Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Posted: 18 Dec 2012 03:37 PM PST

Do you recognize this man?

He is Tan Seng Giaw.

Just in case you don't know or can't recognize him, I'll leave it to Wikipedia (plus a wee add-ons and where relevant, corrections by me) to provide a glimpse of who he is:

Tan Seng Giaw (Chinese : 陈胜尧) is a Malaysian politician from the Democratic Action Party. He was born on 26 May 1942 in Kota Baru, Kelantan. After attending Primary and High School in Kelantan and Penang respectively, he furthered his education at Plymouth College and Leeds University, England.

His multi-cultural academic and social background has resulted in Seng Giaw being fluent in Mnadarin, English, Bahasa Malaysia, and competent in the writing of Malay in the Jawi script. Seng Giaw's academic qualifications include a M.B.Ch. B. (Leeds), D. Obs. R.C.O.G, M.R.C.P (UK) and finally a M.D. honours (Leeds) in 1976. [...]

His social activities today include the office of Pengerusi Kehormat of Persatuan Murid-murid Tua, Chung Ling for the states of Selangor, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang and uala Lumpur.

Tan's political involvement began in 1976, during which he served the people of Kepong on behalf of Dr. Tan Chee Khoon. He is was the Democratic Action Party's National Vice Deputy Chairman and Member of Parliament for the constituency of Kepong [since 1982. In March 2008 he won by a majority of 23,848 votes].

In 1972, Dr. Tan married Oon Hong Geok, a paediatrician and has two daughters. His wife used to be active in the political scene and represented Taman Aman, Petaling Jaya as a state assemblywoman.

In parliament he plays a sterling role, serving on the Parliamentary Accounts Committee (PAC) as Deputy Chief (to UMNO's Azmi Khalid) and has been a vigilant watchdog on behalf of the public in scrutinizing government finance and expenditure.

Tan Seng Giaw (L) and Azmi Khalid (R)

Awesome, isn't he?

BUT ...

But during the just completed DAP party elections, he was NOT placed in the top 20 for the CEC.

Why was he unsuccessful? Well, my easy answer would be 'lots of reasons', wakakaka.

But anyway, look at his seniority in DAP (years and then Deputy chairperson), his tenure as a DAP MP since 1982 with his most recent victory in 2008 recording a resounding majority that tsunami-ed his MCA opponent away into the Straits of Malacca, and his contributions to both party and nation, etc etc etc.

Yet he was NOT voted into the CEC top 20, but had to be co-opted as one of 10 selected (not voted).

We may deem him as not popular enough among the party delegates to be voted in. Hmmm, maybe he didn't campaign enough or effectively on his own behalf among the party delegates?

OK, lamentable as the DAP party election result has been for Tan Seng Giaw who is no longer the party's deputy chairperson, hasn't it been democratic?

His non-election as one of the top 20 CEC members had been the decision of the voting delegates, and could not be manmanlai-ed a la the style of another party where in its deputy presidential election the total of the votes for 2 candidates at a location exceeded the number of party voters registered, with a party returning officer then questionably declaring a draw wakakaka.

As Lim Guan Eng stated: "We do not control who the delegates choose. We accept the results (of the elections). This is democracy."

Look also at two other high profile DAP leaders - Teresa Kok and DAP Perak Chief, Ngeh Koo Ham.

Everyone knows the Sassy MP, and I admit I love her (her competency lah, wakakaka).

Teresa as Seputeh MP holds the record for the biggest majority for an election victory in any parliamentary constituency. As Kinrara ADUN, she heads the party with the second most number of ADUNs and should have been deputy MB Selangor but for PAS' objections (during the Solar-Powered era) and Khalid Ibrahim's lack of spine in supporting her due status.

She's very active and productive and thus very high profile in her parliamentary and state duties and was once ISA-ed. She was also falsely accused by UMNO of criticizing azan calls, an indication of their fear of her immense popularity among her Malay constituencies.

But she almost didn't make it into the CEC, being voted at an uncomfortable 18th place. The poor darling sweetie explained that her role as party organizing secretary and some of her difficult and unpopular decisions had affected the voting. But nonetheless, she was placed at 18th when you would have expected her to be among the top 5.

Ngeh Koo Ham

Now, Ngeh Koo Ham has gained the unfortunate notoriety of controlling a faction within the Perak DAP which is at odds with another DAP stalwart, Kulasegaran. Kula has the last laugh by coming in at 16th for the elected CEC, while Ngeh very nearly didn't make it, and just squeezed into 20th position.

Kulasegaran

Maybe the 2576 DAP delegates voting at the party election are against certain Chinese, people like Tan who along with 47 other candidates didn't make it? Maybe they have been against Teresa and Ngeh too, though not vigorous enough to cut them out of the top 20?

Rotating parties for better governance

Posted: 16 Dec 2012 03:00 PM PST

IN my last article I wrote about the importance of changing the system of local government that we have. By that I meant we should reintroduce local government elections as well as overhaul the Local Government Act in order to ensure a more transparent and accountable local authority.

There are also other institutional changes which are desperately needed in this country.

Keeping to local governments, the law which exempts them from any legal action being taken against them is also something which has to be looked at.

For example, the Ampang local government was immune to any legal action for supposed negligence in the decision making which led to the Highland Towers tragedy.

But, in case I appear to be harping on too much on local government, let us spread our sights a bit further.

The Election Commission used to be an independent body and its members had the security of tenure similar to those on the Bench. That was changed in the 60s however. What was also changed was the power of the EC to draw the boundaries for the electoral constituencies.

Now the EC commissioners are there at His Majesty's pleasure and the power to delineate constituencies lie in the hands of Parliament. This means that the independence of the EC is questionable as they can be fired at will and whoever has the majority in Parliament will undoubtedly draw the electoral boundaries to suit them and not to ensure a fair representation of the people in this country.

There are many other examples of course but I shall not go into them here. Needless to say the system of governance we have now is built around the concept of patronage.

Those in authority owe their position to a master. This leads to a feudal mentality as well as the ever present suspicion that work is done not on a professional level with the interest of the nation at heart, but instead it is done to serve a political patron.

This systemic malaise that we have can of course be changed by anyone with legislative power and the requisite will to do something about it. But is it possible to find anyone or any group with the nobility of spirit and strong sense of fairness to do so; especially if the status quo suits their own purposes.

Putting an end to child marriages

Posted: 16 Dec 2012 02:31 PM PST

The incidence of child marriages is alarming. By child marriages, I mean the marriage of any person under the age of eighteen. This is more so for the fact that it appears that such marriages are significantly more prevalent amongst Muslims. A recent statement by a United Nations agency here indicates that the number of such marriages has increased significantly over recent years.

The minimum age of marriage for persons of other than the Muslim faith is eighteen. Muslims girls are permitted by state law to marry at the age of sixteen. In some states, like Kedah, the Shariah Court can sanction the marriage of an even younger Muslim girl. In one such case, the Shariah Court recently granted permissions for a twelve-year old girl to marry a nineteen-year old man (some reports have put the age of the groom at sixteen). According to reports, the father of the bride consented to the marriage to avoid any "immoral activity" on the part of the couple. The husband is quoted as saying that his bride had agreed to shoulder the responsibility of a wife. The reports do not indicate either his view or that of the father as to the ability of the twelve year old to understand the full implications of the situation.

It may be recalled that in 2010, a marriage between a fourteen-year old and her twenty-three year old husband sparked some controversy. The Government at that point took the position that if the marriage was permitted under Islam, and as such within the jurisdiction of the State Government, there was no basis to reject the same. Its position does not appear to have changed.

The Attorney General has, through his continued silence on the subject, endorsed such marriages.

On my part, I fail to understand how the Federal Government and the Attorney General could have allowed for this self-evidently destructive trend to continue. Such marriages are not only, I say, unconstitutional, they hurt the children concerned and society. Research shows that child marriages have severely adverse consequences on the physical, emotional and mental development of the child. UNICEF has reported that girls who marry young tend to forego formal education, which, not only disadvantages the girls concern, lead to gaps in their knowledge on maternal health and child rearing issues. There is an increased risk of death in childbirth for girls that young.

It is for this reason that the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, which Malaysia has acceded to, places an obligation on the State to ensure that the "betrothal and the marriage of a child shall have no legal effect" and to take appropriate steps to regulate this.

It is also for this reason that various countries have set to combating child marriages with a view to improving the welfare of children and for the protection of the community. It is generally accepted that the prohibition of such marriages will contribute significantly to poverty eradication and the promoting of gender equality. In some countries, punitive measures against persons who perform, permit, or promote child marriages have been enacted.

It is no answer to say that the economic realities of the situation are in favour of such marriages. If poverty is causing such marriages, then poverty should be addressed. We cannot allow the situation to evolve; I shudder at the thought of this process being used to validate trafficking of child brides or, for all purposes intents, validating the pedophilic tendencies of the monsters that prey on young children. Less sensationally, even the thought of young child-divorcees is reason for concern.

It appears that rather than dealing with the root problems, the Government would rather sidestep the matter. In this, it would seem that Islam is being invoked to stifle the controversy.

While I can appreciate the need for the State to preserve the integrity of personal law, it is not the case that the personal law of Muslims can be understood as permitting the endangering of Muslim minors. More so for the fact that the legal framework of this nation so evidently gives basis to the Federal Government and the Attorney General to intervene and correct the situation.

A question arises as to whether the power of the Shariah Court to validate such marriages is constitutional. The analysis cannot stop at the fact that the Legislative Assemblies of the states enact laws that vest the Shariah Court with the power to validate. Though it is true that the Legislative Assemblies have competence over the legislating of laws for the purposes of the administration of Islam, the discretion to do so is not absolute. It must be appreciated that such discretion is limited to enacting only laws that are constitutional.

As to the question of what is constitutional in the circumstances, several key features of our constitutional framework are material. Firstly, the constitution protects the fundamental liberties of all its citizens. Two of these are highly relevant to the discussion: the right to life, and the right to equal protection of the law.

As to the former, as has been underscored by the Federal Court, the right is not limited to merely concerns over corporeal existence. It extends to the intangible aspects of the right to live one's life, a state of being that hinges on the protection of mental and emotional integrity. As to the latter, it would be wholly repugnant to our system of life to allow for a state of affairs where some vulnerable citizens are protected from physical, mental and emotional abuse while others are not. It is for this reason that while at first glance, some constitutional powers could be read as allowing for violations of these strictures in the interests of some other cause, closer scrutiny would inevitably lead to the conclusion that this could not be the case.

Put another way the power of the State Legislative Assemblies to enact law pertaining to the administration of Islam cannot be extended to validating the enacting of laws that defy the constitution. And yet this appears to be what section 8 of the Kedah Islamic Family Law Enactment 2008 does. It vests the Shariah Court with the power to expose Muslim children to the kind of conduct that is proscribed where non-Muslim children are concerned. In doing so, it discriminates against the former category of children. It permits the undermining of the physical, emotional and mental integrity of Muslim children in a way that is wholly inconsistent with their right to life.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Rabu, 19 Disember 2012

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan