Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Posted: 03 Jul 2011 11:28 AM PDT

By Melissa Chi, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, July 4 — Human rights group Amnesty International today demanded the government either immediately released Bersih 2.0 activists or charged them in court, instead of using detention without trial laws.

Police have detained six Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) members under the Emergency Ordinance since last Saturday for investigations that they were "waging a war against the Agong" as they were found with T-shirts that had pictures of former communist leaders.

"Immediately release all activists or charge them with a recognisable criminal offence, drop unfounded charges, and respect the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly," Amnesty International said.

The international non-governmental organisation (NGO) pointed out that Malaysian authorities were arbitrarily arresting and detaining scores of peaceful electoral reform protesters in the "worst repression of free speech and freedom of assembly" in recent years.

Since June 24, more than 100 activists have been arrested or questioned by police over their support of an electoral reform rally.

The demonstration is being planned for July 9 by the Coalition for Fair and Free Elections, also known as Bersih 2.0, meaning "Clean".

"The Malaysian authorities are muzzling calls for electoral reform by throwing peaceful protestors in jail," said Donna Guest, deputy Asia-Pacific director at Amnesty International. "We have not seen such a crackdown on political activists across Malaysia in many years."

People have been arrested for as little as wearing yellow, which is the colour of Bersih 2.0, are being held without charge, and face investigation for sedition and unlawful assembly.

The government had also threatened to invoke the Internal Security Act over the rally, allowing for indefinite detention without trial.

"Malaysia is undermining its claim to be a moderate democracy through this campaign of repression," Guest said.

On June 29, police raided the office of the Bersih 2.0 secretariat without a warrant, briefly detaining seven people and confiscating laptops, cameras and rally materials.

The chair of the Bersih 2.0 organising committee, prominent lawyer Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, and Malaysian poet laureate A. Samad Said are both being investigated by police under the Sedition Act and Police Act for organising an "unlawful assembly".

Bersih 2.0 is Najib’s biggest challenge

Posted: 03 Jul 2011 11:23 AM PDT

By Ooi Kee Beng

As July 9 looms closer, the administration of Malaysia's Premier Najib Abdul Razak feels itself more and more pushed into a corner.

This coming Saturday threatens to be a day of reckoning for his administration, which from the beginning preferred tweaking the system to reforming the system. Now, two years after he took power from Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, another leader who failed to live up to his own reformist image, he is running out of options.

At the same time, many of his countrymen have run out of patience. Even those sitting on the fence had been hoping against hope that the Barisan Nasional would be able to somehow reverse the degradation of governance that the country has suffered since the days of Dr Mahathir Mohamed.

A non-government organisation calling itself Bersih 2.0 is arranging a huge demonstration in Kuala Lumpur on July 9 to demand electoral reform. The first time such a rally happened was on November 10, 2007. That had amazing results. An estimated 40,000 people took to the streets wearing yellow to symbolise loyalty to the King, not the government.

A huge Hindu rights rally followed a few weeks later and the impetus from these protests almost floored the Barisan Nasional government in the general election that followed soon after.

Now with the many deliberate signals sent by Prime Minister Najib recently that fresh elections might be around the corner, there is reason to believe this second Bersih rally will hold great consequences for the country's democratic development. The government certainly believes so and has been making arrests for offences such as wearing yellow T-shirts and even the "hidden" wearing of the apparently seditious apparel.

Solidarity rallies in support of Bersih 2.0 are planned in Seoul, Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney, Osaka, Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York and perhaps other places as well. In Kuala Lumpur, at least twice the number of participants as before is expected to march for fairer elections.

As before, a memorandum with eight demands will be handed to the King. No demonstration permit has officially been sought by Bersih 2.0 or Perkasa, the right-wing Umno-supported group that will be carrying out a counter demonstration.

Umno Youth, which under Mr Khairy Jamaluddin will also hold its own march on that day, has formally applied for a permit.

In what seems like a bad overreaction, Home Affairs Minister Hishammuddin Hussein has banned Bersih and arrested members of the Parti Socialis Malaysia while taking no action against Umno Youth and Perkasa, despite threats of racial violence from the latter.

Perkasa's eccentric leader, Mr Ibrahim Ali, has been issuing warnings to Chinese about taking part in the demonstration. This makes little sense since a large majority of the marchers are expected to be followers of Parti Islam SeMalaysia.

In truth, the government's unwillingness in recent months to charge Mr Ibrahim with sedition or take the Umno newspaper Utusan Melayu to task for making statements of this kind, has been a source of anger for many.

Electoral fairness

To be sure, demanding electoral reforms has shown itself to be a cogent way of mobilising Malaysians and increasing their political involvement. There are different reasons for this.

First, a democracy's credibility and efficacy depends on the perceived fairness of the electoral system and Malaysia's has not met that for a long time now. This point is intuitively understood by the common man and woman.

Second, electoral fairness is an issue that does not turn racial easily and has therefore functioned well as a lightning rod for general discontent.

Third, there have been many by-elections in Malaysia and these cannot help but showcase official disregard for clean and fair elections.

What Prime Minister Najib should be learning from this is that his barrage of reform terms — 1Malaysia, New Economic Model, Economic Transformation Program or Government Transformation Program — suffers a serious credibility problem. His coalition may not have lost much ground but it has not gained any either, as the recent Sarawak state election showed. Now in his third year as prime minister, his failure to be decisive on reform is perceived as conscious policy, and not the result of inexperience or bad advice.

His nemesis — Pakatan Rakyat, the opposition coalition — has survived three impressive years and more and more Malaysians now believe that elections can lead to change even when the dice are loaded in the government's favour. Should the demanded reforms be carried out, the ruling Barisan Nasional would lose more ground in the next elections.

To conclude, the fourth and most important reason for civil society to call for electoral reforms is that the demands are clearly sensible.

The fact that things are now coming to a head and the police are making arrests with no credible legal grounds, shows the inefficacy of parliamentary debate in Malaysia today and the government's inability to reverse the wave of dissension that has been growing since before the first Bersih demonstration in 2007. — Today

* The writer is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #72

Posted: 03 Jul 2011 11:07 AM PDT

Chapter 9: Islam in Malay Life

Authoritative Versus Authoritarian Ulamas and Scholars

M. Bakri Musa

Then there are such irrelevant issues as who can and cannot partake in these debates. There are those ulamas and scholars who feel that only they are qualified enough to partake in such heavy issues. The rest need merely follow their dictates. They are not so much authoritative as much as authoritarian, to use Khalid El Fadl's words.

It reminds me of the bad old days of imperious doctors who behave like Gods; their utterances and decisions cannot be challenged, least of all by the laity. Thank God, those days are gone. Today physicians fully engage their patients and they in turn participate fully in decisions affecting themselves. The seeking of second and alternate opinions is now standard practice.

Take the issue of Islamic scholars, another very contentious one. Much of the confusion and the ensuing controversies revolve around the different meanings of basic terms. I can best illustrate this by using the example of surgical scholars. In the academic department I was once associated with, among my colleagues were a veterinary doctor, a biochemist, and an engineer. In standing, pay and prestige, these professors of surgery were no different from the other "operating" professors of surgery, the clinician surgeons. They taught medical students and would-be surgeons, and published in surgical journals. But if one were to have appendicitis, one would not ask these "non-operating" professors to operate. If someone were stupid enough to do so, he or she would be politely if not embarrassedly referred to the "real" surgeons in the department.

Similarly there are Islamic scholars and there are ulama. One can learn a lot about Islam – both the discipline as well as the faith – from Islamic scholars; but in performing funeral rites or reciting the Surah Yaseeen (requiem), one needs the ulama. In medicine there are strict rules as to who can treat patients. Apart from specific training, he or she has to be properly licensed. Anyone not so licensed, no matter how competent, could be charged with fraud and criminal assault were they to practice as physicians. This is to protect the public.

No such statutory delineations occur in the practice of Islam, and rightly so. Islam, unlike other religions, lacks a proscribed clergy class. In Islam it is we mortals and Allah, there being no need for an intermediary. There are no priests, bishops, or pope in Islam. Sure we have an imam, but to paraphrase an ancient saying, he is imam because we, the flock, call him so. His power and prestige are derived from and not imposed upon the congregation.

The present heavily bureaucratized Islam, with ulama placed on salary schemes and acquiring all the other accouterments of the civil service, is purely a Malaysian phenomenon. No surprise then that these modern day ulama behave like their petty counterparts in the civil service – very conscious of their turf. Thus, instead of engaging in a scholarly fashion with those who disagree with them, these ulama treat new ideas as potential threats. Hence the ugly specter of the president of the Muslim Scholars Association filing a police report against writers he disagreed with, instead of publishing his own scholarly rebuttal!

This is not a surprise considering the training these ulama had undergone. They are not so much being educated as being indoctrinated. The quality of their scholarship, certainly when viewed from the vantage point of Western scholarship adept at critical thinking and "deconstruction," is severely wanting. Their training is akin to that of students of classical music. Classical musicians are trained not to interpret but simply to follow the path of their masters before them. Improvisations or novel interpretations are not expected or welcomed. If you do, you may end up playing for the local jazz band instead. Only when you have become a Glenn Gould could you establish your own style. Until then, no fancy incidental notes or flourishes in phrasing. Follow the score as it is written.

Likewise the ulama; they are not expected to put forth any new thought or to question. Indeed such critical thinking and novel interpretations are viewed suspiciously as the devil's machinations. Occasionally one may get an alim, who, having mastered the existing state of knowledge, goes on to make his own seminal contributions. There were many such outstanding individuals in the history of Islam. Some were successful in blazing new trails in the understanding of our faith, but most ended up being marginalized or worse, labeled as apostate –and treated accordingly.

What is threatening the world of the traditional ulama today is not the "orientalist" secular Islamic scholars like Patricia Martinez and Farish Noor, rather the emergence of ulama trained in the traditional madrasah system who then went on to be exposed to the rigors of Western scholarship. In the past such scholar-ulama were denigrated back in their native lands, but with the heightened interest in Islam in the West, these individuals are now eagerly sought after by leading Western universities. From their vantage point there, with its superior supporting structures and generous funding, this new breed of scholar-ulama are spreading their views onto the wider Islamic world. With their madrasah credentials, they are as erudite and exquisite in their tajweed (rendition of the Qur'an) as the best of Al Azhar.

The Islamic faith is invigorated with this new breed of scholar-ulama like UCLA's Khaled Abou El Fadl and Duke University's Ebrahim Moosa. These distinguished scholars, steeped in the traditional as well as Western scholarship and well versed in Arabic (the language of Islam) as well as English (the language of technology), will take Islam to greater heights. El Fadl is also remarkable in that he has a personal library of over 6,500 Islamic texts and manuscripts, some dating as far back as the 13th Century. More importantly, these enlightened scholars present a refreshing face of Islam to the modern world, a view more in consonant with the ideals of the faith as revealed to our prophet (pbuh) – a much-needed antidote to the rabble rousing and fatwa-issuing likes of Osama bin Ladin. These modern scholars spread the word of Islam not by issuing endless edicts but by the power of their intellect and the logic of their arguments. As the Iranian scholar Abdoolkarim Soroosh noted, the Qur'an is divine; its interpretation is human. The text of the scripture is silent; it is up to us to make it speak. These enlightened scholars have given a fresh voice to the Qur'an.

Much of the present understanding of Islam comes from the works of dedicated scholars, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. All Muslims should value their contributions. They complement our ulama. Confusion arises only when scholars try to assume the trappings of an alim, or when ulama take on the pretensions of a scholar.

For Malays, Islam is the central element of our culture; it also defines Malayness. Legally, a Malay is someone who regularly practices the Malay culture and professes Islam. Malays belong to the mainstream Sunni sect. But what is more important at the daily level is that Islam in Malaysia is what the government bureaucrats deem it to be. Anyone straying from this "straight path," as defined by the government's ulama, risks being branded as a subversive or "deviationist," and will suffer the worldly consequences (like being incarcerated under the ISA).

Islam arrived in the Malay world in the 15th Century by way of Muslim traders. It did not land on a cultural vacuum as Malays then were already steeped in Hindu beliefs and animist traditions. Many Malays today would want to deny this aspect of our past, to wipe the slate clean. This tendency to overlook what present-day Islamists view as less-than-pristine "unIslamic" past is not an affliction peculiar only to Malays. The Japanese have yet to come to terms with their role in World War II. Thus the preoccupation of Malays today in trying to "cleanse" and "purify" the faith, while misguided, is understandable. The difference between the Talibans blasting to smithereens the ancient Buddhist monuments and Malaysian Islamists desecrating Hindu temples is only a matter of degree.

Sadly, much of the world today view Osama bin Ladin and his band of the Talibans as representing the essence of Islam. Unfortunately many Islamic leaders and scholars implicitly encourage this misconception by not condemning unequivocally the criminal activities of these extremist Muslims. As the late Sudanese reformist Mohamad Taha observed, religious fanaticism is inalienable from religious ignorance. It is out of ignorance of the basic tenets of Islam that these fanatics view this world as hostile, and not as God's wonderful gift to mankind. The challenge is to enlighten Muslims especially those in Malaysia to the pristine message of Islam.

Next: Shari'a in a Plural Society

Defined research criteria

Posted: 03 Jul 2011 11:02 AM PDT

By R Nadeswaran, The Sun

THE horror stories one hears about government grants, especially meant for research, can make a few chapters if a revised edition of Grimm's Fairy Tales is published.

From mark-ups to non-existent activities, we have been told, money has been doled out without question and in many cases without proper answers.

In short, money meant for use in efforts to create new and innovative products and resources that will assist the country have literally ended up in the pockets of a few masquerading as researchers and scientists.

Just how much has been allocated for research is not known because each ministry or government agency has been doling out money under what each terms "our budget".

The system of dishing out grants in Malaysia has never been transparent and neither has any expertise been enlisted to scrutinise the proposed research or budget. On top of that, the results and findings of the research (in many cases) were never asked for nor given.

As this is being written, a journalist from Malaysia has alerted me to the Sports Ministry spending RM6 million to have a foreign company "conduct a study on sports in Malaysia".

What results they can or will produce are unknown, but on what basis the company was chosen is as hazy as the low clouds which hover over Genting Highlands. There is no need to submit the methodology, the reasons for the study and how it would help the country.

Last week, I met a Malaysian student who had applied for a grant of £750 (RM3,675) to undertake a study at the Marquette University in Wisconsin during the summer break for his dissertation on A comparison of sports gambling laws in Malaysia, the UK and the US. He had to write a 500-word essay on what he intends to do and the proposed budget. He then had to appear before a panel and present his ideas and what he intends to achieve.

Sorry for the digression, but for the first time, we are seeing some semblance of regulated criteria (including making presentation and competing with each other) to be used when applications are made for public funds.

But there's no reason to cheer because we have been told that there's a massive opposition to such a move because some of our government agencies and their civil service heads feel that their turf and authority are being undermined.

If such opposition is against wastage or excessive spending, everyone will join in a chorus of condemnation. However, in this case, the objection is to some form of accountability of public money.

As the National Innovation Policy under the auspices of the Prime Minister's Department is about to be unveiled, the ground rules have been put in place by the Special Innovation Unit (Unik) which oversees the funding.

But the guns have already been drawn by those who cannot meet the basic require-ment – tell us your aims and expectations from the research for which you are seeking funds.

Spending millions on why thousands of migratory birds end up at the Tenaga Nasional Power Station in Kapar is not going to be beneficial to Malaysians except for the handful of bird-watchers and conservationists.

Similarly, if money is spent on research on goat farming, the results must be made available to everyone – not exactly the researcher, his family and friends.

Some ministries and government agencies, we have been told, are up in arms because they "were not consulted" when the rules were drawn up. But since when did anyone care about consultation when rules and regulations were drawn up arbitrarily when they dished out the cash?

It has often been said that public money should be used prudently and there's a saying "treat people's money as if it was yours". There's no better reason for openness, transparency and accountability than that the money being utilised belongs to millions of Malaysian taxpayers.

With calls for belt-tightening and prudent spending, Unik must stand firm against attempts to browbeat a stand which all right-thinking Malaysians will support.

For some, change may be difficult to accept and comply with, but no one will benefit if old wayward conduct does not change.

Those seeking government handouts must come with clean hands and conduct themselves in a manner befitting the requirements of prudence and caution in spending money which does not belong to them.

The civil servants objecting to the new requirements may be little Napoleons in their respective territories, but they must adhere to rules, regulations, procedure and requirements – however harsh they may appear.

There's no such thing as a free meal, and the sooner these people realise and accept this reality, the better it will be for the nation and its people.

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