Now I understand why Liow and Mah dare not accept my advice that they requisition an emergency meeting of BN Supreme Council to reaffirm BN policy opposing Hadi’s hudud bill

Now I understand why the MCA President Liow Tiong Lai and the Gerakan President Mah Siew Keong dare not accept my advice, made freely and  publicly over a half dozen times since May 26, that MCA and Gerakan should  requisition an emergency meeting of Barisan Nasional Supreme Council to resolve once-and-for-all the Barisan Nasional spat caused by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Azalina Said Othman for her Ministerial motion in Parliament on May 26 to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill.

Liow and Mah’s reluctance had been all the more astounding as such a Barisan Nasional Supreme Council emergency meeting would be able to reaffirm the Barisan Nasional policy opposing Hadi’s hudud bill as it was the unanimous consensus of all the Barisan Nasional leaders on this issue in March 2015 which was  reiterated in the Cabinet meeting of May 20, 2016.

Clearly, Liow and the other two MCA Ministers have not learnt from the  lesson of MCA’s 2013 General Election debacle which reduced MCA from the second biggest Barisan Nasional party to a puny “7/11 party” (as compared to winning 28 MPs and 68 SAs in 1999 GE) – because  MCA Ministers and leaders make fierce and ferocious statements and even threats all over the coutnry but behave like mice in Cabinet and Barisan Nasional Supreme Council meetings.

Hadi’s hudud bill is a classic case study of the cowardice, hypocrisy and opportunism of MCA Ministers and leaders.

MCA Ministers are going all over the country issuing threats to resign from the Cabinet if Hadi’s hudud bill is passed in Parliament at the end of the year, but they dare not do a simple and basic thing – to requisition an emergency meeting of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council to repudiate Azalina’s Ministerial action to fast-track Hadi’s hudud motion and to end the Barisan Nasional controversy over Hadi’s hudud bill as it would not see the lighrt of day for debate  in Parliament if there is no second Ministerial motion to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill in Parliament at the end of the year.

Now all Malaysians know the reason for the refusal of MCA and Gerakan Presidents to the simple act of requisitioning an emergency meeting of the BN Supreme Council meeting – for clearly they know from the beginning that the problem is not Azalina but the two top leaders of the Barisan Nasional, who had shown utter contempt for MCA, Gerakan, MIC and the Sarawak and Sabah component parties of BN by giving unilateral approval for Hadi’s hudud motion.

This has been revealed by none other than Azalina herself, who said two days ago that it was the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi who had ordered her to move the Ministerial motion to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill.

Azalina made this shocking revelation two days ago when she was asked in Sungai Besar  if she had cabinet approval before she moved the motion to bump up Hadi’s Bill from the bottom of the queue to the top of House business on May 26.

She said: “In my job as minister in charge of parliament, I report to the leader of the majority, who is the prime minister, and I report to the chief whip, who is the deputy PM.

“So the instructions I got to push it (motion to table Hadi’s Bill) from number 15 to number one would definitely be (from) the leader of the majority and chief whip because that is the procedural requirement for Parliament.”

Azalina explained that she got the directive from the prime minister when she reported to him after she was informed by the Dewan Rakyat speaker that the minister in charge of religion, Jamil Khir Baharom, had written to inform the House that the government had no objection to a debate on the bill.

Many questions demand answer, including the following three:

Firstly, who is Jamil Khir to write to  Parliament to say that the government had no objection to a debate on Hadi’s hudud bill?  Did Jamil get the green-light from the Cabinet, including MCA, Gerakan, MIC and Ministers from the Sarawak and Sabah component BN parties, or do their consent and consensus on this important constitutional issue utterly irrelevant and inconsequential in Barisan Nasional?

Secondly, did the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister direct Azalina to move the Ministerial  motion to “bump up” Hadi’s hudud bill, ahead of all official government business?

Najib and Zahid must speak up and explain their actions why the consensus and traditional basic stand of Barisan Nasional parties on Hadi’s hudud bill are completely irrelevant and inconsequential or had they received the “green light” from Liow and Mah who colluded in the Najib-Hadi plot on Hadi’s hudud bill?

Thirdly, why did Azalina take the very unusual stand of distancing herself from the contents of Hadi’s Bill and the government’s decision to allow it to be tabled, saying that she was only involved in parliamentary procedures.

“My role does not relate to the content of the motion. I oversee regulations, so I only take care of the procedure … because the motion was no 15 and it has to go under no 1 in between government motions.”

This is real garbage. Is Azalina saying that she would move the Ministerial motion to fast-track Hadi’s motion even if she opposed its contents, that she is just robot without a mind of her own?

Liow’s announcement on Sungai Besar by-election Nomination Day that MCA would campaign against Hadi’s hudud bill in the twin by-elections on June 18 makes no sense or meaning whatsoever in the context of Najib  and Zahid being the main protagonists in the fast-track of Hadi’s Hudud Bill in Parliament on May 26.

Why are the MCA and Gerakan Ministers afraid to confront Najib and Zahid with Azalina’s revelation and requisition an emergency meeting of Barisan Nasional Supreme Council to get to the bottom of the Najib-Hadi Hudud Bill.

The MCA and Gerakan Ministers’ explanation do not add up, and they should come to Sungai Besar and the Kuala Kangsar by-election to explain to the voters why they dare not requisition for an emergency meeting of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council to resolve the Barisan Nasional spat over Hadi’s hudud motion once and for all?

Or is the Cabinet and the BN Supreme Council not a meeting of equals, with the Prime Minister at most primus inter pares, but between employer and employees or between the leader and the led?

Let the MCA and Gerakan Ministers hold public meetings in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar to explain and justify their failure and continued cowardice to requisition an emergency meetin go BN Supreme Council to end the controversy over Hadi’s hudud bill once-and-for-all!

                This entry was posted on Monday, 6 June 2016, 12:34 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
MCA
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sungai Besar is the third most marginal  and unsafe UMNO seat won in the 13GE and a miraculous Amanah victory in the Sungai Besar by-election will send out four messages affecting the political future of Malaysia

I was drinking coffee at the AMG Cafe opposite just now, and suddenly, I got to thinking what I was doing in Sekinchan after 50 years in Malaysian politics, fighting a by-election which everybody says will be won by the UMNO/BN candidate – and even the MCA President, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai is boasting about a “flow-back” of support of Chinese voters for UMNO/Barisan Nasional in Sungai Besar and Peninsular Malaysia, just like what happened in the recent Sarawak state general election last month.

Am I wasting my time in Sekinchan and Sungai Besar and should I just call it a day after 50 years in politics?  After all, I am not getting any younger – already past 75 years old!

It will be very difficult and uphill battle – in fact a political “miracle” –  for the Amanah and Pakatan Harapan candidate, Azhar Shukor, to win in the Sungai Besar by-election on June 18, and among the reasons are:

1. Sungai Besar parliamentary seat had always been an UMNO/BN stronghold, and UMNO/BN candidates had never lost in a parliamentary contest in this area for the past six decades since Merdeka in 1957.

2. Even at the height of the Opposition power in the 2013 General Election in May 2013, when there was Pakatan Rakyat, UMNO/BN won the Sungai Besar parliamentary seat although by a wafer-thin majority of 399 votes.

3. Now, Pakatan Rakyat (PR) is no more – thanks to the refusal by the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang to be true and faithful to the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework agreed by the three component parties of PR, DAP, PKR and PAS and his unilateral insistence to push for the implementation of hudud law.

4. Although a new opposition coalition, Pakatan Harapan (PH) had been formed to replace PR with the establishment of Parti Amanah Negara, AMANAH is the youngest political party in the country started less than nine months ago. Both Pakatan Harapan and AMANAH are untested political entities in Malaysia. Could they do better than PAS and PR in the 2013 General Election?

5. Although the Opposition candidate who lost by a wafer-thin majority of 399 votes in Sungai Besar in the 13th General Election came from PAS, the 18,296 votes secured by the PAS candidate or 48.6% of the votes cast against the 18,695 votes won by the UMNO candidate, the 13th General Election score was the highest ever achieved by PAS candidates who had been  contesting  in the area  in past elections because in the 2013 General Election, the PAS candidate was standing as a Pakatan Rakyat candidate with support from DAP and PKR as well.

Now that PAS had violated the PR Common Policy Framework and caused the disintegration of Pakatan Rakyat,  the PAS candidate can only poll less and not more votes than the 13GE figure.  I expect the PAS candidate to lose more than 10,000 votes as compared to what PAS secured in the  2013 GE.

In the circumstances, is there any hope or possibility for AMANAH, representing Pakatan Harapan, to win in Sungai Besar – which also returns to my original question as to what I am doing in Sekinchan and Sungai Besar in these two weeks.

I have already stated the reasons why  it will be very very difficult – as good as a political “miracle”  – for Azhar Shukor, the AMANAH and PR candidate, to win in Sungai Besar.

But it is not impossible, and miracles do happen, although few and far between.

Sekinchan 适耕莊 has a very good name, in Chinese it means suitable for farming villages. It has expanded to become 《《渔米之乡》》适耕莊, not only suitable for vast paddy fields but also rich in fish.

Under the energetic, vigorous and creative leadership of the three-term DAP State Assemblyman for Sekinchan, Ng Suee Lim, Sekinchan is now also famous as a premier agricultural tourist attraction.

History now beckons to Sekinchan to  assume leadership for a new role, not just   as the base suitable for farming, fishing and tourism, but  a political leadership role to “Save Nation, Promote Democracy”.

Although Sungai Besar had always been an UMNO parliamentary stronghold, it is the third most marginal and unsafe parliamentary seat won by UMNO/BN in the 2013 General Election, which saw UMNO/BN losing majority popular vote with Datuk Seri Najib Razak becoming  the first minority Prime Minister in Malaysia, having won only 47% of the popular vote but 60% of the 222 parliamentary seats because of unfair and undemocratic delineation of parliamentary constituencies.

If Malaysians are to achieve  in the 14th General Election what they failed to do on May 5, 2013 – to achieve a change of government in Putrajaya –  then Sungai Besar has an important and even pivotal role, as it  is one of the seats which must be won by the Opposition from UMNO/BN control.

If Pakatan Harapan cannot win Sungai Besar in the June 18 by-election, the chances do  not look good that there will be a  change the government in Putrajaya in the 14th General Election.

A miraculous Amanah victory in the Sungai Besar by-election will send out four messages with far-reaching effects for the political future of Malaysia:

First, that Sekinchan is prepared to transform itself as a centre not only suitable for farming, fishing, tourism but to play a national political leadership role  to save Malaysia and protect democracy. Sekinchan will go down into the history books as an important centre to save the nation and protect democracy, and everyone in Sekinchan and Sungai Besar can hold their heads high for generations to come for their patriotic and pivotal role in the by-election on June 18.

Secondly, Sekinchan and Sungai Besar will also send  an unmistakable message to the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak that he must give full and satisfactory accounting for the RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin global scandals or he should step down as Prime Minister of Malaysia.  It is just not acceptable that the whole world is concerned about 1MDB embezzlement, money-laundering and corruption but not in Malaysia, home of the 1MDB national sovereign fund.

Thirdly, that the agenda for change of government in Putrajaya in the 14th General Election by 2018 is back on track; and

Fourthly, that AMANAH and Pakatan Harapan are capable of continuing the hopes and aspirations of  Malaysians as expressed in the 13th General Election for change in Putrajaya to ensure that Malaysia can become an united, harmonious, democratic, just,  progressive and prosperous nation that can be an example and show-case to the world of how  a multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-lingual and multi-cultural nation can succeed and be a winner in the modern age.

(Speech  at the opening Pakatan Harapan  ceramah in Sungai Besar by-election in Sekinchan on Nomination Day, Sunday, 5th June 2016 at 9.30 pm)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 6 June 2016, 7:56 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Elections
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A three-prong strategy for AMANAH candidate, Azhar Shukor, to achieve the political “miracle” to win the Sungai Besar by-election on June 18

As I confessed at  the Sungai Besar by-election ceramah in Sekinchan last night, I have been troubled  by the question  whether  I am wasting my time  in Sungai Besar by-election after my 50 years in Malaysian politics, fighting a losing electoral battle which seems a sure-winner for the UMNO/BN candidate.

My internal agony has deepened with the visit of the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang to  Sungai Besar today, as what he said has doubly confirmed that there is no way PAS could defeat UMNO/BN in the Sungai Besar by-election.

It is true that the PAS candidate nearly won the Sungai Besar parliamentary contest in the 13th General Election three years ago, winning 18,296 votes or 48.6% of the total votes cast, missing victory by a wafer-thin majority of 399 votes.

But the 2013 result was the  best  ever achieved by the PAS candidate in  the history of Sungai Besar parliamentary  elections, as in the 13th General Election, the PAS candidate was representing not just PAS but also  Pakatan Rakyat (PR) comprising DAP, PKR and PAS.

The by-election on June 18 will be a completely different ball-game from the 13th General Election, as Pakatan Rakyat had been destroyed by the refusal of the PAS President to honour the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework, and there is a three-cornered instead of a one-to-one contest in the constituency.

There is no way the PAS candidate can win in Sungai Besar on June 18 – as the battle is between the UMNO/BN candidate and the AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidate.

In fact, the question for PAS in the Sungai Besar by-election is whether they will lose some 10,000 of the 18,296 votes the PAS candidate secured in the 2013 General Election.

What Hadi said in Sungai Besar earlier today only makes this likelihood very real, with the PAS vote in the June 18 by-election likelyl to be reduced to half or less than half of the 18,296 votes polled in the general election three years ago.

I regret that the PAS President came to Sungai Besar to  tell untruths, even in holy month of Ramadan, making   baseless allegations against the DAP and AMANAH.

Hadi claimed  in  Sungai Besar earlier today  that  PAS will “oppose what is not good and support what is good” but “AMANAH, led by DAP, good or bad, they will oppose all”.

Hadi had told three untruths, firstly, about PAS led by him, secondly about DAP, and thirdly about AMANAH.

I am quite reluctant to criticise Hadi as he has elevated himself to “God-like” status, equating criticism and “disloyalty” against PAS led by him as equivalent to “sin”. However the three untruths he spread in Sungai Besar about PAS, DAP and AMANAH  earlier today cannot go unchallenged.

Firstly, PAS led by Hadi does not “support what is good, oppose what is bad”, for the PAS President is  the only one Opposition leader in the country who had given moral support and backing to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, on his twin global scandals – the RM55 billion 1MDB  and the RM4.2 billion ‘donation’ scandals.

Hadi had said that Wall Street Journal (WSJ) had to provide at least four trustworthy witnesses to back its corruption allegations against Najib – referring specifically to the WSJ  expose in its report of July 2, 2015  on RM2.6 billion deposited into Najib’s private banking accounts.

WSJ’s series of reports  last year on “Malaysia’s Watergate” on  Najib’s twin global financial scandals  had earned   WSJ a finalist spot  in the Pulitzer Prize  nomination list in the International Reporting category and caused the New Straits Times group editor Mustapha Kamil to quit his job in protest against the mounting  crackdown on press freedom and freedom of speech especially concerning Najib’s RM55 billion  1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin global scandals.

Hadil’s support for Najib  is not only rare but clearly much appreciated by Najib, especially with Hadi’s backing for Najib’s evasion of accountability and responsibility for the twin global financial scandals,  by demanding four trustworthy witnesses –  may be Hadi should clarify whether he also meant eight trustworthy female witnesses on the ground that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man!

Other PAS leaders jncluding the PAS Deputy President are allowed to issue statements criticising Najib and the 1MDB scandal, but the PAS President has shown that he exercises absolute power in PAS  in overriding decisions by all  other PAS leaders, which was why Pakatan Rakyat broke up  and disintegrated because Hadi was not prepared to honour  the decision of other PAS leaders  at the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council as he was habitually absent.

Secondly, what Hadi  said about the DAP where DAP and I are equated as “unmitigated evil”, where what we said and did are all wrong,  not only fly in the face of truth but also against his own assertions in the past.

I still remember Hadi’s praises for DAP in the past, expressing his “token of gratitude” for standing by PAS when the PAS Kelantan government fell in 1978.

Hadi acknowledged that it was DAP who defended PAS when the Kelantan government fell to Barisan Nasional which  created chaos in the state. At that time, BN was working with PAS but BN did nothing to help PAS and  it was DAP which defended PAS at the time.

But all the good deeds of the DAP in the past have now become “evil deeds” in the eyes of Hadi.

Thirdly, Hadi is also wrong in accusing AMANAH as puppets and stooges of DAP.

Surely Hadi can remember that in the seven years of Pakatan Rakyat from 2008 to 2015, UMNO propagandists used to attack Hadi and PAS leaders as tools and puppets of DAP.

Why is Hadi and the PAS leaders employing these UMNO tactics to accuse AMANAH as tools and puppets of DAP – when they themselves had been the victims of such false and baseless attacks by UMNO in the past?

The question before us is what could be achieved in the Sungai Besar by-election on June 18 to prevent the UMNO/BN candidate from winning, when the PAS candidate stands no chance of winning at all, and is struggling with the battle whether the PAS candidate  could poll more or less than 10,000 votes in the by-election.

In these circumstances, every vote for PAS in the Sungai Besar by-election is a wasted vote, for it can only help to ensure the UMNO/BN candidate win on June 18.

Although the Sungai Besar by-election is a three-cornered contest, the real battle is between UMNO/BN and AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan.

The question is whether the Amanah/PH candidate Azhar  Shukur can perform the political “miracle” and win the Sungai Besar by-election against all odds.

A political miracle in Sungai Besar by-election can take place if the PAS and UMNO members are prepared to rise above party considerations and vote in support of the AMANAH candidate  to save Malaysia from injustice, corruption and abuses of power.

MCA boasts of more than one million card-carrying members but in the 13th General Election in May 2013, less than one-third of the over a million card-carrying MCA members voted for MCA candidates, supporting the Pakatan Rakyat call for political change in the country.

Similarly, if PAS and UMNO members in Sungai Besar  by-election could also do the same great and patriotic act, to vote for AMANAH/PH candidate in a campaign to “Save Malaysia” from rank injustices and for  an end to  global corruption in Malaysia, then the AMANAH candidate can win Sungai Besar by-election.

This is therefore  a three-pronged strategy for victory for the AMANAH/PH candidate, viz:

1. A higher voter turn-out and higher percentage of support by the non-Malay, particularly Chinese, voters in Sungai Besar;

2. PAS members rising above party politics to vote  for AMANAH/PH candidate;

3. UMNO members rising above party politics to vote for AMANAH /PH candidate.

If this three-pronged strategy could apply and be implemented  on June 18, then the next MP for Sungai Besar will be Azhar Shukor!

(Speech at the Pakatan Harapan ceramah for the Sungai Besar by-election at Sungai Besar on Monday, 6th June 2016)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 7 June 2016, 7:30 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call on Chinese Chambers of Commerce, Chinese Assembly Halls, Chinese Guilds and Association to ask MCA and Gerakan to requisition emergency meeting of BN Supreme Council meeting before June 18 to resolve controversy over Hadi’s hudud bill instead of falling into MCA/Gerakan trap of postponing resolution until end of the year

MCA and Gerakan have been calling on Chinese Chambers of Commerce, Chinese Assembly Halls, Chinese Guilds and Associations to oppose Hadi’s hudud bill in Parliament at the end of the year.

This is a very subtle and sophisticated trap which Chinese Chambers of Commerce, Chinese Assembly Halls, Chinese Guilds and Associations should be vigilant and not fall into, as it would   allow MCA and Gerakan Ministers and leaders to have the best of both worlds –  “to have the cake and eat it”!

I call on Chinese Chambers of Commerce, Chinese Assembly Halls, Chinese Guilds and Association in Malaysia to ask MCA and Gerakan Ministers and leaders  to requisition an emergency meeting of BN Supreme Council meeting before the two by-elections in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar on June 18 to resolve the controversy over Hadi’s hudud bill instead of falling into MCA/Gerakan trap of postponing resolution until end of the year.

The threats by MCA and Gerakan Ministers that they will resign from Cabinet if Hadi’s hudud bill is passed in Parliament at the end of the year is now empty and meaningless as the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said has revealed that it was the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Zahid Hamidi who gave her the order to move the Ministerial motion in Parliament on May 26 to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill.

The persons the MCA and Gerakan Ministers should confront are Najib and Zahid and no more Azalina.

Are Liow and Mah afraid to confront Najib and Zahid in the Cabinet, because the MCA and Gerakan Ministers do not regard themselves as equals to Najib and Zahid, as was the case in the early days of Merdeka when Tun H.S. Lee, Tun  Ong Yoke Lee and Tun Tan Siew Sin regarded themselves as equals of Tunku Abdul Rahman and Razak in the Cabinet?

In such a case, it is all the more imperative that Liow and Mah should requisition an emergency meeting of Barian Nasional Supreme Council to resolve the controversy over Azalina’s Ministerial motion to fast-track Hadi’s Hudud bill.

Apart from one or two political parties like the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), over 10 of the 14 Barisan Nasional parties would want to repudiate Azalina’s Ministerial motion to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill and reaffirm the consensus of Barisan Nasional to reject Hadi’s hudud bill.

The Chinese Chambers of Commerce, Chinese Assembly Halls, Chinese Guilds and Association in Malaysia should not fall into MCA and Gerakan’s political trap and should demand that MCA and Gerakan should team up with the majority of the other Barisan Nasional parties to demand two things: (I) repudiate Azalina’s Ministerial motion to fast-track Hadi’s hudud motion; and (ii) extract a firm commitment from Najib that there would no repetition of the betrayal of the BN’s political and  constitutional stand rejecting Hadi’s hudud bill, and that no Barisan Nasional  Minister would ever again move a Ministerial motion in Parliament to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 7 June 2016, 12:30 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
MCA
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A new political scenario would surface  if the UMNO and PAS members in the Kuala Kangsar by-election rise above petty party politics and vote as patriotic Malaysian voters for AMANAH candidate  to save Malaysia from corruption and injustices

A new political scenario will emerge in Malaysia if the UMNO and PAS members in the Kuala Kangsar by-election on June 18 can rise above petty party politics and vote as patriotic Malaysian voters in support of the AMANAH candidate, Professor Ahmad Termizi to save Malaysia from widespread corruption and rank injustices in the country.

Although the Kuala Kangsar by-election is a four-cornered contest, the real battle is between the UMNO/Barisan Nasional and the AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidates.

It is true that the PAS candidate had achieved the best results in the Kuala Kangsar parliamentary constituency since Merdeka in 1957 in the 13th General Election three years ago – losing by only 1,082 votes.

In the 13th GE, PAS secured 13,136 votes against UMNO’s 14,218 votes, with PAS securing 46.6% of the votes cast.

But the 13,136 votes won by the PAS candidate in 2013 were not just PAS votes, but votes for Pakatan Rakyat (PR) comprising DAP, PKR and PAS.

Now, as Pakatan Rakyat is no more because of the refusal of the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang to honour the PR Common Policy Framework and be a PR team-player, it is impossible for the PAS candidate to poll more votes than the 13,136 votes three years ago.

In fact, PAS is likely to lose more than five thousand votes as compared to the 2013 General Election result, bearing in mind that PAS won 9,277 votes in the 2008 GE and 5,748 votes in the 2004 General Election.

Only the AMANAH/PH candidate can defeat the juggernaut election machinery of UMNO/BN  in the Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar by-elections, although the Kuala Kangsar by-election will be an even more uphill and difficult battle than the Sungai Besar by-election.

The key to AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan victory lies on whether UMNO and PAS members in the Kuala Kangsar by-election on June 18 can rise above petty party politics and vote as patriotic Malaysian voters to save Malaysia from widespread corruption and rank injustices in the country.

This is not an impossible development, as it has already  happened as far as the MCA, Gerakan and MIC  members in the 2013 General Election.

MCA has over a million card-carrying MCA members, but only some 30 per cent of the one-million strong MCA membership voted for MCA candidates whin the 13GE while 70 per cent of the MCA membership or some 700,000 members voted for Pakatan Rakyat candidates in support of the national call for political change in Putrajaya.

Malaysian politics is set for a great political change if not only  MCA, Gerakan, MIC members, but even UMNO and PAS members, can rise above petty party politics and take a common stand with all patriotic Malaysians to “Save Malaysia” from widespread corruption and rank injustices in the country – rejecting the Najib-Hadi political conspiracy as evident in Najib’s support for Hadi’s hudud private member’s bill in Parliament on May 26.

Malaysia can be saved if the majority of  UMNO and PAS members, like majority of MCA, Gerakan and MIC members in the 13th General Election three years ago, could rise above petty party politics and in particular petty  Najib-Hadi politics to “Save Malaysia” for a better, more just, progressive and prosperous future for our children and children’s children, regardless of race, religion, region or party politics.

Can the winds of change which started in the 13th General Election by MCA, Gerakan and MIC members, continue to blow strong and hard, even in the Kuala Kangsar by-election on June 18 – this time spearheaded by UMNO and PAS members?

(Speech at the Pakatan Harapan ceramah in the Kuala Kangsar by-election in Jerlun new village on Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 8 June 2016, 6:50 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A Self-Inflicted Downgrade for Malaysia?

By WILLIAM PESEK

Barron’s Asia

June 8, 2016

Goldman Sachs finds itself ensnared in the 1MDB scandal which threatens to squeeze the nation’s credit rating.

Goldman Sachs is sharing its giant vampire squid with Najib Razak’s government in Malaysia.

The investment colossus has found itself at the scene of many a scandal – a financial Forrest Gump, if you will. From U.S. Treasury bidding probes to Greece’s debt crisis to the subprime meltdown, Goldman’s bankers were there reaping fortunes behind the scenes. In a 2009 Rolling Stone piece, Matt Tiabbi famously branded it “a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.”

Make that Malaysia, too. As the Wall Street Journal reports, U.S. officials are probing whether Goldman broke the law by not alerting authorities about dodgy dealings at state investment fund 1Malaysia Development Bhd.

It’s the latest reminder of how Prime Minister Najib’s 1MDB mess is wrapping its tentacles around an entire nation. The unpredictable ways in which it threatens to drag Southeast Asia’s third-biggest economy under, like some massive vampire squid, can be seen in Putrajaya’s balance sheet. Could it even lead to a credit downgrade?

Yes, argues Sian Fenner of Oxford Economics in Singapore. Malaysia’s total government debt, she reckons, ended 2015 at 54.5% of gross domestic product, a heavy burden relative to Asian peers. As Najib dismantles the debt-ridden 1MDB he created in 2009, his government may have to assume some liabilities. According to Fenner’s calculations, that could top 2.5% of GDP. “We find that it would have a material effect on asset prices and pressure on the exchange rate could see Bank Negara raising interest rates to support the currency despite weaker domestic activity,” she says.

In March, Fitch warned a downgrade was “more than 50 percent likely” as 1MDB struggled to meet obligations and the trade balance darkened. Last month, 1MDB defaulted, adding to what traders call “headline risk.” At the same time, corruption probes in at least seven countries are intensifying even as Najib’s government insists the case is closed. Hardly, with overseas investigators sniffing around to locate more than $6 billion of funds believed to be unaccounted for. And as the Wall Street Journal alleges, investigators are all over hundreds of millions of dollars Najib and his family may have used to finance everything from real estate to jewelry to Leonardo DiCaprio’s “Wolf of Wall Street” film.

Sadly, Putrajaya’s response has been to circle the wagons and blame the messenger. Najib recently said his central bank directed the police to investigate foreign media outlets breaking news on 1MDB. That’s an ominous sign for the state of central-bank autonomy in Kuala Lumpur. As I wrote last month, there are questions about whether new Governor Muhammad Ibrahim can maintain the same independence as predecessor Zeti Akhtar Aziz.

Far from boosting Malaysia’s economy, 1MDB is denting its standing as global headwinds intensify. Last week, Credit Suisse became the latest investment bank – joining JP Morgan and others – in downgrading Malaysian shares. Along with “considerable political and governance risks,” Credit Suisse cites oil-price trends and an economy that “remains subject to negative growth revisions and a weak consumer.”

This circles back to Fenner’s view. Since late 2009, she says, the share of debt held by foreigners has more than doubled, and amounted to more than a third of total debt at the end of the first quarter. The drip, drip, drip of bad news since then only increases Malaysia’s vulnerability to shifts in investor sentiment. “While at these levels debt is still manageable, there are several factors that have increased Malaysia’s vulnerability,” Fenner warns.

One is how a government in full survival mode isn’t restructuring an economy falling further behind. Early in his premiership that began in 2009, Najib pledged to scale back the affirmative-action polities benefiting the ethnic-Malay majority. That scheme, implemented by Najib’s prime minister father in the early 1970s, kills productivity, deadens innovation and encourages multinational companies to set up shop in Singapore, Indonesia and Vietnam instead of Malaysia.

Another is how Najib’s party, which has held power since 1946, is neutering government institutions to extend its reign. Case in point: a proposed overseas travel ban on Malaysians who criticize the government. The assault on the media, both domestic and foreign, is troubling, too. For a reality check, I recommend reading Wall Street Journal reporter Tom Wright’s interview with Mustapha Kamil, who recently resigned from New Straits Times newspaper to protest “authoritarian” winds coursing through officialdom.

The more Malaysia obfuscates on 1MDB, the more outside parties pounce. It was truly surreal to see Najib hosting Asia’s World Economic Forum in Kuala Lumpur last week, pretending all’s well in his economy. U.S. law enforcement officials scheduling interviews with Goldman executives (according to the Journal) would disagree. At issue is the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, which demands financial institutions flag suspicious transactions. It should worry Najib’s team that a law employed to snag Ponzi-schemer Bernard Madoff is looking their way.

It should worry investors that 1MDB’s tentacles are wrapped so tightly around what should be one of Asia’s most vibrant economies. With vast natural resources, 30 million people and enviable proximity to China and India, the place should be thriving. Yet it’s run by a party putting its own interests ahead of the masses. And now, Najib’s creature is squeezing Malaysia’s credit rating. No wonder investigators and investors alike have that sinking feeling.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 8 June 2016, 6:07 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Hadi-led PAS is more and more like UMNO, sometimes even  out-UMNO UMNO

I am surprised by the attacks on the DAP launched by the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang since the run-up to the Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar parliamentary by-elections, as if Hadi’s political caliber and leadership have to be judged by the intensity of his attacks on the DAP, regardless of their truth or falsity.

PAS led by Hadi is more and more like UMNO, sometimes even out-UMNO UMNO, and I can  hardly recognize the “open-minded” PAS of Tok Guru Datuk Seri Nik Aziz Nik Mat, who was Kelantan Mentri Besar for 23 years or the PAS of the previous PAS Presidents  Fadzil  Nor and Yusuf Rawa for some two decades before Hadi’s presidency.

Hadi had talked about being the adviser to UMNO and Najib, but sometimes I wonder whether it is Najib who is actually advising Hadi!

Recently, there had been   a few instances of PAS under Hadi which is more and more like UMNO, sometimes even out-UMNO UMNO.

PAS had accused UMNO of communalism in advocating “ketuanan Melayu” but it has now followed the UMNO footsteps  as illustrated by the PAS adoption of Malay warrior garb and other  traditional Malay attire and customs at the recent PAS Muktamar – which even caused an UMNO Minister, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz to observe sardonically that UMNO’s formula had proved to be so successful that PAS was mimicking them.

But this was not the extent of PAS mimicry of UMNO – when Hadi wielded a long keris at the PAS Muktamar, longer than the short keris that Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein had wielded three times at the UMNO Youth General Assembly when he was UMNO Youth Leader, with such awful consequences for plural Malaysia!

Even former Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir was moved to chide PAS for trying to be more nationalist than UMNO – as if the longer the keris, the more nationalist the party, using the length of the  keris to measure nationalism!

With these developments, one should probably not be surprised that the Hadi-led PAS abandoned the “PAS for All” objective and slogan and caused the disintegration of Pakatan Rakyat when Hadi refused to honour the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework and failed to be a Pakatan Rakyat ‘team player’, unilaterally exercising a non-existent  veto to  block Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council decisions although  other PAS leaders agreed to these decisions in Hadi’s absence.

When PAS was in Pakatan Rakyat for seven years from 2008 to 2015, Hadi and other PAS leaders were accused of being DAP pawns and stooges. Now, Hadi and his lieutenants are using the UMNO tactics to accuse AMANAH leaders as pawns and stooges of DAP.

Is Hadi suggesting that UMNO was right when he was accused of being DAP pawn and stooge before PR’s  disintegration?

Hadi sometimes tried to out-UMNO UMNO.

This was when Hadi asserted  that “pemimpin Malaysia wajib Islam, Melayu” which is against the fundamental principle of the Constitution which allows any Malaysian regardless of race or religion even to be a Prime Minister.

The political reality that a Malay would be the Prime Minister of Malaysia in view of the political demography in the country is separate and different  from calling for a constitutional bar to prevent a non-Malay from becoming a Prime Minister.

This is one example where Hadi tries to out-UMNO UMNO.

The time has come for new politics in Malaysia where Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region or political party, unite as one to “Save Malaysia” from widespread corruption and injustices in the country.

MCA claimed to have more than a million members, but in the 13th General Election three years ago, some 70 per cent of the million MCA card-carrying members voted against the MCA and Barisan Nasional candidates, supporting the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) candidates in support of  PR call for political change in Putrajaya.

MIC claimed to have 750,000 members but in the 13GE, some 75 per cent of MIC’s three-quarter of a million members voted against MIC and BN candidates in support of PR candidates!

If in the Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar by-elections on June 18, PAS and UMNO members can rise above petty party politics to “Save Malaysia”  and refuse to fall into the Najib-Hadi trap to use Hadi’s hudud bill to distract attention from Najib’s RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin mega scandals, voting for the respective AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidates,  then the Kuala  Kangsar and Sungai Besar by-elections will see the beginning of a new politics in Malaysia, where national interests are given higher priority than political party interests, whether UMNO, PAS or Najib-Hadi political conspiracy.

(Speech at the Pakatan Harapan Kuala Kangsar by-election kopitiam ceramah in Kuala Kangsar town on Wednesday, 8th June 2016 at 10 am)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 8 June 2016, 5:12 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
MCA
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Hudud merrygoround again distracts an ailing nation

By
Dzulkefly Ahmad

5 Jun 2016, 8:14 am

Malaysiakini

Sadly, our beloved Malaysia is now…

… a nation plagued with crippling perennial problems of gross endemic corruption, hefty embezzlement, wastage and widening income inequality….

… a nation virtually torn apart because of a deepening racial divide and religious intolerance due to bigotry…

… a nation whose critical institutions are chronically subverted by the powers-that-be, thus losing its cardinal role as check and balance on the separation of powers for effective governance …

And yet, despite all these gross failures of nation building, hudud, is once again taking centrestage in Malaysian politics. But why? Why was the Private Member’s Bill from Marang MP Abdul Hadi Awang allowed to be tabled?

To stand down all other government matters in the order paper, only to be told that the PAS president Hadi wanted the debate on the ‘motion/bill’ deferred, is simply nonsensical.

Any thinking Malaysian would realise that granting leave to amend the Syariah Court Act of 355 (Criminal Jurisdiction) and conveniently deferring the debate to a later session, smacks of mala fide. It’s a sinister political manoeuvring at best, and downright despicable at worst.

Unproductive never-ending debate

Never mind that BN is about to implode. Never mind that Pakatan Harapan might bite the ‘Hudud Bill’ bait and go into a tailspin again, like how hudud dismantled Pakatan Rakyat. Never mind that the debate was over a ‘motion’ or a ‘bill’.

The fact of the matter is that the entire nation is yet again embattled in this acrimonious unending debate. And arguably, without any constructive and productive outcome.

Just as everyone was up in arms against everyone else seen as having contrarian views, PM Najib Abdul Razak and his minister in charge of religious affairs Jamil Khir Baharom, deemed it amusing to announce that Hadi’s bill was not a ‘Hudud Bill’ after all.

So is it a ‘Hudud Bill’ or not, Najib? Of course it is, Najib! Why are you afraid to call a spade a spade? Were you really caught unaware? Or did Jamil mislead you?

Simply put, Hadi through his Private Member’s Bill is seeking to amend the syariah court’s jurisdiction to empower a “minimalist” implementation of hudud.

The bill dubbed the ‘Hudud Bill’ of Act 355, needs to be amended to allow syariah courts to mete out some (perhaps three) of the total five hudud sentences; only involving those not in the federal list (Penal Code) and not involving death sentences.

If the Hudud Bill is passed, it can pave the way for hudud to be implemented in Kelantan. Specifically, allowing hudud punishments for adultery or zina (sex between couples who are not married to each other), alcohol consumption (syurb khamr) and apostasy (irtidad).

Obsessed with punishment

So what if Hadi is successful. Should we celebrate and praise ourselves? Is that about all PAS could offer of Islam and its hudud-centric understanding of the higher objectives of shari’ah, in the midst of a failing nation? Punishment and more punishment?

This truly epitomises the typical ‘intellectual paralysis’ of the first generation Islamist political parties that have deluded the minds of the undiscerning Muslims. Such political posturings have been criticised by many contemporary Muslim intellectuals.

I have also said it on numerous occasions. I will repeat myself, fully knowing that l will again be vilified and ostracised as a ‘liberal and infidel’ by God knows who.

The time has come for all discerning Muslims and their organisations to pronounce it loud and clear to all Malaysians, nay the entire world, of what Islam truly stands for, beyond the punitive aspect of the shari’ah.

Parti Amanah Negara (Amanah) will continue to relentlessly advocate for the higher objectives of the shari’ah (maqasid shari’ah), as to address the national failures and move forward towards nation rebuilding.

To embrace the true embodiment of ‘lslam as a mercy unto all mankind’, (rahmatan lil ‘aalamin), Amanah foremost upholds and strongly advocates the imperative of ‘human dignity’ (karamah insaniyyah) as fundamental to debunk all forms of discrimination based on race, faith, religion and political affiliations.

Amanah advocates the principles of justice and equality (al’ adl wa al-musaawa), in both responsibility and opportunity for every citizen in the entire nation, to be observed and institutionalised, without any prejudice and discrimination. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) pronounced this very ‘revolutionary’ precept and commitment in his Medina Constitution.

Only when the recognition of the ‘dignity of man’ is institutionalised in political governance, will the other ‘higher objectives of shari’ah, namely the protection and preservation of faith (hifzul deen), life (hifzul nafs), intellect (hifzul aqal), progeny (hifzul nasab) and finally the protection of property (hifzul maal); be meaningful and operational within a policy construct of enhancing a ‘just and equitable development’.

Free will not coercion

Whilst recognising the appropriate roles of ‘punishment and prohibition’ in Islam, Amanah is very wary and opposed to the over-emphasis of such an orientation of presenting Islam and its shari’ah (legal reductionism), as it reduces Islam to a ‘way of life’ based on a rigid ‘do’s and don’ts’ and finally becoming ‘Talibanic’ in ‘coercion and policing’.

Submission in Islam must be based on conviction, knowledge and free will and not through legal acts of coercion, which invariably breeds ignorance, hypocrisy and dishonesty, human ailments which lslam endeavours to eliminate.

Amanah’s progressive and systemic view of the maqasid shari’ah additionally calls for Islam to be fundamentally hinged on its imperatives of securing and protecting of justice and freedom (hifzul ‘adalah wa hurriyah) for all mankind as advocated by the great 20th century thinker Ibn Ashur’s treatise on maqasid shari’ah.

PAS is at liberty to don any clothing from Arabic jubah and turbans to Malay songket and tanjak and brandish the longest keris. We could only wish them well.

But whenever PAS retrogresses into championing the doctrine of ‘Malay-Muslim supremacism’ (ketuanan Melayu-Islam) and now reducing Islam to merely hudud and punitive laws, fellow Malaysians can rest assured that Amanah and its coalition partners in Pakatan Harapan will lump PAS together with their new found ally, Umno-BN, as our political nemesis.

While the PAS president had time and again repeated the position of assuming an ‘advisory’ role to the Najib-BN government, inadvertently maintaining Najib’s status quo, Amanah and Pakatan Harapan in coalition with civil society shall intensify and mount a serious challenge for change and reforms.

Distortions and subversion of the system, driven by greed and dishonesty, are the underlying reasons for the endemic rent-seeking activities, monopolies and corrupt practices. Amanah calls for an immediate systemic reform premised on the ethical and moral principles of accountability and transparency as advocated by the corpus of Islamic jurisprudence and the immediate restoration of the rule-of-law (siyadah al- qanuniyyah).

Recognising the immediate and urgent needs of a failing Malaysia, the ‘Hadi and Najib Bill’ simply reflects one party that is completely oblivious, out of touch with the injustices, corruption, racial and religious strife that is raging in our nation, and another that is fighting for its political survival by creating distractions from the ravages of 1MDB, national economic slump and a potential party implosion.

____

DZULKEFLY AHMAD is Parti Amanah Negara strategy director and former Kuala Selangor MP.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 8 June 2016, 4:47 pm and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


“Barisan Nasional consensus on consensus” on Hadi’s hudud bill – What is this strange animal?

There is now a  new creature  in the world – the “Barisan Nasional consensus on consensus” on Hadi’s hudud bill.

This new creature of “Barisan Nasional consensus on consensus” was born out of the betrayal of long-cherished principles and political positions adopted by Barisan Nasional leaders and component parties for over four decades, and its first appearance was announced to the world by the MCA President and Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai in Sungai Besar last night.

Liow told the press in his Sungai Besar by-election campaign trail in Sekinchan that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak had given “positive” signals over the Barisan Nasional row in the past two weeks over Hadi’s hudud bill which was fast-tracked to leap over all official government business on the last day of Parliament on May 26 by way of a Ministerial motion which was moved by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said.

Liow told the press that he had met the Prime Minister over Hadi’s hudud bill and conveyed the MCA’s view that the Barisan Nasional spirit and consensus must be respected and the Prime Minister had given “a positive response”.

The Gerakan President, Datuk Mah Siew Keong, confirmed Liow’s statement, saying that a Cabinet meeting today resolved that the Barisan Nasional leadership will discuss and reach a “consensus” on Hadi’s hudud bill.

Mah revealed that  in the meeting with Najib and Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi over Hadi’s hudud bill, it was agreed that there will be a discussion among Barisan Nasional leadership and a consensus decision will be made in accordance with BN spirit.

I feel appalled about the quality, caliber and mettle of the present leaderships of the Barisan Nasional component parties.

In the past fortnight, I had publicly suggested at least half a dozen times to Liow and Mah to requisition an emergency meeting of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council to resolve the Barisan Nasional row over Hadi’s hudud bill once-for-all, especially as Azalina’s Ministerial motion made three fatal mistakes, viz:

•	Violated the consensus of all Barisan Nasional leaders on Hadi’s hudud bill in March 2015;

•	Violation of  the reaffirmation of Barisan Nasional stand by the Cabinet meeting of May 20, 2016 as revealed by Upko Acting President and Minister for Science, Technology and Innovation in an urgent letter to Najib on May 25 in a last-ditch attempt to stop Azalina’s Ministerial motion;

•	Presented unilaterally and arbitrarily, totally against Barisan Nasional spirit, without formal notice to all Barisan Nasional Ministers and leaders.

I am somewhat gratified  what I had suggested publicly at least half a dozen times in the past fortnight  that there should be an emergency meeting of the BN Supreme Council  to end the row over Hadi’s hudud bill is now being acted upon – although Liow and Mah would have engendered greater confidence, not only among the Malaysian public but among MCA and Gerakan members, if they are capable of promptly doing what is right on their own initiative instead of dilly-dallying over it.

No wonder MCA and Gerakan have even lost the confidence of their own party members and not just the Chinese community and the Malaysian public, as illustrated by the results of the last general election.

Could it be that Liow and Mah dare not on their  party’s own initiative requisition an emergency meeting of the BN Supreme Council, for this is not permissible for MCA and Gerakan as they will otherwise be acting “out of line”?

But I am dismayed by the agenda for the belated meeting of BN leaders, which I presume will be the BN Supreme Council – to make a “consensus decision” on Hadi’s bill!

BN leaders have always maintained that there is already a Barisan Nasional consensus rejecting Hadi’s hudud bill, and if this the case, why is there a need to make “a consensus decision” on Hadi’s bill – creating a new-fangled creature of a Barisan Nasional “consensus on a consensus”?

As I said right from the beginning of the controversy, it is meaningless to indulge in empty rhetoric after the horses have bolted and issue threats which nobody believes  like threats to resign from the Cabinet at the end of the year if Hadi’s hudud’s bill is passed by Parliament, when the urgent and realistic thing to do is  restore the status quo ante to reaffirm BN consensus to reject Hadi’s hudud bill, and the sacking of Azalina (proposer) and Deputy Works Minister Datuk Rosnah Abdul Raashid Shirlin (seconder) for the Ministerial motion to  fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill in Parliament on May 26.

Even if Liow and Mah dare not ask for the sacking of Azalina as Minister and Rosnah as Deputy Minister for proposing and seconding the “fast-track” Ministerial motion, the MCA and Gerakan President should ensure that the BN Supreme Council restore the status quo ante on the issue, by reaffirming the Barisan Nasional consensus which had been the basic principle and cardinal position of BN for over four decades right from its formation in 1973!

If there is already a 43-year-old Barisan Nasional consensus rejecting hudud in Malaysia, why is there still a need to reach a “consensus” on Hadi’s hudud bill?

What is this  second consensus on the first consensus in the  new fangled Barisan Nasional “consensus on a consensus”?

Furthermore, what is the first “consensus”?

If the UMNO Ministers take the position that the “first consensus” is Azalina’s Ministerial motion to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill, then unless all the Ministers can agree on a new consensus to oppose Hadi’s hudud bill, there will be a second Ministerial motion in Parliament at the end of the year to “fast-track” Hadi’s hudud bill to bring his motion to a resolution in Parliament.

If the “first consensus” is to recognize the 43-year BN consensus to reject hudud law, the Azalina’s Ministerial motion has violated this consensus, and unless all Ministers and BN leaders agree to a new position, the 43-year BN consensus must stand and remain – and Azalina and Rosnah should be sacked as Minister and Deputy Minister respectively for violating the 43-year-old BN consensus.

What is the “first consensus” and what is the “second consensus” is this new-fangled “Barisan Nasional consensus on a consensus”?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 9 June 2016, 9:00 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Islam
,
MCA
,
Najib Razak
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mah Hang Soon should not have used Wan Mohammad Khair-il’s name in vain or has he got the permission from Mastura’s approval to use her late husband’s name?

Since Nomination Day on Sunday, I have just made a tour of the Sungai Besar and the Kuala Kangsar constituencies where parliamentary by-elections are underway caused by the tragic helicopter crash during the Sarawak state general elections.

In both constituencies, the AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidate started as the underdog in the three-cornered fight in Sungai Besar and the four-cornered fight in the Kuala Kangsar by-elections, but after four days of the by-election campaigns, it is clear that the contest is between UMNO/BN and AMANAH/PH candidates, as a vote for the PAS candidate in both constituencies would be a wasted vote with  no chance whatsoever for the PAS candidate to  win in either one of the two constituencies.

In fact, I had said publicly that I expect the PAS candidate in Sungai Besar to lose by some 10,000 votes and in Kuala Kangsar to lose by some 5,000 votes as compared to the votes polled by the PAS candidates in these two constituencies in the 13th General Election in 2013.

To defeat the UMNO/BN candidate in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar in the by-elections would cause quite a political earthquake as both constituencies had been UMNO strongholds, never won by any Opposition candidate in the past six decades.

But this political earthquake could only achieved by the AMANAH candidate and NOT the PAS candidate because of the demographic composition of the constituencies  and from the  voters’ reactions  in the past four days.

I am shocked when I was in Kuala Kangsar yesterday that the Perak MCA is using the name of the late  Wan Mohammad Khair-il Wan Ahmad in the by-election campaign, claiming that if was still alive, the late UMNO/BN MP for Kuala Kangsar would not have agreed with Hadi’s hudud bill motion or even  with UMNO Minister, Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said for her Ministerial motion fast-tracking Hadi’s hudud bill on the last day of Parliament on May 26.

This is contained in a letter by the Perak MCA Chairman Dr. Mah Hang Soon which appeared in the June edition of the publication “Perak View”, which was distributed in Kuala Kangsar  by the  MCA by-election campaign team led by the MCA Wanita Chief, Heng Seai Kie.

Mah should not have used Wan Mohammad Khair-il’s name in vain or has he got the permission from Mastura Mohd Yazid to use her late husband’s name saying that her husband would have opposed Hadi’s hudud bill and even opposed Azalina’s Ministeiral motion to “fast-track” Hadi’s bill?

As Mastura is now UMNO/BN candidate for the Kuala Kangsar by-election, has Mastura give him the assurance that if elected, she will like her late husband oppose Hadi’s hudud bill as well as oppose any Ministerial motion to “fast-track” Hadi’s motion?

I was doubly shocked yesterday, the second occasion was Heng’s statement in Kuala Kangsar that Azalina did not represent BN when she moved the Ministerial motion in Parliament on May 26 to fast-track Hadi’s hudud motion.

This has come as a surprise all-round, as Malaysians had always been told that the Government in Putrajaya is a BN and not an UMNO government, and Ministers sit in Parliament representing BN and not just UMNO or their respective parties.

Would the MCA Wanita Chairman call for the sacking of Azalina from the Cabinet as she had moved the Ministerial motion as UMNO Minister, committing a gross breach of trust to act as a BN Minister reflecting the views of all BN parties.

What is even more befuddling is her claim that “MCA’s conscience was clear as it had not betrayed the Chinese community”.

Heng provides a classic case of “eyes that see not, ears that hear not, mouth that speaks not, conscience that feels not”.

The MCA Wanita Chairperson is the best advertisement of the present batch of MCA leadership, and why even MCA members have lost confidence in the MCA leaders with some 70 per cent of the one million card-carrying members rejecting and MCA and Barisan Nasional candidates and choosing to vote for DAP/Pakatan Rakyat candidates in the 13th General Elections.

The more she speaks in taking Malaysians for fools, the worse it will be for MCA.

The time has come for new politics in Malaysia where Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region or political party, unite as one to “Save Malaysia” from widespread corruption and injustices in the country.

MCA claimed to have more than a million members, but in the 13th General Election three years ago, some 70 per cent of the million MCA card-carrying members voted against the MCA and Barisan Nasional candidates, supporting the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) candidates in support of  PR call for political change in Putrajaya.

MIC claimed to have 750,000 members but in the 13GE, some 75 per cent of MIC’s three-quarter of a million members voted against MIC and BN candidates in support of PR candidates!

If in the Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar by-elections on June 18, PAS and UMNO members can rise above petty party politics to “Save Malaysia”  and refuse to fall into the Najib-Hadi trap to use Hadi’s hudud bill to distract attention from Najib’s RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin mega scandals, and vote  for the respective AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidates,  then the Kuala  Kangsar and Sungai Besar by-elections will see the beginning of a new politics in Malaysia, where national interests are given higher priority than political party interests, whether UMNO, PAS or Najib-Hadi political conspiracy.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 9 June 2016, 2:06 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parliament
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The evolution of the hudud debate

By
Wong Chin Huat

1 Jun 2016, 7:55 am

Malaysiakini

What is misconstrued and misrepresented as hudud in public discourse in Malaysia may be better termed or understood as expansion of syariah law.

Syariah expansion has two dimensions: first, expansion of the jurisdiction of the syariah court to go beyond personal and family matters into hudud and qisas offences, so named after their punishments; and second, expansion of the court’s power to mete out hudud (fixed) and qisas (retaliatory) punishments.

Should syariah law cover non-Muslims?

While the second dimension has reduced the issue to ‘hudud’, the first dimension has defined the public debate so far because some hudud offences (theft and robbery) and all qisas offences (homicide and bodily injuries) may involve non-Muslims as criminals or victims.

This is where the dilemma lies: imposition of syariah law on non-Muslims would mean outright violation of non-Muslims’ religious freedom, while exclusion of non-Muslims would mean inequality by religion between Muslims and non-Muslims.

Three positions have been observed on the scope of syariah expansion in response to whether the non-Muslims should be governed by the syariah law.

1. Maximalist: Syariah for all, full range of offences

The first position is maximalist, namely, syariah law for all with an extensive list of offences. In May 2014, Isma president Abdullah Zaik Abdul Rahman urged the enforcement of the Islamic criminal code on both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Denial of non-Muslims’ religious freedom was not at all a concern for the Malay-Muslim ultra-nationalist.

Zaik instead accused the infidels of “overstepping their bounds” by opposing or blocking Muslim ambitions in promoting the position of Islam in Malaysia.

2. Two-track: Syariah for Muslims only, full range of offences

The second position is two-track, namely, the same extensive list of offences applies, but syariah law for Muslims only and common laws for non-Muslims. ‘One country, two systems’, if you like.

For the same crime, Muslim and non-Muslim suspects might be tried separately in different courts and face vastly different punishments – for example, amputation and imprisonment and/or fine for first-time thieves.

This is the mainstream position taken by most proponents. By excluding the non-Muslim criminals, they hope to eliminate the basis of non-Muslim objection and continued objection by the non-Muslims is then seen as intrusion into Muslim affairs.

And if the debate is successfully made an intra-Muslim one, objection on the ground of inequality can then be easily dismissed: Muslims should not complain of heavier punishments because they are religiously obliged.

3. Minimalist: Syariah for Muslims only, limited range of offences

The third position is minimalist, namely, syariah law for Muslims only and the range of offences applied is limited to those which will not involve non-Muslims as criminals or crime victims.

It is recognition of the flaw of the ‘two-track’ position, which is at best misinformed and at worst, dishonest.

While different laws may be applied to different territories within the same country (as in the case of Aceh and the rest of Indonesia), different laws applied to different communities in the same territory is simply impossible.

Why? Criminals won’t religiously profile victims to not steal from, rob, kill or injure non-believers so that both parties are bound by the same religious law.

In fact, if anything, the syariah court applies its own criminal procedure code, which denies the non-Muslims (alongside women) full testifying competence. Hence, a Muslim robber may get acquitted because the non-Muslim victim cannot be her own witness.

A minimalist position is then the only way to fully eliminate the non-Muslims as stakeholders from the debate.

The shifts indicated by Hadi’s Bill

Abdul Hadi Awang’s Private Member’s Bill on May 26 indicates a historic shift from the two-track position to the minimalist position in the debate of syariah expansion.

The Bill seeks to amend the Syariah Court (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 by (a) Amending Section 2 to remove the 3-5-6 caps – imprisonment up to three years, fine up to RM 5,000 and whipping up to six lashes; (b) Adding a Section 2A to exclude the death penalty from the syariah court’s jurisdiction.

The exclusion of the death penalty takes out the controversial stoning punishment for married adulterers and normal death penalty for robbers who cause death, murderers and heretics.

This is a new position when compared to a similar bill Hadi Awang tabled in last June.

While deleting the entire paragraph of the 3-5-6 caps, both of Hadi’s bills confine the syariah court’s jurisdiction to matters mentioned in Item 1, State List of the Ninth Schedule in the Federal Constitution.

Item 1 states “creation and punishment of offences by persons professing the religion of Islam against the precepts of that religion, except in regard to matters included in the Federal List”.

It further explicitly limits the syariah court’s power to “not have jurisdiction in respect of offences except in so far conferred by federal law”.

As per the claim of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and his ministers as Hadi’s interpreters, offences under federal law (the Penal Code, to be precise) – theft, robbery, homicide, bodily injuries and sodomy – would be excluded. This is a minimalist position because non-Muslims would be excluded.

Intriguingly, while excluding the death penalty is a new move, Hadi has quietly taken on the minimalist position since last year.

If Hadi was already prepared to make the huge compromise, why did Kelantan PAS – already in discussion with Putrajaya – mislead the public that it was pursuing the whole range of hudud punishments, including amputation?

Why did Kelantan PAS mislead some doctors to offer “surgeon-assisted amputation” and enter a heated debate with their professional body, the Malaysian Medical Association (MMA)?

Was that Hadi’s scheme to split Pakatan Rakyat and his own party?

Intra-Muslim debate

With the shift from PAS’ two-track position in the Kelantan state assembly to Hadi’s minimalist position in the Dewan Rakyat, the nature of the syariah expansion or hudud debate has been substantially changed.

Till now, the agenda of syariah expansion is most strongly opposed by the non-Muslims because of their suspicion to the dodgy two-track position. The dissident voices within the Muslim community are limited to progressive Muslim groups like Sisters in Islam (SIS), Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) and the Group of 25 (G25), and small pockets of lawyers, intellectuals and politicians.

In fact, leaning on the non-Muslim opposition, the standard line to oppose syariah expansion is that “Malaysia is a multi-religious society”, which many Muslim opponents share.

Unwittingly, such argument actually “justifies” the push for syariah expansion in Kelantan and Terengganu, since the populations there are almost mono-religious, respectively 95 percent and 97 percent Muslim.

By taking a minimalist position, Hadi has fundamentally changed the main track of the ‘hudud’ debate, from inter-faith (between Muslim and non-Muslim) to intra-faith (within Muslims).

BN non-Muslim ministers who now jump and threaten to resign in protest will soon accept Najib-Hadi’s explanation and assurance of non-Muslim exclusion.

And once the BN sorts out its internal discord, non-Muslim objection will be attacked harshly as interference into Muslim affairs and even blamed on the opposition.

If passed, Hadi’s bill will enable five hudud punishments for the four hudud offences in Kelantan and Terengganu, which may soon be imitated by other states:

40-80 lashes for drinkers;

100 lashes for unmarried adulterers;

80 lashes for persons convicted of qazaf (unsubstantiated accusation of adultery or sodomy);

For persons convicted of irtidad or riddah (heresy) – in Kelantan, indefinite imprisonment and property forfeiture before repentance; in Terengganu, property forfeiture before repentance and imprisonment not more than five years after repentance.

To continue the debate, Muslim opponents of syariah expansion will have to make a good case – best if based on Islam – against scenarios how these punishments may be meted out.

Instead of a binary choice of “Yes” or “No”, the Muslim public needs to be informed of the detailed implications of these offences and punishments.

For example, should a wife be whipped 80 lashes for accusing her husband of adultery just because she didn’t have with her four just Muslim male witnesses when he was caught pants down?

Or, should a thinker like Kassim Ahmad be jailed indefinitely with all his properties forfeited unless and until he denounces his religious views?

Intra-Muslim debate must be credited for some of the important shifts in the proponents’ position.

For example, pregnancy of single women was originally listed in the 1993 version of Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code II as a circumstantial evidence for adultery. Thanks to advocacy by SIS and other groups, this was dropped in the 2015 version.

Progressive Muslims may also want to take a leaf from Tunisia’s experience – how the push to introduce syariah law fails in a population of 98 percent Muslims, and, why the mainstream Islamist party Ennahda has just declared in late May that “we are Muslim democrats, not Islamists”.

‘Nationalised’ debate

Some may ask: why can’t all Malaysians have a say on this matter? While non-Muslims are no longer direct stakeholders? Can’t they be concerned as fellow citizens about potential miscarriage of justice for their Muslim brothers and sisters?

For that to happen, the ‘consociationalist’ norm of communal autonomy needs to be challenged. The current ‘inter-faith’ debate grounded on ‘multi-religious society’ needs to be ‘nationalised’, where Muslims and non-Muslims enter as individual citizens.

But such challenge may have to come from East Malaysia, where citizenry is not rigidly partitioned along religious lines.

Interestingly, mainstream Muslim group Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (Abim) has urged that the matter be discussed by all stakeholders including the non-Muslims.

Subtly cautioning formalism, Abim also wants implementation of syariah law to be guided by maqasid al-syariah (higher purposes of syariah) so that it may dispense justice.

_________

WONG CHIN HUAT is a Research Fellow with Penang Institute, the state government think-tank on public policy.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 9 June 2016, 11:05 am and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call on Najib to give undertaking that National Security Council Act  will not be enforced until concerns of Conference of Rulers addressed by way of amendments to   be presented in forthcoming Parliament

Tuesday, 7th June 2016 is a black-lettered day in the history of Malaysia, because on this day the National Security Council Act was gazetted and became the first law in the country which was NOT given the Royal Assent.

Under Clause 4(a) of Article 66 of the Federal Constitution, a bill becomes law 30 days after it is presented to the Yang di Pertua Agong, even if the Agong does not give the Royal Assent.

The Conference of Rulers on Feb. 17 had returned the National Security Council (NSC) Bill to the Attorney-General’s Chambers asking for refinement.

The Attorney-General Tan Sri Apandi Ali then said he would review some sections of the bill while Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak said he took note of the rulers suggestion.

The bill was passed by Parliament on Dec 22 last year. Under Tuesday’s gazette, the NSC Act  was declared as assented on Feb. 18, 2016 under Clause 4(a) of Article 66 of the Federal Constitution. The date of enforcement of the Act has not been made.

It is an act of disrespect and contempt of the Rulers’ Conference for the government to proceed to gazette the NSC Act, acting under Clause 4(a) of Article 66, although the Conference of Rulers had asked of “refinement” of the NSC Bill, which both the Prime Minister and Attorney-General had undertaken to do.

I call on the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak to give a public undertaking that the National Security Council Act will not be enforced until the concerns of the Conference of Rulers are  addressed by way of amendments to be presented in the  forthcoming Parliament.

The NSC Act is a grave threat to democracy and constitutional government as it enables the Prime Minister to oust the prerogatives of the Yang di Pertuan Agong to declare an emergency by imposing emergency-like conditions in so-called “security areas”.

(Media Conference Statement in Sekinchan on Friday, 10th June 2016 at 12 noon)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 June 2016, 6:39 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Human Rights
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


If AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidates can win in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar, it will be an important signal that Malaysia is ready to become a normal democratic country where voters can change government through the ballot box like other developed countries

Sungai Besar is the most marginal and most unsafe parliamentary seat in the Peninsular Malaysia  won by UMNO in the 13th General Election while Kuala Kangsar is eighth on the list of UMNO’s most marginal and unsafe seats in Peninsular Malaysia.

If the AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidates can win in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar parliamentary by-elections, it will be a major signal that Malaysia is ready to become a normal democratic country where voters can change  the government through the ballot box like other developed countries.

It will also mean that the AMANAH or Pakatan Harapan candidates stand a good chance to win the 10 most marginal and most unsafe parliamentary seats  won by UMNO in Peninsular Malaysia, namely:

1.	Sungai Besar

2.	Kuala Selangor

3.	Pasir Gudang

4.	Bagan Serai

5.	Ketereh

6.	Machang

7.	Jerai

8.	Kuala Kangsar

9.	Arau

10.	Bera

Many people look at this list and conclude that these seats are not winnable, but I belong to those who look at the list and think of the ways Pakatan Amanah can win in these ten seats.

We are almost at the half-way mark of the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections on June 18.

In both constituencies, the AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidate started as the underdog in the three-cornered fight in Sungai Besar and the four-cornered fight in the Kuala Kangsar by-elections.

It is now clear that the contest in these two by-elections  is between UMNO/BN and AMANAH/PH candidates, as a vote for the PAS candidate in both constituencies would be a wasted vote as there is  no chance whatsoever that  the PAS candidate can  win in either one of the two constituencies.

In fact, I had said publicly that I expect the PAS candidate in Sungai Besar to lose by some 10,000 votes and in Kuala Kangsar to lose by some 5,000 votes as compared to the votes polled by the PAS candidates in these two constituencies in the 13th General Election in 2013.

To defeat the UMNO/BN candidate in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar in the by-elections would cause quite a political earthquake as both constituencies had been UMNO strongholds, never won by any Opposition candidate in the past six decades.

It will mean that all the ten UMNO marginal seats in Peninsular Malaysia  I had listed are winnable by AMANAH or Pakatan Harapan candidates in the next general elections.

Even more important, it will signal that after six decades of nationhood, Malaysia is prepared to become  a normal democratic country where the people can change government through the ballot box without this being regarded as a national catastrophe.

Under Vision 2020, Malaysia aims to become a fully developed nation in four years’ time in 2020 – but how can the country become a fully developed nation when we are not a normal democratic country where voters can change the government peacefully through the ballot box without warnings of national catastrophes?

Let us not look at the West, like the United Kingdom, which had changed the political party in government six times in the past sixty years, but at our neighbours, Indonesia and Philippines, where they accept the ballot box as the means to change the government without bringing the country to ruin and damnation.

The Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections are therefore important milestones in the journey of the country to become a fully developed and normal democratic country.

These should be our major concerns, how Malaysia can become a fully developed and normal democratic country, which should be the main issues in these two by-elections – how good governance, democracy and the national unity of the diverse races, religions and cultures can be leveraged to transform Malaysia into a world show-case  of political freedom, economic prosperity, educational excellence and multi-racial and multi-religious harmony in a troubled and divided world.

Instead, hudud seems to have become the biggest issue in the two by-elections, and the MCA even had a ceramah in Sungai Besar town last night specially focused on the hudud issue.

If there is any single issue which should dominate the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections, it should by the two global financial scandals of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak – the RM55 billion 1MDB  and the RM4.2 billion “donation” scandals.

Did Najib give a full and satisfactory accounting of these two global scandals, which have given Malaysia world notoriety as a nation of global corruption; did the BN candidates or the BN component parties explain these two global scandals?

Dare the UMNO/BN candidates raise the concerns of the voters and people in Parliament about these two global scandals?

Of course not.

After the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Azalina Othman Said moved the Ministerial motion in the last day of Parlaiment on May 26 to fast-track Hadi’s hudud bill, I had said that it was Najib and not Hadi who was the greatest winner.

In one stroke, Najib achieved two things: (1) to sideline the 1MDB scandal which had been haunting and hounding him for more than a year; and (2) make hudud the single biggest issue in the two  by-elections completely overshadowing  Najib’s premiership and the 1MDB global financial scandal.

We must not allow Najib and his strategists to succeed – to use the hudud issue to escape accountability for his two global scandals when other countries have started to close down banks and initiate criminal prosecutions  in connection with 1MDB’s global embezzlement, money-laundering and corruption.

This is the reason for the holding of the two Colloquium on 1MDB global scandal, for Malaysians can never hold their heads high in the world and we can never achieve our potential greatness as a nation, whether as a fully developed nation or a normal democracy, unless we are prepared to get to the bottom of Najib’s two global scandals.

(Media Conference Statement at the Pakatan Harapan Sungai Besar by-election Ops Centre in Sekinchan on Friday, 10th June 2016 at 11 am)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 June 2016, 10:39 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Elections
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Rise of Malaysia’s ‘racist’ strain of Islam

By Lim Teck Ghee

9 Jun 2016, AM 10:05 (Updated 9 Jun 2016, AM 10:08)

COMMENT
 A recent article comparing the treatment accorded by the government and the larger Islamic community to
two recent Muslim visitors
 notes that the question as to why preacher Zakir Naik and scholar Abdullahi An-Na’im and their messages are resounding differently with the Malay Muslim community is a crucial one for Malaysians to ask.

The contrast in the themes articulated by these two visitors in their lectures and public engagements cannot be more different.

That of the scholar is a vision of a more humanistic and intellectually more rational and defensible Islam. The other by the preacher stems from a conservative and extremist position. Based on advocacy of Islam as a superior religion, Zakir offers simplistic but popular – with the Muslim masses – opinions on topics such as dealing with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgenders (LGBT) people and other non-Islamic minorities, apostasy, the treatment of other faiths in Islamic states, the evils of secularism, etc.

Similar questions have been asked by others as to why Islam in this country has taken a hard line position and turned its back on its traditionally moderate roots and associated Hindu-Buddhist values and mores.

Also why the defence of secularism and secular-oriented positions such as those espoused by the Group of 25 (G25) group of prominent ex-civil servants have received little traction while, at the same time, rabble-rousing groups such as the red shirts and Islamic State (IS)-type extremist views have gained ground among the Malays.

Two scholars have recently contributed insights into the rise of a conservative and hard line Islam in the country. Dr Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hami in his paper ‘ISIS in South-East Asia: Internalised Wahhabism is a Major Factor’ (ISEAS Yusof Ishak Institute Perspective, May 16, 2016) has dissected the impact of the Wahabbi brand of Salafism with its extremist worldview from a political development perspective since the 70s.

Dr Azhar Ibrahim, in his blog article, ‘Secularism as Imagined in the Malay-Indonesian World: Resistance and its Muted Counter Responses in the Discursive and Public Realms’, using a cultural anthropological cum historical approach has explained the failure of Muslim intellectuals and intelligentsia to engage and contest the anti-secularists.

Race in Malaysia’s Islamic discourse

While the two papers are useful and timely, what is missing is a discussion of how the factor of race, and the rise of a virulent strain of Malay racism may be a key, and perhaps the major, factor explaining the recent rapid spread of an increasingly conservative and reactionary Islamic ideology and practices in the country.

Although orthodox Islam rejects race and racism, there is mounting evidence that the resurgence in Islam in Malaysia is closely correlated with the rise of anti-non-Malay sentiment, and an ethno-centricism directed at the non-Malay and non-Muslim communities.

Ahmad Fauzi and Ahzar Ibrahim are not the only two scholars who have failed to attach sufficient importance to the racial factor playing a critical role in the most recent phase of Islamic socio-economic and political development in Malaysia. Many other local scholars have chosen to ignore it or have studiously avoided the subject.

This avoidance is possibly because of the belief that Islamic extremism in Malaysia has spread primarily due to externally generated events such as the rise of political Islam in the Middle East.

It may also be because of the view that an academic or public discourse on the subject – even from an academic or intellectual perspective – may be opening up a pandora’s box; or is not helpful to one’s academic or professional career; or perhaps reflects poorly on the integrity of the scholar’s own religious and racial community.

Recent events, however, have brought into the forefront the importance of putting the subject under the academic microscope and of engaging in an open and frank exploration of it, even if this discourse may be regarded as treading on sensitive concerns and issues.

The opening of this pandora’s box is also necessary because it appears that both extreme forms of the two ideologies – one religious and the other man-made – are not only converging but are also mutually reinforcing. The fused outcome – a form of Islamofacism – may be displacing, or perhaps may already have displaced, the earlier moderate mainstream forms.

Two examples of the convergence of ‘ketuanan Islam’ and ‘ketuanan Melayu’ can be highlighted, although more instances are taking place on a daily basis.

In September 2015, Umno supreme council member Annuar Musa openly admitted that he is a “racist”. In his speech to participants at the ‘Himpunan Rakyat Bersatu’ or ‘red shirt’ rally which its organisers estimated to have attracted a crowd of 250,000, he emphasised that racism was allowed in Islam, so long as other races were not oppressed in the process.

According to him, “I am racist but it’s racism based on Islam. Racism is allowed in Islam.” He was also reported to have quoted a hadith (a saying of the Prophet) on ‘assobiyah’ which he interpreted as justifying racism.

The Umno leader may have been playing to the gallery during his speech. However what he announced reflects not only his understanding – and justification – of Islamic racism a-la its Malaysian variety. It also reveals a similar position held by Umno’s leadership and most of the ruling party’s rank and file members since there are no reports of anyone from the party expressing dissent with Annuar Musa’s view.

More recently, the open display of the ‘keris’ – commonly seen as the symbol of Malay nationalism – during the recent opening of PAS’s muktamar has led Dr Mahathir Mohamad to note that “PAS used to criticise Umno for being a nationalist party, but now the opposition party is more nationalist because their keris is longer than Umno’s”.

“We measure nationalism based on the length of the keris, The longer the keris, the more nationalistic. Now they realise that they’re Malays,” he added.

For non-Muslims and non-Malays, these new developments, and the racialism and extremism seeping into the Islamic consciousness of the Malay community, are no laughing matter.

What it means is that they cannot expect PAS, Umno, or perhaps even Parti Amanah Negara, the latest of the Muslim parties and progressive Islamic NGOs and conscientious scholars to draw attention to and fight the battle for equal rights within an increasingly Islamic Malaysian nation.

They have only themselves to rely on and should not, as in the boiling frog anecdote, wait too late to respond to the rising heat from this present incarnation of Islamic and racist resurgence in the country.

LIM TECK GHEE is a former World Bank senior social scientist, whose report on bumiputera equity when he was director of Asli’s Centre for Public Policy Studies sparked controversy in 2006. He is now CEO of the Centre for Policy Initiatives.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 June 2016, 11:25 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Lim Teck Ghee
,
Political Islam
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What has Najib or PMO got to say  on WSJ’s correction to say that the US$3 billion bond fund raised by Goldman Sachs went to BSI Bank in Switzerland and not Singapore, and part of it eventually landed in Najib’s personal bank accounts?

What has the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Raak or the Prime Minister’s Office got to say on Wall Street Journal’s correction to say that the  US$3 billion bond fund raised by Goldman Sachs went to BSI Bank in Switzerland and not Singapore, and part of it eventually landed in Najib’s personal bank accounts?

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has issued a correction, stating that the US$3 billion bond fund Goldman Sachs raised for 1MDB went to BSI Bank in Switzerland and not Singapore as initially reported.

In its correction, WSJ said  its article earlier had “incorrectly  stated the money was sent to 1MDB’s account at the private bank’s Singapore branch”.

The  WSJ stood by the allegation that part of the US$3 billion sent to Switzerland (and not Singapore) ended up in offshore accounts that eventually landed in Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s personal bank accounts.

The Prime Minister’s aide Tengku Shariffuddin Tengku Ahmad was quite gung-ho on Wednesday when he responded immediately after the Monetary Authority of Singapore’s denial that 1MDB’s bond funds were tranferred into banks in the city state, but why has the Prime Minister’s huge entourage of special aides and assistants  been so conspicuously silent about the WSJ correction?

The WSJ stood by the allegation that part of the US$3 billion sent to Switzerland (and not Singapore) ended up in offshore accounts that eventually landed in Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s personal bank accounts.

It was the  WSJ which  in July last year revealed that US$681 million (then RM2.6 billion) entered Najib’s personal bank accounts from an offshore entity called Tanore Finance – which had been proved right and true.

Since then, Australia-based ABC News in March this year  revealed that the total sum entering Najib’s personal bank accounts from multiple sources totalled  not just US$681 million (then RM2.6 billion)  but amounted to over US$1 billion (RM4.2 billion).

Najib had first denied the WSJ allegation of RM2.6 billion deposited into his private banking accounts but  subsequently admitted the RM2.6 billion were deposited into his personal bank accounts, but they were never for his own benefit.

But Najib or the PMO  had as yet to comment whether a total of RM4.2 billion had been deposited into his personal banking account.

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s 45-minute Four Corners’ documentary “State of Fear: Murder and Money in Malaysia” in March   helped many Malaysians to realize that there were actually three separate tranches of deposits into Najib’s personal banking accounts at AmBank, pre the RM2.6 billion donations, the RM2.6 billion donations itself and post-RM2.6 billion donations, viz:

(i) some US$300 million from 2011 to March 2013;

(ii) two transactions in March 2013 totalling US$681 (the often-reported RM2.6 billion political donation) – bringing the total deposited into Najib’s accounts to US$1.03 billion (RM4.14 billion) by April 10, 2013, just over a month prior to the 13th General Election; and

(iii) deposits of £50 million (RM285 million) as well as “a series of cash deposits” in June 2014 and after.

Can Malaysians expect the Prime Minister to come fair and sincere about the twin mega financial scandals, whether the total amounts deposited into his personal banking accounts totalled Rm4.2 BILLION, and most important of all, have an audit of the persons who had benefited from the RM4.2 billion “donation” scandal,  the banks which had the deposit of  the RM4.2 billion 1MDB ill-gotten gains as well as the RM55 billion !MDB scandal.

                                                                        Lim Kit Siang

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 June 2016, 5:13 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP and Pakatan Harapan are not enemies of ordinary UMNO and PAS members and we invite UMNO and PAS members to join in the “Save Malaysia” campaign to stop the country from sliding down the slippery slope of corruption and abuses of power to become a failed state

We are almost at the half-way mark of the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-election campaign.

At the beginning, the AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidates in these two by-elections were the true underdogs.

When I first went to campaign in Kuala Kangsar, I was asked by the press whether the AMANAH/Pakatan Rakyat candidate, nuclear physicist Professor Dr. Ahmad Termizi Ramli would lose his deposit in the by-election.

The situation in both by-elections is now clearer, that in both places, it is a contest between  UMNO/BN and AMANAH/PH candidates, as a vote for the PAS candidate in both constituencies would be a wasted vote with no chance whatsoever that the PAS candidate can win in either one of the two constituencies.

In fact, I had said publicly that I expect the PAS candidate in Sungai Besar to lose by some 10,000 votes and in Kuala Kangsar to lose by some 5,000 votes as compared to the votes polled by the PAS candidates in these two constituencies in the 13th General Election in 2013, and no one in the PAS leadership has come forward to contradict me.

I want to make four points tonight:

Firstly, the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections are capable of creating political earthquakes in Malaysia. If Azhar Shukor is elected MP for Sungai Besar and Prof Termizi the MP for Kuala Kangsar on June 18,   winning in  traditional UMNO strongholds which no UMNO candidate had ever lost in six decades, the message is clear – either  Datuk Seri Najib Razak steps down as Prime Minister or UMNO/BN will be defeated in the next 14th General Election.

Secondly, the biggest issue in the two by-elections is none other than Najib’s twin global mega scandals – the RM55 billion 1MDB and the RM4.2 billion “donation” scandals.

I hope that by the end of the two by-election campaigns in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar on June 18, we can succeed in sending out the message to all the voters in these two constituencies that corruption is  not a “victimless crime”.

In the case of the RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 “donation” twin mega scandals, for instance, the real victims are the 30 million Malaysians, who will have to pay through higher taxes like GST and cuts in essential development expenditures whether for education, health or security so that the country can pay the monstrous 1MDB debts.

Thirdly, DAP and Pakatan Harapan are not enemies of ordinary UMNO and PAS members although we disagree with UMNO and PAS leaders. We invite  UMNO and PAS members to join in the “Save Malaysia” campaign to stop the country from sliding down the slippery slope of corruption and abuses of power to become a failed state, and in these two by-elections to vote for the AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidates for a better future particularly for our children and children’s children.

Some 70 per cent of MCA’s one million members have lost confidence in the MCA leadership and this was why they voted against MCA and BN candidates in the 13th General Elections, supporting Pakatan Rakyat candidates from DAP, PKR and PAS to join in a national awakening and campaign for political change in Putrajaya.

This is also the case with MIC which claims to have 700,000 card-carrying members, but 75 per cent of the MIC members voted against MIC and BN candidates in the 13th General Election in support of the Pakatan Rakyat candidates.

I urge UMNO and PAS members to do the same, so that the ordinary Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region or political affiliation, can join hands in a “Save Malaysia” campaign. This will be a new politics for Malaysia.

Fourthly, a victory for AMANAH/Pakatan Harapan candidates in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections will be a powerful signal that Malaysia is ready  to become  a normal democratic country where the people can change government through the ballot box without this being regarded as a national catastrophe.

The people in  the United Kingdom  changed the political party in government six times in the past sixty years, and even our  neighbours, Indonesia and Philippines,  accept the ballot box as the means to change the government without bringing the country to ruin or damnation.

But in Malaysia, we seem to cling to UMNO/Barisan Nasional as the “eternal government” although it has not only become very corrupt, decadent , undemocratic and cut-off from the aspirations of the people, but also betrayed their founding principles in defending the cardinal principles and fundamental features of the Merdeka Constitution about nation-building in the country.

Only a political coalition which represents the diverse races, religions and regions in the country can replace UMNO/Barisan Nasional in Putrajaya – and only Pakatan Harapan and not PAS, whether as adviser to Najib or UMNO,  can play this role to usher in political change in Malaysia.

(Speech at the Pakatan Harapan Sungai Besar by-election ceramah in Sungai Besar town on Friday, 10th June 2016 at 11.30 pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 11 June 2016, 8:08 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Elections
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.