Ringgit rout fails to revive Malaysia exports

Steve Johnson

Financial Times

1st October 2015

Amid vigorous debate as to whether slumping currencies still have the ability to stimulate significant emerging market export growth, the recent example of Malaysia is fascinating.

During the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98, the collapse of the ringgit led to a sharp and almost instantaneous rise in exports.

Export growth accelerated from zero in mid-1997 to more than 40 per cent by early 1998, according to analysis by Hak Bin Chua, Asean economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

As a result, Malaysia’s current account balance swung from a deficit of 12.4 per cent of gross domestic product in the second quarter of 1997 to a surplus of 18.7 per cent of GDP by the end of 1998.

“The J-curve effect, the temporary worsening [of the trade balance] following the depreciation, was short or even negligible in 1997,” says Mr Chua.

Since September 2014 the ringgit has plunged once again, tumbling to its lowest level against the dollar since the 1997 episode.

Yet, as Mr Chua observes, “the depreciation has not strengthened exports or improved the trade balance at all. There is no ‘J’ so far, only a flat ‘U’.”

This shines through clearly in the second chart, where export growth bumps along the bottom, even as the ringgit heads south.

Admittedly, the slide in the ringgit since 2014 has not been as severe as during the Asian financial crisis, so any resultant pick-up in exports should probably be smaller, but arguably it should not be non-existent.

So, why the disconnect? Mr Chua presents three possible reasons. Firstly, Malaysia has suffered a “severe” terms of trade shock, with the price of some of its key exports, such as palm oil and liquefied natural gas, having fallen markedly.

The picture is far from clear-cut, however. The IMF forecasts that the volume (rather than value) of Malaysian goods exports will rise 6.5 per cent this year, a little above growth of 5.8 per cent last year and the highest figure since 2010. For goods and services combined, export volume growth is forecast to be an impressive 15.1 per cent, the highest level since 2004.

This suggests that the weaker ringgit may indeed be boosting exports, but that this effect is being cancelled out by a worsening of Malaysia’s terms of trade.

However, the IMF also forecasts that Malaysia’s imports of goods and services will also rise 15.1 per cent in volume terms this year, despite the slide in the ringgit and weaker economic growth.

This suggests Malaysia may simply be becoming a more open economy that is embedded more deeply in global and regional supply chains. If so, the forecast rise in export volumes might have occurred anyway, even if the ringgit had not fallen.

Secondly, Mr Chua notes that, given the broad-based strength of the dollar, the ringgit’s slide against the greenback overstates its weakness.

The ringgit may have fallen 26 per cent against the dollar between October 2014 and August 2015, but it only declined 13 per cent in nominal effective exchange rate terms, Mr Chua calculates, limiting any expected rise in exports.

Thirdly, given that 12 per cent of Malaysia’s exports are destined for China, he argues that the latter’s economic slowdown, combined with its trend towards onshoring, represents another headwind.

The latter point could prove particularly problematic for a host of manufacturers across Southeast Asia.

“A recent IMF study shows that China is onshoring and capturing a greater part of the Asian tech supply chain,” Mr Chua says.

Gareth Leather, Asia economist at Capital Economics, agrees that Malaysia, as well as peers such as Thailand, “are suffering because the Chinese are moving down the supply chain”, stealing its neighbours’ lunch.

But although commodity exports may still be in the doldrums, Mr Leather nevertheless sees “possible signs” that manufacturing exporters “are starting to benefit from improved competitiveness” in countries where currencies have weakened.

In Malaysia itself, he says export data are “showing signs of improvement”, with rises in both volume and ringgit terms in July, having fallen in the April-June quarter.

Mr Chua’s conclusion is that the weakness of the ringgit “is only helping to cushion the negative shock [of headwinds to Malaysian exports], rather than reviving exports and growth”.

The debate as to whether currency weakness still retains its old power to boost export volumes seems destined to rumble on a little longer, at least.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 3 October 2015, 6:59 am and is filed under
Finance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sack both Tajuddin and Chong as message is long overdue that Malaysians deserve  Ministers and Deputy Ministers of some standard and quality and not every Tom, Dick and Harry

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, should sack both Datuk Tajuddin Abdul Rahman and Chong Sin Woon as deputy ministers as the message is long overdue that Malaysians deserve Ministers and Deputy Ministers of some standard and quality and not every Tom, Dick and Harry should be elevated to such positions.

For some time, the caliber of Ministers and Deputy Ministers has been on a relentless downward decline like our football world ranking, which plunged to the worst-ever 171st placing in the Fifa rankings in  October 2015 when we were still ranked No. 154 at the beginning of the year in January 2015.

Malaysia was positioned in the Fifa rankings at  No. 79 in 1993, 96 in 1996, 107 in 2,000, 123 in 2005, 154 in January 2015 and 171 in October 2015 – embarrassing chart of a nation’s trajectory of relentless decline, also reflected in other sectors of our national endeavor.

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad had dismissed  Cabinets formed after he retired in 2003 as Prime Minister for 22 years as “half-past six” while former Finance Minister Tun Daim Zainuddin had shown utter contempt of what he described as “deadwood” Ministers.

Early this year, I had written an Open Letter to all Ministers asking them not to be “half-past six” or “deadwood” Ministers, and for heaven’s sake, “don’t be moral pygmies and political dwarfs” but to take a stand on critical issues of the nation on behalf of present and future,  particularly on the great questions of right and wrong in Malaysia.

But my Open Letter elicited no response or change, and  Najib post-13GE  Cabinet was a great failure and disappointment.

With a reshuffled Cabinet two months ago because of  Najib’s twin mega scandals of RM50 billion 1MDB and RM2.6 billion “donation” in Najib’s personal banking accounts, things have got worse rather than better.

This is why the country was recently entertained to the spectacle of a Minister for Communications and Multimedia with minimal grasp of ICT making  the howler when he said that 71 per cent of Malaysian Internet users preferred the slower Streamyx, even as slow as 384 kilobyte per second (kpbs), instead of the faster broadband of multi-megabyte per second.

Meanwhile there is the  “soap opera” of two deputy ministers, Tajuddin and Chong, proving that they were no better than “spoiled brats”, with Tajuddin warning the Malaysian Chinese that they could be slapped if they took their grouses outside the country, and when confronted and berated for such intemperate language, sought to deny that he meant all Chinese and was referring to “DAP Chinese” which later became an outright denial.

May be Tajuddin should explain what he meant by “DAP Chinese” when UMNO and BN claim that 90% of the Malaysian Chinese supported the DAP!

Chong on the other hand, in typically unthinking and foolish manner, accused the national primary schools of breeding racism when fending off attacks from UMNO racists and communalists that Chinese primary schools sow racism.

But Chong tried too hard in his eagerness to also  attack DAP leaders – forgetting that he is the Deputy Education Minister who should be defending the UMNO/BN education system and policy.

Chong is not fit to be Deputy Education Minister and Tajuddin not fit to be Deputy Minister of any Ministry.

In the face of the faux pax by Tajuddin and Chong, Najib must be firm and sack them as deputy ministers to send the clear message that  Ministers and Deputy Ministers in his Cabinet must be men and women of some quality, standard and substance.

His  pathethic plea from Milan “to all quarters to stop making statements that may lead to strife and discord” in Barisan Nasional is completely inadequate and incommensurate to the urgent need to demonstrate that all  his Ministers and Deputy Ministers have minimal political sense and intellectual prowess.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 3 October 2015, 10:13 am and is filed under
Education
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Some answers on my RM50m donation for hostels

Koon Yew Yin

Malaysiakini

2 Oct 2015

COMMENT
 After the publication of my RM50 million donation to the Penang state government for building student hostels, many people, including media journalists and BFM Radio, have asked me a lot of questions. They are curious because they have not come across something like this before.

Here are my answers:

I was born on Jan 6, 1933. My father started a coffin shop at No 8 Jalan Ipoh, KL about 100 years ago. When father retired about 30 years ago, my eldest brother inherited the coffin shop. As he got older, he found difficulty to compete with the modern undertakers and was forced to close the old shop about two years ago, and my younger brother continued the coffin business with a smaller shop in Kepong, KL.

As I have 11 siblings, I always needed some things since I was a boy. I remember always feeling hungry when I was young. One can imagine how 12 children rushed for food during meal time.

This is why I want to help the poor. Besides my RM50 million donation to the Penang government to build student hostels, I have to date, given about 300 scholarships to help students from poorer backgrounds to complete their tertiary education.

As a young boy in 1957, I attended St John’s Institution, KL and then I completed a four-year Civil Engineering Diploma at Technical College (now known as Universiti Teknologi Malaysia or UTM) under a scholarship from the Public Works Department or PWD (now known as JKR). I subsequently qualified as a Chartered Civil Engineer by self-study in 1962.

In 1967, together with three partners, I founded Mudajaya Construction Sdn. Bhd and Gamuda Sdn Bhd. In early 1980, IGB Construction Sdn Bhd, Jurutama Construction Sdn. Bhd and Mudajaya Construction Sdn Bhd grouped together and listed as a public company under the name of IJM Corporation Bhd.

In about 1975 I sold Gamuda Sdn Bhd to Lin Yun Ling and his partners.

In 1983 I had a serious heart angina. At the time a heart bypass operation could only be done at the Mayo Clinic in the US or at Harley Street, London and the casualty rate was frighteningly high. Before my heart surgery in London, I passed all my assets to my wife and children.

After my heart operation, I retired from being an executive director in Mudajaya/IJM Corporation Bhd and I started to learn how to make money from the stock market. In 1983-4 the Hong Kong stock market crashed because China wanted to take back HK. Almost all the Hong Kong investors were afraid of the arrival of the Communists and they sold their holdings as quickly as possible.

Learning to be a contrarian investor

One of the most important investment lessons I learned was to be a contrarian investor, buy when everybody is afraid to buy and sell when everybody wants to buy. I started with only RM200,000 cash and within a few years, I bought 46 percent of Kaiser Stock and Shares Ltd., a stock broking company in HK.

After having read several investment books by famous gurus such as Benjamin Graham, Warren Buffett, Peter Lynch, etc. together with my 32 years of experience, I wish to share my knowledge with people who are interested in investment. I believe in teaching people to make money. It is like teaching people how to fish instead of giving them some fish.

Q: Why do you write regularly on national issues?

A: In 1970 when the New Economic Policy was introduced, the GDP per capita of Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea were the same as ours. They became developed nations despite the fact they did not have natural resources like us. They did not even have timber to build houses.

Over 40 years later, we are still not a developed nation due to bad management and corruption of the BN government. I will continue to write to point out all the bad things of the Government until voters can vote the BN government out of Putrajaya.

In 2009, I published a book called ‘Malaysia: Road Map for achieving vision 2020′ to show how Malaysia can become a developed nation it deserves to be. Unfortunately, we have not achieved a developed nation status due to the bad management and corruption of the BN government. It is most unlikely we can achieve Vision 2020.

I have given all my children the best education that money can buy and I think they can find a good living without my money. As such, I want to help poor students complete their tertiary education. I personally believe that with a good education, they can earn enough to help their own families and other poor people.

As I pointed out earlier, I have already given out over 300 scholarships to really poor students to complete their tertiary education. All my scholarship recipients are not required to pay me back the money I have spent on them. Instead, all they have to do is to promise me that they must not forget that I helped them when they were poor and they will have to help other poor people when they have money to spare.

I sincerely believe some of them will continue to do charity after I die and if they practice the same system or philosophy I do, there will be more and more people contributing to charity.

Q: What are other charities or projects have you supported in a big way in the past?

A: About 10 years ago I paid for the construction of a large extension to the Salvation Army building in Ipoh. I also donated RM350,000 towards the renovation of Ipoh Wesley Private School.

Q: Is it true that Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (Utar) snubbed a RM30 million donation you wanted to give them back in 2009, also for hostels and why did you choose Penang as the state to undertake this and not any other state? Is there a particular reason?

A: Six years ago, I offered to donate RM30 million to Utar for building student hostels under the same terms and conditions as I offered to Penang. However, the MCA leaders, who controlled Utar, owned all the land outside the university campus and rejected my offer because they did not want me to jeopardise their lucrative property development business. They are greedy and just want to take advantage of the poor students.

As a result of the bad publicity, MCA lost almost all their seats in the last general election.

Subsequently, I invested all the RM30 million in the stock market and I managed to make some profit. I chose to donate to Penang because the record shows that DAP is managing Penang very well and I want to support DAP.

Q: How long is the construction process expected to take place, and how many students are you aiming to help with this donation?

A: The chief minister has assigned three top officials to assist my architect in designing and planning for the project. These are, Jagdeep Singh Deo, who is in charge of the State Town and Country Planing, YB Lim Hock Seng who is in charge of public utilities and Ar Yew Tung Seang, Director of Building. The project is going ahead in top gear.

Our initial design can accommodate about 2,200 students. In fact, Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said that the government is willing to top up the project if my RM50 million is not enough.

Preference will be given to poor students irrespective of race and religion, bearing in mind that about 80 percent of the 18,000 Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) students are Malays. Currently USM can only provide accommodation for 1st year students.

Everyone is trying to make money every day. Unfortunately, many people do not know how to use their money wisely. They must realise that our ultimate aim in life is happiness. They will find great happiness if they can create happiness. If they give away some of their money to help poor people who will be happy and they will also be happy.

I have written in my will that after I die, all my remaining assets will be donated to help poor people to make them happy.

In conclusion, I wish to point out that it is not necessary to study overseas to achieve success in life and also that we cannot take our money along when we die. I hope this article will inspire some readers to follow my footsteps in doing charity. You can tell your friends to read this inspiring story of an undertaker’s son.

KOON YEW YIN, a retired chartered engineer, is a philanthropist.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 3 October 2015, 12:24 am and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Malay agenda

 – Nungsari Radhi

The Malaysian Insider

2 October 2015

The subject of Malay angst is a popular one lately. Not everyone is upset, of course, but there is a segment among the Malays, perhaps driven by a sense of insecurity, who have created mental models that put themselves under siege.

They feel disunited, threatened, and their honour besmirched. This, despite the Malays controlling almost all parts of officialdom in the country and constituting more than 60% of the population.

Many commentators have pointed out the unreasonableness of these sentiments. That this is an imagined reality, propagated for less than honourable intentions – to develop a political constituency among the Malays based on their fears and, perhaps, on their prejudices.

 Stoking racial sentiments is really going down the slippery slope that can have terrible consequences. We should do everything to avoid even approaching that slippery slope. Thus far, I am quite disappointed with the kind of leadership exhibited on this.

We should make Malaysians realise what is happening in Syria – a beautiful ancient country now decimated by internal strife caused by sectarian differences. People who used to live together are now killing one another, fleeing their homes, becoming refugees in other lands.

We have forgotten what happened to Yugoslavia – the barbarism, murder and bloodshed that saw the country broken up into pieces. It existed as a country for over 60 years prior to that and what happened seemed to suggest that they lived a lie all those years. Are we living a lie ourselves?

The Malays do have some problems and the real issue is under-development. It is not an uncommon problem – the sociological and economic dimensions of development are well studied and understood, and some of them are applicable here. But the departure point must be the proper phrasing of the problem – this is a developmental problem that requires developmental solutions.

The Malay under-development is multi-faceted. There is still a sizeable segment of the community whose income levels are low, low enough and numerous enough in numbers that the average Malay income is below the national average. That says something about their levels of human capital.

There is also the issue of distribution of income which is highly uneven. It is more uneven than the distribution of income between the races as indeed, over time, there are greater intra-racial variances in income than inter-racial variances.

Why, in spite of everything, are the Malays, on average, still laggards in the development story? Which Malays have benefited and what happened to the rest?

Clearly, the model of development that created access to basic education and health is over. That was in the early decades after Merdeka and it was done well. This greater, almost universal, access to educational opportunities created capabilities, which were then translated into upward mobility as more Malays entered the labour market.

From that point onwards, further development went beyond providing access through physical development into the “softer” areas of values and institutions.

Over time, however, solving a developmental problem, which is a national problem, became a Malay problem. There seem to be dual but parallel tracks of national and Malay or more generally bumiputera developments.

How did the objective of the New Economic Policy (NEP) – to promote national unity by removing racial identification of economic functions – become entrenched instead by this mutation of public policy and institutions.

The public sector, the national institutions, became predominantly Malay and the Malay agenda is one conceived by the Malays, for the Malays and by the Malays. It lost its national character. What was supposed to be a corrective treatment, based on need, became a special treatment, based on some sort of right.

And a myth was created and perpetuated – that this institutional framework is necessary to safeguard the Malay interests. All the while, the Malay developmental problems – of low income and a skewed income distribution – persisted and in some specific instances, worsened.

This is the contradiction that needs to be broken, and get reshaped. The Malay mind, its psyche, is not liberated, what more developed, by this fallacious mental model. There has to be true independence of the Malay mind for it to reach its full potential.

What should then be the Malay agenda?

The deeply ingrained feudal mentality must change. It is at odds with globalism, competition and the pursuit of excellence. There must be the belief that each individual Malay is in control of his or her own destiny, that upward mobility is a function of how he or she performs, not determined by his or her station of birth or by a helping hand from somewhere, or someone’s patronage. Self-reliant is a Malay agenda.

The Malays should ensure that democracy works, that it is not hijacked by any minority group. They need a healthy competition in politics because only a healthy competition will yield an effective government, one that will deliver their agenda, which is also a national agenda. In that regard, there needs to be free flow of information, freedom of the press and debate. So long as the democratic process works, the wishes of the majority will prevail. Democracy is a Malay agenda.

Their relative under-development means that the Malays will have to rely on public institutions. Therefore, an important Malay agenda is to ensure that the public sector is an efficient one, an effective one and most of all, one that is not crippled by corruption, and a system that is fair. Anti-corruption is a Malay agenda.

Education is the great leveller and its broadened access has raised the first post-Merdeka generation upwards, but the education system – the national education system – has deteriorated when the need for it has been amplified by the demands of a very competitive globalised world. Malaysia needs a world-class education system that develops the students’ individual potential, produces a united citizenry and prepares them for the challenges of globalisation. Educational reform is a Malay agenda.

That Malaysia is well placed geographically and is endowed not just with this geographic advantage but that this geographic advantage has resulted in Malaysia having such a cosmopolitan populace, a truly Asian tapestry that can be wielded for the nation’s advantage, indeed, for the benefit of Malays generally. The future of the country in the globalised world depends on taking advantage of this dynamic. Thus, multiracialism is a Malay agenda: to mix, to do things together and to learn from each other.

As a community, the Malays must strive to be multi-dimensional. There must be a thriving civil society – of all sorts – within the community and tolerance of differences between groups in the community. It must reduce dependency on officialdom and rely more on volunteerism and community-driven initiatives. The future is about networked living. Social capital formation is a Malay agenda.

I have concluded many years ago, that even if the institutional framework is there and the incentive structures are the right ones, success will only come to those who work hard. Striving for excellence, in any enterprise, is hard work. Hard work means diligence, persistence and a certain stubbornness – of failing and trying again, and again. So, finally, working hard is a Malay agenda.

The Malays’ survival and development, indeed, their advancement will depend on themselves, not on anyone’s patronage. They cannot be lulled into believing that the state, the government, will provide for them. They have to think for themselves, believe in themselves, in competing and winning.

The danger about relegating thinking to others is that there will be the tendency of relegating accountability altogether. Pretty soon, there will not be personal responsibility even for personal matters.

A person’s dignity, or maruah in Malay, lies in his character and his behaviour – the Malay word is akhlak.  Hence, the interdependencies of maruah and akhlak, which is neutral of one’s economic standing.

Keeping your dignity is therefore about having the right character and displaying proper behaviour. There is nothing dignified in being insolent, crude and rude. It simply is kurang ajar, a lack of nurture.

The Malays must learn to reject these traits and those who peddle them. They should choose leaders who dignify them, who elevate them to become better human beings, not those who appeal to their base instincts and exploit their weaknesses.

On man-to-man relationships, Islam teaches Muslims to be generous to mankind and to take care of this earth, to be the guardians of life on earth. To fulfil that role, they must strive to possess the economic means and the command of knowledge.

That is the imperative – to strive to create wealth in order to share it with and to give to, others.

The Malays must also strive to learn in order to teach and use knowledge. In fact, this is not only the Malay agenda but also a national and human agenda. – October 2, 2015.

* Dr Nungsari Radhi is an economist and managing director of Prokhas Sdn Bhd, a Ministry of Finance advisory company.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 3 October 2015, 6:00 am and is filed under
Malays
,
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


When sermons become hate speeches

Syerleena Abdul Rashid

The Malaysian Insider

2 October 2015

During the recent Aidil Adha celebrations, it was reported that the Pahang Mufti Department allowed some very detestable things to be broadcasted.

The sermon aimed at the opposition, in particularly; Malay Muslims who joined DAP by insinuating that they had gone against Islam by joining the political party.

The script stated, “The separation is because they priorities political parties, such as Umno, PAS, PKR and even the new Gerakan Harapan Baru more than Islam.”

“Furthermore, there are Muslims who joined DAP, which is clearly against Islam.”

Therein lays a problem most Malaysians are too afraid to admit: the contentious issue where sermons are being misused as political propaganda and have seemingly swayed from the authenticity of religious teachings.

Hate speeches are creations of the majority; those who are a part of a majority population and this happen when they begin to buy into the “minority fear”.

Their messages are often directed towards the minority and the contents are designed to degrade and impair.

In general, sermons or khutbah are regarded as oration or speech given by a member of a religious institution or clergy; topics and issue frequently emphasise on religious ethics or even moral standards that are in line with the religious teaching.

For Muslim, the khutbah originated from the practices of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), who had used this style or speech to instruct or command his followers at gatherings.

The objectives of sermons are still the same today as they were centuries ago; it exists to instruct religious values, inform public of laws and acceptable code of behaviour or ethnics within both past and present contexts.

The acceptance of fundamentalist teaching has become somewhat widespread only because such ideologies are sanctioned through their heavily backed structural organisations.

Elements that hinges on bigotry, intolerance, fear and suspicion have become increasingly common and too real.

Universally, religious bigotry is considered unethical and iniquitous because it strips others of their rights through persecution and discrimination

Here in the Malaysia, whenever we think of bigotry, we find ourselves thinking in terms of race or ethnicity and how can we not?

Decades of institutionalised racism and fear mongering have made us irresolute and suspicious; candid questions or bold remarks can brand us as infidels or as traitors.

Character assassination, harassment and false accusations have already begun to dominate the socio-political religious sphere of our nation.

Religion should be able to generate great personal devotion and passion while expressing respect others and accepting what makes us different.

These messages should motivate believers to devote their lives to easing out suffering and hardship, while treating other – even those who embrace different religious beliefs, with esteem.

Religion must never be about driving the spear of destruction and hatred into the very heart of humanity.

Mahatma Gandhi once said, “The pursuit of truth does not permit violence being inflicted on one’s opponent.”

Sermons filled with hate and other sorts of negative elements promote violence, encourage oppression and are demeaning in nature.

For a multi-religious nation like Malaysia, the practice of the religion is protected by the Constitution and because of this, there are simply no reasons for any kind of religious bigotry.

Inciting hatred at this level and encouraging members of public to disregard humility or common courtesy involves more than simply demonstrating that you dislike someone or something.

What we have on our hands, is the slow unraveling of dark sinister elements that out only outline the unabashed hypocrisy that has permeated into our society. – October 2, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 3 October 2015, 12:33 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A Chinese puzzle at Petaling Street

by Azly Rahman

Malaysiakini

1 Oct 2015

We live in a world of puzzles and mysteries and will probably die still unable to answer questions that live in us. We tell tales and conjure conspiracy theories to comfort our souls and to make sense of life in this theatre of the absurd designed by a deux ex machina we call by different names.

A puzzle is better than a mystery, however. At least we will still have the complete picture. Everyone has a piece of a puzzle. A mystery, on the other hand is not fun, though philosophically exciting. There are puzzles and mysteries in life: the missing airplane MH370 is a mystery puzzling us till today. Someone has the answer.

The brutal and unimaginable murder of the Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu, shot and blown to pieces with a C4 bomb, is a sure puzzle mysteriously hidden as truth by those who plotted it. So, a puzzle can be a mystery and a mystery puzzling.

Still with me?

The Chinese envoy’s visit to Petaling Street on Autumn Day of the Mainland China calendar. The warning not to incite racial violence. The timely stop to a Maruah Melayu rally. The confusion generated amongst those in the Foreign Ministry and the blaming game that ensured. These are puzzling things.

Then there is the mystery of this Chinese Petaling-Street intervention in the affairs of a sovereign nation-state; a mystery of an event for a world government’s diplomat that has mastered, like a Sifu-Mahaguru of Global Diplomacy since the times of Emperor Shih Huang Ti who build the Great Wall of China to stop the Berbers (now called ‘the barbarians’) out of the kingdom.

So – a mystery and a puzzle that is. Timely intervention by the modern Middle Kingdom and a time to flex a muscle on Malaysia. The puzzle and mystery unfolds.

There is also neither puzzle nor mystery of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak playing golf in Hawaii with President Barack Obama a few months ago. No big deal playing golf. But the mystery to Malaysians is what is being discussed though the mysterious little talks between the two world-class golfers in between walking around the green fields filling the holes with those little white balls.

The mystery of what deals are struck is puzzling when we talk about the Chinese sudden interest in spending an afternoon in Petaling Street, aborting the hulubalang Melayu, or Malay warriors, from running amuck and doing the latah at the same time and rempit-ing across the little pavements of Jalan Alor.

I am not puzzled why these three Malay words ‘amuck’, ‘latah’ and reportedly now, ‘lepak’ are honoured in the Oxford English Dictionary. I hope we will have the word ‘rempit’ next. Is this a mark of cultural recognition and representation? Maybe this too is a puzzle but I am not conjuring any conspiracy theory of why the ‘Orientalists’ are not leaving us ‘modern savages’ alone.

When we have ‘rempits’ in Oxford – well, in the dictionary I mean, we will have a cultural representation of the Malays we wished we would not have to live by . However, we do have some Oxford graduate some time ago who glorified Mat Rempits and ‘Mat Cemerlangs’ (‘Excellent and High Performing Lads and Lassies on Wheels’).

Puzzling?

Okay – let us make some connections between Petaling Street, golf-playing and the Global Euthanasia note (The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement or TPPA Malaysia is planning to sign.

Signing a national economic suicide note?

How do we explain Malaysia’s decision to still sign the TPPA agreement and sign a national economic suicide note, essentially? The 2008 Obama-nomics agenda for an overarching global economic domination is both a puzzle and a mystery, not only to Malaysians but also to Americans.

How is this, like the case of the bankrupted American energy giant ‘too-big-to-fall’ Enron, both a puzzle and a mystery? We have the actors all with weapons – the Americans with Texan Magnum, the Malays with the Taming Sari keris, and the Chinese with the Shaolin temple sword – all fighting in broad daylight in a puzzling and mysterious world adorned with commanding heights.

Here is a clue of the nature of today’s Asian politics with regard to the Chinese presence in the free word, as I quoted from the Sept 29 online issue of The Asia Sentinel, reporting on the Petaling Street walkabout episode by Ambassador Huang Huikang:

“… Huang’s action, although relatively mild and minor, is being regarded by critics as a disturbing example of the new assertiveness that was demonstrated on larger scale and a larger stage on Sept 24 in New York, when President Xi Jinping told the United Nations that China will contribute 8,000 troops for a UN peacekeeping standby force, giving it a dramatic new role as one of the largest forces in UN peacekeeping efforts…

“Just a week ago, China joined Malaysia for the first Association of South-East Asian Nations joint military exercise, sending 1,000 Chinese troops. There has also been a rising Chinese economic presence, with the Guangdong provincial government announcing recently that it intended to develop Malacca, now a sleepy coastal town, into a seaport to rival Singapore and build a series of industrial parks…” (Asia Sentinel, Sept 29, 2015)

Indeed, given enough understanding of the regional and global politics, of President Obama’s idea of an ‘Asia Pivot’, and the Obama agenda of the TPPA plan meant to block China’s economic hegemonic dominance in Asia, we may be able to make sense of the mystery and the puzzle. This is a lesson much needed for the lawmakers, especially from the Malay ruling parties, to handle diplomacy better.

I am still thinking of the words ‘amuck’, ‘latah’, ‘lepak’, and ‘rempit’. Certainly neither puzzling nor mysterious how they have become aspects of representation – of the Malays, unfortunately.

DR AZLY RAHMAN grew up in Johor Baru, Malaysia and holds a Columbia University (New York City) doctorate in International Education Development and Masters degrees in the fields of Education, International Affairs, Peace Studies and Communication. He will be pursuing his fifth Masters in Fine Arts, specialising in Fiction and Poetry Writing. He has taught more than 50 courses in six different departments and has written more than 350 analyses/essays on Malaysia. His 25 years of teaching experience in Malaysia and the United States spans over a wide range of subjects, from elementary to graduate education. He has edited and authored six books; Multiethnic Malaysia: Past, Present, Future (2009), Thesis on Cyberjaya: Hegemony and Utopianism in a Southeast Asian State (2012), The Allah Controversy and Other Essays on Malaysian Hypermodernity (2013), Dark Spring: Essays on the Ideological Roots of Malaysia’s General Elections-13 (2013), a first Malay publication Kalimah Allah Milik Siapa?: Renungan dan Nukilan Tentang Malaysia di Era Pancaroba (2014), and Controlled Chaos: Essays on Mahathirism, Multimedia Super Corridor and Malaysia’s ‘New Politics’ (2014). He currently resides in the United States where he teaches courses in Education, Philosophy, Cultural Studies, Political Science, and American Studies. His forthcoming book, One Malaysia, under God, Bipolar, a joint project between Gerakbudaya and World Wise Books of New Jersey, USA, is his seventh compilation of essays on Malaysian Cultural, Creative, and Critical Studies. He is currently working on his eighth book, on Gifted and Talented Education in Malaysia, honouring a prominent educator. Twitter, blog.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 4 October 2015, 7:06 pm and is filed under
Azly Rahman
,
International
,
Malays
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Bad week for rule of law and credibility and professionalism of key national institutions like police and judiciary contributing to the “Perfect Storm” confronting Malaysia

This is a bad week for the rule of law and the credibility and professionalism of key national institutions like the police and the judiciary with multiple developments.

I will just cite three instances.

The
first
 is mystery of the sudden and shocking sacking of the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail some two months before his compulsory retirement age and his  disappearance from the public domain in the wake of speculation that Gani was on the verge of filing charges against the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak for corruption in connection with the RM50 billion 1MDB scandal and that Najib had pre-empted Gani from prosecuting him by summarily sacking him as Attorney-General.

Gani’s sacking was followed by  inter-departmental internecine warfare with police arrests of key officials in the Attorney-General’s Chambers, Bank Negara and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission which degenerated into an intra-departmental police tussle, involving the No. 2 man in the Police Special Branch,  Abdul Hamid Bador.

What is truth and what is fiction?

Some light was glimpsed today when Malaysiakini reported that Abdul Hamid Bador,  former Special Branch deputy director, had in an open letter urged Gani to come out into the open to clarify the scandal surrounding the debt ridden 1MDB, which  Gani  had allegedly said was “crystal clear” before he was unceremoniously sacked.

Relating his last meeting with Gani before the latter was replaced, Hamid said the former AG had been vocal about the case, saying it was “crystal clear” but after his sacking, Gani had  “gone silent and totally mute”.

Abdul Hamid asked Gani:

 “What has happened to you? There are those who say you have received threats forcing you to back down.

“It is suggested (Gani) had some scandal or misconduct that could be used by them to discredit him in public.

“Come on, Gani! What is a small personal scandal, even if there is such, when compared to the horrific impact the 1MDB fiasco has unto the nation!

“People will easily forgive you. Come out and make a stand. All this while you are idolised as a tough fighter among the civil servants.”

I do not know what scandal Abdul Hamid is referring to, but I would endorse his statement that the people would be forgiving and support his call to Gani to come out of hiding to take a stand on the “horrific impact the 1MDB fiasco has unto the nation” –  against which Gani’s “scandal”, if any,  would pale into insignificance.

Gani would reach his compulsory retirement age on Oct. 6.  Will Gani stand and speak up in the national interest after Tuesday?

The
second
 is the statement yesterday by the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar urging the public not to trust media reports regarding a probe by the United States Department of Justice on the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, under its Kleptocracy Assets Recovery Initiative 2010.

It is exactly two weeks since the publication by New York Times report raising the serious question whether Malaysia has got a kleptocrat as a Prime Minister.

Is the IGP seriously suggesting that after a fortnight, the Malaysian Government, whether through Royal Malaysian Police, the Foreign Ministry or the powerful and well-funded Prime Minister’s Office, are incapable of establishing the veracity or otherwise of the NYT report?

Khalid advised all those seeking information on the NYT report to direct all enquiries to the US Government.

If Najib could not  get a specific “yes” or “no” from the Obama Government, what  is the use of the “special relationship” between Najib and US President Obama, particularly Najib’s boast that he is the only prime minister to be able to play golf with Obama (although this claim is being challenged as New Zealand Prime Minister John Key played golf with Obama a year earlier)?

Thirdly
, the Court of Appeal’s conflicting decision on Thursday from an earlier Court of Appeal judgment in the Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad case which had ruled that Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) requiring 10 days’ notice to the police for any assembly as unconstitutional.

On May 12, 2015, the Federal Court struck off the Attorney-General’s bid to appeal against the Nik Nazmi acquittal by the Court of Appeal, when the deputy public prosecutor concerned  conceded that as the Nik Nazmi case started at a sessions court, the final avenue was at the Court of Appeal.

With the Court of Appeal decision in April last year ruling that the 10 days’ notice required under Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) was unconstitutional, the only proper recourse for the government to reverse the Court of Appeal decision and to require 10-day notice to the police under the  PAA was to secure a constitutional amendment to this effect in Parliament – and not by way of a conflicting ruling in the R Yuneswaran case at the Court of Appeal which creates utter confusion as to what is the law on the question.

The Court of Appeal in the Yuneswaran case  should be bound by its earlier Nik Nazmi decision and not come out with a conflicting opinion, creating total confusion as there are now two conflicting Court of Appeal rulings on the same point of law in question.

Why has the Court of Appeal departed from the general rule of  being bound by its own decisions?

These three events have cast a grave shadow on public confidence on the rule of law and the  credibility, professionalism and even legitimacy of  key national institutions like the police and the judiciary – contributing to the “perfect storm” which is being formed out of the  multitude of political, economic, good governance and nation-building crises to  confront the nation.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 4 October 2015, 3:51 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Corruption
,
Judiciary
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia is for all Malaysians

— Tan Jin Huat

Malay Mail Online

October 3, 2015

OCTOBER 3 — The recent comments by Mohammed Yunos that have been reported in the press are uncalled for, offensive and not words from someone befitting the stature of a true leader. He was alleged to have said that Malaysia’s ethnic Chinese have the option of leaving for China if they are dissatisfied with their lives here. Further, he asserted that “They (the Chinese) have land or their country of origin China, and if anything were to happen to them they still have a place to rely on.”

I have often asked myself about the motivation behind such comments. What is there for him to gain from such comments?

From my observation of what has happened in our politics over the years, there may be a few guesses. First, those who shout loudest by playing the race card would like to position themselves for upward political mobility within their party. This has happened many times in the history of Umno. It is nothing new. Many Umno leaders have done that in the past. I can remember the speech of our current PM in his fiery speech about the Chinese at the TPCA stadium before Operation Lallang took place in 1987. Second, it is to gain political mileage within the party. In the past, those who have championed the race issue have risen quickly up the ranks of their party.

Third, the continual twisting of legitimate national issues in racial and/or religious issues seem to have a hidden political agenda. The current slew of comments has come out as a result of criticism of the Bersih 4 protest. The Bersih protest has nothing racial in its agenda but rather they have focused on legitimate national issues that need redressing. Bersih stood for (1) Holding free and fair elections; (2) Having a transparent government; (3) Strengthening the system of parliamentary democracy and (4) Saving the national economy. The red shirt protest or anti-Bersih protest has turned the issues into racial ones such as insulting Malays and Malay leadership. If Malay leadership has been “insulted” at Bersih, it is our PM because of the 1MDB issue. In any democracy, when a national leader is perceived to be corrupt with unexplained critical issues, then it is legitimate for the public to call for his resignation.

Then by twisting the issues and turning them into racial ones, I hazard a guess that the purpose is to achieve a two-fold aim: first, it is to purposely provoke other races especially the Chinese so that they will react in such a way that they will say and do the wrong thing. Then they can have a legitimate ground to pounce on them, and create a big hue and cry. However, so far there has been no real legitimate ground for Yunos to do so. So, I see this as a baiting game! Since the authorities have so far been seen to be selective in their prosecution, these people have acted with impunity and got away with what they have said and even threats; some wanting to slap the Chinese and others causing a riot in Petaling Street or Chinatown.

Next, there is the aim of shifting the blame to others and also diverting people’s attention from the real issues of the day. The diversion is needed to move the public attention from the need for proper and transparent governance in this country. But the urban public today are more discerning than before. The common proverb holds true: “You can fool some of the people some of the time. You can fool all people some of the time. But you cannot fool all the people all the time”.

Then, a religious justification is provided for the actions of the “red shirts”. Tan Sri Annuar Musa saying in a pro-Malay rally last month that acting in defence of Malay honour was permitted in Islam so long as other races were not oppressed in the process. Other Umno leaders are reported as saying that racism is in line with Islamic teachings.

Every day we see groups in Malaysia shouting their extreme ideology. The latest is the Hizbut Tahrir Malaysia (HTM) whose spokeman has said that “Malaysia is not just for Malays but for Muslims”. It was reported in Malay Mail Online on October 3 that “HTM aims to establish an Islamic state in Malaysia and a worldwide caliphate as part of its global network”. From the video clip, the waving of flags which had Arabic inscription and looked very similar to those flown by ISIS, an outsider would quite likely conclude that the group subscribe to an ISIS ideology. Now the religion card is being played by yet another group. It looks like this group if it continues will want to hijack what has been agreed in the Malaysia Agreement of 1963.

The basis for the formation of Malaysia is the Malaysia Agreement of 1963, not the Merdeka declaration of 1957, though it is part of historical legacy. In the formation of Malaysia, Malaya ceased to exist, and the Federation of Malaya Agreement has been superseded by the Malaysia Agreement. Hence, Malaysia belongs to all its citizens whether they be Malays, the indigeneous people of Sabah and Sarawak, Indian, Chinese, and others.

What are the implications of the Malaysia Agreement?

First, Tanah Melayu has ceased to exist as rightly pointed out by Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz recently.

Second, All Malaysian citizens are not pendatang. Pendatang are those who are not citizens of Malaysia. In fact, every race whether Malay, Indians or Chinese were once pendatang. They originated elsewhere but have made Malaysia their home. We can easily think of our national leaders as having their origin from elsewhere. We can think of many Malay leaders as having originally originated from different parts of Indonesia or other parts of the world. Just think of our PM Mahathir, Badawi, Najib Razak, Zahid, Khir Toyo, Sanusi Junid among so many others in UMNO. Even our Tunku Abdul Rahman had Siamese blood.

To those who are shouting out the pendatang slogan, if you have pendatang roots and have become Malaysian citizens in the past, why are you a hypocrite by calling others pendatang when you yourself have pendatang status previously? To those so will create racial animosity and disharmony, which has been happening over the years. It is one reason why those whom Umno leaders call pendatang are not voting BN anymore in the General Election. It is because of such talk the greatest losers in the BN are the MCA, MIC and Gerakan, though they have a few good leaders.

It is best to drop such racial slurs or talk altogether when talking to one another as fellow Malaysians. Harping on these issues will not help the race relations in this country. I am very sad indeed that it is those in political power that are stoking the racial fires.

If we do not stop now, it is a matter of time that we will descend down the road like Syria. This is an appeal to the powers that be to stop before the downslide gets worse. I appeal to the powers that be because they have the power to control the situation which they are not doing from my perspective. Do the right and good thing for the sake of the country, not just for the sake of personal interest.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 4 October 2015, 7:41 am and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Whether Najib is ousted as PM or UMNO replaced, Malay political power is not threatened as a new PM will be a Malay and the new coalition will be Malay-dominated reflecting Malaysia’s demography

Former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir in his talk at the hi-tea organized by the Pusat Bandar Taman Cempaka UMNO Branch yesterday urged  Malays to emulate their Chinese counterparts in making their case against Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak by transcending party lines when their interests are under threat.

Mahathir is mistaken in his interpretation of the motives and meaning of the results of the 13th General Elections in 2013 when he implied that  the Chinese voters “forget their party interests” if the interests of their race are threatened.

For Mahathir’s information, national interests transcending communal interests were the primary consideration for  the Malaysian Chinese who voted in the 13th General Election – not just for DAP, but for Pakatan Rakyat candidates including candidates from PKR and PAS.

This was why the Chinese voters elected Malay MPs from Pakatan Rakyat parties, rejecting Chinese candidates from MCA.

This is what a mature democracy and a Malaysian-centric electorate should do, placing national interests above personal, party and communal considerations.

We have just marked the 58th year of Merdeka and 52nd year of the formation of Malaysia.

Is it still too premature to expect an increasing number of  Malaysians who are  capable of rising above personal, party and communal interests to be guided and motivated by national interests?

We had many  towering Malaysians in the early decades of the nation who rose above personal and ethnic considerations to serve the nation.

We just lost one such towering Malaysian, the late Yuen Yuet Leng, one of the nation’s top cops who had  a bullet lodged near his heart for more than half-a-century till his last breath as a testimony of his professionalism and patriotism.

Why have towering Malaysians decreased over the decades as if becoming an extinct species, with more and more becoming just Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans and Dayaks, even ethnic champions,  instead of becoming Malaysians, towering or otherwise?

The 34-hour Bersih 4 rally on the eve of the 58th Merdeka anniversary was a great milestone in Malaysian nation-building, where hundreds of thousands of Malaysians regardless of race, religion, region, age, gender or even politics converged in Kuala Lumpur for a common national cause transcending race – demand for  good governance and clean, free and fair elections.

Although unlike Bersih 1, 2 and 3 rallies where the Malays were a clear majority, Malays for various reasons were in a minority in Bersih 4 rally but  doubled  their representation from 20% on the first day to 40% on the second day,  the “yellow shirt” gathering was completely different from the Sept. 16 Red Shirts rally in terms of ethnic and national consciousness.

In the 34-hour Bersih 4 rally, whether on the first day when Malays were 20% or the second day when Malays doubled to 40%, there was no tinge of racialism  or racial consciousness, and no one, whether Chinese, Malays, Indians, Kadazans or Ibans felt threatened or behaved in a threatening manner on account of his or her race!

Instead of praising and celebrating the maturing of Malaysian nation-building and democracy, where hundreds of thousands of race and religion could gather peacefully for a common national purpose without any racial fear or tensions whatsoever, the  UMNO/BN government decided to launch a campaign to demonise, defame and communalise the Bersih 4 rally, with MCA and Gerakan leaders instigating UMNO extremist fringes to respond in a provocative and  racist manner, like the Sept. 16 Red Shirts Rally.

The 4-hour Sept. 16 Red Shirt rally was clearly a totally different kettle of fish, as right from the announcement of the planned rally after the 34-hour Bersih 4 rally, the atmosphere was thick with  threats of racial incidents and conflicts, accompanied by graphic images of a racial “bloodbath”, causing Malaysians all over the country in the following fortnight  to worry whether would be  racial clashes in Kuala Lumpur on Sept. 16.

If there had been towering Malaysians in the  Cabinet,  Ministers whether from UMNO or the Barisan Nasional coalition would have visited Jalan Petaling to calm the jittery traders and businesses and assure them of  peace and order instead of the  fear and insecurity enveloping the area, leading to the closure of 500 shops and over 700 trades in Jalan Petaling on Sept. 16 for safety reasons.

No Minister, even from MCA and Gerakan, visited Jalan Petaling in the week leading to the Sept. 16 Red Shirts Rally to calm the businesses and traders, but  UMNO Ministers and Deputy Ministers were conspicuous in their attendance of Sept. 16 Red Shirts Rally to give their support!

With the approach of the 60th Merdeka anniversary, the time has come for the re-emergence of towering Malaysians like Yuen Yuet Leng, who had before his death  confided to his old friends his lament and disappointment at the fractured state of racial relations in the country.

Malaysians, and in particular leaders in all sectors of the country, should cease and desist from trying to communalise issues and events in the country.

For instance, the hottest topic in conversational circuits in the country today is whether there would be “no confidence motion” against the Prime Minister and whether  Najib could survive the motion, a topic made more intriguing with the open support by the former longest-serving MCA President Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik to Mahathir’s call for the ouster of Najib as Prime Minister.

Najib may be falsely confident that he would not have to face a “no confidence” vote in Parliament, believing that he had taken adequate safeguards by ensuring that the Speaker would not allow such a motion and that he had the unquestioned loyalty of UMNO/BN MPs with promises of more financial allocations for them.

But Najib may be counting his chickens before they are hatched.

Be that  as it may, there should not be any attempt to communalise any “no confidence” against Najib.

Whether Najib is ousted as Prime Minister or UMNO replaced as the leading political party in the government coalition, Malay political power is not threatened as a new Prime Minister  will be a Malay and new coalition will be Malay-dominated reflecting Malaysia’s demography.

As UMNO veteran Tengku Razaleigh said before the Sept. 16 Red Shirts Rally, he did not know where the perceived threats to Malays were coming from when the government is headed by a Malay, state governments headed by Malays with the exception of Penang, the civil service is mostly made up of Malays, the army are mostly Malays and there are also the Malay rulers.

Malaysia’s  foremost civil rights activist,  Zainah Anwar, had also recently questioned where does the “threat to the Malays” come from after 58 years of UMNO rule, why, after more than four decades of the New Economic Policy, are (i)  75.5 per cent of those at the bottom Malays; (ii) some 90 per cent of the unemployable university graduates Malays; and (iii) of the RM54 billion worth of shares pumped to Malay individuals and institutions between 1984 and 2005, only RM2 billion remain in Malay hands today.

Can Malaysians move beyond race to the Malaysian nation?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 4 October 2015, 11:43 am and is filed under
Mahathir
,
Malaysian Dream
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Can an UMNO/BN leader declare that Najib should step down as Prime Minister without  being disciplined or sacked for breach of party discipline?

Two former top  Barisan Nasional leaders have openly called for Datuk Seri Najib Razak to step down as Prime Minister – Tun Mahathir, former longest-serving Prime Minister and UMNO President for 22 years and Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik,  MCA’s former longest-serving President for 17 years.

Although the incumbent MCA Ministers, Wee Ka Siong and Ong Ka Chuan have in double-quick time dissociated the MCA leadership from Ling’s stand, there is no doubt that Mahathir and Ling’s call on Najib to step down as Prime Minister has struck a great resonance among the ordinary UMNO and MCA membership.

This support for the call on  Najib to step down as Prime Minister  will increase when Najib continues to be incapable of coming clean on the two mega scandals of the RM50 billion 1MDB and RM2.6 billion “donation” in Najib’s personal banking accounts – compounded by Najib being the  first Prime Minister or President not only in Asia but  the world to be probed as a kleptocrat by the US Department of Justice (DOJ)  under its Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative 2010.

It is a  matter of grave national concern that two weeks after the New York Times first reported about the Najib  probe by  US DOJ under the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative, neither the Prime Minister nor the Malaysian government could categorically come out with a denial.

Issues of public credibility and integrity of Malaysian leaders have reached such a parlous stage that the double-quick dissociation of MCA Ministers from Ling’s support of Mahathir’s call on Najib to step down as Prime Minister immediately raises the question whether the stand of MCA Ministers had anything to do with the scandal of the  RM2.6 billion “donation” scandal in Najib’s personal banking accounts, as the monies were alleged to have been farmed out to UMNO/Barisan Nasional leaders during the 13th General Elections.

Did Wee and Ong receive any funding from the RM2.6 billion “donation” for the 13th General Election, and if so, how much; and how much did the MCA receive as a whole from Najib from the RM2.6 billion “donation” for the last general election  and whether the MCA leadership is capable of giving a full statement of such funding from Najib’s RM2.6 billion “donation”.

Coming back to the original question – would any UMNO/BN leader or MP be blacklisted and disciplined if anyone of them declare support for the Mahathir/Ling call for Najib to step down as Prime Minister.

In the middle of last month, Malcolm Turnbull became Australia’s 29th Prime Minister replacing Tony Abbot in a dramatic leadership change which took place in a matter of hours.

During question time on Monday, 14th September 2015, Turnball paid a visit to Abbot requesting a leadership ballot on Tuesday morning, but Abbot decided on a leadership ballot the same night, which was won by Turnbull in a 54-44 vote among the Liberal Parliamentarians.

Although the political system in Malaysia is not the same as  the Australian one, the question is whether the 54 Liberal MPs who voted for a change of Australian Prime Minister could have been suspended or sacked from the Party by Abbot to forestall any majority win by Turnbull?

With the Australian example in mind, will any UMNO/BN leader and MP who support the Mahathir/Ling call for Najib to step down as Prime Minister, and expresses his or her stand in public, be  liable to party discipline, whether suspension or expulsion?

For that matter, will any UMNO/BN MP who expresses support for a no confidence motion in Parliament against Najib, regardless of who moved the motion, could be held  for breach of party discipline and liable to party suspension or expulsion?

These are the unchartered political waters which Malaysians are entering.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 5 October 2015, 12:00 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Dear government in waiting

Praba Ganesan

Malay Mail Online

October 1, 2015

OCT 1 — This is when they say the abyss stares back at you.

The purgatory which politicians outside Barisan Nasional (BN) are residing in presently is fossilising. How else can those bequeathed with political gifts — a slipping economy, GST squeezing the humour out of lower income homes, misfiring ministers and a prime minister facing heat missile after missile often from a predecessor — struggle? They seem to be buried by the weight of zero-expectation when they should be readying for the parade.

It should be Hari Raya daily in the opposition camp, but instead doubts fill their days and nights.

Who should be partners? Everybody.

Result: Every day they find different ways to defend the old Pakatan Rakyat, in a maddening effort to force a square peg in a round hole.

Who should lead? Why Anwar Ibrahim of course, for every other choice is flawed.

Opinion: Anwar should be free but the country is larger than the opposition, it is certainly larger than the former leader of the opposition. Focus on ideas not personalities, otherwise can’t tell Pakatan’s avatar apart from BN’s.

Reality: They are so unsure of winning the next general election that it’s not playing Peeping Tom with the abyss anymore, they are halfway into the abyss.

Two whoppers

Let’s begin with the puzzles if we want to help the opposition: How to keep a clear opposition coalition in Semenanjung (Peninsular Malaysia) and what will win over the Borneo people from BN’s grip?

PAS will never play ball. They have an agenda and it has to them greater purpose than the trivialities of Malaysian politics. Nasrudin Hassan Tantawi, Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man and Nik Abduh Nik Aziz — without mentioning the president Hadi Awang — are indifferent to temporal matters when they transgress on their beliefs. They can’t understand why the rest of us can’t believe like them.

Therefore, trying to look for a point of agreement is akin to willingly bend over backwards for a partner already convinced you are wrong. In his mind, he is right, you are wrong.

Everyone outside PAS is wrong. Therefore, they will keep praying till the rest see the light. Which explains why those seeking means to tie Islamism, modernism and stability to govern together after experience in government have left the party.

Now for that two-hour flight.

Sabah and Sarawak is not about winning the majority of the seats there, but to win enough to negate BN’s absolute advantage in Dewan Rakyat. Borneo despises Semenanjung (Peninsular Malaysia) dominance. Everything across from the South China Sea is associated with half a century of subjugation, without distinction. The fear can only dissipate if control is transferred, which is why despite all the Borneo based parties yielding little influence in Putrajaya they are phenomenally preferable to any Semenanjung-based party. The fear is not baseless.

I forget the number of times Semenanjung-based Pakatan leaders observe that they should be driving Sarawak or Sabah forward. PKR for instance has always favoured Muslim leaders as default for Borneo. Reminds me that not long ago the British argued Malaya was better in their hands than in the local hands.

Trust is not built by promises, it is built by action. Pakatan needs Borneo-based leaders in the driving seat over there. It’s not rocket science.

Street brawl, not Marquess of Queensberry Rules

If tough decisions are made there will be three-way fights— you can cringe now.

The unspoken rule has been that BN cannot be overtaken in multi-corner fights. BN have too large a base is the unchallenged paradigm.

I posit that things may have changed since, and mostly in the last decade.

BN’s “base” claim works side by side with the idea that the opposition only receives the “anything but Umno” vote.

What is the “anything but Umno” vote? Since independence, BN — The Alliance before — while winning comfortably never crossed the two thirds vote numbers even if they won more than two-thirds of the seats. In the tougher elections they only just managed to cross the 50 per cent threshold.

Because there are many Malaysians who can’t even in their worst days stomach BN — which belongs to Umno. All opposition parties collect these votes though the distribution is indeterminate.

Here it’s pertinent to refer Britain — the home of first past the post method— about multi-corner fights. Both the Conservatives and Labour Party prefer first past the post, because despite five-way fights everywhere, they have enough of a base to edge past those other than themselves. Once it is preferential or proportional voting, the smaller players will become relevant like in Indonesia and Germany. And they will be emboldened. If there is substantial enough a base then multi-cornered fights are manageable. That’s the lesson for Malaysia.

PKR, DAP and the mutineers at Amanah may have a base built since 2008. What they may need is confidence in themselves rather than reliance on reluctant, nay, suspect partners.

Three-way fights are mortal wounds only if the new coalition relies on the population’s aversion of BN rather than their own value proposition to pull votes.

Slow West

Neither does appeals to the West end our misery.

International relations is about self-interest.

Which is why Israel always matters to America, and Malaysia not so much. If there was concern it will be about having a stable partner since we affect the Straits of Malacca and the South China Sea, with a role in the Tran Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

The guy in power is who they appeal to unless the other guy out of power appears to be a few inches away from power.

The US is not alone in that think.

If Malaysia’s opposition wants serious attention, then they have to show they are serious and with real intent.

The world warmed up to Barack Obama even before he became the Democratic Party’s candidate, and that is largely because they sensed a winner. It is not that there has never been a black academic liberal with a penchant for geopolitics willing to engage the world. Obama was the first with a winning ticket.

Opposition leaders are serving their interests better by zeroing in on the votes they have not than the charity of foreign friends for moral validation. Morals are second place to the morale of the people at home.

Move forward, not rue the past

Pakatan, or the coterie of parties minus PAS, are at a crossroad.

Half-hoping that dejected partners are willing to endure enough to carry on together even if not altogether sold on the core principles of the coalition is irresponsible. That’s just inviting perpetual renegotiations which inundate the landscape and hampers a consistent gameplan for the general election.

Decisions have to be about winning not about being morally superior.  So what if the present government has lost the moral authority. The people of Malaysia seek leadership and comfort in knowing we are on the right track. Winners lead, while the righteous are welcome to prime positions in the critics’ bench.

The opposition has to paint the picture of their reality for Malaysia.

So that Malaysia matches its promise.

To be a vibrant democracy with a thriving economy, a leading light of multiculturalism and pluralism, a reminder for the globe that people not labels drive prosperity.

Tell us that vision. We like to know what is wrong with the present picture, but we like to know more what is next. And that you have that boldness to carry a nation to that vision.

Try that, might get some votes that way.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 5 October 2015, 7:20 am and is filed under
Pakatan Harapan
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


For some Muslims, life in Malaysia is like living under a microscope

by Boo Su-Lyn

Malay Mail Online

October 5, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 5 — Several Muslims say Islamic laws should not be used to regulate their personal lives in areas like sex, what they eat, or even what they read, after a publisher failed to challenge at the Federal Court a Shariah enactment used to seize a book on Islam.

Communications manager Ahmad Ariff Azmi, 27, who is currently living in Australia, noted that Muslims in Malaysia suffer from restrictions, such as identifying with alternative schools of thought as religious authorities only allow the practice of the Shafi’i school.

“I don’t think faith needs a regulatory authority,” Ahmad Ariff told Malay Mail Online, when asked if Shariah laws should not regulate areas like praying, drinking, dressing or having sex.

“There are too much politicking and corruption rife in Malaysian governance that can also be found with the individuals governing these religious institutions. It is Allah’s law; you as the individual have to self-regulate and interpret within yourself to what you think will please the Creator and ultimately gain your eternal salvation,” he added.

Malay Mail Online polled half a dozen Malaysian-Muslims living here and overseas, most of whom said a Muslim’s personal life should not be regulated by the state, even as Shariah laws across the country mandate fines and imprisonment for things like skipping prayers, not fasting during Ramadan, or even caning for adultery or consuming alcohol.

Different freedom for Muslims and non-Muslims

Bar Council constitutional law committee chair Firdaus Husni said the freedom for Muslims and non-Muslims “differs in varying degrees” due to different existing regulations and restrictions.

She noted that there are permissible restrictions to one’s freedom to speech and expression, such as Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution that allows the enactment of laws to control the “propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam”.

“It is however important to note that following from a string of decided cases, it has been held that while one’s fundamental rights under the Federal Constitution must be interpreted generously, any permitted restriction to an individual’s constitutionally guaranteed freedom must be read restrictively,” Firdaus told Malay Mail Online.

Former law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim lamented Tuesday that Muslims in Malaysia do not enjoy constitutional liberties, following the apex court’s decision to uphold the constitutionality of Section 16 of the Shariah Criminal Offences (Selangor) Enactment 1995 that makes it a crime for Muslims to publish publications deemed to be against Islamic law.

The court ruling means that ZI Publications director Ezra Zaid will have to stand trial in the Shariah court, who faces a fine not exceeding RM3,000 or two years’ prison, or both, if he is found guilty under Section 16(1) of the Selangor Shariah law.

ZI Publications and Ezra had challenged the Shariah law after Selangor religious authorities seized from their office in 2012 180 copies of “Allah, Kebebasan dan Cinta”, a Malay translation of Irshad Manji’s book titled “Allah, Liberty and Love”. Manji is a Canadian Muslim journalist, who’s also a lesbian feminist.

Production manager Hazily Hariss said he felt that Muslims in Malaysia have less freedom than non-Muslims, pointing to “most” Malaysian Muslims who want to be “perfect” Muslims and who try to Arabicise everything.

“And for that reason, the ones in power put everyone else under a microscope to make sure we obey their rules and ideals,” Hazily, 28, told Malay Mail Online.

He also said Muslims should not be regulated in areas like consuming alcohol, or how they pray, dress, or have sex, stressing that “everything and anything a person does is between them and God”.

Should be free to read anything

Haslinah Yacob, who is pursuing a Master’s in counselling, said Muslims should be free to read any book on religion, be it Islam or other faiths.

“The Quran tells us to think…not to follow blindly. That is what I am doing. I want to see available literatures. If no religion can withstand being ‘picked /analysed’, then it is the wrong one,” Haslinah, 54, told Malay Mail Online.

She cited Chapter 10, verse 100 of the Quran that states: “And it is not for a soul to believe except by permission of Allah, and He will place defilement upon those who will not use reason”.

Economics student Adam, who is currently studying in Australia, said Shariah law should not regulate any “personal” matters.

“More pressing matters like disputes in marriage contracts, laws of business transactions and the likes are more necessary matters that should be regulated by Shariah law,” said Adam (a pseudonym).

The 24-year-old Malaysian Muslim also questioned Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution, one of the provisions used in the Federal Court ruling on the Ezra case, that states that laws can be enacted to “control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief” among Muslims.

“Why shouldn’t we allow propagation of any religious doctrine or belief?” he said. “I should be confident enough in my knowledge of my own religion to know that questions that MIGHT arise from said propagations are questions asked to strengthen one’s faith, not to weaken it.”

Own way of enforcing Islam

Blogger Shahirah Elaiza Wan Hassan, 28, who is currently living in New Zealand, said Muslims in Malaysia have as much freedom as non-Muslims to pursue an education, to work, or to live peacefully.

“Every Islamic country has its own way of implementing Islam and incorporating Islam into the governance of a country. Furthermore, every Muslim individual is going to have their own personal journey. It’s important to accept nuances in the way Islam is practiced by everyday, flawed human beings,” Shahirah Elaiza, who is doing a Master’s in media studies, told Malay Mail Online.

She also stressed that people should not be prohibited from reading books or materials that critique Islam, noting the accessibility to such ideas on the internet.

“I personally believe texts or individuals that challenge our beliefs (in a respectful manner) can help strengthen our faith as Muslims and even correct our understanding of Islam while helping us to keep an open mind, especially in terms of understanding nuances in the way Islam is practiced and of course, the way other faiths are practiced too,” she said.

Gay Muslims restricted

Tnassri (a pseudonym), however, said he is restricted by “so many” rules and fears the unknown as a Muslim gay man.

“Gay clubs used to get raided on a higher rate compared to non-gay clubs, which now has led to there being only one gay bar left,” Tnassri, a 30-year-old who works in PR, told Malay Mail Online.

“The rate of HIV gay men is at an all time high and majority of them are Malay men. Why? Because of religion. They fear they will be condemned for being who they are that they choose to do normal adult things in hiding and don’t even want to get tested regularly, in fear that people will know they are gay,” he added.

Religious authorities should “act like decent human beings and not interfere in people’s private affairs”, according to Tnassri.

“Islam shouldn’t be forced onto an individual,” he said.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 5 October 2015, 8:49 am and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Has Najib lost confidence in Saifuddin as CEO of Global Movement of Moderates and looking for a new candidate?

The mounting pressure for action to be taken against Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah, including open calls for his expulsion from UMNO, raises the question whether the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak has lost confidence in Saifuddin as CEO of Global Movement of Moderates and is looking for a replacement for Saifuddin.

This is one of the items Najib should clarify today on his return from Expo Milano 2015.

At the beginning of  his fourth speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday, Najib recounted how five years ago he had stood before the same assembly and called for a Global Movement – of Moderates of all religions and all countries – to marginalize extremists, reclaim the centre, and shape the agenda towards peace and pragmatism.

He said Malaysia had followed up his call with both practical action and by building intellectual capacity.

What has Malaysia to show in terms of the “practical action” and the building of “intellectual capacity” for a home-grown Movement of Moderates?

Precious little in the past five years since Najib’s first speech to the UN on the subject  – as all we can see is the local  incorporation of the Global Movement of Moderates (GMM), the appointment of Saifuddin Abdullah as its CEO and the hosting of conferences, lectures, roundtable discussions by GMM which seemed to be held in a vacuum and going nowhere.

In the past two years,  the virtues of moderation, tolerance and peace are in retreat in Malaysia, with extremism and the politics of hatred, intolerance and falsehood  rearing their ugly heads resulting in the worst racial and religious polarization in the nation’s history with incidents like the extremist, racist and highly provocative Sept. 16 Red Shirts Rally.

Is this why the Prime Minister has not responded to my call that the government commission the Global Movement of Moderates to report on who were the extremists and who were the  moderates in the  events surrounding the 34-hour Bersih 4 rally and the 4-hour Sept. 16 Red Shirts Rally in time for the 2016 budget debate in Parliament beginning on Oct. 26?

Will Najib ensure that this proposal is tabled for decision by the Cabinet on Wednesday?

The GMM should also be tasked to inquire into the serious allegation made by the former Deputy Director of Special Branch, Abdul Hamid Bador that the Chinese are targeted to divert attention from the RM50 billion 1MDB controversy.

Hamid alleged that those in power would do “anything” to take attention away from the 1MDB issue, including playing the race card.

Abdul Hamid said: “They have confused the people by claiming that there is a plot to topple the government. Who wants to topple the government? They claim it’s the Chinese. Suddenly from a criminal breach of trust issue, this has become a racial issue.”

If Hamid is right and  true, those in power in Malaysia have violated the ASEAN Langkawi Declaration on the Global Movement of Moderates adopted by ASEAN leaders in Langkawi on 28th April 2015 which committed all ASEAN governments and leaders to recognize and promote moderation as an all-encompassing approach embracing democratic values, good governance, rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, equitable and inclusive economic growth, tolerance and mutual respect and adherence to social justice.

How can Malaysia, as  ASEAN Chair and the host country where the ASEAN Langkawi Declaration of the Global Movement of Moderates was adopted less than six months ago, be the first to violate the Declaration when Malaysia is to host the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur next month?

The mounting call for the sacking of Saifuddin from UMNO is clearly one of the forms of extremism which the GMM  should be marginalising and eliminating.

Is Saifuddin’s work as CEO of GMM  and that of his successor to be confined only to UMNO/BN or pro-UMNO/BN circles, which is an oxymoron as “moderates” in  UMNO/BN or pro-UMNO/BN circles are  a rare and may soon become extinct species, with the overwhelming majority of them cowed by hawks like Datuk Tajuddin Abdul Rahman, who  would have no qualms in committing excesses and other forms of extremism in our plural society?

Clarifications from Najib on these questions are urgent and pressing,  before GMM goes the way to oblivion like his other initiatives, such as his  signature policy of 1Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 5 October 2015, 7:02 am and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tajuddin should focus on his job, not make racist remarks

Syerleena Abdul Rashid

Ma
laysiakini

2 Oct 2015

“Nak kena lempang macam itu,”
 those were the words Deputy Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Minister Tajuddin Abdul Rahman uttered recently. The Pasir Salak MP articulated such bigoted statements as a response to China’s Ambassador to Malaysia Huang Huikang visit to Petaling Street.

He warned further, “I want to warn the Chinese Malaysians, don’t think when you have a problem, you want to complain – just a little bit also complain – that there will be people to protect them.”

Two other BN component parties – MCA and Gerakan has since issued statements of their own; the former demanding an apology for singling out Malaysian Chinese and the latter threatening to deliver a “flying kick which is harder and longer than his hand”.

A politician of Tajuddin’s stature should have exuded some class in his response. No doubt, these are trying times but politics is about respecting the relationship between society and the government.

Politicians play an important role in society and are regarded as representatives of the people – individuals who are involved in influencing public policy and decision making in government.

The off colour remarks made by Tajuddin only proves that the elite are too disconnected from reality. Being the deputy agriculture and agro-based industry, it would be in our country’s best interest if he could stay on topic, focus on the economy and formulate solid policies that can improve our waning agriculture and agro-based industries.

Agriculture was once a primary driving for in Malaysia’s economy but is presently a minor sector which accounts only 7.1 percent of Malaysia’s GDP in 2014 and provides 13.3 percent employment (which is roughly 11.1 million Malaysians).

The ministry is responsible to strategizing, planning policies as well as alternative development programs that can overcome several of the prevalent challenges that exist in the industry.

Studies show that over 66 percent of those employed in agro-based industries are over 50 years old and this simply shows that there is an employment demand gap left void by young Malaysians. (According to statistics, 161,000 graduates or 8.8 per cent of youths, aged between 20 and 24 years, are currently unemployed).

Additionally, our country is also faced with highly competitive international markets; such is the case for rubber, where Malaysia is already losing to lower cost producers like Thailand and Indonesia. Whereas for the locals, the unsustainable food production system has lead to the grim realities concerning food security and nutrition we know too well.

I would like to reiterate that these are the challenges the ministry and especially the deputy minister must try to overcome first and foremost.

Winston Churchill once said that “a politician must have the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year, and to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen”.

Hence, politics is meant for those who possess integrity and the dexterity to achieve results and improving the lives for those they represent.

Politics isn’t meant for inept and corrupt individuals; and it certainly isn’t meant for those who assume ‘slap-happy’ bravados can win the hearts of their constituents.

SYERLEENA ABDUL RASHID is DAP Youth Bukit Bendera secretary, DAP Wanita Bukit Bendera political education director and MBPP councillor.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 5 October 2015, 8:38 am and is filed under
Syerleena Abdul Rashid
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why there is no academic freedom in Malaysia

– Murray Hunter

The Malaysian Insider

5 October 2015

The Malaysian government is trying to develop the country into an education hub.

Most universities seek awards of excellence and to get their institutions into the rankings.

However, even with these aspirations, Malaysia’s overall rankings have been slipping over the last decade, while many other universities within the region have been rising dramatically.

As a consequence, Malaysian universities have been open to both domestic and international criticism, which has often resulted in successive ministers of education defend their standing.

The government is pursuing new reforms and just recently released the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 with much fanfare. However, something conspicuously absent from these proposed reforms is more academic freedom.

Academic freedom of expression is extremely low in Malaysia.

There are two parts to the concept.

The first is about institutional freedom where a university should be autonomous, with full accountability, where the university administration is free to make independent decisions about mission, governance, hiring of academic leaders, academic and non-academic staff, selecting students, and introducing new programs and courses.

The second aspect is individual academic freedom, where there is a climate promoting freedom to teach what an academic thinks is right, freedom of expression within the public domain on issues, freedom to associate with others, with integrity.

In Malaysian public universities today, both staff and students are formally forbidden, except with permission from their respective vice-chancellors, to express opinions publicly, write about, or organise or participate in forums about politics, religion (particularly Islam) and education. They are not allowed to criticise their own institutions.

The ministry has given directives that no staff should talk to the media on sensitive issues without permission. This ban does not just include the areas mentioned above, but also environmental issues like haze.

The Malaysian Bar Association claims that this directive breaches Section 10 of the Malaysian Constitution guaranteeing free speech.

In addition to the formal directives, informal bans exist on research and discussion about ethnic conflict and local corruption, especially if research findings might raise questions about government policy.

Sanctions for violating these rules and norms range from rebukes from administrators, to the loss of jobs through the non-renewal of work contracts, to prosecution in the court system through sedition laws, etc.

The use of teaching contracts is particularly powerful in curbing free speech of academics, where academics fear they will not get extensions if they don’t carry favour with administrators.

Malaysian academics even need permission from the vice-chancellor to attend any conference and travel outside their own state within Malaysia.

All university staff and students are required to swear allegiance to the Barisan Nasional government, rather than the constitution of Malaysia or the Agong.

They must promise to follow directions of their immediate superiors and the government of the day without question or criticism.

Some academics tried to oppose the swearing of allegiance to the government a few years ago, to no avail.

The fact is, today Malaysian public universities don’t make independent decisions about their respective missions, hiring of academic leaders, and recruitment of staff, student intake, and the introduction of new programmes and courses. This is still completely in the hands of the ministry.

The Education Ministry strictly controls what courses any university may offer, and all curriculum must be approved prior to teaching.

The ministry has even specified some compulsory subjects that must be taken by all students in Malaysia such as Asian Civilization and Malay Studies. Some argue these subjects are controversial in the religious views put forward.

Malaysian universities are part of the apparatus of government rather than being an independent source of ideas and policy.

There have been numerous cases where students and academics have faced intimidation and other sanctions, including prosecution for expression in the media or organising events which university administrators don’t like.

Recently at the International Islamic University near Kuala Lumpur, two students were given a one-year suspension each for organising a meeting on campus where an opposition politician was invited to speak.

Earlier this year, Dr Khoo Ying Hooi, a senior lecturer in the Department of International and Strategic Studies at Universiti Malaya (UM), was put under criminal investigation for possible violation of defamation laws, after she wrote an article in The Malaysian Insider titled “Who owns the police?”

Late in 2014, eight students from UM faced disciplinary proceedings for their involvement in a rally on campus for the then Malaysian opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Dr Abdul Aziz Bari, a law professor at Universiti Selangor (Unisel), was charged with sedition over his statements and articles written about the constitutional limitations and powers of the Sultan of Selangor.

Another academic, Dr Azmi Sharom, a law lecturer from UM, was also charged with sedition after commenting publicly about the constitutional crisis in Selangor.

A group of students from UM last year faced disciplinary action after they protested against the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) during a visit by US President Barack Obama to the campus.

Just recently, all staff and students were warned not to attend the Bersih 4 rally held around Malaysia on August 29 and 30.

And the list goes on.

Most academics fear the consequences and repercussions of speaking out about public issues, unless their views are favourable to the BN government. Cooperation with opposition held governments in Kelantan and Penang is also taboo. Most academics choose to remain silent.

However, one of the more disturbing things is that some local academics go out of their way to apologise for the lack of academic freedom in pseudo-research, where for example, the issue with academic freedom with academic responsibility would be linked, making an underlying assumption that academics cannot be trusted to be academically responsible.

This is probably best epitomised by a comment by a Malaysian academic “Alang Ahmad” on the Scholars and Researchers for Academic Freedom in Malaysia (Saraf) on Facebook, where he said:

“Sorry, we UiTM lecturers owe our livelihood to the BN govt. Besides unity of Malays has greater importance than the silly wishes of some juveniles” (November 25, 2011).

Some academics have followed their superiors’ agenda by creating research that supports government ideas and points of view like Ketuanan Melayu. Such a case was where the academic from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (USM) used an extended concept of “Nam Tien”, a term used to refer to the migration from the Red river delta to the Mekong Delta during the 11th and 18th century to argue that the Malay race has for thousands of years been a target of invasion, due to envy by other races.

Even more disturbing is the reluctance of university academics to speak out against their superiors, leaving the door open for university management to mismanage and flaunt the system financially.

The author was told by a state director of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) that he has tried for years to get university staff to report their superiors for corruption, but been unable to get anybody to stand forward and make a formal report.

Dr Ibrahim Ahmad, the deputy vice-chancellor if Inti-Laureate International University claims that the Malays are “cultural prisoners” and are not courageous in speaking out due to the norms of society.

He goes on to say that this weakness is allowing extremism to creep in and preventing Malays advancing.

Public universities in Malaysia are heavily politicised. All vice-chancellors are selected by the Ministry of Education and personally appointed by the minister. Some vice-chancellors have close connections with the Biro Tata Negara (BTN), an organisation that has been heavily criticised for its villainous brainwashing, racism, and propaganda.

It appears the most important qualification of a vice-chancellor is his/her loyalty to the BN government, rather than academic and administrative abilities.

In addition, very few deans and office bearers are elected by lecturers within the faculties, so these leaders tend not to be accountable to their staff, giving them wide powers. These people tend to be loyal to their superiors and thus academics are under close scrutiny of their activities.

According to the highly cited US expert on education Dr Philip Altmbach, it is difficult to see how a fully developed higher education system can be developed without academic freedom.

In the light of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s promise to give universities more autonomy, intellectual and academic freedom should be issues at the top of the list. However with the current crackdown on free speech, academic freedom is only likely to receive lip service in the near future.

If good policy is going to be scripted, corruption fought, and critical thinking and creativity developed in Malaysia’s universities, a paradigm shift in academic freedom is necessary.

The academic values of autonomy, freedom of expression, and integrity have been largely ignored, at the plight of university standards in Malaysia.

Although Malaysia has globalised its education system, it is still encumbered by Malay cultural norms that are preventing evolution of higher education institutions to their best potential.

In wider society, if academic freedom doesn’t exist, how can freedoms exist elsewhere within the nation?

This is the dilemma hindering the potential of the country to progress today.

The lack of academic freedom weakens the national intellect, which can be witnessed by Malaysia’s relative decline among its neighbours over the last decade.

Malaysian universities may have modern infrastructure, but they are hindered from growing by the current inability of academics to speak out. – October 5, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 5 October 2015, 3:24 pm and is filed under
Education
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.