Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Time to reclaim our true history
- Anything But Umno (Part 2)
- ISA repeal: Our Mandela moment and thereafter
- Sabah not on the right track if sitting on a time bomb!
- Nazri Aziz – the defective law minister
- Let’s reclaim history for ourselves
- A new dawn beckons
- Peanuts, not sweeping reforms
| Time to reclaim our true history Posted: 16 Sep 2011 10:23 PM PDT But supposing what Zainal has said is true - that we were never colonised - why did he wait till now to point this out? Why did he keep it secret from the whole country and allow the government to continue to celebrate Independence Day every year when there was really no liberation from colonialism to begin with? We've never been colonised by the British! I've never heard anything so ludicrous. And it's coming from history professors. Not just one, but at least two. Yeah, professors touting hogwash.  Prof Zainal Kling (right) first dropped the bombshell when he said several days ago that Malaya was never colonised. He said it was wrong to say that we were under colonial rule for 400 years, which would mean since 1511 when the Portuguese invaded Malacca. This would also mean that we were never colonised by the Portuguese, the Dutch and the British. No kidding? He said under the British, the Malay states were merely protectorates because the Malay rulers retained their sovereignty. Only Singapore, Malacca and Penang, known as the Straits Settlements, were colonies. He said Malaya was colonised by the British for only two years, during the Malayan Union period from early 1946 to the end of 1947, and by the Japanese during the Second World War. Wow! And here's his punch line - it is therefore wrong to say that the police, political leaders and Malay officers before 1957 were subservient to the British.  Ah! That's the main point, isn't it? He brought all that up to discredit what PAS deputy president Mohamad (Mat) Sabu (left) had recently said about the attack on Bukit Kepong, didn't he?Mat Sabu had said that the real heroes of that incident were not the police who defended the Bukit Kepong police station because they were serving the British, but that the credit should go to Mat Indera, the communist who led the attack, because he was fighting against the colonialists. Mat Sabu's remarks have created a storm since, and both sides of the political divide have been drawn into it. Their supporters have also entered the fray, either voluntarily or through being instigated to do so. Even ex-servicemen have joined in. But supposing what Zainal has said is true - that we were never colonised - why did he wait till now to point this out? Why did he keep it secret from the whole country and allow the government to continue to celebrate Independence Day every year when there was really no liberation from colonialism to begin with? Why did he let Malaysians put up with this masquerade? Something doesn't add up. By withholding this crucial piece of information from the nation, is Zainal Kling being a true Malaysian? Why has he waited till this politically opportune time to drop the bomb? Semantic quibble The other professor who has come out to say the same is Prof Emeritus Khoo Kay Kim. He corroborated Zainal's viewpoint by saying that "the British never ruled the country". They had "merely taken over the administration of our country", he added. Excuse me! Is there a difference between "ruling" and "administering"? This whole thing sounds like a semantic quibble - the British merely administered, they did not rule; we were not colonised, we retained our sovereignty; we were a protectorate, not a colony.  Khoo (right) said that from a legal point of view, Malaya was never colonised because the British made treaties with the Malay rulers before taking over the administration. That may be the form, but let's not forget the substance. In being a part of this 'conspiracy' of silence together with Zainal until this politically opportune time, Khoo's status as a true Malaysian must also be viewed with suspicion, mustn't it? Are there other professors involved in this 'conspiracy'? Suaram president Kua Kia Soong hints that the professors' response to Mat Sabu's remarks is "sickeningly deferential". This seems to imply that they have been put up to it. And if so, their academic integrity would have to be questioned too, because aren't academics supposed to be above politics? The great sin for professors, especially History professors, would be revisioning history to serve political purposes. Or to be deferential to the government of the day. As it is, Malaysian history as presented to Malaysians has been little more than a construct designed to aggrandise the ruling party, especially Umno. The real history has not been fully told. And the reason for this is that the ruling party has been adept at manipulating historical facts, including omitting important ones, to present a story that glorifies the party itself and promotes Ketuanan Melayu. To be sure, Umno was not the only party that engaged in the movement for independence. It was not even the first on the scene. Others came before it. Baling Talks meant to fail Watch the documentary '10 Tahun Sebelum Merdeka' by the film-maker Fahmi Reza and learn about the struggles of the multi-racial Putera-AMCJA for independence 10 years before 1957. Learn about the People's Constitution they drafted, the successful country-wide 'hartal' they staged on Oct 20, 1947, to protest against the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals made by the British. Guess who staged a counter-protest to the 'hartal' in some rural areas like Senggaram and Bagan Datoh? Umno! (Doesn't it remind you of Umno Youth counter-protesting againt Bersih 2.0?)  Read about the struggles of Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM), which came into being seven months before Umno was formed. Its main goal was to attain full independence for Malaya. Read about Ahmad Boestamam, Shamsiah Fakeh (left), Ishak Muhammad, Mokhtaruddin Lasso, Burhanuddin Helmi. Read about the fight against colonialism by the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), founded in 1930. Yes, the communists were freedom fighters. Anyone who says "those who regard the communists as freedom fighters are traitors" (like retired lieutenant-general Ja'afar Onn) is talking rubbish. Who fought the Japanese when they invaded Malaya? And after the war, when the communists went about killing people, whom were they targeting? Those who had collaborated with the Japanese. In 1945, the CPM opted to work for national independence using legal means. But in time, the British began cracking down on what they considered radical factions opposing its rule. The CPM was declared illegal in 1948. Then the Emergency was declared as the CPM mounted an armed struggle against the British colonialists.  In 1955, the CPM made overtures to Tunku Abdul Rahman's government to negotiate peace. That led to the Baling talks (right). If you were to read the transcripts of that negotiation carefully, you would realise that Chin Peng, representing the communists, was sincere in wanting to lay down arms and be part of the legitimate political movement towards independence because he acknowledged that the government was now an elected one and as such he was no longer fighting the British. It was the Tunku who made things difficult for the communists by demanding total surrender and subjection to a period of detention for them to be investigated. This scuttled the talks. When journalist Said Zahari asked the Tunku right afterwards if he was disappointed that the talks were not successful, the Tunku gave an astoundingly revealing reply. "No, no, not at all," he said. "I never wanted it to be a success." Twisted history These are not what have been taught in our schools. And so for generations, millions of Malaysian students have graduated not knowing the full story. Only the story that Umno wants them to know. And Umno has been revisioning history too, downplaying the contributions of the leftists and the non-Malay communities. Just visit the Independence Memorial in Malacca and see for yourself. This is not unexpected. Our leaders have been twisting things to suit their political agenda for decades. And historical facts are not spared. But the spin against Mat Sabu has gone out of whack. His opposers have even extrapolated the meaning of his remarks to imply that he does not appreciate the sacrifices of the police and the armed forces. This is certainly not true. There is no such implication. By saying that the Bukit Kepong police were serving the British, he did not say that the whole armed forces of this country from that era till now are worthless. No logical person would see such an implication in what he said - unless their agenda is to shoot him down regardless of logic.  All told, there has been a lot of vitriol thrown at Mat Sabu, and consternation expressed at the 'revelations' of Zainal Kling and Khoo Kay Kim, but there is also an upside to the whole episode.It is opening up a new public debate that is much needed. And the theme of that debate is the reclaiming of our true history. Forums are being held, including one discussing the role of the leftists in the struggle for independence, featuring eyewitness Said Zahari (left) himself. More history experts should be joining in. As well as more chroniclers of those times. The Malaysian mental revolution starts now. And the reclaiming of our true history is its catalyst. |
| Posted: 16 Sep 2011 05:54 PM PDT Ali Kadir, The Malaysian Insider Humility is a virtue which everyone of us should aspire to but many of us prefer pride. So we should not be surprised that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Barisan Nasional are claiming credit for announcing the removal of some laws which the BN government has used for decades to stifle dissent, lock up critics and control the press. Strange isn't it that they are silent about being the architects of the ISA and other laws but quite happy to claim credit for proposing their demise. This is like a factory owner or dare I say rare earth plant, which pollutes the neighbourhood for 20 years, and then congratulates itself for shutting down the factory, not saying sorry for the increase in the number of deaths from cancer. But it's OK, by claiming credit Najib and BN are behaving just like humans or like desperate governments anywhere in the world. I just have a few points to make. One, this is a proposal, a whole bunch of nice words but only words. Two, the test of sincerity of any policy or initiative is timing. If Najib proposed these changes and implemented it within his few weeks in office, then he could make the argument that his DNA is that of a reformer. But he and BN are only doing this now because it is his last gambit, not because he believes that Malaysia is a mature democracy. The real mature people are the Malaysians who have fought with blood, sweat and tears for a better country. Remember the Hindraf men who were detained for speaking up for their community, the Sin Chew journalist who was jailed for alerting Malaysians to the racism of Ahmad Ismail, politicians who were deprived of sleep and tortured for no other reason that they didn't agree with the government, Raja Petra Kamarudin who was detained because he was too troublesome.
|
| ISA repeal: Our Mandela moment and thereafter Posted: 16 Sep 2011 04:31 PM PDT For national reconciliation to have a chance, we need to give truth a fair hearing. One vile accusation is that Uthaya is racist. It's an allegation easily rubbished by Uthaya's track record as counsel to Malay and Chinese victims of police brutality. He took up their cases pro bono years before any of his present armchair cyber critics even acquired a pinch of political consciousness. Helen Ang, Free Malaysia Today The release of Nelson Mandela after a 27-year detention ushered in South Africa's post-apartheid era where the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was established during his presidency. It is hoped that Thursday's watershed announcement on repealing the Internal Security Act will yield a similar milestone in our political landscape. And hopefully the same two keys words – 'truth' and 'reconciliation' – will be as significant for us. Can this momentous move to sheath the ISA sword go some way in making Malaysians braver and more clear-headed in confronting self-evident truths? Ex-ISA detainee P Uthayakumar is one of the foremost and forthright speakers of the truth today. I'll share why I hold a deep respect for this man but first a few words on another political figure that played a recent role in carving out public space for the exploration of truth. The Malay far right has been calling for Mohamad Sabu, better known as Mat Sabu, to be ISA-ed over his remarks on the Bukit Kepong episode. "Well over 900 police reports" were lodged against Mat Sabu for what is in essence a challenge to the Umno version of our Merdeka narrative. Threat of police investigation is a same sort of weapon that the ISA is. And the ISA has been a blunt and brutal instrument to put the fear of government into the people. The almost one-party state is feared for its power to lock you up and throw away the key. Umno controlling the Home Ministry not only has ISA at its disposal but the police and their lock-up facilities too. PAS secretary-general Mustafa Ali suggested that the large number of police reports against Mat Sabu were mobilised by Umno through the many NGOs connected to the party. Punishing the truthseekers We must take our hat off to Mat Sabu for sticking to his guns on the Mat Indera contentious comment and remaining unfazed by the almost a thousand police reports. It is through Mat Sabu standing his ground despite 'dikepong' (being besieged) from all sides that paved the way enabling last evening's forum in Petaling Jaya on the contributions of the left to the decolonialisation process. If Mat Sabu had succumbed to pressure exerted by adversaries and allies alike, the topic would have been closed prematurely. Members of the public could not then have heard Dr Rohana Arifin's forum presentation telling how the Bukit Kepong hagiography – the eponymous film directed by Jins Shamsuddin – goes to serve the Umno propaganda. A retraction by Mat Sabu as Karpal Singh had demanded would have shut the window of opportunity created and later kept ajar by PAS agreeing to back up their deputy president. Umno is the devil we know that fails to mask its coercive nature in trying to silence Mat Sabu. Turning the complaints over to police opens the door to another facet of state intimidation, especially when sedition is invoked. DAP is an equally treacherous devil. Coming on the heels of Karpal's insistence that Mat Sabu should apologise was the hatchet job by Tunku Abdul Aziz. The party vice chairman had piled insult upon derision upon malice in tearing into Mat Sabu. Karpal did not bother to hide the motivation for his attack. He declared upfront that the resulting backlash from Mat Sabu offending Malay 'sensitivities' would be "very damaging" to Pakatan's prospects in the general election. A parallel motive propels the attack by Aziz, i.e. DAP's courting of the Malay vote. In fact, DAP stabbing Mat Sabu in the back indicates that the party is preparing itself to go direct to the Malay electorate and bypassing electoral pact partners PAS and PKR as intermediaries. The DAP plan to stand its own Malay candidates is no secret. Note that on Sept 2, when Umno firepower in the form of pliant press and party proxies was trained on Mat Sabu, DAP international secretary Liew Chin Tong signed his party's name to a Pakatan joint statement that condemned the Utusan Malaysia reports as "irresponsible spin-mongering being perpetrated by Umno leaders and the media". Yet a mere five days after the opposition's purported defence of Mat Sabu, the New Straits Times on Sept 7 published Aziz's vicious denunciation of the populist speaker's historical reinterpretation. Tunku Aziz, Karpal and the party they chair don't give a toss for any intellectual truth of the matter. Granted, Mat Sabu's off-the-cuff observation has an adverse impact on the potential votebank and Pakatan pursuit of the Putrajaya crown. However DAP pulling the rug from under Mat Sabu's feet signifies how for them, truth is better off denounced if it gets in the way of fishing in Malay waters.
|
| Sabah not on the right track if sitting on a time bomb! Posted: 16 Sep 2011 04:08 PM PDT Who owns lands in Sabah several times the size of Singapore and got it without state cabinet approval? Answer: Felda. Who takes our income taxes, service taxes, parking offence compounds and penalties? Answer: The Federal government, to the tune of around RM19 billion per year (for taxes only), and that calculates to about RM95 in five years. And how much were we allocated for development fund under the five-year 10th Malaysia Plan? RM9 billion with Sarawak and Sabah combined! DANIEL JOHN JAMBUN Former chief Minister and Sabah State Assembly Speaker, Datuk Salleh Said Keruak, had said recently that he believes Sabah and Malaysia are on the right track to achieving state and national targets, and that to him Sabah has already seen tremendous developments "by leaps and bounds since independence," and that "the federal allocations for Sabah and Sarawak... they are getting a bigger chunk of the federal fund. No one can deny this," that the per capita income in the state has also increased and increasing and lifestyles have improved and that "we enjoy a peaceful and harmonious state that continues to progress at rapid pace," he said. Of course there have been a lot of changes after independence, but we must not look at what we have achieved only but what great developments we have missed because of mistakes we had committed and are still committing! If I were to elaborate on this point alone I could go on to fill up a few pages of this paper, even many books. When I wrote my paper, "Shattered Hopes and Broken Dreams," I listed a host of problems which had become cancerous for Sabah. Anyone wishing to have a copy of this paper can email me at danieljjambun@gmail.com. The issues are many, but let me just mention a few. By joining Malaysia in a hurry we have lost the right over a lot of things like revenue collection, which most of it now goes to Kuala Lumpur, and this is a violation of Point 11 of the 20 Points which says: "North Borneo should retain control of its own finance, development and tariff, and should have the right to work up its own taxation and to raise loans on its own credit." By looking at our potential oil revenue, Salleh cannot deny that we should now be richer than Brunei! Now there has been a discovery of a field with a stock of US500 billion worth of gas in Sabah waters, and the frustration is that it is even this will not be under our control. And what untold wealth have we lost because of the surrender of Block L and M – a surrender made without reference to the state cabinet and the federal cabinet? If we complain about Tan Sri Harris surrendering Labuan to KL without the people's consent, imagine how much more we have lost with the loss of Block L and M! Tremendous development, my foot! Salleh tries to downplay the seriousness of the illegals problem by saying there are needed in the plantation and construction sectors, as if we Sabahans are blind idiots who have never learned the truth about the whole rotten things about PTIs. The illegals are a massive problem which is threatening Sabah with the possibility of a reverse takeover and a drastic change in the demography of Sabah. Hundreds of thousands of them have become legal, are now already full-fledged new Bumiputeras of Malaysia because some leaders saw to it that they get Mykads. Many are still coming through our porous boundaries with ease. To come in and out of Sabah is so easy, without any fear of being caught. Just take a fishing boat out to sea and join a bigger boat to go to the Philippines waters which is a short distance away! And to come back, just do it vice versa, and the border police won't even care! The refusal by UMNO to form a Royal Commission of Inquiry to solve it despite the many requests by BN local component parties can only be interpreted as caused by a hidden agenda to sabotage Sabah for the sake of political expedience. The problem of the PTIs has become legendary and thanks to the works of Mutalib M. D. and Dr. Chong Eng Leong, we know this is not just a fourth-stage cancer. Sabah is sitting on this time bomb which is waiting to explode! And the federal government's suspicious method of solving the problem with the 5P Registration method is not working. How many illegals have been sent home although we have registered hundreds of thousands of them? What is going on behind it all? Why haven't we heard anymore about it? Salleh cannot deny that the PTIs are still the mother of all problems in Sabah! Sabah on the right track? After 48 years with BN, Sabah has become the poorest in Malaysia although it was endowed with rich natural resources. What happened? Where have all the forests gone? Answer: To the casinos of Genting, Macau, Hong Kong and Manila. Who got all the wealth of gold and other metals from the infamous Mamut Copper Mine? Answer: The Japanese! Who is reaping the majority share of the huge Sabah Forest Industries in Sipitang? The Indians, with Ballarpur Industries holding a superlion share of 97.8 percent since March 2007. (BPH is wholly owned by Ballarpur International Holdings NV, which in turn is owned by BILT (80%) and JP Morgan (20%). We are surviving by importing 70% of our food supplies! So, I beg Salleh to explain what he means by "lifestyles have improved." Who owns lands in Sabah several times the size of Singapore and got it without state cabinet approval? Answer: Felda. Who takes our income taxes, service taxes, parking offence compounds and penalties? Answer: The Federal government, to the tune of around RM19 billion per year (for taxes only), and that calculates to about RM95 in five years. And how much were we allocated for development fund under the five-year 10th Malaysia Plan? RM9 billion with Sarawak and Sabah combined! Datuk, are we on the right track? Over the last few years, especially after Umno took over Sabah in 1994, tens of thousands of Sabahan youths have gone to Singapore and the Peninsular to try to make decent livelihoods. We have a very high unemployment rate! A recent job fair organized by the government caused an embarrassment to the BN because tens of thousands came like hungry wolves trying to get only a few jobs. All those news about job creations and job offers, and blaming youths for being choosy are just propaganda and people are tired of it. A hotel doorman in Kota Kinabalu makes about RM600, but if he did the same work in Kuala Lumpur he can make RM2,000 plus, even more in Singapore. Why? Because the economy of Sabah had long gone to the dogs! We have a runaway inflation, which the BN keeps justifying as "tidak membebankan pengguna (not burdening the consumers)." People are suffering even with a salary of RM2,500, let alone those with less, and the worst affected are the kampung people who never get any salary raises because they have no salaries! And yet they still have to pay for the higher petrol and cost of transport. Sabah's GDP at 5% per annum is the lowest in the nation and we have been running on deficit budgets for the last 13 years! We are debt ridden! And with all these happening we don't see any clear light at the end of the long dark tunnel. We have been promised that poverty would be ended in Sabah by the end of last year. Instead the government found out there were even more poor people than they thought! We have been promised Sabah will achieve a developed status by 2015 but at the way things are going this is not going to happen, not even by 2020. Salleh wants was to see Sabah become stronger economically, politically and culturally and staying within the federation. But with the strong economic colonialism of the Peninsular over Sabah, especially with the repressive cabotage policy in place and lack of Borneonization, how are we going to be economically stronger? How do we become politically stronger with Umno controlling everything here? Does political strength mean Umno strength of control and dominance? If even the local BN components are just stooges, what political strength for Sabah do we have? And about becoming culturally strong, what does that mean? Even the Pesta Kaamatan is being controlled by Umno, even by leaders who have no KDM blood, to the point of excluding the Huguan Siou in the ceremonies! This talk about cultural development is all lies. What is real is that the Malay supremacy is being applied in Sabah, with employments in the public sector is biased to certain groups, so is that what Salleh means by Sabah becoming culturally strong? We don't need all these sweet talks which are made just for the sake of propaganda. What we need is solid results which can be backed up by real figures, and outputs and growths which we can feel in our stomachs.
|
| Nazri Aziz – the defective law minister Posted: 16 Sep 2011 10:44 AM PDT By Mariam Mokhtar, FMT Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Mohamed Nazri Aziz said that the government was serious in fighting corruption and announced the latest Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) initiative whereby taxi drivers would become mini-ambassadors and informers on behalf of the MACC. He added that if the information the cabbies supplied was successful in securing arrests and convictions, they could also be rewarded for their efforts. Nazri said: "The government is committed to battling corruption through its transformation plan by establishing a National Key Results Area for corruption and reducing corruption via increased enforcement and prevention, while improving the people's perception of the government's and public services' integrity." The campaign was launched by Nazri at the MACC's Hari Raya Aidil Fitri open house on Sept 13. He said that over 30,000 taxi drivers would be the MACC's informers and that around 200 taxi drivers operating in the Klang Valley would start the campaign. Why does Nazri participate in another thoughtless measure rather than confront the problem of corruption head-on? Nazri, who is also the de facto Law Minister, should perhaps be reassigned the title "Defective Law Minister". It is possible he is taking his cue from Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and also the former PMs who only pay lip service, when it comes to tackling corruption. It appears that this latest measure to raise the public's awareness, increase their responsibility, and hence engage the community in fighting corruption was the brainchild of the MACC. According to Nazri, cab drivers made ideal informers because they would pick up information as they talked with their passengers. Perhaps Nazri could tell us how many high-ranking politicians ever use cabs? These representatives of the people are some of those who are allegedly most corrupt. The big fish allegedly involved in corruption are driven around in chauffeur-driven cars. He said: "They (the taxi drivers) are at the frontline of the tourism industry as they are the first group to interact with overseas tourists. "They can be considered the country's duta kecil (mini ambassadors) in disseminating information (about the country). Therefore, programmes like this are needed. "They can be our whistleblower and can play the rôle as deliverer of information to MACC. We expect them to play a crucial rôle. I believe that after this, MACC will brief NGOs and government agencies and may even train them because we are serious in enlisting their help to fight graft." The MACC chief commissioner Abu Kassim Mohamed also said: "Taxi drivers will be MACC's eyes and ears in reporting corruption. They pick up a lot of information from passengers' conversations, or might even witness corrupt transactions in their taxis." When did Nazri and Abu Kassim last take a taxi? The last time I did, I was ripped off going from Medan Gopeng to my home which is just around the corner. The journey of 2.3km took less than five minutes but cost me RM30. The bus fare from KL to Ipoh was less than this last step of the journey. Do these men not realise that the public is constantly being ripped off by errant taxi drivers and that passengers, especially tourists, are at their mercy? Taxi drivers, their companies and the government agency under which taxis come, should be among the people to be investigated for corrupt practices. The drivers fleece the public with expensive fares, they refuse to use the meter and many of the vehicles they operate are unsafe. The latest taxi I travelled in was not working, the boot would not shut and my suitcase balanced precariously on top of the taxi driver's effects, which took up most of the space in the boot. The taxi was filthy and the driver refused to use the meter. He told me I could be dropped by the roadside if "kamu tidak suka". The belligerent attitude of some of our taxi drivers is similar to that of our politicians. If Nazri were to read the newspapers, especially the mainstream media, he might realise the number of complaints which passengers, especially tourists, make against taxi drivers. The ambassadorial rôle played by the taxi drivers would drive tourists away. As it is, locals have given up complaining as they do not see any action forthcoming from the authorities. Taxi drivers, just like politicians, are a law unto themselves. There are also allegations that the taxi companies are controlled by corrupt politicians. Why should Nazri and the MACC waste more taxpayers' money on idiotic schemes? Why should we waste more of the public purse paying for the salaries of these dim-witted ministers and heads of public institutions?
|
| Let’s reclaim history for ourselves Posted: 15 Sep 2011 10:05 PM PDT Tunku 'Abidin Muhriz, founding president of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS), starts a weekly column today. IDEAS is a think tank committed to promoting the fundamental precepts of first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman's vision in the belief that a fresh application of those precepts can help the nation overcome the challenges it faces. Clearly, my two ancestors employed different strategies in dealing with the British. Was one a hero and the other a traitor? No, they were merely individuals trying to abide by their adat while dealing with the exigencies of global British power. ROAMING BEYOND THE FENCE MY formal "hello" will have to wait because the impulse to comment on the current furore about our history is just too great. As I have written elsewhere, genealogy enables us to contextualise events that occurred around our ancestors and those who lived with them.
|
| Posted: 15 Sep 2011 05:16 PM PDT The Prime Minister's announcement on a number of changes to the country's laws, including ending the Emergency, will have massive positive implications. Under Article 150, once a proclamation of emergency by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is gazetted, the floodgates are lifted and legislative powers of Parliament are greatly broadened. Parliament can make laws that violate, suspend or bypass any constitutional provision except six items in Article 150(6A). By SHAD SALEEM FARUQI, The Star THE Prime Minister's speech last night evoked the kind of hope and exhilaration I felt many decades ago on Aug 28, 1963, when I heard American civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. deliver his "I have a dream" speech at the steps of Lincoln Memorial. The Prime Minister pointed to a number of changes that he intends to bring to the country. Many of these proposals will have massive positive implications for the country's legal system, its administration of justice and the sovereignty of law over personal discretion. He promised that: > The emergency proclamations that are in operation will be presented to Parliament for annulment; > The Internal Security Act will be repealed but replaced with two security laws framed under the Constitution's anti-subversion provision of Article 149; > The Restricted Residence Act and the Banishment Act will be brought to an end; and > The much-criticised Printing Presses and Publications Act will be amended. It will take some time and considerable research to fathom the full implications of the above pronouncements. Needless to say, the impact on the legal life of the community, the rights of the citizens, the powers of the Home Minister and the police will be monumental. The rule of law will be strengthened and the days of the omnipotence of the Government will come to an end. Looking at the implications of the lifting of the Emergency, the following salient features of emergency laws must be noted: Ordinary legal system eclipsed: Under Article 150, once a proclamation of emergency by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is gazetted, the floodgates are lifted and legislative powers of Parliament are greatly broadened. Parliament can make laws that violate, suspend or bypass any constitutional provision except six items in Article 150(6A). All fundamental rights except freedom of religion can be violated. The federal-state division of powers can be disturbed and state powers usurped. Emergency laws do not require a two-thirds majority. Neither do they require the consent of the Conference of Rulers or the Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah and Sarawak. Judicial review on constitutional grounds is ousted because of Article 150(6). An emergency law has no time limit and can continue as long as the emergency lasts. Malaysia has been under such a state of emergency continuously since 1964. For all practical purposes, an emergency legal system eclipsed the ordinary legal system for the last 47 years. The King's power to make laws: As with the powers of Parliament, the powers of the federal executive are immensely enlarged during an emergency. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong acquires plenary and parallel ordinance-making powers under Article 150(2B) as long as the two houses of Parliament are not sitting concurrently. The executive's power of ordinance-making is as large as Parliament's power of legislation. The entire Constitution can be suspended except for six topics in Article 150(6A). Since 1964, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has promulgated nearly 92 emergency ordinances. Among these is the Emergency, Public Order and Prevention of Crime Ordinance, which is a favourite with the police and which results in more preventive detentions than even the Internal Security Act. Executive power to give instructions: Under Article 150, the Federal Government acquires powers to give directions to the states in contradiction with the meticulous federal-state division of powers. If the emergency proclamations are repealed, what effect will that have on the legal system? Restoration of normal laws: If the two proclamations of national emergency in 1964 and 1969 are repealed, the country will return to the normal operation of the constitutional system. The five or so emergency laws made by Parliament under the authority of these proclamations will cease to operate. Any detention under these laws will have to be terminated. Emergency ordinances will end: As with the emergency laws enacted by Parliament, the 90 or so emergency ordinances promulgated by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (and the hundreds of subsidiary laws made thereunder) will also cease operation. However, the cessation of emergency laws is not immediate. Under Article 150(7), there is a grace period of six months during which the emergency laws may still continue to operate. Once the six months expire, the expiry of the laws is automatic and no individual repeal is necessary. However, no action (e.g. for damages) can be taken for anything validly done under previous laws. Some may wonder whether the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, in his discretion, may refuse the Prime Minister's advice to restore the rule of law and to lift the proclamations of emergencies? In a long line of other cases, it has been held that emergency rule does not alter the position of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as a constitutional monarch bound to act on advice. The case of PP v Mohd Amin Mohd Razali (2000) altered the law slightly: it held that during the dissolution of Parliament, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is not bound by the caretaker government's advice on emergency matters. Amin is, of course, not relevant to the Prime Minister's speech last night because Parliament is not under dissolution and the Prime Minister's advice is binding on the King. Judicial review strengthened: The lifting of the Emergency will remove the eclipse of ordinary laws. The possibility of judicial review of executive and legislative measures will be enhanced. Many human rights will be restored. The demise of hundreds of emergency laws, some conferring preventive detention powers and others excluding due process, will be a defining moment for Malaysian democracy. However, the euphoria that is bound to be felt as a result of these wholesome developments must be tempered with caution. New proclamations: The lifting of the 1964 and 1969 emergencies does not prevent the re-issuing of a new proclamation of emergency and the promulgation of new emergency Acts and ordinances, if circumstances so demand. Subversion laws stay: Even if the Emergency is lifted, Parliament is still armed with anti-subversion powers under Article 149. New security laws under Article 149 have been suggested by the Prime Minister. Existing laws like the Dangerous Drugs Preventive Measures Act will not be affected by the lifting of the Emergency unless the Government sets about to apply the reformative paint brush to them as well. Police Act remains: Controversial ordinary laws like the Police Act, the Official Secrets Act and the Universities & University Colleges Act will remain in the statute book though, of course, they will face pressure to accommodate the spirit of the times. Some may, therefore, regard the lifting of the Emergency as merely a cosmetic measure because Articles 149 and 150 still arm the Government and Parliament with massive power to suspend constitutional guarantees. Such a perspective is unduly cynical. It amounts to an all-or-nothing attitude. Whatever reforms are adopted and implemented must be welcomed. They may be harbingers of new things to come. They will certainly set a new mood and may be the catalyst and impetus for further improvements to the human rights scene. A government receptive to the lifting of the Emergency cannot be indifferent to improving the situation of laws under Article 149. All in all, one must applaud the Prime Minister's courage, his willingness to listen to the voice of the people, his receptiveness to the felt necessities of the times, and his exhilarating agenda for reform. The Attorney-General's office also deserves congratulations for advising the Prime Minister on the incongruence between the rule of law and the state of emergency lasting 47 years. So, let Sept 16, 2011 go down in our history as "a joyous daybreak" to end the long night of the Emergency. > Datuk Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of Law at UiTM and Visiting Professor at USM.
|
| Posted: 15 Sep 2011 04:23 PM PDT Let's not be fooled, people. The changes Najib announced are merely cosmetic, and will have to be passed in Parliament first before they become effective. Meanwhile, Articles 149 and 150 are still there to provide Parliament with the power to pass laws that do not have to be consistent with the freedoms guaranteed in Articles 5, 9, 10 and 13, and to allow the Cabinet to declare an emergency. The Emergency proclamations may go, but Article 150 is still around. We the people are still vulnerable. By Kee Thuan Chye, Free Malaysia Today PEANUTS. That's what Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's so-called "sweeping reforms" are. They hardly amount to a political transformation. While it's cheering to note that the Internal Security Act (ISA) will be repealed – finally, after our many years of waiting – and that the Emergency proclamations are to be lifted – a decision that is decades overdue – it's disturbing to be told that they will be replaced by two new laws aimed at preventing subversion and safeguarding public order. And even though the detention period under these new laws may be shorter, with further extensions to be made by court order, the Home Minister is still the one to decide who gets detained for suspicion of being a terrorist. This means, theoretically speaking, that although Najib has given the commitment that "no individual will be detained purely based on political ideology", there is no stopping the government from branding a political opponent a suspected terrorist, whether or not he is one. Just to lock him away. Another so-called "reform" is scrapping the requirement for publications to renew their printing licences annually. This, also, is nothing to crow about. It still means that publications have to obtain a licence that the Home Minister may or may not grant. It still means the Home Minister has the absolute power to suspend or revoke a licence at any time. And his decision cannot be challenged in court. He does not even have to give a reason. It also means the Home Ministry can still call up newspaper editors and cow them into submission for publishing something the ministry finds objectionable. Like what happened recently to The Star when it ran the heading 'Ramadhan delights' for an eating-out supplement that was not totally devoted to halal food. The ministry can still practise the double standards it has been practising – turn a blind eye to the race-baiting and rabble-rousing of Utusan Malaysia but come down hard on the minor transgressions of other publications. So where's the change? If the government were truly sincere and had the political will, it should repeal the Publications and Printing Presses Act (PPPA) and no longer require publications to obtain a printing licence. That would be in keeping with the spirit of what Najib talked about instituting in Malaysia when he announced the "reforms" on Sept 15 – a "democratic system based on the universal philosophy of 'of the people, by the people and for the people'". Vague reforms On Section 27 of the Police Act, Najib said there would be a review to take into consideration the provisions under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution which guarantees Malaysians the right to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of association. But in the same breath, he said police permits would still be required for street demonstrations, subject to certain criteria. If freedom of assembly, which should be a right of all citizens, is still curtailed in this fashion, what is that rubbish talk of Najib's about forging a democratic system "of the people, by the people and for the people"? He did say, however, that "permission to assemble will be given in accordance with procedures to be fixed later that will take into account international norms". But this sounds vague. What international norms did he mean? And when is "later" going to be? And speaking of Article 10, why doesn't the government address the other impediments to freedom of speech, such as the Official Secrets Act (OSA), the Sedition Act, the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA), the Multimedia and Communications Act, the Public Order (Preservation) Ordinance? No wonder Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein was smirking and applauding when Najib made his announcements. His absolute powers remain intact. Let's not be fooled, people. The changes Najib announced are merely cosmetic. And of course they will have to be passed in Parliament first before they become effective. Meanwhile, Articles 149 and 150 are still there to provide Parliament with the power to pass laws that do not have to be consistent with the freedoms guaranteed in Articles 5, 9, 10 and 13, and to allow the Cabinet to declare an emergency. The Emergency proclamations may go, but Article 150 is still around. We the people are still vulnerable. Some of us may say that we cannot expect the government to make such truly sweeping reforms in one go, and that we should be thankful for the small mercies we are now getting. Some may say this could be just the beginning, and more reforms could come. That's well and good. But at the same time, we should give credit where it's due for this beginning. It's not Najib we should thank. What we are getting is what has been due us for a long time, what any concerned government should have given us even without our having to pressure them to do so. We should instead acknowledge that the March 8 effect lives on, and therefore the credit for these changes should go to us the rakyat for voting as we did on March 8, 2008. We voted in a stronger opposition, we denied the ruling party the two-thirds majority that it had abused to increasingly curb our democratic rights over the decades. We sent them the message that enough was enough.
|
| 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 | |
