Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Debunking the Bersih 2.0 critics
Exposed ! – The Bearded Blogger Behind The Dirty Tricks Campaigns
Mohon Ulama Muda UMNO jawab perkara ini!
Kuat tidak semestinya menang, lemah tidak semestinya tewas
M’sia’s electoral system: Govt of the people? (2)
Najib, is your AG anti-Islam? Does your administration condone the vilification of Islam?

Posted: 03 Jul 2011 07:02 PM PDT

A number of political commentators have criticised Bersih 2.0 in the news media and blogs. Among these critics are Chandra Muzaffar, Anas Zubedy, Ahirudin Attan (Rocky's Bru) and Mahathir Mohamad.

Their comments would have been welcome if they were honest and holistic assessments of Bersih 2.0. It would have been nice to see the use of sound reasoning. Instead we have faulty argument upon faulty argument, in article upon article.

This is regrettable not just for the dubious ethics with which personal political interests are advanced. It is also unfortunate because the trusting reader becomes confused as to what is true or false and becomes prone to accepting questionable statements and conclusions as truthful.

Misleading arguments and suggestions should not be left standing without a challenge. Here I show seven types of faulty arguments that have been made against Bersih 2.0 and comment on specific examples. It is hoped that the reader would be able to identify them on his own in the future, and be inspired to debate the critic to discover the truth or the best way forward for a given policy.

A. The middle ground

In dealing with what they see as a problem, the critics usually begin with an appeal to the middle path or 'third way'. This is in spite of the fact that a middle ground might fly in the face of logic. They propose a fallacious kind of give-and-take — sacrifice a wheel or two here so as to keep a radiator or fan belt running there. This makes no sense when, for a policy choice or reformist action to truly work or have its intended effect, like a car you need to retain all of its necessary parts. Have yourself a very effective Bersih 2.0 rally, says one commentator, but do it in the pits of Putrajaya where no one hears you (Anas Zubedy in 'Bersih 2.0 — is there a third alternative?', The Malaysian Insider, June 23). Why rally, asks another commentator, when you can have dialogue with the Election Commission and national government — the very same parties that had four years since the first Bersih rally of 2007 to improve the electoral system but did very little (Chandra Muzaffar in 'Understanding the context', The Star, July 3).

The progressive option is not about having Bersih 2.0 or not having it. The progressive option is to reach an immediate agreement for commencing the reform of electoral processes, failing which a Bersih 2.0 march would proceed to inspire change through other mechanisms such as the ballot box. The Agong's call for negotiations should be seen in this positive light. The government should take this as a golden opportunity to wrest the advantage. There is still time for half a week of intensive dialogue between Bersih, the Election Commission and the government to reach an agreement on reform action before 9 July.

B. Exaggeration

The critics also commonly play up unsubstantiated dangers and costs (e.g., by appeal to threat) and play down benefits and mitigating facts (the ignorance of counterevidence). Consider the following commentators' statements pertaining to physical injury and business cost.

"In the first Bersih demonstration on November 10 2007, a number of people were injured. There were similar casualties in the Hindraf demonstration… in the same year." (Chandra Muzaffar)

He reports not how many people were injured (10, 100 or 1,000), what kind of injury was sustained (scratches and scrapes or bullet wounds) and why (whether due to Bersih or Hindraf demonstrators quarreling among themselves or they were hurt as a result of unnecessary, heavy-handed police action). There is also a failure to properly discuss the desirability of the freedom to express fair demands and upholding democratic principles given the risk of scrapes, bruises and such.

It is also difficult to ascertain whether the commentator is sincere in his concern for the marchers and others nearby. Assuming that the planned march goes ahead, he does not ask for the authorities to fully cooperate with the Bersih 2.0 organisers to ensure safety and order. He does not ask of the police to refrain from possibly hurting the marchers. He does not suggest to the authorities to control or remove potential troublemakers such as Perkasa and their 'war general' Ibrahim Ali who openly threatened chaos. The commentator did not even encourage a peaceful, celebratory atmosphere.

"Traders and taxi drivers in the affected areas will inevitably suffer a loss of income. Here again, the past is a good teacher. In previous demonstration in Kuala Lumpur, people in various walks of life had to pay the price." (Chandra Muzaffar)

"Merchants and business organisations need sales during the weekends to survive and make a profit to continue providing employment to the thousands under their care. We cannot afford to lose millions of ringgit every time the rakyat gather to voice concerns." (Anas Zubedy).

Certain traders and taxi drivers might lose their regular daily income for that day fully or partially, but others at slightly different locations in Kuala Lumpur could benefit. The above two commentators refuse to see that benefits could also accrue to the shuttle-bus, energy, merchandise and food and beverages businesses as a result of there being a mass concentration of consumers about town.

There are also those benefits that are unquantifiable in monetary terms: the camaraderie between participants of different races and beliefs; the greatly broadened public awareness about the importance and urgency of electoral reforms; and the sense of empowerment people feel about being able to shape their collective destiny in pressuring reluctant national institutions to peacefully push through needed electoral improvements.

To be complete about it, there are other costs in the form of inconveniences to the public as a result of congestion. But these are not different to the price that Malaysians pay day in and day out when trapped in traffic jams and when having to shove about to board infrequent, jam-packed commuter trains.

It is difficult to imagine the catastrophic net business costs assumed by the second commentator as a result of a couple of hours of orderly marches (endangerment to "thousands" of jobs and losses running "in the millions"). Businesses have ample time to plan and prepare for contingencies, if any (Bersih announced the march many weeks ago). Businesses could also imagine that it is a public holiday. Would they complain so loudly about having to close shop if the sudden death of a monarch imposes an immediate one-day public holiday and road closures for processions?

C. Scaremongering

If middle-ground diplomacy and mild exaggeration do not compel the desired outcome, scare tactics might be used. Abusive ad hominems, straw-man attacks and deliberate omissions can be combined to make the following type of political statements:

"Anwar… [a] deeply flawed politician… the de facto leader of Bersih… wants to become prime minister… and will resort to any means to achieve his ambitions"; "PAS and DAP are also driven by the desire to gain power through the quickest route. For them also the end justifies the means." (Chandra Muzaffar)

Observe the manipulation of emotion by using subjective statements such as "deeply flawed" and speculation ("will resort to any means"). There is little concern for providing evidence. We have also partial reporting; only opposition political parties are mentioned when all Malaysians, including the ruling Barisan Nasional supporters, were invited to join the Bersih march to advocate and demand for electoral reforms. The above commentator also ignores the fact that all rational political parties do seek power, and they do wish to attain it with the least possible cost or resistance, without recourse to violent acts or breaches of trust.

"If the stadium option had materialized, certain elements in Bersih, it is alleged, would have turned the stadium to a Tahrir Square, with demonstrators camping there day and night for weeks on end." (Chandra Muzaffar)

Here we see the non-reporting of sources ("it is alleged"). Alleged by whom and upon what basis, we are not told. An honest commentator would just say he "fears" or "has a gut feeling that there might be" long-standing protests. Moreover, asserting a Tahrir Square scenario is, on its own, a domino fallacy (i.e., the unproven assumption that a particular event is the first in a series of steps that will inevitably lead to some specific, undesirable consequence).

Posted: 03 Jul 2011 11:05 AM PDT

Trevino claims he was a speech-writer for George Bush and he is a founder of the popular Republican blog, Red State. His outspoken, far-right views have provoked controversy in the US, where he has been striving to make a name for himself via the internet.

Those provocative views are, however, unlikely to appeal to his Malaysian clients in BN, who, nevertheless, have clearly being paying him and his associates to defame their political enemies and boost their own publicity.

"My red hair and pale skin IS my passport!"

For example, many people found Trevino's tirade against being forced to go through standard border checks particularly obnoxious. In a series of outbursts on Twitter he proclaimed that the US Border Patrol were "fools" and "bureaucrats" for bothering to look at his papers, because he was white.

He expressed his views with such offensive arrogance that the story provoked nearly 900 angry comments when it was reported in the online Huffington Post.

Posted: 03 Jul 2011 10:39 AM PDT

How to Deal with Present Day Rulers and Systems?

Reproduced by crediting: Muhammad Awais Tahir

This blog post is a part of a series of articles : "How to Deal with Present Day Rulers and Systems", which is an academic effort to understand the sayings of Allah's Messenger on the topic.

CATEGORY 5 - PROPHECIES REGARDING RULERS WHO WILL NOT FOLLOW AND IMPLEMENT ISLAM & ORDER OF NOT OBEYING THEM OR HELPING THEM OR SERVING THEM

HADITH # 16

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا عبد الصمد ثنا حرب بن شداد بصري ثنا يحيى يعني بن أبي كثير قال عمرو بن زينب العنبري أن أنس بن مالك حدثه أن معاذا قال : يا رسول الله أرأيت إن كان علينا أمراء لا يستنون بسنتك ولا يأخذون بأمرك فما تأمر في أمرهم فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم لا طاعة لمن لم يطع الله عز و جل

Anas bin Maalik (May Allah be pleased with him) narrate that M'uaz bin Jabal said, "O Messenger of Allah! If rulers come on who do not follow your Sunnah, and not take your order, so what do you order us regarding them?" Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) said, "There is no obedience for the one who does not obey Allah".

Reference: Masnad Abu Y'ala (Hadith # 4046), Masnad Ahmed (Hadith # 13248), Sh'uaib Arnaoot says that its chain can be called Hasan, al-Albani authenticated in Aj Jami' As Sagheer, Haithmi says it contain 'Amr bin Zunaib and I don't know him, rest of the narrators are Saheeh. Ibn Hibban considered 'Amr bin Zunaib to be trustworthy.

LESSONS FROM THIS HADITH

There is no obedience to rulers who leave the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad and don't rule according to Qur'an, because "There is no obedience for the one who does not obey Allah".

HADITH # 17

عبد الله بن مسعود أن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم قال سيلي أموركم بعدي رجال يطفئون السنة ويعملون بالبدعة ويؤخرون الصلاة عن مواقيتها فقلت يا رسول الله إن أدركتهم كيف أفعل قال تسألني يا ابن أم عبد كيف تفعل لا طاعة لمن عصى الله

Narrated Ibn Mas'ud: The Messenger of Allah said: "Some men will rule over you after me. They will kill the Sunnah and act based on bid'ah. And they will delay Salat beyond its time".

I (Ibn Mas'ud) asked: "If I meet them, what should I do?" The Messenger of Allah said: "You are asking me, O son of Umm Abdullah, what to do? There is no obedience to the one who disobeys Allah!"

Reference: Sunan ibn e Majah (Hadith # 2975), authentiacated by al-Albani in Saheeh Sunan ibn e Majah, and As-Saheeha.

LESSONS FROM THIS HADITH

Someone who is an enemy of Sunnah, and is innovating his own religion, and ruling according to it, it is so obvious that he is not to be followed, that Prophet Muhammad asked Ibn Mas'ud in surprise, "You are asking me, O son of Umm Abdullah, what to do?" and then again he repeated the rule "There is no obedience to the one who disobeys Allah!"

HADITH # 18

أخبرنا أبو عبد الله الصفار ثنا محمد بن إبراهيم الأصبهاني ثنا الحسين بن حفص عن سفيان عن أبي حصين عن عبد الرحمن بن بشير الأنصاري قال : أتى رجل فنادى ابن مسعود فأكب عليه فقال : يا أبا عبد الرحمن متى أضل و أنا أعلم ؟ قال : إذا كانت عليك أمراء إذا أطعتهم أدخلوك النار و إذا عصيتهم قتلوك

Abdur Rahman bin Basheer al-Alansaari reported that a man came and called Ibn e Masud (May Allah be pleased with him), so he turned towards him, so the man said, "O Abu Abdur Rahman ! When will (the ummah) go astray and how will I know? He said, "When there will be on you rulers, if you follow them, they will lead you to hell-fire and if you disobey them they will kill you"

Reference: Mastadrak al-Haakim (Hadith # 8424), the Hadith is mawquf, Ad-Dahabi authenticated it in his Talkhees. There is a similar narration in Masnaf Abu Shaiba (Hadith # 38389) and Masnaf Abdur Razzak (Hadith # 37234), with slight difference in wording: "if you follow them, they will lead you astray…"

LESSONS FROM THIS HADITH

Rulers will force us to enter a system, which will lead us to hell-fire, and if we try to revolt against them, they will crush us by their power; this is when the Ummah will go astray. Furthermore, there is a silent approval of rebellion against these rulers in the saying of Ibn Mas'ud (May Allah be pleased with him).

HADITH # 19

سيلي أموركم من بعدي رجال يعرفونكم ما تنكرون وينكرون عليكم ما تعرفون فمن أدرك ذلك منكم فلا طاعة لمن عصى الله عز و جل

"Some men will rule over you after me, who will show you what is not pleasing to you, and will dislike what is pleasing to you, whosoever from you reaches that time, then there is no obedience to the one who disobeys Allah"

Reference: Mastadrak al-Haakim (Hadith # 5530), hakim says it is according to the condition of the two shaikhs. Authenticated by al-Albani in As Saheeha (Hadith # 590). Narrated by 'Ubada bin Saamit (May Allah be pleased with him).

LESSONS FROM THIS HADITH

It is not mentioned explicitly in this hadith but as the advice "then there is no obedience to the one who disobeys Allah" matches with the last two ahaadith, perhaps the disliked acts mentioned are not ruling according to the law of Allah.

Kuat tidak semestinya menang, lemah tidak semestinya tewas

Posted: 02 Jul 2011 09:09 PM PDT

Ada pihak yang memberitahu yang kerajaan akan meneruskan penangkapan secara besar-besaran terhadap mereka yang bersimpati dengan Bersih semasa Najib tiada di dalam negara dan tidak tahulah samada berita itu benar atau sebaliknya. Apa yang dihasratkan oleh Bersih untuk meminta semua pihak bersama termasuk UMNO dan BN mengadakan rally itu telah dimomokan oleh pihak kerajaan sebagai perusuh dan pengancam keamanan dan tindakan memomokan itu semata-mata kerana takut kehilangan kuasa yang sangat besar nikmatnya itu.

Akhirnya tujuan untuk mengadakan rally secara aman itu telah menjadi isu anti establishment yang dicipta oleh pihak politik kerajaan itu. Hasilnya pihak kementerian dalam negeri telah mengharamkan pertubuhan Bersih ini dan itu mengusik banyak pihak dan rakyat. Penangkapan yang sebegitu ramai oleh pihak Polis itu telah menggunakan ordinan dharurat 1969 dan tidaklah diketahui apa kesudahan yang akan kita hadapi.

Hanya kita berdoa dan sentiasa berfikir secara rasioanl bagaimana rakyat untuk menghadapi tindakan pihak Polis yang dianggap dari segi moralnya sebagai 'high handed' ini. Jika Bersih di haramkan maka rally itu akan mudah digagalkan oleh pihak Polis dan saya tidak mahu ramai rakan-rakan yang menjadi mangsa oleh tangkapan pihak berkuasa.

Itulah sebabnya di dalam posting saya yang lepas saya mencadangkan supaya jika seseorang itu masih mahu menyokong Bersih elok diberikan sokongan itu dirumah sahaja. Banyak cara boleh kita lakukan. Oleh kerana pihak kerajaan telah menjadikan isu ini sebagai isu politik, dan sengaja meletakan rally ini sebagai rally anti kerajaan, maka sekali gus ianya menjadikan perhimpunan ini sebagai perhimpunan yang menyemarakan perasaan penentangan terhadap kita dan ini benar-benar menyebabkan kita kehilangan sokongan yang bertambah ketara dari orang ramai.

Segala usaha untuk mengembalikan sokongan ramai terhadap UMNO kembali gagal kerana tindakan negatif kita sendiri. Saya menganggap tindakan ini sebagai tindakan yang tidak berhidayah dan satu lagi yang nyata kekurangan yang ada kepada kita ialah 'wisdom'm sebagai pihak yang memerintah manusia yang berbagai macam ragam.

Pihak pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO khususnya tidak berupaya menghadapi krisis yang kecil, jauh sekali untuk menghadap krisis yang besar. UMNO telah menggalakan Perkasa untuk melakukan rally untuk menentang rally Bersih yang dari awalnya telah berterus terang untuk melakukannya secara aman. Apa yang dilakukan ini seolah-olah sengaja untuk menjadikan rally pada 9hb Julai ini untuk mengambil kesempatan bagi mengambil tindakan undang-undang terhadap mereka yang mereka (UMNO) tidak sebulu dengan mereka.

Apa yang mengganggu pemikiran kita ialah apabila memikirkan apalah 'consequence' buruk yang pihak kita sendiri akan hadapi. Jika ianya menghasilkan perasaan tidak senang kepada orang ramai rakyat tidak akan memberikan sokongan kepada kita lagi. Dari segi psikoloji nya tidak ada rakyat yang akan memberikan dukongan kepada pemerintah yang tidak tahu mengawal perasaan ramai. Tetapi apabila rakyat tidak berkeyakinan kita selalunya akan melakukan bermacam-macam perkara yang lebih tidak di sukai ramai.

Itulah sebabnya saya berulang kali menyatakan yang untung di dalam isu ini ialah parti-parti pembangkang. Kita tidak sedar parti-parti pembangkang mendapat sokongan orang ramai kerana sikap dan kelakuan kita sendiri. Parti-parti pembangkang tidak lagi payah berusaha kuat untuk memenangi hati rakyat kerana kerja itu semua telah dilakukan oleh pihak kita sendiri. Kita yang memperkuatkan parti pembangkang sebenarnya.

Kita tidak mampu untuk membuatkan orang ramai sayang kepada kita, sebaliknya kita hanya membuatkan rakyat takut kepada kita. Kalau kita berterusan menakutkan rakyat, kita mesti mengakui yang ketakutan itu tidak akan kekal lama. Rakyat akan memberontak di dalam jiwa masing-masing dan itu akan diterjemahkan kepada penolakan di dalam peti undi nanti.

Tetapi oleh kerana pandangan seperti ini tidak mendapat pertimbangan maka jika terbukti kebenaran kepada pandangan ini nanti, ianya mungkin sudah terlambat untuk membetulkan keadaannya.

Posted: 02 Jul 2011 04:07 PM PDT

IV. The apportionment and delimitation of constituencies – Gerrymandering as norm

The Federal Constitution places the responsibility of delimiting constituencies⁶⁸ on the Election Commission.⁶⁹The delimitation of constituencies ought to be done according to clear guidelines by a neutral and independent Election Commission because electoral results can differ greatly according to how the lines are drawn. There are broadly two ways in which the power to delimit may be abused: firstly, mal-apportionment (where the size of the constituencies delimited are grossly disproportionate) and, secondly, gerrymandering (where a delimitation is made with a view to unfairly favouring a particular political party).⁷⁰

Unfortunately, the Federal Constitution does not adequately spell out the guiding principles under which the Election Commission should carry out its duty in delimitation exercises.⁷¹ Vague and general guidelines give rise to inherent ambiguities that could work unfairly against contesting candidates. The vague usage of expressions such as "regard ought to be had", "inconveniences attendant on alterations of constituencies", and "maintenance of local ties"⁷² without further elaboration leaves much to be desired in assuring consistent and fair delimitation practices.

It would hence not come as a surprise that the electoral process is susceptible to abuse through arbitrary and capricious definitions adopted by the Election Commission of the day. For instance, nothing in the guidelines obliges the Election Commission to strictly adhere to the equal-sized constituency doctrine in the delineation process. This gives rise to mal-apportionment where disproportionately-sized constituencies can be delineated to favour a particular political party.

The Malaysian electoral system fails to adhere to the one-vote-one-value principle in its elections. A rural weightage principle is constitutionally provided for in the Thirteenth Schedule of the Federal Constitution,⁷³ thereby augmenting the value of rural electors' votes and, as a result, diluting the perceived advantage (in terms of accessibility, connectivity and communication) their urban counterparts carry over them.⁷⁴

However, the Federal Constitution does not define "rural" and "urban" for the purposes of constituency delineation.⁷⁵Not once has the Election Commission attempted to define what "rural" and "urban" areas actually mean in the course of the delineation exercises.

The problem is made worse by the removal of the limitation on the maximum allowable difference in the number of electorates between the rural and the urban constituencies.⁷⁶

Prior to 1957, the maximum allowable difference between the number of electorates in a rural and an urban district was 33 per cent.⁷⁷ Following the Reid Commission's recommendations in 1957, the limitation was reduced to 15 per cent. This produced a closer adherence to an equal-sized constituency doctrine. However, this limitation was relaxed to 50 per cent in 1962 ⁷⁸ and eventually entirely removed in 1973,⁷⁹ resulting in Malay-based parties being given an electoral advantage.⁸⁰

Some empirical analysis on electoral trends between 1960 and 1999 is sufficient to illustrate the Malay electoral advantage. The Malay population in Peninsular Malaysia was relatively stable, measuring to an average of around 55 per cent of the entire Peninsular Malaysian population.⁸¹ One would have expected that this would be proportionally mirrored in the corresponding percentage of Malay-majority constituencies. However, it was observed that notwithstanding the relatively constant percentage of the Malay population, the percentage of Malay-majority constituencies has seen a consistent increase over the years from the 1959 election to the 1999 election.⁸² This trend holds true at the Federal level as well.⁸³

One possible explanation for such an electoral pattern is the increasingly liberal franchise rules flowing from the Federation's gradual move towards liberalisation of citizenship requirements over the decades.⁸⁴ This invariably resulted in decreasing the enfranchisement advantage that the Malays had over other minority ethnic groups. The ruling coalition saw the need to counterbalance this effect by adjusting the scale to maintain its electoral advantage over other opposition parties representing the minority non-Malay electorate. This could only be brought about through carefully engineered constituency re-delineations in a way that would enhance the political control of Malay-based political parties.⁸⁵

With respect to Sabah and Sarawak, political competition is heavily skewed in favour of the Muslim bumiputras (including the Malays) vis-à-vis non-Muslim bumiputras and other ethnic groups. This has been made possible through a grossly disproportionate advantage given to the former that devalues the latter's votes more drastically than the rural weightage imposed in Peninsular Malaysia.

In both states, no electorally advantaged community constituted the majority in their state constituencies.⁸⁶ Malay-based political parties had the most to gain from this. Again, the success of Malay-based political parties in Sabah and Sarawak⁸⁷ would not have been possible without biased re-delineation practices.

The rural weightage principle would have become the Umno-led coalition's absolute trump card were it not for the opposition PAS (Parti Islam SeMalaysia). PAS is a predominantly pro-Islam Malay political party which primarily aims to attract Malay-Muslim votes. As such, the rural weightage principle becomes a double-edged sword in PAS-contested constituencies.

Umno runs a considerable risk of losing out to PAS, as evidenced by PAS's historical success in diluting Umno dominance in the 1999 and 2008 elections. In the 1999 election, PAS secured a total of 98 out of 394 seats in both the Federal and State legislatures in Peninsular Malaysia, posing a real threat to the BN.⁸⁸

In 2004, Umno's apparent stratagem against the PAS came in the form of mal-apportionment and gerrymandering in the 2003 constituency re-delineation.⁸⁹ The opposition charged, inter alia, that the effect of the constituency review was to diversify the ethnic composition in PAS-held constituencies so as to reduce PAS's chances of securing victory in the 2004 election.⁹⁰ True enough, it turned out that PAS suffered a huge setback, losing control over the state of Terengganu and securing only a marginal victory in Kelantan with a narrow majority of 24 out of 45 seats.⁹¹

With respect to one of the most contentious states,⁹²Kedah,⁹³ it was shown that "[t[he 2002 delimitation process involved moving 'safe areas' in traditional Umno strongholds and non-Malays seats into constituencies that were vulnerable to the opposition and changing boundaries beyond the usual administrative areas in order to create constituencies that would strengthen the BN's electoral position."⁹⁴

Again, the 2002 re-delimitation exercise demonstrated how Umno became the beneficiary of a tactical dilution-through-diversification approach against PAS-held state constituencies in Kedah. Non-Malay wards deemed to be the BN's "safe state seats" were fused with PAS-held constituencies in the redrawing of boundaries.⁹⁵ For instance, the cross-administrative district transplantation of the Gurun state seat to the parliamentary state seat of Yan (renamed Jerai) was cited as a particularly egregious case of gerrymandering, the intention of which was to defeat PAS which previously won the seat in Yan by a slim majority of 0.7 per cent of the votes cast.⁹⁶ The political impact of importing the "safe votes" from Gurun to Yan essentially boosted the BN's electoral strength by an estimated 5,233 ⁹⁷ votes.⁹⁸

A similar pattern was observed in the parliamentary seats of Pokok Sena, Kuala Kedah and Baling.⁹⁹ The parliamentary seat of Alor Setar (which previously gave the BN an overwhelming victory of 14,384 votes) was employed as a buffer to absorb the state seat of Telok Kechai, neutralising the electoral disadvantage it provided the BN (in the parliamentary seat of Kuala Kedah) in the 1999 election.¹⁰⁰ The result of the 2004 election, as one might have expected, was a crushing defeat for PAS.¹⁰¹

A revival of the limitation on the variation in the numbers of electorates between rural and urban constituencies has to be the primary focus of reform. It is not logical to assume that rural areas invariably remain rural in light of the relentless pace of urbanisation in Malaysia. This is sufficient to justify imposing a limitation – with the prospect of increasing equalisation – on the variation in electorate size between rural and urban areas.

As mentioned earlier, constitutional amendments over the years have gradually eroded the Election Commission's status as an independent administrator of the electoral process. For instance, the dissatisfaction by the Alliance over the Election Commission's Report of 1960 to re-delineate constituencies and reduce the number of seats in the House of Representatives from 104 to 100 was reversed by a constitutional amendment passed in Parliament.¹⁰²

This showed how easily the Election Commission's actions in delimitation could be reversed by dissatisfied political parties in power. This 'thwarting mechanism' makes a convenient tool for the ruling party to fine-tune any changes brought by the Election Commission to its own political advantage. The Election Commission's powers to delimit constituencies were also seriously constrained with the addition of the Thirteenth Schedule to the Federal Constitution, which effectively confined the Election Commission to reviewing only the division of the Federation and states into constituencies and recommending necessary changes.¹⁰³

Also, the Election Commission's recommendations are now required to be submitted to the Prime Minister who reserves the right to alter the recommendations even before they are submitted to the House of Representatives.¹⁰⁴ If the House of Representatives does not accept the recommendations, the Prime Minister may amend it "after such consultation with the Election Commission as he may consider necessary".¹⁰⁵ The recommendations for delimitation need only be objected to by one-half of the members in the House of Representatives, and neither the Senate nor the Upper House (Dewan Negara) need to be consulted.¹⁰⁶

Even though the public may under appropriate conditions submit its objection to any recommendations proposed, thereby obliging the Election Commission to conduct a local enquiry in respect of the relevant constituencies,¹⁰⁷ the Election Commission may not conduct more than two such local enquiries.¹⁰⁸

Other later changes¹⁰⁹ include a prescriptive approach undertaken by Parliament as a prerogative to apportion the seats amongst the states of Peninsular Malaysia,¹¹⁰ as well as the removal of the limitation in the variation in electorate numbers between the rural and urban constituencies.¹¹¹ The exercise of the Election Commission's powers has since been relegated to the residual task of delineating constituencies within every state. The more important macro prerogative of apportioning seats in the House of Representatives is acquired by Parliament.

More recent changes¹¹² have further relaxed the rules regarding periodic review of constituencies by allowing a special review of constituencies to be undertaken for any state, or part of a state, whenever the House of Representatives or any state assembly varies the number of its seats.¹¹³ Additionally, the upper limit for mandatory periodic review of constituencies has been removed, giving rise to the possibility that constituencies may turn static should the Election Commission decline to initiate a review. The consequence of these changes is to enable the ruling party to effect any change to the constituencies at practically any time.

This substantial whittling down of the constitutional role of the Election Commission and the considerable transfer of constitutional power to Parliament runs counter to the notion of an independent and effective Election Commission, capable of discharging the independent and neutral administration of elections.¹¹⁴

Posted: 02 Jul 2011 08:21 AM PDT

No elaboration on when and how she is supposed to have made the threat.

A vile and unsubstantiated allegation.

I've known Ambiga for over a decade now and have known her to always be most respectful of all faiths and beliefs, without exception.

I'm not alone. Many members of the Bar will bear testimony to this.

Perhaps Najib should desist in unsubstantiated attacks against Ambiga and explain why charges of sedition for a most vile and filthy attack on the faith of the Malays in this country by Syeditious Akbar ali were dropped by the Attorney General's chambers.

The charge sheet, in PDF, is linked below again for your ease of reference.

Charge Sheet against Seditious Akbar Ali

You will note that it is dated 6th May, 2008 and signed by DPP Mohamed Hanafiah bin Zakaria, the same day, according to Syeditious post dated 18th October, 2010, that he was charged in court.

It is fair to assume that someone in the AG's chambers had, before Syeditious was charged, scrutinized the investigation papers submitted by the police authorities and had formed the view that Syeditious comments were indeed seditious and warranted the preferring of charges.

Hence the charges in court on 6th May, 2008 upon the terms as appear in the charge sheet.

And I cannot imagine that anyone who has since read the full tenor of Syeditious comments, however much they disliked the sedition laws, would argue that he did not deserve to be charged for such an insensitive and hateful attack.

In my related post yesterday, I had shared how, after Syeditious had received advise of legal counsel, he had asked that no moves be made to raise techncal objections until he gave further instructions, and when those instructions finally came, it was that no such technical objections were to be taken as the case against him would be dropped.

As Syeditious had predicted, the charges were subsequently dropped.

READ MORE HERE

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Isnin, 4 Julai 2011

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan