Malaysia’s ‘strongman’?

BY
BRIDGET WELSH

As Malaysia’s premier Najib Tun Razak holds onto power the crisis surrounding the country’s sovereign development fund, 1MDB, has deepened.

In preparations for the United Malays National Organization (UMNO) General Assembly next month, there are moves afoot to purge critics from the party. It had become apparent that Najib will do everything to stay in power.

Short-term Najib has increased his chances for political survival, but in the longer term he has weakened his political foundation by narrowing his base of political support and undermining the political fortunes of his own party.

The following examines several key features that distinguish Najib’s management of the 1MBD crisis from those of earlier premiers. Responses to the scandal suggest that Najib has weakened his leadership.

Past crises

Political crises in Malaysia are not new. The most damaging ones have arisen from within UMNO, the political party that has controlled national government since independence.

From 1969 to 1999, each crisis has seen challenges arising from declining leadership confidence, fierce personalised battles for position, selective arrests of critics, damage of political institutions including the judiciary and the police as well as rises in racial tensions.

Crises have often led to increased authoritarianism, as leaders use their control of the executive office and levers of power to contain challengers and rebuild support; 1MDB is no exception. The recent Human Rights Watch report on the attacks on critics details one of these features, as the past two years has witnessed broad use and interpretation of draconian laws to arrest and charge individuals critical of the Najib administration.

There are elements of the current 1MDB crisis that differentiate it from earlier crises. The 1MDB fund extends beyond Malaysian borders, involving extensive investments and investigations outside. It also involves record amounts of money that make earlier corruption allegations pale in comparison.

Malaysia’s economy is dependent on investment and 1MDB has severely negatively impacted these flows. Money from 1MDB also goes to the heart of political legitimacy in Malaysia as they are alleged to involve funding for the 2013 general election. Perhaps most different of all, is that the crisis involves Najib whose response to 1MDB has shaped its evolution. Here are five key differences in this regard and their implications.

Normalising scandal

More than any premier in Malaysia’s history, Najib has been dogged with scandal and political baggage. From Port Dickson meetings to Altantayu’s murder, his leadership has been clouded in allegations and innuendo.

The scandals extend to his family, especially his wife Rosmah Mansor, whose powerful unelected political role is unprecedented, and in some quarters deeply resented.

Unlike a Teflon phenomenon, where scandals have not scathed leadership, the opposite dynamic has emerged in Malaysia. In sponge-like fashion, Najib has absorbed the scandals, reducing their shock and dampening their toxic effects.

Scandals have become so common place in Malaysia that they have lost the impact to remove leaders from office – at least for now.

Shattering leadership confidence

These scandals have left a serious imprint on the political landscape. Malaysia has long been known for its feudal politics, with leaders followed and respected. Over time, challenging leaders has become more common, with the 1999 scandal involving Dr Mahathir Mohamad a watershed in this regard.

Najib’s leadership has broken records in eroding public views of national leaders. His move from the 1Malaysia to 1MDB brand has taken a premier who failed to win a majority of the electorate in 2013 to the low of less than a third of public support.

Not only does the premier have the lowest popular support on record in public polling, large shares of Malaysians are ashamed of their leader with some expressing ridicule and hatred. The initiatives to go after senior UMNO leaders, will only narrow Najib’s base further as the foundation of his support remains largely die-hard UMNO members.

While Najib’s fall in confidence spills over into governance and government, it also leaves an imprint on Malaysian politics as a whole in that it undercuts faith in the overall political system.

Personalising political institutions

Malaysia’s executive dominates other political institutions. Both Najib’s father Tun Razak and Tun Mahathir expanded powers in this branch of government in the wake of earlier political crises.

In Najib’s case he has been building the power of his office since he assumed office, raising the budget allocations to RM20.6 billion in the 2016 budget (equivalent of 7.6 per cent of the entire budget), increasing its decision-making power and broadening oversight.

One area where Najib’s powers have expanded is in the control of government-linked companies and bodies by using personal loyalists as appointees, such as 1MDB. Najib relies on his office to a greater extent than any other leader.

To date, the 1MDB scandal has negatively affected the parliament, judiciary and attorney general’s office, the police force, Bank Negara (Malaysia’s central bank), anti-corruption bodies, government-linked bodies and more. Najib has yet to respond to the call by the rulers for resolution of the 1MDB scandal.

What distinguishes Najib’s relations with political institutions is that they have been seen to be in his interest rather than serving the country. More than any premier – including Tun Mahathir – Najib is seen to be undermining institutions for his own personal survival. Scant attention is being paid to the damaging precedents that are being set and how they will affect governance in the future.

Weakening BN and UMNO

Two weakened institutions in particular deserve special mention. The first is the Barisan Nasional (BN), or the National Front 13-party coalition that officially governs Malaysia.

The BN has been dying a slow death since the 2008 elections, when the non-Malay component parties failed to deliver their ethnic communities for the incumbent coalition. Non-Malay component parties have lost credibility, and autonomy of their own political decisions. The strongest coalition members are in Sabah and Sarawak, states that provide the needed numbers for UMNO to stay in office, and these allies have demanded more for their loyalties.

During 1MDB, Najib has illustrated how weak the non-Malay component parties are. A pivotal moment in this regard was the dismissal of their concerns over the racialised Malay chauvinist red shirt rally in September.

Najib has even opted to sue the former president of the Malaysian Chinese Association Ling Liong Sik for defamation, while failing to take similar action toward international dailies over the scandal. These actions only serve to illustrate how ineffective the coalition is at inclusive representation and will further erode its support base.

A similar negative trajectory has affected UMNO.

Traditionally, party members are sacked and made ‘outsiders’ before they are targeted. This has not been the case with 1MDB, as divisive lines have hardened within the party toward ‘critics’. Najib has also widened the gap between the party elite and its grassroots.

To manage 1MDB he has used patronage directed toward the 500 elites in the party, notably division chiefs, party office holders and elected representatives. This has showcased the hierarchy of benefits in UMNO. Little has gone down to the base of the party itself, creating resentment and anger.

At the same time there has been minimal direct accountability to members. Najib’s style has been to use others to manage the UMNO grassroots. These dynamics have come at a time when the party’s reputation remains low, and it is not in a position to win power without a broadly popular leader.

This will have serious implications for the party as it moves toward the next elections.

Deepening divide and rule

Traditionally, there has been a pattern in responses to political crises. Initially leaders rely on race to shore up support in UMNO and to instill fear to strengthen their position.  Then leaders reach out across divides through policy initiatives and dialogue to broaden their base.

In 1MDB, this pattern had taken on a different trajectory in that division has predominated over inclusion. Najib has grown more reliant on mobilising race and religion to stay in power since 2013, as evident in the rhetoric and policy.

With 1MDB this came to the fore with the red shirt rally, but it is also evident in the expansion of affirmative action policies and programs. Najib has also widened the divide over those who benefit from his government, with ordinary people paying a much higher price for governance failings in the past, through GST, higher tolls, transportation costs and subsidy reductions. The BR1M cash transfers do not offset the costs being imposed. These costs would have been reduced with more accountable governance and concerted efforts to reduce graft and corruption.

The 2016 budget extends the pattern of unevenness in policies, with its targeting of benefits to key constituency groups rather than fostering broad and inclusive national economic growth. Najib has opted to rely on division to stay in power, with little regard to how race, religious, class and other cleavages are tearing at the national fabric.

As Najib remains in office during the 1MDB scandal, he is being called Malaysia’s new ‘strongman.’ Some even go on to predict he will stay in office longer than the 22-year tenure of Tun Mahathir. Study of the measures he is taking to stay in power point to a different picture.

The damage being caused by 1MDB and the responses to the crisis will have an impact on the political terrain. Najib remains much weaker than he has even been, and his responses have undermined rather than strengthened his leadership, making national outreach and inclusive governance unviable if not impossible.

** Bridget Welsh is Professor of Political Science at Ipek University, Senior Research Associate at the Center for East Asian Democratic Studies of National Taiwan University, Senior Associate Fellow of The Habibie Center, and University Fellow of Charles Darwin University.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 9 November 2015, 7:54 pm and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Political change in Malaysia: Will there be a new normal?

Abdillah Noh

Straits Times

9th November 2015

Despite voices calling for reform, there is a leadership void

Talk of political change in Malaysia has become more intense in the last few months.

Malaysia’s continued political imbroglio puts the economy at risk. Even with an improved fiscal deficit and an economy averaging growth of 5 per cent, critics are not impressed, preferring to focus on the political reform story.

The big question they raise is: Will there be a new normal in Malaysian politics?

Since the last general election, the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, and the United Malays National Organisation (Umno) in particular, have put political reform high on their list of priorities. Reform, however, has not been substantive. Leadership renewal remains problematic, given the BN’s organisational machinery.

Indeed, what with the controversy surrounding Prime Minister Najib Razak and the beleaguered state investment fund 1MDB, the approval rating for the BN has, unsurprisingly, hit an all-time low.

What is more surprising is that approval of Umno among Malays has plummeted to 31 per cent – the first time this has gone below the 50 per cent mark.

Even if Mr Najib leaves the scene, there is little confidence that things will improve. There is a possibility that the BN – Umno specifically – will be mired in a leadership struggle. This is because, for the first time, Umno’s deputy president is not the deputy prime minister.

If Mr Najib resigns, the previous deputy prime minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, has grounds to claim that, as deputy president of Umno, he is the automatic choice to become prime minister, which will put him on a collision course with the current Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

The BN’s survival rests on a strong Umno and if Umno is on shaky ground due to infighting, the next election would prove an uphill battle for the coalition.

With Umno in disarray, the Malaysian Chinese Association unable to win back Chinese support and the Malaysian Indian Congress still sorting out its leadership problem, the BN would be in real danger of suffering a lasting fracture.

BROKEN ALLIANCE

Middle Malaysia is also finding little solace in the country’s opposition parties. Despite investing energy to forge a common agenda, ideological differences between the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS) made the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) alliance untenable.

The PAS’ heavy losses in the 2013 general election naturally forced party stalwarts – particularly the clerics – to revisit its raison d’etre and resurrect the idea of an Islamic state.

The decision to leave the PR coalition fragmented the PAS, with the non-cleric elements deciding to break away to form Parti Amanah Negara (PAN).

With the demise of its spiritual leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat and the split, it remains to be seen whether the PAS can maintain the support it used to enjoy.

Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) is another weak link in the opposition camp.

The party’s ability to garner broad support has been severely compromised due to a series of missteps.

These include the “Kajang” move – a failed bid to topple the 14th Menteri Besar of Selangor, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, and install the party’s founder, former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim – the eventual ousting of Mr Khalid as Selangor Chief Minister and the widely acknowledged tiff between current Selangor Menteri Besar Azmin Ali and Anwar’s wife, PKR president Wan Azizah.

With Anwar in prison, the party is struggling to find a coherent organising principle to remain relevant.

The PKR is still undecided in the question of which party it should forge a strategic alliance with – the DAP or PAS or even both – as mentioned recently by Mr Azmin, its vice-president. To the PKR, partnership is more a matter of political convenience than one of ideological conviction.

The recently formed Pakatan Harapan, comprising the DAP, PKR and PAN, also provides little inspiration.

The PAN is still in its infancy and has gained little traction among Malays, which is most apparent after it failed to mobilise Malay support in the recent pro-reform Bersih 4.0 rally.

The burden is now on Pakatan Harapan to convince Malaysians that the alliance will not go the way of the PR or other alliances forged in the past.

CIVIL SOCIETY COMPROMISED

Civil society has been given ample room to breathe and promised to be the voice of reason that could spur some new political imaginings. Among Malaysia’s many NGOs, the Coalition of Free and Fair Elections – Bersih – is by far the most successful when it comes to mobilising multi-ethnic mass support. It has organised four street demonstrations and successfully drew a multi-ethnic crowd.

Its international chapters show that Bersih is not like any other NGOs when it comes to organisation and reach.

Indeed, Bersih has huge potential to effect lasting political reform that cuts across ethnic concerns.

Unfortunately, the Bersih 4.0 rally shows that partisan interests are slowly taking hold of the movement, compromising its ability to champion change based on issues and not ethnicity.

One social activist even said that “without the support of Pakatan Rakyat, Bersih’s success at multi-ethnic mobilisation would have been questionable”.

Such was Bersih’s dependence on political parties, that Bersih 4.0 suffered poor Malay turnout after the PAS withdrew from Pakatan Rakyat. With the DAP being the next largest party in terms of support, the Bersih 4.0 rally naturally saw overwhelming Chinese support – which did Bersih no favours in detaching itself from ethnic concerns.

By aligning its interests with partisan politics, Bersih may just have lost the golden opportunity to be that force that could effect political change for all Malaysians.

AFTER NAJIB, WHAT NEXT?

A major worry is that there has not been enough discussion about what is to follow the Najib administration. With no alternative plan, the country could experience a prolonged political and economic bind should the present government resign.

Even if elections are called, there is a high chance that they would polarise the country even more. Though concerns such as corruption would surface, parties are most likely to resort to ethnic and religious issues for votes.

If the last election saw Umno and the DAP being the biggest winners in terms of seats won, the next election will see the DAP consolidating its position, with the Malay seats being split between Umno and the PAS.

The new PAN and PKR could clinch a few seats in predominantly urban areas but the Pakatan Harapan coalition will be led de facto by the DAP. With the opposition being led by the DAP and with Umno and the PAS on the other side of the political spectrum, Malaysian politics could see rising ethnic and even religious tensions.

It is far-fetched to suggest that Malaysia will go the way of Syria, Egypt, Iraq or Libya. Commendable international ratings – Malaysia is placed among the top 20 most competitive economies, and is a top 10 investment destination – show that the country’s institutions remain resilient and sound.

However, years of political bickering have compromised its ability to make plans badly needed to enhance its capacity and improve its competitive edge.

•The writer is a visiting fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. He is also deputy dean at the Tun Abdul Razak School of Government, Universiti Tun Abdul Razak.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 9 November 2015, 7:45 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Harapan
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tun Dr Ismail’s son wants Jakim abolished

by Anisah Shukry

The Malaysian Insider

9 November 2015

There was a time in the country’s history when the Malaysian Islamic Development Department (Jakim) did not exist, Putrajaya did not tell Malaysians how to practise their faith, and no one batted an eye when Muslims owned dogs.

And the former deputy prime minister Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman’s eldest son, Tawfik Ismail, wants those days back.

The main step is to dissolve Jakim, Tawfik said during an interview in conjunction with the release of “Drifting into Politics”, a collection of his late father’s writings during the nation’s formative years, edited by Tawfik and academic Ooi Kee Beng.

Jakim was created during Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s time and seems to serve no other purpose than to intervene in the personal lives of Malaysians, Tawfik told The Malaysian Insider when met at his house in Taman Tun Dr Ismail.

“I think Jakim should be abolished. I don’t think Jakim should exist. What is the government afraid of? You have 13 muftis with 13 different fatwas and 13 different ways of approaching it (religion).

“What is the purpose of Jakim? Halal certificates? That can go to the health ministries, trade ministry. What else does Jakim do? Print the Quran? We have a communications minister,” said the softspoken, yet candid, 64-year-old former MP.

Naysayers may argue that Jakim is needed to “protect” the sanctity of Islam, but Tawfik was quick to point out that the Agong, sultans, imams (Muslim scholars) and muftis already filled that void.

“Jakim is an advisory body to the government, but constitutionally it really has no role. Islam is the province of the sultan of the state, it has nothing to do with the government.”

So which areas of Muslim life should the government intervene in? Tawfik flat-out said nothing at all.

“National integration in this country is the biggest challenge. How do you integrate the nation if you are going around this route of looking for faults among Muslims?” he asked.

But, Tawfik clarified that his views on dismantling Jakim were his own, and that G25, the group of retired Malay top civil servants of which he is a member, did not share them.

G25 does, however, want Jakim to justify its existence as well as the hundreds of millions of ringgit it receives from the federal budget each year, which he said could have been funnelled to the Health or Education Ministry instead.

“I think there’s a subversion of the constitution by religious authorities at the state level where they are actually testing the limits that they can go in intruding on a person’s personal life,” he added.

Putrajaya had not always acted as the defender of the people’s faith, revealed Tawfik, who served as MP from 1986 to 1990.

He said that during the time of Malaysia’s first prime minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, only a small religious department existed in the Prime Minister’s Department.

There was no minister of religious affairs, and no national outcry over the fact that his father, Tun Dr Ismail, owned a dog.

“My dad had a Boxer, and, before that, an Alstatian,” recalled Tawfik.

He said all this changed after Dr Mahathir took over and his then deputy, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, tried to infuse their definition of “Islamic values” into every aspect of Malaysian life.

This was done to counter the growing influence of PAS, which had never been an issue during the early years of Independence, said Tawfik.

As a result, Malaysia today is now facing “Arabisation”, with society eschewing its Nusantara roots in favour of appropriating the culture of the Middle East, he said.

“We seem to be delighting in coming up with creative ways of ‘speaking’ Arabic in this country.”

Tawfik said it was for this reason that Drifting Into Politics may not sit very well with Putrajaya.

“Certain things my father says here are quite interesting.

“For example, he said whenever Tunku had a meeting at his house with a group of people… occasionally one or two of them would go into the kitchen and have a drink of brandy and whisky, then come back and join in. He admits this.

“Yes, it’s an open secret, but it’s never been in writing by a leader,” chuckled Tawfik.

His father died in 1973 at the age of 57, after just three years of serving as deputy prime minister. November 4 was his 100th birth anniversary.

With such records in existence, no matter how it tried to Islamise Malaysia, Tawfik said, the government would never be able to rewrite history nor erase its roots. – November 9, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 9 November 2015, 7:57 am and is filed under
Islam
,
nation building
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call for a new political consensus to tackle Malaysia’s multitude of economic, political, good governance and nation-building crisis and restore Malaysians’ self-confidence in our ability to compete with best in the world

The speech by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak to the Malay Contractors Association on Saturday night that blame should not be placed entirely on the government for what is happening in the country right now, especially with the weakening ringgit, is symptomatic of the seriousness of the denial syndrome afflicting the government of the country.

Instead of uniting the national energies and creative talents of the country’s plural people to find solutions to the prolonged crisis of confidence bedevilling the nation, threatening to reduce Malaysia from a first-world “hopeful” to  a mediocre third-world nation, Najib is more obsessed with denying or underplaying  the seriousness and magnitude of the crisis of confidence in the country or inventing excuses for the nation’s woes by blaming them on everybody else except his leadership in the country.

Despite his earlier signature policy of 1Malaysia and his promise to be an open, moderate and liberal Prime Minister, Najib is turning out to be a very polarising Prime Minister who have allowed his followers to play the race and religious cards to perpetuate his political position in party and government.

It is sad and tragic if Najib’s premiership is remembered and identified by the M2.6 billion “donation” and RM50 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals, instead  of by his political initiatives like 1Malaysia policy, the National Transformation Programme or the Global Movement of Moderates which have been effectively abandoned in deed if not in words, gathering dust in the archives of Najib’s administration.

In the sixth decade of our nationhood since the achievement of Merdeka in 1957 and the formation of Malaysia in 1963, Malaysia has lost its way.

I still remember the heady days of Merdeka in 1957, when I was in secondary school, when the people in  the country had high hopes and ambitions.

 When Malaysia was formed 52 years ago in 1963, our country was second in Asia after Japan in terms of economic development, prosperity and per capita income, wealthier than other Asian  countries including South Korea and Taiwan  which were poorer and more backward at the time.

But over the decades, Malaysia lost out in the race of economic competitiveness and educational excellence and by the nineties, Malaysia had been left behind with the emergence of the Asian economic tigers comprising Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan while Malaysia could only aspire to be the next Asian tiger.

But these hopes of Malaysia becoming the next economic tiger  perished with the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s – and today, Malaysia is even further behind the economic tigers as well as risk being taken over by other countries both in Asia and Africa.

Today, bogged down with a multitude of crises which had been described as the coming of a “perfect storm” to hit the country, Malaysians have lost the self-confidence to re-make the world that they had displayed in earlier decades.

Last year, Malaysians abroad were ashamed to admit they are Malaysians – because of missing MAS jetliner, MH 370. This year, Malaysians are again ashamed to admit that they are Malaysians because of the twin mega scandals of RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM50 billion1MDB.

Malaysians have lost our sense of direction, bearings and even moorings.

Najib  has conspired with the UMNO 300 against the interests of 30 million Malaysians, including the three million UMNO members, to perpetuate his political position and Prime Minister’s post despite the whole gamut of economic, political, good governance and nation-building crises in the country.

If DAP and Pakatan Harapan are only interested in our own political interests, we will do everything possible to ensure that Najib will remain as Prime Minister and lead UMNO/Barisan Nasional into the 14th General Elections because he will be an easier target with so many political and economic scandals exploding all over the place.

If we want Najib to lead UMNO/BN in the 14 GE,we will not force an issue of a vote of confidence in Parliament, whether in the form of a no-confidence motion or in defeating the government on an important measure like the Second Reading of the 2016 Budget which will be voted on Monday 16th November at the end of the three-day Ministerial winding-up of the budget debate.

But our national interests must override all our political party interests for we want to send a clear and unmistakable message that the present state of national affairs where confidence, whether national or international, has plumbed to the lowest depths in the nation’s history, cannot continue for the next two-and-half-years before the 14th General Elections, as the country cannot afford the great economic and nation-building costs of such prolonged crisis of confidence.

Will Najib be voted out of power on Monday  with the rejection of the 2016 budget which he had presented to Parliament?

Pakatan Harapan has 72 Members of Parliament, but only 71 votes, as I have been suspended from Parliament for six months. PAS has declared that it will not support any effort to vote out the 2016 Budget.

In these circumstances, is it possible to expect 41 Members of Parliament from UMNO/Barisan Nasional to cross the floor on Nov. 16 to support Pakatan Harapan Members of Parliament to vote down Najib’s 2016 Budget by ensuring that there is an absolute simple majority of at least 112 votes out of a Parliament of 222 Members of Parliament?

I do not see Najib’s position as Prime Minister under any immediate danger  with the impending vote in Parliament on the 2016 Budget on Monday.

This is not because there are no UMNO/BN Members of Parliament who are extremely unhappy with Najib’s 2016 Budget, in particular his complete failure to give proper and satisfactory accounting for the RM50 billion 1MDB and RM2.6 billion “donation” twin mega scandals.

However, unless there are some 40 UMNO/BN Members of Parliament who are prepared to gang up and team up with Pakatan Harapan Members of Parliament and risk disciplinary actions by the UMNO/BN leadership, I do not see Najib under any danger of losing the Prime Ministership on Monday.

However, even if Najib wins the vote in the 2016 Budget second reading on Nov. 16, it does not mean that the coast is clear for him and that he is safe and no more vulnerable from any attacks, particularly from UMNO itself, on his leadership.

After the second reading on the 2016 Budget, there is still the motion of no confidence in Najib as Prime Minister which the Parliamentary Opposition Leader, Datuk Seri Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, has given notice in Parliament.

Even if Azizah’s no-confidence motion is not allowed to come up in the current meeting of Parliament for debate and vote, Najib’s position as Prime Minister and head of the UMNO/BN coalition government could still come under challenge after the Parliamentary meeting on Dec. 3, largely through a constitutional precedent on the toppling of a head of government which had been set by none other than Najib himself.

Recent polls in August 2015 have shown that for the first time in the nation’s history, approval for the government among Malays have fallen below 50 per cent since Merdeka Centre began recording the data in February 2012.

Malay support for the government fell from 52% in January this year to 31 per cent in August, and this could have fallen even lower now in November after the many economic and political economic scandals in the past two months, with the 1MDB and RM2.6 billion “donation” scandals continuing to produce one adverse publicity after another, not only in Malaysia but also internationally.

The government’s overall approval rating had also plummetted from 38% in January this year to mere 23 per cent in August.

if DAP and Pakatan Harapan are only interested in our own political party interests, the last thing we want to do now is to rock Najib’s boat as there cannot be a weaker Prime Minister and head of UMNO/BN to lead the 14th General Election than Najib.

However, we put national interests above everything else, as we do not want Malaysia to go down the drain from a country which half a century ago had the potential to be among the best and most successful countries in the world losing out to one country after another in terms of economic achievements, educational attainments and a show case of successful multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural nation-building.

Today, Malaysia is faced with a prolonged crisis of confidence which threatens to transform Malaysia into a basket-case en route  to a rogue and failed state where there is not only a breakdown of the rule of law but collapse of good and democratic governance.

I call for a new political consensus to tackle Malaysia’s multitude of economic, political, good governance and nation-building crisis and restore Malaysians’ self-confidence in our ability to compete with best in the world

For this reason, DAP and Pakatan Harapan are prepared to co-operate even with UMNO/BN parties, Members of Parliament and ordinary members who want to save the country from becoming a rogue and failed state by putting an end to the multitude of disastrous political and economic polices pursued by the Najib government.

The 107 UMNO branches in Pagoh have declared their support for former Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin demanding that the two mega scandals should not be swept under the carpet.

Are there more UMNO branches and leaders, as well as members and branches from all the other Barisan Nasional component parties, who are prepared to stand up to be counted, as national interest must always override personal or political party interests.

DAP and Pakatan Harapan are prepared to work with the three million UMNO members as  well as the ordinary membership in the other BN parties, as the No. 1 challenge for Malaysians today is whether  the 30 million Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, age, gender or politics,  prepared to unite  to save Malaysia.

(Speech at the DAP “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” Ceramah at Sungai Chua, Kajang on Sunday, 8th November 2015 at 10 pm)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 10 November 2015, 1:52 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Happy Deepavali

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 10 November 2015, 11:51 am and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib will have to resign as Prime Minister if the 47 Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament (22 from Sabah and 25 from Sarawak) vote down the 2016 Budget in Parliament on Monday on 16th November 2015

Will the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak be toppled on Monday, 16th November 2015 when the 2016 Budget is put to a vote in Parliament?

Pakatan Harapan Members of Parliament from DAP, PKR and Parti Amanah Negara total 72,  but there are only 71 votes as I have been suspended from Parliament for six months (i.e. until the end of April).

To have an absolute simple majority of 112 Members of Parliament to defeat the UMNO/BN government in Parliament, at least 42 UMNO/BN Members of Parliament have to cross the floor to support the 71 Pakatan Harapan Members of Parliment, as PAS has announced that it will not support any effort to reject Najib’s 2016 Budget.

It is a  very tall order indeed to expect some 40 UMNO/BN Members of Parliament to join Pakatan Harapan Members of Parliament to reject Najib’s 2016 Budget.

There are 47 Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament in Sabah and Sarawak – 22 from Sabah and 25 from Sarawak.

If all the 47 BN Members of Parliament from Sabah and Sarawak reject Najib’s 2016 Budget next Monday, that will be Najib’s last day as the sixth Prime Minister of Malaysia.

But this is unlikely to happen, but it illustrates the pivotal and in fact “kingmaker” political role of Sabah and Sarawak in determining the future and the Federal Government in Malaysia.

Tenom has been chosen as the venue for the kick-off of the Sabah leg of the nation-wide “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” campaign, which will cover six areas in three days – Tenom, Keningau, Kudat, Kota Kinabalu, Tuaran and Sandakan – because exactly 30 years ago in 1985, political history was made in Tenom.

Tenom is little known outside Sabah despite the state-wide fame for coffee, pomelo and fruits but it wrote political history in the 1985 Sabah state general election when an unknown information officer, Kadoh Agundong became a “giant-killer” defeating the then Sabah Chief Minister, Datuk Haris Salleh and threw him into the dustbin of Sabah politics.

Tenom like the other Sabah hinterlands are capable of dynamic motive power for political change as in the 1985 Sabah state general election and it is our hope that the launching of the Sabah level of the  “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” campaign from Tenom will fire the imagination of all Malaysian, in rural areas as well as in towns, to bring about political change to uphod integrity, transparency and good governance in Sabah and Malaysia.

I am a victim of the RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM50 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals, but I am not the only one, as all the 30 million Malaysians, including  the 3.3 million Sabahans, are also victims of Najib’s twin mega scandals.

Sabah’s latest annual budget is in the region of RM4 billion, which means that if the RM50 billion 1MDB scandal had not happened and had been devoted to the welfare of Sabahans, it would mean that Sabahans would be able to enjoy State Government projects and programmes, with the money to pay the Sabah government officers and departments, completely free of charge, without any taxes or rates for more than 12 years.

This is why there must be a national consciousness campaign among all Malaysians, whether Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans, Ibans or Orang Asli, to make all the 30 million Malaysians, including the three million UMNO members and the Sabah and Sarawak members of BN, that there must be immediate accountability and solution to the twin mega scandals if the country is not to suffer greater damages from the multitude of economic, political, good governance and nation-building  crises hounding the country.

[Speech at the launching of the  “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” campaign in Sabah in Tenom starting with a six-town visit in three days (Tenom, Keningau, Kudat, Kota Kinabalu, Tuaran, Sandakan) in Tenom on Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 9 am]

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 10 November 2015, 10:29 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parliament
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Has the time come for Sabah or Sarawak to produce a Prime Minister?

The choice of Tenom and Keningau today to launch in Sabah  the “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” campaign is most significant.

The campaign is part of a movement to instill in Malaysians a  consciousness of their democratic rights and national inheritance so that they can stand up as one people to defend not only their rights but those of future generations.

In Myanmar, voters lined up as early as 3 am on Sunday (November 8) to vote,  an indication of how eager the people of Myanmar are  to seize a chance for freedom after five decades of military rule.

The latest results  showed that Nobel Peace Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) has won a landslide victory, winning 78 out of 88 seats for the lower house of parliament for which the election commission has final results. The ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) party has won five.

The road for the return of democracy in Myanmar will a long and uneasy one, as much trouble, trial and tribulation lie ahead.

The democratic and electoral process and experience in Myanmar, despite their  numerous weaknesses and defects, hold an important lesson for us in Sabah and Malaysia –  that it is finally the people themselves who must  stand up to claim and protect their democratic rights and national heritage to defeat the designs of those who want to deny them their basic human  rights and legacy.

Keningau has a unique place in the Sabah and Malaysian struggle to restore our democratic rights and national inheritance,  immortalised in the Batu Sumpah in Keningau, which spelt out the rights and legacy which should be protected at all times in Sabah and Malaysia.

It is no exaggeration to say that Keningau represents the heartland and soul of Sabah and the  Batu Sumpah of Keningau the “Northern Star” for Sabahans to preserve what is special and unique for Sabah in the Malaysian Federation.

The launch of the campaign in Tenom this morning was also highly significant for 30 years ago, the people of  Tenom created history and caused a political sensation in Sabah and Malaysia when they voted in an unknown information officer, Kadoh Agundong, into the Sabah State Assembly,  a “giant-killer”  who defeated the then Sabah Chief Minister, Datuk Haris Salleh in the 1985 Sabah state general election.

I had this morning posed the question  in Tenom whether the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak would  be toppled on Monday, 16th November 2015 when the 2016 Budget is put to a vote in Parliament.

November 16 would have been the last day of Najib as the sixth Prime Minister of Malaysia if all the 47 Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament (22 from Sabah and 25 from Sarawak) join the 71 Pakatan Harapan Members of Parliament  from DAP, PKR and AMANAH (minus my one vote, as I have been suspended from Parliament for six months) to reject Najib’s 2016 Budget.

From the present political scenario, this will not happen – but this possibility should drive home to Sabahans and Sarawakians their pivotal role in Malaysian politics, that they are the political “king-makers” who can decide who should be the Prime Minister of Malaysia and who  should form the Federal Government in Putrajaya.

In fact, 52 years after the formation of Malaysia, it is also time to ask a question which had never been posed publicly in Malaysia – whether the time has come for Sabah or Sarawak to produce a Prime Minister for Malaysia.

Who in Sabah or Sarawak would qualify to be Prime Minister of Malaysia – or are there no such  candidate at all?

The launch of the “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” campaign in Sabah in six areas in Sabah namely Tenom, Keninglau, Kudat, Kota Kinabalu, Tuaran and Sandakan from Nov. 10 – 12 is an important part of the national campaign to raise political consciousness of Malaysians – for instance, for Malaysians to realise that I am not the only victim of Najib’s  RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM50 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals as all the 30 million Malaysians and 3.3 million Sabahans are also victims of these twin mega scandals!

(Speech at the DAP  “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” ceramah in Keningau on Tuesday, Nov. 20, 2015 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 11 November 2015, 6:18 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call for a national roundtable conference of  eminent citizens, community and religious elders, political and civil society leaders to brainstorm to search for an exit  for the country’s unprecedented quandary and to restore Malaysians’  lost self-confidence to compete with the best in the world

I thank the people of Sabah who have shown unstintingly their support for the “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” campaign in the past two days during our tour of Tenom, Keningau, Kudat and Kota Kinabalu, continuing tomorrow to Tuaran and Sandakan.

The “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” campaign is not about me, but the future of 3.3 million Sabahans and 30 million Malaysians – whether Sabahans and Malaysians have the right to demand that their elected representatives raise the issues that matter to the people in Parliament and the State Assemblies, like Prime Minister’s Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s RM2.6 billion “donation” and the RM50 billion l1MDB twin mega scandals.

Malaysia is now in unprecedented times and we are in fact in “no man’s land” in terms of our political and nation-building experience.

There have been many strange goings-on in our country in the past year demonstrating that what we see openly and publicly  may not reflect  the many  powerful under-currents  flowing below the surface in our political  society. Appearance is not the reality, as things may not be what they seem on surface.

I will give three illustrations.

On Monday, 16th November, when Parliament reconvenes after the Deepavali break this week, Parliament will vote on Najib’s 2016 Budget after the final day of the three-day Ministerial winding-up.

If Najib’s 2016 Budget is rejected by Parliament on Monday, then Najib will have to step down as Prime Minister as his most important policy and measure  of the year would have been defeated by Members of Parliament and the country will be poised to have a new and   seventh Prime Minister of Malaysia.

Is this likely?

From the present political scenario, this will not happen as I do not see any possibility of some 40 UMNO/BN Members of Parliament crossing the floor on Monday to join the 71 Pakatan Harapan Members of Parliament from DAP, PKR and AMANAH (minus my one vote as I have been suspended from Parliament for six months) to vote down Najib’s 2016 Budget. PAS has already declared that its Members of Parliament will not vote against Najib’s 2016 Budget.

This is not because there are no UMNO/BN Members of Parliament who are very disappointed by Najib’s 2016 Budget, especially in totally ignoring the RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM50 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals which have have such calamitous disasters for the  Malaysian economy  as seen in the multiple collapse  in the value of the Malaysian ringgit, the stock market, the country’s international reserves as well as foreign capital flight and loss of confidence of foreign investors in Malaysia as a haven for their investments.

But do not expect UMNO/BN MPs to break ranks in ones,  twos or threes, which will subject them to immediate party disciplinary action, but things may be different if  there is confidence and assurance that  some 40 UMNO/BN MPs will “strike” at one go to  show their lack of confidence in the Najib leadership. I do not see this happening this coming Monday.

But this possibility should drive home to the people of Sabah and Sarawak their “kingmaker” role in deciding the Prime Minister and who forms the Federal Government in Putrajaya, for 47 BN MPs  in Sabah (22) and Sarawak (25) can decide whether Najib continues as Prime Minister and who constitutes the Federal Government in Putrajaya.

Furthermore, this also means that Najib is not all that powerful as he seems to be.

In fact, for the first time in the nation’s history, Malay voter support for Najib’s government has fallen below 50 per cent, which had never happened to previous Prime Ministers.

A recent poll in August showed that Najib’s government had only support of 31 per cent of Malay voters, 23 per cent of Malaysian voters and 5 per cent of Chinese voters.

With these dismal popularity figures, Najib’s position as UMNO President and Prime Minister cannot be all that invincible and unshakeable – which is why we see the silent war  of UMNO’s 300 chieftains most of whom are in Najib’s pockets versus the three million UMNO members who  want to see an improvement in UMNO’s political stocks among the people and have no vested interests in Najib’s continued premiership.

This brings me to the second illustration.

With the plummeting of Najib’s popularity rating, not only among Malaysian voters but also among  Malay voters, UMNO propagandists and cybertroopers have intensified playing the race and religious cards, especially their lies and falsehoods that the Malays and Islam are under unprecedented threat particularly from DAP, which is supposed to be the personification of Chinese chauvinism and everything anti-Islam.

This is a not only a dastardly lie but a great disservice to Malaysian plural  nation-building.

The DAP was formed not to fight for one race or religion, but for the welfare of all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

This was why from the very first general election contested by the DAP in 1969 and through all the 11 general elections fought by  DAP from 1969 to 2013, DAP had always presented a multi-ethnic and multi-religious slate of candidates.

Down th decades, DAP  have had MPs and State Assembly representatives from all ethnic groups and religions.

DAP does not want to be the voice of the Chinese only, but of all Malaysians, whether Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans, Ibans or Orang Asli,  whether Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Taoists or Sikhs.

It is not only ironic but highlights the treachery and the pernicious  evil of irresponsible Malaysian politics that when the DAP is doing our utmost in the  party history in the past few years to be more Malaysian by reaching out to all sectors of Malaysian society, particularly the Malays in Peninsular Malaysia, the Kadazan-Dusun-Muruts in Sabah and the Dayaks in Sarawak  (such as through on Impian Sabah, Impian Sarawak, Impian Kelantan, Impian Johor and Impian Kedah/Perlis programmes), UMNO/BN propagandists and cybertroopers are working overtime to try to demonise the DAP as the  Great Chinese Chauvinist and Anti-Islam Partty!

Let me reiterate, DAP is not a Chinese and anti-Islam party, but a Malaysian party to represent all Malaysians, whether Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans, Ibans, Orang

Asli, or whether Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Taoists or Sikhs.

My third illustration is even more mind-boggling. UMNO/BN propagandists and cybertroopers are now accusing the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission as the fourth member  in Pakatan Harapan, together with DAP, PKR and Parti Amanah Negara, to oust UMNO/BN from Putrajaya.

I am even accused of forgetting about the unresolved deaths of Teoh Beng Hock and Ahmad Sarbani Mohamad in MACC for the sake of Pakatan Harapan.

These are a pack of lies, but it highlights the unprecedented fracture of Najib’s government, where the  right hand suspects the left hand and one enforcement agency  distrusts another, which saw their worst exhibition with the sacking of Tan Sri Gani Patail as Attorney-General and  the “dissolution” of the multi-agency Special Task Force on 1MDB on July 29.

In the sixth decade of our nationhood since the achievement of Merdeka in 1957 and the formation of Malaysia in 1963, Malaysia has lost its way.

I still remember the heady days of Merdeka in 1957, when I was in secondary school, when the people in the country had high hopes and ambitions.

When Malaysia was formed 52 years ago in 1963, our country was second in Asia after Japan in terms of economic development, prosperity and per capita income, wealthier than other Asian countries including South Korea and Taiwan which were poorer and more backward at the time.

But over the decades, Malaysia lost out in the race of economic competitiveness and educational excellence and by the nineties, Malaysia had been left behind with the emergence of the Asian economic tigers comprising Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan while Malaysia could only aspire to be the next Asian tiger.

But these hopes of Malaysia to become the next economic tiger were never realised with the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s – and today, Malaysia is even further behind the economic tigers as well as risk being taken over by other countries both in Asia and Africa.

Today, bogged down with a multitude of crises which had been described as the coming of a “perfect storm” to hit the country, Malaysians have lost the self-confidence to re-make the world that they had displayed in earlier decades.

Malaysia must get out of this rut we have been stuck in the past few years, which the RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM50 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals have combined to  pull us down deeper and deeper into the abyss.

Malaysians must find and restore our self-confidence to compete with the rest  and the best in the world. We must rediscover our greatness as Malaysians.

The formal political parties in the governing coalition have failed the nation and cannot get Malaysia out of this rut as they are the ones responsible  for the nation stuck  in this deep  abyss.

What is needed is a new start for the nation, and for this reason, I call ror  a national roundtable conference of  eminent citizens, community and religious elders, political and civil society leaders to brainstorm to search for an exit for  the country’s unprecedented quandary and to restore Malaysians’  lost self-confidence to compete with the best in the world.

(Speech at the DAP Kota Kinabalu “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” forum in Kota Kinabalu on Wednesday, 11th November 2015 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 November 2015, 9:26 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Politics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call on Malaysian public to help the police and AG by producing evidence of Ali Tinju’s speech in Low Yat riots to lead to his prosecution under Sedition Act

The interview today of the new Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali in The Malaysian Insider on how
Ali Tinju’s sedition charge had been dropped
 is neither convincing nor reflection of professionalism of the new Attorney-General and the police to bring to book those who openly flout the law to undermine national unity and harmony in the country.

Apandi said the sedition charge against Mohd Ali Baharom was dropped because the police could not come up with the audio recording of the alleged inflammatory remarks the ex-soldier made outside Low Yat Plaza in July.

Apandi said that without the evidence, he was unable to pursue the case.

He said:

“The actual recording was not enough. It was only a few seconds… We missed the ‘seditious’ part.

“They (the police) couldn’t find it. It wasn’t forthcoming. I told them, ‘this isn’t enough, go find more’. They said, ‘cannot find’. So that put an end to it.”

This is totally unsatisfactory and unacceptable, and if I had not been suspended from Parliament for six months, I would have spoken in the committee stage of next year’s budget for the Prime Minister’s Department to censure Apandi for his failure to uphold law and order as the new Attorney-General.

The Malaysian public are not interested in the game of “passing-the-buck” between the police and the AG’s chambers as to who was responsible for the shabby leg work as to result in the inability of the Attorney-General to prosecute Ali Tinju for sedition.

What did Ali Tinju say in inciting the crowd in Low Yat in Bukit Bintang in Kuala Lumpur in July?

This was what Ali was alleged to have said:

“Okay, we want justice. This is the dignity of Malays, not because one Chinese boy attacked many Malays. This is Malay land. Unite, and attack the DAP Chinese who are rude.”

The decision to drop the sedition case against Tinju Ali had sparked a nation-wide outcry as it highlighted the double standards and selective prosecution and persecution of the authorities concerned.

As Apandi has said that the police could not come up with the audio recording of Tinju Ali’s alleged inflammatory remarks outside Low Yat Plaza in July, I call on the public to help the police and AG to produce evidence of Ali Tinju’s speech in the Low Yat riots.

Members of the public who have such evidence can either hand them directly to the police or through the DAP MP for Segambut Lim Lip Eng, who has agreed to perform the public service to receive such evidence from the public and to hand them over to the police.

[Speech by DAP Parliamentary Leader and MP for Gelang Patah Lim Kit Siang at the DAP “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” ceramah kopitiam in Tuaran on Thursday, 12th November 2016 at 12 noon]

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 November 2015, 1:40 pm and is filed under
Court
,
Crime
,
Police
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP offers to champion and defend Najib if the Prime Minister can prove that he is a “scapegoat” of the RM2.6 billion and  RM50 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals

I am prepared to champion and defend the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, if he can prove that he is a “scapegoat” of the RM2.6 billion and RM50 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals which are the major causes of the prolonged crisis of confidence, both national and international, which had hounded Malaysia with such serious adverse economic consequences, whether the devaluation of the Malaysian ringgit, the plunge in the Malaysian stock market, the fall in Malaysia’s international reserves, the flight of foreign capital and the avoidance of Malaysia as a destination by foreign investors.

I am reminded of the saying that with such friends, one does not need enemies when I read what the PPP President, M. Kayveas said at the PPP Deepavali Open House in Brickfields, Kuala Lumpur yesterday.

Kayveas made the astonishing claim that Najib is being made the 1MDB scapegoat when the company’s management should have taken full responsibility for the poor performance of the government investment fund.

This was exactly what  the then Deputy Prime Miniter Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin had proposed, suggesting to Najib that the Barisan Nasional federal government should sack the entire board of the debt-laden 1MDB, but Muhyiddin was  sacked as DPM instead!

It was not only Muhyiddin himself who was sacked, even the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail was sacked, and several top officers on important agencies were arrested or transferred at short notice, and the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) blocked for three months from continuing its 1MDB investigations.

Who became the 1MDB scapegoat – Najib or Muhyiddin, Gani Patail and even myself?

It would appear that except for the leaders of the Barisan Nasional leaders, Malaysians know that a full investigation into the twin mega scandals would mean a full investigation into Najib himself, because no one else apart from him had been so intimately involved with the ins-and-outs of the twin mega scandals.

One can say without fear of contradiction that there is on one in the country who is more knowledgeable and involvled than Najib about the two scandals and any investigation into the twin mega scandals without investigating Najib is an utter waste of time.

However, if Najib can prove to me in the next five days that he is in fact the “scapegoat” of the twin mega scandals, I am prepared to champion and defend him.

Otherwise, Najib should go to Parliament on Monday on 16th November when Parliament reconvenes for the last of the three-day Ministerial winding-up of the 2016 Budget debate to “come clean” and give full and satisfactory accountability for the two greatest financial scandals in the nation’s history.

(Speech at the DAP “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” kopitiam ceramah in Kudat on Wednesday, 11th November 2015 at 12 noon)

                                                                 Lim Kit Siang

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 November 2015, 12:28 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should not have halved Suhakam’s budget from RM10 million but should have abolished the BTN and save over RM50 million

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak showed his true colours of basically unsympathetic  to democratic and human rights of Malaysians when he more than halved the 2016 budget of Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) from over RM10 million this  year to RM5.5 million for 2016.

What Najib should have done is to maintain Suhakam’s RM10 million ringgit budget and abolished Biro Tata Negara (BTN) which would have saved the government some RM54 million budgetted for next year – especially as BTN has continued to be unrepentant and continued its its negative, divisive and anti-national activity of inciting racism, disunity, bigotry and intolerance instead of fostering patriotism, unity, inter-racial and inter-religious understanding and goodwill.

Even former top Malay civil servants in G25 have condemned BTN of being “ultra Malay-racist”.

The unrepentant and recalcitrant mindset of BTN was again illustrated by the defence of the BT  director Raja Arif Raja Ali of derogatory reference of the minorities in the country as “pendatang” when some of them may have been in Malaysia for several generations.

What makes Raja Arif’s defence of the derogatory reference of the term “pendatang” for Chinese and Indians is that it comes at a time when the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak was trying to assure the non-Malays in the country by declaring at the national assemblies of the non-Malay Barisan Nasional parties that the Chines and Indians are “sons of Malaysia” and not  pendatangs.

When Najib was questioned about his sincerity giving such assurances as he had never made such a statement at UMNO General Assemblies, BTN’s Raja Arif’s defence of the label “pendatang” for Chinese and Indians cut deeper than ever and strikes home the question whether Najib’s assurance that Chines and Indians are “sons of Malaysia” and not pendatang is to be taken seriously by the Barisan Nasional parties, leaders and governent departments and officials like BTN.

Or is BTN higher in authority not only over the Cabinet Ministers but even the Prime Minister himself?

Will the Cabinet censure the BTN director Raja Arif for justifying the use of the derogatory term “pendatang” on Chinese and Indians in Malaysia?

(Speech at DAP  “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mani RM2.6 billion?” kopitiam ceramah  at Luyang, Kota Kinabalu  on Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 6 pm)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 November 2015, 1:01 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Obama should be asked specific question when he visits Malaysia whether FBI and US Department of Justice are investigating Najib under the DOJ’s Kleptocracy Assets Recovery Initiative 2010 in connection with the RM50 billion 1MDB scandal

Together with DAP National Political Director and MP for Kluang, Liew Chin Tong and DAP MP for Segambut Lim Lip Eng, we have just arrived in Sandakan, whih  is the last place  of the three-day six-stop launch in Sabah of the “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” campaign as part of the nation-wide movement to make 30 million Malaysians realise that they are all victims of the RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM50 billion 1MDB mega twin scandals.

Malaysians all over the country, regardless of race, religion, region or political affiliation, are increasingly asking two questions about the RM2.6 billion “donation” deposited in Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal banking accounts for the 13th General Election, where the RM2.6 billion came from and to whom the monies went to.

Najib should realise that these two questions are not going to go away, and the longer he procrastinates in giving a full and satisfactory explanation as to where the R2.6 billion came from and to whom they had been given to, the worse it is for Najib in terms of his credibility and legitimacy as Prime Minister of Malaysia.

Najib should take the bull by its horn and on Monday, when Parliament reconvenes, be frank and truthful to Members of Parliament from both sides of the House as well as to Malaysians by giving  full and satisfactory accounting of the twin mega scandals under his premiership.

In the flight from Kota Kinabalu to  Sandakan, I read the Borneo Post report “US returns US$1 million stolen by former South Korean President Chun”, on the return by the United States of more than a million US dollars  to South Korea that were embezzled by South Korea’s former president Chun Doo Hwan which were hidden abroad.

US officials said the return of the funds, US$1.13 million in today’s dollars, demonstrated Washington’s commitment to rooting out the profits of theft by foreign leaders.

The US Department of Justice said FBI investigators had traced US$726,951 to a California account linked to the sale of Orange County real estate by Chun’s son while a second US$500,000 was traced to a Pennsylvania company found to be linked to Chun’s “corruption scheme”.

I am struck by this report because I dread that one day in the future, Malaysians may be reading about the outcome of US Department of Justice investigations into Malaysian political officials under its Kleptocrary Assets Recovery Initiative 2010.

It is the height of national shame that New York Times reported on Sept 11 that the Prime Minister Datuk Seri  Najib Razak was being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) in the US Department of Justice probe under the DOJ’s Kleptocracy Assets Recovery Initiative 2010 but neither Najib nor anyone in Putrajaya had been able to deny or clarify the report after a passage of more than two months.

Never before in Malaysia’s 58-year nation-building history under five previous Prime Ministers from 1957 to 2009 had the country’s Prime Minister had to suffer the dishonour and humiliation of being investigated by a foreign country as to whether he is a kleptocrat or not.

This is a question which must be specifically posed to US President Barack Obama when he visits Malaysia in conjunction with the ASEAN Summit conferences on Nov. 21-22, whether FBI and US Department of Justice are investigating Najib under the DOJ’s Kleptocracy Assets Recovery Initiative 2010 in connection with the RM50 billion 1MDB scandal.

Malaysians cannot and should not suffer the shame and dishonour of their Prime Minister being subject to the humiliating investigation by FBI as to whether he is a kleptocrat like former South Korean President Choo Doo Hwan.

In fact, Najib should ask Obama to make a special statement on this issue during the US President’s visit to Malaysia.

(Arrival Statement at the Sandakan Airport on Thursday, November 12, 2016 at 4pm)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 November 2015, 11:14 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Some of the unthinkable scenarios which Malaysians must think about and even face in the extraordinary political circumstances Malaysia is in today

I have been suspended for six months for pointing out in Parliament  that the Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia did  not have the power  to bar the Public Accounts Committee (PAC)  under the Deputy Chairman Dr. Tan Seng Giaw (Kepong) with the proper  PAC quorum from continuing its investigations  in August into the RM50 billion 1MDB scandal.

My suspension, and the two questions that are being asked all over the country as  to from  whom and to whom the RM2.6 billion “donation” in Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal banking accounts have gone to,  are just symptomatic that Malaysia is very “sick” where a proper parliamentary system and the principles of accountability, transparency and good governance cannot function normally and effectively.

Malaysia is in very abnormal political times – in the interregnum between the fall of an UMNO-led government coalition which had been in power for 58 years but have led the country into a rut after losing its  moral compass and sense of responsibility as a government and its replacement by a new coalition committed to defend the democratic freedoms and  human rights enshrined in the Malaysian Constitution.

This is the time for Malaysians to think unthinkable scenarios  and face up to extraordinary challenges in entirely new political circumstances taking place  in Malaysa today.

Before the 2008 elections elections, it was unthinkable that the UMNO/Barisan Nasional government in Malaysia could be replaced, but after the 12th general elections in 2008, nobody doubts this question as it was no more  “whether” but “when” the UMNO/BN Federal Government in Putrajaya would be replaced.

Similarly, Malaysians must think of what appears to be unthinkable scenarios and be prepared to face the new political challenges presented by them, including the following:

1. Could Najib’s 2016 Budget be rejected by Parliament when Members of Parliament from both sides of the House reconvene on Monday, 16th November after the Deepavali break?

Even if Najib survives the 2016 Budget vote in Parliament on Monday, would he dare face a “no confidence motion” by the Parliamentary Opposition Leader, Datuk Seri Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail or would he prefer to avoid such a test by ensuring that Azizah’s “no confidence motion” would not see the light of day in Parliament?

2. Is Najib’s political position as Prime Minister and UMNO President  so powerful and untouchable  that there is no way he could be toppled before the 14th General Election in some 30 months’ time – that all efforts by UMNO malcontents whether led by Tun Mahathir or Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin would come to nought?

3. Is Najib being investigated by the FBI and the US Department of Justice (DOJ) under their Kleptocracy Assets Recovery Initiative 2010 to determine whether Najib is a “kleptocrat”  under the RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM50 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals?

4. Who will be the next Prime Minister to replace Najib if he could be forced to step down as Prime Minister, considering that he is plumbing the depths of unpopularity among Malaysian voters – as a poll in August showed that the Najib government has the support of only 23 per cent of Malaysian voters, 31% of Malay voters and 5% of Chinese voters?

5. Is there nobody from Sabah or Sarawak who could qualify to become Prime Minister of Malaysia, 52 years after the formation of Malaysia – when Kedah and Pahang had produced two Prime Ministers each, Penang and Johore a Prime Minister each?

6. Will Mahathir end up in a cell next to Anwar Ibrahim in jail after the shocking statement by the Minister for Communications and Multimedia Datuk Salleh Said Keruak that Mahathir may end up finding himsef in jail if Mahathir’s suggestion that lavish lifestyles be used as evidence for corruption happens?

Anwar had in fact expressed “grave concern” last week over police investigations against former Prime Minister Mahathir for criminal defamation, calling for the immediate end of harassment against Mahathir and others, with the observation: “If this is how even Mahathir is treated, the democratic right of ordinary Malaysians to question and criticise the government is in serious jeopardy.”

7. Will Anwar, undergoing his latest bout of political persecution, be released from jail to regain his civil and citizenship entitlements to help shape the political destiny of Malaysia?

8. Is it possible for Mahathir and Anwar to team up in the higher interests of saving Malaysia from the “perfect storm” of political, economic, good governance and nation-building crises gathering against the nation, and restore to Malaysians the self-confidence to be able to compete with the best in the world?

9. Mahathir has proposed a Council of Elders to guide the Prime Minister in leading the government, as the Cabinet has proven to a committee of yes-men to the Prime Minister.

I agree with DAP Selangor leader Dr.Abdul Aziz Bari that a Council of Elders to advise the Prime Minister as proposed by Mahathir does not have a place in the Federal Constitution and  it is no answer to the  problem of an overbearing and over-powering Prime Minister, who should be primus inter pares (first among equals) and not an uncrowned emperor!

Mahathir did not have a Council of Elders to advise him an tie his hands when he was Prime Minister for 22 yeaers, nor was there such a Councill for the first three Prime Ministers of Malaysia – Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein.

What Malaysia needs  is not a Council of Elders to hamstring the Prime Minister of the day, but a restoration of the institutional checks and balances which had been first destroyed by Mahathir and without which there could be no responsible and responsive system of parliamentary democracy and  good governance.

What Malaysia needs is the promotion of consultative governance, starting with a roundtable conference of eminent citizens community and religious elders, political and civil society leaders to brainstorm to search for an exit for the country’s unprecedented quandary and crisi  and to restore Malaysians’ lost self-confidence to compete with the best in the world.

There is an intense debate going on  in the country as to  which should be the first national priority – to change the Prime Minister, to save UMNO/BN coalition, to change the system or to save Malaysia?

Malaysia is neither Najib nor Mahathir, not UMNO or Barisan Nasional and the future of Malaysia cannot be equated to the interests of one person or one political party as national interests must always override personal or party political interests.

This is the greatest challenge facing Malaysians, whether we are capable of achieving rhe Malaysian Dream where all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, age, gender or political affiliation, can find common cause as Malaysians to achieve what is best and greatest in terms of the potential in Malaysia as a confluence of mankind’s greatest religions and civilisations in human history.

(Speech at the Sandakan DAP “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang and Mana RM2.6 billion?” forum in Karamunting, Sandakan on Thursday, 12th November 2015 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 November 2015, 6:46 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Behold The Liberated Minds of Our Hang Jebats and Hang Nadirs!

M. Bakri Musa

www.bakrimusa.com

14th Nov 2015

Why do you stay in prison when the door is wide open?

Jalal ad Din Rumi (1207-73)

The path we chose in pursuing independence represented the best elements of our culture. We followed the right leaders and they in turn adopted the right strategy, one of co-operation and negotiation. That was our nature, to be bertolak ansur (give and take); posturing and confrontation were just not our style.

     Our leaders’ timing too was perfect as Britain had grown weary of her colonies. We were also lucky in that we were dealing with the British. Had it been the Chinese, well, consider the fate of the Tibetans and Uighurs. Had it been the Russians, look at Ukraine and Chechnya.

     Today revisionist historians belittle the valiant efforts of our fathers of independence. Let me set these latter-day interpreters of events straight. Had we opted for Burhanuddin Al Helmy or Chin Peng, the nation’s history and the fate of our people would be far different today.

     In times of crises or profound changes, we have to be extra cautious in whom we choose to lead us, or stated differently, in whom we should follow. It is during such times that we have to exercise our critical faculties and be extra vigilant in choosing our leaders. Malaysia is in such a state today. We have a leader in Najib Razak who is severely-challenged with respect to honesty, integrity, and competency. Profligacy he has in abundance.

     Those enlightened leaders who guided us peacefully to independence should inspire us. As for our earlier heroes who shepherded us to Islam, there is little written about them as our culture had just transited into the written word. In lieu of that I have highlighted the heroes from our legends. One is Hang Tuah, a figure high in the palace hierarchy; the other, an ordinary citizen, Hang Nadim. They may or may not be based on historical characters but they nonetheless serve a useful purpose to remind us of the power of a free mind.

     In Sulalatus Salatin (Malay Annals) there is the story of Temasek (old Singapore) being regularly plagued by schools of flying fish. Hundreds fell victim to this scourge, impaled by the fish’s sharp snouts. All efforts at combating this piscine intrusion proved unsuccessful. Then a young boy suggested to the sultan to plant a row of bananas along the shoreline. That way, Hang Nadim told the sultan, when the flying fish darted onshore, their snouts would be impaled on the plants’ soft stems.

     The scheme worked wonderfully well, and the pleased sultan decided to honor the clever young man. The sultan’s advisors however, had second thoughts. If that youth could dream up such a brilliant scheme at a very young age, they convinced the sultan, what else would he think of later as an adult? Sensing a future threat, the sultan had Hang Nadim beheaded. Imagine!

     That young man certainly had a free mind. He could, to borrow a cliché, think outside the box. He was also not at all shy in telling his sultan on what to do. In a deeply feudal society as Malay society was then (still is), that took great courage.

     That boy however, paid dearly for his courage and free-mindedness. Tragic as that was for him and his family, the far greater tragedy was borne by society. Executing the young man not only deprived that society of its bright star but also sent a clear message that it did not pay – in fact downright dangerous – to be innovative and original. Such a society could never aspire to greatness. That was a steep price to pay, just to protect the exalted positions of the sultan’s selfish and shortsighted advisors.

     If you kill off your bright talents, a generation or two later you will have a society of dumbbells. When the Mongols invaded the Muslim heartland, the first thing they did was to kill off the intellectuals and luminaries. That was the most effective and efficacious way to decapitate that society and culture.

     Hang Nadim’s treatment reminded me of the ancient Mayan practice of sacrificing their beautiful virgins to their Gods. A few generations later, all the newborns in that society were ugly, as the beautiful potential mothers had been killed.

     The legend of Hang Nadim reflects more on society than on him. Every society is blessed with its share of Hang Nadims. What it does with the blessings would in large measure determine its fate.

     Consider the European aristocracies’ practice of taking in gifted citizens under its patronage. The Romanov Dynasty nurtured the best Russian artists, composers and writers. Granted, the arts were often used as political instruments and artists were continually divided between devotion to their craft and to their royal patrons, but at least those creative citizens received royal support and recognition.

      Imagine if the sultan had taken Hang Nadim under his patronage. He would blossom, exploring other bright ideas and expanding on his banana plantation scheme. There could be a flourishing fresh-fruit industry as well as a fish-processing plant. The fish waste would be excellent fertilizer for the rice fields. Imagine, three industries spawned and the attendant jobs for the sultan’s subjects, quite apart from ensuring their safety, just from one bright idea!

     If the sultan had gone beyond and married the young man to one of the princesses, that would ensure future members of the royal family would have something between their ears,  We would then be more likely to get sultans who could choose smarter advisers and make wiser decisions.

      The far greater reward would not be on the young man or the future average intelligence of the royal family but on society. Other bright young men and women would now be inspired to pursue their own creative and innovative ideas in the hope of getting similar royal recognition. Pretty soon the royal court would be full of these bright kids and the sultan would have the best advice. Both he and his kingdom would prosper.

     Today many lament Najib’s dysfunctional leadership. Conveniently forgotten is that the mistake on Najib was made a generation earlier. Who was responsible in UMNO and in the country to have let this flawed character rise up so high?

     Bukhari al-Jauhari’s seminal Taj-us Salatin (Crown Jewel of Sultans) outlined the rules governing the relationship between the ruled and their rulers. Both are answerable to a higher authority. Consequently the ruler is to govern in a just manner in accordance to divine dictates. Bukhari went beyond; it is the duty of rulers to have just, pious, honest, and knowledgeable advisors in carrying out the functions of governance.

     The king must “selalu rindukan sahabat akan orang yang bererpengetahuan … ” (constantly yearn for the friendship of those most knowledgeable).

     Rulers cannot simply lament the poor advice they get or the inadequacies of their advisors, as Raja Nazrin of Perak tried recently in an address to a university community. Rulers must take responsibility; they cannot simply blame their advisors. They must go beyond and diligently seek counsel from those who are competent and honest. Failure to do so would be a dereliction of royal duties, at which point citizens would no longer owe any loyalty to the ruler.

     Two points about Taj-us Salatin; first, it was written in early 17th Century when Malay society was steeped in its feudal ways. It took great courage and a free mind to write such a treatise. Unfortunately we do not know much about this heroic writer, except through his works.

     The second is that the volume predated Hobbes’ Leviathan, another opus on the same subject, by over half a century. So far reaching were Bukhari’s ideas that earlier colonials concluded that Taj-us Salatin could not possibly be an original but mere translation, possibly from some Middle Eastern sources, as no native could possibly possess the intellectual wherewithal to undertake such serious philosophical work. To claim it as otherwise would defy the colonials’ narrative of the “dumb lazy” natives. The colonials scoured the Middle East looking for the original. They are still looking. Those colonial minds had been closed long before they landed on Malay soil.

     Shifting from political philosophy to classical literature, in Hikayat Hang Tuah we have the two protagonists. One, Hang Tuah, is the hero and eponymous legend. Even the name is auspicious–Tuah, the blessed one. In contrast, his nemesis Hang Jebat rhymes with yang jahat, the sinister one.

     The legend begins with the pair in childhood, together with another three, bonding as brothers. Later they became hulubalangs (knights) for the sultan, in the manner of King Arthur’s Knights of the Round Table, minus the equality implied by the round table. Hang Tuah, being numero uno, took his loyalty to the sultan to extremes, even lying on his behalf to deceive a young princess. Soon however, palace intrigue took over and Tuah was charged with treason and sentenced to death.

      The sultan replaced Tuah with Jebat. On discovering the grave injustice perpetrated on his dear friend, Jebat relentlessly pursued the guilty parties. Threatened by Jebat’s aggressive crusade, the sultan summoned his chief minister for help. He suggested the sultan recall Hang Tuah whom the minister had secretly protected. Tuah, ever loyal to his sultan despite the earlier death sentence, returned.

     The climax had the two childhood buddies battling it out in a duel, with Tuah killing Jebat.

     The conventional wisdom has Tuah the hero (as suggested by the title), ready to defend the sultan, right or wrong. The free-minded contemporary thinker Kassim Ahmad, partial to the antihero sentiments of his youth, concluded otherwise. Far from being the hero, Tuah is the archetypical palace sycophant willing to kill his dear friend in order to regain the sultan’s favor, even that of an unjust sultan. Jebat is the genuine hero who sacrificed his life to right a gross injustice. Tuah is loyal to the person of the sultan, Jebat to the principle of justice.

     Today Malaysia is again blighted with a leader who exceeds the Melaka sultan of yore in his many deficiencies. Like that sultan, Najib extols sycophancy over competency among his ministers. And again like Melaka of yore, we are cursed with a glut of Hang Tuahs ever willing to humor Najib. What we desperately need are our Hang Jebats and Hang Nadims.

Adapted from the author’s latest book, Liberating The Malay Mind, ZI Publications Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia , 2013.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 November 2015, 6:37 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call on Najib to declare his stand – whether he will resign as Prime Minister if his 2016 Budget is rejected by Parliament on Monday

Datuk Seri Najib Razak should declare his stand well before Parliament’s resumption after the Deepavali break on Monday, whether he will resign as Prime Minister if his 2016 Budget is rejected by Parliament during it second reading on Monday.

This has become an issue as  the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department and Gerakan President, Datuk Mah Siew Keong  told Sin Chew Daily that there is no need for Najib to resign as Prime Minister even if the 2016 Budget is rejected by Parliament.

This is turning accepted parliamentary conventions and practices on their head but for this perversion of parliamentary tradition to come from the President of a political party which had prided itself as “the conscience” of the Barisan Nasional coalition government indicates the degree of depravity and degradation this political party had undergone in order to hang on to the few  perks of office and position in government.

Regardless of the outcome of the Parliamentary vote on Monday, Najib should declare his stand on whether he would resign as Prime Minister if the 2016 budget is rejected, or he would hang on to office, both as Prime Minister and Finance Minister, regardless of the outcome of the parliamentary vote?

This may appear to be an academic question as a rejection of Najib’s 2016 Budget  on Monday will be the greatest parliamentary and political surprise in the nation’s history, but a very important principle of democratic and good governance is involved.

Did Mah merely state his personal take of the  perversion of parliamentary traditions and conventions, or had Najib spoken to Mah in confidence that regardless of the outcome of a parliamentary vote on the 2016 Budget, he would continue as Prime Minister and Finance Minister come “hell or high water”?

The time has also come for all leaders and Ministers of the Barisan Nasional component parties whether they subscribe to the parliamentary tradition and convention that Najib will have to step down as Prime Minister if his 2016 Budget is voted out in Parliament on Monday, or whether they agree with Mah’s parliamentary perversion that Najib need not resign as Prime Minister and Finance Minister even if the 2016 Budget is rejected by Parliament on Monday.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 November 2015, 9:19 am and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Celebrating democracy

Economist

Nov 14th 2015

– Politics in Myanmar YANGON

THE excitement was palpable. In the pre-dawn dark of November 8th, 30 minutes before voting in Myanmar’s general election began, the queue at a polling station in Yangon, the country’s biggest city, stretched for several blocks. In midmorning a line of voters trailing through a monastery’s leafy grounds suddenly shifted to allow a frail elderly woman, carried up a flight of stairs by two young men, to cast her ballot. Through blazing midday sun and afternoon rainstorms, Myanmar’s citizens turned out to vote in their country’s first competitive general election since 1990—most of them, it appeared, to deliver a blow to the army, which has controlled the country for half a century.

Full results are not yet in, but as The Economist went to press, the National League for Democracy (NLD), an opposition party led by Aung San Suu Kyi, a longtime democracy activist, had won 291 parliamentary seats, compared with just 33 taken by the incumbent Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) and 35 by assorted ethnic parties and independent candidates. Miss Suu Kyi believes the NLD is on track to win at least 75% of the seats contested—enough to give it a majority, despite the constitution’s provision that one-quarter of the seats must be reserved for the army.

The NLD has also performed well in local elections held at the same time as the national one. The party has so far taken 367 seats in state and regional parliaments, compared with the USDP’s 46 and 27 won by ethnic parties. The USDP seems resigned. “We lost,” admits its boss, Htay Oo. Thein Sein, the president, has congratulated Miss Suu Kyi, as has the army chief.

Miss Suu Kyi will not succeed Mr Thein Sein: the constitution drafted by the army deliberately ensures that by preventing anyone from taking the job who has a foreign spouse or children. But assuming the NLD gets a majority, she will decide who the president will be (by February), and, as she admits, will tell him what to do. She is already acting presidentially, calling for “national reconciliation”, talks with Mr Thein Sein and the army, and urging her supporters to be magnanimous in victory.

That has not stopped them from rejoicing. On election night, revellers danced atop cars, waving inflatable red batons and singing party songs. Kya Ma, a 47-year-old public-health teacher, said that in previous elections, “You did not even tell your friends if you voted NLD.”

Local and international observers agreed that the election went smoothly. Fears of widespread disenfranchisement due to error-ridden voter lists proved unfounded. Votes were counted openly, in the presence of party representatives. Advance votes were, however, harder to monitor. In the previous general election (boycotted by the NLD) in 2010, such ballots swung some constituencies in the USDP’s favour. This time there were scattered reports of boxes full of suspiciously fresh and similar-looking advance ballots being delivered to polling stations. But the more constituencies the NLD wins, the more such chicanery amounts to little more than fiddling at the margins.

Cabinet ministers lost their seats to political novices. The NLD achieved a near-sweep in Naypyidaw, Myanmar’s capital, where most residents are connected in some way with the army or the current government. Before the election, U Tin Aye, a former USDP official who heads Myanmar’s election commission, said he wanted his old party to win fairly. But the USDP underestimated how unpopular it is: a USDP victory proved incompatible with a free election. Intentionally or not, the government chose the latter and paid the price.

But whereas the army’s proxy party has been defeated, the army itself remains powerful. Its faction in the parliament gives it political clout that voters, judging from the results, do not want it to have. It will still appoint the ministers of defence, interior and border affairs. This will keep the police and the powerful General Administrative Department—the country’s civil service—under military control. Whether a civilian president will be able to rein in the army remains unclear.

Apart from one public appearance soon after the election, Miss Suu Kyi has kept a low profile. That will not last. Voters, after all, chose the NLD not because of its policies (these are vague), but because of Miss Suu Kyi’s record of struggle against the army, including years of house arrest, and her charisma. Without constitutional reform, the highest office she could accept would be as the parliament’s speaker. But using her personal status to control the presidency would be risky. What would happen if her puppet tires of having his strings pulled? And what would happen to the NLD should Miss Suu Kyi, who is 70 years old, fall ill? In opposition the NLD never had to answer such questions; as a ruling party it would have to.

It will be a short honeymoon for Miss Suu Kyi. She will face international pressure to alleviate the suffering of the Rohingyas, a Muslim minority which the government declared stateless and which therefore had no vote. She has so far shied away from addressing their plight directly. After her victory—and the implicit rebuke it delivered to Buddhist nationalists, who tried to undermine Miss Suu Kyi’s campaign by accusing her of coddling Muslims—many will rightly expect more.

People may not know what Miss Suu Kyi stands for on many domestic issues, but they do know they want a better government, more jobs and a form of development that does not shovel money into the pockets of generals. The army is not out of politics yet, but voters will expect Miss Suu Kyi to deliver.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 November 2015, 7:09 am and is filed under
ASEAN
,
Elections
,
International
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.