Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Of subliminal indoctrination and inept social media strategies
- Despite cheap China loan, local funds underwrite Second Penang Bridge
- Making sense of PAS’s move
- Freedom House Calls For Release of Egyptian Blogger
- WIKILEAKS: Iran outdoes U.S. in FDI; Foreign Bank to Open in KL. Malaysia Economic Update July 2007
- Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #84
- Freedom
- Open House in FELDA for Pakatan Rakyat Leaders
- Logic is illogical
- Hudud and the Constitution
- Confessions of an Atheist
- MCA asks voters to forget past
- Religious Harmony
- Termakan budi, tergadai jiwa dan raga?
- Muhyiddin tells Perkasa not to jump the gun
- ISA repeal delayed to consult stakeholders, say ministers
- Press freedom, a la MCA
- Malaysia Tries to Rein In Private Education Institutions
- Lawyers insist Najib, Rosmah not key to Sodomy II
- Consistently inconsistent
- Alarm bells over unions’ bluster on RM1,500 base wage
- Rantings over the great hudud debate
- Raising retirement age will hurt some — Jacob George
- Controversial RFS is back
- Thumbs up for Community Chest
- Najib’s reform package underway
| Of subliminal indoctrination and inept social media strategies Posted: 03 Oct 2011 09:09 AM PDT By Edwin Yapp, ZDnet In a report I filed a couple of weeks ago, the Malaysian government, through ICT industry regulator, the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), blocked the airing of a public service announcement (PSA) urging citizens to exercise their constitutional right to vote in Malaysia's next general election. The PSA, called "Undilah," (which means "Please Vote" in Malay), is an attempt by an independent film maker and musician Pete Teo to highlight the need of all Malaysians above the voting age of 21-years of age to exercise their constitutional right to vote. |
| Despite cheap China loan, local funds underwrite Second Penang Bridge Posted: 03 Oct 2011 08:56 AM PDT By Jahabar Sadiq, The Malaysian Insider KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 4 — Putrajaya has decided to forgo a cheap US$800 million (RM2.6 billion) loan from China to build the Second Penang Bridge, and has instead asked the state-owned Bank Pembangunan to further underwrite the construction of the 24km bridge which is now due in 2013. The Malaysian Insider understands that the RM4.3 billion Malaysia-China joint-venture project has not drawn any funds from the loan granted in July 2007 when Tun Abdullah Badawi was prime minister. The interest rate for the loan was set at three per cent for 20 years. "The Ministry of Finance (MOF) has not taken one sen of the loan but has asked local banks to provide the balance of the funds," a source told The Malaysian Insider. No reason was given for not taking the loan, which was seen as a sign of closer ties between the Asian giant and Malaysia, especially for Penang, which has a sizeable Chinese population. Another source confirmed that Bank Pembangunan has been told to give out a further loan apart from the RM1.7 billion issued to the joint-venture between the Beijing-owned China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC) Ltd and UEM Builders Bhd, which is owned by state asset manager Khazanah Nasional Berhad. "Bank Pembangunan is now providing most of the money in place of the Chinese loan," he added. It is not known if the use of local funds could be a crimp for loans for other infrastructural projects in the country including the Klang Valley Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) for which the first line linking Sungai Buloh and Kajang could cost up to RM50 billion. The Second Penang Bridge is managed by the Finance Ministry's Jambatan Kedua Sdn Bhd and has been fraught with issues over a lack of urgency in its construction by the Chinese, who were keen to show their engineering capabilities beyond the Middle Kingdom. The final figure of RM4.3 billion was agreed upon after the government had to put its foot down and set a benchmark after initial calculations showed that the cost of the project could go as high as RM4.8 billion. Both UEM and CHEC have argued that the cost of the bridge has increased from RM3.6 billion in 2006 because of the sharp increase in the cost of materials, especially steel.
|
| Posted: 03 Oct 2011 06:48 AM PDT
DAP national chairman Karpal Singh should be commended for reiterating that his party is not in favour of PAS's proposition to implement the hudud, and for calling a spade a spade. The same, however, cannot be said of Pakatan Rakyat supremo Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim who has been reported as saying that at the personal level, he is supportive of the hudud. Thinking Malaysians should therefore probe deeper into what is the real basis of the working relationship between parties in Pakatan Rakyat. Ideological coherence is definitely not the answer. While all fingers point to marriage of convenience as a plausible explanation, we should not forget that the DAP had on more than one occasion requested a separation. Nevertheless, since the political climate prior to the run up to the 12th general election in 2008 was stacked against Barisan Nasional, PAS and the DAP had decided to put aside their differences by omitting PAS's Islamic state agenda in their 2008 election manifesto. PAS's partners in Pakatan Rakyat must be wondering how long this ad hoc alliance will last, now that the former's spiritual leader is insisting that hudud be implemented come what may. This is indeed mind boggling as PAS had decided in its recently concluded muktamar that the party is now struggling to set up a welfare state as opposed to an Islamic polity. While political pundits have offered various explanations for this sudden turn of events, we have yet to stumble upon a satisfactory answer. Why is PAS endangering Pakatan Rakyat's chances of winning the next general election by resorting to an old strategy that has been proven to be ineffective among moderate Muslims and non-Muslims? It could well be that PAS has come to a realisation that the party's image as an Islamic party has been bruised by its decision to embrace the welfare state agenda; but by going back to its original struggle to set up an Islamic polity, the party risks alienating moderates who had supported Pakatan Rakyat candidates in the last general election. This is the central dilemma that PAS has to deal with. PAS's identity as an Islamic party is pursued sub condicione – on condition that its pursuit does not jeopardise the party. In the course of articulating its goal, we have witnessed how PAS's stand vis-à-vis hudud has become more vague. The PAS ideology which was manifest becomes latent. More importantly, a permanent gap opens up between official aims and PAS's behaviour. The relationship between aims and behaviour never completely disappears; it attenuates. The correspondence of PAS's behaviour with its official aims is constantly reaffirmed by its leaders – amongst the many courses of action possible to achieve its official aims, those which are compatible with its stability will be selected. For instance, the recurrent pattern we find in the relationship between PAS and DAP – the split and reconciliation is better understood as the result of articulation, rather than a substitution of aims. On the one hand, PAS's original aim of implementing the hudud is constantly evoked as it is the basis of the party's identity, but on the other hand, the chosen courses of action guarantee organisational stability without taking credibility away from the notion that PAS is still "working" towards its original aim. By invoking hudud, PAS hopes to maintain its legitimacy in the eyes of its supporters. The implementation of hudud will continue to influence PAS, to play an essential role both in its internal processes and in the relationship between PAS and its environment for a long time. We are nonetheless left to wonder if its invocation of hudud this time around is a mere façade. Dr Azeem Fazwan Ahmad Farouk
|
| Freedom House Calls For Release of Egyptian Blogger Posted: 03 Oct 2011 06:39 AM PDT
On the eve of his appeal hearing, Freedom House condemns the unjust imprisonment of Egyptian blogger Maikel Nabil Sanad and calls for his immediate release. Mr. Sanad was sentenced to three years in prison as a result of his criticism of the military's brutal treatment of protestors. During his trial, he was accused of spreading false information and insulting the military. He was convicted in a summary procedure without the presence of a lawyer or the ability to contact his family. Makail Nabil began a hunger strike in August to protest his imprisonment and intends to continue this strike until he dies or is released. "Mikael's trial and hasty imprisonment by a military tribunal on charges of insulting the armed forces is a violation of his right to due process as well as a betrayal of the principles of democracy the Egyptian military claims it wants to uphold," said Charles Dunne, Freedom House's senior program manager for MENA. "The appeal hearing on October 4 is a clear opportunity for Egypt's ruling military council to set right a gross injustice." Egyptians have been the victims of an increasing crackdown on public debate, including the reinstatement of the Ministry of Information, a ministry that does not exist in most democracies and is viewed as restrictive by many activists. At least 12,000 civilians have been tried in military courts since February 2011, according to Human Rights Watch. Bloggers, journalists and those critical of the military have been arrested and restrictions have been placed on publication or broadcast of information or opinion about the military. In August 2011, activist and blogger Asmaa Mahfouz was arrested and charged with inciting violence against the military for her social networking posts. Egypt is ranked Not Free in Freedom in the World 2011, Freedom House's survey of political rights and civil liberties, and Not Free in Freedom of the Press 2011. For more information on Egypt, visit: Freedom House is an independent watchdog organization that supports democratic change, monitors the status of freedom around the world, and advocates for democracy and human rights.
|
| WIKILEAKS: Iran outdoes U.S. in FDI; Foreign Bank to Open in KL. Malaysia Economic Update July 2007 Posted: 03 Oct 2011 01:00 AM PDT
After the Asian financial crisis in 1998, the Central Bank directed the mergers of many local banks, resulting in only ten domestic banks by 2000 down from 54 banks just two years earlier. In 2006 CIMB bought Southern Bank, bringing the number to nine. Nazir said the merger process is lengthy, and it can take two to three years for the new bank to become competitive. (Note: only two Malaysian banks currently have assets over RM 10 billion: Nazir's own CIMB Group and Maybank.) THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin
1. (U) Summary: Malaysia's top investor for the first five months of 2007 is Iran, due to a joint venture by the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) and SKS Ventures Sdn. Bhd. to build a refinery in the northern region of peninsular Malaysia. The Central Bank approved another joint venture for Bank of Baroda and two other Indian banks, marking the first new foreign conventional bank to be approved in many years. Other developments include increased tourism, a flap over pricing of the new Harry Potter book, and a slightly increased forecast for economic growth. End Summary. Malaysia's Top Investor Year-to-Date: IRAN 2. (U) Iran has emerged as the leading foreign investor in the country for the period January through May 2007, at least in terms of approved projects. Iran's new status is the result of a single large refinery in which the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) has a large stake. The refinery, which will be built in the northern state of Kedah, is a joint venture with Malaysian company SKS Development Sdn. Bhd., a sister-company to SKS Ventures which made press earlier this year when it announced plans to develop the Ferdows and Golshan gas fields in Iran. Both SKS Development and SKS Ventures are owned by Malaysian tycoon Syed Mokhtar al-Bukhari. The NIOC stake in the new refinery is reported to be less than 50%. U.S. investment approvals drop to fifth place 3. (U) U.S. investment approvals are running in fifth place this year, after adecade or more of the U.S. being Malaysia's top foreign investor. According to the government investment approval agency, Malaysian Industrial Development Authority (MIDA), Iran's investment of USD 874 million, or 19% of total approved foreign investment, is ahead of Netherlands (USD 653 million), Japan (USD 518 million), Singapore (USD 378 million) and the U.S. (USD 299 million). Average monthly approvals are up slightly for investment from the U.S. and Japan and significantly for investment from the Netherlands and Singapore. Total approved foreign investments were USD 3.6 billion for the first five months of the year and USD 5.5 billion in 2006. Comment 4. (SBU) It is too soon to tell whether the year-to-date project approvals will lead to a significant increase in actual foreign direct investment. Comparing the YTD monthly average for January through May 2007 to the monthly average for 2006 shows a 57% increase. This is hardly realistic. It is more likely that, with national elections around the corner, the GOM is approving everything that comes across the desk in an effort to boost the figures. How many of these proposals ever break ground is yet to be seen. However, the one large refinery jointly financed by NIOC and SKS Ventures is expected to break ground within the next month or two. Foreign Conventional Bank Approved 5. (U) According to the GOM's "Financial Sector Master Plan," developed in 2001, this year was supposed to be the year that the financial sector would be liberalized, after a series of government-imposed clampdowns in the beginning of the 2001-2010 period covered by the plan. A series of gradual liberalizations have been evident since January, and according to press reports, the GOM recently approved the application of a new foreign conventional bank - the first in many years. Bank of Baroda, India's fifth largest lender, has been granted approval to set up a joint venture with two other conventional Indian banks, Punjab National Bank and Andhra Bank, in early 2008. Bank of Baroda currently has a representative office in Kuala Lumpur which it opened in August 2004. Earlier press reports alluded to a long, complex series of negotiations between Malaysia's central bank and Bank of Baroda. This will be the first Indian bank permitted to open a branch in the country, albeit a year later than planned. (Note: as part of Malaysia's drive to become a global hub for Islamic finance, several Middle East-based Islamic banks opened their doors in Malaysia earlier this year.) Visit Malaysia Year 2007 and 50th Independence Day Celebrations 6. (U) The Visit Malaysia Year 2007 tourism campaign was launched nationwide this year to celebrate Malaysia's 50 years of independence from the British, which culminates with the Merdeka National Day on August 31. Many activities and programs such as cultural performances and street shows have been lined up to promote Malaysia as a tourist destination both domestically and internationally. 7. (U) The tourism industry continues to see increasing arrivals and to contribute higher earnings to the Malaysian economy. A total of 17.55 million international tourists visited Malaysia in 2006 and this year Malaysia is targeting 20.1 million tourists who are expected to spend RM40.5 billion (approximately USD 11.8 billion). As of March this year, Malaysia recorded 1.7 million visitors, an increase of 10.9 percent compared to the same period last year. Tourists from elsewhere in Southeast Asia usually make up the bulk of arrivals to the country, including a large number of Singaporeans who come for day trips. Double digit growth was recorded for visitor arrivals from Singapore, Indonesia, China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Australia, Russia and others. According to the Tourism Board website there has been a drop in arrivals from Thailand for the past three months caused by violence in southern Thailand. New Approach to Promoting Tourism 8. (U) According to Zulkipli of Malaysia's Tourism Board, the government is "very interested" in attracting more tourists from the Middle East, North Africa and Russia, all of which are believed to have high growth potential and high average expenditure per tourist, though their tourists travel only in limited seasons. He noted that Middle Eastern tourists in particular are attracted to Malaysia for cultural, religious and dietary reasons, with the largest numbers of tourists coming during the summer. In addition, he surmised that many Arab tourists have avoided visiting the United States and Western Europe, where they may face visa difficulties and could feel "less welcome." 9. (U) In the past, Malaysia marketed itself as a holiday destination, and is now promoting itself as a shopping haven in a move to increase the flow of tourists' receipts. The board is hoping to attract more U.S. tourists, which tend not to travel much to Malaysia given its great distance from the U.S. While in New York recently, the tourism board also aggressively promoted Malaysia's attractiveness for medical tourists and for the MICE (meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions) market. Issues affecting tourism growth 10. (U) Malaysia's poor maintenance of public toilets, unscrupulous taxi drivers, the prevalence of itinerant beggars in tourist zones, and general lack of cleanliness have been hot issues for the government as it seeks to attract more tourists from abroad, according to tourism board officials. Last year the government installed high-tech toilets in several key shopping areas, and local authorities and the Housing and Local Government Ministry are pressuring restaurants and hotels to ensure that toilets are kept clean. Hotels Try to Conserve Energy 11. (U) Econ FSN spoke with Shaha of the Hotel Association, who said he is optimistic that Malaysia will achieve the predicted number of tourists, provided no unforeseen global events such as a bird flu outbreak or a tsunami occurs. He said electricity is the second largest cost to hotels after salary, which is why his group has asked Malaysia's power company and the trade ministry (MITI) to provide appropriate incentives to ease the burden on hotels. The hotel industry is in operation 24 hours a day, and cannot adjust its operations to off-peak hours like the industrial and manufacturing sector. Hotels have made efforts to increase energy efficiency to mitigate the increased cost of power, according to Shaha, but older hotels have found this difficult. The hotel industry also has asked MITI for incentives to cover new equipment for hotels undergoing renovations and upgrading. Pricing Flap Over Harry Potter 12. (U) Malaysia's biggest book chains (MPH, Popular, Harris, and Times) briefly launched a boycott of the new Harry Potter book to highlight how their business is threatened by two hypermarkets, Tesco and Carrefour. The two hypermarkets initially marketed "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" at the discounted price of RM69.60 (approximately USD 20), far below its recommended retail price of RM109.90 (approximately USD 32). Minister of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs (MDTCA) Shafie Apdal defended the hypermarkets, saying such discounts benefit the public. Shafie's move was somewhat unusual in that the MDTCA is often called upon to support smaller scale Malaysian retailers; at the same time, the ministry expends considerable resources to ensure that Malaysian consumers are not overcharged for the large number of staple products subject to government price controls. MIER Raises Its Economic Growth Forecast 13. (U) The Malaysian Institute of Economic Research (MIER) has revised Malaysia's economic growth upwards to 5.7% year-on-year in 2007 from 5.6% forecast a month ago. Despite the revision, the growth projection is still below the official estimate of 6%. MIER executive director Mohamed Ariff said the Malaysian economy is underperforming as it is capable of 6.5% growth. He blamed the relatively slow growth to weak domestic investment. He also commented that although FDI inflows to Malaysia have increased in 2006 after bottoming out in 2005, they are still below pre-crisis levels and lag behind Singapore and Thailand. Call to Hasten Mergers of Malaysian Banks 14. (U) Nazir Razak, CEO of CIMB Group, Malaysia's second-largest banking conglomerate, announced at a conference on the banking sector that, in his view, the Central Bank should intervene to force the acceleration of mergers of domestic banks. This would make them more competitive and better able to withstand the forces of liberalization, he said. After the Asian financial crisis in 1998, the Central Bank directed the mergers of many local banks, resulting in only ten domestic banks by 2000 down from 54 banks just two years earlier. In 2006 CIMB bought Southern Bank, bringing the number to nine. Nazir said the merger process is lengthy, and it can take two to three years for the new bank to become competitive. Alternatively, he suggested that the Central Bank should raise the minimum shareholder asset level from its current RM 2 billion (USD 588 million) to RM 10 billion (USD 2.9 billion) to force out the smaller players. (Note: only two Malaysian banks currently have assets over RM 10 billion: Nazir's own CIMB Group and Maybank.) Government To Leave It to Market Forces 15.(U) Responding to Nazir Razak's call for government intervention to force further bank mergers, Second Finance Minister Nor Mohamed Yakcop said the government has no objection to further consolidation in the banking sector. However, the minister said Malaysia is not planning to introduce new measures to speed up the process. LaFleur (July 2007)
|
| Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #84 Posted: 02 Oct 2011 11:08 PM PDT
M. Bakri Musa Chapter 10: Freedom, Justice, and the Law Society and Individuals Society and individual may be the two sides of the same coin; nonetheless our attitude or more importantly the attitude of those in power as to which side to be viewed first, involves more than just a simple toss of the coin. The difference between a totalitarian state versus a civil one is that with the former, the individual serves the state; in a civilized society, the state is there for the citizens. This seminal distinction makes all the difference. The purported supremacy of Asian values that place a premium on societal goals over the dignity of the individual is in reality at best nothing more than a benign manifestation of authoritarian tendencies. It is no surprise that such societies are prone to militaristic and dictatorial tendencies, as demonstrated by Communist China and the Japan of World War II. Many of the "hi-tech" startups in Silicon Valley are the brainchild of Chinese and Indians entrepreneurs. The Egyptian Nobel Prize winner in Chemistry (1999), Caltech's Dr. Ahmad Zewail, did his formative research in America. The Egyptians recognized him only after he made a name for himself. The Pakistani-born 1979 Nobel laureate in physics, Abdus Salaam, too did his pioneering work in the West. Visit any leading American medical center and you will see many luminaries from such countries as Pakistan, Ecuador, and Ethiopia. While every year America routinely grabs the lion share of Nobel prizes, what is not commonly recognized is that many of these geniuses are foreign born. These talented individuals had to leave their native land to maximize their potential. When I see how Indonesia treats its gifted writers like Pramoedya Ananta Toer, I am saddened not so much for him but for the Indonesians. Here is a talented writer, God's gift to the Indonesians, and their leaders treat him like a criminal. They fail to respect much less appreciate his precious talent. While eminent American universities like Cornell and Cal Berkeley laud him, back in Indonesia his books are banned. It is instructive that he was nominated by his Malaysian admirers for the prestigious Maysaysay award which he won in1965. Meanwhile back in Indonesia the military rulers were debating whether he should be allowed to leave for Manila to receive the award. Reading his autobiography, Nyanyi Sunyi Se Orang Bisu (The Mute's Soliloquy), I am struck at how callous and cruel the authorities are towards their citizens. Pramoedya's fate is in stark contrast to how writers are treated in America. For one, their intellectual property is well protected and they get generous royalty payments. Two, they are honored and rewarded with offers from universities to be their writer-in-residence or such similar program. In Indonesia however, Pramoedya was tortured, his private property and invaluable manuscripts confiscated, and he was banished to a remote island. What Indonesia is saying to its citizens especially its talented ones is this: We do not respect your skills and ability; and if you become too smart, we will show you who is smarter! The genius of modern Western civilization is its fine balancing between respecting individual freedom and rights on one hand, and the needs of society on the other. A salient feature of Western democracy is the freedom it affords individuals to pursue and fully develop their talent and abilities. Only modern democratic societies have successfully resolved the continuing dilemma of reconciling the needs of the individual with the claims of society. Totalitarian societies that prize the supremacy of society (or more correctly, the needs of those in power) have repeatedly proven to be disastrous failures. The abject failure of present day Islamic societies is precisely because their rulers have subjugated individual freedoms to the needs of society and its leaders. They have confused obedience to the state and its leaders as being the same thing as obeying God. The one common feature of many Third World countries today is their callous disregard for the dignity of their citizens. The Golden Age of Islam was attributable to the remarkable freedom afforded to individuals. Such freedom resulted in the intellectual fervent that produced such giants as Imam Ghazali, Ibn Rashid, and Ibn Sinne. Historians now recognize the pivotal contributions of these early Muslim thinkers to the later European Renaissance. To the extent that modern Islamic reformists would like to bring Islam back to those pristine values of the past, especially the respect and dignity for the individual, I am all for it. But present day Islamic "reformists," especially those in the Third World as represented by PAS in Malaysia and the Taliban in Afghanistan, would have their citizens be subjugated by the state. They have the supreme arrogance to believe that their state is divinely sanctioned, and thus holds supremacy over the individual. These leaders ought to be reminded that Islam thrives only in an atmosphere of freedom. An All-Knowing God (Al-Aleem) has also bestowed upon each person an intellect, akal, and with it the capacity to think and reason. This divine gift is unique only to humans; it enables us to decide between good and bad, right and wrong, and whether to believe or not to believe. With this attribute man is also capable of creative knowledge. In short, man is not a robot. This human potential would be stunted if we do not have freedom in the broadest sense of the word. Or as Mahmoud Taha put it, "free from all the dehumanizing influences of poverty, ignorance, and fear." Today only in Western democracies have these fears been alleviated, and thus only in a democratic system does individuals have the potential to reach their full promise. Left alone people will do what is best for themselves and their families. The role of the state is to encourage, not thwart, this natural instinct. When individuals progress, so would society. Next: Personal Liberty in Malaysia |
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 11:00 PM PDT What exactly in present day is the definition of freedom and why is it of paramount importance that the Malaysian youths of today recognise, realize, advocate and preserve its intrinsic value? By Vivek V. Velan Mark Twain once proclaimed that "it is by the goodness of God that in our country we have these three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them." Growing up in a suburban city, it never occurred to me as to how much of an impact a word could carry. One only has to 'Google' the word freedom and will find that such has been made about the literal meaning of this word. In today's modern climate however, the word freedom is often spoken if only in the context of debates and laws which precedes our societal standards and as such very few in the present day actually understands or appreciates the underlying significance and meaning of which this one word holds. The question then that begs to be answered is what exactly in present day is the definition of freedom and why is it of paramount importance that the Malaysian youths of today recognise, realize, advocate and preserve its intrinsic value. From the early days of slavery rebellion of the ancient Romans to the rise and fall of Nazi Germany, men have always stood steadfast in their fight against oppression. The term liberty has often more so than not contributed to raging wars, countries dividing and countless lives to be lost. Closer to home, the independence that we enjoy today comes at the expense of our forefathers who gave up everything to liberate our beloved country from the shackles of the British Empire. Fast forward 54 years since then, the connotation of freedom has altered with a shift in paradigm and we now face a far more complex conundrum, a battle to preserve a different kind of freedom against not invaders or conquerors but rather the current regime itself. Malaysia in all its glory today is plagued with various problems that have hindered its progress and at the same time constrict society's development as a whole. Five decades of being governed by a single party has certainly taken its toll and the end result being the compromise of democracy, basic human rights and freedom of the people. The political framework in which our country is currently built upon has long since been proven flawed and without going into details, the fact remains that we face a sad disposition being that our alternative is no better than the incumbent government and this has led to many believing that hope is indeed lost for progressive change. Barring the select few who continue to fight for the cause, we have begun to go into a spiral decline where we simply accept and settle for a flawed system. The dire plight of our country only came to light after the post-Mahathir era and it was plain to see how the regime in power had breached various articles of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) 1953 including Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Fair Trial to stay in power. Archaic laws such as the Internal Security Act and Emergency Ordinance until recently have been abused to arrest any and all reformists and activists who were not in line with government policies. The media was not to be spared either as laws and sanctions were put in place to block news the government deemed unsuitable for the masses and failure to comply with the rules in place would lead to the revoking of license to broadcast or publish. Furthermore, the Police Act of 1967 is not only in direct violation of Article 12- Freedom of Assembly but also gives law enforcers heightened powers to restrict and regulate the movement of the people. The recent Bersih 2.0 rally is concrete proof of how basic freedom was violated and for far too long we have been forced to live within the boundaries set by men who were put into power and meant to work for the benefit of the citizens and country. If ever there were a time to point fingers and ask who is to be blamed for the predicament we now find ourselves in, then look no further than the mirror in front of you. In our quest for domestic luxury and for fear of stepping out of our comfort zone, we have not only forsaken inch by inch our dutiful rights as citizens of Malaysia, we have become afraid to think and question. A personal favourite quote of mine based on the Gunpowder Treason says that, "the people should not be afraid of the government; it is the government who should fear the people". There will be those in turn who will ask what is it that can we do as normal citizens? Being a firm believer in moderation, the first issue that should be addressed is how do we break free from the chains of biblical ideologies that have for so long suppressed intellectual thinking, positive reforms and progressive change? Lucid reasoning will tell you that by thinking independently as well as questioning critically, proper check and balance to the incumbent government automatically occurs. In one of his many speeches, Ronald Reagan said that "freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We cannot pass it to our children via the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same". Never before have these words held true more so than now as the coming generation of today's youths and the future leaders of our country come to pass. I will not be the first neither will I be the last to state that the only way forward, the only way to champion this noble cause would be to educate the succeeding generation, for a man can be captured, tortured and killed but an idea can never be put to end. The fight for freedom will always continue and is a never ending one at that. It is a privilege accorded to us by our founding fathers that should always be treasured for only when it is taken away, will you truly cherish its value. |
| Open House in FELDA for Pakatan Rakyat Leaders Posted: 02 Oct 2011 10:22 PM PDT By Suara Felda There's a big raya open house currently happening at Felda Settlements all over Malaysia. The invitation for the open house is only for Pakatan Rakyat leaders all over Malaysia. However, this Raya open house is different from the usual. There is no lemang and ketupat. Instead of being happy and in a festive mood, the Felda people are sombre and gloomy as if they are at a burial ceremony. Perhaps it is also a 'tahlil' ceremony to BN in Felda as well. Felda citizens would like PR to know that all this while they did not mind PR coming to their house; but now, PR leaders have started bashing and whacking the Felda Management and instigating the settlers to sue Felda. PR does not realize that the Felda management, staff and settlers need each other and value each other. It is a fact that if a settler dies and leaves his wife and children, he doesn't count on his fellow settlers to look after his wife and children. He would be at peace at the thought that the Felda management and staff will look after them after he has died. The settlers can sue Felda all they want, but in the end when all dust is settled, the ones laughing to the bank are the lawyers while Felda images and fund will be weakened and taken advantaged of by politicians or even closed down. Who will they look upon then? The status of a Felda settler and its advantages are secured as long as there is Felda around and well managed. If there is none, they will be in the same dock as any normal Malay village chap. Even other races such as Indian, Chinese and Sabah natives who are in Felda feel much better in Felda than being an ordinary Malaysian citizen. It is a well known fact that with Felda, you have a lot of advantages. Zero interest house expansion scheme, business loans, contracts, jobs opportunity, education to the highest level and many more. Being in Felda is like being in another world, a special world. In the past, being in Felda means you are scorned by your family and relatives for choosing the unknown, but now many of your families appreciate your decision, share your new found wealth and seek opportunity to enter Felda as a settler. Above is one little secret that PR miscalculated to win the votes of the Felda people. If they persistently try to win only through settlers and feel proud that the settlers are now beginning to wave summonses at Felda, they will learn again and again that the most votes they will obtain is 20%. And basically this figure has been the case even when Anwar was a Deputy Prime Minister. Felda people want to know that PR wants to protect Felda for now and in the future and will be with the management and staff if they are doing the right thing. There is no point of summons after summons if at the end, Felda is no longer around and they lose their entitlement as Felda citizens. That's why the figure will always be that way. Why UMNO succeeds until now is because they are able to convince the Malays that UMNO is the protector of Malay rights and for Felda people, UMNO says that it is defending Felda from people who like it to be destroyed. It is no secret that people would rather not lose RM100 than to obtain another RM100. The formula to win Felda people is to say that you will lose Felda under Isa and Najib and we are here to rescue Felda. By virtue of Felda you must involve the management, staff and settlers to be succesful. Now is the time to reconcile the management, staff and settlers and say that PR will protect Felda. Felda is no longer protected by UMNO. They send a useless guy from Port Dickson to helm the Felda Chaiman's chair with the aim to make Felda as their cash register. Together with his Rosmah-attitude wife, his greedy officers and countless political allies to feed their lust, the useless guy is currently twisting, changing and hijacking every business opportunity and other daily decisions of the Felda management. Never has the Felda management and staff had this kind of rogue chairman before. Felda people, management, staff and settlers love their current Director General. Humble, polite, soft spoken, intelligent but brave enough to face risks make him popular among Felda people. He is in fact considered one of their own. He can be relied on to protect Felda from opportunists from UMNO especially from the useless guy from the PD camp. This makes the useless guy from PD very angry. He is not used to being tied down from making the ultimate decision as he was the Negeri Sembilan MB, for heaven's sake! He must have thought that while he was Menteri Besar a few years' back, whatever it is in Negeri Sembilan be it in the land, water and air is UMNO's and so does Felda, Felda Holding and other subsidaries, Koperasi Permodalan Felda (Felda Cooperatives), Yayasan Felda, Felda United and other Felda affiliates. He stomps his feet towards Najib's office and brings along hisr wife, which appears to be Rosmah's evil twin sister and both having husband meet husband and wife meet wife meeting. Probably after watching that special video from Port Dickson with Najib, and commenting how smart Najib looks in the video, Najib grants him his All Entry Passport to Felda akin to Genting or Disneyland's All Entry Ticket. He planned and schemed with other politicians in Felda's Boardmembers and lured the CEO of Felda Global Venture (whose position will always be filled by UMNO goons who has the most ability to venture Felda fund towards the most ridiculous, money wasting and unprofitable venture) and while the Felda Director General was away performing Umrah at Makkah, he sprang his surprises and showed the Felda Board Members his All Entry Passport. While he thought that he is the most brilliant UMNO member to hijack a professional board member meeting, he forgot that watching his attitude on behalf of the Director General are the representatives from the settlers and the management.The useless guy from Port Dickson rejoiced at the thought of Felda riches and the skills he used reminiscent of his past skills to woo his current wife. In one stroke, the Felda people lost the Koperasi Permodalan Felda chairmanship to a man who was found guilty of money politics, lost thousands of its lands worth billions currently managed by Felda Plantations to the hand of Felda Global Venture Holding for 60 years, and even lost power over direction and control of a Felda subsidiary by virtue of a new structure which will be announced soon. The next few weeks are very crucial to the Felda management, staff and settlers. They are waiting for the dreaded news from the sky and expecting mumbo-jumbos term from Isa's blue eyed boy, the CEO of Felda Global Ventures (or fondly known as the President of Felda Global Misadventures) to justify whatever action that is going to be taken to elevate Felda higher, perhaps to the 7th Heaven where all souls of past and present Felda people will go and mourn. Isa would have never been able to do this without the brainchild of Dr Suzana Idayu and of course his boss, the CEO of Felda Global Ventures, Dato Sabri Ahmad (whose contract is about to expire and had to offer something extraordinary). Of course, a special thank you also goes to Felda Innovation and Youth Director, Mr. Faizoull Ahmad who willingly became the mercenary for Isa as Faizoull has eaten the bait to become the next Director General latest just before election (early next year). As the saying the dog who bites the hand that feeds him, it is the same from him towards the Felda Director General who elevated him to the Director position and created this new department as a platform for him to propose an innovation and transformation program for Felda and at the same time create a meaningful and balanced Felda youth program. Last but not least, kudos to the central committee of Majlis Belia Felda Malaysia led by Anuar Manap who without the support and trust of the current Felda Director General, would not be known and be as popular as he is now and even named as a potential candidate for DUN Johor. This young politician, realizing that Isa has been appointed by the Prime Minister as one of the panel to choose DUN and Parliament candidates for UMNO, has quickly asked the support of his central comittee and his two beautiful wives to realign their support to the useless guy from Port Dickson and become honchos of Faizoull, even though it is the current Director General who gave them a lease of life by giving funds and projects, involved in planning for Felda youth future plans and even appointed one of MBFM's central committee as a Felda officer with Grade 44 and emolument of RM6,000 every month. However, Anuar Manap stumbled at this moment to convince the MBFM grassroots to support the useless guy from Port Dickson, as their grassroots chose to support their own regional Felda management and staff. At the same moment, other Felda youth movements such as Persatuan Usahawan Generasi Felda and Gabungan Wawasan Generasi Felda were inclined to support the Felda management and staff and understood well that the above issue also affects settlers and their futures in the long run. The above is not just a story. It is a key factor for BN's biggest defeat ever in Felda and the whole nation. The useless guy from Port Dickson has promised that if settlers were to accept him as KPF chairman and other decisions, each settler would receive RM15,000. To pay 122,000 settlers, he would have to have a minimum fund of RM1.8 billion to do so. This exercise would be funded by the money from the leasing of the Felda Plantation land exercise. What other strategy do you expect from a guilty money politics offender? Again, as a reminder to PR leaders not to syok sendiri at this crucial moment to whack the Felda management and staff and use the same tactic to instigate settlers to sue Felda as time again and again would tell you that this will only give you 20% of the votes in Felda areas. Show your support for the Felda management, staff and settlers by bringing them together into this issue and make the fence-sitters and BN voters among management, staff and settlers know and understand this issue. All these news are currently tightly held and barred from leaving the headquarters. However from SB and Seranta reports, the grounds at Felda areas are now shaking hard and in every Felda region, the management, staff and settlers have some idea on this issue and are against it with all their hearts. Some even tore down Najib's and Isa's posters from their walls in anger. In response to this, the useless guy from Port Dickson has issued a complete stop to all Felda programs until Budget 2012 is announced by the PM. He fears that the Felda management, staff and settlers will converge and release all this information early to everybody and conspire to plan his fall. Currently, all management and staff are in a curfew state and only his men are allowed to travel and do their own planning and programs. The Director General himself is not spared and he was reported to KDN as trying to instigate a movement among Felda people to topple Najib. It is a cheap tactic to tell Najib that what he, the useless guy from Port Dickson has done to Felda is not wrong and the Felda people currently resents us not because we are wrong but because the Director General instigated them. The result is now the SB is everywhere, following the Director General's car, tapping into his conversations, hacking his emails, attending his functions and he has to videotape every speech in anticipation of any wrongful report to KDN that he plans to topple Najib. To PR leaders, welcome to Felda's biggest open house. Choose wisely whether to win that mere 20% votes or our 100% votes. Please do tell our people the story above (and others) and let us have it in our face that UMNO no longer defends Felda. They might have accused PR of wanting to break and weaken Felda, but they have shown that they are more creative and better at doing the job. If you have difficulties in entering any Felda scheme, just tell them that you are acting with the management and staff and try to explain the Felda issue to the settlers. You will find that when you raise the issue above, the management, staff and settlers will sit down together with their families at any Felda scheme all over Malaysia and listen to you defending them. We also want PR leaders to ask in Parliament regarding the Felda Global Ventures loss that is now nearing RM1 billion. The useless guy from Port Dickson think that the settlers are as stupid as the politicians and will give them big money before the election. Let that be the extra Duit Raya for all, before all Felda people sink the useless guy from Port Dickson and all BN representatives that all this while collects Felda votes including Mr. Prime Minister. |
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 08:19 PM PDT
The doubters (or atheists) are also trying to be smarty-pants. They argue using logic. Hey, religion is about faith, not about logic. That is why we call it faith. Faith is the word that explains the absence of evidence. Logic requires evidence. Faith does not. So when you use logic to argue with those who argue with faith, it is like a duck and a chicken trying to communicate. Can you see how futile that is? NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
While we are seriously trying to resolve the differences amongst the opposition parties, in particular with regards to the issue of Hudud -- which is threatening to break up the opposition coalition like it once did about a decade ago -- we have some smarty-pants trying to impress us on their knowledge of the existence of God (or nonexistence, depending on your point of view) and on what God in His heart wants from us. Can I make one thing very clear? We are NOT discussing theology. We are discussing politics. We are not debating whether God does, or does not, exist -- and if He does, what He wants from us. We are discussing how to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with a better government (and hopefully it WILL be a better government) and not whether God will be happy or angry with us if we do or do not do what some people tell us He wants done. Aiya! How some people do go off tangent and talk about the price of beef when we are discussing how to fish with better results. What irritates me most - especially when we are trying to discuss how to win the election -- is theists challenging doubters to prove that God does not exist. Okay, so God exists. Will that help us win the next election? God existed even back in 1955 but still Umno and its cohorts won every election since then. Anyway, if you are trying to 'sell' your ideology to the doubters, then you shouldn't be challenging doubters to prove that you are wrong. You should instead prove that you are right. Let me put it another way. You are trying to sell your car and you are saying that your car is better than the other brands. Should it not be you, then, who proves that your car is better? How can you ask the customer to prove that your car is not better than the other brands? You are doing the selling. So you should do the proving. If you fail to do that then the customer will just walk away and buy the other brand, which in his/her mind is better. The doubters (or atheists) are also trying to be smarty-pants. They argue using logic. Hey, religion is about faith, not about logic. That is why we call it faith. Faith is the word that explains the absence of evidence. Logic requires evidence. Faith does not. So when you use logic to argue with those who argue with faith, it is like a duck and a chicken trying to communicate. Can you see how futile that is? Anyhow, do you think logic always works? You may think it does but in reality it does not. Let me give you some examples. Ducks swim. You swim. So, logically speaking, you are a duck. 1% of traffic accident fatalities are caused by drunk drivers. That means 99% of the fatalities are caused by drivers who do not drink. Logically speaking, if we ban people who do not drink from driving, many lives would be saved. Okay, what about this one? Vodka and ice will ruin your kidneys. Rum and ice will ruin your liver. Whiskey and ice will ruin your heart. Gin and ice will ruin your brain. Martini and ice softens your desire. Pepsi and ice will ruin your teeth. What is the common denominator here? That's right, ice. So, logically speaking, all you need to do it to lay off the ice and you are safe. So, to those smarty-pants who try to win an argument with theists using what they perceive as logic, let me assure you that that is not a logical thing to do. Logic is sometimes illogical. Okay, back to the issue of the day: how to win the elections. We win elections by getting the people to vote for us. And to get the people to vote for us we need to make them happy with us. And to get them to be happy with us we need to say the right things and make all sorts of promises. So that should be the focus. We need to talk sweetly to them. We need to promise them the moon and the stars. And we also need to prepare ourselves with convincing excuses as to why we can't keep those promises in preparation for when we win the election and we can't deliver our promises. If not then the voters will kick us out again come the next election. So that should be what we do. Arguing about whether there is a God or not and what it is that God wants from us will not bring in the votes. And without the votes we will not be in power. And this is what politics is all about, power. So let's get back on track and focus on what we should do. |
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 07:17 PM PDT
It has to be said that Article 4(1) is a problematic provision. While the aim is clear — that is to guarantee order in the constitutional structure — it has been badly drafted. That is why some judges, such as the one in Chia Kin Tze (1958), got it wrong. We were lucky to have Surinder Singh Kanda (1962) where Lord Denning taught us the meaning of constitutional supremacy. Abu Umar, The Malaysian Insider There are basically three groups when it comes to hudud law implementation in Malaysia. While PAS has been consistent on the matter, DAP, the Islamic party's partner in Pakatan Rakyat, has been consistent in opposing it together with MCA and Gerakan from the ruling Barisan Nasional. Meanwhile Umno, the leading partner in BN, has been sitting on the fences. It is therefore interesting to find Prime Minister Najib Razak — echoing Professor Aziz Bari — saying that elements of hudud law are there already in the legal system. This is quite true given the existence of "moral laws" in the form of syariah criminal laws even though their provisions are not a hundred per cent Islamic. Whatever it is, that position alone is good enough to put question mark on the assertion of hudud opponents that such a law cannot be put into practice in Malaysia as the Constitution and the legal system it created are both secular. Indeed there are many provisions in the Constitution that allow the application of Islamic law, eg in the provision of Article 11 on the right to religious freedom when the parties involved are Muslims. One can also mention the provisions in the state constitution on the qualification of the heirs to the throne, most of which have been taken from the writings of classical Muslim jurists. And whatever one has to say about the impact of Article 3(1), the plain meaning of the provision is that Islam has somewhat become the faith of the nation. The bottom line of those provisions is that Islam has quite permeated the system. Whether or not Islam has become the benchmark is not quite important. But it looks like that it has either equal or superior status compared to the English common law. For one thing, the Civil Law Act 1965 clearly provides that English common law can only be applied when there is a lacuna; when there is no law available. In simple terms, English common law is just nasi tambah, not the main course. The hudud opponents also cite Article 4(1) and the Supreme Court decision in Che Omar bin Che Soh (1988) to say that religious law — or, more specifically, Islamic law — has no place in Malaysia. It has to be said that Article 4(1) is a problematic provision. While the aim is clear — that is to guarantee order in the constitutional structure — it has been badly drafted. That is why some judges, such as the one in Chia Kin Tze (1958), got it wrong. We were lucky to have Surinder Singh Kanda (1962) where Lord Denning taught us the meaning of constitutional supremacy. What is important from this landmark case is that all laws, executive decisions and so on must be done within the constitutional constraints. It pretty clear that the constraint that our constitution has in mind is not vague standards such as democratic character or religious contents. What the Constitution requires is simply that the law or the decision must be made by the right authority and that it does not go against any of its provisions. Now, is there any provision in the Constitution that prohibits the application of Islamic law? This is the one question that has to be dealt before one asserts the need to amend the Constitution to facilitate hudud. As for the controversial case, the court did not actually say that we are a secular state. The case merely rejected the argument that Islamic law should become the benchmark to determine the legality of laws in this country. And this is perfectly sound for the law is considered valid so long as it has gone through the right procedure. We can take the law from any source: Islam, Christianity, Hinduism and so on. What is crucial is these materials must pass the test laid down by the Constitution. Another argument that has been put up to oppose hudud law — as envisaged by Kelantan Mentri Besar Nik Aziz Nik Mat — is that it would create more divisions and inequality in our society. Perhaps one should remember the right to equality under the Constitution is not absolute. This is evident from Article 8 itself and has been further reinforced by various court decisions over the years.
|
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 07:05 PM PDT
LOYARBUROK I am an atheist. I don't believe in god. But don't fret because I'm not the devil and I'm not about to pollute your mind with heresies. You don't have to pity me as well because I am doing fine; thank you for your concern. However, if you have thoughts of impaling me, stoning me, or are imagining me burning in hell, I hope that you would find the kindness in you to erase them because that is just plain rude. You see, I don't believe in god because I don't know how to. Surely, I can't just pick one religion and go along with its message of salvation, what about other religions? I can't follow every religion known to man as well, for I'd be a very confused person. And I am not that arrogant to think that I am intelligent enough to tell with certainty, which religion is truer than others. While I can choose to go with the majority, but then again, despite being an atheist, I am still affiliated with a religion in official registry; so statistics do lie, don't they? But of course not knowing which religion is the word of god does not an atheist make. I am an atheist because I know that there is no god, just as much as you know that there is a god; and you can't make me believe, just as I can't make you into a non-believer. You can force me to submit, but that is not faith, now is it? If you are worried that tolerance for people like me will result in the degradation of morality, I'm afraid that your concerns are misplaced. Atheists are not people who leave religion out of disappointment or angst; we are atheists because we know there is no god. People who are angry or disappointed with god are not atheist because you can't be angry at something that does not exist, that's just silly. But in case you wonder, I do have a set of morality, but not all of which corresponds with prevailing social norms. For example, I think it is immoral to question what consenting adults do in their bedroom; On the contrary, I do think that civil disobedience is not only a right, but a moral imperative if lex is void of jus. Most atheists that I know are people of principles; you have to be if you want to call yourself an atheist. Whilst I can't speak for all, I can speak for myself – that I am a responsible, law abiding citizen; I care for my parents and love my country; I would not do onto others what I would not want done to myself; I have made mistakes and will continue to as long as I live, but I do try to recognize my mistakes and when I do, I have regretted and learnt from them. But I am writing this not only as a confession, but also as a plea for empathy for believers. You see, I've come to realize that it is rather odd being an atheist. Think about it, we define ourselves by what we are not, not by what we are! It is like saying I'm a non-coffee drinker, I'm a non-smoker or I'm a non-Malaysian. There's just too much negativity built into the concept of atheism, can we really blame people when they shun us? As such, what do we stand for? Is it truly our desire to see every individual on earth turn from their faith? I personally find it too great a responsibility to turn a person away from his/her religion, as the resulting product of faithlessness can range from great enlightenment to grave disaster. On top of that, the emotional costs in 'preaching' atheism are often too much to pay for our 'perceived gain'. In 'preaching' atheism, you uproot a person's believe system that has been nurtured since young, you are shattering their truth, their foundation all in the name of what? Our version of truth? Surely you can see that a generous amount of grief, distress, animosity, even hate would result from such an endeavour. And how many of us can engage in intellectual debates without emotional attachment? And when emotions are involved, what are we, atheists reduced to even if we manage to silence our opponents with pure logic – belittling their intelligence, knowledge and exposure? What joy has ever come from ridiculing your 'inferior'? What dignity has ever come from insulting your 'defeated foes'? No, only regret and remorse awaits in hindsight.
|
| MCA asks voters to forget past Posted: 02 Oct 2011 07:00 PM PDT
(The Malay mail) - MCA leaders have asked the electorate not to dwell on the past but look forward as the party seeks to rebuild itself after its defeat in the 12th general election. The party, which won 31 parliamentary seats from 40 it contested in 2004, managed to garner only 15 parliamentary seats in 2008. Its deputy president, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai, admitted the problems faced by MCA and denied the party was experiencing denial syndrome. "We are not the one with denial syndrome and we do not try to say that MCA is supported by the young," he told The Malay Mail. "We know in that in certain areas, the young have a wrong perception of us, so we have to work harder. We know that we have to change." Liow explained that MCA is not a party of individuals and stressed the public are waiting for what the party can do in the future. "This party does not only belong to MCA members but to the Chinese community. The Chinese community has been fighting and supporting this MCA since day one. "It is a really big asset to the Chinese. Thick and thin, it is with Chinese community. Party leaders can come and go. "So please protect the party and not because of certain individuals you are willing to destroy the party." Party vice-president and Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ng Yen Yen echoed Liow's remarks when asked about the alleged practices of corruption plaguing the party leaders. "(Prime Minister) Datuk Seri Najib Razak has asked us to go forward and must not lag behind. Ong Tee Keat is behind, so we must look forward," she said. MCA vice-president Donald Lim said the current party leadership was united and ready to face the coming general election, speculated to be as early as January. "We know we lost so many seats in 2008, partly because of leadership problems. They select who they wanted as candidates and that was part of our downfall in 2008," he said.
|
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 06:44 PM PDT
ZAID UNTUK RAKYAT The Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (ASLI) recently organised a roundtable dialogue on building bridges among religions. Fr Miguel Ángel Ayuso Guixot, Rector of the Pontifical Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies at the Vatican, was the main guest, and he was accompanied by other distinguished figures including the Most Rev Archbishop Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam, Senator Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon of the Prime Minister's Office as well as social activists. As expected, the Muslim side was somewhat under-represented. This was no fault of the organisers: Muslim religious leaders and intellectuals somehow do not see the value in this kind of discourse and engagement. That in the nutshell is the problem in this country. Muslim religious leaders generally are fond of taking a hardline approach to issues involving religious discourse. There is no talk, no discussion and certainly no discourse. These hardliners are fond of reminding Muslims that Islam is not for discussion like other religions, and that Muslims must be cautious of attempts to convert them or to subvert their faith. They remind Muslims that human rights, dignity and personal freedoms have "limits" in a country where the Islamic faith is the official creed. This attitude is very unMalay and unIslamic, but regrettably it is the prevailing situation today. Segregation in schools, where non-Malays attend Moral classes and Muslims attend religious classes, has had its desired effect. Now there is complete distrust and separation between the Muslims and non-Muslims. It has reached a critical point when even teachers are unable convey basic concepts like respect for, and tolerance of, others who profess different beliefs. Even at the highest levels, our leaders and Parliamentarians have shown themselves to be too scared to discuss and debate these issues in three important bills in 2009: the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993, and the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act 1984. If passed, amendments would have helped resolve issues of conversion and some of the problems faced by parents of different faiths when they divorce. The amendments would have enabled Muslim converts to file for divorce in civil courts and would have allowed civil courts to decide cases dealing with child custody, alimony, the division of harta sepencarian (jointly-acquired matrimonial property), the religious conversion of children, and the administration of the assets of a Muslim convert who dies before the annulment of his civil marriage(this would also have included rights of burial).
|
| Termakan budi, tergadai jiwa dan raga? Posted: 02 Oct 2011 06:37 PM PDT
SAKMONGKOL AK47 Ada seorang pembaca blog saya menegaskan janganlah menganggap apabila orang Melayu menyokong UMNO dan BN, mereka itu bodoh. Izinkan saya memberitahu terlebih dahulu, saya tidak berkata demikian- yang saya sebut ialah pemimpin membodohkan orang Melayu. Ada perbezaan besar antara bodoh dan di perbodohkan. Tapi itu menjadi topic lain pula yang kita tidak akan bahas disini. Itu bukan bodoh, itu membalas budi kata nya. Mereka hanya membalas budi kepada sebuah kerajaan yang telah memberi mereka banyak nikmat kehidupan. Orang berbudi kita berbahasa, demikian natijah dari pendapat nya. Saya amat bersetuju dengan pendapat pembaca ini. Kerana ini akan bermakna, orang Melayu yang menyokong kerajaan2 di negeri Kelantan, Kedah, Selangor dan Pulau Pinang mesti di lihat sebagai berterima kasih juga. Mereka pun tidak bodoh tapi sekadar berterima kasih. Mereka berterima kasih kepada kerajaan2 yang telah membantu mereka dalam pelbagai cara. Bukan begitu? Mustahil apabila orang Melayu menyokong UMNO mereka berterima kasih, tapi bila mereka menyokong parti lain, perbuatan tersebut tidak di kira sebagai berterima kasih? Saya berharap pembaca tersebut tidak bermaksud hanya UMNO sahaja berhak menerima terima kasih dari orang Melayu. Sudah tentu pandangan seperti ini tidak boleh di terima kerana UMNO tidak ada hakmilik mutlak keatas sokongan orang Melayu. Malah dalam pilihanraya 2008, UMNO tidak mampu menyatakan bahawa mereka mewakili suara majorti orang Melayu. Dalam PRU itu, lebih ramai orang Melayu menyokong parti bukan UMNO. Bagaimana kita mengklasifikasikan mereka? Murtad Melayu? Tidak mengenang budi? Di sebalik kenyataan yang pious ini sebetulnya terkandung cerita mengenai pertalian antara rakyat dengan kerajaan. Tersirat dalam kenyataan tersebut ialah bagaimana orang Melayu melihat peranan kerajaan dalam kehidupan mereka. Kalau di Amerika, mesej nya lebih kurang akan berbunyi- jangan soalkan apa negara kamu boleh buat kepada kamu, tanyakan apa yang kamu boleh buat untuk negara kamu. Negara dalam konteks ini, kerajaan lah. Atau gantikan negara dengan istilah kerajaan. Dari sini kita akan lihat pertalian antara manusia dengan kerajaan nya. Dari komen pembaca itu, kita dapat mengagak bahawa kerajaan di lihat sebagai penjaga dan rakyat di lihat sebagai yang di jaga. Dan itu membawa 2 pengertian besar; Pertama, kerajaan adalah penjaga yang penuh dengan sifat keibuan menjaga anak anak. Kedua, tanngung jawab menentu masa depan kita di serahkan keatas bahu kerajaan. Mungkin disinilah, iaitu didalam cara orang Melayu melihat peranan dan tempat kerajaan dalam kehidupan mereka, terkandung benih2 kemunduran. Inilah sikap inherent weakness yang kita mesti kikis- yakni menganggap kerajaan itu tempat kita bergantung segala nya dan tempat sumber rezeki hidup. Sikap seperti ini lah yang menyebabkan pemegang tampuk kerajaan membuli kita, angkuh dan sombong kepada rakyat kerdil. Kerajaan itu penaung dan kita yang bernaung , kerajaan itu tuan, kita hamba. Dan kepada si pengampu , konsep kerajaan seperti ini mahu mereka kekalkan. Selagi kerajaan di lihat demikian rupa, ianya memberi mereka a sense of supremacy dan mungkin juga khayalan godlike. Sikap melihat kerajaan sebagai deity yang mesti di taati dan di puja, paling ketara di kalangan orang Melayu dan UMNO bertanggung jawab memanjangkan sikap yang melemahkan bangsa Melayu. Selagi kita mempunyai sikap yang demikian, selagi itulah kita terus bertongkat kepada kerajaan. Orang Melayu akan jadi tamby yang tertunduk tunduk tidak ada keyakinan diri. Kita tidak boleh meneruskan ketergantungan sebegini kerana dengan melakukan demikian, memberi peluang kepada pimpinan politik yang licik mengeksploitasi ketergantungan kita itu. Berbalik kepada komen yang di berikan oleh pembaca tersebut, saya tidak menyebut nya demikian rupa- saya hanya memberitahu bahawa pemimpin Melayu membodohkan bangsa nya sendiri supaya mempercayai mereka mempunyai banyak kelemahan. Seolah olah lemah dan tidak bermaya itu adalah kesemulajadian orang Melayu. Mereka di bodohkan dengan tahyul bahawa jalan selamat ialah melalui bergantung terus kepada kerajaan. Dan bukan nya kerajaan yang mana mana tapi suatu kerajaan yang khusus iaitu UMNO. Tidakkah kenyataan seperti ini self serving? Ini kenyataan yang self serving sebab kerajaan yang di maksudkan itu terdiri dari kerajaan yang di ujudkan oleh satu parti politik khusus sahaja. Tidak kah layak kerajaan dari parti bukan UMNO di jadikan sumber rujukan? Selagi bangsa Melayu terus percaya kepada pembodohan ini, maka bangsa Melayu akan terus menjadi suatu bangsa yang dependent. Kita mesti konsisten dalam gesaan kita. Jika menyokong UMNO di anggap sebagai terima kasih kepada kerajaan yang memberi faedah serta kemudahan kepada mereka, prinsip yang sama mesti juga di pakai keatas kerajaan2 yang bukan UMNO. Kerajaan bukan UMNO di Kelantan, Kedah, Pulau Pinang dan Selangor semua nya menabur budi kepada orang Melayu. Berdasarkan gesaaan pembaca blog yang saya rujuk, maka orang Melayu dalam negeri negeri ini mesti juga berterima kasih kepada kerajaan2 ini dan terus menyokong mereka. Hanya dengan cara demikian, kita konsisten dalam pandangan kita. Jika menyokong itu bermakna berterima kasih, ia nya mesti di gunakan dalam semua keadaan. Berterima kasih dan mendapat sokongan tidak lagi menjadi hak ekslusif UMNO. Cuba kita orang Melayu fikirkan. Jika orang Melayu bersikap bergantung kepada kerajaan secara membabi buta, ianya bertentangan dengan piagam seorang manusia yang mereka. Apakah piagam seorang manusia yang merdeka? Seoarang manusia yang merdeka dan mempunyai jati diri( bukankah pemimpin UMNO sentiasa berkhutbah mengenai jati diri dan yakindiri) meyakini bahawa masa depan mereka adalah tanggung jawab mereka sendiri bukan menyerahkan tanggung jawab tersebut pada kerajaan. Kerajaan bukan lah tuan kepada orang yang menghambakan diri mereka. Sebuah kerajaan hanyalah suatu wadah dan jalan, bukan nya pemberi nikmat dan keistimewaan jauh sekali sesuatu yang mesti di sembah. Manusia yang merdeka itu bertanya apakah yang mereka dapat lakukan melalui kerajaan untuk melaksanakan tanggungjawab bagi mencapai matlamat hidup dan yang paling penting sekali melindungi kemerdekaan mereka sebagai manusia. Ini titik tolak perjuangan orang Melayu sebenarnya. Kerajaan yang di bentuk oleh PAS, UMNO, DAP atau PKR sekali pun bukanlah tuan kepada kita yang hamba. Bukan mereka sesuatu yang harus kita sembah dan takuti. Kerajaan ialah sesuatu yang kita ujudkan melalui persetujuan atau consensus bersama bukan sesuatu yang ujud diatas kita. Tidak ada wawasan nasional kecuali yang di kongsi bersama oleh rakyat dan matlamat kerajaan adalah matlamat yang di yakini bersama dan yang di perjuangkan bersama. The government cannot impose something over us which we the people find disagreeable. Dan di sanalah letak nya bahaya kepada UMNO. Sebab UMNO masih kekal dengan mentaliti bahawa dia kerajaan yang menjadi tuan kepada orang Melayu dan bersikap dia pemberi sumber kehidupan kepada orang Melayu. UMNO tiada, orang Melayu mati. Dan UMNO itu Melayu , Melayu itu UMNO. Mari kita analisa kenyataan yang mengandung 2 bahagian ini- Melayu itu UMNO dan UMNO itu Melayu. Kedua bahagian kenyataan atau pernyataan tersebut tidak mencerminkan aspirasi seorang Melayu yang berjiwa merdeka. Sama seperti tanggapan orang Melayu terhadap sebuah kerajaan,demikian lah tanggapan orang Melayu kepada UMNO. UMNO itu tunjang kerajaan yang menjadi tuan kepada orang Melayu, UMNO itu penjaga dan kita yang di jaga. Orang Melayu memuliakan UMNO sebagai sesuatu yang mesti di taati malahan di sembah dan apa orang Melayu boleh buat ialah mengharapkan pemberian dari UMNO. Oleh sebab kepercayaan ini, nilai pemimpin UMNO bersifat sombong, angkuh, membuli dan memandang rendah kepada rakyat. Nilai silai ini di perlihatkan dalam gaya hidup seharian majority pemimpin UMNO. Inilah yang membawa kecundang kepada UMNO dalam pilihanraya yang akan datang. Bagaimana keadaan begini dapat kekal untuk masa yang lama? Ianya kekal kerana tahap kejahilan dan kesedaran social dan politik orang Melayu relative masih rendah. Dimana tahap kejahilan berkurang, dan kesedaran politik dan social meningkat, pengaruh UMNO menurun. Nampak nya UMNO hanya mampu ujud dan survive selagi sebahagian besar masyarakat Melayu khususnya kekal dalam kejahilan. Kita boleh lihat di hadapan mata kita sendiri bagaimana kekuatan UMNO menjadi lemah apabila kesedaran rakyat khususnya orang Melayu meningkat. Dalam kawasan bandar di mana kejahilan orang Melayu berkurangan sama ada melalui tahap pendidikan yang di capai atau melalui interaksi sosial yang rancak, sokongan dan keyakinan kepada UMNO merosot.
|
| Muhyiddin tells Perkasa not to jump the gun Posted: 02 Oct 2011 06:27 PM PDT
(NST) - Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said Perkasa should not "jump the gun" on the meeting between three Malaysian personalities with Singapore's top politicians two months ago. He said Malaysians often held meetings with representatives of Singapore ministries and the People's Action Party to discuss bilateral matters or improve business ties. He was commenting on claims by Perkasa information chief Ruslan Kasim about a dinner meeting between businessman Datuk Seri Kalimullah Hassan, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and several senior PAP leaders. Ruslan also claimed that a member of Malaysia Airlines board of directors, Datuk Mohamad Azman Yahya, was aware of a secret meeting that took place during the dinner. Muhyiddin said: "As a Barisan Nasional representative, I often meet PAP representatives to discuss various issues.
|
| ISA repeal delayed to consult stakeholders, say ministers Posted: 02 Oct 2011 06:18 PM PDT By Shannon Teoh, The Malaysian Insider KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 3 — The government said today that the Internal Security Act (ISA) can only be repealed in March as it needs to consult and engage with stakeholders to ensure "we get it right". The replacement of the ISA, which allows for preventive detention, with two new laws was the highlight of Datuk Seri Najib Razak's Malaysia Day address in which he promised more freedom to the public. But opposition lawmakers have called the delay in repealing the law, which it says Barisan Nasional (BN) abuses to silence dissent, a "cop out" as the prime minister is likely to call snap polls soon after Budget 2012 is passed. "No, it's a question of engagement and consultation. We want to get it right," Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein (picture) told reporters when quizzed on the delay. Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz also said that the new laws were now in the hands of the Attorney-General and the government would need to be cautious when repealing the ISA. "If we have no new law, then we must immediately release terrorists currently detained under the ISA," the de facto law minister told reporters in Parliament today. When told that the Bar Council has said that no new laws were needed as Malaysia had other legislation to deal with terrorism, Nazri said "that is the Bar's view and it is one which we will look at." Datuk Seri Najib Razak tabled in Parliament today the repeal of the Restricted Residence Act and the Banishment Act, as announced in his Malaysia Day address to kick off his reform package. The repeal of the two laws is scheduled for debate on Wednesday. However, the repeals of the ISA and three emergency declarations were not mentioned in Dewan Rakyat today.
|
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 06:17 PM PDT
If Chua and the MCA are truly and sincerely in favour and supportive of the real and pragmatic practice of press freedom, advocating the unrestrictive, unregulated, and unreserved media culture in the country, then the very first thing the MCA must do is to divest itself totally of its control of The Star and other related publications, by selling its shares in these media companies to the general public. Thomas Lee Seng Hock MCA president Chua Soi Lek has declared that his party wants the current restrictive and oppressive Printing Presses and Publications Act scrapped, to keep up with the increasing public demands for more openness and freedom of expression. Chua said at the recently concluded 58th MCA annual general assembly that the aspirations of the new generation of Malaysians for a more liberal and democratic society means that the Barisan Nasional government should be bold and confident enough to dump the intolerable piece of harsh and authoritarian legislation, not just make amendments to it. "We must work towards abolishing the Printing Presses and Publications Act and set a time frame for that. The government has to be bold and confident enough to take such a step," he said. Chua pointed out that there is no level playing field now in the communication and information arena between the traditional main stream media (MSM) and the fast expanding and influential cyber media. "The print media is subject to various laws, but the new media seem to have a free hand. There should be no such discrimination," he said. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had announced in his Malaysia Day message to the nation on 16 September 2011 that the Barisan Nasional administration would amend the Printing Presses and Publications Act to exempt newspaper publishers from the current mandatory obligation to apply for a new printing permit annually. The MCA proposal to go beyond just making adjustment to the intensely unacceptable and undesirable legislation is certainly commendable and deserving of praise and support. But, an honest and objective look at the current attitude, policy and practice of the party in the area of press freedom surely exposes the hollowness of the Chua proposal, and the insincerity, and even hypocrisy, of the party leadership. If Chua and the MCA are truly and sincerely in favour and supportive of the real and pragmatic practice of press freedom, advocating the unrestrictive, unregulated, and unreserved media culture in the country, then the very first thing the MCA must do is to divest itself totally of its control of The Star and other related publications, by selling its shares in these media companies to the general public. At the same time, the party must remove all political appointees currently running the editorial operation of The Star and the party-controlled Chinese newspapers. Chua Soi Lek should shut up about the issue of press freedom if he is not able to make the MCA give up the control of The Star and other newspapers it currently owns. The political control of the nation's newspapers is surely the most glaring and conspicuous of a bad press culture, of which the MCA is among the top two culprits, the other being Umno which controls the Utusan Malaysia and other Bahasa Melayu newspapers. Chua Soi Lek wants to project himself as one who believes in and advocates the practice of a free press culture, yet he is not prepared to lift the political control and abuse of the newspapers owned by the party. If The Star can publish in full Chua's presidential address at the MCA assembly, it should also publish in full the policy message of DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, if it is truly a free and independent paper, with the catchphrase tagline "The People's Paper". The political slant in its news reporting and political commentaries is very obvious. Anything spoken by the MCA bosses must be published in full, while anything from the DAP or other opposition groups, especially those critical of the MCA, will not see the light of day. Editors at the MCA-control newspapers practise self-censorship to ensure nothing detrimental to the party and its leaders is published. Such a bad press culture in these newspapers is largely responsible for the eroding of the independence and freedom of the media in our nation. I challenge Chua Soi Lek to walk the talk on the matter of press freedom by freeing The Star and the MCA-owned Chinese newspapers from the party control. The test of his credibility and sincerity is not just in the talk advocating a free press culture, but in a determined, decisive, and deconstructive effort to deactivate the political control and abuse of The Star and other MCA-owned newspapers. Until Chua Soi Lek liberates The Star and other MCA-control newspapers, he has no moral right to talk about the freedom of the press and freedom of expression.
|
| Malaysia Tries to Rein In Private Education Institutions Posted: 02 Oct 2011 05:55 PM PDT By Liz Gooch, New York Times KUALA LUMPUR — Malaysia's private higher-education institutions are coming under greater scrutiny, with the government imposing a record number of fines on errant operators this year. Having expanded rapidly in the last 15 years, the private sector is widely credited with increasing access to higher education in Malaysia, but education experts say standards vary greatly. |
| Lawyers insist Najib, Rosmah not key to Sodomy II Posted: 02 Oct 2011 05:51 PM PDT By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal, The Malaysian Insider KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 3 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his wife are not relevant witnesses to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's ongoing sodomy trial, their lawyers claimed today, adding that the duo would not be able to offer any material evidence to the court. Datuk Hisyam Teh, one of the lawyers representing the prime minister and Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor in their joint application to avoid testifying, said that the opposition leader has failed to furnish proof that the two were relevant witnesses. The lawyer said Anwar's application to compel Najib and wife to testify was merely a "fishing expedition" to seek information. While Najib admitted to meeting Anwar's accuser, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, on June 24, 2008 — two days before the alleged sodomy act — the PM's lawyers stressed that the meeting was not related to events on June 26. "I cannot give [any] relevant evidence on what has been brought up by the first respondent (Anwar)," said Hisham, who read out excerpts of Najib's affidavit. Rosmah's affidavit contained the same explanation. "However, we would like to argue that the meeting on June 24 has no nexus, no connection to the incident on June 26, 2008. "The first respondent wants the PM to clarify. This clarification, confirmation on what happened on June 24 is not connected to the primary act, which is the charge... the incident was on June 26, not a day before or after," said Hisham. "They have no legal right to call any person not in possession of material or relevant evidence," said the lawyer. "Where is the connection to the charge?" |
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 05:29 PM PDT
So what is it that you really want? Can we just focus on putting Pakatan in power? Why all these threats of not voting for Pakatan or PAS? We can always discuss the Hudud issue later once Pakatan is in power. And, as you said, if Pakatan does something we don't like (such as they go and implement Hudud) then we can always kick them out and vote Barisan Nasional back in again, say, in 2016 or 2017. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
Last year, we launched the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) in London. Immediately after that, the opposition political parties made a decision not to work with the MCLM. Many Pakatan Rakyat supporters said some very nasty things about us. They even accused us of being Trojan horses, agents/plants of Barisan Nasional, and worse. We then went on a road show to explain our mission and vision. Those whom we spoke to agreed that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. In other words, the knife cuts both ways. The knife that we use to cut Barisan Nasional's throat can and should cut Pakatan Rakyat's throat as well, if they become just like Barisan Nasional. So why do we want to cut Barisan Nasional's throat? Simple! Because Barisan Nasional practices racism, persecution, selective prosecution, abuse of power, corruption, etc. Barisan Nasional manipulates the state agencies (such as the judiciary, police, MACC, AG Chambers, mainstream media, etc.) for political purposes. With Barisan Nasional in power, there is blatant wastage and misuse of taxpayer's money. And the list goes on. Barisan Nasional makes a lot of promises during every election. They even come out with a most impressive Election Manifesto election after election. But they never deliver their election promises. In fact, they do the reverse of what they promise. Barisan Nasional also has very low quality lawmakers, both at parliament as well as state levels. We complain that with the indiscriminate logging in East Malaysia, the Orang Utan is becoming extinct. What we are seeing instead is the Orang Utan being sent to parliament and the state assemblies and these people act even worse than Orang Utan (just view the videos on Youtube to see what I mean). In short, we want change. And we know what changes we want. We are very clear in our minds what is wrong with Malaysia and what needs to be done to put all this right. So the key word is CHANGE. That is what we seek. We are not interested in 'repackaging'. We are not fooled by expensive PR exercises about so-called (how siow) reforms. We do not wish to see old wine in a new bottle. It must be genuine change and change for the better. And that is why we want Barisan Nasional out. The MCLM tried to argue that in many countries they changed the government to seek change but did not really see change. Sometimes it was even a case of out of the frying pan and into the fire. What they got was worse. Our job is to make sure that when we kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat we do actually see change and not end up with old wine in a new bottle. This is the mission and vision of the MCLM. And the way to ensure this is to first of all make sure that they do not send Orang Utans to parliament or to any of the state assemblies. They must be people of calibre/quality and the aftermath of the 2008 general election has proven that this is very important. If this has been observed then, today, the state of Perak would still be under Pakatan Rakyat rule. Anwar Ibrahim's excuse was that it is not that easy to find candidates of calibre/quality to field in the general elections. So we offered to help find these candidates. We were aware that some people had been approached back in 1999, 2004 and 2008. But they refused to contest the elections even though they were promised that they need not join any of the parties and could contest as independent candidates, but under any one of the party banners. We approached all these people again and still they refused to contest the elections. Finally, after pleading with them to sacrifice for their country and to do 'national service', they reluctantly agreed. Then, suddenly, all hell broke loose. We were accused of an attempt to trigger three-corner fights to sabotage Pakatan Rakyat so that Barisan Nasional could win the election. After failing to convince the people that this is not so, I told Haris Ibrahim to just forget about the 'Independent Candidates Initiative'. Let Pakatan Rakyat sort out their own candidates. Let's not get involved in this exercise any longer. And if they fail to get good candidates then that is their problem. It is not any concern of the MCLM. What we would focus on instead is to give talks, do training, etc., and more importantly, to push our Rakyat Reform Agenda (RARA) and The People's Declaration (Deklarasi Rakyat). This is basically to tell the political parties how we want the country to be run and what we expect from the government -- whomsoever it may be that will be forming the government, whether Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat. But the noise from the ground was still ABU (anything but Umno/asal bukan Umno). They don't care a damn about RARA or The People's Declaration or whatever. They just want BN out and Pakatan in. The rest we can talk AFTER we change the government. We tried to explain that what we want to see are changes. We are not in the business of changing the government. We are in the business of seeing reforms. So we must focus on changes, not on changing the government. Nevertheless, if we need to change the government to be able to see changes then that is what we shall have to do. But we shall be changing the government to ensure that we see changes and not change the government for the sake of changing the government. Changing the government is the means. Reform is the objective. But no! We shall change the government, period! Changes can come later, AFTER we change the government. No use to talk about all that now. Change the government first. Okay, if that is what you insist we do then that is what we shall do. So we launched ABU (anything but Umno/asal bukan Umno). We shall change the government and then cross our fingers and pray for the best. We shall take a chance and hope that by changing the government we do actually see changes. If this is what you want then this is what we shall do. So it will be ABU then. After agreeing with all of you that this is what we shall do, now many of you are talking that you will not be voting Pakatan or will not vote for PAS because of this Hudud issue. Why is this such as issue? I thought we are going for ABU. I thought we are going to change the government first and 'talk later'. The MCLM did say we should talk first and then decide if Pakatan can deliver what we want -- in the event they come to power with our votes. But you said, 'No!" We first put Pakatan in power and then discuss later, once they are in power, what we want (or don't want). But now you are doing a U-turn (like what you accused me of doing). Now you are threatening not to vote for Pakatan or PAS. So what is it that you really want? Can we just focus on putting Pakatan in power? Why all these threats of not voting for Pakatan or PAS? We can always discuss the Hudud issue later once Pakatan is in power. And, as you said, if Pakatan does something we don't like (such as they go and implement Hudud) then we can always kick them out and vote Barisan Nasional back in again, say, in 2016 or 2017. Cruzeiro is one of those who oppose the MCLM and would like to see ABU. I hope, therefore, he will focus on ABU and not write articles such as this: http://cruzinthots.blogspot.com/2011/10/arrogant-holy-pas-ready-to-abandon-and.html. Articles like these may turn the people against ABU. |
| Alarm bells over unions’ bluster on RM1,500 base wage Posted: 02 Oct 2011 04:06 PM PDT
The Malaysian Insider understands that the current civil service pay structure begins from a baseline of about RM500 a month, but with a new scheme set to be announced this month, this could rise to RM700. Shamsuddin said the average foreign worker now earned about RM750 per month and any rise would be pure disposable income that would be repatriated to their home countries. The country's main labour centre's push for a RM1,500 per month base wage has raised the hackles of other stakeholders who warn that businesses will collapse while inflation spirals out of control with such minimum salaries. Employers also said that as the four million foreign workers make up the bulk of those earning below that mark, their RM22 billion repatriated annually could double and far surpass last year's RM29 billion in foreign direct investment (FDI). The Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) raised the bar last week from its previous demand of RM900 just as the National Wage Consultative Council (NWCC) held its first meeting to begin discussing a national minimum wage. Both public and private sector workers say wages need to go up to cope with inflationary pressures and rising prices of staple goods apart from fuel costs. But others are wary of the distortionary effects of setting a high base wage, insisting instead that efforts should be focused on upgrading the glut of unskilled workers to fill the dearth of semi- and highly-skilled workers. "This figure seems to be plucked out of thin air," Malaysian Employers Federation (MEF) executive director Shamsuddin Bardan told The Malaysian Insider. Malaysia has always prided itself as a low-cost centre for manufacturing since the 1970s, offering tax incentives, cheap electricity, land and labour to entice multinationals to set up base. But prices are rising and the Najib administration has targeted 2020 for Malaysia to be a high-income nation. Centre for Public Policy Studies director Ng Yeen Seen said that a minimum wage should be geared towards avoiding exploitation, rather than creating hard and fast ideals. She said labour exploitation was particularly rife in Sabah and Sarawak, where some were paid as little as RM180 a month. But paying cleaners, dishwashers and maids RM1,500 would wreak havoc on operating costs of most businesses as wage bills are usually kept under 20 per cent of total expenditure. "The unions should ask themselves what will happen when most SMEs are forced out of business," said Ng, who is a member of the NWCC's technical committee. The Malaysian Insider understands that the current civil service pay structure begins from a baseline of about RM500 a month, but with a new scheme set to be announced this month, this could rise to RM700. Shamsuddin said the average foreign worker now earned about RM750 per month and any rise would be pure disposable income that would be repatriated to their home countries. He pointed out that foreign labour already sent RM22 billion out of our economy last year and rising wages will likely to discourage foreign investors. He said that Singapore already attracts far more FDI than Malaysia with RM114 billion against RM27 billion in 2008 and RM52 billion to RM4 billion in 2009. But this was because the island's average productivity was 3.8 times Malaysia's while wages were only triple, making the republic "better in terms of cost per unit," he added.
|
| Rantings over the great hudud debate Posted: 02 Oct 2011 03:57 PM PDT
This writer has vehemently argued that for as long as there are leaders in the opposition parties who are bent on saying that this Federal Constitution is secular or Islamic and that the Islamic Penal Code is unconstitutional, Pakatan Rakyat would forever be subjected to this unending acrimonious debate. Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, The Malaysian Insider Much as I hate this acrimonious debate on hudud, especially with the general election looming ever so close, I no longer believe that delaying it is going to do any good to anyone either. Not to Non-Muslims, Muslims and much less to Islam. Conventional wisdom would have it that deferring the debate and focusing on more major issues of a dysfunctional democracy such as gross mismanagement of the nation's wealth and finances, endemic corruption, unbridled crony capitalism, gross income inequality would be in order. Accordingly, this writer was earliest in reprimanding everyone, especially the PAS and other Pakatan leaders. His frantic attempt, as usual, fell on deaf ears. In no time, Pakatan leaders, nay the entire nation, are embroiled in the debate. Once again, the "ugly" head of hudud, or such as it were described by many a less-than-friendly commentator, is "splitting" the nation, as if the nation were a one united country prior to the appearance of hudud on the national debate. This writer would want to believe that, as a nation, we are only united in one cause, i.e. to make this beloved nation of ours, a better place for everyone. So why should PAS and Pakatan take this issue upfront now? For obvious reasons. Allow it to be ventilated; the rantings, the ramblings and all the concerns and anxiety, perhaps misunderstandings. Let it out. Say what you really think of it. Perhaps in the free enterprise of ideas, it can no longer be suppressed anyway. In the course of this national debate, the conversation has at least brought one unknown fact to the fore i.e. that the Islamic Penal Code is only enforceable on Muslims. As to how it would be given an iron-clad assurance, as demanded by the Catholic Bishop Dr Paul Tan, who seems friendly with Tok Guru, it has yet to be meticulously articulated. There are some who proposed that PAS conduct a referendum to assess and determine the level of support of the Kelantanese on the implementation of the enactment, now that Tok Guru's chief ministership has spanned well over 20 years. The hudud debate has also been instrumental in assessing that there are many non-Muslims who no longer have any fear of hudud, while many more continue to feel terrorised by the mere mention of the word. It has sadly become a rather bad word. Debate, discourse and the many good writings of scholars and columnists provide useful insights to this once-very-misunderstood-transcendental Law of God, grossly misrepresented and demonised as barbaric and uncivilised. For once, this writer noted the earnestness of many who wish to understand the wisdom of Islamic jurisprudence beyond its purely punitive dimension. That is both reassuring and informative. For all these "happenings", I retrospectively thought that this is not that bad after all. Yes, if all sensitive issues of religion and race get to be swept under the carpet, this nation would never be "enlightened". Indeed, that would be the greatest assault on Reason! Only Perkasa and right-winged religious and racial bigots thrive in the ambience of fear, ignorance and under-siege kind of mentality. More strategically though, imagine if this polemical topic is to come any closer to the finishing line or during the raging campaign period of the 13th general election. God forbid, Pakatan would arguably be dead meat. The "master strategist" Tun M has his way of putting a wedge between the Pakatan coalition partners. Already we have witnessed Pakatan leaders all too willing to cross swords openly and the BN-controlled media ever so ready to fan it up. We, obliviously perhaps, went headlong into the pit in a self-destruct mode. For days, the issue occupied front page of The Star, NST, Utusan, et al; Hudud Feud, Hadi speaks up etc. We have seen enough of these shooting at each other episodes. Fast forward, we thank God that Pakatan survived the nerve-racking hudud debate in a three-hour closed-door meeting. This writer, who was also a secretariat member of the Barisan Alternatif (BA), a forerunner of the PR, witnessed its demise after PAS launched the Islamic Document. This grim reminder was very much in our minds in those critical moments during the hudud debate. Admittedly, this writer would have no qualms revealing the fact that "Islamic state" and "hudud" are the Achilles' Heel of the opposition front; before, in the BA, now, in PR and indeed to eternity. This writer has vehemently argued that for as long as there are leaders in the opposition parties who are bent on saying that this Federal Constitution is secular or Islamic and that the Islamic Penal Code is unconstitutional, Pakatan Rakyat would forever be subjected to this unending acrimonious debate. Pakatan's strategic trajectory to Putrajaya Pakatan has again reasserted its Common Policy Framework (CPF) and of its policy advocacy as spelt out in Buku Jingga or the "Orange Book." Pakatan has again categorically announced its undivided commitment to the Federal Constitution, namely as highlighted by the provisions of Articles 3, 152 and 153 and its resolute vision of bringing about a New Malaysia. In the context of the hudud debate, PAS and many Muslim constituencies would have hoped for a better treatment and recognition of the work of implementing the Islamic Penal Code — namely the Enakmen Jenayah Syariah 2 (1993), which actually predated the existence of Pakatan Rakyat or in fact the BA. In brief, they wanted it endorsed by the Pakatan presidential council. That was not to be the case, as collectively decided by the Pakatan presidential council. Implementation of the Islamic Penal Code is not part of the CPF. The hudud debate has revolved around its constitutionality as posited by some legally trained leaders, while others were arguing from the perspectives of politics and strategy, which also invariably concluded that the agenda be best addressed after the 13th general election. The meeting finally acknowledged and respected the difference amongst parties in Pakatan Rakyat as a democratic alliance particularly with respect to PAS's position on the implementation of syariah law. Difficult though it may seem for PAS but the DAP would similarly be in a rancorous position should Pakatan allow PAS to take the hudud law on board. PAS would have to suffer the mockery of the Umno media for failing to convince her Pakatan partners to support its implementation in Kelantan. It would reinforce the notion of PAS being dictated to or saddled by the DAP.
|
| Raising retirement age will hurt some — Jacob George Posted: 02 Oct 2011 03:39 PM PDT
(The Malaysian Insider) - The Consumers Association of Subang and Shah Alam Selangor (CASSA) reads with great apprehension and concern the ongoing debate and proposal for a higher retirement age in Malaysia. All of us are quite aware that the details of the said proposal are still being ironed out and as such not published. As a result CASSA, other NGOs and the civil society members are not in a position to advice those who come to us for an opinion. Neither CASSA nor others serving public and consumer interests have been consulted like the trade unions who appear to be heavily consulted in the formulation of the said policy but the lacuna is that there are millions outside that umbrella who are not a member of any unions and their interests and rights to retire at 55 will be affected in the wake of a decision being made. Forcing them to immediately resort to the courts for a decision will be unhealthy in the current political and economic climate. Their arguments hold water as they may have already made retirement plans at 55 and are waiting to withdraw their EPF savings. Others may say this is a ploy to retain the EPF savings as the government is going bankrupt and this would be create a backlash come GE13. The pertinent question remains: why should our EPF savings be retained after 55 unless there is a hidden agenda, a clandestine covert plan of action of an ugly kind and dimension. It is in the interest of the government to allow flexibility for employees to decide for themselves whether they want to retire at 55 or otherwise. However, the increase of the age limit should not prevent those who have already attained 55 to withdraw their savings. The arguments put forward by those opposing the move are real. CASSA supports their contention that there are Malaysians who are not subsidy mentality driven and who have planned their retirement planning with dedication and foresight. They may already have adequate funds in their EPF account, and personal savings and investments, to retire at the age of 55. Why stop them and cause great dissatisfaction to them. They may have planned their retirement for years, diligently doing their calculations, extrapolating the EPF contributions and dividends, carefully investing a certain percentage in mutual funds or other plans, where applicable, spending modestly and never overextending themselves like certain cross-sections of the population. In summary, CASSA supports the contention that:
|
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 03:34 PM PDT
After a period of silence controversial online radio station Radio Free Sarawak expects to continue its campaign to address land grabs and corruption in Sarawak. (Free Malaysia Today) - Radio Free Sarawak is back after an almost four months hiatus. It is re-launching this week with an expanded team and greater ambitions. It kicks off with a two hour daily timeslot from 6 – 8 pm on the shortwave 17560 kHz bandwidth. Broadcast is also available online via the website www.radiofreesarawak.org . According to its media release, the RFS "will continue to focus on the concerns and interests of the ordinary people of Sarawak, mainly rural folk, who currently have no access to an independent news source. " "We will also address urban and Malaysia-wide issues in recognition of its popular following among internet users and listeners from other states," said the statement. RFS has been credited for the Chief Minister Taib Mahmud-led Barisan Nasional coalition's losses in the mixed and rural constituencies in Sarawak in the April state polls where BN won 55 seats while the opposition made inroads with 15 seats, whilst one seat, Pelagus, went to independent George Lagong. This was an unprecedented victory for the opposition. Political analyst had also pointed a distinctive swing in votes for the opposition in rural and Malay-mixed areas in Sarawak.
|
| Posted: 02 Oct 2011 03:27 PM PDT
BN leaders say it's time the private sector contributes back to society and laud PM Najib for mooting the idea (Free Malaysia Today) - Barisan Nasional leaders have praised Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's announcement of setting up a Community Chest to fund vernacular and mission schools. Last week, Najib revealed that a minimum RM100 million of gambling funds would be channelled to these schools annually through the project. It would be funded primarily by the profits of gaming company Pan Malaysian Pools Sdn Bhd's returns from its investments and public donations. The funds would be managed by a board of trustees, chaired by Genting Malaysia chairman Lim Kok Thay. MIC chief: Schools can approach us Commenting on this, MIC president G Palanivel said the project would serve to benefit both Tamil and Chinese schools. "Priority should be given to partially-funded schools," he added. He also said that MIC's door was open to any Tamil school which wished to receive the funds. "They can come to us. We will approach the board members for it or the school management can meet the trustees straight," he told FMT. Whether the programme was mooted due to the government's failure to address the needs of the vernacular schools, Palanivel dismissed the notion saying that the government had always given fair allocation to all schools. "Now the government is encouraging the private sector to contribute and it's time for the private sector to show some support," he said. He added that this was not the first time private sector participation was welcomed as even former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad mooted the Caring Malaysia programme to encourage the private sector to contribute to society. "For some reason, it didn't work out that well then. I believe the government should not be shouldering the responsibility alone," he said.
|
| Najib’s reform package underway Posted: 02 Oct 2011 03:23 PM PDT
In Parliament today, the government is proposing to repeal the Restricted Residence Act and the Banishment Act, and to form the PSC on poll reforms. (Free Malaysia Today) - Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak moved to repeal the Restricted Residence Act and the Banishment Act today, fulfilling his vows to implement quick political reforms to improve civil liberties. At the same time, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Aziz also tabled a motion to form the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on poll reforms. Najib promised the formation of the PSC after his government received widespread condemnation for its strong-arm response to the July 9 rally that called for Putrajaya to clean up Malaysia's electoral system. The rally, where close to 1,700 protesters were arrested while scores were injured, was organised by polls reform group Bersih 2.0. The committee members' composition will reflect current Parliamentary numbers – five from Barisan Nasional, three from Pakatan Rakyat and one independent. While tabling the motion, Nazri reiterated that setting up the PSC was not a nod to accusation that election in Malaysia was corrupt but instead a way to deflect the allegations. "The formation of the PSC is to ensure there are no more accusations against the Election Commission," the law minister told the Dewan Rakyat. The PSC will have six months to look into poll reforms and make recommendations on ways to improve the election system. The panel's terms of references included all key eight demands made by Bersih, including the possible use of indelible ink, fair access to media, longer campaigning period and the abolishment of postal votes. Winning back middle Malaysia He also made a landmark announcement to scrap the British-inherited Internal Security Act which allows detention without trial. Najib said the ISA, a law which the opposition claimed BN had thrived on to crush dissent, will be repealed in March next year as his government needed time to draft two new laws to replace it.
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan