Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

The Way We Were
We have bigger fish to fry
The hypnotist
Anwar is expendable, PKR is not
PAS’ Islamist duo set to rattle party

Posted: 15 Dec 2011 10:15 PM PST

THE WAY WE WERE IN 1957: HOW BN HAS DESTROYED MALAYSIAN DEMOCRACY IN 54 YEARS

By Kua Kia Soong

It is now 54 years since we became independent and with the 13th general elections approaching, it is time to count the cost of BN rule since 1957. Many draconian and unjust laws did not exist at independence and Malaysians should seriously reflect on the way we were and how many reforms being proposed today merely represent the status quo in 1957, nothing more. Malaysia in fact needs to undergo much deeper reforms to survive the 21st century.

Let us first examine the situation at Independence to see how our country has regressed under BN before we consider further reforms. It also brings into perspective the so-called "social contract" frequently brought up by UMNO to justify the status quo. And let us not forget that UMNO has managed to destroy our democratic institutions only with the assistance of all the other BN coalition parties in parliament.

The following are some stark examples of the damage done to our fundamental liberties enshrined in our Federal Constitution in 1957:

1. Equality undermined through the amendment to Article 153 in 1971:

The addition of the new clause '8A' to article 153 in 1971 two years after May 13 has led to the gross racial discrimination seen in admissions to educational institutions such as MARA science schools, colleges and UITM and the access to public sector scholarships. In recent years, racial discrimination has been further institutionalized through the routinized usage of "Ketuanan Melayu" (Malay dominance) in common parlance to justify the discrimination.

2. Liberty of the person violated since 1960 to allow detention without trial:

The Internal Security Act that has been used to put away dissidents and the opposition all these years only came into existence three years after independence in 1960. Under the guise of protecting "national security", it was used to finish off the entire leadership of the Labour Party, the main threat to the Alliance government in the sixties. To date, more than 10,000 people have been detained under this iniquitous law.

The Emergency Ordinance 1969 also allows the BN government to detain Malaysians without trial; it only came in 1969 after 'May 13'. Purportedly necessary to deal with gangsters and others, this law was recently used against six leaders of Parti Socialis Malaysia using absurd allegations of fact.

The legislation of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1985 which also allows the BN government to detain people without trial only came into existence in 1985, purportedly to deal with drug dealers and traffickers. In recent years, hundreds of people have been detained under the EO and DDA.

3. Independence of the Judiciary in doubt since 1988:

Ever since Mahathir sacked the Lord President and suspended three more Supreme Court judges just before the crucial judgement on the UMNO Team A/Team B judicial challenge in 1988, the Malaysian Judiciary's independence has been in doubt.

4. Unfair constituency delineation since the amendments to the Constitution in 1962 and after:

The original Merdeka constitution provided that in drawing up constituencies, "there shall not be more than a difference of 15 per cent in the number of electors of any constituency to the electoral quota." The "electoral quota" or national average, was defined as the number obtained by dividing the number of electors in the Federation by the total number of constituencies. Section 2 (c) of the Thirteenth Schedule had stipulated that "the number of electors within each constituency ought to be approximately equal throughout the unit of review."

The Constitution was amended in 1962 transferring the power to delimit parliamentary constituencies from the Election Commission to a bare majority of parliament. Professor R.H. Hickling, the first parliamentary draftsman of Independent Malaya commented on this amendment thus:

"The abolition of the powers of an independent commission smacks a little of expediency and expediency can be a dangerous policy…the Federation is intent upon destroying the relics of a paternal policy embedded in the original Constitution, under which a number of independent bodies (in addition to the Supreme Court) shared, with the legislature, the authority of the federation."

A new Thirteenth Schedule set out certain new features permitting a weightage of up to 2:1 in favour of rural constituencies, thus enabling differences of 100 per cent between urban and rural seats. A further constitutional amendment in 1973 took away altogether the original check in the Thirteenth Schedule on there being too great a disparity between urban and rural seats. Today, the absurdity of constituency delineation in Malaysia is exemplified by the contrast between 6000 voters at Putrajaya federal constituency and more than 100,000 at Kapar, a disparity of 16:1.

5. Suspension of local government elections in 1965:

At independence in 1957, we had elected local government. In fact the Kuala Lumpur municipal elections were our baptism in democracy even before independence. But the government suspended local council elections on 2 March 1965 when the Labour Party was at its strongest, using Indonesia's 'Confrontasi' as an excuse. They promised to restore elected local authorities "the very moment peace is declared and the Emergency regulations are withdrawn." These emergency regulations have been in existence for more than 40 years allowing the government to continue to suspend local council elections.

6. Mother tongue education stunted since 1961:

At independence, the Education Ordinance 1957 provided for local education authorities as part of elected local councils. These local education authorities provided for surveying, planning and allocating resources for building schools. The number of English, Malay, Chinese or Tamil schools to be built in each locality and the financial allocation they were entitled to depended on the need of the people in the area. It was not something to be horse traded by political carpetbaggers to appease their communalist supporters. Thus at independence there were 78 Chinese secondary schools, 1320 Chinese primary schools and 800 Tamil primary schools. Even the school-leaving certificate of the Chinese secondary schools was a government examination.

Now we only have 1285 Chinese primary schools and 550 Tamil primary schools. The government will only allow 60 independent (community funded) Chinese secondary schools and their Unified Examination Certificate is recognized all over the world except in Malaysia!

The 1961 Education Act did away with the Chinese secondary schools and after the suspension of elected local government, education became a federal prerogative and has become an object of communalist politics ever since.

7. The right to peaceful assembly taken away in 1967 and after:

Our right to assemble peaceably under Article 10 was severely circumscribed by the Police Act 1967, giving the police wide discretionary powers to the police to regulate assemblies, meetings and processions by requiring a licence to be obtained for peaceful assemblies. Amendments to the Act in 1987 further extended police powers to stopping and dispersing activities in private places. It also provided the police with power to use force against participants when closing down events, whether in public or private places. Since 2007, section 98 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows the government to use court orders to stop public assemblies. The police have the power to arrest individuals named in court orders if they enter the identified areas of planned assemblies. With the passing of the latest Peaceful Assembly Bill, the right of Malaysians to assemble peaceably has been further circumscribed.

8. Our freedom of expression shackled in 1971 and after:

The constitution was amended in 1971 making it seditious or criminal to question any rights and privileges relating to citizenship, the national language and the use of other languages, to quotas for Malays and the natives of Borneo, and to the sovereignty of the rulers. The Internal Security Act 1960, the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) in 1971, Official Secrets Act 1972, the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 have further restricted Malaysians' freedom of expression. The monopoly of the mainstream media by the component parties of the BN acts as an effective clampdown on our freedom of expression.

9. Our freedom of association restricted since 1959:

We enjoyed relative freedom of association until 1959 when the Trade Unions Act was brought in to impose strict controls on trade union affairs. The Societies Act was introduced in 1966 requiring every organization to secure a licence. In 1967, the Industrial Relations Act further restricted Malaysian workers' freedom of association. The UUCA clamped down on the freedom of association by academics and students. The Societies Act was further amended in 1981 and in 2011, two respectable associations, namely the Malaysian Medical Association and the Malacca Chinese Assembly Hall were deregistered.

Thus, it is no big deal to call for the reinstatement of all the democratic institutions that were in place at the time of independence in 1957. If we manage to do that, Malaysians will only be realizing the quality of life at the time of Independence such as, a relatively more equal society; a more independent judiciary; fairer constituency delineation; elected local government; freedom for mother tongue education to grow; the freedoms of expression, assembly and association respected; no detention without trial for a start.

We would still need a new agenda for concrete reforms to take us through the many challenges we face in the 21st century to deal with racism, racial discrimination and other related intolerances; abuse of powers; law reform and the rule of law; effective prevention of corruption; free and fair elections; more accountable and representative democracy; freedom of information; defending workers' rights and living conditions; upholding women's rights and dignity; protecting the rights of indigenous peoples; a progressive economic policy; an environmentally friendly policy; a people-centred social policy; channeling defence spending into social services and promoting a culture of peace.

We have bigger fish to fry

Posted: 15 Dec 2011 06:38 PM PST

I know many of you are excited about the cow scandal now engulfing Women, Family and Community Development Minister Dato' Sri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil. But that's peanuts compared to what's cooking at the Defence Ministry. It's comical and unfair for some UMNO leaders to ask Shahrizat to resign when they are all in the same pot.

ZAID IBRAHIM

Four months ago, I wrote about Defence Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi and Co. wanting to purchase six more Second Generation Patrol Vessels or SGPVs for the Navy. The story was ignored by the public ; and so I have to write this again.

Some of you will recall that when the Government decided to privatise the Lumut Naval Dockyard in the early 1990s to the man with the white hair Tan Sri Amin Shah Omar, that exercise also entailed the Government buying six patrol vessels from him for the Navy.

That exercise cost taxpayers RM9 billion: RM6 billion for the patrol vessels and RM3 billion for interest charges for late payments and exchange rate losses. Amin Shah ordered the vessels from the German company Blohm + Voss. Apart from procuring the six patrol vessels, Lumut Naval Dockyard (now Boustead Naval Shipyard) also paid RM300 million for their design so that we could build additional units ourselves if we needed them in future. "Malaysia Boleh!" was, after all, the rallying cry then, and our defence officials have never failed to brandish the catchphrase, "transfer of technology".

Fast-forward 15 years later and our current Defence Minister has decided to buy another six patrol vessels. It will cost more this time, naturally, since these are second generation SGPVs with a new design to be built by another company, DCNS. Why we are not using the design that we paid so much for is something we should be thinking about. And why Zahid and Boustead Naval Shipyard have decided to change our supplier to DCNS is anybody's guess.

All I can confirm is that DCNS is a famous company because DCNS supplied us Scorpene submarines (a deal in which someone equally famous got RM500 million in duit kopi). DCNS is also involved in a corruption scandal in Taiwan, where they had been sued by the Taiwan government for recovery of more than USD1 billion for a kickback scandal.

So how much will this new procurement cost Malaysian taxpayers? The new vessels' combat and management system will be decided by some foreign consultants and not by the Royal Malaysian Navy, so your guess is as good as mine. But it's not just the money I am worried about. The consultants are Singapore based companies. Are they not foreigners?. What if they recommend a system that compromises our national security? What assurance do we have that these consultants are not our enemies? Every time we question the Government's secrecy in the procurement of defence equipment, we are told that it's in our national interests to be kept in the dark. Now I know why.

I am certain that input from our Royal Navy into this very important procurement has been minimal at best. So we can expect an announcement later that will sound something like this: the base price for the vessels is RM10 billion while the maintenance, training and parts contracts will cost RM1 billion a year for 10 years. That means Tabung Angkatan Tentera, which has the controlling stake in Boustead Holdings, and ordinary Malaysians (who will be getting RM500 soon) must be prepared to shoulder the burden of a RM20 billion defence contract for vessels that neither you nor I can even be sure we need.

For the moment, I hope our Defence Minister or Prime Minister can answer three simple questions: firstly, are we buying the six patrol vessels from DCNS and for how much? Secondly, why were foreign consultants engaged, to the exclusion of the Navy, to recommend combat systems and other sensitive components of the vessels? And thirdly, why are we not having a competitive bid for this project? I hope we can get some answers soon, before the General Election.

The hypnotist

Posted: 15 Dec 2011 10:25 AM PST

Yes, this is Hasan Ali that we know, an expert in packaging himself with a noble objective and exalting himself with flowery language. Please be reminded that he was a motivation speaker, a master in group hypnotism, before he went into politics.

Tay Tian Yan, The Malaysian Insider

Finally we will have a one less troublemaker in politics if Hasan Ali is eventually removed by PAS.

Of course, it is no one's wish that he will be picked up by another party, including Umno.

Already coming to an end of his political career, Hasan Ali said he wouldn't bother whether PAS would nominate him or approve of what he did, so long as Allah approves him.

He insisted that he was defending Islam, and was fighting for the rights of the Malays and the Rulers, saying that he would not back down in his efforts to promote greater integration between his party and Umno.

Yes, this is Hasan Ali that we know, an expert in packaging himself with a noble objective and exalting himself with flowery language.

Please be reminded that he was a motivation speaker, a master in group hypnotism, before he went into politics.

Hypnotism will not get the problems solved, but will instead bring on an array of side-effects.

No one should query his noble intent of defending Islam, the Malays and the Rulers, but the problem is no one in the state of Selangor nor anywhere in the country would ever rise up against Islam, the Malays or the Rulers.

A member of the state exco, Hasan Ali's duty is to take care of everyone's needs in the state, Muslims or non-Muslims, and promote racial and religious harmony. However, he chooses to exclude this all-important role.

While the hypnotist puts everyone under his spell, he himself falls into the trap of excessive self-conceit.

He has assumed the role of a guardian of Islam over the years, and yet he continues to suspect that someone out there is trying to erode the status of Islam, the Malays and the Rulers.

Selangor used to enjoy relatively harmonious inter-religious relationship, but thanks to his conspiracy theories, restlessness and discord began to surface.

READ MORE HERE

Anwar is expendable, PKR is not

Posted: 15 Dec 2011 08:55 AM PST

PKR must 'ready' itself to lead the Pakatan Rakyat charge with or without Anwar Ibrahim.

The question now is this: When does my responsibility towards "supporting" Anwar – the individual – ends and when does my responsibility to ensuring the relevancy of his "vision" and PKR to our future starts? It is a fine line to tread but I will tread it with the conviction that PKR and Anwar are two separate entities.

CT Ali, Free Malaysia Today

The future of PKR is a shared responsibility. It is not only the concern of PKR members but also all of us who have not forgotten what Anwar Ibrahim has done towards the cause of putting together a credible opposition to give Barisan Nasional a run for its money.

Without Anwar there would have been no Pakatan Rakyat.

Without Anwar there would not have been that much hope in our hearts for regime change and an end to 53 years of abuse by that bully named Umno.

Without Anwar we could not today talk about momentous change that could possibly come in the coming 13th general election.

But our responsibility is not to Anwar alone.

Our responsibility is to his cause, his stated ideals and keeping alive the hope that he gave us for a better future for the people of our nation.

It is a fine line to tread but I will tread it with the conviction that PKR and Anwar are two separate entities.

One cannot eat off the other. In essence, what I am saying is this: if Anwar becomes a liability to the wellbeing of PKR, then our responsibility to PKR and to Anwar is to ensure that minimal harm is done to PKR.

Anwar is expendable. PKR is not!

Anwar in prison?

What now lies ahead for Anwar?

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, his deputy Muhyiddin Yassin, former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Umno and Barisan Nasional can dismiss the future of Anwar with one word – prison.

You, PKR, Pakatan Rakyat and me… we cannot!

This man has run the gauntlet for our cause once too many times for us to abandon him now. He needs our support not for him personally, but for what he has created – PKR and Pakatan.

Gauntlet is described in the dictinary as "a punishment formerly used in the military in which somebody was forced to run between two lines of men armed with weapons who beat him up as he passed".

Najib and BN will put him (Anwar) in prison. You, PKR, Pakatan and me – we will free him from prison.

Not by breaking any prison walls but by winning the 13th general election for Pakatan and making the business of freeing him from prison the first order of business for the incoming Pakatan government.

READ MORE HERE

PAS’ Islamist duo set to rattle party

Posted: 15 Dec 2011 08:48 AM PST

Datuk Dr Hasan Ali and fellow PAS leader Nasharuddin Mat Isa are looking out of synch with the party's leadership but both have solid support behind them, which could unsettle things for their rivals in the party.

Dr Hasan and Nasharuddin are the two leaders who have come to haunt the party at a time when PAS has sacrificed so much to accommodate the liberals compared with the pre-1999 polls when it was breathing fire and brimstone, promoting and defending everything Islam.

By BARADAN KUPPUSAMY, The Star

YOU would think that a man like Datuk Dr Hasan Ali, who is a fiery articulator of all things Islamic, will be embraced by an Islamist party like PAS.

But it is strange that the Selangor exco member for Islam and Malay customs is shunned by the party and, according to state information head Shaari Sungib, has been dropped from the proposed list of PAS candidates for Selangor.

It is said that he did not receive enough nominations from the party branches to qualify to be re-nominated for the Gombak Setia state seat, which he won in 2008.

Various Islamic NGOs have gathered to champion Dr Hasan — a conservative Muslim who defends the banning of beer and other fundamentalist initiatives in Selangor.

They also questioned the party's credentials as an Islamist party.

Dr Hasan also defends the institution of the Malay rulers much more overtly than the party which has a mixed record on that score.

Dr Hasan gave media interviews since Sunday, and in the interviews lashed out at his liberal critics in PAS and said he was not concerned about being dropped as a candidate.

"It is a small matter," he said in an interview on TV3, adding "the larger issues are Islam and defending Islam."

PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang was quick to deny that Dr Hasan has been dropped because such matters had not been decided by the party.

Another veteran PAS leader Nasharuddin Mat Isa is in the same boat as Dr Hasan, as the party's central leadership is dominated by the so-called "Erdogans".

In PAS, leaders deemed progressive and moderate are dubbed Erdogans, after the visionary and popular Turkish prime minister Racep Erdogan.

Three-term MP Nasharuddin, a technocrat and Muslim conservative, is not in the good books of the central leadership.

He was painted with the same brush as Dr Hasan after both were said to be in favour of Malay unity talks with Umno.

Nasharuddin also declared in a TV3 interview on Tuesday that he shares Dr Hasan's sentiments on Islam and Malay rulers as the twin pillars of Malay society.

"I put Islam first. The royal institution is also to be defended," said the Bachok MP, clearly drawing a line between them and the Erdogans, who take the cue from PAS spiritual leader Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat.

The actions of the two leaders – Dr Hasan and Nasharuddin – are causing a headache to the Erdogans in PAS and restraining the push towards liberal policies and collaboration with DAP.

They feel that it is only through liberal policies that they can convince the majority of non-Muslim voters to support PAS in the forthcoming general election.

At the same time, the party has kept open its stand on the hudud issue, hoping to keep its traditional voter base.

This can easily backfire on PAS.

They can lose the hardliners who question the party's liberal policies and "submission" to non-Muslims.

They can also lose the non-Muslim votes for taking on a radical hue.

It is the same party which has decided to deliberately lower the heat of its rhetoric to win the non-Muslim voter support.

It is now the era of the Erdogans in PAS that is led by Nik Aziz and his group. They won most of the top posts in this year's party election.

The Erdogans are trying to finish off the Malay nationalists and equally Islamic leaders like Dr Hasan and Nasharuddin and their supporters in the party.

The stage is set to get rid of them by not nominating them to contest in the general election.

The two, and their supporters in the Muslim NGOs, have challenged the PAS leadership with their "Islam comes first" statements and their readiness to defend the institution of the Malay rulers – all very nationalistic sentiments that come naturally to a Malay but are abhorred by leaders like deputy president Mohamed Sabu.

They are a thorn in the side of PAS, constantly reminding them that there are real issues to defend and politics is not just a process of winning elections and enjoying power.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Jumaat, 16 Disember 2011

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan