Moral Studies paper stolen!

by Mariam Mokhtar

Malaysiakini

Oct 1, 2012

After the furore concerning the leaked question on Bersih 3.0 in the mock SPM test papers, a more serious problem has emerged; the Moral Studies paper for the upcoming examination has been stolen.

Originally, the trial papers had prompted concerns that young minds were being indoctrinated – a charge denied by deputy ministers Puad Zarkashi and Wee Ka Siong.

Puad said: “As long as it does not affect the racial or religious sensitivities or malign any individual, I feel (the question) is not a problem… It’s up to the rakyat to decide.”

Wee also disagreed that education was being politicised and refuted calls for an investigation: “I cannot act based on any Tom, Dick or Harry’s allegations….”

With weeks to go before the examination, all police leave has been cancelled and an investigation into the theft ordered. A spokesperson said the probe would include everyone who had access to the test paper before publication, the printers and the people who set the questions.

Like many other parents and children who want an advantage in the forthcoming exams, this correspondent managed to secure a copy of the Moral Studies paper, for RM100, in the backstreets of Kepong.

The Moral Studies core syllabus is divided into seven fields; self-development, family, environment, patriotism, human rights, democracy, peace and harmony. They are designed to test one’s understanding of moral values (nilai), definitions and reasoning.

To make this test fair for everyone, I have included some of the harder questions.

1. How would you show patriotism?

(a) Fly the Malaysian flag and report your neighbour who doesn’t.

(b) Buy only ‘Made in Malaysia’ goods.

(c) Be a responsible citizen and speak out if you disagree with the laws of the country.

2. You would like to help your community and take advantage of the government projects available but lack knowledge and experience. Would you:

(a) Seek your uncle (the one with Year Five education but who drives a Ferrari) who is the division head of the local Umno?

(b) Seek employment in a firm which offers the necessary training or bribe them to accept you?

(c) Enrol in vocational school and sign up for an apprenticeship to get the required skills?

3. You hear about the calls for democracy and are curious. Would you:

NONE(a) Scrutinise both mainstream and alternative papers, and talk to a variety of people?

(b) Join the butt dance led by the army veterans because you like dancing and as the Poco-poco is banned, you might as well do the state-sanctioned butt dance?

(c) Ignore all the printed media but focus on TV3, RTM and Astro because you never liked reading?

4. Your moral studies teacher asks a rhetorical question. “If you are a cabinet minister, how would you deal with the misappropriation of public funds by your family?” What is your response?

(a) Send your children to New York to lie low, and close down all downstream activities.

(b) Feign ignorance about your spouse’s dealings, and warn your leader that you, too, have detrimental information on him and other party members.

(c) You would never allow such things to happen in the first place – rights come with responsibilities and accountability.

5. Your national newspaper has called for the alternative media to apologise to Malaysians for being a ‘tool for foreigners’. Would you:

(a) Write to the editor of the national paper and ask for his views on the allegations that the authorities are ‘allowing foreigners into the country in exchange for votes’?

(b) Contact one of the right-wing extremist groups and volunteer to wazz on photos of the alternative editors, during one of their protests?

(c) Disagree because you believe we need maids, petrol pump attendants and market stall traders?

6. A fishing village has organised a demonstration because of concerns that a new chemical plant will pollute the environment and affect the livelihood of the villagers and fishermen. Would you:

(a) Say ‘I’ve seen the water and it looks good and clear. What is the fuss?’, then hope and pray that no interfering Malaysiakini journalist asks you to drink the water?

(b) Contact the local thugs to throw bags of acid on the organiser’s cars to scare the demonstrators?

(c) Join the protesters in a march of solidarity?

7. A VVIP is on your flight from London to KLIA. You have been asked to vacate your first class seat for his extended entourage. Would you:

(a) Ask for a datukship in exchange for that inconvenience?

(b) Willingly do so to show your allegiance to King and country?

(c) Don your eyemask and ear plugs, feign sleep, and put a ‘Do not disturb’ sign on your bed?

8. What is the correct procedure for the police to respond to peaceful demonstrators?

riot police fru bersih tear gas(a) Use the element of surprise and wait for Muslims in the crowd to observe the call to prayer; when they are praying on the streets, roll in the trucks and detain the rioters.

(b) Provided there is no violence, marchers should be allowed to exercise their democratic right.

(c) Use a combination of razor wire, tear gas and chemically laced water.

9. How should the judiciary deal with child rapists?

(a) Find some reason to convince the judge that the child forced him to impregnate her and also inspire the judge of his bright future.

(b) Child rape is statutory rape and there are laws to deal with this, if only judges could be bothered to learn the law.

(c) A Muslim can marry his victim and escape imprisonment. If he is not a Muslim, he can convert, then marry his victim and be received with open arms and also be showered with the benefits of being a bumiputera. The rapist can always divorce his child bride so she can resume her schooling or look after the child, whichever suits her.

10. The PM is suffering a drop in his popularity. Would you:

(a) Start a Facebook page with ‘I love the PM’ and write to food and beverage companies to put the PM’s face on their cans of drink?

(b) Tell the PM that he deserves to know what the rakyat feel about him – ‘Serves him right’?

(c) Join the call by the Minister of Misinformation to support the PM’s endeavours in cyberspace – send newspapers doctored photos of people swarming around the PM?

11. If you are elected chief minister of a state, how would you show how much you care for the people?

(a) When your child marries, invite as many people as possible to the wedding. This will save on buying presents, and gets you into the record books.

(b) Attract foreign investment by doing whatever is morally right, environmentally safe, economically viable and of use to the local inhabitants.

(c) Woo big corporations which have problems setting up their businesses elsewhere in the world. Just sign on the dotted line, and ensure that they pay their gratuities to the key people. The rakyat should be thankful for the development and jobs provided. Some scientist is bound to have discovered how to neutralise any toxic or radioactive products.

12. You are asked to be in charge of a think tank to boost the image of the ruling party. Would you:

(a) Organise raids to disrupt any of the opposition’s talks and gatherings, and distribute sex videos, because Malaysians love porn?

(b) Give film companies fiscal incentives and tax breaks to produce films which will plant the seeds of fear in the rakyat?

(c) Gather a team of experts to advise you of the situation on the ground, then systematically tackle each problem with sound reliable policies?

13. You are asked what criterion you would use to call an election.

(a) Consult numerology experts and the tea leaves in your daily cuppa.

(b) Individuals and companies are adversely affected by the uncertainty surrounding the election date, so you will make sure that a firm date is set for future elections.

(c) Ask someone in Sarawak to recommend a reliable shaman. You are a firm believer in alternative methods. Best of all, you like to keep the rakyat in the dark.

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a non-conformist traditionalist from Perak, a bucket chemist and an armchair eco-warrior. In ‘real-speak’, this translates into that she comes from Ipoh, values change but respects culture, is a petroleum chemist and also an environmental pollution-control scientist.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 3 October 2012, 9:32 am and is filed under
Education
,
Mariam Mokhtar
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PM must take women’s ministry portfolio seriously

— JAG

The Malaysian Insider

Oct 02, 2012

OCT 2 — The Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG) is appalled and extremely disappointed by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s callous dismissal of the need for women’s rights groups in Malaysia on the premise that equality was given “from the start”.

The prime minister is remiss to use women’s suffrage as a sole indicator for equality. Despite women having fought equally for independence and gaining the vote, Malaysia’s first female Minister, Tun Tan Sri Fatimah Hashim, was only appointed in 1969, a full 12 years after independence. Today, as in 1969, Malaysia only has one female minister in Cabinet, far short of the 30 per cent indication required by CEDAW.

While the right to vote is an important indicator of the state’s recognition of women’s rights, equality is also measured in other substantive ways.

If Malaysian women were on equal footing as their male counterparts, one telling sign would be a high ranking on the Global Gender Gap Index, which captures the magnitude and scope of gender-based disparities in four key areas of basic rights — economic, political, education and health. As it stands, Malaysia’s ranking has dropped from its overall ranking of 72 in 2006 to 97 among 134 countries in 2011. Our country joins the bottom quarter, made up largely of developing countries in the Middle East and Africa.

Laws and policies in this country currently too do not reflect women’s equal access to justice. If women were truly beneficiaries of equality since 1957, how is it that women’s rights groups had to fight for the Domestic Violence Act in 1994, and gender as a category for non-discrimination was only included in the Federal Constitution in 2001. To this day, a Malaysian mother has no legal right to confer citizenship to her child in the event that the child is born overseas. A Sexual Harassment Bill has yet to be tabled, and Muslim women continue to be sidelined in the continuous regressive amendments made to the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act 1984 and the corresponding Islamic Family Law Enactment of the States in Malaysia.

Such a statement by the prime minister, who is also the Minister of Women, Family and Community Development, belies and belittles the reality women face on a daily basis — the violence, harassment and discrimination — which Government policies have not adequately addressed. The recently released CEDAW alternative report comprehensively documents all forms of discrimination that women in Malaysia continue to face today. For those of us who have to deal with the problems women face on the ground, the Prime Minister’s claim does not inspire any confidence in his leadership of the country and the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development.

We urge the prime minister to take his role as the Minister of Women, Family and Community Development seriously and propose substantive measures with corresponding budgetary considerations in accordance with CEDAW principles to ensure that Malaysia is on the march towards equality.

* Press statement released by the Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG), which comprises: Sisters in Islam (SIS); Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO); Perak Women for Women Society (PWW); Sabah Women’s Action Resource Group (SAWO); All Women’s Action Society (AWAM); Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor (EMPOWER); and Women’s Centre for Change (WCC).

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 3 October 2012, 12:55 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
women
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Reminder of Perak constitutional crisis

 — Koon Yew Yin

The Malaysian Insider

Oct 02, 2012

OCT 2 — As the next general election is fast approaching, almost every day the newspapers publish stories of Datuk Seri Najib Razak and other Barisan Nasional (BN) leaders giving away goodies to win votes. Unfortunately Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leaders cannot afford to give away any goodies. Since the general election is near, we must not forget how PR lost control of Perak to BN.

You will remember that when the High Court on May 11, 2009 recognised Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin as the rightful mentri besar of Perak, the Court of Appeal lost no time in granting Zambry Abdul Kadir a stay of execution on the High Court decision. It did so within a few hours, in fact.

On May 22, the appellate court overturned the High Court judgment favouring Nizar, and instead ruled that Zambry was the legitimate mentri besar.

Malaysian courts have created a record with their supersonic speed in disposing of cases.

The BN is so unfair and unjust to depend on three defectors to govern the state, especially when two of the three defectors were under investigation for corruption.

During the Perak constitutional crisis, I wrote a few articles. As a reminder, I think it is worthwhile to reproduce this excerpt.

“There are many contentious points in the Federal Court’s ruling which have already been debated by other observers better versed in Malaysian constitutional law than me. However, to me, perhaps the most contentious argument was that the Sultan of Perak does not need to act on the advice of the executive council in the matter of dissolving the state legislative assembly and it was at his absolute discretion. This argument, which smacks of a system of absolute monarchy, will take Perak and the country backwards rather than forward.

“But let’s assume that the Federal Court ruling on this is correct. Is this the end of the matter? In my humble opinion, no — and I would like reiterate that the only way out of the present legal quagmire is to return the vote to the people.

“To safeguard the interest of the country and the institution of the monarchy, the voice and will of the rakyat must be respected. It has to be called on to be heard — in one way or another — because though the wheels of justice grind slowly, they grind exactingly.

“To the letter of the law a government must be answerable, and the one standing above politics must be accountable as well. In my humble opinion, Perak will regain its shine and the people’s trust when the Sultan accedes to the dissolution of the state assembly.”

As you all know Sultan Azlan Shah did not dissolve the state assembly.

My view is not an isolated one. A poll of registered voters in Perak conducted by the Merdeka Center for Public Opinion on February 8, 2009 shows that:

● 76 per cent of respondents felt that “the people through elections” should decide who forms the government in Perak. The breakdown by race was 60 per cent Malays, 88 per cent Chinese and 98 per cent Indians.

● 74 per cent of the respondents felt that the state assembly should have been dissolved after the defection of the three Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers. The breakdown by race was 59 per cent Malays, 85 per cent Chinese and 88 per cent Indians.

● 68 per cent of respondents said that the preferred option of settling the political crisis is either to hold three by-elections or state wide polls. The breakdown by race was 46 per cent Malays, 88 per cent Chinese and 80 per cent Indians.

● 66 per cent of the respondents did not accept state governments formed through defections of state assemblymen. The breakdown by race was 46 per cent Malays, 87 per cent Chinese and 73 per cent Indians.

● 62 per cent of the respondents felt that the “role of the palace in this decision” means that it does not recognise the will of the people.

● 59 per cent of the respondents felt that the political crisis in Perak would decrease support for Barisan Nasional.

Taken together, the poll by the Merdeka Center suggests that Zambry and BN may occupy the seat of government but a significant number of the citizens of the state do not accept their legitimacy to hold power.

Clearly, from the survey findings we can infer that while our politicians may have difficulties clinging onto principles and the democratic system, the rakyat know right from wrong.

They cannot stomach politicians who get voted into office on one party’s ticket and then decide to jump ship, causing that party’s popular state government to topple. They do not believe that the status of a government should be decided behind closed doors. And they want the Sultan to use his “absolute discretion” to invoke the will of the people.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 3 October 2012, 12:29 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Second break-in at Aliran office

P Ramakrishnan

Aliran

3 October 2012

Exactly 18 days after the first break-in at the Aliran office, the thieves struck again for the second time!

They removed the same grille, forced open the same window and entered the same room. That was as far as they went.

On the first occasion, they had gained access to the rest of the building from this room but this time we had reinforced security and thus they were unable to move farther inside the building.

We discovered this break-in on the morning of 29 September 2011. They must have struck in the early hours of 29 September because we were in the office until midnight the previous day trying to wrap up Aliran Monthly.

Following the first break in some people commented whether those who committed the break-in were really petty thieves or something else. They had reason to doubt because these so-called thieves were only interested in the computers used by the past president, the current president and the serving treasurer. They were not interested in the two other computers, a printer and some petty cash in the drawer that were also there for the picking!

Now the same people are wondering if the second break in was meant to convey the impression that it must be the work of petty thieves – nothing sinister or ominous about the first theft! All that we can say is, “We don’t know!”

We do not wish to speculate or insinuate. That would not be right.

Most people are of the opinion that making police reports does not curtail crime or reduce their frequency. While we admit that the police cannot solve every crime that is reported, what is more disturbing is that criminals seem to realise this as well, and this only emboldens them.

Is this why they came back a second time in the knowledge that they would have their day and go scot-free?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 3 October 2012, 11:39 pm and is filed under
civil society/NGOs
,
Crime
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The 2013 Budget: Najib’s Last Hurrah? (1)

“More debt has been accumulated in six years than what took 48 years after Merdeka to accumulate.”

A Brief History

The Budget unveiled by the Prime Minister on September 28th , his fourth budget,  contained no real surprises.  It followed the broad pattern of previous Budgets presented since 1998, the year of the East Asian Financial crisis.

A constant feature of these Budgets has been the use of deficit financing to further the BN agenda of promoting the interest of its key constituents while maintaining a grip on the loyalty of its traditional supporters. Tax giveaways and subsidies were part of the instruments used.

Despite buoyant revenues from the exploitation of natural resources which provided almost a third of revenue, the Government has consistently ran deficits which contributed to the buildup of a mountain of debt. The initial rationale for deficit financing was to stimulate and revive the economy after the devastating set back resulting from the East Asia Financial crisis of 1998.

Public funds were initially used to bail out corporations and to inject resources into the banking system. Simultaneously, a relaxed fiscal policy was justified on the grounds of encouraging the private sector to take the lead in accelerating economic growth.

Mega projects became a hallmark of the Mahathir era; generous tax concessions were granted to  GLCs and crony corporations; toll operators and independent power producers benefitted from the largess extended by the government; consumer subsidies were extended to placate the electorate and to retain the loyalty of key groups.

In the years that followed, deficits continued to be incurred and became a constant feature of Malaysian budgets. The ritual promises to achieve fiscal balance were never kept.

The Badawi administration made some feeble attempts but gave into pressure groups and vested interests. Deficits continued to be run.

The general elections between 1998 and 2008 were preceded by “feel good” Budgets that created the illusion of well-being. The electoral set back suffered by the BN in 2008 led to a change in the way public funds came to be utilized. The most recent Budgets delivered by Najib have moved towards targeted cash and other handouts to key support groups.

These transfers were directed to select voting groups and segments of the population. The Budget for 2013 proposes the following key transfers:

a) RM60 million to increase the minimum pension from RM720 to RM820 for pensioners who have been in civil service for at least 25 years.

b) RM301 million to provide a special incentive of RM200 per month to all military personnel, effective from 1 January 2013.

c) RM224million for a one-off RM1,000 to assist former members of the armed forces who have opted for early retirement;

d) RM3billion for assistance of RM250 to households where the head is earning less than RM3,000 and for single unmarried individuals aged 21 and above earning less than RM2,000 per month.

e) Individual income tax rate is to be reduced by 1 percentage point for each income bracket where annual taxable income falls between RM2,500 to RM50,000.

f) RM540 million will be allocated for the Schooling Assistance Program under which RM100 will be provided to all primary and secondary students.

g) Payment of an additional  half-month bonus to civil servants in Dec-12 and another half-month bonus

The over-riding issue confronting Malaysia at this critical phase in its economic history is the alarming rate of increases in level of debt. Malaysia faces insolvency unless urgent measures are taken to check this slide to disaster.

Malaysia is in danger of a serious major debt crisis. It faces the very same issues that triggered the financial crisis faced by Greece and other weaker economies in the EUROZONE.

In a sense the circumstances in Malaysia are worse. There appears to be a total lack of willingness to learn lessons or to heed the polite warnings extended by the IMF and the rating agencies.

The lack of transparency and a sense of denial pose special dangers that the Prime Minster has chosen to ignore in his thrust to buy the next election. And buying the election appears to be the over-arching goal irrespective of the economic cost to the nation.

He is hell bent on his quest for power.

This potential crisis has been long in the making. The Budget deficits have ballooned and for the year 2012; the Federal Government’s debt is estimated to amount to RM502 billion or 53.7 percent of GDP just a little short of the 55 percent mark that sets limits to the size of permissible debt.

The Federal Government’s debt has grown from RM 229 billion in 2005 to RM 502 billion under the Najib administration. Thus, more debt has been accumulated in six years than what took 48 years after Merdeka to accumulate.

Some salient features merit mention.

The Government appears to have strayed from the path of fiscal sustainability even as it targets to reduce the budget deficit to 4% of GDP for 2013 from 4.5% this year, which was trimmed from the earlier target of 4.7%.

These estimates are based on rather rosy assumptions of growth, an under estimate of expenditures which conventionally increase after supplementary budgets are introduced like clockwork, a hallmark of the budget strategies of the Government. The final outcomes are likely to be higher if past experience is a guide.

Be that as it may, the estimates of the deficits and the resulting size of the Federal Government’s debt do not take account of the  rising level of contingent liabilities which are debt guarantees issued by the Federal Government. These stood at RM96.9 billion or 12.2% of GDP at the end of 2010 and mushroomed to RM 117 billion by the end of 2011. They continue to grow.

(to be contd)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 3 October 2012, 10:36 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Finance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call on all MPs,  BN or PR, in Sabah, Sarawak or Peninsular Malaysia to support a RCI to assess whether dreams and aspirations of Sabahans and Sarawakians in forming Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed in past five decades

On the occasion of the 49th Malaysia Day, Catholic Bishop Datuk Cornelius Piong in his message questioned if a 49-year-old agreement symbolised by the Keningau Batu Sumpah to uphold religious freedom and other native rights and customs had been kept.

Piong said that 49 years ago leaders from the federation of Malaya promised the people of Sabah they would progress together and have their basic human rights protected, as part of a campaign to convince them to join forces and form Malaysia, with partner states Sarawak and Singapore.

The three key pledges Piong highlighted were guarantees that Sabahans would have freedom of religion, their native land would be safeguarded by the state government and the federal government would respect and protect Sabah local customs.

“Are these promises still being respected and honoured?” Piong asked in his Malaysia Day message.

He said: “The agreement was carved on an oath stone (Batu Sumpah Peringatan) which is still visible read and remembered.”

I first visited the Keningau district council’s administration centre in March 2010 where the Oath Stone still stands, and engraved on the Oath Stone are the words:

“BATU SUMPAH MENGIKUT PERLEMBAGAAN

1.	Ugama Bebas dalam Sabah

2.	Tanah Tanah dalam Sabah di kuasai oleh Kerajaan Sabah

3.	Adat istiadat anak rayat Sabah dihormatkan dan dipelihara oleh Kerajaan. Sebalik pula rayat2 Sabah di dalam interior bersumpah taat setia kepada Kerajaan Malaysia.”

After my March 2010 visit to the Keningau Batu Sumpah, I had asked: “These were the terms of the oath of loyalty of the Sabahans from the interior five decades ago in exchange for the formation of Malaysia. Have these solemn pledges laid out in the Keningau Batu Sumpah been honoured by both sides?”

Two weeks ago, as part of the DAP Sabah state-wide “Janji Ditepati” Public Hearings, I returned to Keningau and together with the MP for Tuaran, Datuk Seri Wilfred Bumburing, revisited the historic Keningau Oath Stone and I came away more convinced of the legitimacy and relevance of the proposal I had made in Parliament after my first visit to the Keningau Oath Stone in March 2010 – that there should be a Royal Commission of Inquiry to assess whether the dreams and aspirations of Sabahans and Sarawakians in forming Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed in the past five decades.

I had said in 2010 that such a RCI would be the most meaningful way of preparing for the 50th anniversary of Malaysia Day on 16th September 2013, and although there is less than a year left to the 50th Malaysia Day anniversary celebrations next September, the reasons for such a RCI remains valid, sound and pertinent.

I call on all MPs,  whether BN or PR, whether in Sabah, Sarawak or Peninsular Malaysia to support a RCI to assess whether dreams and aspirations of Sabahans and Sarawakians in forming Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed in past five decades

An assessment of the development of the terms and conditions of the three key pledges of the Keningau Oath Stone and the Sabah 20-Points Agreement and Sarawak’s 18-Points Agreement  would be a major contribution to making the 50th Malaysia Day anniversary a really meaningful occasion.

When I visited Tamparuli with Wilfred Bumburing a fortnight ago, former Tuaran MP Datuk Monggoh Orow spoke of the plight of Sabahan particularly those who are landless.

This is a clear violation of the “Land” pledge in the Keningau Oath Stone, which is scandalous, outrageous and even downright criminal, for such marginalisation, poverty and socio-economic backwardness should not take place in the second largest state in Malaysia after Sarawak.

A Pakatan Rakyat government will immediately implement a policy of “Land for the Landless” for genuine Sabahans who want to work the land, and we will eradicate the present abuses of power where huge chunks of land are grabbed by those those in power or for their cronies. Is Barisan Nasional prepared to do the same?

This is a specific instance where the Three Fundamental Pledges of the Keningau Oath Stone have not been complied with, and it is appropriate, timely and most pertinent that the hopes and aspirations of Sabahans as encapsulated in the Keningau Oath Stone is brought to the attention of the highest political chamber in the land – Parliament.

At the Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia Day celebration in Kuching on Sept. 16, Pakatan Rakyat leaders pledged a New Deal for Sabah and Sarawak, adopting the Kuching Declaration committed to the fulfilment of the hopes and aspirations of the people of Sabah and Sarawak in terms of infrastructure development and protection of their fundamental rights in forming Malaysia 49 years ago in 1963.

After 49 years in Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak are  afflicted with the curses  of CLIB while Sabah has an additional curse of “I”, i.e. CLIB for Sarawak and CLIBI for Sabah –  “C” for corruption, :”L” for Land (NCR) injustices, “I” for  Infrastructure (backwardness) and “B” for  Borneanisation (breach), while the last “I” for Sabah stands for “Illegal Immigrants”.

1. Corruption

Although Fighting Corruption is one of the priority six National Key Result Areas (NKRA) of Najib’s Government Transformation Programme (GTP), Malaysia’s corruption has gone from bad to worse in the past three years as tracked by Transparency International’s annual Corruption Perception Index.

In Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak are the two  top states where corruption is most rampant and intractable.

So far, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has nothing to say about investigations into serious allegations of corruption and abuses of power against both the Sarawak Chief Minister, Tan Sri Taib Mahmud and the Sabah Chief Minister, Datuk Seri Musa Aman.

I fully agree with the former Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Adviser, Tan Sri Robert Phang, who said yesterday that the international anti-corruption conference in Kuala Lumpur today is a waste of time and an occasion for the Malaysian government to pretend that it is serious about fighting graft.

I do not think any MP serious about the cancer of corruption in our body politic would disagree with Phang that the sixth conference of the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities being held in Kuala Lumpur would ber worthwhile only if the Malaysian delegation were to use it as an opportunity to address long-standing corruption allegations against the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail.

I would add the Sabah Chief Minister and  Sarawak Chief Minister to Gani Patail as the “test of the trio” as to whether there is the real political will in Malaysia to combat “Grand Corruption” – which is why Malaysia’s Transparency International Corruption Perception Index ranking and score have fallen to the lowest levels of No. 60 at 4.3 score in the past 18 years.

Can the Prime Minister give Parliament and nation and update of the actions being taken by MACC with regard to the various police reports lodged against the “trio” with regard to corruption – in particular with regardf to lawyer Zainal Abidin Ahmad’s recent book, “Tan Sri Gani Patail: Pemalsu, Penipu, Penjenayah (Fraud, Liar, Criminal)?”?

Let me return to CLIB for Sarawak and CLIBI for Sabah.

2. Land (NCR) injustices

The second major issue in Sabah and Sarawak five decades after the formation of Malaysia is the plight of the Kadazans, Dusuns and Muruts in Sabah and Dayaks of Sarawak over Native Customary Rights (NCR) land.

As the Kuching High Court judge, Justice Linto Albert said in his judgment in the landmark “Pantu” NCR case:, “These are cries for justice because one cannot simply throw one’s hands in the air and say that is how life is”!

I endorse the statement by the Sarawak DAP State Chairman, MP for Sibu and State Assemblyman for Bukit Assek, Wong Ho Leng, “as the largest state in Malaysia, no one in Sarawak should be land hungry” – and this is equally pertinent to Sabah –  but clearly this principle can only be established by a Pakatan Rakyat and not Barisan Nasional government.

3. Infrastructure (backwardness)

Both in  Sabah and Sarawak, one of the greatest grievances is the failure to provide the most basic infrastructure facilities, like roads, piped water and electricity.

Both Sabah and Sarawak are states with rich natural resources, whether oil, gas, palm oil or timber, but the wealth of the state have been hijacked by BN leaders and their cronies instead of being ploughed back to ensure that the people in two states enjoy the most basic of infrastructure resources – instead of the scandalous situation in many places in the two states, where there are water pipes without water,  electric poles without power supply or hospitals without doctors.

The schizophrenic reaction of Barisan Nasional to the Pakatan Rakyat’s 2013  Budget pledge for a complete and upgraded Pan-Borneo Highway connecting Kuching to Kota Kinabalu and the east coast of Sabah to bring development in Sabah and Sarawak to be at par with Peninsular Malaysia illustrates this long-standing grievance of neglect and marginalisation.

4. Borneanisation (breach)

Barisan Nasional’s failure to honour the “Borneanisation” undertaking contained in the 18-Point Agreement was recently highlighted by the proposal by Tun Zaki Azmi, chairman of the Special Review Commission on Civil Service Transformation, to lower the requirements for Dayaks and ethnic minority groups to enter the civil service so as to address the imbalance of racial composition within the civil service.

Zaki’s proposal had been lambasted by Dayaks leaders on both sides of the political divide as an insult and mockery of the Dayak community, as they contended there are enough qualified people from Dayaks and the minority groups but the problem is the absence of meritocracy not only for recruitment but also promotion in the civil service.

Zaki must be thanked for highlighting the failure of the Barisan Nasional government to implement Borneanisation as promised in the 18-Point Agreement for Sarawak and 20-Point for Sabah in the past five decades, resulting in the sense of grievance, marginalisation and discrimination by the  Dayak, Kadazan-Dusun-Murut and ethnic minority groups in the two states with regard to the civil service.

Point 8 of Sabah’s 20-Point Agreement and Sarawak’s 18-Point Agreement 1963 leading to the formation of Malaysia states:

“8. Borneanisation: of the public services should proceed as quickly as possible.”

Recently, the favourite slogan on the lips of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak is “Janji Ditepati”.

Has Point 8 of the  20-Pt Agreement on Borneanisation been honoured?

In reply to my question in Parliament, the Prime Minister has disclosed that out of 133 Federal Departments (including Federal statutory bodies) in Sabah, 61 (45.9%) agencies are headed by Sabahans while 72 (54.1%) are headed by non-Sabahans.

Furthermore, according to the Prime Minister’s reply, “Sehingga 14 September 2012, pegawai kelahiran Sabah yang memegang jawatan tertinggi (Gred Utama/Khas dan keatas) di Perkhidmatan Awam Persekutuan ialah seramai 19 orang. Daripada jumlah tersebut, seorang pegawai masing-masing berada di Gred Utama Turus 1, Gred Utama Turus 2 dan Gred Utama A. Tiga pegawai Gred Utama B serta 13 pegawai di Gred Utama dan Gred Khas C.”

Is this “Janji Ditepati”?

(5) Illegal Immigrants

CLIBI for Sabah – the second “I” refers to the long-standing problem of illegal immigrants in Sabah.

A recent September poll result in Sabah released after Najib’s budget presentation listed illegal immigrants the topmost concern of Sabahans and why there had been a drop to just 54 per cent of voters polled in September  who felt that the state was headed in the right direction, a marked decline from a high of 66 per cent in a previous survey conducted in November 2009.

A whopping 53 per cent of voters surveyed listed the illegal immigration problem as the most important issue being faced Sabah.

The survey found that an overwhelming 87 per cent agreed with the establishment of the RCI into illegal immigrants (RCIII) in Sabah.

But confidence in the effectiveness  of the RCIII  was more circumspect — with

only 54 per cent expressing confidence that the commission will be able to address the problem.

The survey also found that Sabah voters had mixed views as to the motivation behind the establishment of the commission, with 46 per cent saying it was “a genuine attempt to address the illegal immigrant problem” while 36 per cent agreeing that it was a “political move to reduce the anger of Sabahans before the election”.

I share in the scepticism that the RCIII is a serious step to resolve the long-standing problem of illegal immigrants in Sabah, as the Barisan Nasional does not possess the political will to resolve this problem once and for all but merely wanted to give the impression that something is being done to address the problem in order to lure Sabah votes in the “fixed deposit” state in the coming general election.

This is why the Cabinet made world history in taking six months to decide on the terms of reference and composition of its membership after its decision on Feb. 8 to set up the RCIII, more than a month for the appointment letters to the commission members to be issued, so that the six-month time span for the RCIII to complete its work and report could begin to be computed.

But up to now, there are no reports whether the RCIII would conduct public hearings throughout the state of Sabah to allow members of the public to come forward voluntarily  to testify about this long-standing problem which have made Sabahans virtually foreigners in their own land.

But should anyone particularly in Sabah be surprised by such indifferent, nonchalant and dishonest treatment of the illegal immigrant problem by Barisan Nasional considering the history of UMNO on the issue, particularly the disgraceful episode of Project Mahathir in the early nineties?

In this connection, the recent statement of a top Special Branch officer had cast grave doubts on the sincerity of the Cabinet when it took the decision in February to set up a RCI on illegal immigrants in Sabah.

This top Special Branch officer is none other than the notorious assistant director of the E2 (M) national social extremist threat division head Mohd Sofian Mohd Makin who made the wild, baseless and reckless allegation that the Pakatan Rakyat was being infiltrated by Jemaah Islamiah (JI) terrorists in the case of PAS and by communist in the case of DAP – and who have not been able to come out with any iota of evidence when challenged to do so.

Sofian has told the press that the advocates of RCI on illegal immigrants in Sabah are anti-national elements who only want to extract political capital from the issue, undermine diplomatic relations between Malaysia and the Philippines and incite anti-peninsular sentiments among Sabahans.

The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak should declare whether Sofian represents the secret but mainstream and official thinking of the UMNO/BN Federal government on the issue of RCI on illegal immigrants in Sabah, and if not, whether immediate action would be taken to suspend and discipline Sofian as he has become the worst example of a “national social extremist threat” his division in the Special Branch is supposed to be monitoring.

The long-standing illegal immigrant problem in Sabah, as well as the RCIII, is the most glaring example of the failure of the  Barisan Nasional in “Janji Ditepati” – the official theme of 55th Merdeka Day and 49th Malaysia Day hijacked by the Barisan Nasional.

Sabah 20-Points and Sarawak’s 18-Points should be reviewed so as to end CLIB curses of Sarawak and the CLIBI curses of Sabah.

I call on all MPs,  whether BN or PR, whether in Sabah, Sarawak or Peninsular Malaysia to support a RCI to assess whether dreams and aspirations of Sabahans and Sarawakians in forming Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed in past five decades.

(Speech by on the 2013 Budget on Thursday, 4th October 2012)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 4 October 2012, 5:03 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is the 2013 Budget Najib’s “silver bullet” to win the 13th GE?

After the presentation of the 2013 Budget by the Prime Minister cum Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak in Parliament last Friday, the Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin praised the 2013 budget as “the best to date”, and such superlative praises have been taken up by the other Barisan Nasional leaders.

Muhyiddin also denied that the 2013 Budget is an “election budget”. No MP whether from Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat would agree with him. In fact, I don’t think Muhyiddin himself believes his own denial.

But whether the 2013 Budget will be remembered by Umno/BN leaders as “the best budget” in the past 55 years will depend on whether it is the “silver bullet” for Najib  to win the 13th General Election with a two-thirds parliamentary majority or whether it would result in his  becoming the last UMNO Prime Minister or a prelude for him to be toppled as UMNO President and Prime Minister in a repeat scenario like what happened to Tun Abdullah in 2009 – becoming the latest “trophy” of Tun Mahathir who would have the scalps of three DPMs and two PMs in the bag!

It is precisely because Najib has no confidence that the 2012 Budget, despite giving goodies for almost every sector of the electorate, would be the “silver bullet” that he has kept postponing the dissolution of Parliament and acquired the dubious record of being the Prime Minister without an elected mandate of his own for the longest period when compared to all the previous four Prime Ministers after Tunku Abdul Rahman, including his father Tun Razak, Tun Hussein Onn, Tun Mahathir and Tun Abdullah.

It is also because of this signal lack of confidence that he made dubious history in transforming the 2013 Budget into a brazen electioneering speech.

Najib took MPs and the listening public by surprise when he devoted the first six paragraphs of his 2012 Budget speech appealing to Malaysians for continued electoral support for Umno/BN government after 55 years, and hurled charges and insinuations against Pakatan Rakyat.

But he outdid himself at the end of his budget speech when he devoted the last 14 paragraph of his 174-paragraph budget speech on an  unashamed glorification of UMNO/BN rule and condemned Pakatan Rakyat, causing many to shake their heads with the common complaint that the 2013 Budget presentation was a poor reflection on the “class” and “standard” both on the Prime Minister-cum-Finance Minister as well as on the annual budget.

It is evident that the 2013 Budget presentation hid a very unconfident Najib who is haunted and hounded by the phobia that his fourth budget speech as Finance Minister may be the last Umno/BN budget in Parliament in the nation’s history.

This is why despite all the chest-thumping and braggadocio of supreme confidence that Malaysia will witness six more budgets to be tabled by the Umno/BN Government to transform Malaysia from middle to a high-income developed country, Najib has continued to play the role of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, “To Be or Not To Be”, agonizing over whether “To dissolve or not to dissolve Parliament” since last year.

In the conclusion of the 2013 Budget presentation, Najib said:

“We are aware that there are parties requesting to be given a chance to form the next Government. In a democratic country, we understand that they too have their rights.  It is the rakyat who ultimately decides who will be given the mandate through the ballot box.”

Although the Prime Minister conceded that it is within the rights of political parties in a democracy to seek to be given a chance to form the next Government and that it is the rakyat who ultimately decides who will be given the mandate through the ballot box, the glaring omission was his failure to declare and pledge clearly and unequivocally that he would personally ensure and facilitate a peaceful transition of federal power for the first time in the nation’s history if this is the verdict of the electorate through the ballot box – to tell the world that Malaysia has become a normal democracy, a basic condition to become, in Najib’s own words, “the best democracy in the world”!

I had in fact posed this question to the Prime Minister many times in the past three years, but he has declined to break his silence despite  his infamous speech of UMNO defending Putrajaya at all cost “even if our bodies are crushed and our lives lost”, raising the question whether he and UMNO really want Malaysia to be the “world’s best democracy”.

In normal democracies, whether the United Kingdom, European Union countries, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United States or even in Japan, none of their citizens would doubt that there would be peaceful transition of power from one political party or political coalition to another, whether at the national or state level, if this is the verdict of the electorate in a general election.

But this is not the case in Malaysia. In fact, we are still a very long way from being a normal democracy, when even the Prime Minister, the Cabinet Ministers, UMNO and all the component Barisan Nasional parties are still not prepared to make a clear and unequivocal commitment for a peaceful transition of federal power if this is the decision of the electorate in the next general election!

Najib cannot delay any further in making a public commitment to accept and facilitate a peaceful transition of federal power in the next general election if this is the verdict of the electorate or he would be proving right the recent description of him as a “false democrat” who “hold elections but have no intention of giving up power”.

(Speech 2 on the 2013 Budget on Thursday, October 4, 2012)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 4 October 2012, 5:14 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib as “Father of Transformation’?

PM Najib prides himself as the ‘Father of Transformation’ or ‘Bapa Transformasi’ because of the spate of transformation initiatives which he has launched since taking over as Prime Minister in 2009.

He has certainly transformed the Malaysian lexicon by introducing an alphabet soup of acronyms such as the ETP, GTP, NKRA, NKEA, SRI, NEM, BR1M and KR1M, just to name a few.

The expensive consultants who conceived of these terms have certainly benefitted from these transformation initiatives. But the positive impact on the man on the street is far less apparent.

While the Prime Minister still sounds positive about his transformation initiatives, his budget tells us a different story.

The budgetary allocations for ETP and GTP related initiatives have decreased for the past two years, from a high of RM15.5b in 2011 to RM8.3b in 2013, a reduction of 46.5%. The allocation for the 6 NKRAs under the GTP has decreased by 47%, from RM9.5b in 2011 to RM5.0b in 2013. The allocation for the 12 NKEAs under the ETP has decreased by 45%, from RM6b in 2011 to RM3.3b in 2013.

The decrease in the allocation for the GTP raises three important questions. Firstly, have the desired KPIs in the NKRAs been achieved? Secondly, even with the decrease in the budgetary allocations, have the funds been properly allocated?

Thirdly, is the decrease in funding for the GTP a sign that PM Najib is slowly but surely abandoning the GTP in favor of direct cash handouts in order to buy votes in the run up to the next general election?

The answer to the first question is an obvious NO.

According to the GTP Annual Report 2012, the 2012 targets were much more aggressive compared to the 2011 targets. For example, the length of roads to be built was increased from 905km in 2011 to 1350 in 2012, an increase of 49%. The number of houses to be connected with clean water and a regular electricity supply was increased from 58087 and 26822 in 2011 to 201192 and 39442 respectively in 2012, an increase of 246% and 47% respectively.

This is supposed to be achieved with a lower budgetary allocation. Presumably the targets for 2013 would also be higher. And yet, this has to be achieved with a lower budgetary allocation.

The funding under the development expenditure for the Rural Basic Infrastructure (RBI) NKRA was decreased from RM6.4b in 2011 to RM5.1b in 2012 and will be further decreased in this 2013 budget to RM3.2b. In other words, funding for RBI has been cut in half since 2011 even though the KPIs for this NKRA have increased significantly since 2011.

One only hopes that PEMANDU will not be asked to ‘massage’ the KPI data for RBI in future years in the same manner to how the KPIs for crime reduction seem to have been ‘massaged’.

The second question involves the allocation of resources between and within the various NKRAs.

Let’s take a look at budgetary allocation for the Crime NKRA, one of the highest profile NKRAs under the GTP. According to the budget estimates from 2011 to 2013, the allocation for NKRA Crime specific initiatives was reduced from RM351m in 2011 to RM239.8m in 2012 and then increased to RM322.3m in 2013.

What was interesting about the increase in allocation from 2012 to 2013 is that most of this went to the NKRA initiative to ‘Increase Safety Perception index’, which is equivalent to the ‘Reduce Fear of Crime’ NKRA initiative in the 2012 and 2011 budget estimates. The increase in this allocation is a whopping RM103m!

While some of this increased allocation would involve policing initiatives such as the expansion of the ‘Omnipresence’ and the ‘Whiten’ Black Spots programs, it is likely that a significant portion would be channeled towards public relations exercises including organizing a ‘Crime Awareness Day’, conducting independent surveys and beefing up the PDRM Communications Unit.

In other words, instead of allocating more resources to reducing crime such as Street Crime (which only gets Rm26.4m of the NKRA Crime budget), much of this additional resources will be used for PR instead.

Hence, not only has the funding for most of the NKRAs been cut, what is left also seems to be in danger of being misallocated for empty publicity measures.

The reduction in the allocation for the GTP and the ETP is an indication that PM Najib is getting desperate and is abandoning his transformation initiatives in favor of buying votes with direct handouts.

An additional symptom of favoring short term handouts to longer term structural changes is the fact that development expenditure will be decreased from RM49.8b in 2012 to RM49.7b. Our development expenditure has decreased from 24% of the total budget to less than 20% of total expenditure in the latest budget. This is very concerning since having a healthy development expenditure is necessary to lay the foundations of future growth in our country.

PM’s commitment to the ETP also shows signs of flagging. The budgetary allocation for the ETP was a whopping RM6b in 2011. If this figure is to be believed, this would mean that government investment in the ETP was 47% of the total actualized investment of RM12.9b under the ETP in 2011, a much larger figure than the 8% target government investment target set by PEMANDU.

This figure has been reduced by almost half, to RM3.3b in 2013. If this reduction is because the private sector has stepped in to fill the investment targets of the ETP, then this would not be a problem.

But the reduction in the budgetary allocation for the ETP has come at a time when the committed investments for the ETP have also decreased. For 2012, announced investments for the ETP stand at only RM16b or about 16% of the RM167b of committed investments announced in 2011.

As private sector doubts continue to rise with regard to the economic viability of the ETP, the PM seems also to have realized this and has cut the budgetary allocation to the ETP, hoping that this quiet bailing out would escape public attention.

The only allocation which has increased is that allocated to the Strategic Reform Initiatives (SRIs). Sadly, the amount allocated for structural reforms via the SRIs is only a measly RM154m in 2013 from an equally measly RM121.5m in 2012.

The SRIs, which were originally devised in the New Economic Model (NEM) under the National Economic Advisory Council (NEAC), seems to have been left behind and ignored after being appended to the ETP. Of the 51 SRIs which were identified in the NEM, 14 were housed in existing ‘natural homes’ as part of either an NKEA or NKRA. The remaining 37 were clustered into 6 rebranded SRIs.

However, many of the specific SRIs have not been implemented and the small amount of funding allocated to the SRIs in Budget 2013 is a reflection of this. For example, the SRI to ‘Set Up a Central Oversight Authority’ to re-examine the ‘Government’s Role in Business’ has not been implemented. The SRI to ‘Introduce Unemployment Insurance’ to set up a Labor Safety Net as part of the ‘Human Capital Development’ cluster has also been ignored. Similarly, the SRI to ‘revive the national development planning committee (NDPC) as the Premier Body for Policy Development, Coordination and Consultation’ under the ‘Public Service Delivery’ cluster has also been ignored.

The failure of the various transformation schemes can best be seen in Malaysia’s fall in the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report from 21 in 2011 to 25 in 2012.

Malaysia’s ranking fell by 4 places as a result of being overtaken by Korea, Luxembourg, New Zealand and the United Arab Emirates. At the same time, Malaysia’s score fell slightly, from 5.08 in 2011 to 5.06 in 2012.

This was reflected in the fact that out of the 148 indicators used by the WEF to compile this ranking, Malaysia experienced in fall in its ranking in 77 indicators compared to a rise in its ranking in only 48 indicators with its ranking in the remaining 23 indicators remaining unchanged.

These indicators cover initiatives under the GTP such as corruption as well as the ETP such as broadband access and the SRIs such as public finance reforms.  It is another indicator to show that after the initial excitement over the GTP and the ETP, these efforts have fizzled out.

Public skepticism in Malaysia over these transformation initiatives are reflected in international rankings and surveys.

(Speech 3 on the 2013 Budget on Thursday, October 4, 2012)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 4 October 2012, 5:23 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Do you want the devil you know?

by Kee Thuan Chye

Free Malaysia Today

October 5, 2012

BN happens to have been in federal government for so long that people tend to automatically assume they have the required leadership.

COMMENT

I’m finding this frequent comment by people rather irksome: “But does Pakatan Rakyat (PR) have leadership? Can it take over the federal government?”

I’m prompted to ask: What do they mean by “leadership”? Is the Barisan Nasional (BN) leadership the kind we want?

I’d take it further: Does BN have leaders? I mean, real leaders?

People tend to forget to look at the states currently being governed by PR. I don’t know much about Kedah and Kelantan, but Selangor and Penang have been doing fine.

I live in Selangor, and as a Penang-born-and-bred, I visit Penang from time to time. The Auditor-General has commended the PR government of Penang for its financial management and monitoring system for three consecutive years – 2008, 2009 and 2010.

The Auditor-General has also commended the PR government of Selangor for its “very good” performance in 2010 of reducing public debt and loan repayment arrears. And from 2009 to 2010, its consolidated revenue also increased by 20.2%.

Leadership must have something to do with it, must it not?

As for BN, people think it has leadership because it is a perception that has been ingrained in them for more than five decades. BN happens to have been in federal government for so long that people tend to automatically assume they have the required leadership.

But look at BN’s leaders today. Which of them are really good? Quite a few have been making stupid statements, that’s for sure. And the statements have been getting worse and worse.

Look at Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein’s response to a question on why during the Bersih 3.0 rally, the police were confiscating memory cards from the cameras of press photographers and members of the public. “I don’t know,” he said. “This is the standard operating procedure of the police.”

And how about MCA president Chua Soi Lek blaming Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim for Ng Yen Yen’s recourse to Australian permanent residence? He said it was because of Anwar’s “restrictive” policies while he was Education Minister that compelled non-Malays like Tourism Minister Ng to seek PR status abroad in the 1990s for the sake of their children’s education. Never mind that Anwar was not the Education Minister then, that it was actually Sulaiman Daud.

Keeping faith with the devil?

Another comment I find irksome is “Better the devil you know than the angel you don’t” – courtesy of ex-prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad recently.

He was not saying something new; this had been bandied about for the last couple of years – by people trying to advocate that even though BN is a “devil”, it is safer to keep BN in power than to opt for a new government and potential uncertainty.

What’s new is that Mahathir has now admitted that BN is indeed a “devil”. Unwittingly, I suppose.

Well, should we keep faith with the devil we know?

The devil we know has not brought us a single institutional reform yet despite Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s numerous pledges.

Just to quote one example, why hasn’t Article 121 of the Federal Constitution been restored so as to return real independence to the judiciary? Without that, the judiciary is still answerable to Parliament, which was not the original intent of our founding fathers, who recognised the need for the separation of powers between the Executive (Government), the Legislative (Parliament) and the Judiciary.

Neither has the devil we know done away with repressive laws like the Internal Security Act (ISA) and the Sedition Act. It has merely replaced the ISA with the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act, and is proposing to replace the Sedition Act with the musical-sounding National Harmony Act.

In fact, the devil we know has restricted our democratic space by first enacting the Peaceful Assembly Act and then giving us the new amendment to the Evidence Act called 114A.

This amendment presumes the accused guilty and places the onus on him/her to prove his/her innocence. It goes against the principle of natural justice. Under this amendment, someone could borrow your computer to post a seditious comment on some blog or website and you could be held responsible for that comment.

You may not even be aware of that posting but you’d have to produce witnesses to testify that you were not at your computer when the posting was done. See how ridiculous it is?

Furthermore, the devil we know has demonstrated that it has different sets of laws for different sets of people. A 19-year-old was arrested for baring his buttocks over photographs of Najib and his wife, Rosmah Mansor, while the incidents of BN supporters burning photographs of Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and urinating on the posters of Kelantan Menteri Besar Nik Aziz and DAP leader Lim Kit Siang have been ignored by the authorities.

And a 19-year-old girl who surrendered herself to the police for having stepped on the photographs of Najib and Rosmah got handcuffed like a criminal. But if you were to look at photographs of ex-menteri besar Khir Toyo and ex-minister Ling Liong Sik when they were arrested – one for land fraud, and the other for cheating the Government – you’d see that neither of them was handcuffed

It looks like on the one hand, we are told we are 1Malaysia, but on the other, there are these double standard.

The devil we know has also been spending public funds to the tune of RM5.77 billion for the political purpose of buying our hearts – and votes.

And in other ways as well. Only recently, Najib, while attending the launch of the Sultan Ahmad Shah Environmental Trust, surprised everyone there by announcing that the government would donate to it one million ringgit. Just like that – one million ringgit of the people’s money, given away at a glitzy launch party. Who gave him the permission to give away our money?

Roaring national debt

Meanwhile, our national debt keeps increasing at an alarming rate.

According to finance expert Teh Chi-Chang, in his book Umno-nomics: The Dark Side of the Budget, “Our national debt now stands at nearly 54% of total national income or GDP …”.

This, he adds, is just one per cent below the 55% debt ceiling set by “our more prudent forefathers” in the Loan (Local) Act 1959 and the Government Funding Act 1983. The way Najib keeps spending, we might soon go through the ceiling.

The devil we know hijacked Merdeka Day this year and turned it into BN’s own day of celebrations and election campaigning, culminating in the setting of a “world record” in the number of tweets in an hour! How that would benefit the country only a twit would know.

The devil we know is currently drawing up a new curriculum for the teaching of History in schools that will supposedly instil “patriotism” in our students. What that probably means is that history being told by the victors about the achievements of the victors will be indoctrinated in the minds of our young.

And our young will be captive because History has been made a must-pass subject at SPM starting next year.

So, what do you think? Better the devil we know, or the idea of a two-coalition system turning into reality that might convince sceptics that it is workable – and that it is the better option?

Even someone from the MCA, which is part of the ruling coalition, has come out to suggest that the devil we know has dark secrets to hide.

Lee Hwa Beng, writing in his book PKFZ: A Nation’s Trust Betrayed, points out that if it had not been for the outcome of the 2008 general election, at which BN lost its two-thirds majority and four states plus Kelantan, “we would never have known what happened in [the] PKFZ [scandal]”.

He adds, encouragingly, “If a repeat of March 2008 occurs at the 13th general election, which are due very soon, who knows what other truths could be revealed.”

For the sake of a better Malaysia , would you not want more truths to be revealed?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 5 October 2012, 1:06 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Kee Thuan Chye
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Has Najib “natural abhorrence” of corruption as to  appear in Parliament to report on the “test of the trio” – Taib Mahmud, Musa Aman and Gani Patail – on updates of inquiries into allegations of corruption and abuses of power?

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced RM1 million contribution to the newly-established International Anti-Corruption Academy (IACA) in Vienna but this could not salvage or buy off the total lack of credibility of his “big speech” on fighting corruption at the launch of the sixth International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA) Annual Conference and General Meeting in Kuala Lumpur yesterday.

The launch of the international anti-corruption meeting yesterday must be the most uncomfortable programme Najib had to attend since becoming the Prime Minister 42 months ago –  delivering a speech on a subject he himself does not believe in and knowing that it would be received with scorn and contempt, politely by the IAACA Conference delegates, but with derision and disdain outside the four walls of the IAACA  Conference at the KLCC.

Surely Najib is not so naïve as not to realise that when he called attention to the “bigger picture” of graft and declared that the fight against corruption must go beyond political and public service borders, it is seen instantly as an excuse to justify the utter failure of his administration, the Government Transformation Programe and NKRA in combating corruption, which is amply borne out by Malaysia’s worst 60th ranking and lowest 4.3 score in the 2011 Transparency International Corruption Perception Index.

Furthermore, when Najib said countries needed to instil a “natural abhorrence” of corruption in society, he is only provoking the question whether he could point out a single member of his Cabinet who is recognised by Malaysians as pre-eminent in the “natural abhorrence” of corruption?

If he could not name a single member of his Cabinet with a “natural abhorrence” of corruption, what about he himself? Does he qualify as a leader with a “natural abhorrence” of corruption?

If Najib has a “natural abhorrence” of corruption, he would not have  demolished the credibility, integrity, professionalism and independence of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) just two weeks ago when he summarily  dismissed allegations that Sarawak Chief Minister, Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud had amassed billions in wealth with the public response: “There are all kinds of allegations, jangan kita layan”.

A Prime Minister who has a “natural abhorrence” of corruption would not have said “Jangan kita layan” but would have gone out of his way to demand and ensure  that the nation’s anti-corruption body would conduct a thorough and comprehensive inquiry into the allegations in the ground-breaking and explosive report by the Swiss-based NGO Bruno Manser Fund (BMF) which estimated the assets of Taib Mahmud’s family at US$21 billion (RM64 billion), with the wealth of Taib himself put at a whopping US$15 billion (RM46 billion) making him Malaysia’s richest man outstripping tycoon Robert Kuok who has US$12.5 billion.

In fact, a Prime Minister who has a “natural abhorrence” of corruption would have seriously considered the establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry to clear Malaysia’s name internationally, as the BMF report has made an even greater impact in international circles than in Malaysia – with the report released in Brussels to coincide with the visit by the Plantation Industries and Commodities Minister Tan Sri Bernard Dompok to the European Commission last month.

The BMF report is the first that describes in detail the business activities and personal wealth of 20 members of the Taib family in Malaysia, Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, United Kingdom, United States and other countries.

It estimated the combined net worth of 20 Taib family members at close to US$21 billion, spread over 400 companies around the globe – all built through their near complete political and economic control of Sarawak, which has been reduced from one of the richest to one of the poorest states in Malaysia over three decades.

As I said in my speech in Parliament on the 2013 Budget yesterday, the three VVIPs comprising the Sarawak Chief Minister, the Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman and the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail – against whom serious allegations of corruption and abuses of power had been made publicly – represent the “test of the trio” as to whether there is a real political will in Malaysia to combat “Grand Corruption” by VVIPs.

Yesterday, I had called on the Prime Minister to give Parliament and nation updates of the actions being taken by MACC with regard to the various reports lodged against the “trio” with regard to corruption – in particular with regard to lawyer Zainal Abidin Ahmad’s recent book, “Tan Sri Gani Patail: Pemalsu, Penipu, Penjenayah (Fraud, Liar, Criminal)?”?

Would Najib demonstrate his  “natural abhorrence” of corruption by  appearing in person in Parliament to report on the “test of the trio” in the war against Grand Corruption – Taib Mahmud, Musa Aman and Gani Patail – and submit updates of inquiries into allegations of corruption and abuses of power against the trio?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 5 October 2012, 4:38 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Male Chauvinist Minister

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Friday, 5 October 2012, 3:03 pm and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pecahkan ruyungnya dahulu sebelum mendapatkan sagunya

— Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Oct 04, 2012

4 OKT — Kenapa kita mendengar rakyat bercakap dan berbincang tentang politik tidak henti-henti sehinggakan jarang-jarang kita mendengar orang ramai bercakap pasal lain. Keadaan sebegini tidak pernah berlaku sampai ketahap ini dan ini sahaja menunjukkan rakyat sedang dalam pencarian. Kehidupan rakyat tentulah ada masa pasang dan surutnya dan ia bergantung kepada siapa yang mentadbir dan memerintah kita. Setiap rakyat ditadbir oleh badan kerajaan secara “direct” atau “indirect” di dalam mana-mana negara yang berkerajaan.

Rakyat ditadbir oleh kerajaan sehingga dikampung-kampung dan mereka ditadbir oleh Jawatankuasa Kemajuan dan Keselamatan Kampung (JKKK). JKKK itu adalah struktur pentadbiran kerajaan yang terendah sekali. Selalunya apabila sampai rakyat biasa bercakap ditempat-tempat awam tentang politik, tidak akan ada perkara lain yang berlaku selain dari berlakunya perubahan. Dalam politik dini hari rakyat Malaysia setiap peringkat bercakap politik dan politik kepartian.

Perubahan itu tetap berlaku dan ini adalah hakikat yang tidak boleh di nafikan oleh sejarah. Kita tidak terlepas daripada angin perubahan ini dan sememangnya perubahan itu sudah sampai untuk berlaku. Kalaulah Muhammad SAW dahulu tidak berhijrah Islam itu susah untuk berkembang kerana masalah tentangan dari kaum mushrikin Makkah. Kemajuan dan perkembangan Islam sendiri terpaksa melalui perubahan dalam bentuk hijrah.

Penghjrahan Muhammad SAW dengan sahabat-sahabat baginda ke Madinah telah mengembangkan makallah Islam sehingga Islam itu merebak ke merata pelusuk dunia sehingga ke Cina. Jika Muhammad masih kekal di Makkah Islam tidak mungkin berkembang dan menempa kemajuan kerana kekalutan keadaan di Makkah itu sendiri. Tetapi apabila Muhammad SAW sampai ke Madinah baginda telah di sambut oleh kaum Ansar dan Kawarij dengan begitu mesra, maka Muhammad SAW berjaya mengembangkan makallah Islam itu dengan jayanya dan berkembanglah agama suci kita itu di Madinah tanpa halangan yang besar.

Begitu jugalah kita di negara ini yang inginkan perubahan itu. Kekalutan politik di negara kita tidak akan dapat diperbaiki selagi kita tidak mahu melakukan hijrah itu dengan berani. Yang penting bagi kita ialah untuk meninggalkan kekalutan yang kita sedang hadapi oleh kerana masalah-masalah yang kita semua tahu dan telah selalu di sebut dan di tulis oleh banyak penulis dan pemikir kita.

Hanya yang menjadi masalah sekarang di negara kita ialah perubahan itu terpaksa melalui usaha yang sangat rumit kerana kita belum pernah lagi melalui perubahan sejak merdeka dahulu. Tetapi di atas kerumitan inilah datangnya perjuangan dan dalam usaha yang sebegini ia tidak mungkin boleh di capai dengan mudah kerana bukan perkara senang untuk memecahkan budaya yang songsang yang telah berakar umbi dalam masyarakat kita. Bak kata pepatah, “pecahkan ruyungnya dahulu sebelum kita mendapat sagunya”.

Sekarang ruyungnya sudah hampir pecah dan sagunya sudah kita nampak. Hanya menunggu masanya sahaja bagi rakyat negara ini merasakan nikmat pembaharuan yang sedang berlaku dengan derasnya di kalangan kita di sini.

Barulah sekarang kita lihat dengan jelas yang perubahan itu agak pasti akan berlaku dan ianya sudah begitu hampir dengan kenyataannya. Tidak ada sesuatu kuasa yang boleh bertahan selama-lamanya termasuklah mereka yang sedang berkuasa di negara kita ini. Tanda-tanda perubahan sudah di tunjukkan dalam pilihanraya yang lalu dengan bertambahnya pengaruh parti-parti alternatif sehinggakan BN telah kehilangan majoriti tradisi 2/3 di Dewan Parlimen dan lima Dewan Legislatif negeri-negeri dalam persekutuan ini telah di ambil alih oleh pihak alternatif.

Ramai yang berharap dengan berusaha keras untuk melakukan “follow through” kepada apa yang di capai oleh pihak alternatif dalam pilihanraya yang lalu. Angin perubahan ini bertiup begitu kencang sehinggakan pihak pemerintah sekarang terpaksa bertahan dengan berbagai-bagai cara kerana pihak pemerintah sekarang belum pernah mengalami perubahan selama ini. Namun benteng pertahanan mereka itu tidak akan mampu menahan ombak perubahan yang sedang melanda kita pada masa ini.

Tentang dari penyokong-penyokong BN pada hari ini tidak perlu di risaukan kerana mereka itu adalah dikalangan mereka yang berada di dalam “comfort zone” dan payah untuk membawa mereka berjuang. Semasa mereka perjuangkan kemerdekaan oleh pimpinan terdahulu itu, ramai pegawai-pegawai kerajaan dan mereka yang makan gaji dengan pentadbiran British dahulu amat takut menerima kemerdekaan ini.

Ramai di antara mereka berkata yang kita tidak akan berjaya mengendalikan sebuah negara yang kita tadbir sendiri kerana kita tidak ada kemampuan apa-apa. Mereka berkata, hendak membuat jarum pun kita tidak boleh lakukan, masakan kita berdaya untuk mengendalikan kemerdekaan negara.

Tetapi apabila kita mencapai kemerdekaan kumpulan ini jugalah yang telah mendapat nikmatnya dan menjadi pembesar-pembesar negara dan negeri kita. Begitu jugalah dengan apa yang kita hadapi sekarang. Ramai di antara penyokong kerajaan pada hari ini berkata belum tentu lagi PR akan berjaya memerintah negara dengan baik jika di berikan mandat dalam pilihanraya ini.

Tetapi itu merupakan masalah yang biasa apabila kita hendak melakukan perubahan. Kemampuan PR untuk mentadbir negara kita adalah lebih baik dari apa yang ada pada hari ini. Yang sudah pasti Umno dan BN tidak mampu lagi mengendalikan rakyat dan negara dengan baik kerana Umno dan BN tidak berkemampuan untuk menguruskan kejayaan.

Mereka telah merosakkan semua kejayaan yang kita telah capai dengan jayanya dahulu. Hakikatnya jika BN masih di berikan mandat ia bermakna kita telah gagal untuk berubah yang sangat-sangat perlu bagi rakyat negara kita sekarang ini.

Tetapi jika kita timbang dari sudut keinginan rakyat untuk berubah pada hari ini, insyaallah kita akan mencapainya dalam pilihanraya yang akan datang ini. Bersedia sahajalah untuk hidup dalam “ambience” politik yang baru untuk kehidupan yang jauh dari kemelut yang kita hadapi sejak beberapa lama dahulu.

Kita terpaksa jauhkan diri kita dari kemelut ini. Jangan sekali-kali kita menzalimi diri kita dengan membiarkan kita masih berada bersama pentadbiran yang telah melakukan kemungkaran politik dan ekonomi serta sosial negara kita. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Friday, 5 October 2012, 12:54 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Land Grab Malaysian-Style

By Thomas Fann

This is not a new issue, in fact it is 21 years old.

It all began when the Barisan Nasional government, with its overwhelming majority in Parliament, passed by 99 to 25 votes the 1991 Land Acquisition Amendment Bill, or Act A804.  The rephrasing of sections of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 basically gave incontestable power to state governments to seize private land for development by private companies and individuals. Lands originally acquired for public purposes can also be used for private development.

Before Act A804, land could only be acquired for public purposes or for public utilities like building of roads, schools, hospitals, pipelines, water or power plants, etc.  With the addition of “..for any purpose which in the opinion of the State Authority is beneficial to the economic development of Malaysia”, no land is safe.

The term “beneficial to the economic development of Malaysia” is as subjective as you can get.  A piece of land can be acquired to build a posh five-star hotel, an amusement park or a golf resort because in the opinion of the government it would bring in the tourist dollar and create jobs for locals, not to mention enriching the private companies who would, of course, be paying taxes.

To really make the Land Acquisition Act water-tight for the acquirer, Section 68A says that acquisitions cannot be invalidated by reason of any kind of subsequent disposal or use (etc) of the acquired land. This new provision aims at preventing the bona fide of the acquirer or of the purported purpose from being challenged in court. You can only challenge the quantum of the compensation offered, the measurement of the land area, the person whom compensation is payable to, and the apportionment of the compensation.

The leader of the opposition then, YB Lim Kit Siang in opposing Act A804, gave this dire warning – “When it becomes law, it will destroy the constitutional right to property enjoyed by Malaysians for 34 years since Merdeka, and become the mother of all corruption, abuses of power, conflicts-of-interest and unethical malpractices in Malaysia…”

Was Kit Siang just over-reacting or scare-mongering when he said that or is it a prophecy that was and is being fulfilled till today?

The impetus for the passing of Act A804 was for the acquisition of 33,000 acres of land in the Gelang Patah area for the construction of the second link with Singapore and the construction of a new township by UEM, wiping out 19 villages and displacing 10,000 people.

The Johor State Government offered the affected small-holders compensation averaging RM26,000 per acre or 64 sen per square foot, far below the then market value of RM100,000 per acre for agricultural land.  In a subsequent civil suit by one of the affected land owners against the Government of Johor in 1995, it was revealed that a subsidiary of Renong was offering the intended development for sale at RM17 per square foot, a whopping 28 times more than what the original land owners got!

For a glimpse into some of the backroom wheeling and dealing that went on with these deals, one should read the court papers of cases like Honan Plantations vs Govt of Johor; and Stamford Holdings vs Govt of Johor.  Names of notable personalities like Muhyiddin, Syed Mokhtar Albukhary and Yahya Talib in secret meetings were mentioned.

For the Second Link and the highway that linked it to the North-South Highway to be built, the Land Acquisition Act was necessary. Compensation to be fair had to not only take into account the then prevailing market value but also the loss of livelihood for the people who used to live off the land.

With Act A804, the government seized a lot more land than was required for the custom and immigration complex and the highway. We can safely say it seized almost 24,000 acres more for a private corporation, UEM, albeit it is a GLC (government-linked corporation).

Today UEM Land, as the master developer of 23,875-acre Nusajaya (as the acquired land is now called) boasts of its enormous land bank and potential billions in profit from its development. We want to ask this simple poignant question – whose lands were these originally, and what about the 10,000 over affected villagers?  Shouldn’t these people be beneficiaries of development and not its victims?  Perhaps some of the villagers are now working in Legoland, who knows?

Whilst some of the people behind the scenes went on to achieve high office in the land and some made it to the top ten billionaires list, thousands of other nameless Malaysians are without land and opportunities. Land grab is non-discriminatory, Malaysians from all racial, religious and social strata are affected.

Gelang Patah was just the precursor to a new ball game called Land Grab and the same modus operandi was used for  Seremban 2, Bandar Aman Jaya in Sg Petani, Pantai Kundor/Pantai Tanah Merah and Paya Mengkuang in Melaka, Kerpan in Kedah, Sepang in Selangor, lands acquired for the MRT project, Jalan Sultan, native customary lands in Semenanjung, Sabah and Sarawak, and

many, many more.

Of course not all compulsory acquisitions are unjust or not justifiable; but there should be a fair and unskewed avenue for aggrieved land owners through the justice system to question certain acquisitions. The courts now are somewhat constrained by Act A804, and in almost all cases such acquisitions are not reversed.

Twenty years on, the same script is being acted out in Johor again (a BN stronghold), this time to the east in Pengerang. A total of 22,500 acres of land are being acquired for the development of the Pengerang Integrated Petroleum Complex (PIPC). The anchor project in this proposal is Petronas’ RAPID project which requires a sizable 6,424 acres.

Smallholders and plantations are being offered between RM1.80 psf and RM8 psf for their land. Can Pengerang be called Gelang Patah 2.0 where again on the pretext of development, a huge tract of land is being taken from their original land owners and placed in the hands of one or a few wealthy individuals and corporations? Is the PIPC the main play or is property speculation the main play? Would the same PM who mooted the Third Link to Singapore in 2009 make the announcement again after all the land has been acquired? Who are the direct beneficiaries of such development?

All these are so “legal” that one government official after another is spewing out that it is done properly under the terms of the Land Acquisition Act 1960. It may be legal, but is it moral?

PM Najib made a statement during the launch of the 6th International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities Conference in Kuala Lumpur on the 4th of October 2012 – “Is the unbridled and ruthless pursuit of extraordinary profits a form of corruption?  I believe that if we see corruption as fundamentally a moral problem, therefore anything that promotes selfish interest at the expense of the well-being of others is morally wrong.  It was vapid (tasteless) self interest and greed that was truly at the heart of corruption. ”

Mr. Prime Minister, I could not agree with you more.

How much is enough for the greedy? How many more poor and defenseless villagers must be forcibly displaced and robbed of the fruits of development to satisfy the insatiable appetites of the greedy who uses the Land Acquisition Act to enrich themselves?  Who will speak up for the thousands who will be landless and many without a means of livelihood?

It is evil when a law is crafted to take away land from the poor without their consent, fair compensation or share in its benefits so that a few might make it to Forbes’ list of billionaires.  We should all be foaming at our mouth with anger at this injustice but instead we just thank God daily that it is not our land they have come to take, at least not yet.

Thomas Fann blogs at
www.newmalaysia.org

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 6 October 2012, 10:42 pm and is filed under
Land
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib – more Brown than Blair?

No time like tomorrow

Malaysian politics

The Economist

Another budget, more cash handouts and more dithering over an election date

Oct 6th 2012 | SINGAPORE | from the print edition

THE prime minister, Najib Razak, fancies himself as the Tony Blair of Malaysian politics. Like the former British prime minister, Mr Najib purports to be a progressive reformer, on a mission to “modernise” his country. The British-educated Mr Najib also likes to pay as much attention to the spin on his policies as to their substance. He even hires former Blair advisers to make sure he gets it right.

For all that, Mr Najib increasingly resembles the hapless Gordon Brown, Mr Blair’s nemesis and successor. For years Mr Brown agitated to push his rival aside. When at last he succeeded, Mr Brown blew it by missing the chance to call an early election while he was still relatively popular. Rather than winning his own mandate, Mr Brown, unelected and indecisive, watched his authority drain away until he was boxed into calling an election right at the end of his term—which he then lost.

Similarly, Mr Najib took over after an internal party coup in April 2009 against the then prime minister, Abdullah Badawi. Talk of an early election for Mr Najib to secure his own mandate first surfaced towards the end of 2010. He himself began to talk up his chances the following June. Then an election was expected towards the middle of this year. All along, Malaysia has been on an election footing, with the cautious Mr Najib ponderously cultivating the voters.

He has crafted new policies for Malaysia’s younger, unaligned citizens while giving away plenty of money to retain his party’s traditional supporters, especially among the ethnic-Malay (and Muslim) majority. In the budget in late September more cash handouts went to poorer households and a one-month salary bonus to all government workers. They usually vote for Mr Najib’s United Malays National Organisation (UMNO).

Would that there were more to show for all the shadow electioneering. Opinion polls conducted by the respected Merdeka Centre (the latest were for June) gave the prime minister an approval rating of 64%, down from the high point of his popularity in the middle of 2010. Still not bad, you might think, but the popularity of the ruling coalition, the Barisan Nasional (BN), is much lower than the prime minister’s own. So now Mr Najib’s options are diminishing fast. He is required to call an election by April at the latest. In the process he has acquired a reputation for dithering, and now has the regrettable distinction of being Malaysia’s second-longest-serving unelected prime minister, just behind his own father, the country’s second prime minister.

Given UMNO’s deep pockets and its practice of gerrymandering constituency boundaries, winning a simple majority has always looked relatively easy for Mr Najib. After all, the ruling coalition, made up of UMNO and several smaller parties, has achieved that in every election since independence in 1957. Yet Mr Najib’s real aim is to win back the two-thirds majority that the BN lost for the first time at the last election, in 2008. In so doing the BN lost its power, among other things, to tinker with the constitution. That failure led directly to the coup against Mr Badawi and the elevation of Mr Najib. The prime minister knows that if he fails to reverse the humiliation of 2008, a genuinely hard task, then he could go the same way as his predecessor. (His chief protection is that personally he remains more popular than the BN.)

Mr Najib has also been spooked by a series of political setbacks. His government mishandled a couple of huge rallies by a coalition of NGOs called Bersih (meaning “clean” in Malay) campaigning for fair elections. And poring perhaps too closely over the minutiae of local-election results, the BN has fretted over a fall in support among Chinese voters. They form the largest minority in the country’s complex ethnic mosaic.

The problem for Malaysia is that the rival parties have been at such a high pitch of combat-readiness for such a long time that the resulting partisanship is poisoning national politics. Pretty murky at the best of times, politics is becoming dirtier by the day. UMNO and its friends in the press and television have been relentless in their assaults on any organisation, such as Bersih, that is deemed to be sympathetic to the opposition. Another target has been an excellent independent website called Malaysiakini. All the old canards about these sorts of groups being in the pay of Zionists, America or George Soros, a foreign financier, have been trotted out. It is not clear whether such slanders still impress Malaysia’s voters, especially its Muslims. They are certainly a sign of desperation.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 6 October 2012, 11:18 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Elections
,
Media
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Politics in Malaysia is the most profitable business

Steve Oh

CPI

I am sure most Malaysians will agree with Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak in a recent speech that there is more to corruption than government abuses. What more is not conjecture as much of it is in the public domain.

Surely it must be evident from the various writings in Malaysiakini, CPI and other weblogs unless someone is so out of touch with the present reality and fails to recognise the angst and anger of many civic-minded Malaysians who see their country sliding down the slippery slope.

It is true what Najib said that “What is often neglected, however, is the fact that corruption and corrupt behaviour is entangled deep with the moral fabric of all societies.”

He went on to say, “It is critical, therefore, people in positions of power and authority to exemplify the values they wish their constituents would follow”.

But does Najib believe what he says?

And more importantly where is the walk besides the talk?

All we have seen seems to be in the contrary. We are wont to ask, “Where is the example from the people in positions of power and authority?”

Instead many blame successive BN administrations for the decrepit moral state of their country because of corruption and abuses of power, which Najib admits implicitly. And Najib has yet to shake off the ghost of Altantuya Shaaribuu whose murder still leaves the public with the question: “Who ordered the killing?”

The incumbent government has much to answer for its failure to inspire the rest of the nation to higher moral conduct when it fails to apply the rule of law objectively across the board and involves its politicians and proxies in unbecoming acts such as the publishing of ‘dirty videos’ and other acts of political subterfuge.

If inspiring is too much to ask, Najib will sound more convincing if he can stop his government from picking on Malaysians whose only crime is they want to see the greed he describes and the obsession with profit diminished.

Excuses, excuses

Najib’s suggestion that “in some countries where severe punishment was meted out for corruption, it has not proven entirely effective” may explain why his administration is coy about allegations of corruption by some of his cabinet colleagues and the Sarawak Chief Minister Mahmud Taib.

However I am not aware of the failure of strong measures to curb corruption that has not succeeded anywhere. Since Najib did not mention the countries, it is hard to substantiate the statement. However there is irrefutable and strong evidence we know that proves severe punishment works.

Singapore is one success story worth noting. Singapore did not become what it is today – among the top nations on the global corruption index for squeaky clean governance – by making flimsy excuses like the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission for not having the power to take corrupt politicians to court.

The Singapore no-nonsense approach has proven corruption does not pay, and where it is found it is dealt with harshly by the authorities and we have even seen a senior politician charged commit suicide.

Surely the MACC’s excuse of having no power in the light of much global evidence in the allegations of corruption by the political bigwig must send every anti-corruption agency around the globe scratching their heads.

The truth is countries ensure there are laws to plug legal loopholes and every ploy by anyone to evade prosecution. Those governments ensure no one is above the law or out of its reach. There is even Interpol to help countries catch their criminals across borders.

Let us not forget Dr Mahahtir Mohammed went to extreme lengths to change the country’s constitution to get what he wanted and members of the royal family came under the scope of the law when he made it possible for them to be taken to court over civil and criminal matters where once they enjoyed legal impunity from prosecution.

But if a government lacks the moral and political will, then it will give dishonest and lame excuses. And sadly that is the problem with the Najib administration that seems bent on punishing those who want to see improvements in the moral fibre of their politicians, and even a constructive group like Aliran is not spared from harassment.

It begins with govt and its actions

The government can’t shirk its role in having created a political culture and society that has seen national integrity decline because of its corruption. Abuses of power filter outside of Putrajaya into the corridors of power and into the streets where cops are seen collecting bribes from illegal migrants and errant motorists.

The people in their daily lives are confronted with corruption everywhere.

With such moral insight that Najib exhibits in his speech, he ought to use his office and inspire his cabinet colleagues to lead Malaysia onto higher moral ground. After all, he espouses the virtues that Malaysians want to see badly after observing their nation bastardized by successive BN administrations. Even one that was relatively decent under Pak Lah was damned by Dr Mahathir Mohammed as “rotten”.

What is worse than a self-confessed reprobate – someone without moral principles – is a hypocrite. The hypocrite says the right things but does the opposite. And the tragedy is they can’t see their moral failings, just like the Emperor without clothes can’t see his nakedness.

The profit motive is amoral. It is an economic concept that oils the wheels of industry and human survival since people learned to trade. But profiteering is immoral and cynically people think politics, especially in Malaysia, is the most profitable business.

Even God asks, “What does it profit a man to win the world and lose his soul?” The solution to greed is for politicians not to profiteer by being corrupt and abusing their powers.

Public servants should serve the public and politicians are supposed to lead them in delivering the services to the people, not be obsessed about staying in power so that they can get rich and greedy.

Even as I write I read of the government giving a grant of RM10,000 to the Selangor Youth to help the government retain power. If that is not a blatant abuse of power that would get a government in trouble abroad for using public funds for political party purposes, then I don’t know what abuse of power is. We can’t overlook government abuses of power because everywhere you turn you see it, you smell it and you meet it.

Religion may be the opiate of the people and a corrupt government their odium.

There are many of us who believe that ‘honesty is the best policy’ even though our leaders have failed to inspire us by example and despite the Islamization of the country. We have to agree with Dr Mahathir Mohammed who once criticised it all as ‘form without substance’.

When Najib denounces greed, he has to lead by example and gather his flock to all take a hard look at themselves in the mirror. And so do all those who point the finger at others including myself. Until we remove the plank in our own eyes, we will not be able to see clearly to remove the speck from the eyes of others.

But I am glad more Malaysians can see the government for what it is and with Najib’s insight and diagnostic talents it may not be remiss for concerned citizens to say to him, “Physician heal thyself” because he may not like the bitter medicine the voters have prescribed.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 6 October 2012, 11:51 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.