The day I felt truly Malaysian

On that fateful Saturday, tens of thousands of Malaysians ignored government warnings and descended onto the streets of the capital to raise a simple point; that as citizens we deserve fairer and more transparent elections.

They told us it was an illegal assembly, Bersih, but we understood we had the constitutional right to assemble peacefully, what more to demand for a better democracy.

But when my government began outlawing ridiculous things like a certain colour or word, as if they were making up laws as they go, I knew I could no longer remain silent. I had to march.

Roadblocks did not stop us, harassments from the authorities did not wither our spirits and threats of arrests did little to sow fear among us. Official government statistics put us at 6,000-10,000. Foreign media estimates say about 100,000 took part in the rally. Whose figures should one trust then? Just ask anyone who was there and they’ll tell you it was anything but 10,000. That, I am sure.

I joined the rest of the people at KL Sentral. I had earlier planned to join a friend at Jalan Petaling where another group of people had already gathered. But prior to my arrival at KL Sentral, I received a text message from him saying, “Don’t come. The police have started!”

I saw firsthand what our police force was capable of. I was there when they fired tear gas canisters into the crowd in a confined part of the KL Sentral building. I tasted, for the first time, the unpleasant effects of tear gas — ironically paid for by our tax money. I’d never shed a tear for my country until I got tear-gassed that day.

I was also there when a barricade of FRUs aimed their fully-loaded tear gas launchers at our faces and threatened us, when we tried to take an alternative route. I should also mention that the crowd did nothing to provoke let alone, were being violent. The Malaysians, who turned up for the rally, were not exclusive to one race or followers of a religion, we were a diverse bunch, no doubt but we were there as Malaysians above all else. We were one people.

Dare I say the demand for fairer elections was more effective in uniting Malaysians than Prime Minister Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia slogan? You bet. If you were there for Bersih, you would concur too.

I then managed to make my way out of the building. By then, the tear gas was still present in the air albeit less concentrated. The fact that tear gas was fired in an enclosed area meant that the gas remained for some time. I had lost the earlier group whom we were with when I saw a group of fellow marchers heading towards me. I asked a man in the crowd why they were heading in the opposite direction. He told me the police had sealed the roads leading to Stadium Merdeka and they had to turn around. So I joined them and we marched along Jalan Tun Sambanthan heading towards Brickfields.

A man behind me remarked to this friend, “Who said we Malaysians can’t march peacefully? Look!” I turned around and said, “I agree with you, my brother!” We exchanged smiles.

I also saw a motorcyclist, who was riding alongside us, got down from his motorcycle, turned his engine off and walked with us. Many more did the same and we sounded our appreciation.

We chanted slogans like “Hidup Rakyat (Long live the people!)” and “Bangkit Rakyat (Rise up, people!)” as we moved. Passing motorists honked and gave us thumbs up in support. Pedestrians cheered at us while we passed them. Even the trains stopped to sound their horns to encourage us. I could even see passengers inside waving at us. We reciprocated by applauding them all. At this point, I am not ashamed to admit I almost teared.

I was fortunate enough not to experience the hell others had to go through. Despite the persistent denials by the authorities, there are hundreds of videos and pictures now circulating around the Internet to prove otherwise. For every video or picture, there are more inspiring stories of how Malaysians put aside their differences to help one another. It is no accident that #bersihstories was among the top local trends on Twitter.

When my grandchildren ask where I was when the rakyat stood up against oppression, I will proudly tell them their grandfather was there marching with the rest. July 9, 2011 was the day I truly felt Malaysian.

Note: Bersih opponents, please understand we marched not only for ourselves but also for you. A clean, fair and neutral EC would benefit everyone across any political divide.

And no, in my humble opinion, Bersih wasn’t hijacked by the Opposition. BN was invited to put aside politics and join the call for electoral reforms but they turned down the offer. So don’t blame the Opposition for backing the movement, such are politicians for they are opportunists. BN had their chance to steal the Opposition’s thunder if they had agreed to work with Bersih but they blew it.

It also must be said that Opposition leaders and supporters are also citizens of this country and they have as much right as you have to demand for a better democracy. If you cannot accept the previous sentence, then you have failed to understand what ‘democracy’ truly is.




Click here to read more...

Two wrongs don't make a right

Speculation suggests that the next General Elections is at hand. With all the talk of Prime Minister Najib seeking a new mandate from the people to push his agenda of reforms, it is only natural for the Pakatan Rakyat to scramble to gain or retain support from the people. But I, personally, do not agree with how the Selangor government has acted recently.

The Malaysian Insider reports the Selangor Pakatan Rakyat government has allocated RM1 million for each of the constituencies it currently holds. Chief Minister Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim said Barisan Nasional assemblymen are being excluded from these allocations because the federal government had similarly discriminated against PR representatives.

But two wrongs don't make a right, does it?

I cannot but to disagree with the Selangor government in this one. Firstly, by denying the RM1 million allocation, the state government is also withholding funds of which every citizen of Selangor is rightfully entitled to. Is that being fair and just?

Punishing voters for not voting you is wrong. It is not ethical. The state government serves the people, regardless of political creeds, and the folks in the Selangor government should know better when it comes to separating party from government.

By excluding BN-controlled constituencies from these allocations, the state government is also punishing their own supporters in those areas, mind you.

Secondly, is this also not vote-buying in nature? The PR leadership was quick to condemn Najib's "you help me, I help you" speech during the Sibu by-election last year but continues to remain silent in this one. For those who may not recall, Najib promised to sign a cheque of RM5 million to resolve flood woes in Rejang Park if BN candidate Robert Lau wins.

“The understanding is quite simple. I help you, you help me. If Robert Lau becomes the MP on Sunday, on Monday I will ask the cheque to be prepared.,” Najib said to a spirited response from the 1,000-odd crowd mostly Chinese.[link]

BN lost, eventually.

RM1 million may not seem a lot and may not even make a huge difference in urban areas like Petaling Jaya or Subang Jaya. But that sum may go a long way for rural constituencies where proper roads, bridges and other infrastructures are lacking.

That said, it doesn't really matter if it's RM1 million or RM100 million, it is the act of discrimination that I disapprove.

I want Malaysia to move forwards and away from such childish politics. Someone's got to be better man (or party, in this instance) and make the first, right move. I truly hope the "better alternative" would show they are indeed the better one.


Click here to read more...

Make promises, not threats

The final outcome of the Hulu Selangor by-election on April 25 was rather shocking if not disturbing especially for those who kept themselves updated by the minute on the vote count. Zaid Ibrahim's re-entry into active politics hit a brick wall when he eventually lost to MIC's P.Kamalanathan by a majority of 1,725 votes. That said, I rather not divulge into conspiracy theories lest I be questioned by the you-know-who but the Hulu Selangor by-election was never short of controversies.

The run-up to the by-election saw the usual antics of Malaysian politics - character smearing, unconvincing fiery speeches, grinning politicians, you name it. But as a Malaysian, I have every right to feel distressed (and maybe lose some sleep over) about what Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak said to a crowd of concerned parents in Rasa, Kuala Kubu Bharu.

There, an 81-year-old Chinese vernacular school, SRJK (C) Rasa, was apparently not in the list of Chinese schools that would receive financial aid from the federal government. The money was allocated under the government's second economic stimulus package. The Prime Minister told the Rasa crowd that he cannot ignore the community's appeal for a new building. He said in Chinese-accented Malay (as featured in the evening news and reported by The Malaysian Insider):

“Kalau kita menang ini election, lu datang KL carik gua (if we win this by-election, you come to KL to look for me,"

"I will write a personal letter to approve the money (RM3 million) and it will be transferred to the school board’s account," he added.

But of course, to The Star it sounded very much like this:

“I hear you loud and clear, and now I am pleased to announce an immediate allocation of RM3mil for a new building."

To me, the if-we-win-you-get-your-goodies kind of promise sounds more like a threat than a typical election guarantee one might be used to hear. What if Barisan Nasional did not emerge as winners in the Hulu Selangor by-election? Would SRJK (C) Rasa be forfeited of the monetary aid, it and hundreds of other vernacular schools so rightfully deserve?

A promise to an obligation is not a promise at all. Whether there's a by-election or not, the government has the inherent responsibility and obligation to provide any possible form of assistance to all school systems in the country - both vernacular and national.

Perhaps, it is high time that our politicians learn to make promises like policy changes and social commitments rather than cheap if-we-win threats.

Good thing the people of Rasa turned in a 82.4% support for PKR's Zaid Ibrahim instead. Could it be Najib's poor attempt at speaking in Chinese-accented Malay? I wonder.
Click here to read more...

Those guilty of money politics not fit to run for office

The decision to field Tan Sri Mohd Isa Abdul Samad (image) to run for the Bagan Pinang state seat sends all sorts of wrong signals. Credibility is of the utmost importance for politicians who runs for office. But what does it mean for the Malaysian people when a candidate, who was found guilty for money politics, is allowed to contest in an election?

To echo former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's statement, character of a candidate (running for election) is important. But apparently Dr Mahathir's words has fallen on deaf ears. Isa was suspended for three years from June 24, 2005, for indulging in money politics in the 2004 UMNO elections. He was originally suspended for six years or two terms but it was reduced after he appealed [source].

Teluk Kemang UMNO Youth head Mohd Faizal Ramli also revealed that his division had conducted a survey and found that the constituents, including the non-Malays, have accepted Isa. Whether the findings were rigged or made-up, his statement paints a bleak image for Malaysian politics where blind loyalty towards individuals and party is seen more important than national interests.

According to Faizal, Isa was the perfect choice for the the candidacy as he proven his loyalty to the party and had set a good example for his fellow party members. I find this truly disturbing. A political party is merely a tool for individuals who share the same ideology to achieve whatever political ambitions they may have. Loyalty to the party above justice, accountability and service to the nation is corrupted loyalty.

Dr Mahathir had initially advised against nominating Isa as Barisan Nasional's candidate for the by-election. He said that Isa had been found guilty in money politics and picking him might give the impression that UMNO was not serious about fighting the corrupt practice. For his two cents worth, I cannot agree more. The lack of thorough consideration and the giving in to misguided grassroot demands by the party leadership sow doubts over Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak's seriousness in reforming UMNO which has recently lost much ground among the urban Malay community.

Najib believes people should look beyond Isa's past sins and consider his ability to resolve the problems voters face as his prerequisite for an able public representative [source]. But is Najib implying that money politics is nothing much but a petty crime? In my opinion, money politics is the greatest abuse and breach of public trust - an opinion which falls back to Dr. Mahathir's statement that character for a politician is more important. So what if Isa is loyal to UMNO. The fact stands that he indulged in money politics and thus his credibility has fallen into question.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein also went on to suggest that there is a difference between good guilt and bad guilt - if we were to go by with his comment on the issue. He admits, “He (Isa) is different from certain individuals who, when found guilty by the party, they are willing to curse the party that has served them. Tan Sri Isa is different. He is patient and strong, and his loyalty to the party is one matter which was considered by the top leadership.”

But justice and redemption are not made by simply being "loyal" to the party. Money politics is a serious form of corruption and a blatant breach of public trust. The issue here is not whether Isa would indulge in money politics again but when one's credibility can be questioned like this, then he is not fit to represent the people. Come October 11 and Malaysians would really love to see if voters in Bagan Pinang are mature enough to understand what credibility and character mean for their representative in government. As for me, I want one who is clean from any wrongdoing - especially from money politics.

Click here to read more...

BN lost. So blame it on the Chinese and Indians?

KUALA LUMPUR, April 12 — Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin is confused, perplexed, puzzled...wonders whether the Chinese have begun to think of themselves as kingmakers in the new political landscape. [The Malaysian Insider, 12/4/09]

Speaking on the loss of two by-elections (Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau) recently, Malaysia's newly appointed Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin (image) believes the voters from the Chinese community were the deciding factor in sending the Barisan Nasional contingent packing for home.

In an interview with Mingguan Malaysia, Muhyiddin was reported to have called the Chinese Malaysian voters 'ungrateful' for ditching the Barisan Nasional despite the latter pouring in millions of ringgit every year to improve Chinese-vernacular schools.

Muhyiddin continues to suggest that the non-Malay community have begun to think of themselves as kingmakers in the new political landscape and is jeopardizing the status quo of the Barisan Nasional establishment.

"The Chinese even though are a minority group feel that they have the deciding power because the Malays are split into three groups… In such a situation, they can decide the outcome of an election and this can be seen from the general election and the by-elections. They think they have the power to decide. It is not only the Chinese but the Indian community as well,’’ he told Mingguan Malaysia today. [The Malaysian Insider, 12/9/09]

Isn't the 'power to decide' the reason why we all vote?

A columnist of Mingguan Malaysia echoed Muhyiddin's sentiments against the non-Malays especially the Chinese community for the loss of the Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau by-elections.

Para pengundi bukan Melayu seperti biasa akan membuat banyak tuntutan pada musim kempen tetapi undi mereka tetap kepada pembangkang. Ini termasuk peti-peti undi yang paling banyak menerima peruntukan yang ditagih oleh pelbagai pihak mewakili pengundi antaranya RM1 juta untuk sekolah Cina, RM400,000 sekolah Tamil, tuntutan tanah rizab dan puluhan lagi. Apa makna ini semua? Bukankah ia menampakkan BN terus dipermainkan oleh pengundi bukan Melayu... keputusan kedua-dua pilihan raya kecil itu dan beberapa yang lain sebelum ini adalah isyarat jelas kepada BN supaya jangan lagi terperangkap dengan muslihat sedemikian. [source]

Non-Malay voters are bound to make plenty of demands during election campaigns but their votes still belong to the Opposition. This includes the various financial allocations given to constituents like to RM1 million set aside Chinese-vernacular schools, RM 400,000 to Tamil school and etc. What do all these mean then? This is a clear indication that the Barisan Nasional is being taken for granted and is dictated by the non-Malays. These defeats (in the by-elections) should serve as a lesson to the BN to not fall for the ploys of the non-Malays again.

I find myself feeling disgusted at the Deputy Prime Minister's statement and the column published by Mingguan Malaysia. To hear such statements coming from a minister, never mind a Deputy Prime Minister and a national newspaper further reiterates why many believe certain institutions in this country are beyond repair.

Muhyiddin's knowledge of Chinese votes going to the Opposition and not Barisan Nasional is first of all, very perplexing. Are not votes suppose to be private and confidential? Even if that is not the case, Muhyiddin's reproach of non-Malays casting their votes for the Opposition underlines his failure to understand the basic concepts of democracy - the right of the people to decide.

To call the non-Malays kingmakers of Malaysian politics at the expense of the majority (the Malay community) is to take cheap shots. Too cheap, in fact. Muhyiddin did not realise this but there are also Malays who voted for the Opposition.

Is Muhyiddin also trying to imply that the non-Malays have no say in the choice of government? UMNO refuses to back down on their racial politics simply because securing the total support of the Malays is enough to secure them the power to govern by default. But contrary to the myths of racial politics, not all Malays are for UMNO. Likewise with the Chinese and MCA, and the Indians for MIC.

But the biggest disappointment rests not with the Deputy Prime Minister calling the non-Malays kingmakers or a Malay-language daily blaming the Chinese for BN's defeats, it is the whole argument of race, race and race that our leaders are bringing to the fold - yet again. Just less than 2 weeks ago, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak (image) urged the nation "to embark on a great journey together to transform the country, promising them that his administration would place priority on performance and the people." Poetic words indeed.

One Malaysia is a concept coined by Najib and his administration which he pledges to place the needs of the people first, regardless of ethnic backgrounds. But it seems easier said than done if his second-in-command continues to view things racially.

The non-Malay voters of Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau may be kingmakers this time around but they are not stupid to exchange their democratic rights for cash splurges and school donations. The non-Malays are not beggars where all praise and gratitude is due to the Barisan Nasional government. In fact, the Barisan Nasional should be grateful to the people as they have been given the mandate to rule and develop this nation of ours since independence from the British. That being said, it looks like BN have a lot of thinking to do now for the next General Elections.

And good luck, Najib in realising the One Malaysia concept of yours.




For further reading:

• 'Cina, India bukan peminta sedekah'
• Kebijaksanaan kaum Cina berpolitik - Mingguan Malaysia
• Najib vows One Malaysia, People First, Performance Now
  

Click here to read more...

UMNO turns to the British for help on Perak crisis

KUALA LUMPUR – An Umno lawyer is understood to have been instructed by the Barisan Nasional (BN) party to seek advice from a Queen’s Counsel in London in an effort to break the constitutional impasse in Perak. [The Malaysian Insider, 22/2/09]

The petulance of Malaysian politics has taken another twist. This time, it is reported that UMNO has instructed one of it's lawyers to head thousands of miles across the eight time zones to London, with hope of finding a solution to the constitutional crisis already brewing in Perak.

The political cul de sac in Perak started off with the formation of a new state government, spearheaded by the Barisan Nasional (BN), through undemocratic means. The previous administration was led by (now former) Chief Minister Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin of PAS. Many have called the dissolution of the Pakatan Rakyat-led state government as unconstitutional and undemocratic but cries of justice have gone fallen on deaf ears. Interestingly, in a recent SMS poll organised by a local television channel, 79% of its participants agree that fresh elections should be held in Perak.

However, the Perak State Assembly is technically, still in the hands of the Pakatan Rakyat. On February 18, Perak state legislative assembly speaker V. Sivakumar (of DAP) suspended the newly appointed Chief Minister Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir (image) and his executive council members from attending the state legislative assembly. Sivakumar ruled that Zambry and the six new executive councillors were in contempt of the assembly due to their undemocratic appointment into power.

And now, UMNO is turning to our former colonial masters for legal advice to break the deadlock; with the intention to legitimise the establishment of the new Perak state government. The party have instructed one of its lawyers to meet a representative of the Queen's Counsel (QC) in London.

The QC or known as the King's Counsel during the reign of a male monarch, are lawyers appointed by letter patents to be one of "Her [or His] Majesty's Counsel learned in the law". Members have the privilege of sitting within the Bar of court.

But the questions is: Why the need to go all the way to London to seek legal advice when we have our very own Malaysian Bar Council who can do the job? Isn't this a waste of resources?

Well, the reason is clear. The Malaysian Bar Council have already given its Pakatan-friendly verdict on the Perak constitutional dilemma. On February 19, the council's president, Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan said snap elections in the state were the best solution to democratically decide the legitimacy of the new state government.

"Going back to the people of Perak will. We urge the parties involved to seriously consider doing so, not only in the interest of the people of Perak but also in the interest of stability and the nation as a whole," she said in a press statement. [The Nut Graph, 19/2/09]

Would the Queen's Counsel in London draw the same conclusion as the Malaysian Bar Council? Only time would tell. But if they don't, Robert Mugabe's counsel of lawyers might just be next on UMNO's list. Only then, would they get an answer they want.
Click here to read more...

Suggestion to ban Karpal from Perak unconstitutional?

ALOR SETAR: The Kedah Royal Household Association (PKDK) is proposing the Sultan of Perak, Sultan Azlan Shah, ban DAP national chairman Karpal Singh from entering the state. [The Star, 12/2/09]

DAP veteran leader Karpal Singh (image) announced his intention to take the Sultan of Perak to court for allegedly 'acting unconstitutionally' in the latest political coup by the Barisan Nasional coalition. The Pakatan Rakyat state government of Perak found themselves out in the cold when four assemblypersons defected to the BN, allowing the latter to form a new state administration under Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir as the succeeding Chief Minister.

To read a detailed chronology of events, click here.

Despite the disputed resignation letters filled by three of the four defectors, by which their seats could be considered if its validity could be verified, the Sultan of Perak did not only fail to dissolve the state assembly for a re-election but also asked then Chief Minister Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin to step down. His Majesty's actions were viewed by some as unconstitutional as Article 16(6) of the Perak Constitution states that:

If the Menteri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly, then, unless at his request His Royal Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council.

In other words, the only way the Chief Minister can resign from his post is for a vote of no confidence by the Perak State Assembly or the assembly being dissolved by the monarch. There has neither been a call for a vote of no confidence against him nor has the assembly been officially declared dissolved. Nonetheless, the new BN state government went on to install a new Chief Minister despite the legal discrepancies.

The biggest critic of His Majesty Sultan Azlan Shah was Bukit Gelugor MP, Karpal Singh. The ever-fiery politician planned to take the monarch to court to settle the legitimacy of his actions over the appointment of the new Chief Minister and the establishment of a new state government. Many quarters have heavily condemned the politician with some even suggesting he'd be stripped of his citizenship for questioning the power of Malay rulers.

On February 11, Karpal decided to back down after a long discussion between party leaders to take the Sultan to court. Pakatan leaders unanimously agreed that the monarch should not be sued and Karpal said he would fall in line with the party's stand despite disagreeing with it.

However, that did not stop further criticism being hurled at the DAP national chairman. The latest of which was from The Kedah Royal Household Association (PKDK). The association is proposing to the Sultan of Perak to ban Karpal from entering the state. Its president Datuk Tengku Zainol Rashid Tengku Yahya suggested it was an appropriate form of punishment for one who had insulted the Perak Ruler.

“We propose that the Sultan of Perak ban Karpal from entering the state as we feel that his action is against the country’s Constitution. His action also (does no good) to his credibility as a senior lawyer and as an elected representative,” he said at a joint press conference with the Malay Unity Action Front (BBPM) here Thursday. [The Star, 12/2/09]

Now, the last time I checked, we live in the 21st Century where the monarchies of our country are bounded by the written law we call the constitution. A more superior law would be the Federal Constitution which takes precedence over the constitution of any state within the federation. Hence, for the PKDK to suggest or think the Sultan of Perak has the power to ban any citizen from entering the state is unconstitutional.

I may not be a lawyer (and correct me if I am wrong, lawyers) but from my quick study of our Federal Constitution, I found out that in Article 9, it states:

• (2) Subject to Clause (3) and to any law relating to the security of the Federation or any part thereof, public order, public health, or the punishment of offenders, every citizen has the right to move freely throughout the Federation and to reside in any part thereof.
  

• (3) So long as under this Constitution any other State is in a special position as compared with the States of Malaya, Parliament may by law impose restrictions, as between that State and other States, on the rights conferred by Clause (2) in respect of movement and residence.

There are two points which, I believe, the PKDK have overlooked. Article 9 (2) states that every citizen (and I believe Karpal is one!) has the right to move freely throughout the country. The Federal Constitution already provides the liberty to every citizen the freedom of movement within country. So, what gives PKDK the right to suggest who should be banned from entering which state.

Clause (2), however, mentions the restriction of such liberties to citizens who are deemed threats to national security . The PKDK may argue that Karpal is a 'threat' to public order for questioning the Sultan of Perak and rousing the anger of many. Even so, Clause (3) states quite clearly that such restrictions are under the jurisdiction of the Parliament. The issue here is that the PKDK has asked the Perak Ruler to ban Karpal from entering the state, implying that His Majesty has the power to do so.

We no longer live in feudalistic days where the monarchy was absolute. State governments are democratically elected and hence, the real power lies with the people.

In his 2004 book, Constitutional Monarchy, Rule of Law and Good Governance, the Sultan of Perak said:

"Under normal circumstances, it is taken for granted that the Yang diPertuan Agong would not withhold his consent to a request for the dissolution of Parliament. His role is purely formal."

And that extends to state Rulers as well, I presume? But then again, what do I know about law!
Click here to read more...

Perak defections - Pakatan tastes its own medicine

-A commentary-

PUTRAJAYA, 4 Feb 2009: The Barisan Nasional (BN) is ready to form a new government in Perak following four assemblypersons in the state quitting their parties to support the BN, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. [The Nut Graph, 4/2/09]

Look's like the Pakatan Rakyat has got a chance to taste its own medicine as the Perak state government's fate hangs on a thread after four assemblypersons 'defected' to the Barisan Nasional.

On January 25, it was announced that assemblyman of Bota, Datuk Nasaruddin Hashim (BN) has decided to trade his UMNO colours for the Pakatan's. However, Nasaruddin rejoined UMNO 10 days later after 'pledging' his allegiance to the Pakatan. Such indecisiveness from the BN man is anyone's guess. But it is just a political staged show for what is to come, I reckon.

The other three assemblypersons are Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang), Mohd Osman Mohd Jailu (Changkat Jering), and Hee Yit Foong (Jelapang) whom all decided to leave the Pakatan to remain 'independent'. All three of them have promised full support for the Barisan Nasional if fresh state elections were to be held.

With the current state of affairs, both the Pakatan and BN have 28 seats each in the 59-seat state assembly. However, BN has the upper hand in this tussle for power, with all three 'independent' assemblypersons mentioned in the above pledging their support the coaltion.

Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced on February 4 that the BN coalition is fit and ready to seize control of the state. On the other side of the fence, the Pakatan are calling for fresh state elections, in an attempt to settle scores more democratically. Either way, the decision to dissolve the state assembly in order for an election to take place lies with the Perak state monarch.

This is the ugly side of Malaysian politics. I have personally grown to disagree with party defections simply because it is unethical. Regardless of whether the outcome favours the party I support or not, such methods of gaining power is indeed improper. What is the point of having elections when someday our elected representatives could decide for themselves which ship to jump. Would that constitute as cheating the voters at the end of the day? I believe so.

Say I voted MP Bob, who is running for Party A, because I disliked Party B. And one day, to my horror, MP Bob decides to join Party B. What happens to the votes that put him in office in the first place? Those votes were for Party A too.

Post-March 8 Elections (2008) have seen the Pakatan Rakyat denying the BN its 2/3's parliamentary majority it has always enjoyed. By all means, the BN only managed to retain federal power with landslide victories in Sabah and Sarawak. The so-close-yet-so-far dilemma soon settled in and Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (image) stunned everyone by claiming the Pakatan was able to form a new government by September 16 (2008) with the help of defecting BN MPs - 30 of them. Of course, September 16 came and nothing happened. Personally, I was looking forward to it and was disappointed it did not happen. However, I was glad it didn't because it would not be right to entice opposing MPs to switch loyalties in order to form a new government. It is undemocratic, in my opinion. If the Pakatan wants to do so, they would just have to wait till the next General Elections. That's democracy.

The Perak saga has Najib beating Anwar to his game. There has been suggestions for an anti-hopping law for politicians fond of switching parties while in office but the the High Court declared in 1992 that the anti-hop law was unconstitutional as it went against the freedom of association as enshrined in the Federal Constitution. The Pakatan justified party-hopping in the post -General Election months as it appeared to have the edge in the political race to form a new government.

However, the Pakatan are now calling for the implementation of the anti-hopping law and fresh elections to re-decide the fate of affairs following party defections. Unfortunately, I don't hear them saying the same things when Anwar audaciously predicted mass defections from the BN camp a year ago. Politicians are just hypocritical.

As unethical party-hopping may be, the same applies to 'position inheritance' as being currently practiced by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his second-in-command, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. Badawi announced that he will step down in March 2009, making way for Najib to ascend to the country's top post. Is this not 'position inheriting'?

Look at it this way. Badawi did not intend to retire if it wasn't for the heavy losses suffered by the BN in the 2008 March 8 Elections. He naturally took the blame for the poor results as he was also pressured by many groups to make way for a new and 'stronger' leader. But Badawi ran as Prime Minister in the General Elections and people who voted for him genuinely supported him to retain his position.

So what happens when Badawi suddenly decides to 'hand over' that position of his to Najib? What if I voted for Badawi because I liked him being the Prime Minister but I disagree with Najib being the next one? So, people like me do not have a say when Badawi decides to just allow Najib to 'inherit' the title of Prime Minister. If party defections are enough to call for fresh elections, how is a resigning Prime Minister not?

Politics in Malaysia has been shamefully reduced to unethical methods like party-hopping, defections and 'position inheriting'. This is not true democracy. True democracy lies in the hands of the people - the rakyat who decides who stays and who goes. The politicians do not decide for themselves who we should or should not support! We decide.
Click here to read more...

Sore MCA man gets bitter over KT defeat?

KUALA LUMPUR: The DAP owes non-Muslims an apology for campaigning for PAS in the Kuala Terengganu by-election as it was tantamount to helping the Islamist party establish theocratic rule, said MCA political education bureau chairman Gan Ping Siew. [20/1/09]

The March 8 spirit lives on in Kuala Terengganu and ballot-casters have shown that their passion for positive change did not wither. While Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said the Barisan Nasional gracefully accepts the defeat, another component party of the coalition, the MCA apparently hasn't gotten over the bitter by-election result.

The Pakatan Rakyat's victory was probably credited to the relentless co-operation shown by PKR and DAP despite the candidate, Abdul Wahid Endut not belonging to either of their ranks. The PAS man defeated BN's Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Salleh by a 2,631-vote majority.

On January 20, the MCA, through its political education bureau chairman released a statement saying the DAP 'owes an apology to the non-Muslim community in Kuala Terengganu' for supporting PAS in their by-election campaign. MCA political education bureau chairman Gan Ping Siew said that PAS' victory in the east coast city is en route to the establishment of Islamic theocratic rule in the country as aspired by the Islamist party. Gan also accused the DAP of assisting PAS just because it wanted to gain power.

“The bureau is deeply consoled that the Chinese voters in Kuala Terengganu made a rational choice to support the Barisan Nasional. This indicates the Chinese there had not been blinded by DAP and had utterly rejected the ideology of theocratic rule in the country,” he said in a statement. [The Star, 20/1/09]

Now, does MCA have a point here or are they simply being sore over the defeat?

It's worth noting that the MCA political education bureau chairman's statements were already dubious to begin with. But first thing's first: Who is Gan Ping Siew to speak on behalf of the Chinese community in Kuala Terengganu?

The MCA itself does not speak for all Malaysian Chinese, let alone a political education bureau chairman. Such statements made by Gan is political arrogance personified as the he tries to rationalised Barisan Nasional's defeat by taking cheap shots at the Opposition. He also said that the Chinese voters made the right choice of supporting Barisan Nasional in the by-election.

Unless Gan is telepathic, there is no way for him to know who voted for who at the polling stations. As far as Malaysian elections are concerned, voters cast their ballots in private, without revealing their candidate of their choice. Once again, who is Gan to say that Barisan Nasional had an overwhelming support from the Chinese community in Kuala Lumpur?

Being a political education bureau chairman himself, Gan failed to even understand the basics of democracy, that is when he claimed that PAS' victory in Kuala Terengganu moves the country a step closer to theocratic rule. The reality is that PAS will never establish theocratic rule in this country without any form of consensus from the DAP and PKR. Likewise, component parties of the Pakatan Rakyat can never act on its own without prior dialogue with the other member parties. That is what we call democracy, Gan! The Pakatan Rakyat is a partnership and not a master-slave relationship these parties are currently flourishing under. So it seemed that a certain political education bureau chairman has failed to understand such fundamentals.

Perhaps, this is the typical fear-mongering so routinely employed by Barisan Nasional leaders to ensure people do not vote for the Opposition. It is a simple but cheap method of garnering public support in the wake of elections. Nevertheless, the March 8 General Elections and both the Permatang Pauh and Kuala Terengganu by-elections have proven that old habits do die hard for certain people.

Hence, MCA should heed Najib's advice and learn from this defeat and not cry trying to figure out who split the milk.

Click here to read more...

Samy Vellu and Khairy contradicts each other

MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu said Karpal Singh, who has been vocal on the Islamic state issue and hudud laws, appeared to have “surrendered to PAS”. [The Star, 29/12/08]

KUALA LUMPUR: Pas is being forced to bow to the DAP on the hudud issue, deputy Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin said. [NST, 23/12/08]


Barisan Nasional leaders are exploiting any opportunity to derail any chances of Pakatan Rakyat seizing the Kuala Terengganu parliamentary seat by January 17. The Opposition's credibility to rule has been duly doubted when PAS vice-president Datuk Husam Musa said his party will implement the Islamic hudud laws when the Pakatan Rakyat takes control of the government. DAP and other Barisan Nasional leaders, in response have publicly rebuked Husam.

The PAS vice-president then made a 'U-turn' in a statement where he assured his Pakatan Rakyat colleagues and the Malaysian public that hudud laws would unlikely be implemented as it requires the consent of all political parties in the Opposition coalition.

All component parties of the Pakatan Rakyat have since re-pledge their support for PAS as they battle for Kuala Terengganu come January 17. Pakatan Rakyat's candidate for the by-election would come from the PAS.

Click here to read the previous article on this issue.

Husam's rash comments were interpreted as a sign of weakness within the Pakatan Rakyat hegemony - something which Barisan Nasional leaders could capitalise on. However, some responses given by key figures of the ruling coalition were somewhat contradictory.
________________________________________________

Claim #1: PAS surrendered to DAP

One notable figure in the ruling coalition to have gone public over the issue was the Prime Minister's son-in-law and deputy UMNO Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin. In his blog, he described PAS as “appearing to be brave and in high spirits” during the campaign but was now “listlessly bowing down to the intimidation of DAP”.

“It has not even been two days since Datuk Husam loudly guaranteed his supporters that hudud will be implemented if Pakatan Rakyat took federal power. And now he has surrendered.” Khairy told reporters. [The Malaysian Insider, 23/12/08]

Claim #2: DAP surrendered to PAS

MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu criticised DAP chairman and Bukit Gelugor MP Karpal Singh; calling him a 'toothless' tiger for pledging his party's support for PAS in the Kuala Terengganu by-election. Samy Vellu said Karpal Singh, who has been vocal on the Islamic state issue and hudud laws, appeared to have “surrendered to PAS”.

“The tiger (Karpal Singh) appears to have surrendered to PAS. He should be consistent with his stand (on the hudud laws) and not become a puppet of Pas. This (the agreement to work together to win the seat) indicates that he (Karpal Singh) and his party (DAP) will give in and abandon their principles for the sake of ensuring a victory for the opposition candidate,” the MIC president said. [The Malaysian Insider, 28/12/08]

________________________________________________


The obvious contradiction both Khairy and Samy Vellu expressed in their criticism towards the Opposition shows that Barisan Nasional were merely playing a political word game to exploit the situation to their favour.

If the same principle applies, would it then be safe to say that UMNO had also once 'surrendered' to MCA who pressured UMNO to discipline a certain Ahmad Ismail for his racist slurs against the Malaysian Chinese community?

...or had MIC also 'surrendered' to UMNO at one point of time for their silence over the mass demolitions of Hindu shrines and temples in Selangor?

...or did MCA 'surrendered' to UMNO for not publicly standing up against the slandering threats of another May 13 racial clash by keris-welding UMNO members?

So, the question that begs to be answered is: Who has surrendered to who?

Click here to read more...

MCA guilty of hypocrisy for Pakatan criticism

PETALING JAYA: PKR and DAP should make their stand on PAS’ goal to implement hudud law should the Pakatan Rakyat win in a general election, MCA Youth Chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong said. [The Star, 22/12/08]

In the tense build up to the Kuala Terengganu by-election scheduled for January 17 next year, PAS made a remark that would strain the already fragile alliance with it's secular Pakatan Rakyat counterparts; possibly undermining the coalition's chances of winning the parliamentary seat. The party's vice-president Datuk Husam Musa was an unpleasant surprise when he said PAS would implement hudud law if the Pakatan Rakyat coalition seizes control of the federal government.

In Islamic law, hudud refers to a set of punishments that would introduce whipping, stoning and amputation as punishment for serious criminal offenses.

Husam Musa's latest statements came at an inappropriate time when both the country's political entities are vying for the Kuala Terengganu parliamentary seat. It was understood that Muslim Malay voters make up 88% of ballot-casters in the constituency while the Chinese stands at a meagre 11%. Nonetheless, the non-Muslim votes are just as decisive in tipping the scale of support for either the incumbent Barisan Nasional or the Opposition come January 17.

The idea of hudud laws being implemented has always been a big no-no among non-Muslims and to some, a threat to multiracial harmony. That being said, Barisan Nasional have just gone one up against the Pakatan Rakyat with the 11% now thinking twice of casting their votes for the latter.

The Chinese-dominated DAP quickly disassociates itself from Husam Musa's statements. Ipoh Timur MP Lim Kit Siang (image) clarified that the implementation of hudud laws was not part of Pakatan Rakyat's policy and reinterated the secular status of the country as agreed in the social contract.

Barisan Nasional leaders even took the opportunity to further inflict damage on their political rivals.

"That is only political rhetoric, trying to be a champion for the Malays without thinking of the nation's multiracial structure. Hudud is only a small claim in Islam. Not implementing hudud does not mean we fail to become good Muslims," said former Selangor Chief Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo. [The Star, 22/12/08]

"The most important thing is what exactly is the policy when they run the government. I think people will look for that," said MCA Wanita chief Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun. [The Malaysian Insider, 22/12/08]

"In the last election, PAS used the slogan welfare state. They did not bring up the issue of hudud but before that they did. Now it seems like the party leaders want to implement hudud. This is a matter of credibility. Hudud is used as a political slogan only but nothing is implemented by them," said Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak. [The Malaysian Insider, 22/12/08]

MCA, a component party of the Barisan Nasional now has a foothold in its attempt to recapture the support of the Chinese community after a disappointing run of defeats during the March 8 Elections. Its Youth Chief, Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong launched an attack on the Pakatan Rakyat, saying the PKR and DAP (both secular) should make their stand on the implementation of hudud laws.

“Other political parties in the Pakatan Rakyat should announce publicly whether they agree with PAS on the implementation of hudud law. They (PAS) should not hide the fact that their ultimate goal is to fish vote,” he told reporters. [The Star, 22/12/08]

Yes, it is imperative that PKR and PAS clarify their stands on the issue as it would certainly cause concerns among many non-Muslims if it is left unresolved. But then again, what gives the pot the right to call the kettle black?

Former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir Mohamad (image), some years ago, once declared that Malaysia was an Islamic state despite the absence of such mention in the Constitution. The Constitution only assures Islam as the official religion of the federation but nothing was written to support the idea of Malaysia being an Islamic country. Even so, Malaysia cannot be an Islamic country since alcohol consumption and gambling are permitted.

Again in 2007, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak irked many when he reaffirmed Malaysia is and has always been an Islamic country. He reasoned that Malaysia has been governed all along on Islamic fundamentals and therefore, it merits Malaysia as an Islamic country. But are not good principles of governance universal, irregardless of religion?

It is not a problem for non-Muslims to accept the fact that their country is governed by Islamic principles which are indeed noble and just. After all, good and fair governance is what people want at the end of the day. But to declare Malaysia as an Islamic state is not only unconstitutional but also poses a scenario where acceptance from the non-Muslim community is near to impossible.

If such statements by leaders who declare Malaysia an Islamic state could cause so much discomfort and confusion among Malaysians, where was MCA then to demand UMNO states to make their stand on Tun Mahathir's declaration? Dr Wee said any collaboration between political parties would have a consensus on their political struggle and ideology. So why the lack of consensus among UMNO and MCA then and the holier-than-thou finger-pointing now?
Click here to read more...

Permatang Pauh - Another nail to BN's coffin?

Anwar Ibrahim (left) seized a momentous victory in the Permatang Pauh by-election, further solidifying the Oppostion's move to take over the federal government by Sept 16. Prior to that, his wife Datuk Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail held the seat for two terms and had recently resigned to make way for her husband's return to active politics. On the March 8 elections, she acquired a 13,388 vote-majority to ensure Permatang Pauh remains a constituency for the Opposition. However, this time around Anwar managed to wrestle in a whopping 15,671 vote-majority over the Barisan Nasional candidate, Datuk Arif Shah Omar Shah. That's 2,283 more votes than his wife had.

The choice of Arif Shah (right) as the man to challenge Anwar in the by-election is somewhat not of a surprise. The assemblyman from Seberang Jaya actually speaks fluent Mandarin. This was seen as a desperate act for Barisan Nasional to woo more Chinese voters as the March 8 elections proved that UMNO no longer had the majority support of the Malay community in that area.

If appointing a Mandarin-speaking candidate wasn't enough to ensure more Chinese support, the Federal Government also gave RM1.2 million to six Chinese primary schools. You would think they might as well send a Chinese deputy minister to officiate that, right? Yes. That was exactly what they did.

BUTTERWORTH: The Federal Government yesterday gave RM1.2 million to six Chinese primary schools here to repair classrooms and halls. Deputy Education Minister Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong (left) said each school would receive RM200,000. [NST, 20/8/2008]

The New Straits Times also reported of heavier campaigning by Barisan Nasional into Chinese-majority areas of Permatang Pauh. Their plan obviously did not work.

The defeat of Barisan Nasional here is one painful pill to swallow for the party's top brass. The leaders have earlier expressed their confidence in Barisan Nasional's (BN) odds of winning the support of the people.

"When we first started to campaign, people said the BN did not stand any chance of a victory. However, after two weeks of effort, pleading and praying, the support has tilted our way," Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak (right) said. [NST, 26/8/2008]

Najib would now have to eat his words or fire whoever that had misinformed him of support being tilted to BN's way.

Anwar's victory may just take the Opposition one step closer to overthrowing the federal government by Sept 16. The charismatic 61 year-old is seen as the next Prime Minister by many Malaysians who believe that a change of government is what Malaysia needs.

Nevertheless, Permatang Pauh is definitely another nail to Barisan Nasional's coffin.

Share on Facebook
Click here to read more...