. As many as 2.5 million of these — about 20 per cent — are first-time voters; and it is these who will decide the outcome of the election.

The 13-party ruling coalition — the BN — will be highlighting past achievements in its campaign and playing on the appeal of the status quo while the opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat, vows to improve governance in the country through radical policy changes.

The status quo message is however unlikely to have an impact on an almost Arab-spring demography: 48 per cent of Malaysia’s population are below 25 years old and 70 per cent are below 40 years old (though not all are voters).

The BN, especially its kingpin, Umno, has always relied heavily on a rural vote bank. It has therefore good grounds to worry since as many as 70 per cent of Malaysians now live in cities, compared to 11 per cent in 1957 and 35 per cent in 1980.

The young and urban are highly wired online as well. With 17.5 million internet users, Malaysia’s internet penetration rate is 61.7 per cent of the population and 81 per cent of the populated areas. On top of that, Malaysia is also one of the most active country on Facebook, with 12 million users, ranking 19th in the world.

The easy access to alternative information has undermined the efficacy of the control over the mainstream media exercised by the government, be it through licensing procedures, censorship or partisan ownership.

The BN has been ruling Malaysia ever since its earliest guise, The Alliance Party, won a self-government election under British auspices in 1955. It is now the longest serving elected ruling party in the world. The only longer serving ones, are the non-elected communist regimes in North Korea, China and Vietnam.

The many negative signs of this political longevity are all too visible to the increasingly sophisticated voters. Essentially, not only has the government over the years alienated non-Malay ethnic groups through its race-based politics, rampant corruption and intra-ethnic economic inequality, but have also driven Malay voters away.

BN had for quite a while styled itself as the moderating force in the ethnically charged population. However, after Umno began turning right in 2005 both in rhetoric and in action, it began losing ethnic Chinese and Indian support.

In 2008, significant numbers of ethnic Malays frustrated with corruption and cronyism joined this movement to vote against the government.

This sense of alienation has not diminished in the intervening years. On the contrary, more groups are showing open dissent against the central government. The Kadazan Dusun Murut group in the state of Sabah is strongly aroused and highly critical of the government’s handling of the long-standing citizenship-for-votes scandals that allegedly allow Umno to build up its support base in the state.

Umno strategists, using the party-controlled newspaper, Utusan Malaysia, and the affiliated right-wing group Perkasa, are working overtime to stop the dwindling of their Malay support base, and are doing all they can to portray the party as a fiercer ethnic champion than opposition Malay parties and leaders. So far, this seems to be alienating more middle-ground voters.

Across the board at the moment, what Malaysians seem to be seeking is greater economic equality as well as an open and clean government. And yet, Prime Minister Najib Razak continues with micro-level vote-buying measures such as giving cash handouts to strategic groups at a time when the country is in great need of macro-level reforms.

The long years in power has also seen the BN generate its own worst enemies. Many leaders in the opposition were formerly from the ruling coalition, including former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.

Their experience in government has been serving as a much-needed reassurance to voters that the opposition is ready to exercise power efficiently, while their personal networks within the system has brought valuable information and understanding of the system that had previously eluded the opposition.

Previous opposition coalitions (in 1990 and 1999) were hastily formed during election time and they easily collapsed soon after. An alternative coalition that has been tested for more than four years, with that has gained substantial administrative experience in governing four out of 13 states is in itself a novel — and critical — factor.

While all the built-in advantages that favour BN in an election have not disappeared and those that remain will be put to full use in the electoral contest that is to come, the factors that work against the government have been gaining strength as well. For the first time ever, it does look very possible that the old government will be voted out. — New Mandala

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 August 2012, 3:31 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


So, has crime rate gone up or down?

 ― Soo Lim Chee

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 31, 2012

AUG 31 ―I refer to the former and incumbent IGP’s  differing opinions over PDRM’s crime statistics.

So, who is to say crime rate has gone up or come down ?

A decreasing number of police reports does not indicate a lower crime rate. A large number of crimes committed went unreported. Therefore any compilation of statistics is unreliable.

Statistics are useful but to attach a great deal of meaning to them is to bark up the wrong tree.

What may be important and should be of concern is encapsulated in the IGP ‘s statement to the media.

“I am aware that people are afraid and there are crimes everywhere. We are working on it and if the people do not believe in statistics then stop looking at them. Let’s work together to reduce crime.”

Yes, we are afraid. Yes, we know there are crimes everywhere. Yes, let’s work together to reduce them.

As I write this, my friend’s wife is recuperating at a hospital after an operation to mend a shattered collar bone. In broad daylight, on August 28, she was mugged near the town centre (where the old Sentosa cinama was) of Section 17, Petaling Jaya.

The snatch thief got away with her handbag. This incident is alarming in that the predators are now out to physically attack and immobilise their prey first. The bold ruthlessness is frightening.

Yesterday, while having our weekly lunch, three friends and I broached the subject of snatch-theft. From our conversation it began to dawn on us that all our wives have been victims of snatch thieves in recent years. My wife was twice a victim.

What does this tell us?

On this Merdeka day, I am ashamed that the crooks plying the streets of our neighbourhood have neither respect nor fear for my country’s law enforcers.

The IGP invited the public to offer ideas on how to make our streets safer.

May I venture a few?

1) I noticed that in my area near the SS2 town centre, where policemen on their beat or at the mobile bases are visible, cases of snatching have almost been eliminated. There is no manned police beat base at Section 17 town centre. Please put one up as soon as possible.

2) Seek the co-operation of the media to highlight punishments meted out to snatch thieves as a deterrent.

3) For areas with high incidences of street crimes, form a special squad by co-opting RELA members?

4) This may appear unorthodox but I am giving it a shot. Employ plain-clothes policewoman as decoy carrying a handbag in which is placed a small charge of explosive with a remote-controlled detonator. As the thief flees with the handbag on his motorbike the policewoman presses the button of her remote to detonate an explosion enough to throw the culprit off his bike, but not enough to maim him.

The anger of the people with street criminals would eventually galvanise them, so that even the meekest among them would help to beat the criminal to pulp if caught.

Perhaps this remains the best deterrent against street crimes.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 August 2012, 8:48 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


With the approach of 13GE, BN mainstream media are  throwing journalistic ethics to the winds and  resorting  to more lies and falsehoods in their attacks on Pakatan Rakyat leaders

With the approach of 13th General Election, which Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said in Kedah yesterday would determine UMNO and Barisan Nasional’s survival (or to be more exact, Najib’s own political survival), the UMNO/Barisan Nasional mainstream media are  throwing journalistic ethics to the winds and resorting to more lies and falsehoods in their attacks on Pakatan Rakyat leaders.

It is a measure of the increasing desperation felt by UMNO/BN leaders that the next general elections could result in a change of federal government in Putrajaya that the next polls in shaping up to the dirtiest elections in the nation’s 55-year history – with blatant and flagrant lies and falsehoods recklessly spread by UMNO/BN cybertroopers about individual Pakatan Rakyat leaders like the accusation that I had urinated at the flagpole in the Kuala Lumpur residence of the former Selangor Mentri Besar, Datuk Harun Idris sparking off the May 13 riots in 1969, when I was never in Kuala Lumpur on May 10, 11, 12 or 13, 1969 or the ludicrous allegation that the Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng had provoked the May 13 riots in his capacity as DAP Youth leader when Guan Eng was only eight years old at the time!

The latest lie and falsehood by UMNO mainstream media is today’s New Straits Times report entitled “’Anti-hopping law unfair and impractical’” on Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s call to introduce a law against party-hopping, which among other things,  said:

“The critics pointed out that Lim’s father, DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang, had even praised members of parliament Datuk Seri Wilfred Mojilip Bumburing of Tuaran and Datuk Seri Lajim Ukin of Beaufort when the duo left Barisan Nasional to support the opposition coalition.”

This is pure concoction for up to now, I have not said anything about the actions of Wilfred Bumburing and Lajim Ukiin in leaving Barisan Nasional to support the Pakatan Rakyat coalition.

My position against party-hopping by elected representatives had been clear and consistent and I stand by what I said in Parliament 34 years ago when on March 21, 1978, I moved a motion in the Dewan Rakyat to seek the leave of the House to introduce a private member’s bill intituled Members of Parliament (Prevention of Defection) Act 1978 to ensure political integrity of Members of Parliament.

This is what I said in Parliament on March 21, 1978:

“I rise under Standing Order 49(2) to move a motion to seek leave of the House to introduce a Private Member’s Bill intituled Members of Parliament (Prevention of Defection) Act, 1978, which would require a Member of Parliament to vacate his seat within 30 days and cause a by-election to be held on his resignation or expulsion from the Party on whose ticket he was originally elected.

“In November last year, I was invited by a Tamil national daily, Tamil Nesan, to answer question submitted by Tamil Nesan readers. One question that was asked was about the defection of Opposition Members of Parliament and State Assemblymen after their election, in betrayal of the confidence and trust placed on them by the electorate.

“I was asked what effective measure could be taken to prevent such opportunistic political betrayal of the people’s confidence. I replied that the most effective way would be for the enactment of a law requiring a Member of Parliament to vacate his seat and cause a by-election to be held on his resignation or expulsion from the Party on whose ticket he was originally elected. I promised to move a private member’s bill on this matter considering its importance.

“Such a Bill is important so as to ensure the political integrity of elected MPs and to prevent political corruption.

“Nothing disgusts the Malaysian public more than to see MPs or State Assemblymen elected on one party’s ticket and then betray the Party and the people’s trust by switching parties. This makes them very little different from con-men. Such practices debase politics, and strengthen the general impression that ‘politics is dirty’, when it is the dirty people who get into politics to make politics dirty.

“The defection of MPs or State Assemblymen from parties on whose ticket they got elected is most undesirable and unethical, because they are elected not because of their personal qualities, but because of the Party they represent. Such practices also permit elected politicians to be bought and sold as if they are on the market place.

“If an elected MP resigns or is expelled from the Party on whose ticket he was originally elected, then he should resign his seat and cause a by-election to be held. If the resignation and expulsion is over a matter of political principle which has the support of the people, then the MP or State Assemblymen concerned should have no qualms about getting re-elected…

“A law which I am proposing will uphold political integrity of MPs and be a serious deterrent to political corruption. Those who wish to see a cleaner political atmosphere should give it support.”

In fear of MPs resigning on grounds of principle causing by-elections to be held,  in 1990, the then Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad abused the UMNO/BN command of two-thirds parliamentary majority to amend the Constitution providing for a new Article 48(6) which stipulates:

“48(6) – A person who resigns his membership of the House of Representatives shall, for a period of five years beginning with the date on which his resignation takes effect, be disqualified from being a member of the House of Representatives.”

Article 48(6) of the Constitution will have to be revoked if any anti-party hopping legislation is to take full effect – allowing any MP or State Assembly member who resigns on matters of political principle to be able to seek a new mandate from his or her voters by contesting in a by-election.

I have no doubt that both Wilfred Bumburing and Lajim Ukiin would be prepared to resign their parliamentary seats for by-elections to be held to submit to  their constituents to secure their support and a new mandate for their political decision to leave the Barisan Nasional and support Pakatan Rakyat – if they are not barred by Mahathir’s Article 48(6) from recontesting a by-election for the next five years.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 August 2012, 2:52 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Mahathir
,
Parliament
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


China’s Growing Economic Crisis

By William Pesek

Bloomberg

Aug 30, 2012

Policy makers around the world have long envied China’s ability to get big things done. A huge 4 trillion-yuan ($630 billion) stimulus plan as the global economy cratered in 2008? No problem. Marshaling banks to lend trillions more? Check. Enacting sweeping regulatory changes at a moment’s notice? You bet.

Ahhh, the good old days. Now, a once-in-a-decade leadership shift is getting in the way of the stimulus-happy policies to which investors became accustomed. The nimbleness that helped China steer around the worst of the global crisis is confronting political paralysis of the kind more often seen in Japan, Europe and the U.S. The upshot is that China’s 7.6 percent growth rate may fall more in the next 12 months than anyone expects.

It’s not that Wen Jiabao doesn’t get the extent to which the supposedly unstoppable China has hit a wall. Just as in 2009, the premier is visiting key industrial cities such as Guangdong and Zhejiang. Wen is facing dour looks from manufacturers surrounded by mounting piles of unsold goods, a rare experience for the main engine of China’s economic rise.

Factory warehouses are cluttered with excess stock, store shelves are filled beyond capacity, and dealerships are choked with cars that used to speed from showroom to road. And yet Wen’s team in Beijing has been eerily silent about how it plans to revive things. That may be because the short answer is, it doesn’t.

Obvious Ways

One problem is that China has run out of obvious ways to kick-start its $7.3 trillion economy. It was easy in 2008: Pump tens of billions of dollars into a sweeping stimulus project and 10 percent growth followed. China’s success gave markets the impression that its leaders could wave some magic wand and growth would be the result.

Magic is in short supply now. Local governments are cash- strapped and awash in debts that could turn bad. The euro zone seems locked into permanent-crisis mode while the U.S. is bogged down with debt, economic stagnation and political paralysis. China proved it can live for a few years without U.S. and European customers, but not forever.

The bigger topic is politics amid this year’s leadership shift. Instead of tackling the issues of growth and economic reform, officials are punting on big decisions. As such, we are now officially living in the “G-Zero” era that Ian Bremmer, the president of Eurasia Group in New York, described in his new book “Every Nation for Itself.”

At one time the weaker links within the Group of Seven nations were supported by the others. Those days are gone and now that China is sputtering, the G-Zero reality is upon us and manifesting itself in disturbing ways.

Take Asia’s surge of nationalism. Political scientists have loads of theories about why China, Japan and South Korea are suddenly at loggerheads: bad blood over World War II, energy needs, designs on controlling the Asian seas, the power vacuum left as the U.S. focused on two intractable wars. One theory that deserves more attention is how these countries deflect the blame for troubles at home.

In Japan, Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda is spectacularly unpopular after raising taxes and restarting nuclear reactors that were shuttered following last year’s earthquake. Playing up territorial disputes allows him to change the subject and throw a bone to Japan’s influential right-wingers. In Seoul, President Lee Myung Bak has been embarrassed by corruption charges against his family. Fanning popular anger about South Korea’s status in Asia has shifted the national dialog.

The same strategy prevails in China. Unwelcome headlines focus on the widening gap between rich and poor, the Bo Xilai scandal, and charges that China fudges economic and pollution statistics. Turning the public’s attention to China’s former colonizers has been a political winner.

Asia’s Loss

The loser in all this is economic cooperation in Asia. (MXAP) Also on the losing side is vital economic change in China. Over the last decade, Wen and President Hu Jintao produced rapid expansion, but few of the structural reforms China needs for balanced growth in the decades ahead. State-owned enterprises and banks are more dominant than ever, producing huge misallocations of resources and priorities. Meanwhile, no effort has been made to build a market that promotes domestic consumption.

Rather than retool the economy, China is content to rely on the old fast-growth, export-driven model. The trouble is, the Wen-Hu era lulled markets into counting on the constant injections of stimulus spending that gave China a unique, yet unsustainable, foundation. If China isn’t a gigantic bubble economy, it’s one made up of many smaller bubbles — property, stocks, exports. These are the result of spending-induced growth and imbalances that might breed trouble down the road, including inflation and a bad-loan crisis.

Traders looking for another dose of stimulus are expressing their disappointment that none seems forthcoming. The Shanghai Composite Index (SHCOMP) is down 13 percent so far this quarter. Those declines may accelerate as China’s leadership transition distracts lame-duck officials from giving markets their fix. The same goes for a world economy more devoid of growth engines than ever.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 September 2012, 10:53 pm and is filed under
China
,
international economic crisis
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Dr Mahathir: How Will History Judge Him?

Koon Yew Yin

The Malaysian Insider

1st Sept 2012

Some friends have asked me as to how history will remember Dr. Mahathir. This has led me to thinking about Ho Chi Minh, Sukarno, Nehru, Lee Kuan Yew and other Asian giants of colonial and post colonial history, and how Dr. Mahathir measures up to them.  However, comparing him to other leaders in our Asian neighbourhood may be unfair to Dr. Mahathir as it may be demanding too high a standard in leadership, given the unusual and extraordinary crop of leaders in our part of the world.

Instead, I am now more inclined to compare him with leaders from other countries of the world where the comparison may be more appropriate.  One leader with whom I am sure Dr. Mahathir would not mind comparison is Kwame Nkrumah, a giant of contemporary African history who Dr Mahathir is probably hoping – when his own obituary is written – for future generations to put him in the company of.

Is Dr. Mahathir who has borrowed the ideas (and the slogans) of Nkrumah and other leading post independence leaders worthy of such a comparison?  Or does he belong to some other group?

Revisiting Neo-Colonialism

Some 40 years ago, when I was a younger man, Nkrumah who was president of Ghana (1960–66), coined the term neo-colonialism in his book Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of Imperialism (1965).  In it he described the socio-economic and political control that can be exercised economically, linguistically, and culturally, whereby promotion of the culture of the neo-colonist country, facilitates the cultural assimilation of the colonised people, and thus opens the national economy to the multinational corporations of the neo-colonial country.

Although Nkrumah was an outstanding political leader who was the chief catalyst for his country’s independence (he had a much rougher time from the colonial regime than most aspiring politicians and Dr. Mahathir ever had) many colleagues and I who lived through that turbulent post-colonial period were not sympathetic to his ideas on neo-colonialism.  While it may have had some validity in some post-colonial states, none of us ever thought that our country, Malaya then, was ever a neo-colonial or puppet state of the British or any other Western interest.

In the first place we had a successful transition from the colonial yoke to full independence without the kind of traumatic experience that some African countries went through. The legacy that Britain left in Malaysia was also a positive one. As for me, I personally never felt beholden to the British in any way. In their relationship with me, my English friends were always respectful and they genuinely took pride in their positive contribution to our nationhood. When I had business dealings with the British following independence in the country, they were always honorable and kept their promises.

Of course this does not excuse the exploitation of the Malaysian economy during the colonial period by the British and their attempts at divide and rule to sustain their authority. But I find it troubling and unacceptable whenever our ultra-nationalists – including Dr. Mahathir –  whenever it suited their agenda – to shift the blame for the problems of our economy and society to the machinations of foreigners and former colonial powers.

Borrowing from a distortion of Nkrumah’s neo-colonial thesis, these ‘patriots’ see a foreign snake, hidden behind every bush and they will raise their voices audibly about this threat every time they need a distraction from their own domestic failings.

The most outstanding preacher of a dummy’s version of an anti neo-colonialism hero is Dr. Mahathir. Here is a man who has milked the foreign bogey – whether it is Britain, Australia, Singapore, the United States, Israel, Jews, the Green movement, the IMF, George Soros, etc – loudly and incessantly to serve his political interests and feed his ego.

Unlike most foreign analysts, I feel that it is not his crying wolf on neo-colonialism on so many occasions that Mahathir will best be remembered in history.  Rather it is the cynical, divisive and racist ideology that first appeared in his Malay Dilemma book, which he has never renounced and which he has now revived in his twilight years.

It is also necessary to point out that although Dr. Mahathir is credited with the bold objectives of “Vision 2020”, he can be regarded as one of the main obstacles standing in the way of that vision.  This is a subject I have covered extensively in my book on “Malaysia: Road Map to Achieving Vision 2020” which is available in most book shops.

Many Malaysians are now aware too of his adoption of the classic colonial strategy of “divide and rule”, a strategy designed to take us backward instead of forward.  The espousal of this discredited strategy stems from his frantic and desperate attempt to prevent the opposition from coming into power, and his greatest fear that a new Pakatan Rakyat government will uncover and expose all the dirty tricks and scandals of his era, thereby overturning the official and bloated version of the achievements of the Mahathir regime.

The Two Leaders’ Opinions of their Societies

Despite all of Nkrumah’s failings, the African leader always thought highly of his people and nation, and sought the highest ideals for them.  In one of his essays, Nkrumah wrote:

“We postulate each man to be an end in himself, not merely a means; and we accept the necessity of guaranteeing each man equal opportunities for his development. The implications of this for socio-political practice have to be worked out scientifically, and the necessary social and economic policies pursued with resolution. Any meaningful humanism must begin from egalitarianism and must lead to objectively chosen policies for safeguarding and sustaining egalitarianism.” (1967 essay entitled “African Socialism Revisited”).

In 2000, Nkrumah was voted Africa’s man of the millennium by listeners to the BBC World Service.

Dr. Mahathir in contrast has had little respect or good to say of any of the communities that make up our society.  He has always thought poorly of his own adopted Malay community and even worse of other long settled and assimilated non-Muslim communities.  Witness not only his writings but also his recent playing of the ‘immigrant’ card to inflame Perkasa crowds against the Pakatan Rakyat and Anwar Ibrahim.  His focus on native Malay and Muslim rights and hegemony appears hypocritical since he has been the Prime Minister responsible for condoning – no, encouraging – the largest wave of immigrant arrivals into the country in recent times.  Witness also his latest attempts to prevent the transition of the country to a more democratic and less authoritarian one.

I think Dr. Mahathir will ultimately be remembered not for the quality of his leadership or the way in which he has sought to unlock the potential of all our citizens.  He will certainly not be remembered for his standard of governance or the example he has set in arousing Malaysians to give their best to the country.  Rather he will most be remembered for his extraordinary long record of leadership in the country. It is a 22 year record of political opportunism and survival secured through appealing to the baser instincts of self aggrandizement and greed and the manipulation of the major institutions of government. This is why history will not judge him so kindly but will place him in the company of lesser and even failed leaders such as Marcos, Suharto and Mugabe.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 September 2012, 8:52 pm and is filed under
Mahathir
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘Janji Ditepati’? Malaysia deserves better

— Marcus van Geyzel (loyarburok.com)

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 01, 2012

SEPT 1 — There are very few things that observers of Malaysian politics can regularly agree on.

However, there will be much concurrence with the suggestion that there are two significant traits for those who follow the local political scene very closely — a sense of humour, and a dose of masochism. Naturally, the agreement will be because those involved deem these traits necessary due to the ineptitude of those on “the other side”.

An unhealthy and extreme partisanship has evolved in Malaysian politics since 2008. This is even more obvious to anyone who follows political “commentary” on Twitter (to whom my use of the inverted commas would be obvious).

There is nothing wrong with a bit of banter and partisan one-upmanship. The disconcerting thing is when the immaturity comes from elected representatives, who forget (or perhaps never realised in the first place) that they are supposed to represent everyone, not just those who voted for them or their party.

Despite the frustration and disappointment, I do still follow some of these tweets, including the propaganda offered by full-time political commentators who are prominently featured in national newspapers. I did mention masochism earlier on.

However, the recent discussions about the Merdeka theme have taken things beyond what should be acceptable to any Malaysian, political or not.

I waited some time before putting my thoughts into writing, as I harboured some hope that the theme would be scrapped following the incessant criticism. Perhaps those responsible would hold their hands up and admit that it was a mistake? Silly me.

When announcing the theme — “55 Tahun Merdeka, Janji Ditepati” (55 Years of Independence, Promises Fulfilled) — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said “we can already see that the promises made by the Barisan [Nasional] have been implemented”.

The theme has since been widely criticised. Some say the criticism is unjustified. It is important to put the theme in context, and consider the facts.

BN have been running a nationwide “Janji Ditepati” tour to highlight the promises that they have delivered to the people.

The theme speaks of the fulfilment of promises, which implies a need to be grateful. Whose promises? To whom are we to be grateful? How do we display this gratitude?

If the answers to these questions were not obvious enough, helpfully, there is an official song. The chorus goes, “Janji siapa? Janji kita!” (Whose promises? Our promises!). The verse serves up the kicker, “Janji sudah ditepati, kini masa balas budi” (The promises have been fulfilled, now it is time to repay our deeds).

Merdeka is supposed to be a celebration by all Malaysians of our nation’s independence. An official theme sets the tone for the entire occasion — and undoubtedly the message of the theme will seep into everything involved in the celebrations.

For this reason, the “Janji Ditepati” theme is fundamentally flawed. It is self-serving, and immediately alienates anyone who does not support Barisan — which, lest we forget, is a choice that Malaysians are entitled to.

I am not surprised that it has come to this. The political campaigning and posturing that has been putting “Malaysia” in the back seat has now extended to our Merdeka celebrations. It looks like this will continue at least until the general elections are finally called. Or perhaps even beyond then — the “winning at all costs” mentality that politicians on both sides of the divide have adopted is unlikely to result in either side losing graciously.

Is there an alternative? Perhaps a Merdeka celebration organised by a coalition of NGOs (no, not that coalition of NGOs)?

For the past two years, an alternative Malaysia Day celebration called “Malaysiaku” (My Malaysia) has been held in Bangsar, organised by Ed Soo. It brought together many NGOs and featured talks, film screenings, cultural performances, forums, stalls, and food.

It was a true celebration of the joy and privilege of being Malaysian, free of the stain of political campaigning — which really is what Merdeka should be about. Unfortunately, the event is not being organised this year. The Janji Ditepati theme means the absence of Malaysiaku is even more keenly felt.

Merdeka Day is already upon us, and Datuk Seri Rais Yatim has firmly said that the theme is fixed. He also asked the Opposition not to ignore Merdeka Day over political differences. This is where the sense of humour I mentioned earlier comes in, seeing that some argue that it is BN who have in essence ignored Merdeka with their unsuitable theme.

Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz said that BN has the right to determine the theme, as it is the BN component parties who fought for independence in the first place. This sentiment unfortunately encompasses all that is wrong with the government’s approach to this year’s Merdeka celebrations.

The unfortunate victims amidst all this politicking are, as always, the Malaysian public. The political stakes are too high for the government to back down without seeming to be giving in. The political temperature that has been rising for months has gone past boiling point and scalded the Merdeka celebrations.

While all this is going on, we ordinary Malaysians will just have to celebrate Merdeka in our own ways, forcibly distanced from official themes and events.

It is unfortunate that, in our 55th year of independence, it has come to this. We expect our leaders from all political parties to conduct themselves in a manner that shows a respect and acknowledgement of the maturity of Malaysian society.

The BN government, in insisting on a theme that is unbecoming of the meaning of Merdeka, have allowed immature politicking to pollute this year’s Merdeka celebrations, and in doing so have disappointed and disrespected many Malaysians. — loyarburok.com

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 September 2012, 9:00 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib did not conduct himself as Prime Minister for all Malaysians when he divided the people on Merdeka Day and urged Malaysians to “defend independence” against Pakatan Rakyat

Datuk Seri Najib Razak did not conduct himself as Prime Minister for all Malaysians when he divided the people on Merdeka Day and urged Malaysians to “defend independence” against Pakatan Rakyat.

In his closing speech at the “Merdeka 55: Janji ditepati” gathering at the Bukit Jalil National Stadium last night, Najib called on the audience “to defend the nation’s independence from enemies and the opposition alike”.
(Malaysiakini/The Malaysian Insider)

He said:

“Ladies and gentlemen, remember that independence only knocks once for any nation. Let us close ranks and defend our independence with a solid front, at every corner and at any time.

“Even more so when enemies and the opposition are trying to bring chaos into the situation.”

This the final and ultimate proof that the 55th Merdeka Day celebrations had been hijacked by UMNO/Barisan Nasional as part of their desperate gambit to hang on to power in the impending 13th General Election – which had been evident when the UMNO/BN election theme of “Janji Ditepati” had been imported lock, stock and barrel to be elevated as the 55th Merdeka Day/49th Malay Day theme.

However, Najib cannot be more wrong, as UMNO/BN leaders cannot claim monopoly to patriotism or nationalism just because they are in power.

As I had often said in Parliament, the real patriots and nationalists of Malaysia are not those who abuse their powers and positions while in office and who are corrupt to the core, but those who are prepared to make sacrifices and pay the price for  standing up for the fundamental rights of ordinary Malaysians, regardless of race or religion, even going to jail and lose their personal liberties, so as to  speak truth to power.

I find it very sad and more a reflection on Najib as Prime Minister that he should be casting such aspersions on the Opposition in his National Day speech – for on a national celebration like Merdeka Day, all Malaysians regardless of race, religion, region or political differences, should be able to put aside their political differences for at least 24 hours and come together as one Malaysian people.

If the Prime Minister cannot set such an example, can we blame the Cabinet Ministers for failing to measure to such a standard?

I also feel sad at the Malaysiakini report
“Propaganda comics colour Najib’s Merdeka bash”
 by reporter Ahmad Fadli NC, debunking the claim that the Bukit Jalil 55th Merdeka Day celebrations was a  truly national celebration, rising above partisan  differences, and not a blatant UMNO/BN event.

The Malaysiankini reported:

The circulation of propaganda comics at the Bukit Jalil Merdeka celebrations yesterday puts a question mark on government’s claim that their celebrations are apolitical.

The 20-page comic titled ‘Promises Fulfilled By The PM For The Rakyat’ piles praise upon the government’s initiatives, while making subtle jibes at the opposition.

The mystery publication by anonymous artists was given out for free at the stadium before start of the event that featuring Prime Minister Najib Razak.

On one of its pages, a couple is arguing over spending their RM100 school handout on groceries. The wife berates the husband saying they have no more money as he has spent everything by  “frequenting the ceramah”.

In another, a young man raves angrily that he can no longer “demonstrate and harass people” since the Internal Security Act (ISA) was abolished.

In both cases, the men are depicted wearing a white kopiah and green baju Melayu, and are always criticising the government’s schemes such as the Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia (BR1M) RM500 cash handout to poor families.

The character appears five times throughout the comic book.

On page 12, a man is shown raising his arms to heaven as if praying, but instead offering praise to the PM for the curtains he has afforded to purchase at the Kedai Kain Rakyat 1Malaysia (1Malaysia fabric store).

On page 9, a man is scolded for being ‘berotak Yahudi’ (behaving like a Jew) for wanting to slander BN by using black magic on ballot boxes.

These cartoons, which have all the fingerprints of pro-BN propaganda, are packaged in a colourful booklet whose cover is bright and cheery in the style of BN campaign artwork, and includes a loud poster that reads ‘We love the PM’.

Was the Bukit Jalil Stadium National Day celebrations planned deliberately to embarrass Pakatan Rakyat leaders who attended the occasion and to divide along BN/PR lines?  An explanation from Najib will be most appropriate.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 September 2012, 4:00 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Puluhan juta wang dibelanjakan, Jalur Gemilang tidak juga berkibar

— Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 01, 2012

1 SEPT — Semalam genap 55 tahun negara kita merdeka dan begitu rapi persediaan yang diuruskan untuk merayakan Hari Kemerdekaan ini oleh kerajaan. Perayaan ini merupakan satu perayaan yang termahal sekali dan itu tidak mengapalah kerana memang sudah menjadi budaya kita berbelanja berlebih-lebihan untuk perayaan. Wang yang dibelanjakan pun bukannya duit siapa tetapi duit rakyat yang membayar cukai dengan keringat dan darah mereka.

Perayaan mengingati Hari Kemerdekaan di negara kita merupakan perayaan yang terboros sekali. Setahun yang lepas saya sempat melihat majlis ulang tahun negara Australia melalui kaca TV yang saya sudah lupa dari saluran mana. Tetapi Australia merayakan secara “simple” tetapi meriah. Majlis itu yang berlangsung dalam kurang dari dua jam hanya mendengar ucapan Perdana Menteri yang ringkas. Tidak ada bas disewa oleh kerajaan untuk mengangkut orang ramai dengan elaun kehadiran sebanyak RM30, baju-T dan sebagainya.

Semua Ahli Jemaah Kabinetnya hanya duduk di atas barisan kerusi yang “simple” dan mudah dan kita boleh tahu mereka tidak menggunakan wang rakyat yang begitu banyak untuk merayakan hari kebangsaan mereka. Sebaliknya kita di sini membelanjakan wang rakyat berpuluh-puluh juta untuk merayakan Hari Kebangsaan kita. Tetapi tak mengapa juga rakyat kita kebanyakannya tidak kisah harta benda mereka diperkosa seperti ini dan ada yang masih memberikan sokongan pihak yang membelanjakan wang mereka dengan boros itu.

Tetapi selain daripada memberikan komen tentang pembaziran ini saya ingin memberikan pemerhatian saya terhadap perayaan Hari Kebangsaan kita yang saya nampak tidak mendapat sambutan rakyat. Banyak publisiti yang kita dengar dan lihat tentang seruan untuk menaikkan Jalur Gemilang, tetapi di mana-mana kita pergi orang ramai tidak nampak Jalur Gemilang dikibarkan di premis-premis perniagaan dan rumah-rumah kediaman rakyat yang ramai.

Keadaan ini lebih jelas lagi dari keadaan semasa perayaan Hari Kebangsaan pada tahun 2008 dahulu. Kali ini tidak nampak semangat mengibarkan Jalur Gemilang itu lagi. Kereta-kereta serta teksi-teksi yang baru sahaja mendapat empat biji tayar pun tidak nampak mengenakan Jalur Gemilang di kenderaan-kenderaan mereka. Malahan situasi hambar tentang pengibaran Jalur Gemilang kali ini adalah yang terburuk dan terendah sekali penyertaan dari rakyat ramai.

Rakyat nampaknya sedang menjelaskan lagi sikap dan pandangan serta pendirian mereka terhadap seruan media yang meluas supaya semua rakyat mengibarkan Jalur Gemilang pada 31 Ogos ini. Nyata rakyat ramai tidak bersama memeriahkan Hari Kebangsaan ini dan elok setiap orang mengkaji kenapa keadaan ini berlaku. Yang pasti rakyat tidak boleh dipujuk-pujuk dengan duit-duit raya atau hadiah-hadiah yang tidak boleh menjamin masa depan negara mereka. Rakyat merasa jemu dengan cara pimpinan hari ini melayan mereka seperti melayan kanak-kanak “kindergarten”: boleh dipujuk dengan gula-gula dan coklat sahaja.

Kedapatan ramai yang mendapat Jalur Gemilang secara percuma pun enggan mengibarkan Jalur Gemilang di premis-premis kediaman mereka. Dengan sambutan hambar ini kita boleh membuat penilaian secara “conclusive” yang rakyat tidak lagi menghiraukan perayaan Hari Kebangsaan ini. Tentulah situasi seperti ini berlaku dengan bersebab.

Bagi mereka yang serius membuat pemerhatian ini akan secara automatik berpendapat yang itu merupakan “reflection” atau “manifestation” rakyat terhadap kekurangan keyakinan terhadap kepimpinan negara.

Dalam kita sedang berada di ambang pilihanraya, kita sudah boleh menilai dengan agak tepat apa yang akan berlaku di dalam pilihanraya nanti, dan keputusannya merupakan keputusan yang “predictable”. Orang ramai berpendapat perbelanjaan yang terlalu boros itu merupakan tanda pimpinan sekarang tidak sayangkan negara kerana yang akan kekeringan adalah perbendaharaan rakyat.

Kepada rakyat kini, cara pimpinan kita berbelanja wang rakyat untuk majlis-majlis keramaian dan parayaan ini serupalah seperti tindakan-tindakan makhluk perosak. “Leaders of these days are bunch of pests,” kata seorang kenalan yang bersama-sama saya minum kopi di salah sebuah kedai mamak di Subang Jaya semalam.

“Giving Pakatan Rakyat the opportunity to take over the government is not an option. It’s a must,” kata seorang lagi bekas pegawai tinggi kerajaan yang baru sahaja bersara sebulan yang lalu. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 September 2012, 9:17 pm and is filed under
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Arguing for a secular state

By Ahmad Farouk Musa

Free Malaysia Today

August 23, 2012

The question is would discriminatory policies noted in classical texts of Islamic state be acceptable in the modern era.

COMMENT

To many Muslims and especially the Islamists, the term secular is a very repugnant term and this abhorrence to anything secular stems mainly from the previously bitter experience of secularism in Turkey that had led to the dissolution of the Ottoman Caliphate, the last Caliphate in the Muslim world.

The fall of the Ottoman Caliphate led to some Muslim scholars to push for a new entity known as an Islamic state. The concept of an Islamic state was not known in the Islamic world before that. The main proponent for an Islamic state was none other than Muhammad Rashid Redha, a great Muslim reformer in the early 20th century. The main intention of Redha was to stem the onslaught of Western imperialism.

History has shown that while secularism was born in the West, its values spread across the world in many different continents and societies. According to Louay Safi, a scholar at the International Institute of Islamic Thought, secularism denotes a set of notions and values whose aim is to ensure that the state is neither engaged in promoting specific religious beliefs and values, nor uses its powers and offices to persecute religion.

To prevent state officials from using their political authority to impose a narrow set of religious attitudes and values on the larger society, and to foreclose the possibility of using religious symbols to agitate one religious community against another, a separation must be made between political authorities from religious affiliation.

The Islamic state conundrum

It is an unshakeable belief among many Islamists that the establishment of an Islamic state must be the first and foremost agenda in any political struggle. It is only when an Islamic state is established that hudud penal code could be implemented.

Since the issue of Islamic state and hudud is intertwined and will become more prominent every time the general election is around the corner, it would be pertinent for us to revisit this issue. To many proponents of Islamic state, in particular those in the Islamic party PAS, the concept of Islamic state is basically a replica of the medieval ideas promoted by al-Mawardi in al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah (The Ordinances of Government).

Barring the Erdoganists in PAS, the ulama wing has been preaching this medieval concept that has been ingrained even in the younger generations, especially among the religious educated. It basically fails to tackle some fundamental issues in the 21st century. It fails to discuss the concept of constitutionalism, human rights and citizenship as an integrated framework that is very fundamental in modern states. It is of note that it is constitutionalism that provides a legal and political framework for the preservation of human rights, freedom and equality among its citizens.

However in an Islamic state as envisioned by many Islamists – the religious educated especially – citizenship is classified between Muslim and dhimmis, namely non-Muslims who pledged submission to Muslim authority and therefore granted protection in exchange for a payment of a special tax known as jizyah. Dhimmis are basically the opposite of harbis that generally mean non-Muslims who are hostile to Islam.

In classical texts of Islamic state like Mawardi’s al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah, the dhimmis are prevented from riding horses or donkeys within the city limits. In modern days, this may be equivalent to driving cars in the city. And that they wear distinctive clothing in public and bells around their necks when visiting pubic bathing facilities. The question is, would such discriminatory policies be acceptable in the modern era?

It must also be acknowledged that an Islamic state will surely be based on Islamic values. This would entail banning all forbidden things in the Quran. Many Muslim ideologues like Mawdudi, for example, believe that it is impossible for such a state to limit its framework because it is a totalitarian state encompassing the whole human life and moral theory. So nobody has the right to stand up against the state and thwart any encroachment of the state in personal matters. Obviously this is very similar to a fascist state.

Going by the current discourse in Malaysia, one gets the impression that the priority of an Islamic state is then to impose a set of rules known as hudud. This obsession with hudud stems from the understanding that hudud is divine law in the Quran that is imposed upon believers. Many people believe that hudud is a set of codified law that can be imposed without resorting to human agency at all. This is an obvious fallacy since the Quran only lays down some basic texts that require human agency to interpret them.

The formulation, adoption and implementation of legislation are always matters of human judgment and reasoning. Therefore their intended implementation is subject to human error and fallibility and can always be challenged and questioned. The problem will arise when such laws are deemed sacred and of God’s divine will and any sort of criticism will be deemed as heresy.

On this matter, Prof Hashim Kamali has argued that hudud Allah in the Quran is a broad concept that is neither confined to punishments nor to a legal framework. It provides a comprehensive set of guidelines on moral, legal and religious themes. Whenever the Quran specified punishments for the offences, it also made provisions for repentance and reformation, whereas juristic doctrine has either left this totally out or reduced it to a mechanical formality that can hardly be said to be reflective of the original teachings of the Quran.

On another note, not only is hudud in direct conflict with the Federal Constitution but in the context of a multiracial and multi-religious society, such a proposition also raises the issue of whether the nation should be governed by two sets of laws: one for Muslims and the other for non-Muslims.

The real problem of having laws such as hudud is that it is presented as mandated by the divine will of God. This makes such laws immune to any criticisms whereas in reality they were merely the product of some literal interpretations of a certain group of scholars that failed to see the maqasid or higher intentions of such laws in attaining the ideals of justice. Criticisms against such laws have been made by many Muslim intellectuals such as Prof Hashim Kamali and until today, have not received any rebuttals from the proponents of hudud.

Syariah must neither be privileged nor enforced as a source of state law and policy simply because they are believed to be the will of God. Prof Abdullahi Ahmed An-Naim argued in “Islam and the Secular State” that the belief of even the vast majority of citizens that these principles are binding as a matter of Islamic religious obligation should remain the basis of individual and collective observance among believers. But that cannot be accepted as sufficient reason for the enforcement by the state because they would then apply to citizens who may not share that belief.

Why a secular state

Secularism does not mean the exclusion of religion from the public life of a society. The misconception that it does, is one of the reasons many Muslims tend to be hostile towards the concept.

Calling for a state to be secular is not similar in any way to the call for secularising the society. A state should be secular in the sense that it is neutral to all the differing religious doctrines. As Abdullahi An-Naim argued, state neutrality is necessary for true conviction to be the driving force of religious and social practice, without fear of those who control the state.

A secular state must embrace democracy. And democracy cannot be based on syariah law, as that, on the contrary, would denote a theocracy. A secular state would allow every living Muslim a true freedom. Freedom to pray and fast as he or she ought to, freedom to follow in the footsteps of the Prophet as he or she sees fit and freedom to submit to the will of God as he or she understands it.

Mustafa Akyol in his book “Islam Without Extremes: A Muslim Case for Liberty” wrote a chapter on Freedom to Sin. In it he argued that Muslims should rethink the meaning of the phrase “amar ma’ruf nahi munkar” or simply “commanding the good, forbidding the wrong”. They need to make a clear distinction between “crime” and “sin”. While combating crime can be made via legal means, sins should only be through civil means like preaching.

The argument does not arise from an antagonistic attitude against piety but from a true appreciation of what piety is all about: a sincere belief free from coercion. Any regime that imposes piety because of the belief that it is part of the doctrine “commanding the good and preventing the wrong” like Saudi Arabia, for instance, is basically creating a community of hypocrites rather than genuine piety.

Genuine piety only arises through personal choice. And that choice only becomes possible when there is freedom. In other words freedom to sin is a necessary medium to be sincerely pious. The erudite Muhammad Asad made it very clear when making his commentary in his magnum opus “The Message of the Qur’an” regarding verse 25 of al-A’raf or Faculty of Discernment where he commented on the story about Adam and Eve temptation when he said:

“The growth of his consciousness – symbolised by the willful act of disobedience to God’s command – changed all this. It transformed him from a purely instinctive being into a full-fledged human entity as we know it – a human being capable of discerning between right and wrong and thus of choosing his way of life. In this deeper sense, the allegory of the Fall does not describe a retrogressive happening but rather, a new stage of human development: an opening of doors to moral consideration. By forbidding him to “approach the tree”, God made it possible for man to act wrongly, and therefore, to act rightly as well. And so man became endowed with that moral free will which will distinguish him from all other sentinel beings.”

The way forward

The arguments regarding this topic could go ad infinitum. However, the main intention is just to stir a debate among the protagonists of Islamic state to that of a secular state. One thing is very clear and succinct: there is no mention about an Islamic state in the Quran. With that in mind, we have to work on the best form of government that will be tenable to all the different races and religions in our country.

If we still want to continue fighting for an Islamic state, we have to agree on one basic fact. Not a single particular Muslim whether the Grand Syeikh of al-Azhar or Saudi Mufti could claim to have a theocratic authority. Considering that Muslims have been divided into different sects, ideas and views, the only system that would be fair for all would be the one that would include all of them in the political process. Taking also into consideration the significant non-Muslim community in our country who should never be considered as second-class citizens, then a secular state that embraces democracy is the most logical option.

We have to agree that secularism, as the separation of state from religion, is probably the minimum requirement for participation in the sphere of civic reason. Secularism needs religion to provide a moral guidance for the community and in turn, religion needs secularism to mediate the relations between the different communities that share the same political space and space of civic reason.

Secularism is able to unite diverse communities of belief and practice into one political community simply because the moral claims it makes are minimal. And secularism is able to tolerate differing view in a religiously diverse community while maintaining its political stability. Whereas such a situation is probably just a dream in an autocratic Islamic state envisioned by many Islamists.

The writer is a director at Islamic Renaissance Front

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 2 September 2012, 7:40 am and is filed under
Islamic state
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Change of national flag Jalur Gemilang never a Pakatan Rakyat agenda and never discussed or raised  in any PR meeting

When the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak yesterday personally led three senior UMNO Ministers to attack the Pakatan Rakyat with the canard that PR wanted to replace the national flag Jalur Gemilang, it was more than anything else a reflection of their sense of desperation about UMNO/Barisan Nasional prospects in the impending 13th General Election than respect for the truth.

I do not believe that with all the police and intelligence resources at their command, the Prime Minister and the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein could be unaware that there is completely no basis whatsoever in the canard that Pakatan Rakyat wanted to change the national flag.

The change of the national flag is never a Pakatan Rakyat agenda and has never been discussed or raised in any Pakatan Rakyat meeting.

This was why I had yesterday twittered in response to the allegation that PR wanted to change the national flag:

“Never came across such scatter-brained idea before. UMNO/BN dirty-tricks dept very busy”

I had not expected the UMNO leadership to be so desperate about their prospects in the forthcoming general election as to jump on the issue as if it is a “God-sent” to accuse the Pakatan Rakyat of disloyalty and being anti-national, throwing in other lies and falsehoods against the PR like wanting to abolish the royal institution and turn the Malaysia into a republic.

But what was really surprising was this “political offensive of lies and falsehoods” was so high-powered, as it was  not left to the army of UMNO/BN cybertroopers, but was spearheaded by none other than the Prime Minister himself, with three senior UMNO Ministers, viz Hishammuddin, the Minister for International Trade and Industry Datuk Seri Mustapha Mohamed and the Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Minister Datuk Seri Noh Omar providing the back-up to mount  the quadruplet of attacks on the Pakatan Rakyat yesterday.

But these attacks were clearly cooked up by the UMNO/BN dirty tricks department, for there is no truth whatsoever in the allegations that the PR wanted to change the national flag or  to abolish the system of constitutional monarchy.

This was the reason for the later chronology of my  eight tweets yesterday on the subject:

1.	Signs UMNO dirty tricks department fast at work? http://goo.gl/3ttJt Mustapa warns bid turn Malaysia into republic – amend Constitution/flag (TMI)

2.	Rising paranoia of UMNO/BN leaders with hyperactivity by dirty tricks department? http://goo.gl/0o2ej Najib wants BN ‘wall’ around Putrajaya (TMI)

3.	Hysteria + paranoia! How come I know nothing about it? http://goo.gl/F9QF8 Najib alleges PR behind bid to replace national flag (TMI)

4.	Can Najib tell us more about what PR has decided that DAP leaders know nothing about? Umno dirty tricks department really work overtime involving PM

5.	Reminds me of old film, Its A Mad Mad Mad Mad World. PR leaders from PKR PAS also do not know what Najib talking about http://goo.gl/F9QF8

6.	UMNO dirty tricks dept concocting “agenda” for PR like change flag/Constitution to allow PM/UMNO leaders to get hysterical, irrational, extremist

7.	Fourth UMNO Minister same day make baseless charge PR wants to change Jalur Gemilang http://goo.gl/DiX9a PR has lost direction says Noh Omar (TMI)

8.	Next UMNO Minister to tell canard about PR want 2change national flag – after Mustapha Hisham Najib Noh Omar? Having pack of liars in Cabinet?

Pakatan Rakyat, through its various policy pronouncements, including the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework in December 2009 and the Buku Jingga on December 2010, had reiterated the PR’s commitment to uphold the fundamental features in the Malaysian Constitution, in particular “to defend the role and responsibility of the institution of Constitutional Monarchy”.

It is the height of irresponsibility for the Prime Minister and senior Umno Ministers to spearhead the Umno/BN dirty tricks department’s campaign of lies and falsehoods against PR as when the four UMNO Ministers repeated the canards that PR wanted to change the national flag and to turn Malaysia into a republic.

Everyone is expecting the 13th General Election to be the dirtiest in the nation’s history of elections.

Is Najib prepared prove them wrong, and  as head of Barisan Nasional make a national compact with the Pakatan Rakyat to conduct a free, fair and clean election campaign in the 13th General Election in keeping with his claim that Malaysia is the world’s best democracy?

Najib should be reminded that “Stopping Dirty Politics” is one of the eight demands of Bersih 2.0 for clean, free and fair elections.  As Bersih 2.0 rightly pointed out in its statement of May 24, 2012:

“In addition to repeated instances of political corruption, politics in Malaysia has grown increasingly dirty in recent times. There have been increased incidences of personal slandering, distortion of issues and spreading of rumours and lies.”

The ball is in Najib’s court. Is he prepared to set an exemplary leadership to ensure clean, free and fair elections or is he going to spearhead the “dirtiest general election” in the nation’s history?

If the former, then the first thing Najib should do is to disband UMNO/BN’s “dirty tricks department” which have been responsible for the heap of lies and falsehoods against PR leaders lately.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 2 September 2012, 2:17 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Internet blackout day: Politicisation of online activism?

 — Damien D. Cheong and Yeap Su Yin

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 02, 2012

SEPT 2 — An internet blackout day was declared in Malaysia on 14 August 2012.

This was in protest against Section 114A of the recently-amended Evidence Act, which enables the authorities to act firmly against individuals who post defamatory, inflammatory and/or seditious content on the Internet.

The law not only holds the user/blogger potentially accountable for the offending post(s) but also any individual or organisation connected to the objectionable website or blog such as a person who: owns, administers or edits the website; is registered with the network service provider; and is in custody or control of the computer at the time the offence was committed.

These new amendments have alarmed many netizens and civil society groups because of the legislation’s wide scope and the heavy onus placed on the accused to prove his or her innocence. Many individuals have interpreted these amendments as an attempt by the Malaysian government to stifle internet freedom. The Stop 114A campaign was spearheaded by the Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ), a civil society group, but it soon attracted support from several prominent civil society organisations, bloggers and opposition parties.

In the wake of Internet Blackout Day, the Najib administration promised to re-evaluate Section 114A, with the prime minister assuring the public that ‘Whatever we do, we must put the people first’. While this outcome may be interpreted as a success for online activism in Malaysia, the question this raises is whether such online activism can truly create an impact on its own or whether it needs support from opposition parties and political notables to do so.

The Internet Blackout Day was inspired by a similar campaign launched earlier this year in the US. This was organised to protest the Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), two bills aimed at curbing internet piracy by targeting foreign websites that commit or facilitate intellectual property theft. The bills would have given US authorities the right to compel US companies such as internet service providers, credit card companies and online advertisers to cut off ties with such websites.

While lawmakers expected both bills to be passed effortlessly through the US Congress, they encountered massive resistance from activists as well as major players in the IT industry. Google, Wikipedia and Reddit, for example, blacked-out their websites on January 18, 2012 in support of Internet Blackout Day. The strong support for the blackouts convinced many lawmakers who had initially supported the anti-piracy bills to withdraw their support. This subsequently forced Congress to delay plans to enact the bills into law.

Online activism had suddenly become very powerful. As Larry Downes from Forbes Magazine observed: (it was) ‘the introduction of the Washington establishment to “bitroots” activism, arising from a community of ordinary internet users that have used technology as tools to promote their cause’.

In contrast, the CIJ’s Internet Blackout Day in Malaysia did not attract enthusiastic support from industry players but gained backing from political heavyweights. These notables included opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim (Parti Keadilan Rakyat [PKR]) and Lim Kit Siang, leader of the Democratic Action Party (DAP) as well as blogger Marina Mahathir, daughter of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. While it did have support from other civil society organisations as well as some private sector companies, the involvement of these notables, and the awareness and additional support they were able to generate, created momentum to sustain the CIJ’s campaign.

The opposition parties, too, were politically advantaged by supporting the CIJ’s Internet Blackout Day. This was because they could: portray themselves as being in sync with the people and the people’s wishes; underscore their role as an effective check on the Government; distinguish themselves ideologically and administratively from the ruling coalition; emphasise their willingness to champion the people’s rights as well as what rights/values the party represented; and increase their visibility. All these are important considerations for the Opposition with the general election expected to be called very soon.

Prudently, the opposition parties (PKR and DAP) did not hijack the campaign but united in support of it. A united opposition is often well-perceived by the voters, and helps with possible coalition formation in the aftermath of elections.

Although online activism is seemingly gaining prominence in Malaysia, it does not appear to be taking the form of ‘bitroots’ activism. This is where ‘the online community’ struggles against ‘the establishment’ as in the US case. The prominence of the opposition parties in the CIJ’s campaign suggests that online activism, while initiated by ordinary individuals, is sustained by support from the major political parties and, hence, likely to be politicised in the end.

As there is much political capital to be gained from championing certain causes, opposition parties might begin to align themselves more with interest groups and activists. They could also hijack existing causes or tacitly instigate groups to advocate and mobilise around specific causes.

In light of this possible eventuality, the incumbent Barisan Nasional coalition could find itself in a possible face-off with an emerging political combination of bitroots activists and the political opposition. Dealing effectively with this highly potent combination may well prove to be the most important challenge for the Malaysian government ahead of the next polls. — East Asia Forum

* Damien D. Cheong is a Research Fellow and Yeap Su Yin an Associate Research Fellow at the Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS) at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 2 September 2012, 6:06 pm and is filed under
IT
,
Media
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


1MDB’s RM2.3b acquisition of Genting Sanyen – Questions

By Sentinel

Several months ago, 1MDB had won the bid to acquire Tanjong Energy from Ananda Krishnan for a consideration in excess of RM 8 billion.  One weekend in August, rumours swirled regarding a new major acquisition by  1MDB in the power sector.

The “rumours” became reality when an announcement by Bursa said that 1MDB had agreed to acquire a unit of Genting Energy for RM 2.3 billion.  That unit of Genting Energy was Genting Sanyen, one of the first generation IPPs with a capacity of 720MW and which came into operation in 1995.  The power purchase agreement (PPA) with TNB will expire in 2016.  Separately, Genting made a parallel announcement regarding the divestment, adding that it will book a extraordinary gain of RM 1.9 billion from the sale.

Any person with some commercial sense will realise that the book value of the Genting asset in question is only RM 400 million.  The PPA has 4 more years to run, after which the asset will be worth nothing more than scrap metal.  Even if TNB decides to extend the term of the PPA, it will be on TNB’s terms, and not on Genting’s terms because the alternative to Genting is scrap value of the plant.  So why would 1MDB pay RM 2.3 billion for the asset ?  Can it recover the RM 2.3 billion in the 4 years remaining of the PPA?

Now let’s make some rough calculations.  The plant has an installed capacity of 720MW.  It was built in 1995, so let’s assume now that the plant’s capacity is around 700MW given the lapse of time.  Let’s also assume that TNB has dispatched the plant 85 pct of the time, so the annual output of the plant should be around [700,000 kW X 24 hrs X 365 days X 85 pct] or 5.2 million kWh (units of electricity). The tariff in the PPA is around 13 sen per kWh, which means annual revenues from TNB will be around RM 677 million.  Roughly half of this goes to payment to Petronas for gas, and for operational costs, which means that net revenues before tax will be around RM 300 – 350 million per annum.

Hence there is no chance that 1MDB can even remotely recover its investment of RM 2.3 billion over the remaining 4 years of the PPA with TNB.  Either there is gross incompetence at 1MDB or there is a hidden agenda somewhere that no one is telling.  1MDB is an MoF vehicle, whose funding is guaranteed by the Federal Government.  We are entitled to an explanation of how funds are spent at 1MDB, and we require accountability.

1MDB acquired Tanjong Energy for over RM 8 billion. Tanjong Energy’s assets are in Egypt, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Oman, Sri Lanka and Malaysia.  For this deal, 1MDB had to raise a US Dollar bond at an inflated yield with the guarantee of the sovereign government of Abu Dhabi.  Questions were asked as to why 1MDB, the so-called wealth fund created from the oil revenues of Trengganu, made such an investment and the rationale for the huge price paid.  There were no answers.  The latest deal with Genting raises similar issues, and this time we must demand answers with full accountability. Those trustees of public funds cannot have a “spend, spend, spend” mentality given the state of the global economy.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 3 September 2012, 2:31 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Economics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


BN’s amateur politicking

— Lokman Zahid

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 02, 2012

SEPT 2 — Malaysia celebrated its 55th Merdeka Day two days ago but its politicians remain mired in a childish mindset that is best left at the kampung level. Come on, aren’t we supposed to be marching towards a developed nation status by 2020?

So why do we still have issues about a long-forgotten flag or that there are attempts to make Malaysia a republic? Who even remembers the flag and who in their right mind think that Malaysia can ever be a republic except the siege-mentality and scare-mongering of the folks in Barisan Nasional (BN).

The sad fact is that on the occasion of the 55th independence day anniversary celebrations, Najib Razak as prime minister had the opportunity to unite the country and speak like a statesman, the same way that Lee Hsien Loong did on August 9 at the National Day Rally in Singapore.

The Singapore Prime Minister cautioned Singaporeans against xenophobia and becoming lazy Singaporeans. After all, that tiny red dot south of the border is almost already the world’s richest country by per capita.  He did not warn those who voted for the Opposition in the last elections, unlike our dear Najib.

In contrast, the BN government used this year’s National Day to divide the people, urging Malaysians to protect their “independence” from the Opposition. What kind of government does that? One that is bankrupt of ideas.

Hsien Loong and Najib are similar in many ways. Both had fathers who were prime ministers. Both have ideas. How is it that one can articulate it better than the other one?

Why do we have a government that tries to convince the people its political foes want to set up a republic? Everyone knows that it won’t happen in Malaysia. Our rulers have enough powers to prevent a change in the Federal Constitution for that to happen. And the people’s safeguard against that is to make sure that no government ever gets a two-thirds majority, be it BN or Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

More than that, why is the BN government harping on such matters instead of boasting its achievements in the coming general election campaign. Why use the National Day to thump its chest and blow its trumpet? We want statesmen for our national leaders, not petty politicians preaching hate to all and sundry.

We have our flag. We have our constitutional monarchy. Now we just need a government that makes sense and works for us to be a developed nation and for everyone to be free from poverty. If the Najib administration cannot do that but rather work on hate and hype, I say chuck them out.

Their politicking is so amateurish that it is a wonder that the BN has been ruling this country since Merdeka. We need a better set of leaders and that starts with all of us voting in the best, not some shrill politician out to be a leader by slinging mud at his opponents. Grow up like Malaysia and Malaysians have in the past 55 years.

Stop this lousy politicking and start leading the country into a better future. Or get out and let somebody capable do the job.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 3 September 2012, 12:02 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.