Would MCA Ministers and Deputy Ministers resign if Najib does not honour his Hulu Selangor by-election promise to issue RM3 million cheque today for building of new Rasa Chinese primary school?

The 1,725-vote majority victory of the Barisan Nasional in the Hulu Selangor parliamentary by-election yesterday is a pyrrhic  victory for the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak – so devastatingly costly both in political and monetary terms that they lay the seeds for the forthcoming defeat of the  Barisan Nasional.

The Barisan Nasional has a bill of over RM100 million for its Hulu Selangor by-election campaign – RM60 million for various infrastructure projects and easily more than RM40 million for the Barisan Nasional election campaigners and the many rent-a-crowd outings for the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and other Cabinet Ministers.

After such outpourings of money politics, the 1,725-vote majority is actually more a defeat than a victory for Najib and the Barisan Nasional.

The UMNO  target was to win Hulu Selangor with at least 6,000-vote majority and the Umno leadership was so confident of this huge victory  that the Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin went public on this Umno objective mid-day during Hulu Selangor polling yesterday.

The Umno leadership thought that it should not have any big problem, with the RM100 million war chest and the big guns led by the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and former Prime Minister, spearheading the charge in the campaign in Hulu Selangor.

Umno leaders regarded the PKR win of the Hulu Selangor parliamentary seat in the 2008 general election as a fluke-shot, which was why Najib talked about the Hulu Selangor seat being on “loan” to PKR.

In 2008, the three Barisan Nasional candidates in the three constituent State Assembly seats of Hulu Bernam, Batang Kali and Kuala Kubu Baru had polled a total majority of 6,176 votes, but at the Hulu Selangor parliamentary level, the BN candidate G. Palanivel lost the seat to the PKR candidate Datuk Zainal Abidin in a wafer-thin majority of 198 votes.

Palanivel secured 22,979 votes for the Hulu Selangor parliamentary seat, which is 3,285 votes less than the total of 26,264 votes cast for the three BN state assembly seats in 2008.

Najib and Muhyiddin calculated that they should be able to restore this 6,176-vote majority BN won at the level of the three state assembly seats in 2008, but the Hulu Selangor by-election results proved them wrong.

In the event, BN’s P. Kamalanathan secured 24,997 votes which is 1,267 votes less than the total of 26,264 votes collectively polled by the three winning BN State Assembly candidates in 2008.

On the other hand, Pakatan Rakyat’s Zaid Ibrahim polled  23,272 votes yesterday which is more than the vote polled by PKR parliamentary candidate in 2008, i.e. 23,177.

Despite all the odds, PR is making headway while BN is clearly losing ground. The future belongs to Pakatan Rakyat.

Najib said the Hulu Selangor by-election is a test for the MCA leadership, which clearly had failed the test as MCA is the biggest loser in the Barisan Nasional in the Hulu Selangor by-election.

In the 2008 “political tsunami”, MCA secured some 37% of the Chinese votes cast in Hulu Selangor but this has fallen to 25 – 28% in the by-election yesterday.

The immediate question facing the MCA is whether the MCA Ministers and Deputy Ministers would resign  if Najib does not honour his Hulu Selangor by-election promise to issue a RM3 million cheque today for the building of new Rasa Chinese primary school?

On the eve of the Hulu Selangor by-election, Najib made the campaign promise in Rasa on a RM3 million approval for rebuilding Rasa Chinese Primary School declaring:

“If we win this by-election, you can come to Kuala Lumpur the next day to look for me. I will write a personal letter to approve the money and it will be transferred to the school board’s account. If we lose, don’t have to come.”

I commend the voters of Rasa for turning in a 82.4% support for Zaid Ibrahim.

Malaysians are waiting to see whether Najib would honour his pledge to sign the RM3 million approval allocation to Rasa Chinese primary school today and if not, what would be the response of the MCA Ministers and Deputy Ministers as well as the MCA President Datuk Seri Dr. Chua Soi Lek.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 26 April 2010, 10:42 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Election
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan still on track to Putrajaya after Hulu Selangor

By
Kenny Gan

It was an intense hard fought by-election in a traditional Umno stronghold which many said was too close to call. BN’s Hulu Selangor campaign was as dirty and nasty as any other by-election and dirtier than most with the stakes seen as a referendum on Najib’s administration. BN fought mostly with character assassinations and money. Both sides also released strategically timed policies, land titles and grants although naturally PR could not match BN’s largess.

The campaign was fierce and furious with both sides throwing in their biggest guns with PR bringing in revered Tok Guru Nik Aziz to shore up Zaid’s Islamic credibility among the conservative Malays. The normally ignored Orang Asli were wooed by BN with parties, booze and cash and Felda settlers who were nursing grievances for decades suddenly found the sky raining with money and promises. Even Maika shareholders were buoyed by the strategically timed news that a buyout of their troubled investment is in the works.

In an uncharacteristic move for an incumbent prime minister which underscored how important this by-election is, Najib Razak himself joined the fray. The Election Commission also got into the act with a dubious transfer of 14,000 voters between polling stations, seen as a calculated move to cause confusion. Several hundred pro-opposition voters were also transferred outside the constituency and denied their right to vote.

When dust of battle had settled and the votes counted, it was BN which emerged victorious by a thin majority of 1725 votes in a voter turnout of slightly more than 48000. But if BN thinks that this by-election win means they have swept popular support away from PR, they are deluding themselves.

BN won only because of EC’s shenanigans and their win-at-any-cost tactics supported by wheelbarrows of money. Such questionable tactics would not be able to be repeated in a general election. Bribes are ineffective if there is a possibility of the bribe giver being kicked out of power.

Mid-term check in a BN stronghold

Hulu Selangor is a mixed parliamentary seat constituency with 54% Malay, 27% Chinese and 19% Indian voters and a traditional BN stronghold.

In 2008 BN won the three state seats under the Hulu Selangor parliament seat with convincing majorities. It lost the parliament seat by a whisker thin majority of 198 votes which is swamped by the 1466 spoilt votes. As this large number of spoilt votes can be seen as protest votes against an unpopular candidate by BN loyalists, this means that BN could have won in 2008 with a more popular candidate than G. Palanivel.

Hence it is fair to say that the 2008 tsunami did not upset the BN stronghold of Hulu Selangor. To defend this seat against BN is far harder than pro-opposition seats like Permatang Pauh or Penanti.

Hulu Selangor is an ideal mid-term check for PR. It is called a semi-rural constituency but is more rural than urban. The people are primarily concerned with bread and butter issues although they also have some grasp of national issues.

The mixed nature of this constituency is a good test of PR versus BN’s strength in mixed seats which will be the main battleground in the next general election. It is a test of whether Najib’s 1Malaysia has made any impact in mixed seats.

As the constituency is under Selangor it may be seen as a referendum on the performance of the PR state government for the past two years. It can also be seen as a referendum on Najib’s performance since taking the reins as prime minister.

However BN’s thin majority in their traditional stronghold despite fighting a no-holds-barred contest did not furnish the pointer that Najib wanted. If anything, it shows that support for PR is still strong. We must remember that BN goes into every election with tremendous advantages of money, machinery and media especially in a by-election where it can focus its resources. To think that only a mere 900 voters need change their votes to reverse the result is cold comfort although BN’s propaganda machine will go to town with this narrow victory.

A changed political landscape

It is worth noting that prior to 2008, BN could have won this mixed seat merely by putting up some posters. Mixed seats were considered safe seats for BN and recognizing this, the Election Commission created lots of mixed seats. The fact that BN had to fight tooth and nail with PR and used every dirty trick in the book with tons of money flowing shows how much the political landscape has changed since 2008.

BN’s narrow victory shows that the 2008 general election results was not a fluke brought about by temporary anger at BN. Just as a tsunami sweeps in and changes the landscape irreversibly what happened after the 2008 political tsunami is a sea change in mindset. This change in mindset is best exemplified by the loss in safe status of the mixed seats.

To maintain its hold on power in the face of blatant corruption and institutional abuse, Umno has traditionally depended on racial divide and rule tactics by playing on racial and religious fears. It was in the mixed seats that such tactics had been played to great advantage for BN. But the 12th general election has turned this on its head with voting across ethnic and religious lines for the first time and this trend is again affirmed in this by-election.

What this means is that voters now vote on democratic issues instead of fears of racial strife or unchecked Islamization. In the era of new politics they look at performance, policies, social justice, service delivery and whatever future hopes and expectations they have of the political parties. This is what a two party system is all about.

A coalition which represents all races is essential for success in mixed seats. Where previously only BN could claim to represent all races, the PR coalition comprising of PKR, DAP and PAS can lay an even stronger claim to multi-racialism. The rise of PKR as a true multi-racial party with a Malay spine is a nightmare come true for BN.

A rejection of 1Malaysia

It is clear that with the receding of racial and religious fears, BN has to find another strategy.  This came in the form of Najib’s 1Malaysia promoted incessantly by the mass media as a catchy slogan.

But 1Malaysia is an intractable contradiction to the race based underpinning of Umno and the concept of Malay special privileges which has been used as the basis for corralling Malay support. To provide a counterbalance to 1Malaysia for the Malays, Umno nurtured the swift rise of Perkasa to outsource its racial posturing. Meanwhile the

non-Malays are expected to return to the BN fold on the shady and vague promises of 1Malaysia.

For a true 1Malaysia, the slogan must be match by the reforming of racial policies especially race based economic policies to provide fairer opportunities and treatment to all races. But it goes without saying that Najib’s 1Malaysia will never be fleshed out but remain a hope and a promise to pull in the non-Malays. With 1Malaysia and Perkasa, Umno hopes to have its cake and eat it too.

The Hulu Selangor by-election result shows that the astute Chinese have rejected Najib’s slick slogan which is nothing more than an attempt to pull the wool over the people’s eyes. The Indians have returned moderately to BN’s fold could mean that the Hindraf factor has largely dissipated. The Indians are mainly concerned with bread and butter issues and PR will have to do more work to convince them that it represents a better future for them than BN.  They should also be educated that accepting BN’s gifts for votes is selling their future away.

The way forward: Can BN compete?

In a democratic competition with PR for the hearts and minds of the people there are certain areas where BN or specifically Umno can never reform despite loud proclamations to the contrary. Among them are corruption, abuse of public institutions and fair treatment of races.

As a party structured on the feudal system of patronage where largess are given for political loyalty, the use of public funds to fund the patronage will forever remain an essential feature of BN’s rule. The vehicle for siphoning of public funds may take the form of inflated negotiated contracts, anti-people sweetheart deals, crony privatization or allocation of national resources, licenses for rent seeking and unproductive projects and may be properly termed corruption.

To allow the corruption to continue public institutions such as the police, the MACC, the judiciary and the media must be co-opted and subjugated to serve interest of the ruling regime instead of the public.

An egalitarian society is not to BN’s interest as BN’s power depends on leveraging a racially polarized society. The race based parties whose raison d’etre depends on fighting for racial rights have no reason to exist in a racially egalitarian society. The use of a cheap slogan like 1Malaysia without any substance behind it does not convince the non-Malays.

BN is critically aware that its fate is tied to the economy. Rising cost of living against stagnated income does no favours for any ruling regime. However to lighten the people’s burden and boost the economy is yet another structural contradiction for BN.

Endemic corruption is ultimately passed to the man in the street and raises the cost of living. A profligate spending government has no choice but to reduce subsidies and increase taxes. Race based quotas and rent seeking activities impose inefficiencies on the economy and hamper its performance. They also lead to the flight of skilled human capital which further drags down the economy.

Hence we can conclude that BN is unable to compete with PR in the next couple years leading to the 13th general election. Time is not on the side of a decadent regime. As the years pass, more young voters join the ranks, the online media penetrates deeper, rural areas become more urbanized, the cost of living goes higher, corruption bites deeper, more scandals will be exposed and 1Malaysia rings hollower.

If PR can survive BN’s incessant attacks until the next general election it stands an excellent chance of wrestling Federal power from BN. Despite PR’s loss, the Hulu Selangor by-election result shows that PR is firmly on track to Putrajaya. –  Harakahdaily

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 27 April 2010, 10:10 am and is filed under
Election
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


When and why has MCA fallen so low with Chinese voter support for Barisan Nasional in Hulu Selangor plunging to 15% with Umno Secretary-General Tengku Adnan estimating that BN only secured the support of 22% of Chinese voters in the by-election?

The immediate reaction of the MCA President Datuk Seri  Dr. Chua Soi Lek to the Barisan Nasional’s win but MCA’s loss in the Hulu Selangor by-election on Sunday was that it should be a wake-up call for MCA leaders that the Chinese community is no longer just concerned with basic needs but about also national issues.

He said that the MCA would also be more vocal from now on.

But this pledge of a wake-up call for the MCA leadership and to be “more vocal from now on” was broken in the next 24 hours, when the MCA leadership failed to speak up on the imperative need that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak must honour his by-election eve pledge to sign in the next 24 hours of a by-election victory a  RM3 million allocation to the school board’s account for the new building of the 81-year-old SRJK© Rasa.

Monday yesterday had come and gone but there had been no honouring of the signing of the approval of the RM3 million for the SRJK © Rasa.

In fact, I had a twitter exchange with the MCA Deputy Education Minister and MCA Youth leader Datuk Wee Ka Siong yesterday, as follows:

weekasiongmp:

RT @NajibRazak: Honoured the ppl of HS have given us their vote. Our work has just begun. focus now is on delivering on what we promised.

limkitsiang:

Has Najib signed RM3 mil 4Rasa Ch prsch 2day as promised? #HS @weekasiongmp RT @NajibRazak focus now is on delivering on what we promised.

weekasiongmp:

@limkitsiang I think PM has the political wisdom to do the right thing.

limkitsiang:

Don’t pass d buck. Not just PM also u n MCA Ministers have pol wisdom 2do right or mere survival? RM3m signed today?

weekasiongmp:

@limkitsiang will keep u posted on this. Btw pls remind State govt to speed up the RM1 land premium n shd not take bk its orig land. Gv LPS

limkitsiang:

7 hrs left b4 end Monday 2day 4Najib 2sign RM3m cheque 2Rasa Ch sch Can Msians expect action from MCA Ministers tmr if no chque? Whole country wait 4answer. Can we have a simple Yes or No?

limkitsiang:

40mins is eternity on 24/7 twitterverse @weekasiongmp cannot hide or run n cannot depend on Umno cybertroopers 2come 2yr defence Waiting 4u

limkitsiang:

1 hr silence on twitterverse is TKO However @weekasiongmp can tweet response anytime <6 hrs 4 @NajjibRazak 2honour RM3m pledge 2SRJKC Rasa

limkitsiang:

#P94 Najib – We deliver every promises we made in #HS http://bit.ly/aGNRMG 10 mins 2midnight @weekasiongmp Najib signed RM3m cheque oredi?

limkitsiang:

Dot on midnite – Has Najib reneged his #HS election promises re: RM3mil 4SRJKC Rasah? Will fly down 2Senate 4media conf 2 highlight subject

As evident from the twitter exchange above, Wee Ka Siong “disappeared” from the twitterverse after two responses and did not react to my five tweets, the last one at midnight.

In fact, the performance of MCA Ministers and national leadership to ensure that Najib honour his RM3 million election pledge to SRJKC Rasa is a litmus test whether MCA can hope to regain public support and confidence.

Can we expect all the MCA Ministers and deputy ministers led by the MCA President today to make a public stand on the RM3 million cheque for SRJKC Rasa or have the MCA leadership not yet started to be “vocal” yet?

It is clear that in the Hulu Selangor by-election on Sunday, Barisan Nasional won but MCA lost.

The question that must be asked is when and why has MCA fallen so low with Chinese voter support for Barisan Nasional in Hulu Selangor plunging to 15% with Umno Secretary-General Tengku Adnan estimating that BN only secured the support of 22% of Chinese voters in the by-election?

This is a far cry from the 37% Chinese voter support secured by MCA in Hulu Selangor in the March 8 “political tsunami” only two years ago!

MCA Vice President Datuk Seri Dr. Ng Yen Yen was quoted by Sunday Star as saying on polling eve that when she first started campaigning in Kampung Assam Kumbang, support for MCA was only about 18%. She claimed to have pushed it up to 25% “and I hope to push it up by another 5% by tonight”.

Tengku Adnan was quoted by Star (Monday 26th April 2010) that BN only secured 22% of the Chinese votes.

An analysis article in the MCA newspaper Star today reported that MCA had estimated that shortly after nomination, only 15% of the Chinese voters would support Barisan Nasional.

Why has a party which boasts of being the second largest Chinese political party in the world been reduced to such pitiable straits?

An analysis of the Hulu Selangor parliamentary by-election results show that Pakatan Rakyat has gained support while Barisan Nasional has lost ground in the past two years, with PR poised to win one of the three constituent state assembly seats and a fighting chance to win another one.

This is illustrated by the following breakdown of the Hulu Selangor by-election results for the three constituent state assembly seats:

Constituency

PR

BN

Majority

Kuala Kubu Baru

7,194

5,164

2,030 (for PR)

Batang Kal

10,519

11,820

-1,301

Hulu Bernam

5,439

7,246

-1,807

Postal votes

120

767

-647

From the above results, PR would be safe in Kuala Kubu Baru with a good fighting chance in Batang Kali – two of the three constituent state assemblies.

This is why I say that the Hulu Selangor by-election is a pyrrhic victory for Najib and Barisan Nasional after a RM200 million election expenditure.

Although Pakatan Rakyat is disappointed that Datuk Zaid Ibrahim could not win in the Hulu Selangor by-election, there are many silver linings in the by-election results.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 27 April 2010, 3:00 pm and is filed under
Election
,
MCA
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should make personal visit to family of Aminulrasyid latest fatal victim of trigger-happy police shooting and set up public inquiry headed by credible independent Commissioners

The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak should make a personal visit to the family of the latest fatal victim of trigger-happy police shooting and set up a public inquiry headed by credible and independent Commissioners into the killing of 14-year-old  Form III student Aminulrasyid Hamzah by trigger-happy police in the early hours of Monday near his house at Section 11 in Shah Alam.

This morning, together with Penang Chief Minister and DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng, I visited the bereaved mother, Norsiah Mohamad and his family immediately on our return from Sibu and extended our condolences and shared the outrage and anger at the unacceptable police killing of a 14-year-old student.

The official police version of the shooting/killing of Aminul as given by the Selangor Chief Police Officer Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar had been challenged on the most important facets by the family and eye-witness account.

Firstly, Khalid alleged that Aminul, who was driving, had suddenly reversed the car and tried to ram into the police personnel while his companion “had exited and was able to escape”.

The family said it was not true that Aminul tried to reverse the car to jam the police personnel. Aminul had died when he was shot in the head and the friend who was with him came out to surrender himself but was kicked and punched but he managed to escape.

The police alleged that a long machete was found in the car driven by Aminul, which was denied by Aminul’s mother,  Norsiah Mohamad  saying that the car belonged to one of Aminul’s married sisters.

Aminul is not yet 15 years old as  have been reported in all the press, as he was born on 15th August 1995. He is the youngest of eight siblings (three girls and five boys) and come from a respectable family.

His father, who died six years ago, was general manager of Integrated Logistics and his uncle is the Maybank Berhad CEO Datuk Johar Che Mat.

Aminul has committed the traffic offence of unlicensed underaged driving but surely Malaysian youths do not have to  die for such infractions!

Aminul is dead but her mother wants to redeem the good name of her son and her family, as Aminul is described by the police as a “criminal”.

The 14-year-old Form III student from SMK Section 9, Shah Alam has no criminal record, is a sports all-rounder who got 3As and 2Bs for his UPSR and preparing to sit for the PMR examination at the end of the year.

I was taken to the tragedy spot where Aminul was killed, which was about 300 metres from his house in Section 11, Shah Alam, with angry neighbours  including Nazimuddin and Rahim  recounting the appalling  and heinous events outside their houses  in the early hours of Monday just after a European football game.

I saw the tree busted by the car driven by Aminul which careened out of control when the 14-year-old student was shot in the head with a bullet. The car knocked into a wall and ended up in the drain. There were still faint blood stains on the stone walkway.

The noises caused by the “drama” woke up the immediate neighbourhood, with some saying not less than five shots were fired. The menfolk came out and saw three to four cars. They saw a body sprawled on the front seat, with head down and legs slightly out.

They could not see the face and had no idea of his identity. They were not inclined to ask at that late hour as they thought that the police were carrying out their duties and had killed a criminal.

Some more police cars came and they went back to sleep. They did not know until the next morning that the person shot and killed was Aminul, not only known to the neighbourhood, but was the best friend of the son of one of those recounting the heinous events to us. The person who recounted this cried and I grieved with him.

“This is not LosAngeles but ShahAlam” shouted one of the  neighbours still angry at police trigger-happy killing of 14-yr-old Aminul.

These Shah Alam residents expressed their worry that they are afraid of the police who, instead of ensuring their security and safety, are now a threat to their security and safety – particularly concerned that youngsters who watch football games at mamak stalls into the early hours of the morning risk dangers like the fatal one which befell Aminul.

The public inquiry into Aminul’s killing announced by the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, to be headed by the Deputy Home Minister Datuk Abu Seman Yusup, is completely unacceptable not only to the public but also to the bereaved family and the Shah Alam residents  for there is no credibility and confidence that there would be “no cover up” whatsoever.

The Abu Seman Yusup public inquiry should be scrapped. In its stead, there should be a public inquiry comprising independent and credible Malaysians who can command instant public confidence that they will do a thorough, independent and  professional job to get to the bottom of the Aminul’s killing.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 28 April 2010, 6:17 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Open Tweet to Cabinet on police killing of 15 year old Aminul Rasyid

OPEN TWEET TO CABINET Suspend all police invlvd in police killing of 15yr Aminul ShahAlam Order public inquiry 2assuage public anger/outrage

04/28/2010 08:21 AM

Will visit Aminulrasyid’s aggrieved mother ShahAlam w Penang Chief Minister when we return from Sibu 2express sympathy support solidarity

04/28/2010 08:36 AM

#Aminulrasyid Let Msian Twitterjaya raise firestorm protest anger @ police killing 15yr teen n demand no more indiscriminate police shooting

04/28/2010 09:09 AM

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 28 April 2010, 9:36 am and is filed under
Police
,
Twitter
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #12

By
M. Bakri Musa

Chapter 2:  Why Some Societies Progress, Others Regress

Culture As Society’s Genes

Culture is to society what genes are to an individual.  Culture forms the framework for development for a society, both under normal circumstances but also more importantly, under differing and stressful conditions.  Likewise, our genes predict our eye and skin colors, as well as our reactions to specific environmental conditions, as for example, our propensity to develop specific diseases under certain conditions.  Culture does that for a society, as exemplified by the response of the Marioris to the invasion by the Maoris.  Just like genes, culture is transmitted from one generation to the next, and it remains remarkably stable with each generation transmitting its values to the next through the process of acculturation.  In traditional societies, such acculturations take place informally in the family and other social settings; in modern societies, at schools and similar institutions.

            Changes in genes, or more accurately the distribution of the changed gene in a population, do occur through natural selection, but very slowly.  Likewise with culture, changes do occur but very slowly as evidenced by the subsequent divergent cultural transformations of the Marioris and the Maoris conditioned by their particular environment.

            The environment can induce rapid changes on DNA through a process call mutation.  Two well know mutagenic (mutation-inducing) agents are radiation and chemicals.  A colony of bacteria subjected to a hostile chemical environment (antibiotics) will develop resistance quickly through such mutations which enable those bacteria to overcome the effects of those chemicals.

            Many would take umbrage to my characterization of culture as society’s genes, for that implies that culture cannot be changed, or at least not quickly.  There is the implication of predestination, just as individuals are biologically through their genetic endowment, so too is society through their culture.  Culture is thus destiny.  This is erroneous.  For just as genes could be changed in nature through random mutations or artificially in the laboratory through planned biogenetic engineering, so too could culture, either naturally or be induced.

            The cultural equivalent of biogenetic engineering would be mass education and the introduction of modern technology, or any major social change imposed on or brought on in a society.  The fermentation in the Muslim world today is because its traditional societies have been changed through their exposure to the greater outside world through mass education and modern communications.  Old certitudes are now gone, as are traditional power structures.  These changes are rapid and disorientating; they could lead either to a stronger, more resilient society (equivalent of a resistant bacteria) or alternatively, to the disappearance and disintegration of that culture (equivalent to biological extinction, as with the dinosaurs).

            The cultural equivalent of random mutation would be exemplified by the sudden change in leadership or a revolution.  Iran under Ayotallah Khomeini was a radically different nation from when it was under the Shah.  That transformation was sudden and unpredictable, comparable to a biological mutation.  Had someone assassinated the Ayatollah soon after he took over, Iran would have been radically changed back again.  In genetics, such a phenomenon is referred to as reverse mutation.

            The pertinent question then is why certain societies have cultures that predispose them to change and progress while others have cultures with strong inertia and a tendency for stagnation.  Here I define human progress broadly, that is improvements in the ability of that society to take care of the basic needs of its citizens in terms of food, clothing, and shelter, as well as ensuring that each citizen is allowed to develop fully in all aspects.

            Such general descriptions aside, there are specific quantifiable criteria that can be used to assess progress or lack thereof.  These include economic well being as reflected by such indices as per capita income but also general well being as measured by longevity and infant mortality rates.  While these may not be truly reflective of the achievements of a particular society, nonetheless they give a rough indication.  It is unlikely that a nation with a low per capita income, short life span, and high infant mortality to be considered developed or progressive.  Nor can one expect such societies to be major sources of inspiring works of arts and other cultural refinements.

            Implicit in my definition and description of progress is that there are certain values that are universal, that is, they are the aspirations of all people.  This is a risky proposition to make in these days of cultural relativism where the accepted wisdom is that all cultures are equal and should be measured only within its own context.  Even the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights has its own detractors who opposed the very concept of the universality of any social or cultural construct.  Nonetheless we all can agree on certain simple ideas.  These are, as enumerated by Lawrence Harrison and Samuel Huntington in their book, Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress:

Life is better than death

Health is better than sickness

Liberty is better than slavery

Prosperity is better than poverty

Education is better than ignorance

Justice is better than injustice.

            Even Mother Teresa would have agreed with those general statements.  Fanatical Muslims of the “suicide bomber” variety might take exception to the first sentiment (Life is better than death”).  To them, life in this world is temporary and thus not worthy of their attention; the greater rewards are in the hereafter.  To me, belittling God’s precious gift of life is not exactly an expression of our respect and honor for the All Mighty.  After all, life is God’s creation and we should not dismiss it lightly!  Were Islam to belittle life in this world, there would not be the strong prohibition against suicide in our Qur’an.  If only those so-called martyrs could see the pain and anguish they caused their loved ones, and the destruction they inflict on others!

            I do not imply that material and socioeconomic progress go hand in hand with spiritual and ethical enlightenment.  Far from it!  Societies in command of great wealth and power may be intellectually, spiritually, and socially flawed.  Conversely, great philosophers and thinkers have evolved from societies that had rudimentary technology and relatively little wealth.  The tiny Caribbean island of St. Lucia, no economic powerhouse, produced two Nobel Prize winners:  Sir Arthur Lewis in economics and Derek Welcott in Literature.  Using that criterion – number of Nobel laureates per capita – St. Lucia is certainly far ahead of many advanced and progressive nations.

            In the heyday of imperialism it was accepted that culture made all the difference.  The concept of culture then was closely tied to race.  As with the understanding of race at the time, it was accepted that there was a similar evolutionary scale for culture, with the Europeans, more specifically the northern and western Europeans, being on top (or most cultured).  The differences in the physical features of people of the various cultures (dark skin for the Mediterranean races and high cheek bones of the Eastern Europeans) further reinforced this connection between race and culture.  At the bottom were Asians and Africans.  The Europeans being the most “cultured” were destined to rule the world; if members of the other races wanted to be considered civilized, they must ape the ways of the Europeans.

The German anthropologist Franz Boas shook this accepted wisdom with his revolutionary concept of cultural relativism.  Boas spent his professional career studying the Eskimos of Artic Canada, and was impressed by their cultural values.  Their culture ideally suited them to survive in that harsh environment where “cultured” Europeans would not stand a chance.  He championed the idea that each culture should be judged in its own right and not compared to others.  The essence of this idea is encapsulated by the remarks of the legendary wealthy American stock investor, Warren Buffet.  When asked of his extraordinary talent (his ability to pick undervalued stocks), he replied that he is grateful to live in America as his particular skills serve him well, for had he lived in Bangladesh, he would be starving.  The wisdom of the Sage of Omaha!

Cultural relativism may be a fine idea when societies were isolated.  With globalization, today’s young Eskimos are exposed to and are rapidly becoming part of the larger world.  Their grandparents may have been satisfied with living in igloos and trudging along in the frigid cold on their dog sleighs, but today’s young prefer living in homes with central heating and dashing around in their snowmobiles.  Telling them that those are artifacts of a decadent Western culture would not dissuade them.

Likewise, it is equally futile for Malaysian leaders to discourage the young not to spend their time on the Internet, Twitter and Facebook because those were “western” inventions, as Minister of Information Rais Yatim did recently.  It is to be noted that Rais is enamored with his camera and cell phone; he conveniently forgets that those too are “western” inventions.

While nobody today accepts the old concept of an evolutionary scale of culture, nonetheless it is becoming obvious that different societies adapt differently to changes and stresses.  Like individuals, some societies are more successful than others, regardless of the criteria we use to define success.  The intellectual inquiry of why this is so is now an active and legitimate scholarly pursuit.  Unlike earlier notions of cultural evolution, today’s research has nothing to do with aggrandizing one’s sense of cultural or racial superiority, rather on how best to help societies and cultures cope with change and thereby reduce some of the social pathology associated with dysfunctional cultures.

Next:  “Progressive” Versus “Static” Cultures

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 29 April 2010, 11:53 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
globalisation
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia needs a new IGP now after Musa Hassan committed  gross insurbodination for the second time with threats to call police off the streets and not to enforce the law

Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan has committed gross insurbodination for the second time when he threatened to call police off the streets and not to enforce the law in retaliation against the firestorm of public outrage at the trigger-happy police killing of 14-year old Form III student Aminulrasyid Hamzah some 100 metres from his Shah Alam house in the early hours of Monday.

Star online today under the headline
“IGP hits out at critics over shooting of teenager”
reported:

KUALA LUMPUR: Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan has hit out at those criticising the force over the death of 15-year-old Aminulrasyid Amzah, saying he could call his men off the streets if that was what the people wanted.

“If you do not want the police to enforce the law, then say so,” he said.

“I can tell my men to not take any action, including conduct inspections on vehicles or arrest Mat Rempit who ride without licences,” he told reporters after launching a blood donation drive at the National Blood Bank in conjunction with the 203rd Police Day celebrations here Thursday.

He was responding to statements by various groups over the death of Aminulrasyid, who was shot dead when he allegedly tried to reverse the car he was driving into policemen who had stopped the vehicle in Section 11, Shah Alam.

This is a most disgraceful statement from the IGP as it tantamounts to an open and public insurbodination against the Malaysian people who pay for his salary.

This is not the first time as Musa was involved in the public challenge of the previous Prime Minister threatening a police revolt if the proposal of the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission to set up an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission  (IPCMC) to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional and world-class police service was implemented.

All over the world, developed nations are graduating to the concept of democratic policing subjecting the police forces to principles of public responsibility and accountability  but this is clearly very alien to Musa.

Musa has overstayed his welcome as IGP.  Important sectors of society, including a parliamentary roundtable, had been opposed to the extension of his contract as IGP and their reservations and objections have now been  vindicated with the threat by Musa to call police off the streets and not to enforce the law.

Shouldn’t he first resign as IGP?

Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein should declare whether he had given the “green-light” to Musa to make such an outrageous statement and threat and what action he proposes to take to discipline Musa.

Musa’s threats today have transgressed acceptable and tolerable limits and is a great disservice to the majority of police personnel who are disciplined, conscientious and hardworking.

The country cannot wait until September when Musa’s tenure expires.  Malaysians need a new IGP who can inspire public confidence in the professionalism of the police force to fight crime and restore to Malaysians their two fundamental rights to be free from crime and the fear of crime.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 29 April 2010, 7:53 pm and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysian Submarine Scandal Continues

Asia Sentinel

by
Hamish McKenzie

28 April 2010

French Lawyer Looks for Answers for Scandal in Kuala Lumpur

Joseph Breham, one of a team of lawyers looking into allegations of corruption in a Malaysian submarine purchase from a French defense conglomerate, told reporters in Kuala Lumpur Wednesday that he had filed a 10-page inquiry with the French courts that calls into question the actions of a company with close ties to the Malaysian Prime Minister’s best friend and aide, Abdul Razak Baginda.

Breham is also expected to question several witnesses in Kuala Lumpur about the case, which has broken into the open after years of silence in Malaysia. The inquiry, which now rests with independent French prosecutors, is directed at a €114 million (US$151.1 million) commission paid to a company called Perimekar, which Breham’s legal team suggests was established in 2001 purely for the purpose of receiving the kickback. Najib Tun Razak, then Malaysia’s defense minister, led the negotiations with the French government to buy the two Scorpene-class submarines, build by Armaris, a subsidary of the French defense giant DCN, and to lease a third a few months later, in 2002.

Political reformers in Malaysia say they are placing their hopes on the French investigation to get to the bottom of the payment to Perimekar and its implications because, they say, there is little hope that the Malaysian justice system will bring the truth to light. Despite repeated requests for information by opposition leaders in Malaysia’s parliament, Najib and other top members of the government have refused to answer.

Cynthia Gabrial, who sits on the board of directors of the human rights NGO Suaram, for whom Breham and his colleagues are acting, told Asia Sentinel that “whoever’s guilty must be punished, and if it has the be the French court system that actually brings this issue to surface, then so be it.”

It isn’t likely that anybody will get any answers soon, however. The Perimekar episode goes well beyond Malaysia and is believed to be just a part of years of peddling defense equipment including submarines to countries across the globe by DCN.

Investigating judges looking into some parts of the French establishment have been stalled for years by their inability to obtain defense secrets, partly because of a suspicion that they are related to top figures in French politics. In the past allegations have arisen that sought to ensnare such figures as Edouard Balladur, who ran against President Jacques Chirac, and Nicholas Sarkozy, now the French president, who was Balladur’s campaign manager.

Perimekar, according to the Malaysian government, was paid by DCN for “coordination and support services” during the submarine negotiations. But Breham and Suaram say it’s highly unlikely the company had the ability to carry out such a role.

“Perimekar was created only in 2001, a few months before the submarine contract was definitely signed,” Breham told the press conference. “This means that Perimekar has no experience at all in submarine deals, has no experience in logistics, has no experience in nothing regarding submarines.”

“Perimekar until this contract had never had any contract with any company. The only thing Perimekar had done until this signature of the €114 million contract was lose RM75,000 (US$23,310) in 2002. That was the only thing Perimekar had ever done,” Breham said.

Breham said the French prosecution is particularly concerned about the fact that Razak Baginda’s wife, Mazalinda, was the principal shareholder of KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd, which owned Perimekar. He said he hopes the inquiry will answer where the money for the commission came from, where exactly the money went, and if the money stayed in Malaysia.

Perimekar appears to have been subsumed into another company, Boustead DCNS, a joinrbenture between Boustead’s parent company and DCNS, SA, the Frnch defense company. In its annual report, Boustead Heavy Industries described Perimekar as an “associate of the Group” that is “involved in the marketing, upgrading, maintenance and related services for the Malaysian maritime defence industry.”

The inquiry is now at a preliminary stage, Breham said. If the French prosecution finds that the questionable elements surrounding the commission payment to Perimekar warrant further investigation, it will pass the case on to an ‘instruction judge’ who will conduct a deeper inquiry that could last for years. For instance, a similar corruption case involving DCN and the sale of frigate to Taiwan has dragged on for more than 10 years, Breham said. Then, if the judicial power believes there is sufficient evidence of corruption, the case will move to trial phase.

The scandal began to come to the surface in 2006 with the gruesome murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a Mongolian translator and spurned lover of Razak Baginda who had accompanied him to France for some of the transactions over the submarines. Altantuya was shot in the head and her body was blown up with military explosives in a patch of jungle outside of Kuala Lumpur. Two of Najib’s bodyguards, who were directed to intercede with her by Musa Safri, Najib’s chief of staff, have been convicted of the killing. Neither Najib nor Musa has ever been questioned by law enforcement officials about the case. Razak Baginda was tried along with Najib’s two bodyguards but was acquitted without having to put on a defense in a trial that left more questions than answers. Immediately after his acquittal, Razak Baginda left the country for England, where he remains.

Breham said the French jurisdiction cannot consider the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu in its investigation. “The only thing that France’s jurisdiction will delve into is corruption.”

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 29 April 2010, 6:29 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Defence
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


My friend Aminul

Itzmir reels from the tragic death of his best buddy

ALFIAN TAHIR

Wednesday, April 28th, 2010 14:12:00 | Malay Mail

SHAH ALAM: The loss of his best friend, Aminul Rashid Amzah, 15, who was shot dead by police on Monday morning after allegedly trying to flee upon colliding with another car, is something Wan Iztmir Izzat Wan Abdul Rahim, also 15, can’t come to terms with. Recalling how Aminul died some five metres away from his best friend’s house, Iztmir said he was at home when he heard a loud bang.

Thinking it was just another accident, he ignored it until he realised there was a commotion outside.

“When I saw patrol cars and many people, I went out and saw a car with a youngster in it. I recognised my friend’s T-shirt and thought Aminul had one just like it,” said Itzmir “I got closer for a better look and I couldn’t believe what I saw. My best friend was slumped in the car.

“I asked the policeman what had happened but he told me to get back inside my house. When I asked again, the policeman just kept quiet.

“I was very sad when I read the newspapers the next day. Aminul was nothing like what was written.

“We grew up together and we shared a lot of things. Aminul won’t do such thing. He was probably scared after colliding with the other car.

“He had no driving licence. Suddenly faced the police, what would you expect him to do? I would run away too because I don’t have a licence to drive.”

His friend’s sudden death keeps haunting him. “My best friend was covered in blood in that car.

“He was no criminal, he was a nice boy and a great friend.”

On Monday morning, Aminul Rashid sneaked out from his house at Jalan 11/2G, Section 11, to meet friends at a mamak stall. Aminul drove his sister’s Proton Iswara and was accompanied by another teenager, whose identity is still unknown.

On the way back, Aminul collided with another car. In panic he drove away from the scene. A patrol car spotted the incident, pursued the vehicle and managed to stop it by shooting at the tyres. However, the boy was shot in the back of his head and died on the spot. His friend, who was not injured, escaped.

The victim’s mother, Norsiah Mohammad, 60, yesterday morning denied police allegation her youngest son was a criminal. She expressed sorrow at reading the allegations in newspapers.

“How can they call my son a criminal?  That is wrong. I am his mother. I know what my son does everyday.

“He is an active schoolboy who never caused any trouble to the family.”  Her focus now is to seek justice for her son’s death and insisted she was not looking for revenge.

She only wants an explanation as to what transpired, with nothing covered up.

Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo also urged Bukit Aman police to have an independent investigation into the incident.

Another police report was later lodged at the Shah Alam headquarters by the mother and family lawyers.

A Facebook group entitled “KAMI BENCI KEKEJAMAN POLIS MALAYSIA! — JUSTICE FOR AMINULRASYID”  has attracted over 3,500 fans since it was set up yesterday at 3pm.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 29 April 2010, 12:00 pm and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Neighbours’ anger over trigger-happy cops

By
Neville Spykerman

The Malaysian Insider

SHAH ALAM, April 28 — Neighbours who knew Aminulrasyid Amzah today could not contain their emotions as they expressed outrage over his shooting by police.

The Form Three student was driving his sister’s Proton Iswara and is alleged to have attempted to ram a police road-block in Section 11 here, before the fatal shooting occurred early Monday morning.

“This is not Manchester or Los Angeles, this is bloody Malaysia,” said Nadzimuddin Pip, who added the police should have been better trained to differentiate between criminals and boys.

The retiree, along with businessman Wan Rahim Tajuddin, whose house in Section 11 is exactly at the spot where the Proton Iswara eventually crashed, said they had initially assumed police has scored a major success against a criminal.

“His body was lying face down in the car and surrounded by police. We didn’t realise it was Aminul until the next day,” said Wan Rahim, who broke down as he spoke.

He said Aminul was a close friend of his son, and expressed regret they did not have a chance to see the dead teenager’s face.

The men were relating the incident to MPs Lim Guan Eng, Lim Kit Siang and Dr Lo’Lo’ Mohd Ghazali at the scene of the incident in Section 12 this afternoon.

Kit Siang earlier led a delegation of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) lawmakers to Aminulrasyid’s home where they spoke and expressed their condolences to his mother Norsiah Mohamad, 60.

Norsiah said contrary to press reports, her son was only 14 and not 15-years-old.

She also lamented how he had been labelled a criminal.

“I don’t want this to be sensationalised but I want the good name of my son and family to be restored.”

Guan Eng said he was shocked when he first heard about the shooting of the youth and criticised the way the victim was made out to be a criminal.

According to his mother, there was no parang in the car as reported, only shoes.

“How can shoes magically turn into a parang.”

He described the incident as a “cruel act” which occurs in places like Israel and should not have happened here.

“We are not anti-police but are against those responsible.”

He repeated the call for an independent investigation to be carried out, so public confidence in the police can be restored.

Kit Siang called on both the Home Minister and Prime Minster to visit the home of the victim and experience the anguish of his family.

“The whole nation condemns this act.” he said.

He also called on Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein to issue a guarantee to all Malaysians that this incident will not happen again.

Meanwhile the Selangor government today announced the family would receive RM10,000 from the state to help ease the burden of their loss.

Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim is scheduled to visit the family this evening.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 29 April 2010, 6:44 am and is filed under
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Praises for Najib for honouring RM3 million pledge to SRJKC Rasa and Rasa voters for being pioneers of New Politics towards a New Malaysia of justice, freedom, excellence and prosperity while insisting on their rights as citizens and taxpayers

I commend the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak for honouring his RM3 million pledge to SRJKC Rasa for the construction of a new building for the 81-year-old dilapidated school which was made on Hulu Selangor by-election polling eve on Saturday.

I will not quibble that the RM3 million cheque was  only handed over to the  Chairman of the SRJKC Rasa Ng Tek Kui yesterday when it should have been on Monday as pledged.

Greater praises are in order to the voters of Rasa who have demonstrated that they are worthy pioneers of New Politics in Malaysia to usher in a New Malaysia of justice, freedom, excellence and prosperity for all, regardless of race, religion or region, while insisting on their rights to development as citizens and taxpayers.

In the March 8 “political tsunami” of the 2008 general elections, the successful PKR candidate Datuk Zainal Abidin secured 56.74% of the Chinese votes in Rasa.

Will the Rasa voters be influenced and intimidated by  the Prime Minister’s RM3 million carrot-and-stick tactics, resulting in a lower voter turn-out in support of the Pakatan Rakyat candidate, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim as compared to 56.74% polled for Zainal two years ago?

There were three polling streams in Rasa and the  results of the voter turn-out in the Hulu Selangor by-election on Sunday are as follows:

Rasa (Hulu Selangor by-election 2010)

Stream

PR

BN

Saluran 1

205 (77.36%)

60 votes

Saluran 2

301 (80.05%)

75

Saluran 3

319 (88.61%)

41

As a result, for the Rasa area, Zaid received a massive support of 82.42% of the Chinese voters as compared to 56.74% for Zainal in 2008 – a great tribute to the maturity and political consciousness of the voters of Rasah.

Rasa leads all areas in Hulu Selangor in producing the highest percentage turn-out in support of Pakatan Rakyat candidate, viz:

Rasa

82.42

Kalumpang

77.16

Hulu Yam Lama

71.1

Batang Kali

80.53

KKB

78.4

Kerling

67.9

Hulu Yam Timur

71.13

This is why at the announcement of the DAP/PR candidate for the Sibu parliamentary by-election in Sibu on Tuesday night, I  commended the voters of Rasa as a national example for all Malaysian voters in Peninsular Malaysia, Sarawak and Sabah as pioneers and leaders of New Politics in Malaysia to create a New Malaysia of justice, freedom, international competitiveness and prosperity for all Malaysians.

At about 1 pm yesterday, Deputy Education Ministers and MCA Youth leader Datuk Wee Ka Siong tweeted to my twitter page: “Hi YB, I m in PM’s ofis for the cheque presentation for Rasa Sch. Interested to join as witness?”

This led me to tweet back: “U think I am Superman can fly? Wld love 2b there if given advance notice.  At present at ShahAlam over police killing 14yrold student.  U want 2come here?”

When there was no reply, I added another tweet: “Since in PMO ask Najib come 2ShahAlam 2visit Norsiah aggrieved mother #Aminulrasyid n angry neighbours at heinous police killing of student.  U r deputy education aren’t  u?”

I did not get any tweet from Wee for the next 12 hours.

I had in fact  together with the Penang Chief Minister and DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng on our return from Sibu rushed straight from the KLCC in Sepang  to Section 11 Shah Alam to get first-hand account of the heinous police killing of 14-year-old Aminulrasyid and to express our condolence to the bereaved family and public outrage.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 29 April 2010, 12:04 pm and is filed under
Election
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Cry “This is not Manchester or Los Angeles, this is bloody Malaysia” finds resonance in the country and reflects gravity of crisis of public confidence in police professionalism

“Hisham: We’ll be fair – Home Minister promises a thorough investigation” and “No cover-up in probe, says IGP” are two headlines in the Star today on the trigger-happy “shoot-to-kill” police killing of 14-year-old student Aminulrasyid Hamzah in the early hours of Monday morning, some 100 metres from his Shah Alam Section 11 house to assure the  Malaysian public of the action being taken by the authorities.

Both the Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein and the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan can shout from the rooftops but the duo will not be able to inspire confidence whether the aggrieved family or the outraged Malaysian public that there would be a thorough, independent and professional investigation into the heinous incident causing the death of a 14-year-old Form III student in Shah Alam.

The ham-fisted and unwarranted “stern warning” by the Selangor Police Chief Datuk Khalid  Abu Bakar  to politicians and the public not to make statements or to speculate on the incident has the unintended effect of further undermining public confidence in police integrity and professionalism.

Khalid is clearly behind-times as he does not realize that we are in the era of democratic and accountable policing, and not living in a police state where no questions should be asked about the police!

In fact, an independent and professional investigation into the Aminulrasyid police killing should include an investigation why Khalid had come out with an official police version which has been immediately challenged by the family, the neighbourhood and an eyewitness?

For instance, Khalid alleged that Aminul,  who was driving, had suddenly reversed the car and tried to ram into the police personnel while his companion “had exited and was able to escape”.

The family had challenged this version, denying that  Aminul tried to reverse the car to jam the police personnel and that Aminul had died when he was shot in the back of the head causing the car to crash into a tree, retaining wall and into a drain some 100 metres from his house.

Khalid alleged that the police found a long machete in the car driven by Aminul, which had been denied by Aminul’s mother, Norsiah Mohamad, saying that the car belonged to one of Aminul’s married sisters and contained shoes and not a machete.

Will Khalid resign as Selangor Chief Police Officer and personally apologise to the aggrieved family if the official police version is proven to be untrue?

The aggrieved family and the immediate Shah Alam neighbourhood are rightly outraged at the circumstances of the police killing of  14-year-old student Aminulrasyhid as if he is a big-time gangster, causing one of the neighbours to exclaim: “This is not Manchester or Los Angeles, this is bloody Malaysia”!

This heart-felt cry “This is not Manchester or Los Angeles, this is bloody Malaysia” has found resonance and reverberation in the breasts of all fathers and mothers throughout the country and reflects the gravity of the crisis of public confidence in police professionalism.

Aminulrasyhid’s neighbours raised two pertinent questions:  Didn’t the police have the  common sense to realise that the student is not a criminal or he would have sought escape to the highways instead of entering a residential area, trying to flee home to his mother.

Secondly, if Aminul was trying to ram into the police by suddenly reversing and was shot, how could the car ram into a tree, retaining wall ending up in a drain?

As Aminul was shot in the back of his head and killed, he could not have posed any clear or present danger to the police personnel.  Why then was he shot in the back of his head – with some neighbours reporting to have heard not less than five shots?

One of Aminulrasyid’s best friends and neighbour, Wan Iztmir Izzat Wan Abdul Rahim, has given a heart-rending account to the Malay Mail of the death of Aminulrasyid.

Itzmir declared:  “He was no criminal, he was a nice boy and a great friend.”

The police has launched intensive investigations into the case. They should have established by now whether Aminulrasyid is a criminal or not and if not, they should immediately  and publicly clear his name and that of his family even before the final and conclusive close of investigations.

Meanwhile, a Royal Commission of Inquiry must be established to inquire not only into Aminulrasyid’s tragic shooting case but also into all other cases of police shooting, like the case of single-mother Norizan Salleh, 29, who was shot five times after a car chase in Kuala Lumpur in February. She survived the near-fatal shots, but claimed to have been kicked and stepped on by policemen while crawling out of the car, bleeding profusely.

It has been reported that there had been an annual average of some 40 people fatally shot by the police  in Malaysia when in England and Wales, there were only five deaths by police shootings per year, on average, in the last decade.

The Royal Commission of Inquiry into police shootings should cover from where the Dzaiddin Royal Commission on Police ended, i.e. from 2005 onwards into all cases of police shooting deaths, so that no Malaysian would have cause to exclaim with pain, sorrow and despair: “This is not Manchester or Los Angeles, this is bloody Malaysia!”

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 29 April 2010, 3:12 pm and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Abdullah should explain whether he had signed off US$100 billion (RM320 billion) worth  of oil rights to resolve Brunei’s claims to Limbang a month before he stepped down as Prime Minister and why

Former Prime Minister Tun Abdullah should explain whether he had signed off US$100 billion (RM320 billion) worth of oil rights to resolve Brunei’s claims to Limbang a month before he stepped down as Prime Minister in March last year and why.

The disclosure by  former Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir that there had been such a deal is most shocking and even outrageous, demonstrating how gravely good governance had deteriorated after Merdeka in 1957, as this is something Abdullah’s predecessors as Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Hussein and even Tun Mahathir himself, would not have done without proper consent of Cabinet, Parliament and the Malaysian people.

Malaysians would have continued to be kept in the dark of this deal if not for Mahathir’s latest blog entry “Malaysia’s Generosity” yesterday where he disclosed that Malaysia had lost a substantial oil producing offshore area in the South China Sea, namely  Block L and Block M.

Mahathir
wrote:

“ Block L and Block M had been claimed by Malaysia based on historical facts. Accordingly, Petronas entered into a production sharing contract with Murphy Oil to start drilling to produce oil. It is estimated that the reserves amounted to almost 1 billion barrels.

“ Abdullah Badawi negotiated with the Sultan to get back Limbang in Sarawak. In return he agreed to surrender the two blocks to Brunei. No Petronas representatives were present, only foreign office staff and the foreign affairs adviser to the PM.

“ As we all know Abdullah triumphantly announced that he had settled the Limbang claim with Brunei. No mention was made of the two blocks.

“ Brunei disclaimed that they had agreed to give up Limbang. The foreign office and Abdullah did not rebut Brunei’s statement.

“Now it is made clear that the two blocks are no longer a part of Malaysia.

“ Abdullah has caused Malaysia to lose at least US100 billion dollars (about RM320 billion) of Malaysia’s oil in this agreement.”

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak should explain the true situation – whether Abdullah had signed off US$100 billion (RM320 billion) worth  of oil rights to resolve Brunei’s claims to Limbang, that Brunei’s claims to Limbang remains unaffected despite Malaysia losing these two blocks of offshore oil areas, and even more important, why the Abdullah Cabinet at the time of which he was Deputy Prime Minister had agreed to such unilateral and arbitrary sell-out of the country’s sovereign rights.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 April 2010, 10:48 am and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
,
Oil
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call for Royal Commission of Inquiry headed by Tun Haniff Omar to investigate into the death of 14-year-old student Aminulrasyid and all cases of police shooting deaths since 2005

The Parliamentary Roundtable on 28th July last year on “A new IGP for a Safe Malaysia” which was endorsed by responsible and conscientious MPs and key pillars of civil society have been vindicated – that instead of becoming safer, the people of Shah Alam had to exclaim in pain, sorrow and anger “This is not Manchester or Los Angeles, this is bloody Malaysia” following the heinous police killing of 14-year-old Form III student Aminulrasyid Hamzah.

Last July, the two main reasons I had given why Tan Sri Musa Hassan should go without renewal of his tenure  and a new IGP appointed have come back to haunt the country and people because of their prescience and validity, viz:

Failure of Musa in Key Performance Indicators (KPI) as IGP in the past three years, in all the three core police functions to keep crime low, eradicate corruption and protect human rights. In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that under Musa, Malaysians are even more unsafe from street crimes now than when he became IGP in September 5, 2006.

The re-appointment of Musa for another term of IGP cast an adverse aspersion on all the senior police officers, as if there is not a single one out of the eight top police officers occupying key police positions below the post of IGP who are qualified or competent enough to become the new IGP to provide a new police leadership and culture to roll back the tide of crime in the past five years.

I had urged the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to emulate his father, the second Prime Minister Tun Razak to appoint a new Inspector-General of Police still with four or five years of service brimming with ideas to plan out and implement police reforms instead of the current practice of appointing senior police officers left with one or two years’ service more interested about post-retirement arrangements but my advice fell on deaf ears.

The terrible faux pas by Musa yesterday, threatening that he would call the police off the streets and stop enforcing the law, has proven the colossal mistake in extending his appointment as IGP.

Musa deserves a place in the Guinness Book of Records as where else can we find a national police chief threatening to call off his men off the streets when this is the most fundamental duty of any police force in the world?

In fact, anyone who is prepared  to consider even for a moment taking police off the streets is not fit the wear the badge of a police officer let alone be the No. 1  Policeman of the land.

Just for such an outrageous statement, which reflects a shocking state of mind, Musa should be sacked as IGP if not suspended immediately.

In an extraordinary attempt to deflect the national firestorm of protest and outrage at his threat that the police would down tools, Musa tried to blame  the media, particularly the alternative media, for twisting what he had said earlier that day.

This was why Bernama came out with an online statement at 0013 hours in the early hours of this morning, but which compounded the offence when he repeated the threat that he would get the police to down tools.

This is what Musa said as reported by Bernama early this morning:

“Let the politicians say what they want but I want to know whether you want us to enforce the law or not?

“If not, I will ask my men not to stop dangerous drivers or act against illegal racers,” he reiterated a statement made this morning.

What a stupid question the IGP had asked. Of course, Malaysians want the police to uphold and enforce the law but this is no licence for trigger-happy shooting and killing of Aminulrasyid, 14-year-old student in Shah Alam in the early hours of Monday morning this week.

While on this, can the IGP explain why the police leadership had applied double standards in enforcing the law – one law for the rich, wealthy and powerful while another law for the poor and ordinary rakyat?

The Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammudin Hassim must resolve the national crisis of confidence in the police compounded by Musa’s threat of the possibility of the police downing tools regardless of the people’s safety and national security.

The IGP is paid by the people and the country cannot allow anyone, even the IGP, to hold the nation to ransom.

This is a test whether Hishammuddin can be a strong Home Minister vis-à-vis a recalcitrant IGP.

If Hashim is too weak a Home Minister, the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak must step in as there can be no place in the Najib administration  for an IGP who publicly slaps the Prime Minister in the face by rubbishing the Najib slogan of “People First, Performance Now”.

As a first step to restore public confidence from the IGP faux pas, the Cabinet should hold an emergency meeting to establish a Royal Commission of Inquiry headed by  the longest-serving IGP, Tun Haniff Omar to  investigate into the death of 14-year-old student Aminulrasyid and all cases of  police shooting deaths  since 2005.

The Haniff Omar Royal Commission of Inquiry should inquire into all cases of  tragic police shootings, like the case of single-mother Norizan Salleh, 29, who was shot five times after a car chase in Kuala Lumpur in February.

It has been reported that there was  an annual average of some 40 people fatally shot by the police in Malaysia when in England and Wales, there were only five deaths by police shootings per year, on average, in the last decade.

The Haniff Omar Royal Commission of Inquiry should come out with recommendations to end such high rate of fatal police shootings so that no Malaysian would have further cause to exclaim with pain, sorrow and despair: “This is not Manchester or Los Angeles, this is bloody Malaysia!”

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 April 2010, 1:10 pm and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sibu by-election [8-16 May 2010 ] DONATE NOW!

Sibu by-election - DONATE NOW!

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 April 2010, 11:24 am and is filed under
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Who won Hulu Selangor? (1)

By
Bridget Welsh

Despite the BN victory, the geography and ethnic breakdown of the victory does not suggest that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and BN are out of the woods. Quite the opposite is the case; the close Hulu Selangor by-election win of 2.7% shows that the BN is far indeed from regaining national and state power.

The main finding from the by-election results is that the electorate remains deeply polarised. The results show that there is no major national swing across races or generations.

Let me take you through my analysis of the results. Let’s begin with a bit of basics about this constituency. It is huge – with isolated communities, many with little connection to each other. The Chinese communities are comprised of 13 new villages and Chinese in the main town of Kuala Kubu Bahru. The Indian communities are concentrated in estates, with considerable number living throughout the constituency especially in the south.

Malays are concentrated in key rural communities, the Felda area of Ulu Bernam in the north to the eastern areas such as Sungai Buaya in Batang Kali in the south. The more east and south, the greater the level of development, as it is closer to Kuala Lumpur. The key exception is the lovely town of Kuala Kubu Bahru, which is comprised of small businesses and a large number of civil servants.

So what do the results of the 48 different polling stations tell us?

1. Every vote did count. Gains and losses were well distributed over the entire constituency. There are only a few areas where significant swings occurred. Most of the gains for the BN were in Batang Kali. The gains for the opposition were primarily in Kuala Kubu Bahu.

2. Ethnic voting is not consistent overall. No coalition won over one group consistently. Local dynamics did shape the contests. For example, Indian voters in Kerling stayed in Pakatan’s camp, while in other areas such as Ladang Nigel Gardner they moved. This was the product of ongoing concerns about land in Kerling, and the local efforts of the MIC in Nigel Gardner which included financial incentives of around RM300, for example. This was a contest about individual localities and the results confirmed this pattern.

3. Chinese votes show the most consistency. They swung on average over 5% to Pakatan Rakyat. This was most obvious in Rasa, where the BN’s promise of RM3 million backfired. A similar trend occurred in Kalompang. More Chinese voted, in part due to the high level of political campaigning in these areas from both sides and strong sentiment on the ground.

The BN remains unable to win over Chinese support, particularly through financial incentives. The MCA did not effectively deliver the Chinese votes, in part due to DAP’s strength on the ground.

‘Lots of promises’

4. Indian voters remained the most likely possible swing voters, as they moved in different directions in different localities. There is an overall slight return to the BN, but very small. Part of this had to do with the race of the candidate (one of their own). Part was tied to the heavy rewards for voting in some areas. Part was tied to which party has the strongest local machinery. No question, the campaign lacked the same level of passion of 2008 among Indian opposition supporters overall.

5. Malay votes did swing but only in certain areas. There was very little overall movement in the Felda area of Ulu Bernam. Movement toward the BN occurred largely in Batang Kali in the areas of Sungai Buaya and Bukit Beruntung. These were areas where the Umno machinery was well-oiled and the BN engaged the issues of land.

Lots of promises were made to resolve outstanding concerns. The overall pattern does not suggest a convincing swing toward Umno or the BN. Gains were small, usually less than 5%. Low voter turnout was focused in Malay areas, which reinforce the pattern of limited reengagement of the BN with the Malay ground.

6. The localised Malay swing was decisive. The swing in the Malay voters in these two localities were arguably the most important factor in the results in that they comprised an estimated quarter of the voters in the BN majority. The movement in the Chinese areas was the second most important factor.

7. Younger voters voted primarily opposition, including new voters. This pattern was across ethnic groups, but most striking among Malays. This follows the traditional generational pattern in 1999 and 2008. There were very few new voters registered in this area, which suggests that new voters are not registering – another national pattern.

8. Voters did not come home in large numbers. The number of those stationed outside who returned to vote was lower than in 2008 and this contributed to lower voter turnout particularly in the Malay areas. It also contributed to the loss for Pakatan. The police handled the movement of voters and traffic professionally on voting day.

9. The Election Commission factor did not decisively affect results. The movement of voters to other schools made for some confusion and there are reports (estimated less than 100 of voters who could not vote at all), but this did not prove decisive to the final results.

Ground remains competitive

10. No consistent urban-rural divide. While there were gains for the opposition in the town area of Kuala Kubu Bahru, and the BN won most of its returned support in the rural areas, the diversity of the pattern of voting suggests that the semi-rural periphery remains highly contested and winnable for both sides.

So, what is the national upshot here? Let me begin with a caveat – it is important to remember that one cannot read too much from one constituency and contest. This constituency, however, offers diversity to allow for broader national indications, yet it was unique in its size and proximity to Kuala Lumpur that added even more intensity to the level of political engagement.

This said, the key finding is that the Malaysian electorate remains highly polarised within ethnic communities and across generations. While the passion of reformasi has ebbed, the core loyalists to both sides of the political terrain remain firm.

The middle ground was less inspired this time round, in part due to the nature of both the campaigns that did not draw voters to the polls clearly and convincingly. In short, the ground remains competitive for both sides.

As we look to the next national polls, ethnically, the BN has the slight advantage nationally, but generationally the opposition is favoured. In the final analysis, BN’s slim margin does not speak of substantial changes in voting behavior.

DR BRIDGET WELSH is associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University. She can be reached at
[email protected]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 April 2010, 5:00 pm and is filed under
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Democratic values under threat

By
Tunku Abdul Aziz

MAY 1 — I congratulate Barisan Nasional (BN) on winning the Hulu Selangor by-election last week. They mounted the greatest by-election campaign that money could possibly buy, and it appears that money for them did grow on trees. It was no object.

There is no disputing the fact that my favourite candidate, Zaid Ibrahim, lost the contest by 1725 votes.

The people exercised their right to choose the man to represent them in the Dewan Rakyat. That was what they wanted, and good luck to them. They deserve each other. But a question that simply refused to go away, as I watched the campaign unfolding before my eyes, was how much of the Barisan Nasional victory reflected a genuine return of confidence in the BN government, and how much of it had to do with the financial inducements and promises of more goodies where they came from.

Money was scattered with manic abandon like so much confetti at a society wedding? I must confess in all seriousness and fairness that BN had superb organisation where it mattered — on the ground. Their election machinery also enjoyed the great advantage of being lubricated with the best engine oil that money could buy — money itself.

Zaid gave an extremely good account of himself and there was certainly no shame in losing in an unequal contest. The whole apparatus of the Federal Government was ranged against him in Hulu Selangor.

Zaid lost the by-election in circumstances that were a damning indictment of Malaysian society’s declining ethical standards. BN leaders were obviously in no mood to allow the little niggling ethical or moral niceties to stand in the way of their larger design for Selangor.

After many by-election reverses, they finally found a rich harvest, no pun intended, in the Felda oil palm schemes. Years ago, the settlers were persuaded by the BN administration of Selangor to part with their land in a multi-million ringgit development scheme that went sour.

The land owners lost their land and the shirts on their backs. It was a typical greed-driven BN so called ‘fail safe’ get rich quick venture that incompetence, avarice and corruption all conspired to wreck even before the first brick was laid.

These settlers who had waited for their money for the last fifteen years, thirteen of which under successive BN state governments, quivered with excitement when they were told openly that there would be an initial small down payment with the rest on the way if BN won the Hulu Selangor seat.

I wonder what the Election Commission and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission chiefs thought about all this business of cash for votes, but I expect they have already decided, in a show of ‘independence’ that they say they are, that it is probably not worth making an issue over such an entrenched Umno cultural norm. Please do not take my word for it, but Umno does not deny that it has problems with money politics. Hulu Selangor is but an extension of that culture. In spite of claims to the contrary by the government, Malaysia is not an open, democratic nation.

That is precisely why the election authorities did not see fit to step in smartly and disqualify the bribe giver and declare Zaid Ibrahim the winner. Evidence of serious breaches of both the elections as well as anti-corruption acts is clear for all to see. I reminded of a saying which goes something like this. “There are none so blind as those who will not see.” The person who coined this could well have been thinking of our EC and the MACC.

An electoral victory it might have been for BN, but to me it is a victory as hollow as it is immoral. If this is an example of BN’s cavalier approach to ethical issues, then we are being short changed on 1 Malaysia. It will remain a mere slogan without strong moral and ethical underpinnings. The financial seduction of voters is a criminal offence, and for Najib to claim that he was not bribing the voters but merely solving their problems is disingenuous, but as I have pointed out on another occasion, Najib does not disappoint us in his ability to perfect the art of the possible. To him, the means justify the end.

The government has admitted to spending millions on a makeover of its image overseas, but it is money down the drain if it persists in behaviour which is patently at odds with international best practice. In this case Mr. Prime Minister, you really have to lead by example or give up 1 Malaysia as a lost cause.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 May 2010, 10:25 am and is filed under
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Latest tweets on killing of Aminulrasyid

Tq 4support proposal Hanif RCI #Aminulrasyid n police shooting deaths since 2005 Can 4MCA Ministers n MCA Youth support RT @weekasiongmp

04/30/2010 02:14 PM

AG not satisfied with probe #Aminulrasyid killing n sent back police papers This is just unacceptable Set up Hanif RCI into Aminul’s death!

04/30/2010 08:18 PM

Hisham’s useless toothless #Aminulrasyid “special panel” chaired by dep home minister AbuSeman cannot inquire or recommend Utter waste time!

04/30/2010 09:46 PM

#Aminulrasyid SpecialPanel Chairmn AbuSemen: Don’t want politicians-they have special interest. DeputyHomeMinister points finger at himself!

05/01/2010 05:47 AM

#Aminulrasyid Special Panel most useless body ever set up by govt in nation’s history-cannot investigate cannot make recommendations 2police

05/01/2010 05:51 AM

#Aminulrasyid SpPanel Chmn AbuSeman dare not reveal names of all 8members Where’s transparency? Dare not criticise IGP 4ransoming nation Where’s authority n legitimacy?

05/01/2010 05:58 AM

#Aminulrasyid Why IGP ask 4inquest when PAS MP Khalid produced 2nd witness on trigger-happy police shooting n not murder/homicide charge?

05/01/2010 06:21 AM

MCA Youth leader supports Tun Hanif RCI into police killing #Aminulrasyid Will Umno Youth n BNYouth also support? RT @Khairykj @weekasiongmp

05/01/2010 06:52 AM

Msia sends police 2join UNpeacekeeping missions abroad eg Timor-Leste Darfur Kosovo SierraLeone Cambodia  #Aminulrasyid Rthey trigger happy?

05/01/2010 07:17 AM

#Aminulrasyid Question 4IGP n Hisham – R all police grilled 2comply w UN Code of Conduct 4Law Enforcement Officials esp re use of firearms?

05/01/2010 07:21 AM

Have not expressed myself clearly When I put tat question I implied our police in UN missions are fully trained But why is there such high rate of trigger-happy police incidents inside country? RT @__earth

05/01/2010 09:36 AM

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 May 2010, 10:36 am and is filed under
Police
,
Twitter
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lost in Hulu: Lessons for Pakatan (3)

By
Bridget Welsh

Nationally people are wondering why a widely-respected candidate such as Zaid Ibrahim lost the Hulu Selangor by-election to a MIC unknown.

Yesterday, I described part of the story – the factors shaping the BN. Below I lay out the issues that undermined Pakatan Rakyat, drawing again from the campaign messaging, logistics and political dynamics.

Due to the size of the constituency and national political firepower they faced, this election tested Pakatan like never before. It showcases some deep weaknesses within the opposition that have to be addressed in order for Pakatan to win national power.

Ultimately, the real test will be whether Pakatan learns the lessons of strengthening cooperation and adapting to the new political environment. The fact of the matter is that they held their own, but underperformed. Underperformance is something that the opposition cannot afford to do if it seeks to take over Putrajaya.

On the back foot

From the beginning of the Hulu Selangor campaign, Pakatan was on the defensive. They did not set the tone of the campaign, having to respond to attacks on Zaid’s link to drinking and gambling, the Selangor Pakatan government and more.

NONEMuch of campaign, including the visit by PAS spiritual leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat in the last days of the campaign was tied to addressing the attacks on morality waged on PKR leaders. Rarely does a defensive posture engender a positive outcome.

This was exacerbated by a slow start to the campaign. Of the three component parties in Pakatan, PKR has the weakest machinery in Hulu Selangor. It took a few days for the party to sort out a productive working relationship on the ground internally and with the component parties in the opposition coalition.

Part of this had to do with resolving the issues of multiple sovereignty – the role of the state government and the role of the parties. The slow start was further enhanced by long-standing personality differences in style and outlook within Pakatan, and the opposition had to work to address these differences.

The election showed that the parties can work together effectively as they gained ground towards the latter part of the campaign. The DAP and PAS delivered effectively and all the parties worked well together – eventually. In a tight contest, however, every day counts.

Pakatan was slow off the mark and was unable to fully bridge the gap as it gained speed towards the finish line.

Stale and splintered messaging

Listening to the ceramah and observing the campaign paraphernalia, Pakatan seems locked in a time warp. The posters followed the same model of 2008, with the slogan “Hope for Malaysia”. The messages are two years old and resonated with the party faithful, not the swing voters.

Many voters asked what was new. The fact is that as Pakatan is in power in Selangor, the call for change or even reform has less political traction. In government, it is not adequate to use an anti-incumbent campaign. The cry of “reformasi” only served to strengthen the party faithful, not to secure new voters that Pakatan needed to assure a win.

hulu selangor by-election voting day 250410 pkr posterThe campaign also lacked a central theme. While some campaigners focused on contemporary issues such as the rival candidate, P Kamalanathan, others addressed concerns with Apco and even Altantuya Shaariibuu – the issue that was prominent in the Permatang Pauh by-election in August 2008.

The messages were all over the place, and, as such, it was not clear exactly what Pakatan stood for. Multi-ethnic inclusion? Reform? Anti-Umno? New leadership? The voters lacked an anchor to identify with. For some voters, particular messages did connect, such as the poster of Teoh Beng Hock, which was particularly present in the Chinese areas. For others, it was confusing and uninspiring.

This was reinforced by the fact that the opposition was hampered in getting its message out. In Hulu Selangor, the alternative media had limited impact, particularly in Ulu Bernam. The challenge of communication exacerbated the problems of messaging as Pakatan was disadvantaged in its ability to connect with the voters.

The state newspaper, Selangorkini – with only a few thousand copies – was a drop in the bucket to reach this large constituency. Pakatan nationally has the disadvantage due to its lack of access to traditional media, and in this type of constituency – semi-rural and diverse – this disadvantage is particularly acute.

More broadly, this speaks to a real need to improve how Pakatan communicates with the public.

Burden of wearing two hats

Even more challenging is the dual roles that Pakatan has – in government and opposition. It is very difficult to wear two hats politically, especially when the roles are the exact opposite of each other.

This election provided the first real opportunity for Pakatan to showcase its record at the state level and they failed this test. One main reason involves the failure to develop new messages for the new context and move beyond March 2008. Pakatan has yet to develop a new identity that is tied to its role in state governments post-March 2008. No one person can be blamed for this since it is a matter for the entire leadership of Pakatan.

Even more difficult is showcasing the successes of the state government in a constituency where the state government has made minimal impact. Hulu Selangor was a neglected constituency. This has to do with the fact that all three representatives for the state are in BN. Pakatan did not effectively engage this area before the election, especially in the Felda areas.

This was driven home as the campaign progressed and state politicians learned firsthand that many did not even know that Pakatan was in government. Some voters lived in a ‘BN bubble’. This illustrated serious shortcomings on the part of the state government.

There were exceptions such as Selangor excos Elizabeth Wong’s work in the Orang Asli areas or Ean Yong Hian Wah’s work in the Chinese new villages, which contributed to gains for PKR in these areas, but overall, particularly in Malay areas, the state government had limited engagement and deliverables that it could showcase effectively.

hulu selangor by-election 100410 pakatan dinner ulu yam baru khalid 02While Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim was highly popular and respected, the actions of the government as a whole did not come across to the key voters.

This was compounded by the fact that many problems in this constituency were associated with land. Traditionally land is a state matter, but on the ground it was difficult to resolve these issues since the jurisdiction of issues was not so clear cut.

Many problems had occurred in the previous BN state government – housing scams, land speculations, unfair land allocations, limited land rights, shoddy development – to name but a few. They remain unresolved and require the cooperation of the private sector, federal government and state government.

Sadly, the failure of these actors to work together to resolve issues for Selangor has hurt development in the state, and in the semi-rural parts of the state in particular. In the campaign, blame was cast largely on the new Pakatan state government unfairly to address these problems.

Come next election, Pakatan will have to address the concerns over land effectively in order to secure votes, and this will require working more effectively to accommodate the different actors involved. This only points to the serious work ahead that Pakatan needs to address as a state government to win votes.

Party of defectors, not leaders

Convincing voters that it can govern effectively is vital for the opposition’s future. This starts with the leadership of the opposition. Nationally, Pakatan has to come to terms that the attacks on Anwar Ibrahim have had their impact.

The opposition leader does not have the same level of popularity of 2008. In part, this was the product of his loss of credibility over the Sept 16 affair that lingers in the minds of voters. In part, this has to do with questions associated with the Sodomy II trial, although the majority of the electorate see this as a political ploy.

NONEIt nevertheless has cast a shadow over the future direction of the leadership of Pakatan. Voters want to be assured that the coalition they vote for has clear leadership and direction.

The major issue in this campaign was the impact of the defections. People supposedly loyal to Anwar, such at Hulu Selangor’s Dr Halili Rahmat, people who were touted by Anwar to be important PKR leaders and personal friends openly joined the other side. This raises questions about Anwar’s leadership that have to be addressed in order to win the confidence of the electorate.

PKR is becoming perceived as the party of defectors, not leaders. The defections also affected campaigning as they spilled over into weakening the local machinery resulting in the party relying heavily on outsiders to run the campaign.

Are the rats leaving a sinking ship? Or is the party finding out who is willing to commit to real reforms in government and stick with the fight? While these may be true, the impact of the defections was especially damaging in Malay areas, and had broader resonance.

Pakatan needs own identity

More fundamentally, Pakatan needs to come up with a programme for the future in government. Malaysian voters are pragmatic and want direction on the part of their leaders. Nationally, Prime Minister Najib Razak has adopted economic reform as his own platform. He has usurped the position as the reformer, at least symbolically.

Pakatan has yet to showcase a new set of ideas to address the current challenges. It has yet to engage with how the Najib leadership in BN has evolved and is evolving. Personal attacks on Najib are not adequate to win votes. They need a clear programme and direction, based on being in government at the state level and as a potential government nationally. It is no longer enough to be different from BN. Pakatan needs its own identity that voters can connect to.

Pakatan may have lost in Hulu Selangor. The bigger challenge is to make sure that it has not lost its direction. The by-election showed that the opposition is learning – it gained ground towards the end – but faces challenges in communication, leadership and identity.

If it wants to win power nationally, it has to take bold steps to engage the electorate and current political conditions. To avoid getting lost and further losses, Pakatan has to avoid internal blame and recognised that voters want change to be more than symbolic.

DR BRIDGET WELSH is associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 May 2010, 9:00 am and is filed under
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.