A Failed Mission in Washington DC

by
Raja Petra Kamaruddin
 in Washington DC

It was a strange scene at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington on Wednesday morning.  When the seminar on Governance & Rule of Law in Malaysia began, only one of the speakers came into the room, Nazri Abdul Aziz.

Attorney-General Gani Patail and former Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamed were somehow nowhere to be seen. And in good Malaysian fashion, the seminar started 10 minutes late.

The seminar’s chairman, Ernest Bower, looked tired and nervous, saying that he had received a number of e-mails expressing concern that the seminar would not be balanced. He said that he wants a dialogue on important issues. Therefore he also has invited the opposition to speak at CSIS. He hopes they will accept.

Ernest Bower then shocked the audience of about 40 people by saying that the session was ‘off the record’. The flyer announcing the seminar never said it was an off the record session. It doesn’t matter though. The session was so boring there is very little to report anyway.

Malaysian Ambassador to the US, Jamaluddin Jarjis a.k.a. JJ, spoke for two minutes. He just said that he is working very hard to improve relations with the US (whenever he happens to be in town, that is). He made no mention, though, whether the new US$150,000 Porsche he just bought is paid for by the Malaysian taxpayers or by him personally.

Nazri said that it was just a coincidence that he, Gani and Abdul Hamid happen to be in Washington at the same time. (Sure. If you believe that then I have half a bridge to Singapore to sell you.) He said he didn’t know where the two missing persons were.

He then introduced the “four members of my delegation,” all MPs. (Talk about wasting the taxpayers’ money!) Two of them were PKR turncoats, including the infamous Zahrin Mohamed Hashim.

In a tribute to Malaysia Today, Nazri held up an Internet printout and referred to Martin Jalleh’s article, Malaysian Circus Goes to Washington. He claimed that he had been planning the trip to Washington for nine months because he and the Prime Minister believe it is important to strengthen ties with the US.

Nazri then started his formal speech and spoke for 30 minutes. It was a very academic and therefore a very boring speech. There was no real substance to it and the audience quickly grew bored. Even JJ got so bored as he sat next to Nazri on the podium.

But what shocked the audience was to watch JJ’s antics at such an “important meeting” at such a “prestigious think tank.“

The whole while Nazri was speaking, JJ was sending and receiving messages on his Blackberry and mobile phone. He never turned off the ringer. When he tapped out a message, one could hear the “click, click, click” of the keys. He even called his aide up to the podium twice to have conversations. He also got up and left the room and then came back.

And here is a first for Washington. Then, as Nazri was still speaking, JJ picked up the Washington Post and started to read it — not once, but twice.

Nazri went on and on, quoting Malaysia’s many laws banning corruption. But of course he never said that they apply only to the opposition and not to UMNO politicians or taxi permit holders (nudge, nudge, wink, wink).

Finally, he stopped speaking and said he would welcome tough questions. He got one right from the start from Kumar, the head of Amnesty International’s Washington DC office. Kumar said Nazri and JJ had both just said that they want to improve relations with the United States. But that will never happen as long as people in Washington have concerns about Malaysia’s harassment of the opposition and Anwar’s trial.

Referring to the Malaysia Today article, Kumar said if there’s a Malaysian circus, it’s Anwar’s trial. Nazri replied, “Anwar is a friend of mine.” (With friends like Nazri, who needs enemies?). Nazri said he underwent his legal training in the United Kingdom and claimed that if he ever sensed that the Prime Minister was interfering in the case and there is political interference in Malaysia’s independent judiciary, he would tender his resignation.

He added, “When we heard about Saiful’s charges against Anwar, I thought it was unfortunate. For the sake of the country, we don’t want the nation to endure a trial like this again. But Saiful is entitled to justice. Why talk about rule of law if you ignore his report? He had a right to report to the police. In any event, Anwar’s acquittal before shows that our judiciary is independent, and we did not appeal that decision. That shows we are interested only in justice, not political persecution.”

Nazri went on. “We do not have an agenda against Anwar. Why would we want to use the same old charge of sodomy, again? If you don’t believe me, there is nothing I can do.”

JJ clapped.

JJ was the only one who clapped.

Murray Hiebert then stood up to introduce himself as the former Asian Wall Street Journal correspondent in Malaysia (but politely declined to mention his experience with ‘good governance’ and ‘the rule of law’ in Malaysia when he was the guest of a Malaysian prison).

Murray asked about the Allah issue. Nazri turned to the Malaysiakini reporter in the room and told him, “Don’t you dare report what I am going to say.”

Nazri looked alive and gave a 20-minute history and language lesson, repeating the usual government line. As Nazri finished his long-winded answer, JJ leaned over to whisper to Ernest Bower, who suddenly jumped up and brought the seminar to a halt. It was still only 11:30am and the seminar was supposed to go until noon.

JJ probably thought an early halt would be wise before they put their foot deeper into the mouth. Or maybe he was really getting bored and just couldn’t take it anymore. Or maybe he was hungry. So JJ led Nazri out of the room and the audience followed.

So much for the so-called ‘dialogue’.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 25 February 2010, 1:10 pm and is filed under
Foreign
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Government should stop waste of public funds which end up in greater national embarrassments like the “strangest” cloak-and-dagger CSIS seminar featuring Nazri in Washington yesterday

Foreign Minister, Datuk Seri Anifah Aman should give an assurance that the government would stop waste of public funds which end up in greater national embarrassments like the “strangest” cloak-and-dagger Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) seminar “Governance and Rule of Law in Malaysia” featuring the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz in Washington yesterday.

I agree with the former United States Ambassador to Malaysia John R Mallot who had described the seminar as the “strangest” he had attended in Washington DC. The reasons for such an appellation would include:

Seminar Panellists – Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail and former Chief Justice and now head of Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) advisory panel Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad who were billed to appear with Minister in Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz never showed up.  Nazri told the seminar he did not know where the two were in Washington.

The presence of the Abdul Gani and Hamid would have reinforced criticisms of the lack of progress in judicial and institutional reforms to restore international confidence in the independence and integrity of key national institutions.  This is why I had publicly gone on record to criticize Abdul Gani’s participation at the CSIS seminar as his first duty is to carry out the duties of the Attorney-General independently and professionally to ensure national and international confidence in the administration of justice rather than to join in government’s international roadshows to win foreign hearts and minds that there is the just rule of law and a truly independent judiciary in Malaysia.

Seminar pronounced “off the record” – The last-minute conversion of  the CSIS seminar into an “off-the-record” session gave it a cloak-and-dagger character that what Nazri said in his speech and Q & A cannot stand public and international scrutiny. Mallot said that it was “unusual” for the session to be off-the-record, which is “very rare for a Washington think-tank”.

The two hour seminar was cut short by one-third of the time  – starting 10 minutes late and ending 30 minutes earlier.

Dismal crowd – one account put it as about 40 people.

Has the Malaysian government achieved its purpose in the CSIS seminar in convincing Washington opinion about the justice, propriety and justification for the Anwar Ibrahim Sodomy2 prosecution and persecution?

From all accounts, the answer must be an unequivocal “No”.  The “strangest” cloak-and-dagger CSIS seminar in Washington is not coup for the new Malaysian Ambassador to Washington, Jamaluddin Jarjis but a major blot in his record book.

The Najib government should learn from the embarrassment and ignominy of the “strangest” cloak-and-dagger CSIS seminar in Washington yesterday – that the only way for Malaysia to escape the international opprobrium and condemnation for the Anwar Sodomy2 trial is to drop the charges against the Parliamentary Opposition Leader and Prime Minister-in-waiting Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 25 February 2010, 6:54 pm and is filed under
Foreign
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia in the Era of Globalization

By
Bakri Musa

Introduction and Overview

A Father’s Query

Growing up in colonial Malaya, my father insisted that his children attend English schools. This was surprising as my parents were Malay school teachers and the country was then in the grip of intense nationalistic fervor, anticipating independence. Malay teachers were at the vanguard of this movement, specifically in UMNO.

In his later years my father would confide to me his reasons. He wanted us, his children, to learn the ways and secrets of the English, and to discover what it was that made them so successful that they could control an empire. What was it about Britain, he wondered, an island half the size of Sumatra that it could produce a race that would control a vast portion of the globe? Why was it that the British who colonized Malaysia and not Malays over Britain?

My father was not the first to ponder such matters.

The American biologist Jared Diamond in his Pulitzer prize-winning book, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies, recounted his experience with a tribal chief in Papua New Guinea at the end of the Second World War. At that time the Allied forces were regularly dropping supplies and other “goodies” to the troops and natives on the island. These cargo drops were much anticipated. To the Stone Age natives, these precious gifts were literally falling from heaven.

Their chief Yali, as befitted a true leader, went beyond simple wonderment. In a pensive moment he too wondered why it was that Diamond’s people (that is, White man) who were dropping the cargoes on the natives and not the other way around. The chief may had been in a Stone Age surrounding and culture, but his insight and curiosity were on par with past and modern thinkers and philosophers.

Yali’s question, as Jared referred to, was also on my father’s mind during another major event in his life. During World War II the Japanese briefly colonized Malaya. He could not help but notice the vast difference between the behaviors of the Japanese masters as compared to the British. While the English were very successful in making Malays and others eager to learn and ape their ways, there was no love felt by Malaysians for the Japanese, despite their much-hyped profession of Asian solidarity. To be sure the Japanese were much respected, but that was out of fear and intimidation. Unlike the British, the Japanese were very much hated for their brutal and savage ways. There wasn’t a Malaysian tear shed when they surrendered.

My father wanted to know why these two races, the Japanese and British, would turn out to be very different as masters. Even more important, what was it that made them venture beyond their shores while Malays were content to stay at home. This last point has not always been the case. After all, his father had migrated across the Strait of Malacca from Sumatra. Many in fact ventured far beyond the archipelago, landing on such distant shores as Madagascar and South Africa. Malays back then were famed as seafaring people.

Historians, ancient and modern, have attempted to explain the rise and fall of great civilizations. Unfortunately I am no fan of that discipline, perhaps the result of botched teaching during my high school. History is unfairly stamped on my mind as only dates, persons, and events; a narration of who did what to whom and, of course, when. Rarely is the fundamental question of “Why?” asked. And when it is, the answer would depend very much on one’s (or the historian’s) perspective.

Events of World War II would undoubtedly be interpreted much differently from the current version had the Japanese and Germans won. To the victor goes the privilege of writing history, observed Churchill. This bears emphasis. Today Westerners, that is members of the developed societies, write much of the literature on development. Rightly so, for few would want to hear the views and theories of development propounded by socialists and communists. Theirs is a failed system. We must however, be careful to separate propaganda on the virtues of the West from empirically proven successful strategies. Another useful caution is that what works in the West may not be necessarily be so elsewhere. That however should not be the excuse for us not to study Western ways, for if they are not applicable to our society, then at least we should at least find out why.

A more problematic issue with the study of history is that human societies and conditions change. Thus factors and conditions considered favorable for development in the past may no longer be appropriate today; indeed they may well prove to be obstacles. This caution is necessary in view of fundamentalist Muslims’ obsession to enforce 8th Century laws onto modern society.

A more fruitful pursuit in understanding the fate of societies lies in the sciences, both the social and natural sciences. Science after all attempts to explain phenomena with a view to predict and or alter subsequent events. That essentially is the focus of my enquiry.

Variations in the level of progress occur not only between but also within societies. Having lived in three different countries, I am very much aware of this. In Malaysia we have the Malay/non-Malay dynamics; in Canada, the Francophone and Anglophones; and in America, the Blacks and Hispanics versus Whites. When I hear discussions in America on the lack of Blacks and Hispanics in higher education, all I have to do is substitute Malays for Blacks or Hispanics, and the debates might as well have been in Malaysia.

When I was living in Montreal in the 1970s, the passionate arguments then were on the lack of French-Canadians at McGill University. Those heated discussions eerily echoed the equally impassioned rhetoric of an UMNO Youth gathering. Only the geography and participants were changed, but the dynamics remained remarkably similar.

Malaysia’s Problems In Perspective

During my childhood I was very much aware of the gross inequities between the races in Malaysia. I was also keenly conscious of the racial undertones whenever minor social and economic conflicts arose. Even seemingly innocuous neighborly disputes could quickly escalate into major racial confrontations.

I remember how an innocent and inconsequential labor dispute at Malayan Railway in the late 1950’s quickly degenerated into an ugly racial confrontation, simply because most of the workers were Indians and the managers, Malays. It took the swift action of an economics professor, Ungku Aziz, to prevent that conflict from degenerating. A decade later in May 1969, a boisterous electoral victory parade by a predominantly Chinese party precipitated the nation’s worse race riot.

The successive governments of Malaysia, from the colonial British to the present, have long grappled with the race problems with varying degrees of success. Out of that 1969 national tragedy emerged the New Economic Policy, with its objectives of eradicating poverty and the “identification of race with economic functions.” The dangerous gaps separating the various communities in Malaysia have now narrowed considerably; nonetheless inequities still exist and continue to be a major source of social instability. Malaysia’s problems however, are not unique.

A year after the Malaysian riot and in the opposite end of the globe, I would once again be caught in the maelstrom of another interracial conflict. It was in Montreal, this time between the French- and English-Canadians. Although the number of casualties was nowhere comparable to the Malaysian melee, nonetheless qualitatively, the dynamics were similar.

That Canadian rage erupted when members of the separatist Front de Liberation du Quebec (FLQ) kidnapped a Francophone provincial cabinet minister and the British consul. The diplomat was later released unharmed, but the minister was savagely murdered. That crisis precipitated a civil unrest the likes of which Quebec and Canada had never seen. The old War Measures Act was resurrected and thrust onto Canadians; overnight they saw their cherished freedom taken away. That conflict also saw armed troops marching and heavy tanks rolling down the streets of Montreal. The scenes were reminiscent of a banana republic rather than a modern nation.

Canada, like Malaysia, has come a long way from those ugly days of a generation ago. In many parts of the globe today however, we still see ugly ethnic conflicts, and the participants in each of those disputes insist on the righteousness of their claim and on the uniqueness of their particular positions.

Malaysia has the added problem of its socioeconomic cleavages paralleling racial lines. Again this is not unique. With the massive migrations and arbitrary drawing of political boundaries in the last century, many countries have ethnically and culturally diverse populations, and the attendant inter-communal inequities. Much of the world today is still consumed with irrational ethnic and racial hatred, from Europe (Northern Ireland and the Balkans) to Africa (Nigeria and Rwanda), and Asia (Sri Lanka and Fiji). Thus Malaysia’s experience in dealing with her interracial problems has worldwide relevance.

Canada, like Malaysia, had its own sets of interracial problems. The socioeconomic differences between the French and English there were obvious, at least a generation ago. The province of Quebec may be overwhelmingly French, but signs in that language were practically non-existent in downtown Montreal. The executive suites there were more likely to be filled with a Baker, Smith, or Wilson, rather than a Beauchamp, Dumaine, or Poirier. At least that was the situation back in the 1960’s.

These differences extended beyond the social and economic arena. I remember being perplexed by a case of fever in a young French-Canadian girl. A senior English-Canadian doctor casually suggested that I look at the patient’s teeth and remarked rather crudely that French-Canadians had “rotten teeth.” Sure enough, she indeed had severe cavities and gum disease. Thus even oral pathology follows racial lines. To what extent such differences reflect differing socioeconomic status or merely the function of genetics, diet, or culture is not known.

A decade later in California, I was again struck by the glaring inequities between the different communities. The dynamics were more complex involving Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics. Every so often America’s race problems would explode, as in the Watts riot of 1960s and the Rodney King of 1992. That second eruption followed the acquittal of four white policemen who were caught on videotape senselessly beating up an unarmed black man, Rodney King.

Even when the citizenry of a nation is relatively homogenous, differences can occur, for example, between regions. Coastal regions of China are more developed and readily adopt free enterprise, while its central regions remain mired in totalitarianism. And conflicts between the two occur regularly.

Thus the study of how societies develop is relevant to understanding inequities not only within but also between nations.

Next: A Discussion on Causation

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 25 February 2010, 12:17 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
globalisation
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


The weakness of PERKASA

by
Azly Rahman

I have been following with interest, yet again, with the development of a new Malay-centric interest group called Perkasa.

Is its creation a necessity in an age where in the emerging force of change is multiculturalism and the rise of neo-Malays with cosmopolitan and cosmotheandric perspectives ready to abandon ultra-Malayness?The weakness of Perkasa lies in the gradual boredom-ness of its existence, in face of the excitement of radical marhaenism.

Ho hum. That is what all these newer developments in Malay-consciousness is about, as if we have not heard enough calls to protect the rights of the Malays – rights already enshrined in the constitution.

Ho hum. That is an expression of boredom unto all these, when we know that modern crutches and structures of disabilities of the Malay culture – ultra-nationalistic Youth parties, Biro Tata Negara, cow-head protesters and a myriad others – are still used to make the Malays scared of their own shadow.

Ho hum, when we are presented with the boring story of yet another organisation whose goal is to promote the philosophy of ‘we versus them’ in a country mystified with the slogan ‘1Malaysia’; of being and becoming one in a metaphysical world of blue ocean strategies of shark-eat-shark.

 Perkasa is unnecessary, I believe. Malays need to intermingle with other races and learn from each other meaningfully; more than just visiting each other during festive seasons and putting up banners during Deepa-Raya, Kongsi-Raya or Christmas-Raya or any other ritualistic social gathering American-Thanksgiving style.

Deep and serious dialogue on the arts, humanities, philosophy, and spiritual consciousness is needed in all of us so that we may eliminate fear, battle evil within, stamp out mistrust, and find common ground in the aspects of cultures we can hybridise. Culture is dynamic and contains enabling and disabling aspects. Perkasa represents the disabling aspect of Malay culture, and critical consciousness needs to permeate the psyche of its members.

Neo-Malays (or rather, philosophically framed, cosmotheandric and post-modern Malays) need to stay away from interest groups that continue to misrepresent them. More discussions on how best to move this country forward in all spheres of life should dominate those cafes, warong, teh tarik joints, and other places of hanging out.

Universities and educational institutions need to discuss radical multicultural philosophy a la radical marhaenism to bring future Malaysian leaders together as equal cultural partners in nation-building. We do not want to see in decades to come Malaysian universities offering course such as ‘Hitler-studies in Malaysian context’ or ‘The Rise of Asian Nazism’ to battle the wave of hate-crimes and the rise of Hitlerian thinking.

Mobilising Neo-Malays

But who would lead the radical change in this new Malaysian consciousness? I see two possible groups:

Academicians, if they are willing to stick their neck out and challenge the dominant ideology and the ideologues. But they are co-opted and are not free to voice their opinion in fear of retribution.

Artists, professionals, theologians, humanists, artisans, students – they are all over the place but the danger is that they are being fragmented by the wave of individualism, postmodernism, and non-committal.

In my flights of fancy, I would call the genesis of a separate radical identity that would set this group free from any political groups yet close to the ideals of a just and virtuous republic governed by transcultural philosophy. It is one that will produce independent ideas of change and writings that will make Malays face history and transform it, leaving behind the vestiges of feudalism and crafting an existentialist Malay history honoring absurd, marginalised, enslaved, and fallen heroes buried alive in modern history textbooks. I have written about this in an article on the new post-tribe ‘Sawojaya’.

The conceptualisation of a new race is difficult for many Malays to accept, especially when dealing with the repertoire of symbolism of Malayness. My vision is a republic of virtue no less, but must begin with us traveling the path of transcendentalist and romanticist idea of Nature and the natural state of human beings. In matter of cosmopolitanism in religious belief, it will take perhaps another half a century for Malays to acquire the taste for engaging in inter-faith dialogue. It is a very difficult task.

One has to be a ‘stranger’ and an ‘outsider’ Malay or an ‘ugly Malay’ in order to excavate the disabling cultures of the Malays. To continue to form support any organisation that has an alliance with the ‘powerful and wealthy Malays’ would retard the march for a populist intellectual change.

ASAS 50, a child of Poejangga Baru and perhaps Lekra, was a very successful movement that also created the radical Malay thinkers of Independence (mainly teachers and writers). Kasim Ahmad, Syed Husin Ali, Tongkat Warrant, Kemala, Usman Awang, Samad Said (left), and even P Ramlee to an extent were foundational in spearheading this movement, inspired perhaps too by the works of Indonesian poets such as Chairil Anwar, WS Rendra, Putu Wijaya, Ajip Rosidi, and writers such as Prem (Pramoedya Ananta Toer) and Muchtar Lubis.

Perkasa might be reduced to a weak force that fails to take off. I would suggest it be disbanded or be funded to teach multi-cultural understanding in kampongs. How much shouting can one make on the streets in support of those who eat too much durian in six-star hotels?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 25 February 2010, 12:26 pm and is filed under
Azly Rahman
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Najib is setting the stage for drastic action by UMNO against Tengku Razaleigh

When the Prime Minister and UMNO President, Datuk Seri Najib Razak said last night that it was up to UMNO members to decide if action should be taken against Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah for continuing his campaign against the federal government over Kelantan’s oil royalties claim, the stage is set for drastic action by Umno against the Kelantan prince and elder Umno statesman.

It is clear as to what Najib meant when he made the ominour statement:” We have to hear what the party members have to say” after the Umno supreme council meeting last night.

Already, the Deputy Prime Minister and Deputy Umno President, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin had more than once expressed displeasure at Razaleigh’s  unrepentant recalcitrance, openly questioned Razaleigh’s loyalty to Umno and accused him of trying to confuse the public over the oil royalty issue.

Will Razaleigh back down from the very clear ultimatum from the Umno leadership to “cease and desist” or to face severe Umno retaliation for continuing to champion the state rights not only of Kelantan but other states, particularly Terengganu, Sabah and Sarawak who are directly affected by the oil royalty controversy.

Whether Razaleigh would be “disciplined” or even hounded out of Umno is an internal Umno matter but the issue he has taken an uncompromising stand concerns not only him and Umno, but larger public interests affecting not only the oil royalties but the state rights of all states in the federal system of government in Malaysia.

Razaleigh yesterday accused the Federal Government of behaving like a “Godfather” even though their power comes from the 13 states.

Today, Razaleigh has upped the ante in a Malaysian Insider report elaborating on his concerns at the signs of decline everywhere in Malaysia, saying that even Malays are getting disillusioned with the state of the nation and leaving the country.

He said: “Something must be wrong in this so-called Malay Land (Tanah Melayu) when they (Malays) are leaving.”

He said people, especially the young, are feeling uneasy over developments in the country, adding:

 “There are many Malays in London who are professionals, making good money, who will not return because the environment is not right in Malaysia.”

The Prime Minister said his government’s refusal to pay oil royalties is in accordance with the law and was decided upon after consultation with various legal experts.

Najib should present a White Paper when Parliament meets on March 15 to explain why for 25 years from 1975 to 2000, the Federal Government recognised and paid five per cent oil royalties to the Terengganu state government for offshore oil produced, but refused to accord such recognition because PAS captured power in Terengganu state in the 1999 general election and paid out instead  “compassionate monies” to a separate Federal Government agency.

The White Paper should declassify all documents and records of Petronas, the Attorney-General Chambers and other government agencies to explain when and why legal opinion changed from recognition of the states’ oil royalties rights for 25 years from 1975 to 2000 to refusal to recognise such state rights and to pay out instead “wang ehsan”  at the discretion of the Federal Government.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 26 February 2010, 6:02 pm and is filed under
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Raising Malaysia’s Hackles

An angry youth protest highlights the Malaysian authorities’ insecurities over international criticism.

Opinion Asia | The Wall Street Journal

The prosecution of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim is proceeding apace, but that doesn’t mean international pressure is useless. Witness the government’s reaction to recent international criticism.

A bipartisan group of 56 Australian parliamentarians sent a letter earlier this month to the Malaysian High Commissioner in Canberra, saying the fact that a leading opposition voice has been charged with sodomy a second time “raises serious concerns,” and urging the authorities to drop the charges. The letter cited an op-ed in this newspaper by Munawar A. Anees, who claims he was tortured by the police and forced to confess to sodomy with Mr. Anwar before the first trial in 1998. And it echoes statements by American and Canadian politicians also worried about the impartiality of Malaysia’s rule of law.

The reaction was swift. Some 500 members of the ruling coalition’s youth wing and sympathizers protested in Kuala Lumpur last week, calling the letter a “trampling” on “sovereignty.” Youth leader Khairy Jalamuddin told us in a telephone interview that the trial is a judicial process, not a political one.

Yet the Malaysian response, far from being a deterrent, only shows how sensitive the country is to international pressure. The letter’s coordinator, Labor MP Michael Danby, says Malaysia is one of Southeast Asia’s relative success stories and any threat to its fledgling pluralistic democracy should not be lightly disregarded. “You wouldn’t want us to be quiet on Aung San Suu Kyi, neither should we be quiet on what’s happening to Anwar Ibrahim,” he says.

International attention may not change the course of Mr. Anwar’s trial, but at the very least, it reminds Malaysia’s elites that their actions won’t go unnoticed—or, perhaps, without consequences.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 26 February 2010, 12:45 pm and is filed under
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Spare the Rod, Spoil the Country

by
John Berthelsen

Wednesday, 24 February 2010

Malaysia seeks to organize an international caning conference

Malaysia appears determined to make an international fool of itself. The latest news, according to Shahrizat Abdul Jalil, the Women’s Minister, is that the country is considering organizing an international conference on caning and whether it is an appropriate punishment for women under Islamic law.

The announcement by Shahrizat comes on the heels of a government statement last week, nine days after the fact, that a shariah court had ordered the caning of three women for adultery. A fourth, far more publicized, is the case of Kartika Dewi Shukarni, a part-time model who was ordered by a shariah court to be caned for drinking beer. The case is still hanging fire while the Regent of Pahang decides how to treat the matter.

This all is in addition to the widely publicized show trial of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on charges of consensual sex with a male, a selective prosecution at best even if he did it, since Kuala Lumpur throngs with gay bars, and political persecution at the worst over widespread suspicion that the charges were trumped up. There is also the January violence in the wake of a high court judge’s decision to allow the Malaysian Catholic Church to use the word Allah as a synonym for God in its Malay-language editions of its newspaper, the Catholic Herald. Eleven churches, a Sikh temple and two Muslim prayer rooms were attacked.

Many critics hold UMNO responsible for fanning racial disharmony. In the cases of the prayer rooms, eight UMNO members were arrested for attacking them in an apparent attempt to make it look like either Chinese or Indians had done it. There are similar suspicions that ethnic Malays had thrown pigs’ heads with money in their mouths into mosques in Kuala Lumpur.

That, plus the continuing political turmoil, appears to be driving up flight capital totals and citizens who are leaving along with their money. And it is giving international investors some serious second thoughts at a time when the export-led economy is finally starting to emerge from the global financial crisis that began in October of 2008.

As to the caning, in the first place the government ought to organize a conference on whether caning, Malaysia style, is an appropriate punishment for anybody, anywhere, unless for crooked government politicians, of which Malaysia has a surfeit . Although caning is officially outlawed in only 25 countries, it is rare in a lot more, and in very few is it practiced as barbarically — on men — as it is in Malaysia, which until quite recently was regarded by the world as one of the globe’s most advanced Islamic states.

Now that reputation is in shreds, largely driven not by religion but by politics. Parti Islam se-Malaysia, or PAS, a  traditionally  conservative opposition Islamic party, has expressed concern about the canings, announced by Hishammuddin Hussein, the Home Minister. It may well be that PAS will end up more lenient on caning than UMNO, and thus draw in more moderate Malays alienated. Dzulkefly Ahmad, the Islamist party’s chief strategist, called the canings politically motivated and said Islamic justice calls for fairness without cruelty or corruption.

The caning itself makes one wonder if Malaysia can do anything right. Hishammuddin told reporters the caning was carried out while the women were fully clothed and seated, and the person wielding the whip was not allowed to raise his (or her) arm above the shoulder. The caning, he said, “did not injure them, [but] the three women said it caused pain within their souls.”

One would assume that the purpose of corporal punishment is to cause pain. And when it is done to males in Malaysia and other countries that were once part of the British empire, the damage from the rotan, a thick rattan whip, can be so traumatic that they pass out after one or two strokes. The wounds can take months to heal, at which time the authorities may subject the offender to the rest of his strokes. Offenders have been known to beg for more prison time to escape the rotan. Authorities use only a light rattan stick to hit women on their backs.

So what the caning of the women has done is to show that to much of the world the authorities look like barbarians, while to the rest of it they look like fools for sparing the rod and trying to have it both ways.

Certainly, the outcry across both Malaysia and the world should have been enough to give pause to the government.

“The case constitutes further discrimination against Muslim women in Malaysia,” said Hamidah Marican, executive director of Sisters in Islam, a moderate Muslim women’s group, in a statement. “And to do this surreptitiously implies that the government wanted to hide this degrading and unjust treatment from public scrutiny.” Sofia Lim Sui Ching, president of the All Women’s Action Society (AWAM), told local media the government must explain itself for allowing the punishment to be carried out in a government prison in secret without addressing issues raised in Kartika’s case, which is still hanging fire while the ex-model meets with the Regent of Pahang.

“The caning of these three women is just the tip of the iceberg,” said Donna Guest, Deputy Director of Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific program, in a prepared statement. “Since 2002 the Malaysian authorities have caned over 35,000 people, mostly non-Malaysians for immigration offenses.”

The rights organizations also object on the basis that Malaysia has a two-tier justice system. Muslims come under the jurisdiction of shariah courts for personal matters as a result of changes pushed through by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in the 1990s to create a parallel court system. The other 40 percent of Malaysia’s 28 million people, mostly ethnic Chinese and Indians, come under the regular civil courts. Under the country’s civil justice system, flogging of wmen is forbidden. Thus, the rights groups say, Muslim women are being discriminated against.

Nonetheless, Shahrizat said she plans to invite ministers from other Muslim-majority countries, academics and religious experts to exchange “ideas and experiences with regards to the implementation of shariah law.”

This is not particularly a product of Islam. Judicial corporal punishment in Asia is practiced only in countries formerly ruled by the British. The late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto put an end to the practice in Pakistan.

Despite the concerns over the Anwar trial, which has drawn criticism from lawmakers in Australia and the US as trumped up to snuff out a legitimate opposition, tourism visits are up – or were, hitting about 1.5 million from January 2009, a rise of 7.2 percent year-on-year in October. Expectations of a double-digit increase in 2010 tourism may be dampened by the publicity.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 26 February 2010, 5:00 am and is filed under
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Speak Out for Anwar Ibrahim’s Sake

By
Paul Martin
, former prime minister of Canada.

The Globe and Mail

Anwar Ibrahim is a former deputy prime minister of Malaysia. After having differences of opinion with prime minister Mahathir Mohamad in 1998, he was removed from office, charged with sodomy and corruption – charges condemned worldwide as an attempt to remove him from politics – and imprisoned for six years. After his release in 2004, he became the leader of a coalition of opposition parties that is successfully challenging the ruling coalition’s power. Mr. Anwar has now been charged again with sodomy, a charge that has again been condemned worldwide.

I have known Mr. Anwar well since the period when we each served as finance ministers for our respective countries. He is deeply committed to democracy, justice and the rule of law. And I have watched with horror how he has been treated in Malaysia because of that commitment. His initial imprisonment was seen worldwide as politically motivated. Amnesty International regarded him as a prisoner of conscience, jailed for the non-violent expression of his political opinion. After his release in 2004, he redoubled his campaign, attracting thousands to his public rallies, with the result that the historic 2008 election returned an unprecedented number of opposition candidates to Parliament. He now poses a threat to the government in the next national elections, expected in 2013 – the real reason for the latest charge.

His trial, which began Feb. 2, is widely seen as not meeting international standards for a fair trial. The former Anwar political aide who is making the sodomy accusation was reportedly seen with leading ruling coalition figures prior to the filing of the charge; Mr. Anwar’s lawyers have been denied access to vital prosecution documents; and the trial has been transferred to a higher court whose judges are seen as linked to the ruling coalition’s main party. It is small wonder that Michael Danby, chair of Australia’s parliamentary subcommittee on foreign affairs, has charged that Malaysia’s legal system is being manipulated to drive Mr. Anwar out of politics. Mr. Danby has said that Asian democrats were “flabbergasted” by the charges and that “everyone in Malaysia, and everyone in the international legal community, knows that Anwar is innocent of these charges.”

The presence of so many foreign embassies attending Mr. Anwar’s show trial is a clear expression of international concern. This is an issue on which the world must speak out.

If his country is to take its place among the progressive nations of the world, it is crucial that the politically motivated charge against Mr. Anwar be dropped and that he be free to pursue his vision of a democratic Malaysia, properly respectful of human rights and international law.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 26 February 2010, 10:29 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Foreign
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


LKS visits Kota Belud

In KotaKinabalu w MPs 4Serdang Segambut KK also SriTanjong SA attended UPKO CNY do met BernardDompok DonaldMojuntin YongTeckLee EdwardKhoo

Friday, 26 February, 2010 18:35

Dinner w Kadazan leaders Windbell Restaurant TgAru incl EdwardMuji JeffreyKumin DrEdwardBosi Steven FrancisAriffin MickyJangki JeffreyEkol

Friday, 26 February, 2010 19:07

Glad 2meet Sabah bloggers at Cititel Hotel Kota Kinabalu Sat tmr 830 am Maybe we can set agenda 2save Sabah n Malaysia

Friday, 26 February, 2010 22:46

Met Sabah political bloggers this morning coined a new word – deavatarise How n why imp 4bloggers 2also get into real world of knockabouts

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 12:03

Met
RonnieKlassen
 impressive fella breathing commitment n hunger 4change believes should go beyond Sabah 4Sabahans Bravo Sabah Save Malaysia

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 12:09

Attended KKJournalist Assn CNY open house met cameraman who took pic my being carried up plane KK airport 1979 when HarrisSalleh banned me

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 12:31

Unfortunately veteran AsiaTimes reporter Lai Zin Kang does not have pic copy appreciate if pic cld b emailed 2me

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 12:48

Arrived KotaBelud most heartwarming welcome by Bajau Dusun Iranun Chinese people my 1st visit met Jalunin Saidil (cont) http://tl.gd/c59du

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 13:09

KotaBelud is kg of Parliament Speaker Pandikar Amin n 2exSabah CM of Said Keruak fmly symbolise 1Malaysia in Chinese shop with Bajau stall

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 13:14

@alabusulun liking? Salted fish unique in KotaBelud comes ikan sampantiau very tender taste but very salty told not advisable 4hb ppl tkz

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 13:38

http://twitpic.com/15kujz – Tweeting from Kota Belud

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 13:41

@mukharrom KotaBelud connection ok on way from Kk breaks n starts

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 14:02

Travelled worst n most disgraceful 8km road 4beautiful SMK Tambulion Kota Belud like mirage in desert since school opened June 2006

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 15:49

Some 800 students 54 teachers suffered daily arriving like orang putih covered in dust Muhyiddin shd visit school urgently shame 2MP KBelud

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 15:56

MPs utterly shocked at atrocious road have 2dy ministers visited  school n road? We will shame BN govt in parliament Pandikar shld back us

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 16:08

But this not only outrage KotaBelud visited Camp Paradise military complex 2house 1800 personnel impressive highrise qtrs but totally empty

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 16:22

CampParadise is now Ghostland Paradise 35 personnel in complex for 1800 what gross waste public funds Don’t build any more new army complex

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 16:38

Visited Jelapang Padi KB last month 5300 acres of padi land 500 houses flooded under six ft water caused by bad irrigation drainage

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 16:58

Umno MP not going 2find it easy 2defend KotaBelud at such atrocious service record n constituency problems KB ppl complain MP mostly in KL

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 17:04

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 27 February 2010, 4:58 pm and is filed under
Sabah
,
Twitter
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


UMNO/BN betrayed its pledge of power-sharing by rotation of Sabah Chief Minister’s post

It is coming to a year since Datuk Seri Najib Razak became the sixth Prime Minister of Malaysia bombarding Malaysians with his multi-million ringgit “1Malaysia” slogan and campaign.

It is sad and ironical that despite such high-intensity 1Malaysia publicity campaign in the past 11 months, Malaysians have never been more polarized both on race and religion, reminding Malaysians that they are even further from the goal of a united Malaysian nation, as illustrated by issues such as the Allah controversy, the burning of churches and attack of mosques and other places of religious worship, the cow-head and pig-head incidents; irresponsible politicking of race and religion as the mischievous attempt by Umno leaders and Umno-controlled media to paint the Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and Penang Pakatan Rakyat state government as anti-Malay and anti-Islam; the racist brain-washing courses conducted by Biro Tata Negara of the Prime Minister’s Department, resulting in “ultra” statements like dismissing the Chinese and Indians as “pendatang” and defaming the Indians as coming to Malaysia as beggars and Chinese women coming as prostitutes; the rise of what UMNO elder statesman Tengku Razaleigh has described as “rabid racism” like the surfacing of organizations like Perkasa, etc.

Everywhere and everyday in Malaysia, there are more evidence of the absence of 1Malaysia rather than its presence.

In Kota Kinabalu today, I saw new evidence of the absence rather than the presence of 1Malaysia – with two conflicting and competing sets of billboards, banners and advertisements of Chinese New Year greetings by MCA in Sabah.

There is one set of Chinese New Year greetings by the “stand-alone” Sabah MCA Chairman Edward Khoo, Assistant Minister to the Chief Minister competing with another set of Chinese New Year greetings featuring the lame-duck MCA President Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat accompanied by his Sabah MCA claque of supporters.

When under his leadership, the Barisan Nasional and its component parties cannot present a united front, like having 1MCA, 1Umno, 1Gerakan, 1Barisan Nasional, what credence and credibility can there be for Najib’s 1Malaysia?

Is there 1Sabah?

2013 in three years’ time mark Sabah’s 50th anniversary in the formation of Malaysia. It is appropriate in preparing for the occasion to seriously assess whether the dreams of Sabahans in 1963 to form Malaysia together with Sarawak and Peninsular Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed.

Have the people of Sabah been granted their full citizenship rights as Malaysians in the past five decades?

Let the debate and soul-searching begin as to how one of the richest states in Sabah had been reduced in five decades to become the poorest state in the federation.

In the nineties, the Barisan Nasional promised Sabahans that poverty in Sabah would be eradicated in the year 2,000.  However, instead of abolishing poverty in 2000, Sabah’s poverty rate became the worst in the whole of the country.

Barisan Nasional next promised that hard-core poverty in Sabah would be abolished in 2010. This is another candidate heading for the mountainous dump heap of Barisan Nasional broken promises, in Sabah and in Malaysia!

Sabahans and Malaysians remember that to topple the PBS Sabah government, Umno and Barisan Nasional pledged that if they come to power in Sabah, they would be genuine power-sharing through the rotation of the post of Sabah Chief Minister among the three major communities in the state.

What is the Umno/Barisan Nasional record of their rule of Sabah in the past 16 years since 1994?

UMNO/BN had betrayed their pledge of power-sharing by rotation of Sabah Chief Minister’s post as in the past 16 years, the Chief Minister’s post was held by a Kadazan native for 9 months, Chinese for 4 years and Umno for more than 11 years!

Nothing could be more eloquent than this episode to highlight the enormity of the breach of faith and betrayal of pledge of Umno/Barisan Nasional to the people of Sabah in the past 16 years of their rule of Sabah.

This is a far cry from the great promises shared by Sabahans in the early decades of nationhood.

Earlier today, together with DAP MPs Hiew King Cheu (Kota Kinabalu), Teo Nie Ching (Serdang), Lim Lip Eng (Segambut) and DAP Kadazan leaders Edward Muji and Jeffrey Kumin, I revisited the “Double Six” Mausoleum to pay respects to the great Sabah sons who perished in the Triple Six tragedy of  June  6, 1976 – Chief Minister Tun Fuad Stephens and State Ministers, Datuk Salleh Sulong, Datuk Peter Mojuntin and  Chong Thien Vun.

Almost exactly 32 years ago on February 25, 1978, I had first visited the “Double Six” Mausoleum as well as the grave of Peter Mojuntin at St. Michael’s Church, Penampang.

Sabah history would be very different today if not for the tragic air crash of June 6, 1976 wiping out the core of the Sabah cabinet.

It is time that Kadazans and Sabahans reflect what went wrong that the rights of Kadazans and ordinary Sabahans had become so emasculated and marginalized while the vast rich resources had been monopolized by a few.

In this connection, the time has also come for the Federal Government to lift the ban on the biography of Peter Mojuntin, “The Golden Son of the Kadazans”, written by my old friend and DAP comrade, Bernard Sta Maria, who was Malacca State Assemblyman.

The book was banned on June 22 1978 on grounds of public security and order. This is utterly unacceptable. Those who disagree with the interpretation of events in the life of Peter Mojuntin can write a rebuttal or come out with their own publications – but there can be no justification or excuse for the ban of the book “The Golden Son of the Kadazans”.

[
Speech at the dinner with Kadazan representatives at Windbelll Restaurant, Kota Kinabalu on Friday, 26th February 2010 at 9 pm]

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 27 February 2010, 9:07 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Sabah people must fully embrace new Internet technology in the “Save Sabah, Save Malaysia” battle

Sabah people must fully embrace new Internet technology of blogs, facebook and twitter in the “Save Sabah, Save Malaysia” battle to restore justice, freedom and prosperity for all Malaysians regardless of race, religion or region

This is my first visit to Tuaran and it is historic in more senses than one.

Firstly, the coming together of Bajaus, Dusuns and Chinese in Tuaran tonight  illustrates the living 1Malaysia in Sabah and not just at the sloganeering level  of 1Malaysia since Datuk Seri Najib Razak became the sixth Prime Minister in April last year.

When I visited Kota Belud earlier today, I was told that Sabah – like the Bajau, Dusun, Iranun and Chinese in Kota Belud – had been practising 1Malaysia for decades, with the various ethnic groups  in Sabah long having a very easy, friendly and cosy relationships with each other, and their response to Najib’s 1Malaysia is whether the Prime Minister had been sleeping all these decades.

Secondly, this DAP Chinese New Year Open House going on now in Tuaran is being followed not in other parts of Sabah and Malaysia but throughout the world.

This has been made possible by the new Internet technology of blogs, facebook and twitter enabling people not only in Sabah and Malaysia but worldwide to share events, ideas and aspirations on-time and instantaneously, regardless of time and geography.

For instance, when the other leaders like the three DAP MPs, Hiew King Cheu (Kota Kinabalu), Teo Nie Ching (Serdang) and Lim Lip Eng (Segambut), the DAP’s sole State Assemblyman Jimmy Wong Sze Phing (Sri Tanjong) and Sabah DAP officials like Edward Muji (Vice Chairman) and Jeffrey Kumin (Organising Secretary) were speaking, I had sent out four tweets about Tuaran which is accessible worldwide instantaneously.

My four tweets on Tuaran a short while ago are:

In Tuaran attend DAP CNY OH Sabah tale of horrors continue Tuaran has most unique hospital not just Msia but world – without a single bed!

150k ppl Tuaran have 2go2KK 4hospitalisation Big shame! 4nearly 30 yrs string of promises 2build ward w beds never met #Save
  Sabah/Malaysia!

2nd Tuaran horror Dy educ minister Fuad promised last yr work on new secondary school in Pekan Nabalu near Tuaran wld start b4 Xmas Not kept

Horror3 – 1994 Umno/BN promised 2build bridge over Sg Damit Tuaran Promises repeated in 4 gen elections Never kept #Save
  Sabah/Malaysia!

I had said in my first tweet on Tuaran about “Sabah tale of horrors” because I had during my visit to Kota Belud earlier today sent out seven tweets about the deplorable infrastructure and socio-economic problem in the area, viz:

Travelled worst n most disgraceful 8km road 4beautiful SMK Tambulion Kota Belud like mirage in desert since school opened June 2006

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 15:49

Some 800 students 54 teachers suffered daily arriving like orang putih covered in dust Muhyiddin shd visit school urgently shame 2MP KBelud

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 15:56

MPs utterly shocked at atrocious road have 2dy ministers visited school n road? We will shame BN govt in parliament Pandikar shld back us

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 16:08

But this not only outrage KotaBelud visited Camp Paradise military complex 2house 1800 personnel impressive highrise qtrs but totally empty

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 16:22

CampParadise is now Ghostland Paradise 35 personnel in complex for 1800 what gross waste public funds Don’t build any more new army complex

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 16:38

Visited Jelapang Padi KB last month 5300 acres of padi land 500 houses flooded under six ft water caused by bad irrigation drainage

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 16:58

Umno MP not going 2find it easy 2defend KotaBelud at such atrocious service record n constituency problems KB ppl complain MP mostly in KL

Saturday, 27 February, 2010 17:04

The people of Sabah must fully embrace new Internet technology of blogs, facebook and twitter in the “Save Sabah, Save Malaysia” battle to restore justice, freedom and prosperity for all Malaysians regardless of race, religion  or region.

As I had tweeted on Feb. 23, there has been an exponential growth of twitter with 50 million tweets created per day in the world from 5,000 tweets per day in 2007, 300,000 tweets per day in 2008, 2.5 million tweets per day in early 2009 and 35 million tweets per day at the end of 2009.

Our visits to Kota Belud and Tuaran has confirmed the shocking neglect, discrimination and marginalization of the ordinary Sabahans regardless of race, religion or region by a handful of political opportunists who have waxed rich from the wealth of the state of Sabah while the people of Sabah had been reduced to the poorest in Malaysia.

The campaign “Save Sabah, Save Malaysia” must be launched without any delay so that the ordinary people of Sabah and Malaysia can fully enjoy the fruits of development and the wealth of the state and country.

[
Speech at the DAP Tuaran Chinese New Year Open House in Tuaran, Sabah on Saturday, February 27, 2010 at 9 pm
]

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 28 February 2010, 11:40 am and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Mark 50th anniversary of Malaysia with commission of inquiry on how the dreams and aspirations of Sabahans in forming Malaysia had been betrayed in past five decades

The Joint Chinese New Year Open House by Sabah Pakatan Rakyat in Kota Kinabalu today is most significant and historic, sending out a clear and unmistakable message that Pakatan Rakyat in Sabah will not repeat the mistakes of the 2008 general elections and we will ensure that the next general elections will see a one-to-one fight between the Pakatan Rakyat and the Barisan Nasional in Sabah.

With the SAPP President, Datuk Yong Teck Lee as our guest here, let me say that we will like to see the one-to-one fight with the Barisan Nasional in Sabah in the next general elections the most unique and  important feature in the next Sabah general elections, embracing SAPP also.

The high-spirited overflowing capacity crowd at today’s Joint Pakatan Rakyat Chinese New Year Open House is more than a Chinese New Year reception. It is a potent sign of the changing and challenging times in Sabah and Malaysia – as it is as rousing and inspiring as any climax election rally.

Let us today from Kota Kinabalu raise a political whirlwind to bring about change in Sabah and Malaysia in the next general elections to elect  a Pakatan Rakyat Chief Minister in Sabah and a Pakatan Rakyat Prime Minister in Putrajaya.

My visit to Kota Belud and Tuaran yesterday has left me with one abiding impression – how the dreams of Sabahans in forming Malaysia had been betrayed in the past five decades.

In Kota Belud, 800 students and 54 teachers of SMK Tambulion have been suffering daily from the worst and most disgraceful 8km road which covered them in dust, turning them into orang putih, an ordeal which will last another year or two, while Tuaran competes for a place in the Book of Records with a hospital for three decades without a bed!

Bapa Malaysia and Malaysia’s first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman made the historic proposal for the formation of Malaysia comprising Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore at a speech to the Singapore Foreign Correspondents’ Club on 27th May 1961.

Sabah, together with Sarawak, will be commemorating their 50 years of Malaysian nationhood in another three years in 2013.

The people of Sabah were promised progress and development, at least to the level achieved by the Peninsular states.

Have these promises to Sabah been fulfilled in the past five decades? The answers must be a loud No.

From being a very rich state especially in terms of natural resources, the people of Sabah are now among the poorest in Malaysia with the worst poverty rate!

Where have all the wealth of Sabah gone to in the past five decades?

After nearly five decades, Sabah even lack the most basic infrastructures to be found in the rest of Malaysia like regular electricity supply, uninterrupted piped water and good roads and bridges.

This year, the people of Tawau celebrated Chinese New Year’s Eve in darkness because of power blackout – not a rare occurrence but a regular ordeal to the people of Tawau, Sandakan, Lahat Datuk and most parts of Sabah. The provision of piped water is in constant state of crisis. The state of the roads and bridges in Sabah are a scandal.

The people of Sabah are entitled to ask why with Sabah’s immense wealth, they cannot enjoy the basic infrastructures that are taken for granted in other states – why, for instance, Sabahans must suffer constant power black-outs which are unheard of in Kuala Lumpur, Penang, Alor Star, Ipoh, Seremban, Malacca, Johore Bahru, Kuantan, Kota Bahru, Kuala Terengganu – even in Kuching, Sibu, Miri?

After Tunku Abdul Rahman’s historic proposal for the formation of Malaysia in May 1961, various consultations were conducted after various objections internally as well as from foreign powers, even involving the United Nations.

There was a Cobbold Commission which conducted  a survey of the people in Sabah and Sarawak to ascertain the views on the formation of Malaysia.

I think there is no more meaningful manner for Sabah and Sarawak to mark their 50 years of Malaysian nationhood than to conduct a comprehensive review  of the successes and failures in all aspects of development in these two states in the past five decades with feedback from the people Sabah and Sarawak.

For Sabah, if there cannot be a Royal Commission of Inquiry, then I suggest that Pakatan Rakyat conduct a commission of inquiry in all the 25 parliamentary and 60 state assembly seats in Sabah to allow Sabahans, regardless of race, religion or region to speak their minds on how the dreams and aspirations of Sabahans in Malaysia had been betrayed in the past five decades.

[
Speech at Sabah Pakatan Rakyat Joint Chinese New Year Open House at Kin Kwok Chinese Secondary School Hall, Kota Kinabalu on Sunday, 28th February 2010.
]

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 March 2010, 1:27 pm and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Of the opposition, obstacles, opportunity and oblivion!

By
Martin Jalleh

The public has increasingly perceived the fledging PR to be a “fragile”, “feuding”, “fraying” and “faltering” coalition – one that was “not on a firm footing”.

Last year saw the end of the euphoria that enveloped the whole country after the political tsunami of March 2008. It was a year during which the Opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat (PR), was brought down to earth and forced to face the enormity of the challenge to deliver what it had promised during the elections.

It was also a year when the public increasingly perceived the fledging PR to be a “fragile”, “feuding”, “fraying” and “faltering” coalition — one that was “not on a firm footing”.  In light of this scenario, the PR was hard pressed to convince the public that they could form the next federal government.

One would have thought that the PR, after having lost Perak to the BN in February 2009, would come to its senses about the need to be united.

But it continued with its petty and puerile public inter and intra-party squabbles, spats and skirmishes, much to the surprise and scorn of the public and the satisfaction of Umno!

Meanwhile, the great hope which the apolitical Hindraf gave to the Indians and in fact to Bolehland came to a halt.

Its high-browed leaders haggled over its future, hurled accusations at one another and accused PR of hypocrisy. By year’s end, Hindraf appeared headless, helpless, hopeless and headed for oblivion!

Coming back to the PR, in contrast to those disappointed, disillusioned and even disgusted over what they felt was the coalition’s failure to deliver and to stop its disunity, there were the PR die-hards who felt that it was too early to dismiss PR altogether or to write its death sentence.

It deserved more time and trust to prove itself.

The opposition coalition was only less than two years old as compared to the BN of more than 50 years.

The PR was made up of many first-timers with divergent ideologies and inclinations and like any coalition, has varying kinds of leaders/members such as the enlightened, the erratic, the eccentric and the egocentric!

Further, the PR in fact had ruled well in their states. The Auditor-General (AG) gave the highest rating to Selangor and Penang in terms of good governance since March 2008, which compared very favourably against BN-ruled states.

The AG also gave a commendable rating to the PR’s performance during its 11-month rule in Perak.

In 2009, PR also contributed significantly to Parliament in the form of better participation and stronger arguments during Question Time and debates.

In July, the PR formed parliamentary committees in tandem with 25 government ministries to help its MPs deliberate important bills and issues including the Budget.

Even in terms of by-elections, the PR fared well.

There was a time when it was a foregone conclusion that the BN would be the winner in any by-election. But in 2009 (a year of by-elections), the PR and the  BN faced off seven times, with the opposition pact winning five times to BN’s two.

The PR successes in 2009, however, were overshadowed by its many shortcomings. In August 2009, Anwar conceded that his party PKR was the “weakest link” in PR and that “there is a flaw in our vetting system. We rushed to choose candidates to contest in the last general elections but I promise that this will be improved.”

In October 2009, the PR was humbled in the Bagan Pinang by-election. There were a host of lessons to be learned. Anwar did not hesitate to admit that the defeat was due to the “weaknesses and shortcomings” in PR. Some PR supporters even heaved a sigh of relief that the PR had lost! It was a heaven-sent harsh wake-up call.

In the same month, an exasperated Lim Kit Siang warned: “Pakatan Rakyat had been suffering a prolonged and unceasing bout of loss of public confidence… to convince the Malaysian electorate in its credibility, cohesion, integrity and common sense of purpose.” PR may be only a “one-term miracle”, he prodded them.

Lethargy set in as the year went by. If not for the political lassitude of 20 missing PR MPs in Parliament, the BN’s Budget Bill (in mid-December 2009) could have been voted out and the PR could have won a vote of no-confidence against the BN government.

PR appeared to be resting on its laurels. How long would it last?

In 2009, Karpal Singh slammed Anwar for “creating enough trouble” and asked him to quit. Raja Petra said Anwar was in a “self-destruct mode”.

Umno shamelessly labelled the PR chief a “chameleon” (which Umno politician is not?) and a High Court ordered him to stand trial for sodomy charges! But Anwar soldiered on.

Umno spent the year systematically sabotaging the PR-ruled states by abusing varous institutions of democracy.

The PR was portrayed as weak, wavering and wobbling and Umno as having bounced back stronger to stamp its “supremacy”. Najib was back in the saddle (taking the country for a ride) with his slogans!

The PR’s successes were downplayed. Umno’s scandals were diverted. Federal funds were denied or delayed or distributed discriminately.

PR leaders were demonised and Umno portrayed as the champion of Islam and the Malay race, and the defender of the royalty. Umno was bent on destabilising and destroying PR!

The PR was undaunted by the task ahead. In December 2009, Pas MP Dzulkefly Ahmad introduced the PR’s Common Policy Framework as a “Dawn of a New Awakening” — a daring framework of common goals and grounds derived out of debate and dissent among the three parties, determined to deliver the “revolution of a political culture”.

The road to Putrajaya requires stomach, stamina, solidarity and the sacrifice of personal agendas and parochial party issues for the the larger national agenda. Sloganeering will not do.

The 1,500 delegates at PR’s first national convention were reminded of the dictum “Perform or Perish”.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 March 2010, 3:39 pm and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Towards A Developed Malaysia – Part 4

By
Bakri Musa

[Presented at the Third Annual Alif Ba Ta Forum, “1Malaysia Towards Vision 2020,” Rochester Institute of Technology, NY, December 5, 2009, organized by Kelab UMNO NY-NJ.  The presentation can be viewed at www.youtube.com (search under “Bakri Musa RIT”) or through
this link
]

Part Four of Six:  A Bigger Fish Story

Returning to my original tale, I now have a bigger fish story to tell; the story that is, not the fish.  Consider two villages.  The leader of one was suddenly struck by the fishing bug; now he also wanted his people to be great fishermen and win coveted derby prizes.  He wanted to put his village on the map for its fishing prowess.  So he embarked on a crash program teaching his people how to fish, importing great fishermen as teachers, and subsidizing the fishing tools.  He also made fishing compulsory in schools and forced every villager to learn how to fish.

           He was successful; the village’s catch increased substantially, and his villagers were winning many fishing tournaments.  His leadership was widely lauded, making the other villages envious.  They yearned that if only they could have such an efficient, far-sighted, single-minded, and yes, even ruthless leader, then they too would be good fishermen and their village would be equally famous.

            The leader of the second village on the other hand was not at all interested in winning praises for his leadership; of course he appreciated them but he did not specifically seek them out or made that his priority.  He was for developing his people, whatever their talent.  If some were caught by the fishing bug, he would support them.  He would not however, force everyone to take fishing classes.  If others were scared of the water or could not stand the fishy smell but were interested in woodworking or something else, he would also support them and let them be.  He reasoned that if they were to become good craftsmen, they could always trade their carvings for fish.

            So he encouraged his followers to purse their individual dreams.  He did not profess to know what those dreams were or where they would lead, but he trusted his people and encouraged them.  And yes indeed, a few of his people who were not interested in fishing pursued their dreams to be scientists.  He helped them by building laboratories and importing science teachers.

            As luck would have it, one of those villagers who became a scientist discovered an efficient method of fish farming.  Now instead of going out in the ocean and risking his life in the storm, all he had to do was scoop up the fish from his pond.  He was so successful that not only could he feed his entire village, he had some for export.  Sure he did not win any fishing derbies, and those fishermen would mock him for his “fishing” skills.  However, where it counts – putting fish on the table – our scientist readily beat those star fishermen.

            If you were a villager, which leader would you prefer?  The first who would force you to accept his dream, or the second who let your pursue your own?

            We will reach a developed state not by chanting and coining cute slogans but through developing our people and equipping them with modern skills, and then granting them the freedom to pursue their dreams.  If fishing or rice farming is their passion, let it be, only make sure that they do not do it in the same inefficient ways of their ancestors.  Instead help them become as efficient as the Japanese fishermen or American rice farmers.  Japanese fishermen have refrigerated ships equipped with canning facilities, while American rice farmers sow their rice seeds from low-flying planes.

            We could readily achieve this if in developing our people we would allocate the bulk of the resources towards enhancing the skills of the large middle group while simultaneously emphasizing the top 90th percentile by giving them twice the allocation on a per capita basis.

            Once our people are developed, our nation would follow.  Once we achieve that, then we could coin whatever fancy slogans we want.

Q & A Sessions:

Q1:
      What do you think of 1Malaysia, and what is your vision of a united Malaysia?  I visualize it as a mighty river with many contributing streams, like the Nile.  Can you comment on that?

MBM:
  I have never heard it put quite that way, but that is an interesting, and if I may add, original metaphor.  I like it!  The mighty Nile has its Blue and White Niles.  I suppose Malaysia has its brown, black, yellow and a few other colors contributing to our Nile.

            That metaphor presupposes that we would all mix it up and become undifferentiated, for at the Nile delta you could not separate the waters from the Blue Nile from that of the Red.  Unfortunately, or fortunately I would argue, we humans are always proud of our culture, heritage, and even color.  The more developed we are, the more conscious we are of our roots.  Being conscious and proud of our heritage is very different from being obsessed or being defined by it.  The former is positive and constructive; the latter, negative and destructive.  Barack Obama personifies the former; Adolf Hitler, the second.

            We all have this need to belong; we do not want to be part of a large homogenous mass.  Incidentally, that is also part of Allah’s grand design; He could have made us all clones of each other.  Life would not be much fun then, nor would it be beautiful.

            Let me suggest a culinary metaphor instead.  America prides itself with its melting pot model.  There is however, no mistaking what is in the pot; it is essentially an English stew – an Anglo Saxon culture and ethos.  Today that stew is enriched with the addition of Italian pasta, jalapeno peppers, and French wine, but in flavor, texture, color, and yes, even smell, it is still basically the old English stew.  Even a hint of challenging that would throw things in a tizzy.  Witness the frenzy of hysteria gripping the White extreme right to Obama’s presidency.

            I once suggested the salad as the more appropriate metaphor for Malaysia.  Yes, there are onions, black olives and other ingredients, but there is no mistaking that it is not a salad without the greens.  Salads are not a regular Malaysian fare, so my metaphor fell flat.  More appropriate would be the more familiar and universal favorite, rojak.  The main if not defining vegetable there is taugeh (bean sprout).  It alone however, does not make rojak; we need cucumbers, tofus, onions, black olives, and all the other ingredients.  Without them it would not be rojak.  They enhance the overall flavor.  Nonetheless when you pick up a handful of rojak, you could still separate out the various ingredients, but once in your mouth, you taste only the complete rojak, not the individual vegetables.

            That is my vision of a united Malaysia, the rojak.  The Malays, Chinese, Ibans and others should be proud of their heritage; it is not Malaysia without them.  As to what I think of 1Malaysia, I do not know as no one, least of all Prime Minister Najib, has clearly articulated what it means.  Besides, I am more interested in the content, not the label.  I am also not much for slogans; you should all read Shahnon Ahmad’s short story, Unggappan (slogans) about the leader consumed and intoxicated with his endless sloganeering.

Q2:
      Can we achieve Vision 2020?  It is only a decade away.

MBM:
  Absolutely, nothing is impossible!  However, I think your question is really this:  Can we do it with the current leadership?  I have not seen any evidence of bold leadership to answer in the affirmative.  On major issues like the controversies on the teaching of science and mathematics and on Biro Tata Negara, Najib has remained curiously silent.

            If Malaysia were to register near double-digit growth in the next ten years, that would put us in the developed category by 2020, at least by economic indices.  That is not impossible, as China had demonstrated.  However as mentioned earlier, high per capita income alone does not equal developed status.  Brunei would quickly disabuse one of that delusion.

            As for the other criteria – like respect for the rule of law and an honest police force, or at least the perception thereof – those too could be readily achievable.  If Najib were to recruit from Scotland Yard or the FBI for his next police chief and head of the anti corruption agency, the impact would be immediate and dramatic.

            Similarly, in making the next senior judicial appointment, if he would canvass practicing lawyers, legal scholars, heads of leading NGOs, and then heed their recommendations, that too could have a significant impact.

            I pose this back to you:  Is Prime Minister Najib capable of making those bold moves?  Your response is the answer to the question on whether we could achieve Vision 2020.

Q 3:
     We all had high hopes for change following the political tsunami of the March 2008 elections.  With the ongoing mess in Perak, Penang, and Selangor however, we are disheartened.  It seems that these politicians, regardless of party affiliations, are the same animal.  What hope is there for the nation?

MBM:
  If by change you mean things that you could see, yes, I share your pessimism.  It seems that the same cast of lousy actors is back on stage except that this time they are wearing different costumes.  They are not even good actors because they still display their old characters.

            Let me suggest that you view the situation differently.  The Barisan coalition, specifically UMNO, lost four states.  Those are no ordinary states.  Selangor, Perak, and Penang are the most developed, their economies constitute (I guess) nearly half of the nation’s.  If Federal Territory with the capital Putrajaya had its own Assembly, Barisan would be thrashed there too.  That is significant, symbolically.  Likewise Kedah; it is rural, conservative, and very Malay.  For UMNO to lose that state means that the party could not automatically count on Malay support.  This is a seismic shift.

            To me the most significant but not readily apparent change is with the voters.  For the first time they realized that they could actually change their government simply by putting a mark on the ballot paper.  There is no need to risk your limb and life by partaking in armed insurrections or demonstrating on the streets.  Once citizens get that sense of empowerment, you cannot take it back.  That is why in subsequent by-elections even though they would not shift the political calculus, voter turnout had seen record highs.

            Other changes follow from that.  Now leaders too, recognize that they could be thrown out of office.  That definitely has a salutary effect.  In the election of 1999, Najib Razak was nearly kicked out in Pekan.  As a result he became a better politician because of that near-death political experience.

            Do not give up; the March 2008 election was a political tsunami.  Unlike the Asian tsunami which radically changed the physical landscape, the political tsunami of 2008 radically changed the mindset of our people.  Those who ignore that would definitely be made to relearn its painful lesson come the next election.

Next:   Part Five of Six:         Q&A (Cont’d)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 March 2010, 8:30 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anwar Ibrahim will continue as Parliamentary Opposition Leader even if PKR MPs number less than DAP’s 28 MPs

A Malaysian Insider journalist has just drawn my attention to
a tweet by Parliamentary Opposition Leader
 Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yesterday that he has no problem in my taking over from him.

I was also asked whether the DAP would rally behind Anwar.

My response was that the question of DAP rallying behind Anwar does not arise, as we are solidly in support of his leadership in Pakatan Rakyat, as Parliamentary Opposition Leader and as Prime Minister-designate in the Pakatan Rakyat plan to wrest power from Umno and Barisan Nasional in the next general elections.

As far as the DAP is concerned, Anwar continues as Parliamentary Opposition Leader even if PKR Members of Parliament number less than DAP’s 28 MPs.

All keen followers of the Malaysian political scene see what is happening in PKR as a long-needed self-cleansing process which, however painful and agonizing, is necessary to restore public confidence in the credibility and viability of PKR and Pakatan Rakyat.

As I have just commented in
my tweet
:

“Great diff between PR n BN – PR rubbish are BN gems”.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 March 2010, 12:08 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
DAP
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Death of legendary DAP grassroots stalwart

Tweets
@limkitsiang

Sad news DAP Bentong founder n Pahang DAP stalwart Cheong Koon Kam 64  died in Bentong home 2day Contested DUN Semantan 1974 elections RIP

Mar 2, 2010 06:35PM

@n_izzah

@dredwinbosi
 tq at wake4CheongKoonKam legendary DAP stalwart contested 5elections in Bentong since 1974’Never admit defeat’ spirit

Mar 2, 2010 10:27AM

Up 2last sec KoonKam died in cause 4Reform n New Malaysia singly registered over 900 new voters last 3mths his target 1k voters Great Msian

Mar 2, 2010 10:33AM

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 March 2010, 11:22 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Twitter
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Family wants ban on book lifted

Daily Express | Sunday, February 28, 2010

Kota Kinabalu: The family of the late Datuk Peter J. Mojuntin Saturday expressed appreciation to efforts by individuals and politicians through various channels to call for the lifting of the ban on the book “The Golden Son of the Kadazan”.

“My family appreciates every single one of those efforts,” said his eldest son, Donald Mojuntin, who is now a State Assistant Finance Minister and Moyog Assemblyman.

“However what we, as a family, will not condone is any effort to politicise the matter. Datuk Peter J. Mojuntin has done his part in our continuing efforts in the development of the people, State and the country,” he said.

He said as a member of Datuk Peter J. Mojuntin’s family, he wanted the ban lifted.

“Our family’s view on the matter is that ‘The Golden Son of the Kadazan’ was written to honour the man. A man of the people whom we love, respect and are very proud of.

“In his relatively short life, he inspired so many and achieved so much. For recognising that and writing the book, we appreciate Bernard Santa Maria.

In my family’s opinion there is nothing controversial about the book that will affect peace and order in the country,” he said.

Mojuntin said the book was a short biography that shows a glimpse of the man that his father was. He quoted the author’s words:

“He (Peter Mojuntin) was a man of high principles, deeply seated in his religious beliefs. No position was rewarding if justice, equality and freedom, were denied to his people, his state and his country”.

In this respect, Mojuntin said it was not necessary for the matter to be politicised.

“His life was sacrificed along with Tun Fuad Stephens, Datuk Salleh Sulong, Chong Thian Voon and Darius Binion. They have been laid to rest.

“Let them rest in peace. Let his life and the lives of Tun Fuad and the other leaders who were victims of the ‘Triple 6 Tragedy’ become a source of positive inspiration.

“Fuad, Peter and the others fought for the rights of the rakyat with selfless devotion. They served the rakyat because they loved them.

Let each of their stories be told but not for political reasons but for historical and inspirational reasons,” he said.

“The family fervently hopes that one day everyone would be given the chance to share, to a certain extent, the life of Datuk Peter J. Mojuntin, the kampung boy, the man and the leader through the biography,” he added.

DAP Secretary-General, Lim Kit Siang had, on Friday, called on the people of Sabah, especially the KDM community, to voice support for lifting the ban on the book.

Lim, who was here to attend several Chinese New Year open houses, questioned whether the banning of the book had something to do with the fact that the author was a DAP leader.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 March 2010, 5:10 pm and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.