Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Sabah shows way in religious harmony
- Having Faith in Malaysians
- The kingmakers of Borneo
- Courtesy, decorum and Psy
- Mandela Vs Mahathir - Statesman & Man of Distaste
- Indian capacity to ‘create trouble’ endless
- The flawless wasatiyah?
- Suara Interview: The Future of Malays Part 3
- Anwar Ibrahim is now Huguan Siou
- Sabah, Sarawak at historical crossroads come the 13th GE
- K-pop sensation Psy dances into Malaysia's political drama, Gangnam style (+video)
- Spitting on the grave of a ‘great man’
- General Election 2013 – BN, Shifting From Strategic Defence to Strategic Offense
- BN’s Vishwaroopam is getting ugly
- Stop playing with our sentiments, Hisham
- Mahathir’s Tall Tales on Sabah!
| Sabah shows way in religious harmony Posted: 12 Feb 2013 07:55 PM PST
For Francis bin Dakun, a 44-year-old Catholic priest, Hari Raya celebrations are a family affair: "I take leave to spend time at home. I'm from a family of twelve: seven of my brothers and sisters are Muslim. My father, who became a Catholic, ended up building two kitchens in the house." Karim Raslan, The Star At a time when our public discourse is seething with resentment and distrust, the quiet but very dignified mutual respect of the Dakun family is so refreshing, if not uplifting. IN Sabah, the line between religions often runs through the middle of a family. Needless to say, many West Malaysians with our black-and-white way of viewing the world might fine such proximity a little disturbing. Still, as I discovered a few weeks ago when I was shooting my Astro Awani show Ceritalah Malaysia in the former timber boom town of Keningau, issues of identity are all the more fluid and less divisive the further away you are from Kuala Lumpur. For Francis bin Dakun, a 44-year-old Catholic priest, Hari Raya celebrations are a family affair: "I take leave to spend time at home. I'm from a family of twelve: seven of my brothers and sisters are Muslim. My father, who became a Catholic, ended up building two kitchens in the house." "We are Dusun and in the past, we had no religion. We followed the traditional beliefs. My father (he's passed away now) was a bobohizan. "He was like a kampung doctor and when we were sick he would take care of us since he understood the various herbs and medicines." "I became a Catholic when I was 14. It was a personal choice and the family respected it. "I did not hear God's voice calling me to be a priest. However, I was 25 years old at the time and working in a shipping company in Kota Kinabalu, I saw that the there was a great need: that the Church lacked priests. It took me seven years of training in Kuching to become a priest and further two years study in Rome. "We use Bahasa Malaysia in our religious ceremonies," (indeed we filmed a wedding he presided over in a small church outside the town). "The use of the word 'Allah' is normal and acceptable in our community. "We have been using it from well into the past. We are so comfortable with the word and cannot help but use it during the service." Father Francis' elder sister Nooridah Hidayah bte Dakun is a Muslim and an ustazah. She is also extremely active in the community giving regular talks on Islam and the Quran as well as a surprisingly innovative multi-faith discussion last year between Muslim, Christian and Buddhist religious figures. Listening to Ustazah Hidayah as she talks about her childhood, it's clear that she was sensitive and very spiritual from an early age: "I was close to my Atok, my grandmother and each year they had a ceremony to guarantee the family's safety – the 'menerebung'. However, I would feel worried. I was afraid that the 'menerebung' didn't really protect us, didn't cover everything. "I had doubts and was uncertain. I began questioning everything: where did the rain come from, the storms at night? "It was then that I came across the word 'Allah.' At the time I was a Christian and I found the word in Christian books. Finally, I managed to find the Syahadah itself and the sentence made me feel at ease and at peace. "When I was 14 I went to a residential school. "There and with the help of an elder sister who'd converted and married a Muslim, I, too, became a Muslim. It was a difficult time. "The family was unhappy and it took five years for my father to accept my choice of religion. Then one day as I was about to pray, he called me by my Muslim name, Hidayah." Her initial struggle for acceptance by her family has given Ustazah Hidayah a greater degree of empathy and warmth: "We must accept others for their faith. We must have hikmah. "We should approach others respectfully. There is no need to speak harshly." Both brother and sister are soft-spoken and diffident and there is a slight aura about them, especially when they are together. As a West Malaysian Malay I can't help but find the Dakun family's history and their respective personal journeys to Christianity and Islam enormously instructive. Moreover, at a time when our public discourse is seething with resentment and distrust, their quiet but very dignified mutual respect is so refreshing, if not uplifting. As Father Francis says: "In our family, one thing that is meaningful to me is that religion is not the cause of disunity but to bring us closer. After all, we are just one family."
|
| Posted: 12 Feb 2013 06:06 PM PST
Some have claimed that Malaysia's pluralism is also its weakness. I happen to disagree. I believe that the plural and complex nature of Malaysian society serves as an effective means to temper the tone and tenor of our national political discourse, and that as a result of this complexity all the parties of the country – from both BN and PR – will have to settle to a moderate median line in the long run. No party can run Malaysia alone, without being in a coalition and without abiding by the general will of such a coalition. Farish A Noor A few years ago, a Malaysian diplomat who also happens to be a friend of mine asked me: "After living abroad for more than two decades, were you ever tempted to give up your citizenship?" It was a question that was easy to answer, and I immediately said, "No. I remain a Malaysian because I happen to love my country very much." It was true then, and it remains true today. I have, since the age of 18, lived in Britain, France, Holland, Germany and now Singapore. For the benefit of those who may be curious, I will also point out that I studied abroad at the cost of my mother, after we sold our land and house to pay for it, and not by the grace of a government scholarship. I chose the life of an academic because I love learning and teaching, despite the fact that I knew I would never be rich – unlike so many of my schoolmates whose luxurious lifestyles I can never hope to emulate.
But I happen to love my country and its people, and despite the doom-mongering of the naysayers I still believe that Malaysia – despite its size – is a country that deserves its place on the stage of world history. My faith rests not in the institutions of the state, for institutions are but empty structures that need to be filled by people who give it meaning and purpose. My faith lies in Malaysians and their ability to judge and think wisely when it matters most. The reasoning behind this faith of mine comes from my experience as a teacher of history, and Southeast Asian history in particular. I have noted in my lectures and writings many times over that whenever Malaysia has come close to the brink, it has always been saved by the Malaysians themselves. Note the lessons of history that we can learn from: At the elections of 1986, the Malaysian public showed that they would not endorse radical or violent politics by punishing the party that articulated it, PAS. Likewise in 2004, after PAS's ill-advised support for the Taliban, it was trounced at the elections again. Then in 2008, the Malaysian public likewise expressed their distaste for communitarian politics by robbing the BN of its two-thirds majority in Parliament. In fact, if there is one consistent variable in Malaysian politics, it is that the Malaysian public has rarely, if ever, rewarded extreme religious-conservative or sectarian-communitarian parties and politicians. Perhaps this is due to the simple fact that as Malaysians we realise that we are bound together and will share the same fate, despite the antics of some elected representatives. Some have claimed that Malaysia's pluralism is also its weakness. I happen to disagree. I believe that the plural and complex nature of Malaysian society serves as an effective means to temper the tone and tenor of our national political discourse, and that as a result of this complexity all the parties of the country – from both BN and PR – will have to settle to a moderate median line in the long run. No party can run Malaysia alone, without being in a coalition and without abiding by the general will of such a coalition. My hope is that in the long run all the parties of Malaysia will learn that they have to appeal to Malaysians as a whole, as a plural and complex nation, rather than to their respective racial, ethnic, religious and/or linguistic vote bases. Read more at: http://www.ukeconline.com/CEKU/having-faith-in-malaysians/
|
| Posted: 12 Feb 2013 05:32 PM PST
In 1962, the Cobbold Commission that heard HALF A PERCENT (0.5%) of the total population of North Borneo and Sarawak decided that this represented an affirmative decision to proceed with the signing of the Malaysia Agreement, even though a significant proportion of the 0.5% who bothered to respond to the Cobbold Commission had expressed reservations to the idea of forming Malaysia and requested more time. By Nilakrisna James In 2011, the late Datuk Amar James Wong Kim Min, former Minister of the State Government of Sarawak, handed me an autographed copy of his book, "The Birth of Malaysia". Despite the United Borneo Front's proposal to have this coveted piece of literature as part of the history textbooks in the national curriculum for Secondary Schools, many are still deprived access to this book and are completely unaware that the contents of this book merely includes the essential reports prior to the formation of Malaysia in 1963. Within these reports are essential viewpoints and insights into what the people of North Borneo (Sabah) and Sarawak wanted from the Central Government of the proposed Federation of Malaysia, now known as the Malaysian Federal Government. There is no point harping on racial or religious grounds about the consequences of the IC issue in the RCI if we do not remember that these issues were the very fears expressed in the reports that were made and drafted over 50 years ago. I consider it my duty to the nation as an ordinary citizen to now progressively work through these reports and summarise the key points of these reports prior to the election so that we will make an informed decision about who we really want as the masters of our economic fate in Borneo. I am writing this in response to the illegal IC debate which I believe goes to the very root of the issue of a breach of Sabah's territorial integrity and the heart of our future political security. The Malaysia Agreement 1963 The Malaysia Agreement was signed on the 9th July 1963 between the United Kingdom, the Federation of Malaya, North Borneo (now Sabah), Sarawak and Singapore. Without the Malaysia Agreement, Malaysia would not exist. Without the Malaysia Agreement, Sabah and Sarawak would not be part of Malaysia. The Malaysia Agreement therefore stands as the most important document in the history of Malaysia. Unlike the Federal Constitution, it can NEVER be amended by anybody unless the territories that originally signed it decide once more to return to the negotiation room and determine a new future. The Malaysia Agreement is also an agreement that has no time limit and not bound by any limitation. If the Malaysia Agreement had a time limit, then the territories which signed the Agreement will no longer be bound to one another upon expiry of that time limit. So, logically, the Malaysia Agreement stands timeless. If this was an ordinary Agreement, breach of any of its clauses could be challenged. If it was an ordinary Agreement, it would have stipulated what must be done if there was a breach of the clauses. The Malaysia Agreement remains silent on the issue of breach. This is deliberate. The Malaysia Agreement was drafted deliberately in its simplest form to allow the maximum loopholes and flexibility so that the territories which signed the Malaysia Agreement will have no unreasonable restrictions in determining their fates in the Federation of Malaysia. With top lawyers as signatories to the Malaysia Agreement, it would be inconceivable that the Agreement was drafted without careful thought and arrangement. Some of the signatories were educated and could have had access to the best legal advisers in the UK. The Malaysia Agreement therefore was calculated to be silent on some issues and loud on others. When Singapore exited the Malaysia Agreement in 1965, there was much debate in parliament which is well recorded. No matter how much discussion went on there, they knew full well that nobody could challenge Singapore based on the Malaysia Agreement. Indeed they could not challenge Singapore based on any other legal document either. So it was all talk amongst Malaysian politicians with no impact on Singapore. Singapore went on to become the richest of the territories that entered into the Malaysia Agreement and Singapore was neither sued for their exit nor legally challenged. Lee Kuan Yew had one of the best legal minds in the East and he was no fool. If he wanted to continue leading Singapore, he knew he could not screw up his decision for Singapore in 1965. Nearly fifty years on, the guy is still standing tall with no regrets except his admission to me of "deep collateral guilt" for the people of North Borneo and Sarawak. To understand the gravity of this situation therefore, all Malaysians must understand that the Malaysia Agreement was not a unilateral decision made by the Government of Malaya. Malaysia was formed because the British had to decide how best to dispose of their two colonies, Sabah and Sarawak. Before they could form Malaysia and sign the Malaysia Agreement therefore the British proposed that a Commission of Enquiry be carried out in North Borneo and Sarawak in 1962 to determine how the people of the Borneo territories felt about the proposal. The idea had already been discussed between the British and Malayan Governments in 1961 and on principle, Singapore and Malaya had by then agreed to merge and it was merely a question of seeking the views of the people of North Borneo and Sarawak and also the Sultan of Brunei, as to whether Brunei would also wish to join the new Malaysia. Brunei, which was far smaller than the territories of Sabah and Sarawak, and yet in view of its proximity would have been subjected to the very same fears of communism at the time, somehow had a far better excuse not to enter into the Malaysia Agreement, which the British Government seemed to have fully respected. The Malaysia Agreement was eventually signed after a Commission of Enquiry was carried out in North Borneo and Sarawak and two reports were presented to the British Government. These two reports were:- 1. Report of the Commission of Enquiry, North Borneo and Sarawak 1962 (Cobbold Report) 2. Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee 1962 (IGC Report) The Commission of Enquiry Appendix B of the Cobbold Report shows the Census Abstract for North Borneo and Sarawak in 1960. In North Borneo, the population in 1960 was 454,421. They had 304 graduates, which was about 0.07% of their population. In Sarawak, the population in 1960 was 744,529. They had 548 graduates, which was also about 0.07% of their population. The Cobbold Commission sent out open invitations to the people of North Borneo and Sarawak to give their views both orally and in written form. Of a combined total population of 1,198,950 people in North Borneo and Sarawak, the Cobbold Commission received 2,200 written letters and memoranda (0.183% of the population) and 4000 or so people appeared to give their views orally (0.334% of the population). In 1962, the Cobbold Commission that heard HALF A PERCENT (0.5%) of the total population of North Borneo and Sarawak decided that this represented an affirmative decision to proceed with the signing of the Malaysia Agreement, even though a significant proportion of the 0.5% who bothered to respond to the Cobbold Commission had expressed reservations to the idea of forming Malaysia and requested more time. With only 852 graduates in total, it is unclear how many of these graduates bothered to give their views. In any event, North Borneo and Sarawak did not have the intellectual capacity to form a pool of educated leaders to decide their political destiny in 1962. Like schoolboys in a sandpit, a parody of 'Lord of the Flies' was inevitable as power struggles developed between people who were selected based on their popularity and political leanings rather than their intellectual prowess. For men who had only known subservience and wars, our forefathers were expected to develop democracy and political structures with civilisations that were centuries ahead of us. In 50 years, we are expected to develop the intellectual capacity of nations that began developing these political structures in the 16th century. Barely a hundred years ago, we were considered merely savages and uncivilised people. It is no wonder to me that in 2013, we are still sweeping the mess under the carpets. The arrogance is more than evident, the greed glaring in the face of the nation and the vast majority of us, nearly all of us, stay silent, as we did in 1962, still somewhat savage and uncivilised in the way we attack each other politically. The Cobbold Commission must therefore, posthumously, take full responsibility for a premature recommendation that has on hindsight led to more devastating consequences than could have possibly been predicted by even 0.07% of the population in 1962. We have lost all sense of harmony as documented in the Cobbold Report and we have become angry with each other, with foreigners, with our fingers pointing in all directions so that everybody has a part to play in the chaos and hatred. This is, by all accounts, tragic and devastating and, as a nation, we have lost our humanity. We no longer have faith in our system because we have stopped trusting anybody. We assume first and foremost that our neighbour has a bone to pick with us. A small proportion of the population cares about the weak, the animals, the refugees and those who seek shelter in our country. A huge proportion of this population feel disenfranchised and cheated of their rights: their voting rights, their racial rights, their religious rights, their native rights, their territorial rights, their economic rights, their political rights, their freedom rights, their civil rights, their marching rights, their union rights, their welfare rights, their medical rights, their educational rights, and it goes on. They will get to the cause of this disenfranchisement and someone must take the blame: those who lead, those who benefit, those who are related, those who are more well-off, those who try to stop the chaos, those who are simply in the way of these arguments. The rights can easily be negotiated within reasonable parameters but we still have savages who can never get it right. We are simply, in the eyes of all developed civilisations, pathetic and ridiculous. By all accounts, it is still perhaps only 0.07% of the nation that can reasonably lead this country. Yet, the nation will stay silent, as they did in 1962. Our votes will never be enough to make a sizeable representation of what we feel as a nation and what we want as our future political destiny. We vote not by logic but by sentiments and so it is easy for us to be manipulated and fooled. The security of Sabah and Sarawak And so, in Borneo, we have no choice. To be known as the Borneo Kingmakers, to be the one who could hold the Federal Powers to reason and harness the security of our borders and immigration status, to be in a position to secure our 60 State seats and 25 Parliamentary seats in Sabah, to be in a position of phenomenal wealth and power so as to never have to bow and say yes to Malayan Federal orders, and more importantly to be able to hold Malaya to its Malaysia Agreement promises, the leaders at the helm of Sabah and Sarawak must be the type of leaders that common ordinary folk commonly describe as a dictator and a tyrant; men accused typically of rising to the top through corruption and raping of resources and holding the populace at bay with enough to keep them financially stable. Such leaders would belong to 0.07% of the population of Sabah and Sarawak and they stand out as leaders who are charismatic enough to secure the forests and immense oil and gas reserves that are offshore and onshore the island of Borneo. We need these leaders to secure our rights in Borneo and ensure that every nominated Sabah and Sarawak minister at the State and Federal level will be taken seriously enough to hold immense portfolios and corporate positions so that the reality of Borneonisation is observed without having to say so. They secured these realities through ways which we can never agree with and yet, there is no other way than to go through the coffers of our immense resources. They needed a form of silent mandate from the silent majority of people in Borneo to gather enough wealth to put them in a position of power that makes them more powerful than any other leader in the other 11 States of Malaysia. They know full well they can never secure the mandate of the public to reach the top and so they did what they felt they had to do before any other leader from the other 11 States got there first. Any man or woman with the ambition of being powerful enough to sit on the same level playing field as the Prime Minister of Malaysia would have done exactly the same thing as such leaders in Sabah and Sarawak without a shred of remorse. We are too small to be significant and so we simply cannot afford to be sentimental and idealistic. We have to be ruthless, bold and follow the path of fierce logic to achieve our part of the bargain in 1963 when we signed the Malaysia Agreement. Neither you nor I, if we qualified as 0.07% of the brains of Borneo, would have done it differently. It comes to mind therefore that even if I were ever given the mandate to lead Sabah as the Chief Minister, I would have probably followed in exactly the same footsteps as Musa Aman and Harris Salleh before him, with one exception. I would have amalgamated with Taib Mahmud and ensured the victory of whichever coalition we wish to negotiate with in West Malaysia but I would not allow Taib to take Sabah for a ride. It does not matter who the next Prime Minister of Malaysia is because at this point, by whatever means they took to achieve it, both Musa and Taib are the only two leaders in Sabah and Sarawak who would have the tenacity, the money and the balls to stand to the end like Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein and Robert Mugabe: big guys in small places who wrapped big guys in big places around their little fingers, while the rest of the world complains. Copyright 13 Feb 2013 and published with permission from writer. Note: Nilakrisna James is a lawyer, writer and activist who co-founded the apolitical NGO, United Borneo Front, in 2010 with politician, Datuk Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan. They parted ways at the end of 2011 when Dr. Jeffrey assumed the Chairmanship of STAR as an oppositional leader independent of any Federal led coalition. Nilakrisna remains a member of UPKO, a native component party of the ruling Barisan National alliance. |
| Posted: 12 Feb 2013 04:36 PM PST
Let's get it clear. We are Malaysians. And we are polite and courteous and we do treat our guests well. Let's not allow politics to sour us up into grumpy, crazed extremists out to commit violence for the sake of making a point or embarrassing those we hate. The Malaysian Insider If one were to read Korean rapper Psy's Facebook page, one would assume that some Malaysians out there are extremists or psychopaths who cannot accept another person's point of view. There are threats, praises and everything in between over Psy's "Oppa Gangnam Style" performance in Penang during the second day of this year's Chinese New Year celebrations. Let's get this straight. Psy is a professional singer who was paid to sing his hit song in Penang's Han Chiang school field. He and his back-up group performed the song twice. That was what he was paid to do. So where is the love for the South Korean whose hit song has seen some 1.3 billion views on YouTube? Where was the usual Malaysian courtesy accorded to a guest of the country? Why do we need to vent our spleen about his performance, threaten him to stop him from performing, or condemn him later for not going the extra mile to do something else beyond singing his song? When did we Malaysians become so rude? When did we become so opinionated and passionate about our politics that we watch a live performance and make a big deal about it? Psy came to perform. People came to watch, dance and sing along. Nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with him gracing Barisan Nasional's Chinese New Year do if he was paid for it. Nothing wrong for anyone else to hire him later, too. What was wrong was the way we treated him on the social networks. Do these social networks bring out the worst in us and unveil our baser instincts? Or do we want to disprove the hype that we are the happiest people, with the most dazzling smiles and courtesy in the world, simply because that is what our government says we are? Let's get it clear. We are Malaysians. And we are polite and courteous and we do treat our guests well. Let's not allow politics to sour us up into grumpy, crazed extremists out to commit violence for the sake of making a point or embarrassing those we hate. That's not being Malaysian; that's lunacy that no one should tolerate. Instead of celebrating Chinese New Year with entertainment, some Malaysians have made it their cause to rant and rave and show their dark side because of politics. You shame yourself as a Malaysian for doing so. And you so shame your parents and your country in the process that it will be a wonder if anyone else will ever perform in Malaysia, no matter the fee.
|
| Mandela Vs Mahathir - Statesman & Man of Distaste Posted: 12 Feb 2013 04:02 PM PST
South Africa is made up many indigenous peoples. Add to that, the migrant Asians, white settlers and other neighbouring African states. Today, they celebrate their diversity and are called the Rainbow Nation. Here, we threaten Pendatangs with revocation of citizenship. Even the word PENDATANG which I never really heard in my school days in the 70's has gained considerable currency so much so I am quite nonchalant to define myself as a Pendatang even though I am GENPENTIGA. Ice Cream Seller The last few weeks, I have been prodded enough to awaken my few and far between bouts of commenting on issues here. A white Afrikaneer (please tell Ibrahim Ali that it is not a type of cheese) that I knew told me that he was so proud of what he referred to as MY PRESIDENT. To come from someone of the opposite divide and to say so with such pride was something to hear and behold Bottom line - they won the world cup with nearly all their players white and sweating blood and guts to bring glory to their country and the event was a great advertisement for their country. Here, we threaten Pendatangs with revocation of citizenship. Even the word PENDATANG which I never really heard in my school days in the 70's has gained considerable currency so much so I am quite nonchalant to define myself as a Pendatang even though I am GENPENTIGA (Generasi Pendatang Tiga). PRIBUMI, BUMIPUTRA (all imported words from India by the way) are singled out at the expense of people of migrant descent. Unfortunately, the singular defining factor of separation in our land has been for sometime now along the lines of religion - diversity can be accepted provided religion is the same. On one occasion, he appointed a political opponent, a tribal chief - Mangosuthu Butolezi as the President whilst he was away from office. Mangosuthu Butolezi was a Zulu chief.
|
| Indian capacity to ‘create trouble’ endless Posted: 12 Feb 2013 03:56 PM PST Joe Fernandez Carpet dealer Deepak Jaikishan has now let on that Rosmah Mansor, the wife of Bugis-origin Prime Minister Mohd Najib Abdul Razak told him once that "90 per cent of all problems in Malaysia are created by ten per cent of the Indian community". Call it either super efficient utilization of human resources or not enough trouble being created. The last time we heard any such thing, it was Adolf Hitler blaming the Jews in Nazi Germany, "for creating trouble", before sending the scapegoats to the gas chambers. Sabahans must be heaving a sigh of collective relief to learn that the 1.7 million (2005 figures) illegal immigrants in their midst, except for the MyKad-seeking minority from the Indian sub-continent, are a figment of their imagination. Any perception of trouble-making in their nation by other illegal immigrants is mere hallucination. The statistics cited by Rosmah must be "true" since the Indian Nation in Malaysia has been given the short end of the stick for the last 56 years. Even so, ninety per cent of the Indians in Malaysia, in the reassuring words of the Prime Minister's wife, are meekly accepting their miserable lot and are not trouble-creators. This is the peaceful crowd led like lambs to slaughter by MIC leaders since 1957. There are no prizes for guessing who are among the ten per cent of Indians who are considered trouble-creators by Rosmah. It's not about crying wolf once too often It's simple for an Indian to make it to Rosmah's List of Indian Trouble Creators in Malaysia: "just fight back against anyone -- usually not an Indian -- who creates trouble for them". Rosmah, in taking it personal, no doubt has entered private eye and former Special Branch operative P. Balasubramaniam in her List since he reportedly had the temerity, like murdered pregnant Mongolian wannabe model Altantuya Shaariibuu, to keep asking for monies allegedly promised to him for whatever reason. In the first place, she probably chose him for whatever task she had in mind in her mistaken belief that "no one will believe an Indian". It's not about crying wolf once too often. Apparently, Indians are not known to be into the Gospel Truth unlike others who are congenitally incapable of telling lies. Then there's the little matter, as age-old wisdom holds, of sparing the snake momentarily and killing the Indian first. Rosmah herself is Truth Personified. Of course, dead Mongolians tell no lies either. Now, Deepak has certainly been added as well to Rosmah's List of Indian trouble- creators in Malaysia and no doubt at the very top just next to Bala, the one "who no one will believe". The shocking Statutory Declaration I vs the infamous Statutory Declaration II. We can rest our case. Rosmah's List, obviously drawn up when she was not too busy pronouncing impotency in cases referred to her for expert medical opinion, might be a little too biased. Police work really hard to keep the peace in the country We can concede that Indian gangsters can sometimes be real trouble-creators and especially if they inconveniently make off with a luxury car or two which belong to a Datuk and sell them for a song to the Triads. Then the Police would have to take it really personal and beat the you-know-what out of the first Indian they meet near the scene of the crime in order to get at the truth. We have to hand it to the Police. They work real hard to keep the peace in the country. Still, the Indian gangsters are not bigger criminals than the white collar types -- not Indians of course -- and the still drinking mother's milk Datuk -- again not Indians --who routinely put their hands in the National Cookie Jar at our expense. Just take a look at the burgeoning National Debt Burden. Meanwhile, Rosmah's List of Indian Trouble-Creators reportedly excludes the real trouble-creators like former Prime Minister and Huguan Siou of the Illegal Immigrants Mahathir Mohamad: May 13, the killing of Indians in Kampung Medan by illegal immigrant mercenaries from Madura, doing a number on the Indians, Sabah illegals, electoral rolls, Forex losses, Maminco, mispricing of government contracts, Danaharta, Sodomy I, Sodomy II etc etc Surely Mahathir, whose family hails from Kerala, southwest India, should top her List. He's the architect of institutionalized discrimination over 22 years to give the Indians in particular and Malaysians in general, the short-end of the stick. All Malaysians will be on accord that Mahathir's capacity to create trouble is infinite. In order to lay the groundwork for his trouble-creating activities, Mahathir wrote "The Malay Dilemma". The on-going Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) in Sabah has revealed that Mahathir tried to steal the country from the Orang Asal – Dusuns including the Kadazan or urban Dusun and the Muruts – and hand it over to the riff-raff from neighbouring countries and even from as far away as the Indian continent, his grandmotherland, in exchange for votes. Hindraf Makkal Sakthi, run by P. Waythamoorthy and his elder brother P. Uthayakumar, may be removed from Rosmah's List soon if they are willing to play ball, whatever it means. The ad hoc apolitical human rights movement was even outlawed until recently on the grounds that it was functioning like a terrorist organisation and probably was either inspired by or was in cahoots with the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. This romantic notion of terrorism a la the PRDM (Polis Raja Di Malaysia) falls apart once we realise that there's really no love lost between the Sri Lanka Tamils and the Indian Tamils whether in Sri Lanka or Malaysia. Of course, to the Malaysian Police, a Tamil is a Tamil no matter where he comes from. Waytha in the habit of playing with fire Still, it can't be denied that Uthaya looks like a trouble creator all the same but not everyone will agree that Waytha is in the same boat as his brother in Malaysia. The younger brother is more noted for creating trouble for the country abroad by drawing unwelcome attention to the country's shoddy human rights record. This includes the overwhelmingly Malay police asking Indian policemen to join them in beating up Indian youths in custody. He's also in the peculiar habit of "playing with fire", to quote the Home Ministry's favourite phrase, by pointing out that Article 153 in the Federal Constitution makes no mention of any Special Privileges, is confined to only a reasonable proportion in four areas – civil service, institutions of higher learning, scholarships, business opportunities – and besides covers non-Malays as well. Uthaya has the annoying habit of demanding to know why local authorities are denying even cendol licences to Indians. Uthaya must be racist if he wants to enjoy cendol sold only by Indians. He has also been pointing out that 5,000 Indian scrap metal dealers, all unlicensed, are at the mercy of the local authorities who keep fleecing them over their status. If only Uthaya could accept that it's not nice to throw sand in the rice-bowl of others. If the scrap metal dealers are all licensed, it would indeed be difficult for those in enforcement at the local authorities to keep their families in the style they have become accustomed to ever since the advent of scrap metal. In the case of the straight A Indian students denied government scholarships and places in local universities, Uthaya should know that there are "too many Indian lawyers and doctors in the country". He should accept that there are others who want to be doctors and lawyers as well even if they are not straight A students. Indians love their MIC leaders too much to let them suffer It's strange that only ten per cent of the Indians are fighting back and that the rest, including 350,000 stateless people, are living in the hope that "some nice things will happen to them someday with no effort on their part". Meanwhile, they want to keep a good distance from the Hindraf trouble creators especially since they love their MIC leaders too much despite these gutless wonders squatting on them all these years. MIC leaders are human beings too and could do with the scraps and crumbs that come their way now and then from the powers-that-be in return for delivering Indian votes en bloc. It's no coincidence that the Hindraf brothers are lawyers, noted trouble-creators from among Indians. In any case, this bad habit among lawyers will soon be a thing of the past since the Certificate in Legal Practice (CLP) has been ingeniously designed to weed out future trouble-creators. The Indian lawyers are kidding themselves if they take others for fools. Any Tom, Dick and Harry can be a lawyer – the thrust of the CLP -- as long as trouble-creators can be weeded out. Therein the challenge facing the ten per cent of Indians in the country addicted to trouble-making as the nation heads towards the 13th General Election.
Joe Fernandez is a mature law student, among others, who loves to write. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.
|
| Posted: 11 Feb 2013 12:54 PM PST
The poison is being stirred in the minds of the grassroots, that if the DAP is allowed to hold power with Pakatan, the Malays will lose all. The most interesting part of this campaign is that the Malays have already lost to the 'Chinese businesses' and are struggling to survive. Amir Ali, Free Malaysia Today An unchallenged BN has resulted in the coalition to be complacent, allowing the creeping of all forms of extremism within its ranks. A quick look at the ruling Barisan National's 'moderate' call shows how flawed it is, with a definite failure at home. Moderation is the name, says the Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak who has joined in the creation of an international alliance of the moderates, to prove his commitment. Yet, with his flight to Gaza and his outright support for the Hamas, has it not exposed the flaws at the international level? By no means, is the Hamas a moderate movement. It has been said, in the past, that the BN government has one major flaw. Complacency is the name. The fact of being unchallenged for decades has led the BN to be complacent, allowing the creeping of all forms of extremism within its ranks. Pressed by the rising opposition forces, BN has acquired yet another major weakness. The ruling coalition, pushed in a corner, does not know how to deal with this forceful and powerful opposition. Hence, we saw the cats coming out of the bag of extremism. While the central powers within the BN claim they are in favor of moderation, their partners and supporters do not seem to agree with them. Many among the supporters of the ruling coalition reject the '1Malaysia' concept, insisting on the pursuing the ethnic divide. To them, Malay rule is sacred, but what is more important is the denial of others' rights. Nevertheless, the BN is pushing a silent campaign against the opposition. Among the Malays, there are fears that the 'Chinese will rule' if the Pakatan Rakyat comes to power. Many still believe, in the very heartlands of the Pakatan's power bases, that the Malays must go back to the Umno. When asked why? They would reply that the Malays owes a lot to the Umno, or that they cannot afford the Chinese to take over. The fact that Malay political rule is a salient point in the Umno-BN campaign is indicative of the failure of the 'wasatiyah'. It also shows a lack of control of the PM on his troops, and of the Umno grassroots. It simply does not make sense that a party leader promoting moderation, allows his grassroots to campaign solidly on 'Malay power'. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/02/12/the-flawless-wasatiyah/ |
| Suara Interview: The Future of Malays Part 3 Posted: 11 Feb 2013 11:55 AM PST
Japan after the Meiji Restoration of 1868 sent thousands of its teachers and senior civil servants to the West to study its systems of education and administration. They were gone not just for a few weeks of "study tour" but for years. We take in a handful of teachers from America under the Fulbright Program and we make a big deal of it and deem it revolutionary. M. Bakri Musa [The original, in Malay, appeared in suaris.wordpress.com on January 31, 2013] Suaris: You advocate strategies that are generally deemed to be evolutionary in nature to change the collective Malay mindset. Should Malays be "shocked" with revolutionary changes as we saw with the Japanese and South Koreans that led to their quantum leap in achievement? MBM: When Mohamed Bouazizi burned himself to death in Tunisia on January 4, 2011, it was not his intention to start a riot or revolution. He had simply given up hope; he just wanted to end his misery. His personal action however, triggered a revolution not only in Tunisia but also the entire Arab world. Gamel Nasser was frothing at the mouth in wanting to revolutionize the Arabs; he was lucky that his Egypt was not totally whipped by Israel in the 1967 War. Senu Abdul Rahman and other Malay leaders like Abdullah Badawi, together with our intellectuals, were also intoxicated with their Revolusi Mental back then. Today, you could not even find the book of the same title that they wrote, and we Malays have remained the same. Whether a change is evolutionary or revolutionary depends not on action or intention but on results and consequences. Bouazizi merely intended to end his suffering but his action reverberated throughout the Arab world, taking down hitherto strong men like Ghaddafi and Mubarak. Evolutionary changes are small and incremental; revolutionary ones dramatic and disruptive. It is well to remember that we could bring down a mountain by aiming a jet of water at its base (as with the old hydraulic tin mining) as by planting explosives. James C Scott, the Yale political scientist who studied the peasants in Kedah's rice bowl, in his book, Weapons of the Weak, uses a different metaphor. When the ship of state runs aground on a coral reef, attention is directed to the shipwreck (revolutionary) but not the aggregations of petty acts that made those treacherous reefs possible (evolutionary). Your reading of the Japanese and South Koreans is not quite accurate. True, viewed today the changes in their societies are truly revolutionary. However, the steps their leaders took much earlier were all incremental and evolutionary in nature, stretching over decades. Japan after the Meiji Restoration of 1868 sent thousands of its teachers and senior civil servants to the West to study its systems of education and administration. They were gone not just for a few weeks of "study tour" but for years. Even today, Japan takes in thousands of English teachers from America. Those were all evolutionary not revolutionary initiatives. We take in a handful of teachers from America under the Fulbright Program and we make a big deal of it and deem it revolutionary. Likewise South Korea; during the 1970s it sent thousands of its students to the West for graduate work in the sciences and engineering. When President Pak visited America he met with many of them including those who opposed him, to cajole them to return. When they did, they were supported with loans to start their enterprises. Compare that to Prime Minister Najib; the only student he met was a Petronas University flunkie, one Saiful who was purportedly looking for a scholarship. I dealt more deeply with Japan and South Korea, as well as Ireland and Argentina, in my earlier book, Malaysia In The Era of Globalization (2002). To continue our "Look East," a closer example both in space and time is China. Mao Zedong was consumed with one revolution after another to, borrowing Najib's favorite word, "transform" his country. The result? Hundreds of millions of his countrymen suffered or were killed. Hundreds of millions! That would be the whole of Indonesia! Then came Deng; his philosophy was simple. He could not care less what the color of the cat as long as it catches the mouse. With that he changed the nature and character of China and its society. Today China has eclipsed economically Japan and Germany, and threatening to do likewise to America. Our neighbor Indonesia had one revolution after another under Sukarno, but its people remained destitute. Mahathir too aspired to revolutionize our culture and people. In the end it was he who cried. Returning to my earlier garden metaphor, revolution is where you indiscriminately spray Roundup. Yes, that would kill the lalang but also wipe out the useful plants. With evolutionary strategies, you would meticulously pour the concentrated pesticide right at the root of the offending weed while sparing the useful plants. They can now grow unimpeded, the lalang now completely eradicated. Liberate the Malay mind, one at a time, in a process that is evolutionary and incremental but cumulative and sure. The results would astound us and be deemed revolutionary. When a mind is liberated, it can no longer be imprisoned. We would then be no longer, to use the terminology of the Algerian philosopher Malek Bennabi, "colonizable." Even more beautiful, a liberated mind will see clearly that the green, lush grass in our garden is after all the tenacious and highly destructive weed lalang and not, as our leaders are trying to convince us all along, alfalfa. To continue. Suaris Interview # 4: It is said that Malays are at a crossroad. This is particularly so with the upcoming General Election 13 where the choice is between feudalism and liberalism. To what extent do you agree with that viewpoint?
|
| Anwar Ibrahim is now Huguan Siou Posted: 11 Feb 2013 11:50 AM PST
Furor against bestowing of Huguan Siou title on Anwar Ibrahim Matthias Hermes, Borneo Insider KOTA KINABALU, February 11, 2013: As if the 'Allah' issue has not done enough damage to the racial unity-and-harmony of this unique nation that is proud of its racial harmony, now another race-and-culture-sensitive issue has ensued. Not only that, this latest controversy involving opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has heightened the 'anti-Malaya' sentiment among the native people of Sabah. This happened when the Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Ranau decided to bestow PKR de facto chief Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim the coveted-and-sacred title of 'Huguan Siou of Malaysia', during his visit to Kg Paginatan in Ranau, to grace a political gathering there on Sunday. Huguan Siou means Paramount Leader for the Kadazan Dusun community. This has sparked a furor and strong protest among the Kadazan Dusun community in Sabah, with many questioning its appropriateness and demanding for an explanation from the party involved in this matter. Many have since expressed their anger through Facebook in response to a posting of the incident by Jonathan Yasin, Ranau PKR Chief which features a photo showing Anwar wearing the Kadazan Dusun headgear and a sash bearing the 'Huguan Siou' title around his shoulder with the caption: "DS Anwar Ibrahim telah dinobatkan sebagai Huguan Siou Malaysia di Kg Paginatan, Ranau-10/2/13" (DS Anwar has been coroneted the Huguan Siou of Malaysia in Kg Paginatan, Ranau 10/2/13). The said posting received more than 350 comments and shared by more than 50 people, with most of them expressing their disapproval and disgust against such an act which they deemed a gross insult to the Kadazan Dusun community. One top commentator, Amylia G Joannes stressed that the title of Huguan Siou is the highest honour of the Kadazan Dusun community and is only bestowed to a member of the community who is truly qualified and deserving of such a title. "Everyone realizes that Huguan Siou is synonym to the Kadazan Dusun. Hence one must understand that when someone mentioned about Huguan Siou, automatically people will refer to the Kadazan Dusun community. So, it's better to use other name (on Anwar) so as not to create any confusion and uneasiness to others," she said. Another commentator, Gaman Kodou expressed regret that such a coveted, sacred title that is exclusive to the Kadazan Dusun community has been given to someone who is not only an outsider, but also who has not contributed anything to the state. "Now that even the supreme title has been bestowed to a non-KDM and an outsider, imagine what else will be given away to the Pakatan Rakyat government if they come to power in Sabah? And they got the cheek to talk boast about safeguarding Sabah rights? This is what make us doubtful of the true objective of Pakatan Rakyat," said another commentator, David Tiptop. Read more at: http://borneoinsider.com/2013/02/11/anwar-ibrahim-is-now-huguan-siou/
|
| Sabah, Sarawak at historical crossroads come the 13th GE Posted: 11 Feb 2013 11:38 AM PST Borneo can seize the reins of power in Putrajaya if it secures a united block of 50 seats in Parliament to lay claim to the Prime Minister's post in partnership with whichever coalition in Malaya is willing to eat humble pie and settle for the Deputy Prime Minister's post despite having more seats than the Borneo block. Joe Fernandez The unprecedented political divide in Malaya with the emergence of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) taking half the 165 Malayan seats in Parliament and five states (now four) and Kuala Lumpur on Sat 8 Mar, 2008 opened up a historical window of opportunity for Sabah and Sarawak to free themselves from the 50-year-long vice-like grip of the Malaya-dominated Federal Government in Putrajaya. In 2008, voters in Malaya voted against the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) -- and not so much for PR -- and hence, it's said, the Opposition Alliance won by default. PR turned in a miserable performance in 2004 at the 12th General Election. It can be said that PR jumped on the makkal sakthi -- people power -- bandwagon effect created by Hindraf's 25 Nov, 2007 Uprising when 100,000 Indians took to the streets of Kuala Lumpur. This was followed by the mid-Feb 2008 Rose Rally in Putrajaya. A series of local authority demolishing of Hindu temples was the proverbial last straw that broke the camel's back. Although the Indians don't have even one seat, parliamentary or state, in Malaya, this marginalised and disenfranchised Nation in Malaysia decides in 67 parliamentary seats. This time the new BN-PR status quo of 2008 is expected to remain in Malaya.
Malaya has too many seats in Parliament Indeed, it will even be surprising if BN does not lose Perak once again as in 2008. Public anger against the ruling party is at a boiling point in the state. BN, using a ruthless carrot-and-stick approach including kidnapping the Speaker, the police raiding the state assembly and the Sultan reportedly being arm-twisted, wrested back Perak through defections of three vulnerable PR state assemblymen which sparked a constitutional crisis. The forthcoming 13th General Election -- expected between April 28 and Oct 28 -- in Sabah and Sarawak could be the unfinished, and long delayed, Borneo chapter of the 2008 political tsunami which was then confined to Malaya. The consensus in Borneo is that it's an opportune moment now for all local parties across both sides of the political divide in Sabah and Sarawak to come together and adopt a common position as follows on the 13th GE: (1) say no to the parti parti Malaya taking any seats, whether parliamentary or state, in Sabah and Sarawak; (2) Malaya, as provided by the constitutional documents on Malaysia, should not have more than one seat less two-third in the Malaysian Parliament, at the very maximum. This is not reflected in the 165 seats currently held by Malaya in Parliament i.e. 18 more than it should have given the present 222-seat Parliament.
Taib Mahmud has finally run out of luck To add insult to injury, the parti parti Malaya hold both parliamentary and state seats in Sabah and Sarawak and have plans to seize even more seats as both the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) and PR try to outdo each other; (3) Taib Mahmud, who has painted himself into a corner through gross abuse of power and conflict of interest, should step down for the sake of Sarawak. He can thereby avoid being blackmailed by either PR or BN and as well prevent the parti parti Malaya from striking further roots in this Nation. In any case, Taib can no longer lead a charmed life as in the past three decades and more. He has run out of luck as Prime Minister Mohd Najib Abdul Razak no longer trusts him, fearing the highly vulnerable leader's defection to PR, and will pick the parliamentary candidates in Sarawak, as in Sabah, himself. Najib is also picking the state candidates in Sabah. There will be no state election in Sarawak this year; (4) Sabah and Sarawak should not continue to be hoodwinked by Putrajaya's big talk on so-called development in Borneo. The fact that Sabah and Sarawak are the poorest Nations in Malaysia speaks volumes. In addition, not only Sabah and Sarawak but Malaysia as well compares unfavourably with Singapore which left Malaysia in 1965 after two years in the Federation and Brunei which stayed out at the 11th hour; and (5) the eradication of the grinding poverty of Sabah and Sarawak hinges on these Nations getting back control over their politics, resources and revenue from the racism, prejudice and opportunism-ridden Putrajaya.
Sabah, Sarawak must regain control over its resources Last year, Putrajaya plundered Sabah alone to the tune of RM 50 billion by conservative estimates. This does not take into account losses incurred by Sabah under the National Cabotage Policy, rakings by Malayan companies sitting on native land and gambling monies flowing to the Peninsula. The objective of regaining control over politics, resources and revenue, in furtherance of its manifest destiny, will not be achieved if the parti parti Malaya continue to steal seats, parliamentary and state, in these Nations. It would be tragic if Sabahans and Sarawakians don't capitalise on the political divide in Malaya since 2008 to secure their rightful place in the sun. Borneons may quarrel among themselves but they need to unite in the face of a common external threat and enemy. Unity is strength.
Putrajaya capitalising on disunity in Sabah, Sarawak Malaya has indeed emerged over the last half century as the arch enemy of Borneo, the real crocodile in the region, as warned by President Sukarno in 1964 at the height of his Ganyang Malaysia (Hang Malaysia) movement driven by Indonesia's policy of konfrontasi (confrontation) towards the neo-colonialist Malaysia created by the British disingenuously after both Sabah and Sarawak became free nations. Sabah obtained its independence on 31 Aug, 1963 and Sarawak the same year on 22 July. Malaysia only came into being on 16 Sept, 1963, dragging in Sabah and Sarawak without referendum, to facilitate Chinese-majority Singapore's independence through merger with almost Chinese-majority Malaya. The Orang Asal population of Sabah and Sarawak were ostensibly needed by the Malay-speaking communities in Malaya, and the tiny Orang Asal (Orang Asli) population there, to provide greater balance against the Chinese population. If Borneons don't unite, Malaya will take advantage of their disunity to continue creating proxies, stooges and rogue elements from among them to continuing serving their nefarious ends, for want of a better term. Once Borneons have disposed of Malaya from their politics, they can "go back to quarrelling among themselves". Sabah and Sarawak should not worry about which coalition in Malaya grabs Putrajaya. They need to foster in themselves a sense of professional detachment when dealing with Malaya. The abuses there, if any, are none of their concern.
United Sabah, Sarawak can lay claim to PM's post Instead, they should be willing to work in pragmatic partnership, within or outside Government, with whichever coalition in Malaya can lay claim to Putrajaya. This ideal is being actively promoted by the State Reform Party (Star) led by Jeffrey Kitingan. The Star chairman, the de facto Orang Asal chief, prefers Borneo to throw its backing for strategic reasons behind whichever Malayan coalition emerges as the weaker one in Parliament. Sabah and Sarawak will indeed be in a spot if BN stakes claim to Putrajaya and PR refuses to concede defeat and instead takes to the streets. Conversely, PR could win a bigger share of parliamentary seats vis-a-vis BN, but the latter may claim having the single biggest block of seats since the former isn't a registered coalition but three parties contesting under their respective symbols. Again, it's unlikely that PR will cave in that easily into semantics. Borneo can seize the reins of power in Putrajaya if it secures a united block of 50 seats in Parliament to lay claim to the Prime Minister's post in partnership with whichever coalition in Malaya is willing to eat humble pie and settle for the Deputy Prime Minister's post despite having more seats than the Borneo block. Even, then the Malayan partner is not expected to have more than 70 seats at the very most.
Agenda Borneo vs Agenda parti parti Malaya in Borneo A Malaysian Prime Minister from Borneo will be able to set aside the written Constitution of Malaya which is being passed off as the written Constitution of Malaysia and give the unwritten Constitution of Malaysia -- part of the Agenda Borneo -- its rightful place. That would underline Sabah and Sarawak as Nations in Malaysia and not the 12th and 13th states in a Federation of Malaya masquerading as the Federation of Malaysia. The local parties who refuse to co-operate on Agenda Borneo -- everything against the Agenda parti parti Malaya in Borneo -- are no doubt traitors, indeed treasonous elements, who are willing to betray their own people. No doubt they want to continue being proxies, stooges and rogue elements of Malaya, like Judas Iscariot in return for the proverbial 30 pieces of silver, in order to facilitate Putrajaya's internal colonisation policies in Sabah and Sarawak. It's only a matter of time before they realise the folly of their ways and hang themselves in shame and disgrace. It's a tragedy that there are people among the people of Borneo who take no pride in themselves and their people, and who have no guts to stand on their own two feet but prefer to shamelessly latch on to outsiders, willing to be sycophants for self-serving reasons. Their children and grandchildren will urinate on their graves. The outsiders, as evident from the grinding poverty of Sabah and Sarawak, are the worst form of parasites, leeches and bloodsuckers to ever walk the Earth.
People of Borneo deserve better after 50 years of Malaysia There's the traditional falling out among thieves taking place in Malaya as they eye Borneo. PR has pledged that it will "steal less oil and gas" -- that's what it means -- from Sabah and Sarawak, i.e. only 80 per cent, compared with BN's 95 per cent in the inner waters and 100 per cent in the outer waters where most of the wells are situated. Already, BN apologists in Sabah and Sarawak are claiming that national oil corporation Petronas would go bust if PR makes good its pledge. The last thing on the minds of Sabahans and Sarawakians is any fate that may be in store for Petronas. Their only concern is to take the right path as they stand at a historical crossroads come the 13th GE. Indeed the window of opportunity opened up for Borneo by 2008 may never be repeated for another half century if Sabah and Sarawak were to root for either BN or PR or both. The people of Sabah and Sarawak deserve better after 50 years of suffering under a bad British idea called Malaysia.
Joe Fernandez is a mature law student, among others, who loves to write. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.
|
| K-pop sensation Psy dances into Malaysia's political drama, Gangnam style (+video) Posted: 11 Feb 2013 11:11 AM PST
In an effort to jazz the youth vote in Malaysia ahead of elections in which it faces a very strong opposition, the government called in K-pop sensation Psy. Simon Roughneen, CS Monitor Korean pop sensation Psy danced right into the middle of Malaysia's increasingly fractious politics today, following the prime minister on to the stage at a government-held Chinese New Yearcelebration in opposition stronghold Penang. Psy's two renditions of his hit "Gangnam Style" were the highlight of a scorching morning in the west coast city, where Malaysia's governing coalition, known as the National Front, made a local and youth vote pitch ahead of elections expected to be the closest-fought in Malaysia's history. "If you read most of the surveys, they show almost a neck and neck race, but most analysts think that the BN will win narrowly," says James Chin, a professor of political science at Monash University. The National Front, known by its Malay acronym BN, has run Malaysia since independence in 1957. But the stakes are high with 30 percent of Malaysia's 13 million voters due to cast their ballots for the first time in this election, slated to be announced by the end of April. The opposition, another coalition led by former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, is hoping to better its best-ever showing in the 2008 election, when it took 1/3 of the seats. Tensions have been heightened by two mass opposition-linked rallies in capital Kuala Lumpur, when tens of thousands of demonstrators were doused with water-cannons and tear-gas in July 2011 and April 2012. But Psy's appearance at today's event seems unlikely to sway these younger voters one way or another. "It will be seen as publicity stunt," says Professor Chin. Indeed, Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak pledged 20,000 new houses and a new monorail system for Penang just before Psy came out on stage. He ended his address by asking "Are you ready for Psy?" And was met with a sea of enthusiastic cheers. When he then asked "Are you ready for BN?" it was met by a less enthusiastic response from the crowd. "Everyone was here for Psy, not for politics," says Chang Myn-Kit, who works in Singapore, but made his way back to Penang to be with family for the Chinese New Year. Some government supporters in the crowd made their voices heard, however. "I'm here for Psy and for Najib," says Eddie Lau, waving an "I Love BN" banner. |
| Spitting on the grave of a ‘great man’ Posted: 10 Feb 2013 03:11 PM PST Building a civil society is less about monumental buildings, grandiose projects, stealing from the poor in the name of governance. By Howl Pillay, FMT Restraint and respect for the departed is a sign of civilised behaviour. At times we fail the test. Our conscience pricks us and it hurts but we learn. The next time around we desist from such behaviour. We then are on the road towards building a civil society. Surely building a civil society is not about monumental buildings or grand projects. Or of grabbing the wealth of the rich and stealing from the poor in the name of governance. Building a civil society is about a scrupulous adherence to the rule of law. It is about men and women behaving in a civil manner in the simple things they do everyday in their everyday lives. It is about politeness; about grace; about fairness. We hold our tongue and our horses, especially when we hold the reigns of great political power. Truly great men are humbled by that experience. They are transformed by it. And after retirement they retreat to within themselves to better understand themselves and the people they governed; to acknowledge their mistakes and their weaknesses. The exemplariness of their lives carry a message for future generations; a message that acts as a light and a lamp to guide us in our journey to the better place we seek. These, readers, are the Lincolns, the Rizals, the Ho Chi-minhs, the Tunku Abdul Rahmans, the Kartinis, the Gandhis, the Mandelas of history. Lincoln's emancipation speech will serve as an inspiration for as long as there are enslaved people. Rizal's incredibly courageous farewell message to his people – Mi Ultimo Adios – written on the night before facing a Spanish firing squad and smuggled out in an old lamp is the proud patrimony of every Filipino. And Ho Chi-minh's words, deeds and steely courage inspired the Vietnamese to defeat two Western powers and unite a country after thirty years of war and sacrifice and yet he died as poor as a Vietnamese church mouse. And Kartini's educational endeavours on behalf of girls and women in her country is still honoured and her birthday is celebrated by two hundred and fifty million Indonesians as Kartini Day and school children solemnly pledge to continue her legacy every year. Pissing and puking on graves But the minds of the unscrupulous leaders, the incorrigible ones, the recalcitrant ones are different. They turn up the volume of politics and fill it with racial hatred and tension. They invoke ancient animosities and stoke the flames of religious intolerance to achieve their own ends. They hit out at all and sundry; they trash their rivals. They conveniently forget; they selectively remember and they humiliate those who have the courage to stand up to them. They piss and puke on the graves of others who had come before them. They rave and they rant; they twist and turn until all meaning is rendered meaningless. And they enrich themselves at every opportunity for their greed is insatiable. It is they, who through their speech and deed come closest to making the dead turn in their graves. They are not content doing the dirty work of dirty politics when in office. They continue with the same even after leaving it. And they do it with even more vehemence and venom. Old habits indeed die hard. But still we who are civilised know that it is wrong to wish the death of another. It's a no-no-no! And so we take our unconscious thoughts with us to bed. And in sleep they become our dreams and nightmares; often forgotten on waking and if remembered, often nightmarish. 'You will be judged' A long line of men and women are streaming past a bier. The line stretches back miles to some unknown place like ants streaming out of an undetectable hole in the ground. And yet more people are waiting patiently in groups and clusters both large and small in the streets of the capital. They speak in quiet, dignified whispers. And soldiers guard the dead man, the 'great man', heads bowed. I walk, unhurried, looking for the end of the line. I must not jump the queue; I am part of building a civil society. And then out of the blue I spot an old friend. We exchange greetings politely. All his life he spoke of his disgust for the man now lying in state. I am puzzled. I ask him, in a whisper: "Why are you here?" And he whispers back: "To make sure he is really dead". A nod of my head, and I continue. I have walked hardly a hundred meters when yet again I see an old friend from my university days. Once a journalist, he gave up writing on anything at all after the newspaper he worked for was closed down by this 'great man'. Again we exchange greetings. He shakes my hand vigorously, like he is energised and happy. I say to him that he was the last person I expected to patiently wait his turn to pay his respects to this man. He suppressed his laughter before whispering: "I will bow low before him so that I can see from close quarters how a mouth can fall silent forever".
|
| General Election 2013 – BN, Shifting From Strategic Defence to Strategic Offense Posted: 09 Feb 2013 06:19 PM PST
The Opposition has also run out of ammunitions and their rank and file is woefully battle-fatigued. Self-doubts have emerged and major policy disagreements between DAP and PAS have divided the rank and file as well. Karpal Singh has done an invaluable service to the BN government. Whatever surprises that were touted as game-changers, such as the so-called political realignments in Sabah, could not be sustained and have not been transformed into any major groundswell. By Matthias Chang – Future Fast-forward In my previous articles, I suggested several reasons for having a General Election in 2013, one of which was that as long as the Opposition controlled four State Governments, it would be a strategic disadvantage to the BN Government to have an early election. The four State Governments controlled by the Opposition parties would not be dissolved in the event of an early election so that they could harness their limited resources and concentrate on the Parliamentary Election in an attempt to seize Federal power. The four State Governments would be the "impregnable forts" offering shelter and resources to opposition forces and afford them opportunities to conduct strategic forays in BN controlled areas. Since 2010, the strategists in the Opposition camp have been baiting the BN Government to hold early elections and each time, I had warned of such a danger. The four "impregnable fortresses" have now been encircled and whatever forays outside the fortresses had limited battlefield success. If I were Anwar Ibrahim, I would sack those strategists who were conducting continuous and relentless battles against the BN government since 2010. If Tommy Thomas was one of them, he should be the first to be "decapitated", figuratively speaking. How can any strategist be so stupid to adopt the blunders of Brutus (especially riding on the wrong tide) in the famous final Battle of Philippi as the winning strategy for the Opposition? Brutus, casting aside the advice of the more cautious Cassius, misread the tide and plunged into a disastrous defeat. To salvage what little honour remaining, Brutus committed suicide, as did other conspirators who murdered the great Caesar on the false pretext that the assassination was necessary to save Rome. And as they say, the rest is history! History will repeat itself in the "Second Battle of Philippi", which will commence soon enough. One must not ride on the crest of every tide for there are tides that will assuredly lack the force and momentum to guarantee victory. Low tide comes to mind. In July 2012, the strategic balance changed for BN – from Strategic Defence to Strategic Parity. Since December 2012, we are witnessing a new phase – Strategic Offense – the gathering momentum for an irreversible High Tide! A good analogy of what has happened would be the great victory by the greatest boxer in history, Muhammad Ali over the big puncher, George Foreman in Africa. Employing the "rope-a-dope" tactic, Ali baited George Foreman to punch relentlessly for eight critical rounds until exhaustion took over. Ali took every punishing blow to the head and the body, absorbing the pain and the relentless pace. When Foreman was all spent and worn out, Muhammad Ali unleashed a devastating blow that floored Foreman for good. Well, the Opposition has thrown every conceivable punch at the BN for the last three years but there was no knockout punch. Like the abovementioned boxing match, the pace was relentless, and the blows punishing but BN took it all and is still standing. The Opposition has also run out of ammunitions and their rank and file is woefully battle-fatigued. Self-doubts have emerged and major policy disagreements between DAP and PAS have divided the rank and file as well. Karpal Singh has done an invaluable service to the BN government. Whatever surprises that were touted as game-changers, such as the so-called political realignments in Sabah, could not be sustained and have not been transformed into any major groundswell. Initially, the Opposition held the high ground, having the tactical advantage and when they over-estimated their strength, they launched a blitzkrieg offensive on several fronts, all at once and gained massive ground. But, the offensive sputtered in the second half of 2012 and by December stalled. It is clear that the Opposition "Generals" are at a lost as to which front-lines are to be abandoned, the troops pulled back to a more defensible perimeter and how to prepare for the inevitable counter-attack. Napoleon made the same strategic mistake and so did Hitler when they attacked Russia. The critical blunder was to launch a broad frontal attack in the hope of a rapid collapse of enemy's forces thereby exposing the weakness of the supply lines, stretched thin by the wide frontlines. When the great Marshal Zhukov counter-attacked, the entire Eastern Front collapsed leading to the defeat of Nazi Germany! The Opposition has now consolidated and reduced their frontlines to the battle for Penang and Selangor with expeditionary forces in Sabah and Sarawak as diversions. But, it is too late. Exhausted troops are manning the frontlines, not sure of fresh supplies or reserves. If truth be told, the Opposition has no reserves at all. The Barisan Nasional has already launched its counter-attack with a full Division of fresh troops kept in the rear as reserves for two years for this one objective. And they have abundant supplies. Additionally, the Opposition's propaganda campaign is losing momentum and has no longer any bite. It was a huge strategic mistake for the Opposition to latch on to the coattails of Deepak, a blackmailer whose agenda was hijacked by an opportunist legal goon to project himself as the "Knight in Shining Armour", who has opened himself to future prosecution for being complicit in drawing up the so-called first statutory declaration for private-eye P. Balasubramaniam. My reasons are as follows. The clue is in the followings words of the press release dated December 20, 2012 by the solicitor of P. Balasubramaniam: "As far as I am concerned, the 1st SD was transcribed, produced and eventually affirmed by my client over a period of two months during which time every detail was painstakingly checked and cross-checked to ensure the highest accuracy…" (and as reported by Malaysiakini) Based on the above statement, the rakyat is told to accept as Gospel truth what is stated in the Statutory Declaration (SD). Who did the checking and crosschecking? The lawyer? The private eye? Some other third party? If it is the lawyer, what are the implications? Let me just say, he is on shaky grounds to assert so boldly that "every detail was checked and cross-checked". But, there are no statements as to how the checking and crosschecking were conducted and with whom did the lawyer and or the private eye checked and crosschecked the so-called details! By the way, there is no such hotel as the "Prince Court Hotel" where it was alleged that the 2nd SD was executed. There is however a "Prince Hotel & Residence" in Kuala Lumpur and a "Prince Court Medical Centre" also in Kuala Lumpur. Was this fact checked and crosschecked by the solicitor when he released his press statement, I wonder? If not, why not? The location of an alleged crime scene is most important. But, this is now open to doubt notwithstanding that the crime scene was identified as the non-existent "Prince Court Hotel" by a member of the profession that prides itself as being honourable! If every detail relating to the 2nd SD was not meticulously checked and cross-checked as it should be, then one has to question the accuracy of the 1st SD and no one should take the word of the solicitor as the absolute truth. Even the contrived "Deepak Scandal" did not have the desired effect. The goons behind this pantomime who postured as "knights in shining armour" were in fact muckrakers, peddling trash. The orchestrated press conference consists of innuendos and subtle speculations but devoid of hard evidence. The conductor of this third rate pantomime, if truth be told, is an opportunist and a coward. Let's call a spade a spade – the conductor of this sordid pantomime was orchestrating an insidious blackmail and his co-conspirators who pride themselves as honourable were up to their eyeballs in this cesspool. The entire political campaign of the Opposition (save that of PAS) was grounded on emotions and hate. In essence, the political campaign of the Opposition is a "Hate Campaign" – to demonise and politically assassinate the leaders of the Barisan Nasional (past and present). More important issues are at stake and Malaysians should take time to analyse some critical facts with regard to the leading members of the Opposition parties. Take Lim Kit Siang. Politically as a member of parliament, he can be likened to a "rolling stone", one who has no loyalties to his constituency. How else can one explain his track record as an MP:- • Bandar Melaka (1969–1974) • Kota Melaka (1974–1978) • Petaling Jaya (1978–1982) • Kota Melaka (1982–1986) • Tanjong (1986–1999) When his Tanjong campaign to take over Penang failed in 1995 and 1999 (he was rejected and defeated in Tanjong together with Karpal Singh in Jelutong in 1999), he gave up totally the campaign to capture Penang. What happened in 2008 was unexpected, for if DAP was so sure of taking over Penang he would have waged battle in Penang. The DAP Chief in Penang, Chow Kon Yeow publicly declared in 2003 that there would be no more Tanjong 3! So, Kit Siang ran to Perak to seek greener pastures. • Ipoh Timur (since 2004) Karpal Singh is a lesser rolling stone. Karpal's political career began in 1970 when he joined the DAP. He won the Alor Setar Bandar state seat in Kedah in 1974. He was first elected to parliament in 1978 when he won in the Jelutong constituency, Penang, as well as the Bukit Gelugor state seat. Karpal held the Jelutong seat for more than 20 years until losing it in 1999. He held the Bukit Gelugor state seat until 1990, moving on to contest the Sungai Pinang and Padang Kota seats in subsequent elections but was defeated. In the 2004 general election, Karpal returned to parliament with a 1,261-majority win in the new Bukit Gelugor seat and retained his seat in the 2008 election. Lim Guan Eng has a similar pattern. Lim was first elected as a Member of Parliament for Kota Melaka in 1986, after defeating Soh Chin Aun and was re-elected in the subsequent 1990 and 1995 general elections, albeit with reduced majority votes. He was ineligible to contest in the 2005 election on account of his conviction for sedition. He suffered a personal setback when he and his wife came in last and second-last respectively in the election for the DAP Malacca Committee. It came as no surprise therefore, that in the 2008 General Election he switched to Penang as it is clear he did not enjoy much support in Malacca even within his own party. The unexpected DAP victory in Penang in the 2008 general election allowed Lim Guan Eng to become the Chief Minister of Penang replacing the former Chief Minister, Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon even though Lim Guan Eng is not from Penang. Senior DAP leaders of Penang such as Lim Hock Seng, Phee Boon Poh, and Chow Kon Yeow were bypassed and were instead appointed as excos. The above, by any measure, is a reflection of the political opportunism practiced by the three top leaders of DAP and I would urge the Malaysian voters to be very cautious in entrusting the fate of our country to such leaders. I must give credit where credit is due. It can be said without any fear of contradiction that of the three Opposition parties, PAS is the most consistent in its political aim of setting up an "Islamic Welfare State" whether one agrees with that agenda or not. PKR has similar political origins as the former Semangat 46, both came into existence as a result of differences within UMNO. But, DAP is a totally different political entity. Throughout its history, it could not forge any lasting cooperation with other opposition entities and or project a leadership role. It was only when Semangat 46 and PKR came into the ranks of the Opposition that DAP gained a wider acceptance. However, this was and is purely tactical so as to garner more electoral victories. DAP never aspired to be the ruling party and therefore had no long-term vision for the country. Being part of the "ruling coalition" that captured Penang and having the coveted Chief Minister post was a political bonus beyond its wildest dreams, as they had in 2003 given up all hope in capturing Penang when it abandoned the Tanjong 3 campaign! Given the inherent political contradictions between DAP and PAS with regard to the establishment of an Islamic Welfare State, there is just no way that DAP will give support (other than lip-service) to PAS in those constituencies where DAP may have some influence over the Chinese voters. The stand taken by Lim Guan Eng on the "Allah Issue" will be the straw that will break PAS' camel's back. Given that this issue is so close to the hearts of all PAS members and the blatant and very public refusal of DAP's leadership (especially Karpal Singh and Lim Guan Eng) to make a tactical compromise is an indication that when the crunch comes, the retention of Penang as a DAP stronghold is a bigger prize for DAP than the prospect of securing Federal power. The cold calculation is simple. If the Opposition loses out in the General Election, for DAP it is better to have "a bird in hand (i.e. Penang) than two in the bush" for it can survive such a defeat. And to buttress its long-term survival, it is not beyond DAP's calculation to offer an olive branch to the BN on a similar understanding as what Gerakan accomplished in 1973. Given this final equation, it is utterly stupid for the Chinese voters to give any support to DAP. DAP in Chinese parlance is a "Fun Kuat Jhai" i.e. a traitor, for DAP will assuredly betray PAS! The soothsayer has spoken, "Beware the Ides of March" but this time, there will be no assassination of a Caesar, but instead we will witness the burial of Malaysia's Brutus, Cassius and the other conspirators after the Second Battle of Philippi! |
| BN’s Vishwaroopam is getting ugly Posted: 09 Feb 2013 03:26 PM PST Stop just looking at the bigger agenda. BN and Najib must also know how to sort out the smaller issues if they want to win over voters. K Kabilan, FMT (Vishwaroopam in Tamil means the true face. It is also the title of a Tamil blockbuster which is still awaiting release in Malaysia due to its supposedly controversial theme.) Sometimes one does wonder if the government is really concerned about the peoples' wishes. Is it even listening to what the people are saying? It appears as though the government is more interested in doing things which it thinks will be good for the rakyat. Najib Tun Razak's earlier clarion call that his government was not one which subscribed to "government knows it all" seems like a half-baked lie right now. Take, for example, the decision to fly down South Korean megastar Psy for the Barisan Nasional Chinese New Year open house in Penang. A cool RM3 million was reportedly spent for this. Of course, it was not the rakyat's money as the Gangnam ride was reportedly sponsored by private parties. Still, that much for a singer who has only one known mega hit? And at a time when people are complaining of not getting real value for their money? What about the Ponggal festival at Dataran Merdeka on Feb 2? Of course, it was deemed to be a mega success, by MIC standards. It would surely be if RM5 million was reportedly set aside to get the crowd. Word has it that almost 1,400 buses were chartered to bring in Indians to the capital city to show that they all love our prime minister. In return, they did get a full meal of nasi briyani, courtesy of the BN government. Is this how Najib wants to get the people to back him and BN again? This method seems so archaic, but it must be working for them to be doing it repeatedly! But it goes back to the main question once again. Isn't Najib interested in what the people really want? Does the rakyat still want the government to dictate what's good for them? The death of a security guard The first is the death of security guard C Sugumaran who died after allegedly being beaten by policemen and members of the public on Jan 24. The first post-mortem stated that he had succumbed to a heart failure. The family wants a second post-mortem and that's where things have started to break down. Sugumaran's body still lies in a mortuary while his family wants the know the true cause of his death. Very simple request. Any caring government, or a home minister, or prime minister, would have made the all-important call so that truth and justice are served. But what we have here is the prime minister asking for a forensic report to be passed to him, and then even 10 days later, making no decision on the matter. In the meantime, the home minister sits quietly, letting the police handle the matter. The police, on their part, want to follow rules and regulations to the letter while not doing anything conclusive at all. It's a merry-go-round with a family still waiting for answers, and closure as a result of the death. Is there an easier way to solve this problem? Yes, there is. It is actually as easy as Najib going to the local radio stations and trying to impress the Chinese voters with his Mandarin. But will he take the easy way to solve this problem? I doubt it!
|
| Stop playing with our sentiments, Hisham Posted: 09 Feb 2013 03:20 PM PST So Dato Hisham, please stop beating around the bush and tell us frankly: is the movie Vishwaroopam going to be released at all? By S Vell Paari, FMT It is as a result of these four NGO's, the Malaysian government has yet to approve for the spy thriller to be released in local cinemas even though the Censor Board has approved the second edited version. The decision to release or not to release this movie is Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein's call. My questions to Hishammuddin are these: 1. In what way is the Muslim sentiment of the Tamil speaking Indian Muslims of Tamil Nadu, Singapore and rest of the world, together with the local 60 Indian Muslim NGOs, different to the four NGOs currently objecting to the movie? I can understand if it's the case all over the world. Malaysia has the highest edits, 16 in total as opposed to seven in Tamil Nadu. Are you saying these four NGOs' ideology to Islam is different to the rest of the world? This decision is no different to PAS ruling on the Chinese attire issue in Kedah. 2. The Home Ministry (KDN) speaks of sensitivity but where was this sensitivity in regards to the controversial book Interlok which was deemed to be insensitive to the Indian community? It took such a long time for a decision to be made to remove the book from school syallabus. Are you punishing us for objecting to Interlok? 3. This movie was cleared for general viewing in local cinemas by the Malaysian Censor Board. It was then banned by the ministry after a single show following complaints from the local Indian Muslim NGOs (the first group). So are you saying that the Malaysian Censor Board was ignorant of the feelings of Muslims in our country? 4. Where was this sensitivity when the cow-head incident happened in Selangor in 2009? And weren't you the one who said we must understand the feelings of the protesters? Why is it that when we (the Indian community) were subjected to abuse, we must understand the feelings of those abusing us? Why is it that our sensitivity is never taken into consideration? Why? Is it because we don't have feelings or are we not entitled to have feelings. 5. Pirated versions of the movie are flooding the local market. Your Home Ministry has helped to boost the income for the SME piracy market. These pirated DVDs and VCDs are uncut versions of the movie. So what did the four NGOs (the second group) and you achieve with the continued ban of Vishwaroopam? Will the police force be now instructed to arrest the families of average Malaysians of Indian origin who decide to buy the pirated version of the movie due to KDN's double standard? Will we be seeing kids handcuffed and dragged with their parents into police vehicles? What a disaster! With such stunts from KDN, who needs a tsunami? Working against Najib It's a clear case of insubordination by you against the direction and vision of the prime minister. You are clearly becoming a millstone around Barisan Nasional's neck. So Dato Hisham, please stop beating around the bush and tell us frankly: is the movie going to be released at all? What is so sensitive about the feelings of these four NGOs as against to the wishes of the other 60 Indian Muslim NGOs (with whom MIC had come to an agreement to allow for the release of the movie with mimimum edits) and the balance of the Indian community?
|
| Mahathir’s Tall Tales on Sabah! Posted: 09 Feb 2013 08:22 AM PST
Putrajaya has no business whatsoever, under the constitutional documents on Malaysia, to block recommendations from the Sabah or Sarawak Governments on permanent residence in their respective territories. Yet we are told by Mahathir that he liberally gave out citizenships in Sabah during his 22 years in office as Prime Minister. Joe Fernandez We have heard it all now on Sabah from former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. In his latest take on the on-going Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) in the state, Mahathir claims that he instructed that only those eligible in Sabah should be granted citizenship. This is rich! He's degenerating before our very eyes even as a poor liar. There's an old Malayalee saying with which Mahathir should be familiar: "Once you tell a lie, you must tell a thousand other lies to cover up the first lie." No wonder there's an old Jaffna joke going around about the tragic fate of a cobra that was unfortunate enough to bite a Malayalee. The cobra died! The Jaffna people claim that they were chased out of Kerala and into northern Sri Lanka by the Malayalees who first welcomed the migrants from Tamil Nadu by draping them in yellow cloth, literally speaking, but later allegedly tried to slit their throats. Citizenships are not based on any so-called directive from the Prime Minister, the Home Minister or the Federal Cabinet.
Citizenship is based on the Federal Constitution, the only Social Contract between the State and the people. So, Mahathir could not have issued such a directive on the grant of citizenships. There was no need for one since there was no basis. His so-called directive on citizenships is another red herring meant to divert attention from the tainted electoral rolls in Sabah and whether his family from Kerala, southwest India, ever determined their citizenship status in the wake of the British departure from Malaya in 1957. But more on that story in a little while. The issue (child) of a citizen by operation of law – i.e. the latter holding no citizenship papers – or an issue of a citizen by registration – i.e. the latter with citizenship papers – is eligible to be citizen by operation of law whether born in the country or abroad. Those born abroad must have had their births registered at the nearest Malaysian High Commission or Embassy, or at the British or a Commonwealth mission, where's there's no such representation.
The Federal Constitution is clear on this point. The Government of Malaysia has no prerogative and discretionary powers on citizenship under the Federal Constitution except the Federal Cabinet when it comes to resolving the citizenship woes of Malaysians. The Federal Cabinet can act in this case. Many of those eligible to be citizens by operation of law in Malaysia are stateless because they carry no birth certificates like their parents, grandparents and ancestors. These include Indians and the Orang Asal (Orang Asli) in Peninsular Malaysia and the Orang Asal – Dusuns, Muruts, and Dayaks -- in Sabah and Sarawak. The sea gypsies or Bajau Laut -- Pala'u – in Sabah are also stateless. The issue of a citizen by naturalization – i.e. the latter a foreigner who obtained citizenship in Malaysia – is eligible for citizenship by registration. If born overseas, there are the other requirements to be met. Failure to register as a citizen or failure to register the birth if born overseas would mean that the issue would be considered a citizen of the naturalized citizen's old country. There are many in Malaysia in this category as a result of being born in Brunei, Indonesia (Kalimantan) and India, among other places. They are permanently doomed to carry red (permanent residence) and green cards (temporary residence) or even Special Passes (white) from the Immigration Department.
Citizenship by naturalization is a long process which begins with entry permit and work permits. However, foreign spouses of Malaysians need only to get a social visit pass in lieu of entry permit. The catch is one cannot apply for a work permit on a social visit pass. The next step for the foreigner would be to acquire temporary residence – green card – followed by permanent residence i.e. red card. Given the required numbers of years in residence in Malaysia, police clearance from the old country and the Malaysian Police, a foreigner can apply for citizenship by naturalization. By right it should be a hassle-free process but the truth here is stranger than the fiction. Anything can happen at this juncture from long delays to an ominous silence from the authorities concerned. It would be interesting to know on what basis and by what authority citizenships were issued to foreigners in Sabah. Mahathir had previously acknowledged that he gave out 200,000 citizenships in Sabah to those "who had stayed there for a very long time, spoke Malay unlike the Chinese etc".
This is the same man who denied even permanent residence in Sabah to some 300 deserving foreign professionals serving in the state, many for even up to 30 years. The Sabah Government recommended them for permanent residence in Sabah and Malaysia. The matter was only resolved when Chong Kah Kiat, as Chief Minister, personally called upon Mahathir at his office in Putrajaya and brought up the matter. It transpired that the little Napoleons in Putrajaya had been routinely consigning such applications from Sabah to the wastepaper basket. The fact that the professionals concerned were non-Muslims may have had something to do with their long wait. Putrajaya has no business whatsoever, under the constitutional documents on Malaysia, to block recommendations from the Sabah or Sarawak Governments on permanent residence in their respective territories. It's back to square one today in Sabah and perhaps in Sarawak too. Yet we are told by Mahathir that he liberally gave out citizenships in Sabah during his 22 years in office as Prime Minister. Being in Malaysia a very long time and speaking Malay are not by themselves sufficient qualifications to be granted citizenship in the country. One must go through the proper procedures and process as set down in the Federal Constitution. In Sabah and Sarawak, there are added criteria under the Malaysia Agreement. The Governments of these two Borneo Nations in Malaysia must be the initiating and recommending body for foreigners in their territory who apply for citizenship.
The Federal Government cannot take it upon itself to issue citizenships to foreigners in Sabah and Sarawak. Anyone who holds citizenship in Malaysia in violation of the Federal Constitution holds no citizenship at all. It's a nullity in law from the very beginning. The same fate applies to those who obtained citizenship by furnishing false and misleading information with or without the knowledge of the authorities concerned. The revelations at the RCI tell of foreign-born applicants obtaining Malaysian personal documents merely on the strength of Statutory Declarations wherein they claimed birth in Sabah. The crux of the story in Sabah, and one for the RCI to determine, is the extent to which the electoral rolls in the state has been tainted by those ineligible to be there. That's not the end of the story.
We have also heard at the RCI that duplicate MyKads of Malaysians had been issued by the National Registration Department (NRD) to foreigners for the purposes of voting. These foreigners apparently voted on behalf of Malaysians who had registered as voters but seldom turned up on polling day. Other Malaysians who were eligible to register as voters didn't bother to do so. This provided another great loophole to nefarious elements who did not hesitate to issue duplicate MyKads to foreigners to enable them to register as voters on behalf of Malaysians. Mahathir has been silent on these allegations which emerged during revelations at the RCI. Instead, he keeps harping on what his directives were on the issuance of citizenships in Sabah and claimed that "other people including Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim may have gone off at a tangent in Sabah" and obviously "unknown to him". Mahathir is one lie after another on Sabah. He has yet to come clean even on his own family from Kerala, southwest India, being in Malaysia. Again, we are reminded of the old Malayalee saying on lies.
______________________________________________________________________ Joe Fernandez is a mature law student, among others, who feels compelled as a semi-retired journalist to put pen to paper – or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.
|
| 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