Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- BN will get the Indian swing
- Thank you from a grateful Malaysian from PJ Utara
- The day I got rail mad
- ICJ best forum to settle Sabah, S’wak, S’pore questions
- Mr P Waytha Moorthy’s condition on the 20th day of his Hunger Viratham
- Second Objective of Battle of Gelang Patah – Target 19 of the 26 Parliamentary and 30 of the ...
- Democracy : The Hypocrisy of DAP Cyber Troopers and Supporters
- Court turns a blind eye to justice
- Cabinet Members go cycling-carnival in the face of a looming crisis?
- Stop the Same Old BN Bullshit!
- Untalented TalentCorp
- Victims and villains of Ladah Datu
- Longer campaign period: for message or mischief?
- My political thoughts during the Hunger Viratham Day Eighteen 27th March 2013
- MRT
| Posted: 29 Mar 2013 05:02 PM PDT
It is only with BN that Indians can obtain a larger representation in Parliament and in the Cabinet. With a strong voice in Parliament, Indians have managed to obtain modifications to the novel "Interlok". It is only with a stronger voice in Parliament that one gets things done. If Pakatan comes to power, no amount of pressure exerted by the Indians can amount to anything. It is always one excuse or another. FMT LETTER: From Fred Smith, via e-mail (response in the same format as a news report) By Sillyna Teh If Pakatan Rakyat becomes the federal government, Indians will suffer. That's why Indians are swinging back to BN. COMMENT Knowing that a few Chinese are aiming to vote for Pakatan Rakyat, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has tripled his efforts to woo the Indian voters. And on March 17, he was in Meru, Klang, exhorting the Indians to stay loyal to BN. He has promised the Indians citizenship, scholarship, business entrepreneurship, schools, and jobs. This columnist spoke to a friend in Kapar, Klang, and asked him why he supports MIC and not PKR. He is a surgeon and his name is Natchitran Venu. Below are his reasons why he is for MIC. These are his exact comments: 1 PKR pretends to be pro-rakyat while MIC has always been pro-rakyat who will benefit from its (MIC's) existence. 2 Past record of MIC's service to the community unlike PKR's cronyism and nepotism within three families, 3 I don't subscribe to PKR's loose morals. 4 PKR is a directionless party with self-centred leaders. 5 PKR and its partners -DAP and PAS – have no knowledge of the original struggle for independence. 6 Pakatan is a coalition of convenience and is just counting its last days. Going by his above comments which are sound and logical, it is hoped that many Indians will wake up to the fact that they are doing the right thing by returning to MIC. This is because MIC is in BN and it always has the interest of the community and is supported by 12 other political parties in BN. Rarely do MIC leaders keep quiet when it comes to protecting the interests of the Indian community. The same also goes for MCA leaders. Therefore with 100% support from their BN partners, the voices of MIC leaders are heard, not muzzled. In recent times MIC strategy director S Vell Paari has spoken up in public and president G Palanivel continues to engage more subtly and get things done. MIC's voice During the pre-Merdeka days, the Indians were vocal in fighting for Independence as they were known for being active trade unionists. Over the years, Indian voices have gradually toned down as there were fewer issues, except last year when some Indians demonstrated in front of Parliament and in front of the National Registration Office in Putrajaya in regard to citizenship issues. This issue is not problematic as there are only very many Indians without citizenship since Aug 31, 1957. Compare this to the fact that one million non-citizens received citizenship papers overnight although they were not qualified at the time of Malayan independence and you will know the scale of justice experienced by the Indians. Concerning Indian education, many have done well for themselves although a few have dropped out from school and engage in criminal activities due to lack of opportunities. Many people always say that Malaysia is a land of opportunities and even the less-skilled can obtain a job. This is so true these days as many unskilled or low-skilled people have shunned low-paying jobs that have been taken up by foreign workers. That is the reason why Pakatan wants to become the federal government. They will force the Indians to do the jobs of the foreign workers to gradually cut down the number of foreign workers. It is only with BN that Indians can obtain a larger representation in Parliament and in the Cabinet. With a strong voice in Parliament, Indians have managed to obtain modifications to the novel "Interlok". It is only with a stronger voice in Parliament that one gets things done. If Pakatan comes to power, no amount of pressure exerted by the Indians can amount to anything. It is always one excuse or another. With Pakatan, Indians cannot ask for more and get more benefits. Indians already know that they have been sidelined in the recent Pakatan manifesto launched on Feb 25. That is so true.
|
| Thank you from a grateful Malaysian from PJ Utara Posted: 29 Mar 2013 01:43 PM PDT
All I see are adults in your comment sections just and only complaining, blaming others and etc. (just plain bitching). Which race did not wake up and etc. Just pointing fingers to a particular group of people. What does this do or achieve? Foo Meng Sun YM RPK, I have followed your web site/blog for the last 6 years or more. Also, I had commented only once in 6 years. I just want to email you this observation and you can choose to edit and re-post it if you feel fit to do so. In summary, I want to say Thank you. Your articles had really woke me up on the real issues we face in Malaysia. It had made me be aware how much more work we have to go about it. My email here is to encourage you that all your hard work have not gone to waste. I am appreciative of your hard work. I will comment on what I see and believe that we must be bigger than the politics and politicians. I am not sure if my email/note below makes sense to you. But I will be writing from my point of view only. I have learnt to think why you write and speak in such a manner. You are a true Malaysian. We fellow readers should be thinking more like you and what is good for the country. For one moment just forget about which political party they come from first. I will borrow a famous quote by Abraham Lincoln, the "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth". The Malaysian Governments should be afraid of the (Rakyat) people and serve the (Rakyat) people and not the (Rakyat) people be the slaves to Government. If not the (Rakyat) people will replace you politicians. If they are not working for us the (Rakyat) people we will replace Government with someone who would. I remember once somebody asked you what "you would do as the PM of Malaysia?" - Stop same-race marriage, i.e. Chinese marrying Chinese and so forth. I suppose this will get rid of all the race based politics in Malaysia as I can see that all the political parties are just playing the race cards to justify their means and their actions. All I see are adults in your comment sections just and only complaining, blaming others and etc. (just plain bitching). Which race did not wake up and etc. Just pointing fingers to a particular group of people. What does this do or achieve? Please do not forget 3 fingers are pointing back at you. Do not blame others but blame yourself – me, myself and I (the 3 fingers). If you want to point and blame others, you are also 3 times part of the problem. Sometimes I do not bother to read them at all. I just read your articles and see what the objective of the article is. If you want to change, get involved in the change and do not heckle. Be responsible adults, be the change and make the changes to the systems in the political landscape. I wish the readers would volunteer their time at the grass root level for the parties they believe in. Then they can see how much change they can bring to the system. See the needs of the people first. As time goes along with so much infighting in Malaysia we will not be able to compete in the global markets. The NEP had worked in some ways during the time of inception. I do not believe in giving a benefit which cannot be sustained in the long run or an indefinite period. Over a period of time it will be abused and it will be taken for granted. It has turned into a mind-set/belief, it is their right only. (Classic example Article 153) http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/letterssurat/46193-article-153-is-not-just-for-malays-but-for-every-malaysian But in today's market place (2013), we have created a generation who only live on hand-outs. It does not allow us to be competitive in the world stage. ie Katak di bawah tempurung Q. How are we going to compete against the best in the world? In short, we Malaysia will be the net exporter of talent as the best will study, migrate and work overseas. When Malaysia loses their best talents and we are left with the political power who play the game of divide and rule, we will deplete the natural resources of the country to their private pockets. Thank you for making me realise that every vote counts. We should not be silent and let gerrymandering, postal voters and phantom voters be used as the tools of the political powers to stay in government illegally. FYI, I am in favour of the 3rd force. I have not made up my mind who to vote in PJ Utara and I will come home to vote too from overseas. I will see the candidate first. I am happy with both my current DUN and MP in Petaling Jaya. They serve the people. So take this note/email as positive that all your hard work have not gone to waste. You have changed one Malaysian here and I will do my part to change my family and friends to be objective and know that we need to make a New Malaysian Malaysia (I know I am quoting the 1960's LKY of Singapore). Thank you Yours sincerely, Foo Meng Sun
|
| Posted: 29 Mar 2013 12:52 PM PDT
Jonathan Fernandez I have just been reminded exactly why I don't take the highly inept public transportation service, and the harsh reminder has left me fuming. I was supposed to drive to Seremban but was advised against it because it's the school holidays and there was the threat of a snarl-up. My friend told me not to throw caution to the wind as he had gotten stuck in a bad two-hour crawl to and from Seremban last week. So I decided to give the KTM a shot. I had read how politicians have been so lavish with their praises on the upgrades to the current system. And I was told that it would take 90 minutes, one way. That would only set me back by 30 minutes, if compared with driving hassle free. After weighing the pros and cons, I thought to myself: "Why not?" I opted for the much-commended KTM. I reached the station and then realised the next ride was just three minutes away. "Lucky me," I so wrongfully told myself. To be fair, the train arrived right on time - 2.10pm. Then I got thrown into a state of confusion. We, my wife and I, were about to enter one of the cars until I realised it was a females-only section. So we quickly dashed to the next coach, it was the same. Then we ran to another. It was strike three and we were out. As the doors closed shut, I could feel my blood reaching a boiling point. I then switched my attention to the digital clock mounted a beam at the station. The next ETA was 2.40pm. That meant we would have to wait in this sweltering heat for a good half-hour. KTM stations are airconditioned, mind you. I became a raging bull. For some reason, maybe because she was wearing a red top, I charged at my wife. Somehow blaming her for the situation we were caught in, although this lasted for just a few seconds until I realised the real guilty party. The culprits are actually those who have been riding their high horses and singing praises about their own achievements. The ones who are living in denial and forcing everyone else to be led into their fantasy world of impeccable governance. What really riled me up was this incident could have easily been avoided had the most basic of measures been put into place. For instance, how difficult would it have been to display signs indicating where the female-only coaches and all access cars would stop? And where's the harm in increasing the frequency of the trains? Simple things like these could really save people the trouble. Trust me, frantically searching for the right coach isn't exactly fun, not at all. It makes you feel like a little lost puppy. So, throw me a bone already. On the bright side, I have again been made to realise how lucky I am. In fact, when taking everything into account, I should really use a calculator to count my blessings. But there are so many out there, my countrymen, who have to endure this Third-World system on a daily basis. For them, I hope and pray that a marked improvement be made. If our system is lightyears behind the likes of Singapore's, then admit the flaws and fix them. But don't go around misleading the people and manipulating the rakyat's perception on the country's transportation system, that would just make me rail mad.
|
| ICJ best forum to settle Sabah, S’wak, S’pore questions Posted: 29 Mar 2013 12:39 PM PDT
Joe Fernandez If the Government in Putrajaya is truly honest with itself, it will confront the fact that there's very little sympathy in Sabah and Sarawak on the ground for the security forces apparently battling it out in Lahad Datu. It's 50 years too late. They might as well pack up and go home and instead recall the Sabah Border Scouts and Sarawak Rangers. At the same time, the continuing statements from one Jamalul Kiram III, the Manila press, the Philippines Government and Nur Misuari of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) on Sabah and Sarawak are being viewed in the right perspective. Local political parties in Sabah and Sarawak are convinced, like the descendants of the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate and Nur Misuari that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague is the best venue to settle rival claims to the two Borneo nations. Already, the State Reform Party (Star) led by Jeffrey Kitingan, has reportedly included the ICJ option in their draft Manifesto for the forthcoming 13th General Election. The ICJ is also the best venue to address the fact that Singapore was expelled in 1965 from the Federation of Malaysia by unconstitutional, unlawful and illegal means. It's an open secret that then Malaysian Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman had the doors of Parliament locked until the MPs agreed to the expulsion of the city state from the Federation. The general consensus across both sides of the Sulu Sea is that the Sabah/Sarawak issue will not go away unless there's a final resolution one way or another. In the absence of a final resolution, the security of both Sabah and Sarawak will continue to be compromised and thereby affect investor and consumer confidence.
Singapore Application would be a continuation of Pulau Batu Putih case If Singapore is featured as well at the same time that the cases of Sabah and Sarawak are considered, it would amount to a revisitation of the Pulau Batu Putih hearings which saw the island of a few rocks being awarded to the city state. The Singapore Application could be made by the Government of that island or vide a Class Action Suit commenced by concerned citizens seeking closure on an issue which has bedevilled relations on both sides of the causeway since 1965. The descendants of the nine heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate claim that they have private property rights to Sabah or parts of it. They further claim and/or used to claim that sovereignty over Sabah rests with the Philippines Government. This is a grey area since one Sulu Sultan apparently "transferred" his sultanate's sovereignty over Sabah to the Manila Government by way of a Power of Attorney which has reportedly since expired. Jamalul Kiram III claims to be Sultan of Sulu.
Sulu claimants, Nur Misuari don't have a leg to stand on in Sabah, Sarawak At last count there were some 60 claimants to the Sulu Sultanship, not all being descendants of the nine heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. The nine Plaintiffs viz. Dayang Dayang Piandao Kiram, Princess Tarhata Kiram, Princess Sakinur Kiram, Sultan Ismael Kiram, Sultan Punjungan Kiram, Sitti Rada Kiram, Sitti Jahara Kiram, Sitti Mariam Kiram and Mora Napsa were recognised by C. F. Mackasie, Chief Judge of Borneo, on 13 Dec, 1939 in response to Civil Suit No. 169/39. The Judge ruled that the nine heirs, as the beneficiaries under the will of the late Sultan Jamalul Kiram, who died at Jolo on 7 June 1935, are entitled to collect a total of RM 5,300 per annum from Sabah in perpetuity for having foregone in perpetuity the right to collect tolls along the waterways in eastern Sabah. The reference point was the deed of cession made between the Sultan of Sulu and the predecessors of the British North Borneo Chartered Company on Jan 22, 1878, and under a confirmatory deed dated April 22, 1903. If the descendants of the nine heirs end up at the ICJ in The Hague, there are no prizes for guessing which way the case will go. The Sulu claimants don't have a leg to stand on in Sabah.
Nur Misuari ready to do battle with a battery of lawyers The Sulu Sultans of old were extorting tolls, virtually a criminal activity, from the terrified traffic along the eastern seaboard of Sabah. The Brunei Sultanate meanwhile denies ever handing any part of Sabah, or the right to collect tolls along the waterways, to Sulu. The British North Borneo Chartered Company had no right whatsoever to enter into negotiations on behalf of the people of Sabah with anyone. The entire land area of Sabah, by history, Adat and under Native Customary Rights (NCR), belonged to the Orang Asal (Original People) of the Territory. The sovereignty of Sabah rests with the people of Sabah. This sovereignty was re- affirmed on 31 Aug, 1963 when the state won independence from Britain which had occupied the state after World War II. Therein the matter lies. The sovereignty of Sabah had never been transferred to Brunei, Sulu, the Philippines, Britain or Malaya, masquerading as Malaysia since 16 Sept, 1963. Likewise, Sarawak's independence was re-affirmed on 22 July, 1963 when the British left. Sarawak had been an independent country for over 150 years under its own Rajah until World War II intervened and the Japanese occupied the country. The war over, the British coerced the Rajah to hand over his country to the Colonial Office in London because they had plans to form the Federation of Malaysia with Sarawak as one of the constituent elements. British occupation of Sarawak was illegal and an act of piracy. Nur Misuari claims that Sarawak had belonged to his family, from the time of his great great grandfather. He claims that he has the services of the best lawyers at his disposal to make his case at The Hague.
Cobbold Commission a scam by British and Malayan Governments The outcome of any hearing at The Hague will be a forgone conclusion: the Sulu and Nur Misuari petitions will be struck out without even a hearing; the Court will rule that the people of Sabah and Sarawak never agreed to be in Malaysia; and Singapore will hear that its expulsion from Malaysia in 1965 was unconstitutional, unlawful and illegal. The people of Sabah and Sarawak must be given the right to intervene in the Applications at the ICJ which will determine their fate. There's nothing to prevent the people of Sulu and the southern Philippines from throwing in an Application that the Philippines Government has no business to occupy their traditional Muslim homeland. The people of Singapore decided in a Yes or Note Vote in 1962 to the idea of independence through merger with Malaya via the Federation of Malaysia. The inclusion of Orang Asal-majority Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei was to facilitate the merger between Chinese-majority Singapore and non-Malay majority Malaya. Brunei stayed out of Malaysia at the 11th hour after an armed rebellion in the Sultanate against the idea of Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei being in Malaysia. No Referendum was held in Sabah, Sarawak, Brunei and Malaya on Malaysia. The Kelantan Government even took the matter to Court. A sampling of community leaders conducted by the Cobbold Commission found that only the Suluk and Bajau community leaders, perhaps sensing some personal benefits for themselves as proxies of Muslim-controlled Kuala Lumpur, agreed with the idea of Malaysia.
Revolution another possibility to finish off Sulu, Nur Misuari, Manila Orang Asal community leaders wanted a period of independence before looking at the idea of Malaysia again. They asked for further and better particulars on Malaysia to be used as the reference point for a future re-visitation of the Malaysia Concept. They were not provided these further and better particulars. The Chinese community leaders, keeping the eventual fate of the resources and revenues of the country uppermost in mind, totally rejected the idea of Malaysia. They were not wrong. Putrajaya today carts away all the resources and revenues of Sabah and Sarawak to Malaya and very little of it comes back to the two Borneo. The Cobbold Commission disingenuously declared that two third of the people in Sabah i.e. Suluk/Bajau + Orang Asal supported Malaysia. The Commission made the same declaration in Sarawak where only the Sarawak Malay community leaders supported the idea of Malaysia for self-serving reasons. When Singapore was expelled from Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak – the facilitators of the merger between Singapore and Malaya – were not allowed to exit the Federation. This is a crucial point which will feature at the ICJ. Security became an afterthought. But as the continuing influx of illegal immigrants into Sabah and Sarawak, and the Lahad Datu intrusion, has proven, there has been no security for both Borneo nations in Malaysia. ESSCOM (Eastern Sabah Security Command) and ESSZONE (Eastern Sabah Safety Zone) comes too little too late, after 50 years. In the unlikely event that the ICJ rules in favour of the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate and Nur Misuari, it would be the sacred duty of Sabahans and Sarawakians to launch a Revolution and decapitate all the claimants to their countries from the Philippines. This would bury the issue once and for all and shut up the Manila press and the Philippines Government. Singapore's re-admission to Malaysia, if it materialises, would not persuade Sabah and Sarawak to join the Federation as well. The people would want Malaya even quicker out Sabah and Sarawak. It would be the end of a long drawn out nightmare.
Joe Fernandez is a graduate mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.
|
| Mr P Waytha Moorthy’s condition on the 20th day of his Hunger Viratham Posted: 29 Mar 2013 12:25 PM PDT
Mr Waytha has been unable to continue with his writings as his condition has considerably deteriorated. Ganesan Mr Waytha Moorthy's condition continues to deteriorate. The medical report from yesterday shows serious deterioration in his bodily functions. Quoting from the report: "It is now well into the 19th day of Mr Waythamoorthy's hunger Viratham strike. He appears very weak and disorientated, his blood pressure is erratic. There have also been several episodes of fainting the last few days. His urine sample also indicates a very high level of circulating ketones as well as hematuria. He also suffers from Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension as well as Right Ventricular Tachycardia Dysplasia. A team of doctors, including myself, have been making periodic visits to oversee his general well being. Occasionally IV Drips were given." The Doctors are recommending, "It is of our professional opinion that Mr Waytha should stop his fast immediately and seek proper medical attention at a hospital set up to prevent any further damage to his internal organs." The political leaders of both the BN and Pakatan seem not to be worried about any adverse outcome on Mr Waytha Moorthy. They have it within them to review the proposals in the blueprint which are the focus of the Hunger Viratham and to accommodate them into national policy. The proposals in the blueprint are entirely justifiable, but these leaders look askance. This, Hindraf believes is the inevitable fate of the minorities in the country. Their rights and interests will forever be compromised. When they speak up, they will be beaten down as being sectarian or racist. All kinds of arguments will be put forward why their requests are "terlalu". Mr Waytha Moorthy continues his Hunger Viratham despite these developments..
|
| Second Objective of Battle of Gelang Patah – Target 19 of the 26 Parliamentary and 30 of the ... Posted: 29 Mar 2013 12:19 PM PDT
The Battle of Gelang Patah is not so much about the victory or defeat of an individual or the gains or losses of individual parties, but whether Johore can become a "kingmaker" in the 13GE to spark a political tsunami in the country from the south and across the South China Sea. Lim Kit Siang Yesterday, when visiting Taman Damai Jaya in Gelang Patah, I spoke about the meaning of the Battle of Gelang Patah. I stressed that the Battle of Gelang Patah is not my personal battle on whether I can be re-elected to Parliament. If this is the case, I should stay back in Ipoh Timor which I had won with a majority of over 21,000 votes in the 2008 general elections, instead of going for a very high-risk contest in Gelang Patah which was won by the MCA/BN candidate with a majority of over 8,000 votes in 2008 and a humoungous majority of 31,666 votes in 2004. In Gelang Patah I could very well lose but I am prepared to take the risk. This is because the Battle of Gelang Patah is not so much about the victory or defeat of an individual or the gains or losses of individual parties, but whether Johore can become a "kingmaker" in the 13GE to spark a political tsunami in the country from the south and across the South China Sea to effect the first peaceful and democratic transfer of power from Barisan Nasional to Pakatan Rakyat. The First Objective of the Battle of Gelang Patah is in South Johore – to target the six Parliamentary and 13 State Assembly seats in South Johore to pave the way for Pakatan Rakyat to Putrajaya in the 13th General Elections. Johor Baru has three parliamentary and six state assembly seats, namely Johor Bahru, Pasir Gudang and Tebrau parliamentary seats and Stulang, Tanjong Puteri, Johore Jaya, Permas, Puteri Wangsa and Tiram State Assembly seats. None of these Johor Baru parliamentary and state assembly seats had been won by the Opposition, which is against the national trend where parliamentary and/or state assembly seats in the capital of most of the states are strongholds of the Opposition, whether Malacca, Negri Sembilan, Selangor, Perak, Kedah, Penang, Kelantan, Terengganu or the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur where the Pakatan Rakyat swept 10 of the 11 parliamentary seats in 2008. There are three other parliamentary seats and seven state assembly seats in the South Johore region, namely Gelang Patah, Kulai and Pulai with seven state assembly seats, namely Skudai, Nusajaya, Pengkalan Rinting, Kempas, Senai, Bukit Batu and Bukit Permai. Objective One of the Battle of Gelang Patah is to win for Pakatan Rakyat the six Parliamentary and 13 State Assembly seats in South Johore, for if we cannot achieve this objective, the chances of Pakatan Rakyat winning the 13GE to form the new Federal Government would be a very slim one. The Second Objective of the Battle of Gelang Patah is the challenge to Pakatan Rakyat on a state-wide basis in Johore in 13GE. If we can create a political tsunami to set off from Johore, then Pakatan Rakyat should aim to target 19 Parliamentary seats and 30 State Assembly seats. The 19 Parliamentary seats are the 12 first-tier constituencies of Johor Bahru, Pasir Gudang, Tebrau, Pulai, Gelang Patah, Kulai, Tanjong Piai, Kluang, Batu Pahat, Bakri, Labis and Segamat and the seven second-tier seats of Sekijang, Ledang, Muar, Ayer Hitam, Sri Gading, Simpang Rengam and Sembrong. For the 30 State Assembly seats in Johor, the Battle of Gelang Patah should target the 23 first-tier seats of Stulang, Tanjong Puteri, Johor Jaya, Permas, Puteri Wangsa, Tiram, Pengkalan Rinting, Kempas, Skudai, Nusajaya, Senai, Bukit Batu, Bukit Permai, Pekan Nenas, Mengkibol, Penggaram, Bentayam, Sungai Abong, Bekok and Jementah. There are seven second-tier winnable seats, viz: Mahkota, Layang-Layang, Parit Yaani, Maharani, Gambir, Tenang and Pemanis. The future not only of Johore but also Malaysia is in the hands of the voters of Johore in the 13GE.
|
| Democracy : The Hypocrisy of DAP Cyber Troopers and Supporters Posted: 28 Mar 2013 12:05 PM PDT
Is there any benchmark that whoever protested against Barisan Nasional then they are Heroes and whoever that protested against DAP will be shamed? Shen Yee Aun On 22 March 2013, I led a peaceful rally to submit a memorandum to the Chief Minister of Penang and the Secretary General of DAP. Since then I had been heavily ambushed by all the DAP troopers and supporters in the internet. What shocked me is that most of their comments is actually slapping at their own face. |
| Court turns a blind eye to justice Posted: 28 Mar 2013 11:58 AM PDT
It was very disappointing that Judge Vernon Ong said that the Court was bound by Section 9A of the Elections Act 1958 and cannot review a gazetted electoral roll, literally throwing to the wind the conventional wisdom that "where there is a malady the Court will provide a remedy" – even if it has to use its inherent powers. P Ramakrishnan, Aliran executive committee member Malaysians were rudely shocked to learn that the High Court in Shah Alam put itself in a straitjacket and refused to see the glaring injustice that was clearly highlighted by Klang MP Charles Santiago in a suit that was decided on 14 March 2013. Charles Santiago (right) at the High Court. The DPP, on behalf of the EC, argued that "Section 9(a) of the Elections Act 1958 stipulates that once the electoral roll has been certified and gazetted, it is final and binding". Mr Santiago wanted the Court to review the principal and supplementary electoral rolls for his parliamentary constituency. It was very disappointing that Judge Vernon Ong said that the Court was bound by Section 9A of the Elections Act 1958 and cannot review a gazetted electoral roll, literally throwing to the wind the conventional wisdom that "where there is a malady the Court will provide a remedy" – even if it has to use its inherent powers. The Judge further noted that the Court could not compel the Election Commission (EC) to respond to the queries of the MP as there was no provision in the Act for it to do so. While it may be true that there is no such provision, what is far more important is whether there is specifically any provision in the Act prohibiting the EC from responding? Why was this logical point entirely overlooked by the Court? If the Court was the bastion of justice as provided by the inherent powers of providing a remedy for a malady, it would have been the natural consequence to fall back on this logic. But surprisingly, this was not the case. While it may be true that the Court was bound by Section 9A of the Election Act, shouldn't the Court invoking its overview functions have also looked into the legality of this section? Is it constitutional? Is it constitutional to perpetuate a wrong in spite of fraud, probably even of a criminal nature, that were clearly established by Mr Santiago? Section 9A was controversially introduced to the Elections Act 1958, after the High Court in Kota Kinabalu declared the Likas by-election of 2001 null and void. The Kota Kinabalu High Court nullified the Likas by-election because there were discrepancies in the electoral roll. Section 9A states: "After an electoral roll has been certified or re-certified, as the case may be, and notice of the certification or re-certification has been published in the Gazette as prescribed by regulations made under this Act, the electoral roll shall be deemed to be final and binding and shall not be questioned or appealed against in, or reviewed, quashed or set aside by, any court." This is what lawyers call a "privative" or "ouster" clause. The effect is to prevent any Court from having a review of the matter at hand. In this particular case, it has to do with the electoral rolls. Courts in many common law jurisdictions have always viewed such privative or ouster clauses in a very dim light as such clauses effectively prevent the judiciary from discharging its independent role under the doctrine of the Separation of Powers as arbiters of rights and duties vis-à-vis citizens and the State. In our view, this "deeming" section was introduced so that the Barisan Nasional can win elections through phantom voters and by cheating. By placing this fraud beyond the purview of the Courts, the BN government has legitimised winning of elections through fraudulent means. The injustice is so obvious and glaring. How could a Court not address this issue even in passing? He had pointed out the case of one Premila Menon, who resides in Dublin, Ireland. She had not registered as a voter; yet her name appears on the electoral roll. He had further produced a Statutory Declaration from a Pandamaran resident stating that he is the only voter registered at his address but another 60 voters of other races are mysteriously listed under this same address. These two cases clearly establish the irrefutable fact that the electoral roll is padded with dubious voters. The electoral roll is not clean and yet these dubious voters can vote in the coming 13th General Election. In the case of Premila Menon, someone else can assume her identity and vote in the election. This was how the BN candidate in the Likas by-election got elected. Even though the Court said it was helpless because of the seemingly prohibitive Section 9A, surely it could have pointed out the injustice perpetuated by this section. It could have taken judicial notice that there are phantom voters on the roll. The Court cannot ignore this gross injustice and turn a blind eye to this grievous wrong as the legitimacy or otherwise of the popular mandate is intrinsically bound to the sanctity or otherwise of the roll per se. To dismiss Mr Santiago's justified application as frivolous and vexatious is to add salt to the injury. It is a travesty of justice. Is this a forerunner of things to come post-election? Even if the existence of unaccountable dubious voters on the electoral roll (that may contribute to a BN victory in certain seats) is subsequently established beyond reasonable doubt, the Pakatan Rakyat cannot challenge this. It cannot win because cheating has been legitimised. The BN will win the case and the PR will lose its challenge in any court of law in Malaysia.
|
| Cabinet Members go cycling-carnival in the face of a looming crisis? Posted: 27 Mar 2013 02:16 PM PDT
What would it take 10,000 or more people to drive to Putrajaya with their bicycles strapped to the rooftops? What would it cost the government (i.e. the rakyat's money) to even assure that there would free bicycles to spare? J. D. Lovrenciear The planned 1Malaysia Patriotic Cycling program at Putrajaya on April 3, 3.00 pm, 2013 which hopes to see "more than 10,000" rakyat and all Cabinet Members cycling around a 12 kilometre loop to "promote 1Malaysia spirit" and "appreciate the scenic views" probably should qualify for the 'Believe-it-or-not' series. Yes, can you believe it?! When the nation is gripped with a general election fever, battling the unending threats, uneasiness and even reported and witnessed incidents of physical harm, our Honourable Cabinet Members see great wisdom in a mammoth cycling public relations stunt. Who is the genius behind this public relations idea? Do we not have a single member within Cabinet to see through this flawed strategy - or rather, gimmick? When a nation is pregnant with the labour of going to the polls in what already is widely accepted as the 'mother of all battles' since 1957 and with the rakyat pendulum-ing between despair and hope that is punctuated with bells of alarm, we have a carnival of sorts to gocycling. Whom are we hoodwinking? Or is this the season forHoudini acts? In the first place, what would it take 10,000 or more people to drive to Putrajaya with their bicycles strapped to the rooftops? What would it cost the government (i.e. the rakyat's money) to even assure that there would free bicycles to spare? Mind you, given the sweltering heat and sudden downpours these days, what would it take from the participants to accomplish this seemingly brilliant solidarity showmanship? Would it not give more dividends to the BN politicians if the Cabinet Members left the comforts of their cosy abodes, donned working jeans, rolled up their sleeves and walked the many Tamans and busy marketplace across the nation to be with the rakyat and to appreciate the concerns, despairs and hopes of the rakyat? Take a leaf from the books of strategic public relations, will you Sirs: In the face of threatening crises - (i.e. as in this case of a 'if we loose...' as preached by BN and drummed by Tun Dr. Mahathir, time and time again), the people do not go to the mountain. The mountain (i.e. Cabinet) goes to the people. Remember that episode beamed across the globe on George Bush when the horrific Katerina hit New Orleans? The President of the United States of America went to the grounds in the stark face of a national crisis, in jeans and rolled-up sleeves with the wind blowing into his face ruffling his ever combed hair as he reached out to a black citizen huddling her child. That won kudos and reinstated hope and trust in the face of a crisis. It returned patriotism to 'One USA'! Please Members of our Cabinet, think! Patriotism is not secured through cycling sojourns and scenic views. Party feelings and goodies bags do not enable patriotism. On the contrary, patriotism is chiseled out from trust-creation, empathy-demonstration and responding to going concerns with convincing capacity-building. Address the concerns of the rakyat; not create make-believe carnivals to show a might of power. Remember public relations is not about pulling stunts orrazzmatazz showmanship. It is about strategic trust building anchored on the ability to identify issues clearly and provide remedies through transparent and accountable communication and communicative behaviour. Does your glorified mass gathering of cycling showmanship therefore address the looming crisis affecting BN? And by the way, how much did it cost the rakyat to pay for this seemingly brilliant public relations event and your consultants?
|
| Stop the Same Old BN Bullshit! Posted: 27 Mar 2013 02:13 PM PDT
With the former opposition PR coalition in power now in the state of Penang, we are quickly witnessing the use of the same demagogy that we have been accustomed to from the BN all these years.
Dr Kua Kia Soong, SUARAM Adviser
For years now, concerned Malaysian NGOs have been performing a service to the nation by raising concerns or criticising the BN government for projects that are destructive to the environment, socially disruptive or blatantly not in the interests of the people. Often, we have had to put up with the taunts of BN leaders that Malaysian NGOs are either foreign agents or supporters of the opposition. The recent BN harassment of SUARAM for pursuing the Scorpene scandal in France is probably the most thoroughly absurd episode in Malaysian history of NGO bashing.
This line of reasoning – that NGOs are partisan - is clearly "bullshit", or as I put it in my 1986 publication, "Malaysian Political Myths", "taurus turdo". My old friend, the late K. Das in the Foreword to my 1989 title, "445 Days behind the Wire", called it "bovine excreta". They all amount to the same malodorous heap of cheap demagoguery intended to appeal to popular prejudice but surprisingly, some people only see one side of the dung heap. Others who live in the middle of it simply can't see it!
With the former opposition PR coalition in power now in the state of Penang, we are quickly witnessing the use of the same demagogy that we have been accustomed to from the BN all these years. Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has recently accused one of the most consistent and responsible NGOs in Malaysia, namely, the Consumer Association of Penang, of being selective in its criticisms and – worse still - of being aligned to the BN. Lim had called on the people to be wary of "hostile and dangerous NGOs that were now adopting the BN line" to oppose the state's RM6.3 billion tunnel and four-stage integrated road system.
True NGOs work for the people
Anyone who has followed the investigative journalism of Utusan Konsumer all these years will know that CAP and its sister organisation, Sahabat Alam Malaysia, have been the most tireless and consistent torch bearers of consumer and environment protection in Malaysia for decades now. No other organisation in Malaysia – political party or NGO – can claim that distinction.
With both coalitions competing to see which can attract more foreign investments and mega projects, Malaysian NGOs will have to be even more vigilant to protect the interests of the people, the environment and taxpayers. Whichever coalition is in power in Malaysia, they will be subject to the same level of monitoring by NGOs to ensure that they adhere to the norms of good governance.
You can expect concerned and vigilant Malaysian NGOs to be here for the long haul, ready to point out any let-down by BN or PR.
Real democracy will never be attained merely through periodic general elections and relying on parliament alone. To make democracy work, the people must step up their demands from outside Parliament. NGOs play a crucial role in articulating the interests of the people against the marauding capitalists who are bankrolling both coalitions. Democracy is more than simply voting once in five years for as the saying goes, "If voting in the general elections ever changed anything, they would have abolished it by now!"
Politicians would be wise to steer clear of demagoguery in their political ambitions by appealing to popular prejudices rather than by using rational argument. Equating the peoples' opposition to the Penang tunnel and highways projects to "adopting the BN line" is the height of dishonesty and pure bullshit.
|
| Posted: 27 Mar 2013 02:04 PM PDT
TalentCorp was initiated by the government and as part of the government they must be aware that employees in the public sector are dominated by one group of people. It would be quite hypocritical for them to preach about diversity in the workplace when they too practice selective hiring. Fairuz Ahmad In early 2011, the Malaysian government took a bold step by setting up TalentCorp, an agency designed to streamline the performance of the Malaysian labour market. One of the primary goals of Talentcorp is to attract Malaysians working abroad to return home, thereby reversing the outflow of highly skilled Malaysian professionals to foreign countries—a phenomenon proverbially known as 'brain drain'. As a Malaysian working in the Middle East for many years, I am one of the candidates with whom Talentcorp actively seeks to engage. I read on the internet about the results achieved by TalentCorp. In its first 12 months of operation, TalentCorp claimed to have attracted 680 professional Malaysians to re-locate to Malaysia. This is a small number considering the estimated 700,000 Malaysians currently residing abroad. In its second year, TalentCorp managed to encourage 923 highly skilled Malaysians to return home. This year, TalentCorp targets 1000 Malaysians to return to Malaysia. Two years since its inception, it is quite obvious the performance of TalentCorp has barely improved. Recently, members of the Malaysian expatriate community in the Middle East were invited to attend networking events organized by TalentCorp. These events were held in several major Middle Eastern cities--namely Doha, Manama, Muscat, Abu Dhabi and Dubai. Since they were planning to drop by my city, Doha, I saw my chance to gain further insight into TalentCorp. I was not sure what to expect from the networking event, but I had a feeling it would be rather grand as the venue chosen was the meeting hall of a luxury hotel. The event started with a presentation by Puan Sherene Azura Azli, general manager of TalentCorp (CEO Johan Merican was curiously absent). She spoke rather optimistically about TalentCorp's ambitions to improve the performance of the Malaysian labour market. Puan Sherene clarified to the packed audience that Malaysia's goal of becoming a high income nation was impeded by the talent and skills deficit. Senior representatives from the petroleum and healthcare industries also gave presentations to drive home the point that in order for Malaysian corporations to succeed, individuals with skill and influence are needed to participate in the local job market, especially in the private sector. Overall I was impressed with the presentations and the professional nature of the event. However, there was no formal discussion about the realities of the Malaysian job market. There was no presentation about the systemic discrimination among employers, the disparity in salaries and the difficulty among fresh local graduates to gain employment. Puan Sherene alluded to the issue of disparities within the labour market when she gave the statistic that 67% of local university graduates are women, of which only a small fraction make it to managerial positions. She did not further elaborate the point she wanted to make. I could only assume that she wanted to keep to the script, which was to portray Malaysia with optimism rather than negativity. When the event was opened up to the floor for questions and answers, no one raised any query. Apparently, the audience was keener on the Malaysian style buffet than raising issues about discriminatory hiring practices and wage unfairness. Challenges that face the Malaysian labour market was not a topic that people wanted to discuss openly. Personal interactions were different. I witnessed one assertive guest approach TalentCorp senior manager, Adele Lim, to highlight the issue of quotas, affirmative action and unfairness in hiring practices. He remarked that foreign expatriates have been critical of Malaysian talent, claiming they lack the skills necessary to succeed in technical roles. He spoke specifically about the oil and gas sector, which he claimed is dominated by engineers from India. Adele denied that there was bias. She opened the conversation to a HR manager from an oil and gas company to get his feedback. To her dismay, he concurred that there is bias in the Malaysian oil and gas sector that allows certain foreign nationals to dominate various technical sectors. The harsh and competitive nature of globalization has allowed such a phenomenon to exist. Although I am veteran in my industry, I still remember the difficulties of trying to look for a job in the late 80's. Even today during a period of stable economic growth, there are many university graduates who find it difficult to find jobs in Malaysia. It has been said that Malaysian universities churn out nearly 20,000 engineering graduates a year. But the perception among hiring executives is that they are not sufficiently competent.There could be many reasons why the private sector has been slow to absorb the local graduates, many of whom come from the Malay ethnic community. But the prevailing belief among many experts is that there is an element of bias. A study conducted by two Malaysian professors, Dr Lee Hwok Aun and Dr Muhammed Abdul Khalid, discovered that Chinese graduates are far more likely to get call backs for interviews than their Malay counterparts with similar curriculum vitae. TalentCorp, with its lofty goals to help Malaysia's labour market, should encourage the government to take action on this issue. After all, this is an easy matter to solve-- job agencies and HR managers should be encouraged to hide the names of applicants before submitting résumés to prospective interviewers. Accordingly, companies should be asked to create interviews that are standardized, so that the same set of questions are asked to all candidates, regardless of ethnicity, gender, age or other discriminatory criteria. I am not naive to think that TalentCorp has all the answers. TalentCorp was initiated by the government and as part of the government they must be aware that employees in the public sector are dominated by one group of people. It would be quite hypocritical for them to preach about diversity in the workplace when they too practice selective hiring. I am also sure government workers are fully aware of the wage differences between the private and public sectors. Another topic TalentCorp failed to touch upon during the event was the issue of salaries. An economic census conducted in 2011 showed employees in the mining sector were among the highest paid at RM7,772 per month on average, while the average monthly wages in the services and manufacturing sectors were RM2,126 and RM2,040 respectively. This disparity in salaries drives many people in less lucrative economic sectors to seek employment outside Malaysia, where salaries are much higher. TalentCorp is squandering the opportunity to improve the Malaysian job market. Their goal seems to be about appeasing the private sector while striving to reach an arbitrary key performance indicator (KPI) set by the government. They do not seek to challenge the private or public sectors. This was apparent in the networking event. TalentCorp should not try to promote their objectives to individuals working in the Middle East or Western countries, but to the Malaysian employers themselves. They have to change the misguided perceptions held by the employers and encourage them to be more proactive in their search for the right talent. It should be TalentCorp's goal to minimize or eliminate the artificial barriers created by the private sector. The incentives given to foreign nationals with skills should be extended to all eligible Malaysians, with added bonuses, as they are more likely to re-invest their money into the local economy. Likewise, the public sector should be asked to actively participate in TalentCorp's future networking events. They should send the message to Malaysians all over the world that they too can contribute to the government . The message should be about social and civic responsibility ahead of financial reward. If Puan Sherene could wonder why more women are not occupying senior management positions, she should be challenging the employers and not raise this issue as a rhetorical question to a disaffected audience. New ideas need about how to promote greater participation of women at all levels to be introduced and shared with the public. For example in Norway, a quota system was introduced that requires 40% of corporate board members to be women. Puan Sherene should ask her employer, the government, if Malaysia needs to introduce similar ideas to promote fairness at the workplace. The issue of foreign nationals preventing the rise of local Malaysian talent to senior levels is another matter that needs to be addressed by TalentCorp. They should not deny the existence of such a phenomenon. They should try to tackle it by asking the government to put stricter conditions on visas issued to foreign nationals. They should also seek to have foreign nationals undergo yearly assessments that prove they are contributing to Malaysia's economic growth and transfer of technology. These assessments should be audited by third party agencies, so that the companies do not try to circumvent the issue. Most companies hire primarily based on financial considerations. If they cannot gain the productivity from the Malaysian workers, they tend to place the blame squarely on the employees. It is about time those in management positions take the responsibility, and not judge the employees too harshly. I think in the case of TalentCorp, maybe it is time for their managers to be judged.
|
| Victims and villains of Ladah Datu Posted: 27 Mar 2013 12:32 PM PDT
How come we are unable to nab one chieftain with our twelve battalions, i.e. some 7,000 of our security personnel, not to mention all the artillery we unleashed? J. D. Lovrenciear The incident of the Sulu Sultanate attacks in Sabah and our duty-bound security counter-attacks has brought to the fore a barrage of very serious allegations and issues that demand immediate reflection, investigation and more importantly the courage, integrity and determination to put national security, national sovereignty and citizens' sanctity above all else. Political party strategies, priorities and profiteering thereof are a definite act of treason against nation, King and citizens. Just take a re-cap of the many statements, allegations, speculations, and all kinds of shady finger-pointing going on between and by the politicians, and you cannot help feeling that there is massive iceberg out there. In the fist place, why blame or even insinuate that 'opposition' may be behind the support for the Sulu Sultanate? Why is the media not contributing to aspired harmonization but seem so engrossed in creating alarm after alarm? Are the media being exploited for and by self-serving interests? And then what about news that burst out detailing about an UMNO-instrument who was into discussions with the Sulu Sultanate? Do the UMNO leaders not have that same sense of serious concern for nation, King and rakyat to immediately investigate and expose the truth without prejudice or favor? Lest we forget, what was the Sulu Sulatnate doing as an important VVIP at UMNO's own Assembly? Now that this very person has turned the tides on Malaysia, does UMNO – and even its component comrades of BN, not sense that investigations, accountability and explanations need to be forthcoming without any shades or colors? Or how about the allegations surrounding the Libya arms that reached the shores of Muslim militants in Philippines via Malaysia's Sabah? Was this another of our classic 'tutup satu mata' stance? Do we also not get immediate answers to this? Next, in case we overlooked, what was a former Prime Minister – now common citizen and retired out of official power doing in Lahad Datu? He was flashed all over the media meeting with our soldiers who are answerable to the General and King. What gives him excess to otherwise security matters that are privy only to those in the right office? The commoner-citizens are not wrong is showing so much of apprehension and concern over the Lahad Datu incident that now appears even more mysterious. Yet the politicians preach that rakyat must not politicize the situation. What kind of threatening is this? Does it not smell akin to a gangster - where the strong and powerful shut up the weak (for lack of 'inside information') and unarmed (for lack of positions in office)? Do citizens not have a right to know what is right and wrong? Do citizens who will finally fight the war against any intrusion and attack on their sovereign status and safety cordons not have a right to demand that politicking has no place in this Lahad Datu incident? The rakyat are reading outside of the main stream media loop these days. One such report is that which appeared in the Manila Standard Today (MST). So we ask in defense of our armed personnel and their grieving families, how come we are unable to nab one chieftain with our twelve battalions, i.e. some 7,000 of our security personnel, not to mention all the artillery we unleashed? We managed to kill 63 of the 200 band of armed 'terrorists' but lost ten of our loyal, brave men in uniform. That is a high price to pay when you only had foot-intruders running ambush in the plantation (not jungles, mind you) against our battalions armed to the teeth. Come to think of it there have been far too many incidents in Malaysia these past many years where the citizens are merely left to speculate for the lack of transparent accountability. They are left high and dry in the absence of believable justifications. It ranges from tolls and highways, mega projects and sand selling, rail and island cessation – name it we have had it all didn't we? That was the high chaparral days of the OSA – Official Secrets Act, mate! We do not have to go far – even till this date and hour we cannot speak and agree openly about the real truth of the May 13, 1969 horrors. There is so much of politicking. Likewise for the Altantuya grisly murder – we are left with a judgment verdict which concluded that although motive is essential, it is not necessary for this case. Now are these not of national interest to concern the caring citizen? With the media pledging allegiance to either political parties or to individuals within the corridors of power, it is not helping situations either. With some media playing safe owing to political party allegiance although they would be quick to cloak their reporting with the label of 'self censorship' is just as bad doing damage to nation building. So much so we have degenerated into a deep well of darkness where we cannot see the distinct difference between political parties and government. This then is the malaise – the very cancer that is making our borders vulnerable and our future fragile. Perhaps there is some food for thought here in what the Philippine Defence Secretary, Voltaire Gazmin is reported to have said: "when you are hunting fish, the water becomes your enemy."
|
| Longer campaign period: for message or mischief? Posted: 27 Mar 2013 12:21 PM PDT
The call for a longer election campaign period is a double-edged sword. It can have both favourable and unfavourable consequences. But if the latter outweigh the former, there is merit in keeping the campaign period to the barest minimum. James Ang So far, the call for a 21-day campaign period was made by Pakatan Rakyat which claimed it needed more time to reach the voters. Is this a reasonable request? The campaign period permitted by law runs from the date of nomination day until polling day. The Election Commission (EC) has already said it will increase the previous period of seven days to 10 days for GE-13. So, is 10 days sufficient time? There is only a thin line between a campaign period and a pre-campaign period. In law, a "campaign period", means the period during which any candidate or his election agent is allowed to hold election campaign in the candidate's constituency. This includes, among others, the right to print posters, open offices, hold public rallies, meetings and displays; and distribute election campaign material. These activities are restricted to a candidate's constituency. The pre-campaign period extends from the end of one general election to the start of the next. There is even a thinner line between an "election campaign" and "electioneering". Electioneering is defined as activities that politicians and their supporters carry out in order to persuade people to vote for them or their political party, like making speeches and visiting voters. Given this blurred distinction, it is true to say that political parties have in fact been campaigning from the last general election in 2008. It is common knowledge that some political parties have been campaigning long and hard over the last five years. If during this period, they have not been able to get their message across to the voters, they probably never will. Leaders of these parties have held political ceramahs, held politically-motivated public rallies, used the compliant social media, and have even actively campaigned overseas. It was not too long ago when erstwhile election observers came-a-knocking from the Muslim community in the US. The aborted attempt by an independent senator from Down Under is another case in point. On top of all these, the Opposition parties are also demanding fair airtime on government radio and television. The Information Ministry has said this would be allowed. So, wherefore is the need for a longer campaign period? Truth be told, fatigue is already setting in among the people who wish to see the back end of elections so that they can go back to living life without the hype and hyperbole normally associated with excessive politicking. There are media reports of people, especially the younger voters, who say they are put off by the incessant political bickering so much so that they are wondering whether or not they should vote at all. Businesses are also being affected. Hotels claim that polls uncertainty has impacted their business. Room reservations, and seminar and wedding bookings have suffered since people are adopting a wait-and-see attitude. By now, most people have already made up their minds whom to vote for. They know which political parties have the capacity to deliver and are aware of their track record. They also know which politicians make excessive claims and promise the unattainable Utopia. A few are still undecided, and it only needs a brief period to convince them one way or another. So, a 10-day campaign period is sufficient to put the finishing touches to what has been a protracted campaign. However, as I said, if after five years the parties have not got their act together and still have not got their message across, they are probably not yet ready to govern. But, if an extension of the campaign period is being sought with mischievous intent, then no period will be long enough....
|
| My political thoughts during the Hunger Viratham Day Eighteen 27th March 2013 Posted: 27 Mar 2013 12:18 PM PDT
Today there is still a lot of residual anger against UMNO among the Indian poor. Pakatan is capitalizing on this and is thinking that the votes of the Indian poor have nowhere else to go but to them. This thinking shows in the way they have treated the Indian electorate recently in their Election Manifesto flip flops.
P. Waythamoorthy This is the eighteenth day of my Hunger Viratham.
In this tenth part I will be penning my thoughts on the option of strategic abstention by the Indian poor in the forthcoming elections.
PART 10
Strategic Abstention as an option for the Indian poor in the forthcoming General Elections.
Today there is still a lot of residual anger against UMNO among the Indian poor. Pakatan is capitalizing on this and is thinking that the votes of the Indian poor have nowhere else to go but to them. This thinking shows in the way they have treated the Indian electorate recently in their Election Manifesto flip flops.
Pakatan believes they should get a majority of the Indian votes – not maybe as high as the last time, but still the majority. Barisan for their part believe they can buy the Indian vote with the goodies they have planned. Hindraf's analysis however is this – the urban educated Indians will largely go for Pakatan. Add to that the beneficiaries from the last election who have personally gained and all those who potentially stand to gain in the forthcoming elections. These votes are with Pakatan. Then on the Barisan side, the MIC machinery is preparing to reach out to the local warlords and through them to the poorest among the Indians. They will be throwing a lot of money in the process in doing this
In our estimate all of that will all probably account for 50% of the Indian voters. You can argue about the accuracy of that number, but it surely is in that ballpark give and take a few percentage points.
The leverage for the Indian poor does not come from those foregone votes. When we say leverage, we mean leverage as in getting the politicians to commit to the specific bottom up plans laid out in our 5 year Blueprint for the Indian poor. This is the key point on which the decision as to where the remaining Indian votes will go will be determined. Hindraf will make sure of that. This is the key point that BN and PR should focus on.
We have a few more days left for BN and PR to take their respective positions, either explicitly or by default on the question of the endorsement of the 5 year Blueprint. If they remain silent or ambivalent then we in Hindraf will project it to mean they do not support a program of comprehensive and permanent correction to the socio-economic problems of the Indian poor – that they do not care about the Indian poor. This therefore will form the central message from us to our base.
On the contrary, if either, and I reiterate, if either PR or BN comes up and is willing to endorse the 5 year Blueprint in a clear binding way, our message to the Indian poor will be to throw their support behind them – whoever they are –PR or BN.
What if Pakatan and BN have not endorsed the Blueprint by the time Parliament is dissolved? The message that this sends to the Indian poor is that they both do not have the interest of the Indian poor in their minds. The proposals in the 5 year Blueprint are entirely justifiable. And if they do not want to adopt them and do not show the necessary commitment to implement them, then it does not really make any difference who wins in these elections. We will make absolutely sure that this is the message that the Indian poor will hear.
Under these circumstances, abstaining from voting either BN or PR becomes a real option for the Indian poor. Both PR and BN cannot complain on any count on the adoption of this option by the Indian poor. To the Indian poor, the logic is simple. Neither care, so neither deserves anything in return.
What will be the consequence of this move? This strategic abstention effectively means a pullback in the number of votes for both BN and PR in this GE. What this means in turn is that, all those seats that were won marginally will all be affected. The uncertainty increases. If you take Selangor alone, we see at least (at least) 20 State seats that fall in this category – easily. The same logic and formula apply in Kedah, Penang, Perak, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang and Johore. All marginally won seats in the last elections with an Indian voter population of more than 10% are candidates to come into this category. And not all the Indian poor need to abstain. Even if 20% of the Indian voters abstain, the impact will be significant. Strategic abstention can prove to be quite impactful.
By this strategic abstention, the Indian poor will be determining new winners and new losers. The winners will know they won without those votes and the losers will know they lost without those votes. To both the winner and the loser the significance of the vote of the Indian poor would have become clearer. This adds to calculations for future elections. Will the contenders want to treat the Indian poor vote so cavalierly? Yes they can, but only at a cost. That will become plain.
Extending this logic to the next level, strategic abstention can also be applied to individual candidates in the elections. If they will announce their stand on the Blue print, whether they support it and what specifically they will do in support of the programs for the Indian poor and put it down formally to Hindraf. Hindraf can then endorse some of these candidates in return. The logistics of this has to be worked out, but this is also another option.
My conclusion therefore is that strategic abstention does become a purposeful option for the Indian poor in this election. By this act the Indian poor would have taken the opportunity to show the significance of their votes, whether we will issue the call for it will be determined over the next couple of weeks, depending on when Parliament is dissolved.
Our position is very clear. We do not want to see just changes in faces at the helm of our country; we also want to see real changes in the lives of the Indian poor. And we will take any position that supports our motives.
We will make our decision on what we will do soon as the dust settles for us.
|
| Posted: 27 Mar 2013 12:15 PM PDT
What this has resulted in is the retro-fitting of major urban public transportation network into existing, established residential and commercial areas. Since it is retro-fitting, the existing laws also do not adequately cover all the scenarios arising from such construction. Jee Ping It is unfortunate that in the race to push Malaysia to become a developed nation, we chose to focus on the building of buildings, car plants, a new government center and many other catalytic projects. What we forgot to do was adequately connect these job and leisure hot spots to communities with world-class public transportation. What this has resulted in is the retro-fitting of major urban public transportation network into existing, established residential and commercial areas. Since it is retro-fitting, the existing laws also do not adequately cover all the scenarios arising from such construction.
|
| 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