In Malaysia, Sarawakians look for a fairer deal

by Desmond Davidson

The Malaysian Insider

September 14, 2013

Only three years ago and 47 years after the formation of Malaysia did the 2.4 million people of Sarawak, together with those in Sabah and the peninsula, mark the birth of the country on a national scale.

This year will be the fourth such celebration. But how do Sarawakians feel about what should arguably be the country’s most important national event?

“There’s something lacking. I’ve never felt the spirit of Malaysia Day,” was 50-year-old paraplegic Josh John’s reply to The Malaysian Insider in Sarawak’s capital city, Kuching.

To this former accountant, who lives in the city’s Batu Kawa suburb, every Malaysia Day is “just another holiday”.

John (pic) attributed the lack of feeling for Malaysia Day to the government’s failure to emphasise how important it is.

“To this day, the government still places emphasis on the importance of Malaya’s independence from the British rather than the historically more significant event – the birth of the country.

“So what do I think of Malaysia Day? Not much,” said the father of one, who became wheelchair bound after suffering a viral attack to his spinal column that left him paralysed 17 years ago.

Violet Yong, a DAP assemblywoman, also cannot understand why Hari Merdeka continues to be more important than Malaysia Day.

“Why is August 31, the Malaya independence day and which has nothing to do with Sabah and Sarawak, an event still more important than Malaysia Day?” she asked.

“The emphasis should be on September 16 rather than August 31,” she said.

The Pending assemblyman also feels the lack of awareness about Malaysia’s formation among the people of Sarawak is due to what is being taught in school.

“The formation of Malaysia is not correctly taught in our schools,” she said, urging the government to have a re-look at school history textbooks.

Yong believes not much emphasis is given to the formation of Malaysia there and it is reflected in the schoolchildren’s thinking.

“After 50 years of Malaysia, what have we got? People, particularly the younger generation, are still confused about Malaysia Day. They all think Malaysia Day is on August 31,” said the two-term assemblywoman.

Yong’s opinion seemed to be right on the money when we talked to Melissa Crocker, a 33-year-old public relations officer, and Layla Jane, a 34-year-old online entrepreneur.

Crocker said she was “confused” by all the dates and the celebrations while Jane said she “never thought about it (Malaysia Day)”.

The dates Crocker was referring to are July 22, August 31 and September 16.

July 22 is Sarawak’s Independence Day which was marked by the state for the first time this year.

“(Malaysia Day! I thought you were referring to the event of August 31. Now I really don’t know.

“My only understanding of Malaysia Day is when Sabah and Sarawak joined Malaya to form Malaysia. And that again is something I didn’t learn in school.

“So forgive me, because apart from that, there is little I know of the significance of the formation of Malaysia.

“Hari Merdeka on August 31 is the real deal!”

Crocker said since she has little idea of the historical significance of Malaysia Day, the government should take steps to create better awareness of Malaysia Day and make it more significant.

Layla Jane, 30, is an online entrepreneur. “Now so insignificant. Don’t feel Malaysia Day,” she said.

Jane, too, said she was never taught about the formation of Malaysia when she was in school.

“All of us only know about Hari Merdeka,” she said. “So that’s why I never gave much thought to Malaysia Day.

“So if you were to ask me about Merdeka Day, I can talk to you a lot about it. But if you ask me about Malaysia Day, I’m sorry I can’t.”

Yong said Malaysia Day was important day to her and her DAP colleagues and supporters as it was a culmination of their efforts in pushing the government to recognise the historical importance of the day.

“I personally am excited by Malaysia Day. It is an important day. It is the day Malaysia was born.”

That excitement, Yong said, is a little tempered by what she believes, that the government’s decision to start marking Malaysia Day three years ago was a political gimmick.

“The government has not done much to elevate the importance of Malaysia Day.”

Baharuddin Mokshen, a senior Parti Keadilan Rakyat state leader, agreed with Yong.

“It was only to pacify the people of Sabah and Sarawak,” he said.

“I feel the government gave this Malaysia Day as a token to smother the simmering flame of potential separatism.

“I personally have no sense of feeling for Malaysia Day because the government failed to make it an important date.

“It’s just another holiday,” he said, a line that is now a well-echoed sentiment.

Another bone of contention to both Yong and Baharuddin as they view Malaysia Day is the unequal development accorded to Sarawak.

“How can we really joyfully mark Malaysia Day when we lag so far in development compared to the states in the peninsula?”

That, Baharuddin pointed out, has now fostered talk of separation, and not only in Sarawak.

“On the Internet, people are talking and asking if Sarawak is better off as an independent state.”

Datuk Amar James Wong, one of the state’s forefathers of Malaysia, wrote in his book, The Birth of Malaysia, that one of the factors that was on their minds when they were toying with the idea of federation was that Sarawak, in the late 1950s, was not a rich country and “seemed to have a low economic potential”.

He stated that Sarawak’s revenue in 1959 was a mere RM67million.

“In short, we were not then a rich country with great potential.”

Fifty years on, with its timber exports and the lucrative oil and gas, Sarawak is one of the biggest contributors to the national coffers.

Baharuddin said the development funds received by Sarawak does not reflect its contribution to the national economy.

“Just look at our Pan-Borneo Highway. After nearly two decades of begging, the road that’s supposed to be the state’s economic lifeline is still a third-class road,” he said.

Equality is what Yong is hoping for too.

“That’s my one wish. For all Malaysians to come together and celebrate Malaysia Day in true fairness and as equals.

“At the moment this is not happening. We are still lagging behind in all forms of development despite the fact that Sarawak is contributing much to the national coffers.” – September 14, 2013.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 16 September 2013, 7:18 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
nation building
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia at 50 : Inclusive development, nation-building and human rights

– Simon Sipaun

The Malaysian Insider

September 15, 2013

In two days’ time on 16th September, 2013 Malaysia will turn 50 years old. For a country, 50 years of age is very young, although it is old for a human being. It does make me feel my age to realise that I am 25 years older than Malaysia.

I have reached the age described by George Burns as the time “where everything hurts, what does not hurt does not work”. The reality is “today is the oldest we have ever been, yet the youngest we will ever be”.

The theme of this RTD is Malaysia 50 years since formation: Inclusive development, nation-building and human rights. Indeed it is a very wide subject. It is a three-in-one. The three are closely inter-related.

Recognising Malaysia Day

In 2007, I used to see billboards at the Kota Kinabalu International Airport with the slogan “celebrating 50 years of nationhood” written on them. Of course, the truth is in 2007, Malaysia was only 44 years old. This is a classic case in which history is the distortion of facts by people in power.

I used to point this out at the slightest opportunity in the past but it felt like it was just a voice in the wilderness. I had the impression that the federal government was trying to make the people, especially Malaysians living in Sabah, believe that the formation of Malaysia was on 31st August, 1957.

This probably explains the fact that it took the federal government 46 long years just to accept and acknowledge 16th September as Malaysia Day. For 46 years, 16th September passed by as just like any other day, although in Sabah it was a public holiday to mark the birthday of the TYT. The focus of national attention was 31st August, the Independence Day of Malaya.

Last year, 2012, was only the third time in 49 years that Malaysia Day was being observed. Following it, some reporters asked me if I was satisfied. My response was, it was 46 years too late, but under the circumstances it was better late than never. I believe this is the wrong way forward, not in line with the spirit and intention of inclusive development, nation-building and human rights.

Recently I received an email inviting me to purchase a T-shirt to make people aware that Malaysia Day which falls on 16th September is in fact Occupation Day. Inscribed on the T-shirt are slogans stating “oil and gas stolen, native rights trampled, civil service Malaynized, 20-points violated, Labuan taken over, cabotage policy and projek ic”. This is an indication of how some Sabahans feel about Malaysia today. It is one of disappointment. It is not the Malaysia they expected 50 years later.

Inclusive development & Malaysia Day

Inclusiveness implies the treatment of every citizen equally and without exception. It is the right way to move forward. It is even more relevant to a country like Malaysia because it has many potentially divisive factors including geography, race, religion, language, history, tradition, culture and so on. Malaysia is a plural society not homogeneous. Inclusive development makes the citizens feel that the government cares for them.

However, the question is – do the citizens feel that the government of the day really cares for them? One good indicator is the result of the 13th general election held on 5th May this year.

The combined votes who wanted a change of government amounted to 5.82 million compared with 5.24 million who preferred the status quo. Under the present electoral boundaries the 5.24 million who voted for the government were rewarded with 133 parliamentary seats whereas the 5.82 million who voted for change were rewarded with only 89 parliamentary seats. Thus, a government representing the minority was formed. A democratic system of government is usually associated with a government representing the majority.

I notice that inclusive development is being talked about and indeed intended, but what is being practised is anything but inclusiveness. For example, the Orang Asli in Semenanjung are subjected to a system akin to the apartheid system of South Africa, namely separate development. Why do we have a separate law to control the community? There is a separate department to control the Orang Asli. But the department has never been headed, managed and administered by the Orang Asli themselves. The Orang Asli Act has been in existence since 1954 meaning it is 59 years old this year (2013).

But look at the sad and pathetic state of affairs of the Orang Asli today! If the law was intended to benefit the Orang Asli, it has not achieved the desired objectives. The law should be repealed and the federal constitution amended to place the Orang Asli in the same category as the Malays. The Orang Asli are more deserving of the so-called affirmative action policies meant for the Malays. In the name of inclusiveness the Orang Asli should be represented in government.

However their representative must be elected by the Orang Asli themselves and not appointed by the government. The government should also seriously consider Suhakam’s recommendations contained in its national land inquiry report.

Nation-building & Malaysia Day

Inclusive development represents a very important component in the nation-building process. Let me make some suggestions in respect of nation-building.

The process of unifying and integrating should be based on justice, equal rights and respect. Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) provides that all humans are born free and equal in dignity and right.

No nation which embraced race-based politics and one community claiming superiority over others survived.

Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa are cases in mind. The time to discard politics based on race and religion is long overdue. We should move forward as Malaysians. Let us focus on things that bind us as human beings and Malaysians rather than on what divides us. For example, there should be only one box in all government forms and not one for Malays, one for Chinese, one for Indians and one for Others.

Corruption which is very costly should be eliminated or at least minimised for a start. The commissioners in MACC should be independent commissioners similar to Suhakam and not civil servants. There should be a separate independent prosecutorial agency to handle corruption cases and not the attorney-general.

We should concentrate on enlarging the size of the economic cake rather than spending too much effort and time how to share it. The process of development should be based on need and not on race and religion.

We should have a sound education system at par with the best in the world and all Malaysians should be subject to the same system.

Good governance is described as participatory, transparent, accountable and efficient. It promotes the rule of law and equal justice under the law. Good governance should be the order of the day.

No Malaysian or community should feel deprived or marginalised. Everyone should be treated equally and fairly. There should be no selective prosecution or application of the law.

All laws which empower the government to arrest without trial should be repealed. Article 10 of the UDHR provides that everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial legal body. Article 11 provides that everyone has the right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

The provisions of the Treasury Instructions should be strictly complied with. Negotiated tenders should be stopped. It is like a one-horse race. It wins without moving. The real value of the ringgit is not realised. The government must bear in mind that it is just the trustee of the people to take good care of public fund and assets on their behalf.

The illegal immigrants in Sabah should be equally shared among all the states in Malaysia. After all it is a national problem and it is unfair that Malaysians living in Sabah should be shouldering the entire burden. It is also alleged that this is government self-created problem.

Sabah deserves better treatment by the federal government in terms of more equitable distribution of opportunities, development funds and projects.

I understand that the national service training programme was introduced in 2003. The training course only lasts for three months for 18-year-old youths. I also understand that between 2004 and 2007 RM2.37 billion had been spent. During the same period 16 deaths have been recorded.

There were also reports of sexual assaults, rapes, lost in the jungle, food poisoning, fever, vomiting, racial brawl and so on. I am not convinced that it is possible during a period of three months to instil the feeling of genuine patriotism among 18-year-old youths. Neither can you turn them into soldiers in three months. It is high time that such courses should be reviewed in terms of cost-benefit.

From what I have heard and read the training programme called Biro Tata Negara is more designed to promote ketuanan Melayu and to create unnecessary animosity towards the non-Malays and distort the true facts of history. If that is the case such programme appears to be the opposite of inclusiveness, nation-building and human rights and should have no place in this country.

To minimise, if not eliminate, polarization the composition of the civil service and other government agencies should be more reflective of the racial make-up of the Malaysian society.

Meritocracy should be observed and practised, otherwise Malaysia will be left behind in a highly competitive and globalised world.

Petronas Accounts should be made available to the public. Oil and gas is God-given and the people have the right to know how the revenue derived from the natural resources is utilised by the government. There is no reason why the accounts should be shrouded in secrecy if the government has nothing to hide.

Human rights & Malaysia Day

Finally some suggestions associated with human rights. Human rights are our rights as human beings. They have not been conferred on us by any authority. They should therefore not be taken away from us by any authority. However human rights must be accompanied by responsibility. In exercising our human rights we must not, in the process, violate the rights of others.

To date, none of Suhakam’s annual reports has ever been debated in Parliament. Suhakam has been preparing annual reports since the year 2000. It is suggested that the Suhakam Act be amended to make it mandatory for Parliament to debate its annual report. It is also proposed for Suhakam Commissioners to be appointed only once but on a seven-year term to make the national human rights institution truly independent.

The government should no longer delay the implementation of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission. A police force which is very professional and disciplined should welcome the establishment of such commission.

Suhakam’s report on the recently concluded national land inquiry which incorporates its recommendations should be seriously and favourably considered by government.

To-date, Malaysia has not signed and ratified the core international human rights instruments including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Malaysia should not delay any longer from signing and ratifying them to prove that it is sincere and committed to the promotion and protection of human rights in the country.

The necessary follow-up actions associated with the implementation of the National Human Rights Action Plan (NHRAP) should be expedited in earnest. Suhakam had recommended to the government the development of the NHRAP as early as in 2001, one year after its inception. A NHRAP will help improve the promotion and protection of human rights in Malaysia by placing human rights improvements in the context of public policy.

The existence of the internet and the alternative media makes it more and more difficult for the government to hide the truth from the people. The public’s expectation is also getting higher and higher and if the government does not response to their legitimate demand an Arab Spring type of situation could develop. – September 15, 2013.

* Text of Tan Sri Simon Sipaun’s speech presented at the Proham Malaysia Day RTD on Saturday at Universiti Malaysia Sabah. He is Proham’s chairman.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 16 September 2013, 7:11 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
nation building
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s New NEP: Step Forwards or Backwards

by Koon Yew Yin

42 years after the New Economic Policy (NEP) was launched by his father, Tun Abduk Razak, Prime Minister Najib Razak has now followed in his father’s footsteps with a new national policy specially aimed at enhancing Malay participation and control of the economy and which is expected to run into the year 2020.

There are many reasons to fear the worst from this new national policy.  Firstly unlike the NEP which was initiated following the racial riots of May 1969, this policy is clearly linked to Najib’s fear of losing his position as president of UMNO in the coming UMNO general assembly elections. Najib has also made references to the fact that the new policy is to reward the Malay voters who supported UMNO during the last elections but this appears less strong a reason than his own survival as UMNO leader.

Secondly, unlike the NEP which was at least endorsed by a larger multi-racial grouping in the form of the National Operations Council, the main catalyst for the so-called Bumiputra empowerment policy has come from Malay pressure groups such as the Malay Economic Action Council (MTEM), Perkasa, right wing Malay media and bloggers and their god father, Dr. Mahathir. In fact the MTEM has claimed the credit for the new policy.  Completely side-lined even though the nation is not under emergency rule has been the cabinet as well as Parliament.

The apparent failure of the ruling BN coalition of parties to even be minimally consulted on the new policy speaks volumes of how much respect Najib has for his non-UMNO BN colleagues and for the  principles of parliamentary democracy.  It also shows that Najib – despite all the rhetoric of 1Malaysia and the inclusive scope of the New Economic Model – is prepared to sacrifice the interest of the non-Bumiputra component of the country’s population to secure his own and UMNO’s Malay interest.

Thirdly, the policy appears to be an open-ended one. Its range of initiatives is the entire range of socio-economic sectors where UMNO’s leadership feels that the Malay position needs to be strengthened – equity ownership, business, human capital, housing, state institutions, private sector jobs, etc.

Fourthly, even though the policy talks about Bumiputra and Malay empowerment, it is clear that the main beneficiaries will be UMNO members in the business community. According to media reports, the new initiatives will amount to $31billion worth but this is likely to be an under-estimate.  We can expect the figure of government expenditure on the new policy to run into the hundreds of billion by the year 2020.

 Impact of the New NEP

Will this massive reallocation of public funds on a racial basis bring about positive benefits? What is likely to happen with the implementation of the new policy? Policy analyst, Dr. Lim Teck Ghee, who in 2006 exposed the government’s fiddling of the corporate equity statistics to under-estimate Malay share as well as recently also exposed the fiddling of crime statistics, expects the racial and political manipulation of official statistics to continue.

He also had this to say to an online news portal (Malay Mail Online)

“It looks like the New Economic Model which was supposed to set the strategic policy direction for the country until 2020 and to de-emphasise ethnic based economic policies has now been effectively abandoned.

“The emphasis on prioritizing the bumiputra agenda is politically motivated and racially skewed.  It is aimed at ensuring that there is no challenge to Najib in the next UMNO general assembly and beyond, as well as to trump the opposition. As to it being a reward for Malay voters, this is simply an excuse. If Malay voters had deserted UMNO during the last elections, the same pro-Bumi policies would still have been set out with the justification that the Malay voters will need to be won back to UMNO.

“The enlargement of pro-Malay economic policies (other Bumiputra will only benefit marginally) will worsen the rent seeking, patronage and other opaque government procurement and engender even more cronyism and corruption. Efficiency, competitiveness, merit-based reform will take second place and the losers will be the larger population and the country. Poor Bumiputra (as well as non-Bumis) need greater access to capital, education, housing and business opportunities but we have seen how UMNO’s leaders and cronies have in fact monopolized the opportunities during the past 40 years of the NEP. We can expect the same situation to continue.”

Various independent Malay analysts have expressed the same opinion. Respected pollster Ibrahim Suffian has put it succinctly, “He is shoring up support of the Malays, particularly business people and contractors,” he told AFP. “He’s appealing to the base.”

Wan Saiful Wan Jan of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs has similarly said that Najib’s reluctance to dismantle the affirmative action policy would harm Malaysia’s economy in the long-run.

According to him, “it will definitely have a negative impact on the economy. The announcement … further enhances the role of government in the economy.”

In the next few months and years, the ripple effects of Najib’s sucker punch to the nation’s socio-economic development will become clear. Slower economic growth, loss of business confidence, deterioration in the business and social institutions of the country – these and other negative impacts can be expected.

Just a few days earlier, UMNO veteran and Minister of Tourism and Culture told an online news portal that Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz called on Malaysians to think themselves as Malaysian first.  Nazri should have addressed his Malaysia day wisdom to his boss in UMNO rather than to other Malaysians.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 16 September 2013, 12:06 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
NEM
,
NEP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Relive history – with a modern twist

by Chester Chin

Star

September 15, 2013

PETALING JAYA: For the first time, Malaysians will see clear video footage of the late Tunku Abdul Rahman when he declared the country’s independence.

Not only that, local celebrities and politicians like Tan Sri Michelle Yeoh, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai, Nurul Izzah Anwar, Lim Kit Siang, Datuk Seri Nazir Razak, Datin Sofia Jane and Datuk David Arumugum could also be seen in the crowd at Merdeka Stadium in other footages.

The footage is just some of the many old clips from the 1950s and 1960s restored and doctored by local filmmaker Pete Teo and his team over a span of five months.

These clips will be featured in Teo’s latest Hari Malaysia music video which will premiere at midnight both on www.HariMalaysia.com and YouTube.

“Previously, you would not be able to see Tunku’s face in the footage.

“However, we have restored the footage to give Malaysians a clearer picture of the moment,” he said.

He said his team used CGI (computed generated image) effects to superimpose the well-known figures in politics and arts, transporting them back in time for the historic moment.

The viewers will feel a pinch of nostalgia watching the heartfelt black-and white music video.

Teo noted that there was a different nation depicted in the old films in which people back then were more together and had a sense of pride and happiness.

“In many ways, the community is not so much together now as compared to the race relations in the past.

“The country may have progressed in certain ways but in some aspects, we have also seen Malaysia regress.

“In light of today’s politics and environment, I think it is more important for Malaysians to be reminded of those moments in the past,” he added.

There are two variants of the four-minute video.

The English version features a rendition of the song Slipstream performed by Melina William while the Malay version contains the song Kembara by Asmidar.

Both tracks were written by Teo and the Malay version features orchestration by Japanese violinist Sayaka Katsuki.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 16 September 2013, 12:20 am and is filed under
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib Has Set Us Back 40 Years

By Kee Thuan Chye

msn.com

16 Sept 2013

Najib Razak shows once again that his actions are often driven by his own paramount desire to stay in power. He’s about to be challenged for the position of Umno party president soon or returned unopposed, a situation that will also determine whether he retains the position of prime minister. Most likely, from the look of things, he won’t be challenged, but he still needs to consolidate the reason he should stay on as president. So last Saturday, he abandoned his 1Malaysia slogan to announce a Bumiputera economic empowerment plan that is obviously designed to win him support from the ethnic community that patronises his party. He exposed his own contradiction and reaffirmed what we have come to see as his real belief – that he doesn’t care what means he uses as long as he achieves his end.

By his action, Najib also shows yet again that he is a flip-flopper. He has apparently forsaken his New Economic Model, which was introduced in 2010 to phase out the outdated New Economic Policy (NEP) in favour of affirmative action based on needs rather than race, and make Malaysia more competitive and investor-friendly. But now with the new Bumiputera economic empowerment plan – to which he is dedicating a whopping RM31 billion, to be dished out in the form of loans, contracts and programmes – it looks like he is reinforcing rent-seeking, which will retard sustainable growth.

By his action, Najib has set us back 40 years – to 1971, when the NEP was introduced. He has fortified the idea that there are two classes of citizens in Malaysia – Bumiputeras and non-Bumiputeras – thereby totally subverting his 1Malaysia stance. But whereas one of the stated objectives of the NEP was to eradicate poverty, Najib’s Bumiputera economic empowerment plan is not aimed at helping the needy. It seems to be providing crutches even for those who don’t need them.

Malay Economic Agenda Council CEO Nizam Mahshar is right in pointing out that the plan provides no courses of action or strategies, and no targeted outcomes. Is this perhaps deliberate? Is the money being pumped into the programmes meant to be loosely administered so that it can easily go to Umno cronies? And is the lack of targeted outcomes aimed at avoiding accountability?

Unashamedly, Najib declared that the new plan was a reward for the Malay community for supporting Umno and Barisan Nasional (BN) during the last general election (GE13). Is it really a reward for the entire community or a reward for Umno cronies?

When he increased the price of RON95 petrol in early September, he said it was a necessary part of “the process of reducing the public’s reliance on subsidies”. Ironically, his Bumiputera economic empowerment plan is perpetuating this very reliance on subsidies, but on the part of Bumiputeras.

Of course, this suits Umno fine, because as long as the party drums it into the Malays that they cannot compete without assistance, they will have to depend on Umno’s largesse. And, consequently, they will continue to vote it into power. But, at this rate, how will the Malays – who, incidentally, form the majority of the population – be able to progress on their own? And how will this affect the country’s productivity and goal of becoming a developed nation by 2020? With this kind of plan and this kind of subsidy mentality in place, do you think we can still make it?

I much doubt it. Najib’s action has effectively stopped Malaysia from moving out of its malaise. We will continue to lag behind because we can’t seem to shake off ethnocentric policies that blunt our economic competitiveness, enfeeble our human resources, curtail our efficiency. If he still wants us to believe that we can become a developed or high-income nation by 2020, he is fooling us.

He also spoke with a forked tongue when he tried to appease non-Bumiputeras by claiming that his new plan was made in consideration of all the races. He said it was meant to create new wealth so that all Malaysians could share the benefits. “We are doing what is fair, we are doing what is right, and we are doing what is equitable,” he said. “It means that we do not have any evil intent or prejudice against the other races.”

Yeah, right. His vocabulary needs to be re-examined. Or perhaps he meant that with the impending new opportunities, non-Bumiputeras would benefit from the forging of Ali-Baba partnerships like before, or from being sub-contracted to do the actual work for projects that inexperienced, ill-chosen Bumiputeras secure.

But, seriously, it would be hard for non-Bumiputeras to believe what he said. Most of them were already incensed that he used public funds to help him and BN win GE13 – by doling out cash to many individuals and groups. Now he is using public funds again – to reward the ethnic group that voted for his party. That’s a double whammy.

They would be further incensed that government-linked companies (GLCs) will have to set targets for Bumiputera participation, and CEOs of these GLCs will score high on their key performance index (KPI) if they fulfil these targets! We know what this could result in. To meet their quotas, the CEOs might just take in any Taib, Din or Haris. That would be counter-productive.

Besides, as MCA Youth Chief Wee Ka Siong has rightly pointed out, GLCs have developed to where they are from the taxes paid by all racial groups. “Therefore, there should be no racial distinction in the performance of GLCs … If skin colour and ethnicity are the only priority, this will cause GLCs to become uncompetitive.”

Wee should have been harder on Najib and said that there must be no racial distinction whatsoever, full stop. It doesn’t do this country any good to divide the races; in fact, it causes harm. As it is, on social media, non-Bumiputeras are calling Najib names and hurling abuse at him because the taxes they pay are being channelled towards upholding an ethnocentric cause that is not only divisive but also makes them feel like second-class citizens.

I would, however, suggest that instead of repeating this decades-old claim, non-Bumiputeras might want to pause and consider which is the group that is actually second-class – the one that is being marginalised, or the group that’s being told that it can’t compete on its own. I think in all fairness to everyone, Najib should be treating Bumiputeras with respect and telling them that they can succeed without special assistance. In doing so, he would not only be forgetting about his own ends; he would really be helping his own race and also his country.

* Kee Thuan Chye is the author of the new book The Elections Bullshit, now available in bookstores.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 17 September 2013, 7:08 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
NEM
,
NEP
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Where is my government?

— Malaysians for Malaysia

The Malay Mail Online

September 17, 2013

SEPT 17 — As a taxpayer of more than 3 decades I am increasingly disillusioned by the present government. I am not able to call them “my” government as they do not support me or my needs. I can very clearly see the Government of the Malays and the Muslims but I am not able to see the government of the Chinese, Ibans, Indians, Kadazans, Orang Asli and the rest of us.

My hard earned tax ringgit are being used to pay the wages of the Malay majority civil servant (in excess of 90 per cent), build numerous suraus in every government building, finance government projects that benefit their rich families and friends, etc. But why are my needs, and those of my sisters and brothers of other ethnic origins and religious persuasions, not supported? It would be good to see a breakdown of tax contribution by ethnicity. It would be no surprise to see that the majority of our taxes are contributed by Malaysians who are ignored by this government.

I see the government speaking up and fighting for Malay and Muslim rights. But why do they not defend my basic human rights? Why are my needs ignored? Why are my rights trampled on by the government? Recently the minister of the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry was very quick to act against employers who discriminate against women wearing the ‘tudung’ (Muslim headgear) as employees. But why is there no similar response to all the ethnic and religious injustice meted out to those of us from different ethnic and religious persuasions?

Are we not also Malaysians? Do we also not have equal rights under our constitution and as human beings? Article 8 of the Federal Constitution was cited by the Minister, which states: “there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment”.

Why then does minister Rohani not warn the senior managers of our civil service (JPA) that stern action would be taken against them for discrimination against the Indians, Chinese, and other ethnic groups? Our civil service managers practise a policy of apartheid. In promotion, in appointment of leadership post, in recruitment, etc the mangers of our civil service practise a blatant racist policy.

In recent decades we have seen increasing injustice and bias by this government towards citizens of religious persuasions other than Islam.

For example, why is there not even one prayer room for these citizens in any government department, hospital, etc. Why does the government not actively support, fund and encourage the development and building of Churches, Hindu and Buddhist Temples, etc in the country?

Muslim civil servants actually go for religious training and talks during office hours. Why are religious individuals from other faiths not allowed to organise such talks as well in government departments?

Of course a civil servant should be working when at work, not attending religious talks. That this even happens in government hospitals where over burdened staff are struggling to improve care is unbelievable.

I voted for a government that will support and look after all Malaysians, not just one segment of the population.

Who we actually voted for is our democratic right. What matters is that we as a people have accepted the elected government. The government’s responsibility is to meet the needs of all the people, those who voted for it and those who did not. This is the sign of a mature government, not a childish one.

An elected government that only serves a segment of the population does not deserve to be in power and is neither democratic nor of God.

Where is my government has become my lament and prayer. Why are so many of us treated as second class citizens. Why is there no respect and basic dignity extended by our elected leaders to the entire population? Why are we constantly asked to leave our land by our elected minsters?

Why am I pouring out my energy and lifeblood (tanah tumpahnya darah ku) for this nation I love but am not appreciated? When will I be included and accepted?

I no longer believe the present government is one which represents all of the people of Malaysia. They are a government of their rich families and friends. A government that focuses on racial and religious issues and uses them to create disunity so that they can rule and deflect attention from their corruption and failure to support the poor. A government that even fails to get the support of the ethnic group they claim to represent.

Our beloved nation is at a crossroads. Either we descend further into the darkness of racial and corrupt politics and policies that have defined us for the past three decades. Or we move collectively into the light of a nation made up of one people – Malaysians.

A nation where all are respected and treated as equals.

Where the needs of every segment of our people are looked after.

Where the narrow walls of religious and racial bigotry are broken down permanently.

Where all have an equal future.

Where the ethnic/religious persuasions of our prime minister are not as important as the quality of his actions and intentions.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 17 September 2013, 11:34 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Good Governance
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Bumiputera Economic Empowerment Plan – Najib’s double-barrelled repudiation of the New Economic Model and 1Malaysia policy

The 50th  Malaysia Day had been the most  troubling Malaysian anniversary since it was declared a public holiday four years ago, for  only two days earlier, the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak had virtually renounced his reformist credentials as Prime Minister for all Malaysians as well as the torch-bearer for national transformation, whether governmental, political or economic.

Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said Najib’s announcement of the RM31 billion Bumiputra Economic Enforcement Plan two days before Malaysia Day was “a very lucky day” and “the most-awaited event”, and it is understandable why Muhyiddin was so elated, for it marked the triumph of his “Malay first, Malaysian second” stand and the ignominous trouncing of Najib’s 1Malaysia policy in less than four years.

It was in March 2010 that I challenged Muhyiddin and all the Cabinet Ministers at the time whether they fully supported Najib’s  1Malaysia Policy, reminding them that the goal of 1Malaysia as spelt out by the 1Malaysia Government Transformation Programme Roadmap was  “to make Malaysia ….a greater nation: a nation where, it is hoped, every Malaysian perceives himself or herself as Malaysian first, and by race, religion, geographical region or socio-economic background second and where the principles of 1Malaysia are woven into the economic, political and social fabric of society”.

I had specifically asked Muhyiddin and all the Cabinet Ministers whether they were prepared to declare that they were “Malaysian first” and their race second.

There was total silence from all the Cabinet Ministers at the time after Muhyiddin had declared that he was “Malay first” and then only a Malaysian.

It is pathetic that in the past four  years, there was only one UMNO Minister, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who dared to publicly declare that he is Malaysian first and Malay second.

Even Najib himself had never ever declared that he is “Malaysian first, Malay second” despite his proclamation of the  1Malaysia signature policy in the past four years.

In fact, in July 2011, Najib dodged the question when asked at the Malaysian Students Leaders’ Summit whether he was prepared to state that he was Malaysian first and what he thought of Muhyiddin’s infamous remark of being “Malay first and Malaysian next”.

Najib did not answer the question, saying: “I don’t want to respond in a way that will divide me from my deputy. 1Malaysia is our guiding philosophy. It does not matter what you say, just as long as you follow (the 1Malaysia concept).”

The Bumiputera Economic Empowerment Plan is Najib’s double-barrelled repudiation of his two most important policy formulations after becoming Prime Minister in April 2009 – the New Economic Model (NEM) which promised a needs-and-merit based transformation of the  affirmative programme to uplift the quality of life of the low-income 40% of the households, regardless of ethnic groups, and the 1Malaysia Policy based on the concept of fairness to all where no group would be marginalised and support and opportunities are provided on the basis of need and merit.

The Bumiputra Economic Empowerment Plan is  a sad commentary on the dismal failures of Najib’s 1Malaysia Policy predicated on the basis that the principles of 1Malaysia with Malaysians regarding themselves first as Malaysians and by race, religion, region or socio-economic status second are woven into all aspects of Malaysian nation-building policies as well as in  the economic, political and social fabric of society.

The Bumiputra Economic Empowerment Plan must be faulted on two grounds: the marginalisation of the non-Malays in Malaysia and  the continued hegemony of Umno-putras  to be the main beneficiaries of the RM31 billion Bumiputra Economic Empowerment Plan as during the years of New Economic Policy (NEP) creating fortunes and wealth for the UMNO few in the name of the upliftment and advancement of the bumiputra many but who remain in poor in the low-income 40% of Malaysian households.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 September 2013, 3:03 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Muhyiddin Yassin
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Land of scandalous possibilities

 – Martin Jalleh

The Malaysian Insider

September 16, 2013

Today, we celebrate our land of (a)

Forced patriotism

Façade of a multi-racial-religious nation

Foisted respect for the authorities

Failing and fading social fabric

Fabricating and spinning media

Fictitious and twisted history

Fogged education policy

Flagging international image

Fear and favour causing high brain drain

After half a century we can only boast of (a)

Frail economy and imminent bankruptcy

Farcical changes and reforms

Fantasised progress figures

Flops, foul-ups and flip-flops

Flawed development policies

Fanciful empty acronyms

Foolish public relations

Flagrant greed and corruption

Fraudulent claims and wastage

50 years have passed and we are left with (a)

Floundering institutions

Fools, “frogs” and foul-mouthed leaders

Fanatics and bigots who fan the flames

Felons, fixers and framers of gutter politics

Fatuous, asinine and arrogant Ministers

Forked-tongued and feckless powers that be

“Foster states” of Sabah and Sarawak!

Fractured nation of fragile peace

Fettered freedom!

Happy Malaysia Day, anyway!

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 September 2013, 11:48 am and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia gets “very high risk” corruption ranking in procurement of defence equipment

by Jennifer Gomez

The Malaysian Insider

September 18, 2013

There is a “very high” risk of corruption taking place in Malaysia in the procurement of defence equipment, according to an international study by Transparency International UK’s Defence and Security Programme (TI-DSP).

Malaysia scored 25.14 out of 100 in a 6-band rank which exhibits “very high” risk of corruption among 21 other countries.

The other countries in the study were Afghanistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, China, Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Palestine, Pakistan, Rwanda, Singapore, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

“Malaysia’s band ranking went from “D” – high to “E” – very high,” the statement noted.

With the latest findings, local anti-graft watchdog Transparency International-Malaysia (TI-M) is urging the Ministry of Defence to abandon its practice of direct negotiations with certain parties and instead carry out open tenders.

It also called on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s administration to submit an annual budget, which includes the defence budget, to Parliament for debate, consideration and approval.

This, TI-M said, would allow citizens to know how their tax money is being spent and also avoid outdated military equipment being purchased at very high cost.

The study by TI-DSP found that two-thirds of parliaments and legislatures around the world failed to exercise sufficient control over their ministry of defence and armed forces, and 70% of these largest arms importers in 2012 leave the door open to corruption.

The report also identified seven key areas in which parliaments may reduce corruption, namely budget oversight & debate, budget transparency, external audit, policy oversight & debate, secret budgets oversight, intelligence services oversight and procurement oversight.

TI-M said RM23 billion has been allocated to defence and security under the 10th Malaysian Plan while, in contrast, through the cuts in fuel subsidies, the government was to save RM1.1 billion for the rest of the year and RM3.3 billion next year.

“There is always a high risk for corruption in the defence sector because the amount of money involved in contracts is enormous.

“We think defence establishments can be leaders in integrity and openness, providing an example by leadership to implement integrity pacts for other institutions and sectors within the country,” TI-M said in the statement.

The local anti-graft watchdog also expressed concern that lack of transparency in procurement practices would lead to the purchase of outdated military equipment at a very high cost.

“This could cost lives, when there is a war or incident such as that which happened in Lahad Datu, Sabah.”

TI-M noted it was time for members of parliament from both sides of the divide to further strengthen their oversight of the country’s defence budget and focus on tightening the procurement procedures.

“Information should be made available to the parliamentarians who will then be able to debate over the defence budget and monitor the procurement process to prevent a similar embarrassment suffered by the Najib administration.”

TI-M also called on parliamentarians to establish cross-party committees and groups of external experts to empower their scrutiny and inform their debate of defence matters. – September 18, 2013.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 September 2013, 12:13 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Defence
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Moon-Cake Festival

by Allan CF Goh

Up in the blissful autumn night,

Hanging by the majestic pines,

The silvery moon proudly shines,

Sprouting her divine light so fine.

The serene lake tries valiantly,

To mirror the moon’s bright splendor,

By reflecting a rounded light,

Water-dancing in paired ardour.

The moon traces a blessed circle,

Symbolizing a completeness,

Of the abundance of family,

And their bonded togetherness.

The family gathers in great joy,

To celebrate the communion,

For receiving a good harvest,

For blessing a kin’s reunion.

This night the sweet moon-cake is shared

Amongst all in the family.

This signifies a roundedness,

Celebrated in homily.

This night, all the children rejoice

In the display of great lanterns,

Created for the moon festival

In a variety of patterns.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 September 2013, 11:31 pm and is filed under
Poem
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A matter of human dignity

by KJ John

Malaysiakini

Sep 17, 2013

I was touched and moved by Marina Mahathir’s excellent treatise on the value of human dignity in her most recent column in The Star. Hers related to our school system. That motivated me to share my own experience and that of my two sons in our school system.

My experience of abuse

First my own experience given that I am now already 63 years old. Yes, when I was in Form Two, in the Ibrahim Secondary School of Sungai Petani, one afternoon, my friend Gobalkrishnan and I went to play basketball in our school. We borrowed the school basketball which was kept by the canteen operator after signing our names in the book.

While we were making hoop shots a younger student in school uniform came and asked to take the basketball for his class because his teacher wanted the ball for his PE class. We said no, as we had borrowed and signed for it.

After a while the class teacher turned up with the same boy and asked for the ball; I said the same thing that we had signed up for the ball to play. He slapped me across the face and threw the ball at my friend’s head. Then they walked away with our ball!

I went home crying, mainly because of embarrassment more than anything else, since even my father had never slapped me. My father happened to be on the board of governors of the same school. He spoke to the headmaster, who was nicknamed “bulldog,” and related the incident to him, in detail.

Next morning, after school classes had started, I was called to the headmaster’s room and I saw the teacher who slapped me there.

The headmaster asked me to relate what happened. I did in the midst of crying and sobbing about it. After I finished the HM gave the teacher a chance to contradict me, but he did not and only argued that he needed the ball for the PE class. The HM asked the teacher to apologise to me, and told him not to repeat such physical abuse.

My son’s issue

In 1995, when one of my kids was in Year Six he was told by the school that he could not wear short pants to school, as he was already emplaced on the Prefectoral Board. The only problem was that my wife had already bought three pairs of shorts for him before school started. Therefore, there was an apparent conflict between the instructions received by my son and our desire for him.

I decided to take time off and went to the school next morning. I met with the deputy headmaster as the HM was not in. He explained that there was a new ustaz in the school and he had declared that all Year Six kids must wear long pants to cover their legs. I asked the deputy HM if he agreed with this new rule; and he said they were not consulted.

I asked for the complaints book, and they had none but the deputy HM was happy to open and new one and I gladly wrote my complaint and explained why my son will not be wearing long pants since we had already bought the shorts for him. We explained the situation with him and he had no problems with it. By year end, some three or four students also started wearing shorts. We had no other related problems.

Another son’s abuse

Another son was in a Chinese primary school in the Mandarin stream. One day my wife called me in the office to say that the son had called home crying that the teacher had thrown a duster at him and it had hit him, and it was hurting.

Next day, I took time off from work and went into the school to meet the headmaster. After a while we met the HM and he called for the respective teacher to come to his room and in front of us asked her to explain why she had done what was wrong. She broke down and cried in front of all of us and spoke to explain in Chinese.

The HM explained, after she left, that she was a spinster and often had some problems with her temper and attitudes. He then apologised and assured us it would never happen again. It never did to any of our other two more boys.

The matter of dignity

Every human is created in the image of God and assigned dignity by the creator. Therefore, each of us must be regarded and treated with the same dignity we rightfully deserve. Most organizations, rather unfortunately, ignore the same dignity and treat human beings as lesser mortals because of this notion that they have authority and power to do what they like.

It is all based on the roles they assume, or too often they only play. Actually roles of bosses or teachers are sacred responsibilities assigned to them for temporary stewardship of their charges.

But, most do not understand or accept this stewardship role as trustees or trusted ones, and instead use their roles to abuse their authority and power. The main thing that I found wrong with all systems is the fear most people have to speak up and for truth. Very often, wrongs are left unattended and slowly but surely the problem grows until the children are asked to eat in the toilet and not one see anything wrong with it.

Feedback is critical

The best and most effective way to deal with such issues is for parents to draw the line when their children or their colleague’s dignity is abused and give considered and good feedback without getting too emotional about the matter.

All systems can only improve when there is good and effective feedback. That is part and parcel of the meaning of a democracy. As ordinary citizens, each of us must assume important roles to ensure that all public space is conducted with honour, dignity and courtesy.

Only through feedback, like the one highlighted by Marina or by us as parents, can we hope to stop any abuse by wrong and abusive people. When and if we do not, then over time, there is a culture of abuse and we all become callous to the hurts and pains of ordinary people.

For us to become a truly developed country we must all change our attitude and regard all feedback as important to improve systems of governance, especially in our multi-ethnic environment. May God give us courage to speak up against wrong wherever it is found.

——————————————————————————–

KJ JOHN was in public service for 29 years. The views expressed here are his personal views and not those of any institution he is involved with. Write to him at
[email protected]
 with any feedback or views.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 September 2013, 4:52 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Human Rights
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anwar tells of special task force to issue ICs to foreigners in Sabah

by Lee Shi-Ian

The Malaysian Insider

September 19, 2013

The Royal Commission of Inquiry on Sabah’s illegal immigrants problem today heard from Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim that indiscriminate issuance of Malaysian identity cards had begun during the time of second Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak Hussein.

Anwar, the Deputy Prime Minister from 1993 until his dramatic sacking in 1998, Ibrahim, told the Inquiry that between 1972 and 1984, there was an influx of refugees fleeing fighting in the southern Philippines.

The refugees were granted identity cards indiscriminately between 1979 and 1990, said Anwar, who said a special task force was formed by the National Security Council for this purpose.

“The task force is still active today,” he said.

Anwar issues of national security were closely guarded by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad during the latter’s premiership.

Dr Mahathir also doubled as the Home Minister at that time, who was in charge of citizenship matters.

“Yes, I knew of this special task force but I was not privy to its workings or exact details of its tasks.

“Ultimately, Dr Mahathir was the person responsible and if he chose not to bring-up the issue during Cabinet meetings, you have to wonder why,” said Anwar.

He further said that members of the administration then including within Umno were not aware of what transpired.

“There were no Cabinet papers on that issue nor was it brought up during meetings, you can check the minutes if you don’t believe me.

“Had I attended any such meeting relating to the issuance of identity cards to illegal immigrants, I am very sure that it would be noted in the minutes. I am not talking about an ordinary task force, I am referring to a special task force whose tasks were less than transparent,” Anwar told the Inquiry.

Saying the task force was still operational, he named Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his predecessor Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawiand, saying both have more information about the task force.

“The task force was set up by the National Security Council, which is known to be a very important strategic body. What some people may not know is that the NSC also serves as Umno’s war room from time to time,” Anwar told the five-man RCI panel led by former Sabah and Sarawak Chief Justice Tan Sri Steve Shim Lip Kiong.

To a question by RCI consulting officer Manoj Kurup on how to dealing with illegal immigrants who held identity cards, Anwar replied:

“This is a massive nightmare for the country which was created by the executive, it involves massive corruption and a serious threat to Malaysia’s sovereignty. And now we are being asked how to clean up the mess created, which also had strong ramifications in the 13th general election.”

Shim and Manoj took turns in questioning Anwar on his role during that time.

Shim: There was a significant population increase in Sabah which occurred roughly around the time of Umno’s entry into the state. You were responsible for spearheading Umno’s entry into Sabah in 1991, isn’t that correct?

Anwar: Yes, there were good reasons for Umno to feel that they should have a strong influence in Sabah. However, you have to differentiate between a political party fighting a legitimate battle within the boundaries of the law and a party that isn’t.

Shim: There are perceptions that the population increase was due to illegal immigrants being incorporated into the community to increase the fortunes of a certain political party.

Anwar: It is unfair to blame the party as a whole as not everyone is privy to the matter. But the leaders who knew about the incident and chose to condone such secretive and clandestine acts of sabotage should be hauled up and held responsible. Nobody should condone an illegal operation which threatens national security.

Manoj: What can be done to tackle the issue of illegal immigrants holding Malaysian identity cards?

Anwar: We should be fair, not every Filipino in Sabah is an illegal immigrant, we must ascertain who are the actual refugees. Indiscriminate revocation of their identity cards is against international law, even if Malaysia is not a signatory to that particular agreement. But the first step we must take is to put an immediate stop to the issuance of identity cards to illegal immigrants. There are government or Umno officers who have been sent to Sepang and Selayang to issue identity documents to illegal immigrants. We must stop these excesses now without any excuses.

Manoj: What should be done with the illegal immigrants who have Malaysian identity cards, whose children and grandchildren were born here?

Anwar: This is a very complicated issue as withdrawing their identity cards would mean these people become stateless. We must think of the present generation and consider their rightful place in Malaysia.

Urging for caution when it comes to revoking the identity cards given under dubious circumstances, Anwar said the matter must be dealth with on humanitarian grounds.

“If we revoke the identity cards, who is going to accept the illegal immigrants? Certainly not the Philippines or Indonesia.

“I have held discussions with former Philippines President Fidel Ramos during our respective terms in office. He was reluctant in accepting former refugees back to the Philippines as he considered them Malaysia’s responsibility,” Anwar added. – September 19, 2013.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 September 2013, 5:05 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Mahathir
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why are our English teaching standards so low?

Khairie Hisyam Aliman

The Malay Mail Online

September 16, 2013

SEPT 16 — Recently we heard that out of 60,000 English teachers nationwide, about 70 per cent of them did poorly when sitting for the English Language Cambridge Placement Test.

Last Monday, Education Minister II Datuk Seri Idris Jusoh said these English language teachers, classified as “unfit” to teach the subject, had been sent to courses to improve their command of English.

“The ministry will also consider sending them overseas for exchange programmes to take up TESL (Teaching of English as a Second Language) courses,” a news report quoted him as saying, while adding that a good portion of these teachers had enrolled in local English courses.

Well, now talk last year of Malaysia possibly importing English teachers from India is put in a different perspective. But the core of the problem is also brought to light — what’s up with our teacher recruitment process?

While I am all for continuous self-improvement whatever your job title is, these “unfit” teachers have no business teaching English in the first place. If they are unfit to teach English to our kids and have to be trained further to be good enough, how is it that they became English teachers in the first place?

The fact that such a large proportion of our English teachers are so poor at what they are supposed to teach speaks poorly of the entire teacher selection process. One wonders how low the bar for entry is if more than two thirds of those selected by the process are then found incapable of teaching the language.

While the issues surrounding the teaching of English in Malaysia is not limited to the proficiency of the teachers — they cover, among others, the average Malaysian’s  negative mentality towards English as well as our misguided teaching approach — proficiency and competency nevertheless remains a core issue.

In a complex equation where every variable needs to be up to par in order to produce good results, getting teachers who know their English well is relatively basic compared to, say, revamping the teaching approach in the classroom or tailoring our education syllabus to cater to different competency levels of students from different backgrounds.

Forget last year’s silly talk of importing English teachers from India. If our recruitment standards at home for local English teachers remain as low as they apparently are, how do we move forward from here?

How do we progress in tackling declining English standards among our students and graduates if such a simple aspect — teacher proficiency and competency — is neglected?

Therefore there must be measures to tighten up the recruitment process and raise the bar for entry into the English teaching profession. Let us hope this is on the minister’s agenda.

In addition, if so many of our teachers are not up to mark, is it worth all that money to send all of them to courses and exchange programmes overseas?

Courses and exchange programmes, which I presume would involve government funds, would be costly. These teachers would still be on the payroll while they study.

If they were not qualified to teach English in the first place, why bother training them further? Will they even come close to a desirable proficiency level after these training programmes when mastering English takes years for most people?

Would it not be more cost-effective to slowly cut away the deadweight and instead use the ministry’s resources to hire better, more competent people who do not require extensive, expensive training just to be able to do their jobs properly?

Continuing with “retraining” for so many teachers who weren’t meant to be hired as English teachers in the first place is like throwing good money after bad. And money is not unlimited, especially given the economic climate and fiscal issues we are facing.

I for one hope that the Education Ministry marshalls its resources better, because our students’ futures — and by extension ours and the nation’s — are at stake here. We need better English teachers today, not tomorrow or whenever these teachers have been to more courses.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 September 2013, 12:08 am and is filed under
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Cry, My Beloved Malaysia

by Aerie Rahman

The Malay Mail Online

September 16, 2013

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 16 — The framers of our Constitution envisaged Malaya as a nation infused with lofty values. They wanted a secular nation with Islamic characteristics. Provisions were made within this sacred document to safeguard individual liberty.

Equality is enshrined but tempered with Article 153 to reflect the social realities of Malaya. However, the original intention was to make this article temporary and subject to review – which was not to be.

These are the fundamental values that Malaya shared with any other progressive nation: liberty, equality and secularism.

The proposal to amalgamate Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak with Malaya to establish Malaysia was made because of liberty. It was a way to hasten independence for Sabah and Sarawak.

Moreover, it was a strategy to stamp out the Communist insurgency – the antithesis of freedom. We knew that under Communist rule, freedom and democracy would be extinguished – the Maoist “Leap” and Stalinist gulags were sufficient evidence to that.

It is not my intention to sanctify the founding members of Malaysia. They are, after all, mere mortals. But these principles that they held dear are principles that I deeply believe in.

After 50 years of Malaysia’s existence, where are we today?

A suffocating miasma

As a nation rich in natural resources, we have utilised huge sums developing our infrastructure. We boast of the once tallest twin towers in the world. We constructed a modern city from scratch, Putrajaya. We’ve managed to attract the Formula One and various international events to this country. The finest things that cash can buy.

Yet, something is missing in the development of this nation. The erosion of the fundamental values that our founding members fought to institute has become this nation’s bane.

This country is devoid of a soul

Religious bigotry is on the rise – who can forget the arson attacks on churches and the defiling of suraus? The tide of extreme reactionary sentiments is peaking, with thugs masked as NGOs scurrilously employing police reports to intimidate dissenters. Protecting sensitivities has become a pretext to curtail liberty. Racial “otherisation” is common with Africans being the latest target.

We are fed with lies. Perfidy is synonymous with the current administration. The Sedition Act was supposed to be abolished, yet it still lives. The ISA was repealed, yet its spirit continues to haunt us in the form of SOSMA.

Freedom is important. From an ontological perspective, autonomy allows people to actualise their “Self.” Since people are different, freedom allows us to find our own way to create our own authenticity and self-worth. This government with its illiberal policies is making us alienated from our “Self.”

When affirmative action becomes perpetuated for such a long time, ethnocentrism becomes institutionalised. Subsequent generations perceive it as a right because they were born into it. Affirmative action continues to be iniquitous – without an end in sight.

It’s the values that defines who we, as a nation, truly are.

Voting with your feet

The consequences of the absence of these values are devastating and debilitating. Malaysia faces a talent haemorrhage. We’re losing our competitiveness. The best and the brightest leave the country to escape this oppressive condition.

For those who are not the best or the brightest or for those who love Malaysia too much – they remain in Malaysia. They become either cynics or stoics or hopeless romantics. For those unaware or who prefer the situation that we are in, well, I envy you.

Journalist Thomas Friedman postulates that there are high imagination-enabling and low imagination-enabling countries. The former creates and enriches the world through innovation, leaving low imagination-enabling countries eating dust. The brain drain is shamefully relegating Malaysia to the latter.

The government is cognisant of the brain drain. They funnel money into Talentcorp. But it’s illusory. Talentcorp is a reactive measure, pulling people back. It is not a preventive measure, ensuring that people don’t have the desire to leave in the first place. Structural problems remain unaddressed. More ringgit wasted down the drain to solve the brain drain.

A leap of faith

Loving Malaysia is like loving a person who doesn’t love you back. No matter how hard you try, she will continue rejecting you. But you continue trying.

I came to England with the hope of furnishing myself with a liberal education. I also wanted to settle down in a liberal democracy. But I feel alienated here. I don’t feel that I belong. Celebrating Hari Raya in London is not the same as in my kampong in Penang. The increasing xenophobia here makes me feel unwanted. The food here is too bland.

Why come back? Entahlah. It’s a geographical accident that I was born Malaysian, I could have been born as a citizen of any another country. Maybe going back to Malaysia has more to do with emotional attachments than rationality.

The Malaysian project is a project that I can call my own. Sure, Western nations have enduring and efficient institutions and have more mature societies. But it isn’t mine and never will be.

Malaysia is supposed to have a significant position in the theatre of world history. I wish to be part of this endeavour to situate Malaysia where she truly belongs.

Call me quixotic. I know that I am

I don’t deny the progress that Malaysia has made. We have a stronger Opposition after GE 12. We have intelligent leaders such as Nurul Izzah, Khairy Jamaluddin and Ong Kian Ming striving for a better Malaysia. The government recognises that we need to become a high income nation.

Nevertheless, when I weigh the evidence, I cannot help but feel negative. My wish of a post-racial society seems like a fantasy – a long walk to a colour-free Malaysia.

Onn Jaafar was different from the rest. He wanted Umno to be open to all races – a dominant post-racial party hopefully leads to a post-racial society. But he was to be disappointed. Onn Jaafar was a man ahead of his time.

Don’t tell me the desire for a secular, liberal, equal and post-racial Malaysia makes one ahead of his time as well.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 20 September 2013, 7:30 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Déjà vu

Kapil Sethi

The Malay Mail Online

September 19, 2013

SEPT 19 — Enforcement officers attempt to demolish parts of a Hindu shrine. The row over the use of the word Allah intensifies. Sermons proclaim that the social contract is non-negotiable. More travellers die in express buses. A headmistress in Shah Alam asks her Chinese pupils to go back to China. The prime minister hopes that Utusan Malaysia continues to prosper. It comes to light that some schools are installing CCTVs in toilets.

Rewind to approximately three years ago. A temple is to be relocated. People bring a cow’s head and desecrate it. A High Court judgement allows Christians to use the word Allah and a firestorm erupts. The NEM is revealed, roundly criticised for diluting the social contract and promptly shelved. More travellers die in express buses. A headmistress in Johor asks her Chinese pupils to go back to China. Utusan Malaysia continues its rhetoric. There are calls in Terengganu for 1 Malaysia toilets to be used by both sexes.

While it looks like that in addition to road safety and privacy, in the area of race and religious relations there is no change, in reality it points to a deterioration rather than stasis. Instead of broad social cohesion punctuated by a few incidents of chauvinism, the situation seems to be turning on its head.

Instead of a gradual levelling of the playing field and an emphasis on merit and needs over communal privilege given the steady economic rise of Malaysia, what is being witnessed is growing stridency in asserting the permanence of majority privileges fuelling rising discontent among the minority.

But is this deterioration in race and religious relations in Malaysia mirrored elsewhere? Are the economy and public policy impacted by this, even the wider political system?

After the last elections, the electorate is evenly divided in terms of their support for the two major coalitions, but there are significant deviations in terms of race, age, income and geography. There is a definite hardening of attitudes between the races, with stereotypical representations of a majority community under attack on one side and a victimised minority on the other being given prominence. Issues of justice, education and electoral fairness are also coloured by the same lens.

The political elites, especially in Umno awaiting elections, are retreating into a racial cocoon, with the very concept of BN seemingly reduced to a sideshow with the pathetic showing of MCA and MIC at the hustings. The reported return of PAS to leadership by the ulama is the opposite side of the same coin. However hard as DAP tries, its history leads it to be painted as a Chinese party.

The economic scenario is not exempt either. All economic indicators point to a worsening of Malaysia’s macroeconomic position, national and household debt ballooning largely due to domestic factors and stocks and currency declining largely due to external headwinds. In this scenario, instead of working towards more prudent spending, reducing corruption or promoting growth oriented investment, racial issues are hogging the headlines. Some groups want preferential rentals on the basis of race from mall owners or racial quotas in the award of Petronas contracts, while others want casinos closed and the redevelopment of heritage markets like Jalan Alor on racial lines.

Race and religion clearly are defining the current discourse to the point of becoming a reference of sorts for almost every debate of national importance. The key to real transformation in every area of Malaysian endeavour may lie in improving race relations on the basis of equality rather than superiority.

Privately every race can believe in its supremacy, but if the aim is to become a developed nation by 2020 where the poorest are assisted, the brightest are encouraged and innovators are feted, in public life, equal respect is a must.

Unfortunately the current national leadership seems intent on taking the country in exactly the opposite direction. The long-term consequences on the economy, society and indeed the idea of nationhood premised on unity in diversity could be catastrophic.

Of course this obsession with what goes on in toilets is a matter for another analysis altogether.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 20 September 2013, 8:55 am and is filed under
Elections
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Fed-up of broken promises, threats, Orang Asli men speak their mind at Tribunal

By Elizabeth Zachariah

The Malaysian Insider

September 20, 2013

Broken promises, deplorable living conditions and threats have spurred six Orang Asli from villages in Kuala Lipis, Pahang, to travel for at least 12 hours to Kuala Lumpur to testify in the Bersih People’s Tribunal.

Norman a/l Kong took two hours from his village – Kampung Pos Senderut – to the nearest tarred road, for a bus, then another eight hours from the road to KL while Kampung Regang’s Sani a/l Sobang took longer.

They are one of hundreds of villagers from deep within Kuala Lipis, which comes under the Cameron Highlands constituency, who are disheartened with the lack of amenities that were promised to them time and time again by the Barisan Nasional (BN) candidates before every general election.

Worse, the villagers claim that they were “threatened” and “forced” to vote for BN.

“After a meeting with the Orang Asli Development Department, our village head came back and told us that we would be arrested by police if we did not vote for BN,” Sani, 33, said.

He revealed that prior to that, he had gathered some villagers and urged them to vote for the opposition in the 13th general election.

Sani testifying during the session today at the Bersih People’s Tribunal. The Malaysian Insider pic by Afif Abd Halim, September 20, 2013.Sani testifying during the session today at the Bersih People’s Tribunal. The Malaysian Insider pic by Afif Abd Halim, September 20, 2013.”I told them that I have had enough of BN’s promises that were never kept and I wanted to vote for a change.

“But after the village head’s meeting with us, many of my friends, who had agreed not to vote for BN, changed their minds out of fear,” Sani told The Malaysian Insider today.

Norman added that the candidate for the ruling coalition, had always promised water, electricity, better houses for his village.

“We have been listening to the same promises being made since Merdeka but until now, we are still without electricity, we still live in bamboo houses and we still get water from a river nearby.

“We are concerned about our children’s education as they cannot study properly at night. Many of them drop out as it takes two hours to go to school and another two to get back,” the father-of-three said.

He disclosed that his villagers were also threatened by BN supporters to vote for them.

“They said that our healthcare and education would not be free anymore. They said we would not receive any help from them if we did not vote for them.

“I voted for them three times before this. But I don’t believe them anymore,” Norman said.

Both men, crushed by the ruling governments’ empty promises, discussed the situation with their church members in Raub, who then informed the Orang Asli about the tribunal.

“Once we heard about this, we knew we had to come here and tell of what happened in our villages,” Norman said, as his eyes glistened with tears.

Sani declared that he was not afraid of anyone when asked if he feared that there would be backlash due to his testimony at the tribunal.

“The police or the village head…I’m not scared,” he said with a wave of his hand.

Norman said he voted for the opposition despite threats that he and his family will lose certain benefits, such as free healthcare. The Malaysian Insider pic by Afif Abd Halim, September 20, 2013.Norman said he voted for the opposition despite threats that he and his family will lose certain benefits, such as free healthcare. The Malaysian Insider pic by Afif Abd Halim, September 20, 2013.In his testimony yesterday, Norman named MIC president Datuk G. Palanivel, and claimed that the latter and another BN candidate for Jelai state seat had “threatened” them by saying they would be charged for education and healthcare if they lost in the election.

Datuk Seri Wan Rosdy Wan Ismail from Umno was the BN candidate for the Jelai state seat.

“So, I voted for the candidate with the rocket sign (DAP),” he had said.

He also said the villagers were given RM20 each by Palanivel and were promised another RM80 if they voted for BN.

“Tetapi janji ini juga tidak ditepati (this promise, too, was not fulfilled),” he added. – September 20, 2013.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 20 September 2013, 12:47 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Indigenous people
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


One positive statement regarding Umno please

Zan Azlee

The Malaysian Insider

September 20, 2013

My colleague, Dzulfitri Yusop, a fellow journalist, asked me yesterday if I could make one positive statement about Umno or name one positive member of Umno.

I laughed. Too many people like to assume that I am anti-establishment just for the sake of being anti-establishment all of the time without being rational.

So I thought really hard to come up with a positive statement to show that I was not one of those ABU (Asalkan Bukan Umno, or Anything But Umno) people. We have to always keep an open mind, right?

Quite some time passed by and I still could not think of anything positive to say about the party aside from it being formed in my home state of Johor.

All jokes aside, I do know that Umno was formed with the best intentions in mind to help the Malays have political and authoritative powers in Malaya (and later Malaysia).

It was a party that was meant to protect the rights of the Malays and be a voice for them so that they will not be oppressed. Quite noble, I agree.

But the very fact that it was to protect a particular race makes it, in my opinion, totally unsuitable to be a political party because no one country consists of only one race.

If that particular party were to win the right to govern the country, common sense would come to the conclusion that their priority when governing is to protect the interests of that one particular race.

That does no sound too appealing, does it? No wonder Dato’ Onn Jaafar, the founding father of Umno, decided to leave the party when his suggestion to make the party multi-racial was rejected.

Aside from Dato’ Onn, there were many other attempts by other rational and forward thinking Umno members who wanted to change the party for the better.

Tunku Abdul Rahman was one. But even he failed and ended up being ousted and deposed by his deputy, Tun Abdul Razak, following the May 13, 1969 incident.

And even today, it would not be fair to say that all Umno members are racists, backward thinking and archaic. Because that would be too generalising.

People like Datuk Saiffuddin Abdullah are very forward thinking and, in my opinion, non-racist. But even he fell short of calling for Umno to be multi-racial.

Instead, he only suggested that people of any race can apply to be direct members of Barisan Nasional instead of being forced to join the racial-based component parties.

But these people are few and far between. I can probably count their numbers with just one of my hands. In fact, I actually can.

And when it comes to Umno, the saying that a drop of blue can taint the whole pot of milk does not exactly apply since everyone has to toe the party line.

At best, a party like Umno, with such specific interests as their objective would only qualify to be a non-governmental organisation (NGO) or even a lobbying organisation.

Then at least our suffering would just be limited to listening to or reading their ridiculous and atrocious statements instead of actually seeing them passed and becoming policy. – September 20, 2013.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 20 September 2013, 12:25 pm and is filed under
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What more does RoS want?

by Teresa Kok

fz.com

Sep 20, 2013

Yesterday (Sept 19), a RoS ( Registrar of Societies) spokesman was reported in The Star as saying that DAP has failed to deliver to the Registrar of Societies (ROS) original letters from the 500 delegates who were allegedly unable to participate in last year’s party polls.

The spokesman said it has been a month since the DAP leadership claimed to have the letters that will help clear the air on allegations that 753 delegates were denied of their right to vote but DAP has yet to submit them.

I want to first ask a question which reflects the indignant sentiment of many DAP members and supporters – “What more does RoS want?”

When RoS directed the DAP to hold fresh Central Executive Committee’s (CEC) election, does it not mean that he has completed the investigations into complaints against the party, despite the fact that the complaints are baseless and malicious?

By asking for the letters, is the RoS saying that the department has not completed its investigation? Then why was the instruction to DAP to order a fresh CEC election?

In the DAP CEC election held last December, there was no mistake in vote counting or tabulation but only in the posting of election results due to a computer glitch. And DAP has fully cooperated with the RoS’s investigations.

Except  for the computer glitch which was an honest mistake that was rectified on its own by the CEC, there was nothing that the RoS could pin point and use as basis for ordering a fresh CEC election, hence his unfair and unprofessional decision to so instruct  without giving any reason.

RoS could seek refuge in the technicality of the law, but the fact remains that till today, he owes the DAP an answer why he was not satisfied with explanations submitted by the party.

Since the RoS spokesman’s remarks is an attempt  to mislead public into believing that DAP has something to hide about the 500 letters, I wish to set the record straight here.

DAP Special Congress Steering Committee Chairman Anthony Loke had at a press conference held on Aug 19, produced more than 500 letters submitted by DAP delegates to the party headquarters testifying that they had received notices to last December Congress where CEC election was held, but were unable to attend.

That was done to rebut the claim by the Prime Minister Dato Seri Najib who had on August 16 ,  claimed that on said DAP had no credibility as it claimed to practice democracy but are afraid to do so within its own party.

Najib said the DAP had failed to notify the 753 members of its CEC election which was held in December last year.

It was obvious that Najib himself was duped by the lie propagated against the DAP.

With the letters, Anthony has successfully debunked Najib’s claim that till today, he has not and is unable to utter a word of reply.

Despite being pressured earlier to state if the reason for ordering CEC fresh election is because 753 delegates had been denied their right to attend last December’s  DAP Congress, the RoS has chosen not to respond. If he had responded, DAP would have produced the letters to expose the lie.

Over the last few months, there have been far too many lies and falsehoods being spread against the DAP with regard to the last December CEC election, the allegation that 753 delegates being denied the right to vote is only one of them.

With the fresh CEC election fast approaching, we can expect more lies and falsehoods aimed at sabotaging the election.

All DAP members must be united in the face of such unprecedented vicious and sustained attacks against the party and must not succumb to the lies and falsehoods.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 20 September 2013, 6:36 pm and is filed under
DAP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘Barring Chin Peng’s ashes makes us laughing stock’

Malaysiakini

Sep 21, 2013

Former inspector-general of police Abdul Rahim Mohd Noor warned that Malaysia will become a laughing stock if the government adamantly refuses to allow Chin Peng’s remains to be brought into the country.

“There is a hue and cry from the public not to even allow his ashes (back into Malaysia). My God… This is stretching the argument a bit too far. It’s a bit naive I think.

“If the government – the authorities – succumb to this public pressure not to allow Chin Peng’s ashes to be brought back, I think, we are making Malaysia a laughing stock to the whole world,” he said in an interview aired on BFM yesterday.

Abdul Rahim, who led the successful peace negotiations on behalf of Malaysia with the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) in the late 1980s, said the refusal to allow Chin Peng into the country, even when he was alive, made a mockery of the 1989 Hatyai Peace Treaty.

The retired top cop, who was then chief of the Malaysian Special Branch, said he had convinced the government at that time to engage in talks with the communists, more than 30 years after the failed 1955 Baling negotiations.

Abdul Rahim said that even though the 12-year Emergency was lifted in 1960, security forces were still battling communist remnants in the 1980s, but the decline of communism in the region was an opportunity for renewed peace negotiations.

At that time, there were still around 2,000 communists along the Malaysian-Thai border, with the two largest groups being the North Malayan Bureau and the 10th Regiment, which comprised largely Malays, he said.

With the backing of then-prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Abdul Rahim said, the Special Branch, in secrecy, initiated negotiations with the communists at the end of 1987 and early 1988 on Phuket Island, which lasted for five rounds.

This, he said, culminated in the 1989 peace treaty signed in Hatyai, and comprised two agreements, one containing the core terms and another on administrative details on how the terms would be implemented.

‘Other ex-communist returned, met sultan’

“I was involved in the drafting of both agreements, so I know full well that under the terms of agreements, first of all, the agreements are binding on every CPM member, from the highest, topmost to the bottom, lowest most.

“If you say that Chin Peng as secretary-general of the party (CPM) is the highest-most member, then he qualifies to get all the privileges, advantages or whatever promises made in the agreements, which includes for him to be allowed to come back (to Malaysia),” explained Abdul Rahim.

Furthermore, he said, in the event these former communist members were not allowed to permanently return to Malaysia, they must still be allowed to enter the country on social visits, according to the agreements.

“But in the case of Chin Peng, he was not allowed both. To me, it’s absurd, totally absurd. It’s unfair, grossly unfair…

“There were others (ex-communists) who were allowed to come back and they were mainly Malays. Abdullah CD was allowed to come back to Malaysia and was even given an audience with the current Sultan of Perak.

“Rashid Maidin, I was told, performed his pilgrimage through KL with the help of the Malaysian authorities. What’s all these?” Abdul Rahim said in an exasperated voice.

Abdullah CD was CPM chairperson while Rashid Maidin was a CPM central committee member.

Asked if the fixation of not allowing Chin Peng to return home, even when he is dead, was along racial lines, Abdul Rahim hesitated for a moment, then replied: “I am not prepared to make presumptions like that.”

“As far as Chin Peng’s case is concerned, we created a situation where we made a mockery of the (peace) agreements,” he added.

‘Gov’t turning Chin Peng into an icon’

He warned that the government’s stance in preventing Chin Peng’s ashes from being buried in his hometown in Sitiawan, Perak, was making the ex-communist leader an icon.

“Specifically, I think it is not good for the ruling party, particularly in their attempts post the 13th general election, to win back Chinese Malaysian support,” he said.

The government had justified its decision by declaring that Chin Peng was responsible for the deaths of countless members of the security forces, most of whom were Malays.

Abdul Rahim lamented that the people do not seem to understand the context of the international communist struggle and instead perceive that the over 40 years of communist insurrection in Malaya was “Chin Peng versus the entire government machinery”.

He pointed out that research showed the communist structure was collective in nature and it was not a one-man-show where Chin Peng called all the shots.

“I do not know why it should develop along this line (Chin Peng versus government). The fact is that good or bad – whatever Chin Peng is, the background is a peace treaty had been signed. We got to jolly well honour the terms and conditions,” he said.

Asked by the radio station how he thought history would remember Chin Peng, Abdul Rahim replied: “They (historians) should be able to analyse Chin Peng as a communist leader – his role and his party’s role – in battling the British, in getting rid of the British.

“His role in the peace process – the failure of the Baling talks and the success of the Phuket peace talks leading to the Hatyai Peace Treaty.”

Abdul Rahim has been consistent in wanting the government to uphold the terms of the peace treaty and had made a similar urging during a 2009 interview with Malaysiakini for Chin Peng to be allowed back to Malaysia.

Another senior cop who was also directly involved in combating the communists and was shot by them twice, Yuen Yuet Leng, had similarly urged reconciliation.

Chin Peng passed away on on Sept 16 of cancer, which incidentally was also Malaysia Day.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 21 September 2013, 11:56 am and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.