| Who will win GE13? Posted: 24 Jan 2013 07:51 PM PST 
P Gunasegaram, Malaysiakini Numbers, they say, never lie although statistics can be made to. Where they are most useful, however, is when they can be analysed to give a scale of the magnitude of the task ahead for someone who wants to achieve something. The opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition, comprising of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), PAS, DAP and allies in Sabah and Sarawak, has made plain its target of taking over the government in the next 13th general election, and is publicly confident of doing so.
Can it? The figures clearly show that it is a much easier task for Barisan Nasional to keep its power than it is for Pakatan to wrest it away. Before I get pilloried as a doomsayer for opposition chances, do hear me out. As I said, numbers don't lie.
Let's focus on Parliamentary elections which decide federal power. The March 2008 elections, GE12, saw a huge swing of votes to the opposition. Popular vote for BN dropped to a mere 50.3 percent from its previous 64 percent. The BN lost 58 seats to the opposition, effectively Pakatan. The opposition gained 61 seats to take 82 seats. The difference between seats gained and lost is because of the three additional seats in 2008.
In peninsular Malaysia where all of the swing occurred, the opposition had 51 percent of the popular vote. But because their strength was in the urban areas which had much higher population densities, it translated into a smaller proportionate number of 80 seats for the opposition, and 84 seats for BN in the peninsula.
What saved the day for BN was the very solid showing in Sabah and Sarawak where it lost just one seat in each of the two states to garner 25 seats in Sabah, and 31 seats in Sarawak. That gave them 56 seats from East Malaysia and thus, the right to rule.
Without the strong showing in Sabah and Sarawak, BN would have been really on the ropes, and much closer to losing the elections. In the event, BN garnered 140 seats in Parliament, comfortably exceeding Pakatan's 82 seats, with only eight seats short of a two-thirds majority.
But it is a testament to the strong showing by BN in all the previous elections (barring the ill-fated 1969 elections) that this comfortable victory was still the worst showing by BN in any polls to date, forcing the resignation of BN head Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, and the subsequent ascent of Najib Abdul Razak to his position as BN chief and prime minister.
What would it take for Pakatan to win GE13 at the federal level? BN has 58 more parliament seats. It would need at the least a swing of 30 votes for a narrow two-seat majority in the house. For that, you need to see another swing as big as the one we saw in 2008 towards the opposition.
The question is, where is Pakatan going to get the 30 seats? Most of the seats which are of a Chinese majority or which have significant Chinese populations, are already in the bag. Chinese votes can't swing much more than it already has, and so is not likely to be decisive in terms of getting more seats, although it will help in the retention of many.
Key 'Malay, Sabah and Sarawak' votes
The key this time is whether there will be a continuous swing in Malay votes to PAS and PKR the way it was in 2008, and whether major swings will be seen in Sabah and Sarawak of the scale that was seen in 2008 in the peninsula.
Realistically, one should expect that the swing to Pakatan, in terms of seats won, will moderate overall in peninsular Malaysia, and that there will be some reversals even if the popular vote overall increases in favour of the opposition.
That would mean that without a significant shift in Sabah and Sarawak, and a gain of at least 15 seats there to 17 overall from East Malaysian states, there is likely to be little chance of upsetting the BN hold in terms of Parliamentary seats. Even with such a swing there, Pakatan still needs to get an additional 15 seats in the peninsular, which is not an easy task.
Yes, Pakatan will make more inroads. But will they win? Tough, but not impossible. After all, no one predicted the swing to Pakatan in 2008. What's there to say that it could not happen again? A lot could depend on the events leading up to the elections.
Opposition pundits point to investigations by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the illegal immigration and registration of voters there which may find traction among Sabahans in favour of the opposition.
Those who think BN will win say Najib has tried hard to regain both the middle ground and Malay votes, and may succeed at least partially.
One thing's for sure, its going to be closer than ever before. If you want to make your vote count - and your vote will count more than at anytime, since voting had begun in this country in 1955 - make sure you go out there and vote on polling day, even if you have to return from Singapore or Kalimantan.
That way, whatever the result and whichever party you supported, you would have done your part towards free and fair elections in this country, the results of which would reflect majority aspirations.
P GUNASEGARAM is publisher and editor of business news portal KiniBiz which is to be set up next month in a joint venture with Malaysiakini. He has worked as a journalist and analyst in Malaysia for over 30 years. |
| Welcome to the Philippines 81st province Posted: 24 Jan 2013 11:51 AM PST 
Mahathir used the ISA and Operasi Lalang to silence his critics. He created heavy industries and installed his own cronies in these ventures. He treated the Treasury like his own private kitty, bailed out favoured people, and thought nothing of losses being borne by the taxpayers. He brainwashed Malaysians, especially the Malays, into accepting a two-tiered society. Mariam Mokhtar, Free Malaysia Today It is believed there about 1.75 million Filipinos in Sabah, who were allowed to settle in the state during Dr Mahathir Mohamad's premiership. People should be able to place their trust in the prime minister to head the elected government; some prime ministers achieve greatness, others are best forgotten. Many are mediocre, others gain international acclaim. The future of one Malaysian prime minister might well lie in a cell. His crime? When he was in power, he did not act in the interests of the country, but was consumed by a passion to further his own political interests. He was prepared to sell his country to foreign nationals. Last week, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad admitted in a press conference that he had authorised the provision of ICs to Filipinos. The Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on Sabah revealed that between 1970 and 1984, around 73,000 Filipino refugees had been allowed to settle permanently in Sabah. Pundits claim that today, there may be around 1.75 million Filipinos. In 2011, the opposition alleged that around three million Indonesians had been absorbed into Malaysia and given citizenship, with Bumiputera privileges and most important of all, granted full voting rights. The Wikipedia entry for the Philippines states that there are 80 provinces which are grouped into 17 regions depending on their geographical, cultural and ethnological features. With these allegations, Peninsular Malaysia might as well be known as the 34th province of Indonesia, and Sabah should be recognised as the 81st province of the Philippines. Mahathir tried to deflect criticism from his "Project IC" by making unfair comparisons with the granting of citizenship to Malayans by Tunku Abdul Rahman. When he was stung by the criticisms of sullying the name of the Father of Independence, Mahathir tried to backpedal, but the damage was already done. Malaysians don't really care about Mahathir's racial origins, his ethnicity or his religious conviction. They do mind his deception and the manner in which he helped propel the Ketuanan Melayu myth to the detriment of all races and religions in Malaysia. He championed the Malays above everyone else, but left out other Malaysian-born citizens, and tagged them with the "pendatang" label. His adherence to his Malay bloodline, whilst ignoring his equally noble Indian ancestry, is what has probably made many people despise the Indian Muslims, through no fault of their own. Many disparaging remarks which appear to be directed at all mamaks, are in reality directed solely at Mahathir. Private kitty Mahathir used the ISA and Operasi Lalang to silence his critics. He created heavy industries and installed his own cronies in these ventures. He treated the Treasury like his own private kitty, bailed out favoured people, and thought nothing of losses being borne by the taxpayers. He brainwashed Malaysians, especially the Malays, into accepting a two-tiered society. Mahathir asked us to "Look East" because of his personal spat with the West, but unbeknown to us, he did a private deal with Margaret Thatcher in the Pergau Dam scandal. It is laughable that anyone should think the British will come and rescue Malaysia, like the cavalry charge in the cowboy movies. British Prime Minister David Cameron and his government are more interested in flogging their old weaponry to Malaysia, saving their firms in an economically stagnant Europe and rejuvenate their flagging property market with Malaysian EPF money. During Tony Blair's time, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) was told to halt its investigations into the BAE arms sale to Saudi Arabia. Allegations of kickbacks to a Saudi prince proved embarrassing and Blair claimed that he was acting in the "national interest". Will Cameron be any different? Recently, some professionals revealed that in their student days, they were not awarded scholarships or loans for further studies because they did not show allegiance to Umno, or that their parents were not pious Umno Muslims. These are revelations from Malays who did not have the right connections but were able to scrape up just enough money to pay for their own education. Anyone who thinks Umno helps all Malays is deluded. Umno only assists Umno Malays. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/01/25/welcome-to-the-philippines-81st-province/ |
| Don’t muddy the water issue Posted: 24 Jan 2013 11:41 AM PST 
Syabas would have us believe that this has everything to do with the supposed water shortage in Selangor and the need for the Langat 2 plant and Pahang-Selangor water transfer project. This doesn't make sense, since the Langat 2 plant was slated for completion in 2014. The Wangsa Maju plant failure has nothing to do with Langat 2. Tricia Yeoh, The Sun THE water saga between the Selangor government and water operator Syabas took another turn in the latest episode of the Wangsa Maju pump station fiasco that affected more than 27,000 households in the Klang Valley. It is easy to confuse the many issues, thereby muddying them together. But first, some facts. The Wangsa Maju pump house – which is made up of four pumps and one for standby purposes – broke down on Dec 29 last year and Jan 1, and since then both parties have accused each other of being at fault. The pump house has a design capacity of 180mld (million litres per day). Syabas claims that the failure was due to "operating above its design capacity for a long period of time in recent years" (Syabas, Jan 15). Selangor state checks, however, revealed that throughout 2012, the pumps operated beyond their capacity of 200mld for only 18 days out of the whole year. The central issue here is whether or not the pumps have actually been well-maintained to operate consistently without breaking down. The responsibility to maintain these pumps falls under Syabas and not the Selangor government. According to standard operating procedure, "preventive periodic maintenance" is a basic requirement that should have been conducted by specific capable contractors. This was apparently conducted up to 2008, after which it was only done whenever a pump was damaged. Prevention is surely better than cure, something any water operator should have known at the outset. No regular checks by the appropriate technical experts were carried out, and this was the primary reason for the breakdown. Even if Syabas employees carried out routine inspections, why did they not realise the pumps were already faulty, and thereafter immediately alert their superiors? In fact, it was revealed that one of the five pumps was already reported as faulty since last year and this was not addressed. This brings us to the next issue of good governance. The water industry is regulated by SPAN (National Water Services Commission). Syabas has unfortunately demonstrated its inability to manage its equipment efficiently, when it should have investigated the root problem even before it became a problem by following SOPs and best practices. SPAN and the Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water should use this opportunity to correct any inefficiencies in the water delivery system. Failure to reprimand only means it is silently supporting incompetency. It is not clear whether SPAN had instructed Syabas (or rather, Puncak Niaga Sdn Bhd, the actual pump operator) to make urgent corrective measures. Added to this is a revelation in the Auditor-General's Audit Report for the operating period of 2009-2011, which showed among other things that the funds Syabas received for capital expenditure (capex) from the Selangor government were used for operating expenditure (opex). If such funds were necessary for the upgrading of water pumps, then they should not have been misallocated. Syabas would have us believe that this has everything to do with the supposed water shortage in Selangor and the need for the Langat 2 plant and Pahang-Selangor water transfer project. This doesn't make sense, since the Langat 2 plant was slated for completion in 2014. The Wangsa Maju plant failure has nothing to do with Langat 2. In earlier columns, I stated that this RM9 billion mega-project should be reconsidered in preference of other solutions like upgrading plants, rainwater harvesting, water recycling and treatment of Selangor's raw water resources. Some have also raised the question of why the Selangor government lays the blame squarely on Syabas when it holds 30% of its shares. Although this means attending board meetings and access to documents, Selangor is still the minority shareholder, and has no role in dealing with day-to-day operations. In fact, the federal government through its Finance Ministry Incorporated holds the golden share of Syabas, which allows them to flex some muscles. Nowhere in the concession agreement (which, by the way, is also signed by the federal government) does it say that maintenance of pump stations falls under the jurisdiction of the state government. Under Section 191(5) of the Water Services Industry Act 2006, the minister has the right to determine what amounts to national interest issues, and this determination would be "final and binding". This means the minister – and through its regulator SPAN – would be empowered to make the best decision to resolve the water problems of Selangor. Tricia Yeoh writes on national policy issues. |
| Sabah RCI: What next? Posted: 23 Jan 2013 12:59 PM PST 
Does it not boggle the mind that in the face of such incontrovertible evidence of this massive illegal operation, Mahathir would still deny its existence? What gave him the courage to do so, if not for the fact that the Royal Commission's proceedings have virtually been blacked out by the mainstream media, while his statement of defence would be given prominence? Kim Quek Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad finally admitted – in the face of overwhelming evidence – that he granted citizenship to the illegal immigrants who have flooded Sabah, but quickly added that the citizenship was granted legally. He said: "Many of them in Sabah were not there for a day or two, but 20 or 30 years and can speak Malay. They have the right to be citizens". Is that all there is to the infamous "Project M" (M stands for Mahathir) that has brought untold miseries to Sabahans: the mere granting of citizenship to qualified immigrants in the normal legal way? To get to the truth, let us hear some top officials of the Sabah National Registration Department (NRD) who gave evidence to the Royal Commission of Inquiry looking into the population explosion of Sabah. INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE · Sabah NRD assistant registrar Kee Dzulkifly Kee Abd Jalil said the special unit he was working in, illegally issued some 100,000 blue identity cards (IC) to the immigrants (blue cards are meant for citizens only), in addition to issuing 200,000 letters of approval for birth certificate for the children of immigrants. With these approval letters, they would get their birth certificates from the hospitals or district offices. These immigrants, who are all Muslims, are mainly from southern Philippines and Indonesia. Kee Dzulkifly, together with some of his fellow officers who also gave evidence collaborating Kee Dzulkifly's evidence, was subsequently detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for two years from 1995 to 1997, for engaging in these illegal activities. · Tamparuli NRD chief Yakup Damsah said that upon instruction from then Sabah NRD chief Abdul Rauf Sani, he and his colleagues were flown from Sabah to Kuala Lumpur, where they operated a clandestine operation in the house of Mahathir's then political secretary Abdul Aziz Shamsuddin at Kampung Pandan to illegally issue blue ICs to immigrants. Yakup said the purpose of the operation was to boost Muslims voters and to ensure they vote for Umno in the Sabah state election. His group issued 40,000 blue ICs within a month. Yakup was subsequently detained under the ISA for his illegal act. · Sabah NRD chief Ramli Kamaruddin, who succeeded Abdul Rauf, said that two weeks before the 1994 Sabah state election, he met then deputy home minister Megat Junid Megat Ayub (then home minister was Mahathir) at Hyatt Hotel in Kota Kinabalu, where he was instructed to issue temporary IC receipts to immigrants. These receipts, in the names of voters who never voted, would enable the immigrants to vote on polling day, so as to ensure a Barisan Nasional (BN) victory. Also present at the hotel was Osu Sukam, who later became Sabah chief minister in 1999. Ramli Kamaruddin was also detained under ISA for two years from 1995. · Sabah NRD deputy director Mohd Nasir Sugip testified that the department carried out the clandestine "Ops Durian Burok" from 1992 to 1995 under instruction from the state Election Commission (EC) to provide unqualified immigrants with blue ICs so that they could vote in an election. With the new ICs issued in accordance with the details provided by the EC, these Philipino and Indonesian Muslims were then planted as voters in strategic constituencies (classified as 'black' or 'grey' for BN) across Sabah to help BN win in elctions. At one time, Sabah EC director Wan Ahmad Wan Yusof handed over a list of 16,000 names and asked for these to be converted into 'Bumiputra Islam" voters. Mohd Nasir was later detained under the ISA. BLACK OUT BY MAIN STREAM MEDIA All these evidences were presented to the Royal Commission on Jan 16, third day of the hearings; whereas Mahathir claimed his innocence on the next day, Jan 17. Does it not boggle the mind that in the face of such incontrovertible evidence of this massive illegal operation, Mahathir would still deny its existence? What gave him the courage to do so, if not for the fact that the Royal Commission's proceedings have virtually been blacked out by the mainstream media, while his statement of defence would be given prominence? Despite such connivance from the mainstream media and Mahathir's brazen denials, there is no way that such staggering breach of law can be buried in this Internet age of ubiquitous information. Equally impossible to deny is Mahathir's link to these acts of treason. The two key political leaders featured in the evidence – Aziz Shamsuddin and Megat Junid – were Mahathir's closest confidante, who were also well known for their roles as henchmen to execute some of his more unsavoury schemes. At their level of political influence and status, these two henchmen would have neither the courage nor the reason to embark on such a bold venture of high treason that could easily have led their journey to the gallows, without the protection of the highest political leadership. It is as clear as daylight that these two political minions were only carrying out the wishes of their political boss. MAHATHIR IRRETRIEVABLY LINKED Project M is unparalleled in modern history in that it is a clandestine operation that has succeeded in robbing the sovereign rights of a people by massive infusion of illegal immigrants and pervasive contamination of the electoral roll with illegal voters (known as the phantom voters). The success of Project M has ensured Umno's hegemony in Sabah for almost two decades. And the original Sabahans will continue to be subjected to such rule unless the illegal immigrants and phantom voters menace is resolved. What is even more alarming is that the phantom voter cancer continues to grow right up to this day, not only in Sabah, but there is ample evidence that its malignancy has been spreading in Peninsula Malaysia, as exemplified by the thousands of dubious registered voters that surface continually, particularly in the state of Selangor. The latest evidence was uncovered by a survey carried out by the Selangor government. In a house-to-house check on the half a million newly registered voters, 135,000 of them could not be traced, for which the EC has not given any valid answer. In fact, our greatest problem is our EC, which has unabashedly acted as a political arm of Umno. Take the case of the explosive expose' uncovered by the Sabah RCI. In any democracy, the election commission would have immediately swung into emergency action, and in conjunction with other agencies such as the NRD, police and attorney general's chamber, would seek out the criminals and rectify the huge damage to restore integrity and public confidence to the electoral system. But not our EC. The latter has chosen not to react on the lame excuse that any comment would be 'subjudice' and any action would also be premature, as the RCI has not completed its findings. BONANZA FOR OPPOSITION? The same deaf and dumb tactic has also been adopted by Prime Minister Najib Razak and the component parties of Barisan Nasional. EC and BN's strategy seems to be: do nothing until the next election which will be held in probably two months' time. (Parliament stands dissolved on April 28, and polling within 60 days thereafter.) And opposition alliance Pakatan Rakyat and civil society will have to decide whether to stage another mass rally, both to force some urgent and basic electoral reforms including cleansing of electoral roll, as well as to gain political capital by swinging the middle ground further towards them. Whatever the decision on the mass rally, the opposition will certainly leave no stone unturned to publicise the moral and political bankruptcy of the incumbent political power in resorting to means most foul at perils of destroying our democracy so as to cling on to power. Thus, the Sabah RCI is turning out to be a last minute gift to the opposition after all, whatever its findings. |
| Perak power struggle - pause or game over? Posted: 22 Jan 2013 11:43 AM PST 
THE people of Perak are waiting expectantly to cast their vote in the 13th general election for a very special reason. Chen Shaua Fui, fz.com The first shock for the people was when the Barisan Nasional (BN) state government fell in the 2008 general election for the first time since independence in 1957. Then, they had a second shock when the new Pakatan Rakyat state government fell in a dramatic tussle just one year later. It was to escalate into a serious constitutional crisis involving the palace, Election Commission, courts, security forces and a very physical session in the state legislative assembly. At the end of the turmoil, the BN took control of the state once again and the coalition has ruled for about four years since then. But that was not the final word on the crisis. The ousted menteri besar Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin mounted a series of court challenges to reclaim the seat of government. However, after a full year, the Federal Court ruled that the BN's choice of menteri besar Datuk Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir was the rightful holder of the post. The contest for control of the state erupted when three state assembly members, from the 32 that were from the Pakatan coalition, became BN-friendly independents thus changing the balance of power in the 59-member legislature. Pakatan leaders stoutly maintained that the BN state government had no mandate to rule because they had not been voted in by the people. This was hotly debated at all levels of society, from the coffeeshops to cyberspace. A common view was that the next general election would be a sort of referendum on whether the BN's action to take control of the state has the support of the people. Of course, this view is not uniformly heard among the voters. Among the Chinese, a frequently aired opinion at the time of the crisis was that the Pakatan government was denied justice. This could be because the Chinese were among the direct beneficiaries of a number of policy changes adopted by the Pakatan government. In particular, the decision to award land titles to holders of temporary occupancy licences (TOL) generated much goodwill for the new government. This was especially because the Chinese living in New Villages had been pressing for permanent titles since before independence, with little success. A veteran political observer, Chong Soo Choon, 67, a long-time columnist for a Chinese daily, who provided in-depth analysis during the Perak power struggle, endorses this observation. "Until today, the Chinese community around Ipoh think that the Pakatan government was unjustly overthrown, and people still talk about it during tea sessions," he said. Chong, who lives in Ipoh, said that most of the Chinese he meets are of the opinion that if the Perak government had continued to be run by Pakatan, it would have performed on par with the Penang government and their living conditions could have improved as a result. However, his ground observation shows that the Malays are split on this issue, with the older generation staunchly supporting the BN, and the younger generation rooting for change. Undoubtedly, the BN government has tried to win back the people's support with a series of public-oriented programmes. Last year, the Perak government had restructured its water assets to pay back its RM1 billion debts to the federal government. The state government managed to reduce its debt to RM326million. Also, more than 8,000 acres of land were allocated to Chinese independent schools, religious schools and Tamil schools, so that revenue generated from the land would be used to fund the schools. The Chinese educationists welcomed the allocation as this was seen as systemic funding to the school. A BN leader, who wished to remain unidentified, expressed confidence that the coalition will win in the next general election as it has been working very hard to serve the people. "We have not been any less effective than the Pakatan government," he told fz.com in a phone interview. It is pertinent to ask whether voter sentiment about the change of government remains as strong today as it was during the period of political upheaval in 2009. This is especially because there have been a constant round of sensational political developments on the national stage in the intervening years, including allegations of grand corruption. Feelings were certainly running high during the period of the political crisis. No one would have imagined that when Zambry was going to the Perak palace in Kuala Kangsar to be sworn in on Feb 6, 2009, he would be greeted by a boisterous protest of about a thousand people, mostly Malays, who were trying to block his motorcade. However, as the BN state government settled into the job, the people became used to the new status quo and the Pakatan leaders decided to abide by the Federal court verdict in 2010. |
| The corruption debate continues Posted: 22 Jan 2013 11:33 AM PST 
The concept of corruption is not so clear that if you see it, you would know it. China and India, no paragons of good governance according to all such indicators, have grown a lot faster than most "less corrupt" countries. Cheong Kee Cheo, fz.com CORRUPTION is bad. This statement can find few dissenters from a moral or ethical standpoint. Corruption is bad for the economy. Equally unobjectionable? Many people, economists included, would concur. And this is the premise of two recent articles on corruption in The Edge's Forum pages. The first, " Are we really that corrupt?" (Issue 939, Dec 3), by the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs, came to the conclusion that since the country's growth is unaffected by the perception of rising corruption as measured by Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index, corruption may not be as bad as people think. Neither conclusion is warranted. First, economic growth is affected by a host of factors, only one of which is corruption. It is almost impossible to make explicit all these factors — a prerequisite for isolating the impact of any one of them. Second, even if these can be made explicit, disentangling their impact can be a nightmare because they are almost certainly interrelated. And third, even if the impact of all these factors can be isolated, demonstrating the link between corruption and growth is no simple matter because the relationship between them is complex. Economic theory will have us look at how scarce resources are misallocated because of corruption, the inefficiencies thus generated, and these inefficiencies' impact on the economy. To conclude that corruption has an impact on growth by comparing trends then is a bit like saying that the rise in crime must be caused by foreign workers/migrants since both have been rising over the same period. Or that strong sunshine causes shark attacks. The difficulty of establishing a direct link between corruption and growth has not stopped scholars from producing a plethora of evidence-based research. But the results have been far from conclusive. Google "corruption and growth" and you will find many studies that demonstrate empirically the negative impact of corruption on growth. Indeed, this is the position taken by the World Bank and other multilateral organisations. These studies, however, have to come to terms with some inconvenient facts. China and India, no paragons of good governance according to all such indicators, have grown a lot faster than most "less corrupt" countries. At the same time, the dominant view is being questioned by some scholars. One paper, by Heckelman and Powell (Corruption and the Institutional Environment for Growth, Suffolk University, 2008), found empirically that "corruption is growth enhancing when economic freedom is... limited." |
| Use properly lah... speak also Posted: 21 Jan 2013 02:03 PM PST 
Mohsin Abdullah's imaginary write-up on Bahasa Malaysia includes these words. THE government has issued guidelines for the media on the proper usage of Bahasa Malaysia. Documented in book form "courtesy" of the Information, Communication and Culture Ministry. Its minister Datuk Rais Yatim himself launched the "manual". Mohsin Abdullah, fz.com Hence the guidelines must be used by all media practitioners in Malaysia – state owned as well as private. Rais wants the media to play a major role in upholding Bahasa Malaysia as the national language. Definitely there will be lots of write-ups in support of the government initiative towards making the noble cause a success. But just need to know if the write-up be something like this ? "Gunakan Bahasa Malaysia, Bahasa Kebangsaan. Bahasa Malaysia adalah bahasa yang INOVATIF yang boleh digunakan untuk berKOMUNIKASI dengan EFEKTIF. Ia adalah MEDIUM yang berPRESTIJ untuk kita meREALISASIkan, MISI, VISI dan ASPIRASI serta INSPIRASI NASIONAL supaya rakyat berbilang bangsa di negara tercinta ini dapat berINTEGRASI dengan sikap TOLERANSI. Kita mempunyai IDENTITI kita tersendiri. Kita punya INTEGRITI. Namun dalam dunia MODEN ERA GLOBALISASI kita mesti terus AKTIF, KOMITED dan DEDIKASI supaya OBJEKTIF kita tercapai dengan PRESTASI yang membanggakan. Hanya dengan itu kita mampu jadi masyarakat GLOKAL." |
| Dr M, we don’t need your racist rants Posted: 19 Jan 2013 03:39 PM PST 
Unlike the 200,000 Sabah immigrants, the pre-independence immigrants were not illegal immigrants. Our forefathers worked and many gave their lives to the building of Malaysia. Our forefathers fought along the Malays to gain independence. Unlike in Sabah where the immigrants were given citizenship for your political agenda. By S Vell Paari, FMT PETALING JAYA: MIC strategic director S Vell Paari responds to former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's recent claims on citizenship rights. Mahathir's claim: If the government can form a commission to probe the citizenship given to some 200,000 Sabah immigrants, he asked "why not on those pre-independence immigrants?" Vell Paari's response: Unlike the 200,000 Sabah immigrants, the pre-independence immigrants were not illegal immigrants. Our forefathers worked and many gave their lives to the building of Malaysia. Our forefathers fought along the Malays to gain independence. Unlike in Sabah where the immigrants were given citizenship for your political agenda. Mahathir's claim: He said the Malays generously allowed the immigrants to be citizens, speak their languages and practise their respective cultures, something that even neighbouring Thai and Indonesian natives failed to do. Vell Paari's response: Like Malaysia there are also immigrants in Thailand and Indonesia from China and India who are allowed to practice their respective culture and languages. Unlike your discriminating views, a Chinese became PM of Thailand and the current PM of Thailand is of the same non-Thai bloodline. In Indonesia I have Indian friends who are either second or third generation Indonesians and they speak in Tamil. In Indonesia they even had a picture of Lord Ganesha on their currency. Hinduism and Christianity are also practiced. They have greater freedom of religion. Would you have allowed that under your prime ministership? Please do not create tension for our country with Indonesia and Thailand to justify your lame excuse. Mahathir's claim: He added that those who can't use the brain to think wisely were equivalent to animals. Vell Paari's response: Just because you have a warped process of thinking, don't insult others. On the same point, don't also insult animals. Unlike you, they were not evil enough to send Anwar Ibrahim to jail to rid of a political opponent. For your political survival for six years, you denied him to his family. Don't mistake me, I am a BN politician and it's in my DNA to make Pakatan Rakyat look bad and it's in Pakatan's DNA to do vice versa but they are my political opponents and not enemy. Sometimes political agenda must be set aside to do what is right for Malaysia as a whole. Unlike you, they are not evil enough to attack a man who was going throught a personal issue as in the case of Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. A man who during his prime ministership was going through the pain of his wife suffering from a terminal illness. A man who was torn between the duties to his wife and country. If you were in his shoes, would you been able to cope? I doubt it. During the Bosnian conflict, you broke out in tears and could not speak. You cried as they were of your faith but in the case of Tun Badawi, knowing his personal grievous, you still hounded him with no emotion and humanity. And you still do. Mahathir's claim: He lamented that the immigrants were now plotting to remove the Malay privileges. Vell Paari's response: Well what did you do in Sabah by giving 200,000 illegal immigrants citizenship. Were they Malays? More like Pakistanis and Filipinos. You plotted to remove the rights and privileges of the Sabah people. Let's be frank and say that this was done to reduce the majority of Christians in Sabah. You gave citizenship to a MNLF commander and his fighters. You jeopardised the national security of the country. You have sent people to ISA on lesser charges. You committed treason in playing with the country's national security for your political agenda. READ MORE HERE |
| At odds over sacred word Posted: 19 Jan 2013 11:47 AM PST 
Hadi has become known for his flip-flops but this particular issue has cast more doubts on his ability to lead the party. It is clear he cannot be relied upon to defend the party's interests and he will be lucky if PAS retains him as president at the party polls due this year. Joceline Tan, The Star PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu was walking on cloud nine after the success of his Stadium Merdeka rally. He had pulled off something big and his supporters claimed the event had raised his profile in PAS. Mat Sabu, as he is known by all and sundry, is aware that not everyone in PAS thinks highly of him because he lacks the religious credentials demanded of top PAS leaders. He knows that party members call him "Raja Lawak" (king of laughs) but they would have to take him more seriously after this. But the bubble burst on Sunday night when news trickled out that the Syura Council of Ulama, the party's highest decision-making body, had ruled that the word "Allah" is sacred to Islam and cannot be used to describe God in any non-Muslim religious books.  Alwi: 'Road to paradise lies in Islam, and not in PAS'The Syura Council said the "kalimah Allah" could not be used as the translation for the word God from any other language. The Syura Council overturned what Mat Sabu along with his party's two top leaders, Mursyidul Am Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Matand president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang, had been telling the media just days earlier that non-Muslims can use the term "Allah" as long as they do not misuse it against Islam. Mat Sabu's stand even won praise from Dr Paul Tan, the controversial Catholic Bishop who has raised many an eyebrow with remarks that have made him sound more like a politician than a man of the cloth. But Mat Sabu has since done a U-turn, saying that "my stand is the same as the Syura Council"; and the Bishop who has been waltzing with PAS is now dancing solo. Everyone in PAS has fallen in line because the Syura Council is the most powerful body in PAS and the decision was pushed by the party's leading scholar in usuluddin (Islamic faith) Datuk Dr Haron Din. He is the sort who speaks softly but carries a big stick, and he has used the stick to great effect. It was an embarrassing blow to Hadi and Nik Aziz because they are big names. Dr Haron had been deeply disturbed by the compromises made on the "kalimah Allah" issue since 2010. Everyone has noticed how he has scaled back on political activities in the party but he has held his tongue. He was also furious that Hadi had given the go-ahead for the use of "kalimah Allah" without first going through the Syura Council.  Nik Amar: 'Muslims sensitive about sacred word'Hadi had appeared at a press conference together with DAP's Lim Kit Siang and PKR's Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on the same day the Sultan of Selangor released a stern reminder to Selangorians that there is a state fatwa on the usage of the term. Many in PAS were shocked by Hadi's action. They thought it showed poor judgement and some claimed he was manipulated by the Pakatan Rakyat leaders. Hadi has become known for his flip-flops but this particular issue has cast more doubts on his ability to lead the party. It is clear he cannot be relied upon to defend the party's interests and he will be lucky if PAS retains him as president at the party polls due this year. Some claimed this is what happens when the top leadership of PAS is made up of non-ulama figures apart from Hadi, the deputy president and the three vice-presidents are non-ulama. PAS Dewan Ulama chief Datuk Harun Taib, also a member of the Syura Council, told people he could not understand why the party was so concerned about pleasing people on the west coast when it should be looking after its traditional supporters in Terengganu and Kelantan.  Mohamad: Went from cloud nine to a burst bubble.People like Harun are convinced the faith would be in serious jeopardy without strict control over the "Allah" term. "Muslims are very sensitive with the usage of certain sacred words. I am very relieved and I thank the Almighty for the decision of the Syura Council," said Kelantan state exco member Datuk Nik Amar Nik Abdullah. Nik Amar is normally quite a jovial person but he has been in a grim mood over the issue. He admitted that he is upset with DAP leader Lim Guan Eng for raising it. "He should not touch on it," said Nik Amar who is also the deputy state PAS commissioner. Read more at: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/1/20/nation/12581443&sec=nation |
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
