| Selangor Land Grab by BN Posted: 21 Nov 2012 11:59 AM PST 
Despite all attempts at "transforming" UMNO and Barisan Nasional to be "people first", and all the rhetoric on accountability and integrity under the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak's Government Transformation Programme, UMNO leaders still regard the tax-payers' monies as their own. After all "UMNO is rakyat" and hence there is nothing wrong with UMNO robbing what belongs to the rakyat. Tony Pua It did not come as a shock to anybody when DAP State Assemblyman for Sekinchan, Ng Swee Lim exposed on Tuesday that Barisan Nasional (BN) component parties secured at least 24 pieces of valuable land from the state government while they were in power between 2000 to 2008. These pieces of land which are mostly in commercial areas, amounting to 34.5 acres were "sold" to UMNO, MCA, MIC and Gerakan for a pitiful RM1 per square feet. What is perhaps more surprising is that such information was somehow kept under wraps for such a long time after they lost their hold on power. But what is most shocking is the response by Selangor UMNO Information Chief Abdul Shukor Idrus, who is also the state assemblyman for Kuang who argued that "what's wrong with giving the land to UMNO" as reward for the "contributions by UMNO in fighting for indepedence and developing this country". His response to Ng during the sitting as recorded in the Hansard was "…Kalau dipandangkan jasa UMNO menuntut kemerdekaan dan akhirnya Sekinchan (Ng) boleh jadi lawa macam ni, kalau tak kerana UMNO menuntut kemerdekaan dan memajukan negari ini, saya ingat Sekinchan (Ng) pakai baju daun sekarang ini… apa halnya kalau diberi kepada UMNO" Abdul Shukor attempted to control the fallout with a press conference yesterday (Wednesday), only to dig a deeper hole for UMNO and himself. He tried to justify that "UMNO is rakyat" and hence there's absolutely nothing wrong in giving state land to an "organisation that represents 400,000 people". The above proves that despite all attempts at "transforming" UMNO and Barisan Nasional to be "people first", and all the rhetoric on accountability and integrity under the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak's Government Transformation Programme, UMNO leaders still regard the tax-payers' monies as their own. After all "UMNO is rakyat" and hence there is nothing wrong with UMNO robbing what belongs to the rakyat. UMNO and Barisan Nasional leaders clearly has no moral sense of right and wrong, and are completely uneducated in the ability to differentiate between what belongs to the government/people as opposed to what belongs to the political parties. The response by UMNO leaders tells Selangorians that if UMNO were to be elected back into power in the coming general election, then they will continue to rape the state by carving out valuable pieces of state land to be alienated to UMNO, MCA, MIC and Gerakan at dirt cheap prices. Datuk Seri Najib Razak, as the Selangor UMNO Chief who had declared that Selangor must be "returned" to BN "at all costs" must state his stand on the land grab by the coalition he leads. Does the Prime Minister also condone the land grab exercises and agree with his Selangor UMNO Information Chief? Or does Datuk Seri Najib hold the "transformed" belief that such blatant land grab by BN is corrupt, an abuse of power and a serious breach of the people's trust? If Datuk Seri Najib wants Malaysians to believe that BN has really "transformed" and can be trusted, then he must declare that such land grab exercises by BN component parties must not only be banned, all land that has previously been alienated to them on the cheap, must be returned to the state. Otherwise, Datuk Seri Najib Razak will be exposed as a "transformation" fraud – where it talks about integrity, transparency and accountability on the one hand but continues to allow his party and coalition to rob the rakyat blind on the other. |
| Police Budget formula helps BN to remain in Government more than it helps prevent crime Posted: 21 Nov 2012 11:56 AM PST 
DAP MP for Bukit Bendera Liew Chin Tong As Parliament concludes the debate on Budget 2013 this afternoon with the debate on allocation to the Home Ministry, it is very sad to note that budgetary figures of 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 show that the Barisan Nasional government is more interested in using the police to maintain power than to fight crime. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak became Prime Minister in April 2009 and Budget 2010 was his first budget. Since then Najib has full power to change the course of history and hence should take full responsibility for the crime situation in the country. In the context of the heightened crime situation nationally, it is high time for the nation to examine the priorities of the police through its budgetary arrangements. It is important to note that the police force executes the policies of ruling politicians. There is no point to blame the police for misplaced priorities. Ultimately, the policy directions of the police reflect the choices made by the ruling government. The Police Force was given an allocation of RM 4.5 billion in 2010, RM 5.8 billion in 2011, RM 6.3 billion in 2012 and RM6.5 billion for 2013 respectively. There is an increase of RM 1.8 billion or 44% between 2010 and 2013. (Budget 2013 documents show that actual spending in 2012 will reach RM6.78 billion, beyond the original budgeted RM6.3 billion). Consistently in the past four years, the criminal investigation department receives only 8% of the total allocation. Management and logistics jointly consume 59% of allocation in 2010, 55% in 2011 and 2012 and 54% in 2013. Internal Security and Public Order category's share of allocation is 22% in 2010, 25% in 2011, 27% in 2012 and 28% in 2013. Indeed, Internal Security and Public Order category increased its allocation from RM975 million in 2010 to RM1.46 billion in 2011, RM1.68 billion in 2012 and RM1.79 billion in 2013. Between 2010 and 2013, allocation given to Internal Security and Public Order increased by 84% while the total financial allocation for the police increased by 44% during the period. While Internal Security and Public Order includes the traffic police and border patrol, the bulk of allocation goes to police units that deal with the security of the government than the security of the people, such as the paramilitary unit General Operations Force, as well as Federal Reserve Unit and other categories of riot police. Likewise, Intelligence (in particular Special Branch) receives 6% of the allocation. A spy agency like the Special Branch is not needed in a democracy. Elaborating on the roles of "Intelligence", Budget 2013 says that it is "to safeguard the security of the nation by gathering intelligence through secret and open means on communist, subversive and extremist elements and (shielding the nation) from intelligence and spying of local and foreign threats." Two decades after the Hatyai Accord, it is comical to target the communists, even more so in view of Umno's recent exchange partnership with the Chinese Communist Party. The budgetary figures on the police during Najib's premiership speak for itself. The government is more interested to maintain power through the police than to fight crime. |
| Do Your Job Right, PTPTN Posted: 21 Nov 2012 11:52 AM PST 
Kee Thuan Chye It's unbelievable how lackadaisical the National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) is in collecting loan payments. These, after all, constitute the rakyat's money, and it is the responsibility of the corporation to be accountable for it. And yet its chief executive officer, Agos Cholan, can say, in an interview with Malaysiakini, that it tells its debtors to pay whatever they can. Whatever they can! What kind of an attitude is that? Isn't it encouraging defaulters? Is PTPTN not concerned about getting back the money because the money belongs to others? Is it plainly incompetent? Is it poorly run? If so, it reflects badly on the government we have. In fact, the least the Government could do now is crack the whip on the people heading PTPTN to ensure that they do their job well, and if they don't, it should have them replaced. After all, we are talking about huge sums of money being loaned out. As it is, the total amount stands at RM45.41 billion, and by the end of the year, it will reach RM50 billion. That's not small pickings. It's money that could be used for the good of the rakyat – a lot of good. If some of it is not recovered when the loans are due, more money will have to be pumped into the fund. Where will that money come from? Of course, we can say that PTPTN money is for the good cause of higher education so it might be all right if the recipients don't pay back or take their time to do so, but a loan is a loan. Its terms and conditions have to be respected. If you tak berani tanggung, you shouldn't take a loan. You can't say afterwards that paying back will cause you to be in debt. You should know what you'll be in for. Of course, if the Government decides to scrap PTPTN and write off the loans, that's a totally different matter. But until that happens, the loan agreement is sacrosanct. Even for a scholarship, there is usually the condition of the recipient being bonded by employment to the Government after graduation, which he or she must respect. If they renege, they must pay back in cash. But more than the issue of money, what is important to consider here is that this is not the way to run a government agency. By not doing its job the way it should, PTPTN is showing a bad example of government operations. As for Agos Cholan, the things he said in the interview reflect an unseemly attitude. If he brings that to bear in his job, he should seriously reconsider his position. He said PTPTN wants to do things "the nice way", i.e. it refuses to come down hard on debtors. How could he say that? It's not the role of PTPTN to be "nice". How could he also say, "So far, we have been quite nice and moderate. We advertise in newspapers, on billboards and hold awareness campaigns to tell the people, 'Pay back lah'". That sounds utterly unprofessional. And of course if PTPTN puts it that way, nobody's going to pay lah. So perhaps we could say, "Agos Cholan should step down lah." He said 130,000 or so debtors have been blacklisted, and of these, only 20 percent have started paying back. "The rest have not come forward yet. We are still waiting," he added. Still waiting? If creditors were to just wait for their debtors to come to them, they'd be out of business in a flash! Sure, PTPTN is not a commercial enterprise or a profit-making organization, but it is a trustee of the rakyat's resources. PTPTN should be proactive instead and go after the debtors. But wait! There is a problem. According to sources quoted by Malaysiakini, many of the students to whom PTPTN gave out loans cannot be traced. This is incredulous. It reeks of incompetency of the highest order. Keeping track of one's debtors is the most basic of functions. Otherwise, how can you ensure getting back your money? So how could PTPTN be so lax about keeping proper records and updating them continually? Agos Cholan is a former banker; he should know better than most people that you can't lend money and later lose contact with the people you lent it to. What's his excuse? Apparently, PTPTN's database suffered a disaster when it was converted into electronic data under a system that didn't work well and was then tinkered with under a different system that made it worse. It is now being rebuilt based on the first system, "running on an old engine". The process has of course cost a lot of money – and a lot of misplacement of data. And "running on an old engine" doesn't sound like a good prospect. Agos admits that there was a time when PTPTN couldn't justify RM5 billion worth of loans – "we didn't know who took out loans or who has paid; the numbers weren't there". This sounds harrowing when so much money is at stake. But he assures us that "it has all been rectified". Rectifying it is one thing; using it to spring to action to recover the money is another. Agos eschews using debt collection agencies because he's worried they might "not be professional enough". How about using the legal recourse? After all, there is no excuse for the debtors not to pay. When they signed the loan agreement, they knew what they were in for and they agreed to the terms. So those who have not been paying need to be jolted into honoring those terms. Indeed, if a few debtors were to be hauled to court on this account, it might spook other defaulters into paying up. But one suspects that PTPTN's reluctance to enforce legal compliance stems from a fear of offending its loan recipients. These are the youths who will be voting at the upcoming general election. The ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) would be worried about losing their votes. Especially with Pakatan Rakyat pledging, if it captures Putrajaya, to write off PTPTN loans and provide free tertiary education. Furthermore, the 'Occupy Dataran' campout staged by university students in April to call for the loans to be scrapped has added pressure on BN. Be that as it may, the BN government will not endear itself to the rakyat if it is seen to be incompetent, inefficient and cavalier about the people's resources. It might end up being rejected instead. In any case, nothing beats doing a job right. If PTPTN cannot do its job right, the Government will be held accountable. Then no amount of appeasing the young voters will be of help to the BN cause. The point of reckoning may ironically be the ballot box. * Kee Thuan Chye is the author of the bestselling book No More Bullshit, Please, We're All Malaysians, available in bookstores together with its Malay translation, Jangan Kelentong Lagi, Kita Semua Orang Malaysia. |
| Nation-building or undermining? Posted: 21 Nov 2012 11:49 AM PST  Najib: Empty talk about 'transformation'
In an open letter to the Prime Minister, P Ramakrishnan takes to task Najib's cakap-tak-serupa-bikin rhetoric. My dear PM, You sounded like a great statesman when you urged Malaysians "to disregard political difference and work toward nation-building". That was simply fantastic! It was very heart-warming to hear you say, "We must build the nation together. Irrespective of the political differences that we have, at the end of the day this country is ours." That was simply unbelievable! How we wish that you really meant what you said. If that was your philosophy, by now you would have been proclaimed as the greatest Prime Minister this country has ever had. If that had happened, you need not now scramble around the country desperately trying to get the Barisan Nasional returned to power. If you had put this rhetoric into practice, this country would have moved forward in leaps and bounds, astounding the rest of the world. We would have achieved so much during your three and a half years of premiership that would have helped you to walk through the coming 13th General Election without a sweat. But when we assess you and try to match you with what you said at the launch of the Genovasi Challenge in Kuala Lumpur on 14 October 2012, we are gravely disappointed. You come across as a hollow politician who is not capable of living up to your words. If you truly meant that "at the end of the day this country is ours" why is it that a vast majority of citizens are not made to feel that way? Why do you tolerate and refuse to take to task those narrow-minded Umno petty politicians and Perkasa poison-spewing ultras who refer to the rest of the citizens as 'pendatang'? This is as much the country of the ordinary citizens and they have as much right as these name-calling despicable and loud-mouthed politicians who claim sole ownership to this right. If you truly meant that "we must build the nation together", why is it others are not given their chance to contribute as well? Why is it that those outside the Barisan Nasional circle are excluded and denied their legitimate right to voice their opinions and articulate their policies and promises? Why do you punish those had voted for the Opposition by denying their MPs and state assembly members the allocations that you lavishly make available to your BN MPs and assembly members? Aren't these elected opposition representatives also citizens of this country? Don't the voters who elected these opposition representative have the same voting rights to choose whoever they prefer – just like those who elected the BN MPs and assembly members – without being punished for their choice? Why then this discrimination? What has party affiliation to do with the democratic process and the benefits that are due to the citizens? And yet, hypocritically you declare, "We must build the nation together." How do we do that when you don't reach out to the others; when you completely shut them off and punish them? You don't even bother to consult the Leader of the Opposition before introducing new Bills to parliament as is done in mature democracies. You don't give sufficient time for citizens to comment on these policies that are bound to impact them in various ways. Very often you rush through these Bills with super speed and with very little debate. How do we build this nation together? It has always been only your way and no other way! If there is no room for inclusion or co-operation, how then do we work together? "Irrespective of the political differences that we have, at the end of the day this country is ours," you say. But how is it that others are not allowed to work together with you for the common good of the nation? Why are you so divisive in your policy and approach? You have done nothing to stop Utusan from spreading its venom and lies. You have never reprimanded them or replaced the editorial staff responsible for creating discord and hatred. They seem to have a field day. How do we "disregard political differences and work toward nation-building" when we are constantly bombarded with vile and vicious and divisive commentaries without any let up? How is that those who disagree with or who have different views from you are hardly given the space to operate democratically? They have to contend with the police and the hooligans who turn up to disrupt Opposition events and activities. How do we "build the nation together…. Irrespective of the political differences that we have"? How do we bring the various communities together and strengthen our national unity for the good of the country when the entire fabric of BN policy is racial? It is never based on justice irrespective of ethnicity – it is always based on racial quotas and racial handouts. It is a policy designed to keep the poor and the helpless dependent on the BN charity and not to rescue them from their poverty to lead a life of dignity. That is how the BN has thrived as a saviour of the rakyat for more than half a century, deluding the people that they don't have a life and hope beyond the BN. But you are not partial even to all the Malays even though you claim to represent the Malays. You only look after the cronies and the elites in Umno. When the Malays don't belong to these groupings, they don't get any benefits. But Umno will always speak in the name of the Malay community as if it is the benefactor of all Malays. The reality is that the Malays in Pas are almost completely ignored when it comes to receiving benefits; the Malays in Parti Keadilan Rakyat are treated as enemies. They get hardly any goodies. How do we work together? How do we believe you when you say "at the end of the day this country is ours"? Do we all equally have a share in the wealth of this nation? In spite of the much touted BR1M magic that you introduced, in spite of the greatly proclaimed 1Malaysia delusion that you created, Malaysians are not brimming with joy! If after more than half a century of nationhood, we can't rise above our racial identities and political differences and work together as citizens of this country then we have failed ourselves miserably. For this the BN must be solely held responsible. It is their divisive policies that have kept us apart and never brought us together. The BN policy has failed this country and its people. They are not capable of any alternative policy that will benefit every citizen. The wealth of the nation really has not been equally distributed among the people – only cronies and certain leaders at the top have harvested benefits beyond the wildest dreams of the ordinary, common man. The BN's so-called nation-building efforts have not yielded the results this country deserves. We have to turn to an alternative policy to achieve this and this opportunity will be available at the 13th General Election. P Ramakrishnan is the immediate past president of Aliran |
| Bruno Manser Fund report slams plans for 50 new dams in Malaysian Borneo Posted: 21 Nov 2012 11:47 AM PST Sarawak's indigenous people to pay the price for US$ 105 billion industrialization scheme
A new Bruno Manser Fund report exposes the Sarawak state government's excessive hydropower plans for the Malaysian part of Borneo - Bruno Manser Fund is calling for a moratorium on all dam construction after Bakun and for the withdrawal of foreign consultants from socially and environmentally damaging hydropower plans (KUCHING, MALAYSIA) Tens of thousands of indigenous people from the rainforests of Borneo are facing forced displacement from their traditional lands on the basis of hydropower plans drawn up by the state government of Sarawak in Malaysian Borneo. A report released today by the Bruno Manser Fund entitled "Sold Down the River. How Sarawak Dam Plans Compromise the Future of Malaysia's Indigenous Peoples" examines the dam plans that form part of SCORE, Southeast Asia's most ambitious and most expensive energy project, with planned investments of up to US$ 105 billion by 2030. Cultural genocide Under the guise of "development", the Sarawak state government under Chief Minister Taib Mahmud is planning to virtually dam all the rivers in the state's interior, irrespective of the social and environmental implications. The dam plans, which are being pushed ahead under a cloak of secrecy, constitute the core element of the so-called Sarawak Corridor of Renewable Energy, SCORE. If implemented, they would entail the cultural genocide of a significant part of Sarawak's rich indigenous culture. Indigenous cultures from Sarawak's interior, such as the Kayan, Kenyah, Penan and Kelabit, are likely to face extinction if the dam plans are implemented in full. But the dams are also likely to have serious negative repercussions on downstream Iban and Bidayuh communities. For centuries, the rivers of Borneo have been the lifeline of Sarawak's indigenous people. The planned Baram dam alone is estimated to be displacing 20,000 Borneo natives and flooding over 40,000 hectares of rainforests and farmlands. A first series of 12 dams is currently being implemented by Sarawak Energy, the state's power monopolist. The report stresses the fact that Sarawak is already confronted with a power excess: the current peak demand in Sarawak is around 1000 megawatts (MW) and is thus far less than the power that can be produced by the recently completed Bakun dam alone, which, with a capacity of 2400 MW, is Asia's largest dam outside China. Foreign corporate actors' pact with the devil The Bruno Manser Fund report discloses that many companies involved in the dam plans are closely linked to the family of Sarawak's long-term Chief Minister Taib Mahmud and to Cahya Mata Sarawak (CMS), the flagship of the Taib family's business empire. Taib is currently under investigation for corruption by Malaysia's corruption watchdog, MACC. In order to benefit from the strong investments linked to the Sarawak dam plans, foreign corporate actors, such as Australia's Hydro Tasmania, Snowy Mountains Engineering Company (SMEC), GHD, the US consultant MWH Global, Norway's Norconsult, Germany's Fichtner and construction companies such as China's Three Gorges Corporation and Sinohydro have concluded a "pact with the devil" and are assisting the Taib government with its momentous dam projects. Key managerial positions within Sarawak Energy, the implementing agency of the dams, are held by foreigners, such as by the Norwegian CEO Torstein Dale Sjøtveit and by the Australian dam project director Andrew Pattle, who has been seconded by Hydro Tasmania. Funding agencies behind the Sarawak dam plans include Malaysian banks, such as RHB Bank, EON Bank and AmInvestment Bank, as well as Kuwait Finance House and Kenanga Investment Bank, which is a joint venture between the Taib family's Cahya Mata Sarawak (CMS) and Deutsche Bank. Bruno Manser Fund calling for a moratorium The Sarawak state government and Sarawak Energy as the implementing agency are facing increasing opposition from the affected communities against their excessive dam plans. Representatives of SAVE Rivers, a Sarawak network set up to fight the Taib government's dam plans, are currently embarking on a tour through Australia. The "Hydro Tasmania out of Sarawak" tour is aimed at increasing the pressure on publicly-owned Hydro Tasmania, one of the most important corporate actors involved in the Sarawak dam plans. The Bruno Manser Fund is calling for a moratorium on all Sarawak dam construction and for an independent external review of the Bakun, Bengoh and Batang Ai dams. Sarawak Energy is asked to sack its chairman, Hamed Abdul Sepawi, the cousin of Chief Minister Taib Mahmud, and to provide full transparency of its finances, contracts and funders. Foreign corporate actors are asked to shun SCORE, as any involvement in the Taib government's hydropower program is inextricably linked to corruption, environmental damage and human rights violations. The full report entitled "Sold Down the River. How Sarawak Dam Plans Compromise the Future of Malaysia's Indigenous Peoples" is now available online at: http://www.stop-corruption-dams.org/resources/ For daily updates on the "Hydro Tasmania out of Sarawak tour", please consult: http://www.savesarawakrivers.com |
| Book Launch and Forum: Prelude to the Post-Lee Kuan Yew Era Posted: 21 Nov 2012 11:25 AM PST 
Date: Saturday 24 Nov 2012
Time: 2-4pm
Venue: Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall
1 Jalan Maharajalela, Kampung Attap, Kuala Lumpur, Transit: Maharajalela Books Smokescreens & Mirrors by Tan Wah Piow Escape from the Lion's Paw edited by Teo Soh Lung & Low Yit Leng These two books on Singapore will be launched by Mr Tan Yew Sing & Dr Kua Kia Soong Followed by a panel discussion: Prelude to the Post-Lee Kuan Yew Era
Moderator : Maria Chin Abdullah Dr G Raman is a well respected Singapore tax and commercial lawyer with over 40 years practice behind him. In the 1970s he gallantly served as the legal advisor to the student unions at the University and Polytechnic which were under attack by the authorities. G Raman was himself detained without trial in 1977 by Lee Kuan Yew. Despite his years of suffering under repression, he remains a sharp critic of the PAP government. Mr Tan Wah Piow is former student leader who fell on the wrong side of politics in Singapore. He was jailed in 1975. In 1976 he went into exile in the UK, where he now practices law. In 1987 Singapore accused him of being a "marxist" mastermind, an allegation he refutes in his book Smokescreens & Mirrors. Tan calls for a campaign to restart, rejuvenate and reclaim the Constitution. Dr Wong Chin Huat is a political scientist by training. He serves as a steering committee member of Bersih 2.0 He campaigns for electoral reform and civil and political rights. He also writes political commentaries. for The Nut Graph, Selangor Times, Malaysiakini amongst others. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tan Wah Piow, the author of Smokescreens & Mirrors, will be in Kuala Lumpur to launch the book on the 24th November. Smokescreens & Mirrors is not only a powerful rebuttal of the Singapore government's allegations against him in 1987 as the "Mastermind of a Marxist Plot" to overthrow the PAP, it is, in the words of one Singaporean reviewer: Smokescreens, however, is not simply a historical analysis of the political machinations that took place in 1987. It closes in the present with a call to action: Tan pushes for a re-examination of Operation Spectrum as "an initial education process to mobilise public opinion to Restart, Rejuvenate and Reclaim the Constitution" (p.72, capitals his). He establishes the foundation of his arguments upon the Singapore Constitution, which he avers "has to be the first point of reference in any political debate where liberties are at stake" (p.30). G. Raman states in his foreword that "the book contains Wah Piow's agenda for a true democratic society in Singapore". Smokescreens is thus polemical – and openly so. In Escape from the Lion's Paw edited by Teo Soh Lung and Low Yit Leng, Wah Piow published his long awaited account of his escapade from Singapore in 1976. The chapter The Making of an Outlaw is a mini-autobiography of this former student leader who was thrown into prison in 1975 following a fabricated charge. Immediately following his release, he had to devise his escape routes to avoid being inducted into the military. It became an enormous blow to the authorities when he managed to escape from the the Lion's Paw, and and sought political asylum in the United Kingdom where he now resides and has his own legal practice. His citizenship was revoked in 1987. This book also carries stories of escapades published for the first time of other dissidents who had to flee from LKY's iron-fist rule, among them, the late Francis Khoo and Wah Piow's colleagues during the University days, Tsui Hon Kwong from Hong Kong and ex-detainee, Ms Tang Fong Har. These two books are published this year in Singapore to coincide with the 25 anniversary of the infamous Operation Spectrum in 1987. At the time 22 social activists, lawyers, journalists and church workers were detained without trial. Many Singaporeans till today do not believe in the PAP government's claim of a Marxist Plot, and despite the lapse of time, the issue continues to haunt the political credibility of the regime, and a lingering embarrassment to the more liberal elements within the ruling PAP. Dr G Raman has been a practising lawyer in Singapore since 1969. His doctorate thesis is titled "Law as an Instrument of Social Change in Singapore". It deals with how the PAP used law to perpetuate its hegemony in Singapore. Raman was the legal adviser to the University of Singapore Students' Union in 1969 and later in 1974. He represented one of the two workers charged with its student leader, Tan Wah Piow on the trumped-up charge of rioting in 1974. He was detained for more than a year in February 1977 for alleged subversive activities under the Internal Security Act. Author of a book on probate practice in Singapore and Malaysia, Raman has contributed articles to the Journal of Contemporary Asia and other local publications." In the Forward to Smokescreens & Mirrors, G Raman wrote:
"Twenty-five years later (from 1987), Wah Piow's dreams may not have been realised. But the dreams are taking shape and it is a matter of time before the ideals that Wah Piow espoused become a reality… It will be an opportunity missed and a road to their downfall if the PAP does not take note of the winds of change that are blowing so strongly amongst Singaporeans, especially the young". The call for the revamp of the way politics are managed in Singapore is inevitable, and this is becoming more pressing especially after the 2010 general elections and the 2011 Presidential Elections when the ruling PAP, though still safely in power, nevertheless suffered strategic defeats in public perception as a party which could do no wrong. The speakers will address these issues in Prelude to the Post-Lee Kuan Yew Era. |
| I challenge Hisham to a debate Posted: 19 Nov 2012 02:41 PM PST 
FMT LETTER: From Gobind Singh Deo, via e-mail I challenge Home Minister Hishamuddin Hussein to a debate over what more could be done to make police stations safer for members of the public so as to avoid further recurrences of incidents such as deaths, assault and rape of detainees in police custody. The minister seems clueless as to how he can further improve the police force, especially in light of the rape of an Indonesian woman by three officers in a police station in Prai recently. It is worrying to read his response to a call for him to resign as Home Minister over the case, saying, "We have already ensured that they are brought to court. What else can we do? This is our country's system." Such a statement by the Home Minister in such a situation does not inspire an ounce of confidence. It also doesn't help that the minister further failed to take a position on the implementation of the IPCMC, which would perhaps offer some hope to the nation that the government is serious about complaints against the police and how such complaints are to be dealt with. The minister's cold responses to complaints against the force shows how out of touch he is with what the real issues are and what needs to be done to solve the problem. I think he just doesn't know what's going on or understand what is happening around him. He should learn from cases in the past where people have died, have been abused and have been raped in custody. He should learn from the deaths of Kugan, Teoh Beng Hock and Ahmad Sarbani Mohamed. These were cases in which allegations of brutality were raised and inquiries were held. All of them point to weaknesses in measures which currently exist in police stations or places where individuals are taken for questioning when suspected of having committed offences. The Teoh Beng Hock RCI went so far as to recommend broad changes to be made in order to make these places more secure so as to avoid such incidents from occurring again in future. The Home Minister does not seem to have understood anything at all from all this. And what of cases in which police officers are accused of rape and abuse of women and young girls in police stations? In 2008, a police officer, was charged at the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court for raping a 17-year- old student and forcing her to perform oral sex on him in the Putra Heights police station. The trial saw the victim describe how she and her boyfriend were stopped by a police patrol car at 6am on June 18 that year and taken back to the police station. At the police station she and her boyfriend were taken to separate rooms for questioning. There, she was raped and forced to perform oral sex on the officer. In her police report, the victim alleged that the officer told her not to be afraid as he had seen many other girls like her previously. No action was taken until the matter was raised in Parliament and exposed in the press. And now we have a case in which three officers are alleged to have raped an Indonesian maid in a police station. The three have been charged swiftly, but not until after the matter was highlighted in the press and demonstrations were held both here and in Indonesia, which even saw the burning of our national flag. How does the minister have the stomach to say "what else can we do? This is our country's system" in light of all this? This is not what we expect from the Home Minister in a situation as pressing as this. The question is how do you make the police more accountable for their actions? How do you put a stop to it? How do you make senior officers and even the government more responsible for incidents like these so as to ensure that officers are not motivated to break laws in pursuit of their own agenda and there are no more assaults, rapes and deaths in police custody? This is where the minister's response is seriously lacking. He should tell us, what has he done to make police stations safer since becoming Home Minister? How has he as minister reduced "opportunity" for such incidents from happening in police stations? READ MORE HERE |
| History Lesson, My Version Posted: 19 Nov 2012 01:48 PM PST 
Dump Islam, go for Science. It is difficult, but it will bring you enlightenment. You will bow lower than a Muslim when you KNOW how powerful the God of The Universe is. Mad Scientist (In reply to Zack on the Sultans) Dear Zack, The answer to your question is this short essay I am writing for you below. Your question was: "if adat resam and religion was so taboo a subject to even talk about openly let alone to promulgate to a Malay person let alone to a Malay Sultan, what made our Sultans at that time to suddenly allow the preaching of this new religion (Islam) and to even embrace it wholeheartedly and in doing so, to have all his subjects also simultaneously embrace not only this new religion but its traditions too?"
1. At the time in history, if you care to check up on our old history books (the newer ones in school are all rubbish), Islam arrived on the beaches of Malaya, and the Hindu Sultans were visited. These missionary Arabs wanted to do business and so sought the permission of the Sultan. In return they taught Islam, impressed the Sultan, and the Sultan decided to use religion as a means of rule, which allowed him better grip on his Sultanate without the need for more soldiers or police. Religion is self governance and self policing. One does not steal because he is afraid of God and punishment in the after life. There is no need for guards. 2. Item (1) is not really an Issue, yet. What is the real problem is that these missionaries Arabs taught only the legal aspects of Islam, not the science and plentiful medical advances, not the philosophy. Perhaps they themselves did not know or perhaps they were selfish and did not want to impart too much knowledge. Whatever the reason, the Islam that came to the shores of Malaya is the primitive backward retarded version, meant exclusively for ruling. 3. The Ruler at the time, or Sultan chose Islam and decreed that everyone should follow suit as a demonstration of power, as a change of governing method, and as a clear advantageous religion to use for ruling. The majority Malays simply followed. If you went against the Sultan in those days, I cannot imagine what would happen to you. Even today we can see how one person at least got visits from the police for saying something about a certain Sultan. Thus Malays became Muslims. 4. Hence, what made the Sultan change religion is the influence and teachings of these Arab Missionaries. Our history books revealed how the Malays were impressed by these Arab Muslims, praying by the seaside. They wonder what religion the Arabs were. Such statement indicates the Malays were already impressed, hence the Arab Missionaries must have had an easy time with their "dakwah" effort. 5. Note also in history these Arabs were successful traders and became rich trading in our Spices to Europeans who needed them. This was before the British and other Europeans found out where the Spices came from and refused to buy and pay the exorbitant prices the Arabs were charging them. All this you can verify from historical records and books. 6. When the British came, they studied our Malay system and concluded the Sultan is the best person to deal with. To cut a long story short, by way of agreements with the Sultans, the British got Penang, Singapore, Port Dickson, and perhaps the entire Malaya under their influence, and kept the Sultans as ruler for the Malays, as they know the Sultans have a good grip on the Malays and the Malays need their Sultans, until today. It can be argued that the British are very clever occupants of Malaya. The Malays got their Sultans and Political Power while the British got the loot, which of course they shared with the Sultans. 7. Islamic Medical science and other Sciences, of which there is plentiful and very advanced, relatively speaking, never reached the shores of Malaya, perhaps never allowed to. Many million of Muslims do not even know the word camera comes from the Arab word "kamar" which means room (as in dark room for photography) and the word alcohol comes from none other than Al-Kohl, the discoverer of well, alcohol! I am going to end this essay with a simple solution for Muslims. Dump Islam, go for Science. It is difficult, but it will bring you enlightenment. You will bow lower than a Muslim when you KNOW how powerful the God of The Universe is. As for God, it is a personal choice. I choose to hang on to my belief in God, and am thus a Deist, not an Atheist. Some may prefer Atheism. Some prefer to be Gay. Whatever makes you happy! written by zack, November 13, 2012 03:00:10Dear RPK,In the wake of the current news surrounding the notion that there shall be no compulsion in religion, i have a question that i have been meaning to ask for quite some time. We love our Sultans, there is no doubt about that. We love our Sultans to the extent that what the Sultans believe is what we believe and it goes to the issue of religion also, in so far as the Malays are concerned. Religion and adat resam went hand in hand from the old days and was strictly adhered to so much so that it was taboo for anyone to question it. It was a fact from the earliest of times in our country that trying to take a Malay out from his religion or his adat resam was out of the question. In this context we immediately think about Islam being the religion of the Malays. But history tells us that the Sultans used to be Hindu and all Malays at that time were also Hindu and the adat resam that was practiced was in all probability the Hindu adat resam. This perhaps explains why our bersanding and majlis berinai and baju melayu bear much resemblance to Hindu traditions. Then all of a sudden, well at least that is how the History books put it, the Sultans embraced Islam and every single Malay person followed suit without question. My question is, if adat resam and religion was so taboo a subject to even talk about openly let alone to promulgate to a Malay person let alone to a Malay Sultan, what made our Sultans at that time to suddenly allow the preaching of this new religion (Islam) and to even embrace it wholeheartedly and in doing so, to have all his subjects also simultaneously embrace not only this new religion but its traditions too?p.s. please do not post this question if you view it offensive. apart from seeking some clarifications, i certainly do not intend any publication which may be offensive to any person. |
| Parents question the credibility of the Government in its decision to abolish PPSMI Posted: 19 Nov 2012 01:37 PM PST 
Shamsudin Hamid, Coordinator Concerned Parents Selangor Representing over 12,000 active members of the Concerned Parents Selangor (CPS), we participated in the dialogue on the Malaysia Education Blueprint (MEB) held recently at the Sunway Convention Centre. At the end of the session, when participants were invited to present their views; we raised several questions on the rationale for the abolishing of PPSMI, and the reasons why certain matters pertaining to it are left out of the MEB. It was indeed most disappointing and shocking when the Dialogue Session Chairman by way of an answer gave a terse one sentence reply - "PPSMI telah digantikan oleh MBMMBI, itu sahaja saya boleh katakan". It was as if the issue raised was a taboo subject, and it gives rise to the assumption that government servants especially from the Ministry of Education (MOE) are prohibited from talking about it. The fact that the MEB mentioned PPSMI in only about three sentences, gives credence to this assumption. After referring to several recent public letters on the issue notably: "Continue PPSMI for greater good of nation" (Star Oct.17), "We need confirmation" (Star Oct.22), "Is the abolition of PPSMI truly justified" (Star Oct.28), "PPSMI advocates disappointed" (Star Nov.6), "Stop politicising teaching of English" (Star Nov.8); and the knowledge of our members' opinions on the matter, we can only conclude that the MOE have not been transparent in its undertakings. Worse, we parents believe that the credibility of the MOE is truly questionable when we consider the sequence of events from July 2009 when PPSMI was abolished until today. This sequence of events are: 1. The decision to abolish PPSMI in July 2009 was made suddenly without prior consultation with stakeholders or interested parties. It lacked transparency as reported in the UNESCO report. It was also made after demonstrations by 'Malay language nationalists' (headed by Samad Said) lion against the use of English in the study of science and mathematics. Hence the true motive behind the decision to suddenly abolish PPSMI is open to question. 2. On instructions of the MOE, school PIBGs were not allowed to discuss or deliberate on the matter. Schools which persisted in raising the issue were punished. A case in point is the SRK Assunta in Petaling Jaya which for 51 years acted as a feeder school for SMK Assunta. In Nov. 2009, PIBGs of both SRK Assunta 1 and 2 persisted in having EGMs to vote on the matter whereby by secret ballot, 93% of parents voted for the continuation of PPSMI. Consequently, on specific instructions of the Pejabat Pelajaran Daerah (PPD) Petaling, the majority of students were not allowed to go to SMK Assunta after Std. 6 but dispersed to various other schools in the district without parents given time to appeal. It was only after a spontaneous demonstration by affected parents which was covered by NTV7 1pm News on the same day, was the instructions rescinded by the PPD.(http://thestar.com/news/educ). 3. More than half a million parents voted for the continuation of PPSMI in online surveys conducted by PAGE KL and Penang, Che Det's portal and the MOEs website itself. This fact has never been acknowledged nor taken into consideration in the NEB (Source: News reports and the website portals themselves.) 4. A similar fate befell the thousands of individual letters appealing for the reinstatement of PPSMI sent from all over the country. (http://staronline/news/visuals) 5. In Nov.2011, the MOE stated that in September, it had conducted a survey in schools nationwide to determine the efficacy and results of PPSMI. They announced that based on the statistics obtained, PPSMI had failed in its objectives. Only some selective statistics were made public as justification. Alluding to the OSA, the complete survey reports and statistics were not made available for scrutiny by the public. However in September 2012 a series of reports and statistics were published by PAGE (Parents Action Group on Education), which totally disproves the earlier MOE claims of PPSMI having failed. (Sunday Star 23 Sept.PAGE sources: Malaysia Educational Statistics 2009, 2011 and 2012, EPRD, MOE and the Millennium Goals at 2010). 6. The pledges given by the MOE for a 'soft landing' to parents who opted that their children continue learning science and mathematics in English, have not been fully fulfilled. 7. Due to demands from parent groups, MOE had beginning late 2011 until early 2012, appointed various private panels and think-tanks to provide views on PPSMI. Amongst others, were the Education Review Panel headed by Tan Sri Dzulkifly Abdul Razak and comprised of eminent personalities from the private sector. The National Education Dialogue Panel headed by Tan Sri Wan Zahid Noordin. It was reported that the consensus arrived by these panels were all generally in favour for the reinstatement of PPSMI in essence. The big question mark here is whether the inputs of these panels were taken into consideration in drafting the MEB. 8. The Korean foreign consultant to the MEB panel who was a former education minister in his country, perhaps in deference to the DPM had failed to mention one significant fact. Even if he had, it was not mentioned in the MEB or perhaps even deliberately omitted. The fact of the matter is that not long after PPSMI was introduced in Malaysia under the administration of Tun Dr Mahathir, the Korean government invited top educationists from a prominent institute of higher learning here in Malaysia to advise and instruct the Korean MOE on the implementation of PPSMI there. It is still in practice today. 9. There is a parallel national education system under the Ministry of Rural Development whose Maktab Rendah Sains Mara (MRSM), offer 'O' and 'A' level courses under the UK General Certificate of Education (GCE) syllabus; which provides the teaching of Maths and Science in English. MRSM whose student intake is limited to bumiputra students especially from rural areas, is perceived as being discriminatory towards non bumiputra parents whose only wish is to have their children continue learning the said subjects in English. Rightly or wrongly, this perception is real and worse, it has transformed into a general anti government stance by non bumiputra parents especially those from the urban areas. 10. Recently the Hon. Minister of Education announced certain incentives like a tax break, book subsidies and a grant or loan be given to parents whose children opts to study science. Question here is if the whole matter has been well planned in the first place, why was it not mentioned in the MEB. Or was the announcement made to assuage the disquiet of parents who recently raised the issue of the MOE plans to achieve a 60% intake of science stream students in schools. From the above summary of events, one can only conclude that the MOEs' credibility in carrying out its responsibilities as the prime mover in transforming the country's education (and social) landscape, is severely questioned. The fact that the whole education issue has been politicised by certain quarters within the government and without, cannot be denied. This whole episode simply does not augur well for the openness and the 'listening to the rakyat' credo that the government is promoting. |
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Cuma sekadar mahu menunjukkan bahawa, selepas program Jelajah Janji Ditepati Najib Razak tidak dipedulikan rakyat, tawaran Bajet 2013 kurang membekas, pelbagai insentif one-off mudah dilupakan, kini Umno-BN bertarung seperti parti pembangkang, dengan cuba menyelongkar apa juga yang dilihat sebagai "keburukan atau sisi negatif", termasuk menyiarkan kembali ucapan Anwar Ibrahim, semasa dalam kerajaan dahulu, yang mengecam PAS dan DAP.