2011 challenge to Malaysians  – to unite and demand that they enjoy equal opportunity to earn a good living and provide a secure, happy life for each individual and the family

“Malaysia is at the crosssroads.”
– 1Malaysia Government Transformation Programme Road Map (January 2010).

“Malaysia has reached a defining moment on its development path.”
 – New Economic Model (March 2010).

“We need to see the reality for what it is: we are on a burning platform”
 – Tenth Malaysia Plan (June 2010).

However, the year 2010, which  also marks 21 months of  Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s premiership, has not been distinguished by any conviction or sense of urgency that Malaysia is “on a burning platform”, “at the crossroads” or “a defining moment” – that the country has no choice but to forge ahead with a paradigm shift in national economic strategy and public policy.

It is the exact reverse. Despite the 21 months of Najib’s premiership, based on  his signature theme of “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”, multi-racial, multi-lingual, multi-religious and multi-cultural Malaysia has suffered greater racial and religious polarization and loss of social cohesion, with  the concepts of unity in diversity and inclusiveness, social justice, excellence, integrity and our international competitiveness receiving one setback after another.

The bad old days of “the government knows best” are back with a vengeance, as illustrated by the raft of developments in the closing days and weeks of 2010, eg:

•	Catholic church officials told to remove crucifixes and to avoid hymns being sung when Prime Minister Najib Razak attended the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur’s Christmas tea party last Saturday.

•	Controversy over Cabinet decision to make history a compulsory-pass subject for SPM from 2013 when the history text books are antithetical to the principles of unity in  diversity and inclusiveness reflective of  Malaysia’s plural society.

•	The appointment of Tan Sri Isa Samad, who had to relinquish his previous post as Cabinet Minister because of UMNO “money politics”, as the new Felda Chairman, rubbishing the Government Transformation Programme (GTP) and  National Key Result Action (NKRA) on fighting corruption.

•	The ordeal of businessman Chia Buang Hin who alleged that he was beaten and robbed by police over the expired road tax of his wife’s car that he was driving which re-opened anew the question of the efficiency, incorruptibility and professionalism of the police to keep crime low and be the protector of the rights of Malaysians and the crying need for the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) as proposed by the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission in 2005.

•	The brewing constitutional crisis in Selangor over the appointment of the State Secretary,  stemming from the refusal of the Barisan Nasional-controlled Federal Government to respect the democratic rights of the voters of Selangor to elect a Pakatan Rakyat state government of their choice.

•	The unchecked racist and inflammatory incitement by irresponsible media like Umno’s  Utusan Malaysia such as the targeting of DAP MP for Serdang Teo Nie Ching.

These developments are all inimical to the 1Malaysia concept of unity in diversity and inclusiveness  propounded by Najib and not calculated to enhance public confidence in good governance and our international competitiveness.

The  Talent Corporation is to start operation tomorrow to carry out a more effective brain-gain strategy to attract talented Malaysians and non-Malaysians to contribute to Malaysia’s knowledge-based economy.

But the Talent Corporation is set to become another expensive failure as how could it convince  the return of the talented from the  Malaysian diaspora when the present government is incapable to arrest the unchecked brain drain from the country.

Have more Malaysians migrated abroad in the 21 months of Najib’s premiership than the previous 21 months?

It is not that Najib does not have the answer. The New Economic Model had pinpointed the problem and the solution when it said:

“We are not developing talent and what we have is leaving. The human capital situation in Malaysia is reaching a critical stage. The rate of outward migration of skilled Malaysians is rising rapidly.” (p.6)

“Globalisation has created a fierce competition for talent, forcing companies and government to recognize that people are the most valuable assets. To compete on a regional and global scale, Malaysia must retain and attract talent. Malaysia must be seen by its people and others as a land of equal opportunity to earn a good living and provide a secure, happy life for each individual and family.” (p.8)

The Talent Corporation is incapable of giving such an assurance – that Malaysia is “a land of equal opportunity to earn a good living and provide a secure, happy life for each individual and the family”.

In fact, the developments of the past 21 months, and in particular in the closing days of 2010,which are  completely detrimental to the 1Malaysia concepts of unity in diversity, inclusiveness and social justice, will destroy whatever chances of success the  Talent Corporation might have.

Only a  Malaysian government, with unwavering leadership and political will,  can give such an assurance.

This is the national challenge for Malaysians in the new year 2011 – to unite and demand a government and leadership with the political will to convince Malaysians that they enjoy equal opportunity to earn a good living and provide a secure, happy life for each individual and family life.

Wishing all Malaysians a Happy New Year.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 December 2010, 1:52 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Brain drain
,
Corruption
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Staid papers suffer as gossip sells

By
Yow Hong Chieh

The Malaysian Insider

Dec 31, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 31 — Newspaper circulation in the country maintained its downward slide this year as readers continue to shun hard news in government-controlled titles for more sensationalist tabloids.

Circulation of local media mainstays — The Star, New Straits Times, Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian — has fallen over the past five years, in some cases dramatically so. Scandal sheets, however, remain largely popular and in some cases far outselling more traditional rags which helped advertising expenditure grow 22 per cent to RM3.5 billion for the first half of 2010.

Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC) figures for the full year ended June 30, 2010 show The Star’s circulation dropping from 295,479 to 286,409 (-3.1 per cent), the New Straits Times from 120,770 to 109,341 (-9.5 per cent), Utusan Malaysia from 181,346 to 170,558 (-5.9 per cent) and Berita Harian from 183,187 to 160,597 (-28.7 per cent).

Sales of the four newspapers have been falling these past five years, with all but The Star registering drops of 20 per cent or more between 2005 and 2009.

So-called “light reading” newspapers like Malay-language Harian Metro and Kosmo, on the other hand, continue to go from strength to strength, posting higher sales numbers this past year on top of already impressive circulation numbers.

Kosmo was the biggest winner with a massive 32.9 per cent jump in circulation from 129,633 last year to 172,252 this year. Harian Metro also managed to chalk up an impressive 11.8 per cent rise in circulation to 378,354.

The weekend editions of both newspapers, Kosmo Ahad and Metro Ahad, saw similar increases of 35.1 per cent and 11.5 per cent, respectively.

All Chinese-language papers managed slight single-digit bumps in sales this past year, with the exception of Guang Ming Daily which slipped by 2.67 per cent to 95,158.

Circulation for Sin Chew Daily went up from 374,757 to 382,578 (2.1 per cent), China Press from 159,034 to 160,841 (1.1 per cent) and Oriental Daily News from 97,882 to 103,827 (6.1 per cent).

Free paper The Sun recorded a 4.38 per cent boost in circulation from 287,935 to 300,512.

Bulk sales — the practice of selling bundles of copies at discounted rates for distribution in schools, airplanes and hotels — now make up a slightly higher proportion of average net sales per publishing day for mainstream papers.

Reduced rate sales for The Star went up from 8 to 10 per cent of total sales, the New Straits Times from 23 per cent to 27 per cent, Utusan Malaysia from 6 per cent to 7 per cent and Berita Harian from 13 per cent to 19 per cent.

In contrast, bulk sales for Kosmo, Harian Metro and Chinese-language dailies constituted one per cent or less of daily average sales.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 December 2010, 9:21 am and is filed under
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Wishing all Malaysians a Happy New Year !

                This entry was posted on Friday, 31 December 2010, 3:20 pm and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


NUJ blames racist editors for Utusan’s circulation drop

By
Adib Zalkapli

The Malaysian Insider

January 01, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 1 – National Union of Journalists (NUJ) president Hata Wahari blamed Utusan Malaysia editors and what he called their racial rhetoric for the daily’s declining sale.

He also called on the authorities to act against Utusan Malaysia editors for fanning racial sentiment in its reports.

“Utusan Malaysia which used to enjoy daily circulation of 350,000 has now become government’s propaganda tool in playing up racial issues and creating discord among the people of various races,” said Hata (picture) in a statement today.

“NUJ Malaysia also calls on the authorities to act against the chief editor and other editors of Utusan Malaysia for undermining racial harmony in the country,” he added.

Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC) figures for the full year ended June 30, 2010 showed that Utusan Malaysia’s circulation dropped from 181,346 to 170,558, or a drop of 5.9 per cent.

“NUJ Malaysia hopes that the chief editor and editors of Utusan Malaysia will revert to the objectives of the newspaper during the early days of its publication,” said Hata who is also an Utusan Malaysia journalist.

The Utusan Group was founded in Singapore in 1939 by Malay intellectuals including the republic’s first president Yusof  Ishak who were critical of the then colonial government.

The company is now controlled by Umno and Utusan Malaysia has been accused by Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leaders promoting racial hatred in its reporting.

It had accused Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng of being anti-Malay and recently launched an attack against DAP’s Serdang MP Teo Nie Ching for alleged failure dress appropriately in her visit to a mosque.

“Failure of the authorities to take action against Utusan Malaysia chief editor and editor would only show that they are consenting to the agenda of creating racial discord in the country by a racist and undignified newspaper,” said Hata.

He also urged editors of other mainstream dailies that have suffered declining circulation to stop from being government propaganda tools.

“The union also asks editors of mainstream media especially Utusan Malaysia, New Straits Times, Berita Harian and the The Star to play the role of disseminating information to the public and not as propaganda machinery of the government, political parties, or any individual,” said Hata.

The ABC report also showed that The Star’s circulation dropping from 295,479 to 286,409 (-3.1 per cent), the New Straits Times from 120,770 to 109,341 (-9.5 per cent), and Berita Harian from 183,187 to 160,597 (-12.3 per cent).

Sales of the three newspapers and Utusan Malaysia have been falling these past five years, with all but The Star registering drops of 20 per cent or more between 2005 and 2009.

So-called “light reading” newspapers like Malay-language Harian Metro and Kosmo, on the other hand, continue to go from strength to strength, posting higher sales numbers this past year on top of already impressive circulation numbers.

Kosmo was the biggest winner with a massive 32.9 per cent jump in circulation from 129,633 last year to 172,252 this year. Harian Metro also managed to chalk up an impressive 11.8 per cent rise in circulation to 378,354.

The weekend editions of both newspapers, Kosmo Ahad and Metro Ahad, saw similar increases of 35.1 per cent and 11.5 per cent, respectively.

All Chinese-language papers managed slight single-digit bumps in sales this past year, with the exception of Guang Ming Daily which slipped by 2.67 per cent to 95,158.

Circulation for Sin Chew Daily went up from 374,757 to 382,578 (2.1 per cent), China Press from 159,034 to 160,841 (1.1 per cent) and Oriental Daily News from 97,882 to 103,827 (6.1 per cent).

Free paper The Sun recorded a 4.38 per cent boost in circulation from 287,935 to 300,512.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 January 2011, 11:36 pm and is filed under
Media
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Utusan told to stop obsession with Teo’s attire

by
 Aidila Razak

Malaysiakini

Jan 1, 2011

Women organisation representatives today slammed parties who have attacked Serdang MP Teo Nie Ching for wearing “tight clothes” at an aerobics event organised by a mosque earlier this month.

According to Empower executive director Maria Chin Abdullah, the attention on her clothing was evidence of gender discrimination against female elected representatives.

“This is a sad pattern. We see this even in election campaigns where female candidates are subjected to personal attacks about how they dress and who they associate with.

“This happened in the case of (Seputeh MP) Teresa Kok, (Bukit Lanjan assemblyperson) Elizabeth Wong, and (Batu Gajah MP) Fong Po Kuan, who has had to sustain racist remarks in Parliament,” said Chin when contacted.

On Thursday, Malay daily Utusan Malaysia reported on its front page that Teo was “creating trouble again” by dressing in tight clothing while participating in an aerobics session in the car park of a mosque in her constituency.

The mosque committee had invited the MP to participate in the event, which was part of their Maal Hijrah celebrations.

Teo had attended event dressed in track pants and a white tee shirt.

‘Why target Teo?
‘

Women’s Aid Organisation president Meera Samanther concurred with Chin, and asked why Teo (below) has been a regular target for such remarks.

The Serdang MP first came under Utusan’s keen eye when they front-paged her wearing a “tight kebaya” and not covering her hair when she attended a surau event last August.

“Why target her? Is it because she is female, vocal and in a position of power?

“We are disappointed with such remarks but I would tell Teo that there will always be people who are unhappy, and she should ignore them and continue with her work,” said Samanther.

Both women’s rights activists also pointed out that Teo had attended the event as an invited guest of the mosque committee, whose members had no problems with her attire.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 1 January 2011, 8:56 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


2011 – The Rise Of Pakatan Rakyat, The Imminent Fall Of Umno/BN

 by
Richard Loh

Let us Malaysians start the New Year with a Big Bang. May our New Year resolutions not be for self but for the country. We should resolve to be fully committed to voting in a new Federal Government at the next GE, one  that will bring about the changes Malaysians have desired for so long.

It would appear that 2010 was a very good year for Najib, even though all he did was to plaster  the whole country with slogans and rhetoric that benefited no one but his wife, foreign agents and cronies. Just imagine the millions or even billions  wasted  to promote them. And it is the rakyat’s money!

What comes out of Najib’s mouth sounds so hollow.  You  must have read in the Mainstream Media his various speeches in front of different communities. He paints  a rosy picture to arouse the rakyat into believing that what he is ‘trying’ to do is for the ‘good’ of the country.

He talks about unity, equality, religious tolerance, Bangsa Malaysia but  his actions contradict his preaching. He  can still tolerate the racists Utusan, Perkasa and civil servants  spreading racial hatred and religious intolerance. All these are living proof  that Umno/BN have failed in their 54 years of administration and governing.

The alternative media and bloggers too have  countered all these insincere promises and pointed out  that talk and slogans alone will not unite the country and bring prosperity to the rakyat.

We must reject Umno’s/BN’s  call to return them to power again. There is totally no hope that they  will change.  BN’s continuing rule of this country will only bring more hardship to the rakyat and will bankrupt the country.

After March 2008, we expected Umno/BN to realise that there are so many faults in their ways of governing. However,  instead of making amends,  they have continued to use  strong-arm tactics, undemocratic processes and a divide-and-rule system to stay on top. It is in name only that Umno/BN upholds democracy. In reality, it is leaning towards becoming a totalitarian regime.

Can you still tolerate Umno/BN, given  their undemocratic actions, corruption  and racism? While taking a break from writing this article, I read the news that Najib & Co are on their way to power-grabbing Selangor – just like what they did to Perak.  And  it was reported too that no cross was to be visible and no sermon allowed when Najib attended a Christmas function recently. This is a clear sign that 1Malaysia is not accepted even within Najib’s own administration.

Najib & Co do not care  about the rakyat. They are busy planning and plotting how to take back the States that they lost in order to regain a two-thirds majority. They will not hesitate  to resort to underhanded methods and undemocratic processes and yes, they will get the help of the EC in the coming GE to ensure a win.

The 2008 tsunami shook up Umno/BN but it did not destroy their corrupt, arrogant, racist and undemocratic nature. To date, they have still not felt any shame in using their power to betray the rakyat and choke the States under PR of development funds. This country cannot afford to continue to allow such incompetent and undemocratic leaders to govern any further.

Malaysians must learn to accept the truth – that this country and its citizens can survive without this regime. We need not be afraid of their threats. We must recognise that it is  we who decide the government of the day, not Umno/BN.  We need to punish Umno/BN for not listening to us and we must put them into cold storage for 2 or 3 terms.

We must believe our hands are not tied. We have choices in everything.  If you don’t like a Proton Saga,  you can go for a Persona. And there are many other choices of car models and makes. If you don’t like Versace,  you can have Christian Dior, Amani and many other brands of clothing, perfume and make-up. The choice is yours to make. But make a wise choice,  for otherwise the consequences can be disastrous.

Umno/BN have been the ruling government for 54 years and we have grown tired of their undemocratic actions, their censoring of our freedom, their corruption, racism, unequal distribution of the nation’s wealth, poor education system plus their downright incompetence.

We now have a choice, an opportunity to rid our country of the cancer inflicted by Umno/BN and to start afresh with Pakatan Rakyat. Yes, there are weaknesses and flaws in PR. They may not be 100% perfect (which government is?) but I am very sure they are well over 100% better than Umno/BN.

So, join me in spreading this call:

CHANGE TO SAVE MALAYSIA.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 2 January 2011, 7:43 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Former Deputy Bank Negara Governor Lin See Yan’s personal testimony that claims of GTP/NKRA success in reducing crime do not translate to Malaysians feeling more safe from becoming victims of crime

In Parliament, DAP and Pakatan Rakyat MPs had posed the question to the Home Minister and the Deputy Home Minister whether Malaysians feel more safe from crime and the fear of crime despite government and police claims of success of the Government Transformation Programme (GTP) in delivering results for the National Key Results Area (NKRA) target to reduce crime – to achieve at least a 5% reduction in overall reported index crime every year for the next three years and for street crimes, a 20% reduction by December 2010.

A very eloquent answer was given yesterday by former Deputy Bank Governor Governor, Tan Sri Dr. Lin See Yan, in his article
“The mystique of national transformation”

 arguing that  “The challenge is to convince stakeholders to buy in and take ownership of the array of programmes” in the
StarBizWeek
 Year Starter issue  with the theme
 “In Transformation”
.

This is what Dr. Lin wrote:

Important how the public ‘feels’

The Prime Minister declared that success of the ambitious blueprint hinges on its effective implementation: “Execution needs to be flawless.” As I see it, discernable progress in four areas of priority concern to the rakyat and investors needs to come early enough to build confidence. They are corruption, crime, education and private enterprise.

It is not enough to show that in the first nine months of 2010, crime fell by 16% (but still have 132,355 unresolved reported cases) and street crimes fell 38% (18,299 unresolved reported cases) or that 648 people were arrested for corruption.

The public and investors (with ears on the ground) have to “feel” any improvement. Raw and biased statistics cannot tell the real story, and don’t impress. At this time, it would appear the rakyat and investors don’t “feel” any material improvement in the crime and corruption situation. That matters. But they don’t rush to judgement. What they want to “feel” is for today to be better than yesterday, and tomorrow to be better than today; and come tomorrow, their expectations are fulfilled.

Incidents from personal experience reinforce this. Damansara Heights (DH) is rated as a top spot to work and live in greater KL. I stay there and my office is in nearby busy Plaza Damansara. Last week my car was parked three doors away from my office, and within 10 minutes (no joke) the car was gone stolen (sophisticated anti-theft gadgets didn’t help).

Although a police pondok is nearby, I still had to go to report at a police station far away and took altogether three hours just to get a police statement taken. Many more steps still have to be made before I can file an insurance claim. That’s another story. Because my car was a popular brand, we were told that four such cars were stolen in DH in recent days.

Not so long ago, my associated office in DH was broken into and computers were stolen. When friends and neighbours learnt of my predicament, I had an earful of equally unfortunate incidents nearby, including muggings, holdups and handbag snatching. The point is simple: crime remains a problem of serious concern, even in the most liveable area in KL. People and investors just don’t “feel” safe whatever the data may show.

What Dr. Lin wrote is personal testimony by the former Bank Negara Deputy Governor that claims of GTP/NKRA success in reducing crime does not translate to Malaysians feeling more safe from becoming victims of crime.

What Dr. Lin wrote reflects the feelings of the people in the street and validates the contention of Pakatan Rakyat MPs in Parliament – that Malaysians do not have an improved sense of safety, personal or property, or a reduced fear of becoming a victim of crime despite the government and police claims of success in GTP and NKRA to reduce crime.

This will not only have a serious impact on Malaysia’s international competitiveness, discouraging FDIs and tourists, but will also cast doubts on the credibility of government claims of success of its other GTP and NKRA programmes, whether fighting corruption, enhancing education or reducing poverty.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 2 January 2011, 9:43 am and is filed under
Crime
,
NEM
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


“Pornographic” poetry for our teens?

Letters

by
Mrs. Sheela R

The study of Malay literature for students of the Upper Secondary level features a poem by Raja Ali Haji, a scholar and a prominent literary figure of the nineteenth century. Raja Ali Haji was noted for his numerous literary gems such as the “Tuhfat Al-nafis” (The precious gift) and “Syair Kitab al-Nikah” (The book of marriage).

The poem selected for study at the Form four level is an excerpt from his lesser-known literary work entitled “Syair Siti Sianah”. The foreword written in Malay includes an explanation as to whom the poem is intended for and the purported advice it contains. I reproduce this extract below:

“Syair Siti Sianah pula mengandungi nasihat yang tujukan khas kepada golongan wanita supaya mereka sentiasa menjaga maruah diri, etika dan nama baik keluarga serta tidak melanggar ajaran, norma masyarakat dan budaya”.

(
Translation: “Syair Siti Sianah” contains advice which is specially directed towards women to always guard their virtue, ethics and uphold their family name whilst not going against the teachings of religion, societal norms and culture”).

Now, to the poem itself.  A total of 11 verses have been selected for inclusion in the text. As an example, I reproduce three verses below with a brief/approximate translation:

Verse 7

“Setengah perempuan yang makan angkat,

Memakai gelang bertingkat-tingkat,

Memandang laki-laki matanya lekat

Dengan jantan suka berdekat”

 (Some women bedeck themselves with jewellery and seek to entice men with flirtatious looks)

Verse 8

Kaki dan tangan dinaikkan pula,

Pura-pura dikatakan ubat segala,

Hakikatnya diketahui Allah Taala,

Supaya laki-laki berhati gila

(With hands and legs lifted in a lascivious manner they try to seduce men)

Verse 11

Laki-laki perempuan bertindih lutut

Banyak kelakuan yang tidak patut

Sembahyang ibadat sudah bantut

Kerana syaitan duduk di buntut

(Men and women indulge in close proximity, with piety forgotten, for the devil has trapped them, literally in the derriere with lustful behaviour!)

Exactly how is a poem of this genre expected to encourage sixteen year olds not to “stray from the path of virtue”?

While poetic license is a virtue, poetry that denigrates women and at that too in a highly graphic manner cannot be considered appropriate study material for secondary schoolchildren. After all¸ the study of literature is to educate not titillate.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 2 January 2011, 7:11 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A Special Memorial for Fan Yew Teng

Fan Yew Teng: A Husband, Father, Brother, Comrade, Patriot and Humanist

Date: 5/1/2011; Time: 8pm; Venue: YMCA Hall, KL

All are welcome!

View Larger Map

                This entry was posted on Monday, 3 January 2011, 2:31 pm and is filed under
Announcement
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


History syllabus and textbooks: The non-Malay fig leaf and more serious matters

Commentary

by
Dr. Lim Teck Ghee

Centre for Policy Initiatives

Sunday, 02 January 2011

The Ministry of Education has finally replied to concerns raised by many Malaysians that the teaching of Malaysian history has been debased through changes in the syllabus and textbooks. However the letter by the Corporate Communications Unit of the Ministry totally ignores the allegations and makes no attempt to address the specific and general concerns articulated in the media and the internet.

Instead, the reply is a public relations job detailing non-Malay participation in the writing of text books and referrals made in recommending text book writers. This is insufficient to allay concerns or refute the allegations made of the political bias, crass nationalism and blatant Islamization that have come to dominate the history syllabus and textbooks.

Now that various names have been made available to the public, the onus is on these individuals identified in the Ministry letter to step out of the shadows and to vouch for the high standards and integrity of the syllabus and textbooks process put in place by the Ministry.

One of these select experts, Dr Ranjit Singh Malhi, has already spoken out. What do the others – presumably paid for their services by public funds – have to say in response to the charges of a racialized, politicized and religiously propagandistic process that has infiltrated and subverted the history textbook and syllabus system?

The history syllabus is presently undergoing revision. This is the right time for those named in the Ministry’s letter, as well as others that have been participating in these expert panels and textbook work, to come clean and provide some feedback to the public on what is wrong with the current system and what should be done to ensure that the Malaysian history taught in schools has a truly balanced perspective of the contributions of all ethnic communities and civilizations.

Besides Dr Ranjit Singh Malhi, those mentioned in the Ministry’s roll of honour owe the hundreds of thousands of students, who will be required to spend many hours memorizing and regurgitating what the Ministry decrees to be the true history of Malaysia and the world, no less than their full and honest disclosure and appraisal of the system, its products and probable outcomes – a system that the Ministry is imputing has not only their full participation but also their endorsement.

There are larger issues as well that we need to debate vigorously in the public sphere. Will the teaching of history, especially in its current form, foster patriotism and national unity? Or will it result in greater racial and religious polarization? There have been no studies as well as empirical evidence showing that the enhanced teaching of history will bring about the wildly optimistic ends that the Minister of Education has publicly pronounced.

Should history be made a compulsory pass subject? And does this imply that more hours in the schools and greater attention should be given to the teaching of history?

How useful is the emphasis on history, Malay studies and Islamic studies to the student population in schools and in the universities?

The outcome of the emphasis on cultural and religious learning and knowledge (including history) in our national schools and universities has been disastrous, especially for Malay students. It has resulted in poorly trained, low quality human capital unable to meet the needs of a competitive global market and lacking the flexibility, open-mindedness and adaptive knowledge to contribute to economic development and national productivity.

Does the Government not see that this misguided move to strengthen the teaching of a racially and religiously bigoted history may in fact reinforce the culture of alienation and poverty that is at the root of many of our social and economic problems?

Instead of emphasizing the importance of history and other narrowly cultural-religious subjects in the schooling system (religious learning has a place but it should be in the private sphere of the home, and not in the public sector), the government should prioritize the teaching of science, mathematics, computing, communications, English and other related subjects that are internationally acknowledged as the main drivers of innovation and intellectual capital.

If the Minister of Education is hell bent on making his mark in history the wrong way – and at the expense of our precious young minds – it is incumbent on his cabinet colleagues to put him right. But perhaps they do not give a damn since their children and grand-children are studying in private schools and abroad.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 3 January 2011, 3:00 pm and is filed under
Education
,
History
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Big Government, Big Problems

Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #47

Chapter Six: Malaysia: Assets and Liabilities

Big Government, Big Problems

by
M. Bakri Musa

The remarkable achievement of the Reagan Revolution in America and Thatcher’s in Britain is the recognition, long overdue, that government is not always the solution. In many instances, it is the problem. The most spectacular example of the failure of big government is the Soviet Empire. It collapsed not because it was defeated in war (although the West would like to claim that it won the Cold War) but because the Soviet state had been too massive and highly intrusive. Given the momentum of globalization, the Soviet system would have imploded anyway.

          The only other major totalitarian government today is China; it survived because its leaders were smart enough to recognize the desperate need for change, and did it quickly. The 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising was a rude awakening for those leaders. Today’s Chinese communists are a far cry from their dogmatic Mao comrades. This difference is best encapsulated by Deng Xiapeng’s celebrated slogan, “To get rich is glorious!”

          Deng was decidedly more pragmatic. He quoted the Chinese proverb to the effect that it matters not what color is the cat as long as it catches the mice. The Chinese are now realizing that capitalist cats are more productive (can catch more mice!) than communist ones!

          The IT revolution makes it extremely difficult to maintain closed societies. Borders are now porous to news and information (and also increasingly also to trade). Saddam Hussein may tell his people that the outside world is crazy and that Iraq is heaven on earth, but they know otherwise. The only reason they publicly agree with him is because of fear.

Determining the optimal size of government for a nation is more problematic. In times of war or national emergency, a strong central government is obviously essential. But in peace time there is no magic formula to determine the right size of government. Even determining how big is big is an issue in itself.

          There are many ways of measuring the size of a government: the percentage of the labor force it employs; the portion of the revenue needed to run it; and the size of its budget relative to the economy. By whatever criterion, the Malaysian government is way up there in size. Additionally the government is also a very dominant player in the economy, and in everyone’s life.

It is important to distinguish between the size of government versus its power. A government may increase its size by employing more policemen to make the streets safer. That is rightly the responsibilities of the government. But if it uses those same policemen to harass its citizens for speaking out or to stifle dissent, than that would be increasing both its size and power. Earlier I noted Bank Negara employing hundreds of new employees, not to better monitor recalcitrant banks rather to check on the pockets of those entering and leaving Malaysia. Here the Bank had increased its size and power. The more significant indicator is the attitude of the governed towards their government. This unfortunately cannot be readily quantified, but one can easily get a sense of it by reading the daily papers and gauging the attitude and activities of the citizens. In Russia, whenever there is a problem, be it food shortages or labor unrest, the people immediately look to the government for solutions. In America, the immediate response is to seek answers within the private sector. Only when that fails, as with the recent repeated lapses in airport security, would the government be called in, and then only reluctantly and with great trepidation.

          In Malaysia whenever groups like the Bumiputra Chamber of Commerce or Peninsular Association of Malay Graduates meet, you can bet that their ensuing string of resolutions will all begin thus: “The government must do this and that.” In contrast, when the Chinese Malaysians discuss setting up a university, all they asked was for the government to grant them the permit. The Russians’ attitude towards government is the polar opposite to that of Americans; likewise the attitude of Malays different from non-Malays. Russia is backward while America is advanced. In Malaysia the group that depends on the government is backward, those free of government are more advanced. There is a lesson here.

          The Soviet Empire is now long gone and with it, central planning and grand Five Year Plans. But Malaysia is still enamored with both. As it enters the new millennium Malaysia proudly unveils its Eighth Five Year Plan. No doubt a century from now it will still be either introducing or reviewing its Umpteeth Malaysia Plan! If the country has not learned from the Soviets the futility of such plans, then surely the 1997 economic crisis should. That crisis made a shamble of those detailed planning and attendant endless hours of meetings of the then Seventh Malaysia Plan.

           The oppressive effects of big government are felt in many ways. Economists conceptualize the “crowding out” effect on credit and capital, that is, the government’s large debt and need for capital would crowd or squeeze out funds or credit that would be available for private businesses. This negative impact on the economy is well known and has been empirically documented. The euphoria and giddiness on the state of the American economy (before the 9-11 terrorists’ attacks, that is,) was due to the success of the government in controlling spending and cutting deficits. President Clinton began his second term by declaring, “The era of big government is over!” With the public sector having to spend and borrow less, there was more money available for consumers and the private sector. Interest rates plummeted and consumer spending boomed. These are generally accepted and well-proven macroeconomic formula.

            What is less appreciated is that this crowding out effect also applies to other areas, like talent and ideas. When government is the dominant employer, it sucks out talent that would have been available for the private sector. Thus deprived of able individuals, the private sector will stagnate.

             The late Tun Razak intuitively knew something about this. He was fully aware back in the 1950s and 60s that to Malays, the civil service was the dominant employer (still is). Thus few were left for the private sector. This hobbled his policy of trying to increase Malay participation in industry specifically and the private sector generally. To overcome this “crowding out” of Malay talent in the private sector, he introduced a scheme whereby civil servants could opt to retire early and not lose their pensions. Many bright and enterprising young civil servants took advantage of this liberal severance package and left to join the private sector. With their administrative experience and the security of their pension to fall back on, they proved to be capable and successful entrepreneurs and executives. They formed the initial nucleus of the burgeoning Malay business class. The political establishment too benefited from this injection of new talent.

             The failure of the Soviet system is partly due to this “crowding out” effect on talent. With a huge government and massive military, its best and brightest were attracted to careers in the public sector, the party, or military. Only second-rate talents were left for industry. With the collapse of the government these talented individuals were stranded and left unemployed, as the rudimentary private sector was not able to absorb them.

             In America on the other hand, the brightest students pursue private sector careers. It is this infusion of talent that explains the vigor of American industry. During Tun Razak’s time, the civil service attracted many top talents; it still then had the leftover aura of its previous glory under the British. The civil service today however, is a very different beast. With strict quotas, promotions strictly from within, and little infusion of fresh talent especially at the upper levels, today’s civil service is essentially a Malay institution and a very insular one at that. Recruits are almost exclusively local graduates. They have limited English proficiency and thus their reading (and consequently intellectual) horizons are limited, severely restricting their intellectual and professional growth. Some senior civil servants may have higher qualifications, but few have experiences outside of government. In short, mediocrity is the norm in the public service.

             A huge government staffed by the less-than-talented is a recipe for disaster. Every year we have examples of gross mismanagement. In response to the economic crisis of 1997, Mahathir announced a multibillion-ringgit stimulus package to jumpstart the economy. But nothing happened. Turns out that the money was bottled up in the deep recesses of the massive bureaucracy!

Next: The Far and Pervasive Reach of the Malaysian Government

                This entry was posted on Monday, 3 January 2011, 12:18 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
globalisation
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Removal of crucifixes and banning of hymns – violation of religious freedom guaranteed under Constitution

Media statement by Dr Chen Man Hin, DAP Life Advisor in Seremban on 3rd January 2011.

PM aides’ orders to St John’s Cathedral to remove crucifixes and banning of singing hymns at St John’s Cathedral constitute a violation of religious freedom guaranteed under Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution

The orders border on the ridiculous. The excuse given by PM aides that the cruciffixes would be offensive to the Prime Minister while visiting the church and grounds.

Malaysia have diplomatic relations with many Christian countries in the West, South America and the Phillipines. Crucifixes decorate many public buildings in these countries. Would the aides issue orders to Christian countries in the West and South America to take down or remove the crucifixes when the Prime Minister of Malaysia visit the said countries?

Church buildings and grounds are sacred areas to Christians especially Catholics. Crucifixes are sacred. So are the religious rites and singing of hymns. Forcible removal of crucifixes in churches would constitute an act of sacriliege. The orders by the PM aides are therefore sacrilegious.

The prime minister is most welcome to visit churches and meet the priests and parishioners. No conditions should be imposed, as freedom to practice religion is guaranteed under the Constitution.

It is the practice in churces all over the world to keep their doors open to churchgoers and visitors all day, as long as they show decorum and respect for the sancitity of the church building and its grounds.

PM aides should take a tour of Christian countries in Europe, USA and South America or secular Singapore. It will open up their minds and see how religious freedom is practised. Their backward outlook is an anachronism in a world where races, religions and cultures interact and mix. They need to change or we risk becoming isolationist and disconnected with the rest of the world.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 3 January 2011, 12:10 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Dr. Chen Man Hin
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Rule of law must prevail

by
P. Ramakrishnan

President

Aliran

3rd Jan 2011

The Chief Secretary to the Government, Tan Sri Mohd Sidek Hassan, has precipitated a constitutional crisis in Selangor by ignoring time-honoured norms and constitutional requirements in naming the Selangor State Secretary unilaterally.

In any appointment to a state, there must be consultation before a final decision is taken. This sensible approach has been completely sidelined. Mohd Sidek had chosen to ride roughshod over the Menteri Besar of Selangor, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim. In doing so, Malaysians are wondering whether he is acting strictly as a civil servant or as a political tool of the Barisan Nasional.

It is a matter of grave concern for Aliran when a functioning state constitution is not respected and its provisions not honoured. It has been pointed out by legal experts that according to Article 52(4) of the Selangor state constitution the state secretary “shall take and subscribe in the presence of the Menteri Besar the following oath of secrecy.” In this instance, the Meneri Besar’s central role cannot be ignored.

It has been announced that the newly appointed Selangor State Secretary, Datuk Mohd Khusrin Munawi, will be taking his oath of office in the presence of His Highness, the Sultan of Selangor. This seems odd according to constitutional expert, Prof A. Aziz Bari, who contends that this is a “new practice” and that he was not aware that such a practice existed.

There is some talk that the MB may convene the state assembly to debate this issue. It may be pertinent to pursue this line of action in order for the state government to exert its authority which is derived from the people.

It would be wrong to set aside what is stated in the written constitution. We must submit ourselves to the rule of law at all times. This is how a democracy functions. Anything short of this will be anarchy.

It is imperative that the state secretary and the MB must enjoy cordial working relationship for the benefit of the state. It is known that Mohd Khusrin and the Selangor state government have been at odds over certain issues. To appoint him as the state secretary in spite of these serious differences would suggest that some foul plot is afoot. Is the Chief Secretary to the Government trying to undermine the Selangor state government?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 3 January 2011, 3:19 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Utusan Malaysia a daily reminder of the hollowness and  hypocrisy of Najib’s 1Malaysia concept

Utusan Malaysia is a daily reminder of the hollowness and hypocrisy of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia concept as the Umno newspaper continues to peddle lies and poison to incite strife and hatred in  Malaysia’s plural society.

Najib’s 1Malaysia talks about embracing “our diversity of ethnicity, religions and beliefs and, by being inclusive, build mutual respect and acceptance into a solid foundation of trust and cohesiveness” but Utusan Malaysia is doing the very opposite every day with its staple of lies and falsehoods.

The 1Malaysia Government Transformation Programme Roadmap released in January last year advocated the promotion of  “an all-inclusive 1Malaysia media” and warned of the danger of greater national divisions and disunity when “some writers abuse the greater freedom of expression now available to use terms and feelings that are racist or inflammatory in nature and tone”.

It said:

“While censorship is antithetical to democracy, there is a need to introduce, instill and internalize a  commitment to journalistic professionalism, a sense of responsibility and self-restraint, with sensitivity to the divergent views and feelings of the diverse communities in Malaysia.”

Unfortunately, this “commitment to journalistic professionalism, a sense of responsibility and self-restraint, with sensitivity to the divergent views and feelings of the diverse communities in Malaysia” is completely absent in Utusan Malaysia, which have become even more  irresponsible and unprofessional in the past year, peddling lies, falsehoods and poison to incite strife and hatred in our plural society.

A good example is the irresponsible editorial by Awang Selamat in Mingguan Malaysia yesterday repeating the lie that the DAP wants to abolish the Malay sultanate system  to create a republic.

DAP had,  whether on its own or as part of Pakatan Rakyat, or previously Barisan Alternative in 1999  and Gagasan Rakyat in 1990 policy pronouncements declared and reaffirmed its commitment to upholding the fundamental features of the Malaysian Constitution  including the system of constitutional monarchy.

Utusan Malaysia is guilty of the height of journalistic irresponsibility and total lack of professionalism in peddling the lie and poison that DAP wants to abolish the system of Malay rulers to establish a republic. Even  worse, Utusan Malaysia will be guilty of the worst crime of treason to the nation and people of Malaysia in trying to incite disunity, strife and hatred in our plural society.

Najib, Umno and Barisan Nasional leaders cannot continue to be indifferent to Utusan Malaysia’s open incitement of hatred and strife in our plural society, not only because it makes a total mockery of Najib’s 1Malaysia concept, but even more important, in undermining and destroying all efforts to create a united, cohesive, just, prosperous and competitive Malaysia that can take its rightful place in the global community.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 3 January 2011, 12:26 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Constitution
,
DAP
,
Media
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Defuse Selangor constitutional crisis by suspending Khusrin’s appointment or Najib’s slogan of an inclusive 1Malaysia government would suffer another irreparable blow

The Chief Secretary, Tan Sri Sidek Hassan should defuse the Selangor constitutional crisis by suspending Datuk Mohd  Khusrin Munawi’s appointment as State Secretary and consulting the Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim on the most ideal appointee to be the top Selangor civil servant or Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s slogan of an inclusive 1Malaysia government would suffer another irreparable blow.

Najib’s 1Malaysia concept proclaimed as its goal  “to make Malaysia more vibrant, more productive and more competitive” by fully embracing “our diversity of ethnicity, religions and beliefs and, by being inclusive, build mutual respect and acceptance into a solid foundation of trust and cohesiveness”.

The 1Malaysia Government Transformation Programme Roadmap made public a year ago had identified seven areas to achieve the ideals of 1Malaysia, with the ultimate goal specifically spelt out as to create a Malaysian nation where “every Malaysian perceives himself or herself as Malaysian first, and by race, religion, geographical region or socio-economic background second and where the principles of 1Malaysia are woven into the economic, political and social fabric of society”.

The seven areas are:

The economy and national unity under 1Malaysia

Education and national unity under 1Malaysia

Promoting 1Malaysia social interactions

Managing religious and cultural polarities

Towards a truly 1Malaysia government

Promoting and practising all-inclusive 1Malaysia politics.

Promoting an all-inclusive 1Malaysia media.

A strong case can be made out that apart from massive propagation of the 1Malaysia logo in the past year, the 1Malaysia concept has suffered even greater setbacks rather make greater inroads in all the seven areas concerned.

The constitutional crisis over the appointment of the Selangor State Secretary without consulting the Selangor Mentri Besar underlines the fact that the Chief Secretary and the Federal Government are  not prepared to set the example of being fully committed to a “truly 1Malaysia government” which fully embraces inclusiveness in a federal-state relationship involving different political coalitions running the Federal and state governments.

If the 1Malaysia concept of inclusiveness, to build and promote mutual respect and acceptance among Malaysians regardless of ethnicity, religion or beliefs (which must include political beliefs) is the guiding national spirit under the Najib premiership, the Chief Secretary would be even more mindful that he should consult with the Selangor Mentri Besar on the appointment of the Selangor State Secretary so as to strengthen trust and cohesiveness in Federal-state relations instead of inviting the opposite consequences.

A full-blown Selangor constitutional crisis over the appointment of the Selangor State Secretary would be proof that Najib’s 1Malaysia concept is an empty slogan – reason why the Selangor constitutional crisis should be defused immediately with the Chief Secretary suspending Kushrin’s appointment and fully consulting the Selangor Mentri Besar on the ideal appointee for the post.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 4 January 2011, 1:40 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Constitution
,
Najib Razak
,
public service
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Portrait of my father, Fan Yew Teng

By
 Pauline Fan

It has not been easy to bid farewell to my father, a man who touched so many not just by his tenacious commitment to social justice and through his incisive political writings, but also through his warm, radiant, playful personality.

Papa was a wellspring of strength and joy for the family; he was the deepest source of joy and laughter in my life. He loomed large in our lives; his presence was indelible, his charisma unmistakable. He was always a kind of hero figure for me and my sister. When we were young, we would watch him with awe working among his books, listen to him incessantly typing away on his old manual typewriter, and the scent of pipe tobacco that filled his study is still my favourite scent in the world.

As I grew older, I began to understand that Papa’s work, his continuous engagement in politics and social issues, was inseparable from his life. He did not simply have a ‘job’; he lived out his uncompromising principles through his writings and actions, and was driven by his deep-seated ideals to fight for social justice and human dignity. For Papa, politics was the natural arena where citizens could exercise their rights and obligations in modern society. In the words of Papa’s literary hero George Orwell: “In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics’. All issues are political issues . . .”

The complex layers of Papa’s personal history revealed themselves to me over time, like the hidden meanings in a poem familiar but not yet understood. When I was about nine years old, Papa took the family on holiday to Pahang, Terengganu and Kelantan to visit the various small towns where he had once been posted as a teacher in the 1960s – Kuala Lipis, Temerloh, Kota Bharu and Tanah Merah.

We travelled by train, his preferred mode of transport, and accompanied Papa as he traced the journey he had taken as a young teacher 20 years earlier. He deeply loved his country – its landscape, its people and their customs; and the East Coast remained specially cherished in his memory. We went to the seaside in Marang, then to the rather godforsaken town of Tanah Merah, adopted two kittens at the train station in Manik Urai, named them Manik and Urai and left them with his old friend Gopal in Kuala Lipis.

Only later did I discover that Papa had been posted to teach in these remote areas because of his active involvement in the National Union of Teachers (NUT). He had served as the NUT’s Director of the National Membership Campaign and Assistant Secretary of the Pahang branch and was the editor of ‘The Educator’, the official organ of the NUT. The authorities were particularly irked by his role as one of the co-organisers of the teachers’ strike of 1967, which helped bring about equal pay for women, as well as housing, pension and medical benefits for all teachers.

Similarly, I learnt about Papa’s political career gradually in the course of growing up, as one discovers another piece of a vast, living jigsaw puzzle – about his years with the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and how he served as Acting Secretary-General while Lim Kit Siang was detained under the Internal Security Act; about his terms as Member of Parliament for Kampar and Menglembu; about his sedition case for publishing a speech by Dr. Ooi Kee Saik in ‘The Rocket’; and about how he was disqualified from Parliament and deprived of his Member of Parliament’s pension.

While Papa was campaigning with the short-lived Social Democratic Party in 1986, I remember accompanying him to see his old printer who was preparing his campaign posters and leaflets. I remember too Papa’s disappointment when the SDP failed to win any seats, and how he then withdrew from formal politics and threw himself into writing and activism. Papa’s fighting spirit was irrepressible; even in his hours of political defeat and isolation, he remained convinced that political change was both necessary and possible.

Papa did not deliberately set out to ‘radicalise’ his daughters, but politics was such an elemental part of his being that we inadvertently imbibed his sense that Malaysia’s political landscape left much to be desired. One of the ways my sister and I spent time with Papa was to accompany him on his ‘wanderings’ to second-hand bookshops and coffee shops in Kuala Lumpur and Petaling Jaya, where he would run into friends and ‘comrades’ and engage them in vibrant exchanges of opinion about the latest political scandal or social injustice.

Papa was truly a man of the people; he could establish instant rapport with virtually everyone, from his loyal newspaper man, Balan, to Pak Ali, a devoted member of Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) who owned a restaurant in Taman Tun Dr. Ismail for many years. When my sister and I returned to Malaysia during our university holidays, Papa brought us along to several PAS and DAP ceramah as well as to various talks he was giving at Cenpeace or ABIM, where we witnessed the fiery oratory style that never left him. He also brought us to the Malaysian Sociological Research Institute to meet the intriguing chain-smoking activist and writer, Dr. Alijah Gordon, who was extremely fond of him.

Papa forged friendships that lasted for life. His relentless pursuit of social and political justice for ordinary people, as well as his vivacious personality and well-read intellect, endeared him to many the world over. Among his friends he counted Helen Clark, the former Prime Minister of New Zealand, and Malcolm Caldwell, the British Marxist scholar who was killed by the Khmer Rouge in 1978.

Papa believed in people and principles, not in systems and ideologies. I think this is why he was so fascinated by history, the narrative of humanity itself. Papa’s knowledge of history never failed to astound us. He could talk for hours on the history and politics of India (particularly the dramatic local politics of Tamil Nadu), or Willy’s Brandt’s Ostpolitik, or the fall of the Roman Empire.

And Papa believed in love. His romance with my mother was epic in every sense; turbulent at times, but adoring to the end. Shortly after my parents got married, my mother left for Cambridge to pursue her Doctorate. Undeterred by his aversion to air travel, Papa voyaged over land and sea, from Port Klang to Madras, across India by train, then by bus through Pakistan, over the Khyber Pass in Afghanistan, through Iran and Turkey and on to Europe, to join my mother in England in the winter of 1975-76.

Papa’s personal legacy to me is a passion he cultivated in me since childhood, a passion that shaped my life profoundly through young adulthood and continues to this day to mould who I am and how I relate to the world: an undying love of literature. Papa constantly invoked the spirit of the writers he loved most – George Orwell, James Joyce, and Albert Camus among others. He imbibed and lived, in his own flesh and blood, the writer’s life: he wrote only by hand or on his beloved typewriter, he smoked a pipe in the style of Bertrand Russell, he read voraciously, and his room was a labyrinth of books, newspapers, and magazines.

Papa was urged by an intellectual restlessness that is the mark of all true writers. He believed in the power of the written word to encapsulate the interminable drama of the human spirit, of the individual and society. Like the Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Papa believed that “literature is the living memory of a people.” In fact, one of the last books Papa read from cover to cover was Michael Scammell’s acclaimed biography of Solzhenitsyn which Papa had picked up at a second-hand bookstore in Bangkok. Incidentally, Scammell had interviewed Papa about his sedition case in the 1970s for a write up for the ‘Index on Censorship’, the prominent British journal on political freedom which Scammell founded and edited.

Language and politics were inextricably linked for Papa. His commitment to the written word reflected his conviction that writers had a duty to uphold the integrity of language, to employ it as a weapon of truth against a political rhetoric riddled with lies.

As Orwell remarked: “Political chaos is connected with the decay of language . . . one can probably bring about some improvement by starting at the verbal end”. It is this belief in the ability of language and literature to speak truth to power that urged Papa to read and write to the very end. I imagine Papa now taking his place among his literary heroes; I imagine him engaging in endless conversations (and arguments) with them, in a place beyond space and time, beyond history, beyond language – a place, in the words of the poet Yehuda Amichai, “where there is time for everything”.

Note: A special memorial tribute service for Sdr Fan Yew Teng will be held at the YMCA Hall in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday 5th January 2011 from 8pm to 11pm. Another memorial service will also be held in Ipoh at the Excelsior Hotel (14th floor) Conference Room on Thursday, 6th January 2011. All are welcomed to attend.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 4 January 2011, 10:46 am and is filed under
DAP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anwar’s “black-eye” assault – Open Appeal to Solicitor-General by Mat Zain

by
Mat Zain bin Ibrahim

5 hb.Januari 2011

Kepada;

Yang Berbahgia Datuk Idrus Harun,

Peguam Cara Negara Malaysia,

(Solicitor General of Malaysia)

Jabatan Peguam Negara,

Block C3,Kompleks C,

Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan,

62152 Putrajaya.

YBhg.Datuk,

Maklumat mengenai penipuan dan pemalsuan-pemalsuan yang dilakukan berkenaan ujian Deoxyribonucleic Acid (“DNA”) dalam kes berprofil tinggi 1998.

Assalamualaikum YBhg. Datuk, semoga dalam sihat walfiat.

2.	Sehubungan dengan perkara tajuk, sukacita saya menjemput YBhg. Datuk menyemak semula surat saya bertarikh 27hb.Disember 2010, berkaitan isu diatas yang dialamatkan kepada YDH Tan Sri Ketua Polis Negara, dengan salinannya kepada YAB Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan YBhg. Datuk sendiri yang diakui telah diterima oleh masing-masing pada tarikh berkenaan juga.

2.1.	Dalam Surat Rayuan Terbuka ini, saya akan tinggalkan dahulu buat sementara waktu, kandungan maklumat-maklumat berkaitan perkara tajuk, yang saya huraikan dalam Bahagian II dan Bahagian III dalam muka surat 7 hingga 20 surat tersebut. Saya berasa yakin bahawa YDH Ketua Polis Negara sedang dalam proses menyiasat kesahihan maklumat-maklumat berkaitan perkara tajuk dalam Bahagian II, manakala maklumat berkaitan “subsequent conduct” individu tertentu dalam Bahagian III surat tersebut.

2.2.	Dalam surat saya bertarikh 27.12.2010 itu juga,saya telah jelaskan bahawa sebarang siasatan mengenai maklumat diatas,perlu merujuk kepada kertas siasatan kes mata-lebam oleh kerana beberapa insiden yang berlaku adalah “bertindih” (overlapping) lebih-lebih lagi “pemain utama” kedua-dua kes pemalsuan dalam insiden mata-lebam dan pemalsuan “DNA” adalah sama.

3.	Fokus saya dalam Surat Rayuan Terbuka ini adalah kepada Bahagian I surat tersebut iaitu;

3.1.	Berkaitan dengan “Penjelasan dan Jawapan secara bertulis kepada soalan-soalan yang tidak sempat dijawab semasa sessi penggulungan perbahasan Bajet 2011” yang diberi oleh YB Dato’Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein (YB Hishammuddin), Menteri Dalam Negeri, pada 2.12.2010, sebagai menjawab soalan daripada YB Tuan Lim Kit Siang dan;

3.2.	Berkaitan dengan “Ministerial Statement” oleh Menteri Jabatan Perdana Menteri, YB Dato’Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Azizi (YB Nazri)), dibawah Peraturan Mesyuarat 14(1)(i) pada 14.12.2010, sebagai penjelasan kepada usul memotong RM10 daripada gaji Peguam Negara yang dibangkitkan oleh YB Tuan Lim Kit Siang juga.Saya percaya YBhg.Datuk sedar bahawa kenyataan berkenaan adalah terbit daripada arahan khusus Jemaah Menteri kepada YB Nazri dan seorang lagi Menteri Kanan iaitu YB Dato’Seri Utama Dr.Rais Yatim (YB Rais Yatim), supaya mendapatkan penjelasan lanjut daripada Peguam Negara, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail (Gani Patail) sendiri, berkaitan isu yang dibangkitkan sekembalinya Gani Patail daripada Mekah setelah menunaikan Haji musim  lalu.

3.3.	Saya percaya YBhg.Datuk akan bersetuju dengan saya, jika saya katakan bahawa, YB Hishammuddin dan YB Nazri mahupun YB Rais Yatim TIDAK mempunyai ekses kepada kertas siasatan Polis ataupun SPRM.Mereka juga TIDAK mempunyai sebarang kuasa penyiasatan sepertimana terdapat dalam Kanun Prosidur Jenayah (CPC), ataupun kuasa berkaitan pendakwaan atau perkara yang incidental mengenainya,sepertimana yang dibekalkan kepada Peguam Negara, mengikut Artikel 145(3) dan 145(3A) Perlembagaan Persekutuan.Oleh hal yang demikian pengumuman yang telah dibuat oleh YB Hishammuddin dan YB Nazri secara berasingan itu, adalah semata-mata berdasarkan kepada fakta-fakta yang dibekalkan dan nasihat yang diberikan oleh Peguam Negara, kerana perkara-perkara pengumuman berkenaan adalah berkaitan siasatan dan undang-undang.

4.	Saya percaya YBhg.Datuk sendiri turut sedar bahawa pengumuman yang dibuat oleh kedua-dua YB Menteri berkenaan mengandungi fakta-fakta dan/atau maklumat-maklumat mustahak yang tidak benar dan/atau yang mengelirukan dan/atau yang telah dipesongkan (distorted).Saya juga percaya YBhg.Datuk turut sedar dengan demikian itu, Peguam Negara sama ada secara sengaja atau sebaliknya, telah menyebabkan YB Hishammuddin dan YB Nazri membuat pengumuman yang mengelirukan dalam Parlimen atau lebih jelas lagi, jika saya katakan, mereka telah memberi maklumat palsu kepada rakyat. Akibatnya, kedua-dua YB Menteri terlibat, mungkin terdedah kepada risiko dikenakan sesuatu tindakan undang-undang.

4.1.	 Tindakan Peguam Negara boleh diibaratkan, sebagai “sebuah roda yang terbenam didalam lumpur yang licin. Lebih ligat roda tersebut diputarkan untuk keluar dari lumpur tersebut, lebih dalam ia akan terbenam”. Begitulah keadaannya dalam isu ini. Lebih ligat Peguam Negara memutar belitkan undang-undang, fakta dan keterangan, untuk keluar daripada masaalah penipuan dan pemalsuan yang beliau telah lakukan sendiri, lebih kuat beliau menjerut leher sendiri. Malangnya orang lain yang tidak berkenaan pula turut menjadi mangsa keadaan.

5.	Bagi meleraikan kekalutan diatas, yang telah berlarutan selama 12 tahun, saya merayu YBhg.Datuk, atas sifat Peguam Cara Negara, yang boleh dalam keadaan tertentu bertindak sebagai Pendakwa Raya, mengeluarkan kenyataan resmi kepada umum, bagi mengesahkan posisi YBhg. Datuk sendiri dalam hal ini. Adalah sangat tidak wajar untuk pihak Peguam Negara mencari perlindungan di-belakang Menteri-Menteri dalam membuat kenyataan-kenyataan berkenaan perkara penyiasatan dan pendakwaan,sedangkan YBhg. Datuk sendiri yang telah berhujah menyatakan bahawa Perdana Menteri pun bukan “competent authority” untuk membuat kenyataan sedemikian bagi pihak Peguam Negara. Saya jemput YBhg. Datuk merujuk kepada kes yang diperturunkan dibawah;

5.1.	Dalam Rayuan Jenayah No:43-(70)-2008, Keputusan “Decision on Revision” oleh Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi Yang Ariff  Dato’Mohamad Zabidin bin Mohd. Diah bertarikh 5.3.2009.

“Suffice for me to say I agree with learned SDPP’s submission that “it is well settled that the authority or discretion to institute a prosecution and all other powers incidental to it,is vested with the Attorney-General by virtue of Article 145(3)and 145(3A) of the Federal Constitution.Such being the case,any promise with regard to the prosecution or anything incidental to it can only be made by the Attorney-General and not the Prime Minister. Surely, the Prime Minister could not be seen to be making promise on behalf of a competent authority which is given the exclusive discretion under the Federal Constitution with regard to prosecution or any matter incidental thereto.”

5.2.	Dalam premis diatas, diharap YBhg.Datuk dapat memberikan penjelasan mengenai status kenyataan YB Nazri yang beliau buat pada 14.12.2010 dan sama ada YB Menteri berkenaan merupakan “competent authority” membuat kenyataan sedemikian bagi pihak Peguam Negara. Lebih-lebih lagi kenyataan tersebut menyentuh bidang kuasa Pendakwa Raya. YBhg. Datuk juga wajar menjelaskan sama ada Jemaah Menteri merupakan “competent authority” untuk mengistiharkan perlantikkan Ahli Panel Bebas berkenaan sebagai “sah” atau sebaliknya, dan sama ada YB Menteri boleh mengistiharkan sesuatu siasatan kes jenayah itu ditutup.

6.	Untuk faedah umum dan pihak-pihak yang mempunyai kepentingan berkaitan perkara dalam persoalan ini,saya merayu YBhg. Datuk menjelaskan persoalan-persoalan yang berikut dibawah dengan telus dan ikhlas. Semoga penjelasan YBhg. Datuk berikan kelak, akan dapat menyelesaikan kemelut ini “once and for all”. Tidak dapat tiada isu pemalsuan keterangan dalam insiden mata-lebam, akan berbangkit semula apabila siasatan menyeluruh dijalankan berkaitan maklumat sepertimana perkara tajuk. Persoalan utama adalah seperti berikut dibawah;

6.1.	Benar atau tidak terdapat tiga (3) laporan perubatan yang berbeza antara satu sama lain, yang disediakan oleh Dr. Abdul Rahman Yusof. Laporan pertama disediakan pada 26.10.1998 atas arahan Gani Patail. Laporan kedua (yang akan dirujuk sebagai Ekshibit-A9) dan Laporan Ketiga masing-masing tanpa bertarikh disediakan oleh Dr. Rahman diantara 14.12.1998 hingga 21.12.1998 yang diarahkan oleh Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah (Allahyarham Mohtar),Peguam Negara ketika itu.

6.2.	Benar atau tidak dua(2) daripada tiga(3) Laporan diatas, iaitu Laporan Pertama bertarikh 26.10.1998 dan Ekshibit-A9 telah dikemukakan dalam prosiding Suruhanjaya Di-Raja Tersebut, dan dirakamkan dalam Laporan Suruhjaya berkenaan.

6.3.	Benar atau tidak Laporan Pertama bertarikh 26.10.1998 yang penyediaannya diarahkan oleh Gani Patail, tidak terdapat dalam Laporan Suruhanjaya yang kemudiannya diperkenankan oleh SPB Yang Di-Pertuan Agong.

6.4.	Jika Gani Patail dan/atau Tan Sri Musa Hassan (Musa Hassan), dan/atau Dr. Rahman dan/atau ACP Mat Zain Ibrahim (ketika itu Pegawai Penyiasat kes mata-lebam), sama ada secara bersendiri atau berpakat, tidak terlibat dengan apa cara sekalipun dalam pembikinan ketiga-tiga Laporan Perubatan seperti yang tersebut diatas, bolehkah YBhg. Datuk jelaskan bagaimana laporan-laporan tersebut, kesemuanya berjumlah 65 muka surat, boleh ujud dan siapa yang bertanggungjawab dalam pembikinannya.

(i)	Bolehkah YBhg. Datuk turut jelaskan bagaimana laporan-laporan berkenaan boleh berada dalam kertas siasatan mata-lebam, kertas siasatan SPRM dan Laporan Suruhanjaya Di-Raja tersebut.

6.5.	Berkaitan dengan kuasa Peguam Cara Negara (Solicitor General-SG) sepertimana terkandung dalam Seksyen 376 Kanun Prosidur Jenayah (CPC).

(i).	Benarkah mengikut Seksyen 376 (2)CPC, kuasa SG sama dengan kuasa yang ada pada seorang Timbalan Pendakwa Raya (DPP) sahaja. Apabila SG bertindak sebagai Pendakwa Raya ketika ketiadaan Peguam Negara atau pada waktu ia tidak berupaya bertindak sebagainya,adalah untuk “administrative purposes” sahaja dan tidak melibatkan pengambilan “kuasa penuh” Pendakwa Raya. Kuasa penuh Pendakwa Raya hanya boleh dilaksanakan oleh Peguam Negara seorang sahaja yang dilantik oleh SPB Yang Di-Pertuan Agong.

(ii)	Semua DPP,dan termasuk SG, boleh menjalankan semua atau mana-mana hak dan kuasa yang ada atau yang boleh dijalankan oleh Pendakwa Raya dengan atau dibawah CPC atau mana-mana undang-undang bertulis
kecuali
 (diulangkan)..
kecuali
 apa-apa hak atau kuasa yang dinyatakan wajar dilakukan oleh Pendakwa Raya
sendiri
, iaitu;

a)	Melantik DPP dibawah Seksyen 376  subseksyen (3)CPC, dibaca bersama dengan Seksyen 376 subseksyen (4).

b)	Menandatangani sijil dibawah Seksyen 418A subseksyen (2) CPC iaitu untuk memindahkan perbicaraan dari Mahkamah Rendah kepada Mahkamah Tinggi.

c)	Perintah menjalankan perbicaraan terhadap pengarang, tuan punya, pencetak atau penerbit sebarang buku atau surat khabar yang didaftarkan dibawah Akta Mesin Cetak dan Penerbitan 1984 atau dibawah Akta Penyerahan Bahan Perpustakaan 1986.

6.5.1.	Sehubungan perkara diatas, izinkan saya merujuk  sekali lagi nota prosiding Rayuan Jenayah 43-(70)-2008 mengenai “Decision on Revision” di-hadapan Hakim YA Dato’ Mohamad Zabidin bin Mohd. Diah. Dalam hujah pihak Pendakwaan,YBhg. Datuk  sendiri telah menekankan dengan membawa contoh-contoh case-laws bahawa hanya Pendakwa Raya sahaja yang mempunyai kuasa untuk menandatangani sijil dibawah Seksyen 418A tersebut, oleh kerana keperluan tersebut adalah
“statutory requirement”
, atau dalam bahasa mudah ianya adalah kehendak undang-undang. Jika demikian, bolehkah YBhg. Datuk jelaskan mengapakah aplikasinya dalam perlantikkan DPP mengikut Seksyen 376 (3) CPC dibaca bersama dengan Seksyen 376(4) berbeza dengan apa yang YBhg. Datuk hujahkan di-Mahkamah, sedangkan undang-undang yang dipakai ialah CPC yang sama.

6.6.	Dengan mengenepikan persoalan kesahihan perlantikkan DPP-DPP berkenaan sebagai Ahli Panel Bebas, diharap YBhg. Datuk jelaskan sama ada sekumpulan DPP yang dilantik sedemikian itu mempunyai hak dan kuasa untuk mengadili (
adjudicate
) perkara berkaitan kelakuan dan/atau salah-laku jenayah seorang Peguam Negara,sama sepertimana hak dan kuasa sebuah Tribunal yang dilantik oleh Yang Di-Pertuan Agong setelah dinasihatkan oleh Perdana Menteri mengikut Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

6.7.	Saya percaya YBhg. Datuk tidak akan menafikan telah menerima ketiga-tiga laporan perubatan disediakan oleh Dr. Rahman dalam persoalan ini,menerusi salinan surat-surat saya bertarikh 15.4.2009 dan 7.5.2009.Saya percaya YBhg. Datuk bukan orangnya yang akan membakul-sampahkan dokumen-dokumen tersebut, sebaliknya YBhg. Datuk telah meneliti kesahihan laporan-laporan berkaitan dengannya.

6.7.1.	Oleh hal yang demikian itu, bolehkah YBhg. Datuk jelaskan, keterangan yang macam mana lagi  YBhg. Datuk ingin cari.

6.7.2.	Malahan dengan hanya bersandarkan laporan saya bertarikh 15.4.2009 dan 7.5.2009 itu sahaja,saya yakin YBhg. Datuk telah boleh membentuk suatu kes prima facie terhadap Gani Patail dan orang atau orang-orang yang bersubahat dengannya, kerana memalsukan keterangan ketika proses penyiasatan kes mata lebam, tanpa perlu merujuk kepada kertas siasatan kes  itu sendiri ataupun kertas siasatan SPRM berkaitan.

YBhg. Datuk,

7.	Saya telah menunggu sehingga hari ini
5hb.Januari 2011
 untuk mengedarkan maklum balas bersangkutan dengan kenyataan yang dibuat oleh YB Menteri-Menteri tersebut itu. Saya percaya YBhg. Datuk dan khasnya Gani Patail,masih ingat bahawa dua belas tahun lalu, pada
5hb.Januari 1999
, Peguam Negara,Allahyarham Mohtar telah mengeluarkan Press Statement yang disediakan oleh Gani Patail berkaitan dengan Penyiasatan Polis dalam insiden mata-lebam kepada umum. Saya sendiri tidak akan lupa tarikh bersejarah ini.

7.1.	Press Statement  5.1.1999 inilah yang telah memusnahkan kredibiliti PDRM dan khasnya Pasukan Penyiasat insiden mata lebam ketika itu. Press Statement ini juga telah menyebabkan Jemaah Menteri terpedaya untuk mempercayai bahawa PDRM tidak berupaya untuk menangani sesuatu siasatan jika melibatkan pucuk pimpinan tertinggi sendiri, dan dalam hal ini penglibatan Ketua Polis Negara. Akibatnya Jemaah Menteri telah memutuskan bahawa Suruhanjaya Di-Raja pula dibentuk untuk mengambil alih siasatan daripada Polis.

7.2.	Bagaimanapun PDRM akhirnya telah membuktikan bahawa ia adalah satu Pasukan yang berkecuali dan professional dan mampu menjalankan penyiasatan yang adil “without fear or favour”,sekalipun ianya adalah terhadap orang nombor satunya. Ini telah diakui oleh Ahli Suruhanjaya Di-Raja tersebut sepertimana yang dirakamkan dalam “Part Two,muka surat 69 perenggan 6.6. Laporan Suruhanjaya”, walaupun ramai yang tidak menyedarinya atau mempedulikannya.

8.	Saya percaya YBhg.Datuk serta Pimpinan Tertinggi dalam Jabatan Peguam Negara,turut sedar, bahawa Press Statement 5.1.1999 itu adalah merupakan bukti utama yang boleh digunakan untuk mensabitkan beberapa kesalahan jenayah terhadap Gani Patail dan orang atau orang/orang yang bersubahat dengannya,berkaitan penipuan dan pemalsuan keterangan.

8.1.	Bersempena dengan ulang tahun ke-duabelas Press Statement 5.1.1999 itu pada hari ini, saya mengajak YBhg. Datuk “to come clean” untuk menyelesaikan kemelut ini.

9.	YBhg. Datuk bebas memilih untuk terus melindungi perbuatan jenayah ini dan terpaksa bersedia untuk terus berbohong untuk menutup pembohongan terdahulu yang tidak akan berkesudahan, ataupun YBhg.Datuk memilih untuk menyelamatkan kredibiliti Jabatan Peguam Negara pada hari ini, supaya membolehkan YBhg.Datuk dan rakan-rakan yang lain membuka tirai baru dalam membawa AG’s Chambers kezaman kecermelangannya sebelum 1998.

9.1.	Apa pun pilihan yang akan dibuat, saya inginkan YBhg. Datuk tahu bahawa penipuan dan pemalsuan yang dilakukan sejak 1998 itu dan terus terpaksa dilakukan sehingga hari ini, adalah berputik daripada perasaan marah, dendam peribadi dan keegoan sesaorang yang mengambil kesempatan situasi tidak menentu ketika itu.

10.	Akhir kata saya menuntut maaf sekiranya surat rayuan terbuka saya kepada YBhg. Datuk ini membebankan, dan saya memohon maaf juga sekiranya terdapat kata-kata saya yang terlanjur atau menyinggung perasaan. Saya pernah membuat rayuan yang serupa kepada Allayarham Tan Sri Peguam Negara ketika itu, menerusi minit saya dalam muka surat 26 hingga 29 perenggan 10,11 dan 12 bertarikh 27.1.1999, dan diharap YBhg. Datuk sudi melihatnya jika ada kelapangan.

Salam sejahtera, selamat maju jaya dan Selamat Tahun Baru.

Terima kasih.

Yang benar,

(Mat Zain bin Ibrahim)

5hb.Januari 2011.

( Nota:Surat Asal telah diakui terima oleh Pejabat Peguam Cara Negara @ 0850 pagi  5.1.2011)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 5 January 2011, 1:15 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Law & Order
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Kenapa Saya Memilih Roket

by
Zairil Khir Johari

Sejak berita keahlian saya dalam DAP telah diumumkan oleh media massa selepas ucapan perbahasan saya semasa Konvensyen Pakatan Rakyat di Kepala Batas tempoh hari, soalan yang paling kerap diajukan kepada saya adalah: kenapa DAP?

Pada saya jawapannya amat mudah. Secara ikhtisar, saya telah memilih untuk menjulang perjuangan rakyat dalam kancah politik negara kita melalui Parti Tindakan Demokratik (DAP) sebagai satu kesinambungan pewarisan dan jasa arwah ayahanda saya kepada negara tercinta. Ada yang mungkin mengatakan bahawa tindakan sedemikian adalah satu percanggahan, sedangkan ayah saya dahulu bukan sekadar ahli biasa UMNO, malah seorang pengasas parti itu sejak tahun 1946 dan merupakan seorang pemimpin kanan yang pernah memegang jawatan Naib Presiden dan Setiausaha Agung. Malah, ada yang sudahpun mengecam perwatakan saya sebagai seorang pengkhianat bangsa atau ‘Melayu lupa diri’, kononnya saya ini ibarat kacang yang telah melupakan kulit dengan tindakan membelakangi sebuah parti yang sudah kian lama dianggap sebagai pembela bangsa.

Saya memang akur bahawa UMNO merupakan sebuah parti yang masyhur dan bersejarah, dan atas usaha dan pengorbanan pemimpin-pemimpin terdahulunya telahpun berjaya meraih kemerdekaan tanah air kita daripada penjajah British. Namun sejak kebelakangan ini, niat asal penubuhannya, atau raison d’être, untuk membebaskan negara dan memartabatkan bangsa sudahpun ternoda.

Tidak perlu saya mengulangi hujah-hujah saya tempoh hari tentang penyalahgunaan kuasa dan penyelewengan amanah rakyat yang kini sudah menjadi amalan harian sebuah kerajaan yang rakus kuasa. Akan tetapi, saya ingin menarik perhatian kepada hakikat bahawa dua orang bekas Perdana Menteri, iaitu Al-Marhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra dan Tun Hussein Onn, telahpun mempertikaikan UMNO sewaktu krisis dalaman yang telah memecah-belahkan parti tersebut lebih kurang 20 tahun dahulu. Jelas sekali bahawa kedua-dua tokoh itu tidak sanggup lagi melihat kehancuran dan keranapan jiwa sebuah parti yang sepatutnya menjadi tunjang pembangunan negara. UMNO yang dahulu sudahpun lesap, yang tinggal hanyalah jasad kosong yang kini diperalatkan untuk kepentingan peribadi golongan pemerintah.

Maka dengan kesedaran ini, terpaksalah seorang anak muda yang menghajatkan kemajuan bangsa dan negara mencari ikhtiar yang sesuai dengan aspirasinya. Hatta dalam penjelajahan batin, tersualah saya dengan satu semarak yang kian tampak. Merenung ke dalamnya saya menyedari bahawa semangat perjuangan ayah saya serta rakan-rakan seperjuangannya masih lagi membara, walaupun jasad yang didiaminya sudah bertukar. Sungguhpun begitu, dasar perjuangan tetap sama: iaitu untuk membebaskan rakyat daripada penindasan dan kepincangan sebuah kerajaan yang zalim. Cuma kini, seruan perjuangan telah disahut dan didukung dengan teguhnya oleh parti DAP bersama dengan parti-parti komponen lain dalam gagasan Pakatan Rakyat.

Jika dahulu satu politik baru telah berjaya dicetuskan melalui usahasama UMNO, MCA dan MIC dalam Parti Perikatan, pada hari ini saya percaya kita boleh memperbaharui dinamik politik negara kita melalui penggemblengan kesemua kelompok rakyat Malaysia dengan tidak mengira kaum atau agama, demi menerbitkan budaya politik masa depan yang berlandaskan persaudaraan rakyat dan bukan sekadar toleransi antara kaum. Inilah antara sebab-sebab utama yang telah menarik hati saya kepada perjuangan parti DAP.

Saya juga tertarik dengan keikhlasan kepimpinan parti untuk mengembalikan sistem urus tadbir negara kita kepada satu sistem yang berlandaskan ketelusan, amanah dan yang menjunjung rakyat. Komitmen ini jelas termakbul dalam pentadbiran kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang yang diterajui Ketua Menteri Lim Guan Eng. Iltizamnya tidak goyah dan sungguh mengkagumkan meskipun diserang dengan gegak gempita pada setiap masa oleh jentera Barisan Nasional yang bersifat perkauman.

Dalam keadaan negara yang makin pincang dan ketandusan modal yang bernas, adalah jelas bahawa kepimpinan kerajaan pusat sudah tidak lagi mengenali dan memahami nadi rakyat. Setiap tahun makin ramai warga Malaysia yang meninggalkan tanah air untuk mencari rezeki dan kehidupan baru di negara lain. Antara sebab utama yang memangkin penghijrahaan mereka adalah kehilangan kepercayaan kepada kemampuan kerajaan untuk menyediakan kestabilan dan kemantapan yang dikehendaki, bukan sekadar dalam penyediaan peluang pekerjaan tetapi juga dalam institusi-institusi negara yang makin dicurigai kebebasannya. Masalah ini akan menjadi parah apabila negara kita kehausan bakat muda dalam pelbagai-bagai bidang. Di sini saya melihat bahawa satu kelebihan parti DAP dan juga parti-parti lain dalam Pakatan Rakyat adalah keupayaannya untuk menarik minat golongan cediakawan muda kepada arus perjuangan politik. Ini amat penting kerana masa depan negara bergantung terus kepada kebijakan generasi muda.

Dalam pada itu, saya melihat kewujudan pemimpin-pemimpin muda yang menampilkan kecerdikan dan kesungguhan yang cukup subur dan cekap, bukan sahaja dalam DAP malah juga dalam parti-parti lain dalam Pakatan Rakyat, sebagai satu tanda yang sihat untuk masa depan negara. Dengan itu saya tidak gentar, malah berbangga sekali, untuk menyertai barisan yang amat cekal ini.

Selain daripada yang sudah dicatat, saya juga tertarik kepada pendirian parti DAP yang tegap dan kukuh mempertahankan Perlembagaan Persekutuan, khususnya Artikel 152 dan 153, sebagaimana yang telah ditegaskan oleh Pengerusi Kebangsaan DAP Karpal Singh dalam ucapan penggulungannya semasa Konvensyen Pakatan Rakyat tempoh hari. Komitmen terhadap pemeliharaan Perlembagaan Persekutuan ini adalah satu dasar yang amat penting sekali, kerana ia membuktikan keikhlasan parti dalam usaha menegakkan lambang-lambang utama negara seperti status Islam sebagai agama rasmi Persekutuan dan juga hak agama-agama lain untuk diamalkan, kedudukan istimewa orang Melayu dan Bumiputera serta kepentingan sah kaum-kaum lain, dan juga pengunaan Bahasa Melayu sebagai Bahasa Kebangsaan. Lunas sekali bahawa parti DAP adalah sebuah parti yang berteraskan prinsip-prinsip kenegaraan yang sewajarnya.

Kini kita berada di ambang perubahan. Rakyat mencari-carikan budaya politik yang baru. Budaya politik yang tidak menindas tetapi menjunjung rakyat. Budaya politik yang tidak berunsurkan isu-isu sempit seperti perkauman tetapi berlandaskan keperluan jati rakyat sejagat. Saya percaya bahawa parti DAP mampu dan akan terus mara dalam perjuangan untuk merubah kemelut yang sedia ada demi membina satu wawasan Malaysia yang adil dan saksama.

Dan itulah dasar kenapa saya memilih roket.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 5 January 2011, 10:41 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Politics
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Teoh Beng Hock’s death — Open Verdict

Twitter updates from
@limkitsiang

01/05/2011 01:08 PM

Will justice be served? Teoh Beng Hock inquest decision at Shah Alam Court @ 2.30 pm. Will b there 2 await verdict?

01/05/2011 02:48 PM

TBH inquest – ShamAlam court fully crammed awaiting verdict while outside large crowd who cannot find places. Its 18long mnths since tragedy

01/05/2011 02:57 PM

In court Karpal Gobind Malik TeresaKok TanKokWai TeoNieChing LimLipEng AuYongHW EliWong Xavier TBH fmly members Sgor MB Khalid otw

01/05/2011 03:06 PM

Court sits –  TBH inquest begins

01/05/2011 03:10 PM

Coroner thanks counsel from all parties for assistance in the TBH inquest

01/05/2011 03:12 PM

Coroner starts reading his verdict

01/05/2011 03:14 PM

Dealing with the law on inquests

01/05/2011 03:20 PM

Now on undisputed facts of the case

01/05/2011 03:29 PM

Likely time of TBH death on July 16,2009  – between 715am to 1115am

01/05/2011 03:34 PM

Two theories of cause of death advanced – death by homicide n death by suicide

01/05/2011 03:40 PM

Discussed theory of death by suicide – issue of “suicide note”.  Concluded – coroner said he is not qualified to say it is suicide note.

01/05/2011 03:38 PM

Coroner ruled out verdict of TBH death by suicide

01/05/2011 03:51 PM

death by homicide – ruled out.. Coroner returned Open Verdict

01/05/2011 04:41 PM

TBH Open verdict vindicated original demand 4Royal Commission Inquiry into all aspects of MACC death esp inquest finding of pre-fall injury

01/05/2011 04:43 PM

2prong response 2TBH death verdict – call 2Najib 2honour undertaking 2family 4RCI if not satisfied w inquest n apply 2High Court 4revision

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 5 January 2011, 5:21 pm and is filed under
Teoh Beng Hock
,
Twitter
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Fan Yew Teng: Recalling a towering Malaysian

By
Joseph Sipalan

MalaysiaKini

Jan 6, 11

Freedom fighter, husband, father, friend, teacher, true Malaysian.

These were among the many fond descriptions given to veteran activist and DAP strongman Fan Yew Teng, as family, friends and comrades came together to honour his legacy during a memorial last night in Kuala Lumpur.

About 250 people packed into the YMCA hall in Brickfields, staying three hours to share their cherished memories of their time spent with the charismatic Fan, who died last Dec 7 after a year battling with prostate cancer.

More than 20 people took to the rostrum to speak of Fan and how much he had influenced their lives, with his unyielding zest for life and indomitable spirit in the pursuit of justice.

Among those who spoke at the memorial were DAP national chairman Karpal Singh, party life advisor Dr Chen Man Hin, DAP advisor Lim Kit Siang, Penang Chief Minister and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, former Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (Abim) secretary-general Mohd Anuar Tahir, Fan’s wife Dr Noeleen Heyzer and his twin daughters Lilianne and Pauline.

They spoke of vastly different experiences with Fan, who convinced Karpal to contest his first ever election in Alor Star, Kedah in August 1974 despite the latter just losing his father to a road accident three months earlier.

Anuar also recounted how Fan endeared himself to everyone in Abim as a staff member of the Islamic organisation, saying how Fan’s openness in studying the Quran impressed everyone to the point that he was light-heartedly called ustaz Fan by Abim staff.

Far from being one-dimensional, Noeleen shared how her late husband – who did not like flying – was a man willing to take risks and sacrifices for love, literally travelling thousands of miles over sea and land, going through India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Turkey and Europe to join her in England where she was studying in the 1970s.

“And just as he took risks and sacrifices for our love, he did the same for his principles,” she said.

Alternative Asean Network (Altsean) coordinator Debbie Stothard, who had worked closely with Fan in the 1990s when protesting on Burma issues, said Fan’s sense of humour was also an integral part of what made him such a charismatic leader.

She said anyone around him could not help but be won over by his boundless energy and strength of character, adding jokingly that they would feel safe with Fan around during protests because he would be the first one the police would go after.

But even with the many different experiences Fan had imparted to those around him, they all saw the same fire and passion that drove the man in his pursuit of freedom, equality, democracy and peace.

As Lim Guan Eng said when eulogising the multi-talented leader, Fan was a “true patriot” whose only wish was to have a truly equal, democratic and peaceful Malaysia.

“In that sense, Fan was a towering Malaysian. Not towering in the sense of building 100-storey buildings or accumulating ill-gotten gains or abusing power and exploiting fellow Malaysians, but a towering Malaysian in ideas, ideals, faith, hope and love.”

A second memorial will be held at the 14th floor of the Excelsior Hotel in Ipoh later this evening.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 6 January 2011, 4:09 pm and is filed under
DAP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Inquest verdict ruling out suicide and on Beng Hock’s pre-fall injury an indictment of MACC and police and powerful ground for full-scale RCI into the actual causes of Teoh Beng Hock

The ending of the Teoh Beng Hock inquest in an “Open Verdict” 18 months after the tragedy outside the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) headquarters in Shah Alam has not only caused nation-wide consternation but validated the opposition to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s two-prong proposal in July 2009 to have first an inquest and after it,  a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the procedural aspects of the MACC in carrying out investigations.

On 22nd July 2009, I had said:

“I am disappointed by the Cabinet decision on the mysterious death of Teoh Beng Hock.

“There will be no Royal Commission of Inquiry into the causes of Teoh’s death although an inquest would be held.

“A Royal Commission of Inquiry will be set up, but only to look into the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) investigative procedures and to determine if there were any human right violations when Teoh Beng Hock was being interrogated.

“This falls short of public expectations and is unsatisfactory and unacceptable.

“What the Malaysian public want is a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the mysterious causes of Teoh’s death at 14th floor of MACC Hqrs, the investigating procedures of MACC as well as into the independence, professionalism and integrity of the MACC whether it has become the catspaw of its political masters to declare war on the Pakatan Rakyat instead of declaring war on corruption.”

Three days later, I had called on the Cabinet to halt Teoh Beng Hock inquest to allow it to review and widen the terms of reference of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the causes of Teoh’s death to command public confidence in public institutions and the Prime Minister.

Unfortunately, the call for a Royal Commission of Inquiry into all aspects of Teoh’s death was ignored and the authorities decided to proceed with the inquest and to await its outcome before constituting  a Royal Commission of Inquiry into investigation aspects of MACC.

Although there is nation-wide disappointment with the “Open Verdict”, the inquest had made two important findings:

ruling out suicide as the cause of death, which had been openly canvassed by the MACC; and

finding that Teoh Beng Hock was inflicted with  “prefall injury”.

This raises the question who was responsible for Teoh Beng Hock’s “prefall” injury, which reflected adversely on the MACC as well as police investigations into Teoh’s death.

For this reason, a Royal Commission of Inquiry, not just into the procedural aspects of the MACC’s investigations but to probe further into the causes of Teoh Beng Hock’s death following the inquest findings ruling out suicide and  on Teoh’s pre-fall injury,  should be established immediately without any delay.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 6 January 2011, 4:25 pm and is filed under
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.