The 14GE is not battle between the Malays and Chinese for political power as Malays will not lose political power but whether Najib and UMNO leaders can continue to mislead Malaysians to continue  their economic scandals and abuses of power

I want first to thank the DAP Assemblywoman for Senai, Wong Shu Qi for a new translation and bringing out this new Chinese edition of “Time Bombs in Malaysia”, a collection of my speeches in Parliament during my first two terms as Member of Parliament from 1971 – 1978.

I am reminded of the first day of the resumed Parliament on Feb. 23, 1971, when Members of Parliament convened for the first time after a 21-month suspension of Parliament and National Operations Council (NOC) Emergency rule  after the May 13 racial riots of 1969, under the grave threat that Parliament will be closed down and Members of  Parliament sent home if they failed to accomplish the first task expected of them – to amend the Malaysian Constitution to entrench four issues as “sensitive” issues which could not be questioned on pain of conviction for sedition and the removal of the  parliamentary immunity of MPs with regard to these entrenched “sensitive issues” even in parliamentary debates.

In fact, a few days before MPs met, the UMNO Youth leader at the time warned that UMNO Youth would surround Parliament until MPs approved the Constitution Amendment Bill.

During the debate on the Constitution Amendment Bill in Parliament, there was palpable electricity in the air, with government  MPs walking around with bulges in the pocket, signifying the least pacific intentions.

However, the 13 elected DAP MPs were not so easily browbeaten and we stood up for the people’s rights and made it clear that DAP MPs were not elected into Parliament to be “yes-men” to surrender their principles or betray the trust and confidence of the electorate.

When the DAP MPs stood their ground and opposed the Constitution Amendment Bill 1971, the parliamentary democratic process was abused and the Speaker was instructed to punish the DAP MPs by denying them the chance to participate in the next parliamentary item on the debate on the Royal Address.

When even up to the last hour of the third and final day of the debate and not a single one of the DAP MPs had “caught the Speaker’s eye” to speak, all the DAPs walked out in protest – which  started  the history of Parliamentary walkouts and boycott in Malaysia.

So the recent parliamentary charade where I was punished and suspended for six months from Parliament for basically pursuing the question “Mana RM2.6 billion?” had a history going back some 44 years!

In those dark days for democracy and human rights in 1971, the future political prospects were bleak and gloomy, and many completely lost  hope for change, progress and democracy in Malaysia.

But we in the DAP, despite the many ups and downs, trials and tribulations, Internal Security Act detentions and even prison terms, continued to plough on because our love, loyalty and patriotism to Malaysia, and belief in democratic change and in progress, which saw fruition not after one general election or two, but after eight general elections of nearly four decades, as evident in the 2008 and 2013 General Elections.

What I wrote in the foreword for the second edition of ‘”Time Bombs in Malaysia” (August 1978 – after the July 8, 1978 General Election) reflects the DAP’s loyalty and commitment to democratic change and process in Malaysia.

I had  quoted  from my speech at an election victory dinner in Klang on 20th July 1978, where I said:

“The post-election period has been a season of rumours…The latest rumour is that the DAP would join the Barisan Nasional….

“The idea of DAP joining the Barisan has never occurred in the minds of DAP leaders. It has never been discussed. It is a mere fabrication by rumour-mongers who have their  own axe to grind!

“To give these rumours some credence, these rumour-mongers point to my speech to DAP MPs and State Assemblymen last Sunday declaring that the DAP was prepared to co-operate with the Prime Minister, Datuk Hussein Onn, to overcome the problems and obstacles in nation-building.

“This has been the stand of the DAP right from the beginning, that we are prepared to work with anybody to help build a Malaysian nation on a just and equal basis, to save democracy, to combat poverty and class exploitation, to uphold human rights and to fight corruption.  We are not an Opposition for opposition’s sake.

“In fact, when Datuk Hussein took over as Prime Minister after the death of Tun Razak, I made exactly the same point in Parliament in the motion of confidence on Datuk Hussein Onn as Prime Minister.

“We in the DAP are reasonable people. But we will be firm and unyielding in our political principles and beliefs.  But we will be firm and unyielding in a reasonable way.

“We will seek, for the interests of the country and for the future of our children, to make the government see our point of view, to understand the people’s deepest hopes and dreams.  We will do this by speaking up inside and outside Parliament and the State Assemblies, and in meeting with the Prime Minister and other government leaders.  We will do so, not to ask for Minister or Deputy Minister posts or to get entry into the Barisan, but to change the thinking and assessments by all political leaders on basic problems of the nation.”

For the past five decades, DAP had remained true and faithful to the democratic values and guidelines which I summed up in Klang on 20th July 1978, eleven days after the July 9, 1978 general election, where DAP won 16 Parliamentary and 25 State Assembly seats.

The 14th General Election which is likely to be held in two-and-a-half years in 2018 will be a watershed in Malaysian electoral history.

Malaysians who had rooted for political change in the 13GE went into the deepest and darkest despair at the demise of Pakatan Rakyat, for they see the hopes of political change being destroyed completely, at a time when the UMNO/BN government has proved to be such a national liability and disaster.

The formation of Parti Amanah Negara and establishment of Pakatan Harapan comprising DAP, PKR and AMANAH have however saved the political situation, filling the political vacuum and void caused by despair and seeming hopelessness for political change, with the country inundated by so many political, economic, good governance and nation-building scandals under the Najib premiership.

However, the battle for political change in 2018 GE will not be easy or smooth one, as the Najib strategists are doing their utmost to present the 13th General Election as a battle for the survival of Malays and Islam, equating  the survival of Datuk Seri Najib Razak as Prime Minister with  the survival of the Malays and Islam in Malaysia.

This not the case. The 14GE is not battle between the Malays and Chinese for political power as Malays will not lose political power but whether Najib and UMNO leaders can continue to mislead Malaysians to continue  their economic scandals and abuses of power.

A Pakatan Harapan Federal Government will compete with UMNO and Barisan Nasional to have a better record in upholding the fundamental features of the Malaysian Constitution and look  after the rights and interests of all Malaysians, whether Malays, Chinese, Indians, Ibans, Kadazans, Orang Asli and the question of Malays or any community losing political rights, or Malays and Islam under threat,  will not arise.

This is because a Pakatan Harapan Federal government does not want to be a one-term government but be able to continue to get the mandate of the electorate in subsequent polls to govern Malaysia because we have proved to be better in looking after the rights and interests of all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

(Speech  at forum on “ Malaysia – What is the road to take for the future” in conjunction with  the book launch of new Chinese edition of “Time Bombs in Malaysia” at the Kuala Lumpur Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall on Wednesday,6th January 2015 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 7 January 2016, 11:44 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Disgrace of Malaysian University Education

By Murray Hunter

Asia Sentinel

January 6, 2016

Mismanagement, waste, and corruption in public universities

Malaysia’s public universities have dropped completely out of the World University Rankings maintained by the Times of London. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia was ranked 87th in the top 100 Asian rankings in 2013, but has since fallen out. Not a single Malaysian university made the top 100 Asian rankings.

The collapse of higher education in Malaysia has grown so marked that World Bank economist Dr Frederico Gil Sander  recently said the state of the system is more alarming than the country’s considerable public debt. The talent needed to develop the Malaysian economy is not being produced.

It isn’t just the Times survey. Malaysian public universities have also shown mixed results in other surveys like the QS rankings,where three Malaysian universities rose slightly while Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, International Islamic Universiti Malaysia, and Universiti Teknologi MARA, all slipped. Not a single Malaysian university made the top 100, According to the QS ranking profiles, Malaysian universities have lost significant ground in academic reputation and tend to be weak in research, with no Malaysian university even reaching the top 400.

Public Universities Vice-Chancellor/Rector Committee chairman Kamarudin Hussin, also vice chancellor of Universiti Malaysia Perlis (Unimap) claims that the ranking methodologies favor older, more established universities. Yet many universities within the top 100 Asian universities were established relatively recently. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, ranked 7th was established in 1980, Nanyang Technological University, ranked 10th was set up in 1981, and Pohang University of Science and Technology, ranked 11th, was established in 1986.

Even ideologically governed schools better

In addition, a number of universities from countries that are not democratically, governed like Sharif University of Technology (43rd, Iran), Isfahan University of Technology (61, Iran), Iran University of Science and Technology (69), King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (71, Saudi Arabia), and King Saud University (72, Saudi Arabia), all made the top 100 Asian university rankings last year.

Kamarudin accepts that Malaysian universities have “many issues that must be resolved….(and) there are plenty of oversights that must be fixed”. However, unfortunately, he didn’t mention what they are, or offer any solutions.

Probably the tone Kamarudin used in his article hints at the first problem – the view that authority takes precedence. Kamarudin asserts that academic freedom exists, but should be subject to the views of the so called “majority,” which could be read as authority. In August last year, Kamarudin was one of the strongest opponents of students attending the Bersih 4 rally, threatening disciplinary action such as suspension or even expulsion of students who attended.

Independent thought suppressed

Supressing independent thought is counterproductive to creativity, critical thinking and problem solving, the very mindset that Malaysian universities seek to develop. Among the characteristics required are people who are knowledgeable and have the right to choose.

Malaysian universities begin to lose the plot where their leaders are glorified with unnecessary ceremonies that make a mockery of academia, and tend to dominate the persona of universities, rather than act as facilitators for people to excel.

This leads to unnecessary expenses such as lavish dinners with highly paid entertainers to celebrate this or that event, this award or that. Some of these dinners are very extravagant, costing up to hundreds of thousands of ringgit. Vice chancellors make lavish trips both domestically and internationally, with no apparent benefit to the universities except for MOUs that are never acted upon.

This is in a time when university budgets are being slashed, the minister has directed university management to be frugal and seek funds outside government allocations.

Waste, incompetence

The waste goes much further. The Malaysian Auditor General’s 2012 report, for instance, cited Universiti Malaysia Sabah’s (UMS) mishandling of its computerized maintenance management system. After the university spent RM400,000 between 2008 and 2012, the auditor general found that data was not keyed into the system and the person responsible for managing the system had no IT knowledge.

The cost of three building projects ballooned 8.9 percent at Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM) due to delays and inexperience of the contractor.

The auditor general further found at Universiti Malaysia Perlis (Unimap) that funding allocations didn’t take into account the basic needs of students in the planning and construction of its main campus. Despite the allocation of RM438.64 million for setting up Unimap under the 8th Malaysian Plan, only 25 percent of the campus plans have been completed, which university management blamed on budget constraints.

What is even more startling according to the report is that Unimap made the first payment to the contractor working on the permanent campus before the contract was fully negotiated and signed. The report further states that workmanship is extremely poor, cement in many places is cracking and crumbling, roads and parking areas are inappropriate and much of the equipment supplied is not functioning.

According to the report, from 2002 to 2012 the university had no dormitories and has been renting them and ferrying students to campus instead, at a cost of RM138.4 million. In 2015, Unimap arranged with the Proven Group of Companies to supply additional privately owned accommodation at Titi Tinggi, some 35 km from Kangar and 40 km from the main campus at Ulu Pauh. Details of the agreement have never been made public, but Unimap will pay rent for 15 years for the use of this accommodation, but ownership will continue to remain private.

The Unimap-Proven venture is contrary to the Education Ministry’s vision of universities earning income through hostel rental to students. Thus in the medium to long term the university will be restricted in the ways it can earn revenue to fund future budget cuts.

Similar issues exist at Universiti Malaysia Kelantan (UMK) where the lack of student accommodation has led to severe overcrowding at hostels.

Corruption rampant

Mismanagement and waste is one issue, but outright corruption is another.

Any significant time spent within Malaysian academia will produce stories about corruption. However, most, if not all of these remain hearsay, as there are few reports of corruption to higher authorities and very few charges are ever made, with no convictions.

Just some examples that have come to the writer’s attention are consultancy companies run and operated by faculty, with deans and deputy deans as directors and shareholders. Students have told the writer in confidence that examiners at master’s and PhD level ask outright for payments to pass. A particular dean of a new faculty used a company owned by proxies to supply equipment. University cars have been sent to workshops for repairs that don’t exist.

Academics are paying for articles to be published in academic journals without peer review, and the heavy use of research grants for questionable travel is common.

University staff tend to be fearful of their superiors, most extremely hesitant to blow the whistle on their peers and superiors. In an interview with a state director of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the writer was told that the MACC would provide a neutral and discreet place for those who wanted to remain anonymous and report corruption. However those few that came forward faced hurdles with the MACC that were almost insurmountable, such as being requested to file a police report which would jeopardize anonymity.

Domineering vice chancellors

A major problem is leadership. Vice chancellors tend to be domineering, not allowing room for dissent from their own faculty and university members. Often staff are selected on loyalty rather than merit. Strong vice chancellors can browbeat the university board and get their own way on operational issues, due to the transitory nature of university boards.

Universities within Malaysia have become dominated by vice chancellors who are intent on micromanaging their universities. The strong power-distance relationships that develop between the leader and subordinates is powerful enough to destroy many of the management checks and balances that exist to prevent mismanagement and even abuse of power.

It’s time to re-organize Malaysian public universities from the top down. Not only is new leadership needed, but heavy reform of the organization so that these institutions should function as they are meant to. All importantly, vision beyond self-glorification is desperately needed by public university leadership.

Murray Hunter is an Australian academic who recently taught at a Malaysian university

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 7 January 2016, 12:46 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Education
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Umno-PAS attacks fuel anti-DAP sentiments among Malays, study finds

BY
ZULKIFLI SULONG, FEATURES AND ANALYSIS EDITOR
 | The Malaysian Insider

Published: 7 January 2016 6:59 AM

Anger towards DAP among Malay Muslims, especially in rural areas, has increased due to Umno’s consistent campaign to demonise the Chinese-dominated party, even as it recruits more Malay members and leaders, says a think tank.

The animosity intensified after the break-up of the Pakatan Rakyat coalition in June, when DAP parted ways with former ally PAS, the country’s second largest party of Malay Muslims.

With Umno and PAS starting to work together, the anti-DAP campaign is becoming more effective as both Malay parties use religion to attack it, said the Darul Ehsan Institute (IDE).

IDE deputy chairman Datuk Dr Redzuan Othman said the level of suspicion and acrimony towards DAP among Malays was high even in Selangor, where the party is part of the state government.

He said the sentiment was shared by many Malays throughout the country.

“The anger and hatred are among rural Malays, especially among PAS members and supporters,” Redzuan told The Malaysian Insider.

“The level of anger is smallest in constituencies with elected DAP reps in Selangor.”

The anti-DAP sentiment was revealed in a survey by IDE between November 13 and 15 last year, involving 1,716 Malay respondents throughout Selangor.

It found that almost two-thirds of respondents (72%) agreed that DAP was a racial party and that it was only looking after the interests of the Chinese community.

Only 12% disagreed, while 16% said they were “unsure”.

More than half (64%) also agreed with the statement that “DAP was an anti-Malay and anti-Islam party”. Some 18% disagreed while 19% were unsure.

“However, the anti-DAP sentiments are lower in areas with DAP elected representatives even if they are Chinese, such as Serdang which is served by Ong Kian Ming and Subang, which is represented by Hannah Yeoh,” said Redzuan (pic, right).

He said the lower anti-DAP feelings in these areas showed that perceptions towards the party can be changed through information campaigns.

Animosity towards DAP is now also being sparked through attacks by PAS.

PAS research head Dr Mohamad Zuhdi Marzuki had claimed that DAP would work together with Israel if it came to power.

Malaysia has no diplomatic ties with Israel and almost all Muslim movements dislike its Zionist government.

Zuhdi claimed DAP was offered US$300 million in return for an Israeli naval base in Port Dickson, if it captured Putrajaya in the 13th general election.

Zuhdi said the claim was also made by Mohamad Razali Abdul Rahman, a former aide to DAP secretary-general and Penang Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng.

DAP’s allies such as Parti Amanah Negara (Amanah) view Zuhdi’s statements as a calculated campaign to smear DAP and its partners in the new Pakatan Harapan coalition.

The real target of such attacks, said Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, Amanah’s strategy chief, is Amanah itself, formed by some of the more prominent PAS parliamentarians.

“In war, the friend of our enemy is our enemy and the enemy of our enemy is our friend,” said Dzulkefly. – January 7, 2016.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 7 January 2016, 10:57 am and is filed under
DAP
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Dissipating Malaysia’s ‘big risks’

by Gurdial Singh Nijar

The Malaysian Insider

7 January 2016

As we usher in the New Year, it is time to reflect on the state of the nation – our hopes and our disappointments. We have much to be thankful for. After all, our nation is certainly not a seething cauldron of instability.

But at the same time there are disturbing trends, which if left to run their course makes for deep concern.

In this context I was reflecting on a piece by the conservative UK-based Economist magazine (“Stick-in-the-mud”, December 5, 2015).

It cited critics as identifying three “big risks” facing Malaysia. Let me set them out.

First, an erosion of the integrity of Malaysian institutions, from the judiciary to the central bank. Second, a more frequent resort to repression to stifle criticism. Finally, an ever-increasing (negative) role for race and religion.

When presented to several colleagues, their response was – well these are hardly startling revelations.

One said – look, our body politic is no longer perceived as before. Almost imperceptibly contamination has crept in – and coloured the vision of our nation. We are high on the world corruption index. There is ethnic scapegoating and increasing distrust of institutions.

If we are indeed a shadow of our past glory days, is there any prospect of moving beyond mere empty rhetoric to salvage the soul of the nation?

There has been optimistic note of good cheer by our leaders in their New Year messages.

But does the leadership need to do more – to mitigate, if not cure, the perceived ills.

The recent flurry of activity in Parliament to create a plethora of new laws suggests that there can indeed be swift action by our leaders. They can step up when they see it as necessary.

But then these laws are seen not as a panacea – but as feeding even further cynicism and despondency. Because they are seen as bestowing even greater powers to the decision-makers at the expense of the wider citizenry.

Alarmingly, suddenly mob rule has raised its ugly spectre. And there is of course the record number of criminal prosecutions against politicians, academics, cartoonists, social commentators and the like – under a law our erstwhile colonisers used to deal with a restive population striving for independence.

Many are getting rueful. If left to run its downward spiralling course what could happen?

Will standing idly by – and clicking our tongues in regret – bring any desirable change?

Perhaps one fruitful start may be to signal our wish list for this coming year.

Let’s start with three.

First, a wish that the law-and-order officialdom curb swiftly those who raise the ugly spectre of race and religion; and proceed against these social deviants with a vehemence deserving of those who would rip society apart for their narrow selfish ends.

Secondly, to restore the independence of the key institutions that safeguards the integrity of our country. Give them free play to fulfil their mandate – without let or hindrance.

In this context, the courts too need a vibrant resurrection. It’s time to measure the quality of justice. Is it, like the quality of mercy, seen as “falling as a gentle rain from heaven, upon the place beneath”, as Portia pleaded in Shakespeare’s “Merchant of Venice”?

Many of us still hark back to the halcyon days when judicial integrity formed the silent but firm bedrock on which stood the judiciary.

Also does not the abrupt removal of high officials jettison values that we have been upholding so assiduously these past many years?

As a Malay saying goes – a years’ sunshine can be wiped out by a days’ rain – although rain at the right season may shower blessings too – hujan rahmat!

Finally perhaps there is a need to review the charges of serious crimes – like sedition punishable with long jail terms.

In the public perception there is a wonderment why such inordinate time and effort of the police force and courts is tied up bringing to book ordinary folks trying to express themselves – no doubt sometimes a little too enthusiastically.

Do all this – and our blessed country can start on a high note; and lift the pall of doom and gloom. Then we can safely dissipate the “big risks” that other naysayers are predicting for us. – January 7, 2016.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 8 January 2016, 11:46 am and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Judiciary
,
Law & Order
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Restoring hope in politics

Syerleena Abdul Rashid

The Malaysian Insider

8 January 2016

Fundamentally, I am an optimist who always believes that silver linings do exist in any situation we find ourselves in, even in situations so bleak and depressing.

However, there are quite a number of dark moments when my faith is sorely tested and I have to admit, there are times when I feel that the odds are stacked way too high.

Desmond Tutu said it best, “Hope is being able to see that there is light despite all of the darkness”. These are the words that every Malaysian must try to remember.

The injustice and the humiliation we encounter as we soldier on in the name of political and democratic reforms will probably worsen as the general election draw closer.

Malaysians must also understand that our battle – our struggle for liberty, justice and integrity are not based on being against an unjust system and the evil doers, instead, in order to survive and succeed our struggle must aim for something positive.

As human beings, we often find ourselves hoping for something better – we hope that the ringgit will bounce right back up, we hope that corruption will one day be a thing of a distant past, we hope that our children will be given equal opportunity to succeed in life without having to experience the horrendous racial quota system set up by those in power – we hope and pray that things will turn around for the better in our country.

But we’re only human. We’re not philosophers, we’re not freedom fighters, we’re not trained in armed combat, and we’re not kings or queens but just average Malaysians trying to make some sense in this ever increasing tumultuous time we find ourselves in.

Most of us only want answers from some of our leaders who seem uncaring and so removed from our reality.

We read about fellow Malaysians who have been imprisoned or charged because they questioned the validity of certain decisions or actions.

We have heard of families separated – the pain they endured and the tears they cry because someone they knew and loved were taken away from them because they dared speak up against tyranny and corruption.

When Malaysians reflect back on the numerous crimes committed against average law abiding citizen, most Malaysians find themselves distancing themselves from politics – they begin to talk about the futility of the liberation and the hopeless struggle our elders have invested for many decades.

They talk about the “dejected” opposition, or the “inept” youth and how can they not when it’s easier to give into negativity and disappointment.

But let’s be honest. It is not done with fleeting euphoria following new movements or campaigns.

It isn’t done with articles or slogans. It is achieved through leaders, authors, thinkers, activists and average Malaysians like you and me who are able to consciously engage in the politics of hope.

Hope can be as a political instrument. Cynicism and despair cannot materialise these ideas into reality, only self-confidence, conviction and hope can.

The moment people in the possible – it creates a more tangible version of change and socio-political reforms.

Malaysians have proven many times that we are capable to show solidarity, creativity, discipline, bravery, patience, respect and resilience. All we need to do is to create a vision and a future we want our country to head towards.

All it takes it positive attitude and yes, sometimes, it is that simple. – January 8, 2016.

– See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/opinion/syerleena-abdul-rashid/article/restoring-hope-in-politics#sthash.nz04u9e8.dpuf

                This entry was posted on Friday, 8 January 2016, 11:06 am and is filed under
Politics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The IDE study that UMNO-PAS attacks have been successful in  fuelling anti-DAP sentiments among Malays a wake-up call to all DAP leaders and members to take these misperceptions seriously

The Darul Ehsan Institute (IDE) study that UMNO-PAS attacks and demonization campaigns  have been successful in fuelling anti-DAP sentiments among Malays, especially in rural areas, must be a wake-up call to all DAP leaders and members to take these misperceptions seriously.

The study found that after the break-up of the Pakatan Rakyat coalition in June, the campaign to demonise the DAP as anti-Malay has become more effective with UMNO and PAS working together in the anti-DAP campaign.

In a survey by IDE between November 13 and 15 last year, involving 1,716 Malay respondents throughout Selangor, almost two-thirds of respondents (72%) agreed that DAP was a racial party and that it was only looking after the interest of the Chinese community.

Only 12% disagreed, while 16% said they were “unsure”.

More than half (64%) also agreed with the statement that “DAP was an anti-Malay and anti-Islam party”. Some 18% disagreed while 19% were unsure.

I wonder what would be the  results if a survey had been conducted among Chinese respondents to the questions whether UMNO was a racial party that only looked after the interest of the Malay community and whether UMNO was anti-Chinese and anti non-Islamic religions in the country.

Be that as it may, DAP leaders, members and even supporters should be concerned about the IDE survey, for DAP was never formed to be a party for the

Chinese or any particular community but for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region – and it was totally anathema in DAP for anyone to be anti-Islam or any other religion.

In fact, if DAP is founded as a racial party looking after the interests only of the Chinese community, it must be doing quite a poor job that after half a century, only 72% of the Malay respondents surveyed felt this was the case, when it should be 100%; when only 64% felt that the DAP was anti-Malay and anti-Islam party, when it should again be 100%.

But DAP was never founded as a Chinese, anti-Malay or anti-Islam party but a political party for all Malaysians, encompassing all races, religions and regions.

In fact, in the first general election contested by  the DAP in 1969, and now after the 2013 General Elections, the DAP has more Indian Members of Parliament than MIC.

Is the DAP a party for the Indians?  No, the DAP remains as a party for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

In the 58-year history of the nation, has there been any political party leader who had transcended racial and religious barriers to pay the highest political price for another Malaysian of different race or religion, in the way that the Penang Chief Minister and DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng had been disqualified as a Member of Parliament, gone to jail in Kajang, disenfranchised  and lost all his civic liberties as a Malaysian citizen to be elected as MP or State Assemblyman or even to cast his vote for five years after prison release – all for standing up for the rights,  honour and dignity of an under-aged Malay girl?

If there is any UMNO, MCA, MIC or Gerakan leader who had crossed racial and religious boundaries in the past six decades to make the highest political sacrifice for another citizen of a different race or religion, let us learn about it!

Right from the very beginning some 50 years ago, DAP was formed as a political party with a commitment and vision for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

This was why the first three by-elections contested by the DAP before the 1969 general elections were UMNO strongholds – Kampung Baru in Selangor in January 1967 (where the UMNO candidate Ahmad Razali Mohamad Ali won and went on to become Selangor Mentri Besar in 1982),  Tampoi in Johor in September 1967 and the Segamat Utara parliamentary by-election in Johor in October 1968 (where the UMNO candidate, Musa Hitam, won and went on to become Deputy Prime Minister in 1982).

This  was also why starting from the first general election in 1969 contested by the DAP, the party had always put up a multi-racial and multi-religious slate of candidates.

In fact, in the 1969 general elections, two Malay State Assemblymen were elected, one in Perak (Ibrahim Singgeh – Tapah Road) and the other in Negri Sembilan (Hassan Ahmad – Si Rusa).

In the past 11 general elections, DAP had elected Malay Members of Parliament (Ahmad Nor, Zairil Khir Johari, Arif Sabri Abdul Aziz and Senator Ariffin Omar)  and State Assembly representatives in Peninsular Malaysia (Daing Ibrahim Othman, Mohd Salleh Nakhoda Hitam, Fadzlan Yahya, Tengku Zulpuri Shah  Raja Puji).

In the 2013 General Elections, we elected a Kadazan State Assemblyman in Sabah and we look forward to the election of the first Dayak State Assembly representative in the forthcoming Sarawak state general elections expected to be held in March.

All these precedents and breakthroughs are testimony that DAP had never aspired to be a Chinese or non-Malay party and in the new Pakatan Harapan scenario, we will double up in our resolve to be a fully Malaysian party strengthening our Malay, Dayak and Kadazandusun membership and support in keeping with our Malaysian ideals and aspirations.

This is why we have Impian Sabah, Impian Sarawak, Impian Kelantan, Impian Johor, Impian Kedah/Perlis and Impian Perak all of which are born out of the conviction that we are all Malaysians and that the country cannot be developed, progressive and prosperous if there is any people, whatever race or religion or any state where the people are poor and backward and that all Malaysians regardless of race, religion or region, are entitled to the full development of their potentials and rights.

I have always regarded myself as a Malaysian first and Chinese second.

I believe that in the sixth decade of our nationhood, there are more and more Malaysians with such an outlook and commitment – who are Malaysians first, and Chinese, Malays, Indians, Kadazandusun and Ibans second.

This is the stuff that Impian Malaysia, whether Impian Sabah, Impian Sarawak, Impian Kelantan, Impian Johor,  Impian Kedah/Perlis or Impian Perak  are made of!

After the PAS Muktamar in June cutting off relations with DAP, there were already forecasts that with the end of seven-year-old Pakatan Rakyat, DAP will be demonized as a narrow-minded Chinese or non-Malay political party.

They cannot be more wrong, and there is a growing consciousness among various levels of the DAP leadership and membership that we must consciously prove these negative forecast about the DAP completely wrong and baseless.

No political party seeking support from all Malaysians can be anti-Malay or anti-Islam, or for that matter, anti-Chinese, anti-Indian, anti-Dayak, anti-Kadazandusun or anti-Buddhism, anti-Christianity, anti-Hindiuism or anti-Sikkhism.

The battle against such lies and falsehoods had been a particularly uphill battle for the DAP because we had to face the full onslaught of the UMNO juggernaut with its control and ownership of the mass media, particularly in the era before the advent of Internet, the Internet news portals and the social media.

Now joining forces with this UMNO juggernaut seeking to demonise the DAP as anti-Malay and anti-Islam is the present PAS leadership, as illustrated by the alacrity with which they tried to exploit the lie and baseless allegation that Israel had offered DAP RM1.2 billion in exchange for a Israeli naval base in Port Dickson – so outrageous and preposterous an allegation that even UMNO propagandists won’t touch with a barge pole!

The IDE study that UMNO-PAS attacks have been successful in  fuelling anti-DAP sentiments among Malays is therefore a salutary wake-up call to all DAP leaders and members, and even supporters, of the need to take these demonisaiton campaigns seriously.

There are silver linings in the dark cloud of the IDE study, which found that the anti-DAP sentiments are lower in areas with DAP elected representatives even if they are Chinese, such as Serdang which is served by Ong Kian Ming and Subang, which is represented by Hannah Yeoh – which showed that perceptions towards the party can be changed through  direct contact and information campaigns.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 8 January 2016, 8:49 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Malays
,
Pakatan Harapan
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Saudi blueprint

Economist

Jan 9, 2016

The desert kingdom is striving to dominate its region and modernise its economy at the same time

FOR years Saudi Arabia seemed inert, relying on its vast oil wealth and the might of its American patron to buy quiet at home and impose stasis on its neighbours. But oil prices have tumbled, America has stood back from leadership in the Middle East, the region is on fire and power has shifted to a new generation—notably King Salman’s 30-year-old favoured son, Muhammad bin Salman. A sandstorm of change is rousing the desert kingdom.

The visible result is the brutal treatment of dissent at home and assertiveness abroad that has just been on chilling display. On January 2nd Saudi Arabia executed 47 people. Most of them were terrorists linked to al-Qaeda but some, including a prominent Shia cleric, simply called for the fall of the ruling House of Saud. After Iranians set fire to the Saudi embassy in Tehran in protest, the kingdom cut diplomatic, trade and air links, a grave and foolish escalation in a febrile region.

Away from the headlines, however, a different assertiveness could prove equally consequential. Prince Muhammad has drawn up a blueprint designed to throw open Saudi Arabia’s closed economy and government—including, he says, the possible sale of shares in the national oil firm, Saudi Aramco.

Coupling geopolitical swagger with sweeping economic change is a gamble. The outcome will determine the survival of the House of Saud and shape the future of the Arab world.

What is Arabic for Thatcherism?

The plunge in the price of oil, from $110 a barrel in 2014 to less than $35 today, was partly because Saudi Arabia seems determined to protect its share of the oil market. Nevertheless, low prices are a time-bomb for a country dominated by oil and a government that relies on it for up to 90% of its revenues. The budget deficit swelled last year to a staggering 15% of GDP. Although the country has $650 billion of foreign reserves, they have already fallen by $100 billion.

When oil prices fell in the 1990s, the Saudis simply borrowed heavily. They were saved when China’s boom sent commodity prices soaring again in the 2000s. This time no one, including the Saudi rulers, expects a return to triple-digit oil prices. Instead, they acknowledge that the economy must change. Speaking to The Economist this week (see Briefing), Prince Muhammad laid out a blueprint for reform that amounts to a radical redesign of the Saudi state.

The first step is fiscal consolidation. The goal is to eliminate the budget deficit in the next five years, even if the oil price stays low. Though there is much flab to cut, that is still a perilous undertaking which means dismantling the system according to which petro-cash, not taxes, pay for free education and health care as well as highly subsidised electricity, water and housing. More than money is at stake: this largesse has disguised how far the economy is chronically unproductive and dependent on foreign labour. It has been too easy for Saudis to avoid working, or to snooze away in government offices.

The new leadership has made a start. Spending cuts in the last months of 2015 stopped the deficit from soaring to more than 20% of GDP. The 2016 budget includes steep rises in the prices of petrol, electricity and water (though they remain heavily subsidised). The prince pledges to move to market prices by the end of the five-year period. He is also committed to new taxes, including a value-added tax of 5%, sin taxes on sugary drinks and cigarettes, and levies on vacant land.

Recalibrating taxes and subsidies is only the first step. Roughly 70% of Saudis are under 30. At the same time, two-thirds of Saudi workers are employed by the government. With the workforce projected to double by 2030, the country will prosper only if the sleepy statist economy is turned on its head, diversifying from oil, boosting private business and introducing market-driven efficiencies.

The government plans to do this by getting the state out of all but its essential functions. From health and education to state-owned companies, the new Saudi leadership is looking for privatisation and the private provision of public services. It has plans for charter schools and an insurance-based, privately provided health-care system. It is looking at the complete or partial privatisation of more than two dozen agencies and state-owned companies, including the national airline, telecoms firm and power generator. The biggest fish of all is Aramco, a national icon and almost certainly the world’s most valuable firm. The prince favours floating a minority stake in Aramco and opening its books to the world. He is urging his team to come up with a plan within months (see article).

Could such a blueprint become reality? Words are cheap and the obstacles huge. Saudi Arabia has promised reform before, only for its efforts to fizzle into insignificance. Its capital markets are thin and the capacity of its bureaucracy thinner. The investment that it needs in its young people, its non-oil industries, its tourism infrastructure and much else will not come cheap. It will not happen unless investors believe in the country’s future. That confidence will be hard to build.

The best-laid plans

One reason is that austerity on an almost Greek scale will be difficult and unpopular (though the examples of Syria and Libya are a deterrent against outright rebellion—see page 41). The state has provided generously partly to make up for the lack of political rights. Yet the royal family is reluctant to open the pressure valves that might make cuts more palatable. For all its economic urgency, the new regime shows no interest in political reform. Recent elections in which women were allowed to vote and to stand for (largely powerless) municipal councils were the idea of the late king. Nor is there a sign that the religious absolutism Saudi Arabia shares with its enemy, Islamic State, will soften. Even before the latest round, executions were at a 20-year high. Prince Muhammad waxes lyrical about the new generation. But he has little appetite to take on the conservative clergy over, say, the ban on women driving.

The other obstacle is geopolitics. As Iran has become more assertive, the Saudis have stepped in as the champion of Sunni Muslims. They have confronted Iranian-supported allies such as the Houthis in Yemen and Bashar al-Assad in Syria, as well as Shia malcontents at home and in neighbouring Sunni-ruled countries like Bahrain.

The new leadership argues that stability requires it to send a signal to terrorists (hence the executions). It feels obliged to defend its interests by resisting Iran which, it says, is bent on recreating a Persian empire. The argument is flawed: Saudi Arabia instead risks leading one side in a Muslim sectarian struggle it can neither win nor afford. The war in Yemen is a morass; support for Egypt and other Sunni allies is a drain. Defence and security already take over 25% of government spending and will eat up a growing share of a shrinking budget. Regional tensions will also deter private investment. Who would put trillions into an isolated economy in a region in turmoil?

The new regime seems to regard boldness at home and abroad as signs of a strong Saudi Arabia. Yet, though a muscular foreign policy plays well among Saudis, the economy will not thrive if the royal family ends up inflaming its region and blocking social reform at home. If Prince Muhammad is to remake his country, not wreck it, he needs to understand that.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 8 January 2016, 12:09 pm and is filed under
International
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Who are you bluffing, Apandi?

In his 2016 New Year Message, the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak said his RM2.6 billion donation and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals had been resolved and were no more issues in the country.

How wrong the Prime Minister had been.

Every day since the New Year’s Day for the past week, Najib’s twin mega scandals had hogged the news headlines, and there was not a single day when there were no multiple news items on the issue, especially on the Internet.

In fact, no other news story in the country could compete with Najib’s twin mega scandals in terms of their  daily coverage, durability and newsworthiness.

It is not for nothing that Najib’s twin mega scandals were the reasons why Malaysia was ranked third for  the world’s “worst corruption scandals in 2015” by ForeignPolicy website of Washington Post.

Najib’s twin mega scandals  have repeatedly made history, though not of the sublime or honourable kind.

Apart from going international in catapulting  Malaysia into  third place as the world’s “worst corruption scandals in 2015”, they were featured prominently  in today’s  launch of the Legal Year 2016 in Kuala Lumpur, highlighted not only  by the Bar Council President Steven Thiru but also by the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Mohd Apandi Ali.

Steven Thiru, representing the views of the Malaysian Bar that included representatives from the Sabah Law Association and the Advocates Association of Sarawak, demanded a stop to attacks on key institutions investigating the 1MDB scandal and called for them to continue their probe without interference while Mohd Apandi gave the lame answer that there was no interference in the investigations into 1MDB.

A most apt response by Malaysians would be to ask Mohd Apandi to “tell it to the marines”!

Apandi’s continued pretence that there had been no interference in the investigations into the 1MDB flies in the face of reality and does not sit well with his appointment as Attorney-General, which came about as a result of the sudden and shocking sacking of his predecessor, Tan Sri Gani Patail on “Day of Long Knives” on July 28 last year, when the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak launched his “purge” of the government involving the  sacking of Gani Patail as Attorney-General, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin as Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal as Minister for Rural and Regional Minister and the subsequent purges and punitive actions  against recalcitrant key officers in various government  investigating/enforcement agencies.

How can Apandi glibly claim that there had been no interference in the investigations into  1MDB when he could not explain the following events:

*the sudden and shocking sacking of Gani  as Attorney-General when he was some three months before  his  compulsory retirement while  the “health” reason given for Gani’s “sacking” was a most spurious one which no one believed;

*the dissolution of the multi-agency Special Task Force into the 1MDB headed by Gani as Attorney-General  and comprising the Bank Negara Governor, the Inspector-General of Police and the Chief Commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission;

*the sabotage for over three months of the investigation by the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) into the 1MDB by the removal of the Chairman and three other members of the PAC by the expedient of appointing them as Minister and Deputy Ministers;

*the sudden transfer or arrest of key officers in Attorney-General’s Chambers, the Police, Bank Negara and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission  involved in 1MDB investigations which, as Thiru described correctly , were “a subversion of the administration of justice”.

This is why Malaysians are entitled to ask: Who are  Tan Sri Mohd Apandi bluffing when he had not been able to give any cogent or satisfactory response to Thiru’s serious charge that 2015 had seen challenges faced by a number of institutions investigating the 1MDB scandal.

Nobody expects Mohd Apandi  to answer for the derailment of the PAC investigations into the 1MDB for over three months until the appointment of a “cari makan” PAC Chairman or my six-month suspension from Parliament for basically pursuing  and demanding an answer fron Najib to the question, “Mana RM2.6 billion?” but he must answer for the other clear instances of interferences with the  investigations into the 1MDB scandal, which  came within the purview and  jurisdiction of the AG Chambers.

Apandi’s excuse of the  difficulty faced by his chambers in balancing confidentiality and public policy cannot apply to  his failure to give a satisfactory accounting for the government’s serious lapses in good governance in the investigation into 1MDB – why Gani was sacked as Attorney-General; why he was appointed and agreed to be a party to the serious misgovernance in the sacking of Gani; why he did not follow up immediately on the actions  proposed to be taken by the multi-agency Special Task Force headed by Gani on 1MDB; whether there was any truth that the Attorney-General’s Chambers were preparing charges of corruption against the Prime Minister when Najib launched his government “purge” with the sacking of Gani as Attorney-General and Muhyiddin as Deputy Prime Minister; why the dissolution of the Special Task Force on 1MDB; the reasons for the arrests and punitive actions against key officers in the various government investigation/enforcement agencies; and most important of all, why no action had been taken despite the gargantuan 1MDB “debt hole” of RM42 billion according to audited accounts at end of March 2014 but believed to have mushroomed to some RM55 billion before the 1MDB “rationalisaiton” in November last year with the sale of its various assets.

Apandi was proud that he had passed the test of his first 100 days as Attorney-General.

This is Apandi’s own assessment, which is of course not the most accurate or reliable as a person cannot be his own judge.

I doubt Apandi would pass a public opinion poll whether he had acquitted himself well in his first 100 days.

Would Apandi dare to have Parliament debate a motion on his first 100 days as Attorney-General?

Apandi had failed  his first 100 days not only in the handling of Najib’s twin mega scandals, in particular over the sacking of Gani and his own appointment, he should also give a full accounting for his major lapses and misjudgements, including:

*the slew of arrests and prosecutions of Members of Parliament, Opposition leaders and social activists under a variety of draconian laws, including invoking SOSMA when Parliament had been given an assurance that such draconian measures were aimed  only against terrorists; and

*the most  pernicious and iniquitous legislation in the form of the National Security Council Bill which usurped the constitutional powers of the Yang di Pertuan Agong, the Cabinet, the Sarawak and Sabah State Governments as promised in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 and the 11 State Governments in Peninsular Malaysia, paving the way for a Prime Ministerial dictatorship!

As the Prime Minister’s chief legal officer, Apandi should advise Najib not to procrastinate and prevaricate any further, further advise the Prime Minister that his  New Year Message that the  twin mega scandals are no more issues among Malaysians was just an empty pipe-dream as they remain as real and even bigger than ever, and that he should make a clean breast by giving a full and satisfactory accounting of the 1MDB and RM2.6 billion “donation” twin mega scandals before the Special Parliament on TPPA on January 26 or 27, or the Prime Minister’s credibility will not be able to be redeemed at all.

(Speech  at the DAP Kuching Dinner on Friday, 8th January 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 9 January 2016, 9:33 am and is filed under
Judiciary
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP will not forsake our original commitment and vision to be a party by and for  all Malaysians regardless of race or religion at all levels of leadership and elected representatives, bound  by the common goal  of an united,  just, democratic and progressive Malaysia

Bukit Bintang is the 60th parliamentary constituency I am visiting since my six-month suspension from Parliament on Oct. 22 for wanting the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak to give full accountability for his RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals.

Najib had been most  ill-advised to claim in his 2016 New Year Message nine days ago that these twin mega scandals had been resolved and are no more issues in the country, when both these Najib scandals continue to be major concerns and conversational topics  of Malaysians throughout the country every day since the New Year – an alarmin g indication of how divorced from the ground and reality the Prime Minister has become.

As everyone can testify,  Najib’s twin mega scandals had been in the news every day since New Year’s Day , with greater intensity than last year, and there are no signs any time soon that Najib’s twin mega scandals will disappear from the radar of national consciousness and concern.

There is only one way to make Najib’s twin mega scandals disappear and vanish from the public domain – for the Prime Minister to give a full and satisfactory explanation for the twin mega scandals:

•	On the RM2.6 billion “donation” scandal, firstly, where the RM2.6 billion donation came from, whether it was from one or more donors,  which country it came from, as receiving donation from a foreign country for general election purpose to interfere with Malaysian internal affairs will normally be regarded as an act of treason and treachery; secondly, where the RM2.6 billion had gone to, which Ministers, MPs or UMNO/Barisan Nasional leaders had been the beneficiaries, how much each had received, and what have they done to the “donation”; thirdly, what is left of the RM2.6 billion “donation” and where are the balance of the monies now; and fourthly, what was the motive for the huge sums of RM2.6 billion “donation”.

•	On the 1MDB scandal, what were actually  the total debts incurred by 1MDB, as the RM42 billion figure was the total debts incurred by 1MDB at the end of March 2014 when the 1MDB accounts were last audited.  Tan Sri Muhyddin said in his last speech as Deputy Prime Minister on July 26 last year that 1MDB debts would have already exceeded RM50 billion, and by the end of November when the 1MDB assets were “rationalized”, cannibalized and sold out, the 1MDB debts would be nearer RM55 billion.  Why no one had been sacked,  charged in court for corruption or breach of trust for such an astronomical “debt hole” of some RM55 billion?

Is Najib likely to come forward and to accept full responsibility and give full accountability for these two scandals, as he is the only person in the country who is personally responsible for all the  major 1MDB transactions, investments and decisions right from Day One of 1MDB seven years ago?

Of course not!  Otherwise all the Najib strategies to avoid accountability last year would not have happened  – the  desperate cover-ups and stalling efforts like the government purge which saw the sacking of the Attorney-General, the  Deputy Prime Minister, Senior Minister for Rural and Regional Development; the dissolution of the high-powered  multi-agency Special Task Force on 1MDB headed by four “Tan Sri”s (Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail, Bank Negara Governor Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz, Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar and Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamad); the arrest and immediate transfer of key officers involved in 1MDB investigations in the government investigating/;enforcement agencies; the sabotage of the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) investigations and my six-month suspension from Parliament.

Najib is trying his utmost  to avoid  accountability for the twin mega scandals by drumming fear and hatred that his downfall as Prime Minister will result in Malays losing political power and Islam placed under grave threat.

Will Najib’s downfall as Prime Minister result in Malays losing political power and put Islam under threat?

Nobody really believes this –  in fact, I do not believe Najib himself will believe it. This is because Najib’s downfall will only mean that Najib and his cronies in UMNO  will lose political power, for political power in Malaysia will continue to be in the hands of the Malays as the demographic reality is the surest guarantee that the Malays will not lose political power whatever happens to Najib or to UMNO in the next general elections.

In 1970 Malaysia’s population was made up of 44.32% Malays, 34.34% Chinese, 8.99% Indians, 11.89% non-Malay Bumiputeras, 0.67% others.

In 2010, the percentage of Malays increased to 55.07%, Chinese reduced to 24.34%, Indians dropped to 7.35%, non-Malay Bumiputeras maintained at 11.94% and 1.3% others.

During the 13th general election, 52.63% of the voters were Malays, 29.68% Chinese, 7.31% Indians, 8.96% non-Malay Bumiputeras and 1.43% others.

Out of the 165 Parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia, 114 are Malay majority seats, 22 Chinese majority seats and 29 mixed seats. There is not a single Indian majority seat.

How could Malays lose political power in such circumstances, whether from the point of the ethnic make-up of the general population, the  electorate or the parliamentary constituencies?

In fact, if the electoral system had been really “one man, one vote, one value” in the 13th General Election in May 2013, UMNO would now  be in the Opposition benches and the Prime Minister today would be Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and not Datuk Seri Najib Razak, and the country would have been spared the catalogue of political and socio-economic scandals plaguing the country, like  Najib’s RM2.6 billion “donation”  and  the RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals.

In reality, it  is not the Malays who face the danger of losing political power, but Najib himself who might be toppled as Prime Minister in the next general election.

Najib and his coterie are  doing their utmost to avoid accountability for the twin mega scandals by drumming fear and hatred that Najib’s downfall as Prime Minister will result in Malays losing political power and Islam placed under dire threats.

In the coming months in the next two-and-a-half years, these tactics to incite fear and hatred based on irresponsible and irrational politics of race and religion  will intensify and we must expect the campaign of demonization of the DAP to falsely paint  the DAP as anti-Malay and anti-Islam to escalate further.

DAP will not forsake our original commitment and vision to be a party by and for  all Malaysians regardless of race or religion at all levels of party leadership and elected representatives bound  by the common goal  of an united,  just, democratic and progressive Malaysia.

I am accused of leading anti-Malay street demonstrations in Kuala Lumpur after the 1969 general election  and  responsible for the May 13 riots in 1969 – when I was never in Kuala Lumpur at the relevant period, as I was campaigning in Kota Kinabalu.

DAP had been falsely accused of wanting to create a Christian Malaysia when DAP had repeatedly pledged our commitment to uphold the fundamental features of the Malaysian Constitution, as reiterated at today’s accords signed at the historic  Pakatan Harapan Convention in Shah Alam, including protecting Islam as the official religion of Malaysia.

Recently, there was the lie that Israel had offered RM1.2 billion to DAP in exchange for a  naval base in Port Dickson.

DAP will not succumb to these lies and demonization campaigns.

We must have a very incompetent and unprofessional police force if these three allegations are true, and the police had not done anything about them – when in fact, Malaysia has one of the most competent Special Branch in the world.

DAP will  forge on with our  original commitment and vision to be a party by and for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region, with all races and religions represented at all levels of our party leadership and elected representatives, whether in Parliament, the State Assemblies or the local councils.

We will remain true to our conviction to be a truly Malaysian party for all Malaysians!

(Speech at the DAP Bukit Bintang Dinner at Confucian Private School, Kuala Lumpur on Saturday, 9th January 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 10 January 2016, 8:10 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Malays
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


10 things about: Steven Sim, the computer engineer turned MP

by Opalyn Mok

Malay Mail Online

January 10, 2016

GEORGE TOWN, Jan 10 — Steven Sim Chee Keong was relatively new in DAP when he first stood for elections in 2013 for the Bukit Mertajam parliamentary seat and won.

Prior to that, he was the Seberang Perai Municipal Council councillor and had been helping his predecessor Chong Eng and later, Berapit state assemblyman Lydia Ong Kok Fooi with party matters.

Ever since he won the seat, the 32-year-old has been using technology to try and improve governance and delivery to the people, particularly his constituents in Bukit Mertajam.

He is the one behind the introduction of a user-friendly application called “Citizen Action Technology” for the public to lodge complaints to the local authorities.

He also wrote a book titled
The Audacity To Think: An Invitation To Rethink Politics
which is his take on political concepts based on his experience.

It is hard to imagine that this young energetic politician used to be a chocolate entrepreneur before calling it quits to continue his studies in computer science.

Here, Sim shares his journey from being a diehard fan of Tun Mahathir Mohamad’s to a DAP leader.

In his own words:

My first memory of politics was the 1999 general election and I was 16 or 17.
 At that time, my parents being good old Penang Chinese voters had this funny strategy of voting Opposition at national level for check and balance and voting for the government at local level for development. At that time, I was a through and through Mahathir boy, growing up in the Mahathir era.
I told my mother, why are you voting for Lim Kit Siang, he’s a bad guy. So that was my earliest political memory, telling off my parents for voting the Opposition.

Then the
second major encounter in politics was when I was in my second year at university. I was roped in by a lecturer… critical thinking and communications lecture, for the student elections. One of the reasons he called me in was because I was articulate in class. He invited me to take part in the student elections.
 Of course, being a lecturer, he was pro-university.
So I didn’t begin my political experience with the Opposition.

The third experience officially initiated me to politics…
it was after I graduated and came back to Penang, to my hometown even though KL is much more lucrative. So I came back to work in the corporate sector, in a large MNC, for two years. And I had a very good learning experience. It was quite a successful stint, I would say. After two years, I decided to get involved socially because I was active in university.
I decided maybe I should join a political party… but seeing it as a social organisation… giving me a platform to play a role in society.

Guess what, the first party I went to was Gerakan. Actually, coming from my background, I’ve always been a pro-Mahathir boy. At that time, we saw Gerakan as the conscience of the government… and Gerakan was filled with a lot of intellectuals. So
I went to Gerakan HQ, I remember specifically, and for some reason, somebody there scolded us, saying why you come on a weekend, come back on Monday. But we are working people, how to come back on Monday.
 We were there to join the party. This was two years after I graduated, around 2007. The next thing,
I wrote to DAP through their website, telling them I wanted to volunteer and contribute. Then I was surprised that within days Chong Eng wrote back to me and within less than a week or so, we decided to meet.
I remember I met her at a coffee shop in Bukit Mertajam and I remember telling my girlfriend that “my god, their car is even worse than ours” and she’s an MP, a YB. So I offered to help her with her IT stuff. That was my first role, I assisted her to do up her blog and we were the first to set up the Twitter account for her, in 2007.
 So I joined DAP before 2007 and when elections came in 2008, because there were so few of us, I was so new and yet I was also asked to give ceramahs. That was how I started my political career.

I never looked back since I joined the party. One of the best things I get from this corporate world is how it’s evidence-based, it’s data driven, and I’m an engineer. I think that is what we need in politics. That’s what I always try to do.
I think politics needs more engineers now. We have too many lawyers and economists and political scientists and social scientists, all these are good and necessary but we need more engineers, in the sense that, because for us engineers, all products are not just words and graphs and charts, all products are very tangible that users can actually test.

I was never a reader when growing up, I went to university with two books; the Holy Bible and Rich Dad, Poor Dad, both were gifts.
I came back from university with 300 over books and most of it were not my course books.
 One of the first books I read was a biography of Gandhi and it was very inspiring and after that, Nelson Mandela. I’ve always been inspired by leaders, leaders who don’t just lead but leaders who change the way the world is, change the way that things are being done, my latest one is about Bill Clinton. Because of Hillary, I’m reading about Bill Clinton. I think he’s a brilliant politician, very genuine.

I’m not in politics because I need to survive, I’m in politics because of certain things I want to do
 so I work harder despite not depending on politics to so-called cari makan.

I think, to me, I want to leave this world, knowing that I’ve done something, that I’ve made my mark. It may not be in a big way like Nelson Mandela or Gandhi but at least, deep down, I know I’ve made my mark, I’ve done something. Last few years, I know I’ve introduced new things, I’ve changed how things are. We totally changed how the local council responds to people and how the people interact with the local council.

Today, I’m introducing participatory budgeting. Enough of rhetoric, perhaps in a small town like BM, I can afford to do this experiment. BM can be the launchpad for real things that change the way things are, not more of the same. Moving on, this is what I want to do, at a larger scale, at the state level, at the federal level.
The fire is still there from the first day.

I’m looking to use my experience as a computer engineer, in technology, bringing my experience from corporate sector to complement what I do. What I’ve been doing has those elements, computer, science and technology. I’ve never been somebody who is keenly aware of power but
I’m someone who believes in leadership and if that is what is needed to improve governance, then I will continue to be in politics. In fact some people say I am quite blur when it comes to power struggle which is true in a way, for better or worse. I’ve never been in that race. There’s just so much work for us to do.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 11 January 2016, 6:10 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Politics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Moody’s Cuts Malaysia Credit-Rating Outlook on Weaker Finances

by Shamim Adam

Bloomberg

January 11, 2016

Moody’s Investors Service lowered its credit-rating outlook for Malaysia, citing an external environment that has crimped government revenue despite Prime Minister Najib Razak’s efforts to improve the country’s finances.

The ratings company cut the outlook on the A3 sovereign rating to stable from positive, it said on Monday in a statement. The move brings its outlook into line with that of Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings, with all three companies ranking Malaysia at their fourth-lowest investment grades.

Since Moody’s assigned a positive outlook in November 2013 the government has sought to improve its finances, rationalizing fuel subsidies and putting in place a goods and services tax, the ratings company said. But the impact on the government’s balance sheet has been limited and will remain so, in part due to changes in the external environment, it said.

“Those environmental changes have also undermined Malaysia’s external position, with large capital outflows, a falling current account surplus, sharp exchange rate depreciation and falling reserves,” Moody’s said.

The ringgit, which was already weaker prior to the Moody’s announcement amid general risk aversion related to China, was 0.6 percent lower at 4.4120 a dollar as of 2:05 p.m. in Kuala Lumpur. The yield on the 10-year government bond was up three basis points to 4.25 percent.

Investors Flee

The outlook cut from Moody’s comes about six months after Malaysia avoided a credit rating downgrade from Fitch. The ringgit slumped about 19 percent in 2015 — falling to a 17-year low — as international investors unloaded Malaysian equities amid domestic political turmoil, falling oil prices and a selloff in emerging-market assets.

“It was always difficult for Moody’s to maintain the outlook at positive let alone think about an upgrade given the current environment of low commodity prices and the weak external backdrop,” said Euben Paracuelles, an economist at Nomura Holdings Inc. in Singapore. “The fact that they’ve kept it at stable is likely in recognition of the fact that there are actual fiscal reforms that are happening.”

Najib came under pressure last year after a multi million-dollar funding scandal surrounding him came to light and investors grew wary of risks posed by state investment company 1Malaysia Development Bhd. Both the premier and 1MDB have consistently denied any wrongdoing.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 11 January 2016, 7:56 pm and is filed under
Economics
,
Finance
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib and UMNO propagandists are giving the  Malays the supreme insult doubting their intelligence and capability when they  spread the canard that the Malays will lose political power to the DAP and Chinese if Najib and UMNO lose in next general election

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and UMNO propagandists are giving  the Malays the  supreme insult doubting their intelligence and capability when they spread the canard that the Malays will lose political power to the DAP and Chinese if Najib and UMNO lose in the next general election.

There is no doubt that Najib and UMNO are facing the greatest crisis of survival in their lives, for a recent poll has shown that  the popularity rating of the Najib UMNO-led government is at an all-time low –  below the 50 per cent mark for the first time, down to some 30 per cent.

Even UMNO leaders accept the real  prospect  that Najib can lose not only the popular vote (which UMNO/Barisan lost in the 2013 general election securing only 47% of the total votes cast) but also the majority of the parliamentary seats (which through an undemocratic electoral system, enabled Najib to secure 60 per cent of the parliamentary seats in the 13GE  although with 43% of the votes, and therefore entering Malaysian history as the first minority Prime Minister in the country).

If the 2013 General Election had been fair and democratic, where the principle of “one man, one vote, one value” is the abiding feature of  the electoral system, the Prime Minister after the general election in May 2013 would have been Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and not Najib Razak, and Anwar would not be in Sungai Buloh prison today.

It is a national tragedy that instead of redeeming his position as the first minority Prime Minister of the country, by heading  a government which really cares for the people and nation, which is clean, incorruptible, consultative, democratic, fully guided by the principles of accountability, transparency and good governance, Najib had done the reverse, which is why there are Najib’s  RM2.6 billion and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals giving Malaysia a bad name not only locally but in the international arena as well.

Events after  New Year’s Day has proven Najib very wrong when he claimed in his 2016 New Year Message that his twin mega scandals had been resolved and are no more issues in the country.

In actual fact, Najib’s twin mega scandals,  which caused Malaysia to come third in the world’s “worst corruption scandals in 2015”, are even bigger issues  than last year and continue to hound and haunt Malaysians every day in the New Year, with new questions and revelations.

Najib and his lieutenants are doing their utmost to distract national attention and to cover up the scale and iniquity of the RM2.6 billion and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals, and this is why the  reckless and baseless campaign to demonise DAP as anti-Malay and anti-Islam and warnings that the 14GE will be a battle between UMNO and DAP to determine the survival of Malay political power will intensify, as there is a “master” game-plan to escalate the campaign  in the next two-and-a-half years before the 14GE.

Najib and UMNO propagandists are treating  Malays as people with very low IQs who do not have the  intelligence and capability to differentiate fact from fiction, truth from lies, and who could be easily deceived to believe the canard that if Najib and UMNO lose in the 14GE, the Malays will lose political power to the DAP and Chinese.

In the first place, the 14GE is not be battle of UMNO and DAP, but a battle between the Barisan Nasional led by UMNO and the Pakatan Harapan coalition of DAP, PKR and Parti Amanah Negara.

Secondly, DAP is not a Chinese party as right from the beginning of our formation 50 years ago, we were committed to the  principles and vision of a Malaysian party, led by Malaysians and serving the interests of all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion  or region.

This was why in the very first general election contested by DAP in 1969, two Malay State Assemblymen were elected, and down the decades, there had been Malay Members of Parliament and State Assembly representatives under the DAP banner.

This was  also why in the first general election contested by  the DAP in 1969, and now after the 2013 General Elections, the DAP has more Indian Members of Parliament than MIC.

But this does not make DAP a political party only for the Indians as DAP remains unequivcably as a party for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

Whatever happens in the 14GE, whether Najib is toppled as Prime Minister or  UMNO loses the Federal Government, the Malays in Malaysia will continue to exercise political power in Malaysia as there is no way they will lose their political power.

The demographic reality is the surest guarantee that the Malays will not lose political power whatever happens to Najib or to UMNO in the next general elections.

In 1970 Malaysia’s population comprised  44.32% Malays, 34.34% Chinese, 8.99% Indians, 11.89% non-Malay Bumiputeras, 0.67% others.

In 2010, the percentage of Malays in the Malaysian population  increased to 55.07%, Chinese reduced to 24.34%, Indians dropped to 7.35%, non-Malay Bumiputeras maintained at 11.94% and 1.3% others.

During the 13th general election, 52.63% of the voters were Malays, 29.68% Chinese, 7.31% Indians, 8.96% non-Malay Bumiputeras and 1.43% others.

Out of the 165 Parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia, 114 are Malay majority seats representing some 70%, 22 Chinese majority seats (13%) and 29 mixed seats. There is not a single Indian majority seat.

With the triple factors establishing overwhelming Malay predominance in the Malaysian political scene –  the demographic  make-up of the general population, the electorate and  the parliamentary constituencies –  can  Najib and UMNO propagandists explain how the Malays will lose political power, whatever the scenario in the 14GE?

How Malays who dominate in 70% of the parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia will lose political power to the Chinese, who are in the majority in only 13% of the parliamentary seats?

Surely Najib and UMNO propagandists are not insinuating that  the Malays in the country are simpletons, who have no intelligence or capability, that despite comprising some 60% of the population in Malaysia and being the  majority voters in 70 per cent of the parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia as compared to 13% of the seats where there are Chinese voter-majorities, the Malays can lose political power to the Chinese – especially  with a decreasing Chinese population as compared to the Malays?

The stark facts are for all to see – political power in Malaysia is not going to fall out of Malay hands, whether to the Chinese or any other ethnic community, whether Najib or UMNO is toppled in the 14GE or not.

The 14GE is not a battle between UMNO and DAP; it is not a showdown between the Malays and Chinese, but between the Barisan Nasional  coalition government of Malaysians versus the Pakatan Harapan coalition.

The central question in the 14GE is not about the survival of Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans or Ibans but about the survival of Malaysia and the Malaysian people – whether Malaysians regardless of race or religion can save Malaysia from the present national trajectories towards a failed and rogue state, and liberate the country and Malaysians from the rampant corruption, abuses of power, widespread socio-economic policies and nation-building failures of the Najib and the  Barisan Nasional government.

(Speech at the DAP Senawang Branch 1,500-people “Mana RM2.6 billion?” dinner in Senawang, Negri Sembilan on Sunday, 10th January 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 11 January 2016, 7:59 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Malays
,
Pakatan Harapan
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Saudi Arabia has bigger problems than Iran

 — Tobin Harshaw

Malay Mail Online

January 8, 2016

JANUARY 8 —Saudi Arabia’s feud with Iran over the beheading of a prominent Shiah cleric led to a lot of overwrought speculation about Sunni-Shiah tensions rising to tear up the Middle East. Those more steeped in regional affairs point to the other 46 men beheaded, almost all of whom were Sunnis charged with terrorism.

The theory here is that the execution of the preacher, Nimr al-Nimr, was less about provoking Shiahs than pre-empting domestic outrage over the deaths of so many Sunnis, who make up 85 per cent of the country’s population. The kingdom has rarely been concerned with domestic opinion in its 90 years of statehood. Does Saudi Arabia now fear unrest among the masses? Should it?

Outside of North Korea and the New England Patriots, few institutions are more opaque than the Saudi royal court. But over the last year, the first in the reign of 80-year-old King Salman, the famously hidebound monarchy has undergone a shocking and risky makeover.

Salman, who took over last January 23 on the death of his half-brother King Abdullah, was widely expected to be just a caretaker. Instead, he took care of business. Within months, he replaced the anointed crown prince with his nephew Mohammed bin Nayef, the longtime interior minister. Yet he also watered down this new heir’s influence by dismantling the crown prince’s previously independent court.

The real winner was the king’s young son, Defence Minister Mohammed bin Salman, who became deputy crown prince and gatekeeper to those seeking the king’s attention. The prince was named head of the new Council of Economic and Development Affairs, which took over many powers of the finance ministry, and was given control over Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil monopoly. (Yesterday, he suggested that the kingdom may consider selling a stake in the oil giant.)

Many questioned whether the untested Mohammed bin Salman, who is thought to be in his early 30s, was up to all that responsibility. Open letters printed in the Guardian attributed to a “senior Saudi prince” accused King Salman of being “completely reliant on his son’s rule” and hinted that the oldest generation of royals should choose a replacement for Salman.

Mohammed bin Salman’s tenure has not put those doubts to rest. He was the prime agitator for the Saudi intervention in neighbouring Yemen, where Iran-backed Houthi rebels had overturned the Saudi-backed government. A nine-month bombing campaign has reduced much of the impoverished country to rubble and killed hundreds of civilians, but the military quagmire just grows deeper. It certainly does not demonstrate a mastery of geopolitics.

There were also reports, unverified but widely believed in the Arab world, that road closings for the deputy crown prince’s motorcade were partially responsible for the stampede among Muslim pilgrims near Mecca in September, in which more than 2,000 died. Even if the prince was blameless, and even if road closings were not a factor, the rumours cut deeply into one of the family’s greatest sources of legitimacy: as dependable custodians of the Islam’s most revered sites.

The Saudi reaction to 2015’s collapse in oil prices is also under scrutiny. Saudi Aramco has refused to cut back production — no doubt wary of the huge losses in market share it suffered by following that path in the 1980s — leading to huge deficits and staggeringly high unemployment rates among younger citizens. As David Fickling of Bloomberg Gadfly points out, the Saudi economy is now more exposed to cratering oil prices than archrival Iran’s.

Facing this budget crunch, the young prince did what you might expect from a modern monarch: He called in the consultants. With advice from McKinsey & Co, Mohammed bin Salman has outlined a plan that will impose taxes and cut billions in electricity, gasoline and water subsidies, particularly among the wealthiest. The government has begun issuing sovereign bonds, its first since 2007, rather than further draw down its US$635 billion (RM2.8 trillion) in reserves. Some state-controlled functions, such as airports, will be privatised.

Above all, the plan calls for diversifying the economy away from oil, which provides 80 per cent of budget revenue. The imported number crunchers say a “productivity- and investment-led transformation” could add 6 million jobs by 2030. Sure. Mohammed bin Salman wasn’t alive to see all of them, but there have been at least 10 previous official development plans for the kingdom since 1970, and each has put economic diversification at the top of the agenda.

Perhaps 11th time will be the charm. Maybe the Saudis and their Gulf allies can forge a truce in Yemen that lasts more than a couple of days. Perhaps rising Sunni rivals such as Qatar, which notably did not break off diplomatic relations with Iran this week, can be brought into line at the emergency meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council scheduled for tomorrow.

But none of this will ease the royal family’s existential fears, or its horror over the Arab Spring of 2011. Particularly chilling was fall of Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak, abandoned by his longtime US allies.

The House of Saud has long kept the populace in line by spreading out oil riches, what the scholar Toby Craig Jones calls “the very social contract that informally binds ruler and ruled.” Now, a population of which a large majority is under 30 will be the first in memory to face economic privation. It may want a greater say in its future.

“Part of the leverage the regime has had on their people is that they don’t impose taxes and therefore people don’t expect representation,” said Robert Jordan, a former US ambassador to Riyadh. “But once they pay taxes, you’re likely to see an increase in political unrest.”

The kingdom is taking no chances. It has initiated a new security law that lists “disrupting public order,” “risking national unity” and “harming the reputation” of the royal family as terrorist acts. Human rights lawyer Waleed al-Khair was given 10 years in prison for “inflaming public opinion,” and a pro-democracy blogger, Raif Badawi, was given the same term as well as 1,000 lashes.

While this week’s mass execution was the largest since the 1980s, use of the death penalty overall has been on the rise. In recent years, drug offenses have been far and away the top reason for capital punishment. The first-place ranking for 2016 changed on Saturday, when each of the 47 beheaded had been convicted on terrorism charges. (Adultery, apostasy and “sorcery” also all remain punishable by death.)

If those executions were meant to stifle dissent, it wasn’t entirely successful. Since Saturday, there have been a series of protests in the Shiah-majority Qatif region, near the kingdom’s vital oil fields, with reports of shots fired and a Saudi Aramco bus torched. The bombing of two mosques there last May, for which Islamic State took credit, was a warning that the region’s Sunni-Shiah conflict, which the Saudis have done nothing to assuage, could do great damage inside the kingdom.

Domestic worries also provide an explanation for continuing the fruitless campaign in Yemen. The border between the two nations exists more in theory than practice, and the last thing the Saudis want is for the Houthi rebellion to spread among the Sunni tribes that straddle the line. We saw a similar dynamic during the Arab Spring, when unrest among the Shiah majority in neighbouring Bahrain during became such a threat that Saudi tanks rolled across the causeway to prop up the island nation’s Sunni leaders.

Saudi Arabia is hardly fertile ground for revolution, even now. It remains among the most oppressive nations on earth. Even under straitened circumstances, its citizens remain among the wealthiest in the world, with a per capita gross domestic product 12 times that of Yemen. Fewer than a million of the nation’s 28 million citizens turned out to vote in last month’s municipal elections, even though women were on the ballot for the first time.

That said, there is little doubt that the new king and his son face challenges at home that were of little concern to their predecessors. Iran makes a useful bogeyman, but at the moment Sunni extremism in the form of Islamic State is a far more potent threat to Mideast stability than Persian/Shiah ambitions. And while the al-Sauds can blame the American perfidy and Muslim Brotherhood treachery for the collapse of Mubarak’s Egypt, they are surely aware that the prime cause of the Arab Spring was economic frustration among a youthful populace with little faith that aging dictatorships would look to the future. — Bloomberg

                This entry was posted on Monday, 11 January 2016, 6:30 am and is filed under
International
,
Islam
,
Islamic state
,
Oil
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The truth hurts

by Mariam Mokhtar

Malaysiakini

11th January 2016

Just because a Malay talks and writes about the injustice meted out to non-Muslims, it does not mean that the Malay is bashing his own race, nor is he denigrating Islam. Malays, in particular, refuse to acknowledge that most critiques are not about the religion, but are in fact criticisms of the Malays who have misinterpreted a particular phrase, or religious edict.

If PAS, Umno Baru and the respective religious institutions are critical in stopping alleged conversions of Malays to Christianity, why were there no mass conversions of Malays during the colonial era, when none of these political parties nor institutions existed?

Many Malays appear to see the conversion issue as a numbers game. Many Malays are also religious hypocrites.

Hasan Ali, the former Selangor exco member, caused panic within the Malay community when he alleged that Malays were being converted by solar-powered talking Bibles. He also claimed that evangelical missionaries were spreading Christianity by providing financial aid to single mothers and the poor.

Despite the publicity he received and the anger he whipped-up among the Malays, he did not produce a single Malay who had been proselytised. So, what were his reasons for causing mass hysteria, and why was he not punished for threatening national harmony?

Many colleagues, who work in the women’s NGOs, claim that many Malay women, who are victims of domestic abuse, get little help from their own communities.

In the past, the police were reluctant to get involved, so these women used to approach Christian shelter homes for help and refuge. They did this reluctantly, and as a last resort, because others of their own faith and race, rejected their requests for help. So, can you blame Malay women who after years of abuse finally find temporary relief and moral support from a Christian home?

When allegations are made about Muslim proselytisations, all hell breaks loose in Malaysia. The raid on the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) was a shameful episode in our history. Again, the supposed Malay converts, to Christianity, could not be produced.

When Muslim clerics convert children, without their parents’ permission, in rural schools of both peninsular Malaysia and in Sabah and Sarawak, the Muslims who criticise Malay proselytisations are silent.

Quick to blame others

The Malays are quick to blame others for undermining their religion, but if they cared to look in the mirror, they would see that they are the ones who are bringing disgrace to Islam. In their eyes, it is always the non-Muslims’ fault. They keep accusing the opposition, in particular the DAP, of wanting a Christian government, a Christian PM and of getting rid of Islam as the official religion of Malaysia.

Apart from lack of personal accountability, where is the Malay sense of self-worth? Why do the majority of Malays criticise a woman’s dress, her drinking habits, or her desire to enter a beauty contest? Why do the same Malays keep quiet about corruption and injustice?

There is a growing trend for some Muslim women to spend a small fortune on religious classes in a particular part of town, because they are taught by a celebrity ustaz or ustazah.

Is this an extension of the footballers’ wives who must be seen with the right people, wearing the right clothes, using the right accessories and driving the right cars, or better still, being chauffeured to and from the classes. Has Islam been reduced to such a low point?

A practising Muslim need not abandon his reasoning and intellect. When a cleric, or a religious authority, does something which appears ludicrous, will the average Malay speak out?

When the Perak mufti said that wives could not refuse sex if their husbands demanded it even if they were on a camel, his comments sparked a firestorm, but where was the criticism from his peers? This man calls himself a learned scholar.

Finally, when will the Muslims show fairness? The case of mother M Indira Gandhi, who was denied access to her youngest daughter whom her convert husband kidnapped and converted seven years ago, is an example of Muslim arrogance over the constitutional rights of a Malaysian and a mother.

This is what happens when a two-tiered system of laws rule the country. Who among the Muslim judges will make the right move to serve justice for Indira? No judge as yet will do the proper thing and grant Indira custody of her daughter, because his career will come to a premature end if he does not bow to the will of his political masters.

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a defender of the truth, the admiral-general of the Green Bean Army and president of the Perak Liberation Organisation (PLO). Blog, Twitter.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 11 January 2016, 10:39 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Malays
,
Mariam Mokhtar
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Can Prime Minister and Cabinet  end the greatest injustice in the Najib premiership –   ensure Indira Gandhi’s  re-union with her  daughter within 48 hours  after the Prime Minister, Cabinet, Parliament and Judiciary have failed her for seven years?

Tomorrow is the Cabinet’s weekly Wednesday meeting.

One of the issues the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak  and the 36 Ministers  in the Cabinet must wrestle with is what they could to  end one of the greatest injustices in the Najib premiership of six year nine months – where a mother had been forcibly separated from her 11-month old baby daughter not for one or two years but for seven years!

The Prime Minister, the Cabinet, Parliament and the Judiciary have all  failed Indira Gandhi and the Constitution, the laws,  the courts and the system of governance have been manipulated to deny Indira her fundamental rights as a mother to see,  hold and touch her daughter!

The same week that Najib became the sixth Prime Minister of Malaysia in April 2009,   Indira found that her three children had without her knowledge or consent been  unilaterally converted to Islam by her ex husband, who had converted to  Islam a month earlier.

That started Indira’s long and still unending legal battle for control and custody of her three children.

Recent reports that the Cabinet had assigned three Ministers to look into the implications of the Court of Appeal judgment on her case, or the announcement that the Prime Minister had “agreed in principle to study whether existing laws need to be amended to prevent unilateral conversion of children” provide neither consolation nor solace to a mother who had been forced to fight  the system for close to seven years just  to exercise the basic maternal and human rights to see her daughter – especially as there had been so many instances of Cabinet impotence and failures  in her seven-year struggle.

What could be more heart-rending than her teary-account of her forlorn seven-year fight to be with her daughter.

As she recounted about what happened seven years ago:

“There was an argument, he assaulted me, it’s just a few seconds. He grabbed Prasana my daughter’s hand and he just fled. That was the last time.”

It has been seven years since she last saw Prasana and not a single day has passed without her thinking about her youngest daughter.

She said: “Till today we can’t get single information about how she is, which school she is going to, there is nothing. I have no information but she is always in our prayers, she is fine, doing well.”

What type of a government is the Prime Minister heading, which could deny Indira her maternal instincts to see her daughter for seven long years?

Indira is appealing to the Federal Court, which can mean a total of a 10-year agony and not just a seven-year battle.

Nobody would believe if he or she were told when Malaya achieved independence in 1957 or Malaysia established in 1963 that under the nation’s Constitution, laws and system, a mother could be forcibly separated from her child for seven long years as not able to see or touch her,  and that the Prime Minister, Cabinet, Parliament, Judiciary, the Constitution and the laws could conspire to deny a mother her basic maternal rights.

The first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein, would be horrified that such an injustice could be perpetrated in Malaysia under our Constitution, laws and system of governance, and I have no doubt that as Prime Minister they would have acted to ensure that such  injustice would be ended immediately and  not  marred Malaysia and our system of governance.

Isn’t there something that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet can do immediately tomorrow to ease Indira’s  agony, pain and suffering as a mother in Malaysia?

Leaving aside for the moment what could be done to spell out the law clearly and justly about the problem of unilateral religious conversion of underaged children by one of the parents, there is no reason why the Prime Minister and the Cabinet could do nothing to  ensure that within 48 hours, Indira Gandhi should be able to re-unite with her daughter whom she had not seen for seven long years.

This is a test not only of the compassion and humanity, but also the sense of justice and competence of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet.

Let Najib and Cabinet tell Malaysians after their meeting tomorrow what they could do to end one of the greatest injustices of the Najib premiership – the forcible separation of  a mother from her daughter for seven long years – with  Indira’s re-union with her daughter for the first time in seven years!

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 12 January 2016, 10:45 am and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Islam
,
women
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.