Umno and BN’s post-March 8 schizophrenia

Umno and Barisan Nasional leaders should end its post-March 8 schizophrenia – claiming to have finally heard the voice of the people and yet still refusing to  “walk the talk” of reforms like closing down the Tamil daily Makkal Osai, continued detention of  Hindraf leaders  under the Internal Security Act (ISA) and stonewalling the proposal for an  Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service to keep crime low and make the country safe for Malaysians, visitors and investors.

Such political schizophrenia seizing Umno and Barisan Nasional has become a daily staple in the mass media, as illustrated by the following two headlines today:

•
Najib tells BN: Win over support from non-Malays

(NST);

•
Makkal Osai loses licence – Tamil daily’s application rejected

(The Star)

Has it occurred to the Umno and Barisan Nasional leadership, including the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister,  that the best way to ensure that the Barisan Nasional will lose even more support from the non-Malays are high-handed, arrogant and undemocratic  actions like the closure of Makkal Osai, the refusal to release the five Hindraf leaders, P. Uthayakumar,  newly-elected Selangor DAP State Assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah A. Manoharan,  V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and T. Vasantha Kumar or refusal to give Uthayakumar the best medical treatment while under ISA detention?

In fact, such political arrogance and contempt for human rights will also offend all right-thinking and justice-loving Malays, as illustrated by the March 8 “political tsunami” which saw Malaysians voting across  racial and religious divides.

New Straits Times
 announced today that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is expected to
announce
 several measures to reform the judiciary at a dinner organized by the Malaysian Bar at Hotel Marriot, Kuala Lumpur tonight.

I will attend the dinner.  While DAP and Pakatan Rakyat  will support judicial reforms to restore national and international confidence in the independence, impartiality, integrity and quality of the judiciary after two decades of “judicial darkness”, however belated, they are merely  first steps in a journey of a thousand miles of major national reforms whether in mindsets, institutions, laws or governance if Malaysia is to rise to the challenges of globalization where the competition is not between Malays and non-Malays but between Malaysians and the rest of the world.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 17 April 2008, 2:59 pm and is filed under
Judiciary
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


A Wave of Change Across Southeast Asia? But counter-currents too

By
Farish A. Noor

The latest results from the governorial elections in the provinces of West Java and North Sumatra, Indonesia, would suggest that a sea-change of sorts is taking place in Indonesia. Shortly after the shock election results following the General Elections held in Malaysia earlier this year, the governorial elections of Indonesia has led to the victory of the Justice and Prosperity party (PKS) and the National Mandate party (PAN), both of which are Islamist in character and both of which trace their ideological and intellectual geneaology back to the Islamist Masjumi party of the 1950s that struggled to make Indonesia an Islamic state until it was finally banned by President Sukarno in 1960.

What do these results entail and what does it say about the state of Indonesian politics today? More importantly, should the victories of PKS and PAN be seen as the victory of political Islam, and does this signify a shift towards a more Islamist-inclined politics for the rest of the country?

For a start, we should begin with some important observations comparing the results in Indonesia with the recent results in Malaysia. In both cases, the parties that won fielded candidates who are young and relatively unknown compared to the older veterans of the more established parties like Golkar in Indonesia. Yet, as was the case in Malaysia recently, it was precisely the relatively younger age and lack of exposure that perhaps accounted for the victory of the candidates of the PKS and PAN, for they were certainly not associated with the older modes of politics in the past and were not involved or implicated in many of the long-standing political and economic scandals associated with the old regime that dates back to the time of former President Suharto.

Secondly it should be noted that the Indonesian parties, like the opposition parties that did extremely well in Malaysia, campaigned on a reformist ticket calling for change and a new vision of politics for Indonesia. While speaking to Indonesian students at the Muhamadiyyah University of Surakarta and Sunan Kalijaga Islamic University of Jogjakarta, I was struck by the overwhelming consensus among all of them that Indonesia is thirsting for a new form of politics that breaks away from the norms of the old feudal past. Like Malaysia, Indonesia today has an entirely new generation of younger voters, many of whom will be voting for the first time during the General Elections of 2009, next year. Already many local analysts are predicting a major shift in voting patterns and are awaiting results that may shock all the older established parties.

Change, however, is always a contested process and needless to say it will take much more than an election to deal with the chronic problems of corruption, nepotism and lack of transparency and accountability in Indonesian politics. While the more modernist Islamist parties like PKS and PAN have totally abandoned the sectarian and divisive discourse of holy war, shariah and the calls for the imposition of an Islamic state and Islamic constitution in Indonesia; a counter-reaction is also brewing among the more conservative movements in the country.

While the members of the PKS and PAN celebrate their fresh victories, on the very same day the Indonesian government’s religious authorities have formally declared that the minority Ahmadi community – a sect that originated from South Asia but has spread all over the Muslim world – are deviants and that the sect should be banned ‘for their own good’. The reason behind this somewhat bizarre pronouncement is that many extreme right wing Islamist groups in Indonesia like the Indonesian Mujahideen Council (MMI), Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) and others have openly declared total war against the Ahmadi communities.

Thus ironically on the same day that Muslim moderates of PKS and PAS celebrated their victories in West Java and North Sumatra, the leaders of the Islamic Defenders Front have openly called for the members of the FPI to go out and kill the members of the Ahmadi community all over the country. In a recorded public rally the leader of the FPI went as far as crying out: “Kill them all! Kill all Ahmadis! Wipe them out of Indonesia! Kill, kill, kill!”

Indonesian politics is likely to remain on the boil well into next year when the General Elections will pit the new Islamist parties like PKS and PAN against the old guard led by Golkar and even parties like the Partai Demokrat of current President Bambang Yudhoyono. While tempering their public discourse some leaders of PKS and PAN have already stated that they will not compromise on issues of public morals such as imposing a ban on consumption of alcohol for Muslims, stricter dress codes and personal morality laws for Muslims, bans on rock concerts and in particular the very popular form of local pop music known as Dangdut.

With the Islamists -both moderate and conservative- setting the terms for the debate on Islam and politics in Indonesia, it is clear that religion will remain one of the central issues of Indonesian politics for a long time to come. But what sort of religious politics? Will it be the modernist vision of the Islamists of PKS and PAN (which is already conservative enough on social and moral issues), or will it be the exclusive and sectarian vision of Islam currently pushed by the likes of the Indonesian Mujahideen Council? Only time will tell, but for now Indonesia remains a focal point for the battle for hearts and minds of two hundred million Muslims.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 April 2008, 8:13 am and is filed under
Farish Noor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


PM’s judicial reform speech – disappointing

I was disappointed by the speech of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on “Delivering Justice, Renewing Trust” hosted by the Bar Council last night.

I had expected more, much more, than what was announced by Abdullah, viz:

•	Ex-gratia payment for “the pain and loss” suffered by the late Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader and Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh and their families, Tun Salleh Abas, Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Wan Hamzah Mohamed Salleh and Datuk George Seah in the 1988 Judicial Crisis. .

•	A Judicial Appointments Commission;

•	Review of the judiciary’s terms of service and remuneration to ensure that the Bench can attract and retain the very best of the nation’s talent.

The thunderous and prolonged applause which greeted Abdullah’s recognition of the “contributions of these six judges to the nation, their commitment towards upholding justice” and acknowledgement of “ the pain and loss they have endured” in the 1988 judicial crisis cannot hide the general disappointment that the Prime Minister had fallen far short of expectations to ensure a fair and just closure to the Mother of Judicial Crisis in 1988.

It is precisely because the “contributions, pain and loss” of the six wronged judges cannot be equated with mere currency that the ex gratia payment is grossly inadequate.  The six wronged judges deserve a full and proper recompense.

Furthermore, the victims of the 1988 “Mother of Judiclal Crisis” and the series of one judicial crisis after another which rocked the nation for two decades were not just the six wronged judges, but the Malaysian people and nation for 20 years because of the ravages to the system of justice which became a laughing stock to Malaysians and the world.

The depredations to  the system of justice in the past two decades, depriving Malaysia of a truly independent judiciary and a just rule of law,  cannot and should not be swept under the carpet with an ex gratia payment to the six wronged judges in 1988.

A Royal Commission of Inquiry – a  Judicial “Truth and Reconciliation” Commission –  into the 1988 “Mother of Judicial Crisis” and two decades of judicial darkness  should be set up precisely as the victims of the ravages to the justice system were not just to six wronged judges but the  Malaysian people and nation which cannot be computed in monetary terms.

The objective of such a Judicial “Truth and Reconciliation” Commission should not be punitive but to find out what went wrong to cause the country to be enveloped by two decades of judicial darkness – why the various national stakeholders, the judiciary, Parliament, mass media and civil society failed the test to defend the cardinal Constitutional principles of the doctrine of separation of powers and an independent, impartial and competent judiciary.

It is only with such a comprehensive  investigation and serious soul-searching that  we can ensure that another “judicial darkness” will not descend on Malaysia in future.

Abdullah’s initiatives announced last night however belated is most  welcome

but they are only initial  steps towards major national reforms which he had promised but failed to fulfill since becoming Prime Minister more than four years ago.

Has Abdullah the political will to implement bold reforms to institutions, laws, mindsets and system of governance in all areas of national life starting with a comprehensive package of national reforms when the new 12th Parliament convenes on April 28?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 April 2008, 10:25 am and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


5 DAP MPs did not submit a single question for Parliament – apologies

I was taken aback when
Chong Zemin
put up the post that a
blog
 had disclosed that there are 29 MPs who did not submit a question for the coming parliamentary meeting starting at the end of the month, and that five of them are from DAP.

The five DAP  MPs cited are:

•	Charles Anthony Santiago – Klang

•	Er Teck Hwa – Bakri

•	Hiew King Cheu – Kota Kinabalu

•	John Fernandez – Seremban

•	Dr. P. Ramasamy – Batu Kawan

I have checked with the five DAP MPs and they have confirmed the mistake of missing  the deadline for the submission of questions, i.e. April 8, 2008, for the month-long inaugural meeting of the 12th Parliament starting on April 28 – although they would still be able to take part in the supplementary question stage of the daily  90-minute question time.

The Party had reminded DAP MPs not to miss the deadline for questions and lose the opportunity to pose questions in the first meeting of Parliament (an important aspect of the work of Opposition parliamentarians) but mistakes are still being made.

Work pressures as new elected representatives, lack of experience with parliamentary standing orders and breakdown of communications have contributed to the five DAP MPs not fielding a single question for the first meeting of the 12th Parliament.

These are not acceptable excuses as voters in the March 8 “political tsunami” have high expectations of DAP MPs and they have the right to expect the new batch of Opposition MPs  to live up to a higher benchmark of parliamentary performance and to subject them to scrutiny.

The Party leadership will ensure that these  mistakes will not be repeated in the rest of the current parliamentary term

The five DAP MPs and the DAP apologise for this regrettable episode.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 19 April 2008, 6:23 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Goodwill ex gratia payments to Anwar, Guan Eng, Syed Ahmad Idid and Operation Lalang ISA detainees?

(Speech at the DAP  Teluk Intan Public Ceramah/Consultation with DAP MPs, State Excos and State Assembly members at Teluk Intan Municipal Hall on Friday, 18th April 2008 at 9 pm)

When the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced on Thursday night the payment of unspecified “goodwill ex gratia payments”  to the six wronged judges in the 1988 judicial crisis, Tun Salleh Abas, Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Wan Hamzah Mohamed Salleh, Datuk George Seah and the late Tan Sri Eusoffe  Abdoolcader and Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh,  he skirted the “rights and wrongs” and the “legality and morality” of the  Mother of Judicial Crisis which plunged the country into two decades of judicial darkness.

The victims of the 1988 Mother of Judicial Crisis and the ensuing  two decades of judicial darkness, with three of the four chief justices during the period, Tun Hamid Omar, Tun Eusoffe Chin and Tun Ahmad Fairuz compounding the travesties of justice by the judicial system, were not just the six wronged judges in 1988 but also included innocent, high-minded, idealistic and patriotic Malaysians who want the best for the country.  In fact, a whole generation of Malaysians were victims of the 20 years of judicial darkness!

Will the Prime Minister extend goodwill ex gratia payments to the other victims of the two decades of judicial darkness like former Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim,  Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and  former High Court judge Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid  Syed Abdullah Idid (the first whistleblower from the judiciary with his 112 allegations of corruption, abuses of power and misconduct against 12 judges in 1996) as well as to the 106  Internal Security Act (ISA)  detainees in the 1987 Operation Lalang?

The goodwill ex gratia payment to the six wronged judges are welcome  though belated but  they are grossly inadequate  in clearing the name and reputation of the six and  in providing a full and proper closure to the 1988 Mother of Judicial Crisis and the ensuing two decades of judicial darkness under three Chief Justices.

The
statement
 today by Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak that the ex gratia payment for the six former judges in the 1988 judicial crisis is not a form of apology to them but merely “our way of addressing some of the personal considerations and some of the personal experiences, hardships that they have gone through” has raised questions about the real worth and meaning of the ex gratia payment.

The payment  of goodwill ex gratia payment without revisiting the 1988 Judicial Crisis  on its rights and wrongs is already unsatisfactory enough but it becomes quite  unacceptable when its whole basis  is stemmed from pity or compassionate grounds to address “some personal experiences and hardships” suffered by the six wronged judges!

Najib is in fact directly contradicting Abdullah’s statement that “the contributions, pain and loss” of the six wronged judges cannot be equated with mere currency by implying that these wrongs and injustices could be dealt with solely in monetary terms.

This is why I maintain what is imperative to start a new chapter in Malaysian judiciary to turn our back on  the 20 years of judicial darkness is to have a Judicial “Truth and Reconciliation” Commission to find out the lessons to be learnt from the 1988 Mother of Judicial Crisis and the series of  one judicial scandal and crisis after another which rocked  Malaysia in the past 20 years,  not out of vindictiveness or vengeance, but to prevent any such  recurrence in the future – focusing also on why the various national stakeholders, the judiciary, Parliament, political parties, mass media, civil society failed the critical test to defend the cardinal Constitutional principles of the doctrine of separation of powers and an independent, impartial and competent judiciary for two decades.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 19 April 2008, 12:57 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Reflections on a sinking Bahtera Merdeka

Dr.
Azly Rahman

Bonda senyum riang (Mother smiled with joy)

Menerima bahtera merdeka… (In receiving the ship of Independence)

– words from an old song of the 70s

With apologies to the late American social critic Gore Vidal, my piece this week was conceived over the weekend at a speech at Harvard University, during which I spoke about the “ambiguities of freedom” in post-March 8 revolution in Malaysia.

The bahtera/jong/ship that was supposed to bring this country and its people to this mythical magical and elusive place called ‘Vision 2020’ is going down fast and will perhaps sink by May 13, 2008 – 50 years after it was built with confidence and with a new hope for a multi-cultural Malaysia that promised justice for all.

The Titanic of Malaysia’s independence is giving way. The Ides of March and April Showers that transformed into a tsunami and that will bring May Flowers of Power of the Sixties sensibility – all these will bring down the United Malays that is neither. The Malays were neither pure Malays nor united. Nor was Umno even a national organisation. Neither national nor organised, especially at the brink of its sinking.

And Johoreans – the creators of UMNO – must now be the ones crying out loud on board the UMNO sinking ship. Little did they know that they accidentally built in the seeds of contradiction and the antithesis of patriotism into foundations of the Bahtera Merdeka.

They did not know what globalisation and radical multiculturalism meant. Nor did they anticipate that when the bahtera travelled to the northern states and Umno changed stewards in the course of 50 years, disasters would happen.
Bonda senyum riang
 is now weeping.

What happened? Insightful analyses continue to be made on the event of the sinking. Blogs are providing powerful and plausible interpretations and readings into the event.

My thoughts on the sinking ship revolve more on the nature of the human mind; how it is prepared for the sinking ship. I want to specifically talk about the Malay mind, one I am quite familiar with having been raised in a Malay worldview, albeit vacillatingly as I move in,  out, and around multiple worlds.

Akujanji culture

It is no just greed and abuse of power that are contributing to the sinking ship. There is systematic mental genocide of Malays by the party that claims to represent them.

The mental illness that has been inflicted on the bright young Malay minds since Independence is like germ warfare by the rich and powerful Malays on the poor and the powerless, so that only the few will survive in this pseudo-Malay game of Social Darwinism and fascism combined.

In the Kennedy-era of the 1960s Modernisation theorists such as David McClelland talked about the nAch virus, or the “need for Achievement” virus needed for people of the Third World countries to modernise.

The Malays were given the nDoc virus to keep their mind in total obedient mode. This is the “need for Docility” or or “need to be made docile”, or “need to be mentally subdued” or “need to merely follow rules and orders” or “need to keep silent even in face of oppression” and “need to sign the Surat Akujanji” and follow whatever the ketua jabatan commands them to do, even to vote for a sinking ship or to surrender their Constitutional rights.

All these are part of the spectrum of the carpet-bombing mechanism deployed in the germ warfare inflicted by the few Malays upon the many Malays, especially to those in the educational and public service institutions.

While those in power can make and break all the rules they want, those who are powerless are forced to kowtow to the demands, however ridiculous these may seem. The multitude of high profile corruption cases, unsolved, attest to the arrogance of the powerful amongst us. The record number of Constitutional amendments this country as seen since Independence too illustrate the nature of control of one branch of government over the others.

Biro Totalitarianisma Negara

The Biro Tata Negara (BTN) is the chief institution that disseminates the idea of Malay supremacy, makes Malays docile, wages nDoc germ warfare on Malays, breeds inter-racial hatred, destroys the possibility of inter-race dialogue, makes Malays afraid of themselves and their own shadow, and psyches Malays into believing that only UMNO is their true saviour.

It is a dangerous and divisive institution that is deliberately destroying the mind of the Malays and forcing the hard-working race to perform in life based on their own merit. It is a fascist institution that is instilling the idea that the non-Malays are the ones making the Malay poor and perhaps lazy.

A successful master-slave narrative needs this brand of ideology in order for soft power to be sustained. A dependency syndrome as such is a necessary creation of the powerful to gain control over the powerless. This is also the hidden doctrine of slavery and mental servitude. The silent and docile Malay is successfully reproduced generation after generation.

The feel-good of this doctrine is akin to the “feel-good” sensation of a “freshie-ragging” session during Orientation Week in many a Malay-dominated institution of learning in which the culture of “abang/kakak – adik angkat” prevails. Both parties derive pleasure out of the structurally-violent relationship. At a deeper historical level, this is how neo-feudalistic mode of thinking gets perpetuated. The State becomes the postmodern Feudal Kingdom.

The Biro Tata Negara is not teaching ethics of patriotism but instead disseminating the virtues of xenophobia and ethnocentrism, destroying the mind of the Malays. The rakyat must now question the very existence and perpetuation of the propaganda machine and institute ways to stop this machinery from further functioning.

I speak from my own personal experience in being forcefully and systematically injected with the nDoc virus some time in the mid-1980s at the height of the BTN’s work in capturing and captivating the mind of the Malays, turning them into leaders who hate especially the Chinese. It claimed that the non-Malays have taken the wealth away from the Malays.

As an educator I want to see the immediate stop to the work of any form of government agencies that teach Malaysians to hate one another. I believe many Malaysian educators for peace and social justice share my view. I want to especially see the BTN and the National Service in their current form and mode of pedagogical operation, go down together with the sinking ship/bahtera merdeka. I want to see more programs that foster inter-racial harmony and collaboration, in a country plagued with policies that discriminates based on race, class, creed, and national origin. I want to see children of the new immigrants as well given the opportunities to learn about inter-racial understanding. I believe many progressive Malaysian educators wish to see the two programs halted and reconstructed.

I think these two systematic programs of mass indoctrination which grew ironically out of the work of “intellectuals” of our public universities are anti-patriotic and do not create good, thinking citizens able to cooperate inter-culturally in a rapidized globalizing world. These two government programs to promote docile thinking are no longer suitable for a changing Malaysia that wants to value tolerance, respect, dignity, and peaceful resolution for all races. They are in fact part of the instruments of domination that has brought UMNO and the government down its knees.

These programs are based on a flawed philosophy of leadership and human development. They are meant to deliberately create Spartans and not Athenians in our youth. Spartans merely follow rules while Athenians create philosophies that spark revolutions and innovations celebrating humanism. Greek (and Islamic) philosophy inspired the European Renaissance movement which then sparked the Scientific Revolution. The government-indoctrination programs of the Malaysian government, perhaps funded through an unlimited budget, waste the talent of our youth and failed to inculcate creativity and multiple-intelligence capacities. They may strengthen the body but weaken the mind at a time when “brain power” is needed in world in which “information is the currency” and “brain-power industries” are the foundation of economies.

Malays not only need to reject all forms of mental domination as such but also perhaps file a class action suit against the BTN for instilling the fear in themselves, failing to relate with trust with other races, and failing to perform to the best of their mental capacity. Parents need to critically think of the value of these programs and how they affect the consciousness of their children/youngster.

If HINDRAF leaders can file for reparation for the injustices inflicted upon Indians brought over as indentured serfs, the Malays who have been forced into indoctrination programs such as those run by BTN must also seek reparation for mental damage caused by the bureau’s decades of work.

We need a new ship and a brand new crew. We need a true blue Bahtera Merdeka. It is now probably docking either in Sabah or Sarawak.

[REMINDER: As usual, please leave comments that educate and that will bring our level of discussion to a higher intellectual plane. We are all learning to propose avenues to build a new republic upon the ruins of the old. Deconstruct paradigms, not people. People are as good as the politics and paradigm that produce them. Let us continue to be ethical and gentle yet deeply critical in our writings.]

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 20 April 2008, 10:41 am and is filed under
Azly Rahman
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Anti-Corruption reform – Abdullah pre-empting parliamary question directed to him next week

It has become the practice for Cabinet Ministers to pre-empt questions which MPs have given notice in the forthcoming parliamentary meeting by giving answers before the questions are  actually asked on the dates they are listed.

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, has proved that he is no exception and is beginning to answer my first question for question time in the 12th Parliament beginning next Wednesday, which asked him “to outline the top ten priority reform measures  which his government  will implement in the next 12 months to demonstrate that he has heard the voices of the people in the March 8, 2008  ‘political tsunami’”.

This morning,
Abdullah
  announced that the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) will be made a full-fledged commission by year-end and will be answerable to Parliament.

He said  said this was one of the four key reform initiatives that would be carried out by the government in the move to address the public concerns on corruption in the country.

The commission’s workforce would be increased  to 5,000 officers over a period of five years and the government would also introduce legislation to provide a comprehensive protection for whistle blowers and witnesess in corruption cases.

Furthermore, the government would also take immediate steps to improve the public procurement process through measures targeted at addressing specific problems in the system.

Last Thursday, Abdullah announced measures towards judicial reforms,  viz:

•	Ex-gratia payment for “the pain and loss” suffered by the late Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader and Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh and their families, Tun Salleh Abas, Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Wan Hamzah Mohamed Salleh and Datuk George Seah in the 1988 Judicial Crisis.

•	A Judicial Appointments Commission;

•	Review of the judiciary’s terms of service and remuneration to ensure that the Bench can attract and retain the very best of the nation’s talent.

As the “proof of the pudding is in the eating”, more details are needed before an informed judgment can be made of the reform measures concerned.

Although belated, reform measures to restore public confidence in the efficacy, efficiency, independence, impartiality and credibility of national institutions whether judiciary or the anti-corruption agency are welcome as they  have been long-awaited by the people.

Yesterday, I had told some reporters that I was astonished  at  the Prime Minister’s confirmation that he was  studying a proposal by the ACA for it to become more independent.

This was clearly putting the cart before the horse as it is the Prime Minister and Cabinet who should take the policy decision that they have heard the voices of the people in the March 8 “political tsunami” and want an anti-corruption agency which is completely independent of the government, answerable only to Parliament , followed by directives to  the various agencies such as the  ACA and the Attorney-General’s  Chambers to draft the necessary  legislation based on best international practices like the Hong Kong Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC)  to implement such a policy decision.

The government’s failure in the fight against corruption in the past four years, highlighted by the ACA’s inability to net a single one of the 18 “sharks” targetted at the beginning of the Abdullah premiership and the  six-point plunge in the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index rankings from No. 37 in 2003 to No. 43 last year, is an undeniable and  indisputable fact.

I am glad that 24 hours after my comment, the Prime Minister has committed himself to a policy position on  an independent anti-corruption agency.

Malaysians will not want a new anti-corruption commission  which purports to be independent in name only but not in fact in spearheading the fight against corruption to restore integrity in the nation’s public life – becoming a second Suhakam which is tasked to be an independent body to protect and promote human rights but is completely unable to do so without the necessary powers and wherewithal to carry out such a human rights mandate.

Furthermore, is  Abdullah prepared to fully respond  to the March 8 “political tsunami” and initiate far-reaching national reforms including the establishment of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) by tabling such a bill in  the first meeting of Parliament and  to free the Malaysian mass media from the shackles of the Printing Presses and Publications  Act?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 21 April 2008, 1:23 pm and is filed under
Corruption
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Apportioning The Blame

by
M. Bakri Musa

It is tempting – and comforting – to blame everyone for the failure of Prime Minister Abdullah’s leadership, or to take the other extreme and heap the blame entirely on the hapless man.

            Both approaches would be inadequate if not wrong.  The corollary to “everyone is at fault” is that no one is.  That would be a collective “cop out,” an abrogation of personal responsibility.  Even if it were that rare instance where everyone is indeed responsible, there would still be the different degrees of culpability that would have to be acknowledged.

            Blaming Abdullah entirely would also be inadequate.  If nothing else, that would reveal the glaring inadequacies of the system, like its lack of checks and balances.

            When a Turkish Airline jet crashed over Paris in 1974 because its cargo door blew out, the blame was not put entirely on the sloppy mechanic – although his negligence was clearly the triggering event – rather on the design flaws that would not indicate when doors were not properly secured.  Firing the poor mechanic (though that was done) would not prevent future similar accidents, but improving the design with better indicator lights did.

            An insight of modern “failure analysis” is that catastrophes are often not the result of a single major error, rather the cumulative effects of a series of minor mistakes each compounding the other until a critical stress point is reached when the whole thing would blow up.  We are all familiar with the story of losing the war for the want of a nut.

Triggering Event

We could usefully use these approaches to analyze Abdullah’s failure.  The triggering event (the sloppy mechanic as it were) was Mahathir’s selection of Abdullah back in 1998.  Had Mahathir not done this, we would have been spared this disaster.

            Malaysia however cannot be at the mercy of the mistake of any one person.  Besides, blaming Mahathir alone would also not pass the philosophical test on the meaning of causation.  We might as well blame Abdullah’s mother if we were to pursue this line of logic, for had she not given birth to him, we would have been spared this debacle.  We could go even earlier and blame Abdullah’s father for the conception.  There would be no end to the line of blame.

            Certainly Mahathir should have been more prudent and sought wider counsel in selecting his deputy.  He should have had the courage to break party tradition and go beyond the sitting vice presidents in selecting his successor.

            While Mahathir was clearly the triggering factor, I would apportion only 10 percent of the blame on him.

The Man Himself

When Abdullah was selected to assume the highest office in the land, he should have taken that responsibility seriously.  This was not, as in the tradition of the civil service from which he came, “just another promotion.”  Granted, the man lacks introspective instinct, nonetheless he should have at least contemplated his abilities and limitations.

            When the distinguished editor Howard Raines was appointed to head the influential New York Times, he knew that he lacked executive experience.  Consequently he enrolled in a brief graduate business program.  When Tengku Razaleigh was approached by then Prime Minister Hussein Onn to be his deputy, the Tengku politely declined.  He felt he could contribute more by being other than a Deputy Prime Minister.  Mark of wisdom and self confidence!

            When Hussein Onn felt that leading the country was way over his head, he did the honorable thing:  He resigned.  Wise man!

            Abdullah clearly lacks executive talent and economic nous; he owes it to himself and the nation to remedy those deficits.  He could have had the services of the best minds, if only he had been prudent in selecting his advisors.

            For these reasons I would apportion a greater blame – 20 percent – to Abdullah.

Editors, Pundits, Abdullah’s Advisors as Culprits

Just as Abdullah has a duty to select competent advisors, they too owe a duty to him and the nation in properly advising him.  They are advisors and counselors, not courtiers and cheerleaders.  Abdullah has his wife and family members to do that for him.  My admonition also goes to Abdullah’s other official advisors like his ministers and UMNO Supreme Council members.

            This duty to advise extends beyond those with appropriately designated titles.  Editors and journalists as well as intellectuals and pundits, whom society has implicitly imposed a similar obligation, also have a sacred duty and a greater obligation to the public in serving as checks and balances on the leadership.

            Veteran news anchor Walter Cronkite’s critical comments on the Vietnam War were instrumental in President Johnson not seeking a second term.  Had Malaysian editors and journalists acted less like lap dogs, Abdullah would not have dared stray far.

            It is hilarious to see these editors of the mainstream media now clumsily trying to correct themselves.  They are finding that ingrained habits are hard to break, especially bad ones.

           If our editors had a fraction of the fearlessness of Raja Petra, and intellectuals an iota of the integrity of Azmi Sharom, we are more likely to get honest competent leaders, and keep them that way once they are in power.

            Academics like Shamsul AB who are on the public payroll and pundits like Johan Jaafar who earn fat public pensions have a public duty not to debase themselves to be the administration’s sycophants.  They have to remain true to their vocation.

            These folks as well as those boys on the infamous “fourth floor” must therefore shoulder their responsibility for Abdullah’s failings.  I would apportion 30 percent of the blame to them.

We Deserve Our Leaders

Abdullah would not be the leader he is without his followers – us – acquiescing to or permitting it.  Had Malaysians not given Abdullah that overwhelming mandate in 2004 and instead adopted a more skeptical “Show me first!” attitude, his ego would not have been so inflated.  He would have a more realistic assessment of his capabilities; it also would have chastened his advisors.

            Malaysians had plenty of opportunities to remind Abdullah of his shortcomings prior to the recent general election.  The last was the Ijok state by-election.  The excesses of UMNO operatives during this last general election grew out of voters’ tolerance of earlier shenanigans.

            We are responsible for the leaders we get.  We must scrutinize our leaders’ promises; we must hold these leaders accountable.  If we fail to do that, then we have only ourselves to blame for their straying.  For these reasons I would apportion 40 percent of the blame on Malaysian voters.

            While Mahathir’s culpability is a miniscule 10 percent, nonetheless he has freely admitted to it.  More importantly, he is trying his best to rectify it.  Malaysians too are becoming more circumspect and taking their voting responsibilities seriously, as demonstrated by this recent election results.

            As for Abdullah, he has accepted responsibility alright, but that is all he has done.  He continues blaming others – party saboteurs, Anwar, Mahathir – everybody but himself.  As for his advisors, pundits, editors and intellectuals, they have remained uncharacteristically silent.  They have yet to acknowledge much less rectify their mistakes.

            The foregoing is not an accounting exercise rather a suggestion on how we should treat our leaders in future.  The burden is particularly high for voters who are also commentators, editors, and intellectuals.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 21 April 2008, 11:29 am and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Bakri Musa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


ACA director-general finally admitting “interference” in anti-corruption investigations?

“This is what the public wants. We want the same, too…What we want is to be independent in carrying out investigations with no interference.”
 –
Director-General Ahmad Said Hamdan, ACA director-general.

Is this response by the ACA director-general to the proposed revamp of the Anti-Corruption Agency into the Malaysian Commission on Anti-Corruption, announced by the Prime Minister yesterday,  an admission that there had been interference all this while into the ACA investigations, resulting in its  inability to nab the 18 “big fishes” targeted at the beginning of the Abdullah premiership four years ago and the country’s plunge in the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index rankings from No. 37 in 2003 to No. 43 last year?

If so, the time has come for the ACA to open its books to fully account for all cases of interferences into all past  corruption investigations into high-profile personalities, political or otherwise.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 22 April 2008, 11:43 am and is filed under
Corruption
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


China-Bashing Season Has Begun

By
Farish A. Noor

While the simplistic thesis put forward by Samuel Huntington in his work ‘The Clash of Civilisations’ reads like a paltry script from a bad movie, it has to be said that bad scripts are often the most believable and effective. It was Huntington who predicted that in the wake of the Cold War a new sort of conflict would arise, namely one configured along cultural-civilisational differences between the developed Western world and the mysterious, exotic and threatening East.

The two cultural blocs that were said to be the future adversaries to the West were the Muslim world and China, respectively. In the case of the former, it was opined by Huntington that with the demise of Communism the potential threat of Islam would be realised sooner or later for the simple reason that Islam and the West shared ‘bloody frontiers’ that were marked by centuries of conflict. This thesis, however, is patently false to anyone who has even the slightest idea of the history of Islam and the non-Muslim world, for the fact is that the frontiers of the Muslim world are not marked by violence nor stained by blood, but rather remain porous horizons marked by the eclectic culture of Islamic mysticism or Sufism: From Southeast Asia to China, from Africa to Europe, the furthest frontiers of the Muslim world are precisely where mysticism and the Muslim practice of inter-cultural dialogue and cultural cross-fertilisation flourished the most.

Related to Huntington’s fear of Islam was his fear of China, dubbed the ‘sleeping giant’ by Napoleon more than a century ago and which till today has yet to truly realise and demonstrate its full economic potential. Huntington’s crude thesis argued that in time the West would have to realise that non-negotiable cultural differences exist between the Western world and the Orient, and that these cultural differences would ultimately serve as the catalyst for an all-out confrontation between the West and China.

As the world stands on the brink of a global recession and as we witness what may soon become a global food and resource crisis, the lens of Western policy-makers and media analysts are already looking eastwards to locate the new ‘threat’ to the global order, namely China.

It is with this thought in mind that we reflect on the rather curious assortment of media tit-bits that have been served to us lately. In a space of a month, the international media has focused on the internal and external developments in China of late. Needless to say, the human rights record of China – not only in its dealings with Tibet but also internally in terms of its treatment of local dissidents – leaves much to be desired. China was and remains an authoritarian state with a brutal policing apparatus that works to ensure that the regime remains in power at all costs, regardless of the loss of basic freedoms and civil liberties to its people.

But having said that, it should also be remembered that the Chinese government is not the only despotic regime on the planet at the moment. Nor should we forget that the Western governments have been willing and able to work with many equally brutal regimes the world over, from the despots of the Arab states to the dictatorships in Latin America and Africa. So why single out China for now? And if China’s record is something to be looked at closely, we might as well take some time out to look at America’s own human rights record in dealing with the detainees in Guantanamo Bay as well.

The latest craze seems to be the focus on China’s economic dealings with Africa and how Chinese companies have been investing in the development of natural resources and infrastructure in the African continent. Several reports in the international media – including the BBC and CNN – have painted the picture of an aggressive China moving into the African continent to suck its resources dry and to secure monopolies in areas such as oil and gas.

Yet it has to be remembered that in the wake of the Second Gulf War and the invasion of Afghanistan in 2002, it was America that took the lead in the race to re-establish its presence in the African continent. Fearful of the prospect that the oil and gas reserves in the Arab-Muslim world were being depleted too fast, and that Arab oil and gas will run out for good in less than two decades, American and other Western oil and gas companies have begun to turn to Africa as another source of vital resources for their industrialised economies. Soon after the invasion of Afghanistan the Washington-based African Oil Policy Initiative Group (AOPIG) was set up to promote American oil and gas company interests in Africa. Already many of these companies have secured for themselves lasting monopolies in African countries like Nigeria.

So is all this talk of an ‘aggressive China’ moving into Africa simply a smokescreen to hide the fact that American oil and gas companies are already there, exploiting the natural resources of Africa to serve their own domestic industrial needs? And if China is to expand and develop its economy, then surely it also needs to secure a steady supply of vital resources such as oil, gas and steel?

This, then, appears to be the real reason and agenda behind the spate of China-bashing that we are seeing in the international media today. For if the governments of the West are really concerned about the standard of human rights in China at present, they would do just as well to apply the same standards to themselves and to their strategic allies in the Arab world, Africa and Asia. For now however, this hypocrisy of the highest level will continue as long as the international community remains blissfully ignorant of the real geo-political manoeuvrings that are taking place in this latest media skirmish between the West and China. A global economic crisis is in the making, as well as a global race for rapidly depleting resources. The media campaign to demonise China today is just the opening round to what will surely be a long-term conflict whose human costs will be borne by the rest of humanity as well.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 23 April 2008, 9:45 pm and is filed under
Farish Noor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Passing of a great Malaysian patriot

Shocked this morning to  hear of the passing away of a great Malaysian patriot, Rustam A. Sani, 63,  academician, scholar and political activist suddenly at about 2.30am at his home in Gombak.

Deepest condolences to his wife, Rohani, his children Azrani and Ariani and grandaughter, Arissa.

Together with Fong Kui Lun, DAP National Treasurer and MP for Bukit Bintang, I paid my  last respects to Rustam at his Gombak home.

Rustam is one of the great Malaysian sons and daughters who have made incomparable contributions to Malaysian nation-building  but who have not been given proper national recognition and yet  who continued to give his  best  for the betterment of the country through his writings and ideas till his last breath.

Rustam’s passing is an irreparable loss to Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 23 April 2008, 3:01 pm and is filed under
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Renewal of Makkal Osai welcomed – now for immediate release of Hindraf 5

The government’s about-turn to renew the publishing permit of Tamil daily Makkal Osai which it banned last week is welcome as it would have otherwise  destroyed the credibility  of  all reform pledges of Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on the judiciary and the anti-corruption agency.

The Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hamid Albar should learn the lesson of the Makkal Osai faux pax and not repeat the same mistake of complying obediently and blindly the dictates of the “Little Napoleons” in the bureaucracy and to bring to bear his higher duties and responsibilities as the Minister  ultimately responsible for all  decisions made by his ministry.

Now, it is for Hamid to order the immediate and unconditional release of the Hindraf 5 from Internal Security Act (ISA) detention in Kamunting.

Hamid cannot again pass the responsibility of the continued detention of the Hindraf 5 to the civil servants as he must bear  full and final responsibility for the government’s refusal to heed the voices of the people in the March 8 “political tsunami” that the Malaysian Indians have legitimate grievances about their long-standing marginalization of their citizenship rights in the country, and the Hindraf 5 should be rewarded instead of being incarcerated for bringing the plight of the Malaysian Indians finally  to the attention of the government and nation.

Yesterday, Suhakam Commissioner Datuk N. Siva Subramaniam denied allegations that Hindraf leader P. Uthayakumar had been denied proper medical care while in detention.  What is most surprising is that Siva had only met representatives from various government quarters  including Taiping Hospital, the police and  the Kamunting detention centre but not  Uthayakumar  himself and it is most inadvisable on his part to venture such a bold judgment based solely on one-sided accounts.

Siva should have met Uthayakumar first before passing any judgment. Did he ask to meet Uthayakumar  or was he denied access to the ISA detainee?  If the latter, he should have told the authorities that he would not be able to offer any public judgment of the treatment of ISA detainees unless Suhakam is allowed free and unfettered access to them!

In Parliament, it had been customary in the past for Ministers, Deputy Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries to blame civil servants for wrong or misleading answers – something completely unheard-of in first-world Parliaments and countries.

All the Ministers in the second Abdullah Cabinet must adopt a new mindset and culture of responsibility and should understand and accept  that the buck of responsibility  ends with them and that  they cannot claim that they were only acting on the advice of the “Little Napoleons” in their ministries and departments.

Ministers and Deputy Ministers must master the subjects under their portfolio  which they have to address in  Parliament, whether during question time or debates, and they must bear full responsibility for every word uttered in Parliament.  Civil servants cannot provide safety nets for Ministers and Deputy Ministers who made a fool of themselves in Parliament when  giving wrong, misleading or even stupid answers.

In the new Parliament starting next week, Ministers and Deputy Ministers should accept that they have no safety nets when giving  replies prepared by their civil servants as they  do not have  the  luxury of blaming their civil servants for any mistake or misinformation for what they say in Parliament.

Ministers and Deputy Ministers are not “postmen” or “postwomen” of their civil servants when speaking in Parliament.

“Passing the buck” to blame civil servants for wrong or misleading answers  given in Parliament should be a thing of the past as it  is  no more acceptable as higher standards are expected of the new Cabinet in the 12th Parliament.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 24 April 2008, 5:42 pm and is filed under
Hindraf
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Rustam Sani – Patriot and Intellectual (1944-2008)

by
Bakri Musa

I am saddened to hear of the sudden death of Rustam Sani.  In Rustam we had a true patriot, one whose love for the country is pure.  It is so because it came from the head as well as the heart.  It is patriotism unadulterated by the pursuit of material wealth, public adulation, or political power.  A genuine intellectual, he was not one to fit his ideas to the fashion of the day.

            He recognized early the heavy duty and responsibility of being a patriot.  His was not one consumed with endless exhortations.  As the son of a renown nationalist, Rustam must have been immersed in the patriotic fervor and fiery speeches of his late father, Ahmad Boestaman.  Yet at a very young age he knew that the new independent Malaysia would need leaders who not only love the country but also be well equipped with the necessary skills and intellect to lead it.

            Consequently he focused on his school work fully aware that he was among the fortunate few among the youngsters to have the privilege of attending school.  From his local sekolah attap (village school) in Behrang Ulu and the Methodist School Tanjong Malim, he went on to the University of Malaya via Victoria Institution.  From there it was on to graduate work at Kent and Reading in Britain, and later, Yale.

            He was a scholar as well as a practitioner of politics.  His intellectual accomplishment was never diminished by his political involvement.  He had penned more academic papers and popular commentaries as well as books than many fulltime academics.  It was only yesterday that I read his latest (and alas his last) posting on his blog.  Rustam was in his usual sharp element; that posting was a trenchant commentary on Mahathir’s interview on BBC’s Hard Talk.  Rustam was also to have launched his latest books, Failed Nation? Concerns of a Malaysian Nationalist, and Social Roots of the Malay Left, later this month.  Imagine two books!

            As an academic, Rustam molded thousands of young minds.  That may be his greatest though not easily visible legacy.  Rustam may not have been successful in electoral politics, nonetheless his contributions to the nation dwarfs those of “successful” political leaders.

            Rustam is survived by his wife Rohani, son Azrani and daughter Ariani, as well as daughter-in-law Ku Salha and granddaughter Arissa.  My condolences and prayers go to them in this moment of sadness.  May Allah shower His blessings and Mercy on this great Malaysian patriot and intellect.

[I patched below an essay I wrote on Rustam on September 17, 2007.]

One heartening development in Malaysia (and elsewhere) in the last few years is the emergence of personal blogs and the Internet news and commentary portals. This development may prove to be even more transforming socially, politically and in many other ways than the introduction of the printing press five centuries ago.

Rustam Sani’s Vox Populi is the latest. He came on aboard a few weeks ago, and has been busy updating it regularly. His recent essays dealt with the current political leadership crisis, as well as commentaries on such topical issues as education.

A sampling of recent topics includes “The Silat Bunga of Abdullah and Mahathir,” and “Something is Rotten in the Kingdom of Higher Education.” Rustam is indeed the voice of the people.

As elsewhere, blogging is now fast becoming mainstream in Malaysia. This process is hastened considerably by the many bloggers who were once mainstream journalists, beginning first with the late MGG Pillai, and later with the likes of Kadir Jasin, (www.kadirjasin.blogspot.com) and Ahirudin Atan (www.rockybru.blogspot.com) entering the scene.

The younger pioneers like Nizam Zakaria are still there, active as ever and expanding their field of commentary. I particularly enjoy his take on the local arts scene and his excerpting his new novels.

Even more encouraging is the appearance of many blogs and Internet portals using the Malay language, as with Kassim Ahmad’s (www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com). His website also serves as a readily accessible repository of his earlier essays and commentaries, including his banned works like Hadith: A Re-Evaluation. Kassim, like Rustam, is facile in both Malay and English. Unlike many, they both stick to one or the other language with their essays; there is thankfully no jumbling mixture of rojak that I find so irritating and difficult to read.

The appearance of many blogs in Malay indicates that the Malay masses are now no longer captive to the mainstream media and government propaganda machinery (they are both the same). My favorites include Laman Marhean and Agendadaily.

While many are lamenting the current political leadership crisis in UMNO, there is already one positive consequence to this: the spawning of many new websites and blogs in the Malay language.

These enterprising and productive individuals are doing more than those bureaucrats and pseudo scholars at Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka and other public agencies to project our national language globally. Unlike Dewan’s glut of salaried men and women, these cyber contributors cost the government not a penny!

Introducing Rustam Sani

I first heard of Rustam Sani in 1985 when he delivered the public oration on the occasion of Kassim Ahmad receiving an Honorary Doctorate of Letters from Universiti Kebangsaan. That Kassim deserved the honor was beyond question, nonetheless I found the university’s action surprising, although a very pleasing one. Kassim had then just released his harrowing account of detention under the ISA, Universiti Kedua (Second University).

Kassim is an independent thinker; it must have taken great courage for those at the university to so honor him. Rustam was then head of its Department of Sociology and Anthropology, and who nominated Kassim. I was heartened that at least there was one soul at the university brave enough to go against the grain and managed to convince his colleagues in the university senate to go along.

Rustam and I share many commonalities. We both attended English schools in our respective little towns (Tanjong Malim for him, and Kuala Pilah for me). We then went on to the “big school” for our Sixth Form, the venerable Victoria Institution for Rustam, and Malay College for me.

From the University of Malaya Rustam went on to Reading and Kent in Britain. Later as a Fullbright-Hayes scholar, he obtained double masters from Yale. Like me, he returned home, but unlike me, he stayed and put up with the system.

Ponteng (opting out) was never a consideration for him; the nationalist’s blood runs too deep in Rustam’s veins. His father, the late Ahmad Boestaman, was a firebrand nationalist and an early leader in the movement for Merdeka. Firebrand is an apt adjective, for Boestaman was active in API (lit. fire), the acronym for Angkatan Pemuda Insaf (The Committed Youth Movement).

Boestaman later founded the socialist Parti Rakyat Malaysia and served in Parliament in the early 1960s. It was tribute to the way things were then that young Rustam did not suffer the consequences of having a father active in opposition politics. How different things are today!

Tribulations of A Social Scientist

Life as a social scientist in Malaysia must be terribly trying, both professionally and personally. Your field of enquiry touches on so many “sensitive issues,” at least sensitive to the establishment. You cannot follow your intellectual interests, unless the authorities grant you permission. That is quite apart from the funding issue.

When you have someone like Rustam who dares to think differently, life could be even more difficult, on as well as off campus. Rustam was lucky to have been spared the harsh fate meted out to Kassim Ahmad, Syed Hussin Ali, and others. Perhaps Allah in His Infinite Mercy and Wisdom decided that the Boestaman family had suffered enough, and thus spared Rustam the fate endured by his father. The British detained Ahmad Boestaman for eight years for his leftist activities during the Emergency. Just to show that Malaysian leaders did learn a thing or two from their British masters, the Tunku later jailed Ahmad Boestaman for four years under the ISA in 1963. He became the first sitting Member of Parliament to be so detained. That is a mark of distinction and honor in my book, not a blemish.

On campus, unless you toe the official line you would definitely be sidelined no matter how productive you are. Rustam was one productive academic; I came across his writings many times when researching for my books. Unfortunately, on Malaysian campuses intellectual productivity is not valued. To advance, suffice that you are an enthusiastic cheerleader for the authorities.

Far from being satisfied as a detached scholar-analyst, Rustam was actively engaged as a political practitioner and activist with Parti Rakyat Malaysia. He walks the talk; he practices what he preaches.

Off campus, the same oppressive atmosphere prevails. The pages of the mainstream publications and airtime of radio and television are the exclusive preserve of unabashed supporters of the status quo. To these pundits, their sultans would always be donning a samping sutra (silk cummerbund) even when they are wrapped in bark loincloth. Once that sultan is out of power, these cheerleaders would, without skipping a beat, go on praising the next one and unhesitatingly damning the old one. Witness the current vulgar vilification of Mahathir by his once ardent supporters.

The mainstream media have lost their precious credibility, as well as balance and objectivity! In the end it is their readers (and thus the nation) who are not being well served. It is not a surprise that the blossoming of the Internet news portals and blogosphere coincides with (or perhaps the cause of) the decline of the mainstream media.

When Gutenberg introduced his printing press five centuries ago, he did more than simply made reading materials readily available for the masses. He emancipated them, freeing them from the tight controls of the clergy and ruling class who then had exclusive access to written works. They were the exclusive arbiter and interpreter on matters religious and others. The masses need only follow them meekly, as a flock of sheep would their shepherd.

The ready availability of the printing press upended all that. The resulting mass literacy made possible the reformation, and an end to the Medieval Age.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 24 April 2008, 7:31 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Lee Kah Choon saga – opportunity lost for BN leaders after March 8 “political tsunami”

The
Lee Kah Choon saga
 is an opportunity lost for Malaysian leaders to emulate the Malaysian voters in the March 8 “political tsunami” to rise  above race, religion and political differences to work single-mindedly for the good of the people, state and country.

In the last Parliament, in keeping with the perverse notion of “Support Barisan Nasional, right or wrong”, a new rule was formulated for all Barisan Nasional MPs that they cannot  support Opposition motions whether right or wrong and cannot vote according to their conscience but must toe the party line.

As a result, the then Chairman of the Barisan Nasional BackBenchers Club, Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad (now  Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister) was forced in May 2006 to resign from his post to avoid disciplinary action against him for speaking up in favour of my privilege motion in Parliament  to refer the  then MP  for Jasin,  Mohd Said Yusuf to the Committee of Privileges over  the impropriety of an MP asking the Customs and Excise Department to “close one eye” in a case involving the import of sawn timber in Malacca.

It was in disgust at such obtuse and petty-minded mentality where individual and party interests were placed above parliamentary, public and  national interests that the Malaysian voters rose as one to teach the Barisan Nasional a salutary lesson in the March 8 “political tsunami”, depriving the BN of its hitherto unbroken two-thirds majority in Parliament and power in five states.

In the March 8, 2008 general election, Malaysian voters crossed ethnic, religious and even party lines to vote for change and the Lee Kah Choon saga would have been one opportunity for Barisan Nasional leaders to demonstrate that they have heard the voices of the people and are prepared to emulate the voters’ example to put aside personal and party differences for the betterment of the people, state and nation.

Initially
 the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi  sent  out the right signals in his first public reaction on Tuesday on  Lee’s appointment and acceptance of the posts of Penang Development Corporation (PDC) director and InvestPenang executive committee  chairman – that for him, “it’s okay as long as there is no clash in policy”.

However, in a matter of a few hours on the same day, Abdullah was prevailed upon to ignore the voices of the people in the March 8 “political tsunami” and to come out with a hardline stand declaring that Lee’s decision was “against the spirit of BN” and requiring action from the Acting Gerakan President, Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon.

The latest  pronouncement on the matter came from  Deputy Prime Minister and Deputy Barisan Nasional Chairman Datuk Seri Najib Razak yesterday that Lee’s acceptance of the two Penang state government positions was against the “clearly stated policy of BN” – making it the most unknown “clearly stated” BN policy as the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and BN leaders had not known  about it for 48  hours!

One important reason why Malaysia had lagged behind other countries in economic development and international competitiveness in the past four decades  is because of  the country’s failure to give top priority to meritocracy and excellence in nation-building.

The Lee Kah Choon saga shows  that the Barisan Nasional government and leaders have yet to hear the voices of the March 8 “political tsunami” who want Malaysian leaders to emulate the voters in transcending ethnic, religious and political differences to work for the betterment of the people, state and nation by creating a new culture of talent and merit unsullied by partisan considerations.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 25 April 2008, 3:00 pm and is filed under
Election
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Hishammuddin’s apology – Malay keris-wielding antics laid to rest?

Two weeks ago, when speaking at the first public ceramah/consultation with DAP MPs, Excos, State Assembly representatives in Ipoh,  I broached the subject when the UMNO Youth leader and Education Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussin will publicly apologise for his offensive, irresponsible and provocative
“Malay keris” antics
 which MCA, Gerakan  and even Umno leaders had blamed as one of the causes of the Barisan Nasional’s debacle in the March 8, 2008 general election “political tsunami”.

I said:

Hishammuddin should publicly apologise for his “Malay keris” antics and MCA, Gerakan and other Barisan Nasional leaders should demand in unison for such an apology and assurance of no repetition in Cabinet and Parliament.

Unless Hishammuddin is prepared to make a public apology and MCA, Gerakan and other BN leaders in Cabinet and Parliament take a public position demanding that Hishammuddin publicly apologise for his offensive, irresponsible and provocative “Malay keris” antics, it could not be said that Umno, MCA, Gerakan and BN leaders have learnt anything from the March 8 “political tsunami”.

The questions I want to pose tonight is whether Hishammuddin is prepared to publicly apologise for his irresponsible and provocative “Malay keris” antics and whether MCA, Gerakan and other BN leaders are prepared to demand in unison for such an apology and assurance of no repetition in Cabinet and Parliament as proof that they have taken seriously the voice of Malaysian voters in the March 8 “political tsunami”.

Now Hishammuddin has made his apology, although quite an ambivalent one.

MCA, Gerakan, MIC and Umno leaders are euphoric and ectastic with Deputy Prime Minister,
Datuk Seri Najib Razak
 declaring that Hishammuddin’s apology was “something great and noble” and   calling on the issue of the “keris-wielding” to be put to rest.

I had repeatedly lambasted Hishammuddin for his irresponsible,  offensive, insensitive and provocative “Malay keris wielding” in the last Parliament even citing it as a reason for a RM10-salary cut for the Education Minister’s pay as a censure, and  I was extremely disappointed that apart from support from other DAP MPs, there was not a  squeak of protest against the keris-wielding antics its  from the Barisan Nasional ranks, whether front or back benches, whether MCA, Gerakan, MIC, Umno or from other BN component parties.

I can accept Hishammuddin’s apology,  however haughty or ambivalent, but the issue cannot  just be forgotten and buried if no attempt is made to understand  its root causes and how and why it could happen – symptomatic of something very wrong with half-a-century of Malaysian nation-building.

Hishammuddin’s irresponsible, offensive, insensitive and provocative “Malay keris wielding” symbolized  the worst of Umno political hegemony, which was mischievously equated with Malay political power.

It represented a rejection of the Vision 2020 objective of creating a “Bangsa Malaysia” out of the diverse races and religions in Malaysia, a repudiation of the concept of “ketuanan Malaysia” to replace “ketuanan Umno” camouflaging as “ketuanan Melayu” and a refusal to accept that all Malaysians must be treated as equal and rightful citizens in  Malaysia.

In apologizing for his insensitive “Malay keris wielding”, is Hishammuddin prepared to fully respond to the paradigm shift pioneered by the voters in the March 8 “political tsunami” for a fully Malaysian approach, transcending race and religion,  to the nation-building challenges of the country where the focus is no more on competition between Malays and non-Malays but between Malaysians and the rest of the world in the highly competitive era of globalization?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 27 April 2008, 12:23 pm and is filed under
nation building
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


12th Parliament Opens Today

The “political tsunami” 12th Parliament elected on March 8, 2008 convenes today for the swearing-in of the 222 elected Members of Parliament and the election of the Speaker and two Deputy Speakers.

Tomorrow, the Yang di Pertuan Agong will officially declare open the 12th Parliament with a royal address which represents the policy speech of the government.

On Wednesday, question time and debate will begin.

There are great expectations of the new Parliament.  Let its curtain rise.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 April 2008, 8:21 am and is filed under
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Freedom From An Oppressive Government

by M. Bakri Musa

The greatest legacy the leader of a nation could bequeath would be freedom from an oppressive government.  This realization comes to me when I compare Malaysia’s experience during the 1997 economic crisis to America’s current struggle with its massive debt mess.

            The differences in reactions and consequences are attributable to one salient factor:  Unlike Malaysians, Americans do not fear and are not dependent upon their government.  Americans have a healthy skepticism towards their leaders and government, an attribute generally lacking among Malaysians.

            With Malaysia in 1997 there was a general crisis of confidence, with widespread gloom and doom permeating the skyscrapers in Kuala Lumpur as well as the suraus in Ulu Kelantan, and from the Prime Minister to the village penghulu.  It also precipitated a deep and ugly split in the leadership that resulted in riots and ugly street demonstrations.  The very symbol of our sovereignty – the ringgit – was devalued.

            Like Malaysia then, America is today plagued with a mountain of debt on a scale a universe beyond what Malaysia suffered.  The American dollar is also being debased, not by the government however as with Malaysia, but by the more powerful force of the marketplace.

            The American tribulation is even greater, as the leadership – in particular President Bush – is viewed as ineffective and irrelevant.  America is additionally burdened with an expensive and bloody war.  Yet for all that, there are no riots or widespread doom and gloom.  When Americans are disenchanted with their president or government, they throng the voting booths in record numbers to vote for a change.

Our Inherent Freedom

In Islam, a ruler is denied “the right to take away from his subjects certain rights which inhere in his or her person as a human being.”  Meaning, freedom from oppression is not a gift bestowed by the ruler upon the ruled, rather the natural state.  Or to put it in the language of the Quran, the will of Allah!  Citizens would consent to giving away those rights to the ruler only upon a demonstrated need for the greater good.

            Many a leader, evil and benevolent, have used this rationale to take away this precious rights away from citizens.  Even otherwise civilized societies are not immune to this seduction, as evidenced by the easy passage of the Patriots Act in America.  Citizens have only themselves to blame if they were to grease the path towards their own enslavement.

            Government oppresses less through sheer size and more through exercising unchecked powers.  Scandinavian countries have large governments, yet their people are not oppressed or threatened.  These governments get voted in repeatedly.

            They use their might not to oppress citizens but to emancipate them.  The police force is used (rightly) for discouraging and apprehending criminals, not for spying on innocent citizens or harassing political dissenters.  Public funds are used to build daycare centers and affordable housing, not detention camps and police barracks.

            The Indian government is also large, though in terms of absolute budget size it is smaller than most of the Scandinavian countries.  Yet the Indian government remains oppressive and intrusive in the lives of its citizens, caricatured by the ubiquitous “Permit Rajs.”

            By modern standards, Stalin and Mao Zeedung had access to more limited resources and far primitive instruments of controls, yet they were able to maintain a tight grip on their people, even long after those leaders were dead.

            A repressive government led by well-intentioned and capable leaders can achieve wonders in improving the lives of their citizens, as seen with Singapore.  Even when the leaders were less well intentioned and less capable, they could still do remarkable things, as with Indonesia’s Suharto.

            Nonetheless oppression is still oppression no matter how seemingly sophisticated the guises and excuses.  Singapore effectively controls its citizens through inane and intrusive rules as well as punitive laws like its libel statutes.  South Korea’s General Park justified his on the pretext of economic efficiency and national security.  It worked only temporarily in South Korea; it will be the same with Singapore.  Sooner or later citizens’ yearning for freedom will emerge.  Once the flame of freedom is lighted, it can be doused only temporarily.

Let Your People Be!

In America, when someone says, “I am from the government, and I am here to help you!” it would be treated as a line from an unoriginal comedian.  In Malaysia, it would be taken as a solemn promise, even though it is rarely fulfilled.  This reflects the control the government exerts over Malaysians, or more charitably, the citizens’ faith (misplaced) in their government.

            In America, Ronald Reagan became the most popular modern president by promising to “take the government off citizens’ backs!”  In Malaysia, whenever citizens’ groups meet over a problem, their resolutions would inevitably begin with, “The government must do this and that!”  That reflects an ingrained dependency syndrome.

            It was not always so.  There was a time when citizens especially Malays would never trust the government.  It was easy then as it was a colonial one, manned by people of a different race and skin color.

            Rulers exert their grip on citizens primarily through fear a la Saddam and Stalin, or rewards a la Singapore.  Both are effective; the second however is more enduring as citizens could delude themselves into believing that they are doing the state’s bidding on their own volition.

            Thus through a carefully crafted system of rewards, Singapore quickly reduced its birth rate.  It was so successful that the government is now desperate to reverse course!  Singapore’s positive reinforcements prove more effective than China’s odious and punitive laws.

            There is a third route, cara halus (subtle way), unique to Malay culture where rulers exerts a emotional hold on their subjects through a collective sense of terhutang budi (debt of gratitude).  It is predicated upon the cultural belief encapsulated in the saying, Hutang budi di bawa mati (we bring our debt of gratitude to our grave).  Malays would willingly put themselves (and their children) into endless servitude to the sultan in return for some perceived favors, sought or unsought.  Such controls, reinforced by cultural norms, are even more powerful.

            UMNO leaders play on these collective cultural guilt trips when they continually harp on their pivotal role in Merdeka and Ketuanan Melayu.  “Be grateful!”  “Kacang lupakan kulit” (Bean forgetting its pod); “Melayu Mudah Lupa!” (Malays forget easily!); these are the phrases bandied about to emotionally enslave Malays.

            For added insurance, the UMNO government also uses fear through such oppressive laws as the ISA, as well as rewards of massive patronages via the New Economic Policy.  Hence the strong grip the UMNO government has on Malays especially.  This communal guilt trip is just as enslaving as Stalin’s harsh police state.

            As long as citizens are not liberated and emancipated, they will never realize their full potential.  Their creativity will forever be stifled; their talent stunted.  The best that they could achieve would be total obedience, otherwise known as servitude.

            More dangerously, such citizens would go berserk once that control is suddenly gone or destroyed.  Long reduced to human robots, they are unable to think or act independently.  Today’s Iraq is a tragic reminder of this reality.  This fate awaits all closed societies.

            If that were to happen to Malaysia, it would be the greatest tragedy, for both ruler and ruled.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 April 2008, 3:54 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Urgent Parliament motion on Wednesday  for release of Hindraf 5 and 60 other ISA detainees

I have given notice to Parliament to  have an urgent debate on Wednesday for the release of the Hindraf Five –  M Manoharan, DAP Selangor Assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan dan T. Vasantha Kumar – and over 60 other detainees  currently held in Kamunting Detention Centre under the Internal Security Act (ISA), including some who had been incarcerated for over six years.

In calling on  Parliament to urge the Abdullah administration to respect and comply with the wishes of the people as demonstrated in the March 8 “political tsunami” for  a more democratic, accountable and  progressive Malaysia,  the government is reminded that the ISA detainees  should not be denied their fundamental rights to an open trial if they are deemed to be threats to national security.

The refusal of the government to release the Hindraf 5 and the scores of other ISA detainees is proof that the Abdullah administration is not prepared to heed the people’s aspirations clearly articulated in the March 8 “political tsunami” to end its arrogant governance and to revoke its  high-handed and undemocratic policies and laws.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 April 2008, 4:43 pm and is filed under
Hindraf
,
Human Rights
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


After the apology over the keris

by
Azly Rahman

We must resolve the keris controversy generated by Umno Youth chief Hishammuddin Hussein, who has brandished the keris at the party’s annual assembly twice now.

At last year’s meeting, Umno Perlis delegate Hashim Suboh said at the end of the debate on economy and education issues: “Datuk Hisham has unsheathed his keris, waved his keris, kissed his keris. We want to ask Datuk Hisham, when is he going to use it? […] Force must be used against those who refused to abide by the social contract.”

This was in relation to Hishammuddin’s alleged weakness in dealing with demands from Chinese schools.

We live in a world in which signs and symbols of violence colonise our consciousness. From cave walls inscribed with images of Neanderthals clobbering a baby dinosaur, to production of images disseminated worldwide via the electronic media and Internet, we are confronted with violence.

We are creatures of signs and symbols manipulated by those who own the means of producing static and moving images. Objects of violence – of deaths and mega-deaths, of decimation and of demolition, and of the demonstration of defiance and destruction – all these, throughout history, have become symbols of choice for those in power.

Consider those crude-looking objects like sharpened stones and rocks used by cavemen to club one another, spears used in Alexandra of Macedonia’s phalanx, the spears and swords used in the Taiping Rebellion in China, cannons used in Gettysburg in the Civil War in America, and the rifle used by the Saddam Hussein in celebrating victory, the 21-gun salute in a modern military-inspired ceremony in Kuala Lumpur, the range of inter-continent ballistic missiles buried in the silos of Nevada – and finally the Malay keris.

Consider the sharp and pointed object. It involves release of inner tension, of perhaps the libido and repressed energy, of anger or frustration and of the lack of language to communicate peace.

All the energy from the body, flowing through the shoulders, the biceps, the hand, the wrist, the fist, and finally all these, the chi, the chakra or the tenaga lahir dan batin – all contained like the Einsteinian fusion-ed energy – is released through these objects of anger and destruction such as the keris. The technology of killing continues to be perfected as human beings become more sophisticated in the art and science of anger mis-management.

The traditional keris – like Malaysia’s proposal of the East Asia Economic Caucus – is a weapon of mass confrontation and has evolved in this postmodern era into a symbol of mass deception. It is a symbol. It is a sign. It represents something. The keris is a semiotic subject of study and must be looked at from different perspectives of meaning.

What is the nature of repression, the untamed libido, the repressed energy, the anger, the frustration, and the bottled up fear that is encapsulated and buried in the psycho-archeology of the keris? I hope the original creator of the Umno logo can answer this question.

Proposal for Umno

I want to propose something new. I want to invite Umno to consider changing its antiquated logo, the keris. It’ll be a good branding exercise to increase marketability in line with Malaysia’s corporate-ideological restructuring.

If Apple Computer can do that with its original 1970s unfriendly logo of an apple falling on Newton’s head and have it evolve into something friendlier like ‘take the byte off an Apple’, then Umno can do so as well.

When I was a child sitting under a rambutan tree in a Malay kampong in Johor, I had this question: what if Parameswara the assassin-prince – who was watching with thrill a mousedeer kick a Rottweiler into the Straits of Malacca – had sat under a durian tree and the fruit fell. What if it hit his head and he had to be taken back to Palembang to be hospitalised for concussion?

Would Malacca have been ‘founded’; would ketuanan Melayu have become an issue; and would the keris have been wielded at the Umno general assembly? I do not know.

History can be the greatest coloniser. Memories lie. There is no such thing as ‘historical fact’ when selective, authored and doctored accounts based on power/ideology/genealogy of truth and falsehood are used to report ‘historical events’ – and turned into ‘facts’ to be disseminated by our nationalistic and patriotic Sejarah/Tawarikh/History teachers and curriculum developers of the Biro Tatanegara.

Umno must improve its logo. It must hold a logo competition. The criteria must be this: only symbols of peace are allowed. And one must submit an essay of 500-word on why the symbol of the party is chosen.

One must first read studies on signs and symbols of violence throughout history and how they have shaped human consciousness/cognitive evolution.

And one could consider these words from an ancient Malay text:

. …Shukur dan sabar ihsan Islam

Suci dan ikhlas hakikat dalam

Menjalankan ucap siang dan malam

Memuji Tuhan Halkul Alam.

Inilah keputusan jalan hakikat

Ibu nyawa sudah dapat

Nyawa dan badan sudah mufakat

Boleh kita membawa sifat…

A symbol of any good and friendly ancient Malay scripture that glorifies the common person and not the ancient rulers would be a good replacement. A symbol of peace is needed.

The enquiring mind is more powerful than the weapon of mass deception. A new regime must have this as a foundation. I hope to see Umno’s new logo.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 30 April 2008, 8:12 am and is filed under
Azly Rahman
,
nation building
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Bad start for 12th Parliament

Its a bad start for the 12th Parliament, with Parliament setting the bad example of breaking and bending laws and rules to fit the whims and fancies of the Barisan Nasional government, whether during question time or in the first debate on the Royal Address.

Those who have seen the live telecast may want to give their views for the benefit of MPs.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 30 April 2008, 12:52 pm and is filed under
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Abdullah could only  think of seven priority reform measures…

Yesterday, my parliamentary question (No. 5 on the Order Paper) asking  the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi “to outline the top ten priority reform measures  which his government  will implement in the next 12 months to demonstrate that he has heard the voices of the people in the March 8, 2008  ‘political tsunami'” was not answered as only three got replied.

From the answer Abdullah would have given (reproduced below),  the Prime Minister could only  think of seven priority reform measures (many of which are quite unsatisfactory)  although he had promised Malaysians wide-ranging reforms since he took over from Tun Dr. Mahathir Mahathir  more than four years ago.

May be you can outline more reform measures which deserve Abdullah’s top priority in the next 12 months.

Abdullah’s answer:

Seperti yang telah saya nyatakan sebelum ini, pihak Kerajaan menghormati keputusan rakyat sebagaimana yang telah dizahirkan dalam Pilihanraya Umum ke-12 baru-baru ini, dan kita menerima keputusan tersebut dengan hati yang terbuka.  Pada masa yang sama, kita juga akan memastikan agar mandat yang telah diberi oleh rakyat, untuk terus mentadbir Negara ke arah kejayaan dan kegemilangan tidak akan disia-siakan.

Kerajaan yang saya pimpin adalah kerajaan yang berpengalaman; kerajaan yang terbukti.  Namun saya percaya bahawa Kerajaan yang saya pimpin ini tidaklah bersifat jumud.  Saya yakin bahawa Kerajaan pimpinan saya akan terus bersedia untuk menjiwai hasrat rakyat, serta menangani isu-isu yang menjadi bebanan serta menimbulkan kegusaran rakyat.

Atas dasar itu lah, maka saya telah mengumumkan sebuah agenda pembaharuan bagi memenuhi hasrat rakyat. Butiran agenda tersebut adalah seperti berikut:

•	Pertama: menangani impak kenaikan harga barang, terutamanya makanan, akibat arus pasaran global;

•	Kedua: mengkaji semula pelaksanaan pelan-pelan ekonomi negara bagi memastikan agar faedah pembangunan negara akan dinikmati oleh setiap rakyat;

•	Ketiga:   mengurangkan jurang pendapatan dikalangan dan diantara golongan etnik, di samping memastikan kesaksamaan untuk semua rakyat Malaysia;

•	Keempat: mengurangkan kadar jenayah;

•	Kelima: meneruskan usaha kearah memerangi rasuah dan meningkatkan budaya integriti;

•	Keenam: menyokong pembaharuan serta meningkatkan keyakinan rakyat terhadap institusi kehakiman dan

•	Ketujuh: menangani isu sensitive berhubung agama termasuk pembinaan dan pemindahan rumah ibadat.

Setakat ini, saya telahpun membuat beberapa pengumuman berkaitan dengan agenda yang telah saya gariskan dan ianya telah diterima baik oleh rakyat.  Pembaharuan-pembaharuan ini adalah tambahan kepada agenda pembangunan nasional seperti yang digariskan dalam Misi Nasional dan Wawasan 2020.  Saya yakin bahawa agenda besar Kerajaan ini akan dapat menambah baik kualiti kehidupan rakyat, dan saya percaya rakyat akan terus memberikan sokongan kepada Kerajaan dalam usaha untuk melaksanakan pelbagai langkah bagi membawa Malaysia kearah era yang lebih gemilang.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 1 May 2008, 2:29 pm and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Police after RPK again

Police going after Raja Petra Kamarudin again.

His computer was confiscated during a police search of his house in Sungai Buloh this morning connected to his recent posting on the Altantunya Shaariibuu murder case in his blog,
“Let’s send the Altantunya murderers to hell”
.

Malaysiakini
 has reported DSP Victor Sanjos of the cybercrimes division as saying that the police are investigating Raja Petra  under the Sedition Act 1948 for incitement and also because he “commented on a case before the court made its decision”.

Any  offence in the latter category would  fall under  “contempt of court” to be dealt with  by the presiding judge for the Altantunya case.  When did it become an offence under the Sedition Act?

The police action, coming immediately after the denial by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak through his press secretary of having anything to do with the murder of Altantunya Shaariibuu, smacks of an orchestrated response to Raja Petra’s blog – and must be deplored in the strongest possible terms.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 2 May 2008, 3:38 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
IT
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Lee Hwa Beng  to investigate RM4.6 billion PKFZ scandal?

Letters

by
Albert Lim

I refer to YB
blog posting
 dated April 11 regarding abovementioned.

I strongly believe and fear that YB predictions may come true with the appointment of former Subang Jaya state assemblyman, Lee Hwa Beng as Port Klang Chairman, reported today by China Press.

With Lee’s appointment, the transport minister gives an immediate instruction for him to appoint independent auditor to look into PKFZ scandal. Obviously, the transport minister’s instruction is a  step in the wrong direction, a step towards  a 3rd minister to be marred and tarred.

Again, BN minister has underrated  the intelligence of all Malaysians, a lesson not learnt in the aftermath of March 8 political tsunami.

I hope YB Lim will look into the issue again, raise it in Parliament. A very simple action to show Ong Tee Keat’s sincerity in exposing this scandal is by appointing  credible persons in the investigation,not Lee Hwa Beng known as ally to former transport minister Ling Liong Sik.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 3 May 2008, 12:01 pm and is filed under
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.