Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Passive May Be Better Than Active
- Twisting the Constitution is not political reform
- Most illegitimate babies in Sabah
- The BBC Owns Up As FBC Scandal Deepens!
- BBC broke standards over paid-for Malaysia programmes
- Uthaya’s 53 new Indian majority seats: A racist in the mould of Dr M?
- It’s Not Rocket Science, EC
| Passive May Be Better Than Active Posted: 15 Nov 2011 10:46 PM PST In his article Cure the Cause, Not the Symptoms yesterday, Raja Petra said: If the political parties prove they are incapable of bringing about change then maybe we should forget about political parties (and therefore about seeing change through the electoral process -- which without reforms is not going to see a change of government anyway). Maybe it requires a different form of action to bring about change. Now, I wonder what he meant by that. Could he probably have meant taking a passive rather than active stance? Passive resistance may be a better option than active action seeing that many Malaysians can be perceived as gutless and scared of civil action such as taking to the streets because they fear the police, arrest, water cannons, etc. Well, how about you DON'T take to the streets? Instead, you stay home and do nothing. Imagine a scenario where 28 million Malaysians stay home and don't go to work or school. Public transport such as buses, train and taxis don't run. How long do you think a government can last. Is this what RPK meant? Was he referring to 'hartal' - the power of silent protests? Hartal is a word derived from Gujurati that literally translates to "closing down shops" or "locking doors"refers to the act of closing shops or suspending work, esp in political protest. To be fair, while hartal by virtue is the political and constitutional right of citizens to protest the failure of their government at keeping promises and/or making decisions or taking actions contrary to people's interest, hartal can negatively impact the economy and daily activities of people. Historically, it has been more than a century since the first hartal was staged in South Africa. Led by Ghandi who conceived the idea of civil disobedience because of his methodology of satyagraha (devotion to the truth) against colonialism , it was organized to protest The Black Act in 1906 in 1906. It is inspiring to see how the amendment of the 'Black Act' mobilized more Indian people in the Transvaal into joining Gandhi's Satyagraha campaign. South African History Online says: |
| Twisting the Constitution is not political reform Posted: 15 Nov 2011 02:31 PM PST But commentator "Hakim Joe" in a letter to Malaysia Today lambasting Pakatan Rakyat for inaction on reform, does just that in discussing who can be prime minister (or deputy prime minister, in his argument). Hakim Joe says Lim Kit Siang and Karpal Singh "do not qualify because the Constitution forbids it on racial grounds". That is just wrong. It is false. There is no such thing. Perhaps Hakim Joe prefers to see race-based quotas at the highest levels. But his own preferences do not make the law.After 54 years of constitutional government, you would think some things would by now have been well understood, such as:
If the Constitution says anyone can be prime minister, it is ludicrous to say the Constitution then bars Lim Kit Siang or Karpal Singh from being chosen as deputy prime minister "on racial grounds". That is a plain lie. It is one thing to argue for reforms. It is another thing to push a lie in the name of reform. Article 43 of the Federal Constitution only says that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong chooses a Cabinet of Minister, after first choosing a prime minister. He has the power to choose, and he must choose an MP who, in his view, commands the support of the Dewan Rakyat. That is all.
|
| Most illegitimate babies in Sabah Posted: 15 Nov 2011 02:24 PM PST These figures were part of 152,182 illegitimate babies recorded nationwide from 2008 to last year, Deputy Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Heng Sai Kie said.
|
| The BBC Owns Up As FBC Scandal Deepens! Posted: 15 Nov 2011 01:07 PM PST In a report published today by its governing body, the BBC Trust, the Corporation admitted that the programmes, which were acquired by the BBC for 'low or nominal cost' from independent producers, "seriously breached" the BBC's guidelines on conflicts of interest and the prohibition of sponsorship for current affairs programming. As a result, the BBC announced it will tighten rules on sponsored programming and has already made a series of changes to the way it acquires and funds programming for its international channel BBC World. Richard Ayre, who chaired the meeting of the Trust's Editorial Standards Committee said:
This shame and apology from the BBC, contrasts remarkably with the statement by the Malaysian Minister, Nazri Abdul Aziz, just last week that the BN Government remains happy with the illegal services that FBC were performing at a cost of RM 94 million to the Malaysian taxpayer! He commented to reporters that FBC's breaches were only a question of ethics, which was no problem because:
|
| BBC broke standards over paid-for Malaysia programmes Posted: 15 Nov 2011 01:01 PM PST Several UK dailies reported that the BBC Trust has banned the BBC's World News channel from buying certain programmes and accepting some sponsorship deals, after an investigation found serious breaches of the corporation's editorial guidelines in shows about subjects including Malaysia. One of them was a show called "Taking the Credit", which featured carbon trading and was first aired in 2009. According to British daily The Times, the investigation by the trust's editorial standards committee (ESC) found a further 15 programmes in serious violation of the BBC's editorial or sponsorship guidelines were shown across Europe and elsewhere. The BBC internal committee ruled there had been conflicts of interest in eight documentaries about Malaysia because of an "apparent financial relationship" between the government and FBC Media, the production company, reported the Guardian newspaper. The Guardian also reported FBC Media's parent company, FBC Group, confirming to the BBC investigation that the Malaysian government was a client. "Based on evidence before the committee of the apparent financial relationship between FBC Media (UK) Ltd and the Malaysian government, the committee concluded that FBC Media (UK) Ltd was not an appropriate producer for these particular programmes, being about Malaysia, its industries and Malaysian government policies. "International audiences must be able to rely on the same integrity and independence in the BBC's editorial decisions as audiences in the UK," ESC chair Richard Ayre was reported as saying by The Guardian. He added that the World News channel has been banned from buying programmes for a low or nominal cost and it will "no longer accept sponsorship from non-commercial organisations". TV company FBC Media has been found to be at the centre of the Malaysia news-fixing scandal facing broadcasters BBC and CNBC, and is facing collapse. The London-based firm and its parent company FBC Group have gone into administration — a legal term that allows a company facing bankruptcy to carry on business — following reports it accepted £17million (RM85 million) from Putrajaya to burnish the Najib administration's image on global broadcast networks.
|
| Uthaya’s 53 new Indian majority seats: A racist in the mould of Dr M? Posted: 15 Nov 2011 05:35 AM PST Hence it comes as a repugnant backward step that the Human Rights Party headed by P Uthayakumar saw fit to propose to the Parliamentary Select Committee on electoral reform for at least 15 new Indian majority parliament seats and 38 state seats to be created. He wants the seats to be "at least 70% Indian majority". How the Election Commission is supposed to gerrymander the seats to his requirement which is an affront to democracy is not mentioned. Perhaps this "one stroke of a pen" politician who has declared that 90% of Indian problems can be solved by giving land to Tamil schools can enlighten us. But should we be surprised at HRP's racial demands when this party has unabashedly looked at everything through a racial lens? Actually the name "Human Rights Party" is a misnomer and it should be more appropriately renamed "Hindu Rights Party" as HRP was set up solely to champion only one ethnic community and specifically Tamil Hindus within that community. Pouring Fuel on Fire No, we are not surprised but we are only surprised that HRP and its leader still fail to see the futility of their racial approach. There is no doubt that Malaysia has one of the most unfair racial policies in the world but trying to fight racism with racism is like pouring fuel on a fire you are trying to put out. You cannot fight Umno's racism with more of the same because it only deepens the schism between ethnic groups and sets the stage for even more racial bargaining. If one racial group can demand so can other racial groups. Extremist demands from Indians only give credibility to Perkasa's demands for Malays and embolden them to make more demands. Then Chinese will get into the act and soon Malaysia will be partitioned into racial ghettos. It is clear that the system of racial politics where resources and opportunities are distributed by race does not work. 54 years of raced based parties championing the rights of its own ethnic group has resulted in a predictable outcome – the dominant race gets the most and the weakest race gets the least. Furthermore, the rights of the dominant race continue to be enlarged at the expense of the others. Why then does Uthayakumar want to propagate a system which is guaranteed to marginalize Indians? Can HRP match Perkasa in making and obtaining racial demands? Or are Indians only entitled to make racial demands while others must keep quiet? It has been said that 70% of Indians are poor but Indians are not a classless society. There are also rich Indians like Ananda Krishnan and Tony Fernandez and middle class Indians. As the community has stratified into classes trying to solve the Indian problem with race based affirmative action will just result in the same abuse seen with Bumiputra affirmative action. Help will not reach those who need it most but will be hijacked by those who are strong enough to grab them. Any other outcome is just idealistic. The Myth of Racial Representation The other fallacy which must be addressed is that only Indians and help Indians. Uthayakumar's demand for Indian elected representatives goes to the core of his penchant for this myth. If this is true then Indians should just support MIC and Chinese have no reason to turn away from MCA. Why create another coalition of race based parties which will only propagate the same system? Old wine in new bottle is not going to taste any different. We should not be concerned about the race of our elected representatives but focus on electing whoever can serve best. This means moving away from the race based mentality of having someone of the same race to represent you. An elected representative should take care of everybody in his or her constituency irrespective of race. Selection based on race only gives an opportunity for unsavoury characters to come in at the expense of better quality candidates. There is absolutely no reason to suppose that an Indian will take care of the Indian community better than a dedicated and selfless representative from another race. Of course BN is ingenious at playing this race game. Chinese are told that if they support MCA they will have no representation in government. Even MCA President Chua Soi Lek has issued a transparent threat that MCA will not accept any government posts if the party garners worse results than the last general election. To the Chinese such threats roll off like pouring water on a keladi leaf. What is the point of representation which is powerless and voiceless when it comes to community rights and only behaves like apologists for Umno? Indians should emulate Chinese in this respect and reject the myth of racial representation.
|
| Posted: 15 Nov 2011 05:24 AM PST Over 115 countries and territories in the world allow external voting, and two thirds of these allow external voting by all citizens. Given that 51 years has passed since the concept of absent voting was first provided for in our Federal Constitution, one would have thought that the EC would have studied what is done in other countries and come up with a workable system by now. MyOverseasVote would like to set out in simple terms how easily overseas voting can be made to work. Firstly, any Malaysian wishing to vote from overseas will need to be registered with their overseas address as an absent voter or other kind of postal voter. There is no question of the EC having to "trace" voters who have not registered. (For this to work effectively, there should either be an expedited route for voters to switch between ordinary and absent voters under the 2002 (Registration of Electors) Regulations, or overseas voters must be gazetted as postal voters under the 2003 (Postal Voting) Regulations, and must be able to apply to be postal voters in advance of an election. Both of these require amendments to the relevant rules.) Once nominations have closed and ballot papers have been printed, returning officers should issue the postal ballots in front of candidates' election agents and seal them in envelopes divided up by consulate, which should be sent via the EC to each Malaysian consulate overseas by diplomatic pouch. Only one pouch needs to be sent to each Malaysian consulate overseas. Once postal ballots are received by a Malaysian consulate, it should summon election agents of each political party to witness the envelopes being unsealed and to witness that all the postal ballots are placed into the local postal system. (The 2003 Regulations already allow the EC to provide for the method of despatch of postal ballots. Provision may have to be made for the official appointment of overseas election agents by political parties.) In order to vote, each voter will have to receive the postal ballot at his home address, fill out and sign a declaration of identity in front of a witness, and then mark the ballot paper and return the postal ballot together with the declaration of identity to the Malaysian consulate. This can either be returned by post or in person to the Malaysian consulate. Each Malaysian consulate should have 27 sealed ballot boxes, 13 for state elections and 14 for federal elections. Upon receipt of each ballot, it should be placed into the relevant ballot box.
|
| 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