Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Posted: 19 Nov 2011 06:17 PM PST

Again and again in Malaysia, those who defend the rights of citizens to exercise their fundamental liberties are treated as offenders.

Again and again in Malaysia, those who defend the rights of citizens to exercise their fundamental liberties are treated as offenders, while those who incite fear and hatred and inflame racial and religious sentiments are given the upper hand to dictate the agenda through compliance, support or inaction by key state institutions.

Zainah Anwar, The Star

WHERE should we draw the line between freedom of expression and incitement to hatred? This is a debate that occupies the international human rights system today as governments grapple with the need to fully respect freedom of expression as protected by international human rights law and comply with the prohibition of incitement to hatred.

As democracy matures, the public space for debate opens up further. Citizens, educated and aware of their rights, begin to articulate their demands for justice and social change. Diverse voices will compete for public attention and support. Traditionally marginalised groups will assert their right to be treated as citizens with equal rights and dignity. This is all good for democracy, respect for human rights and the well-being of society.

However, the problem arises when those identified as "others" are constructed by the dominant community "as people who do not share a community's history, traditions and values" and, as a result, are "all too often perceived as predatory competitors, or at least a threat to the stability of that community's belief system", as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said.

And thus they get demonised, threatened, discriminated against and even murdered just because they are different.

This is a global problem. In the name of "war on terror", Muslims are vilified, attacked, or discriminated against. A whole community is demonised for the actions of a tiny minority who abuse Islam to justify their violence and terrorism.

In the name of ethnic or religious homogeneity, whole communities are physically removed from a territory by driving them out, deported to concentration camps, or murdered. In modern times, the forcible expulsion and murder of Jews in Europe, Muslims in the former Yugoslavia, and Tutsis in Rwanda stand out.

In the name of religion and culture, homosexuals are stigmatised, attacked and murdered.

It is obvious that human beings are not born to hate those who think, act or look differently. Just look at a playground of toddlers of all colours and backgrounds playing together.

All too often, hate, fear and insults are manufactured to serve a political agenda. And it is convenient to manipulate and abuse religion, ethnicity and culture to create fear and anxiety in order to delegitimise the rights and interests of the "others".

In modern times, the media have been used as tools to inflame perceived grievances and rouse emotions, escalating tensions and conflict that can result in violence. Much research has been done to show how in Serbia, Serb supremacists used television to stir up ethnic tensions prior to the civil war. In Rwanda, Hutu propagandists used the radio to lay the groundwork for genocide.

While such atrocities seem impossible in Malaysia, the fact is in our country today, fear and hatred are manufactured on a daily basis and public opinion inflamed through screaming headlines in some mainstream newspapers and television stations, and in the venomous hate language in the alternative new media.

Muslim feminists, human rights defenders, and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) groups and individuals are among those most vilified and demonised.

Recent events are cause for much concern. Many feel we are on a slippery slope to potential outbreak of violence. A country that has thrived, celebrated and been enriched by its history of embracing diversity and pluralism is today dominated by extremists who manufacture threats to race and religion supposedly posed by those they disagree with.

Thus, we see the demonising and defaming of Datuk Ambiga Sreenivasan for her courage and resolve to go ahead with the Bersih rally.

The fact that government leaders took the lead in depicting Bersih as a threat to national security opened up the space and gave legitimacy to the even more belligerent voices among non-state actors.

Death threats were sent; vile, abusive and hate messages proliferated by SMS and on the Internet, Bersih supporters were labelled "communists", "anti-Islam", or "funded by foreign Christian groups".

The attacks against Seksualiti Merdeka are yet another public contestation that swiftly escalated into a shrill and belligerent public discourse.

First, a forum to discuss the rights of LGBTs was portrayed by the media as a festival to promote free sex and a threat to security. Ambiga who was due to launch the event was once again demonised, this time labelled the "anti-Christ" by the right-wing group, Perkasa, which demanded that her citizenship be stripped.

Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir, who defended Ambiga against these unjust attacks, in turn became the target of hate mail.

As expected in Malaysia today, close to 200 police reports were lodged all over the country against the organisers and supporters of Seksualiti Merdeka. The police banned the event and many activists were called in for questioning.

It is one thing to exercise one's right to differences of opinion, but it is another when stigmatising, demonising, fear and hate-mongering language and accusations are hurled at marginalised and discriminated groups and human rights defenders.

Irresponsible newspapers day after day use inflammatory headlines to build up the frenzy. Mobs are hired to intimidate organisers and the police intervene, not to disperse the hooligans but to raid legitimate meetings held indoors to discuss issues of public interest and concern.

While Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) protects the right to freedom of expression, Article 20 also requires governments to prohibit the "advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence".

While striking the right balance is no easy task, the clear meaning is that freedom of expression is to be upheld for as long as it does not advocate hatred and incite discrimination, hostility or violence against an individual or group. Any limitations should take place only in the pursuit of justice and democratic principles, not against those who stand for justice and democracy.

But all too often, restrictions on freedom of expression are enacted in order to protect the interests of those who benefit most from silencing criticism, dissent and public debate on contentious issues.

That a group like Sisters in Islam which upholds equality and justice for Muslim women is demonised as anti-God, anti-Islam, and anti-Syariah, a coalition like Bersih 2.0 which demands for free and fair elections, is portrayed as a threat to national security and public order, or an event like Seksualiti Merdeka to recognise the human rights of people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities is deliberately stigmatised as a "free-sex" festival, arguably does not constitute a legitimate exercise of free speech but incitement to discrimination and hostility that could potentially result in conflict and violence.

The Prime Minister in his Malaysia Day speech promised the dream of a new Malaysia "that practises a functional and inclusive democracy where public peace and prosperity is preserved in accordance with the supremacy of the Constitution, rule of law and respect for basic human rights and individual rights".

How do the hate language and the relentless police reports by extremists against those demanding their constitutional right to fundamental liberties, and the continual phone calls to activists to visit Bukit Aman or a police station for yet another round of questioning under one restrictive law or another, create this democratic and inclusive Malaysia?

A government that practises democracy must protect and nurture a public space that promotes justice, equality and democratic and human rights principles.

Voting rights for overseas Malaysians

Posted: 19 Nov 2011 05:57 PM PST

If we can't work it out ourselves, then why not look at how other countries do it? After all, Britain and the USA - both countries where people vote according to their localities, like ours - allow non-resident citizens to take part in elections. If these two developed countries can do it, then why can't we, a country aspiring to developed nation status, do it too?

Farah Fahmy, The Malaysian Insider

I shouldn't be amazed, but I am.

Here we are in the year 2011, and astonishingly, there are still people out there who hold antiquated views about who should be able to vote.

Datuk Ei Kim Hock has rightly been castigated for suggesting that Malaysians like me who live abroad should not be allowed to vote as we have "lost touch" with our country. I'm not sure which is the more preposterous claim, that someone like me takes no interest in what's happening in the country, or that someone like me should not be allowed to vote because what I read about Malaysia may be "biased" and "wrong."

Now, I will grant you that there are Malaysians out there who don't take an interest in what's going on in the country, but actually, these people live inside Malaysia as well as outside Malaysia, so should disinterested Malaysians living in the country be barred from voting too?

Until 1918, only men with property could vote in Britain, and it wasn't until 1928 that women were accorded the same voting rights as men. Do people like Datuk Ei really want us Malaysians to go back to a time when voting rights were accorded to certain people only?

Let me remind such people of one simple fact: voting, unlike many other things, is a right accorded to every adult Malaysian citizen. As long as I am a Malaysian citizen I should be able to vote, and the government and the Election Commission (EC) should be doing their utmost to ensure that all able Malaysians are able to vote, no matter where they live.

I know there are plenty of people out there who will blithely say, "Well come back then, if you care about it so much." Let me tell you this: whether I come back to Malaysia or not to vote is not the point.

So let me reiterate the point, in case you missed it: as long as I am a Malaysian citizen (and yes, I am a registered voter) I should be able to vote, and the government and the EC should be doing their utmost to ensure that all able Malaysians are able to vote, no matter where they live.

Don't talk to me about logistics, either. If the government and the EC can cater for students, army personnel and diplomatic staff, then obviously they have found a way to accommodate overseas voting.

Besides, if we can develop the latest technological marvel and include it in our passports and MyKad, then it can't be beyond someone's capabilities to overcome these supposed logistical hurdles.

As far as I'm concerned, too many excuses have been given on why overseas Malaysians aren't allowed to vote. "Logistical nightmare" is merely one excuse. The other one often trotted out is the "difficulty" in locating overseas Malaysians.

Again, let me ask: do the authorities knock on every single door in Malaysia to ask people to register? Of course not. So why should this be an issue when it comes to overseas Malaysians?

As I've mentioned in a previous article, it really isn't difficult to run an information campaign in this day and age. If the EC can't work out how to do it, I'm sure there are plenty of Malaysians who would gladly set up a Facebook page to do this and publicise any registration exercise!

Posted: 19 Nov 2011 05:22 PM PST

By Mariam Mokhtar

In the lead up to Christmas, it appears that the season of goodwill has been replaced by the season of Christian bashing, at least in the state of Selangor.

During question time at the Selangor state assembly, the state executive councillor Dr Hasan Ali, who is also the PAS leader, claimed that the Selangor Islamic Affairs Department (JAIS) had discovered an audio device which had been used to proselytise Muslims in Selangor.

Hasan claimed that the solar-powered "hand-held audio Bible" had been discovered by JAIS during its investigation into the proselytisation of Muslims in Selangor.

He said, "The research also revealed several efforts by the Christian community to convert Muslims by setting up welfare groups, giving financial aid and other forms of assistance to single mothers, the poor and the elderly.

"The hand-held Bible was also used to preach", he declared and added that the word Allah had also been used in a Bahasa Malaysia version of The Bible.

Hasan Ali is no stranger to controversy. Last August, he defended an illegal JAIS raid on a thanksgiving dinner at the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) premises, because he claimed JAIS had found "evidence of proselytisation of Muslims."

In complete contrast was the Selangor Menteri Besar, Khalid Ibrahim who had expressed regret over the incident and ordered a detailed investigation.

But the ensuing result, outraged both Muslims and non-Muslims, and raised more questions than answers, because the Sultan of Selangor, who is defender of the faith in the state, decreed that "no one would be charged over the raid because of insufficient evidence". He then went on to say that Muslims present at the dinner, would have to be counseled.

Perhaps, if anyone should take heed, it would be the PAS deputy president, Mat Sabu.

At a Bagan Dapsy (Dapsy is the youth wing for DAP) fundraising dinner in Butterworth, in early October, Mat Sabu warned the crowd of BN's propaganda machinations to try to undermine the opposition.

His allegations centred on BN's strategy called the 3R program whereby race, religion and royalty would be used to propagate a culture of fear in the people and try to make them vote BN in GE-13.

Mat Sabu said, "If these discrepancies were found true after proper verification, Barisan Nasional would recapture Selangor in the next general election.

"BN now propagates various malicious lies using the 3R strategy to undermine Pakatan and woo voters using fear tactics."

Fresh in his mind was the cow-head demonstration, non-Muslims being banned from using the word "Allah", churches being fire-bombed and Penang Chief minister Lim Guan Eng's comments about Johor which had upset its Sultan.

Mat Sabu probably did not realise, last October, that one of the greatest threats would be in the form of his fellow PAS member, the Selangor PAS leader Dr Hasan Ali.

Is Hasan Ali a rogue PAS member or is he in league with Umno?

Hasan used religion to instill fear and hatred in the Malays by claiming that their religion was under threat. He seems indirectly to be manoeuvering the Sultan of Selangor into an invidious position.

Hasan seems to have adopted Umno's strategy of using the 3Rs to undermine the opposition and used all three elements in one fell swoop in the latest "solar-powered talking Bible" case.

One does not need the solar-powered hand-held device. Anyone who wishes to see the Indonesian/Malay versions of The Holy Bible can download a copy from the internet.

Nevertheless, Hasan Ali is more daft than he looks. He has insulted the intelligence and integrity of Malays and Muslims by his allegations.

What makes Hasan think that a Muslim can be converted to Christianity by listening to readings from The Bible? Did he listen to the recordings and think there was something in the readings of The Bible that made him question his own faith? Perhaps his own religious roots are not as strong as most Muslims.

The millions of non-Muslims who live near to a surau or mosque and who have no choice but to listen to Koranic tape-recordings blaring-out five times a day, have not become Muslims have they?

It appears that both Hasan and JAIS have little knowledge of what makes a person embrace a faith, whether it is one they are born into or one they adopt or discard, in later life.

For over a century, several hundreds of thousands of Malayan/Malaysian children have been indoctrinated in Mission Schools, but the non-Christians have remained staunch believers of their own faiths despite having to recite the Lord's prayer at assembly every morning.

If Hasan Ali claims Muslims have been converted, how many are there, where are they and why did they convert?

The Hasan Ali diatribe appears to have popped up at a critical time, just when the public is angry about the National Feedlot Centre (NFC) scandal involving the Women Family and Community Development Minister, Shahrizat Abdul Jalil.

Hasan Ali and his solar-powered talking Bible is a red herring to divert the nation's attention from Shahrizat and her family's abuse of RM250 million of taxpayer's money.

The public is furious for many reasons; The project was awarded to her husband and three children and its been disclosed, in the Auditor-General's report, that the project was a mess and failed to meet its targets.

No wonder the project failed. We have learned that RM800,000 was allegedly spent by Shahrizat and her family on overseas vacations, two luxury condominiums worth around RM7 million each were purchased and she awarded herself RM26,400 in expenses.

The Deputy Prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin said Shahrizat was not involved even though the money trail leads to her. What were her expenses if she had nothing to do with the project?

Never mind talking Bibles because if our faith is strong, no one can dislodge it.

However, the endemic corruption in our Cabinet and the lackadaisical, indolent attitude of our ministers must be dealt with urgently.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Ahad, 20 November 2011

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan