Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Anti-hopping law – a necessity?
- The Havoc Education Reform Inflicts: Education Blueprint 2013-2025
- PR leaders sign Kuching Declaration
- UMNO and the Malay Mental Serfdom
- Maddening Malaysian Maths
- There may be no anti-Islamic movie at all
- Kelantan's Green Revolution: the march to Putrajaya
- New wine, old wineskin
| Anti-hopping law – a necessity? Posted: 17 Sep 2012 02:44 PM PDT The exact motivation(s) of a voter in voting for a particular candidate will be hard to ascertain. Whether the voter votes for the candidate as an individual or for the party which the candidate represents will be a source for further study. The fact that a voter actually crosses at the column beside the party's emblem to denote his or her support for that party/candidate on the ballot paper may however provide an important, though not definitive, clue to the question. Be that as it may, the end result of a vote for any candidate would be the formation of the government by the political party whose candidates win the most number of seats. That is the thrust of our – and in fact, every - democratic process. It follows that when a government can be changed by several elected representatives frog-jumping from an elected government to the opposition, the democratic process whereby our government is chosen and formed would be rendered a mockery. In the same breath, when a new government could be formed by an opposition, who has actually lost the election, by virtue of the frog-jumping acts, the whole foundation and premise of that new government is the betrayal of the people's votes and choice. That would be a sad reflection of where we are, in terms of democratic process, in the 21st century. Yet, parliamentary defection is not peculiar to Malaysia. GC Malhotra, in his book, Anti-Defection Law in India and the Commonwealth, noted that the defection is also known "by different nomenclatures—such as "floor-crossing," "carpet-crossing," "party-hopping," "dispute" and "waka [canoe]-jumping." In fact "crossing the floor", according to the Australian Parliamentary Library, 2005, sometimes refers merely to the act of voting on an issue with the opposition rather than the act of defecting to another party. In the book, Malhotra listed anti-defection laws, in varied forms, enacted by India in 1973, 1985 and 2003. The 2003 law provides that a person can be disqualified from serving in parliament for "voluntarily giving up the membership of his original party" (2005: 965). Furthermore, the Indian law permits parliamentary expulsion simply for voting (or abstaining from voting) "in the House contrary to any direction issued by the political party to which he belongs." Kenneth Janda, in his paper, "Laws Against Party Switching, Defecting or Floor Crossing in National Parliaments" (Northwestern University, August 2009), observes that at least 8 countries see defection as a serious mischief necessitating anti-defection rules in their respective constitution. These are Belize, Namibia, Nepal, Nigeria, Seychelles, Sierra Leone and Zimbabwe. Closer to home, even Singapore sees it fit to provide in its constitution a provision which reads: Article 46 Tenure of Office of Members (1) Every Member of Parliament shall cease to be a Member at the next dissolution of Parliament after he has been elected or appointed, or previously thereto if his seat becomes vacant, under the provisions of this Constitution. (2) The seat of a Member of Parliament shall become vacant; (b) if he ceases to be a member of, or is expelled or resigns from, the political party for which he stood in the election. Janda observed that as of 2009, there were at least 41 nations which have anti-defection laws (as opposed to having a constitutional provision) in one form or another. Perhaps, the best rationale for anti-defection laws is best summarized by Scott W Desposato, as quoted by Janda in his paper:
|
| The Havoc Education Reform Inflicts: Education Blueprint 2013-2025 Posted: 16 Sep 2012 03:11 PM PDT In this five-part commentary I will critique the latest reform effort contained in Preliminary Report: Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 released on September 11, 2012. The first three essays will address the Blueprint's findings and recommendations; the fourth, its omissions, and the last, the flaws in the process with this particular reform effort. The Blueprint clearly identifies the main problems and challenges at both the system and individual levels, but fails to analyze why or how they came about and why they have been let to fester. Consequently the recommendations are based more on conjecture rather than solid data; more towards generalities and the stating of goals rather than on specifics and how to achieve those goals. On the positive side, the goals and milestones (at least some of them) are clearly stated in quantifiable terms, so we would know whether they have been achieved going forward. Despite extensive public participation and the inclusion of many luminaries (including foreign ones) on the panel, the report has many glaring omissions. It fails to address the particular challenges facing Islamic and rural national schools. This is surprising considering that the constituents in both streams are Malays, a politically powerful group. Even more pertinent, those schools regularly perform at the bottom quartile; they drag down the whole system. Improving them would go a long way in enhancing the entire system. Yet another omission is the failure to analyze and thus learn from earlier reform efforts. This Blueprint does not live up to Najib Razak's assertion of being "bold, comprehensive and transparent." Transparent perhaps, but not bold or comprehensive! That is not surprising as the panel is dominated by civil servants. They have been part of the problem for so long that it would be too much to expect them now to magically be part of the solution. Predictability of Education Reform It is a particularly Malaysian obsession to reform its educational policy with the political season. Every new minister feels compelled to do it, as if to demonstrate his political manhood. Now it is Muhyiddin's turn. Five years ago under Hishamuddin there was Langkah Langkah Ke Arah Cemerlangan (Steps Towards Excellence). Five years before that under Musa Mohamad was Pembangunan Pendidikan 2001-2010: Rancangan Bersepadu Penjana Cemerlangan Pendidikan (Education Development 2010-2011. Plan for Unity Through Educational Excellence). Notice the long pretentious titles and frequent use of the word "excellence." In the meantime generations of young Malaysians, especially Malays, continue to pay the price for the follies of previous reforms, in particular the one in the 1970s that did away with English schools. Someone finally wizened up and brought back the teaching of English, albeit only in science and mathematics. Then just as we were adjusting to and recovering from that reversal, a new leader who thought himself smarter changed back the system! This latest reform released on September 11, 2012, will prove to be the 9-11 of Malaysian education. The destruction may not be as dramatic visually and physically as the other 9-11, but the wreckage will be real and massive, with the havoc remaining long after to haunt current and future generations. The damage will be extensive, cumulative, and compounding. As in the past, this time we are again being promised that this storm of a reform will wash away the thick polluted haze that has been hovering over our schools. Yes, the air will be clearer and fresher after a storm, and the birds will sing. Meanwhile however, we have to deal with ripped roofs, flood debris, and destructive landslides. In compiling this Blueprint the government has commendably sought wide public participation and at great expense. The public in turn responded massively and enthusiastically, reflecting the angst over our education system. The panel however, did not sufficiently discern the difference between quantity and quality, and duly gave equal time to the bombasts as well as the wise.
|
| PR leaders sign Kuching Declaration Posted: 16 Sep 2012 02:02 PM PDT The de facto leader of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Anwar Ibrahim signed on behalf of his party, while Lim Kit Siang, DAP National adviser signed on behalf of DAP and Haji Abdul Hadi Awang, PAS President signed on behalf of PAS. Also affixing their signatures on the declaration were also state leaders. Sarawak PKR Chief Baru Bian signed on behalf of PKR, while Wong Ho Leng, Sarawak DAP Chairman signed on behalf of DAP and Haji Adam Ahid, PAS Commissioner on behalf of his party. The Declaration reads: "Lest we forget, and lest all the peoples of our great Nation of Malaysia forget, we the undersigned do once again firmly, resolutely and unequivocally pledge and promise before the whole Nation of Malaysia as our witness, on this historically day the 16th of September, 2012, in the City of Kuching, and on behalf of our respective parties and Pakatan Rakyat will honour all its pledges and promises to the peoples of Malaysia. "We will honourably execute all the policies set forth in the Buku Jingga so that Malaysia will once again be a great Nation, her peoples prosperous, her future secure and peaceful, and her name celebrated by all the nations of the world. "We will honour the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement of 1963 which our founding fathers put their hands to, and as a sign of our deep commitment to the peoples of Sarawak and Sabah, consistent with democratic principles and justice for all Malaysians, in particular:
|
| UMNO and the Malay Mental Serfdom Posted: 16 Sep 2012 01:53 PM PDT I am most baffled when he says or suggests that UMNO has an ideology. Since when does UMNO has an ideology consisting of beliefs and basic driving force? What ideology? Since the time when I was still in UMNO until now, we have been taught that UMNO hasn't got an ideology. It has always claimed it's pragmatic although the word actually means anything goes. No sir, UMNO hasn't got any ideology. Everyone sees a position in UMNO as a means to make more money. That is why Najib has so much difficulty in weaning off incumbents from their current seats. Unless of course he pays them off and that is what he is doing. He's giving so many people golden handshakes. When he says DAP will dominate, he must be off his rockers. But then he is talking to a pliant and nodding crowd whose minds are conditioned by TV3 and Utusex Malaysia. The argument that DAP will dominate is incredible as well as devious. He was speaking at the Mesyuarat Perwakilan UMNO Bahagian- the local Perhimpunan Agung. It was the same when he spoke to the rented crowd at stadium Bukit Jalil a few months ago. But when he retires to the sleeping quarters, he can't sleep because he's getting nightmares. He's thinking, can UMNO even reach the 100 seat mark? Well, I know more about him that the average reader. We have explained why DAP will become a formidable party because of the disciplined and quality leadership and clarity of its cause. Seat wise, DAP cant form a government without PAS and PKR because it's contesting not more that 52 seats or even less. Unless of course the Malays in PKR and PAS are of the same mediocre standard as UMNO leaders, then only, Malays are disadvantaged. Malay survival is at risk if they continue the corrupt and self-interested UMNO. Even Kit Siang and Guan Eng acknowledged the political reality of this country. The majority of the population is Malay and to suggest that anyone other than a Malay can be PM and TPM at this juncture of our history, is devilishly disingenuous. Bu then, UMNO is the devil we know. The reason why DAP is assailed is because the party has become the party of choice by the majority of the Chinese, Indians and to small extent, Malays. Malays now prefer PKR and PAS. When he asked the pliant crowd are you ready for elections- they will answer yes of course. We have been waiting for the money! Where the mo? Do Malays depend on UMNO? That is what UMNO wants us to believe and that it's why it's only strategy is to keep Malays on economic leash by giving handouts and free things. It's also Najib's only strategy. Talking about ETP and NKRA, KPI must exert some tremendous mental stain on him. Poor fellow. That only thing they have withheld from Malays- effective economic freedom free from regulations, licenses that favor the rich, quotas that are robbed by the rich and powerful etc. That is absolute lie. Malays do not depend on UMNO for their survival. Malays have got a choice if they want to maintain that emotional security- support PAS or PKR. Do we see Malays suffer in Selangor, Kelantan, Penang and Kedah where UMNO is not in power? No? Then Malays do not depend on UMNO for their survival. They prosper under good governance, sincere and dedicated administrations. When UMNO leaders proclaim that our security is at risk that reflects more of their incompetence. The Home Minister shows his complete incompetence by allowing vigilantes to roam the street and create havoc. Hishammuddin should resign from his post as Home Minister if he's not bright enough.
|
| Posted: 16 Sep 2012 01:34 PM PDT Leaving aside the complete unreliability of frogs, for simplicity sake let us still view that 20 of Sabah's 25 federal seats are held by BN. In neighbouring Sarawak, with peh-mo in almost total control, the BN holds 29 of its 31 federal seats. But will BN? 222 - 56 East Malaysian seats = 166 peninsula federal seats Immediately post GE-12, BN held 140 to Pakatan's 82 (whence AI had laughingly claimed he could obtain an additional deformed 30 MPs by 916 to give a Pakatan 112 majority versus BN's 110 wakakaka).  Thus, out of BN's 140, there were only (140 - 49 East Malaysian BN federal seats =) 91 federal seats in Peninsula. Recall, immediately post GE-12, Pakatan had 75 peninsula federal seats, providing us with a OK Corral-like stand-off in Peninsula of 91 BN seats versus 75 Pakatan seats, a mere majority of 16. Thus, assuming voters continue to vote Pakatan in those same 75 federal constituencies in Peninsula, the coalition only requires victory in another 9 seats to put BN gasping for breath in Peninsula like an ikan kembong landed on hot burning beach sands.  And in Peninsula, such a victory is very doable with doom and gloom already forecast for BN in the peninsula states of Johor, NS and Malacca, and which may explain UMNO becoming more and more feral (thuggish), with the UMNO Home Minister even talking like a petulant immature boy. Mind though, BN (UMNO) may claw a couple back in Kedah because of one screwed-up bloke there who prefers UMNO to Pakatan's DAP and who has not cooperated well as a Pakatan leader should.  Assuming optimistically for an instant, Pakatan in GE-13 wins 84 federal seats in Peninsula to BN's 82 (and IMHO, it's quite likely to be more than just 84 wakakaka) it needs another 28 seats in East Malaysia to form the new Malaysian government. Of that required 28 East Malaysian seats, the DAP has won and thus is fairly well entrenched in 3. Will Pakatan be able to win another 25?  Alas, PAS has been obdurately selfish in Labuan, knowing full well it can't win in that constituency yet insisting it wants to stand its candidate there again. In GE-12, its candidate came last in a 3-corner fight and lost his deposit wakakaka.
|
| There may be no anti-Islamic movie at all Posted: 15 Sep 2012 03:47 PM PDT Cindy Lee Garcia tells the website that she was hired last summer for a small part in a movie she was told would be called "Desert Warriors," about life in Egypt 2,000 years ago (Islam is about 1,400 years old). She told Gawker "It wasn't based on anything to do with religion, it was just on how things were run in Egypt. There wasn't anything about Muhammed or Muslims or anything and that, according to Gawker, "In the script and during the shooting, nothing indicated the controversial nature of the final product. Muhammed wasn't even called Muhammed; he was "Master George," Garcia said. The words Muhammed were dubbed over in post-production, as were essentially all other offensive references to Islam and Muhammed. Garcia said that there was a man who identified as "Bacile" on set, but that he was Egyptian and frequently spoke Arabic. The online 14-minute clip of a purportedly anti-Islamic movie that sparked protests at the US embassy in Cairo and and the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya is now looking like it could have been ginned up by someone sitting a basement with cheap dubbing software. Full credit goes to Sarah Abdurrahman at On the Media and Rosie Grey at Buzzfed who appear to be the first to highlight (there may be others, but they're the ones who caught my eye) the fact that almost every instance of language referring to Islam or Muhammad in the film has been dubbed in. That is, mouths are mouthing but the words you're hearing don't match. There have already been a bunch of lies associated with the alleged film. A man named "Sam Bacile" was identified as being the writer and producer. He claimed to be an Israeli citizen. The Israelis say they have no record of him. He claimed to have spent $5 million on the movie. The clip online doesn't look like even $100,000 was spent. There is no record of a "Sam Bacile" living in California, and his strange insistence on the fact that he was Jewish and that he had exclusively Jewish funders for his film in an interview with the Associated Press now looks like something of a red flag. The one verifiable person involved in this strange tale so far is Steve Klein, an evangelical Christian and anti-Islamic activist with ties to militia groups and a Coptic Christian satellite TV station based in California. Klein told Jeffrey Goldberg at The Atlantic earlier today that he was a consultant on the film, that "Sam Bacile," was a pseudonym, that the person behind the name probably isn't Jewish, and he didn't know the real name of the man. He doesn't know the name of someone he worked on a movie with? Yet another strange, credulity-stretching claim. Now comes the part with the compelling case of no movie at all.
|
| Kelantan's Green Revolution: the march to Putrajaya Posted: 13 Sep 2012 07:43 PM PDT |
| Posted: 13 Sep 2012 05:06 PM PDT This lack of knowledge is of concern naturally because we are talking about a public servant with a great deal of power (he can shoot us with his pistol after all), and it is important that he understands that the limits on his power does not depend simply on whatever Standard Operating Procedure he may have but also our rights as citizens. However, knowledge can be gained. Police officers do take courses and some of these courses will have components of Constitutional Law in them. I have taught a diploma course on Constitutional Law and the officers in my class appeared to have grasped the concept. Knowledge, therefore, is not really the issue here; it is the corresponding attitude towards that knowledge which truly matters. In the past few weeks there have been many incidents that illustrate the paradox that occurs when one pays lip service to a principle without truly understanding its importance and ideals. The Peaceful Assembly Act was supposed to be a law that would allow a more liberal approach to public gatherings, but instead we see it being used to actually hinder such gatherings. The Janji Demokrasi gathering was deemed illegal before it occurred because proper procedures for asking permission was not followed as demanded by the Act. Investigations on organisers and participants of Janji Demokrasi are also currently being conducted, again under the auspices of the Act. A green rally in Pahang is being investigated because a person who is deemed underage by the Act was suspected of taking part. All this fuss over what were peaceful gatherings. I have said before that there was little wrong with the previous laws (the Police Act) regarding public gatherings. The Police Act gave a lot of discretion to the police to allow or not allow public gatherings, this is true; however if there was a proper understanding and appreciation of the Constitution, the police should, by and large, allow any public gathering as long as it is not dangerous or violent in nature. The problem with the Police Act was one of attitude and not the law per se. This same attitude persists and it can be seen in the implementation of the new Peaceful Assembly Act. What is needed in the country therefore is not even more, so called liberal laws, but a true appreciation and respect for the human rights of the people of this nation. The police have to understand that their role is not simply about enforcing the law for whatever government is in power. Their role is to enforce the law in the spirit of the Constitution and the freedoms that it guarantees for everybody.
|
| 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 | |
