Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Why I joined the DAP
- Q & A on the Hudud and Qisas Enactment
- Is Musa on his way out?
- Why Section 114A should be repealed
- Karpal’s strong stance annoys DAP leaders
- Despite defections from BN, Sabah opposition still far from united
- Religious discord getting louder
| Posted: 26 Aug 2012 05:00 PM PDT
Ong Kian Ming, The Malaysian Insider Before joining the DAP, I have never been a member of any other political party despite having worked for two think-tanks that were linked to the MCA and Gerakan. Why am I making the decision to join a political party now and why did I choose the DAP? I believe that our country is at a critical juncture in its history where for the first time since achieving our independence, we have a credible and strong opposition capable of governing at the federal level. This has been most clearly demonstrated in the state governments in Penang and Selangor which have vastly outperformed their predecessors in terms of delivering transparent, accountable, responsiveness and caring governments. At the same time, despite the various transformation initiatives which have been rolled out by our Prime Minister Najib Razak, there is still a glaring absence of fundamental structural reforms that are necessary to spark a genuine process of transformation. Not only is there the business-as-usual way of ill-conceived and murky deals being done — via the various 1MDB-linked land and asset acquisitions, just to name one — we also see a disturbing ramp-up in fear-mongering attempts by the BN-linked papers such as Utusan in order to raise feelings of ethnic insecurity. Things seem to be getting worse for the country as a desperate regime clings to power, seemingly at all costs. As such, the time for sitting on the academic sidelines and commentating as an analyst is over. It is time, at least for me, to take the plunge and to play a more active role to bring about a necessary regime change in the country. While some may say that I could have continued to be a critical voice in the public sphere without joining an opposition political party, especially in the area of evaluating government policy, there are some natural limitations to what one person working in a non-political context can achieve. Playing the role of a check and balance on those in power can be most effectively carried out by opposition political parties and politicians, because that is one of their primary responsibilities. Coming up with coherent alternative government policies needs to occur within the context of opposition political parties because they are the ones who have the power to implement these policies if they come to power. The important process of discussing and debating policy platforms and political positions can only take place within the context of political parties and one needs to be a member of a party to contribute effectively. While I very much value the voice of civil society, I feel that I can play a more effective role, moving forward, as a member of a political party in providing inputs in my areas of expertise. Why do I choose to join the DAP specifically? Firstly, the position which the DAP has taken and continues to take, on major national issues, is consistent with my own political beliefs. The DAP's vision of a more equitable and just Malaysia that is secular, free from corruption, governed democratically and by the rule of law is a vision which I very much share in. My many columns and comments in newspapers will reflect this, I feel, starting from the time when I was working in two BN-linked think-tanks — the Institute of Strategic Analysis and Policy Research (INSAP) and the Socio-Economic Development and Research (SEDAR) Institute. For example, I have been writing and researching on the issues of electoral reform and of ensuring a clean electoral roll since 2001. Secondly, I have great respect for the many sacrifices which many of the DAP leaders have made because of their political beliefs including being beaten up, humiliated and even jailed under the various repressive laws that continue to exist in this country. Leaders like Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng, Karpal Singh and Teresa Kok, just to name a few, have demonstrated their willingness to walk the walk during their many years of struggle in the political arena. Thirdly, I have utmost confidence in the leadership of the DAP in its intention to renew its ranks and to bring in fresh perspectives and ideas. My experience in interacting and working with many of the younger DAP leaders including Tony Pua (who invited me to blog about education-related matters way back in 2006), Anthony Loke, Liew Chin Tong, Teo Nie Ching, Chong Chieng Jen, Hannah Yeoh, Wong Kah Woh and Teo Kok Seong has been very positive and has reinforced my confidence that the DAP will be in very good hands in the future. Furthermore, I am very encouraged by the DAP's efforts in recruiting young and capable future leaders into their ranks including Zairil Khir Johari, Steven Sim and Kasturi Patto. What kind of role do I see myself playing within the DAP? I remain committed to the issues which I am passionate about and will continue to highlight issues pertaining to electoral reform, education policy, decentralisation and other aspects of economic policy. Thankfully, I will not be alone as I will have the opportunity to supplement and complement what other DAP leaders have said on these issues. If the opportunity arises, I will also highlight other policy-related issues which are timely and important but which I feel sufficient attention has not been given to. I will also continue my work as an elections analyst to provide insights and analysis to the DAP. It will be an interesting learning experience as I navigate the demands of being a member of a political party and to make whatever contributions I can to the DAP as a member. I will obviously have to give up my "hat" of a political analyst but it is a small sacrifice to play in the larger scheme of things. I look forward to the new challenges that are coming my way and I am excited about the prospects of playing a small but hopefully meaningful role in the context of bringing about positive change to our country as part of the DAP. (I am in the process of completing the final report on the findings of the Malaysian Electoral Analysis Project (MERAP) which will be published online. I am on sabbatical leave from UCSI University until the end of the year.) * Ong Kian Ming holds a PhD in political science from Duke University and economics degrees from the University of Cambridge and the London School of Economics (LSE). He recently joined the DAP. He can be reached at im.ok.man@gmail.com
|
| Q & A on the Hudud and Qisas Enactment Posted: 25 Aug 2012 07:27 AM PDT
In countries with a population that are not predominantly Muslim (e.g Nigeria and Sudan), the laws are not applicable to non-Muslims. In countries where non-Muslims are of very small minority or non-existent and where an Islamic state is established (such as in Saudi Arabia, Iran), Hudud offences and punishments are incorporated into the law of the land and apply to all citizens. 1. What is the Hudud and Qisas Law? Hudud and Qisas laws deal with offences and punishments that are interpreted by Muslim juristic scholars to be derived from the Qur'an and the Sunnah (of the prophet). Hudud literally means limit. According to some scholars, the word "hudud" is not used in the Qur'an specifically in terms of punishment. However juristic opinion has reduced hudud to mean mandatory punishment. Under Hudud law, theft, robbery, illicit sex, alcohol consumption and apostasy are considered offences. Punishment for these offences are corporal in nature, involving whipping, stoning to death and amputation of limbs. Qisas (law of retaliation) refers to offences that involve bodily injury or loss of life. The punishment is death or imprisonment, but compensation in the form of a sum of money or property (diyat and irsy) is accepted if the guardian of the victim forgives the offender. In Malaysia both Hudud and Qisas offences are contained in the set of legislation known as the Syariah Criminal Code Enactment. In Kelantan the law is formally called the Syariah Criminal Code (11) Enactment 1993 and was passed on November 25, 1993. In Terengganu the Syariah Criminal Offences (Hudud and Qisas) Bill was passed on July 8, 2002. 2. What offences are covered in the Kelantan and Terengganu Enactments? Six offences are recognised under the Enactment as Hudud offences, namely:
3. What are the punishments prescribed for the offences?
Every offence except zina must be proven by the testimony of 2 adult principled male Muslim witnesses who have not committed any major sins nor continue to commit minor sins. Zina is to be proven by the testimony of 4 adult principled male Muslim witnesses. Zina can also be proven by pregnancy of or birth of a child by a woman not then married unless she brings proof to the contrary. In the event there is insufficient evidence for the purposes of meting out hudud punishments, then the offender may nevertheless be punished by the court with non-hudud punishments. This is known as ta'zir punishment. 5. Can Hudud punishment be reduced and adjusted? Hudud punishment is mandatory. Section 50 of the Terengganu Enactment provides that hudud punishments may not be reduced, substituted, stayed or in any way varied. Nor can the offender be forgiven. 6. What is the difference in the notion of crime between Hudud and any secular penal code? Under secular laws, an action is considered criminal if it brings about serious harm or death to another party or when there is victimization involved. The violation of private property rights, including bodily rights (as in physical assault and rape) is also construed to be a crime. Although Hudud and Qisas are informed by these premises, there are additional areas in the Islamic law which are outside the bounds of these justifications. For example, under secular law, a sexual relationship between consenting adults is not a crime as it does not bring injurious harm to another party. Drinking of alcohol is not a victimizing act, hence it is also not a crime. However, drunken driving is, as it can potentially cause serious harm to another party. The right to renounce one's religion is also not a crime as it is considered a human right to religious freedom, with no repercussions of victimization. In contrast, Hudud law "criminalizes" all of these actions, namely, sex outside marriage, drinking of alcohol and the renouncement of the Islamic religion. Hudud proponents say that these laws are divinely ordained by God. However, the codification and formalization of these laws are mediated by human actions and subjected to human interpretations. 7. How can Hudud be subjected to human interpretations? The hudud provisions have been formed through the opinions of jurists in Muslim jurisprudence. The methodology of interpretation that is used involves ijtihad (independent reasoning) and qiyas (analogy). Their views are further subjected to sanctions through a politico-legal process of ijma or consensus of the jurists or through majority opinion (jumhur). The founding of the four schools of jurisprudence by the four great imams (Abu Haniffa, Malik ibn Anas, Shaf'i and Hanbal) were all in the Abbasid period, stretching from the 8th to the 13th century, or 100 years after the Prophet's death. 8. What other countries have a similar law? Hudud laws were introduced in Pakistan in 1979 under the rule of General Zia ul-Haq. In Sudan President Numeiri introduced Hudud by replacing the old Penal Code of 1974 with the new Penal Code of 1983. In the new Penal Code of Sudan, Hudud offences such as adultery are unlawful and the punishment will vary for Muslims and non-Muslims and whether one was married or unmarried. In Nigeria the northern state of Zamfara was the first to introduce the Hudud law in January 2000. Nine other Muslim-majority states in Northern Nigeria have subsequently adopted the Hudud to a lesser or greater extent. 9. Is Hudud only applicable to Muslims? In countries with a population that are not predominantly Muslim (e.g Nigeria and Sudan), the laws are not applicable to non-Muslims. In countries where non-Muslims are of very small minority or non-existent and where an Islamic state is established (such as in Saudi Arabia, Iran), Hudud offences and punishments are incorporated into the law of the land and apply to all citizens. 10. Is there a chance that Hudud may overstep the legal rights of non-Muslims? In all likelihood it will. As Malaysia is a plural society and where the concentration of one ethnic community is not necessarily confined to one region or state there are bound to be clashes and overlaps in application. For example in any crime the victim and perpetrator may be of different religions. If the alleged rapist is a Muslim and the victim is a non-Muslim, there will be the question as to under what law the charge would be brought about. Under Hudud the alleged male perpetrator may stand to gain because of the impossibility of getting the testimonies of four Muslim male witnesses. Under Hudud, Muslims who commit robbery of property that is valueless in Islam e.g. liquor or entertainment equipment will have a chance of escaping any prosecution. In another worst-case scenario, such as in an incident of gang-rapes, where there are multiple perpetrators and victims (comprising Muslims and non-Muslims), eye-witness accounts of the rapes which may be offered by the victims would not be admissible as evidence as they may not be Muslim and male. In all of these hypothetical cases non-Muslims will stand to see justice taken away from them. READ MORE HERE
|
| Posted: 23 Aug 2012 03:14 PM PDT Rumours are rife that Najib Tun Razak will soon give the nod for Musa Aman to be replaced by an interim CM. Calvin Cabaron, FMT KOTA KINABALU: Increasingly embattled Umno may be forced to do a rescue reshuffle of the party hierarchy in Sabah in the hope of retaining its political hold on the state. Reliable party insiders here said the reshuffle would involve no less than the top posts in Sabah Umno and the state government Рboth currently held by Musa Aman. Musa's leadership is being openly challenged by his own colleagues. The most recent and stinging attack was from Umno's influential Beaufort MP Lajim Ukin who disclosed that Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak reneged on a pledge to change Musa, who has become subject of various allegations of abuses of power including one involving hundreds of millions of ringgits in a Swiss bank account. Lajim, together with Tuaran MP Wilfred Bumburing, the former deputy president of Upko Рa BN component Рhave since left the national coalition and thrown their support behind Anwar Ibrahim's Pakatan Rakyat. According to the insiders, Najib is expected to give the go-ahead to the idea of replacing Musa as Sabah Umno chief. Shafie Apdal, an Umno vice-president who is also a senior federal minister, will eventually replace Musa. In the interim, these insiders said, Musa would be asked to take a vacation and let a senior Sabah Umno minister take over as chief minister ahead of the 13th general election. Two names had been floated for the job РHajiji Mohd Noor of Tuaran or Masidi Manjun of Ranau. The manoeuvring is to eventually pave the way for Shafie, the Semporna MP, to take over the leadership of the state after the general election. Lajim-Musa tussle Shafie has already won many friends and confidantes in the Sabah BN circles and they include ex-BN stalwarts Lajim and Bumburing, as well as PBS deputy president Maximus Ongkili and LDP president VK Liew, both are serving in the federal government. Umno's grapevine has it that Lajim could well be doing Shafie a favour by steadily going against the establishment. He is expected to provide more information on alleged corruption in government as the election looms. The tussle between Lajim and Musa has been going on for some time. The Beaufort MP went so far as to brief Najib about the swelling disapproval of Musa in the state which was further fueled by the expos̩ of money-laundering investigations being carried out in Malaysia and abroad. Musa is being described as 'Mr Vacuum' by those doing business in Sabah to illustrate the lack of business friendly conditions in the state. Many have overlooked the fact that Musa was already a successful multi-millionaire businessman well before he was appointed chief minister in 2003. When he was appointed, he reportedly declared his wealth to be RM300 million. But that is exactly where other groups are going for his throat. They argue there is no reason for him to allegedly "take all" as he is already very rich. However other spheres of influence control Sabah politics in one way or the other. On one hand, Shafie is said to be close to Najib while on the other Musa reportedly has the ear of the Prime Minister's influential wife, Rosmah Mansor. Najib-Shafie-Yong team Shafie is favourably positioned as the great uniter able to win back Lajim and Bumburing, should the duo get elected under Pakatan ticket in the coming election. According to the Umno insiders, Shafie is also a friend of Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) leader, Yong Teck Lee, and this relationship would come in handy for Najib should there be a hung parliament later.
|
| Why Section 114A should be repealed Posted: 22 Aug 2012 03:19 PM PDT
Continued opposition to this piece of legislation may yet result in it being taken off the statute books. P. Gunasegaram, The Star THE recent amendment to the Evidence Act with the insertion of Section 114(A) basically presumes that a person who is depicted in a publication as owner or administrator is presumed to have published the contents. This effectively means that those named in publications are presumed guilty of any offending content that may be posted, including those on the Internet where there is no licensing and it is easy to use some other person's name, photograph and details as the originator. This presumption of guilt, requiring the accused to prove his innocence, instead of the prosecution having to prove his guilt, is a strange reversal of the rule of law when the entire justice system is based on the assumption of innocence unless guilt is proven. It is stranger still coming in the wake of moves to liberalise draconian laws such as the Internal Security Act which provided for detention without trial, and the Universities and University Colleges Act which severely curtailed the rights of students to participate in the political process. When there is such liberalisation taking place, it is strange that the Government should be setting the clock back by introducing legislation that goes clearly against the grain of justice. Yes, the Internet space is a raucous one and lots of stuff are pasted and posted, and people, including many in the Government, the Cabinet and the Opposition, are regularly blasted for things that they may or may not have done. But there are laws to deal with them such as the defamation laws. And some of the victims have sought recourse to these with visible success, which includes Information, Communications and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim. Why, therefore, should a sledgehammer be given to prosecutors to bring a tonne of weight down indiscriminately on people who may not have committed the offence, but may have a tough time proving that they had not and may become involved in tangled knots with the law for a long time? Conspiracy theorists, of whom a lot exist in this country due to the nature of the way things are, have immediately seen this as a move to limit criticism. That's hardly a PR effort by the Government. When the Centre for Independent Journalism organised an Internet blackout on Aug 14, it met with a tremendous response and many people just did not post anything on the Net during that particular day. Such support must have had an effect on the decision of the Prime Minister to call upon the Cabinet to review its decision to pass the amendment to the relevant Act. "Whatever we do we must put the people first," the PM had tweeted, and who can disagree with that? But unfortunately, the Cabinet stuck to its guns and backed its previous decision. Dr Rais said the Cabinet discussed it exhaustively and decided not to make any changes because Parliament was represented by the ruling party and the Opposition and had debated it. "Once it is officially passed, to do something now is an afterthought," he said. Dr Rais added that the Law Minister would explain further. Later, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein said the controversial amendment would be explained further by the Attorney-General. "If explained properly, I believe right-thinking people will know why the amendment was tabled in Parliament and approved. If there still are fears, laws can also be tweaked, amended and abolished, but don't get emotional about it," he said. Those interested will wait for the Government explanation, although Dr Rais had already said that presumption of fact was nothing new in law and there was still room for accused persons to defend themselves. The converse position is that such a law can be abused. Those who want to "fix" someone on the Net can post comments and claim that it came from that particular person. And that person will be tied up in knots trying to defend himself. That is the main fear among Internet users and other publishers. Inordinate power is in the hands of prosecutors who now don't have to prove who the real publishers are. The question is why grant them these additional powers under the amendment when the entire Internet is subject to the laws of the country? The only difference is that there is no licensing of the Internet compared to conventional media such as print and broadcasting. Thus, the new laws are seen as a move to bring the Internet under control more quickly than using existing laws, a move which the disinterested would oppose. Policymakers may actually realise that. As seen by the quote from the Home Minister above, if there is continued strong opposition to the amendment, it could be repealed. Perhaps it may need another tweet from the Prime Minister to make that happen, and this time he will be at that Cabinet meeting. That should make a difference to what the Cabinet may think.
|
| Karpal’s strong stance annoys DAP leaders Posted: 22 Aug 2012 03:15 PM PDT
DAP chairman Karpal Singh's strong stance against party-hopping is deafening amidst the "inelegant silence" of other leaders in the party. Instead of facing Barisan in the general election as Karpal wants him to, Anwar is still clutching at "Sept 16" straws by personally welcoming Umno's Datuk Seri Lajim Ukin (Beaufort) and Upko's deputy-president Datuk Wilfred Bumburing (Tuaran) into Pakatan. Baradan Kuppusamy, The Star DAP leaders are fervently hoping that their chairman Karpal Singh will stop courting controversy for at least a few more months and let the party get over with a general election in which it is expected to do well. But the veteran leader can't just close up especially when one of his pet topics is in the national news — party hopping — for which Karpal has only derision, seeing it as an act of betrayal of the electorate. He is dead set against the practice, saying nothing could demean the voter more than an elected representative jumping ship for money, perks and posts. And he has spoken up against this act of betrayal, not just now but also during Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's Sept 16 fiasco in 2008; in February 2009 when three PKR assemblymen defected to Barisan Nasional and even back in the 1970s and 80s when PAS bore the brunt of its assemblymen defecting to Barisan. Karpal had lashed out at the Pakatan leader when he began enticing Barisan MPs soon after becoming Opposition Leader in 2008. Anwar had launched his abortive Sept 16 takeover of Putrajaya by trying to entice 30 Barisan MPs which, together with his own 82 MPs, would give him a simple one seat majority in Parliament or so it was speculated. Karpal had publicly said he did not approve of Anwar's methods and but other DAP leaders like secretary-general Lim Guan Eng and adviser Lim Kit Siang, the two men who actually run the party, kept silent. The defections failed to materialise and the Sept 16 coup fell flat. Five months later, Barisan's Bota assemblyman Nasarudin Hashim defected and was welcomed with open arms by Anwar in February 2009. Anwar called the defection a brave and principled act. But Karpal openly declared that it was unprincipled. He went against the Pakatan supremo and most of his backers, warning that only trouble could come out of this. His warning was brushed aside by PKR and DAP leaders who wanted to beef up their ranks with "defectors". Days later, Nasarudin returned to Barisan. Three assemblymen — two from PKR and one from DAP — also crossed over to Barisan, giving it a simple majority in the Perak state assembly to take over the state government. DAP's Jelapang assemblyman Hee Yit Foong, Behrang assemblyman Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi and Changkat Jering assemblyman Mohd Osman Mohd Jailu had taught the Pakatan a bitter lesson, something that Karpal had warned about. Now nearly four years later, talks of party hopping is back in the national news with two Sabah veteran MPs from Barisan crossing over to Pakatan in the twilight of their career, claiming that they always had Pakatan's interest at heart. Instead of facing Barisan in the general election as Karpal wants him to, Anwar is still clutching at "Sept 16" straws by personally welcoming Umno's Datuk Seri Lajim Ukin (Beaufort) and Upko's deputy-president Datuk Wilfred Bumburing (Tuaran) into Pakatan. He wants to make an impact in east Malaysia whose 55 parliamentary seats are vital for him to enjoy a simple majority in Parliament. While Karpal has said that DAP is against party hopping as a matter of principle, the party's real power holders — the men who pull the party levers — are keeping quiet. Only Karpal has the clout and the seniority in DAP to speak his mind publicly, even if it means going against the wishes of his own party and that of Pakatan. Other DAP leaders prefer to keep an inelegant silence.
|
| Despite defections from BN, Sabah opposition still far from united Posted: 21 Aug 2012 02:59 PM PDT
Sabah's opposition front appears to be moving towards unity, but the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition seemingly still holds the upper hand in the 13th general election that must be called by next April, despite the recent defections to the Pakatan Rakyat (PR). Although there was momentum gained from the recent crossovers, the opposition in Sabah still has its work cut out in avoiding three-corner fights in the next elections. Sabah's colourful opposition ― which includes the State Reform Party (STAR), Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP), and federal opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) ― recently added the newly-formed Angkatan Perubahan Sabah (APS) and Pakatan Perubahan Sabah (PPS) to its fold. Beaufort MP Datuk Seri Lajim Ukin and Tuaran MP Datuk Seri Wilfred Bumburing had last month quit BN, and respectively formed the PR-aligned PPS and APS. They were last week joined by Senator Datuk Maijol Mahap. STAR president Datuk Dr Jeffrey Kitingan told The Malaysian Insider that his party is eyeing between 20 and 30 state seats, and anywhere from seven to 12 parliamentary seats. He did not dismiss the possibility of multiple candidates from the opposition, saying: "We've already calculated three corner fights ― two opposition, one BN ― it's OK for us." But when pressed about seats that were expected to be closely fought, he said that "these areas we have to work harder and also try to reduce the overlap." When asked about Bumburing and his APS, Kitingan said "we don't really worry about him because we've been working very hard on this area." He was confident that the recent defections would not "affect" STAR's supporters, saying that Bumburing and Lajim would be "bringing in support from BN side. Their departure will only affect the BN." Kitingan said that the opposition parties in Sabah are "trying to forge a loose coalition" but claimed that PKR's representatives did not turn up during discussions last Monday. "So we will see whether they are sincere." When asked who will lead the Sabah opposition front, he said: "The United Borneo Alliance (UBA) is already operating as a group. So I think it is better it be led by local leaders rather than Kuala Lumpur (parties)." However Sabah PKR's Darell Leiking said "the goal is more important than where you are from," adding that being a leader in PKR did not mean that he was "less of a Sabahan" compared to leaders from parties such as STAR and SAPP. When asked whether Sabah-based parties or federal opposition PR would lead, the PKR Penampang division chief said the opposition should move away from such "polemic" to focus on more important issues. "I think the whole idea is to have a very solid, unified opposition to face a common political enemy," he said, adding that they would be focused on replacing the "BN regime." Darell said the SAPP is "very friendly with PR", adding that the party's president, Datuk Yong Teck Lee, is "very clear that he supports PR to form the government (and) PR will surely accord the same support." PKR vice-president Chua Tian Chang said a key issue would be seat allocations: "(If) we manage to get one-to-one (contests, that) is already a great achievement". But he said "if two parties are working on the same seat, the strength (of the opposition) is stronger", saying there is "no reason why we cannot co-operate." He was responding to questions on how STAR and APS, with both focusing on the Kadazandusun Murut communities, would work together. "Only BN want to create an impression that there is a split (in votes), where's the split?" asked Chua, who is seen as the pointman for defections in Sabah. Chua said that any crossovers would only require PKR to give up seats, saying that "it won't concern SAPP and STAR." He was upbeat about voter support, saying that people on the ground are "very enthusiastic... working together to fight BN." APS information chief Lesaya Lopog Sorudim said the "focus is one fighting against one so the opposition votes will not be split and benefit BN." Lesaya said Anwar had given the APS seats in mainly Kadazandusun Murut areas, adding that APS leader Bumburing was given the "mandate" to "discuss with STAR and SAPP to ensure a win-win situation". DAP Sabah publicity secretary Chan Foong Hin told The Malaysian Insider that the party still aims to contest 20 state seats and 10 parliamentary seats, but said "it's too early to conclude how many seats finally we will contest" as negotiations are still going on. Chan said that PR in Sabah now has "additional partners" with Lajim and Bumburing pulling out from BN, and said this was viewed "positively". "Of course seat negotiations will be readjusted or fine tuned again to accommodate ... every partner under Pakatan Rakyat. We are open to talk with any party as long as they support PR and honour our Buku Jingga," he said. Federal seats in east Malaysia's Sabah and Sarawak are expected to be BN's focal point come the general election as both states, including the federal territory of Labuan, contribute a significant 57 seats, or 25 per cent of the 222 Parliamentary seats available. In Election 2008, BN lost its customary two-thirds parliamentary majority largely due to significant losses in the peninsula, where it won just 85 seats while the opposition swept 80 seats. BN's saving grace was in Sabah, Sarawak and Labuan where the coalition trounced the opposition and made a near-clean sweep, winning 55 parliamentary seats to the opposition's two. However with the recent defections, BN now held 53 parliamentary seats in east Malaysia, while the opposition's score is now four.
|
| Religious discord getting louder Posted: 20 Aug 2012 03:13 PM PDT It is not political differences but religious strife that will undo the country. Free Malaysia Today The hudud debate is moving into a dangerous phase as the arguments take on an increasingly strindent tone. We do not know how the controversy will end and in what manner. But one thing is certain: if it is not handled correctly, it will blow up into a firestorm that will engulf the whole country. For religion is an extremely sensitive issue and everyone is prepared to defend their respective faith to the last drop of their blood. Malaysia is a country of diverse races and creeds. This is an indisputable fact despite the pronouncement of a former prime minister that it is a Muslim country. Perhaps his declaration was based on the imperative of demographics: since the Malays are overwhelmingly in the majority, it logically follows that their religion should occupy a pre-eminent place on the national altar. This has already been acknowledged and enshrined in the sacred Federal Constitution. There is no problem with Islam as a religion. It is when certain practices of the religion are taken out and are to be imposed on people of other faiths that the clash of beliefs will be set into motion. Muslim politicians and leaders must recognise that non-Muslims will never submit themselves to hudud simply because they do not subscribe to such penal laws. Their minority status does not mean they can be pulverised and made to bow down to the will of the majority. An Islamist party and many of its supporters and sympathisers seemingly do not want to accept the secular nature of the government. It is certain that if a new opposition government rides to power, the party of god would want to exert its influence to set up an Islamic state where hudud would have full play. This is unacceptable because the votes of non-Muslims should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the religious platform of a hudud-driven party. Non-Muslims – whether laymen, clerics, politicians – do have a stake in the discourse on laws pertaining to religion. If they oppose hudud, they are not being anti-Islam or insulting one of the great religions of the world. Their opposition is one of a principled stand: no government can impose its religious penal code on people of other faiths. To do so is to tear apart the fabric of society, leading to unnecessary loss of lives. Tension running high
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan