The ultimate Malaysian debate: Malaysia or Malaysaja?

By Nurul Izzah Anwar

AUG 31 — Perkasa claims to defend Malay rights in a multi racial Malaysia. And these Malay rights are inalienable, non-negotiable and permanent. Those that disagree with their interpretation of these Malays rights are deemed treacherous and should leave Malaysia.

In the spirit of Ramadhan and Merdeka, I would like to invite Perkasa to a Constructive Engagement for a new beginning for Malaysia with me.

I would like to ask Perkasa, several key questions to better understand, and together seek real solutions for the crisis it claims the Malays are facing.

I believe that Perkasa is the current vocal, and not necessarily the majority voice of the Malays. And by all indication, Perkasa is the alter-ego of Umno.

If Perkasa can be engaged constructively and a resolution found, then we would have answered the acid-test of Malay concerns once and for all?

To have an honest Constructive Engagement or dialogue, I suggest that we must decide on four fundamental principles.

First, we must base our dialogue on an agreed standard reference document. Should it be the Malaysian Constitution? The Umno constitution? Or the Perkasa constitution?

If we are unable to decide then our dialogue becomes futile and a monologue at best.

However, looking at how Perkasa continues to refer to Article 153 (even brandishing a copy of the constitution in media events) we can infer that the Constitution indeed is the preferred standard reference document for this dialogue.

Second, once we decide on the standard reference document, then we have to address the issue of constitutional interpretation?

For example, nowhere in the written constitution is it mentioned specifically of the existence of the term ‘Malay rights’. Instead the only term spelled out is the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays in Article 153.

The Article contains specifically, of the powers vested in the Yang di Pertuan Agong to ensure that places in the civil service and institutions of higher learning along with quotas in the allocation of scholarships, and permits or licences required for business and trade are reserved for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak.

Another case in point is interpreting to reconcile the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays provisions with other non-Malay citizens with Article 8(1): “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”; and Article 8(2): Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.

It would be ideal to have a mandated entity such as a Constitutional Court or at least a Constitutional Council appointed by the King to act as the final interpreter of any constitutional issues.

The role of the King is central to the issue of constitutional interpretation, as Article 153 of the Constitution states that: “It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.”

However, it should be noted that the existing judiciary already acts as an interpreter of constitutional matters in Malaysia.

For the purpose of this dialogue, both sides can present their interpretation of the constitution to be rebutted subsequently.

Third, the dialogue be made public and presented to the people for feedback and validation.

Again, it would have been ideal if a Referendum Process is legalised whereby such fundamental issue can be decided and resolved by the citizens and made binding to all.

As an alternative, the public feedback for comments and recommendation mechanism through letters or the internet would have to do. It is not binding but it would be a measure of public participation, which can only enrich our democratic process.

Fourth, the dialogue format is suggested as follows, I shall submit my point of view in the form of this open article to Perkasa for a rebuttal, and also later for Perkasa to provide their version for my subsequent rebuttal.

The outcome shall be presented to the public for comments and recommendations.

Then as a test of sincerity I invite Perkasa to a Publicly Televised Debate.

Dialogue Safeguards

I propose both Perkasa and I will indemnify all political parties from our views.

Maybe Umno might disagree with Perkasa’s views or PR mine. And all political parties can participate at the comments and recommendations stage if it wishes.

To avoid being seditious, I propose that our views are qualified as an attempt to seek clarification and not to challenge or repeal the Constitution.

I believe that Perkasa and I are true Malaysians and Patriots, but that only our views may differ, hopefully for now.

However, if Perkasa refuses to engage on this matter at all, then it is sufficient for the people and history to judge this dialogue as my sincere attempt to reach out to them for the sake of our country.

My first question is; who is a Malay?

Article 160 of the Malaysian Constitution, defines Malay as being one who “professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay customs and is the child of at least one parent who was born within the Federation of Malaysia before independence of Malaya on the 31st of August 1957.”

Therefore, constitutionally, a Malay is one who speaks the language, practices the religion of Islam, and performs the rights and rituals of its culture.

My question to Perkasa is, spiritually and intellectually, does a Malay accepts injustices, power abuse, corruption, racism, anti-democratic laws, state institutional degradation to ensure that the Malays are a Supreme Race in Malaysia, with first class citizenship privileges not to be shared with other non-Malay citizens?

My second question is; what are Malay rights?

Malay rights is an ideological and philosophical and not a legal and constitutional construct.

Article 153 only mentions the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays, and not the ‘Special Rights’ of the Malays.

The term Malay rights is alluding to the unwritten ‘Social Contract’ that defines a ‘Malay Agenda’ which has been extended to include the term ‘Malay rights’.

The Social Contract outlines certain privileges that the Malay community enjoys in exchange for granting citizenship rights to non-Malays during independence by the founding fathers as contained in Articles 14-18, Chapter 1 Part III- Citizenship, of the constitution.

These privileges collectively, are referred to as the ‘Malay Agenda’ which includes provisions on the status of Malay rulers to be preserved, with the head of state, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to be elected from His Majesties. Islam would be the national religion, and the Malay language would be the national language. The ‘Malay Agenda’ also includes provisions of economic privileges accorded by Article 153.

It is also pertinent to note, that according to the Reid Commission that drafted the constitution, Article 153 was intended as temporary preferences to seek racial parity, subject to be reviewed after 15 years by Parliament as to its continued need.

It then should have been reviewed in 1972 but was preceded by the 1969 race riots. Efforts were made, that no sunset clause be included for Article 153, and that under the Sedition Act (1971), it is illegal to be discussed even by Parliament.

These economic privileges in the aftermath of the 1969 race riots, was then institutionalised into the New Economic Policy (NEP) which was then extended as the New Development Policy (NDP) from 1990-2000 and currently we are in the final year of the 3rd Outline Perspective Plan (OPP3 2000-2010) which also includes the National Vision Policy.

However, we welcome the announced change from a race-based to a need-based affirmative action policy as outlined in NEM, but if past practices are any indication, the initial affirmative action stance along with an affiliation-based discrimination will still remain. We will continue to find that the actual wealth distribution will still be skewed to the cronies of the ruling elite.

This has become a ‘Malay Right and Entitlement’ and the cornerstone of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, which continues to even overshadow the New Economic Model (NEM) initiated by the Najib government today.

My question to Perkasa is, has the concept of ‘Malay Rights’ now become a permanent convention that supersedes even the written constitution in policy and practice that has to be accepted by all non-Malay citizens?

My third question is; what is the Perceived ‘Malay Anger’ about?

Can it be that the ‘Malay Anger’ built on ‘Malay Insecurities’, may appear to be racist in form, but in essence is a ‘Malay Siege Mentality’ defensive reaction, to the failure in achieving the NEP goals (reborn as the NDP in 1990, followed by the OPP3 and refined as the current NEM) after 40 years of implementation?

Can it also be that the false sense of losing Malay Entitlement and Privileges has crystallised into a political ideology of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, that further divides the nation?

Can it be that the Malays feel that they are getting poorer, marginalised and disillusioned in their own country in spite of the NEP and billions spent?

Can it really be that the ‘Malay Anger’ is conveniently blamed on the industry of the non-Malays and reformed minded Malays?

It seems that the ‘Malay Anger’ is centred on economic entitlements rather than on cultural, royalty, language, legal, educational, religious or political power deficiencies, where the Malay remains dominant and rightfully unchallenged, as seen from the official affirmative action policies, institutions and civil service population composition.

Could it be that the real question nagging the Malay psyche is, what then is the value and utility of having the Malay traditional dances, Royal institutions, Malay language, Malay medium schools, Federal and State Religious bodies, Syariah court system, civil service and the Federal and State governments remain dominantly Malay, when the Malay feels poor?

It is this imbalance of achievements that creates a dysfunctional Malay identity of being only Political Masters in name and not in wealth that keeps ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ alive.

The ‘Malay Anger’ is purposely focused on the dismal achievements of NEP goals and targets that is used as the justification to continue it ‘permanently’ at all cost and beyond reason.

Instead the angry Malays should focus on the diminishing ‘enabling’ factors to equitable and sustainable economic growth (as increasing the economic pie to achieve NEP targets is the main premise to wealth redistribution policies in NEP) caused by cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse that in reality subverts and undermine achieving the well intended NEP goals.

My questions to Perkasa are;

Where does the real blame for the ‘Malay Anger’ lie? Is it with the NEP results or is it with its selective implementation, where only the ruling elite few and their cronies benefit to the detriment of the Malay majority?

How can Perkasa explain just one example, which is the well documented NEP leakage of RM52 billion in equities originally allocated to the Malays that have been sold off?

What impact has cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse have in shaping the ‘Malay Anger’?

Who has really betrayed the ‘Malay Agenda and Malay Rights’?

My fourth and last question is; what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?

In my final analysis, only through free and fair elections that the people can decide if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ or ‘Ketuanan Rakyat’ shall define Malaysia.

Once the next general election outcome is determined, and if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is victorious, then some may choose to vote with their feet (emigrate with massive brain drain and a diminishing tax base), and some will choose to vote with their wallet (domestic capital flight compounded with decreasing FDI that further stunts our economic growth), which in turn will indicate the makings of a potential failed state with irreversible consequences.

What is left will be a shell of a former Malaysia that could have been a great example of a democratic and pluralistic nation to the world.

We are truly at a monumental cross-road for the soul of our nation.

As a reminder of a possible way forward out of this ‘Malay Dilemma’, a Malaysian statesman, the late Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman once argued that “the question (of the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays) be left to the Malays themselves because as more and more Malays became educated and gained self-confidence, they themselves would do away with this ‘special position’.” Ismail believed the special position was “a slur on the ability of the Malays.”

After 53 years, are we Malays not educated and self-confident yet?

After 53 years, are we Malays still ignorant to the real causes of our problems yet?

After 53 years, are we not Malay enough to act as the protector and provider of justice, equality, dignity, fraternity, liberty and peace for all who choose to co-exist as partners and fellow citizens yet?

In conclusion, we the Malays must stand up and do what is right for Malaysia and our children as they face the challenges of a competitive borderless world.

Would we be so blind and selfish to risk their future for our sins of the past and our deliberately induced insecurities of the present day?

Then my last question to Perkasa is; Will you allow our country to remain in name as Malaysia or be renamed as Malaysaja?

Towerting Malaysian of yesteryear

The Star
CERITALAH by KARIM RASLAN

AS Malaysians celebrate Merdeka, I find myself thinking about the late James Puthucheary.

A giant of the Merdeka Generation, he was (among other things) an activist, intellectual and lawyer.

James was already a legend when I first met him at the legal firm of Skrine & Co back in 1987.

White-haired, Pickwick-ian and wry, few details escaped his observation.

As a former detainee of the British, Singaporean and Malaysian governments, he possessed an undeniable glamour for idealistic young lawyers.

Needless to say, when he talked about “Harry”, “Hussein”, “Mahathir” and “Keng Swee”, we all listened attentively.

As a very half-hearted lawyer baffled by contract law, I tended to shirk my work and disappear into James’ office.

He would regale me with stories about 50s and 60s politics and the latest updates on the turmoil in Umno as Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah struggled for control of the party.

One never gets tired of listening to him talk about his days as an Indian National Army officer or as a leader of the University Socialist Club at the University of Malaya in Singapore.

What strikes me now, as I reconstruct those conversations, was how truly Malaysian his life was.

It is true that he cut his political teeth in Singapore, where he was a founding member of the People’s Action Party.

Nevertheless, James was born in Johor and after his banishment from Singapore in 1963, resided here permanently.

In many ways, his biography reminds us of when the borders between Malaya and Singapore were fluid.

It also harkens back to a time when their men and women could speak their minds without fear or favour, and transcend ethnic, class and ideological barriers.

The collection of James’ writings, No Cowardly Past, which was re-launched this year, captures some of this ethos.

It reads almost like a yearbook of the Merdeka Generation, encompassing all sides of the political spectrum.

It was edited by his brother Dominic (a one-time Gerakan MP) and the outspoken academic Jomo K.S.

Pictures of James with Lim Chin Siong, Sydney Woodhull and Devan Nair are blended with the reminiscences of A. Samad Ismail.

There are mentions of his associations with the likes of Abdullah Ahmad, Phillip Kuok and others.

Tengku Razaleigh spoke at the launch of the book’s second edition.

This is a tribute not only to his greatness as a human being, but his uncanny ability to make friends from all walks of life.

It was a trait that many of his cohorts shared, which their successors — Malaysia’s current political and intellectual elite — have lost.

How many of our current leaders are truly Malaysian, rather than communal, sectional figures?

One struggles to name even a handful.

More disheartening is the fact that none of them can articulate ideas or policies like James did.

In his Who Owns Malaya and Significant Changes in Ownership and Control in the Malaysian Economy, he argued for state intervention to adjust the historical socio-economic imbalances in the country.

These principles later helped shape the New Economic Policy (NEP) of Tun Abdul Razak.

Unlike today’s Malay extremists however, James did not see the NEP as a permanent fixture.

Indeed, he believed that the “domination” of Malaysia’s economy by the Chinese was a myth, and that it was really the concentration of capital in foreign (i.e. British) hands that needed to be addressed.

Despite the nearly 40-year time gap, many of his contentions are still relevant.

He saw that communal-based parties — no matter how closely allied — would eventually fail to deliver on nation-building.

James, furthermore, worried about sectarianism creeping into our educational system, seeing the “... dangers of large sections of Chinese and Malay children spending very large parts of their formative years in communally separate compartments.

“The existence of two communal educational structures should be frightening to all those who believe that the country’s future is dependent on non-communal politics.”

We may disagree with his proposed solution to Malaysia’s problems: namely socialism, or rather social-democracy, but no one who looks at Malaysia today can deny that his writings have an eerie, prophetic ring to them.

What’s saddening is that we have not only disregarded his warnings, but also rejected the liberal, accepting and pluralistic legacy of Malaya and Malaysia’s founding fathers.

Towering Malaysians like James have been replaced by minnows.

Nevertheless, I still have hope that this land, which gave birth to James and others like him, may see the rise of young people who can move it forward.

I keep this hope alive in my heart, like so many other Malaysians waiting for a better tomorrow.

And while we wait, let us honour the memory of James Puthucheary.

Probe into leak of text messages, phone calls

The New Straits Times 
By Aidi Amin, Maizatul Ranai and Rozanna Latiff

KUALA LUMPUR: The alleged leak of confidential text messages and telephone conversations of a woman is now being probed by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC).

The MCMC is checking to ascertain if the telecommunication company had committed any offence.

The directive to investigate came from Information, Communication and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim who said this case must be seen as a wake-up call for all telcos.

"Call details and SMSes should never be released unless the customer's security is at risk," Dr Rais told the New Straits Times.

He was commenting on the RM20 million suit by Noor Haslina Abdullah, the chief executive officer of a private college in Terengganu, against the service provider, Celcom Axiata Bhd.

On Sunday, Noor Haslina had filed a suit against Celcom for allegedly releasing her private text messages and telephone exchanges with third parties.

"I am monitoring the situation closely as this is a serious allegation," Dr Rais said, adding that telcos must be careful when it comes to their customers' privacy.

Meanwhile, Bar Council president Ragunath Kesavan said the release of private information should only be made through a court order or by a law enforcement agency.

"Private information should never be given out, not even to third party marketing agencies," Ragunath said.

He also called for an extension of the Personal Data Protection Bill to better protect the privacy of an individual.

While he welcomed the passage of the bill in April, he said the provisions were limited as they only protected information used in commercial transactions.

"Nowadays, many people will provide personal information in all sorts of situations, including on websites and social networks.

"We need a specific law to ensure this information will not be released or abused."

Ragunath added that the leak of an individual's personal information without his or her consent, or a request from a law enforcement agency, was a breach of contract which warranted severe penalties.

In her statement of claim, Noor Haslina, 39, said she suffered mental trauma as a result of the incident.

Noor Haslina had alleged that when she arrived at her office on March 11, she received a package which contained nine A4-size pages with information on her SMS exchanges and a pen drive containing recordings of her telephone conversations.

She lodged a police report several days later and filed the suit when there was allegedly no response from the telco.

Merdeka! Oppressive laws must go

By Anil Netto,

Happy Merdeka, folks! It’s time once more to reflect on the state of our nation and where we are at the moment.

We have much to be thankful for. Despite the best attempts of certain quarters to divide us on the basis of race and religion, Malaysians by and large haven’t fallen for the bait. We have grown into maturity and can now see through such diabolical tactics.

Nonetheless, there are still issues that require sober reflection. The watershed elections of 2008 promised to renew our nation. But that remains very much a work-in-progress. Thirty months later, oppressive laws are still etched in our statute books. Laws such as the ISA and the Printing Presses and Publications Act, for instance.

This blog is part of a nationwide campaign on blogosphere today to get rid of the undemocratic PPPA. Lately, it’s not just opposition newspapers that have felt the repressive provisions of this law, but cartoon books as well!

Without freedom of the media and of expression, we cannot move forward and articulate progressive and creative ideas to rejuvenate our nation. We are unable to promote a wider, healthier debate on the issues that matter to the people. We are unable to highlight to a broader audience the corruption and economic hegemony that leaves many residents of Malaysia struggling to make ends meet.

As long as oppressive laws remain in our statute books, we will not realise the full vision of independence, freedom and justice that Merdeka promised. We cannot leave the task or renewal and reform to the politicians alone. All of us have a stake in this. We must get involved in the movement for justice and renewal. For a start, this Merdeka, let’s call for the scrapping of the oppressive PPPA.

Deadly shooting in Slovak capital

The motive of the shooting in Bratislava was unclear [AFP]

An armed man has killed seven people and wounded at least 14 others in Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia.
The assailant was believed to be a 50-year-old man, although his identity is unconfirmed. Police said he killed himself after the shooting.
"He was alone. He fired at everything that moved during his escape bid, the policemen surrounded him ... they made it impossible for him to escape," Jaroslav Spisiak, the police president, said.
Six of the dead were believed to be members of the same Roma family.
The motive of the shooting was unclear.
Child injured
Dominika Sulkova, from the country's rescue service, said the shooting occured at around 10am (08:00 GMT) in the morning.

She said that a three-year-old child was among the injured, although his or her life was not under threat.
Emergency crews were on the scene and authorities were urging people to stay indoors.
Darius Haraksin, a reporter for TV JOJ in Bratislava, told Al Jazeera: "The first part of the incident was that the gunman went to his neighbour's [flat] and killed five or six people in one flat.
"Later on he went outside the building and started shooting on everything he saw. The incident took 50 to 55 mins ... there was big chaos."
Area sealed off
Marta Vozbranukova, a teacher working at a kindergarten close to the scene, told the AFP news agency: "I saw an older man carrying an automatic gun walking towards a prefab house.
"After a while, an injured man of a Roma origin, whose family lives in the house, ran out and fell on the ground where the gunman shot him two or three more times.
"The gunman then started shooting on the street."
Vozbranukova said that the there were no children in the kindergarten at the time.
The Devinska Nova Ves district of Bratislava, where the shooting took place, was sealed off by police roadblocks, TV-channel TA3 reported.
Slovakia experienced some shooting incidents involving criminal gangs in the 1990s, but has had no large-scale shootings in recent years.

Nurul Izzah goes to KDN

Doctor acquitted of murdering wife

SHAH ALAM: Happy Merdeka. What a great Merdeka gift!
Those were the first public comments made by a doctor after he was discharged and acquitted by the High Court for murdering his 46-year-old wife at their home in Rawang three years ago

Judge Datuk Asmabi Mohamed made the decision in the case against general practitioner Dr Jitweer Singh Ojagar Singh, 56, (pic).
Jitweer was charged on July 24, 2008, with the murder of Shento Kaur Jaswant Singh, 46, in a house in Bandar Country Homes, Rawang.
He was alleged to have killed her between 7pm and 10am on Oct 22, 2007.
Asmabi concluded there were too many gaps in the prosecution's case and that the cause of death could not be substantiated beyond that it was due to pressure on the victim's neck.
She said the prosecution also failed to link the accused to the murder.
By not presenting the couple's driver and maid as witnesses, the judge said the prosecution failed to fill the gaps.
Jitweer, who had been on RM400,000 bail since September, looked restrained despite his acquittal. His lead counsel, Karpal Singh, said they would file for damages against the Public Prosecutor and the government following the acquittal.
He said because Dr Jitweer managed to obtain bail, it showed the prosecution had lacked evidence to make their case.
Karpal said no one should be charged without incriminating evidence.
Dr Jitweer said since he had been on bail, he had been working at his clinic in Rawang and taking care of his three children — a 20-year-old son and 10-year-old twins.

Nazri blames BN’s chauvinism for low support

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 30 – Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz blamed his Barisan Nasional comrades today for driving away support with their chauvinistic ways, warning them that they could not ride on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s popularity to win the general election.

The vocal Umno supreme council member told The Malaysian Insider this afternoon that he blamed the “communal leadership” of certain BN politicians for the public’s declining confidence in the ruling coalition.

“I blame the leaders. Some have become ministers but still look at themselves as communal leaders instead of national leaders.

“But this makes little sense for once you are a minister, you represent all... not just your party or your race,” he said.

Nazri (picture) was responding to the results of a Merdeka Center survey that showed 45 per cent of Malays were dissatisfied with Umno while only 44 per cent were satisfied.

Umno performed even worse with the Chinese community, with only 12 per cent saying they were satisfied while 55 per cent were dissatisfied. A total of 34 per cent had evaded response, suggesting the possibility that a larger number than the 55 per cent could be dissatisfied with Umno.

The poll results, which involved a sample size of more than 1,000 registered voters in the peninsula, contrasted significantly with Najib’s approval rating of 72 per cent in a separate poll conducted in May.

Nazri however, claimed that Najib’s popularity alone would not be enough to help the BN win the next general election.

“The prime minister being popular on his own is not enough. The BN should be popular. A popular PM cannot carry the BN through to a victory and this was proven in the Sibu by-election.

“If this 72 per cent indeed says something, then we should have won in Sibu but we lost, so what good is a popular prime minister if he cannot carry the BN?” he said.

Nazri bleakly pointed out that if the BN leadership failed to buck up, the coalition would only go further downhill and eventually lose in the coming general election.

“BN really has to do a lot of image building... otherwise, we will face trouble in the 13th general election. I can see that Umno members, MCA members.... none have learnt their lessons,” he said.

Nazri claimed that BN leaders, in their attempt to regain lost support from the people, had resorted to making harsh statements.

“They make harsh statements to win support from their own communities. Meaning, they would rather win in the newspapers than in the hearts of the people.

“The MCA, by showing they are chauvinistic Chinese, think they can get the support of the Chinese community. But then, the Chinese already have the DAP, so what is MCA trying to do?” he said.

He noted that by practicing chauvinism and extremism, the MCA had only caused itself to lose the support of the moderate Chinese community and that of the Malay community.

“The MCA has their own niche in the BN structure.. they consist of the moderate Chinese-thinking people so when they put forward extremist views, they lose support from the Chinese and the Malays,” he said.

Nazri claimed that similarly, Umno politicians were attempting to match up to their foes in Islamist party PAS.

“Umno leaders are trying to show they are more Islamic than PAS. However, PAS supporters are PAS supporters and they will support PAS whatever comes their way.

“So, in doing that, Umno will not get all the support of the Malays... they will lose support and at the same time, they will lose the support of the non-Malays, because of their extremist stand,” he said.

Nazri noted that the same notion could be applied to the Indian community and the MIC.

“This is the scenario and it shows that we have never learned our lessons. How is it that Umno only speaks for the Malays and the MCA for the Chinese and yet we want to sell ourselves to the people by saying we are multiracial?

“This is not the rakyat of the 1960s or the 1970s,” he said.

Nazri said that the people “see a glimmer of hope in the PR because they have tried the BN for so many years. So, even though PR parties do not share similar ideologies... they have the support.

“A drowning man will hold on to a straw,” he said.

Nazri however reminded the public that the PR structure was no better than the BN’s, claiming that it was “racial consideration” that had caused the parties to choose Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as their de facto leader.

“They chose him because he is a Malay. They would have truly achieved their multiracialism if they had chosen someone else to be leader... like Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng or Karpal Singh,” he said.

Nazri also said that the best medicine for the BN at this point was to allow direct membership.

“We will be discussing this during our BN convention at year end. I am in full support of this because sometimes, a person may be supportive of the BN but not of the Umno, MCA, MIC or the other parties,” he said.

He claimed that this would promote true multiracialism in the BN and was a step forward towards creating a true Malaysian party.

“Eventually, we can move towards abolishing this racial party system. It is never easy but at least a process must be in place,” he said.

Rapper faces sedition charge over YouTube clip

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysian rapper Namewee is being investigated for sedition, police said Monday, after posting a YouTube video which drew allegations he was stirring up ethnic tensions in the multicultural nation.
Wee Meng Chee, 27, better known as Namewee to his fans, made national headlines three years ago over another YouTube clip mocking the national anthem which authorities also said was seditious.

He apologised for that incident, but is in fresh trouble for posting a three-minute rap titled "Nah" criticising a Muslim Malay headmistress accused of making racial slurs against her ethnic Chinese and Indian students.

"We are investigating him under the Sedition Act," Bakri Zinin, the Federal Criminal Investigation chief, told AFP, adding that Wee will soon be called to give a statement.

Wee faces up to three years in prison if he is charged and convicted.

The rapper removed the video from YouTube on Sunday, after prompting criticism from various parties including Prime Minister Najib Razak who reportedly urged action against those who try to stoke racial tensions.

"We don't care whether he has removed the video or not, the harm has already been done, we will continue with the investigation," said Bakri.

In the video, which is still available on other websites, Wee used obscene language and rapped in a mixture of English and the national language Malay.

The headmistress allegedly told ethnic Chinese students to return to China and compared Hindu prayer strings to dog leashes.

The government has ordered a probe into the case which caused anger among Malaysia's minorities who complain that their rights are being eroded as the country becomes increasingly "Islamised".

"I am a Malaysian who grew up harmoniously with friends from all walks of life and different races," Wee said on his blog Sunday.

"My main objective for uploading the new video 'Nah' was to condemn such acts and to stand up against racism," he said. The title is a slang word for "no".

"I have also taken out the said video from my YouTube account since I have already highlighted my stand over the issue, which is to stop racism in this country," added the rapper.

Wee has developed a cult following among young Malaysians after his controversial six-minute rap video in 2007 that mocked the national anthem. He is reportedly preparing to launch an album next month.

- AFP

At the stroke of midnight...

To safeguard democracy, the people must have a keen sense of independence... Mohandas Gandhi
By Phlip Rodrigues
COMMENT At the stroke of midnight, the story changed. Once, it was all about the white master who held sway over this broad land. Now, the brown man is in charge and holds the destiny of the country in his hand. Once, the orang putih took much of the wealth back to the motherland. Now, the newly empowered natives control the purse string. Once, all the races did not notice their ethnic origins. Now, all live in distinct compartments. Once, there were no special places for anyone. Now, life revolves around percentages.
At the stroke of midnight, the plot changed. Then, the tuan was a commanding presence. Now, a different breed of titled players evoke dread – and hate – with their special status. Then, there was a sense of security even if you did not belong to the majority class. Now, ethnic minorities become the target of harassment and ridicule. Then, all could make light of each other's cultural peculiarities. Now, intolerance and bigotry take root. Then, farmers tilled the land, fishermen made their living off their catch, migrant workers mined the land and tapped the rubber trees – all in peace and amity. Now, gluttonous wheeler-dealers, instant moguls, corrupt officialdom straddle across the toiling, ill-paid masses.

At the stroke of midnight, the economy changed course. Before, agriculture was the main stay, and the country prospered to a certain extent. Today, big industry and big business are the rage but the people are left out in the cold. Before, the forests were left unmolested and the indigenous people could hunt undisturbed. Today, the trees are felled to enrich the few, but the true sons of the soil have nowhere to go. Before, there was no oil to fuel the country and make it richer. Today, black gold gushes out but billions of ringgit had disappeared into the black hole. Before, our natural resources were not fully tapped. Today, they are exploited to the hilt but all the wealth did not erase poverty.

At the stroke of midnight, education wore a new uniform. In yesteryears, discipline, quality, and merit were the order of the day. Nowadays, the spark of dedication is sorely missing and no one is proud of a school system gone haywire. In yesteryears, institutions of higher learning were hallowed ground that produced graduates of calibre. These days, they are a byword for rot and decay. In yesteryears, there was camaraderie all around. Nowadays, the atmosphere in the classes and on campuses is charged with hostility and enmity. Those years, outstanding results were highly appreciated. Nowadays, they are ignored and a pool of talent goes to waste.

At the stroke of midnight, our founding fathers swelled with pride: life would change for the better because we have become masters in our own house. We did not fire a single shot. The white rajahs took their flag down and left our shores in quiet dignity. We hoisted ours and left our past behind while we looked ahead. There were steady hands on the wheels.

But long past midnight, the course of history took a different path. It was not a route intended by the fighters for independence. The freedom we got was soon exchanged for another form of subservience. The homegrown tuans took control of all spheres of life. By degrees, they grew more powerful, antagonistic, spiteful, malicious. In politics, they control the government, and through the barrel of political power, they entrench themselves. It is a new ball game played on an uneven field.

From the stroke of midnight in 1957, the same party had been enjoying uninterruppted power for more than half a century. Logically, with each passing year, every step of the way should lead to better days. By now, the country should be standing taller and stronger than its peers. The script did not turn out that way. Drunk with power, blinded by greed, stricken with hubris, neck-deep in corruption, the ship of state that started out with so much promise and hope long years ago is limping to port. The only political totem pole we knew all these decades has become a detested sight.

At the stroke of midnight 53 years ago, we became free. The baton passed to our hands. We carried the torch aloft. The sun set on the British empire. A new dawn rose. We basked, we sang, we cheered, we cried for joy. Now the mood is muted. Dark clouds are gathering on the horizon. Troubled times are ahead. We wait for change, for democracy, for independence – yet again. If it comes at the stroke of midnight, it will eclipse the Merdeka story.

Phlip Rodrigues is FreeMalaysiaToday managing editor.

Time to heed Tunku’s call for courage to change

By Stanley Koh - Free Malaysia Today

COMMENT In the 1950s, there was no Google or Yahoo. There were no DVDs. There were not even video tapes. In Malaysia, TV had not arrived. People flocked to the cinemas to watch movies. Comic books like Beano and Dandy were read as books and not on digital devices. They had to fell trees to make the paper on which those comics were printed.

The global scene was also different.

The US economy was on the upswing. And the Cold War was at its frostiest.

Anti-communism dominated the US Congress’ political agenda. Africa began to become decolonised. The Korean War was raging and the Vietnam War was beginning. In the Middle East, the Suez Crisis War was being fought in Egyptian territory.

The technology we take for granted today would have blown the mind of the typical 50s guy. Yes, Dick Tracy did have a mobile phone in his wristwatch. But then, he was not real; he was a cartoon. But even he did not have a laptop computer.

The world was indeed a different place in the 50s. And so was Malaysia —or Malaya, British North Borneo and Sarawak.

The Malayan Emergency lasted from June 1948 to July 1960. Many innocent people, including women and children, died at the hands of communist guerrillas. On Feb 23, 1950, communists attacked and burnt down a police station at Kampung Kepong in a siege that lasted three hours.

Anti-communist military operations, shooting practices, roadblocks and curfews were the order of daily life in the 50s.

It was the “hearts and minds” campaign of the early Malayan government which won the war against the communists. With Malaya’s independence in 1957, the communists were completely isolated and became increasingly irrelevant. In due course, the Malayan Communist Party finally collapsed.

A 176-word proclamation repealing the 12-year-old Emergency Regulations Ordinance signed by Tunku Abdul Rahman and a 10-minute ceremony witnessed by the entire Cabinet, Police and the Press in the Cabinet Room of the Parliament House formally signalled the defeat of the Communists.

On Aug 31, 1957, the Federation of Malaya ceased to be a British protectorate and Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra became the nation’s first prime minister.

It has been 53 years since that night when the Tunku proclaimed “Merdeka” three times and the Union Jack was lowered and the Jalur Gemilang raised, signalling the birth of a new independent and sovereign nation, Persekutuan Tanah Melayu.

Malaysians hailed the Tunku as the “father of independence” as the new nation shed its colonial past. “Wave upon wave of cheers dinned about him,” reported the Straits Times in 1957.

Same questions asked

That initial euphoria is gone now. Today, Malaysians are still asking the same questions they have been asking for the last few decades: “Has Malaysia progressed politically, socially and spiritually?”

Have the words the Tunku spoke during the independence proclamation guided our leaders in governance? Have they showed them the way towards progress?

“In the course of human history, no nation, in order to salvage itself, will ever remain static for a long time,” he said.

“It will be compelled to decide on one of two directions, to go forward or backward.

“This depends on the ability and adaptability of that nation in facing changes and developments.”

The Tunku also warned the nation, saying, “But since human history is the history of changes and developments of making things better and more perfect, this type of self-satisfied nation will be left further and further behind and eventually disappear and remain only to be revealed by future historians.”

Today, the nation is still divided by race-based ideologies and communal differences exploited by extremists and rightists, and between the rich and the poor, the governed and the governing, the demands of a more liberal society and the totalitarianism of draconian laws.

Has the Malaysian political culture become a culture of threats and the promotion of fear against civil society?

Are Malaysians facing more challenges against inefficiency, more corruption and more authoritarianism?

Are we prepared to dismantle decades-old anti-democratic and unfair laws that are becoming obsolete while the mindsets of societies keep evolving rapidly--socially, culturally, spiritually?

Meaningless celebration

Race supremacy, overbearing and abuse of executive powers over the legislative and judiciary arms of government, infringement of human rights and liberties are some examples of bad governance going against the grain of the democratic substance in a modern and progressive society.

Political maturity, considerable discipline and a prevailing civic-mindedness are prerequisites of a progressive nation and this has been evidently proven in many modern societies.

In Malaysia, however, there are signs showing a dire need for a Malaysian transformation. But do we have the political will to bring about that transformation?

The celebration of Merdeka is meaningless unless we love this country by showing the fortitude and courage to change the government with a better one, all for a better tomorrow.

“When the people are in a state of complete complacency with their present status they tend to fear anything that may produce changes,” the Tunku said 53 years ago.

“They will suspect any move or anybody who comes out with new ideas or inventions.”

It is time we heeded his call.

Stanley Koh is the former head of research at MCA.

Re-diagnosing Malaysia’s cancer

By K Pragalath - Free Malaysia Today

MERDEKA FEATURE Fifty-three years since independence, Malaysia is fighting a losing battle against the R-cancer. It is also not responding to the cancer radiation programme known as 1Malaysia. Instead this rehabilitation programme has worsened the cancer. R refers to racism that has been permeating into the society through various levels.

What makes it more malignant than the rest is that it is being led by people who are along the corridors of power, entrusted to lead and raise a new generation.

This cancer is worsening as the physicians (read politicians) do not treat Malaysia of its cancer. Instead the physicians are turning up as catalyst to spread racism.

When physicians turn cancer catalysts
An example of this is the meeting between Home Minister Hishammuddin Tun Hussein with the cow-head protesters. Yet as home minister he still has the tenacity to tell Malaysians not to incite racism.

In recent times, there are several cases already that have debunked Education Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s half-past six suggestion for a task force to investigate the case involving school principals.

Muhyiddin’s call for a task force is definitely a half-past-six measure as police reports have been lodged against the principal. By calling for the formation of a task force, he simply is dismissing police investigations.

These incidents cannot be “isolated” as said by Koh Tsu Koon if the culprits are school principals and teachers.

In identifying this cancer, many symptoms have been misdiagnosed.

The education system has, by and large, been overlooked as the contents are lop-sided. The minority race groups can understand the sensitivities of the majority but not vice-versa.

Education over-emphasises on the majority without paying due attention to the minority races. For instance, freedom fighter Sybil Karthigesu is a misnomer. Secondary schoolchildren are unaware of this freedom fighter’s contribution in Perak.

Religion and cultural aspects of Malaysian minorities are taught like a footnote from a chapter.

There are also certain individuals and media who make racial allegations but are let loose by the authorities.

They act as catalyst through their own mediums. A national Malay daily continuously ensures that the cancer blooms at various body parts of Malaysia.

Despite being “Malaysia’s Messenger”, it gives prominence to certain colourful characters that openly endorse racial supremacy and contradicts the 1Malaysia treatment programme and belittles the minorities of a multiracial Malaysia.

To add salt to injury, racial groups have sprouted up like laryngeal cancer to further worsen Malaysia’s health.

In the spirit of Merdeka, the above-mentioned catalysts must be stopped. Various other cancer eradication programmes, apart from 1Malaysia radiation programe, by all levels of society are also needed.

Cop-out for BBC's HARDtalk

Since when was the BBC afraid of legal threats? Is this not a massive hint that there is a big story lurking somewhere? Isn’t the BBC eager to be the first, with the expose? Is it not eager to get to the bottom of the truth?

Mariam Mokhtar, Malaysian Mirror

The “HARDtalk” news programme, broadcast on BBC World News and the BBC News channel, is a half-hour interview when world renowned personalities are asked difficult questions, to discover their true stories and challenges.

Malaysia’s Raja Petra Kamarudin (RPK) was scheduled to be interviewed on Wednesday, 1st September 2010. According to the MalaysiaToday site, Bridget Osborne from the BBC called to inform him that his interview had been cancelled.

HARDtalk appears to have failed its loyal viewers but it has failed to uphold the freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

According to Ms. Osborne, the BBC’s lawyers advised them not to proceed with the program as this would “upset the Malaysian government and may even expose the BBC to legal action”.

She explained that the questions they would pose to Raja Petra, “would be very sensitive in nature and critical of the government, would run foul of the Malaysian government”.

Another reason she offered was that “the program would be accessible in Malaysia”, and “makes this a problem for the BBC.”

Naturally, Malaysians the world over, are disappointed.

Raja Petra may be pleased to learn that the BBC rarely drops a program. However, the BBC’s about-turn means he is considered a liability. This gives him “street cred”.

Raja Petra would have been a viewer-catching asset and boosted viewer/listener numbers. But it appears that he is now a political liability.

But what exactly are the real reasons why the BBC dropped out? It beggars belief that an established and world renowned organisation such as the ‘Beeb’, can be held to ransom by the Malaysia government.

Such irony! Raja Petra was probably going to mention the lack of freedom of expression in Malaysia.

Who would have thought that the stranglehold of the Malaysian government could reach thousands of miles away and silence Raja Petra?

This is indeed a sad day for civil liberties and freedom of speech. The fact that the BBC allowed itself to be manipulated means that it has failed itself, and its viewers. It has compromised its principles and integrity.

But who or what ordered this climbdown?

Most people are aware that Raja Petra is fond of running rings round the Malaysian government.

In a Malaysia which is beset by draconian laws and where is freedom of expression is lacking, Raja Petra’s site brings many Malaysians light relief.

He is both entertaining and a bit like a “cyber vigilante”. He is not unlike the Super-hero in cyberspace who exposes evil deeds.

Thus, if Raja Petra was expected to be critical of the Malaysian government, then would it not be judicious to have a representative of the Malaysian government present, to counter Raja Petra’s views and offer the Malaysian government’s official take, to the viewers?

That way a balanced and fair opinion is given, by both sides of the political divide.

Since when was the BBC afraid of legal threats? Is this not a massive hint that there is a big story lurking somewhere? Isn’t the BBC eager to be the first, with the expose? Is it not eager to get to the bottom of the truth?

The United Kingdom government is aware that its arms industry is riddled with corruption. Previous governments are alleged to have concealed, and continues to conceal this, from both the parliament and the public.

It is possible that the reasons for the climbdown are not political but are purely economic.

Maybe the pressure was not from the Malaysian government but from the British government.

Perhaps, any excuse to not ruffle Malaysian government feathers, means the British government can have a smooth ride to support its arms sales. And don't we all know how lucrative these are.

Deal? Or no deal?

Merdeka! Merdeka! Merdeka!

Actually, Umno was not the only one who fought for independence. And they were not the first. But we are told that Umno was the only one as if there were no others or no others before Umno. And they even say that Umno was forced to take up the fight for independence because the Rulers had sold out the country to the British.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I wrote an article called Sedition and the first 'Royal ISA detainee' on 11 May 2008 to commemorate Umno’s 62nd Anniversary. What I want to bring to your attention is the part that I wrote as follows:

In 1938, ten years before the introduction of the Sedition Act 1948, Tengku Musa Ghiathuddin was bypassed in favour of Sultan Hisamuddin Alam Shah, the Sixth Sultan of Selangor, on the insistence of the British. Tengku Musa was opposed to British intervention in Selangor and his struggle for ‘Merdeka’, many years before Umno was formed, saw His Highness ‘evicted’ from the Selangor throne.

You can read the rest of the article below.

What has history got to say about Musa Ghiathuddin Riayat Shah of Selangor? Well, Wikipedia has this to say:

The independent-thinking of Tengku Musa galled the British resident T.S. Adams, who recommended the dismissal of Tengku Musa as Crown Prince. Despite the pleas of his father Sultan Sulaiman, Tengku Musa was disinherited as Raja Muda in 1933. The reason given was allegedly "personal misbehaviour". His full brother, Tengku Badar Shah, born in 1895, was also passed over by the British authorities, who appointed a half-brother Tengku Alam Shah, as Raja Muda instead (later Sultan Hisamuddin Alam Shah Al-Haj ibni Almarhum Sultan Alaeddin Sulaiman Shah).

You can read the full write-up here: Musa Ghiathuddin Riayat Shah of Selangor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musa_Ghiatuddin_Riayat_Shah_of_Selangor).

Tomorrow we shall be celebrating Merdeka Day and we are going to be reminded about Umno’s ‘struggles’ and ‘sacrifices’. But no mention will be made about people like Tengku Musa who opposed the British and also struggled for Merdeka and thereby lost his throne plus was exiled to an island in the Indian Ocean until a few months before he died. In fact, he was allowed home only because he was dying.

Tengku Musa is my ‘role model’. He opposed the British and sacrificed his throne and freedom in his opposition to colonial rule. But he is never mentioned. He is not even remembered. What is usually mentioned is that Umno fought for independence although Umno came many years later.

Actually, Umno was not the only one who fought for independence. And they were not the first. But we are told that Umno was the only one as if there were no others or no others before Umno. And they even say that Umno was forced to take up the fight for independence because the Rulers had sold out the country to the British.

Yes, there were Rulers who did compromise with the British. But this is only because the British put these people on the throne and those who opposed the British were denied the throne. Would not Rulers who owe their throne to the British not compromise with their ‘masters’?

Umno has its version of history. I have mine. And I relate my version of history according to what really happened, not according to how Umno would like us believe happened.

******************************************

Sedition and the first 'Royal ISA detainee'

In honour of Umno’s 62nd Anniversary today, allow me to educate you a bit on some of our forgotten history and the unsung heroes of the fight for Malaya’s independence from Britain. Ironically, the Sedition Act 1948 was a British instrument to stifle this struggle for Merdeka and to silence critics to British rule.

“I recall the statement made by the First Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Tuanku Abdul Rahman, when requested by a foreign emissary to sack me from the office of the Prime Minister of Malaya,” said the First Prime Minister and Bapa Merdeka, Tunku Abdul Rahman, on 23 January 1978.

“’Oh, I cannot, for he is appointed by the people and not by me,” replied His Majesty, “On the other hand, he can sack me.’”

“If this system were to change and the Rulers were given the sovereign right and prerogative to rule by the DIVINE RIGHT of kings,” added the Tunku, “then I fear it would be only a question of time before the whole institution was scrapped.”

During the Constitutional Crisis about a decade later, the then Deputy Prime Minister, Ghafar Baba, said that it is not unlawful to criticise the Rulers. That does not tantamount to sedition. You may not, however, propose that the Monarchy be abolished and for Malaysia to be turned into a Republic, as that would constitute a crime under the Sedition Act.

There was a time, though, when criticising a Ruler was definitely a crime. That was of course 500 years or so ago in England. But that was the time when Kings were considered ‘personally’ appointed by God and to criticise the Monarch is the same as criticising God. And if you criticise God then you will be burned alive at the stake.

In 1946, the Malays rose up to oppose the British-mooted Malayan Union. With that saw the birth of Umno the same year. As the Umno leaders crisscrossed the length and breadth of Malaya to rally for support, the British decided to introduce the centuries-old Sedition Act that would make it a crime to oppose or criticise the British Colonial Government.

Royalty was not immune from the wrath of the British. In 1938, ten years before the introduction of the Sedition Act 1948, Tengku Musa Ghiathuddin was bypassed in favour of Sultan Hisamuddin Alam Shah, the Sixth Sultan of Selangor, on the insistence of the British. Tengku Musa was opposed to British intervention in Selangor and his struggle for ‘Merdeka’, many years before Umno was formed, saw His Highness ‘evicted’ from the Selangor throne.

When the Japanese invaded Malaya in 1942, my grandfather, Raja Sir Tun Uda, smuggled Sultan Hisamuddin to safety and hid His Highness in the jungle. My grandfather, who was both cousin and brother-in-law to His Highness, then came out from the jungle to negotiate for safe passage for the Sultan. After extracting a guarantee from the Japanese that the Sultan would not be harmed, my grandfather brought His Highness out of hiding.

The Japanese, however, would not allow Sultan Hisamuddin, who they regarded as a British lackey and not the rightful heir to the throne, to take back the throne. Instead, the Japanese installed Sultan Musa Ghiathuddin Riayat Shah as the new (Seventh) Sultan according to proper protocol and tradition (which means Sultan Musa would now be the legal and rightful Sultan of Selangor).

My grandfather was then arrested and brought to the Japanese headquarters (what today is known as Carcosa Sri Negara) where he was to be executed by pancung kepala (beheading). Sultan Musa rushed to the Japanese headquarters to ‘witness’ the execution and just as the Japanese soldier raised the Samurai sword, and before it could separate my grandfather’s head from his shoulders, Sultan Musa dropped to his knees and begged that they spare my grandfather’s life.

The Japanese were taken aback. A Ruler is ‘God’ in the Japanese tradition and for ‘God’ to go down on his knees and beg was a sort of ‘culture shock’, to put it mildly. My grandfather’s life was invariably spared and he spent the war years assisting the Sultan in ensuring that the people of Selangor at least had enough food to eat. Sultan Musa, of course, had to ‘collaborate’ with the Japanese and ‘abuse’ his ‘God’ status in ensuring that the people of Selangor were spared the ravages of war.

When the British came back in 1945, they sacked Sultan Musa and reinstalled Sultan Hisamuddin onto the throne of Selangor. For ‘collaborating’ with the Japanese, Sultan Musa was sent into exile to the Cocos Islands in the Indian Ocean. That was in the days before the introduction of the Internal Security Act and the Kamunting Detention Center. In that sense, my grandfather, Sultan Musa, was the first ‘Royal ISA detainee’ back in 1945 (so I was NOT the first Royal ISA detainee).

Ten years later, Sultan Musa was brought back to Kelang so that he could die at home. His Highness died soon after that and now lies buried in the Royal Mausoleum in Kelang alongside my father, grandmother, grandfather and scores of grandparents, uncles, aunties and cousins. Sultan Hisamuddin Alam Shah died in 1960 and was succeeded by Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah, the late Agong.

Yes, I still do not trust Anwar

By Haris Ibrahim,

To my ‘Lest we, including Anwar, ever forget’ post, Bro Habib Rak sent in a comment to ask : “Bro Harris, the point of this historical clip being?”
Fair question, Bro.
The point of that historical clip is this.
If Mahathir retired in 2003 heralded by many as the architect of modern Malaysia, today his legacy lies in tatters.
Increasingly, many see his 22 year reign as a dark period when our critical institutions of governance, our system of education, our economic management and civil rights were all severely compromised.
What we must not lose sight of is that Mahathir could not have managed the rape and plunder of this nation on his own.
Bro Habib, the object of that historical clip was to remind all of us that Anwar, who now promises to lead the people of this nation to the promised land, come the 13th GE, was, from 1982, part of the Mahathir administration and, from 1993, his deputy prime minister.
In 2007, in two posts, I had said that I hoped Anwar would give me reason enough to trust him.
You can read those posts HERE and HERE.
Then on 18th August, 2008, 8 days before the Permatang Pauh by-election, in my ‘Dear Anwar’ post, I said I was going to take a chance with Anwar.
This is how I presented my position :
“…let me first say that whilst I have the highest regard for YB Lim Kit Siang and YB Lim Guan Eng, yet in the matter of the politics and governance of this nation, I do not trust them implicitly and without question, because they are politicians and 50 years of BN politics has delivered a hard and painful lesson to many of us.
Don’t trust politicians completely.
Many times last year, I wrote in this blog that I wished you would give me a reason to trust you.
Whilst I have to be frank and tell you that I still do not trust you, three things have persuaded me to ‘take a chance’.
First, and this is the only rational factor of the three, this nation needs to be rid of the racist, divide and rule politics of BN. UMNO will not change, and the other component parties have shown themselves to be helplessly subservient to UMNO.
You and your party leaders, together with the leaders of DAP, have been taking policy positions or making policy statements that, by far and large, seem to be in line with the aspirations of the people.
I say ‘seem’ because much still remains to be seen” .
That post elicited 173 comments. Many said that I had articulated how they felt.
Yes, many still do not trust Anwar, but are prepared to give him a chance.
This is not to say that Anwar is not a changed man from his days during the Mahathir administration.
The burning question for me, is, has he changed?
Is he ready to be the prime minister for all, or is he still the Malay nationalist that Mahathir enticed into UMNO?
Will he lead us to the promised land, or from the frying pan into the fire?
Many, myself included, hope that he is indeed reformed from his UMNO days.
We can only be guided by his actions to make conclusions about whether he is a changed man, and conclusions that we must make soon given that a general election will very soon be upon us.
What we must not do with Anwar, or any other politician for that matter, is to accord them blind, unquestioning faith.
Many have sent in comments to say I should now let this matter rest given that the Supreme Council has made a decision which Jeffret has accepted.
Sorry, I will not.
I still have concerns based on Anwar’s actions.
I will share with you in my next post Anwar’s actions that got me concerned.
For now, let me just say, relying on Joe Fernandez’s report in Malaysiakini today about the proceedings during the PKR Supreme Council meeting yesterday, that there is hope yet for PKR.
There are still good men in their ranks in the likes of Chua Jui Meng and Tian Chua who understand the value of honouring a promise.

Now PKR suspends all twelve?

By Haris Ibrahim,

My source in PKR just sent me a copy of a press statement of even date released by the party HQ. I reproduce the same verbatim below. ____________________________________________________
KENYATAAN MEDIA
30 Ogos 2010

Jawatankuasa Disiplin Keadilan telah membentangkan laporan berhubung kes penubuhan Parti Cinta Sabah dan mendapati bahawa kesemua 12 orang yang terlibat adalah bersalah dalam membuat pendaftaran parti baru kepada ROS walaupun kemudiannya telah menarik balik pemohonan tersebut.
Kes ini telah dikemukakan sebagai aduan baru pada bulan Jun 2010 apabila pengadu mendapat pengesahan daripada pihak Jabatan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan Malaysia.
Setelah diteliti dan dibincang laporan tersebut, Majlis Pimpinan Pusat Keadilan yang bersidang pada 29 Ogos 2010 telah bersetuju mengesahkan keputusan Jawatankuasa Disiplin Keadilan untuk menggantung 12 anggota Keadilan berikutan aduan penubuhan Parti Cinta Sabah.
Penggantungan tersebut berkuatkuasa dari 4 Januari 2010 hingga 3 Januari 2011.
Namun demikian, Fasal 27.4 Perlembagaan Parti memperuntukkan bahawa kesemua 12 anggota tersebut boleh membuat rayuan kepada Majlis Pimpinan Pusat bermula hari ini dan pihak Majlis Pimpinan Pusat bersedia menyegerakan rayuan untuk dipertimbangkan kerana untuk tidak memprejudiskan penglibatan mereka dalam Pemilihan Parti 2010.


SAIFUDDIN NASUTION ISMAIL
Setiausaha Agung
Parti Keadilan Rakyat
Dihantarkan kepada anda melalui / Delivered to you by:
BIRO KOMUNIKASI
PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT
A-1-09, Merchant Square
No. 1, Jalan Tropicana Selatan 1
47410 Petaling Jaya
Tel: +603 7885 0530
Fax: +603 7885 0531
E-mail: komunikasi@keadilanrakyat.org
Web: www.keadilanrakyat.org

Seditious Malaysia

By Ding Jo-Ann | The Nut Graph

 

What is sedition?

“A ‘seditious tendency’ is a tendency:

to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government (in Malaysia);

…

to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State;

to raise discontent amongst the subjects of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or of the Ruler of any State or amongst the inhabitants of Malaysia or of any State;

to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia;

to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal Constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution.”

(Source: Section 3[1] of the Sedition Act 1948)
Allegedly seditious acts:
1) Talking about race-based vs needs-based affirmative action

“In [Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek's] speech, he questioned the quota on equity given to bumiputeras. He claimed that this system, which has been long practised in Malaysia, should be gradually replaced with meritocracy and need.”
“This is an irresponsible statement that aims to destroy the harmony between races.”
“It is clear that this is against the law, as provided under the Sedition Act. Therefore the authorities should take action against Chua.”

Perkasa secretary-general Syed Hassan Syed Ali, when lodging a report against Chua for the MCA president’s opening speech at the recent Chinese Economic Congress. Chua had called for preferential treatment to be given according to needs, rather than race.
Syed Hassan said Chua’s statement would cause unrest among Malay Malaysians because the Federal Constitution clearly provided that nobody could question their special position. (Source: Perkasa lodges report against Soi Lek, Malaysiakini, 18 Aug 2010)
2) Praying for the chief minister

“So far, we have called 15 people to help in the investigation.”
“Statements recorded from several witnesses confirmed that the incidents took place, and we are going ahead with the investigation.”

Penang police chief Datuk Ayub Yaakob, saying police had set up a special team to investigate the alleged replacement of the Yang-di-Pertuan Agong’s name with Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s during Friday prayers at a mosque. He said investigations were being conducted under the Sedition Act.
Initial investigations have reportedly revealed there was no such name replacement, but that there had been separate prayers for guidance for the chief minister to embrace Islam. (Source: Penang police form special team to probe sermon “doa” issue, The Malay Mail, 22 Aug 2010)
3) Selling Zunar’s comic books

“When I asked the officers about the change, they told me that they were merely following orders.”
“Of course, I questioned them because I found it to be very strange.”

Book vendor Hawee Othman, on her charge under the Sedition Act for selling copies of monthly magazine Isu Dalam Kartun by Zulkifli Anwar Ulhaque, more popularly known as Zunar. Hawee had initially been investigated under the Printing Presses and Publications Act. However, later she found out the charge had been changed to one under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act. (Source: Cops put Zunar comic vendor in a fix, Malaysiakini, 21 Aug 2010)
4) Questioning vernacular schools

“Chinese and Tamil primary schools do not impede national unity. Bigots and racialist groups which do not exclude Majlis Perundangan Melayu are the main culprits undermining national unity.”

MCA central committee member Loh Seng Kok, urging authorities to probe the Malay Consultative Council (MPM) under the Sedition Act after it called for vernacular schools to be abolished. (Source:Under siege MCA claims MPM flouting sedition laws, Malaysiakini, 23 Aug 2010)
5) Staging a Christian play in Shah Alam during Ramadan

“We want the church and pastor to be investigated for sedition and for insulting the Sultan.”

Petaling Perkasa chairperson Zainal Abidin Ahmad, calling for a Shah Alam church and its pastor to be investigated for planning to stage a Christian play at the Shah Alam Convention Centre during Ramadan. He said a Ramadan bazaar was held around the convention centre and buka puasa buffets were held in the area. (Source: Perkasa complains about Shah Alam Christian play during Ramadan, The Malaysian Insider, 17 Aug 2010)
6) Blogging about the royal institution

“We detained him for about two hours and he was very cooperative. We just wanted to record a statement from him about a posting in his blog which touched on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the royal institution.
“The action followed a police report that was lodged about the posting.”

Negeri Sembilan police chief Datuk Osman Salleh, referring to the detention of Parti Keadilan Rakyat supreme council member Badrul Hisham Shaharin. Badrul Hisham, also known as Chegubard, was detained under the Sedition Act in relation to a posting on his blog about the Yang-di-Pertuan Agong and the royal institution. (Source: Police: Chegubard detained to record statement, theSun, 10 July 2010)
7) Reporting about foreign workers working on the new palace not getting paid

“[Therefore], their reports are anti-Malay and anti-Istana. The reports [portrayed] the palace as if it was being built upon the tears of the people.”

Senator Ezam Mohd Nor, calling on the Home Ministry to probe The Star and Malaysiakini for publishing reports on the woes of foreign workers working on the site of the new palace. The Star reported that many of the 1,000 foreign workers had not received their salary for three months. (Source: Ezam wants gov’t to probe Malaysiakini, Star, Malaysiakini, 3 Jul 2010)

The Mahathir prediction

My.sinchew.com

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has predicted that racial tension would escalate if the New Economic Policy (NEP) type of policies is removed in favour of open policies which disregard the disparities between races in the interest of equity and merit.

The former prime minister has also warned that the time is not right for changes to be made to the existing pro-Bumiputera affirmative policies.

He said that the violent Communist revolution in Europe was caused by the disparity between rich and poor, and hinted that such a scenario could happen in Malaysia if the so-called economic gap between the Bumiputeras and the other races is not narrowed.

Hence, he suggested that the affirmative policies and programmes be continued infinitum, arguing that such a protection for the Bumiputera is still necessary and that a 20-year timeline is not enough for them to become economically on par with other races.

The NEP was launched in 1971 and technically ended in 1990, but most of its programmes are being continued.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has announced that he would remove subsidies and many of the pro-Bumiputera quotas under his meritocracy-based economic reforms, but many Malay leaders, including Mahathir, want to retain the status quo.

Mahathir has become the leading voice of dissidence against the New Economic Model (NEM) initiated by Najib, insisting that the affirmative scheme must continue, or else the Bumiputeras would lose out.

Mahathir’s doomsday prediction that the country would plunge into a violent revolutionary situation like that of the 18th and 19th Century Europe if the affirmative economic policies and programmes are scaled is certainly alarmist and scaremongering, to say the least, and a witticism of the highest illusionary degree.

Mahathir talks as if all non-Bumiputras are rich and only Bumiputeras are in dire economic suffering. Granted that there are many Bumiputras in the rural who are really poor and deserving of government financial aid, but there are also many non-Bumiputras who are in similar appalling economic condition.

I am not saying that there should not be any affirmative policies and programmes to help those who are poor and underprivileged, but they should be based on needs, not on race. There are more poor Bumiputras simply because they constitute a larger portion of the population, and they deserve all the assistance to live a better life and lifestyle. So, do the poor of other races. The government affirmative policies and programmes should focus on thord e need of the poor of all races, not on any particular race irrespective of their economic status. MP Tony Pua’s suggestion that those who can afford luxury houses costing more than half a million ringgit should not be given discount under the affirmative programme is not without merit. The discount money should rightly be channelled to help those who cannot afford a simple decent home.

If we are to take an honest look at the May 13 incident in 1969, which, incidentally, was the raison d’etat for the formulation and implementation of the NEP, we should realize that basically race was just the whipping boy for what I believe to be the explosion of intensive frustration of the economic hardship suffered by the poor of all races – Malay, Chinese and Indians.

The May 13 riot was not racial per se. It was sparked off by the poor Malays being told by Malay politicians that the rich Chinese caused them the economic suffering, and the poor Chinese being told by Chinese politicians that the powerful Malays in the government caused them their hardship.

The riot was triggered off by the then massive suffering of many poor Malays and poor Chinese, both having reached the extreme intolerable level of economic and financial hardship. The intense manipulative racial stroking by irresponsible politicians of the already tense environment during the campaign for the May 10 general election detonated the already ticking economic time bomb, masquerading as packs of racial grenades all over the country..

The economic hardship was not confined to any particular race, and was fundamentally caused by an irresponsible corrupt government of the day. It was the demonic racist politicians who exploited the suffering poor and turn what was basically an economic deprivation problem into a racial bloodbath.

When I was doing a research paper on revolution for a course on history at the Flinders University in South Australia, I did a comparative study on the causes of revolutions in France (1789–1799), Russia (1917) and China (1911 and 1949). I found that there were five common factors that gave rise to the revolutions in these countries.

The first factor is that there was massive economic hardship among the general populace of the country. Many people were facing difficulties in even putting food on the table. Jobs were scarce. Children go to bed hungry. In such a situation, many became desperate, and couldn’t care less about any consequence, even if they were to resort to violent means to survive. These people become fertile ground for the seed of revolution to take root and grow.

Secondly, while the majority of the population was suffering hardship, an elite class of economically powerful and corrupt officials and business people nonchalantly exploited the people. The people were heavily taxed, pieces of essentials keep rising, bribes were demanded for getting things done at government offices, the cops were trigger-happy, and many innocent people were persecuted and prosecuted on the most unsubstantial and flimsiest charges.

Such a scenario gave rise to a massive resentment and revulsion among the people. The circumstance was certainly appropriate for mass action to get rid of the immoral and corrupt political parasites.

Thirdly, the major influence and impact of the increasingly powerful mass media, particularly the newspapers, contributed to educate the general populace of their fundamental human and civil rights.

The people began to realize that they have absolute rights to a decent life and lifestyle, and that they are the actual bosses of those in the government and its administration. They began to demand for justice, fairness, economic equality, political freedom, liberty in organizing and operating their own well-being, and the rights to freedom of expression, worship, jobs and education.

In other words, the people have got up from their innocent slumber and became enlightened to the fact they have fundamental birth rights which they should protect, preserve and prevent from exploitation by the abusive and dictatorial authorities.

Fourthly, the rise of some well-educated idealistic charismatic leaders led to the mobilization and organization of the people into collective powerful pressure groups which took the lead to fight against the establishment. A massive people movement began to make the clarion call to the masses to stand up and be court for the nation. The charismatic people rousers became the powerful attractive socio-political magnets attracting the masses to march for change.

Finally, like Mao Zedong said, a mere spark will cause fire to a whole plain. In the case of 18th century France, Emperor Louis XIV and his successor Emperor Louis XVI mismanaged the nation’s finances that by 1789, the government was bankrupt. Louis XVI resorted to impose heavy taxes on the people. The people, who suffered from bad harvest, exploded in anger and attacked the Bastille (prison for political prisoners). The Fall of Bastille started the French Revolution. It spread out to other parts of France.

The explosive pressure cooker blew its cover and all hell broke lose as the people took to the street to demand for accountability and change.

Nearer our time, we have seen how the dictator Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines was ousted by the People Power Revolution in 1986. The massive protest was brewing since 1983, after the assassination of opposition politician Ninoy Aquino, followed by the deteriorating economy, with the government plunging deeper into debt. By the end of 1983, the country was bankrupt, and the economy had contracted by 6.8%. The pressure started to build up until 1986 when the time bomb exploded.

From my studies on revolutions, we can observe that what gave rise to the massive visible, vocal and even violent demonstration demanding for reformation and transformation is basically the mass dissatisfaction, disenchantment and disillusion with the governing establishment, sparked off by just an unjust act.

There will not be any violent revolution in Malaysia, if there is a competent, accountable, and transparent government in Malaysia, which promotes and practices truth, righteousness, justice, equality, fairness, and caring concern.

Happy Medeka. May God bless our nation real good!

I am Chinese but I want to be known as MALAYSIAN!

by Philip Yong

So, the day has arrived. The day we’ve all been patiently waiting for. Yes it is finally here!

This was the day all Malaysians regardless of race stood up together to shout ‘MERDEKA, MERDEKA, MERDEKA!’ from the bottom of their hearts. Even just by imagining the atmosphere at that moment, I can feel the joy. But today, I no longer have that feeling.

Tomorrow (31st August 2010) is our country’s 53rd National Day. Wow, we’ve got our independence for 53 years already, how amazing can that be? But you know what? I don’t feel a thing. I don’t feel proud to be a Malaysian at all. Well, if you’ve been catching up with the tabloids lately, you would know what I mean. 53 years is not very long but still a substantial number. Why are we the citizens of Malaysia not united? Our National Day is tomorrow but there are still people out there fighting and screaming ridiculously accusing others of demeaning their race. Why after 53 years we still can’t be united? Why do we have to fill in forms asking for our race? Why isn’t there an option for ‘Malaysian’ in those forms? Yes I am Chinese but I want to be known as a Malaysian, is that wrong?

Independence? Even now I am writing this in fear of being caught by the officials for inciting hate or perhaps sedition. I’ve read about so many people being caught for speaking against the government. Well, is that wrong? Don’t we the rakyat, have the right to speak? I believe we are supposed to be a democratic country. But it seems to me that I don’t get to decide what I want for myself and my country. It seems like we’re being dictated. Well, I think I better not go on further as I do not want to celebrate our National Day in the cell.
I want change. I do not care who or which party is in charge of the government. All I want is change. I am sick and tired of everything negative going on. I think if today I meet a foreigner, I will be reluctant to address myself as a Malaysian because of all the bad press that have been going on for quite some time. And I do not blame the foreigners for having such a negative image of our country. It is our leaders fault or so to speak. But as a Malaysian, I will not sit here quiet awaiting for a better tomorrow. I will stand up along with many other Malaysians who share my thoughts. Which I believe is in the thousands if not millions. We will fight for a better tomorrow, through over powerful voices. We’ve stayed quiet for far too long. 53 years, like I said is a substantial number.

I love Malaysia. I really do. That is why I am speaking up. I remember a couple of months ago, I attended the Badminton Thomas Cup quarter finals between Malaysia and Denmark. Everybody in the stadium was shouting and screaming in support of the Malaysian team. That is the real 1Malaysia we should advocate. It was one of the very few moments I felt so proud to be a Malaysian. Till today I still remember how everyone regardless of their race was so united and I honestly miss that moment.

So in simple word, my wish for this year’s Merdeka is for the nation to be united as one. I am sure we can and we will achieve that. Whichever coalition whether it is the Barisan National or Pakatan Rakyat, as long as they advocate that then you have my support as well as many other Malaysians support. Remember it is the rakyat that build the country and not the other way around.

HAPPY MERDEKA!

Malacca tales

By Anil Netto,


A two-day trip to Malacca proves to be an eye-opener. And a cruise along the Malacca River after dark reveals more than just the gaudy lights of the illuminated river banks.

When I arrived in Malacca last weekend for a two-day stay, residents there told me quite a bit about the city and its questionable spending on various projects. Mostly they centred on and around various modes of transport:
My first impression of Malacca is that of the impressive Melaka Sentral express bus and taxi terminal and bazaar in Peringgit. This looks much bigger and more futuristic than the Penang express bus terminal. In fact, its circular terminal reminds me of an airport terminal, buses parked all around it like spokes sticking out of from the central hub of a wheel. That initial positive impression evaporates when a friend informs me of roof leakages at the wet and dry market in the RM28 million complex, as reported in The Star. Not only that, leaking and clogged pipes and irregular lift and escalator operations plague the market area. Last June, the Council spent RM4 million on structural repairs.
Then, I heard rumblings about the new Malacca “International” Airport in Batu Berendam, some 150km from KL, which was officially opened earlier this year. Back in 2007, the new terminal opened but a host of problems still needed fixing: the extended 1,800m (formerly 1,362m) runway – under a RM135 mil refurbishment project launched in 2007 – could not be fully used because several obstructing trees had to be removed, as mentioned in a report on the skyscrapercity.com website. It was also found that a nearby hypermarket warehouse reportedly exceeded the height limit.
An additional RM60mil had to be borrowed from the federal government to extend the runaway to 2,135m to allow Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 to land at the airport, according to the firefly website. The RM190 million airport was officially opened in May 2010 – but the problems haven’t ended.
There’s the problem of refuelling. At present, refuelling facilities at this “international” airport only caters for smaller aircraft such as Fokkers. Now they are building fuel depot facilities in the hope of attracting larger aircraft. How much are they going to spend for all this, how many airlines are actually using the airport; how many passengers per day pass through the terminal?
The real question is, does Malacca really need an expanded airport, with KLIA and Changi not far away? Discussion forums have labelled the airport as an “ego trip”. If that’s not enough of an ego trip, in March there was talk of Malacca setting up its own airlines! Apparently, the airport faces difficulty in attracting budget airlines, as reported in Kosmo. Expand the airport and then look for airlines?
To get away from it all, my friends in Malacca decide to show me the latest attraction in Malacca, which they have laughingly labelled “Paris by night”. The night boat cruise along the Malacca River is actually a good idea and, at RM10 per head, affordable to most visitors. The first thing you notice as you step into the wide boat at the jetty is the newest ‘toy’ in Malacca, the 24-seat monorail train at the Taman Rempah Station nearby. The 1.6km monorail track runs parallel along the banks of the river for a while and then twirls out of sight, heading to Kampung Bunga Raya Pantai in the heart of the city. The RM16 million monorail project was supposed to have been launched on 29 August but already, it has been delayed twice. The project is being carried out by the council, state subsidiary Kumpulan Melaka Berhad and Agibs Engineering & Construction Sdn Bhd.
The commentary over the speakers in the boat is in both Malay and English interspersed with Kenny G music. The smooth male voices point out the illuminated kampung houses along the river bank, the former Cathay building and the shophouses with their river-side back-doors that have been converted to ‘front doors’. Then we pass by another ‘toy’, an amusement park where a ferris wheel spins and a ‘pirate ship’ rocks from back-and-forth like a rocking horse. This, we are proudly told, costs RM3.3 million. I gaze at the ferris wheel and something doesn’t seem quite right. It is spinning all right, but there’s no one inside the glass-topped capsules! My friends tell me no one was inside either the last time they took the cruise a month earlier.
Then we approach the historic St Francis Xavier Church, clearly visible along the banks, and my friends tell me to listen carefully. The recorded commentary falls eerily silent. Instead, the lilting strains of Kenny G on his sax waft through the boat. There’s nothing to tell passengers on the boat that they are passing by a historical landmark – one of the oldest churches in the country – and most of them appear oblivious to it.
Similarly, no mention of Christ Church further down or even the red-walled Dutch-constructed Stadthuys, built in 1650, the most famous structure in Malacca, next to the ruins of A Famosa. These merit just a passing mention as the “kawasan menara jam”. So much for enlightening visitors about Malacca’s history.
Along the way and back, my friends cite other instances of questionable, even reckless, spending in Malacca. I get the picture – and it’s not pretty.
One big disappointment is that the sprawling green esplanade near St John’s Hill along the sea has disappeared. Instead, we now see two large malls facing each other near the miniature Dataran Pahlawan. Open green space, it would seem, is hard to come by in this heritage city.

A scholarly approach to the mosque issue

For all our goofs, we sometimes get some things right.
I thought this a very measured, and above all, extremely learned piece, which analyses the mosque entering controversy from a scholarly perspective.
Take away the hype, and the hate scented hyperbole, and this is what the facts and religious scholarship suggests.
I’ve met Dr. Manuty, and he seemed to me a very kindly gentleman – a man who knew his subject material very well.
On this issue, I remember fondly my time in Aceh, where there I was made very welcome in mosques and suraus.
Pleasant memories….
(In the off chance anyone was wondering, I believe the mosque pictured in the background of this blog is in Terengganu. Isn’t it a gorgeous photo?)

*

Isu Bukan Islam Masuk Masjid
Bagaikan menahan lukah di pergentingan, UMNO dan para kuncunya tidak habis-habis menerkam apa jua kesempatan dan isu sebagai modal mempertahan survival politik perkauman mereka. Seperti biasanya, bagaikan jerat sudah mengena, UMNO dan para pendokongnya mengambil kesempatan ke atas tindakan beberapa pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat bukan Islam yang telah memasuki masjid dan surau baru-baru ini. Peristiwa Dr. Xavier Jayakumar berucap di dewan utama sebuah masjid di Taman Sri Andalas, Klang pada Ogos 2009 yang lalu, telahpun hampir dilupakan. Kini tindakan YB Teo Nie Ching (Ahli Parlimen DAP Serdang) masuk ke Surau Al-Huda, Kajang dan YB William Leong (Bendahari PKR, Ahli Parlimen PKR Selayang) masuk ke dalam Masjid At-Taqwa, Selayang Baru pula dijadikan isu besar.
Untuk menjelaskan pendirian kami mengenai isu ini, kami ingin membawa perhatian semua pihak kedudukan perkara ini dari perspektif fiqh (hokum Hakam Islam). Sekurang-kurangnya ada empat pandangan mengenai masalah ini. Pertamanya: Mazhab Hanafi yang membenarkan bukan Islam memasuki semua masjid. Keduanya: Mazhab Syafie yang membenarkan masuk kesemua masjid melainkan masjid Haram dan kawasan tanah haram Makkah. Ketiganya: Mazhab Hanbali yang membenarkan untuk memasuki masjidil haram dan lainnya setelah mendapat kebenaran dari umat Islam atas tujuan-tujuan yang munasabah. Akhirnya, Mazhab Maliki yang tidak membenarkan memasuki semua masjid melainkan kerana darurat kerja.
Beberapa peristiwa di zaman Rasulullah juga boleh dijadikan panduan. Baginda pernah membenarkan ramai orang-orang bukan Islam masuk dan tinggal lama di masjid. Rasulullah juga diriwayatkan pernah menerima tetamu Kristian dari Najran di dalam masjid Madinah, malah diizinkan oleh Nabi s.a.w untuk menunaikan sembahyang mereka di dalam masjid dan nabi menyebut kepada sahabat: “Biarkan mereka (untuk melunaskan sembahyang mereka)”
Kepelbagaian pandangan ini menggambarkan keluasan hukum Islam dalam persoalan yang digembar-gemburkan sebagai isu besar ini. Hakikatnya, majoriti ulama silam dan kontemporari jelas mengharuskan bukan Islam memasuki masjid-masjid biasa dengan syarat-syarat tertentu seperti keperluan mendapat keizinan umat Islam atau badan berkuasa Islam, mempunyai sebab yang munasabah dan menjaga adab-adab yang telah ditetapkan.
Oleh yang demikian, kami berpendirian bahawa adalah tidak wajar bagi siapa jua untuk menyempitkan sesuatu yang tidak jelas dari sudut nas-nasnya dan dalil-dalilnya. Apatah lagi jika kita sememangnya berpegang dengan mazhab al-Syafie sebagai mazhab rasmi umat Islam di Negara ini. Lebih jauh lagi, sikap menghalang bukan Islam memasuki masjid ini adalah bertentangan dengan semangat yang diputuskan oleh Muzakarah Jawatankuasa Fatwa Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi Hal Ehwal Ugama Islam Malaysia Kali Ke-90 yang bersidang pada 1 Mac 2010 telah memutuskan bahawa pelancong bukan Islam diharuskan memasuki masjid dan ruang solat dengan syarat-syarat yang telah ditentukan.
Amalan menerima bukan Islam memasuki masjid atas tujuan yang murni juga telah diamalkan di beberapa negara lain. Ia terbukti memberi nilai positif kepada keberkesanan pemahaman mereka kepada agama Islam, mengelakkan salah faham dan menjana interaksi yang harmoni dalam perhubungan di antara umat Islam dan bukan Islam.
Sewajarnya, para wakil rakyat PR demikian perlulah diberikan pujian kerana kesungguhannya dalam menjalankan tugasnya dengan baik kepada masyarakat majmuk di negara ini. Apatah lagi ia memang telahpun mendapat kebenaran pihak pengurusan masjid dan dilakukan pula atas tanggungjawab mereka sebagai wakil Kerajaan Negeri Selangor.
Kekecohan yang digembar-gemborkan hakikatnya akan memakan tuan. Inilah gambaran kegagalan UMNO selama ini dalam mendidik rakyat mengenai hakikat Islam. Sikap seperti ini akan menyuburkan pendirian fanatik melulu di kalangan orang Islam yang kurang berilmu. Lebih menghinakan apabila berita mengenainya ditokok tambah dengan pelbagai fitnah baru demi mencapai matlamat politik sempit yang diperjuangkan. Kita sentiasa mengingatkan bahawa umat Islam tidak boleh merelakan diri mereka terus dibelenggu dalam kerangka pemikiran sempit politik perkauman dan agama ala UMNO ini. Ini akan menjadikan kita semakin lesu dan masyarakat bukan Islam pula semakin menjauh dari kita. Yakinlah bahawa, kerja mereka ini akan menjadi sia-sia seperti mencari umbut di dalam batu.
Hakikatnya, tanpa mereka jangka, krisis yang mereka wujudkan ini akan menjadikan orang Melayu dan masyarakat Islam lebih memahami agamanya secara total dan lebih berkeyakinan bahawa Islam dan masyarakat Melayu akan lebih terjamin di bawah Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat pada masa depan. Inilah keyakinan kita kerana Islam itu tinggi dan merupakan agama yang membawa rahmat untuk seluruh alam.
DR MUHD NUR MANUTY
Pengerusi
Biro Pemahaman & Pemantapan Agama
Parti KeADILan Rakyat
28 Ogos 2010

Kelantan sues Petronas over oil royalty