Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Posted: 20 May 2013 01:02 PM PDT

Unlike the parties graciously accepting the results in the Philippines, the coin toss if used here could invite disastrous consequences.

By Syed Nadzri Syed Harun, FMT

Coming just after a blistering general election in this country, the story about how the toss of a coin settled a dead-heat vote in the Philippines was simply amusing.

We dread to think of what might happen if such a rule was adopted for the polls here because even with the elaborate process, the disputes seem to be endless…and mindless.

According to news reports late last week, election authorities in the Philippines applied a tie-break between two candidates in the contest for mayor in a farming town in the central part of the republic in a decidedly old-school way — by flipping a coin.

When all the ballots were counted after voting, the two men running for mayor in the town of San Teodoro — Marvic Feraren and Boyet Py — amazingly ended up with 3,236 votes each.

To break the impasse, a decision was taken for the coin toss and as the story went, the two rivals faced off inside a ring of desks in a bare-walled room, taking turns to flick the coin to the ground five times.

According to the rules, the candidate getting the most heads would be proclaimed the winner.

At the end of the contest, Feraren, a member of the ruling Liberal Party, the son of a previous mayor, was declared the victor, throwing two heads to his opponent's one. And the most interesting part — both of them accepted the result without much rancour. They shook hands and embraced afterwards. That's food for thought indeed.

Firstly, there are so many methods other than our own out there that countries use in their election process.

The use of the coin to settle a polls deadlock for better or worse is an accepted practice in the Philippines and the world must respect that.

Secondly, unlike the parties graciously accepting the results in the Philippines, the coin toss if used here could invite disastrous consequences.

From current experience, the losing side would inescapably cry foul, especially when the winner happens to be a "member of the ruling party and son of the previous mayor". There would be loud claims that the coin or coins used were "phantoms" which would only turn on its head side when flipped accordingly.

On top of that, the sore point would extend to the outrageous charge that the coin or coins used were shipped in discreetly from Bangladesh and that they are unstable, thus the element of cheating.

Next, the accusation would fall on the mediator or the person officiating the process.

If the result does not come a particular way, he would be accused of either being biased or corrupt and a whole army of party followers would jeer the mediator to kingdom come.

There will also be claims that a blackout suspiciously ensued just as the coins were flipped to suggest foul play.

Even if it had been verified that there was no such sinister power outage, the attack would continue regardless on all fronts, so much so that many are simply taken in.

As an extension to the blackout tale, the loser and his supporters would summon the mob and organise protest rallies, asking people to turn up in black as a symbol of "blackout" (when no blackouts actually occurred).

READ MORE HERE

Malaysia: An Irreconcilable Divide?

Posted: 20 May 2013 12:59 PM PDT

Of all the kernels of facts about the elections, we know that along with rural voters, a higher proportion of females also leaned heavily towards BN.

Thus far, relatively large rallies - in the tens of thousands - not only in PR strongholds such as in Kuala Lumpur and Penang, but also in BN controlled states such as Johor and Negeri Sembilan - suggest that the opposition remains focused and agitated about making sure the issue of electoral fraud does not become a mere footnote.

Sunil Kukreja, Asia Sentinel

The outlook isn't that good, an academic says

Never before have Malaysians ventured into such unchartered waters. The outcome of the May 5 general elections has revealed just how split and intensely divided the electorate in the country currently is, and it has set in motion a political and social scenario that is tantamount to having to confront new realities in this nation of some 27 million people.

The fact that the two main political coalitions Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) - spearheaded by Najib Abdul Razak for the former and Anwar Ibrahim for the latter - were tangled in an intense campaign leading up to the elections was emblematic of the fact that Malaysians found themselves divided between two distinctly divergent paths. Recognizing the lack of widespread enthusiasm for the several BN aligned parties, campaign strategists for BN made a distinct choice during the campaign to play up Najib's relatively favorable public rating as a way to galvanize support. By contrast, Anwar's popularity and his dynamic public presence set the stage for the campaign to be one about a popularity contest between Najib and Anwar.

Yet, it was apparent from early on in the buildup to the elections, and since then, that the Malaysian divide is much more than one about two prominent political figures, it is indeed substantive and deep. The fact that Najib had to stem the political bleeding for the ruling coalition that first became most transparent after the 2008 general elections seemed obvious enough. The loss of their two-thirds control of parliament and several key states including Selangor, Penang and Kedah in 2008 was a significant enough blow to BN's seemingly invincible political machinery. Indeed, one of the main goals of BN this time around was not just to reassert their domination in parliament, but also to recapture the aforementioned state governments from the PR coalitions.

Although BN managed to wrest Kedah from PR's control, the much coveted states of Selangor and Penang once again remained out of the former's grasp. Indeed, as is well-known by now, aside from suffering greater losses in these two significant states, Najib's coalition ceded more ground to the opposition since 2008 as its majority in parliament dropped from 140 to 133 seats while it also lost the popular vote (52 to 48 percent). Yet, having garnered enough seats in a gerrymandered, first-past-the post electoral system, BN has managed to continue its historic streak of uninterrupted control of the federal government.

Most of the postmortems of this highly contentious and charged election have revealed some consistent findings. Of all the kernels of facts about the elections, we know that along with rural voters, a higher proportion of females also leaned heavily towards BN. On the other hand, the younger voters (particularly in those in their 20s and early 30s), for a significant number of whom this would have been their first foray into the electoral rolls, and non-rural voters were more enthusiastic and energized about the opposition.

The significance of this mobilization of younger and more agitated voters is being played out in so-called 'Black 505' rallies in various parts of the country in the days since the elections. Notwithstanding the fact that these rallies are far from spontaneous and have come to represent PR's way of keeping the spotlight on their claims that BN's parliamentary wins are attributable to gross electoral fraud, the response of PR's supporters in coming out to these rallies is a telling barometer of the depth and intensity of the political divide.

A tale of two Islamist parties

Posted: 20 May 2013 12:35 PM PDT

PAS and Indonesia's PKS ponder their political future in the wake of new challenges ahead. In the case of PAS, will it make up for its failure in Kedah and Kelantan?

Karim Raslan, The Star

PAS is at a crossroads. The loss of Kedah as well as the fact that it has two seats less in the Dewan Rakyat weighs heavily on its leaders.

It must surely now be pondering the party's direction as well as its place in the Opposition i.e. Pakatan Rakyat.

But PAS is not the only South-East Asian Islamist party pondering its future. Look at the challenges facing Indonesia's Prosperous Justice Party (PKS).

First founded in 1998 as the Justice Party (PK), it made a splash in 2004 when it won 45 seats in the House of Representatives and then 57 seats in 2009.

Like PAS, PKS is an ideologically-driven and disciplined party.

I can still remember the ease with which PKS could call its supporters out onto the streets and the extraordinary order with which it undertook its demonstrations, with men and women clad in white, striding separately yet determinedly.

After the turmoil and drift of the Reformasi years, the PKS embodied the discipline that Indonesia appeared to desperately need.

Indeed, the party was a revolutionary experiment in Islamist politics.

Its moderate approach to social issues and firm anti-corruption platform gave it a wider appeal than most of Indonesia's previous Islamist parties.

When I'd meet staff in hotels or shops across Jakarta and ask which party they supported, PKS was almost inevitably the first mentioned.

The party won respect from the youth due to its crusade against corruption, loose living and its emphasis on dakwah.

People want to be free, but they also want lives of purpose. The PKS was able to tap into that.

The party's success also held the promise that political Islam could function, indeed thrive, in a democracy.

It's arguable that PAS' "Erdogan" faction modelled the Malaysian party's dramatic move to the centre based on PKS.

But how the mighty falls!

Former PKS president Luthfi Hasan Ishaaq was forced to resign earlier this year after an aide, Ahmad Fathanah, was accused of accepting a Rp1bil (RM301,000) bribe from a beef import firm.

Indonesia's Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) last week attempted to seize cars at the PKS headquarters, claiming the vehicles were purchased with bribe money linked to Luthfi's case.

The KPK has also investigated or questioned Luthfi's successor, Anis Matta, as well as other party leaders like Agriculture Minister Suswono and PKS elder Hilmi Aminuddin.

The PKS responded by vowing to lodge a report against the anti-graft body with Indonesia's National Police, who have no great love for the KPK.

One cannot help but feel that the party is fast becoming part of the discredited establishment.

One wonders whether the PKS' problems are part of a wider trend of Islamist parties failing to perform once in office, as evidenced by the failure of Mohamed Morsi's Freedom and Justice Party in Egypt or the descent of Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Justice and Development Party (AKP) into authoritarianism in Turkey.

Ironically, all three of these Islamist parties have failed to deliver the "justice" promised in their names.

It seems the PKS is in for an electoral drubbing come the republic's 2014 national elections.

An Indonesian Survey Circle (LSI) poll on March 17 found public support for PKS at a measly 3.7%.

On the other hand, Ahmad Heryawan and Gatot Pujo Nugroho's victories in the recent West Java and North Sumatra gubernatorial elections suggest it remains a force in Indonesia's provinces.

At the same time, it suggests that the PKS is losing the wider appeal it gained from outside the party's hard-core supporters.

Now, I'm not at all suggesting that PAS' leadership is guilty of the same moral or financial improprieties that PKS' is.

But the two parties' bold attempts to become broad, national parties have reached a crisis point – albeit for different reasons.

PAS should deserve credit for winning broad support from the Chinese-Malaysian community. It's natural and logical for it to do so.

But its failures in Kedah and Kelantan robbed Pakatan of making further gains in the 2013 elections. It seems to be better at winning power than at governing.

How it makes up for these deficiencies will determine its future.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Selasa, 21 Mei 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan