Five “atomic bomb” issues for the AMANAH candidates to hurl at Najib in Parliament if they are elected as MPs on Saturday

PKR Secretary-General and MP for Pandan Rafizi Ramli created quite a stir when at a  Kuala Kangsar by-election ceramah, he said that if the AMANAH candidate, Ahmad Termizi Ramli, who is a nuclear physicist, is elected, he would be asked to hurl an “atomic bomb” at the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak in Parliament.

Everybody had a good laugh as they  knew that it was a figure of speech, meaning that Ahmad Termizi would be raising in Parliament mega Najib scandals and wrongdoings, as it would be physically impossible for any human being  to “hurl” any atomic  bomb at anyone in Parliament – as an atomic bomb will be too heavy for any human being to hurl it around as if Termizi is a superhuman  weight-lifter. For example, the  two atomic bombs, “Little Boy” and  “Fat Man” dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki which ended the Second World War in Asia-Pacific in 1945,  weighed more than 10,000 pounds each!

But there are cretins who took Rafizi literally as even  to lodge police reports as if

Rafizi was issuing a grave threat threatenning the life and limb of the Prime Minister (if so, even DAP leaders will be the first to deplore Rafizi’s speech) and what is even more shocking, the Police took the police reports of the cretins so seriously that Rafizi had been questioned by the police and there is even a possibility that Rafizi may be charged in court for an action which would be the first in the world  – for issuing a threat through use of figurative language.

We will wait to see what the Police and the Attorney-General will do in this case, but there is no doubt that if Azhar Shukor and Ahmad Termizi Ramli are elected as MPs in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar respectively, they will be expected to raise issues and scandals of “atomic-bomb proportions”  in Parliament.

I can off-hand think of five such “atomic bomb-proportion” issues to be raised  in Parliament by Azhar and Termizi if they are elected as MPs, viz:

1. Malaysia’s first global financial scandals in history – Najib’s RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin mega scandals.

At his  briefing to civil servants on the 1MDB scandal as part of the UMNO/BN campaign in Sungai Besar by-election, the 1MDB Chief executive Arul Kanda said  the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) had “found no evidence which linked the RM2.6 billion donation to 1MDB”.

I do not want to call Arul a liar but his statement is downright untrue, as the PAC  had never investigated into the RM2.6 billion (which later grew to  RM4.2 billion) “donation” scandal, so how could the PAC “found no evidence which linked the RM2.6 billion donation to 1MDB”.

When Arul can so blatantly give such  a false representation about the PAC report on 1MDB scandal  as to claim that  the PAC never found  Najib’s RM2.6 billion (actually RM4.2 billion) “donation” in his personal banking accounts  were not linked to the 1MDB, how can any statement by Arul on 1MDB be believed by Malaysians?

There has been endless attempts to downplay the magnitude of the RM55 billion 1MDB scandal.

If RM55 billion is divided among the 42,000 voters in Sungai Besar, every voter will get RM1.3 million.

What can RM1 billion do?

As RM1 billion can be used to build 100 schools, construct 6,600 km roads or 500 bridges, it boggles the mind as to what RM55 billion can do to improve the livelihood of the people of Sungai Besar.

2. National Security Council (NSC) Act.  It is serious disrespect and contempt of the Conference of Rulers that the Najib government had totally ignored the advice of the Malay Rulers to “refine” the NSC Bill before it becomes law. The NSC Act is both undemocratic and unconstitutional, as it usurps the prerogative of the Yang di Pertuan Agong to declare a state of emergency in Malaysia, by unconstitutionally conferring on the Prime Minister the powers to declare “mini-emergency” by the simple expedient of declaring specific areas or states as “security areas”.

3. The unprecedented Ministerial motion in Parliament on May 26 to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill, going against the 43-year Barisan Nasional stand and consensus that hudud is unconstitutional and not suitable for a plural nation like Malaysia.

4. The rise of the extreme politics of race, religion and hate to polarise Malaysians along racial and religious lines to the extent that the unity and very existence of the Malaysian Federation formed in 1963 could be under peril, with the people of Sabah and Sarawak more and more alienated by Putrajaya policies.

5. The failure of the BN Government to perform and deliber the basic functions of government, as ensuring the safety and security of Malaysians on Malaysian home-land and in Malaysian waters, highlighted by another kidnapping of four Malaysians by Abu Sayyap and the frequent arrest and hostage of Malaysian fishermen by Indonesian authorities.

All these five issues have become so  big that they have assumed “atomic bomb” proportions, and only the AMANAH/Pakatan Rakyat candidates will highlight these issues in Parliament if they are elected as MPs in the two by-elections on Saturday.

(Speech at the Pakatan Harapan Sungai Besar by-election ceramah in Sungai Besar village on Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10 pm)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 June 2016, 1:16 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Elections
,
Financial Scandals
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Citizens’ Demands on 1MDB and Najib’s US$1 billion “donation”

The 1MDB Colloquium held in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar on 11th and 12th June 2016 respectively, which was graced by many distinguished speakers have raised many pertinent issues with regards to the Government’s complete lack of accountability with 1MDB.

The recent global developments over 1MDB made it even more imperative for Dato’ Seri Najib Razak to explain what he has refused to explain for more than a year.

We, the undersigned, are citizens of Malaysia demanding clear and direct answers by the Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak and his Cabinet on the following pressing questions on 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) and Najib’s US$1 billion deposits into his personal bank account:

1. Who will pay if 1MDB loses the arbitration case with Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC)?

On 14 June 2016, IPIC has filed its US$6.5 billion worth of claims against 1MDB in London’s Arbitration Court.  IPIC is seeking US$3.5 billion bond plus interest that amounts to US$4.8 billion, the US$1.2 billion loan plus interest, and about US$481 million owed to its subsidiary, Aabar Investment PJS.

The above claims followed the discovery that 1MDB has made as much as US$3.5 billion of payments to a fraudulent British Virgin Island incorporated entity, Aabar Investment PJS Limited, which IPIC has denied ownership.

2. Why hasn’t the Ministry of Finance confirmed Bank Negara’s findings presented to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) which disclosed Good Star Limited, that the recipient of US$1.03 billion of 1MDB funds was owned by Jho Low?

In Bank Negara’s letter addressed to the PAC on 6 April 2016, which was hidden by the PAC Chairman Datuk Hassan Arifin from the PAC members, it explained that two foreign regulators have confirmed the Good Star Limited was owned by Jho Low since its incorporation in 2009.  This letter has since been exposed by the Wall Street Journal.

3. Where has 1MDB’s US$940 million of so-called “unit” parked with BSI Bank Singapore disappeared to, now that the Bank has been shut down by the Monetary Authority of Singapore for the failure to comply with money laundering laws and regulations?

The Prime Minister has claimed that these “units” were “redeemed” from 1MDB’s Cayman Islands investment in January 2015.  The Cayman Islands investment was made with the purported proceeds from 1MDB’s earlier investments with Petrosaudi International Limited.  The disappearance of these US$940 million would confirm a bigger fraud involving the top 1MDB officials in complicity with Petrosaudi.

4. Why have the Ministry of Finance and the new Board of Directors chaired by Treasurer-General Tan Sri Irwan Serigar allowed 1MDB’s CEO, Arul Kanda Kandasamy to participate in Barisan Nasional’s Sg Besar by-election campaign?

Malaysians are shocked that Arul Kanda is allowed to campaign for Barisan Nasional when he has the grave responsibility to ensure that all the Malaysian tax-payers’ money are properly accounted for in 1MDB in the light of the discovery of fraud and the collapse of its much-hyped rationalization exercise.

5. Why has Dato’ Seri Najib Razak granted unfairly generous tax concessions to the master developer of Bandar Malaysia, IWH CREC Sdn Bhd and its wholly-owned subsidiaries?

The Prime Minister said the incentives would include a 10-year income tax exemption and eight years of exemption from stamp duty, as well as real property gains tax and withholding tax.  Why has these private local and China companies received such unfair tax privileges which will deny Malaysia possibly billions of ringgit of tax income over the next 10 years? Is it because IWH CREC is now unable to raise the necessary financing to acquire the 60% of Bandar Malaysia for the agreed RM7.41 billion?

6. Why has Dato’ Seri Najib Razak not explained how he had spent the alleged Arab donation of US$681 million into his personal bank accounts as well as the nature of an additional US$300 million or more which was also deposited into the same accounts?

The Wall Street Journal and Australian Broadcasting Corporation have exposed the additional sums deposited into Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s accounts.  These exposes would bring the total deposited into the Prime Minister’s account to a total of more than US$1 billion (RM4.2 billion).  The Prime Minister cannot remain silent and must explain the origins of these additional sums.  Are these “donations” too?

At the same time, we demand that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak

7. Instructs the Auditor-General and directs the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) to reopen the investigations into 1MDB.

This is in the light of the disastrous failure of 1MDB’s rationalization exercise and the fact that 1MDB had made as much as US$3.5 bilion of payments between 2011 and 2015 to a fraudulent entity, Aabar Investment PJS Limited incorporated in the British Virgin Islands.

Given that 1MDB has failed to present all documents, including crucial bank statements relating to its foreign subsidiaries and transactions in the first report by the Auditor-General, the Prime Minister must give full powers to the Auditor-General to procure these documents from foreign authorities.  This will allow the Auditor-General to trace the ownership of entities incorporated in tax-havens as well as obtaining bank statements from foreign banks.

8. Instructs the Auditor-General and directs the PAC to commence the audit and investigations into SRC International Sdn Bhd.

SRC International has been found to have made payments amount to at least RM69 million via intermediaries into Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank account(s).

The Prime Minister has failed to explain how the RM69 million the Ministry of Finance subsidiary has found its way into his personal account.  However, the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Apandi Ali has declared that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak is innocent because he was unaware of the origins of the fund.  If that is the case, why hasn’t the monies been returned to SRC International?  At the same time, the management of SRC International has not been brought to task for transferring the sums into the Prime Minister’s account.

This Citizens’ Demand, which comes under the Citizens’ Declaration petition, is signed by the following Malaysian citizens:

(The document was signed by YAB Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, YAB Tun Dr. Siti Hasmah, DAP Parliamentary Leader Lim Kit Siang, President of Parti Amanah Negara Mohamad Sabu, PKR Vice-President Shamsul Iskandar, GKCM president Kamarul Azman Habibur Rahman and Pakatan Harapan candidate from Amanah for P093 Sungai Besar, Azhar Shukur.)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 June 2016, 5:15 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


It is still not too late for every voter, especially outside Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar, to make the historic trip home to  vote in the two most important by-elections in nation’s history

The 13-day campaign for the Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar by-elections are over and it is for the 32,632 voters in Kuala Kangsar and 42,365 voters in Sungai Besar to decide the outcome of the two historic by-elections today.

For the past two weeks, I had been shuttling between Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar, and it is my hope that on the 50th anniversary of my political work in Malaysia, I can get a big present – a historic and miraculous victory in the Kuala Kangsar and/or Sungai Besar by-elections.

Can we “write history, create miracle” today?

I confess to be disheartened by a good round-up article in
Malay Mail Online
,
“As poll looms, Sungai Besar voters ask: Should I bother?”
 by its reporter, A. Ruban, quoting several voters who were staunch supporters of the now defunct Pakatan Rakyat in two minds about casting their ballots in the Sungai Besar by-election.

Ruban wrote:  “Disenchanted with the infighting within the opposition ranks yet spurning Barisan Nasional (BN), both residents and registered voters living outside the Selangor parliamentary seat said they either can’t decide who to vote for, or may just skip polling altogether.”

These “disenchanted voters” expressed being “fed up with what has been going on in Pakatan”, expressing the sentiments: “I am definitely not voting BN, so let’s see how it goes… if I am free, I will go vote, or else I will just stay home”.

They felt Pakatan should get its act together if it wanted to be taken seriously about government change, complaining that the PKR-DAP-PAS pact known as Pakatan Rakyat that was later replaced by the Pakatan Harapan partnership comprising Parti Amanah Negara (Amanah) with PKR and DAP, was a simple name change.

One anonymous voter complained that Pakatan is in “shambles” and he would rather wait for the 14th general election due just two years away to cast his vote, when he could get to vote for the state seat as well.

I fully agree with complainants who want  the Pakatan Harapan to get its act together and there is merit in many of the  dissatisfactions about the state of Pakatan Harapan politics today.

But I cannot agree with any voter, whether in Sungai Besar or Kuala Kangsar, throwing his or her vote away because of the lack of ideal conditions in Opposition politics – or I should have thrown in my towel in Malaysian politics long ago, not having to undergo two terms of Internal Security Act (ISA) detentions, countless court prosecutions (including the Official Secrets Act) and political persecutions (including 50 years of demonisation by the UMNO/BN  print, electronic and social media), see my son sent  to jail and losing his parliamentary status and forfeiting his parliamentary pension for standing up for the honour and dignity of an underaged Malay girl, and countless tests, trials and tribulations for an united, democratic, just, progressive and prosperous Malaysia for all her citizenry, regardless of race, religion or region.

It is not enough just to wait for the 14th General Election although it it just two years down the road, as what happens in the two by-elections today will have far-reaching implications and consequences not only for Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar, but also for Malaysian politics and governance as a whole.

Although both the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections cannot  materially change  the respective parliamentary numbers and strength of the political parties, a defeat by UMNO in the sixty-year-old  UMNO traditional stronghold of Sungai Besar and/or Kuala Kangsar would have a traumatic effect which will affect the future of Datuk Seri Najib Razak as Prime Minister – whether immediately, in the next 24 months or during the 14th General Election by 2018.

In fact, a defeat for UMNO in Sungai Besar and/or Kuala Kangsar will be  world news and make history for by-elections in Malaysia, for it would tally with international perceptions and sentiments about the1MDB global scandal hounding and haunting the Malaysian Prime Minister and government, and a clear signal that even Malaysians in semi-rural areas are not politically apathetic or unconcerned about global scandals, good governance and the great questions of right and wrong in public affairs as many had thought.

Even more important, a defeat for UMNO will a powerful message that Malaysians are prepared for the next stage of the nation’s political development  – for Malaysia to become a normal democratic country where voters can change the government peacefully and democratically through the ballot box like other mature democracies without inviting national catastrophes.

In the past 60 years, there has been six democratic and peaceful change of government in the Untied Kingdom, but not a single time in Malaysia. Even Philippine and Indonesia have more democratic traditions and practices than Malaysia, as Filipinos and Indonesians can use the ballot bbx to change the party or political coalition in power without any national disaster or calamities.

If UMNO/BN wins in Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar by-elections, it will cause no surprises as these had been UMNO/BN strongholds for six decades.  Malaysian politics and governance will see “more of the same”.

But an AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan victory in Kuala Kangsar and/or Sungai Besar will be of such historic and miraculous magnitude that it will usher great political changes culminating in the 14th General Elections by 2018.

It is still not too late for every voter, especially outside Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar, to make the historic trip home to  vote in the two most important by-elections in nation’s history.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 June 2016, 8:23 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Twin Malaysia By-Elections to Reveal Level of Support for Najib

by Shamim Adam

Bloomberg

June 18, 2016

Voters in two Malaysian districts head to the polls Saturday in by-elections that will indicate the extent of Prime Minister Najib Razak’s hold on his party.

More than 42,600 people in Sungai Besar in Selangor state and 33,000 in Kuala Kangsar in the northern Perak region will pick new lawmakers after a helicopter crash last month killed incumbents from Najib’s United Malays National Organisation, or UMNO.

The vote is the first test of public support for Najib on peninsular Malaysia after a year of political turmoil over funding scandals. Losses or narrower victories could spur concern in UMNO about his ability to steer it to another win in a national election due by 2018. Equally, a strong win for seats already held by UMNO would bolster his grip.

Former leader Mahathir Mohamad has recently lost traction in his bid to convince party officials that Najib is a liability and will cost them a reign unbroken since 1957. Most UMNO divisional chiefs back the premier, even amid concerns about slowing growth and its impact on ethnic Malays, the cornerstone of the party. Convincing wins would help Najib silence the Mahathir-led murmurings about his leadership.

“Najib desperately needs these wins,” said Ahmad Martadha Mohamed, dean of the college of law, government and international studies at Universiti Utara Malaysia. “It will validate his position that despite all the problems he’s facing, they are able to win. Otherwise, his status will be in the balance, especially as president of UMNO.”

Sarawak Win

Ruling coalition Barisan Nasional, or BN, secured a bigger majority in recent elections in Malaysia’s biggest state of Sarawak, but a vote across the South China Sea on Borneo island was dominated by local issues. Voters on the peninsula may be more attuned to the turmoil surrounding the premier.

Najib, 62, has battled graft accusations since July and denied wrongdoing. He was cleared by the attorney general this year over revelations that $681 million appeared in his accounts before the 2013 election. The money was a donation from the Saudi royal family and most was later returned, the government said. The premier has also been embroiled in probes into the finances of troubled state fund 1Malaysia Development Bhd.

Ministers in Najib’s cabinet have made daily trips to the two constituencies, shaking hands and at times handing out bags of rice and other aid to the poor. They are seeking to counter an opposition focusing on questions about Najib’s credibility. In a Twitter post on Friday, Najib told voters not to taken in by what he called the opposition’s games.

‘Better Access’

“I support the opposition more than BN, but you have to also think about who has better access to the government, who can get more things done and who can improve your life,” said Mei, an ethnic Chinese fruit seller in Sekinchan town in Sungai Besar who would give only a partial name. “You have to look out for your own interests, and not what the prime minister did or didn’t do.”

A divided opposition may make it easier for BN coalition to win, and the presence of multiple candidates may assist it.

Two opposition groups are running against UMNO for both seats, while an independent candidate has turned Kuala Kangsar into a four-cornered battle.

UMNO won Sungai Besar in 2013 in a straight fight, and Kuala Kangsar in a three-way race, both by narrow margins.

Race, Religion

Racial and religious issues are coming to the fore of Malaysian politics, including the past two weeks of campaigning. UMNO, in power since independence, won the 2013 ballot by its slimmest-ever result as Chinese and Indian electors deserted Najib’s coalition.

Since then, Najib has move to woo the Malay majority. He has reached out to the opposition Parti Islam se-Malaysia and proposed they work to promote Islam’s doctrines. PAS, which is pushing for the Islamic penal code to be implemented in a state it controls, is also competing on Saturday.

Under PAS’s hudud laws, adulterers and apostates could face death by stoning, while those found guilty of theft could have their hands amputated.

About 68 percent of voters in Kuala Kangsar are Malay, 24 percent are Chinese, and Indians and other ethnicities make up the rest, according to the Bernama news agency. In Sungai Besar, Malays make up about 67 percent of voters, while 31 percent are Chinese and the rest minority groups.

“BN will need to work hard to win, as there are many Chinese who aren’t happy about hudud and the fact UMNO is trying to get close to PAS,” said Yusof Asri, a barber who lives around the Sungai Besar area, gesturing a hand being chopped off. “I’m telling all my friends to vote wisely.”

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 June 2016, 1:08 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Election victories bolster scandal-tainted Malaysian leader

By ASSOCIATED PRESS

Daily Mail

19 June 2016

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia (AP) — The party of Malaysia’s scandal-tainted Prime Minister Najib Razak has won two parliamentary by-elections in a landslide, further strengthening his rule despite corruption allegations.

Najib’s United Malays National Organization retained the Sungai Besar seat in central Selangor state and Kuala Kangsar in northern Perak state in the elections Saturday with much larger majorities. The elections were triggered after the deaths of the incumbents in a helicopter crash.

The victory was expected due to a fractured opposition, as well as the ruling coalition’s well-oiled machinery and money. Voters in the two rural constituencies are mostly ethnic Malays, the bedrock of support for Najib’s Malay party.

Najib said the victory showed that the people rejected “politically-motivated slander” against his government. Last month, he also secured a major win for the coalition in a state election.

“This will significantly strengthen his position in UMNO. Najib can claim that he can lead the party and the coalition to electoral victories despite all the scandals,” said James Chin, director of the Asia Institute at Australia’s University of Tasmania.

Najib has been grappling with accusations of corruption and mismanagement over allegations that hundreds of millions of dollars had been channeled into his accounts from an indebted state fund.

Under pressure to resign, Najib has denied the money came from state investment fund 1MDB. The government cleared him in January, saying the money was a donation from the Saudi royal family and that Najib had returned most of it. The explanation was met with widespread skepticism.

The fund, which Najib started in 2009, is still mired in debt and is being investigated in several countries for embezzlement. A Malaysian parliamentary inquiry recently found massive unexplained payments and called for a police investigation of the fund’s former head.

Chin said Saturday’s victories also showed the waning influence of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has campaigned against Najib. Mahathir has been a fierce critic of Najib over the 1MDB scandal and has quit the Malay party.

Chin said the big win could prompt Najib to call early elections to secure his position. General elections are not due until 2018.

Support for the National Front coalition, which has been in power in Malaysia since independence from Britain in 1957, has eroded in the last two general elections. In 2013, it lost the popular vote for the first time.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 June 2016, 2:00 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Embattled PM wins by-elections in Malaysia

AFP

Bangkok Post

19 Jun 2016

KUALA LUMPUR – Malaysia’s ruling party won two parliamentary by-elections Saturday that were closely watched for indications of whether graft allegations hounding Prime Minister Najib Razak were affecting his governing coalition’s support.

The results in two mainly rural constituencies were largely expected, as support typically runs strong in such areas for the dominant United Malays National Organisation (UMNO).

The UMNO-led ruling coalition also enjoys huge advantages in money and machinery over a splintered opposition.

UMNO candidate Budiman Mohamad Zohdi won the parliamentary seat of Sungai Besar of west-central Malaysia, while Mastura Mohamad Yazid won the Kuala Kangsar constituency seat in the country’s north, the election commission announced.

Both candidates also pulled off a thumping victory as predicted.

The contests — held after the previous incumbents died together in a helicopter crash in May — are the first parliamentary electoral contests since the corruption allegations emerged last year.

But for the second time in as many months, the results provided relief for Najib and his ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition.

Last month, the BN scored a thumping victory in Sarawak state assembly polls to extend its decades-old control of that stronghold state.

“The victory in both the constituencies (on Saturday) will enable Najib to entrench himself as the powerful leader of UMNO,” said Oh Ei Sun, a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore.

UMNO benefited in Saturday’s contests from opposition discord.

It had faced candidates from the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) and Amanah, a new party comprising mostly former PAS members.

Amanah’s members split acrimoniously from PAS last year, largely over the latter’s increasing Islamic conservatism.

Experts say that likely split the votes of the Muslim ethnic Malays who are the country’s majority group.

Najib faces allegations that billions of dollars were plundered from a state-owned investment fund he founded.

The accusations, which burst forth last year, include the revelation Najib received at least $681 million in deposits to his personal bank accounts in 2013.

Najib and the state fund, 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), deny wrongdoing.

But Najib has fuelled suspicions by shutting down domestic investigations and sidelining critics, while shoring up his hold on power.

Authorities in a half-dozen countries are investigating 1MDB money flows, however, and Switzerland and Singapore have frozen millions of dollars in assets.

Najib led the BN — in power since independence in 1957 — to its worst-ever showing in 2013 national elections amid voter concerns over the economy, corruption and alleged government repression.

Malaysia’s opposition had sought to highlight the 1MDB issue in campaigning for Saturday’s polls, but analysts say the issue carries little weight with masses of Malays who have been raised on UMNO control.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 June 2016, 6:45 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib sticks it to nemisis Mahathir with twin byelection victories

Amanda Hodge

The Australian

JUNE 20, 2016

The party of Malaysia’s scandal-tainted Prime Minister Najib Razak has won two by-elections in a landslide, further strengthening his rule despite corruption allegations.

Malaysia’s Teflon-coated Prime Minister Najib Razak has claimed a key victory over political mentor-turned foe Mahathir Mohamad with landslide wins in two weekend by-elections.

Mr Najib has survived not only an international scandal over an alleged misappropriation of billions from his pet 1MDB state development fund, but also allegations he profited by as much as $US1 billion from the fund, which he denies.

Mr Najib’s Barison Nasional coalition held the west coast seats of Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar on Saturday with increased majorities. Though the victories were expected, the by-elections had been billed as a test of Mr Najib’s ability to lead the party, which has ruled Malaysia for 57 years, back into government at the general election.

On Saturday night, Mr Najib took aim at Dr Mahathir, who referred to the Prime Minister as the “Idi Amin of Malaysia”.

“He called me the Idi Amin of Malaysia. (Well) the Idi Amin of Malaysia is more popular,” Mr Najib told party loyalists.

In a later statement, he said his party had won the by-elections despite a campaign of “unprecedented politically motivated slander”.

“Tun Mahathir turned the elections into a referendum on my leadership,” he said. “He campaigned for his former enemies in the opposition, dishonourably smearing his own party with crude language and claiming to speak on behalf of the people. But his betrayal was motivated by personal interest, not the national interest.”

Malaysians “rejected Tun Mahathir’s lies” and his “unworkable coalition of former enemies”, he added.

Dr Mahathir, Malaysia’s longest-serving prime minster, quit the ruling United Malay National Organisation earlier this year over Mr Najib’s refusal to step aside over the 1MDB scandal, which is the subject of six international investigations.

He has since led a coalition of former political enemies from the Left and Centre in a bid to raise popular anger over the scandal ahead of the next general election, which must be held by 2018.

It doesn’t appear to be working. Last month, BN also secured a landslide win in Sarawak state elections, where Mr Nijab campaigned heavily and pledged billions in largesse.

The consecutive wins have raised speculation Mr Najib will call a snap poll to consolidate and capitalise on the apparently waning influence of the once all-powerful Dr Mahathir.

The coalition lost its two-third majority in the 2008 polls, and Mr Najib lost the popular vote in 2013 although his government retained power.

Dr Mahathir’s Save Malaysia coalition hopes to collect a million signatures for its Citizen’s Declaration seeking the intervention of the country’s sultans. But the alliance, which includes the main opposition People’s Justice Party (PKR) led by Dr Mahathir’s former deputy Anwar Ibrahim, is under increasing strain.

Mr Anwar was jailed towards the end of Dr Mahathir’s 22-year tenure as prime minister on what many believed were politically motivated charges of sodomy, and is now serving a second sodomy sentence.

While Mr Anwar had earlier given his blessing for the PKR to work with Dr Mahathir, he reportedly sent a private letter from jail last month warning a senior PKR leader not to get too close to the former strongman.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 June 2016, 6:45 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


If Hadi is right, it must be Allah’s will that 65-year-old PAS is defeated by nine-month-old AMANAH and crushed in Sungai Besar by-election securing one per cent of Chinese votes when it received 75% Chinese voter support  in 2013GE

This must be the first time that the UMNO President has beaten PAS President in claiming divine intervention for an electoral victory.

On Saturday night, the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said he had turned to God for answers if he was on the right path or whether he had really strayed, and Barisan  Nasional’s “thumping victories in Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar by-elections was God’s answer to his prayers”.

Najib said:

“I don’t reply with harsh words. I only want to work. I prayed to Allah, if I am right, then show it.

“(Then) God gave us victory beyond our expectations.”

It will not be long before there will be claims that  Najib’s RM55 billion 1MDB and RM2.5 billion “donation” twin global scandals have received God’s blessings as well.

In the two by-elections, the student has outshone the teacher, as the “adviser” took two full days to recover from PAS’ stinging defeats in the two by-elections and to urge PAS supporters not to despair as it is in  Allah’s powers  to dictate victory for all who uphold Islam.

If the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang is right, it must be Allah’s will that the 65-year-old PAS is defeated by nine-month-old AMANAH and crushed in Sungai Besar by-election,  securing one per cent of Chinese votes when it received  75% Chinese voter support  in 2013GE.

The PAS President had warned voters about incurring God’s wrath should they vote for the wrong candidate in the two by-elections.

PAS polled 6,902 votes in Sungai Besar or 22% of the total votes cast and 5,684 votes in Kuala Kangsar or 24% of the total votes cast, and it is indeed most sad and shocking that the PAS President regard over three quarters of the voters of Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar as the “damned” and “accursed” because they did not vote for the PAS candidate.

The two by-election results have sparked renewed discussions as to how to avert  three-cornered fights in the 14th General Election which may be held next year, and may be it is opportune time to revisit a proposal for PAS to concentrate in Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah and Perlis while AMANAH  focus on all the other states, subject to adjustments to the arrangement by two political parties.

In the 14GE, Kelantan PAS faces the prospect of losing power in the state which it had governed since 1990, 23 years under Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat as Mentri Besar.

I have predicted during the by-election campaign that PAS would lose by 10,000 votes in Sungai Besar and 5,000 votes in Kuala Kangsar, and the results have not only proved me right but I was  too conservative.

PAS polled 18,296 votes in Sungai Besar and 13,136 votes in Kuala Kangsar in 2013 GE but only 6,902 votes in Sungai Besar and 5,684 votes in Kuala Kangsar by-elections – or a loss of 11,394 votes in Sungai  Besar and 7,452 votes in Kuala Kangsar.

Although the PAS candidate lost by a wafer-thin majority of 399 votes in Sungai Besar and a slim majority of 1,082 votes in Kuala Kangsar in the 13GE in 2013, these votes were won in the name of Pakatan Rakyat and not just PAS.

I had contended that a more correct reflection of PAS support were the results of the 2004 GE, where the “stand-alone” PAS candidate secured 7,988 votes in Sungai Besar and 5,748 votes in Kuala Kangsar.

In the event, PAS was not even able to achieve what it polled in 2004 in both constituencies, polling only 6,902 votes in the Sungai Besar  by-election as compared to 7,988 in 2004GE; and  5,684 votes in the Kuala Kangsar  by-election as compared to 5,748 in 2004GE.

Going by the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-election results, PAS will be completely wiped out in Selangor and Perak, reduced from the 15 State Assembly seats won in Selangor and the five seats in Perak   in the 13 GE to zero in both Selangor and Perak  as in the 2004 GE.

It is really pathetic that all that the party’s top election strategist can show after the party’s 65 years of political struggle  is the party’s role as a “spoiler”  in Malaysian electoral politics.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 June 2016, 10:00 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Let Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections be the last battles for the politics of race and the opening salvoes for the  battle for the new politics of good governance, democracy and nation-building

The two Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-election results on Saturday have given rise to ecstasy and  euphoria on the one hand and gloom and doom on the other.

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib was so elated by the twin by-election results that he even proudly embraced Tun Mahathir’s description of him in Jerlun two days earlier and proclaimed that  “Idi Amin of Malaysia is more popular” than Malaysia’s  former longest-serving Prime Minister.

UMNO/Barisan Nasional leaders celebrated the “return” of the Chinese voters to Barisan Nasional and there is talk of an earlier 14th General Elections next year although it was scheduled for 2018.

UMNO/BN virtually proclaimed a new political dawn with the mythical “skyrocketing” majorities in two by-elections – 9,191 votes in Kuala Kangsar and 6,969 votes  in Sungai Besar.

But as the former Batu Kawan Umno vice chief Khairuddin Abu Hassan has rightly pointed out, BN’s majority was not that big once all the votes for the opposition were taken into account.

If the Amanah and PAS votes are combined, BN’s majority is reduced to 2,086 in Kuala Kangsar or 8.73% of the total votes cast  and 2,289 in Sungai Besi or 7.31 per cent.

Is it possible to turn the by-election tide for Barisan Nasional in these two constituencies  in the 14th General election whether next year or 2018?

The Ijok by-election in Selangor on 28th April 2007, less than year before the 12th General Elections in March 2008, would answer in the positive.

In the Ijok by-election, the BN candidate, K. Parthiban, won with a majority of 1,850 votes – more than the 1,649-vote Barisan Nasioanal majority in 2004 General Election. Parthiban secured 5,884 votes while Keadilan’s Abdul Khalid Ibrahim got 4,034 votes.

In the March 8, 2008 General Election some ten months later, Khalid converted his by-election defeat by 1,850-vote majority into victory with a majority of 1,920 votes, polling 7,196 votes against the Barisan Nasional’s candidate, Mohd Sayuti Said who polled 5,276 votes.

The challenge for Pakatan Harapan is how to do an “Ijok” in the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar parliamentary constituencies in the 14th General Election.

With the Ijok example, there should be no need  for any hand-wringing or prognosis of gloom and doom for the Pakatan Harapan in the next general election.

While local development issues are influential in affecting voting trends during by-elections, national issues of  good governance, democracy, justice and nation-building are not  irrelevant or topics  like Najib’s  RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion twin  global scandals, GST, abuses of power and human rights violations like the  National Security Council (NSC) Act would have reached their “saturation point” and have no more  “value-added” role in influencing voters, particularly in by-elections.

I had said on the by-election Polling Day on Saturday that  UMNO/BN victories in Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar would  cause no surprises as these had been UMNO/BN strongholds for six decades – with Malaysian politics and governance  seeing  “more of the same”.

But an AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan victory in Kuala Kangsar and/or Sungai Besar will be of such historic and miraculous magnitude that it will usher great political changes culminating in the 14th General Elections by 2018.

This was not to be.  The twin Barisan Nasional by-election victories were not unexpected but the majorities were a surprise – although not as “sky-rocketing” as the Barisan Nasional leaders and propagandists would want to make them out to be.

Nevertheless, let Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections be the last battles for the politics of race and be the opening salvoes for the  battle for the new politics of good governance, democracy and nation-building, leading to  two new developments:

Firstly
, for Malaysia to become a normal democratic country where voters can change the government peacefully and democratically through the ballot box like other mature democracies without inviting national catastrophes.

In the past 60 years, there has been six democratic and peaceful changes of government in the Untied Kingdom, but not a single time in Malaysia. Even Philippine and Indonesia have more democratic traditions and practices than Malaysia, as Filipinos and Indonesians can use the ballot box to change the party or political coalition in power without any national disaster or calamities.

Secondly
, for Malaysians to rise above race, religion, region and even political affiliation to save Malaysia from careening towards a fractured and failed state, acquiring a new global notoriety as a kleptocracy.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 June 2016, 5:46 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The June by-elections and the politics of losing

Bridget Welsh

Malaysiakini

21st June 2018

COMMENT
 The by-election results for Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar are in. Umno held onto their seats, and increased its majorities.

Given the tragedy surrounding the polls stemming from the helicopter accident in Sarawak last month, the fact that by-elections disproportionately favour those with access to resources, and the reality that these contests were three-cornered fights with a divided opposition, these results are not unexpected.

The important implications of these by-elections lies less in the winning, but in the losing – as the shifts in campaigning, voting and political alignments reveal that old dreams are gone. Malaysian electoral politics is shifting, and all indications are that the direction is not toward a stronger, more vibrant polity that offers meaningful choices to the electorate.

Declining engagement

At this marker before the next general election, it is important to identity key trends. Importantly, voters are not engaging as in the past. This is evident in the decline in voter turnout. Malaysians are tired of the politicking and turning away from elections.

The drop in voter turnout from 2013 was a whopping 14 percent in Sungai Besar and 13 percent in Kuala Kangsar respectively. Importantly voter turnout levels were also a drop from 2008. What is even more revealing is the decline in voter registration more broadly, especially among younger Malaysians.

Voters are disappointed with the options provided and tired of a political contest that appears to be about the fight for power rather than the fight for representation. Voter disengagement advantages incumbents, as shown in the by-elections results, and this unhealthy trend reinforces the sense of disempowerment that has deepened with the governance scandals over the last year.

Both campaigns were devoid of any meaningful new messages. They were not about any real reform or policies that help Malaysians. Neither side had anything substantive or new to offer the electorate. Instead the campaign was about fighting enemies, be they Mahathir Mohamad, Najib Abdul Razak or Abdul Hadi Awang.

Battles over personalities dominated over the concerns of ordinary people as the past featured more than the future. If there was any issue that stood out, it was hudud, which was carefully placed by Umno to serve as a distraction to reinforce opposition splits, fears and insecurities – emotions that favour the incumbent.

Umno’s use of race and religion for campaigning is not new. This issue however became less about hudud than about the person who introduced the hudud bill, namely Hadi, as here too the election became about old strategies rather than new ones. The overall shallowness of the campaign speaks to the fatigue in the political system and the widening deficit of new ideas and leadership for moving the country forward.

To fill the vacuum, both sides turned to relying on resources and patronage in campaigning. Buying votes has now become the norm for the BN, especially in by-elections. Yet, the crass exchange of funds for votes was so blatant that it set a new low standard of vote-buying. The Electoral Commission seemed to endorse this practice.

While the BN may relish in their victory, this practice will be difficult to replicate on a national scale, especially given the rising debt and fiscal constraints tied to the economic mismanagement of the Najib administration. This mode is not viable to win GE14.

The opposition on its part has joined the goodie game. In an ‘if you can’t beat, then join them’ dynamic, Pakatan Harapan parties handed out rice and other sundries. The use of state funds (or rather people’s funds) were similarly used to woo electoral support, feeding the practice that elections are about what you get materially in the short term rather than in the long term.

The opposition has adopted a campaign tactic it will always lose, not only for the fact that they do not have the funds to be competitive, but more for the reality that it undercuts the opposition from any advantage they have to fall back on principles. For every bag of rice they distribute, they undercut all criticisms of an unfair electoral process. They are becoming what they said they were fighting against.

Loss of dreams

The move away from campaigning over ideas and defending principles underscores broader shifts in the political disengagement among the electorate at large. The stakes in Malaysian elections have changed. While 2008 was about change, and 2013 about the possibility of a change in government, current elections no longer appear to offer the option of meaningful difference.

Today it is not clear what the opposition stands for. These by-elections did not reveal an alternative political narrative for the opposition, a wasted opportunity to genuinely construct a new foundation. For many voters, the dream of change is dead.

It is thus no surprise that there were political realignments in voting, with some Chinese and Indians moving away from the opposition (although between 5-10 percent in a preliminary study of the data). This lack of viable alternative leadership also contributed to the increasing fragmentation among Malay voters. Malays are more divided than they have ever been, an advantage that works in Umno’s favour. The overall momentum is changing, from anger directed toward Umno moving toward disappointment with the opposition for failing to meet expectations and achieve its promises.

The by-elections do however suggest emphatically that another dream is dying – this is of PAS and hudud. The biggest loser in the campaign was Hadi Awang’s PAS, as the results show that the traditional Islamist party cannot even win second place in a seat where it has repeatedly campaigned and even in a Malay heartland seat in Perak barely scraped through in second place. Preliminary analysis of the data shows that PAS held onto around a third of Malay voters, a record low in recent decades. Its connection to Umno was electorally toxic for the party.

Not only is Hadi Awang undermining any hope of PAS governing, voters have shown emphatically that they care less about hudud, with the majority rejecting it as the centrepiece of a campaign. PAS was not rewarded for pushing its archaic exclusive moralism, a sign ahead that the party under Hadi Awang is heading towards a minor electoral status worse than 2004. The by-elections show clear signs that the dream of hudud is dying, as the voters have spoken what surveys have long shown – hudud does not win votes. Hadi Awang’s leadership is destroying the party – a dynamic that truly makes Umno gleeful.

Votes of (no) confidence

Immediately after the polls there were many groups claiming victory. The first was Najib’s camp, with claims of a ‘vote of confidence’. This is a gross error in interpretation. Polls continue to show that Prime Minister Najib remains deeply unpopular – and his lack of presence in these by-elections (as compared to other senior leaders) was telling.

Supporters of the PM may live in a dream world of believing in confidence, but they are fooling themselves if they think that two by-elections will translate into a national mandate for their leader. The reality is that Umno’s chances electorally are stronger without the scandal-ridden PM.

A second claim of victory came from Amanah, whose first entry into peninsular politics showed that they are a significant new Malay party. They performed well. This performance, however, rested very much on the support and machinery of their allies, especially the DAP. This dependence is not healthy. Although it received multi-ethnic support, considerable support for the party came from Chinese voters.

Amanah has a long way to go to show it is an equal independent partner in the opposition alliance, and faces an uphill battle to bring in mass Malay support. A key step in that regard is to stop its myopic fight with PAS and focus on what it offers on its own and for the country as a whole.

Another claim has revolved around the participation of Dr Mahathir, with Umno belittling his role. The results show that support of Mahathir for the opposition did not translate into cutting into significantly Umno’s political base, as the party held its own. What is not clear is how this happened.

Neutralising dissent within Umno was effective as incentives and intimidation were used in the campaign, with grassroots leaders inside the party feeling the effects. Again, these tactics will be difficult to replicate at the national level. Umno’s greatest enemy has been itself, and divisions within the party and its base remain.

The most substantive vote of confidence surrounded the opposition as a whole. Taken together (PAS and Amanah) the opposition support remained high at 45 percent of the electorate. This is a loss of less than 5 percent of voters moving away from the opposition parties. As such, the opposition’s core support remains significant in what continues to be a polarised polity.

Entrenched losing mentalities

Opposition support is now however more fragmented. Looking ahead, it is unlikely that a pact can be formed to prevent multi-cornered fights in the next election. It is also impossible that Pakatan Rakyat can be repaired. Humpty Dumpty has fallen off the wall. Pakatan is broken. Even if Hadi steps down or is pushed out as leader in the next PAS party election, old formulas and coalitions are not viable.

As such, the reality is that the multi-ethnic opposition will need to address how it can maximise its support among opposition supporters and more importantly cut into Umno’s traditional base if it to even maintain its electoral position.

These are difficult tasks ahead, especially given the internal divisions in PKR and imbalances among the opposition partners. A new viable national opposition cannot achieve these tasks with a focus on issues and enemies of the past, a lacklustre campaign that relies non-competitively on resources rather than people’s priorities and battles that appear to be about themselves rather than for the people.

If the opposition is to move out of a losing mentality, it will need to address three key issues: a new leadership, a new narrative and revamped principles/parameters for cooperation and campaigning. The burden on the opposition to change is higher than ever, to reject practices and behaviour that has resulted in losses since 2013.

In contrast, the by-election victories show that for Umno, the strategies of maintaining electoral support remain the same – a controlling leader, a reliance on resources, the use of control of electoral bodies (through movement of voters as occurred in both by-elections and the advantages of delineation) and the manipulation of race and religion.

Umno continues to effectively capitalise on fear and insecurity, touting the idea that any viable national alternative besides Umno will result in loss of place and position for its political base. This may appear like a winning strategy for elections, but it remains to be seen how long a campaign based on a mentality of losing actually moves the country forward.

In this climate of economic contraction, the politics of losing is now more dominant than ever. Negative politics and politicking are defining the national landscape. Disengagement and division are eroding the democratic quality of elections. The June by-elections show that these developments are not a winning formula for ordinary Malaysians.

BRIDGET WELSH is Professor of Political Science at Ipek University, Senior Research Associate at the Center for East Asian Democratic Studies of National Taiwan University, Senior Associate Fellow of The Habibie Center, and University Fellow of Charles Darwin University.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 June 2016, 10:26 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will Muslims lose their freedom of religion without hudud?

BY SYED JAYMAL ZAHIID

Malay Mail Online

June 19, 2016

KUALA LUMPUR, June 19 — Assertions that Malaysian Muslims will be denied their constitutional right to practise Islam without hudud have no basis either in law or the religion, two scholars have said.

Hudud proponents, notably from PAS, seeking to sway Muslims to their side have long argued that the harsh Islamic criminal code is a divine law but Muslim intellectual Dr Chandra Muzzafar said it is not an integral component of the Quran.

“I do not think that if a society does not have certain forms of punishments, penalties for certain offences, it cannot be regarded as the criterion for determining whether the person is able to practise his or her faith,” the president of the International Movement for Justice told Malay Mail Online in a recent interview.

“The essence of faith in Islam is tawhid, which is the oneness of God and if you can live according to that principle in terms of the conduct of your life, I think you are living as a Muslim. Tawhid doesn’t include this notion of certain forms of punishments,” he added.

Tawhid in Arabic means believing in the oneness of God. It is the most crucial aspect of the aqidah (belief), which in turn defines a Muslim.

Tawhid is professed in the shahadah, which is the first of the five pillars of the Islamic faith. The other four are: performing prayers; helping the poor by giving alms; fasting in the month of Ramadan; and performing the Haj or pilgrimage to Mecca, depending on affordability.

As long as Muslims can observe the five pillars — and Muslims in Malaysia have been able to without interference — they are considered to be practising the religious lifestyle required of them in the Quran, Chandra said.

“As long as you are able to live an honest life, you’re upright, you are fair to other human beings, you can pray, you can fast, you can pay the zakat and perform the haj, I suppose you are able to live as a Muslim,” he said.

As example, he cited Indonesia, which is the world’s largest Muslim nation with a population of over 220 million, that abides by secular laws.

Islam is free

Constitutional law expert Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi described the assertions made by PAS leaders on hudud to be “incredible, naive and narrow”.

“There is absolutely nothing in the law that prevents a Muslim from being a good Muslim… what is it that a Muslim in this country cannot do, that the law stands in their way? Is it that we can’t dress in a modest way that is required by our religion? Even the police force allows women to wear a scarf,” he said in a recent interview.

PAS leaders who want hudud and the establishment of an “Islamic state” have made both issues the core of its ideological campaign, declaring them divine laws and labelling those opposed to its implementation “infidels” or deviants.

The Islamist party’s president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang asserted during its annual general meeting earlier this month that civil laws and democracy are an “alien concept’ introduced into the country by its former colonial British masters.

Hadi also reiterated that both civil laws and democracy have failed to uphold social and economic justice, and called it to be replaced with what he termed the divine path of the ad-Din (the Religion).

Shad Saleem disagreed with Hadi, saying Malaysia’s civil laws are already Islamic by nature.

The law professor at Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) pointed out that both the civil and Shariah courts share the same objectives, which is to deter crime and ensure justice.

This means that even without hudud, a Muslim can strive to live according to the teachings of Islam by following secular laws.

“It is not systems or laws that produce justice and virtue; it is people who produce justice and virtue. And our [civil law] system doesn’t stop us in any way from being virtuous or living our life according to the message of the Quran and the life of the Prophet,” he said.

The UiTM don said hudud as a criminal justice system is only a small component of Islamic laws.

“And even in the criminal law aspect, almost everything that hudud forbids is forbidden by our legal system. The Penal Code punishes almost everything… we have laws against gambling, laws against corruption, almost the whole of hudud in terms of what is right and what is wrong… everything that is makruf [good], everything that is mungkar [bad], our legal system almost duplicates that,” Shad Saleem said.

Power, control

Chandra said the collective misunderstanding about hudud among Malaysian Muslims is rooted in the anti-intellectualism culture that developed after the destruction of the last Islamic caliphate in the 13th century, which he claimed the religion’s clergy worldwide subscribe to.

He added that the push for hudud today is more worrying because it is largely driven by the Islamic clergy’s thirst for power and exert control on Muslims, in their self-prescribed role as the religion’s custodians.

“The vast majority, whatever their sect or inclination, adopt a legalistic, traditionalist approach to Islam. Laws, not universal values or eternal principles, in their opinion embody the sanctity of the religion.

“It explains why laws — though only about 300 out of 6,666 verses in the Quran deal with various types of laws — are given so much prominence in the writings of the ulama. By overemphasising laws, the ulama, who alone exercise authority over interpretation, enhance their own power. It is a power derived to a great extent from their role as the custodians of the whole tradition of Islamic law,” said the author of the book Rights, Religion and Reform.

Malaysia took a step closer to introducing hudud through Hadi’s Bill, tabled in the Dewan Rakyat last month, which ostensibly seeks to enhance the Shariah courts’ punitive powers to be on par at least with the civil magistrate courts.

The majority of Malaysian Muslims today appear to subscribe to PAS’ view that hudud is a key component of their faith, as seen in the whopping 83 per cent of 22,304 votes received in a recent Twitter poll conducted by Asia’s top debater Syed Saddiq Abdul Rahman.

However, Syed Saddiq told Malay Mail Online that most of the Muslim respondents to his study possessed little understanding about the Islamic penal law, with many assuming hudud to be an effective tool to fight corruption.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 June 2016, 4:17 pm and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


An early GE14 on the cards?

P Gunasegaram

Malaysiakini

21 Jun 2016

QUESTION TIME
 While most people had expected BN to win the parliamentary seats of Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar hands down, the huge margin of victory must have surprised both BN and the opposition and raises the possibility of early general elections in the wake of the euphoria and an opposition in disarray.

But before we discuss that, what caused the rout and what are its implications? By numbers, two things seem fairly obvious. One, there was a massive swing to BN of Chinese votes and two, Amanah’s support among Malay votes were even lower than expected.

Taking Sungai Besar as an example, by some estimates as high as 50% of the Chinese vote could have gone to BN compared to just 25% in 2013. Chinese account for 31% of the electorate in Sungai Besar.

Some, including this writer, had given Amanah a significant chance of winning in Sungai Besar based on an 80% Chinese voter support, provided that Amanah could get at least 20% Malay voter support and 60% Indian support and BN got less than majority support of Malays, at 45% or less.

The Chinese voter support figure was way off the mark while indications are that Amanah did not even get 20% support from Malays with BN getting majority Malay support. This, in the end, provided a decisive victory for BN.

Perhaps the securing of the release of the two Sekinchan fishermen from jail in Indonesia days before the poll helped. But there was no such thing in Kuala Kangsar and the BN still won big there.

The Chinese were unhappy with PAS over hudud and its apparent connivance with Umno over fast-tracking the so-called hudud bill, but they still don’t trust Amanah over hudud. That Amanah made no firm statement over hudud did not help.

On top of that, PKR did not seem to have their heart in supporting Amanah. Selangor Menteri Besar and PKR deputy president Azmin Ali was not seen enough in the campaigning, leading to speculations of a split in the party.

The break within opposition, disunity, and extreme disappointment with the opposition disarray may have alienated Chinese voters further while MCA’s strident statements over the hudud bill may have played a part in the return of some Chinese votes to BN.

The inevitable conclusion

Amanah communications director and Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad said part of the reason for the swing in Chinese votes to BN was due to goodies and intimidation.

Sorting out the catch at Bagan Sungai BesarKhalid claims Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi when meeting Chinese voters hinted their fishing licences may not be renewed if BN did not win while promising to help them secure permits to hire foreign workers on their boats if BN won. “So they may have thought that it’s better to make use of this election to get benefits,” he told a press conference.

Turning to the Malay votes, the lack of support for Amanah may be due to the newness of the party. The old Umno was formed in 1946 and the PAS forerunner in 1951. They have represented Malay and Islamic interests in peninsular Malaysia for a very long time. It is not going to be easy to break in and become a significant new Islamic and Malay party, when in addition to Umno and PAS, you also have PKR, too.

And then there is the question of whether Umno may have made itself more appealing to Malays by appearing to push the hudud agenda. With Umno, PAS and PKR divvying up the Malay and Islamic votes among themselves, is there a place for Amanah?

Unless Amanah can garner more support from Malays, it may well become irrelevant. While it is true Amanah got significant votes in both Sungai Besar (where it got more votes than PAS) and Kuala Kangsar (where it got less), much is probably due to Chinese support.

Another thing to note is that even the combined opposition vote is not sufficient to dislodge BN from victory in either constituency. In Sungai Besar, BN would still have won with a majority of 2,289 votes, a sharp improvement from just 399 votes in 2013. For Kuala Kangsar, the majority was 2,032 this time nearly twice the 1,082 previously.

The inevitable conclusion from that is that even with Chinese votes going back to BN, the combined opposition is not far away from winning – it would require a voter swing of a mere 1,000 plus votes in each constituency. But PAS is not in the opposition coalition.

If they don’t somehow get PAS into the Pakatan Harapan coalition, not only does the hope of winning the next general elections diminish considerably, they may even lose Selangor because it looks like Malay support will be split between Umno and PAS with Amanah figuring little in the overall picture for Malay votes.

The RM4.2b question

Which brings us to our final billion-ringgit or shall we say RM4.2 billion question: Is Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, despite the swirling questions over 1MDB and donations into his personal bank account, confident of calling a snap poll in the face of the victory at the twin by-elections? And how will BN do if he does?

GE14 is not due until 2018 but already there is speculation that it might be brought forward to next year, given BN’s grand showing in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar.

Calling early elections may be a risky gambit for Najib and BN. A general election is not the same as a by-election even if there were two this time. People are going to be much more energised and concerned when there might be the possibility of a change in government. National issues will come to the fore again.

And while PAS and Umno may be working together for hudud, they are by no means allies yet. If they are not, then you cannot discount the possibility of PAS uniting with Harapan under an opposition coalition, putting aside differences over hudud much as they did in 2013 and 2008. If that happens, the figures change substantially and BN no longer has the edge.

For instance, in 2007 at a by-election for the state seat of Ijok in Selangor, where Anwar Ibrahim campaigned hard for PKR’s then strongman Khalid Ibrahim, BN still won by a comfortable 18% margin. But the following year, in the 2008 general election, the opposition took Selangor and four other states and denied BN a two-thirds majority. The very same Khalid who lost in Ijok won it back with a 15% majority and became menteri besar of Selangor.

When Najib became prime minister in 2009 after Abdullah Ahmad Badawi stepped down following BN’s poor showing in 2008, he was expected to go for early polls too. As events unfolded he waited till the very end. He is likely to do the same this time, although almost anything is possible in politics.

Unless the opposition gets its act together and all the heavyweights here – PKR, DAP, PAS and yes, Amanah – pull wholeheartedly in the same direction they have little hope against BN – in early or late polls, with or without Najib. That’s the clear message from Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar, and the opposition ignores it at its own peril.

Former editor P GUNASEGARAM is now a consultant.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 June 2016, 8:17 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Asia University Rankings 2016: Malaysia must refocus to develop as a higher education power

By Ellie Bothwell

THE World University Rankings

June 20, 2016

The country spends more on higher education than many of its regional neighbours, so why isn’t this reflected in the Asia University Rankings?

Malaysia aims to be the “education hub” of South-east Asia, says Wahid Omar, vice-chancellor of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

“Higher education is the catalyst for innovation for the country and the key agent in revolutionising the lives of the community as a whole,” he says.

While Singapore is the strongest country in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) in the rankings, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia are also home to some of the continent’s top-ranked universities.

Thailand leads on the number of representatives, with seven, but the highest-ranked institution in the region outside Singapore is Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, in joint 70th place.

Jamil Salmi, former coordinator of the World Bank’s tertiary education programme, says Malaysia has “more consistently focused on excellence in its university sector” than Thailand and Indonesia and has “one of the highest levels of public spending on tertiary education in the world”.

But Simon Marginson, professor of international higher education at the UCL Institute of Education, says that as Malaysia has “two-thirds of the gross domestic product per head of Korea”, it “should be doing much better”, and he questions whether the country is “paying the price for being a resource-rich economy”.

“This can lead governments to ‘coast’ and underperform in higher education,” he says.

Top universities in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean)

Asean rank	Institution	Country  	2016 Asia Rank

1	National University of Singapore	Singapore	1

2	Nanyang Technological University	Singapore	=2

3	Universiti Teknologi Malaysia	Malaysia	=70

4	Mahidol University	Thailand	90

5	King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi	Thailand	98

6	Universiti Putra Malaysia	Malaysia	121-130

=7	Chiang Mai University	Thailand	141-150

=7	Universiti Sains Malaysia	Malaysia	141-150

9	Chulalongkorn University	Thailand	151–160

=10	Suranaree University of Technology	Thailand	161–170

=10	Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia	Malaysia	161–170

=12	University of Indonesia	Indonesia	181–190

=12	Khon Kaen University	Thailand	181–190

=12	Prince of Songkla University	Thailand	181–190

He adds that the marketing of Malaysia as a “knowledge economy” and “innovation hub” has been “better than the substance”. He also argues that there “does not seem to be the same institutional desire to excel in research and work to strong international benchmarks” as there has been in Singapore.

“Malaysian pay scales are relatively unattractive, and talent is lost to Singapore and elsewhere,” he adds. “Another factor is the undeclared ethnic preference that permeates the Malaysian state and public sector. There are doubts about whether Chinese community and Indian community talent in Malaysia have equal opportunity to succeed – not a problem in Singapore, which is fiercely meritocratic.”

On Thailand, Marginson says that the country’s universities have been “held back by years of political turmoil, and lack of genuine governmental enthusiasm about funding”, although he adds that scientific output in the country continues to advance.

Kalaya Tingsabadh, vice-president of Thailand’s Chulalongkorn University, ranked in the 151-160 band, says that while the country’s institutions attract top scholars and produce high-quality undergraduates, the main challenge is attracting graduate students.

“Our graduates go to top US and European universities for their graduate studies, so graduate student recruitment is a big problem. It means we don’t have quality graduate students to work as research assistants,” she says, adding that her institution is looking to negotiate double degree programmes with several UK universities to address this.

But despite this brain drain, she says, most of these graduates end up returning to Thailand.

“It’s something very special about Thai people – they always come back home despite the low salary they get in Thailand. I think it is due to our strong family ties. Thailand is also a very pleasant place to live and Thai food is more delicious than food elsewhere. So we have plenty of PhDs from top universities from around the world who come back to take positions as faculty members.”

She adds that the Asean University Network has been “really beneficial” for Thai institutions, by providing opportunities for universities to collaborate on student and staff exchanges.

Malaysia’s Omar adds that the network has “harmonised quality assurance”, facilitated credit-transfer mechanisms and strengthened “provision of technical and vocational education and training for Asean’s growing economic needs”.

But he says that for Malaysian and other Asean universities to reach the level of those in Singapore, China, Hong Kong and South Korea, institutions must focus on the “quadruple helix” – the “cooperation of academia, industry, the government and the people” to help “spur the country’s quantum leap”.

“More funding and resources are needed to make a difference, with strong governance and empowerment,” he says.

“Malaysian universities need to make their presence felt and create more impact than they have done, especially in relation to the benefit to the community as a whole.”

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 June 2016, 7:09 am and is filed under
Education
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Fallacies and facts on the two by-elections

Kim Quek

Malaysiakini

21 Jun 2016

COMMENT
Bombastic assertions abound since the conclusion of the by-elections in Sungai Besar, Selangor and Kuala Kangsar, Perak. Chief among these are Malaysians’ resounding endorsement of PM Najib Abdul Razak’s otherwise precarious leadership and the allegedly corrupt rule of the Barisan Nasional government, as well as a huge shift of Chinese support to BN.

These claims are in reality more fallacy than fact.

Let me pen down some of my thoughts on these issues and on the scenario that follows these by-elections.

Surge of support for Najib and BN illusory

First, BN did gain in popular votes, increasing from 50 to 54 percent. But such a margin of gain – in a by-election as against in a general election – certainly cannot be interpreted as a surge of popular support, for the simple reason that the special conditions that favour BN in a by-election cannot be duplicated in a general election.

Unlike in a by-election, BN cannot possibly have the resources to shower goodies (read bribery) and issue threats as profusely as it does now in the many constituencies in a general election.

Further, in a general election, there will be the presence of much more mostly ant-BN outstation voters, who are generally young, urbanised, better informed, with disproportionately high ratio of Chinese who are invariably pro-opposition. Under such circumstances, BN’s 4 percent gain in popular votes in a by-election can easily be evaporated in a general election.

The most Najib can claim from the current election results is that BN has maintained the status quo.

Shift of Chinese support to BN deceptive

Second, the appearance of extensive return of Chinese support to BN is more illusory than factual, as the statistical evidence of reduction of votes cast in favour of the opposition Amanah’s candidate in Chinese-dominated polling stations cannot be wholly interpreted as reduction of Chinese electoral support.

This is mainly due to the statistical distortion created by the massive absence of the anti-BN outstation Chinese voters, as in Jalan Dato and Kampong Pajak Potong, K Kangsar where the reduction is a whopping 37 percent. Despite such reduction, Chinese votes remain heavily and decisively pro-opposition.

The other factor of unusual increase in support to BN as in some polling stations in Sekinchan, Selangor, is the special favours specific to the local residents dished out by BN, like instant approval of long deprived citizenship, handing out permits to fishermen to import long-deprived foreign workers, freeing of fishermen imprisoned in Sumatra, etc

Minus the temporal and localised effects of such instant election goodies and the factor of absent voters, it will be seen that the widespread and deep-running Chinese discontent against BN over long-standing racial discrimination and runaway corruption as exemplified lately by the horrible 1MDB/Najib corruption scandals will take its usual toll on BN come general election, as it did in GE13 and GE14.

PAS in limbo

Third, PAS has completely lost its overwhelming Chinese support it received in the last general election, and such loss is irreversible unless PAS mends its stance on the hudud issue the way it did in GE13 and GE12 as a partner in the now dissolved Pakatan Rakyat.

If PAS continues to go solo as it does now, it will lose all its seats in the West Coast come next election, and only cling on to some seats in its Kelantan enclave, and perhaps a few more in Terengganu and Kedah.

The party is hence facing a dilemma – to continue to go solo which will revert itself to its former status as a local party in Kelantan; or team up with one of the two existing political blocs (BN and Pakatan Harapan) to continue its role as key player with nation-wide representation.

Should it choose the latter, the party will be torn between two irreconcilable political objectives – whether to uphold the late spiritual leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat’s high standard of Islamic social justice which vows to stamp out corruption and racial discrimination or to allow racist ideology and narrow religious pursuit to take precedence as apparently pursued by party president Hadi Awang and his faction in their friendly overture to Umno.

In other words, will PAS resume its interrupted agenda of social justice a la Nik Aziz by re-joining Pakatan, or embrace Najib’s Umno which thrives on racism and corruption?

We expect a political tussle along these lines will soon take shape within PAS.

The fledgling Amanah

Fourth, Parti Amanah Negara has not gained sufficient traction among Malay electorate, either from PAS or from Malay society at large. It is hence in urgent need of spreading its wings at the grassroots level.

Its latest friendly gesture to PAS, with the obvious intention to establish working relation with the latter, is a worthy attempt to fast track its political agenda by harnessing PAS’s existing political machinery which has been shown in the recent by-elections to be largely intact, but the way forward is strewn with obstacles while Hadi is in control.

Such re-joining of forces is distinctly possible and in fact desirable once Hadi leaves the stage, as the progressive leaders in Amanah will certainly restore PAS’ former glory as a major political force with multi-racial appeal and thus will make significant contribution to the opposition front.

Rural Malays’ apparent apathy to corruption scandals

Fifth, opposition trump cards of the highly publicised 1MDB/Najib mega corruption scandals did not seem to have made a serious impact on the electorate.

This is of course rather unexpected, but having considered the electorate being largely rural Malays, whose mind set has long been shaped by Umno’s political propaganda via Umno-controlled TV and newspapers which are also their main source of news which are heavily censored, coupled with their limited capacity to fully comprehend critical information, their apathy should not come as a complete surprise.

In fact, few truly understand the numerical meaning of RM2.6 billion and RM50 billion, let alone appreciate fully the devastating implications when their leader has stolen RM2.6 billion and the nation suffered the loss of RM50 billion of public funds through frauds.

Needless to say, such public apathy will not be completely replicated in more urbanised constituencies, though the long inculcated Malay sense of insecurity over Umno’s possible loss of power will continue to sway Malay votes despite comprehending the nature of these scandals.

As a start, to win over the Malay heartland in the less urbanised area, the opposition must break through this info barricade and start campaigning with leaflets and ceramah on these scandals by using simple graphics and illustrate these gigantic losses in terms of easily related objects such as the number of houses and the number of people that would otherwise be provided with public housing, or how many public universities and hospitals that would otherwise be built, if there had been no such gigantic losses through corruption.

In conclusion, I would say that the outcome of the two by-elections is no indication of a change in the balance of political power between BN and Pakatan, and certainly cannot be interpreted as Malaysians’ endorsement of Najib’s leadership or approval of Umno/BN’s corrupt and morally bankrupt rule.

It has, however, thrown up a new light – that PAS with its formidable core supporters will play a significant role in the shape of politics to come either as a partner in an alliance or a spoiler to the opponent or both – so long as Amanah has not made pivotal inroads into PAS’ support base to significantly reduce its electoral influence.

KIM QUEK is the author of the banned book ‘The March to Putrajaya’.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 June 2016, 7:59 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Rached Ghannouchi Q&A: Thoughts on democratic Islam

David Hearst – Peter Oborne

Middle East Eye

13 June 2016

MEE talks to Rached Ghannouchi after he presided over the separation of Ennahda’s religious and political activities

MEE: Ennahda has just taken a historic decision to separate itself from the mosque and to define itself purely as a political project. How do you define what you have done? Is it separation or specialisation?

RG: Its a continuation, not a rupture. Last week in the congress we adopted the idea of a civil party so that we can distinguish between what is sacred in Islam and what can be freely interpreted. The political field is not sacred nor immutable. It’s civic, human. It’s free for ijtihad or independent human reasoning. More than 90 percent of Islamic texts are open to interpretation and to nuance. We consider few texts as fixed or immutable. Many Muslims confuse the two kinds of texts and consider all texts as sacred and untouchable and only capable of bearing one meaning. The Islamic text concerning politics is open to interpretation, and this is the field in which we now act. We consider ourselves observant Muslims. We believe in Islam, that Islam came to Earth to liberate mankind, and to define the free person.

MEE: How then will Ennahda change?

RG: You have to distinguish between a political institution and a religious one. For example, mosques must not be an arena of confrontation between political parties. Mosques have to unify the Muslim community, not to divide it. We have to avoid any political propaganda within mosques. Politics push people to compete, for wealth, power, and this is what we have to avoid.

MEE: Are you saying that imams should not talk politics?

RG: No they can speak out, but only about the common or national interest. When a country is under occupation, the imam has to urge people to resist, to resist against poverty, against any social disease concerning the community, not about political parties. Some religious preachers are members of our party. Once elected to parliament, they will now have to choose either to be in parliament and stop being an imam, or stay as an imam and not go to parliament.

MEE: Does that apply to you?

RG: Yes.

MEE: Are you going to cease any dawa or proselytising of Islam?

RG: Yes. We have stopped all dawa within the party. We have to ensure those who call people to Islam unify the community not split it, because religion is a matter of unity, not a means of dividing society.

MEE: You were in Britain in 1994 when Tony Blair became the leader of the Labour Party, and I was in the conference chamber in 1994 in Blackpool when he said there would be a new constitution of the Labour party and announced the abolition of Clause 4, which committed the Labour Party to the state ownership of the means of production. This was seen as a constitutional break by New Labour with its past and a statement that they were a new party. Is there a comparison between what you have just done and what Tony Blair did in 1994?

RG: Yes. We would like to promote a new Ennahda, to renew our movement and to put it into the political sphere, outside any involvement with religion. Before the revolution we were hiding in mosques, trade unions, charities, because real political activity was forbidden. But now we can be political actors openly. Why should we play politics in the mosque? We have to do politics openly in the party. We have not misled anyone by using religiosity for political reasons. We have to respond to people’s needs and not mislead them with religious emotions.

MEE: You say that now the revolution is secure, it is no longer Ennahda’s job to protect Islam. The post-revolutionary state does that. But is this state that secure? If the Emiratis had succeed in buying the loyalty of your president, Beji Caid Essebsi – they offered Tunisia $5bn-$10bn – everything you built, the constitution, parliament, elections, would have crumbled.

RG:  I have enough confidence in our president. I have confidence in his patriotism and he is elected by the Tunisian people. His authority does not depend on the support of a foreign power. He knows a large section of the Tunisian people elected Ennahda and he needs Ennahda to consolidate his government. We need his party to make a balance, to make a solid base for our state and our government. Power is based on the balance of power. The balance of power in Tunisia needs collaboration between the president, his party and our party.  All opinion polls reflect that more than 70 percent of Tunisians are keen to maintain democracy. So it’s not easy to stage a coup d’etat against the wishes of this vast majority of Tunisians.

Of course Tunisians protest against official policies, but even among their ranks there is support for the state. Compare what happened in Mosul in 2014 to what happened in Ben Guerdane earlier this year.  In Mosul two to three hundred Daesh fighters took over a city of three million, with its own central bank and with huge consequences for Iraq. A similar number of Daesh tried to take over the small border town of Ben Guerdane and they failed because Tunisians are very keen to keep this country a democracy.

MEE: A statue was re-erected to the Tunisian leader who pushed to have you retried in prison and executed. The statue of Habib Bourguiba on a horse was put back in its original place in the Avenue de Bourguiba in Tunis and there was an official ceremony to which the president went.

RG: Yes. Bourguiba is a great personality. You cannot airbrush him out of our history. He guided a national movement which liberated Tunisia. I cannot negate that. It is a reality.

MEE: So you support the re-erection of the statue?

RG: I am not in favour of this statue. When I was in prison Bourguiba wanted to retry me, so that my sentence would be increased from life imprisonment to the death penalty.  He wanted to repeat the behaviour of the sultans, but he was deposed within three days. But he has his place in Tunisia’s history. In my speech at the opening  ceremony of the party conference, I mentioned a number of national leaders and one of them was Bourguiba.

MEE: Now that you have left Islam, what will be the identity of your party? Why should Tunisians vote for you and not Nidaa Tounes?

RG: We didn’t leave Islam. Islam is our reference point. It’s the inspiration, but we don’t ask people to elect us because we are more religious than others. We would like to attract people to our movement regardless of their religiosity. All Tunisians are able to join our party, if they accept our programme and our programme is not based purely on religion. It’s based on giving real services to people, real solutions to solve their daily problems. To provide education, good health-care and create jobs

MEE: Will you be a party of the left or right?

RG: We are in the centre. We believe in a social economy to reconcile the free market with social justice. Similar to the model of the Scandinavian countries.

MEE: You have changed your constitution; would you change the party’s name?

RG: Not yet. It could be called the Conservative Party.

MEE: Then will you need a Shura Council?

RG: Yes, we need a Shura.

MEE: A Shura is for a religious organisation

RG: Our party is democratic. Decision-making in the party is not individual. Decisions are made by institutions. We would like to institutionalise any decision-making concerning the public interest. So we are very keen to fight against any sort of dictatorship, inside the party, or in the wider political system.

MEE: If you won a majority in the next elections in 2019 would you govern alone or would you seek a coalition?

RG: We are still in a transitional democracy, so we need a consensual system. Tunisia is not able to be ruled by one party now, even if this party gained the majority; 51 percent is not enough in this period of transition.

MEE: What signal are you sending the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Yemen, Syria, who do not have a state to protect them, or free elections, to people who are languishing in prison. What is your relationship to the Brotherhood in Egypt?

RG: We advise all Islamists in the region to be more open and to work with others and to look for a consensus with others, because without national unity, without national resistance against dictatorship, freedom cannot be achieved. There needs to be a genuine reconciliation between Islamists and secularists, between Muslim and non-Muslim. Dictatorship feeds off confrontation between all parties. This only leads to chaos and civil war, where no one will be the winner and everyone will be a loser.

MEE: Political Islam exists because of its claim to give an alternative to the choice between dictatorship and Daesh or al-Qaeda. If you now say as an international scholar that political Islam does not exist, what choice are you giving people who do not have a state to protect them?

RG: I am talking about Tunisia. In Tunisia, we don’t need to continue political Islam, because this is a reaction to dictatorship and to severe laicite (secularisation). We don’t want Islam to be an element of confrontation. Islam is now coexisting peacefully with the state. The state, as mentioned in our constitution, protects Islam. And Muslims and our free society protect Islam. So Islam does not need to be protected by one party. But in other countries, perhaps political Islam can play a role against dictatorship. It can be an element to mobilise people against dictators. Why not ?

MEE: Will you still play a role in the International Organisation of the Muslim Brotherhood?

RG: I am not part of any international group. I am only part of the International Union of Muslim Scholars which is a non-political body. I am also part of the European Fatwa Council.

MEE: You are turning your back on political Islam. You describe yourself as a Muslim democrat and Ennahda will become a conventional democratic party on the European model. Are you therefore acknowledging that there is no role for political Islam and does that mean in turn, the Western critique that Islam itself is in need of reformation has some truth in it?

RG: I don’t think that Islam needs a reformation, but the way people understand Islam needs reforming. But Islam itself does not need a reformation.

MEE: But do you think that the era of political Islam is over?

RG: Political Islam is a Western term. It was first used after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, when Muslims felt that there was a vacuum and that they had to rebuild an Islamic nation. Before that there was a separation between the state and society and each had their role, scholars, rulers, and judges. But when the state began to arrest the ulema ( body of Muslim scholars) the idea emerged that Islam was under threat. In Tunisia, Islam is not under threat, so we do not need political Islam.

MEE: What do you say to those people who accuse you of abandoning them to Daesh, because the salafi jihadists will say: “We and we alone are the true believers.”

RG: One of the reasons that I do not need to belong to political Islam, is that Daesh is part of this political Islam. Daesh is one of the elements within political Islam, so I would like to distinguish myself from Daesh. I am a Muslim democrat and they are against democracy. Daesh considers democracy as haram. There are many deep differences between us and Daesh. Daesh. They are Muslim. I cannot say that they are not. But they are criminals. They are dictators. Daesh is another face of dictatorship. Our revolution is a democratic revolution, and Islamic values are compatible with democracy.

MEE: If you abandon the phrase or the idea of political Islam to Daesh, aren’t you giving them space that they will misuse?

RG: If our project, our interpretation of Islam is a success, there will be no place for Daesh. Daesh could not take any part of Tunisia. They attack London or Paris, but they did not take any place in Tunisia, so we are the real alternative to Daesh, providing a model of democracy that promotes pluralism rights and respects religious freedoms.

MEE: Do you acknowledge you are taking a risk with your party, to compete on purely political grounds. Is not that a risk for you?

RG: Perhaps some people will leave us, but others will join because most of the Tunisian people are moderate. They are very keen to define themselves as Muslim, but they are open minded. Eighty percent of Tunisia is living on the coast. They live facing Europe. So Tunisia cannot be Daesh. This ideology cannot be mobilised in Tunisia. Salafi jihadis cannot constitute a real trend. They are the legacy of Ben Ali, of dictatorship. They are not the product of the revolution. Once democracy prevails and the economy has recovered, I think there will be little attraction to jihadi salafism or even Islamic radicalism.

MEE: Is the West giving you enough support?

RG: Not enough. I think the West gave more support to democracy in Eastern Europe than in Tunisia, even though Tunisia is like a fortress guarding Europe against Daesh. If Daesh takes over Tunisia, Europe will be under real threat, as we see in parts of Libya.

MEE: Are there any circumstances in which you would become president?

RG: Its not in my plans, so far.

MEE: So far. So there are circumstances in which you would become president. Is your project to build a national party which will become the core, the heart of political life in Tunisia?

RG: Yes. I think Ennahda can be the main party in Tunisia. Tunisians are homogenous, very unified, while there is real plurality in thought and culture. There is a large centre ground. Ennahda can represent this centre of ordinary Tunisians within the middle and lower class.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 June 2016, 7:22 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.