Remember PAS research centre director Mohd Zuhdi Marzuki? Remember that news about a leaked WhatsApp conversation about PAS joining while PAS was still a component party of Pakatan Rakyat?
PAS research centre operations director Dr Mohd Zuhdi Marzuki, whose WhatsApp message about the party working with Umno went public, claimed that the message was about "analysing scenarios" of the party breaking away from Pakatan Rakyat.
Dr Zuhdi said on his Facebook page that the options of the party leaving the coalition was a request made by a PAS leader of the central committee WhatsApp group.
Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2014/07/29/pas-dr-zuhdi-says-whatsapp-message-exit-senarios/#kjH2Iau5jCiLkzPt.99
"PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli also hit out at the PAS member, Dr Mohd Zuhdi Marzuki, for the racial and religious tone in the leaked message.
In a sign of escalating tension between both parties as a result of the current Selangor menteri besar crisis, Rafizi also demanded that PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang state the number of PAS leaders who held such views."
https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/3303875/all
Zuhdi is now again reported for PAS to join BN (Barisan Nasional). His excuse?
Former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad's "arrogance" and belittling of PAS' plan to form or be part of the next government has left the party with only two choices, a PAS strategist says.
PAS research centre director Mohd Zuhdi Marzuki said the choices are either for PAS to remain in the opposition, or to join BN in forming the next government.
What kind of morals/excuses can PAS offers to join in or support a corrupt and power abusing government just escape me.
(PAS still considering joining government with BN after general election)
Read more at https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/410096#u5ek1xzhRw0Pc7Wh.99
Showing posts with label Government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Government. Show all posts
Friday, January 26, 2018
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Mathias Chang: The Rakyat Has Finally Crossed The Rubicon
The Rakyat Has Finally Crossed The Rubicon
The Countdown To Defeat For BN Has Begun
Will Najib Be The First Unelected Prime Minister of Malaysia?
By Christopher Chang
3rd May 2012, Future Fastforward
This article follows from a discussion with my father who is now recuperating at home. My father was admitted to hospital on the 23rd April on the initial diagnosis of having a stroke but was discharged late afternoon on the 28th April after his condition stabilised. His concerns for the country prompted him to discuss with me his views and he has directed that I post them to the website asap.
“If people lose their trust in the government, then the country has lost its basis” - Confucius
Christopher Chang (Chris): What is your reaction to the police brutality as shown
in several YouTube video clips?
Matthias Chang (Matthias): I am not surprised at all. I had concluded in the early morning of Tuesday, 24th April that excessive force would be used. My mind was focused on the Bersih Rally on the 28th April. I was contemplating writing an article to warn the BN government not to repeat the mistakes made in previous Bersih rallies even though deep down in my heart I know that my appeals would be ignored. But, I could not pen my article as I was rushed by an ambulance (following a 999 call) to the KL General Hospital.
Chris: But the Home Minister on the 22nd April, and as reported in NST was quoted as stating:
NST: The home ministry will allow next week’s Bersih rally and similar peaceful gatherings AS THEY DO NOT jeopardise national security. The minister, Dato’ Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, said the ministry’s initial monitoring indicated that the Bersih assembly did not require excessive presence of the police, such as the Federal Reserve Unit (FRU) as the rally was not a security threat.
Matthias: This minister (who is a lawyer by profession) as well as the Prime Minister must explain why the City Police Chief applied ex-parte (i.e. without the knowledge and presence of the Bersih organizers) for an order that Bersih cannot gather at Dataran Merdeka (the Independence Square), as inter-alia it posed a threat to public order and security. This is inconsistent and contradictory to the press statement of the Home Minister. Either the “right hand is not aware of what the left hand is doing” or it is the “good cop, bad cop” routine and the Home Minister hopes to be absolved from any potential fall-out. It would be utterly naïve for him to think of that, and that the public would fall for it.
Chris: Were you surprised by the turnout, estimated to be between 200,000 and 300,000?
Matthias: The exact number is not important but, if as reported by international media and independent observers as over 200,000 and comprising a crosssection of our people then this is historic and this means that the Malaysian people have crossed the Rubicon – the threshold has been crossed. It is a clear message to the BN government that the people are fed-up, pushed to the wall and their limits of tolerance have been breached. THEY DO NOT TRUST THE BN GOVERNMENT ANYMORE.
What I did not expect was that the threshold was crossed at this juncture, at this point in time. I had expected that if the BN Government called for a snap election before the clean up of the electoral roll, the rakyat would come out in droves to punish the BN government and ensure its defeat. The turnout would surpass all previous elections!
There have always been irregularities in our electoral roll as well as incidents of phantom voters, but in the past the people put up with the irregularity as it would not be sufficient to determine the outcome in a major way.
This reality and perception no longer hold true. This has been buttressed by the fact that electoral reforms were only considered after the massive turnout of Bersih 2.0. But for Bersih 2.0, the status quo would remain and this has really stirred the hornet’s nest. The fundamental issue is one of trust. And as Confucius said, once there is no trust in the government, the country has lost its basis!
Only the die-hard UMNO and BN supporters would not acknowledge this and or fail to see the writing on the wall. I had warned as such in my numerous articles before and after Bersih 2.0. The irony is that, the Home Minister before 28th April acknowledged that the government over-reacted when dealing with Bersih 2.0. But, the people treated it as propaganda or in local parlance, sweet talk. The government is no longer able to command the trust of the rakyat. And this is the death knell for the BN government.
I say this without any fear of contradiction. As a lawyer and as a former political secretary to the fourth prime minister, I have always stated the facts objectively without fear or favour. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected but do not throw profanities at me. Prove me wrong and debate with me.
Chris: Dad, there are so many versions as to what happened, what is your take?
Matthias: First lesson in politics, when advising a politician – Don’t get emotional and be distracted from the principal issue(s).
The starting point must be that any law or court order must be just and seen to be so. And that the military, police and security personnel (Special Branch etc.) must be the protector and defender of the people.
Screw up this fundamental principle and the ability of the government to govern is undermined and the trust of the people is forfeited. The legitimacy of the government is brought into question. It is a Herculean task to recover the trust and legitimacy – unless the government is changed or the leadership of the government is changed.
Invariably, within the government, daggers would be drawn and sharpened as no leader is ever indispensable. Who, at the material time would have thought Edward Heath would be replaced by a shopkeeper’s daughter in the person of Margaret Thatcher and she (the Iron Lady) at the peak of her powers would in turn fall victim to a political coup. She did not even know what hit her, as on
that fateful day she went to Paris for an EU meeting in full confidence of her powers on the world’s stage! On her return, the plotters thrust the dagger into her bosom. The rest, as they say is history.
There will be the usual blame game and the more the BN government and their spin doctors indulge in such nonsense, the worse it will be for them. Police brutality cannot be excused under any circumstances (even if provoked) as the police are trained to handle such a scenario and to exercise restraint. There are standard operating procedures (SOP) under which strict orders are issued as to how to handle and control such a situation (especially one which the Home Minister has declared that Bersih is not a security threat to the country. There were no warnings before tear gas and water cannons were used on the crowd at the barricade near Dataran Merdeka.
Elsewhere, the crowd was peaceful, yet we have videos showing police brutality – several policemen beating a single protester in one instance. Then, we have a video of traffic police on their motorbikes in formation chasing the crowd when their role is to control traffic! And more!
Let us take the bulls by the horn. Let’s accept the official version that some protesters broke through a specific barricade. Does that justify the police brutality????
And if the police were to say that the brutality inflicted on the protesters was the action of a few renegade policemen and that the entire police force should not be criticized or condemned, then my reply is, sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander – the alleged actions of a handful of so-called renegade protesters and or provocateurs cannot be blamed on the entire gathering as from the beginning it was peaceful. In any event, the upper hand is with the security forces as they are trained and properly equipped.
I was informed that someone propagated a lie that a policeman was killed by the protesters when there were no fatalities at all. This could very well be a provocation by someone to inflame the police to react in a negative way. It is hoped that whoever is responsible for this false information be brought to book.
This issue must be thoroughly investigated. But, I stand to be corrected. Chris: But, Dad how do you respond to the assertion that a Court order was contravened?
Matthias: There are court orders and court orders. The order by the Magistrate, Encik Zaki Asyraf bin Zubir is a “lawful order” but was it just in the circumstances or an abuse of power? Can it be said that the magistrate was unaware of the press statement by the Home Minister that Bersih 3.0 was not a security threat to the country. What were the grounds / evidence stated in the supporting affidavit in the ex-parte application to contradict the Home Minister? This should be made known to the public. I hope that the Bar Council and concerned lawyers and human rights groups would file the relevant application to challenge the grounds for the said application, being an application made ex-parte. Hence, utmost good faith and full disclosure of all relevant facts (including the press statement by the Home Minister) is required. Was the magistrate misled?
Be that as it may, I take the view that the Court order is unjust in its scope and purport. Dataran Merdeka, in spite of its haloed name, has been used for all sorts of functions, from rock concerts to other social gatherings. Even Mat Rempits have used the surrounding roads for their illegal racing and getting away with it, but the ordinary folks cannot even use the said road parallel to the square. When hundreds of thousands of people gather there to express their democratic right for a clean electoral roll, they were barred from using the place by a Court order. That order is manifestly unjust, when it has been expressly stated by the Home Minister that it posed no security threat to the country.
The likely retort is that, Matthias, this is a Court order and must be obeyed! I will cite a few examples why it can be disobeyed, even at the risk of contempt of court.
1. During the British colonial rule, several laws were enacted to suppress the people, yet it is UMNO who never ceased to tell us that they “led the demonstrations against the British for independence and justice for the people”. Newspapers were shut down and people imprisoned for defying British colonial rule. There were laws and court orders but they were defied. So the laws and the court orders must be examined whether they are just or unjust laws.
2. South Africa had Apartheid laws and court orders. But they were defied by the Black majority and Nelson Mandela was incarcerated for over 20 years when he defied these inhumane and unjust laws. Malaysians and the Malaysian government supported the struggle of the Black majority.
3. The Palestinians have been humiliated and imprisoned for opposing Zionist Israel’s occupation of their land. Today, over ten thousand are incarcerated in Israeli prisons including young children below the age of 14 years. They have been imprisoned in accordance with Israeli laws and court orders. Have the Palestinians no right to demonstrate against these unjust laws?
4. During the civil rights movement in the USA, there were “legitimate” laws forbidding “Blacks and dogs” from public places, e.g. in parks and blacks must sit at the back of buses, segregated from the whites who were seated in the front and any contravention is a criminal offence attracting custodial sentences. But, it took a brave woman to defy the law and demand that she be treated equally. The woman is none other than Rosa Parkes. She has been referred to as "the first lady of civil rights" and "the mother of the freedom movement" by the US Congress. Parkes' act of defiance became an important symbol of the modern Civil Rights Movement and Parkes became an international icon of resistance to racial segregation. She organised and collaborated with civil rights leaders,
including boycott leader Martin Luther King, Jr., helping to launch him to national prominence in the civil rights movement.
5. I would like to quote Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on defying unjust laws: “One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law”.
And I say, Amen to that.
6. From Yahoo, I found this posting – “In India, the Salt Satyagraha was a campaign of non-violent protest against the British salt tax (an unjust law) in colonial India which began with the Salt March to Dandi on March 12, 1930. It was the first act of organised opposition to British rule after Purna Swaraj, the declaration of independence by the Indian National Congress. Mahatma Gandhi led the Dandi march from his Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi, Gujarat to produce salt without paying the tax, with growing numbers of Indians joining him along the way. When Gandhi broke the salt laws in Dandi at the conclusion of the march on April 6, 1930, it sparked large scale acts of civil disobedience against the British Raj salt laws by millions of Indians.
“Gandhi was arrested on May 5, 1930, just days before his planned raid on the Dharasana Salt Works. The Dandi March and the ensuing Dharasana Satyagraha drew worldwide attention to the Indian
independence movement through extensive newspaper and newsreel coverage. The satyagraha against the salt tax continued for almost a year, ending with Gandhi's release from jail and negotiations with Viceroy Lord Irwin at the Second Round Table Conference. Over 80,000 Indians were jailed as a result of the Salt Satyagraha. The campaign had a significant effect on changing world and British attitudes toward Indian independence, and caused large numbers of Indians to actively join the fight for the first time.”
And even though I may not agree with the Opposition parties, I will oppose any attempt to stifle such expression of the democratic will of the people. Election with a clean electoral roll is a legitimate way of making political changes, including the change of a government. But when the legitimacy of the means to effect change is undermined by fraud, irregularities etc. we are inviting
the public to effect change by other means.
Let me remind the powers that be that Republican France was as a result of the French revolution. The American War of Independence was a revolution against British Colonial rule and the Americans today proudly celebrate on the 4th July as their Independence Day, following the success of the American Revolution. It may be wise for the BN leaders to restudy history. I am not here advocating
revolution, but when legitimate means for change are denied to the people, be prepared for the inevitable as history has demonstrated repeatedly. BN, you are forewarned. A clean and fair election is the only way.
Chris: Why has the government not come out openly that they will ensure a clean electoral roll?
Matthias: The government has established a Parliamentary Select Committee to look into the electoral reforms but I take the view that it has not and or failed to address the issue of the registration of fraudulent voters and other malpractices. By opposing Bersih 2.0 and 3.0 in the manner in which it did, it is the perception that the government is aware of these fraudulent voters and malpractices but is not willing to clean up the electoral roll.
All it takes is for the government, specifically the Prime Minister to declare that he is against fraudulent voters and other forms of registration malpractices highlighted thus far, and will leave no stone unturned to ensure a clean electoral roll to regain the trust of the people and take the wind out of the sails of the Opposition parties.
Why Najib and for that matter all senior politicians in the Barisan Nasional have not done so openly and categorically is the Trillion dollar question. I leave it to you to draw the necessary conclusions. I am exhausted, I must stop here……. The dizzy spells are getting bad.
Chris: Thank you Dad.
The Countdown To Defeat For BN Has Begun
Will Najib Be The First Unelected Prime Minister of Malaysia?
By Christopher Chang
3rd May 2012, Future Fastforward
This article follows from a discussion with my father who is now recuperating at home. My father was admitted to hospital on the 23rd April on the initial diagnosis of having a stroke but was discharged late afternoon on the 28th April after his condition stabilised. His concerns for the country prompted him to discuss with me his views and he has directed that I post them to the website asap.
“If people lose their trust in the government, then the country has lost its basis” - Confucius
Christopher Chang (Chris): What is your reaction to the police brutality as shown
in several YouTube video clips?
Matthias Chang (Matthias): I am not surprised at all. I had concluded in the early morning of Tuesday, 24th April that excessive force would be used. My mind was focused on the Bersih Rally on the 28th April. I was contemplating writing an article to warn the BN government not to repeat the mistakes made in previous Bersih rallies even though deep down in my heart I know that my appeals would be ignored. But, I could not pen my article as I was rushed by an ambulance (following a 999 call) to the KL General Hospital.
Chris: But the Home Minister on the 22nd April, and as reported in NST was quoted as stating:
NST: The home ministry will allow next week’s Bersih rally and similar peaceful gatherings AS THEY DO NOT jeopardise national security. The minister, Dato’ Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, said the ministry’s initial monitoring indicated that the Bersih assembly did not require excessive presence of the police, such as the Federal Reserve Unit (FRU) as the rally was not a security threat.
Matthias: This minister (who is a lawyer by profession) as well as the Prime Minister must explain why the City Police Chief applied ex-parte (i.e. without the knowledge and presence of the Bersih organizers) for an order that Bersih cannot gather at Dataran Merdeka (the Independence Square), as inter-alia it posed a threat to public order and security. This is inconsistent and contradictory to the press statement of the Home Minister. Either the “right hand is not aware of what the left hand is doing” or it is the “good cop, bad cop” routine and the Home Minister hopes to be absolved from any potential fall-out. It would be utterly naïve for him to think of that, and that the public would fall for it.
Chris: Were you surprised by the turnout, estimated to be between 200,000 and 300,000?
Matthias: The exact number is not important but, if as reported by international media and independent observers as over 200,000 and comprising a crosssection of our people then this is historic and this means that the Malaysian people have crossed the Rubicon – the threshold has been crossed. It is a clear message to the BN government that the people are fed-up, pushed to the wall and their limits of tolerance have been breached. THEY DO NOT TRUST THE BN GOVERNMENT ANYMORE.
What I did not expect was that the threshold was crossed at this juncture, at this point in time. I had expected that if the BN Government called for a snap election before the clean up of the electoral roll, the rakyat would come out in droves to punish the BN government and ensure its defeat. The turnout would surpass all previous elections!
There have always been irregularities in our electoral roll as well as incidents of phantom voters, but in the past the people put up with the irregularity as it would not be sufficient to determine the outcome in a major way.
This reality and perception no longer hold true. This has been buttressed by the fact that electoral reforms were only considered after the massive turnout of Bersih 2.0. But for Bersih 2.0, the status quo would remain and this has really stirred the hornet’s nest. The fundamental issue is one of trust. And as Confucius said, once there is no trust in the government, the country has lost its basis!
Only the die-hard UMNO and BN supporters would not acknowledge this and or fail to see the writing on the wall. I had warned as such in my numerous articles before and after Bersih 2.0. The irony is that, the Home Minister before 28th April acknowledged that the government over-reacted when dealing with Bersih 2.0. But, the people treated it as propaganda or in local parlance, sweet talk. The government is no longer able to command the trust of the rakyat. And this is the death knell for the BN government.
I say this without any fear of contradiction. As a lawyer and as a former political secretary to the fourth prime minister, I have always stated the facts objectively without fear or favour. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected but do not throw profanities at me. Prove me wrong and debate with me.
Chris: Dad, there are so many versions as to what happened, what is your take?
Matthias: First lesson in politics, when advising a politician – Don’t get emotional and be distracted from the principal issue(s).
The starting point must be that any law or court order must be just and seen to be so. And that the military, police and security personnel (Special Branch etc.) must be the protector and defender of the people.
Screw up this fundamental principle and the ability of the government to govern is undermined and the trust of the people is forfeited. The legitimacy of the government is brought into question. It is a Herculean task to recover the trust and legitimacy – unless the government is changed or the leadership of the government is changed.
Invariably, within the government, daggers would be drawn and sharpened as no leader is ever indispensable. Who, at the material time would have thought Edward Heath would be replaced by a shopkeeper’s daughter in the person of Margaret Thatcher and she (the Iron Lady) at the peak of her powers would in turn fall victim to a political coup. She did not even know what hit her, as on
that fateful day she went to Paris for an EU meeting in full confidence of her powers on the world’s stage! On her return, the plotters thrust the dagger into her bosom. The rest, as they say is history.
There will be the usual blame game and the more the BN government and their spin doctors indulge in such nonsense, the worse it will be for them. Police brutality cannot be excused under any circumstances (even if provoked) as the police are trained to handle such a scenario and to exercise restraint. There are standard operating procedures (SOP) under which strict orders are issued as to how to handle and control such a situation (especially one which the Home Minister has declared that Bersih is not a security threat to the country. There were no warnings before tear gas and water cannons were used on the crowd at the barricade near Dataran Merdeka.
Elsewhere, the crowd was peaceful, yet we have videos showing police brutality – several policemen beating a single protester in one instance. Then, we have a video of traffic police on their motorbikes in formation chasing the crowd when their role is to control traffic! And more!
Let us take the bulls by the horn. Let’s accept the official version that some protesters broke through a specific barricade. Does that justify the police brutality????
And if the police were to say that the brutality inflicted on the protesters was the action of a few renegade policemen and that the entire police force should not be criticized or condemned, then my reply is, sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander – the alleged actions of a handful of so-called renegade protesters and or provocateurs cannot be blamed on the entire gathering as from the beginning it was peaceful. In any event, the upper hand is with the security forces as they are trained and properly equipped.
I was informed that someone propagated a lie that a policeman was killed by the protesters when there were no fatalities at all. This could very well be a provocation by someone to inflame the police to react in a negative way. It is hoped that whoever is responsible for this false information be brought to book.
This issue must be thoroughly investigated. But, I stand to be corrected. Chris: But, Dad how do you respond to the assertion that a Court order was contravened?
Matthias: There are court orders and court orders. The order by the Magistrate, Encik Zaki Asyraf bin Zubir is a “lawful order” but was it just in the circumstances or an abuse of power? Can it be said that the magistrate was unaware of the press statement by the Home Minister that Bersih 3.0 was not a security threat to the country. What were the grounds / evidence stated in the supporting affidavit in the ex-parte application to contradict the Home Minister? This should be made known to the public. I hope that the Bar Council and concerned lawyers and human rights groups would file the relevant application to challenge the grounds for the said application, being an application made ex-parte. Hence, utmost good faith and full disclosure of all relevant facts (including the press statement by the Home Minister) is required. Was the magistrate misled?
Be that as it may, I take the view that the Court order is unjust in its scope and purport. Dataran Merdeka, in spite of its haloed name, has been used for all sorts of functions, from rock concerts to other social gatherings. Even Mat Rempits have used the surrounding roads for their illegal racing and getting away with it, but the ordinary folks cannot even use the said road parallel to the square. When hundreds of thousands of people gather there to express their democratic right for a clean electoral roll, they were barred from using the place by a Court order. That order is manifestly unjust, when it has been expressly stated by the Home Minister that it posed no security threat to the country.
The likely retort is that, Matthias, this is a Court order and must be obeyed! I will cite a few examples why it can be disobeyed, even at the risk of contempt of court.
1. During the British colonial rule, several laws were enacted to suppress the people, yet it is UMNO who never ceased to tell us that they “led the demonstrations against the British for independence and justice for the people”. Newspapers were shut down and people imprisoned for defying British colonial rule. There were laws and court orders but they were defied. So the laws and the court orders must be examined whether they are just or unjust laws.
2. South Africa had Apartheid laws and court orders. But they were defied by the Black majority and Nelson Mandela was incarcerated for over 20 years when he defied these inhumane and unjust laws. Malaysians and the Malaysian government supported the struggle of the Black majority.
3. The Palestinians have been humiliated and imprisoned for opposing Zionist Israel’s occupation of their land. Today, over ten thousand are incarcerated in Israeli prisons including young children below the age of 14 years. They have been imprisoned in accordance with Israeli laws and court orders. Have the Palestinians no right to demonstrate against these unjust laws?
4. During the civil rights movement in the USA, there were “legitimate” laws forbidding “Blacks and dogs” from public places, e.g. in parks and blacks must sit at the back of buses, segregated from the whites who were seated in the front and any contravention is a criminal offence attracting custodial sentences. But, it took a brave woman to defy the law and demand that she be treated equally. The woman is none other than Rosa Parkes. She has been referred to as "the first lady of civil rights" and "the mother of the freedom movement" by the US Congress. Parkes' act of defiance became an important symbol of the modern Civil Rights Movement and Parkes became an international icon of resistance to racial segregation. She organised and collaborated with civil rights leaders,
including boycott leader Martin Luther King, Jr., helping to launch him to national prominence in the civil rights movement.
5. I would like to quote Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on defying unjust laws: “One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law”.
And I say, Amen to that.
6. From Yahoo, I found this posting – “In India, the Salt Satyagraha was a campaign of non-violent protest against the British salt tax (an unjust law) in colonial India which began with the Salt March to Dandi on March 12, 1930. It was the first act of organised opposition to British rule after Purna Swaraj, the declaration of independence by the Indian National Congress. Mahatma Gandhi led the Dandi march from his Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi, Gujarat to produce salt without paying the tax, with growing numbers of Indians joining him along the way. When Gandhi broke the salt laws in Dandi at the conclusion of the march on April 6, 1930, it sparked large scale acts of civil disobedience against the British Raj salt laws by millions of Indians.
“Gandhi was arrested on May 5, 1930, just days before his planned raid on the Dharasana Salt Works. The Dandi March and the ensuing Dharasana Satyagraha drew worldwide attention to the Indian
independence movement through extensive newspaper and newsreel coverage. The satyagraha against the salt tax continued for almost a year, ending with Gandhi's release from jail and negotiations with Viceroy Lord Irwin at the Second Round Table Conference. Over 80,000 Indians were jailed as a result of the Salt Satyagraha. The campaign had a significant effect on changing world and British attitudes toward Indian independence, and caused large numbers of Indians to actively join the fight for the first time.”
And even though I may not agree with the Opposition parties, I will oppose any attempt to stifle such expression of the democratic will of the people. Election with a clean electoral roll is a legitimate way of making political changes, including the change of a government. But when the legitimacy of the means to effect change is undermined by fraud, irregularities etc. we are inviting
the public to effect change by other means.
Let me remind the powers that be that Republican France was as a result of the French revolution. The American War of Independence was a revolution against British Colonial rule and the Americans today proudly celebrate on the 4th July as their Independence Day, following the success of the American Revolution. It may be wise for the BN leaders to restudy history. I am not here advocating
revolution, but when legitimate means for change are denied to the people, be prepared for the inevitable as history has demonstrated repeatedly. BN, you are forewarned. A clean and fair election is the only way.
Chris: Why has the government not come out openly that they will ensure a clean electoral roll?
Matthias: The government has established a Parliamentary Select Committee to look into the electoral reforms but I take the view that it has not and or failed to address the issue of the registration of fraudulent voters and other malpractices. By opposing Bersih 2.0 and 3.0 in the manner in which it did, it is the perception that the government is aware of these fraudulent voters and malpractices but is not willing to clean up the electoral roll.
All it takes is for the government, specifically the Prime Minister to declare that he is against fraudulent voters and other forms of registration malpractices highlighted thus far, and will leave no stone unturned to ensure a clean electoral roll to regain the trust of the people and take the wind out of the sails of the Opposition parties.
Why Najib and for that matter all senior politicians in the Barisan Nasional have not done so openly and categorically is the Trillion dollar question. I leave it to you to draw the necessary conclusions. I am exhausted, I must stop here……. The dizzy spells are getting bad.
Chris: Thank you Dad.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
MUHYIDDIN DESPERATELY WANTS TO GO TO HEAVEN
I wish I have the capability of writing stuff with this post title as the real author of MUHYIDDIN DESPERATELY WANTS TO GO TO HEAVEN is none other than RPK (Raja Petra Kamaruddin) of Malaysia Today. He seem to have phenomenal memory of the past plus very credible sources of information that we lesser mortals do not have. You should go to MUHYIDDIN DESPERATELY WANTS TO GO TO HEAVEN to read what RPK has to reveal about our Deputy Prime Minister.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
UMNO stand for UM No reforms
To make it clearer, let us put it in a more dramatic manner - UMNO means UMmmmm NO reforms.
The President of UMNO plus current Prime Minister of Malaysia said, "we got your message." Have they? Many doubt it. Look at what has transpired so far. What did the new Tourism Minister Azalina do on taking office? Cut off Tourism fund to state controlled tourism body in Pakatan Rakyat ruled states. What did the new Minister of Rural and Regional Development did on taking office? Redirect funds away from Pakatan Rakyat ruled state bodies and planning to channel them via Malaysia Federal Government direct to previous village heads who have resigned as village heads. They will be given some kind of Federal posts instead. Can't remember the rest, but these 2 are enough to bring our blood to a boil again. These are the kind of actions that aroused the Malaysians to stand up and be counted in the recent election and are being repeated again. What will Malaysians do if this continue? I don't know about you. I know what I will do.
Did they get message? Someone did get the messages. But it is the wrong person. It is me who got the messages. AGAIN! Same old story.
The President of UMNO plus current Prime Minister of Malaysia said, "we got your message." Have they? Many doubt it. Look at what has transpired so far. What did the new Tourism Minister Azalina do on taking office? Cut off Tourism fund to state controlled tourism body in Pakatan Rakyat ruled states. What did the new Minister of Rural and Regional Development did on taking office? Redirect funds away from Pakatan Rakyat ruled state bodies and planning to channel them via Malaysia Federal Government direct to previous village heads who have resigned as village heads. They will be given some kind of Federal posts instead. Can't remember the rest, but these 2 are enough to bring our blood to a boil again. These are the kind of actions that aroused the Malaysians to stand up and be counted in the recent election and are being repeated again. What will Malaysians do if this continue? I don't know about you. I know what I will do.
Did they get message? Someone did get the messages. But it is the wrong person. It is me who got the messages. AGAIN! Same old story.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Ahmad Said to be Terengganu Menteri Besar (Chief Minister or MB)
According to theStar Online, the UMNO Supreme Council meeting has given its support for Ahmad Said, the Terengganu Kijal State Assemblyman, as the new Menteri Besar (MB or Chief Minister) of Terengganu, which hopefully now has helped avert a Constitutional crisis. The Terengganu Palace's choice for the post of Menteri Besar was Ahmad Said while initially, the other UMNO state assemblymen and Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was Idris Jusoh, the former Terengganu Menteri Besar who was reported as having incurred the wrath of the Terengganu Palace.
Hopefully, the swearing in of the Terengganu Menteri Besar will take place soon, followed by the appointment of the State Exco (Executive Committee) and the formation of Terengganu State Government.
Hopefully, the swearing in of the Terengganu Menteri Besar will take place soon, followed by the appointment of the State Exco (Executive Committee) and the formation of Terengganu State Government.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Malaysian Government to apologise for victims of 1988 judicial crisis
"Zaid: Govt has to apologise to victims of 1988 judicial crisis"
That was what I read at theStar Online:
That way by a rare respected UMNO member, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, who was not selected to stand for the 2008 Malaysia General Election, probably because of some remarks that didn’t go down well with UMNO. Anyway, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has now been appointed as a Senator, then the de facto Law Minister, replacing the "stupid, stupid, stupid" Nazri, former de facto Law Minister(that word stupid wasn't meant to be used to describe Nazri, but is repeating what he uttered in the Parliament).
In the 1988 Judicial crisis, then Lord President (equivalent of current Chief Justice) Tun Mohd Salleh Abbas, was sacked, in the opinion of many, unjustly. I had the good fortune to ask Tun Mohd Salleh Abbas regarding the provision in Malaysia Constitution for free speech, free expression and free assembly plus the clause that said any laws or regulations that go against the spirit of the Constitution is invalid. I wanted to know about the validity of the requirement to get a police permit for peaceful assembly without arms.
I had to express my sympathy over what happened to him as during our conversation, if I remembered correctly, he couldn't even afford Internet access (this is from a 59 year old brain which may or may not be reliable).
I am of the opinion that the Federal Government should not only apologize, but also to compensate those who were wronged.
That was what I read at theStar Online:
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/3/23/nation/20730100&sec=nation
That way by a rare respected UMNO member, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, who was not selected to stand for the 2008 Malaysia General Election, probably because of some remarks that didn’t go down well with UMNO. Anyway, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has now been appointed as a Senator, then the de facto Law Minister, replacing the "stupid, stupid, stupid" Nazri, former de facto Law Minister(that word stupid wasn't meant to be used to describe Nazri, but is repeating what he uttered in the Parliament).
In the 1988 Judicial crisis, then Lord President (equivalent of current Chief Justice) Tun Mohd Salleh Abbas, was sacked, in the opinion of many, unjustly. I had the good fortune to ask Tun Mohd Salleh Abbas regarding the provision in Malaysia Constitution for free speech, free expression and free assembly plus the clause that said any laws or regulations that go against the spirit of the Constitution is invalid. I wanted to know about the validity of the requirement to get a police permit for peaceful assembly without arms.
I had to express my sympathy over what happened to him as during our conversation, if I remembered correctly, he couldn't even afford Internet access (this is from a 59 year old brain which may or may not be reliable).
I am of the opinion that the Federal Government should not only apologize, but also to compensate those who were wronged.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Koh Tsu Koon ignored Indians
Koh fails to stop - just looks and goes
Athi Veeranggan | Mar 3, 08 11:20am [extract]
(edited to avoid duplicate content)
A group of residents numbering more than 200 carrying banners and placards and many chanting anti-BN slogans, were protesting against the BN (Barisan Nasional) for failure to expand a Valdor Tamil school despite appealing for 20 years.
While they were staging their protest, Koh Tsu Koon passed the area in his (presumably expensive)four-wheel drive about 11am.
They shouted for him to stop and hear them out, but Koh - contesting his
first parliamentary seat in Batu Kawan which covers the Valdor area - ignored the calls and drove on by.
Remeber how insensitive UMNO held their General Assembly during Deepavali? Remember how Abdullah Badawi dissolved the Parliament during the Chinese New Year celebrations. Remember how the Prime Minister said he is Prime Minister for all Malaysians. Let us remember. Let us not depend on cheap talk. Let us examine actions.
Remember all these when you cast your votes on Saturday 8 March 2008.
Athi Veeranggan | Mar 3, 08 11:20am [extract]
http://www.malaysia kini.com/ news/79042
(edited to avoid duplicate content)
A group of residents numbering more than 200 carrying banners and placards and many chanting anti-BN slogans, were protesting against the BN (Barisan Nasional) for failure to expand a Valdor Tamil school despite appealing for 20 years.
While they were staging their protest, Koh Tsu Koon passed the area in his (presumably expensive)four-wheel drive about 11am.
They shouted for him to stop and hear them out, but Koh - contesting his
first parliamentary seat in Batu Kawan which covers the Valdor area - ignored the calls and drove on by.
Remeber how insensitive UMNO held their General Assembly during Deepavali? Remember how Abdullah Badawi dissolved the Parliament during the Chinese New Year celebrations. Remember how the Prime Minister said he is Prime Minister for all Malaysians. Let us remember. Let us not depend on cheap talk. Let us examine actions.
Remember all these when you cast your votes on Saturday 8 March 2008.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Dr, Mahathir mudah lupa: Not true
We have read about the selective amnesia of Tun Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad at the "Royal Commission on VK Lingam tape" with his numerous "cannot remember". However, he was reported by MySinchew.com as having "remembered" a gentlemen agreement for a one term premiership for Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the current Prime Minister of Malaysia and successor to Tun Dr. Mahathir.
So people saying Dr. Mahathir lupa lupa (Dr. Mahathir easily forget) is not true.
Source:
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/6552?tid=14
So people saying Dr. Mahathir lupa lupa (Dr. Mahathir easily forget) is not true.
Source:
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/6552?tid=14
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Should non-Muslims in Malaysia have a say regarding Malaysia becoming an Islamic state?
This post is a response to Friday Special: Rights of non-Muslim in an Islamic state which in turn was a post published in response to my comment in the above blog which was reproduced verbatim in that post. First, I would like to thank Malay Women in Malaysia for being willing to engage in discussions about Islam with a non-Muslim unlike many others who would suppress discussions as they say non-Muslim do not know Islam and therefore have no right to talk about Islam. I have followed the links given in that post and now I think I am ready to respond.
It was educational. At least now in addition to knowing the people of the book are referred to as dhimmis in an Islamic state, I now know the rest are called thimmies (also referred to as Ahl Zimmi?) and the the tax paid by non-Muslims is called jizyah. If the site that discussed this issue is accurate, my misconception that non-Muslim cannot serve in the military is wrong for a non-Muslim may opt to serve in the military and is then not obligated to pay jizyah (but see my comment below regarding services in the military). However, I cannot find any reference to what happen in that case. Would that non-Muslim be obliged to pay zakat or escape paying any tax at all?
The second link perhaps answered this question. In a reply to a question about Muslim paying the taxes in the United Kingdom, the response was it is permissible for a government to impose taxes to pay for the public sectors and common welfare. So I would suppose in an Islamic state, in addition to jizyah and zakat, there could also be taxes like Income Tax, sales tax, service tax, etc.
The third link addressed the rights of non-Muslims in an Islamic state: "Muslims and Zimmis have the same rights and are subject to the same obligations in the Muslim country, but there are exceptions. Zimmi is not allowed to be the president of the Muslim state or even to be leaders in army or judges among Muslims (condensed)." In essence, the second part negate the first part as the second part imply that non-Muslim DO NOT have the same right. If anybody do not agree with this statement, please put your arguments in the comments.
Further, serving in the military have many implications. In the military, you are to obey without questions. This mean whoever serve in the military must have full faith in those higher up in the chain of command. There are such a thing as "cannon fodder". But non-Muslims cannot lead in the Islamic military, only follow orders. Not all who professed a religion (I am not just referring to Islam) adhere fully to its noble teachings, and I don't think you can blame a non-Muslim if he is reluctant to serve in such a military. What should he do when ordered to kill someone of his own faith? It would also not be fair as he would have no chance of advancement in the military, and not only military. A non-Muslim will also have no chance to lead the country or to become a judge.
In an Islamic state, the supreme law will not be the Constitution, but the Syariah law. If I remember correctly, someone said that the actual leader of an Islamic state may not be the President but the Supreme Leader elected from an assembly of mujtahid (Islamic scholar). Essentially, all this mean the non-Muslim can have no say in the running of his country. Now you tell me how all that had been discussed above can justify saying non-Muslims shall have the same rights as a Muslim. I am open to comments to rebut all this.
Every person will have their own opinions of things. Some are colored by their bias towards their own religion (and please don't take this as referring to Muslims only), others try to be objective. Let us say we accept that "the whole thing (taxes, rights, governance of the country) would be fair for all Muslims and non-Muslims" is accepted, but let me ask this simple question. Is it right or fair to impose an Islamic state upon citizens of a country which originally was not formed as an Islamic state and the non-Muslims who originally was a part of the group of people who helped form Malaysia were assured that the country being formed will NOT become an Islamic state. Further, is in right that the people of Sabah and Sarawak who were never given an indication of the possibility that Malaysia may become an Islamic state will have such a state imposed on them? May I speculate on the possibility of them agreeing to join Malaysia if they had been told that one day, Malaysia will become an Islamic state? I asked a Sarawakian, and the answer was obvious.
Further, the Reid Commission dated 27/9/1956 at page 19 stated that "The religion of Malaya shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practicing their own religion, and shall not imply the State is not a secular State." This was what was agreed to when the United Kingdom granted independence to Malaya. Is this not saying that Malaya is a secular state? Is this binding?
Do we have a say on this matter? And if the authorities insist on pushing it down our throat, and we do not want to accept, what can we do? I did not chose to be born in this country, but I was, and I grew up here, started a family here and will live the rest of my life here. If an Islamic state is imposed upon me and my family over our objections, where can I go? I can't go to China as I am not a citizen of that country and they may not accept me. By the way, China has more Muslims than Malaysia, but are they hankering for China to become an Islamic state? Will Malaysia allow itself to be divided into two, one an Islamic state, and one a secular state and its citizen given free choice as to which part they want to go to? And even if that is ever allowed to happen, can you imagine the chaos and hardship as homes are not easily portable.
Will a fair-minded Muslim impose the Islamic state upon me and my family over our objections?
Malay Women in Malaysia, if you took the trouble to read up to here, I thank you. I also believe I read "democracy" being discussed in one of your posts. I think you had a negative opinion regarding democracy, and if so, we were of the same mind if I had stuck to what I wrote in an essay for General Paper in the 60's (we had to take HSC or Higher School Certificate then). We were asked to write an essay on democracy. I had opined that democracy is rule by the average (which are not the most intelligent) as there is such a thing as a normal curve - huge majority (average) of average intelligence in the middle, a small fraction of high intelligence and low intelligence on both side of the curve. A democratic government got to go back to the electorate every so many years to get a mandate from the people (majority of average intelligence) to continue to rule. A smart politician who only value power may not dare to implement policies which he or she knows is good for the country but which the majority of average intelligence cannot see the merits and may not accept. He or she may implement policies which are popular but detrimental to the country. I got an A for that essay. I have matured since and have seen many things happened around me. If you did discuss about democracy in your blog, to save me the trouble of searching for it, I hope you will leave a comment and a link to that post because I will like to give my response to that post.
It was educational. At least now in addition to knowing the people of the book are referred to as dhimmis in an Islamic state, I now know the rest are called thimmies (also referred to as Ahl Zimmi?) and the the tax paid by non-Muslims is called jizyah. If the site that discussed this issue is accurate, my misconception that non-Muslim cannot serve in the military is wrong for a non-Muslim may opt to serve in the military and is then not obligated to pay jizyah (but see my comment below regarding services in the military). However, I cannot find any reference to what happen in that case. Would that non-Muslim be obliged to pay zakat or escape paying any tax at all?
The second link perhaps answered this question. In a reply to a question about Muslim paying the taxes in the United Kingdom, the response was it is permissible for a government to impose taxes to pay for the public sectors and common welfare. So I would suppose in an Islamic state, in addition to jizyah and zakat, there could also be taxes like Income Tax, sales tax, service tax, etc.
The third link addressed the rights of non-Muslims in an Islamic state: "Muslims and Zimmis have the same rights and are subject to the same obligations in the Muslim country, but there are exceptions. Zimmi is not allowed to be the president of the Muslim state or even to be leaders in army or judges among Muslims (condensed)." In essence, the second part negate the first part as the second part imply that non-Muslim DO NOT have the same right. If anybody do not agree with this statement, please put your arguments in the comments.
Further, serving in the military have many implications. In the military, you are to obey without questions. This mean whoever serve in the military must have full faith in those higher up in the chain of command. There are such a thing as "cannon fodder". But non-Muslims cannot lead in the Islamic military, only follow orders. Not all who professed a religion (I am not just referring to Islam) adhere fully to its noble teachings, and I don't think you can blame a non-Muslim if he is reluctant to serve in such a military. What should he do when ordered to kill someone of his own faith? It would also not be fair as he would have no chance of advancement in the military, and not only military. A non-Muslim will also have no chance to lead the country or to become a judge.
In an Islamic state, the supreme law will not be the Constitution, but the Syariah law. If I remember correctly, someone said that the actual leader of an Islamic state may not be the President but the Supreme Leader elected from an assembly of mujtahid (Islamic scholar). Essentially, all this mean the non-Muslim can have no say in the running of his country. Now you tell me how all that had been discussed above can justify saying non-Muslims shall have the same rights as a Muslim. I am open to comments to rebut all this.
Every person will have their own opinions of things. Some are colored by their bias towards their own religion (and please don't take this as referring to Muslims only), others try to be objective. Let us say we accept that "the whole thing (taxes, rights, governance of the country) would be fair for all Muslims and non-Muslims" is accepted, but let me ask this simple question. Is it right or fair to impose an Islamic state upon citizens of a country which originally was not formed as an Islamic state and the non-Muslims who originally was a part of the group of people who helped form Malaysia were assured that the country being formed will NOT become an Islamic state. Further, is in right that the people of Sabah and Sarawak who were never given an indication of the possibility that Malaysia may become an Islamic state will have such a state imposed on them? May I speculate on the possibility of them agreeing to join Malaysia if they had been told that one day, Malaysia will become an Islamic state? I asked a Sarawakian, and the answer was obvious.
Further, the Reid Commission dated 27/9/1956 at page 19 stated that "The religion of Malaya shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practicing their own religion, and shall not imply the State is not a secular State." This was what was agreed to when the United Kingdom granted independence to Malaya. Is this not saying that Malaya is a secular state? Is this binding?
Do we have a say on this matter? And if the authorities insist on pushing it down our throat, and we do not want to accept, what can we do? I did not chose to be born in this country, but I was, and I grew up here, started a family here and will live the rest of my life here. If an Islamic state is imposed upon me and my family over our objections, where can I go? I can't go to China as I am not a citizen of that country and they may not accept me. By the way, China has more Muslims than Malaysia, but are they hankering for China to become an Islamic state? Will Malaysia allow itself to be divided into two, one an Islamic state, and one a secular state and its citizen given free choice as to which part they want to go to? And even if that is ever allowed to happen, can you imagine the chaos and hardship as homes are not easily portable.
Will a fair-minded Muslim impose the Islamic state upon me and my family over our objections?
Malay Women in Malaysia, if you took the trouble to read up to here, I thank you. I also believe I read "democracy" being discussed in one of your posts. I think you had a negative opinion regarding democracy, and if so, we were of the same mind if I had stuck to what I wrote in an essay for General Paper in the 60's (we had to take HSC or Higher School Certificate then). We were asked to write an essay on democracy. I had opined that democracy is rule by the average (which are not the most intelligent) as there is such a thing as a normal curve - huge majority (average) of average intelligence in the middle, a small fraction of high intelligence and low intelligence on both side of the curve. A democratic government got to go back to the electorate every so many years to get a mandate from the people (majority of average intelligence) to continue to rule. A smart politician who only value power may not dare to implement policies which he or she knows is good for the country but which the majority of average intelligence cannot see the merits and may not accept. He or she may implement policies which are popular but detrimental to the country. I got an A for that essay. I have matured since and have seen many things happened around me. If you did discuss about democracy in your blog, to save me the trouble of searching for it, I hope you will leave a comment and a link to that post because I will like to give my response to that post.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Malaysia Parliament House
Friday 10 August 2007 was the first time I stepped into the Malaysia Parliament House to attend the Parliamentary Roundtable to reaffirm Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state (click BACK button to get back to this page). Took some photos to show how the Parliament House as seen from outside and part of the inside its compound. The top part of this post shall consist mainly of photos. The bottom part is the more important section of the post. Here is a view from outside:
This is the view of the tower block from the car park inside the compound:
It seems the Parliament house is divided into 2 blocks, the 18-storey tower block that you see in the photos above and the three-storey podium, housing the Senate and the House of Representatives (Dewan Rakyat) behind it. Beside the main tower are some nice fountains and a photo of one of them is shown below:
The Parliamentary Roundtable to reaffirm Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state (click BACK button to get back to this page) was held in the three-storey podium behind the main tower. To get in, we have to put our keys and digital camera in a basket and pass through a metal detector. We also have to surrender our identity card to get a visitor pass although if I am not wrong, it is against the law to hold the identity cards of visitors. Strange that such requirement is practiced in the house of the lawmakers when at the Citibank building tower, to get in, they only scan your identity card but give it back to you. Seemed to me Citibank is more law abiding than our law makers!
To get to the chamber where the Roundtable is held, we have to go through a long corridor pictured below:
This photo was actually taken after the Parliamentary Roundtable is over, and the figure on the left in the distance is Harris Ibrahim whose writings I have quoted in other parts of this blog. Alon the corridors are, among others, an indoor garden and a souvenir shop. Below is a photo of the indoor garden:
At the end of the corridor, we had to climb the stairs to the first floor to the discussion chamber. Unfortunately, another group was occupying the chamber beyond their allotted time, and we had to wait outside. Here are some photos while we were waiting to get in:
Wonder if the report of the interview will ever get to see the light of day.
Well, those are some photos of the Malaysia Parliament House. The Parliament, according to Fulton, E. Davie. Progressive Conservative Member for Kamloops, B.C., Canada, exists for the purpose of controlling the executive, of holding it accountable and responsible in the fullest sense; and second, that Parliament is a representative institution to which the people have entrusted the task of acting for them with respect to this matter of controlling and giving consent to the proposals of the executive. There are supposed to be 3 branches of bodies to govern the affairs of a democracy. These three branches are the Executive, Legislative (Parliament or Congress), and Judicial branches. No one branch contains absolute power, rather, each branch is balanced off of the others creating a system of checks and balances to protect the principals of democracy.
However, it appear to many that this system of checks and balances have been broken down to quite an extend in Malaysia by the sheer majority of the Barisan (coalition) and the way the constituencies are divided. Malaysia has always been proud to proclaim to the world that there is power sharing among the races in Malaysia. However, the Barisan itself is dominated by UMNO (United Malays National Organisation) dominates the Barisan and dictate terms and the other parties appear to me to be there just to tag along. They are bound by the whip to vote for all proposals by the executives and to vote against any proposals by the opposition, irrespective of the merits of a proposal. The Barisan Members of Parliament are not allowed to vote according to concience. So what is the purpose of all debates and the shoutings when at the end of the day, result of the debate is irrelevant. The Parliament as it exist today appear to be nothing but a rubber stamp for the purpose of formalising the proposals of the Executive. It is my hope as a Malaysian citizen who was born here, bred here and intend to live out the rest of my life here that the situation will change and the Malaysia Parliament will one day become what it is meant to be, where meaningful debates are carried out, where no one is allowed to call another "stupid, stupid, stupid....." instead of rebutting a valid point brought up, and get away with it because the Speaker says such language is the norm, when Members of Parliament, irrespective of party, ruling or opposition, are allowed to vote according to conscience.
Regarding this issue of Malaysia being an Islamic state, the MCA or the Malaysia Chinese Association made a statement, and was promptly ordered by the UMNO youth to shut up. Now not a squeak on the issue from them. What is the role of the other component parties in the Barisan?
The Judiciary have been shackled from the day the former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir sacked the then Lord President Salleh Abbas in 1988 and the power of the judges to declare laws or executive actions ultra vires if they clashed with the Constitution was squashed. Now we have a subsevient Judiciary which is not independent, where the appointments of judges are controlled by the Executive.
Farish A Noor talked about what can happen in a weak democracy where a powerful few can rule by decree, and if the citizens don't wake up, this is the situation we will end up with if we do nothing and allow it to happen. BTW, there is further discussions of this at Poll: Is the world round or flat? Has important implications for Malaysia.
Outside view of Malaysia Parliament House
This is the view of the tower block from the car park inside the compound:
View of Malaysia Parliament House Tower block from car park
It seems the Parliament house is divided into 2 blocks, the 18-storey tower block that you see in the photos above and the three-storey podium, housing the Senate and the House of Representatives (Dewan Rakyat) behind it. Beside the main tower are some nice fountains and a photo of one of them is shown below:
Water fountain beside main tower
The Parliamentary Roundtable to reaffirm Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state (click BACK button to get back to this page) was held in the three-storey podium behind the main tower. To get in, we have to put our keys and digital camera in a basket and pass through a metal detector. We also have to surrender our identity card to get a visitor pass although if I am not wrong, it is against the law to hold the identity cards of visitors. Strange that such requirement is practiced in the house of the lawmakers when at the Citibank building tower, to get in, they only scan your identity card but give it back to you. Seemed to me Citibank is more law abiding than our law makers!
To get to the chamber where the Roundtable is held, we have to go through a long corridor pictured below:
Corridor to the chamber
This photo was actually taken after the Parliamentary Roundtable is over, and the figure on the left in the distance is Harris Ibrahim whose writings I have quoted in other parts of this blog. Alon the corridors are, among others, an indoor garden and a souvenir shop. Below is a photo of the indoor garden:
Indoor garden
At the end of the corridor, we had to climb the stairs to the first floor to the discussion chamber. Unfortunately, another group was occupying the chamber beyond their allotted time, and we had to wait outside. Here are some photos while we were waiting to get in:
Parliament Opposition Leader interviewed by Oriental Press reporter
Wonder if the report of the interview will ever get to see the light of day.
Well, those are some photos of the Malaysia Parliament House. The Parliament, according to Fulton, E. Davie. Progressive Conservative Member for Kamloops, B.C., Canada, exists for the purpose of controlling the executive, of holding it accountable and responsible in the fullest sense; and second, that Parliament is a representative institution to which the people have entrusted the task of acting for them with respect to this matter of controlling and giving consent to the proposals of the executive. There are supposed to be 3 branches of bodies to govern the affairs of a democracy. These three branches are the Executive, Legislative (Parliament or Congress), and Judicial branches. No one branch contains absolute power, rather, each branch is balanced off of the others creating a system of checks and balances to protect the principals of democracy.
However, it appear to many that this system of checks and balances have been broken down to quite an extend in Malaysia by the sheer majority of the Barisan (coalition) and the way the constituencies are divided. Malaysia has always been proud to proclaim to the world that there is power sharing among the races in Malaysia. However, the Barisan itself is dominated by UMNO (United Malays National Organisation) dominates the Barisan and dictate terms and the other parties appear to me to be there just to tag along. They are bound by the whip to vote for all proposals by the executives and to vote against any proposals by the opposition, irrespective of the merits of a proposal. The Barisan Members of Parliament are not allowed to vote according to concience. So what is the purpose of all debates and the shoutings when at the end of the day, result of the debate is irrelevant. The Parliament as it exist today appear to be nothing but a rubber stamp for the purpose of formalising the proposals of the Executive. It is my hope as a Malaysian citizen who was born here, bred here and intend to live out the rest of my life here that the situation will change and the Malaysia Parliament will one day become what it is meant to be, where meaningful debates are carried out, where no one is allowed to call another "stupid, stupid, stupid....." instead of rebutting a valid point brought up, and get away with it because the Speaker says such language is the norm, when Members of Parliament, irrespective of party, ruling or opposition, are allowed to vote according to conscience.
Regarding this issue of Malaysia being an Islamic state, the MCA or the Malaysia Chinese Association made a statement, and was promptly ordered by the UMNO youth to shut up. Now not a squeak on the issue from them. What is the role of the other component parties in the Barisan?
The Judiciary have been shackled from the day the former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir sacked the then Lord President Salleh Abbas in 1988 and the power of the judges to declare laws or executive actions ultra vires if they clashed with the Constitution was squashed. Now we have a subsevient Judiciary which is not independent, where the appointments of judges are controlled by the Executive.
Farish A Noor talked about what can happen in a weak democracy where a powerful few can rule by decree, and if the citizens don't wake up, this is the situation we will end up with if we do nothing and allow it to happen. BTW, there is further discussions of this at Poll: Is the world round or flat? Has important implications for Malaysia.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Flag of Malaysia and United States of America
Here are images of the flag of Malaysia (recently referred to as Jalur Gemilang or "Stripes of Glory") and the flag of the United States of America:
According to Wikipedia, there is no substantive connection to either flag. However, from the remarkable similarity between the two flags, it is highly likely that the Malaysia flag designed by Mohamad Hamzah of the Public Works Departmen was inspired by the flag of the United States of America.
There are similarities between the two countries in that both have large immigration population or decendents of immigrants, and both are federations of various states. The great difference is that USA stress on assimilation of immigrants and learning and using English while Malaysia allows each races to keep their culture and languages. Malaysia do make Malay (now called Bahasa Malaysia) the official language and Islam the official religion.
According to the original Malaysia Constitution, Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion, but because of the need to counter the oppositon party PAS (Pan Malaysian Islamic Party or Parti Islam SeMalaysia) which was pushing hard for Malaysia to become an Islamic country, the former Dr. Mahathir declared that Malaysia is already? an Islamic country because Malaysia has assimilated Muslim values in the Government administration, in the Banking system, etc.
There is great fear among the non-Muslim population of the creeping Islamisation of the country as demonstrated by the Lina Joy case, Revathi's case and many other cases. Look at these for example:
Candlelight vigil for Revathi (and for Malaysia)
Candlelight vigil for Revathi (and for Malaysia) Part 2
Unity threatened by continuing infringements of religious freedom booklet.
Families have been broken up because of religion and minor children converted to Islam without the consent of the non-Muslim spouse when the counterpart converted to Islam.
And look what some hardliners are saying and getting away with:
This is a Muslim country, leave Malaysia if you don't like it, says Jerai Member of Parliament.
Update 20 July 2007: The Deputy Prime Minister made a very disturbing announcement that despite what is written in the original Constitution, Malaysia has never been a secular state, but is an Islamic state. And according to Malaysiakini, the Internal Security Ministry has confirmed that they have given a directive to all mainstream media not to publish any news on the issue of Malaysia being an Islamic state. And here is the "clincher": "However, he said newpapers can still publish statements from Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his deputy Najib Abdul Razak on the country being an Islamic state."
Note: free question mark graphic trying to express my exasperation at the things that goes on in our country with us pretty much being unable to do anything was taken from Free Emphasis Graphics, a link put here as appreciation to be allowed to use their graphic.
Update 21 July 2007: To balance the issues raised here, I will like to add that not all Malaysian Muslims share the view of our Deputy Prime Minister. Here is a courages Muslim blogger Haris Ibrahim who posted an interesting rebuttal to the Deputy Prime Minister statement. I will paste some extract from his article at Najib, bring forth your proof.
"Your late father, according to history, was part of the 1956 delegation that went to London to secure our independence.
Truly, this nation is indebted to your late father, the late Tunku and every freedom fighter of the era for securing independence for our nation.
And a secular Federal Constitution.
Yes, secular.
Have you not read the Reid Commission report, that document that bears testimony to the selfless work of our leaders of days gone by?
Tun Salleh Abas did, in extenso, in the case of Che Omar Che Soh. I have referred to this in an earlier post entitled ‘Historical and Constitutional Position of Islam Judicially Examined’.
Let me reproduce for you here the relevant excerpt from Tun Salleh’s judgment.
‘…we have to set aside our personal feelings because the law in this country is still what it is today, secular law, where morality not accepted by the law is not enjoying the status of law. Perhaps that argument should be addressed at other forums or at seminars and, perhaps, to politicians and Parliament. Until the law and the system is changed, we have no choice but to proceed as we are doing today.”
"Tunku said : ‘The country has a multi-racial population with various beliefs. Malaysia must continue as a secular State with Islam as the official religion’.
"‘Former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn has supported Tunku Abdul Rahman’s view that Malaysia should not be turned into an islamic state…”The nation can still be functional as a secular state with Islam as the offical religion,” he said"
"As one who, like you, professes a belief in Islam, I must ask that you desist in these unfounded contentions.
As you also well know, God in the Holy Qur’an commands that when there is a dispute on an issue, it is proper to call in the evidence of the respective parties.
You say Islamic state.
I say secular.
I have produced my proof.
‘Have you any knowledge with you? If so, bring it forth’ - Surah 6 verse 148 of the Holy Qur’an
Please note that I have refrained from invoking the last part of the verse above. At this juncture, I shall assume you were merely mistaken.
I am obliged to say here that if you insist on continuing to make these assertions without bringing forth your proof, I shall invoke the curse of God as commanded in Surah 3 verse 61 of the Holy Qur’an"
Harris Ibrahim is indeed a brave Muslim blogger. I pray he will not get into any problems.
As usual, I will contact Harris Ibrahim if he has any objection to me putting excerpts of his post here, and will remove them if he object.
Malaysia Flag
United States of America Flag
According to Wikipedia, there is no substantive connection to either flag. However, from the remarkable similarity between the two flags, it is highly likely that the Malaysia flag designed by Mohamad Hamzah of the Public Works Departmen was inspired by the flag of the United States of America.
There are similarities between the two countries in that both have large immigration population or decendents of immigrants, and both are federations of various states. The great difference is that USA stress on assimilation of immigrants and learning and using English while Malaysia allows each races to keep their culture and languages. Malaysia do make Malay (now called Bahasa Malaysia) the official language and Islam the official religion.
According to the original Malaysia Constitution, Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion, but because of the need to counter the oppositon party PAS (Pan Malaysian Islamic Party or Parti Islam SeMalaysia) which was pushing hard for Malaysia to become an Islamic country, the former Dr. Mahathir declared that Malaysia is already? an Islamic country because Malaysia has assimilated Muslim values in the Government administration, in the Banking system, etc.
There is great fear among the non-Muslim population of the creeping Islamisation of the country as demonstrated by the Lina Joy case, Revathi's case and many other cases. Look at these for example:
Candlelight vigil for Revathi (and for Malaysia)
Candlelight vigil for Revathi (and for Malaysia) Part 2
Unity threatened by continuing infringements of religious freedom booklet.
Families have been broken up because of religion and minor children converted to Islam without the consent of the non-Muslim spouse when the counterpart converted to Islam.
And look what some hardliners are saying and getting away with:
This is a Muslim country, leave Malaysia if you don't like it, says Jerai Member of Parliament.
Update 20 July 2007: The Deputy Prime Minister made a very disturbing announcement that despite what is written in the original Constitution, Malaysia has never been a secular state, but is an Islamic state. And according to Malaysiakini, the Internal Security Ministry has confirmed that they have given a directive to all mainstream media not to publish any news on the issue of Malaysia being an Islamic state. And here is the "clincher": "However, he said newpapers can still publish statements from Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his deputy Najib Abdul Razak on the country being an Islamic state."
Note: free question mark graphic trying to express my exasperation at the things that goes on in our country with us pretty much being unable to do anything was taken from Free Emphasis Graphics, a link put here as appreciation to be allowed to use their graphic.
Update 21 July 2007: To balance the issues raised here, I will like to add that not all Malaysian Muslims share the view of our Deputy Prime Minister. Here is a courages Muslim blogger Haris Ibrahim who posted an interesting rebuttal to the Deputy Prime Minister statement. I will paste some extract from his article at Najib, bring forth your proof.
"Your late father, according to history, was part of the 1956 delegation that went to London to secure our independence.
Truly, this nation is indebted to your late father, the late Tunku and every freedom fighter of the era for securing independence for our nation.
And a secular Federal Constitution.
Yes, secular.
Have you not read the Reid Commission report, that document that bears testimony to the selfless work of our leaders of days gone by?
Tun Salleh Abas did, in extenso, in the case of Che Omar Che Soh. I have referred to this in an earlier post entitled ‘Historical and Constitutional Position of Islam Judicially Examined’.
Let me reproduce for you here the relevant excerpt from Tun Salleh’s judgment.
‘…we have to set aside our personal feelings because the law in this country is still what it is today, secular law, where morality not accepted by the law is not enjoying the status of law. Perhaps that argument should be addressed at other forums or at seminars and, perhaps, to politicians and Parliament. Until the law and the system is changed, we have no choice but to proceed as we are doing today.”
"Tunku said : ‘The country has a multi-racial population with various beliefs. Malaysia must continue as a secular State with Islam as the official religion’.
"‘Former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn has supported Tunku Abdul Rahman’s view that Malaysia should not be turned into an islamic state…”The nation can still be functional as a secular state with Islam as the offical religion,” he said"
"As one who, like you, professes a belief in Islam, I must ask that you desist in these unfounded contentions.
As you also well know, God in the Holy Qur’an commands that when there is a dispute on an issue, it is proper to call in the evidence of the respective parties.
You say Islamic state.
I say secular.
I have produced my proof.
‘Have you any knowledge with you? If so, bring it forth’ - Surah 6 verse 148 of the Holy Qur’an
Please note that I have refrained from invoking the last part of the verse above. At this juncture, I shall assume you were merely mistaken.
I am obliged to say here that if you insist on continuing to make these assertions without bringing forth your proof, I shall invoke the curse of God as commanded in Surah 3 verse 61 of the Holy Qur’an"
Harris Ibrahim is indeed a brave Muslim blogger. I pray he will not get into any problems.
As usual, I will contact Harris Ibrahim if he has any objection to me putting excerpts of his post here, and will remove them if he object.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)