Democracy is shining in the dark

December 31, 2011

Democracy is shining in the dark

by Bridget Welsh@www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT Largely driven by ordinary citizens, often connected through the social media, Southeast Asia is experiencing important and substantive political change.

In this year of the Arab Spring, attention has centered on developments in the Middle East. With street protests and elections, amidst violence, there is no question that the region has experienced a profound political upheaval.

Yet, 2011 has been extremely significant in Southeast Asia as well. The ripples of change are here. Largely driven by ordinary citizens, often connected through the social media, Southeast Asia is experiencing important and substantive political change, with the balance clearly in favour of greater empowerment of citizens, human dignity and promise.

Let me begin with the one that Malaysians themselves know well – the increased political awakenings of citizens.

It centers on July's Bersih 2.0 and more recently the demands for academic freedom by university students and graduates, but one can go back to the Sarawak state election in April to see a greater sense of political awareness and appreciation of the impact every individual can have on bringing about a better government.

Personally, I will never forget the energy at the political rallies in Miri, where young and old came out in the rain to listen and hope for a better future. It is important for all the political parties across the spectrum to remember that people stand in the rain not to support the parties, but the potential of better governance they represent.

The trend now is moving outside of political parties towards civil society and individuals, taking the issues directly into the hands of ordinary people. This broadening of political participation is healthy, in that is allows for more diversity of views.

This political awakening is happening across Southeast Asia – in Singapore, where a record number of citizens attended political rallies and voted, in Thailand, where local communities banded together to address the challenges of the floods, and in Indonesia, where the anti-corruption drive and calls for good governance are being led through whistle blowing and robust online discussions.

Even when poor decisions are being made by leaders or politicians are providing bald-faced denials, the citizens are exposing these and fighting back.

Consider the saga of housewife Prita Mulyasari of Tangerang, Indonesia. When she complained about the hospital service and sent the e-mail to 20 of her friends, the hospital sued her and she was fined. She fought back, winning an acquittal in civil court in 2009, and earning the support of thousands of Facebook fans.

This July Indonesia's Supreme Court overturned the decision saying that she was guilty of defamation and now the outrage has deepened. Her family is calling for a judicial review, with the support of an angry public frustrated with the inequalities in court decisions and corruption within the judiciary.

Fights like Prita's are never easy. Those who stand up to power often face alienation and threats, especially women. The rallying around what is right is increasingly common and gaining ground, as the public across Southeast Asia are speaking up.

Political openings in authoritarian outposts

There are now more places in the region where people are standing tall. This year will be remembered as that change occurred in the most unexpected places – the more authoritarian political systems.

In May, Singapore's general election became a watershed, exposing the frustrations with elitist governance in the island state.

This human wave calling for inclusion and fairness extended to the presidential polls in August, where the PAP's chosen candidate for President Tony Tan only squeaked through with less than 1% of the vote.

Months later, the system remains in shock, still assessing how to win back the support and at the same time operate in a new political environment where the public has a sense of its own power. Once the power of the people is let out of the bottle, it is very hard indeed to put it back into constraints.

The PAP is working hard to adjust in contrast to how UMNO responded after 2008. Yet, one-party dominant political systems face real challenges incorporating new voices and embracing reform, especially when the resistance inside the system is entrenched.

Singapore's political evolution is important as it has served as a global model. It is especially important for Malaysia, given its historical links to the island republic.

In both countries, the tests for the future lie within the dominant parties and whether the leadership of both countries is genuinely willing to bring about reform, not just promises and deliver half-hearted and flawed measures. It is important to laud the efforts of reform, but carefully scrutinise the implementation.

Nowhere is the importance of scrutiny more relevant than in Burma (Myanmar). What a political year that country has experienced. Since the November 2010 election results were announced early this year, the country has undergone political liberalisation led by the new civilian leadership.

This top-down transition is still in its early days, yet there are distinguishing groups of soft-liners and hardliners in the system. Right now the soft-liners – those advocating for genuine inclusion of the opposition, pushing for economic reform and better governance – are leading the charge.

Today one can find almost revolutionary changes on the ground with pictures of Aung San Sui Kyi on the streets of Rangoon, a much more open media and even a protest law that is more liberal than Malaysia's.

While many activists, especially ethnic minority leaders and what is known as Generation 88 leaders (those associated with the student movement opposing military rule in 1988) are still in jail, many others have been released and the 40 or so seats to be contested in by-elections in 2012 will include the National League for Democracy, bringing it into parliament.

Interestingly the country's legislature has become a place for substantive discussion of policy and problems, as all sides seem – at least for now – to be focused on bringing the country forward. The resistance is strong, and challenges, especially in the economic realm are high – yet here too, in one of the region's darkest democratic corners, there is light.

Increased contestation over basic freedoms

This year has taught us – from the Middle East to Southeast Asia – that political change is possible in the more authoritarian outposts. Yet, in the focus on the unexpected, we sometimes overlook the ordinary. There are two realms where serious contestation over basic rights is evolving with great intensity in Southeast Asia.

The first is in an issue many Malaysians know well – religious freedom. Despite the talk of 1Malaysia, the fact is that religious minorities in the country feel a deepening sense of anxiety. What is forgotten here is that many individuals in the religious majority feel a similar sense of concern.

The problem here – as it is elsewhere in the region – is multifaceted, from the over-politicisation of issues and a lack of trusted political leadership to deep-seated racism and more. What is important is to appreciate how much healthy dialogue now exists.

The media tends to focus on the problems, the bogus police reports against religious leaders for speaking frankly, rather than on the quiet sanity and respectful interactions that are growing.

Between and among faiths there is considerable respectful discussion as the quiet majority embraces the ridiculousness of the Obedient Wives Club.

Interfaith understanding is deepening, as with a more robust discussion within faiths on issues. This is part of the more open political space filled by ordinary citizens, engaged in discussions and genuinely motivated by our common humanity.

Religious freedom issues are also being contested and engaged elsewhere in Southeast Asia. This year saw a religious crackdown in the Hmong in Vietnam, further marginalisation of religious minorities and attacks on religious institutions in Indonesia and religious violence in Timor Leste between groups often through gangs.

Yet, simultaneously, for every crackdown or attack, there are thousands of discussions and shared knowledge as solidarity across the faiths remains the mode of the majority.

Minorities are facing another troubling issue, however. It involves land. There is a region-wide crisis evolving over land rights, from Cambodia and Vietnam to Timor Leste and Burma.

Land grabbing is occurring unchecked throughout the region, often with impunity and dire consequences for those lacking the political connections to hold onto their homes.

Consider the case of Boeung Kak Lake in central Phnom Penh where over 3,000 people were pushed aside for a "new development " despite having land titles. There has been an ongoing battle through the courts and on the streets to stop the evictions.

Residents won a court victory in August, recognising their titles, but the struggle continues. Many more cases of land grabbing are going unnoticed, as often those who are affected lack the resources to fight.

Now there is more international attention and support of this issue through civil society, as steps are being taken to strengthen laws and improve access to information. Protests against injustices such as these are having an impact, admittedly with high costs for those involved.

Inequality firmly on the agenda

This year more attention is placed on the concerns of the marginalised. The Occupy Wall Street movement has had an international dimension.

Whether it has been in the budget programmes or in the human rights reports on migrant labor, an appreciation of those outside, those left behind by development, is increasing permeating into the broader public psyche. Inequality has squarely been on the public agenda in 2011.

While the policy solutions and approaches have yet to fully evolve, getting to be part of the agenda is an important first step.

Democratic openings require inclusion of all, especially those who have the least. You judge the vibrancy of a democratic system by looking at the conditions faced by those on the political periphery, not those in the center.

As we look toward the future, to a year that will indeed be historic in Malaysia given the upcoming 2012 polls and increased levels of political engagement, taking stock of the trends in 2011 allows us to move forward constructively.

This year has been a good one for democracy in the region, and the trends of empowerment point to future success, despite the obstacles. Let's celebrate the successes of 2011, especially acknowledging the bravery of individuals, and welcome hope for 2012.

---

DR BRIDGET WELSH is associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University and she can be reached at bwelsh@smu.edu.sg.

Like this:

Be the first to like this post.

Read More @ Source

Permohonan hakim tarik diri Anwar ditolak: Mahkamah

KUALA LUMPUR: Mahkamah Tinggi di sini, hari ini menolak permohonan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim supaya Hakim Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah menarik diri daripada mendengar kes liwat yang sedang dihadapinya dengan alasan ia tidak mempunyai sebarang merit. www.bharian.com.my

Video Rating: 0 / 5

More » Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

When pig heads fly

They say it is impossible for the Umno controlled BN to lose its grip on power, "when pigs fly" goes the adage. But when the possibility of BN losing looms, pig heads seems to fly left, right and centre.

There is an expression to describe something that is impossible or never going to happen, as the popular saying goes, "when pigs fly".

Being ground dwelling quadrupeds with no biological means of flight, the pig or swine is more likely to wallow in mud pits than ever travel through the air under its own power.

Though cynics have pointed out that one can chuck pigs bodily into the air to make them fly and force a re-examination of that popular adage.

And for well nigh 54 years, the possibility of the ruling Umno-led BN coalition being unseated from its perch of power over Malaysia, is an idea that will evoke such a response.

'BN will only lose... ya right, when pigs fly'

However such a possibility is no longer so remote after the political tsunami of 2008, when a popular vote-revolt saw the ruling coalition not only lost five states to the fledgling Pakatan Rakyat opposition, but also for the first time since Malaysia's inception, lost its grip on its once ironclad two-thirds parliamentary majority.

Though when the possibility of the Umno led BN losing its grasp on power does come knocking on the door, the immediate remedy seems to be the chucking of pig heads, left, right and centre.

Literally, pig heads seem to have finding their way into mosque gates and compounds of the Muslim house of worship.

By most accounts often vigorously launched through the air, or flying, rather then a more sedate drag-and-dump.

Vice-versa, petrol bombs, though thankfully in most cases clumsy attempts at mixing Molotov cocktails (Molotov cocktails come in glass NOT plastic bottles) and orchestrated red paint seem to fly as well, in some cases raining like manna from heaven on churches and Gurdwaras.

It is not immediately known if the plastic wrapped swine heads, as if to be handled gingerly by Muslims, and the badly mixed Molotovs and bloody paint were an attempt to summon the self-fulfilling when-pigs-fly prophecy of a BN downfall or perhaps to strike the match of a more sinister agenda.

What is worrisome is that like in so many occurrences in Malaysian history, purported sectarian violence, religious strive and racial hatred are seemingly being stirred and mired by parties with sinister purposes, coincidentally, perhaps, always in concert with a crisis in the Umno dominated BN or internecine warfare among its Malay warlords.

As one would recall the incidence of Ops Lalang when opposition dissidents labelled terrorist were swooped up after Umno Youth created a keris-bathe-in-Chinese-blood rumble in the Merdeka Stadium.

Strangely, the Umno leader responsible, now Premier Najib Razak survived without even a strand of hair on his body touched.

Another coincidence, it also seemed to be in concert with a power grab in Umno and quarrels with BN components.

But former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamed said that it was "wholly a police operation", run by "men with guns" that even he as PM could not control.

The good doctor is an honourable man, and as honourable men do not lie, we should perhaps take his account of it as kosher.

Or the earlier May 13 'racial riots' that was said to have been precipitated with an internal Umno power-struggle.

Stories looms of youths being gathered and issued sharp implements, not of the gardening kind, by parties unknown who issued orders probably best left unrepeated under light of day.

Were the three Malaysians of Indian descent murdered in cold blood by the youths gathered at the then Selangor MB's house, radicals who provoked the Malay crowd taunting them of Umno's loss in the municipal elections, or innocent tea-boys delivering packed lunches?

Not for us to know, or will we ever know?

But Najib's father Tun Razak was also an honourable man and as honourable men do not lie, we should perhaps take Umno led BN's account that it was a flashpoint of racial violence, unplanned by any but exploded on its own.

Or if we were to listen to Kulim Bandar Baru MP Zulkifli Nordin's frequent outtakes in parliament, we do have to ask ourselves, was May 13 precipitated by the DAP?

As was seemingly apparent in the "Lancau" laced provocative statements, he attributed to DAP's 1969 marching slogans and happily recites whenever he has the opportunity to do so in parliament would suggest, the socialist party may have provoked the riot.

And Zulkifli as he often posits, is a God-fearing, religious and honourable man, and as honourable men don't lie, perhaps what he likes to repeat is true.

Najib, who is also an honourable man seems to believe that the recent introduction of flying pig heads, Molotovs and red paint are real works of those waiting to engineer racial riots akin to May 13.

He also saw nothing amiss with mushrooming NGOs with mysterious backers championing the rights of a majority race, suddenly appearing to defend already constitutionally guaranteed rights, flout the law and saw no issues with degrading the rights of other races.

Though the "who" behind all those unidentified flying objects and unkn! own NGOs , remain a 'mystery'.

As Najib is an honourable man and honourable men do not lie, then perhaps he is right. Maybe there are parties unknown that sought to destroy Malaysia's racial harmony and pit us against each other, race against race and religion against religion.

Who would benefit from such a terrible thing?
Perhaps those who will then orchestrate the arrest of opposition dissidents they casually label as terrorists, those who would rally the Malays behind their role as champions of the race.

Or perhaps those who are afraid of losing political power and thus would want nothing more than to declare emergencies like in 1969 or the preceding ones in Sabah, Sarawak and Kelantan, to 'resolve the political situation' and maintain their grasp and control on power.

Whatever the case, pigs, or pig parts are really flying it seems, though what this omens, is perhaps for us the rakyat to decide. Is it time for change? Is it time to change?

But what I know for sure is it is a ti! me for a ll of us Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists and other religious denominations in this our beloved Malaysia to be calm and act wisely, to remember God and to remember the that all religions asks us to be peaceful and sensible peoples.

It is time for all Malaysians of all descent, be it Malays, Kadazans, Indians, Ibans, Chinese, Muruts, Bengalis and all the rest to unite, Najib may claim to own 1Malaysia but this is our one and only Malaysia.

It is our sacred place that we should dedicate ourselves to preserve and protect from threats to our harmony, from within or without.

Let not these 'pigs', whoever they are take away our land, let they not steal our peace. Let them not stir us against each other, but let us show them resolve, that we our rights and destiny self dictate. To this end, let us unite, let us be one and this our earthly paradise, keep safe.

Read More @ Source

MAT_SABU_MENJAWAB_FITNAH_KOMUNIS_TV3_umno cari isu tutup kes bersih2.0.flv

sian kat abang mat tomahan umno nak tutup kes cincin rosmah 24juta -nak pesong rakyat tutup cerita bersih -nak elak isu barang naik -nak hapus anwar x dapat hahaahaha

Video Rating: 3 / 5

More » Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

Tee Keat: I'm a negative example for Najib

Prime Minister and Umno President Najib Abdul Razak may be striving to convince his party into adopting the moderate approach, but former MCA president Ong Tee Keat thinks that Umno has in reality moved more towards the right.

Speaking to Malaysiakini last week, he said Umno is doing this because of pressure from within and without, forcing the party to shore up its community support base.

While Ong agrees that Najib may have intentions to reform his party as well as the BN, Umno, however, may not always stick to his reform plan, especially under the watch of pressure groups like Perkasa.
!
He was asked to comment on the difference among three prime ministers Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Najib.

"Mahathir was a very strong and dominant leader. But at least, he could always give you an answer even when facing an explosive and controversial issue. But, of course, he is a controversial leader as well.

"Abdullah is a good old man. He may not give you a clear answer but he can understand your limitations and grievances.

"As for the current prime minister, I can see that he wants to do something and reform. But on the road to reform, you have to face pressure from within and without the party.

"Under such circumtances, you may not always stick to your own way," said Ong, who had served as minister and deputy minister under the three premiers.

He said under the current delegates s! ystem, e ven a prime minister and the BN president may not survive if party support is lost.

"You are not only the government chief executive, but also the party chief. You have to face the pressure within your own party, and if you cannot sustain your party support, you may lose your government position."

Islamic state issue little impact

Ong, who had pushed for the probe into the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal during his tenure as transport minister, went on to mock himself, saying he is a negative example for Najib.

The MCA maverick was involved in a protracted power struggle with Dr Chua Soi Lek (right), who was then his deputy, culminating with Chua's expulsion from the party for damaging the party's image when a video tape of him having sex was widely circulated.

However in 2009, Chua's supporters succeeding in reinstating him as deputy who then went on to oust Ong the following year, after the party's central committee resigned en masse, triggering an extraordinary general meeting.

Ong has since kept out of the party's internal politics, choosing instead to focus on his constituency.

One and a half years after being thrown out as president, Ong did not want to comment on the future of the MCA and the BN.

However he opined that MCA will not stand! to gain much support by continuing to harp on the Islamic state issue, the main campaign theme set by his successor.

He said the rakyat cares more about the corruption and power abuse rather than islamic state issue.

"Many arguments today have been raised in 1990s before. I don't think this can make any impact despite the Chinese-based rulling parties continue to harp on this issue,

"Some may think that what you are saying is illusory, we don't know whether this will be implemented or not. But corruption and power abuse are the problems we can feel."

Read More @ Source

Mat Sabu Kata Komunis Melayu Mat Indra Pejuang Negara !!!

Mat Indera bukan pejuang Oleh WAN NOOR HAYATI WAN ALIAS dan ABDUL HAKIM RAHMAN pengarang@utusan.com.my KUALA LUMPUR 6 Sept. -- Mohamad Indera atau Mat Indera bukanlah pejuang kemerdekaan dalam tragedi Bukit Kepong, sebaliknya adalah pemberontak yang mempunyai agenda untuk menjadikan Tanah Melayu sebagai negara komunis. Perkara itu dijelaskan oleh bekas Timbalan Ketua Polis Negara, Datuk Abdul Rahman Ismail yang berkata, perjuangan Mat Indera berbeza dengan perjuangan tokoh-tokoh kemerdekaan yang lain seperti Tok Janggut, Tok Bahaman dan Tok Gajah. "Mat Indera yang dikatakan mengetuai serangan ke atas Balai Polis Bukit Kepong pada 23 Februari 1950, sebenarnya bukan menentang penjajah British sebaliknya bermatlamat menubuhkan sebuah negara komunis di Tanah Melayu. "Tok Janggut dan Tok Gajah pula berjuang berhabis-habisan menghalau penjajah dari tanah air bagi mengekalkan pemerintahan tempatan sedia ada," katanya ketika ditemui Utusan Malaysia di sini, hari ini. Dalam pada itu, Abdul Rahman turut menjelaskan perbezaan maksud pejuang dan pemberontak berdasarkan pengalamannya yang turut terlibat menyiasat kes-kes mangsa kekejaman komunis dari 1950 hingga 1955. "Di mana-mana negara dalam dunia, pihak yang mengangkat senjata untuk merampas negara secara kekerasan adalah dianggap pemberontak manakala pihak yang mengangkat senjata untuk mempertahankan keamanan negara adalah pejuang. "Pemberontak-pemberontak Parti Komunis Malaya (PKM) adalah pecahan daripada Malayan People Anti ...

Video Rating: 3 / 5

More » Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

The year the government repeatedly changed its mind

UPDATED @ 02:10:09 PM 31-12-2011

December 31, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 31 — A growing public demand for accountability forced the government this year to make many about-faces and policy U-turns, characterising what critics would say was a weak administration but supporters might call responsive management. 

And voters will get to eventually decide if they want to punish or reward Barisan Nasional (BN) when Datuk Seri Najib Razak calls elections.

The Malaysian Insider reviews some of the year's notable changes in position and direction.

Bersih 2.0 rally

Bersih protesters making their way through Jalan Sultan in the capital city on July 9

The first Bersih rally in 2007 was credited with shrinking the ruling coalition's voter support in Election 2008 that led to Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's early exit from government and his successor, Najib, appeared keen to avoid a repeat.

The Najib administration initially moved to nip the problem in the bud by detaining several individuals campaigning for the July 9 rally on suspicion of security risks to King and country and banning T-shirts bearing the images of communists as well as yellow-coloured clothes.

But days before the street march in the capital city, the Yang di-Pertua Agong stepped in to calm the rising storm and the seventh prime minister softened the government's stance against Bersih 2.0, led by lawyer-activist Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, and offered the 62-member coalition the use of a stadium of choice for its rally demanding a cleaner and more transparent electoral system.

When the electoral reform movement demanded Stadium Merdeka, Najib said he meant the Shah Alam stadium in Pakatan Rakyat-controlled Selangor, leading to yet another stalemate.

The 72 hours leading to the rally became fuzzy as misinformation reigned.

City police issued a lockdown on the capital and got a court order barring entry to 92 individuals, including the movement's leaders.

However, videos of harsh police action against the peaceful protestors went viral online and through social media channels such as Facebook and Twitter.

Faced with global criticism, the government conceded it may have mishandled the incident.

PSC electoral reform

Datuk Seri Maximus Ongkili, in charge of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Electoral Reform.

On August 15, five weeks after the July 9 rally, Najib announced the set up of a bipartisan Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on electoral reform, addressing Bersih 2.0's eight demands.

But the very next day, Najib's deputy Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said the PSC would only fine-tune and not reform the electoral processes. It was not the first time Muhyiddin had voiced a different view from his boss, raising questions of unity within the Najib Cabinet.

The PSC kicked off its public hearings for feedback on November 11, and several recommendations have been made since. The Election Commission has endorsed recommendations like indelible ink for the next general election.

Bumiputera quota

Najib speaking at the Umno General Assembly, the group he needs to convince whichever way he takes Bumiputera quotas.

Pro-Bumiputera quotas remain as part of the government's economic policies.

On September 27, Najib said, "We want to do away from (with) quotas but we must support them (Bumiputera entrepreneurs) in a way that would allow them to grow" in a bid to calm growing unhappiness with the affirmative action plan that favoured one community.

After suggestions that the PM had decided to abolish quotas, Najib clarified three days later: "I did not say we want to abolish quotas, but I said we cannot be too reliant on them".

National Feedlot Corp scandal

Datuk Seri Shahrizat Jalil, under fire for her family's involvement in the NFC.

It started off with Najib being firmly with Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Jalil, after story broke that her family members had been very liberal with the use of a RM250 million soft loan to a National Feedlot Corporation.

The company was set up to reduce Malaysia's dependency on foreign beef. However the pasture for the company extended as far as Bangsar condominiums and other baffling purchases.

As the attacks grew on Shahrizat's CEO husband, Umno's resolve to defend its Wanita Umno chief weakened, as did the reluctance of the authorities to investigate the case.

Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency eventually started investigations after seeing widespread public dissatisfaction.

Peaceful Assembly Act/Bill 2011

Bar Council members march to Parliament to voice their objection to the Peaceful Assembly Bill November 29 2011.

On the eve of Malaysia Day on September 16 Najib went on live television and promised the end of oppressive laws such as the Internal Security Act, Banishment Act and a slew of laws used to suppress political dissent.

There was a collective sigh of relief, but within days his cousin Hishammuddin announced that there would be new laws to fill the void.

On November 24, as a show of progress since Bersih 2.0, the Peaceful Assembly Bill was tabled.

It was pilloried instantly by legislators, and citizens were not far behind.

Critics said the new law, despite its name, would create more restrictions on the right of the public to assemble than the laws it would be replacing.

The government was forced to modify part of the law but many social activists and opposition politicians remain unhappy with the legislature that was eventually passed by Parliament.

Read More @ Source

Majlis Peguam Kini Hilang Arah

Kuala Lumpur, 7 September- Majlis Peguam Malaysia atau Bar Council kini dilihat sebagai sebuah badan yang mewakili pemimpin dan parti-parti pembangkang, dan tidak lagi dilihat sebagai sebuah badan professional yang bebas dan non partisan, ujar peguambela yang juga penasihat Undang-Undang UMNO, Datuk Hafarizam Harun. "Saya selaku peguambela yang juga merupakan ahli kepada Badan Peguam Malaysia (Malaysian Bar) melihat Majlis Peguam Malaysia (Bar Council) telah lari dari landasan tujuan penubuhan mereka mengikut Akta Profesion 1976. "Jika kita melihat Akta Profesion Undang-Undang 1976, Majlis Peguam seharusnya bersikap bebas. Bebas bermakna, mereka sepatutnya bersikap non-partisan, berkecuali," katanya di sini. Tegas beliau lagi jika diperhatikan kenyataan-kenyataan Bar Council, terutamanya tiga empat bulan ini, jelas kelihatan Bar Council ini lebih kepada satu pertubuhan yang disifatkannya sebagai pertubuhan separa politik, di mana tidak ada benda yang baik yang dilakukan kerajaan. "Contohnya, mengapa apabila saya sebagai seorang peguam telah dihadapkan ke Jawatankuasa Hak dan Kebebasan, Bar Council tidak mengeluarkan sebarang kenyataan rasmi yang mana dikeluarkan di semua media termasuk Malaysian Insider dan Malaysiakini mengutuk tindakan Speaker Dewan Undangan Negeri Selangor. "Tetapi apabila Datuk Ambiga telah dihalang masuk ke Sarawak ketika Pilihanraya Negeri Sarawak baru-baru ini, tidak sampai 4 jam beliau telah dihantar pulang, Bar Council telah mengeluarkan ...

Video Rating: 5 / 5

More » Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

1.    In the past few weeks, the MACC has been very prolific. Many advertorials have been published in the main stream newspapers of the MACC's achievements in eradicating corruption. The conviction of former Selangor MB Dato Seri Khir Toyo to 1 year imprisonment seems to boost the MACC's image.

2.    The MACC blazed the trail again when on the 21st December 2011, the MACC announced the arrest of five (5) civil servants for bribery in separate places in Kedah. On Tuesday 27th December 2011, the husband of the ex-CEO of the Iskandar Investment Board (IIB), Mohd Amin Suhaimi, was charged in Johor Bharu for corruption. It seems strange that the ex-CEO herself was not charged. Then on Wednesday 29th  December, a former IIB senior V-P, Rostam Razali, was fined RM20,000 after he pleaded guilty for abuse of power in disclosing confidential tender price information.

3.    Meanwhile in KL, the Permanent Chairman of Malaysian Muslim Welfare Organisation (Perkim) Selangor branch who was also the former International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) Deputy Rector, Professor Emeritus Datuk Dr Ariffin Suhaimi, was charged with two other Perkim members, Dato' Baharin Baba, 58, and Abas Adam, 60 for Criminal Breach of Trust (CBT) by the MACC. The offence was alleged to have happened in the early 2000s.

4.    While all these seem to show that the MACC would have the stamina and resolve to dig at old records to uncover corruption, abuse of power and CBT, the public has not forgotten the persecution of Dato' Ramli Yusuff, the former Director CCID, and his lawyer, Rosli Dahlan. The public considers this as a fix-up job by former IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan and A-G Gani Patail achieved with the collusions of the MACC. Musa Hassan was exposed as an incredible witness which is a legal euphemism for calling him a liar. Because of that, the public considers the MACC as a tool of oppression that would do the biddings of A–G Gani Patail and their political masters.  

5.    Thus, some skeptics say that these recent events are merely to allow the MACC to end 2011 on a high note. It is as if the MACC is trying to erase all the bad publicity for causing the deaths of Teoh Beng Hock and customs officer Ahmad Sarbaini while in the MACC's custody. The outcome of the Royal Commission of I! nquiry a nd the Inquest have not satisfied the public's thirst for the truth and justice. Rightly or wrongly, that is the public perception. And perception counts if the government of PM Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak is to lead BN to a successful GE 13.

6.    In that regard, I feel compelled to raise the two blatant cases involving YB Senator Dato' Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil, Minister for Women and Family Development, in the NFC episode and YB Senator Datuk Dr. Awang Adek Hussein, Deputy Minister of Finance, for admitting he received cash into his private accounts but justified it as for political donations towards social program.

7.    Like the rest of the Rakyat, I am astounded and appalled by the reasons put up  by both these two politicians who were rejected by the Rakyat in GE 12 and had to be smuggled into the Cabinet by back door appointments through the Dewan Negara. Their mere presence as Ministers in the Government betrays everything that PM Najib has been saying about winnable candidates. These two were rejected by the Rakyat in GE12 and their involvement in these two scandals will certainly not endear them any closer to the electorates in GE 13.    

8.    In the case of Dato' Seri Shahrizat, the evidence are already in the public domain of the misappropriation of the NFC funds granted for the national cattle project instead being used to purchase luxurious condominiums, super cars and fantastic salaries for Shahrizat's husband and children.

9.    The initial statement by the MACC that they only investigate corruption cases and referred the matter to the Police is seen as a feeble attempt to pass the bucket. That was the same thing that happened in the Khir Toyo's case until I pursued it that led to Khir Toyo being charged. Even so, the Rakyat questioned why Khir Toyo was charged under the Penal Code where the maximum penalty is only 2 years whereas punishments under the MACC Act would extend to 20 years. The Rakyat sees this as a cover up!

10.�! �     In the case of Datuk Dr. Awang Adek, his open admission of having received such monies to fund his own "social" programs actually constitute political gratification. That an offence of corruption has been established could not be clearer. But most worrisome to me is the inability of Awang Adek, as our Finance Minister, to realise that what he had done was wrong. For him to justify his conduct spells doom for the country if our national finance is to be managed by a man of such moral fabric.

11.     I invite the MACC Chief Commissioner, Dato' Sri Abu Kasssim, to deliver to both Shahrizat and Awang Adek the lectures that he had delivered to me when I was on the MACC Advisory Panel about the meaning of gratification. Since I am now pursuing a law degree, for these Ministers' benefit I reproduce s. 3 on Interpretation in the MACC Act:

"gratification" means-
(a)    money, donation, gift, loan, fee, reward, valuable security, property or interest in property being property of any description whether movable or immovable, financial benefit, or any other similar advantage;

12.    For Sharizat to maintain that her family is justified to get the contracts goes against the provisions of the MACC Act:

23. Offence of using office or position for gratification
(1)    Any officer of a public body who uses his office or position for any gratification, whether for himself, his relative or associate, commits an offence.

(2)    For the purposes of subsection (1), an officer of a public body shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, ! to use h is office or position for any gratification, whether for himself, his relative or associate, when he makes any decision, or takes any action, in relation to any matter in which such officer, or any relative or associate of his, has an interest, whether directly or indirectly.


13.    Let me ask Awang Adek, if he is not the  Deputy Finance Minister whether these companies and associates would give him those monies to fund his political programs. The case of Dato' Harun Idris is on point. That makes it clear that Awang Adek had accepted gratification as defined by s. 16 MACC Act:  

16. Offence of accepting gratification
Any person who by himself, or by or in conjunction with any other person--

(a)     corruptly solicits or receives or agrees to receive for himself or for any other person; or
(b)     corruptly gives, promises or offers to any person whether for the benefit of that person or of another person,
any gratification as an inducement to or a reward for, or otherwise on account of--

(A)     any person doing or forbearing to do anything in respect of any matter or transaction, actual or proposed or likely to take place; or
(B)     any officer of a public body doing or forbearing to do anything in respect of any matter or transaction, actual or proposed or likely to take place, in which the public body is concerned,
commits an offence.

14.     As a Minister, Awang Adek is a public officer. Thus, his acceptance of such monies into his personal account constitutes bribery:

21. Bribery of officer of public body
Any person who offers to an officer of any public body, or being an officer of any public body solicits or accepts, any gratification as an inducement or a reward for--

(a)     the officer voting or abstaining from voting at any meeting of the public body in favour of or against any measure, resolution or question submitted to the public body;
(b)     the officer performing or abstaining from performing or aiding in procuring, expediting, delaying, hindering or preventing the performance of, any official act;
(c)     the officer aiding in procuring or preventing the passing of any vote or the granting of any contract or advantage in favour of any person; or
(d)     the officer showing or forbearing to show any favour or disfavour in his capacity as such officer,
commits an offence, notwithstanding that the officer did not have the power, right or opportunity so to do, show or forbear, or accepted the gratification without intending so to do, show or forbear, or did not in fact so do, show or forbear, or that the inducement or reward was not in relation to the affairs of the public body.


15.    Once Awang Adek admitted that he had accepted gratification, then there is a presumption that it is corrupt gratification:

50.  Presumption in certain offences.
(1)    Where in any proceedings against any person for an offence under section 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22 or 23 it is proved that any gratification has been received or agreed to be received, accepted or agreed to be accepted, obtained or attempted to be obtained, solicited, given or agreed to be given, promised, or offered, by or to the accused, the gratification shall be presumed to have been corruptly received or agreed to be received, accepted or agreed to be accepted, obtained or attempted to be obtained, solicited, given or agreed to be given, promised, or offered as an inducement or a reward for or on account of the matters set out in the particulars of the offence, unless the contrary is proved.

16.    It is abundantly clear that the actions of Shahrizat and Anwang Adek are not defensible. The MACC does itself discredit if it continuously refuse to act with the same speed and efficiency when it involve members of the ruling party. The Rakyat is tired of excuses. In the interest of the BN Government, Shahrizat and Awang Adek should resign and offer themselves for investigation by MACC and other authorities. By resigning, only then can investigations against them be done without the undue influence which cannot be the case if they remain in the Cabinet.

17.    As we celebrate New Year, the Rakyat expect a new resolve by the Government and the MACC. If the fight to eradicate corruption is seen as mere lip service, the Rakyat will rise and teach the government a lesson at the ballot box. Before that happens, I urge the government to wake up to today's realities before the Rakyat say enough is enough!

Happy New Year 2012!

"HUMBLENESS IS GOOD VIRTUE, ARROGANCE SHALL FALL, THE MEEK WILL RULE THE WORLD".
.....................................................................
Tan Sri Datuk Robert Phang Miow Sin
Justice of Peace

Chairman – Social Care Foundation

Read More @ Source

MoU Umno dengan Parti Komunis China

Video Rating: 2 / 5

More » Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

Race Relations Act a la UK a sick Umno joke

Umno is now promising us all that it will double padlock the "National Safe", for want of a better term, so that no one can break into it and rifle the contents or muck around with it in any manner.

Malaysia may not need a Race Relations Act a la the United Kingdom because there's no basis for comparison between the model country for the proposed Act, or any other western democracy for that matter. Indeed, no Asian country would even consider having such a disgraceful law on the books.

UK system is not racist but the people are

Malaysia and the United Kingdom are poles apart on the delicate question of race relations.

The fundamental difference is this: in the United Kingdom, the system is not racist.

However the people are and as a result, immigrants from the Third World often end up at the receiving end at the hands of the locals in more ways than one.

Whites in the UK wouldn't hesitate in the least to openly and publicly call non-whites any number of names, often very derogatory, just to let off some steam. It must be remembered that society, by and large in the western world, are not the thinking, educated kind. They earn a living most of the time by standing somewhere the whole day and pushing some buttons on a machine.

Malaysian system is racist but the people are not

In Malaysia the system is racist, the people are not. This is why we can practise the Open House culture during the various festive celebrations without living in fear or indulging in hypocrisy and humbuggery. "Muhibbah" -- goodwill -- is the operative word here.

Such things as the Open House practice wouldn't happen in the UK, or Australia for that matter, where the whites can't stand to even see the sight of any Black i.e. the operative word "Black" meaning anyone who is not white/Caucasoid, and "Black" being defined as anyone with even a drop of Black blood.

So, a person can look as white as snow, according to Whitey, but still be considered "Black" because of a proverbial drop of Black blood. In the white political/racist dictionary, there are only two races in this world i.e. white and Black, there being no yellows, reds, browns or duskies.

Whitey can look as Black as charcoal after lying in the sun the whole day or because he comes from a part of the world where Caucasoids including archaic whites have a more than a little permanent colour in their complexion but he would still be Whitey, according to the politician and racist in Whitey.

However, no matter how racist Whitey is, he does not allow for a system that's racist in his country and neither will he allow a system which is not based on merit. The Brightest and Best, Whitey will grant you any day, must lead the way for all. Hence, we have the rise of Barrack Hussein Obama in the United States as president of that great country. Afro-Americans like Obama form only ten per cent of the population in that country where whites make up 60 per cent.

So, when we talk about colour in Malaysia, it's actually a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Deliberate distortion of history

In Malaysia, our problem is not the lack of a Race Relations Act but a distorted take on our history.

It allows politicians to run amok to the point of forever bringing the country to yet another May 13. That's the fateful day in history, 1969, when specially-trained commandos disguised as civilians hacked innocent Chinese to death and precipitated a week-long Sino-Malay bloodbath. They were acting on the orders of the then higher-ups in Umno which three days earlier had done very badly in national elections as a result, among others, of kicking out the largely-Chinese Singapore from the Federation four years earlier.

If we are to ever get a system in this country where institutionalised racism doesn't prevail we need to get our history and our Federal Constitution right. In that case, we wouldn't need a Race Relations Act because unlike in the western democracies, our people are by nature not racist.

The institutionalised racism in Malaysia stems, among others, from distortions and deviations in the implementation of Article 153 of the Federal Constitution and the New Economic Policy (NEP) which is an extrapolation of the 4th Special Position accorded to the Natives of Sabah and Sarawak and the Orang Asli and Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia.

Who are the natives

For starters, we need to take note that the Federal Constitution does not recognise the Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia as Natives of the Land. The definition of Malay in the Federal Constitution, more a noting of Malay nationalism at best, does not amount to bestowing Native status on Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia.

This is rightly so since the Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia come from various other language groups from the islands of southeast Asia, the Indian sub-continent and Arab states, all these peoples being bound by a common faith i.e. Islam. Professor William Roff wrote in his "Origins of Malay Nationalism" that as late as 1885, 85 per cent of the Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia were either immigrants or the descendants of recent immigrants.

The Federal Constitution has rightly recognised only the Orang Asli and the Natives in Sabah and Sarawak as Native to Malaysia and this is reflected, in the case of Sabah and Sarawak, in the Adat which includes Native Customary Rights (NCR) over land.

To reiterate, Malay nationalism in Peninsular Malaysia does not amount to being bestowed Native status, either directly or indirectly, by the Federal Constitution. All nationalism are defined by what they oppose.

Malay nationalism

Malay nationalism was a response, and distinctly garbed in Islam, to the economic backwardness of the Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore vis-a-vis the Chinese -- the politically "troublesome" south Chinese -- who were encouraged by the Chinese Emperor to migrate to southeast Asia and focus only on business and nothing elsewhere. So powerful was the Edict of the Chinese Emperor in Beijing to the people in south China that its effects can be seen and felt all over southeast Asia today.

All responses to economic and social issues throughout the history of man have taken religious form in order to move the masses and Malay nationalism was no exception. Again, Malay nationalism does not equate or accord with being a Native of Peninsular Malaysia. This fact, among others, must be recognised and accepted, in order to dismantle the system of institutionalised racism in Malaysia.

It's also our history that the British colonialists fought two wars with Bangkok to carve out Peninsular Malaysia from the Thai kingdom to plant rubber and tin.

The British did not fight these two wars so that the Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia could subsequently go on to invent the fairy tale that they are Natives of the land.

If not for the British, there would be no Malaysia and we in Peninsular Malaysia would be speaking Thai and calling ourselves Abjit Rama Rama and the like to be recognised as citizens of his Majesty the King in Bangkok.

Malay Rulers

The Conference of Malay Rulers was yet another creation of the British colonialists.

The British could not understand the concept of a ruler, a Sultan, who did not have territory to lord over and control. Muslim sultanates on the islands of southeast Asia were Kerajaan Sungei -- riverine kingdoms -- reduced to collecting tolls along the waterways in order to govern the spiritual affairs of the local ummah (faithful). A Sultan, was like a mini Pope, charged with being the spiritual head of the local ummah and nothing more.

The British left the institution of sultanships alone except for forbidding them to henceforth send the bunga mas -- taxes collected by the Sultans from the Muslim squatters on Thai territory -- to Bangkok.

The British also defined the territorial borders for the various Sultans in Peninsular Malaysia. The states were now regular little kingdoms and no longer confined to Sungei Perak, Sungei Pahang, Sungei Johore and the like. The Bugis and other-origin Sultans also received regular pensions from the British colonial administration in order to govern the spiritual affairs of the local Ummah.

The system in Malaysia must also free itself of institutionalised racism by either recognising and implementing the 1963 Malaysia Agreement or allow Sabah and Sarawak to free itself of the Federation and forge their own destiny in the world.

At present, the Federal Government has a master-slave relationship with the two Malaysian Borneo states through local proxies, stooges and traitors.

It's no secret that the Dayaks in Sarawak and the Dusuns -- including the Kadazans or urban Dusuns and the Muruts -- in Sabah live in fear of the ruling elite in Putrajaya stealing their countries and handing them over to the impoverished Muslim hordes from the nearby Philippines and Indonesia.

It must also be recognised that much of the racism in the politics of this country stems from Umno twisting and turning every issue into a racial issue. This is being deliberately done under the politics of distraction and disruption in order to pit the Malays and non-Malays against each other and scare the former into circling the wagons and gather under one political platform – read Umno – so that a handful of leaders can live it by like latter-day sheikhs "as if there's no tomorrow".

The politics of distraction and disruption camouflages the thievery that goes on at the Public Treasury as government projects ultimately cost the tax-payer anything up to ten times what it should actually cost. The difference is being pocketed by the politicians under various guises: Bumiputeraism, NEP, Malaysia Boleh and the like.

Malaysia Chronicle

Read More @ Source

"Saya Sendiri Duduk Di Bukit Kepong Setahun Untuk Hasilkan Filem" -- Jins Shamsuddin

KUALA LUMPUR, 13 Sept -- Dakwaan bahawa filem Bukit kepong sebagai sebuah filem mengikut acuan "Pakatan Rakyat" sebagaimana yang didakwa oleh Timbalan Presiden Pas , Mohammad Sabu disanggah sepenuhnya oleh pengarah filem tersebut, Tan Sri Jins Shamsuddin. Sebaliknya menurut Tan Sri Jins Shamsuddin kajian menyeluruh dilakukan dalam menerbitkan Filem Bukit Kepong itu termasuk mendapat bantuan penduduk kampung, waris mangsa serta ahli keluarga terdekat Muhammad Indera selain pihak Polis. "Saya telah diminta oleh Tun Haniff Omar, ketika itu dia Ketua Polis Negara yang mencadangkan kepada saya untuk membuat filem Bukit Kepong, kerana sebelum itu, dia ada juga bekerjasama dengan beberapa agensi kerajaan lain tetapi kos untuk membuat filem ini terlalu mahal. "Saya telah membuat penyelidikan rapi termasuk menemubual bekas anggota komunis yang terbabit dalam serangan itu, waris mangsa serta ahli keluarga terdekat Muhammad Indera, lelaki tempatan yang bersekongkol dengan pengganas komunis," katanya secara eksklusif dengan "Pakatan Rakyat"-Online di sini. Filem Bukit Kepong yang mengisahkan serangan komunis terhadap Balai Polis Bukit Kepong dibuat berdasarkan sejarah sebenar tragedi berdarah pada 23 Februari 1950 itu, bukannya mengikut perspektif "Pakatan Rakyat" seperti dituduh Timbalan Presiden Pas, Mohamad Sabu. "Saya menafikan sekeras-kerasnya tuduhan Mat Sabu bahawa filem ini dihasilkan berdasarkan perspektif dan arahan "Pakatan Rakyat". Filem ini digarap berdasarkan fakta sejarah yang sebenar dan saya sendiri menetap di ...

Video Rating: 3 / 5

More » Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治