Obama’s Malaysia Test

Bridget Welsh

Project Syndicate

APR 25, 2014

KUALA LUMPUR – When Barack Obama lands in Malaysia this weekend, his two-day stopover will be the first visit by a US president since 1966. Unfortunately, human rights will probably not be on the agenda. Even as Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s government pursues yet another politically motivated case against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, the United States, by refusing to schedule a meeting with Anwar, has signaled that it will not stand up for justice in Malaysia.

In fact, the Obama administration has refused to treat Malaysia like a normal country and engage leaders from all sides – a stance that has emboldened Najib to move against Anwar, whose coalition received a higher proportion of the popular vote in the May 2013 election than Obama did in the 2012 US election. And the many serious challenges to human rights and governance in Malaysia do not end with politicized convictions of opposition leaders. Just days after Obama declared last October that Malaysia was a model of “diversity and tolerance,” Malaysian authorities denied non-Muslims the right to use the word “Allah” in the practice of their own faiths – a decision condemned throughout the Muslim world for its negative portrayal of Islam.

Moreover, members of Najib’s government endorse hudud, a class of penalties within sharia law that could imply strict limitations on Muslims’ right to choose how they practice their faith. According to the US State Department’s own human-rights reports, curbs on religious freedoms have included demolition of Hindu temples, bombings of Christian churches, and a ban on the practice of Shia Islam, to which some 15% of the world’s Muslims adhere. Likewise, according to the Pew Research Center, Najib’s government has “very high” restrictions on religious freedom.

International measures of press freedom and corruption reveal persistent deficits as well. Malaysia’s mainstream media, owned and controlled by the ruling coalition in power since 1957, regularly fabricate stories. Most recently, coverage of the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 has blamed the US, effectively belittling the support of American personnel and other resources in the search effort. And, in its latest report, Global Financial Integrity ranked Malaysia second in the world for illicit capital movements, reflecting years of outflows from a massive informal economy tied to corruption.

Malaysia’s institutional problems extend to elections. The Electoral Integrity Project ranked the 2013 election 66th for polls held worldwide last year – placing it firmly in the lowest tier, below Pakistan and Iran. Indeed, the government lost the popular vote and took power with a margin of parliamentary seats that was lower than the number of constituencies where serious irregularities were reported. And, given the country’s politicized judiciary, most electoral petitions were summarily dismissed on technical grounds, with many candidates denied even the right to present their cases. (The Najib government promised to address the irregularities; a year later, no investigation has begun.)

Rather than strengthening democracy, Najib has chosen to increase cash handouts, straining government finances with a $10 billion expansion of a race-based affirmative-action program that favors Malays. And he is accommodating his party’s chauvinist elements, led by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. Racist discourse – tinged with anti-Western rhetoric that Najib has ignored – has reached fever pitch, with right-wing groups openly advocating intolerance and racial hatred. Not surprisingly, this has compromised much-needed economic reforms and is causing deterioration in the business environment.

Malaysia’s economy is caught, moreover, in the middle-income trap, unable to “graduate” to advanced-country status. In an effort to attract much-needed foreign capital, Najib has introduced the Goods and Service Tax (GST) and cut back on subsidies; but this has not been accompanied by fiscal prudence or effective measures to stanch the leakages from corruption and cronyism.

Citizens have been hard hit by rising inflation and record-high household debt, which now stands at 80.5% of GDP. The government is failing to provide an adequate supply of even basic necessities, with water rationing now in effect.

As a result, the government’s popularity has plummeted, contributing to the Najib government’s inability to muster public support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the proposed mega-regional trade agreement with the US and ten other Pacific Rim countries. The government has already issued a statement that Obama’s visit will not yield progress on the TPP, indicative of the prevailing lack of confidence in the measure.

America’s role in Malaysia is highly polarizing. The Malaysian government has already interpreted Obama’s visit as an endorsement of Najib’s leadership, while opposition activists accuse the US of abandoning its democratic principles and whitewashing the government’s growing authoritarianism.

This does not serve America’s long-term interests in Asia, where it is viewed increasingly negatively – particularly in Malaysia. According to the latest Asia Barometer Survey, only 30% of Malaysians – the lowest share in Southeast Asia – view the US favorably, with negative sentiment most highly concentrated among young people and Muslims. A visit by Obama that fails to address Malaysia’s fundamental political and economic challenges will erode America’s standing further.

Such a visit will also raise further questions about what Obama actually stands for. From Egypt to Ukraine and beyond, there is a deepening global perception that America’s commitment to fighting racism and intolerance, defending human rights, upholding good governance, and promoting free and fair elections has faltered under Obama. This week’s long-overdue trip will carry enormous symbolism. That is why it could haunt America for years to come.

Bridget Welsh is an associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 26 April 2014, 3:36 am and is filed under
Foreign
,
International
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Royal Navy submarine abandons search for MH370

By  Ben Farmer, Defence Correspondent

The Telegraph

25 Apr 2014

A Royal Navy submarine has ended its search for the missing Malaysia Airlines passenger jet as a senior US defence official conceded the hunt for MH370 may now take years.

The Ministry of Defence in London said HMS Tireless had stood down after combing the southern Indian Ocean with its advanced sonar scanners, looking for the airliner’s black box.

The decision to stand down the Trafalgar Class hunter killer submarine was made after Australian commanders coordinating the international search said there was no chance of hearing more ‘pings’ from the lost black box.

A statement said: “With the Australian command assessing that there is no prospect of further acoustic detections associated with the aircraft black boxes, HMS Tireless has been stood down.”

A senior US defence official told the Reuters news agency that a fortnight of scouring the Indian Ocean floor with a US Navy submersible drone had turned up no wreckage.

Searchers would now have to increase the scope of their hunt.

“We went all in on this small area and didn’t find anything. Now you’ve got to go back to the big area,” he said.

“And now you’re talking years.”

HMS Tireless has been working alongside the survey ship HMS Echo looking for the airliner which disappeared on March 8 with 239 passengers and crew on board flying from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

Cdr R Hywel Griffiths, the submarine’s commander, said the vessel had searched 7,000 square nautical miles in 16 days.

He said: “The only submarine participating, Tireless, with her advanced underwater search capability, is ideally suited to this challenging task.

He went on: “I am also very proud of the professionalism and enthusiasm of my ship’s company. My highly trained and experienced young team of sonar operators were key to this operation, supported by the steadfast commitment of the remainder of my team, some in their very first months at sea.”

HMS Echo is currently heading for a port in western Australia to take on supplies, having supported the search in recent weeks.

Although the most promising efforts have been focused underwater, an extensive air and surface search is still continuing, nearly seven weeks after the loss of the jet.

On Friday up to eight military aircraft and 10 ships working on visual searches of an area of about 19,000 square miles.

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak told CNN on Thursday that his government will release a preliminary report on the plane’s disappearance next week.

The report has already been sent to the United Nation’s International Civil Aviation Organization, but has yet to be made available to the public, CNN reported.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 26 April 2014, 8:06 am and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP Muslim MP waves off PAS’ hudud move

Malaysiakini

Apr 26, 2014

Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz, one of only two DAP Muslim MPs, says he is obligated to support hudud law because of his religion but will still not back PAS’ private member’s bill on the matter.

 The Raub MP said regardless of personal views, the  reality is the country’s secular constitution  and if PAS wants to implement hudud law it must first push for a new Islamic constitution.

Until then, Ariff Sabri said PAS should not force other Muslims to back it’s hudud plan by questioning their faith.

 “PAS must do the right thing first – secure parliament and change the constitution

 “Unless they do this, they can’t push through a bill hoping to capitalise on some sort of religious blackmail.

 “I don’t support your bill therefore I am not a good Muslim or even an infidel? I don’t agree with you does not mean I lack faith ,” he said in a blog posting today under his pen name Sakmongkol.

 Ariff Sabri said he would not wear his opposition like a “badge of honour” but neither would he be “spineless” like Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s apparently ambiguous stance.

 Najib had yesterday declared Umno was “not opposed” to hudud law but said there were several obstacles that needed to be scrutinised.

‘Don’t engage in religious blackmail’

 “I hope PAS isn’t going to lower its esteem  of other Muslim MPs who will not support PAS even though we are from the same political grouping. There are also Muslim MPs in PKR.

 “As PAS does not have majority control of parliament, it should not propose this bill,” said Ariff Sabri.

 He added that if PAS is adamant, then it should consider DAP national organising secretary Anthony Loke’s suggestion that PAS leave Pakatan Rakyat.

 Ariff Sabri stressed his stance on hudud law was not “entirely” because of DAP’s official stand.

 “I want to make it clear to DAP that personally as a Muslim I am obligated to support hudud by trying to be as good a Muslim as I can be.

 “As a party member, I stand by what the party stands for. I believe DAP accepts my personal stand,” he said.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 27 April 2014, 5:43 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Islam
,
Parliament
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Moratorium call on statements by Pakatan Rakyat leaders on latest hudud controversy to refer issue to Majlis Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat for decision

(Media Statement in Gelang Patah on Sunday, 27th April 2014)

For the first time in six years after the “political tsunami” of the 12GE in March 2008, the overly-paid strategists, plotters and schemers of UMNO/BN must be feeling on top of the world and rubbing their hands with glee for they have finally vindicated their existence and colossal expenditures.

They believe that they have struck gold and have finally succeeded in putting in place their formula to ensure the end of the political threat posed by Pakatan Rakyat and the return to Putrajaya of UMNO and BN in the 14GE by the perpetuation of the political and power structure of Umno/BN even in the years after 2020.

Three days ago, the Deputy Mentri Besar of Kelantan, Datuk Nik Mohd Amar Nik Abdullah publicly said that DAP and PKR should stay off the hudud bill controversy on the ground that “they have no right to interfere” in the PAS agenda to implement hudud in Kelantan.

He said that in the common policy framework signed among Pakatan Rakyat component parties on September 28, 2011, PAS only agreed to not impose on its long-standing objective for Malaysia to be recognised as an Islamic State.

He said the agreement is limited at the national level but in the context of Kelantan it is different because hudud was enacted way back in 1993, before the opposition pact was realised.

He said he did not understand why DAP and PKR are questioning PAS motives when there is a difference between a federal and state manifesto as PAS is not departing from the agreement by enforcing hudud in the Muslim-majority state of Kelantan.

This led the DAP National Organising Secretary Anthony Loke to riposte the next day that if PAS wanted to act on a unilateral basis on the hudud issue, it should quit Pakatan Rakyat as this would be going against the consensus in Pakatan.

Overnight, Pakatan Rakyat appears to be confronted with the worst crisis since it was first formed after the 2008 general elections, something which the overly-paid UMNO/BN strategists, plotters and schemers had never been able to achieve despite all their plots and provocations in the past six years.

Both Nik Amar and Anthony should have been more restrained in the public arena in view of the many in Umno/BN who seeking to “fish in troubled waters”, creating a situation which, in the Chinese saying, cause “friends to grieve and enemies to rejoice”.

Let all Pakatan Rakyat leaders, whether DAP, PAS or PKR, continue to be guided by the PR common policy framework and consensus so as to give hope to Malaysians for the long-needed changes in the political landscape in the country if Malaysia is to become a united, democratic, competitive and prosperous nation which holds itself out as beacon of light of a successful multi-racial and multi-religious nation to of the rest the world.

The September 28, 201l consensus of the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council referred to by Mohamad Amar, reaffirming that hudud is not a Pakatan Rakyat agenda, is as follows:

KENYATAAN BERSAMA MAJLIS PIMPINAN PAKATAN RAKYAT

28 September 2011

Mesyuarat Pakatan Rakyat malam ini memperakui dan mempertahankan dasar-dasar bersama yang telah dipersetujui sebelum ini sepertimana terkandung dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan, Dasar Bersama dan Buku Jingga.

Pakatan Rakyat terus memperteguhkan iltizam politik bagi mempertingkatkan daya-saing ekonomi, pendapatan rakyat, mutu pendidikan, kesihatan dan menangani kos kehidupan yang semakin menekan.

Mesyuarat juga memperakui dan menghormati perbedaan ideologi setiap parti dalam Pakatan Rakyat sebagai sebuah permuafakatan demokratik, termasuk pendirian PAS berkenaan hukum syariah.

Mesyuarat juga memperakui kewujudan Enakmen Jenayah Syariah II Kelantan 1993 dan enakmen Jenayah Syariah Terengganu 2003 yakni sebelum wujudnya muafakat Pakatan Rakyat. Keadilan dan PAS menghormati perbezaan pendirian oleh DAP dalam perkara ini.

Mesyuarat Pakatan Rakyat juga mempertegaskan bahawa kami tidak akan terheret dengan mainan politik terdesak Umno-Barisan Nasional untuk memecah belahkan kesatuan Pakatan Rakyat. Kita percaya penuh di atas kematangan dan kebijaksanaan rakyat untuk menilai suasana ini.

Mesyuarat sekali lagi mempertegaskan bahawa muafakat dan objektif utama politik parti-parti komponen PR dalam Pilihanraya Umum (PRU) ke-13 ini adalah untuk membina kembali asas-asas kenegaraan yang telah dirosakkan oleh Umno-BN, dengan berpandukan prinsip Keadilan Sejagat (UniversalJustice), Pentadbiran yang Baik (Good Governance), Kebertanggungjawaban (Accountability), Ketelusan (Transparency), Kompetensi (Competency) bagi mencapai Kemaslahatan Umum (Public Good) untuk semua rakyat.

YB DATO SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM

YB TUAN LIM KIT SIANG

YB DATO SERI TUAN GURU HJ ABDUL HADI AWANG

Pakatan Rakyat component parties and leaders must always be aware of the plot of UMNO strategists, plotters and schemers to cause the disintegration of Pakatan Rakyat by magnifying differences where we have “agreed to disagree”, and to adhere strictly to the common policy framework arrived at by the Pakatan Rakyat parties to be the common national agenda for the country.

In these circumstances, I would call for an immediate moratorium on statements by Pakatan Rakyat leaders on latest hudud controversy and to refer the issue to Majlis Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat for decision.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 27 April 2014, 3:25 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Islamic state
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Open letter to the President of the United States

 – Tony Pua

The Malaysian Insider

April 26, 2014

Dear President Barack Obama,

Welcome to my country, my home, my beautiful Malaysia.

We Malaysians are extremely proud that an American president, the first in 48 years, decided to visit our humble country.

Although you are an American, Malaysians together with the rest of the world celebrated with you when you won the historic presidential election in 2008.

To quote your predecessor, President George Bush, your “journey represents a triumph of the American story”.

I was personally moved and inspired by your victory acceptance speech in Chicago, “If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer… at this defining moment, change has come to America.”

Hence you would surely remember and appreciate the struggles of African Americans in the history of the United States for freedom, justice and equality.

Article 1, Section 2 of 1787 first constitution of the United States had defined African-Americans as “three-fifths of a person”.

In the landmark US Supreme Court case of Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), it was decided that African-Americans, whether slave or free, could not be American citizens.

Even after the Civil War and the abolition of slavery by the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (1865), the white supremacists had subverted the objective of these changes by using various strategies to disfranchise their black citizens.

The subversion of the US Constitution was even endorsed directly and indirectly by the presidents and the Congress of the era to enforce segregation and discrimination.

It is only through the continued political efforts of the African-American civil rights movements in the 1950s and 1960s, culminating in the Civil Rights Act (1964), which outlawed discrimination, based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, in workplaces and by facilities that served the general public.

Four decades later, the world witnessed the inauguration of the first African-American president of the United States.

We were inspired, and we celebrated because in Malaysia, we face very similar challenges, challenges which we are still struggling to overcome.

Minority races in the country are discriminated politically, socially and economically.

No Malaysian can ever imagine the possibility of a non-Malay ever becoming the prime minister of the country.

Race and religious issues are exploited extensively and openly to entrench the powers of the ruling elite.

Civil liberties are curbed via a web of Draconian laws, with the complicity and collusion of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.

The late Karpal Singh, the former chairman of my party, was found guilty of sedition, for simply expressing our Federal Constitution.

The government even wanted him jailed for the “offense”, even though he was pretty much paralysed from the waist down.

The leader of the opposition, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been politically and unjustly persecuted and previously jailed since 1998.

Even I myself am under the threat of being disqualified as a member of Parliament and risk being jailed for up to 2 years if I were to be found guilty of “illegal assembly” for taking part in a peaceful candlelight vigil.

What’s more, religious freedom in the country is becoming increasingly suppressed, with religious extremism rearing its ugly head.

Malaysia is the only country in the world where the term “Allah” is deemed exclusive to Muslims, a position which our Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has openly endorsed.

Malay-language Bibles have been seized. The Church is currently prosecuted in the Courts while religious leaders are being outrageously investigated for sedition.

Mr President, needless to say, I am certain your diplomatic corps would have also brief you on the extensive corrupt practices as well as abuses of power by our government to enrich the influential elite and their cronies.

53% of Malaysians voted for a change of government in the last general election held a year ago.

Unfortunately, due to extensive gerrymandering, media manipulation as well as corrupt electoral practices, the aspirations of change by the ordinary Malaysians could not be achieved.

Hence it is our hope that your visit will not just be about “trade-relations”, the diplomatic euphemism for “profit maximization”, and “regional security”.

Malaysians hope that your visit to Malaysia can be a beacon of light in these difficult times.

We hope that you will be able to share your personal journey and the fight by great American leaders against institutionalized racism and discrimination to make it possible for you to become elected as the president of United States, the leader of the free world.

Malaysians too, dream of the day discrimination, marginalization and segregation by race, religion, colour and sex will be a thing of the past, and all Malaysians will be given equal opportunities and just treatment.

Mr President, with all due respect, we do not need you to visit our country to tell us that our country is a standout example of moderation, because it is not.

Or for you to praise our government that it is a model plural society living in peace and harmony, because it is a façade.

We need you, Mr President, to speak of the universal virtues of humankind, of the principles your forefathers upheld and sacrificed for.

We want you to speak of the importance of basic human rights, equality, freedom and fundamental democratic principles.

We want to know that the president of United States still believe in the protection and promotion of civil liberties throughout the world – those very liberties which allowed you to be in your position today.

We hope, Mr President, you will carry on the legacy of one of the world’s best loved civil rights activist, Dr Martin Luther King, who believed in non-violent civil disobedience.

You have rightly honoured his achievements in your speech celebrating the 50th anniversary of Dr King’s famous speech in November last year.  You told us:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

“…We rightly and best remember Dr King’s soaring oratory that day, how he gave mighty voice to the quiet hopes of millions, how he offered a salvation path for oppressed and oppressors alike. His words belong to the ages, possessing a power and prophecy unmatched in our time.

“…and because they kept marching, America changed. Because they marched, the civil rights law was passed. Because they marched, the voting rights law was signed. Because they marched, doors of opportunity and education swung open so their daughters and sons could finally imagine a life for themselves beyond washing somebody else’s laundry or shining somebody else’s shoes. Because they marched, city councils changed and state legislatures changed and Congress changed and, yes, eventually the White House changed.  Because they marched, America became more free and more fair…”

We Malaysians hope that you, Mr President will share your dreams with Malaysians and the rest of the world, just as Dr King did so with Americans, in that “soaring oratory”, where he said:

“I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.’ I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.”

Mr President, Malaysians have a dream too, and we hope, from the bottom of our hearts, you will share our dreams.

Thank you, Mr President. We hope you will enjoy our acclaimed Malaysian hospitality. – April 26, 2014.

* Tony Pua is a member of Parliament for Petaling Jaya Utara and DAP’s National Publicity Secretary.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 27 April 2014, 1:24 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Good Governance
,
Human Rights
,
Impian Malaysia
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will Obama assist democracy in Malaysia?

By Anwar Ibrahim

Washington Post

April 25

For 15 years, the people of Malaysia have been immersed in our own Arab Spring. After enduring a corrupt and authoritarian regime for more than five decades, an era has emerged in which we are standing up for our rights.

For the first time in our history, the voices of reform and democracy represent the majority. In last year’s general election, the popular vote in favor of the opposition would have swept from power the authoritarian regime of Najib Razak and the party that has ruled Malaysia since its independence in 1957. In its place would have been the Pakatan Rakyat (People’s Alliance), poised to push the nation on the path to greater freedom and democracy. Alas, widespread fraud and devious gerrymandering perpetrated by the ruling party, a situation the White House noted, affected the outcome. A study conducted by Harvard ranked Malaysia as having one of the worst records on electoral integrity in the world.

Despite this setback, the Malaysian people have remained steadfast. Despite anger and frustration over our government’s continued corruption and abuse of power, we have pursued a peaceful approach to educating and engaging with the masses. Thousands have come to hear our message and embrace our cause.

President Obama’s visit to Malaysia this weekend comes at a pivotal time. It would be an opportune moment to live up to the ideals Obama espoused in his campaign and the early days of his administration. Then, there was hope that U.S. engagement with Muslim countries would be based on mutual respect and mutual interest. Yet as the Arab Spring came and went, hope was eclipsed by disappointment. It is baffling that the United States can talk about a democratic transition in Egypt today as hundreds of innocent people are sentenced to death while thousands languish in prison.

In Malaysia, there is an opportunity to take a different path.

Our agenda for Malaysia is straightforward. We envision a nation that enforces the rule of law; a country where judges are independent of executive influence, the media are free and the election commission conducts its affairs unfettered by the dictates of the ruling party. We would fight corruption by guaranteeing the independence of the Anticorruption Commission and removing the laws that make government procurements opaque.

In our Malaysia, all media would be independent and free to shine sunlight on excesses of power, be they in government or the private sector. Most certainly we would repeal draconian laws, such as the Sedition Act, so they cannot be used to muzzle political opponents. In our pursuit of a robust and dynamic economy, social justice principles would prevail over unfettered accumulation of wealth by the rich and powerful. Rent-seeking projects would no longer be allowed to be masqueraded as infrastructure spending, nor would the misappropriation of state funds be permitted under the guise of subsidy cuts while higher and higher taxes are foisted on the middle and lower classes to pay the bills.

In tending to the needs of all races, the Pakatan Rakyat envisions a pluralistic society in which moderate Islam coexists harmoniously with other faiths whose espousal is a fundamental liberty under the federal constitution. It would be a far cry from the diabolical politics of the ruling party, which purveys to the Western world its facade of moderation in religious and race relations while pursuing a policy of race baiting and incitement to religious hatred — abuses widely documented by groups including Suaram and Human Rights Watch. With the print and electronic media under the regime’s full control, rumors are spread about an imminent government takeover by Christians, threats of violence are hurled against non-Muslims, Bibles are seized and bishops get hauled in by the police for interrogation. My address to a congregation in a Catholic church one Sunday was condemned as an act of apostasy.

No doubt Malaysia’s media will shower praises on the regime in the wake of Obama’s visit. Malaysia has descended to 145th place on the Reporters Without Borders index of media freedom, so it takes some effort for Malaysians to get the truth. And the truth is that the U.S. pivot to Asia should not merely be about trade and investment or the creation of alliances of the world’s great powers, important as these goals may be. The values of freedom and democracy must remain paramount, and even if Wilsonian idealism appears to be on the wane, Jeffersonian ideals still resonate with the people in this part of the world.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 27 April 2014, 5:35 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Human Rights
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Fruitless search for MH370 will scour larger area of ocean floor, says Tony Abbott

Lisa Cox

Sydney Morning Herald

April 28, 2014

The search for Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 will enter a new phase after 52 days of searching failed to find any sign of the plane wreckage, Prime Minister Tony Abbott has announced.

On Monday, Mr Abbott said it was highly unlikely that any debris from the plane would be found on the ocean surface.

But Mr Abbott defended the search operation in the southern Indian Ocean, saying authorities remain confident that signals detected weeks ago were from a black box recorder.

“Most difficult search in human history”: Prime Minister Tony Abbott addresses the media with the chief of the Joint Agency Co-ordination Centre, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston.

Speaking in Canberra, Mr Abbott said the “most difficult search in human history” would switch its focus to underwater operations over an expanded area – roughly 700 kilometres by 80 kilometres.

The Bluefin-21 submersible, which has been criticised as unreliable, will still be used to search the ocean floor, along with specialised sonar equipment towed by ships that will scan the seabed for wreckage.

“We will do everything we humanly can, everything we reasonably can, to solve this mystery. We will not let people down,” Mr Abbott said.

“While the search will be moving to a new phase in coming weeks, it certainly is not ending.

“By this stage, 52 days into the search, most material would have become waterlogged and sunk.

“With the distances involved, all of the aircraft are operating at close to the limit of sensible and safe operation. Therefore, we are moving from the current phase to a phase which is focused on searching the ocean floor over a much larger area.”

The new search phase will cost “in the order of $60 million”, Mr Abbott said.

MH370 vanished on March 8 carrying 239 people, including six Australians.

It would be a “terrible outcome” for the families of those on board if the plane was not found, Mr Abbott said.

Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, who has been co-ordinating the search, said the revised search could take up to eight months to complete.

He said searchers were still confident they were searching in the right area.

“If everything goes perfectly, I would say we will be doing well if we do it in eight months,” he said.

“But then you have issues, potential issues, with weather, potential issues with equipment. Witness what’s happened with the ‘Bluefin-21′, a number of teething problems with it.”

Mr Abbott defended his handling of the search and his declaration at the time the signals were detected that searchers were confident they were in the right area.

“Our way of operating at all times has been to release credible information as soon as we’ve had it so that we could be as transparent as possible,” Mr Abbott said.

“We still have a considerable degree of confidence that the detections that were picked up using the equipment deployed from Ocean Shield were from a black box recorder.

“We are still baffled and disappointed that we haven’t been able to find undersea wreckage based on those detections.”

A preliminary report into the plane’s disappearance by the United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organisation has been handed to Malaysian authorities and is expected to be released to the public this week. The report is expected to recommend real-time tracking of commercial aircraft.

with AAP

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 April 2014, 4:35 pm and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is MCA president Liong Tiong Lai prepared to declare that MCA will not return to BN Cabinet unless Najib gives assurance that the secular Malaysian Constitution will be upheld including no hudud laws and the retraction of Mahathir’s “929” declaration that Malaysia is an  Islamic State?

I am quite amused by the ferocious statement by the MCA deputy secretary-general Datuk Wee Jeck Seng demanding that DAP “kick out” Lim Guan Eng and myself “for agreeing with hudud” and  as “payback” for going back on our promises.

Amused because I could still remember vividly that Jeck Seng was initially dropped as a candidate for Tanjong Piai parliamentary seat in Johore in the 13th General Elections last year, and overnight the MCA and Barisan Nasional flags and symbols not only disappeared from Pontian area, DAP received feelers that he was prepared to contest on a DAP ticket in Tanjong Piai as he did not fancy contesting in  the Johor State Assembly constituency of Pekan Nenas to which he was assigned.

DAP would have no truck with such a political opportunist but Jeck Seng got back the Tanjong Piai parliamentary seat after his supporters kicked up quite a furore against the decision of the then MCA President, Datuk Seri Dr. Chua Soi Lek.

With such an “outstanding” political background, whatever Jeck Seng says needed to taken with more than a pinch of salt and no one is surprised that his statement yesterday was built on a great lie – that DAP leaders have agreed to the implementation of hudud.

Sin Chew Daily had reported in a box in the past few days what it described as the three-point agreement of the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council on hudud on Sept. 28, 2011, which is not a very correct version or translation (particularly Point 1) of the PR Leadership Joint Statement signed by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on behalf of PKR, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang on behalf of PAS and myself on behalf of DAP, as the relevant  two paragraphs were as follows:

“Mesyuarat juga memperakui kewujudan Enakmen Jenayah Syariah II Kelantan 1993 dan enakmen Jenayah Syariah Terengganu 2003 yakni sebelum wujudnya muafakat Pakatan Rakyat. Keadilan dan PAS menghormati perbezaan pendirian oleh DAP dalam perkara ini.

“Mesyuarat sekali lagi mempertegaskan bahawa muafakat dan objektif utama politik parti-parti komponen PR dalam Pilihanraya Umum (PRU) ke-13 ini adalah untuk membina kembali asas-asas kenegaraan yang telah dirosakkan oleh Umno-BN, dengan berpandukan prinsip Keadilan Sejagat (UniversalJustice), Pentadbiran yang Baik (Good Governance), Kebertanggungjawaban (Accountability), Ketelusan (Transparency), Kompetensi (Competency) bagi mencapai Kemaslahatan Umum (Public Good) untuk semua rakyat.”

It is therefore completely incorrect, misleading and irresponsible for the MCA and BN leadership to allege that the DAP and the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council had agreed to the implementation of hudud in Kelantan – what more the wild and reckless allegations that DAP leaders had “tricked and misled” non-Muslims to support PAS by “white-washing PAS to non-Muslims just to win votes”.

DAP stand on hudud had always been constant and consistent, that it is unconstitutional and not suitable for a plural nation like Malaysia.

DAP leaders have never shied away anywhere from admitting DAP’s differences with PAS on the questions of Islamic state and hudud, and even PAS leaders have publicly admitted that a vote for PAS in the 13 General Elections was not a vote for hudud, but a vote for the Pakatan Rakyat’s common programme of upholding justice, ensuring democracy, restoring the independence and professionalism of important national institutions destroyed by UMNO/Barisan Nasional and promoting national unity among Malaysians regardless of race, religion, class or territory.

It is the MCA and its leadership which must prove that they are principled and have not betrayed the founding MCA principles.

Recently, the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib said that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud. Is this the stand of the present MCA and current MCA President  Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai?

What Najib said is clearly against the stand  taken by the first three Prime Ministers of Malaysia, founding Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, second Prime Minister Tun Razak and the third Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn and all the previous MCA Presidents before Datuk Seri Dr. Ling Liong Sik!

Is Liong Tiong Lai prepared to declare that MCA will not return to the Barisan Nasional  Cabinet unless Najib gives assurance that the secular Malaysian Constitution will be upheld including no hudud laws and the retraction of the fourth Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s arbitrary and unconstitutional “929” declaration in 2001  (Sept. 29) that Malaysia is an Islamic State?

Or is Liow and the present MCA leadership more interested in getting back the perks of office as Ministers and Deputy Ministers even though the BN Prime Minister and Cabinet had undergone another sea-change in policy from the founding Constitutional principle of a secular Malaysia of no hudud laws to one which does not reject hudud laws?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 April 2014, 2:51 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Islam
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why hudud is unconstitutional and impractical

– Low Teck Kuan

The Malaysian Insider

April 26, 2014

PAS has recently been extremely persistent in pushing for the implementation of hudud in Kelantan. Despite numerous warnings by other political parties against their agenda, PAS seems hell bent on introducing a Private Members Bill in Parliament to further their own political agenda.

However, here lies the big question: Is it possible to implement one set of criminal law (hudud) in one state and have the rest of other states and Federal Territories obeying another set of criminal law?

Certainly no, because let’s be clear on this, you cannot have one set of law for one state on crime and another set of criminal law for other states. Not only it is impractical, it also seeks to disrupt the basic structure and relationship between the Federal and the states which was laid down by our founding father Tunku Abdul Rahman. It is also unconstitutional as PAS’s constant attempt at introducing hudud also seeks usurp federal powers at the same time.

Part VI of the Federal Constitution defines the relations between Federal and the states, where therein lies Article 73 to 79 of the Federal Constitution which laid down Parliament’s (Federal level) exclusive power to make law. Specifically, Article 74 (1) states that “…Parliament may make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the Federal List or the Concurrent List…” while Article 74(2) states that “…the Legislature of a State may make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List…”

And if we look at the Federal list which is the First fist set out in the ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution, internal security (including police, criminal investigation, public order etc.) clearly forms part of the Federal’s exclusive power and responsibility. Any attempt by any states to usurp this power is therefore unconstitutional. Even Article 75 demonstrates Federal’s superiority over all other states, where it is stated that “if any State law is inconsistent with a Federal law, the Federal law shall prevail and the State law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void”. Supremacy of the Federal Constitution as stated under Articles 4(1) also provides for the prevalence of the Federal Constitution against any conflicting laws passed by Parliament.

Crime is and has always been under the Federal’s jurisdiction, not the state. You cannot have one criminal court sentencing criminals to stoning or amputation with the rest of the country’s criminals committing the same offence being jailed. Even the police force will be acting separately and confused. It’s akin to Kelantan seceding, running and acting on its own. It also creates a dangerous precedent where any one state could at any time decide and choose to act on Federal matters on its own which will defeat the very purpose of forming a federation in the first place.

In addition, implementation of hudud is clearly unconstitutional as it seeks to cover crimes that are already well covered in the Penal Code. Although PAS legal bureau chairperson Mohamed Hanipa Maidin disagreed and stated that two criminal justice systems namely civil law and syariah law, have existed “since the time the federal constitution was created” and therefore is constitutional. However, I beg to differ as Syariah offences tried in the Syariah Court are only permitted on the premise that the State law stipulating Syariah offences is not in conflict with the Penal Code. Syariah Court only has jurisdictions over Islamic criminal offenses that are not covered by Federal law.

Common crimes, such as theft, murder, rape and any other offences which are already covered by the Penal Code are obviously beyond the state’s reach. By attempting to introduce hudud which has the effects of replacing provisions in the Penal Code, it is essentially in conflict of it and thereby unconstitutional. A good case to note here is the case of Che Omar bin Che Soh v. Public Prosecutor [1988] 2 M.L.J. 55, where the Court held that although Islam is the religion of the federation, it is not the basic law of the land and Article 3 (on Islam) does not impose any limit on Parliament to legislate. Therefore, Federal law takes precedence.

To implement hudud, PAS will need to significantly alter the Federal Constitution and redefine the basic structure of Federal-state relationship and responsibilities that has proven to be successful since the Merdeka days. Is it then advisable for us now to allow PAS to disrupt this core system and let Kelantan manage crime on their own with their own set of police force and criminal court? What happens then if there is a conflict between Federal and state institutions during execution of these two distinct laws? For example, what if a Kelantan Muslim commits a crime in other state? Or a non-Kelantan Muslim who commits a crime in Kelantan, but ran off to Penang? Which set of law applies? Should these people too be subjected to hudud law? Which police force will be responsible to nab them? Is the civil criminal court responsible to hear this crime? Or the Syariah criminal court?

Perhaps the more pressing question will be, does the Kelantan Muslims even want to be subjected to hudud where other Muslims living outside Kelantan would not? What if they still want to be governed by the existing Penal Code? Do they want to be treated differently from the rest?

Should Malaysian Muslims and non-Muslims alike who reside outside Kelantan start subjecting Kelantan Muslims to different treatments? Thereby discriminating them? Is it even just, fair and equitable to do so?

Have the wise ulamas in PAS ever considered these possible jurisdictional and enforcement problems? They could not even offer a constructive solution to the existing conflicts between two sets of law on marriage yet (Deepa’s case), what guarantees do we have that they can solve more complex situations as mentioned above? Especially when it comes to crime where hudud punishments and repercussions are more severe and long lasting?

The Federal Constitution was written by our founding father Tunku Abdul Rahman to be supreme. Since our early school days, we were taught to cite the Rukun Tetangga every Monday morning. One of the key Rukun was “Kedaulatan Undang-Undang”, which simply means the “Supremacy of the Constitution”. Tunku Abdul Rahman wanted us to remember that the Constitution is supreme and any attempt to alter its nature and structure must be defended against fervently.

By PAS seeking to introduce hudud, PAS is essentially trying to erode Federal’s exclusive power on crime and alter the system that our founding father had put in place which is clearly wrong. This is the one of the reasons why Karpal Singh fought against the implementation of Hudud, not because he was against Islam (and so do I, as I sincerely believe that Islam is a good religion) but that he was against any attempt by anyone to undermine the mechanism that defines and functions this country which is the Federal Constitution. In fact, throughout Karpal’s years of service as a Member of Parliament he had not opposed any other policies or laws which were formulated based on Islamic principles (such as Islamic banking).

Hence, in the good memory of Tunku Abdul Rahman and Karpal Singh, and in protecting the fundamentals and principles that were laid down by them, all Members of Parliament should oppose PAS’s attempt to introduce hudud (not on the basis that they are against Islam) but on the basis that there is a need to preserve Federal jurisdiction and protect the Federal Constitution. PAS should also reconsider its stance in seeking to push through Hudud in Kelantan due to its unconstitutionality and impracticality. Even if the Bill is passed on a simple majority in Parliament allowing Kelantan to adopt hudud, it will still be unconstitutional and can easily be challenged in the Court of law on grounds that it conflicts with the Penal Code.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 April 2014, 6:50 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Islam
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Karpal’s last thoughts on hudud, sedition act and ties in Pakatan

The Malaysian Insider

APRIL 29, 2014

LATEST UPDATE: APRIL 29, 2014 04:59 PM

In one of his last interviews before his sudden death in an auto accident on April 17, Karpal Singh spoke to DAP mouthpiece The Rocket on matters close to his heart and his political struggle, including the hudud, the Sedition Act that he was charged with, and inter-party relations with PAS and PKR.

Karpal’s (pic) interview, which is available on The Rocket’s website and its April edition, is reproduced with permission.

Q: You have been frank about issues close to your heart and never hold back in taking a strong stand on issues that other DAP leaders don’t dare to vocalise. Why?

I have been elected by my constituents and it is my duty as an elected member of parliament to speak the views of the people. As long as one abides by the law and is in line with democratic principles under which we operate, no leader should be afraid to air his views.

It would be a sad day for DAP if we hold back just so we don’t get into trouble. It won’t be in the interest of the party or the country. I articulate certain things and issues that are close to the hearts of the people I represent, not just a party stance per se. Of course the party stance is also in line with the constitution.

Q: Has your approach to politics changed now that DAP is a part of Pakatan Rakyat?

There is no such thing as a personal approach to politics; the approach must be in line with our principles. Each of us has a different style. It is the ultimate results that count. The motives or objectives of the party are reflected in what I speak.

Q: Do you think the BN-controlled media has often spun your comments out of context?

They sometimes give my statements a certain twist. And it is not easy for us to correct that because whatever I say as the point of correction doesn’t see print.

Q: Your remarks have been viewed as being principled for staunch DAP supporters. But for DAP partners’ supporters, especially PAS’s Malay voters, it has turned them off especially with regard to hudud and Islamic state issues. How do you explain this?

It is stating what it is. We are not an Islamic state. Malaysia is a secular state and the constitutional provisions are there. There is no place for hudud laws in the country. What I say is always backed up by law or reason.

It is not easy for our coalition partner PAS to accept it, which has its own principles and ideology. But on the other hand, DAP’s stance, consistent with the law and the constitution must be made clear, however painful it may be to them. We hope they understand that I am not doing this with a bad motive or mala fide.

It is not an easy task; sometimes it requires us to reconcile with the irreconcilable.

How do we do that? On the one hand, it is important that we state our principles and also what our supporters expect. We have been put where we are today as a result of the confidence the people have in us. And I don’t think we should betray them. I think it is a clear reflection that our ground would want whatever I have been espousing all these years.

It is difficult to balance the interest of the party and the interests of the coalition parties, particularly for PAS and DAP. With the sensitivities that are involved, it is not easy, but the party stand must be made clear.

Q: If hudud proponents were to moot for a referendum, what would DAP’s stance be? Would it be an easy jump towards hudud if the proponents have the majority?

In a referendum, anything that is put up for voting must be in line with constitutional provisions, such as the contents and the terms of reference stated in the referendum.

There are certain provisions of the constitution which form the basic structure of the constitution. Any attempt made to change that basic structure will be working towards the destruction of the constitution, which we can’t do.

The matter of hudud has been questioned in court in 1988 and it may happen again. In that instance, the federal court unanimously ruled that the country operates by secular law, which means that Malaysia is not an Islamic state. You can’t have an Islamic state where secular law is the order of the day.

Q: In other words, the entire constitution has to be rewritten?

The basic structure of the constitution has to be completely changed. It will be destroying the document upon which all Malaysians abide by. It’s a social contract and the terms of the contract must be adhered to.

Q: Each PR party has its individual strengths and the people know that we stand for our principles. How do we move from mere convenient cooperation to genuine relationship after all that we have been through for the last 15 years?

We can definitely improve on our cooperation much more. It is in the interest of the parties to cooperate so that the ultimate result is stronger support from the people. Also, there should be more cooperation in substance than just the label. We have to strive for something more practical. There is no question of both DAP and PAS merging, in view of the differing ideologies.

With the results shown in 2008 and 2013 it has been fantastic. We can improve further provided there is close working relationship between PAS and DAP; with 89 seats in parliament, who would have ever imagined it.

Q: On the Allah case, what do you make out of the PR stance?

It is good that the upper echelon of PAS agree that the word “Allah” can be used by non-Muslims and this has been supported by many other Islamic countries that have agreed that Allah is not exclusive to the Muslims.

Q: What are your views on the Sedition Act? Notwithstanding the definition of sedition under BN, how would you define something that is seditious or has seditious tendencies?

Sedition is something that is archaic. During the colonial times, it was the practice to stifle the voice of and arrest people who opposed the government, anything you say against them would be deemed as seditious.

But the country has become independent; all that should have been done over with.

This (the Sedition Act) is a 1948 law. That’s 66 years ago. It is a long time ago. I think this sedition act should have been pensioned off long ago.

In fact, the prime minister is on public record saying that it will be repealed soon. But that doesn’t seem to be happening. It has been enforced with more intensity now. The numbers of leaders that have being charged are quite a few.

Q: What motivates you to participate in and stay in politics?

I always thought as a lawyer, the political arena is something very natural to aspire to be in. Politics complements the law.

After the May 13, 1969, riots I decided to join a multiracial party to ensure that whatever happened then will never happen again. And the best party was and still is the DAP, which I joined in 1970 and have remained in till today.

I would like to carry on as long as I can, health permitting. I believe I can still contribute, but there are forces out there who want to stop me.

And as for one who wants to be an MP, you must be prepared to stand up and do what is required of an elected representative. We can’t be frightened and not say certain things to avoid getting into trouble, If you are, then you have made the wrong choice. – April 29, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 29 April 2014, 5:08 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
DAP
,
Islam
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Liow Tiong Lai should stop blowing “hot air” if he is not prepared to issue an ultimatum to Najib that he and MCA would not return to Cabinet unless the Prime Minister gives solemn undertaking to uphold secular Malaysian constitution with no hudud laws for the country

MCA President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai should stop blowing “hot air” if he is not prepared to  issue an ultimatum to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak that he and MCA would not return to the Barisan Nasional Cabinet and Government unless and until the Najib administration gives a solemn undertaking to uphold the secular Malaysian Constitution with no hudud laws for the country.

It is pointless of Liow going on a nation-wide road show to meet thousands of “MCA grassroots leaders and leaders from Chinese guilds and associations” breathing “fire and brimstone” and threatening to unleash thousands of MCA Youth members throughout the country, including surrounding Parliament when it reconvenes in June, over a PAS proposal to table a Private Member’s  Bill in Parliament for the implementation of hudud in Kelantan when the MCA President dare not say “No”, loudly and clearly, to the Prime Minister who had said a few days ago that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud?

Was Liow and the MCA leadership consulted before Najib made the policy change and announcement that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud, which not only violates the fundamental principles and features of the secular 1957 Merdeka Constitution but goes against the struggles, memory and heritage of the nation’s founding fathers in UMNO, MCA and MIC, whether Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Hussein, Tun Tan Cheng Lock, Tun Tan Siew Sin or Tun V. T. Sambanthan?

Or had  Liow  given his personal, if not party, agreement to Najib’s new policy announcement that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud?

Malaysians are entitled to know – was the MCA President ever consulted and whether  he had  given his consent, whether personally and privately or as MCA President,  to Najib’s announcement?

In the early decades of nationhood, no Prime Minister cum UMNO President would unilaterally and arbitrarily make any such announcement involving a major policy change in nation-building without first consulting and getting the consent of all the constituent parties in the ruling  coalition, but  after more than five decades of Merdeka, the MCA has never been so irrelevant and inconsequential in the eyes not only of UMNO, but even among the small component Barisan Nasional parties!

If the MCA President dare not even clarify such an elementary question whether he had been consulted beforehand and whether he had agreed, in his personal or party president capacity, to Najib’s policy announcement that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud, then MCA should stop its “high opera” threatening to unleash thousands of people into the streets throughout the country, including surrounding Parliament when it reconvenes in June.

What credibility does Liow expect to command with such threats when as MCA President, he dare not even say “No” to Najib and to declare that MCA dissociates from  the Prime Minister’s announcement that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud – and that in consequence, he and MCA would not return to the Barisan Nasional Cabinet and Government unless and until Barisan Nasional returns to the  fundamental principles and features of the secular 1957 Merdeka Constitution with no hudud laws in the country?

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 29 April 2014, 1:17 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
MCA
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MH370 Wreckage Found: U.S. Pilot Claims to Discover Wreckage of Missing Aircraft – Find Out Where is it?

By jaskiran kaur  | April 29, 2014

International Business Times

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott has recently announced the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 has “entered a new phase,” focusing on larger area of the ocean floor.

Meanwhile, an American pilot claimed he has found wreckage of the missing airline. After 52 days of the search mission, Michael Hoebel, a pilot from New York, believed he has found the wreckage site of missing jet, Daily Mail reported.

The 60-year-old pilot reportedly spent hours scrutinizing satellite images made available to the general public by the Web site TomNod.com, before he concluded MH370 was lying underneath the Indian Ocean. He noted he has discovered the outline of the jetliner at the bottom of the ocean, off the northeast coast of Malaysia. The area was west of Songkhla in Thailand.

If debris lying at the bottom of the Indian Ocean were verified to be the missing Boeing 777, then it appeared to be in one piece, as per the image that was taken few days after the alleged crash.

The New York pilot informed his hometown news channel WIVB about his discovery.

“I was taken aback because I couldn’t believe I would find this,” he told WIVB.

Heobel said the doomed missing Boeing 777, matched in its dimensions with the debris he found underneath the ocean.

While comparing the satellite image to the photo of the missing plane, the pilot gave his analysis to the reporter. When asked if it could be a shark, he responded: “That’s a 210ft shark.”

The pilot told he has reached out to Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Transportation Safety Board about his findings.

Meanwhile, an Australian company came forward claiming it may have found missing Malaysian aircraft, according to The Star Online. GeoResonance is based in Adelaide. It said it carried out its own hunt for MH370 that began on March 10 and now the staff believe the potential wreckage was in Bay of Bengal in Indian Ocean. This was 5000 kilometers away from the current search area.

They reportedly explored 2,000,000 square kilometers using satellite and aircraft images. The scientists used over 20 technologies to examine the data obtained from their search area. This included the use of nuclear reactor to search potential wreckage area in the north of missing MH370’s last known location.

They compared their data with the images that were taken on March 5, three days prior to the disappearance of MH370.

“The wreckage wasn’t there prior to the disappearance of MH370. We’re not trying to say that it definitely is MH370, however it is a lead we feel should be followed up,”  David Pope, company’s spokesman, said.

Another representative of the company told Australian News Channel 7News that their research was backed up by identification of “chemical elements and materials that make up a Boeing 777 … these are aluminium, titanium, copper, steel alloys and other materials.”

Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 disappeared on March 8 with 239 people on board. Missing Boeing 777 was traveling from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

Seven weeks after continuous search efforts, the authorities have failed to find the missing plane. But it was believed the plane “ended in the southern Indian Ocean.”

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 29 April 2014, 3:01 pm and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Putrajaya still seen as corrupt, as people sceptical of government’s anti-graft efforts

by Elizabeth Zachariah

The Malaysian Insider

April 29, 2014

Most Malaysians are sceptical of Putrajaya’s efforts to eradicate corruption and practise integrity despite its efforts to pursue such an agenda, an analyst told a forum today.

Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS) chief executive officer Wan Saiful Wan Jan (pic) said most people were convinced that corruption and abuse of power were still a critical issue in Malaysia despite the government’s initiatives to work on them.

“Corruption is still an issue. So, despite the government’s initiatives, people still feel the country is corrupt.

 “There is great scepticism of how serious the government is in pursuing this,” he said at a forum on integrity at the Malaysian Institute of Integrity in Kuala Lumpur.

He said the high level of scepticism of the government’s efforts indicated that it was because there were no real efforts to actually eradicate corruption within the government and its departments and agencies.

“It is just like when the government talked about moderation and set up the Global Movement of Moderates (GMM), which is a very good initiative to take the moderation agenda to an international level,” Wan Saiful said, referring to the think tank mooted by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak in 2010.

“But people are making jokes about GMM. They are saying, why promote moderation outside Malaysia when there are extremists in the country that the government is not doing anything about?”

It is also because we have strong separation of powers (judiciary and executive) as well as a strong culture of apolitical public administration. – Danish Ambassador Nicolai Ruge

Malaysians, he added, are tired of politicians from both sides of the divide who demand accountability but were corrupt themselves.

Other panelists of the forum included Media Prima chairman Datuk Johan Jaafar and the Danish Ambassador to Malaysia Nicolai Ruge, who said an inclusive political culture was one of the reasons why Denmark had the lowest corruption level in the world.

Denmark tied with New Zealand to take the number 1 spot as the least corrupt countries in the world in last year’s Corruption Perception Index by Transparency International, scoring 91 out of 100 points.

Malaysia scored 50 to rank at number 53 out of 177 countries surveyed.

“It is also because we have strong separation of powers (judiciary and executive) as well as a strong culture of apolitical public administration,” he said.

In his speech afterwards, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of governance and integrity Datuk Paul Low said the people are demanding greater accountability and transparency from the government as there is an increased awareness of corruption.

“Expectations are higher than in the past. Especially when a society is placed in desperation where the livelihood of the people is at risk through political oppression and corruption.

“The people are prepared to go to the streets to express their anger and to rise up against a failed regime. We have seen this in the Arab Spring uprising, in Greece and recently in Ukraine,” the former Transparency International-Malaysia president said. – April 29, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 29 April 2014, 7:41 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why is Malaysia hiding MH370 report, asks aviation expert

The Malaysian Insider

April 29, 2014

Five days after Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak declared on CNN that a preliminary report on the disappearance of MH370 had been submitted to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), an aviation expert has asked why is Malaysia hiding the report and not releasing it to the public.

While the world continued to wait for any evidence of the Malaysia Airlines flight, Malaysia had taken the “surprising” step of submitting a report to the United Nations agency, Clive Irving said yesterday in The Daily Beast.

“It’s not customary for air accident investigation reports to go to the ICAO. It’s the responsibility of each nation’s accident investigation agency to release the reports directly to the public as (it sees) fit, according to long-established protocols that demonstrate the independence of the investigators from both political and industry influence,” Irving said on the news portal.

More than 50 days have passed since MH370 went missing on March 8 and an Australian-led search in the Indian Ocean, where the Boeing 777-200ER was presumed to have crashed, has yielded nothing.

Reuters yesterday reported that the chance of finding floating debris from MH370 has become highly unlikely, and a new phase of the search would focus on a far larger area of the Indian Ocean floor.

Irving said the greatest mystery in aviation history had eluded explanation despite the multination hunt in the far reaches of the Indian Ocean and this raised two questions.

Were enough resources being devoted to the underwater search?

Was it realistic to continue with the search when the southern hemisphere’s winter has started and conditions would only worsen?

The only “reasonable way” to answer both questions, Irving said, was to compare it with the search for Air France flight 447 which crashed in the Atlantic Ocean in 2009.

What was striking about the search for flight 447 was that it “was never a continuous and open-ended effort”, he said.

“It was carried out over a period of a little more than two years in four discrete, limited-time operations.”

Its black boxes, debris and bodies were found two years later on the fourth operation.

“It is clear that the search for the remains of the Air France Airbus A330 was carefully planned, systematic and well resourced, each operation timed for the season when the south Atlantic was at its least challenging in terms of weather,” Irving said.

In the case of flight MH370, there has been no early discovery of wreckage.

But, he said, “The Atlantic search demonstrated that there is no point in using the most effective deep-diving equipment until the area can be narrowed to a searchable size. Then, and only then, can the technology work – first the location of debris and then its recovery”.

The case of Air France 447 serves as an international benchmark for the integrity of crash investigations, said Irving, because of its transparency and commitment to go public with whatever investigators found.

The final report released in July 2012 was described as “descriptive, prescriptive, and exemplary in its clarity”.

Irving said the Malaysians should have followed the French step and released the report themselves instead of sending it to the ICAO in Montreal.

Irving said that all parties involved in assisting the Malaysian government have remained “very tight-lipped about what is going on”.

The Americans – Boeing and National Transport Safety Bureau staff – in Kuala Lumpur only released a statement saying they “have been an active and engaged party to the investigation”.

The British, represented by the Air Accidents Investigation Board (AAIB), too, did not disclose anything, said Irving.

Pointing to basic flaws, such as the failure to establish the timeline of flight MH730 from when it took off to when it was last spotted on radar, Irving said Malaysia’s handling of the missing plane has failed to inspire confidence.

All it had succeeded in doing was to “fuel speculation for bizarre theories than to bring dependable detailing to the narrative”.

Najib told CNN’s Richard Quest that the report submitted to ICAO might be released this week but the move would unlikely appease families of the 239 passengers on board MH370.

Reuters in a report yesterday quoted Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott as saying given the amount of time that has elapsed, efforts would now shift away from the visual searches conducted by planes and ships and towards underwater equipment capable of scouring the ocean floor with sophisticated sensors.

He admitted, however, that it was possible nothing would ever be found of the jetliner.

“We will do everything we humanly can, everything we reasonably can, to solve this mystery,” he said in Canberra. – April 29, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 29 April 2014, 8:22 am and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Biggest MCA charade in 65-year party history – threatening to mobilise thousands of people and even to surround Parliament to oppose hudud but it could not mobilise one person, the MCA President, to say “No” to Najib

Malaysians are watching the roll-out of the biggest MCA charade in its 65-year party history – MCA threatening to mobilise thousands of people and even to surround Parliament to oppose hudud but it could not mobilise one person, the MCA President himself, to say “No” to the Prime Minister and UMNO President Datuk Seri Najib Razak on the issue.

Based on a very  misleading and incorrect translation of the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council statement on hudud on Sept. 28, 2011, the MCA had launched an aggressive but dishonest nation-wide campaign against the DAP which has ended up as the biggest MCA charade in its 65-year party history.

It is sad to watch such a MCA charade –  for it has only succeeded in relentlessly and mercilessly exposing  Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai and the MCA leaders as political leaders without conviction, principles and scruples, which was why the MCA was roundly rejected by the Malaysian electorate in the 13th general elections last May and reduced to a “7-11” political party in Malaysia.

Liow and the current MCA leadership are now under a stringent test – are they prepared to tell Najib that they are not prepared to return to the Barisan Nasional Cabinet and Government until and unless the consensus principle is restored to the Barisan Nasional, and  Najib retract his unilateral and arbitrary announcement last Thursday that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud?

Or are ministerial and deputy ministerial positions and other perks of office more important  for Liow and the current crop of MCA leaders  than political conviction and   principles including the important  principle that Barisan Nasional operates by way of consensus of all component parties and not just at the dictate of one political party, UMNO?

When Najib made the shocking statement in Alor Star last Thursday that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud, why was there no objection or contrary voice by the MCA President.

Similarly, why was the MCA Presidential Council which met yesterday silent on Najib’s announcement, which was clearly contrary to the principle of Barisan Nasional consensus unless Liow had secretly or privately given his agreement to Najib’s statement – whether before or after the event?

Would an emergency meeting of the MCA Central Committee be convened to rebut and repudiate Najib’s statement last Thursday that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud?

Or there is no such need as what Najib announced in Alor Star had willy-nilly become automatic Barisan Nasional policy, which no MCA leader would publicly oppose or criticize as it would endanger the return of Liow and other MCA leaders to the Barisan Nasional Cabinet and Government as Ministers and Deputy Ministers?

Let Liow and the MCA leadership  clarify this   very simple issue which is being asked by all thinking Malaysians.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 30 April 2014, 2:21 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
MCA
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Obama’s Visit: Any Value and Is Anyone Listening?

Koon Yew Yin

30.4.2014

President Obama has come and gone. His visit to KL has generated much feedback. Analysts concerned with the political direction of the country have been especially disappointed with his refusal to meet the opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim. It was like him visiting Myanmar and refusing to meet Aung San Suu Kyi.

One commentator, Dennis Ignatius, has called this decision “an astonishing betrayal by a country that has often portrayed itself as a world champion of democracy and human rights. It sends an unmistakable signal to corrupt and abusive governments everywhere that disrespect for human rights and the curtailing of democratic governance will be overlooked in exchange for pro-American policies.”

The critic noted that surely the US leader is not “unaware of what is going on in Malaysia – the corruption and abuse of power, the tainted elections, the harassment and jailing of opposition leaders, the racial and religious incitement, the intolerance of dissent, the narrowing of our democratic space.”

In one sense, I share the above view of the critic who incidentally is not any ordinary Malaysia.

He is a retired high ranking diplomat whose profession calls for him to weigh words carefully. In my opinion, if President Obama was truly concerned about human rights and civil liberties in Malaysia, he should have met with Anwar himself rather than send his security adviser, Susan Rice in his place. Such a meeting would have served to remind Najib and other BN leaders that the US takes a serious view of the political persecution of the country’s foremost opposition leader. It would also reassure that the US is prepared to use its clout to ensure that the cause of justice and freedom is not hijacked by the present occupants of Putrajaya which is clear in the way the current case against Anwar has been trumped up and pursued.

If Malaysians are disappointed by the failure of Obama to meet for a one to one with Anwar, his meeting with civil society leaders seems to be a proxy for Obama to listen to civil society on the democratic and human rights issues presently in play – religious and racial polarisation, divisive politics, free and fair elections, political persecution, rule of law, and media control by the government. This was a meeting which appears to have been scheduled for public relation reasons but the fact that it ran to over an hour shows that Obama must have realized that it is necessary for him to listen to other voices than Najib’s to arrive at the truth on developments in Malaysia..

Two Issues on Human Rights:

Two issues in the human rights area appear to stand out for Obama. The first which he personally spoke out against is the discrimination against the non-Muslim part of the population. His statement to his youth audience from the region that Malaysia will not be a successful country if non-Muslims are discriminated against is good advice to Najib and his UMNO colleagues who are trying to bluff the rest of the world that there is no discrimination against non-Muslims or that this discrimination is still necessary despite nearly 50 years of the NEP. Utusan Malaysia would be doing its civil service readers and other Malay readers a great service if they can reproduce just this statement for their attention.

The second issue is Islam’s increasingly political role in the country and the use of the religion to censure human rights activists and silence constructive criticism. I am sure Obama will have paid special attention to the assertion by Dr. Ahmad Farouk Musa, chairman of the Islamic Renaissance Front, that ”there is a concerted effort by the government to silence the dissident and persecute minorities; and religious persecution remains rife and targets not only Christians but also minority groups within Islam including Shiahs and Ahmadis.” I am sure Obama knows that the way in which Islam in Malaysia is manipulated by UMNO to advance its political and religious agenda reveals the hypocrisy behind Malaysia’s so-called “moderate Islamic democracy”.

In the final analysis though, let us not pin too much hopes on Obama’s visit or the visit of any other foreign dignitary if there is to be change in the country. Let us recognize that President Obama has lacked resolve and commitment in keeping to the high principles and values that he claims to stand for. His compromises on many key issues in American domestic politics – health reform, carbon emission caps, Wall Street regulation, financial reform, immigration and a host of others – have led to disappointment among his Democrat supporters. His foreign policy has been a continuation rather than rejection of Bush’s disastrous and bloody US empire building programme which has alienated the rest of the world including American allies..

Obama’s visit to Malaysia is a part of his larger East Asian trip whose main priority is outflank China in this part of the world and to advance US commercial and strategic interests. Let us have no doubts that his position in Malaysia’s domestic affairs will ultimately be determined by American political expediency and the advancement of American political interests.

We have to fight for these Noble Principles:

Although the official final communique from the visit reiterates that “respect for diversity, respect for the freedom to express different views and practice different faiths, respect for all religions and respect for the rights of all in the populations are essential to healthy and prosperous democracies”, at the end of the day, it is up to us to fight for these noble principles.

Any movement for change in Malaysia – whether it is against discrimination of non-Malay minorities or for religious freedom – will have to come from within. The forces of change have to be home-grown; and the struggle for freedom and human rights will have to be fought by Malaysians determined to defeat the extremists and opportunists in our midst.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 30 April 2014, 12:11 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PAS penentu masa depan Pakatan Rakyat?

Wan Hamidi Hamid

The Malaysian Insider

April 30, 2014

Sejak penubuhannya pada 1951, PAS tidak pernah putus asa dalam perjuangan politiknya. Ramai pemimpinnya menjadi mangsa kezaliman pemerintah Perikatan dan kemudiannya Barisan Nasional.

Namun, selepas setiap ketika kezaliman dan kekejaman dirasai, seolah-olah ada pemimpin PAS yang lupa dengan apa yang pimpinan Umno lakukan terhadap parti mereka.

Tetapi ramai lagi ahli-ahli PAS yang tidak lupa dengan kelicikan politik Umno.

1960: Menyokong ISA, menjadi mangsa ISA

Selepas darurat anti-komunis ditamatkan pada 1960, kerajaan Malaya pimpinan Tunku Abdul Rahman merasakan masih perlu ada undang-undang untuk membasmi kegiatan komunis yang dianggap masih berserpihan.

Tunku berjaya memujuk parti pembangkang yang terbesar pada masa itu, PAS, dengan menjanjikan bahawa Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) hanya akan digunakan terhadap komunis sahaja dan tidak akan disalahgunakan terhadap pembangkang atau mana-mana suara sah yang membantah kerajaan. PAS yang memang anti-komunis dengan mudah mempercayai janji Umno. Namun, dalam masa yang singkat sahaja, ISA digunakan terhadap pemimpin pembangkang termasuk Presiden PAS, Dr Burhanuddin Al-Helmy.

1973: Menyertai BN, habis madu sepah dibuang

Selepas pergaduhan kaum 13 Mei 1969, pemimpin Umno ketika itu Tun Razak Hussein memujuk PAS menyertai gabungan pemerintah yang baru iaitu Barisan Nasional atas asalan mahu mewujudkan era baru perpaduan melalui proses pembangunan negara. Walaupun ramai ahli PAS sedar sikap dan pendirian Umno, pimpinan PAS masih mahu duduk bersama dengan Umno dalam saf yang baru. Maka muktamar PAS pada awal 1973 meluluskan usul menyertai BN.

BN menang besar dalam PRU 1974. Pemimpin PAS, Asri Haji Muda mendapat habuan menjadi menteri di peringkat pusat manakala pimpinan lain dilantik menjadi timbalan menteri dan jawatan-jawatan lain.

Sewaktu zaman kegemilangan BN itu, tiada siapa di dalam kerajaan yang mahu menubuhkan negara Islam atau melaksanakan hudud. Pada masa itu juga hanya tinggal DAP dan Parti Sosialis Rakyat Malaya (PSRM) sebagai pembangkang yang serius.

Selepas Hussein Onn menjadi perdana menteri, masalah dalaman PAS di kubu kuatnya di Kelantan dijadikan isu untuk merampas kuasa. PAS dipecat daripada BN dan ia hilang kuasa di Kelantan dalam pilihan raya negeri dan kalah teruk dalam PRU 1978.

1982: Kepimpinan ulama, tanpa kemenangan pilihan raya

Selepas kembali menjadi pembangkang, PAS hanya menang 5 kerusi Parlimen dalam PRU 1982 dan kalah teruk dengan satu kerusi sahaja pada PRU 1986. Walaupun sudah berubah menjadi parti kepimpinan ulama, kemenangan di medan pilihan raya masih kabur untuk PAS. Sebaliknya ia berlumba dengan Umno untuk menonjolkan siapa lebih Islam. Timbul aktiviti dan program untuk menunjuk-nunjuk amalan dan simbol Islam sehingga berlaku isu kafir-mengkafir di antara Umno dan PAS.

1988: Pengharaman Umno, untung PAS kerana Semangat 46

Perebutan kuasa dalaman Umno di antara Dr Mahtahir Mohamad dan Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah pada 1987 antara lain menyebabkan Umno diharamkan oleh mahkamah. Ia kemudian dihidupkan semula oleh puak Dr Mahathir sebagai Umno Baru manakala Ku Li terpaksa menubuhkan Parti Melayu Semangat 46 selepas usahanya mendaftarkan semula Umno ditolak oleh kerajaan.

Semangat 46 mewujudkan dua gabungan, iaitu bersama parti-parti Melayu Islam seperti PAS dan Berjasa (Angkatan Perpaduan Ummah – APU) dan bersama parti-parti pelbagai kaum seperti DAP dan Parti Rakyat Malaysia serta Parti Bersatu Sabah (Gagasan Rakyat).

Melalui kerjasama ini, Semangat 46 bertanding di kebanyakan kerusi Parlimen manakala PAS di peringkat negeri, khususnya di Kelantan. PAS bernasib baik apabila berjaya menawan semula Kelantan dalam PRU 1990 walaupun kedua-dua gabungan pembangkang itu gagal menegejutkan arena politik Malaysia.

Setelah menang kembali di Kelantan, PAS mahu melaksanakan hukum hudud walaupun tidak ada dinyatakan dalam sebarang pendirian bersama sebelum PRU 1990. Oleh kerana perbalahan itu berpanjangan, DAP pada 1995 menarik diri dari Gagasan Rakyat yang merupakan gabungan kembar dengan APU.

1995: Kembalinya kuasa BN, pembangkang berpecah-belah

Dr Mahathir mengukuhkan kedudukan Umno-BN dengan kuasa yang ada serta undang-undang yang lebih zalim. Keadaan itu yang turut diberatkan dengan masalah dalaman pembangkang memudahkan BN menang besar dalam PRU 1995.

Kekuatan Dr Mahathir termasuk menonjolkan keadaan ekonomi yang lebih baik (walaupun kemudiannya didedahkan sebagai ekonomi buih). Kebanyakan rakyat Malaysia juga membuat pilihan atas keputusan ekonomi, dan bukannya emosi atau sentimen kaum dan agama.

1998: Pemecatan Anwar, untung PAS kerana reformasi

Selepas Dr Mahathir memecat timbalannya Anwar Ibrahim daripada Umno, BN dan kerajaan, dan kemudiannya memenjarakan pula, ia membangkitkan kemarahan rakyat, terutamanya orang Melayu dan golongan muda.

Kemarahan rakyat diterjemahkan pula dalam satu kerjasama baru pembangkang atas nama Barisan Alternatif. Dengan menumpang semangat reformasi dan imej Anwar, PAS dalam PRU 1999 menang besar apabila mendapat 27 kerusi Parlimen dan merampas Terengganu serta mengekalkan Kelantan.

2001: Pengisytiharan negara Islam, perpecahan pembangkang (sekali lagi)

Dalam pada pemimpin PAS akhir alaf ke-20, Fadzil Noor mahu merapatkan hubungan antara parti dalam dasar yang mejurus kepada semangat moderat, media milik Umno seperti biasa mencari jalan untuk memecahbelahkan perpaduan parti itu. Selepas Fadzil meninggal dunia, usaha allahyarham hanya tinggal kenangan. Kumpulan yang menguasai PAS selepas itu membawa cita-cita negara Islam yang “keras” berbanding semangat kerjasama dan hak saksama yang dibawakan oleh Fadzil.

DAP sekali lagi keluar daripada gabungan pembangkang. Dalam PRU 2004, PAS hilang 20 kerusi Parlimen yang dimenanginya dahulu, hanya tinggal 7 sahaja. Terengganu pula kembali ke pangkuan Umno selepas PAS kalah teruk di negeri itu.

2008: Kemarahan rakyat, era baru pembangkang

Selepas PRU 2004, pergolakan politik lebih berkisar kepada Umno. Dr Mahathir bersara pada 2003 dan rakyat memberi mandat besar kepada Abdullah Ahmad Badawi kerana janji-janji reformasi. Tetapi apabila semua janji itu dimungkiri dan Abdullah pula dilihat sebagai takut kepada desakan kumpulan pelampau kaum (dan serangan Dr Mahathir), maka rakyat menunjukkan kemarahan mereka terhadap Umno-BN.

Dalam PRU 2008, BN kalah di DUN Kedah, Pulau Pinang, Perak dan Selangor serta mengekalkan Kelantan. Kuasa majoriti dua pertiga BN di Parlimen juga dinafikan oleh pembangkang yang kemudiannya bersetuju membentuk Pakatan Rakyat selepas keputusan PRU ke-12 itu diumumkan.

PAS bagaimanapun duduk di tangga ketiga pembangkang Parlimen selepas PKR yang mendapat 31 kerusi Parlimen dan DAP 28 kerusi Parlimen.

PAS tetap bernasib baik mendapat kerusi menteri besar Perak walaupun ia sebagai parti minoriti kerana perlembagaan negeri hanya membenarkan orang Melayu memegang jawatan itu. DAP mendapat 18 daripada 59 kerusi manakala PKR 7 dan PAS 6. PKR pula tidak mempunyai calon MB yang “layak”.

Namun, difahamkan ada kalangan pemimpin PAS tidak puas hati kerana tidak mendapat banyak jawatan. Tambahan pula media milik Umno mula meniupkan api perkauman, selain pemimpin Umno menawarkan kerjasama “kerajaan perpaduan” Umno-PAS di pelbagai peringkat sejak selesai PRU12.

2013: Kecemerlangan Pakatan Rakyat, tsunami politik baru

Walaupun media kawalan Umno memainkan isu perkauman dan sering mencabar PAS agar melawan Pakatan, ia tidak dipedulikan oleh ahli dan penyokong parti. Usaha perkauman Umno ternyata gagal. Malah, semangat mahukan perubahan semakin ketara, khususnya di kalangan kaum-kaum bukan Melayu.

Hasilnya dalam PRU13 pada 2013, Pakatan mencatatkan kemenangan besar dari segi peratus pengundian di mana ia mendapat 51% undi! Oleh kerana sistem persempadanan semula adalah tidak adil, maka BN terus menguasai kerusi Parlimen dan DUN.

Bagi PAS pula, ia adalah prestasi yang tidak memuaskan. PAS gagal mengekalkan kuasa di Kedah kerana kelemahan pentadbiran dan hilang kerusi Parlimen dengan mengekalkan 21 sahaja.

2014: Hasutan Umno, mencabar PAS melaksanakan hudud walau Umno sendiri tak berminat

Selepas itu semakin kuat hasutan Umno melalui pelbagai cara. Sehinggakan Umno berani mencabar PAS agar melaksanakan hudud sedangkan Umno sendiri tidak berminat untuk melaksanakannya.

Buat masa ini, itulah yang sedang berlaku. Umno melalui pelbagai media yang dikuasainya terus mengejek, menguji, mengusik, menyindir dan mencabar PAS. Sejak 1960, Umno mempermainkan PAS, dan agak berjaya juga permainan politik Umno kerana Umno yang sering “menang” dengan taktik kotornya itu.

Seperti yang pernah dijelaskan oleh pemimpin veteran DAP, Lim Kit Siang, isu hudud dilihat dalam konteks isu politik dan bukannya hukum agama – tidak akan memberi kemenangan kepada PAS dan Pakatan Rakyat yang mahu menjadikan Malaysia bersih dari rasuah, bebas dari kezaliman dan tidak lagi mengamalkan diskriminasi. Sebaliknya, isu hudud bakal memberi kemenangan kepada Umno kerana isu tersebut sudah pun membawa perbalahan sesama Pakatan dan mungkin membawa kepada perpecahan gabungan itu.

Di kalangan rakyat pula, sudah timbul perbalahan atas garisan Islam-bukan Islam dan Melayu-bukan Melayu sedangkan matlamat asal Pakatan ialah menggantikan BN untuk menjadi kerajaan yang lebih adil, saksama dan telus di mana rakyat menjadi tonggak, dan bukannya pemimpin dan kroni.

Malah, jika diteliti, apabila isu-isu agama dibangkitkan dalam pilihanraya, ia memberi kesan buruk kepada parti-parti pembangkang. Hanya apabila isu-isu bersama dibangkitkan – ekonomi, reformasi pentadbiran, hak rakyat di peringkat tempatan serta pendedahan kelamahan dan kezaliman Umno-BN – ia menjamin kemenangan pembangkang.

Ini terbukti dalam PRU 1990, 1999, 2008 dan 2013. Malah keputusan 1990, 1999 dan 2008 banyak menguntungkan PAS secara relatif. Terpulang kepada PAS untuk menilai sendiri apa yang Umno lakukan kepadanya sejak lebih 50 tahun lalu yang kesemuanya memberi untung kepada Umno semata-mata, walaupun ada sedikit cebis habuan kepada segelintir pemimpin PAS.

Jika Pakatan hancur, maka Umno yang semakin angkuh sekarang akan kembali berkuasa sepenuhnya. Segala harapan untuk perubahan yang diharapkan sejak alaf baru akan lenyap sama sekali.

Dan pada masa yang sama, hudud tetap tidak akan dilaksanakan oleh Umno. – 30 April, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 30 April 2014, 4:45 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Hudud has no place in present constitutional structure, say legal experts

by V. Anbalagan

The Malaysian Insider

May 01, 2014

Hudud can be enforced in Malaysia only after a new constitution is drawn up to make the nation an Islamic state, constitutional law experts said.

They said the 1957 Merdeka constitution declared that Malaysia was a secular state and Islamic criminal law cannot co-exist with other federal penal legislation.

The lawyers said a legal challenge could be mounted even if the constitution was amended to implement hudud as this would amount to causing irreparable damage to the basic structure of the supreme law.

Furthermore, they said any attempt to introduce a private member’s bill to implement hudud in Kelantan could be legally challenged for going against the constitution.

They were referring to the move to table the bill in Parliament to allow Kelantan to enforce its shariah penal code in the state which has been controlled by the Islamist party PAS since 1990.

If passed by a simple majority vote, the bill will give effect to the Kelantan Shariah Criminal Code Enactment II of 1993.

The Malaysian Insider understands that the bill seeks power from Parliament for Kelantan to make laws in respect of criminal matters which come under federal jurisdiction.

It further wants the Shariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1988 which limits sentencing power of religious courts to three years jail, RM5,000 fine and six strokes of the rotan, to be replaced.

Instead, the bill wants Kelantan to be given the power to enforce punishment like death, flogging and amputation of limbs for crimes under hudud.

Lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar said the constitution, in letter and spirit, was secular and any attempt to introduce hudud ran contrary to the supreme law as stated under Article 4 (1).

“All actions by all organs of the state, including the legislature and the executive, at the federal and state levels, must act consistently with that supreme law,” he said.

Terengganu which was ruled by the Islamist party PAS between 1999 and 2004 also passed its Shariah Criminal Enactment of 2003, which additionally introduced Qisas (retaliatory) offences and punishment.

Malik said both the Kelantan and the Terengganu enactments did not come into force because of challenges to their constitutionality as well as public outcry.

He described the attempt to introduce the bill in Parliament as a “back door” effort to amend the constitution to facilitate the implementation of hudud in Kelantan.

The late Karpal Singh, who had strongly opposed the implementation of hudud, had articulated similar views on the immutable structure of the constitution.

“There are certain provisions which form the basic structure of the constitution. Any attempt made to change that basic structure will be working towards the destruction of the constitution, which we can’t do.

“The matter of hudud has been questioned in court in 1988. In that instance, the federal court unanimously ruled that the country operates by secular law, which means that Malaysia is not an Islamic state. You can’t have an Islamic state where secular law is the order of the day,” Karpal had told the DAP mouthpiece The Rocket in an interview.

“The basic structure of the constitution has to be completely changed. It will be destroying the document upon which all Malaysians abide by. It’s a social contract and the terms of the contract must be adhered to,” Karpal had said.

Meanwhile, lawyer Shukor Ahmad noted that  Kelantan and Terengganu passed the enactments to appease the public despite knowing the secular constitution did not allow it.

“Hudud cannot be enforced under the present constitutional scheme, even if the two-thirds majority requirement is satisfied as the basic structure of the constitution will be affected,” he said.

He also said it must be remembered that in Malaysia it was the constitution that was supreme, not Parliament.

“An affected party can always to turn to the judiciary to test the validity of a law against the constitution,” he said.

Shukor cited the recent case of the Court of Appeal striking out a provision in the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 as unconstitutional as it violated the right to assemble peacefully.

“So Parliament can use its brute majority to pass a law or amend the constitution but its validity can only be determined once tested in the court,” he said.

Shukor said hudud could be implemented only if a new unitary constitution was approved to set up an Islamic state.

Lawyer Shahredzan Johan said Kelantan wanted to impose punishment under hudud for serious crimes like rape, murder, theft and robbery but such crimes were already provided for under the Penal Code which also spelt out the appropriate punishment.

He said Muslims in Kelantan would be subjected to different laws and punishment compared with non-Muslims and this would amount to inequality and discrimination.

Another lawyer, Fahri Azzat, while saying that an aggrieved party could go to the court to obtain solutions to matters that affected everyone, questioned if that was the better option.

Citing the controversy over the use of the word Allah, he said: “Instead of settling it politically, the matter has been passed to the court to rule.”

Fahri said a court ruling was no guarantee that it would satisfy all parties as a binding precedent has to be followed.

He also said the people’s representatives to Parliament should always place the welfare of the people and country above partisan politics.

Most importantly, they must act to defend, preserve and protect the constitution, he said. – May 1, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 1 May 2014, 11:50 am and is filed under
Constitution
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.