Let 16th DAP National Congress this weekend be a historic curtain-raiser to the “Hundred Days to Putrajaya” campaign for Malaysians to create history and usher in a new, truly united, democratic,  just and prosperous Malaysia under a PR Malaysian government

All eyes are on the 16th DAP National Congress in Penang this weekend not only because it is the last national congress for political parties in Malaysia this year, but also because it heralds the last hundred days before the holding of the long-postponed/awaited 13th General Elections.

Let the 16th DAP National  Congress be a historic curtain-raiser to the “Hundred Days to Putrajaya” campaign for Malaysians to create history and usher in a new, truly united, democratic,  just and prosperous Malaysia under a Pakatan Rakyat Malaysian Government in the 13th General Elections.

Let the 16th DAP National Congress send out the clear and unequivocal message to all Malaysians throughout the country – that DAP leaders, delegates and members are  imbued with a profound sense of  vision, commitment, responsibility and discipline to accomplish the historic mission and objectives of the “Hundred Days to Putrajaya” campaign for Malaysians, whether Malays, Chinese, Indians, Orang Asli, Kadazans or Ibans; whether Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Taoists or Sikhs;  whether in Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah or Sarawak, to unite as one people to restore Malaysia’s greatness as a model of a harmonious plural society where there is tolerance,  freedom,  justice, human rights, democracy, sustainable development, prosperity, good governance and a clean and incorruptible government.

In the run-up to the 16th DAP National Congress and during the “Hundred Days to Putrajaya”, UMNO/Barisan Nasional propagandists and spin-masters will go into an overdrive  in their politics of lies, hate and fear not only to demonise the DAP and create maximum division and damage inside the party but also in DAP’s relations with our Pakatan Rakyat parties, PKR and PAS.

The reasons are obvious. Despite the façade of confidence after the 66th UMNO General Assembly with  the UMNO President, Datuk Seri Najib Razak declaring that UMNO/BN will regain its two-thirds parliamentary majority, it is still a “50-50” situation with the outcome of the 13GE a toss-up between the BN and PR – with the developments during the “Hundred Days to Putrajaya” and in particular the general election campaign having a large bearing on the final results.

In the final analysis, the outcome could be between a restored two-thirds parliamentary majority to UMNO/BN, giving BN a majority of at least 74 seats in the Dewan Rakyat, or PR winning up to 125 seats with a majority of 28 seats over UMNO/BN in Parliament.

In the latter scenario with PR winning Putrajaya with 125 parliamentary seats, a likely distribution of the PR seats would be PKR with 45 seats and DAP and PAS with 40 seats each.

It will be a coalition of equals with  no one political party exercising political hegemony as in the Barisan Nasional coalition.

In their politics of lies, hate and fear,  UMNO and MCA leaders and propagandists have  tried to sow hatred and fear by disseminating irresponsible and conflicting messages to the Malays and the Chinese if PR wins in Putrajaya, with the Malays warned they will be oppressed as DAP would dominate a PR government while Chinese are told that the Chinese would be oppressed as PAS would dominate a PR government.

It is a lie that DAP leaders are afraid of PAS leaders, just as it is a lie that PAS leaders are afraid of DAP leaders. It is also a lie that the Malays or the Chinese will be oppressed under the PR government, for the PR parties of PKR, PAS and DAP are committed to serve the best interests of all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

Our relationship in PR, together with PKR, is one of equals where  we respect each other’s views and differences.

This is diametrically different from the real relationship inside Barisan Nasional, where as a result of UMNO political hegemony, there is only a “one-way street” with MCA, Gerakan, MIC, Sabah and Sarawak BN component parties all afraid and subservient to the  UMNO political hegemon!

Whether history would be made in the 13GE with a change of government in Putrajaya will hinge on the ability of Pakatan Rakyat to convince the 13 million  Malaysian electorate, particularly the four million middle ground voters comprising the three million new voters and one million swing voters from the 12th general election, whether PR can be trusted to adhere to the PR Common Policy Framework, Buku Jingga and other PR common policy declarations as well as the fundamental agreement that any new policy or changes would require the consensus of all three PR parties.

Let the 16th DAP National Congress sound the final call to arms for the 13GE to fly high the Pakatan Rakyat common policy programme for a new, truly united, democratic,  just and prosperous Malaysia under a Pakatan Rakyat  Malaysian government.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 12 December 2012, 12:09 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
PKR
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The pathologies of Malay nationalism

by Ahmad Fuad Rahmat

New Mandala

03 December 2012

The nation

The problem begins with the nation-state ideal; for its coherence depends on there being a people deemed as the rightful owners of a land. It is rooted to the belief that territory is property – a thing to own – and that loyalty to the people means, among other things, the readiness to uphold the integrity of territory to ensure it belongs to the nation.

This requires clearly defined, finite, national borders, which – at least at the face of it – appears as a simple enough idea. Matters become complicated when we ask who those borders are meant for. There cannot be a nation-state, if there is no nation to begin with.

But identities unlike land cannot be enclosed and demarcated. Cultures do not flourish in vacuums. They develop out of interactions and fusions with one another. New words, outlooks and practices are adopted while others fade, in a slow, arbitrary and often ambiguous organic process of contact and migration through time.

The nationalist agenda is at odds with this reality. The belief in the congruence of identity and territory – or indeed identity as territory – at the face of inevitable cultural change that can neither be controlled nor predicted, means that each nation will always find itself in the position of having to redefine the conditions of membership, to determine what or who should or should not be excluded. Culture too is given boundaries as a result.

The nationalist imagination must, in other words, assume however implicitly that there is some supposed essence underlying the flux of culture and identity, out of which the ‘Otherising’ so common to nationalist politics is legitimised. The marker could be anything from a common language, religion, ethnicity, race or history. It could even be a set of values or general traits. None of this is exclusive, of course. At any given time, depending on the issue and occasion, different factors can be evoked to proclaim dissimilarity.

Islam

Islam as we’ve seen time and time again has featured prominently in attempts to imagine a core to Malay identity. It is in fact presented as a condition: the protection of Malays, we’re told repeatedly, depends on the preservation of Islam.

History has had much to do with this. The growth of Islam in 15th century Nusantara converged with the Malay apex of imperial grandeur, where for centuries Malay kingdoms dominated commerce, producing diplomatic relations and maritime armies that placed the Malaccan Straits on the map of world trade.

This began as a very much elite affair, for the earliest Muslim converts in the Peninsula were among the feudal and merchant classes. It was not only until Islam eventually reached the commoner that its defining presence in Malay notions of identity began. Gradually, Islam became appreciated as a force of enlightenment, as it inspired Malays to leave their supposedly superstitious animistic ways of life towards a higher stage of civilization. The necessity of learning the Quran for basic rituals meant that Islam was also the context with which Malays experienced their earliest exposure to systemic, although largely informal, learning. In fact, Islam as education remained the case for common Malays for centuries.

But while education and memories of empire shaped Malay attachments to Islam, its legalistic thrust ensures that it would remain a useful tool. One would be right, for example, to dismiss the recurring Hudud polemics as mere political ostentations between two parties seeking to out-Islamise one another, but in doing so we must not forget how much Islam, with its endless list of dos and don’ts, makes for a convenient resource of conformity and control.

Islamisation

That would not be so troubling, if not for how the pressures for more and more Islam are actually coming from the ground up. Today, Islamic validations are increasingly sought for things as mundane as medicine, fashion and entertainment, as can be seen in the rising trend of halal living. Academic discussions on Islamic science have produced volumes of theoretical literature, albeit with little effects on actual scientific practice or meaningful discoveries. Unsatisfied with the already rigid curriculum of Islamic studies in national schools, more and more private Islamic schools, including kindergartens, continue to be established throughout the country. The list can go on and on.

The state has had little need to take issue with the above demands, for the simple reason that any Islamisation, given present circumstances, would only secure a more Malay definition of Malaysia anyway. Thus it was not at all surprising to see the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), always already seeking to solidify Malay rule, having no qualms about competing on this turf. They seemed to have even relished the challenge, excelling – in realpolitik terms – in ensuring the drastic insertion of Islamic policies into the Malaysian state.

Historians highlight the early 1980s as the point of no return. The revivalism of Islam was the demand of a strong Malay grassroots then. The regime, eventually armed with the credibility of Anwar Ibrahim’s Islamist background, launched its deep and thorough project of Islamisation in response: Islamic banking was introduced. The International Islamic University, Malaysia (IIUM/UIA), now heavily sustained by Saudi funding, was established. So was the Institute of Islamic Understanding (IKIM), which has since then served as the intellectual mouthpiece against pluralism and apostasy. A more Muslim oriented foreign policy was initiated. New laws were imposed, banning imports of non-halal beef and Muslim entry into casinos. Marriages and sermons were made subject to Islamic certification and approval.

Today, JAKIM (Malaysian Department of Islamic Development) is the third most funded department under the Prime Minister’s Office, receiving RM 402 million in 2010 alone. It stands among several other Syariah institutions that were recently erected in rapid succession such as Jabatan Kehakiman Syariah, Malaysia (Department of Syariah Justice) in March 1998 and the Syariah section of the Attorney General’s office in 2003. The latter is to ensure that all laws – including international laws Malaysia are to ratify – are Syariah compliant. In 2009, planning for a Jabatan Penguatkuasaan dan Pendakwaan Syariah (Syariah Enforcement and Prosecution Department) began.

Power

But what is all that power for?

Curiously, the persistence of conservative presence in Malay politics suggests that the increased Islamisation of government, on top of the huge representation of Malays in the military, police, civil service, the cabinet, petit bourgeoisie and banking, in addition to our nine monarchs, are still somehow not enough to assuage insecurities.

It can also be argued that the significant powers that Malays have amassed through the government and bureaucracy over the years are mere catalysts for greater conservative demands, for in apprehensive hands no amount of power will suffice if it cannot translate to total control.

Thus it may be more accurate to look past the power held to see what the power is meant to protect in the first place. And for this we will have to inquire into a prior anxiety, one that is more essential in driving the politicisation of Malay identity as a whole, and that is the fear of losing control over Malaysia’s multicultural complexities.

To clarify, the conservative claim is not that the Malays were here before everyone else. Rather, the Malays, at one point the subjects of a glorious medieval empire, were the ones who shaped the customs and civilization, and by consequence the historical significance, of the Peninsula.

It was therefore the bitterest injustice for the Malay nationalist imagination that independence from centuries of colonialism began with the masses of Malays in wretched poverty. They were 70% of Malaysia’s poor at the time, confined mostly to low level-menial work. University education was far from reach and with little, in fact inconsequential, ownership of capital (Malays owned only 4% of all businesses) Malay control of the country was nothing more than ceremonial despite the triumphant proclamations ofMerdeka (Independence).

Malays in fact became poorer in the ensuing decade, a reality that soon compelled the demand which we are all too familiar with by now: that only the material enrichment of Malays can mend inter-communal relations since they would no longer have to bear the shame of being poor sons of the soil.

Shame and self-loathing

This shame left a deeply bitter mark, for the little real political power that Malays could claim also translated to a crisis in self-esteem. The worst of this fermented into the long tradition of self-loathing that one can find in bourgeois Malay thought, whereby Malay poverty is often explained away as an obvious outcome of laziness.

The Malay Dilemma by Mahathir Mohamed (Malaysia’s longest serving Prime Minister at 22 years) has for some reason survived as the most frequently reissued attempt to defend that thesis. Not only did it draw a direct causal link between Malay laziness and poverty, they were also somehow taken as certain proof of Malay racial inferiority.

But if we are at all to recall that book for its originality, it would have to be for the rather taxing attempt it made to explain that link with pretensions of evolutionary science. Otherwise, the Malay Dilemmawas merely reiterating an impression that was already prevalent among early Malay bureaucrats. After all, it was published only a year after Revolusi Mental (Mental Revolution), a longer book comprising of essays that also insisted on the Malay poverty-laziness-inferiority idea, this time by the most prominent Malay educators in government then.

It is painful, though not unfair, to acknowledge that there was some hint of inevitability to all that, especially when viewed from a broader historical perspective. Munshi Abdullah, the pioneer of Malay reformist thought, was already lamenting Malay inferiority – also in the manner of simplified sweeping claims about Malay laziness – as early as the British takeover of the Straits. Indeed, it was against his profound awe of British science and technology that the lazy, inferior, bumbling, dumb and superstitious Malay which he took constant note of was often “portrayed” in his works (although always, somehow, in the pretext of some deep care and concern he had for Malay progress).

This spirit of supposed tough love resonated again in the early 20th century, this time in Pendeta Za’ba’s works which was also not short of bile. The modern man of Malay letters said that the Malays were poor in “all aspects of life” – in demeanour, attitude and worldview, “in all the conditions and necessities that can lead to the success and greatness of the nation”. Malay youths spend too much time on wasteful activities, he said, and “are perverse in indulging in their carnal and animalistic needs” while having no foresight or prudence in spending. Their elders, on the other hand, are too caught up in stupid superstitions. The works of Malay literature are also “poor and not of the kind that can uplift spirits and improve thought”.

One can argue that such frankness is common to all nationalist rhetoric. It can be likened by analogy to the kind of direct criticism we have all encountered in one way or another in heated family arguments, only the end message in this case is of course broader and more political, to provoke Malays to wake up and strive.

But what makes the above preoccupations with racial inferiority particularly pernicious is the conclusion drawn at the end of it all: the Bourgeois Malay’s ultimate prescription for independence was not revolt or rebellion against exploitation and underdevelopment. Rather, the way forward was conceived in terms of the capitalist ethos, through hard work, self-reliance and private enterprise.

Obstacles

The central role of British colonialism in perpetuating myths of the lazy native is a subject that is best dealt in another discussion, although it would suffice at this point to state the curious fact that the notable Malays who were most willing to uphold and defend that myth were significantly influenced by the colonial lebensvelt.

Munshi Abdullah, for example, taught and translated Malay for Stamford Raffles on top of many other notable Orientalists. Both Za’ba and Mahathir – whose treatises on the subject were originally written in English – were educated via the British system. It was indeed through this orbit of circumstances that the capitalist ethos brought by the British found their advocates among Malay nationalists, however indirectly.

For a better sense of what’s at stake here, we should consider the contrasting attitudes of Malay nationalists who were not as fortunate. For example, Rashid Maidin the labourer, or Ahmad Boestamam the son of a peasant, saw little to no virtue behind the laziness myth or British capitalism, having witnessed and lived through first-hand the violent exploitation of labour that was needed to service British industries. The Malayan left, with whom they mobilised, advocated instead a more confrontational and militant route towards self-determination. Naturally, the British, in the post-war ruin of their empire amidst fears of a Communist takeover of Southeast Asia did all they could to suppress all manifestations of leftist unrest, often with little hesitation to resort to violence or outright political intervention.

The fact that the Malay left and the British ended up more and more preoccupied with one another after independence also meant that Malay capitalism was met with less resistance. This, however, did not mean that it was without its obstacles. There was, for one, the absence of a critical Malay mass: the majority of Malays at the turn of Merdeka were rural, illiterate, uneducated and, more significantly, unfamiliar with the belief in “grace-through-hard-work” that the early Malay elites and bureaucrats embraced.

There was also a problem in the form of an apathetic Malay elite, the old guard of UMNOists close to Tunku Abdul Rahman (Malaysia’s first Prime Minister) who were not seen as committed enough to the cause of Malay development. The Tunku recalled the Malays as “a simple and contented people, used to their own way of life, their distinctive traditions, their deep Islamic belief in God and the hereafter, and respect for their Sultans. Sons of the soil and the sea, they lived close to nature in a bountiful land. Why bother to work so hard?”

But nothing stood in the way as agonisingly as the peninsula’s demographic realities. In 1955, the Malays constituted 84.2% of the total electorate. After independence it was reduced to just 56.8% due to the formal mass incorporation of Chinese and Indians as Malaysian citizens. This was not an easy fact to accept especially for those who just regarded them as temporary migrant workers whose presence in the Peninsula was due to colonial, rather than Malay, demands. It didn’t help that the Chinese were soon perceived as threats: When they were not smeared as mere greedy businessmen, they were feared as treacherous communists.

The protector state

So something had to be done, and for ordinary Malays this meant access to a great deal of welfare, or to be more exact state protection over the ensuing decades after Independence: exclusive commercial guidance and protection, rural development, educational support and a great deal of employment guarantees. The New Economic Policy eventually oversaw that process to noteworthy breakthroughs as the rather rapid growth of a Malay middle, professional and corporate class over the past thirty years is apparent.

The assertion has been made time and time again that the absence of racial violence over this period should not be taken for granted. After all, another May 13th was avoided. But while this claim may be reasonable, it overlooks how that period of purported lull also overlapped with increased centralisation, the erosion of civil liberties and the violent suppression of dissent, engineered by politicians who justified those policies on the basis of Malay supremacy. Violence merely moved away from the streets into the cover of legitimised state power.

Plus, while there may not have been outright street violence, it cannot be denied that Malay welfare was designed and implemented in a circumstance of antagonism. Various policies to transfer wealth into Malay hands were in fact put in place earlier, considerably before May 13th.

The Federal Agriculture Marketing Authority (FAMA) and Bank Bumiputera, though now defunct, were set up as alternatives to Malay dependence on Chinese middlemen and credit sources. Along with the Indigenous (Bumiputera) People’s Trust Council (MARA) and the Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA), they were established when Chinese support for the Alliance was at a dramatic low following the July 1958 crisis within the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA). The crisis emerged out of heated disputes on the extent to which the Chinese should accept being unequal partners in the Federation of Malaya. The possibility of MCA withdrawing from the alliance at that time, in fact, became very real as a result.

By 1967 Malay was confirmed as the only language suitable for state transactions, this after it was decided that subsidies were to be denied to Chinese schools that would not adhere to the national curriculum. The rest is history.

The rationale behind it in other words was not purely economic. A halt in Chinese progress was conceived as a necessary condition for Malay progress. A friend, who it must be said is hardly an UMNO hardliner, summarised it all in stark terms: racism helped Malays.

Blind-spots

But not all Malays: We are often told of how the bottoms 40% of Malaysian households earn RM 1500 or less on average. But we don’t hear as much about the fact that this is equivalent to 2.6 million households, or to be more exact, 12.4 million Malaysians. We even hear less of how 56% of that total, nearly 1.3 million households, are Malay households.

A recent study conducted at the Malaysian National University’s (UKM) Institute for Malaysian and International Studies (IKMAS) reveals more: an average Bumiputera can only rely on one month of financial reserves in the sudden event of unemployment. 50.8% of overall Bumiputera wealth is concentrated in the top 20% of Bumiputera earners, while the bottom 40% can only claim a cumulative share of 7.6%. It is not surprising then that 66% of Bumiputera households have no financial assets.

The lack of class awareness in Malay politics suggests, worryingly (although typically, as ever before) that attitudes of ethnic competition are most poised to influence the interpretation of those figures. All this, at any rate, says little of the fact that Malays already constitute a sizeable portion of Malaysia’s low wage workers, whose income will be further suppressed as they are made to compete more and more with the increasing influx of low skilled migrant workers who are preferred by employers for their cheap cost of maintenance and political insignificance.

Who is Malay?

There is obvious nagging about how economic hardship left to ferment with no vision of solidarity will only sow the seeds of identity politics, of how racist sentiments can hurt feelings and how it can upset the liberal wet dreams of complete individual freedom from all social connections. But here I am reminded of another bitter effect.

In September 2012, a new-born baby girl died after being thrown out of the third floor of an apartment building in Petaling Jaya. The confirmation that the mother is Malay was quickly greeted with the deluge of typically bland Muslim moralising. The manner of the baby’s disposal, it turns out, was not as gripping as the fact that baby dumping among Malays appears to have reached gravely disturbing extents (by then at least 31 cases were discovered since the beginning of the year). Soon enough, surely enough, the typical demands for harsher punishments, more religious education and strict parenting ensued as solutions to the problem. Among the causes identified were Western influence and/or bad peers.

It didn’t seem to matter to Malays that the mother is a 21 year old factory worker living in Desa Mentari, a low cost high density flat in the industrial sector of Petaling Jaya which is also home to hundreds of Malaysia’s low wage proletariats, many of whom are migrants. It didn’t occur to them at any point that the stigma and duress of living as a young, poor, pregnant and unwed Malay Muslim woman, with no freedom to just speak and be, in a country that reduces all identities to their most elementary parts and crudest images can drive any living breathing person mad. None of that mattered: the solution, as always, overwhelmingly, was more and more conformity: values, religion and more order.

Conformity we should recall was what Hannah Arendt pointed to as the spine of the totalitarian condition. For it manifested where the uncertainties and pace of the modern world is just too much to bear: the breakdown of hierarchies, traditions and myths, are for many too overwhelming. In that strident storm, group identity (and in the context in which Arendt wrote, Stalinism and anti-Semitism) becomes a compelling recourse or defence, a way to make sense of the uncertainties of it all. Thus, totalitarianism is not a regime against democracy per se, nor is it about hating other races. It is, first and foremost, the submerging of the human being into the masses in exchange for a sense – a false one at that – of place and stability.

Racism and religious sectarianism then are merely crutches, or shields for the journey, for one would not need to negate others if the world was not understood so antagonistically, as of scarcity, to begin with. And this is the kernel of the Malay nationalism that has endured most so far: born in poverty amidst the bewildering dissonance of demands from other ethnicities, languages, religions and ways of life while brewing hopes of European progress, the strong regime – whether it is led by a monarch, a racist party or Ulamas – will always be the ideal saviour for those harbouring false hopes of tranquil in the cacophony of complex life. Viewed from this unflattering light of home, we are perhaps coming closer to answering the question of who is Malay.

Ahmad Fuad Rahmat is the Managing Editor of Projek Dialog, www.projekdialog.com , a social development project that aims to promote healthy debate and understanding within and among Malaysians
.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 12 December 2012, 1:04 am and is filed under
Islam
,
nation building
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


1st task of “100 Days to Putrajaya” Campaign – prove UMNO/BN prophets of doom wrong with ringing/powerful endorsement by 16th DAP NC for Karpal-Guan Eng leadership to lead DAP in the PR battle for Putrajaya in 13GE

The UMNO/Barisan Nasional propagandists have been working overtime to forecast various doomsday scenarios for DAP, Pakatan Rakyat and the country in the run-up to the 13th general elections, as for instance, warning of a repetition of May 13 racial clashes, chaos and even Malaysia becoming bankrupt and be  like Greece  in three years if UMNO/Barisan Nasional is replaced by Pakatan Rakyat in Putrajaya.

It is almost five years since the Pakatan Rakyat formed the state governments in Penang, Selangor and Kedah and over 22 years since PAS captured the Kelantan state government. Have there been May 13 racial clashes in the Pakatan Rakyat states or have they gone bankrupt?

If Pakatan Rakyat rule is such a disaster, Datuk Seri Najib Razak would not have to undergo the two-year agony of repeatedly postponing the date for the 13th general elections because of his lack of confidence that UMNO/BN would get a renewed mandate to continue to govern Malaysia.

There would also have been no need for Najib to resort to undemocratic and unconstitutional means to mount an  illegal coup d’etat to  grab power from the duly-elected  Pakatan Rakyat state government in Perak in February 2009, a result which the people of Perak are determined to reverse by restoring Perak state to Pakatan Rakyat in the 13th general elections.

The UMNO/BN leaders and propagandists must be told in no uncertain terms to stop their various false doomsday scenarios for the people and the country if they truly love Malaysia.

Just as Kelantan had not gone bankrupt after more than 22 years of PAS rule and  Penang, Selangor and  Kedah have not gone bankrupt after nearly five years of Pakatan Rakyat state governments, but in fact chalking up a better record than Barisan Nasional both in good governance and promoting the people’s welfare,  Malaysia will not become bankrupt after three years.

On the contrary, under PR governance, Malaysia will be set on a new growth path to lead to greater prosperity and justice for all Malaysians for the country, not only because of  an end to corruption, cronyism and abuses of power but because Malaysia will be  governed by leaders whose first priority is the best interests of all Malaysians and the country rather than of themselves and their cronies.

There cannot be another repetition of May 13 racial clashes in the country, for if anything untoward and unfortunate happens after the 13GE, it will not be clashes between Malays and Chinese, but Malays  versus Malays or even Malaysians versus Malaysians with each side led by Malays.

Is Najib prepared to come forward to give an assurance to the nation that such an eventuality would not happen, as Malaysia is wedded  to the system of parliamentary democracy and UMNO/BN  committed to the goal of making Malaysia the “world’s best democracy” – which must be preceded by the onset of a two-party or two-coalition democratic system?

Najib’s most quoted saying since becoming Prime Minister is that “the era the government knows best is over”, but this is also his most violated pledge.

Up to now, despite repeated questions in Parliament and outside, Najib has refused to give a public pledge that he would fully honour the spirit of “the era the government knows best is over” and that if it is the verdict of the 13 million electorate in the 13GE for a change of federal government in Putrajaya, he and UMNO would respect the verdict as well as giving a solemn  undertaking to ensure a peaceful transition of power to Pakatan Rakyat.

If Najib truly believes that “the era the government knows best is over”, he should issue a directive to all UMNO/BN leaders to stop their various false doomsday scenarios for the country and people and end all their politics of lies, hate and fear against Pakatan Rakyat.

In the “100 Days to Putrajaya”, as the 13GE will fall in the next 100 days, DAP and PR must dismantle and debunk the various false and nefarious doomsday scenarios foisted by the UMNO/BN propagandists to frighten Malaysian voters from exercising their historic right and responsibility to usher a change of federal government  for the first time in the nation’s 55 year history.

The demolition and debunking of the doomsday scenarios must begin from the 16th DAP National Congress this weekend – with the first task for DAP delegates to prove UMNO/BN prophets of doom wrong with a ringing and powerful endorsement for the Karpal-Guan Eng leadership to lead DAP in the PR battle for Putrajaya in 13GE and  to  put to rest the lies and falsehoods spread by UMNO/BN propagandists in their attempt to split the DAP national leadership.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 13 December 2012, 2:46 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan Rakyat must avoid repeating the mistakes of the Republicans who lost the US presidency twice because they lost sight of the Middle Ground

At the end of the recently concluded UMNO General Assembly, Prime Minister and UMNO President Datuk Seri Najib Razak rightly warned his UMNO base not to repeat Republic presidential candidate, Mitt Romeny’s mistake, to over rely on older, white voters to win the elections. Similarly, UMNO should not be overly dependent on the rural Malays to win the upcoming Malaysian general election at the expense of ignoring the growing urban multiracial middle class.

Najib is right in pointing out Romney’s mistake. Romney won a majority of the white vote against Obama – 59% to 39% – but he failed to even break 30% of any of the minority groups. Predictably, he lost the African American vote – 6% to 93% – but he also lost the Latino vote – 27% to 71% – and the Asian American vote – 26% to 73% – by significant margins.

Romney won a majority of the votes of those aged 65 and above – 56% to 44% – but lost in the 30-44 age group – 45% to 52% – as well as in the 18-29 age group – 37% to 60%. Among the ideological moderates, Obama defeated Romney by 56% to 41%.

Romney was treading old ground here. The same results, more or less, were achieved by McCain in the 2008 presidential elections. McCain won a majority of the white vote against Obama – 55% to 43% but lost the African American vote – 4% to 95% – , the Latino vote – 31% to 67% – and the Asian America vote – 35% to 63%. He won 53% of the voters aged above 65 (against Obama’s 45%) but lost in the 30-44 age group – 52% to 46% – and lost the 18 to 29 age group by a landslide – 32% to 66%. Among the ideological moderates, Obama defeated McCain 60% to 39%.

Both Republican candidates had to appeal to their ‘base’ of conservative, mostly white and old voters in order to win their respective primary elections. As a result both could not broaden their appeal to reach out to a sufficient number of moderate voters including many minorities in order to win the American Presidency.

Sadly, Najib’s advice is likely to fall on deaf ears within his own party.

Firstly, he himself does not seem to be taking his own advice of reaching out to the middle ground despite his efforts to create a Global Movement of Moderates.

He has cowardly refused to ask the Attorney General not to appeal the High Court decision which declared the Home Ministry’s ban on the use of the word ‘Allah’ by the Catholic Herald.

He had to make a quick U-turn to ‘reinstate’ the NEP into the New Economic Model after Perkasa complained that Part One of the NEM emphasized a shift to a market friendly affirmative action with no mention of the NEP.

He either directly or indirectly directs Utusan Malaysia to create a climate of fear among the Malays that they would somehow lose their rights if Pakatan Rakyat were to come to power and spin seditious lies about how DAP wants to turn the country into a Christian nation.

These are not signs of a Prime Minister who is sincere about appealing to the Middle Ground.

Secondly, his deputy, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, has not given Najib any support for his 1Malaysia slogan as exemplified by his statement in parliament that he is Malay first and Malaysia second.

It is no secret that Muhyiddin harbors ambition to replace Najib as UMNO President by trying to be more ‘Malay’ than Najib. Indeed, many within UMNO are waiting to see Najib do worse than Pak Lah in the next general election so that they can boot him out and replace him with a ‘Malay first’ UMNO Prime Minister.

Thirdly, the harsh and brutal actions taken by Najib’s administration towards the peaceful protestors who turned up for the Bersih 2.0 and Bersih 3.0 rallies in the streets of Kuala Lumpur shows a complete lack of regard towards the Middle Ground voters who want to see a cleaner and fairer elections, regardless of the party in power.

Fourthly, there is no middle ground which Najib and his party can reach out to when it comes to the issue of corruption and abuse of power.

It is something which is institutionalized within UMNO. Dr. Mahathir did not put a stop to this and in fact encouraged it by systematically weakening institutions that could play an effective role of limiting the ill effects of corruption including the judiciary and the anti-corruption agency. Pak Lah, despite his ‘work with me, not for me’ slogan, closed one eye and allowed this corruption to flourish under his watch.

Najib, despite the lip service paid to fighting corruption under the Government Transformation Program (GTP), still has not answered or accounted for his role in the RM7.3 billion Scorpene sub scandal and the murder of Mongolian model, Altantuyaa Shaariibuu.

He and senior leaders of UMNO are maintaining an ‘elegant silence’ in the face of the explosive allegations made by carpet trader, Deepak Jaikishan, which directly incriminate him and his family.

While most Malaysians can see through Najib’s hypocrisy in speaking but not acting on the message of reaching out to the Middle Ground, Pakatan Rakyat cannot take these voters for granted.

Any party or leader within Pakatan can easily alienate the Middle Ground if her or she chooses to pander to any small but vocal group that only represents a small segment of society.

Efforts to consolidate one’s ‘base’ will not win many new votes but will most likely isolate and turn away many of the 3 million new voters in the electorate, 60% of whom are below the age of 30.

Rather, Pakatan needs to work in unison to reach out to the Middle Ground in order to win 70% of the 3 million new voters and 3% of the 1 million GE2008 swing voters so that it can capture Putrajaya with a comfortable majority of at least 7 seats.

More than ever, Pakatan needs to convince the Middle Ground that it can provide better and more credible solutions to the problems which affect all Malaysians and not just a few selective groups.

Pakatan needs to show that it can reverse the serious decline in our education standards, as highlighted by the recent Trends in International Math and Science Study (TIMSS) 2011 where Malaysia’s ranking and average score fell by 6 places and 34 points for Math (from 20th in 2007 to 26th in 2011, from 474 points in 2007 to 440 in 2011) and suffered setbacks of  11 places and 45 points for Science (from 21st in 2007 to 32nd in 2011, from 471 points in 2007 to 426 points in 2011).

Pakatan needs to show that it can fundamentally transform the economy to provide better and higher paying jobs, especially to the younger generation, and increase the share of the country’s GDP allocated to income (as opposed to corporations and the government).

Pakatan needs to show that it can restore public confidence in the police force and come up with better enforcement solutions to reduce crime especially in the urban areas.

Pakatan needs to show that it can provide more a comprehensive solution for public transportation as opposed to the BN’s MRT focused public transportation plan.

Pakatan needs to show that it can revive the integrity of our public institutions including the judiciary, the civil service and the media, all of which have been degraded under the BN.

Pakatan must show that it can bring more evenly distribute and sustainable development to currently neglected areas especially in Sabah and Sarawak.

Only by reaching out to the Middle Ground with concrete and credible solutions can Pakatan achieve its goal of reaching Putrajaya.

If Pakatan repeats the mistake of the BN and of the Republicans by instinctively reaching for our respective ‘bases’ in terms of voters, then we would be giving away these votes to the BN (rather than the BN winning these votes from us).

Even if Pakatan were to lose the 3 million new voters by a small majority (48% to 52%) and just lose 1% of the one million GE2008 swing voters, we would be giving back the BN 2/3rds control of the parliament (The BN would win 149 parliament seats under this scenario). As such, we cannot afford to take our eye off the Middle Ground.

On the eve of the 16th National Congress of the Democratic Action Party (DAP), I call upon our leaders, delegates and members to focus on winning the voters in the Middle Ground.

I am confident that if the DAP, together with our colleagues and compatriots in PAS and PKR, as part of a united Pakatan Rakyat coalition, remain focussed on winning the voters in the Middle Ground, the wave of their support would take us all the way to Putrajaya and usher in a new era for Malaysia and Malaysians.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 13 December 2012, 10:50 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Rethinking poverty in Sabah

— Elizabeth Gimbad

The Malaysian Insider

Dec 13, 2012

DEC 13 — One of my first field trips as a researcher was to a small kampung in Sabah. I was new to the job and after a day of shadowing more experienced colleagues, they decided that I was ready strike out on my own and dropped me off in front of a rickety house on the edge of the village.

As I stood at the bottom of the stairs, a 14-year-old boy with a toddler in his arms came out to greet me, followed by a bevy of younger children. When I asked him for his parents, he hesitated: “They are not around. Shall I get my aunt for you?”

Sabah has the highest incidence of poverty in Malaysia. According to the latest statistics, the poverty rate has dropped from 23 per cent in 2004 to 19.2 per cent in 2009. However, this means that one out of five people in Sabah is still living below the poverty line. The national average for poverty in Malaysia is 3.8 per cent.

In Sabah, households with a combined monthly income below RM1,050 are identified as poor; while the absolute poor have a monthly income of less than RM630. This is higher than the poverty line set for Peninsular Malaysia which is below RM760 a month — it has to be remembered though that the high cost of living is much higher in Sabah compared to Peninsular Malaysia.

“Not all of the children are mine,” the boy’s aunt smiled tiredly. “Two of my siblings passed away and their spouses asked my parents to help care for the children. There was no one else they could ask and living in Kota Kinabalu is expensive. Luckily some of the kids have financial assistance from the school and my husband is a school teacher. My parents still work on the farm with the older children so that helps with the food.”

“How large is your household?” I asked.

“Well, there are four adults. And as for the children…”

“There are nine of us,” her nephew answered.

Their aunt sighed. “Every year I worry that my husband might get transferred to another school. Who will help my parents then?”

The next person I spoke to was an old grandmother and her 16-year-old grand-daughter. She used to plant padi and work on the farm but was forced to stop after a recent illness. Her daughter was working in the city and sent them money every few months. Luckily, her grand-daughter is on a financial assistance scheme for poor students.

“How much does your grand-daughter receive?” I asked.

The amount she named was far less than the RM200 I used to receive as a college student in Kuala Lumpur.

I found out more from the owner of the local kedai runcit.

“That grandmother?” he said. “Her son-in-law ran off with another woman years ago. Her daughter came home crying with the little girl. She must have been 8 then.”

He lowered his voice. “She’s sick with cancer.”

“And her daughter in Kota Kinabalu?” I asked.

The owner fell quiet. “Actually, they haven’t heard from her in a year.”

For now, at least, the extended family unit is still a reliable safety net during times of difficulty. Although there is not enough food, space will somehow be made for another person at the table and an extra sleeping space can be found in the home.

What worries me, however, is that the traditional family safety net is gradually disappearing. Rural-urban migration is already on the rise in Sabah. As families drift apart physically, so does the emotional bond between them; and this affects their commitment to support one another. It is not rare these days to hear stories where siblings working far from home have been denied their share of the family property. If you cannot rely on your family, who else is left to support you?

In these instances at least, the government and its agencies have been able to help by providing financial assistance to the children in these households. However, these are temporary solutions to more lasting problems.

Thankfully, the cost of primary education and basic medical care is low in Malaysia. But how are children who are busy helping out in the home and working on the farm expected to excel academically when they do not have the time to study? How are elderly grandmothers expected to have regular check-ups when they do not have the means of going to the hospital in the first place?

Households that comprise the very young and the elderly need more than just financial assistance to improve their quality of life. While on-going poverty reduction and assistance programmes are important in bringing about change for the poor, the government needs to look beyond financial assistance and housing; and start considering the possibility of providing other forms of social assistance and improving real access to existing facilities.

* Elizabeth Gimbad was raised in both east and Peninsular Malaysia. Instead of joining the corporate rat race, she worked with the Sabah state government to improve the lives of the rural poor. She has since left government service to pursue a Master’s in Development Studies in Australia.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 13 December 2012, 11:45 am and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


16th DAPNC – sound the call to arms for a PR government in Putrajaya with 125 PR seats in Parliament with distribution of 45:40:40 seats respectively for PKR, PAS and DAP

The 16th DAP National Congress the next two days is the focus of national attention for more reasons than one, viz:

•	It is the last national conference this year  for any political party in  Malaysia;

•	In fact, it is the last national conference for any political party before the 13th General Elections which would be held in the next 100 days;

•	DAP is the only political party in the country which dares to hold party elections on the eve of impending general elections, as all other political parties have postponed their party elections until after the elections;

•	Will the DAP emerge stronger or weaker after the 16th DAP National Congress;

•	Will Pakatan Rakyat and the cause for “UBAH” to effect political change in Malaysia  all the way to Putrajaya be strengthened or weakened?

In the past month, Pakatan Rakyat suffered a serious setback when the four million middle-ground voters who will be the arbiter as to  whether it is the Pakatan Rakyat or the Barisan Nasional which will appoint the Prime Minister and   form the government in Putrajaya after the 13GE developed doubts and hesitations as to whether Pakatan Rakyat parties of PKR, PAS and DAP are fully committed to the PR Common Policy Framework and Buku Jingga common platforms.

This is a salutary lesson to all the component Pakatan Rakyat parties that in the “hot-house atmosphere” which will further intensify with the approach of the long-awaited 13th General Elections, that they must always be  conscious that every statement and action not only of the national leaders but of the other echeleons can have an impact many times  larger than ordinary times when exploited and distorted by unscrupulous and unprincipled political propagandists with their biased mainstream media.

The Kelantan gender-segregation ruling affecting non-Muslim hair salons is a case in point where on the one and same issue, DAP is accused of being “subservient” to PAS while PAS is accused of compromising to “appease” the DAP.

It is a lie that DAP leaders are afraid of PAS leaders, just as it is a lie that PAS leaders are afraid of DAP leaders. It is also a lie that the Malays or the Chinese will be oppressed under the PR government, for the PR parties of PKR, PAS and DAP are committed to serve the best interests of all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

Our relationship in PR, together with PKR, is one of equals where we respect each other’s views and differences.  This is why DAP leaders have communicated our stand on the Kelantan hair salons controversy to the PAS leadership right from the very beginning, although we did not announce it in the media.

But this is not adequate to win the support of the four million middle-ground voters if we are to succeed in effecting a  change of government in Putrajaya, as we have to convince them that the three parties in Pakatan Rakyat are fully committed to uphold the principles and platforms that unite us as stated in the PR Common Policy Framework and Buku Jingga while putting aside our historic ideological differences.

DAP stands for a secular state while PAS is in the diametrically opposite pole on hudud – but we agree to disagree in the interests of upholding  democracy; restoring the independence of key national institutions whether the judiciary, the civil service, police, the election commission, the anti-corruption agency or the Attorney-General’s office; ensuring justice and prosperity for all Malaysians; promoting national unity and inter-religious harmony;  and establishing good governance by declaring an all-out war against corruption.

The basis of DAP reaching out, engaging and co-operating with PAS in Pakatan Rakyast  is not on Islamic state or hudud, but on the principles of promoting democracy, pluralism, cultural diversity, human rights, women’s rights and  development in Malaysia.

Malaysia is at the  historic cross-roads in the forthcoming 13th General Election – whether to perpetuate UMNO hegemony and one-coalition state or to change the political landscape by initiating a two-coalition system to signify the advent of a more mature and healthy form of parliamentary democracy in Malaysia.

The 16th DAP National Congress also has a date with history –  not only as the most momentous in the party’s 46-year history but also in the 55-year history of Malaysia.

It appears to be easier for UMNO/BN to regain its two-thirds majority in 13 GE than for Pakatan Rakyat to reach Putrajaya,  for UMNO/BN need to win  another eight seats from the 140  it won in the 2008 General Elections.

Pakatan Rakyat has a longer distance to cover to reach its objective, as the three PR parties must win at least another 30 seats than they won in 2008  to cross the hurdle to  win the parliamentary majority of 112 seats in the 13th general election.

But to be a secure, viable and durable federal government, PR cannot just have a simple majority of one in Parliament, but must reach out to win a larger and more solid parliamentary majority in the 13th GE.

This is an uphill, even herculean,  but not impossible task.

Let the 16th DAP National Congress  sound the call to arms for the “Hundred Days to Putrajaya” campaign  for a Pakatan Rakyat government in Putrajaya with 125 PR seats in Parliament with distribution of 45:40:40 seats respectively for PKR, PAS and DAP.

The secret to a successful  “Hundred Days to Putrajaya” Campaign by Pakatan Rakyat will hinge on our ability to win over the four million middle ground/swing voters by focusing on national issues of importance, including PR’s greater ability:

•	to manage and reduce corruption in the country;

•	to show a new path towards genuine national unity and inter-racial harmony;

•	to govern more equitably with social justice and economic efficiency;

•	to reduce poverty among the native population in Sabah and Sarawak and bring more sustainable development to both of these states; and

•	to usher in a new era of governance where democracy is developed and deepened.

(Eve-of-16th DAP National Congress message on Friday, 14th December 2012)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 14 December 2012, 11:50 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
PKR
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Just teach them in English!

by Azly Rahman

Malaysiakini

Dec 13, 2012

The refusal to teach Mathematics and Science in English is not just an ideological position but an idiotic one as well.

It is an attempt to self-fulfil a prophecy that the rural children, especially the Malays, cannot be challenged and must continue to be given easy passes through social promotion.

The refusal to acknowledge that English is currently a language of scientific progress, more than Bahasa Melayu, is an example of hypocrisy in dealing with success on the part of our policymakers and Malay language nationalists.

Based on spurious research findings headed by a teacher training university, sanctioned by other public universities, the government has erred in its decision that will not only impact the future of Malaysian children in a continually globalised world, where English is the lingua franca.

And this will open up avenues for the establishment of classes of schools, increasing the demand for the setting up of private schools that will emphasise the English language as a language of instruction and a rigorous curriculum that will prepare students for a competitive world.

Sacrificing the future of a generation

The premise that Malay children cannot follow instructions in English and therefore not only standards should be lowered and subject matters made easier, but the teaching of Mathematics and Science itself must be reverted to the Malay Language points to this: that Malay children especially are presumed to be losers even before all avenues of success are provided.

Because in one study they voiced their concern over their inability to understand instructions, the future of a generation is sacrificed.

It is like saying that the more a child says that he/she does not like school, the less the teachers need to work to challenge them.

While children of the privileged in urban areas get first class education through private and international schools or even in high schools abroad and get to master the English Language (so that they can be given places and sponsorship in English-speaking universities abroad), children of the rural poor are left to become victims of policies dictated by research findings that hardy make sense in the realm of educational futurism.

Retired professors , poet laureates, die-hard Malay nationalists who themselves are well-educated in the English language having tasted the successes and given national accolades become incoherent and hypocritical spokespersons to a government policy that will make the myth of the last native a reality.

These individuals do not understand changing times; that English is no longer a language of the colonials.

The colonies revolted against the colonials through the natives’ mastery of the English language.

‘Strategically denying success to the poor’

These individuals who are against the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English are giving wrong advice to the nation: mastering English does not mean challenging whatever status Bahasa Melayu has been accorded to.

The government is strategically denying success to the poor of all races with this language policy reversal.

We are creating a nation at risk; incompetent in the language that will give them the chance to pursue their studies in good universities in the English-speaking world.

There is a specific process one needs to follow in order to gain access to Western education; especially in the fields of Science and Mathematics.

Many of the critical subjects are taught in English.

The multitude of English proficiency tests is evidence that one must understand English for specific purposes (especially in the Mathematics and Sciences) right up to being able to write a Bachelor’s, Master’s, or even doctoral and post-doctoral dissertations in the English language – all these are stages one has to go through.

Especially for entry into American colleges, where English proficiency is given through tests ranging from the Test of English as a Foreign Language (Toefl) to the challenging Graduate Record Examination (GRE), which require consistent polishing of skills not only in English as a language but English taught in the content areas.

The government has blundered, big time, succumbing to irrational voices disguised as those who care about the rural poor who are slow to master Mathematics and Science concepts in English.

Who said kampung kids can’t learn?

There are enough success stories of children of the poor of all races coming from the rural areas slogging and struggling hard to master any language and in any subject matter and triumph to become world-class surgeons, engineers, lawyers, academicians, diplomats, musicians and even culinary experts.

Who said kampung kids cannot be challenged academically? There is enough evidence that if you provide them with dedicated teachers, a nurturing learning environment, a supporting home, a challenging curriculum and constant reminder of “yes, you can” and “when the going gets tough, the tough get going” – children will excel.

Down with those who are out to underestimate the ability of our children to succeed.

We must ignore bad advice and demand success for all – urban and rural, bumiputera or non-bumiputera.

We must demand a radical restructuring of our schools so that the same standard and support is given to all schools and the commitment to a philosophy that however we want our own children to succeed, we want the children of others to achieve similarly as well.

Start early in teaching English. Put an end to any effort to make the myth of the lazy native a reality.

We must remove our glass coconut shell.

——————————————————————————–

DR AZLY RAHMAN, who was born in Singapore and grew up in Johor Baru, holds a Columbia University (New York) doctorate in International Education Development and Master’s degrees in the fields of Education, International Affairs, Peace Studies and Communication. He has taught more than 40 courses in six different departments and has written more than 300 analyses on Malaysia. His teaching experience spans Malaysia and the United States, over a wide range of subjects from elementary to graduate education. He currently resides in the United States.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 14 December 2012, 8:51 am and is filed under
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Spamming Malaysia

— The Malaysian Insider

Dec 13, 2012

DEC 13 — In the past 24 hours, some of you and definitely The Malaysian Insider have been inundated with emails from a number of names like Imran Sulaiman, Ranesa Jegatheesa and Malaysian Indian over the PKR protest for Indians who are purportedly stateless in Malaysia.

These emails are spam.

They are a waste of time and definitely a waste of money if someone is being paid to churn them out and send them to all and sundry.

It shows how much political parties and even governments go to great lengths to get their views across to each and every one of us Malaysians ahead of the general election.

But it is a pain.

And it will turn off some if not most of the recipients of such emails.

Those in power can do better by engaging and explaining to the media the actual state of affairs on issues and matters where political parties take to the streets to push their cause.

There is really no need for pro-government supporters to set up email accounts, or social media accounts, to propagate their point of view and inundate us with their opinions.

Because there is too much noise and chatter in the networks that one is just tempted to trash all these emails, mute Twitter accounts and Facebook statuses that are nothing but propaganda nonsense.

So, please stop spamming us with such drivel. Make a good argument, identify yourself and engage those whom you wish to have a conversation.

Or waste your time and effort, only to end up in the trash folder.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 14 December 2012, 9:02 am and is filed under
IT
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why can’t MACC re-open investigations into the scandal of the RM40 million “political donation to Sabah Umno” in the light of new evidence instead of asking the AG to review his decision on the case?

The PKR director of strategy Rafizi Ramli returned from his second trip to Hong Kong and  meeting with its Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) with the news that the possibility is high that Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman could be charged with money laundering by the Hong Kong authorities following the submission of “new evidence” related to Musa’s alleged logging commissions.

Last week, it was disclosed that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) Operations Review Panel had requested the Attorney-General to review its decision on the RM40 million allegedly channeled from timber trader Michael Chia to Musa.

The question is why the MACC could not act independently and professionally, and on its own re-open investigations into the scandal of the RM40 million “political donation to Sabah Umno” in the light of “new evidence”, especially with many questions left answered, including:

Whether the RM40 million cash in Singapore currency, which Sabah timber trader Michael Chia had in his luggage before boarding a flight to Kuala Lumpur at the Hong Kong International Airport on August 14, 2008 and was impounded by the Hong Kong for three years but which had to be  released when the Malaysian authorities refused to co-operate with ICAC on the case, was “dirty money” derived from corruption and/or illegal logging activities in Sabah which had to be smuggled or laundered back into Malaysia.

There are many unanswered questions about the scandal of the RM40 million “political donation to Sabah Umno” – in particular whether it was the MACC or the Attorney-General’s Chambers which told ICAC that the RM40 million was a political donation to Sabah UMNO and caused the ICAC to close the case and release the RM40 million.

What evidence is there for MACC or the Attorney-General’s Chambers to conclude that the RM40 million cash were  not timber kickbacks for the Sabah Chief Minister but was a legitimate political donation to Sabah Umno?

So long as the Malaysian public are kept in the dark as to whether it was the MACC or the AG’s Chambers which had been responsible for exonerating Michael Chia and Musa and the release of the RM40 million after being  impounded by the Hong Kong authorities for three years, Malaysians cannot be blamed for their scepticism and lack of confidence both in the MACC and the AG’s Chambers as far as combatting “grand corruption” involving top BN leaders are concerned.

There are also concerns about the role of the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, who hails from Sabah and is said to be related to Musa’s family, and whether he had been guilty of conflict-of-interest and therefore abuse of power and corruption if he had played any role in clearing Musa and the release of  the RM40 million cash impounded in Hong Kong for three years as “political donation to Sabah UMNO”.

The MACC will never be able to hold its head high in international anti-corruption circles if ICAC re-opens investigations into the case, which the MACC and the AG’s Chambers had been responsible for keeping closed.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 14 December 2012, 3:49 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


16th DAP national congress crucial for party: Lim

The Sun

14th December 2012

GEORGE TOWN (Dec 14, 2012): DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng has described tomorrow’s 16th DAP National Congress as crucial, “both internally and externally”, to select a new party leadership line-up, as well as begin the 100-day countdown before the 13th General Election.

He said, this time around, the selection of the leadership line-up was a record by itself, as 2,576 delegates were eligible to vote in the party’s election.

“This DAP party congress will select the new leadership for the next three years. As such, the congress is important both internally and externally.

“From the internal aspect, it is the duty of DAP members in a democratic process to choose their leaders,” he told reporters during his working visit to the Penang International Sports Arena (Pisa) here today.

Lim, who is also Penang chief minister, said there was no restriction on any media covering the two-day congress which would be held at Pisa.

“We give priority to all main mass media for coverage. But, we hope the reports will be based on truth and facts. We hope the media will give the correct coverage.

“We are not banning any media…they are allowed to cover. There is no restriction as such. This is open to all,” he said.

Themed, ‘The Power of Change’, the congress this time will see 68 candidates vying for 20 central executive committee posts. – Bernama

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 15 December 2012, 8:54 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP adds non-Chinese, East M’sians to CEC

by Leven Woon | December 16, 2012

Free Malaysia Today

Of the 10 members co-opted into the CEC this morning, seven of them are non-Chinese and East Malaysians.

GEORGE TOWN: The newly-minted DAP central leadership today appointed seven non-Chinese  and East Malaysian leaders into the centre executive committee (CEC) in a bid to sharpen its multiracial appeal.

DAP first-term senator Ariffin M Omar was made a vice chairman to replace Tengku Abdul Aziz who quit the party in May.

Besides him, Zairil Khir Johari, Sabah party chairman Jimmy Wong, Sarawak member John Brian Anthony, Sabah member Edwin Bosi, former Perak speaker V Sivakumar were also the new faces in the CEC.

Both Tan Seng Giaw and P Ramasamy, who were bitterly voted out by party members yesterday, made their way back to the CEC through appointments.

DAP Central Executive Committee 2012-2015

Appointed:

Dr Tan Seng Giaw

 P Ramasamy

 Ariffin S.M. Omar

 Zairil Khir Johari

 Jimmy Wong Sze Phin

 John Brian Anthony

 Edwin Bosi

 Leong Ngah Ngah

 V Sivakumar

 Thomas Su Keong Siong

Office-bearers:

Chairman: Karpal Singh

 Deputy Chair: Tan Kok Wai

 Vice-Chair: Chow Kon Yeow, Ariffin Omar, Chong Chieng Jen, M Kula Segaran, Teresa Kok

 Sec-Gen: Lim Guan Eng

 Asst Sec-Gen: Chong Eng, Ngeh Koo Ham, P Ramasamy

 Treasurer: Fong Kui Lun

 Asst Treasurer: Nga Kor Ming

 National Organising Secretary: Loke Siew Fook

 Asst Nat Organising Sec: Vincent Wu Him Ven, Thomas Su Keong Siong

 National Publicity Secretary: Tony Pua Kiam Wee

 Asst Nat Publicity Sec: Teo Nie Ching, Zairil Khir Johari

 International Secretary: V Sivakumar

 National Political Education Director: Liew Chin Tong

 Asst Nat Pol Edu Dir: Dr Boo Cheng Hau

 Committee Members: Lim Kit Siang, Dr Tan Seng Giaw, Teng Chang Khim,  Leong Ngah Ngah, Jimmy Wong Sze Phin, Edwin Bosi, John Brian Anthony, Gobind Singh

Dr Chen Man Hin reconfirmed as Party Life Advisor

Committees/Bureaus:

Disciplinary Comm: Headed by Tan Kok Wai

 Legal Bureau: Headed by Gobind Singh Deo

 Pakatan Rakyat Bureau: Headed by Teng Chang Khim

 Cultural Bureau: Headed by P Gunasekaran

 Labour Bureau: Headed by A. Sivanesan

 Election Bureau: Headed  by Tan Kok Wai

Pakatan Rakyat bureau

Guan Eng, when announcing the new office bearers, said that the newly-setup Pakatan Rakyat bureau will play a role in cementing closer ties between coalition parties.

“To show that we are a real alternative for Malaysians, we must make sure the bureau is efficient,” he said.

The Penang chief minister also urged party members to get into fighting mode, saying they were only 100 days away from the fierce general election battle.

“If we want a better future, then we are only 100 days shy from making that historic decision.

“How many 10 years do we have, how many opportunity does a country have? We can’t wait anymore longer, we must change now,” he said to resounding applaud.

The party concluded its two-day congress with the party adopting nine resolutions proposed by the grassroots members, which included among others to support the anti-hopping legislation, to close down the controversial Lynas rare earth refinery plant, to make sure party leaders attend functions without local branches having to bear much of the costs and to do away with racism and religious bigotry.

Father and son team sweep DAP polls

Leven Woon | December 15, 2012

None of the Malay candidates who contested made it to the central executive committee.

GEORGE TOWN: The father and son team of Lim Kit Siang and Lim Guan Eng topped the DAP central executive committee (CEC) elections at the DAP 16th Congress held here today.

The elder Lim, who is also party adviser topped the list  followed by the Penang chief minister and party secretary general Lim Guan Eng. DAP chairman Karpal Singh came in third.

A total 1,823 delegates voted in the elections to pick 20 CEC members. These members would among themselves decide who would hold the party’s top positions tomorrow.

The elder Lim obtained 1,607 votes, followed by (Lim) Guan Eng who garnered 1,576 votes while Karpal obtained 1,411 votes.

Some others delegates who formed 20-member line up include Chong Chieng Jen, Loke Siew Fook, Tan Kok Wai, Tony Pua, Fong Kui Lun, Nga Kor Ming, Chong Eng, Chow Kon Yew, M. Kulasegaran, Teresa Kok, Ngeh Koo Ham, Teng Chang Kim and Boo Cheng Hau.

It must also be noted that none of the Malay candidates who contested made it to the CEC.

The biggest casualties of the polls appear to be veteran DAP leader and Kepong member of parliament Tan Seng Giaw. Penang deputy chief minister and Batu Kawan member of parliament P Ramasamy also failed to make the cut.

Apart from Karpal and his son Gobind Singh Deo,  Ipoh Barat member of parliament M Kulasegaran were the only Indian representatives in the 20-member CEC.

The new CEC members will meet tomorrow to elect among themselves the office bearers, as well as to appoint 10 other members to sit in the committee.

Those elected are:

1.  Lim Kit Siang (1,607 votes)

 2.  Lim Guan Eng (1,576)

 3.  Karpal Singh (1,411)

 4.  Chong Chieng Jen (1,211)

 5.  Loke Siew Fook (1,202)

 6.  Vincent Vu (1,202) [new]

 7.  Tan Kok Wai (1,199)

 8.  Gobind Singh Deo (1,197)

 9.  Tony Pua (1,162)

 10. Teng Chang Khim (1,152)

 11. Fong Kui Lun (1,137)

 12. Nga Kor Ming (1,075)

 13. Chong Eng (1,006)

 14. Chow Kon Yeow (986)

 15. Liew Chin Tong (984) [new]

 16. M Kulasegaran (984)

 17. Boo Cheng Hau (958)

 18. Teresa Kok (925)

 19. Teo Nie Ching (903) [new]

 20. Ngeh Koo Ham (824)

Five candidates dropped out of the DAP central executive committee contest earlier today. They are Choong Siew Onn, Er Teck Hwa, Jaya Balan Valliappan, Teo Kok Seong and Violet Yong Wui Wui.

Except for Teo, the newly minted DAP Socialist Youth chief, who said he wanted to focus on developing the party for quitting, the reason for other withdrawals are not yet known.

Meanwhile, Karpal said he was surprised that Seng Giaw and Ramasamy have been dropped, but he stressed it was the party delegates’ decision.

“The delegates have spoken, and there is no return in the next three years. We will see what happened,” he said.

Kulasegaran said he was “speechless” upon hearing that Ramasamy was not voted into the CEC.

“I was so sure that he would do better than me because he got a track record in the Indian community.

“But you have to understand that he is quite new to politics. But he didn’t go very far behind, surely he can be co-opted tomorrow,” he said.

Loke said the intense competition was the main reason why certain veteran or prominent leaders did not make it to the CEC.

“But we stressed that although they did not make it, we deeply value their contributions.

“So when the new CEC members [meet tomorrow], we would certainly consider appointing them [to fill the 10 seats],” he said.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 16 December 2012, 2:53 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Lim Guan Eng
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


How Our Democracy is Damaged

By Kee Thuan Chye

Penang Monthly

December 2012

We often hear of electoral fraud and unfair election practices but what do they really mean? What forms does electoral fraud usually take? What constitute unfair practices and how have they surfaced?

Beyond that, what are the measures that need to be taken to ensure that Malaysian elections are free and fair so that this vital aspect of our democracy is truly well-served and our vote for the candidate or party we support is not made a mockery of?

A new book called
Democracy at Stake?
: Examining 16 By-elections in Malaysia, 2008-2011, published by Strategic Information and Research Development Centre, answers our questions and collates our concerns into a handy and comprehensive compact.

Edited by Wong Chin Huat and Soon Li Tsin, it analyses the 16 by-elections that have been held since the 12th general election according to such relevant categories as how free, fair and clean they were; the freedom and quality of the campaigning; the political parties’ access to media; corrupt practices that were perpetrated; how impartial or otherwise the public institutions were; the amount of campaign money spent; the electoral roll; and the polling process.

Wong, who is in my opinion one of the sharpest political analysts we have, sets the standard for the conduct of elections in his introductory article.

Well-researched and replete with references from many documented sources, it explains why electoral fraud is wrong (“Even if one person is disenfranchised … even if one vote is rigged, democracy is damaged because political equality is compromised to favour the ones who play foul”) and explains what we as citizens should expect of a free and fair election.

The most fundamental of expectations are that we “must be able to register as voters with minimal cost and trouble” and be able to vote “without much difficulty”, and our votes “must be counted with integrity”. By that token, we must also expect that the electoral roll “includes all citizens who are eligible to vote” and “nobody else”.

Wong, however, declares that the electoral rolls in Malaysia “fail on both accounts”.  This is partly because as of March 2012, three million eligible citizens are still not registered voters. But what we may find more disturbing is his revelation that the electoral rolls “include many names who [sic] should not be there in the first place, such as illegally enfranchised foreigners, deceased voters, multiply-registered voters, voluntarily and involuntarily transferred voters who are non-residents in the constituency”.

It is amusing to note that entries like Kampung Baru and a Police Station at Kampung Kerinchi are registered voters on the electoral rolls.

Wong proposes synchronising the electorate database maintained by the Election Commission (EC) with the citizenry database of the National Registration Department (NRD) to minimise errors and allow for corrections to be made continually.

Although he does not say so explicitly, it would also facilitate automatic voter registration, one of the eight demands of Bersih, the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections of which Wong is a steering committee member. The synchronisation of databases would alert the EC to instances of citizens turning 21 and attaining eligibility for voting.

Another disturbing point Wong raises concerns the legal impediments to transparency in the procedure for correction of errors. Section 9A of the Election Act 1958 prevents the electoral rolls from being challenged in court, and Regulation 25 of the Elections (Registration of Voters) Regulations gives “unchecked power” to the EC to “correct any errors free from any public scrutiny”.

This point is particularly pertinent in regard to the Malaysian EC because the public has lost much confidence in the commission’s ability and inclination to be independent and neutral in the conduct of its duty. One important measure that the public needs to take, therefore, is to lobby for the EC to be truly independent and neutral.

If this were achieved, we can be better assured that other conditions necessary for free and fair elections will be facilitated.

These would include what Wong describes as allowing citizens to make “informed decisions after deliberation” from the “availability of information from all perspectives”.

As such, there should be campaign freedom – a reasonable period for campaigning once an election is called; free airtime for all contesting parties on State-owned broadcast media like RTM and unbiased coverage in Bernama as well as private-owned media, like Utusan Malaysia, The Star, Sin Chew, Media Prima’s TV stations, etc; and no restrictions like those imposed in three by-elections at which the Home Ministry banned campaigners from “mentioning (a) Altantuya Shaariibuu, the Mongolian model cum interpreter whose murder was linked to Prime Minister (PM) Najib Razak and his wife Rosmah Mansor, and (b) the role of the Perak Palace in the state’s constitutional crisis”.

The impartiality of public institutions should also be upheld. This includes no abuse of government machinery by the ruling party, such as using official cars and helicopters for party campaigning or, worse, announcing development projects like in the Hulu Selangor “buy-election” when BN offered about RM136 million in projects, payments and compensations while the Pakatan Rakyat Selangor State Government offered about RM27.6 million’s worth.

And of course there should also be no pork barrelling at the hustings, the most famous example being the “I help you, you help me” offer of RM5 million for flood mitigation that Najib made to the Rejang Park voters in the Sibu by-election in return for their support of the BN candidate.

Nor should there be outright vote-buying, as in the alleged giving out of RM100 cash to each Chinese voter at a polling station during the Merlimau by-election.

It is the duty of the EC to report such transgressions but, unfortunately, it has not been fulfilling that duty.

By and large, the individual analyses of the 16 by-elections in the book, contributed by about a dozen observers ranging from journalists to researchers to political scientists, reveal how inept the EC has been, especially in not attending to electoral roll irregularities and preventing abuse of public institutions and corrupt practices.

In the Permatang Pauh by-election, for example, a voter was turned away from the polling station because on the electoral roll, he was said to be dead.

Furthermore, 949 voters were discovered to have disappeared from the constituency’s electoral roll. As the media reported the issue and the EC’s deputy chairman could not explain the disappearance, Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin called on the EC to investigate it. However, “no finding was revealed to the public”.

In Bukit Selambau, election watchdog Malaysians for Free and Fair Elections (MAFREL) backed the Opposition’s claim that more than 60% of the voters in a housing estate were phantom voters, but the EC merely dismissed it.

In fact, the picture that emerges from the 16 analyses is that many of the complaints and allegations made during the by-elections were not resolved afterwards.

On the whole, as the editors sum up in the final chapter, “the integrity of the electoral rolls in Malaysia is highly questionable”. Citing extensively from research done by political scientist Ong Kian Ming, they elaborate on unexplained deletions of names; unaccounted-for additions; high number of voters registered under the same address; unusually high increase of military/police voters (most markedly in Lembah Pantai, currently a Pakatan Rakyat seat held by Nurul Izzah Anwar, which has seen a 1,024% growth of such voters); and other manifestations.

EC Chairman Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof has declared that Malaysia has “the cleanest electoral rolls in the world”, with problematic registrations amounting to only 42,051 names, but according to Ong’s research findings, the number is closer to 3 million.

Whomever you choose to believe, the outlook is far from rosy. The editors believe the irregularities are caused by deliberate fraud rather than administrative or clerical errors. They consider the state we’re in an “Orwellian absurdity”.

On our part, we the public should be pressing for accountability from the EC and other related authorities. Although Democracy at Stake? does not suggest how we could go about doing this, it focuses attention on a serious issue of our political life.

It’s up to us now to protect our democratic right. Taking to the streets through the Bersih rallies has been done and resulted in some headway, but this is unlikely the way to achieve the ultimate goal.

We need to think of other ways to shake the powers that be to get the real democracy we deserve.

* Kee Thuan Chye is the author of the bestselling book No More Bullshit, Please, We’re All Malaysians, available in bookstores together with its Malay translation, Jangan Kelentong Lagi, Kita Semua Orang Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 17 December 2012, 11:58 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Kee Thuan Chye
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Apology to Najib and UMNO/BN leaders for being elected into DAP CEC at the 16th DAP National Congress and with highest votes

I wish to apologise to the Prime Minister and UMNO President, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the UMNO/BN leaders that I was elected into the DAP Central Executive Committee (CEC) at the 16th DAP National Congress – and with the highest votes.

UMNO leaders, including Najib, had been going round the country castigating the DAP for being undemocratic, alleging that I was in the DAP national leadership although I was not an elected DAP leader.

At the recent 66th UMNO General Assembly at the end of last month, Najib returned to the same theme in his UMNO Presidential Address when he flayed the Pakatan Rakyat parties of PKR, PAS and DAP.

This is what he said about me: “Although only holding the position of member of parliament despite not being an elected leader, Lim Kit Siang is evidently quite a powerful individual in the opposition party”.

It had always amused me when Najib made these attacks against me in his  political tours up and down the country, wondering whether he had been misled by his cohorts of political advisers and aides or whether he had deliberately lied although he knew the truth.

I had stood for every elections to the CEC since the party formation in 1966. In the last DAP 15th Congress, I also stood for election to the CEC and was fortunate to top the votes.

I had deliberately refrained from rebutting Najib for his baseless attack that I was not an elected DAP leader as I wanted to test the degree of the Prime Minister’s respect for fact and truth or the quality of intelligence of the Prime Minister’s army of advisers and aides.

If Malaysia has a Prime Minister who has no respect for fact or truth, continuing to tell untruths like his allegation that I was an unelected leader in DAP, or his cohorts and aides are so atrocious in their political intelligence as not to know that I had contested in every DAP CEC election and that I had polled the highest votes in the 2008 DAP National Congress, then the Malaysian public cannot put too much trust and confidence in the Prime Minister’s speeches, statements and assurances.

Now, what is the truth? Was Najib wrongly advised by his advisers and aides, or did he deliberately repeat a lie against me?

Would apologise Najib for lying about me for not being an elected DAP leader in the past four years?   I am not asking for any apology from Najib as I do not think it is worth asking it from him.  If he wants to apologise, he would have to do it on his own volition.

Now Najib has changed his tune after the press reports that I had received the highest votes at Saturday’s DAP Congress.

Yesterday in Sandakan, Najib said DAP was undemocratic because “the father (Lim Kit  Siang) received the highest number of votes and his son (Lim Guan Eng) came in second”.

Previously, Najib said DAP was undemocratic as I was not an elected DAP leader.  Now he charged DAP for being undemocratic because I had secured the most votes.

What a cheap Prime Minister we have – a “heads I win, tails you lose” complex!

Again, I say sorry to Najib and the UMNO/BN leaders for being elected again into the CEC, and like the previous DAP Congress, with the highest votes.

Coming to the 47th year of my commitment in the DAP to  help bring about a more united, just, democratic and prosperous Malaysia, I will continue to do my utmost in the 13GE to realize the hitherto impossible dream in Malaysia of changing the Federal Government in the 13GE.

I call on Najib to set a personal example to end the hate politics of race, religion, lies and fear which UMNO/BN leaders have been spreading to perpetuate UMNO/BN power and undertake to ensure that the 13GE will be smooth, clean, free and fair elections.

Furthermore, Najib should publicly distance himself from and condemn whoever raised the spectre of May 13 or “chaos” after the 13GE if UMNO/BN loses.

He should demonstrate that he is serious and sincere when he repeatedly said after becoming Prime Minister in April 2009 that  “The era the government knows best is over” and give firm and categorical assurance that UMNO/BN would  peacefully transfer power in Putrajaya  to Pakatan Rakyat if this is the verdict of electorate – a position which should be formalized in the form of a resolution by the UMNO and BN Supreme Councils.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 17 December 2012, 3:56 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.