Malaysia’s elections: Should the international community care?

— Ambiga Sreenevasan

The Malaysian Insider

Oct 15, 2012

OCT 15 — Those in the international community may be forgiven for saying, “Is there a problem with the democratic process in Malaysia?”

In the international arena, our leaders portray Malaysia as a moderate Islamic nation that is built on the democratic principles that are enshrined in our Federal Constitution. The fundamental rights of freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom of assembly, the right to life and a fair electoral process, are indeed guaranteed under our Federal Constitution.

The reality is, however, far less idyllic. There are serious questions whether these rights are respected and upheld by those in power.

Since before the 1990’s, Malaysians have been pushing for a reform of the system of governance. There has been growing discontent over issues like rampant corruption, abuse of power, deaths in custody and selective prosecution (or persecution), to name but a few of the grouses.

We are increasingly alarmed by the use of race and religion by politicians to divide the people for political gain, with no regard whatsoever for the possible long term consequences of this conduct.

We note with disgust our mainstream media descending to the lowest depths of junk journalism. We are appalled at the growing instances of political violence.

In the clearest example of how low we have sunk, human rights defenders and civil society who are seen as opposing the government are facing ruthless attacks by the government of the day. SUARAM, established in 1989 and who has in the past year been exposing possible corruption by Malaysians in high places in the purchase of Scorpene submarines from France, is suddenly facing investigation by several government agencies.

The mainstream media is once again playing its role in showing no regard whatsoever for presenting the whole truth. In a front page news story, preposterous claims were made that NGOs like SUARAM and BERSIH were funded by organisations like National Democratic Institute (NDI) and Open Society Institute (OSI) for the purpose of overthrowing the government. Directors of SUARAM have been hauled up by enforcement agencies for their expose on the corruption, yet our anti- corruption agency fails to even begin to investigate the claims of SUARAM that a huge commission of RM500 million had been received by a Malaysian entity in the Scorpene deal.

Civil society is now continuously portrayed in the media as the enemy who is seeking to overthrow the government at the behest of foreign powers. These accusations have also been hurled at BERSIH, more so since July last year when we had a successful rally of more than 50,000 people on the streets of KL, clamouring for clean and fair elections. Another rally was held in April this year when more than 200,000 people were on the streets, again asking for electoral reform.

Malaysians do not easily take to the streets. The numbers must mean that there were good reasons why they did.

I will not go into more details of the attacks that human rights defenders have had to face by those in authority or those who had the tacit approval of the authorities. Suffice it to say they have been sustained and relentless.

When asked, our leaders will say that this government is reforming because of the replacement of many oppressive laws, and the apparent move to greater democracy. They will say that after the BERSIH rally last year, a parliamentary select committee for electoral reform was set up and a report issued.

What they don’t go on to explain is what replaces these oppressive laws and what they are doing to effectively implement the PSC recommendations. In my view, the new legislation just does not go far enough, and the important recommendations of the PSC report are largely ignored or poorly implemented.

BERSIH also continues to receive reports of electoral malpractices and the integrity of the electoral roll leaves much to be desired. Our Election Commission does not enjoy public confidence and is not seen by many as independent. This together with all the other issues that plague our system of governance leads to the inevitable conclusion that the next crucial general elections will be seriously flawed.

All the so-called reforms are like attempting to varnish a table that is ridden with termites. It is difficult to fix a system that is fundamentally flawed by building on the same rotten foundation. That is, even if there is real political will to reform.

The Global Commission on Elections, Democracy and Security which is headed by Mr. Kofi Annan and which has many distinguished members including H.E Dr Ernesto Zedillo former President of Mexico, Dr Madeleine K. Albright and Professor Amartya Sen, issued a ground-breaking report on clean and fair elections dated September 2012.

In his foreword, Kofi Annan states, “The spread of democracy across the world has been one of the most dramatic changes I have witnessed over the course of my career. In country after country, people have risked their lives to call for free elections, democratic accountability, the rule of law and respect for human rights. Elections are the indispensable root of democracy…..”

I make no apologies for quoting from this report at length for I cannot say it better. The report clearly outlines that clean and fair elections are not just about choosing leaders, but are about building a solid framework for a democracy that works for the people. After studies, the following were some of the conclusions arrived at:

1. “Elections with integrity are important to values that we hold dear — human rights and democratic principles. Elections give life to rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, the right to take part in the government of one’s country through freely elected representatives, the right of equal access to public service in one’s country, and the recognition that the authority of government derives from the will of the people, expressed in “genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot.

2. Elections are fundamental to the ethos and principles of democracy…..

3. Citizens lose confidence in democratic processes when elections are not inclusive, transparent, and accountable. When elections have integrity, they bolster democracy, respect fundamental rights, and produce elected officials who are more likely to represent their citizens’ interests.

4. But in addition to promoting democratic values and human rights, elections with integrity can also yield other tangible benefits for citizens. Evidence from around the world suggests that elections with integrity matter for empowering women, fighting corruption, delivering services to the poor, improving governance, and ending civil wars…….

5. Electoral accountability, in turn, is associated with lessening government corruption…….

6. Electoral accountability, in turn, has direct benefits for improving representation of the poor……..

7. Even in countries emerging from civil wars — the most difficult of contexts for building democracy — research now shows that when the termination of the war is accompanied by elections in which former combatants run for office and campaign for votes, countries are less likely to revert to civil war. At the same time, however, other studies note that fraudulent elections are correlated with societal violence and political instability…….”

In an interview after the presentation of the report, Stephen Stedman, director of the Global Commission and a political scientist from Stanford was asked what the motivation was for the report.

In speaking of the chairman Kofi Annan, he said that Annan was “driven by his experience of having to deal with several elections in Africa that had become violent and had gone off the rails. And there is a frustration he feels about how little attention had been paid to those places before they blew up”. (The emphasis is mine)

Let us be clear. Malaysia is not facing the problems or the hopelessness that gave rise to the Arab Spring. We are blessed with an abundance of resources and talent. But to assume that all is well and that there is no need to scrutinise the democratic processes, would be a mistake.

We want change before things do blow up in our faces. We do not want an Arab Spring. We want to choose our leaders in clean and fair elections. If there is to be change, we want to do it through the ballot box.

If the government is willing to overlook, and in fact tacitly support, corruption and abuse of power, and promote racism and religious bigotry for its own ends, how can we trust that the elections will be clean and fair?

There is even an admission of malpractices in the past. A Royal Commission of Inquiry has been set up by the government in the state of Sabah in respect of a large number of foreigners having been given citizenships in exchange for votes for more than 20 years. BERSIH has received reports that this practice continues and even in West Malaysia.

Why is this happening? It is because the party that has been in power for 55 years is now feeling vulnerable. As Aung Sang Suu Kyi has famously said, “It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it.”

So why should one country be bothered about electoral processes in another?

We know that if any such suggestion is made, the immediate diplomatic response is that there will be no interference by one country into such domestic matters of another country. Not that this is entirely true in fact.

As observed of the international community in the commission report “While their rhetorical support for elections with integrity may be constant, their record of responding to flawed elections is not. In some cases, their interest lies in bolstering a preferred candidate, not in an election with integrity per se.

Too often, democratic governments have turned a blind eye to electoral malpractice by regimes and incumbents with whom they have friendly relations”.

And the best answer to why everyone should be interested in clean and fair elections everywhere is stated in the report thus:

“We still live in a world in which states act on their strategic interests. The key lies in reminding democratic governments that their strategic interest is best served by supporting elections with integrity. Not only do democratic governments share an interest in the spread of democracy as a bulwark for international peace, but they must also learn that their bilateral relations are strengthened when their partners have democratic legitimacy earned through genuine elections.”

Malaysia is a member of many important regional and international organisations and appears to enjoy the confidence of its neighbours. We can set valuable examples in the region. We have what it takes to be a role model.

But we can only be that if the example we set is one of a truly democratic system of governance borne out of clean and fair elections. And if we are to be valuable contributors to the global community, then it is in everyone’s interests that our elections are clean and fair.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 October 2012, 2:12 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Constitution
,
Corruption
,
Elections
,
Human Rights
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


TV3 akan menghadapi nasib yang sama seperti Utusan?

 — Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Oct 16, 2012

16 OKT — TV3 sedang merudum “rating”nya. TV3 yang termasyhur sebagai lidah Umno dan BN kini sudah mula tidak mendapat sambutan ramai. Sebelum 2010, TV3 telah mendapat “rating” yang tertinggi sehingga mendapat 3.5 juta penonton sehari dan kini jumlah tontonan dari rakyat telah jatuh sehingga 1.2 juta sehari. Kejatuhan bilangan penonton lebih dari 60 peratus ini tentu bersebab dan sebabnya boleh diagak oleh kita semua. Kejatuhan ini akan akhirnya membawa padah kepada pendapatan syarikat dan menjejaskan prestasi kewangan syarikat televisyen itu.

Selalunya kejatuhan penonton sesebuah syarikat penyiaran seperti TV3 itu adalah kerana kejatuhan keyakinan penonton terhadap kredibiliti saluran itu. Dalam sejarah banyak syarikat penyiaran dan saluran TVnya telah jatuh kerana tidak mendapat sokongan ramai. Keadaan ini tidak mengecualikan TV3 yang kini sudah menampakkan keadaan seperti itu akan berlaku ke atas syarikat televisyen itu.

Kejatuhan penonton yang dialaminya sekarang sudah mula menampakkan apa yang dialami oleh banyak syarikat TV yang terpaksa ditutup di negara-negara yang lain itu akan berlaku ke atas TV3 jika saluran televisyen itu tidak menjaga kredibilitinya di mata penonton yang sedia ada sekarang.

Ramai di antara pengiklan-pengiklan barangan dan perkhidmatan telah mula memikirkan untuk mengiklankan barangan dan perkhidmatan mereka di saluran-saluran yang lain kerana TV3 tidak menjadi saluran sukaramai rakyat lagi. Kejatuhan jumlah penonton untuk saluran ini masih menurun dan dijangkakan yang ia akan melewati bawah dari 1 juta penonton setiap hari.

Keadaan ini berlaku bukan kerana apa….tetapi kerana TV3 sudah menjadi alat pembohongan BN dan Umno dan rakyat yang berfikiran “professional” tidak menganggap saluran TV3 ini sebagai saluran untuk rakyat. Sikap “tidak professional” TV3 ini menjadi persoalan ramai kerana orang ramai tidak gemar dengan sikap condong yang keterlaluan terhadap sesuatu pihak dalam politik ini adalah tindakan yang dianggap tidak jujur.

TV3 tidak yakin terhadap professionisma kewartawanan dan berita. Ia sudah menjadi seperti pentarama jabatan penerangan dan propaganda kerajaan di zaman peperangan melawan komunis dahulu. Rakyat sudah jemu dengan tingkah laku TV3 ini kerana menjadi penghasut bagi membenci setengah pihak dalam masyarakat secara keterlaluan dan ia amat menjijikkan ramai rakyat yang mahukan berita-berita yang seimbang dan professional dalam penyebaran maklumat kepada rakyat.

Saya sudah tidak membuka saluran ini sejak tujuh atau lapan tahun dahulu. Saya sendiri sudah tidak melanggan dan membaca Utusan Malaysia sejak sepuluh tahun dahulu kerana sebab yang sama. Hanya beberapa orang yang rapat dengan saya memberikan apa-apa keratan tulisan Utusan itu jika ia bersangkut dengan isu-isu panas yang dicetak oleh akhbar lidah rasmi Umno itu.

Sebenarnya rakyat memahami yang mana-mana saluran TV dan akhbar itu mempunyai “inclination” masing-masing terhadap sesuatu pihak. Tetapi apa yang dilakukan oleh TV3 dan Utusan itu adalah keterlaluan sehinggakan membelakangkan professionalisma kewartawanan. Tidak bergunalah belajar bidang kewartawanan sehingga ke peringkat yang tinggi tetapi mentaliti dan sikap tidak professional itu ditunjukkan dengan terlalu jelas kepada rakyat yang sudah pandai berfikir ini.

Kerana tindakan TV3 ini maka mereka yang tidak menyebelahi mana-mana pihak terpanggil untuk memberikan sokongan kepada pihak yang dianiayai oleh saluran TV itu. Sesungguhnya apa yang disiarkan oleh TV3 ini merupakan satu yang “counter productive” terhadap kerajaan itu sendiri dan pemantau-pemantau berkaitan dengan berita dari JPM itu tidak dapat merasakan rasa menyampah dan bosan penonton yang ramai-ramai balik ke rumah untuk bersantai dengan keluarga dipaparkan berita-berita yang berbentuk hasutan oleh media massa seperti saluran TV ini.

Bagi pembangkang yang menjadi korban fitnah ini, mereka sepatutnya berterima kasih kepada TV3 dan Utusan kerana kedua-dua saluran berita ini memberikan impak buruk terhadap BN dan tentulah PR yang mendapat keuntungan daripada tindakan mereka itu. Sebahagian besar daripada tanggungjawab pihak pembangkang untuk berkempen itu sudah pun disempurnakan oleh Utusan dan TV3 ini. Seorang yang benci kepada saluran ini menambah seorang yang menyokong kepada pihak pembangkang. Matematiknya senang.

Sikap memecah-belahkan rakyat oleh TV3 ini bertanggungjawab terhadap pembinaan kebencian rakyat kepada pihak yang berkuasa dan tidak adil jika dipersalahkan rakyat memberikan sokongan kepada pihak pembangkang kerana rakyat sentiasa berharap untuk hidup tenang di rumah setelah seharian bekerja kuat untuk keluarga masing-masing.

Apabila sampai di rumah rakyat mahu relaks dengan isteri dan anak-anak dan mereka tidak mahu berhadapan dengan hasutan pihak saluran TV3 sentiasa memaparkan keburukan pihak lain. Rakyat sudah merasakan yang “intensity” pembohongan dan fitnah yang dilakukan oleh TV3 ini membuatkan ramai yang secara automatik membenci saluran itu dan seterusnya kepada pihak yang disokong oleh saluran itu.

Saya telah berjumpa dan bercakap dengan beberapa ketua syarikat yang saya kenali dan mereka memberitahu saya yang mereka sedang menimbang untuk memberhentikan pengiklanan barangan mereka melalui saluran ini jika saluran penyiaran ini meneruskan sikap buruk mereka itu. Jika hilang sokongan dari pihak industri ini TV3 akan hilang pendapatan syarikat yang berkurangan dan segala “glamour” yang dialami oleh saluran TV3 yang terkenal itu.

Jika itu berlaku ia merupakan pengalaman yang sedang dialami oleh Utusan Malaysia yang tidak lagi mendapat sokongan dari pengiklanan yang besar-besar dan itu pun sebabnya Kumpulan Utusan Melayu itu telah kerugian sejak beberapa tahun yang lalu. Jangan terkejut jika TV3 akan menghadapi tindakan rakyat untuk memboikot saluran ini secara menyeluruh. Di zaman dunia tidak bersempadan ini rakyat boleh memilih saluran TV lain yang tidak membina kebencian di antara rakyat di negara ini.

Kita cuba untuk tidak menonton TV3 buat dua tiga hari ini… Saya yakin anda akan biasa dengan pemboikotan itu dan jiwa akan lebih tenteram dan aman tanpanya. Menjaga ketenteraman hati dan jiwa kita itu adalah satu ibadah kerana kita wajib menjauhi musuh-musuh secara baik, tanpa melakukan perkara-perkara yang ganas yang juga ditegah oleh agama dan juga adat kita. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 October 2012, 10:40 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Media
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Deeper Debt

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 17 October 2012, 6:56 pm and is filed under
Economics
,
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan is doing the right stuff

Jeswan Kaur | October 17, 2012

Free Malaysia Today

With the Auditor-General’s report vouching for Pakatan’s ability to ‘do a good job’, does BN have any other trick up its sleeve to bring the curtains down on its arch rival Pakatan?

COMMENT

Poetic justice – that best sums up the 2011 Auditor-General’s report that has given the opposition Pakatan Rakyat-controlled four states top marks for fiscal management.

The Auditor-General in its report had praised Selangor and Penang for collecting a revenue of RM62.50 million and RM192.19 million respectively.

Both states recorded a surge of 46.8% and 4% respectively as compared to the previous year.

The AG’s report also praised Kedah and Kelantan for their revenue collection but said that the states needed to improve their debt management system.

The DAP-led Penang showed the way in terms of revenue collection, chalking up RM192.19 million or 46.8% increase compared with the RM410.70 million generated in 2010.

Selangor, the country’s richest state, increased its revenue collection by RM62.50 million or 4% for the same period.

A paradoxical scenario indeed for in spite of the vehement attacks by Barisan Nasional on Pakatan’s ability to administer the four states under its fold, the opposition coalition, as revealed by the Auditor-General’s report, has proven its rivals wrong, shutting them up in the most fashionable way through an impressive performance.

Be it Selangor Menteri Besar Abdul Khalid Ibrahim’s leadership or Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s straight-forward style of managing the state, both have proven their capabilities.

The Penang state government under Lim launched the Competency, Accountability and Transparency (CAT) concept – the aim, among others, to propel the state government to achieve an efficient, responsible and clean government; CAT also encompasses positive work ethics and inculcates a team spirit based on performance.

However, Lim’s tenure as Penang chief minister has been no bed of roses for no effort has been spared by BN’s controlling arm, Umno, to malign him and cast doubt over Lim’s ability to carry out his duties as chief minister.

And there seems to be no end to the image-smearing undertaken by the BN.

Just last month, Lim was accused by Gerakan Youth vice-chief Tan Kah Leong, BN Tanjung Youth chief H’ng Khoon Leng and Nibong Tebal MP Tan Tee Beng of doctoring a tenancy agreement on his rented residence.

All three were left licking their wounds when Lim, through the document, revealed that the house was rented for RM5,000 a month and he topped up RM1,000 from his pocket to make up the difference from his RM4,000 a month housing allowance.

Pakatan deserves a chance

Before that, Umno tongues wagged that Lim was apparently involved in an extra-marital affair with his former staff. Prior to that, there was the ludicrous claim made by the BN rumour-mongers of Lim’s son being involved in a sex scandal.

Still, despite such pressing times, Lim persevered and was determined not to let the Penangites down – now the 2011 Auditor-General’s report is testament to Lim’s dedication to his work.

The scenario has been somewhat similar for Khalid, who time and again has been lambasted by Umno for being inept.

Khalid, whose over two decades of corporate experience and integrity has given him an edge in administering Selangor, has had his fair share of nightmares, be it the state government’s refusal to go ahead with the construction of the Langat 2 water treatment plant or controversy concerning mismanagement of funds to bail out Talam Corporation Bhd via purchases of land belonging to Talam.

The 2011 Auditor-General’s report also speaks well of two other Pakatan-controlled states – Kedah and Kelantan.

For Kedah, this rice-bowl state considered as one of the country’s poorest, while being far from achieving its debt target, has somehow managed a “satisfactory” balance sheet.

The oil-rich Kelantan, too, was rated satisfactory due to the increase in its consolidated fund by RM86.17 million or 58.1% to RM234.47 million as compared with the RM148.30 million recorded in 2010.

The PAS-conrolled state also saw investments in 2011 increase by RM95 million from RM16.33 million in 2010 to RM111.33 million in 2011.

With the 2011 Auditor-General’s report vouching for Pakatan’s ability to “do a good job”, does BN and Umno have any other trick up their sleeve to bring the curtains down on its arch-rival Pakatan?

The 2011 Auditor-General’s report that applauds Pakatan-controlled states for their good performance should be sufficient evidence to convince the rakyat that given a chance, Pakatan can deliver and do better than BN.

BN’s sour grapes

Call it “sour grapes” or hypocrisy, a BN federal minister, Nazri Aziz, decided to act “decent” and congratulate the Pakatan-led states.

Nazri, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, went so far as to say that the Auditor-General’s report proved that the BN government had no bad intention against its political rivals as accused by some quarters.

“If we want to hide facts, we would have hidden all the praises meant for Pakatan-led states,” Nazri had said.

Is Nazri then implying that BN is not averse to applying dirty tactics to suit its convenience?

And it does seem that Nazri has either been sleeping on the job or is in a critical need of a wake-up call when he remarked that the federal government never harboured malice against its political rivals.

Condemning Pakatan and calling it a liar and inept, as Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak keeps doing – does this not allude to bad intention aimed at killing off Pakatan’s chances at the coming 13th general election?

One thing is for sure and that is the rakyat cannot trust Nazri for he is known to swing like a pendulum when it comes to getting into the good books of the country’s leader.

By the way, what does the Auditor-General’s report has to do with BN’s “intention”? Can the report be tampered with by the federal government? Is this what Nazri is subtly saying?

Whatever Nazri’s rhetoric may be, it holds no water as far as hard work and a commitment towards serving the people go – this Pakatan has in a mere four years recorded straight As unlike its nemesis BN which never seems to get its act in order.

Jeswan Kaur is a freelance writer and a FMT columnist.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 17 October 2012, 10:42 am and is filed under
Auditor-General Report
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Penang
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Police report on corruption against Attorney-General Gani Patail based on  lawyer Zainal Abidin’s  book  “Tan Sri Gani Patail: Pemalsu, Penipu, Penjenayah (Fraud, Liar, Criminal)?” still under investigation

I have received written replies by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, to some of the points on corruption which I had raised in my speech on the 2013 Budget in Parliament on Oct. 4, 2012 but which the Minister did not have the time to respond during his winding-up on Monday.

In my speech I had called on the Prime Minister to give Parliament and nation an update of the actions being taken by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) with regard to the various police reports lodged against the “trio” of Sarawak Chief Minister,  Tan Sri Taib Mahmud, the Sabah Chief Minister, Datuk Seri Musa Aman and the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail.

I had specifically asked what is the outcome of the police report lodged with regard to corruption allegations against the Attorney-General, in particular with regard to lawyer Zainal Abidin Ahmad’s recent book, “Tan Sri Gani Patail: Pemalsu, Penipu, Penjenayah (Fraud, Liar, Criminal)?”?

This is Nazri’s written reply:

“Yang Berhormat Ipoh Timur ingin mengetahui tindakan terhadap dakwaan rasuah oleh Peguam Negara Malaysia sebagaimana dalam buku tulisan Zainal Abidin Ahmad yang bertajuk ‘Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail Pemalsu, Penipu, Penjenayah’. Untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat, buku yang ditulis oleh Zainal Abidin Ahmad mengenai dakwaan rasuah terhadap Peguam Negara yang bertajuk ‘Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail Pemalsu, Penipu, Penjenayah’ masih dalam siasatan pihak polis.”

On corruption reports against the Sarawak Chief Minister, Nazri’s written reply states:

“Yang Berhormat Ipoh Timur, Yang Berhormat Bandar Kuching, Yang Berhormat Sibu, Yang Berhormat Puchong dan Yang Berhormat Serdang ingin mengetahui hasil siasatan tuduhan rasuah yang melibatkan YAB Ketua Menteri Sarawak. Untuk makluman Ahli-Ahli Yang Berhormat, isu ini masih dalam siasatan SPRM. Siasatan kes-kes rasuah yang dibuat oleh SPRM adalah berlandaskan undang-undang dan memerlukan beban pembuktian yang cukup kukuh sehingga mencapai tahap (dengan izin) beyond reasonable doubt.  Ini kerana penyiasatan sesuatu kes itu menjurus kepada intipati kesalahan yang melibatkan keterangan saksi, dokumen dan bukti-bukti lain yang mampu menyokong kes berkenaan.”

In my speech, I had said that although Fighting Corruption is one of the priority six National Key Result Areas (NKRA) of Najib’s Government Transformation Programme (GTP), Malaysia’s corruption has gone from bad to worse in the past three years as tracked by Transparency International’s annual Corruption Perception Index.

I said I  fully agreed with the former Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Adviser, Tan Sri Robert Phang, who had said that the recent 6th International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA) Conference and general meeting  in Kuala Lumpur was  a waste of time and an occasion for the Malaysian government to pretend that it was serious about fighting graft.

This is Nazri’s response in his written replies:

Yang Berhormat Ipoh Timur membangkitkan isu berkenaan kejatuhan negara dalam skor Corruption Perception Indeks (CPI). Untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat, bebanan pencapaian skor CPI tidak boleh diletakkan dibahu Kerajaan semata-mata dan kerjasama daripada semua pihak adalah sangat perlu agar tanggungjawab membanteras rasuah digembleng bersama di antara sektor Kerajaan, sektor swasta, masyarakat usahawan, NGO, parti-parti politik dan rakyat keseluruhannya bagi mencapai matlamat Pelan Transformasi Kerajaan ke arah menjadikan negara kita bebas rasuah.

Yang Berhormat Ipoh Timur mendakwa penganjuran 6th IAACA Annual Conference and General Meeting adalah membuang masa. Pandangan bahawa penganjuran 6th IAACA Annual Conference and General Meeting yang berlangsung di Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre (KLCC) adalah membuang masa dan tidak mencerminkan indeks persepsi rasuah negara adalah menunjukkan bahawa Yang Berhormat Ipoh Timur mempunyai pandangan yang cetek. Kerajaan berpandangan bahawa penganjuran ini boleh membawa impak yang besar kepada negara dari segi kerjasama antarabangsa dalam usaha pembanterasan rasuah. Ini kerana rasuah sebagai jenayah yang juga merentasi sempadan memerlukan kerjasama antarabangsa bagi membendungnya.

Untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat juga, IAACA secara rasmi telah ditubuhkan pada 22 Oktober 2006 di Beijing, China bertujuan membantu negara-negara ahli bagi memenuhi ketetapan dalam United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC). Persidangan pada tahun ini menekankan Artikel 6 UNCAC iaitu ‘Technical Assistance and Information Exchange’ sebagai tema.  IAACA mempunyai lebih daripada 300 ahli organisasi yang meliputi hampir semua agensi pengkuatkuasaan undang-undang memerangi rasuah dan melibatkan lebih daripada 2,000 ahli-ahli individu dari 18 buah negara termasuk pendakwa, penyiasat dan pakar-pakar yang mempunyai pengalaman dalam penyelidikan anti-rasuah.

Keputusan yang berjaya dicapai dalam persidangan-persidangan lepas termasuklah menghasilkan dua deklarasi penting iaitu mengenai kerjasama antarabangsa menentang rasuah dan pencegahan rasuah.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 17 October 2012, 2:31 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Parliament
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Rapidly Losing

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 17 October 2012, 10:15 am and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
,
Transport
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


UN rep clarifies, comments on corruption misreported

By
Susan Loone
 | 9:02AM Oct 17, 2012

Malaysiakini

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) representative who reportedly praised the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) at an international conference said his comments have been misread by the media.

Dimitri Vlassis (left), who is chief of UNODC’s corruption and economic crime branch, said some of his comments and responses during the press conference held in Kuala Lumpur 10 days ago were misunderstood or taken out of context.

Vlassis said he wanted to offer clarifications as consequently those comments were “misinterpreted and may have created erroneous” impressions.

According to the UN representative, he commended the MACC for organising the 6th annual conference and general meeting of the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA) in Kuala Lumpur.

During the press conference, Vlassis said he was asked about the IAACA conference and whether it was worth the expenditure.

“I responded that IAACA was the only home of anti-corruption agencies and that the conference served the very useful purpose of bringing those specialised agencies together, helping them exchange views and experiences and strengthen international cooperation.

“UNODC has been a supporter of IAACA since its establishment and considers every opportunity to achieve those goals a worthy one,” he added in a statement to Malaysiakini yesterday.

“I commended the MACC for organising the conference and thanked it for its hospitality to all participants, including to me and other colleagues from UNODC or UNDP.”

‘Anti-corruption campaigners horrified’

The MP for Ipoh Timor, Lim Kit Siang, took Vlassis to task for the comments reported by the mainstream media, particularly the Oct 7 New Straits Times report, which Lim said had “horrified” anti-corruption campaigners in Malaysia.

Malaysiakini had sent Lim’s statement to Vlassis via the UNODC’s regional secretariat based in Bangkok, Thailand, on Oct 10, for his response.

Lim, who is DAP national adviser, said the comment by Vlassis was a “major blow” and undermined efforts to get Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s government to find the political will to fight corruption, especially those involving top political and public personalities.

Vlassis was also asked to justify his statement on MACC’s performance, since the Transparency International’s (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI) had indicated Malaysia’s ranking and score for 2011 to be the lowest on record.

Lim had also slammed Vlassis for using the IAACA Conference to run down the credibility and usefulness of the TI CPI, by dismissing it as “outdated”, “counter-productive” and “does not serve anyone’s purpose”.

As a result of the comments, Lim added, Vlassis appeared to be sending the message to Malaysians that they do not have to be overly worried about Malaysia dropping to the worst 60th ranking with the lowest score of 4.3 in 17 years of TI’s corruption perception survey.

In response, Vlassis said he was asked about corruption in Malaysia and responded that he was not in a position to pass judgment on the matter because it was beyond his mandate and, therefore, inappropriate to evaluate a country’s performance.

No comment on review

He said Malaysia was being reviewed this year under the Implementation Review Mechanism of the UNCAC and the reviewers were the Philippines and Kenya.

The review was proceeding at a brisk pace, which was an indication of how seriously Malaysia was taking its participation in the mechanism.

“Then I said that I could not go into any further details, or comment on the results of the review, because I was bound by a duty of confidentiality imposed upon me…,” Vlassis said.

“In response to a question on Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index, I said that this was an important tool in raising awareness around the globe, lowering tolerance of corruption and keeping the issue high on the political and societal agendas,” he added.

“However, I expressed misgivings about its continued usefulness, in view of the fact that the complexity of corruption does not lend itself to efforts to reduce everything to a single figure and include it in an index.”

Vlassis said the Implementation Review Mechanism excluded the ranking of states as it has proved that such rankings may be counter-productive.

Countries, he added, should compare themselves only to themselves and not to others, as there were numerous nuances in the implementation of the convention.

He also said he did not have a meeting with Najib and merely shook the prime minister’s hand on the podium during the opening of the conference, where he spoke before Najib did.

“At the press conference, I said that in all anti-corruption efforts, in both the public and private sectors, the tone from the top was key and that Najib’s presence at the opening of the conference carried symbolic significance,” Vlassis added.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 17 October 2012, 10:28 am and is filed under
Corruption
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


UNODC clarification that it was not passing judgment about corruption in Malaysia welcome especially as  MACC’s credibility at lowest ebb after pre-IAACA and post-IAACA blows

I welcome the  clarification by the chief of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)’s corruption and economic crime branch, Dmitra Vlassis to dispel perceptions that at the recent 6th International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA) Conference and General Meeting, he was commending and passing judgment about the Malaysian government’s efforts to fight corruption.

I had issued a statement last week questioning news reports about his commending the Malaysian Government for its “serious efforts” in fighting corruption.

I had pointed out at the time that anti-corruption campaigners in Malaysia had been horrified by such a commendation as “they regard this as a major blow by the United Nations anti-corruption agency undermining their efforts to get the Najib government to have the political will to really walk the talk to fight corruption, in particular ‘Grand Corruption’  involving VVIPs, especially top political and public personalities”.

I had also said:

“Furthermore, they are mystified as to how the Malaysian government could merit praise for its anti-corruption efforts when from the 17-year history of Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI), Malaysia’s ranking and score for 2011 on both counts is lowest on record – ranking No. 60 and score of 4.3 when in 1995 Malaysia was ranked No. 23 and attained a score of 5.32 in 1996.

“In simple terms, TI CPI 2011 underlined the brutal fact that corruption in Malaysia under Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is worse and more intractable than at any time under his predecessors, whether the five years under Tun Abdullah or the 22 years under Tun Mahathir.”

In his clarification on what he had said at a press conference during the IAACA gathering, Vlassis said:

“Unfortunately, some of my comments and responses during this press conference were misunderstood or taken out of context. Consequently, they were misinterpreted and may have created erroneous impressions.”

Vlassis said he was asked about corruption in Malaysia. He said:

“I responded that I was not in a position to pass judgment on the matter because it was beyond my mandate and, therefore, inappropriate to evaluate a country’s performance.”

I welcome Vlassis’ clarification that he was not passing judgment on corruption in Malaysia.

I want to make it very clear that I am not saying that Vlassis or any UN or international anti-corruption body or officer  should not pass judgment or evaluate Malaysia’s anti-corruption efforts, but such judgment or evaluation must stand up to public scrutiny and examination.

Even without referring to Malaysia’s current worst ranking and score in the 17-year history of Transparency International Corruption Perception Index, it is completely unthinkable that any rational or right-thinking person could praise Malaysia’s anti-corruption record regardless of what criteria is used for the evaluation.

In fact, the credibility of MACC has sunk to  its lowest ebb after suffering fatal pre-IAACA and post-IAACA blows.

The thousand-odd “movers and shakers” of the world-wide anti-corruption battle  who attended the 6th IAACA Conference comprising prosecutors, investigators, ex-judges and experts with experience in anti-corruption research and practice cannot be unaware that they were meeting under the most embarrassing circumstances for the host country and organisation.

This was because the 6th IAACA Confrerence  was held two days after the highly-publicised syariah case where the Sarawak Chief Minister, Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud was described by his former daughter-in-law, Shahnaz Abdul Majid, as the richest person in Malaysia and possibly in South East Asia, and that her former husband Abu Bekir Taib was worth in excess of RM1 billion, with 111 accounts world wide with deposits worth an estimated RM700 million.

Three weeks before the 6th IAACA Conference, the Swiss-based NGO Bruno Manser Fund (BMF) dropped a  “bomb” when it released in Brussels a report which estimated Taib’s family assets at US$21 billion (RM64 billion) and that of the wealth of Taib himself at US$15 billion (RM46 billion).

There can be no doubt that for the thousand-odd participants at the 6th IAACA, the chief topic in their off-conference chats and conversations would not be any official item on the IAACA agenda, but the impotence of the host organization – the MACC – highlighted by the BMF revelation of Taib’s fabulous fortunes in his three decades as Sarawak Chief Minister and the Prime Minister’s “hands off” warning to MACC when Datuk Seri Najib Razak issued a clear directive not to entertain probes and questions about the BMF report.

As if the Sarawak Chief Minister’s immunity from accountability for his fabulous wealth  is not enough to demolish MACC’s credibility and expose its impotence in combating “grand corruption”, MACC suffered an immediate post-IAACA blow when Parliament was told that the RM40 million cash in Singapore currency a Sabah businessman was caught with in trying to smuggle into Malaysia from Hong Kong in August 2008  were political contributions to Sabah  Umno and not for Chief Minister Musa Aman and that “no element of corruption was proven”.

This is why I said in Parliament during the debate on the  2013 Budget that MACC and Najib administration have not been able to pass  the “test of the trio” in the battle against “grand corruption” – referring to serious allegations of corruption against the Chief Ministers of Sarawak and Sabah as well as the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail.

In the circumstances,  the clarification by Vlassis, the  UNODC corruption branch chief that he was not passing judgment about Malaysia’s anti-corruption efforts is most wise and  timely as otherwise the international body will be dragged down and itself lose credibility in the eyes of Malaysians and anti-corruption campaigners in Malaysia and the world.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 17 October 2012, 5:17 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Priority is to break back of worsening problem of Indian youth gangsterism with a high-powered Commission of Inquiry to highlight that it is a national problem

This Parliamentary Roundtable on Indian youth gangsterism is most pertinent and timely, not only because  the problem has become even more acute and serious in recent years but also because it  has been two-decades in the making.

I remember  that twenty years ago in April 1992, I had devoted my speech in the debate on the Royal Address in Parliament calling on the government to hear the cry of despair and hopelessness of the Malaysian Indians so as to address the fundamental problems confronting nation-building in Malaysia.

I had spoken of the growing sense of deprivation of the Malaysian Indians, who felt that the government had not been able to do much to improve the plight of the Malaysian Indian estate workers in particular and the Malaysian Indians in general.

For the increasingly displaced and alienated Indian estate workers, the alternative they faced in moving out of the estates was low-productivity jobs in the urban areas – which launched them on  the vicious socio-economic cycle resulting in the very serious phenomenon of Indian youth gangsterism today, aggravated by poverty and long-standing socio-economic and educational marginalisation and discrimination.

The  problem of Indian youth gangsterism has worsened in the past few years, underlined  by the fact that the crime rate and the criminal involvement of Indian youths are  completely out of proportion with their numbers and Indian percentage in the multi-racial Malaysian population.

We must aim at a  two-prong major breakthrough to this problem, viz:

•	Firstly, to convince all stakeholders and power-holders in the country that this is not just an Indian problem but a national problem; and

•	Secondly, to break the back of the worsening problem of Indian youth gangsterism which needs a holistic approach involving socio-economic and educational dimensions.

Towards this objective, I would propose that the government set up a high-powered Commission of Inquiry, involving all sectors of Malaysian society, to highlight the causes and solutions to the problem as the first step to break the back of this worsening problem of Indian youth gangsterism in our country.

(Remarks by DAP Parliamentary Leader and MP for Ipoh Timor Lim Kit Siang at the Parliamentary Roundtable on Indian youth gangsterism held at Parliament House on Thursday, 18th October 2012)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 18 October 2012, 3:15 pm and is filed under
Indians
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The happiest PM in the world

Mariam Mokhtar

Malaysiakini

Oct 15, 2012

The Tunku once described himself as “the happiest prime minister” when he was interviewed in 1983, by Peter Hastings, the foreign editor of the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH).

Today, as we read about Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, and the tactics used against the rakyat, NGOs, civil liberty groups and the opposition, we see a man who resorts to foul play, even breaking the law if necessary, to prolong his political career and that of his party, Umno.

Perhaps, what the Tunku possessed and what his successors lack is a sense of humour. Behind the calm purpose of his jokes, Tunku was able to show his spirit of tolerance.

Tunku laughed when Hastings reminded him of the time an Islamic group had sought the Tunku’s support for adulterers to be stoned to death and he had replied: “There are not enough stones in Malaysia.”

In his biography, ‘Tunku: His Life and Times’, the Tunku is described as looking resplendent in his morning coat and top hat, when he posed with Think Big, the race horse which won the Melbourne Cup in 1975. Just before he went up to receive the winner’s trophy, Tunku swopped his top hat for a black songkok and as the cup was placed in his hands, said: “I thank God for our victory”, a phrase which he repeated later that night at the Victory Cup Ball.

Those who knew Tunku would remember that most of his dinners ended-up on the dance-floor. He revived the Ronggeng (a Malay dance) and foreign dignitaries were invited to dance with their Malay hostesses. With this method, he succeeded in diplomacy, both foreign and domestic, something which would be impossible to replicate in today’s intolerant Malaysia.

The current crop of Malay leaders would never dare emulate Tunku by pursuing their hobbies openly, or even attribute gambling successes to God. They’d rather lie, for the sake of political expediency.

Many Malays of today are two-faced. The pious façade they present to the public is only to advance themselves in politics or to gain commercial advantage. It is widely known that prominent Malays including high-ranking members of the civil service, including the judiciary and police, have private poker sessions. The only time they don’t hide from the public eye, is when they are abroad.

So, why is gaming in casinos and betting on horses prohibited, but corruption allowed? Why should politicians be allowed to play Russian roulette with taxpayer’s money but individual Malays prevented from gambling with their own money?

In the SMH interview, Tunku was asked his views on the Look East policy of the prime minister of the time, Mahathir Mohamad. Tunku said: “Look east? Why should I? I have always liked to look in all directions.”

‘I like people to be happy’

At a birthday party in Kuala Lumpur in 1987, Tunku abandoned his prepared text and towards the end of his speech repeated his scorn for Mahathir: “Whether we look East or West, we shall always be friends with England.”

Tunku told Hastings (SMH) about the influence of the Islamic traditionalists and drinking mores of the Malaysian politicians of the 80s: “It is changing. I used to provide scotch, brandy and champagne at my banquets. The people did not mind. They are tolerant, but Tun Razak, my successor, never liked it. He feared the political consequences. I like people to be happy.”

The Tunku comes across as a normal human being, one the rakyat feels comfortable with. He did not hide behind the veil of hypocrisy, unlike his successors.

Perhaps, the Tunku’s “what you see is what you get” attitude endeared him to the public, rather than the sham public face which many of his successors wear.

When Tunku was advised to stop drinking alcohol at one of the earlier Umno meetings, he said:  “People must accept me as I am: my bad habits and my virtues. At the age of 48, I cannot change them.”

Like other prominent Malay families, Tunku sent his daughter to study as a boarder at the Light Street Convent in Penang. Today, church halls have to remove crucifixes and other emblems of Christianity when Umno leaders are present. Umno expects people of other faiths to respect Muslims and Islam, but thinks nothing of trampling on the rights of other faiths, or accusing them of taking over the country, simply to rile the Malays.

Mahathir exploited the vulnerability of the Malays and gave the Umno Malays legal protection, in the same way that wildlife organisations protect endangered plants and animals. Mahathir made it an offence for anyone to threaten the Umno Malays by changing the environmental, or other parameters, in which the Umno Malays would thrive.

Two weeks ago, Najib argued that successful Malaysian women risked making men “an endangered species”. He is wrong. What he meant was that Umno Malays are the world’s most protected species.

Didn’t Mahathir and Najib learn in school, that if you take an animal from the wild and domesticate it, the animal soon forgets to fend for itself?

Bred in captivity

Successive generations of Umno Malays have been bred in captivity and have become dependent on the food from their keeper. If released into their natural settings, Umno Malays will die. Like most caged animals, they have become lazy and obese. Their mental processes deteriorate because they lack the stimuli necessary for survival. Umno Malays could be weaned off their bad habits, but Umno will never allow that to happen.

If the zookeepers (Umno leaders) have no animals (Umno Malays) to take care of, then they are out of a job.

In today’s Malaysia, the fund for maintaining the Umno zoo is running low. The keepers have siphoned off most of the takings from the zoo. With food stocks running low, portions are small and feeding is erratic. The animals are distressed. They have been used to large meals, at any time of day, not just at feeding times.

These are dangerous times. The animals are waiting to pounce. One wrong move and the keeper becomes their next meal. Those of us watching from outside the cage would then be happiest. If Umno Malays refuse to be mentally liberated now, they run the risk of extinction.

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a non-conformist traditionalist from Perak, a bucket chemist and an armchair eco-warrior. In ‘real-speak’, this translates into that she comes from Ipoh, values change but respects culture, is a petroleum chemist and also an environmental pollution-control scientist.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 18 October 2012, 8:01 am and is filed under
Mahathir
,
Mariam Mokhtar
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call to extend deadline for consultation on education blueprint

By CPI

Oct 19, 2012

The Centre for Policy Initiatives urges leaders from both sides of the political divide to pay heed to the urgent concerns expressed by educationists and civil society organizations with regard to the National Educational Blueprint 2013-2025.

Since its release more than a month ago on Sept 12, the blueprint has drawn markedly little response from our politicians either those in Barisan Nasional or in Pakatan Rakyat who are supposedly representing the interests of the stakeholders.

This lack of response is inexplicable and irresponsible given the importance of education to the future of our young generation and our national interest.

There is a genuine fear by Gerakan Bertindak Malaysia – a non-political, multiracial and multi-religious coalition of over 25 NGOs including CPI – that this blueprint will be hastily finalized before its many weaknesses are fully discussed and ironed out.

We share GBM’s view that the current deadline of October 2012 for the blueprint implementation is too short notice for public scrutiny of a plan that attempts to undo the damage inflicted on our education system over the past three decades and that will be in force for the next 12 years.

Extension of the period of public consultation and feedback must also be accompanied by the disclosure of key expert inputs and research data that have so far been denied to the public for reasons that cannot be justified.

As one example, the Parent Action Group for Education (PAGE) has advocated for the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics and Science in English (PPSMI) to be continued as an option for interested students.

Like the issue of the vernacular school stream, PPSMI is similarly excluded from the blueprint.

A decision by the Education Ministry to decisively shut the door to further appeals prompted Dr Anwar Hassan, PAGE Ipoh chapter coordinator, to suggest that if at the end of the day the cabinet refuses to budge on PPSMI and expanded English coverage, “concerned parents have no option but to look after the needs of their children on their own initiative and means. Those who can afford it will certainly opt for international schools or go abroad”.

What then about parents who cannot afford to pay for private tuition or other alternatives and remain captive to the public school system? Contentious issues such as PPSMI are yet to be brought to a satisfactory conclusion via the blueprint.

The onus is on our politicians to step up to the plate to bring the necessary discussion into the public domain. For the sake of transparency and accountability, the blueprint submissions to the Education Ministry by the academic and professional panels must be released to the public in the same way that the civil society organizations have made their memoranda and recommendations on education accessible to all.

The current Parliamentary sitting provides the opportunity for a bi-partisan push from BN and PR politicians to depart from their normal political affiliation and to speak out as parents and members of a larger community of Malaysians determined to ensure the best educational system for our young.

We hope that they will rise to the occasion by a consensus decision requiring the Ministry of Education to extend the period of public consultation and delay the implementation of key contentious policies contained in the blueprint.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 October 2012, 10:43 pm and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MCA: After Mega Dinner, Mega Disaster Awaiting

By Koon Yew Yin

It was reported in the Star that several thousand people attended the mega dinner in the Ipoh Stadium, organised by the Perak MCA on 14 October. In his speech, Dr Chua Soi Lek, the MCA President, urged the guests to vote for the Barisan National because it had established a solid foundation dating back to independence. He also said that DAP would not be able to defend the Chinese even if Pakatan Rakyat took over power because it is subservient to PAS and Parti Keadilan.

At the function, Dr Chua presented RM 500,000 to 44 Chinese primary schools and 6 national type secondary schools or Rm 10,000 for each school.

Various thoughts come to my mind on reading the report of the mega dinner. One is of disbelief that the MCA leaders can stoop so low in using public funds for Chinese education in their attempt to win a few seats in the coming elections. But we should not be surprised especially when we look at MCA’s track record in the 2008 general election in Perak where they won only one state and three parliamentary seats.

A Chairman of one of the Chinese schools told me that he did not attend the dinner because he did not want to appear so stupid as to accept the Rm 10,000 bribe to vote for the MCA. Learning from the senior partner, electoral bribery appears to be the main item in the standard operating procedure manual of MCA for the coming election. But unlike UMNO in the Peninsula, and Taib and Musa Aman in Sarawak and Sabah who have billions in their political slush funds, MCA can only throw out crumbs – such is the party’s impotency and poor standing in the BN and governmental system.

MCA: See No Evil, Speak No Evil, Hear no Evil

With regard to Dr Chua’s statement that DAP is subservient to PAS and PKR, it is necessary to remind MCA supporters that almost every act of the Perak Pakatan Rakyat administration before BN unfairly regained control, was criticised by the Malaysian mainstream press, especially by Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian.  Chinese readers of the Malay papers and media will be familiar – and must be thoroughly disgusted – with the racist campaign of hate and poison poured out on a daily basis by UMNO, the MCA’s partner, which owns the mainstream Malay papers. Now what has the MCA to say about Utusan’s lies and dirty reporting – nothing!  The silence of the MCA in response to the racist brainwashing engaged in by UMNO speaks volumes about the low quality and lack of backbone of the MCA’s leaders – past and present.

We now see that the Malays are being peddled the line that the Pakatan Rakyat is selling out to the non-Malays and that there is a Christian plot to take over the country.  These dirty tricks and political spinning have not only continued but have gotten worse. Increasingly racial and religious extremist sentiments are coming to the forefront which all of us need to condemn if our country’s social fabric is not to be torn apart.  But does the MCA dare to speak out?  No, instead it is a party to these dirty tactics.

National Education: Monumental MCA Failing

It is pathetic to see the MCA going round the country and throwing out crumbs to the Chinese schools.  During the past 50 years, not only has MCA failed Chinese education dismally but it has also been a leading partner in the decline of our national school system.  Today our national schools are characterized by regressive language and religious dogmas, dismal performance, low standards and unemployable products.  No middle or upper middle class parent – whether Chinese, Malay, Indian or from any community – would want to have their young children schooled in the sekolah rendah kebangsaan and sekolah menegah if they can help it.

This national disgrace has the MCA as one of its leading players. The party has held the Deputy Minister of Education portfolio for umpteen years. Can the MCA point to any educational innovation that it has introduced? Can the MCA point to any educational policy of merit, fairness, and tolerance that it has been responsible for since independence?

The Chinese Deputy Minister of Education or Dr. Chua may be good at giving speeches to Chinese schools and giving out chicken feed funds but when it comes to helping determine the course of national educational policy in key areas, their position is more like that of the office boy.

Let’s take the National Education Blueprint report.  Now what is the MCA to say about the establishment of the matriculation college system which has discriminated against the deserving non-Bumiputeras. Malaysian public universities offer a one-year matriculation programme. These courses have largely catered to the Bumiputera population and are deemed as having a much lower standard, qualifying criteria and final examination requirement for entry into university. This situation is in contrast to that which non-Bumiputera students face as they are required to sit for the much tougher two-year STPM in Form 6. Now how did this system come about if the MCA has not been a willing accessory to the educational discrimination and injustice.

A Fair National Policy: What has MCA Done?

Many Malaysians, including myself, fully support the policy that attention should be given to the educational needs of the underprivileged in society, with appropriate consideration and greater weight to those in the poorer rural-based Bumiputera (Malays and non-Malay Bumiputera) community. However, the needs of deserving non-Malays should also be treated fairly and equally.

For example, information on awards should be publicly disclosed and widely disseminated. The government’s scholarship policy tacitly endorsed by the MCA has been indiscriminately applied to favour of the well to do from one community. Without proper checks and balances, it has had a crippling effect on Malaysian parents and their children, and this includes many poorer Malays.

But I suspect MCA leaders do not care about this and other flaws in our education system. After all, their children are not studying in the local Chinese schools that are receiving a pittance in government aid but studying abroad in expensive private schools and universities – many at tax payers’ expense.

This is why I, and many of my friends, am of the opinion that a mega-disaster is awaiting for the MCA in the coming elections.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 October 2012, 1:51 pm and is filed under
Education
,
MCA
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Nazri tying himself up in contradictions when he said it was HK’s ICAC and not MACC which cleared Musa Aman of corruption in the RM40 million “smuggled” cash from Hong Kong

The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz has tied himself up in contradictions when he said in Parliament yesterday  that it was Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) and not the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) which cleared the Sabah Chief Minister, Datuk Seri Musa Aman of corruption in the case of RM40 million “smuggled” cash from Hong Kong in August 2008.

In answer to supplementary question by the DAP MP for Cheras, Tan Kok Wai, Nazri said in Parliament yesterday:

“Yang Berhormat bercakap tentang wang yang dibawa masuk daripada Hong Kong. Saya hendak sebut di sini itu bahawa siasatan yang dijalankan bukan daripada SPRM. Siasatan dijalankan oleh ICAC iaitu Hong Kong yang terkenal dengan penyiasatan without fear or favor. ICAC telah pun menyatakan itu bahawa tidak ada kes rasuah di sini. Soal sumbangan kepada mana-mana pertubuhan pun tidak ada kesalahan. Kalau macam mana-mana parti pun hendak menerima wang tidak ada kesalahan, boleh terima orang hendak sumbang bagilah, apa salahnya.”

However, Nazri gave a very different story in his written answer on the same subject to the PKR MP for Batu, Chua Tian Chan last week, viz:

1.	Untuk makluman Dewan yang mulia ini, Jabatan Peguam Negara telah meneliti dan mempertimbangkan keterangan yang dikemukakan oleh SPRM dan memutuskan bahawa elemen perbuatan rasuah tidak dibuktikan. Dana tersebut ialah sumbangan yang dibuat kepada Badan Perhubungan UMNO Sabah dan bukannya untuk tujuan persendirian Ketua Menteri.

2.	Pada masa yang sama kes tersebut telah turut disiasat oleh Independent Commission Against Corruption Hong Kong (ICAC). Berdasarkan siasatan ICAC berkaitan kes ini dan keputusan siasatan SPRM yang tersebut diatas, ICAC juga tidak mengambil apa-apa tindakan lanjut.

3.	Mengenai kes yang turut difailkan di Mahkamah Switzerland,  ia merupakan permohonan Bantuan Bersama dalam Perkara Jenayah (MACMA) oleh ICAC bagi tujuan menyiasat perkara yang sama. Permohonan MACMA ini juga telah ditarik balik atas alasan yang sama yang dinyatakan diatas.

From Nazri’s written answer last week, one can conclude the following with regard to the case of the RM40 million cash in Singapore currency in his luggage which Sabah businessman Michael Chia had tried to smuggle out of Hong Kong International Airport on August 14, 2008:

1.	That it was the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail who, based on investigation papers submitted to him, decided that “no element of corruption was proven” and not Hong Kong’s ICAC.

2.	Although the ICAC also carried out its own investigations, it was based on the  decision of the Malaysian Attorney-General that MACC investigations showed “no element of corruption” that the ICAC did not carry out any further action – which is very different from what Nazri said yesterday, that it was the ICAC which cleared Musa of corruption and the MACC followed suit!

3.	That it was based on the Attorney-General’s decision of  “no element of corruption was proven” that ICAC withdrew its request to the Swiss authorities requesting co-operation in a “criminal matter” which had been lodged over a Swiss bank account.

Many questions cry out for answer on the RM40 million “smuggled” cash from Hong Kong to Malaysia, ending up as “donation to Sabah UMNO”, which Nazri should clear in Parliament on Monday during the committee stage of the 2013 budget debate on the Prime Minister’s Department, including:

Firstly, when did the MACC submit its investigation papers on the RM40 million “smuggled” cash to the Attorney-General? When did the Attorney-General decide that “no element of corruption was proven” and to close the file?  Was the MACC in full agreement with the Attorney-General that there was “no element of corruption” in the case, and if so, when did the MACC on its own arrive at such a conclusion?

Furthermore,  how can the instruction of the MACC Operations Evaluation Panel at its meeting in May to the MACC to collect further evidence against the Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman before proceeding to prosecution square with the Attorney-General’s  finding of “no element of corruption proven” against Musa Aman in the RM40 million “smuggled” cash from Hong Kong?

The instruction of the MACC Evaluation Panel to the MACC at its May meeting in connection with MACC investigations into corruption allegations against  Musa Aman was only publicly revealed early this month by the MACC deputy chief commissioner (operations) Mohd Shukri Abdul, as reported by Malaysiakini in “Anti-graft panel wants more evidence against Sabah CM”.

Can one infer  that until early this month, MACC was not aware that the Attorney-General had decided that “no element of corruption was proven” against Musa Aman?

Secondly, when was Hong Kong’s ICAC informed of the Attorney-General’s decision of “no element of corruption” in Michael Chia’s RM40 million “smuggled” cash case and when did ICAC withdraw its application to the Swiss authorities requesting co-operation in serious money-laundering allegations against UBS, Switzerland’s largest bank, following reported disclosure of a series of documents linking Aman Musa  to secret UBS bank accounts in Hong Kong and Zurich?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 October 2012, 2:30 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Privatising power – in the people’s interest?

By
Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah
 | 12:52PM Oct 18, 2012

Malaysiakini

COMMENT I have chosen this subject because the privatisation of power, as an economic policy, is a reflection of a fundamental change in our political economy which will have a significant impact on the future of our economy.

In the 1990s, following the lead of the Reagan and Margaret Thatcher policies of encouraging privatisation as an economic policy, it had a very significant impact on Malaysia’s political economy (I have explained this in my speech on Feb 16 at the Selangor Club).

It shifted the role of government as a guardian of public good which has been institutionalised in various public bodies like the Tenaga Nasional Berhad, to private corporations of selected companies.

Prior to the privatisation of power, there were some disturbing events, which shifted the focus of the people through the help of the media in understanding the economic realities and the needs of power for the purposes of the economic development of the country.

I have in mind, particularly, the massive blackouts that preceded the privatisation. There was extensive media coverage, followed by public concern, to the reasons for this extraordinary happening. Unfortunately, there has never been an inquiry to explain. Be that as it may, in the public mind, the privatisation of TNB as a sole supplier of this essential public good was given a justification.

There has been no public debate as to whether the privatisation of the power needs of the nation is in the interest of the people and nation. However, the consequence of the privatisation of power, particularly the surplus of capacity of 50 percent reflects a certain urgency in rethinking the wisdom of some of the policies with regard to privatisation of power.

As a matter of fact, I think one needs to get the terminologies correct in understanding the significance of the privatisation of power. I’m particularly referring to the term ‘independent power producers’.

The economic reality of the privatisation is that the terminology does not explain enough because the reality is that they are private power producers rather than independent power producers. As private power producers our understanding of their role in the economy and the overall public policy becomes clearer.

Therefore, I would prefer to use ‘private power producers’ rather than ‘independent power producers’ by way of explaining the shift from institutional private good to private power producers. I shall use both terms interchangeably.

Revisiting the power deal

There were five successful private power producers who benefited from the privatisation policy. None of these private power producers had any previous experience in producing power. But what was common to all the successful investors was that they were well politically connected. All the five successful private power projects were gas fuel sourced from domestic natural gas resources supplied by Petronas.

The financing for the private power production was completely domestic, with the EPF playing a key role in providing and acquiring of the bonds that were issued to finance the project. It is said that the five consortiums in the first wave of the investments were guaranteed a return of 20 percent but that their actual returns were even higher.

The significance of this in relation to the overall economy and its effect on the disposable income of the people is yet to be quantified to understand the impact of privatisation of power under the terms of the agreements.

The Power Purchase Agreements signed between TNB and the private power producers (IPPs) are agreements which have been declared to be official secrets and as such are not available for public scrutiny to understand the implications it will have on the economy and the people in the short term and in the long term.

There have been calls for transparency of these Power Purchase Agreements without success. There are many public policy ramifications in considering these Power Purchase Agreements as official secrets. But there are certain significant factors which we can consider.

What is known is that the agreements are of a long-term nature on a “take or pay or fix charge” basis which is imposed on the TNB to pay regardless of whether the power generation capacity is utilised optimally.

With regard to this first generation agreement it appears that the fuel cost risk will be borne entirely by TNB and the terms of Power Purchase Agreements strongly favour the private power producers. Its implications on the economy and the cost of living seem to be ignored. It is reported that the unit cost of electricity purchased from the private power producers is in some cases nearly double TNB’s own generation cost.

The Power Purchase Agreements seem to be influenced by political considerations that are shrouded by the Official Secrets Act. However, the government maintains a golden share in TNB. The significance of it is yet to be seen in terms of its influence in the overall strategy of our economy and the cost of living on the public.

Bakun’s story of failure

One of the IPP projects was the Bakun Hydropower dam project, expected to generate 2,400MW and provide electricity supply to peninsular Malaysia from Sarawak through undersea cables. The project was originally awarded in 1994 to a Sarawakian timber tycoon who did not have any prior experience in dam construction.

 Vast tracts of forest were already cleared of timber and natives were moved from their native customary homes when the Asian financial crisis struck, causing the project to be shelved. Compensation reportedly in the region of a billion ringgit was paid to the concessionaire. The project has been subsequently revived, incurring massive cost overruns.

Today there is a lack of clarity as to whether the original goal of the dam to supply electricity to the peninsula will be realised, and if so, at what cost, both financial and environmental. The Bakun dam was included in Transparency International’s Monuments of Corruption Global Corruption Report 2005.

As TNB is required to purchase a pre-determined amount from the IPPs at fixed costs, when demand falls, as was the case during the 1998 economic crises, TNB faced overproduction and had to put a stop to its own power generating plant, resulting in both inefficiency and loss of profitability.

Additionally, “a higher than necessary cost of power resulted in financial losses to the government controlled utility, higher prices to consumers, and arguably an inefficient allocation of society’s resources”. Against this however is the fact that “timely expensive power is a far superior outcome than blackouts that discourage FDI and domestic investment and stunt economic growth”.

Whilst this is arguably true, the type of FDI that is attracted should also be considered. For example, with Bakun, the power is expected to be used in aluminium smelting plants. Apart from the numerous environmental concerns this poses, this arguably fails to fit into our plans of becoming developed by 2020, a high income nation with skilled workers. Aluminium smelting is considered a sunset industry in many developed countries.

Questions to ask

In light of the increase in electricity tariff to the consumer (average 7 percent) resulting from gradual reduction of fuel subsidy amidst an increase in global fuel prices, and potential future tariff increases, it is to be studied:

a) The impact on the economy especially in terms of the direct and indirect inflationary pressures this presents;

b) The impact in terms of purchasing power to different segments of the Malaysian society;

c) Is this the appropriate time to remove subsidies when the global economic pressures are already resulting in inflationary pressures in the country, or are there other concerns such as the high electricity supply reserve margin or leakages due to corruption/patronage that should be addressed first to remove the shortfall in finances?

d) What would be an adequate reserve capacity? What are the costs/benefits of operating at the present considerably high reserve capacity and is it feasible to continue this in the future? Are there special circumstances in Malaysia that warrant this high reserve capacity which incurs both capital and operating costs?

e) How should the additional profits that Petronas makes with the subsidy removal be invested for the national interest?

f) Can this tariff increase be assuaged by the proposed Feed-in-Tariff for renewable energy and if so to what extent?

g) Do the circumstances of this increase present opportunities which the nation should seize, for example, to move towards cleaner electricity production and efficiency in electricity use as well as reduction in wasteful spending/consumption?

Is enough being done to optimise this, and what are the expected positive outcomes? It is encouraging to see that Malaysia is one of the six Asean countries that have agreed that member countries should use peak demand management measures to cope with the up-trend in regional power consumption.

Measures that have been employed in other countries include providing “subsidies to industries and businesses that use electricity during off-peak hours so as to reduce the government’s massive financial burden of having to invest in power-reserve capacities”. What are the measures that Malaysia is considering to manage peak electricity demand?

h) Is the tariff increase expected to contribute towards achieving Malaysia’s aspiration of reducing carbon emissions intensity of GDP by up to 40 percent of 2005 levels by 2020 as announced by YAB the prime minister in 2009? If so, what is its anticipated impact?

i) How would coal prices be affected by the rise in oil and gas prices? There appears to have been a “sympathetic” increase in coal prices already, should this trend continue, would the public be subjected to further tariff rises given the move towards coal making up a greater portion of the energy mix under the fuel diversification policies? Would this be in line with the country’s carbon emission reduction aspiration?

Poor planning

In order to answer at least some if not all these questions comprehensively, a transparent analysis of what has occurred in the past in terms of the IPP agreements is required. Such an analysis is expected to show:

a) If there was an incremental cost to TNB as a result of the IPP agreements and if this was reasonable or excessive. If excessive, what proportion of this cost was passed on to the consumers? In other words, could the nation have enjoyed the same tariffs with gas subsidies being lower if TNB was not burdened with these excessive incremental costs?

b) If there was an incremental cost, was it justified? For example, was this an appropriate price to pay for power supply security and hence reasonable?

c) What was the analysis conducted to warrant the high reserve margin of about 40 percent and what analysis in terms of scenario planning and cost/benefit analysis was undertaken to justify this high reserve? In other words, was such a high reserve planned for, in which case what is its justification?

Or, could better planning, have enabled TNB to lower operational costs and hence electricity tariffs? It is interesting to note that neighbouring countries like Thailand operate at reserves of around 22 percent which is already considered relatively high .

In other words, how much savings would TNB have made without being encumbered with payments for this high reserve margin? Would it have made a difference if TNB was not obligated with contractual payments to IPPS, partly as a result of this high reserve capacity, or would the costs of potential electricity supply uncertainty outweighed any such savings?

d) What was the actual cost of encouraging consumers to use more electricity (to absorb the excess that TNB was obliged to pay for regardless of the reduction in demand) as was reported during the fall in demand during the Asian financial crisis? Subsidised gas would have been in a manner of speaking “wasted” to meet this artificial demand.

A related issue is to examine to what extent this oversupply of electricity and TNB’s payment obligations to the IPPs resulted in disincentives to promote electricity savings/efficiency even after the financial crisis ended, which in turn consumed more subsidised gas than necessary. Did this again give an inaccurate picture of electricity demand for the future which was then met by more capital costs being expended in building power plants?

e) To what extent did the IPPs, especially the first generation producers, benefit from the decision to allow IPPs into the business of power generation? What was the cost/benefit to the nation of operating on a closed private negotiations basis? Are accounts that despite being private sector players, the IPPs operations are not optimal and rely on the fuel price subsidy to mask their inefficiency justified?

f) What is the true cost/benefit of the Bakun dam project to the public? Who were the gainers, who were the losers, and what are the financial as well as other costs such as environmental, loss of native cultural rights, impact on ecological services? What are the benefits of this project?

g) Did we produce cheap energy for the right reasons? Have we formulated cohesive policies to ensure this? Were the benefits distributed equitably, particularly to benefit the lower income groups or did the rich receive a disproportionate size of the benefit?

Did we attract “good quality” FDI which brought rise in local income, technology and raised quality of life across different ‘income stratas or “bad quality” FDI which increased disparity in income, damaged the environment and quality of life and trapped us in the resource curse.

Keeping public in the loop

Taking an honest look at these issues will allow Malaysia to learn from the earlier experience in future undertakings and guide future decision making in managing and meeting electricity demand. Making the findings public will instill a much desired sense of confidence in the ability of the system to be accountable to the electorate.

This is especially so at a time when managing energy/electricity security is required to not only be met in a cost efficient manner, but also to effectively meet the challenge of depleting resources and limiting carbon emissions to address global warming.

In meeting our future electricity demands, an open and transparent tender process for future IPP arrangements is imperative. This will allow for more competitive pricing of electricity while also meeting requirements for clean, secure and sustainable energy sources.

Additionally, future arrangements with existing IPPs, especially those of the first generation should take into account the fact that they would have fully amortised their capital cost and already enjoyed considerably high profits. A relatively lower profit margin should therefore be negotiated with these IPPs in the interest of the nation, which could translate to unit cost savings for consumers.

Overall, Malaysia should take a holistic and integrated approach in planning for future electricity supply that includes not only security of supply at affordable costs, but also issues that affect development such as income distribution and sustainability as well as issues of growing concern such as environmental degradation and carbon emissions.

In achieving a robust framework within which this can be done, we must learn from the successes and mistakes of the past. Transparency and openness are critical elements in enabling us to do so.

____

This was a speech by RAZALEIGH HAMZAH titled ‘Privatisation of power and public policy’ in conjunction with the Datuk Seri Utama Dr Lim Chong Eu Lecture Series organised by the Penang Club yesterday.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 October 2012, 11:46 am and is filed under
Energy
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Choices Before Us – Emigration, Encampment or Engagement

By Thomas Fann

19.10.2012

I had an interesting conversation with a friend this week about some of the choices made by people we know.

Over dinner, my friend related to me about his brother who had worked and lived in France for many years and how he had decided to return to Malaysia for his retirement only to find out that his citizenship has been revoked.  He tried to appeal to the government but was turned down and he returned to France dejected.

He also related about his sister’s family who also wanted to return but after coming back for a holiday and looking over the socio-political environment and inequality here, changed their mind. My friend further told me that many people he knows are making plans to emigrate to Singapore or Australia.

It was a dinner conversation that left me with a heavy heart because I know that these are not isolated stories but all too common and true, attested to by statistics. For more numbers on immigrants and emigrants, Tindak Malaysia has done the homework for us and you can read about it
HERE
.

AN UNNECESSARY TRAGEDY

The economic and social impact from the loss of these citizens are hard to quantify empirically but it would be colossal in the long-term. We are not talking here just about the funds that would flow out with them but also with it their talents. Remember, most are migrating to countries like Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, etc, where migration criterias are stringent. In short, they would only accept the highly educated, most talented or wealthier from us.

It is a tragedy made worse because it shouldn’t be.

In my humble opinion, Malaysia is still one of the best countries to live in. Geographically, we are strategically located in one of the main shipping lanes of the world. Almost all our lands are fertile and arable. We are blessed with an abundance of both renewable and non-renewable natural resources. Our climate, though a little humid, is mostly stable and comfortable and relatively free from natural disasters like earthquakes, typhoons and floods that plague our neighbours regularly.

But all these endowments are pale in comparison to our greatest asset, our human resource. As a melting pot, with people from some of earth’s greatest civilizations here, we have all the right ingredients to forge a great people and make an impact on human history. But the cooks who are entrusted with cooking this great stew have messed it up for us big time. We have messed it up and people are leaving.

Maybe you are also one of those people who are re-considering your future with Malaysia, or at least the thought has crossed your mind. The way I look at it, we have three choices before us.

EMIGRATION

According to a World Bank Economic Monitor report in 2011, there are more than one million Malaysians living abroad and Singapore absorbed almost 57% or 570,000 of these. Ethnically these are mostly Chinese, though not exclusively. The reasons cited are poor governance and lack of meritocracy issues.  In short, they don’t see a future for themselves and their children to remain here and our loss is their gain. Some of our brightest are holding high office in Singapore and around the world.

Recognizing this loss, the government initiated a programme called Talent Corp to attract back those who have left by offering them various incentives to come back.  According to Talent Corp’s CEO Johan Mahmood Merican, the greater significance is that 200,000 of the one million Malaysians overseas are tertiary-educated.  Since there are about 2 million tertiary-educated Malaysians in the workforce here, that means one in ten of Malaysians who would otherwise be contributing to Malaysia are living abroad. Johan said. “And it warrants attention because we need this qualified and experienced group for our economic transformation.”

According to Talent Corp’s
press release
this year, a total of 1,192 Returning Expert Programme applications were approved since its inception 18 months ago.  While commendable, it is still a paltry number compared to the 200,000 who are still not returning.

Further, in 2010, Deputy Foreign Minister Senator A. Kohilan Pillay reported that 304,358 Malaysians had migrated from March 2008 till August 2009 compared with 139,696 Malaysians in 2007.

The fact remains that until we address the root causes for people to want to migrate away, the efforts of Talent Corp would gain little traction and the brain drain would continue to our detriment as a nation.

ENCAMPMENT

Another option we have if we are not planning to emigrate is to adopt an “encampment mentality”. We say to ourselves, “Why bother with what’s going on in this country? As long as my family and I are alright, that is all that matters.”

Perhaps this choice is the one chosen by most Malaysians today and who can blame them? After all, don’t we all want a good life for ourselves, free of hassle and concerns? We see inequalities, lack of opportunities and poor governance as road bumps or potholes on the road of life which we would try our best to circumnavigate by being tolerant, closing one eye and resigning to it. Life becomes bearable when we have such qualities and we can manage our blood pressure better by it.

We encamp around what we are comfortable with – social circles that share our language, values, religion and cultures.  We build for ourselves nice little “ghettoes” in our nation, where we feel at home with our own kind.

Today as we move around in our cities, we see such “ghettoes” where one would be forgiven, if you are an “outsider” you would feel like you have walked into a foreign land.  The Chinese have sections of cities and even whole towns where the Chinese culture and language are predominant.  Indians have their communities in every cities and towns as do the Malays and the other groups. Actually I hate to use such racial terms to describe ourselves but the fact is, we still see ourselves through such lenses.

The encampment is not confined to racial lines but also to social and faith-based lines. The English-speaking well-to-do crowd from all races get together in their country clubs, the Christians in their own church communities, the Sikhs around their gurdwaras, Muslims in their mosques, Indians in their temples and the poor in their inner city slums.

From a human social behaviour angle, the choice to encamp around what we are comfortable with is an instinctive one especially when one feels threatened and vulnerable. Herding together with our own kind gives us a sense of identity and strength, making life bearable and even enjoyable.

But this option not only doesn’t deal with the larger problem that exists, it adds to the problem in at least two ways.

Firstly, the problem of poor governance, corruption, injustices and inequalities remain and the people who profit from it continue to have a free rein perpetuating it. In their hearts (if they have one), they would say, “Please stay in your ghettoes, your churches, your temples, your country clubs, your kampungs and new villages, while we continue to plunder!”

Secondly, our ghettoes are a powder keg ready to explode one day. We grow farther and farther from each other, pursuing our own cultures, languages and religions. We have become strangers to each other and one day we will see each other as enemies. When the time comes, the same politicians who kept us apart will incite us to fight each other. It will happen, it’s just a matter when, not if.

We do not want to see an Arab Spring in our beautiful country, where the people are so desperate that they would be prepared to die for a morsel of freedom. And die they did. Will one day my children or grandchildren be as desperate as those Egyptians because of my choice to do nothing now?

ENGAGEMENT

There is another choice we can make and that is to actively engage the political process. There are people who say, “I am not interested in politics, it is not my cup of tea.”  Strange thing is, politics affect your daily life and the cup of tea you are drinking.

Instead of saying, “I am interested in politics”, I’d rather say, “I am interested in decisions made by politicians that would affect my well-being and that of my children.” How can we sit idly by while people elected by and paid by us are passing laws that curtail our freedom and future prospects?

Engagement or having a say in our future is not limited to voting in the General Elections but it can happen on a daily basis. Some of the ways we can engage the political process are:

●	Being well-informed of what politicians, government agencies and city councils are doing and whether they are doing their appointed jobs.

●	Highlighting issues, provide constructive suggestions and feedbacks.

●	If nothing is done and we are suffering the consequences of failures, we can take the matter further by going to the press, organising petitions, and even protestations.

●	Report to the relevant authorities any wrongdoings like corruption and abuse of power by government officials.

●	Supplement and complement the work of government by volunteering for social works like caring for the aged and handicapped, doing new voters registration and serving as polling agents on polling day.

●	Working together with lawmakers to craft laws that are consistent with the Federal Constitution and that address certain shortcomings in our society.  Just be aware that because they are YBs, they would know everything, they still need us.

UndiMsia has come out with a book called “Activating Malaysians: The D-I-Y Toolkit” which would be very helpful to Malaysians who choose engagement rather than emigration or encampment.  You can read a review of the book
HERE
.

CONCLUSION

The English writer Gilbert K. Chesterton said, “You cannot love a thing without wanting to fight for it.” All of us have the freedom to choose between emigration, encampment or engagement when it comes to our future in this nation. As for me and my household, we have chosen to stay and engage as much as we can with the political process as citizens because we know selfishly, that it would affect our lives.

Or maybe as Chesterton suggested, it is because we love this country and consider it our home and not just a guesthouse that we can stay or leave depending on the services we are getting.

Thomas Fann blogs at www.newmalaysia.org

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 October 2012, 11:25 pm and is filed under
Brain drain
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.