MONTHLY - aliran.com · Aliran Monthly : Vol.33(9) Page 3 The Kajang by-election on 23 March is fast approach-ing. And the higher cost of living, especially soar-ing food prices,

Aliran Monthly : Vol.33(9) Page 1PP3739/12/2012(031205) ISSN 0127 - 5127 PP3739/12/2012(031205) ISSN 0127 - 5127 PP3739/12/2012(031205) ISSN 0127 - 5127 PP3739/12/2012(031205) ISSN 0127 - 5127 PP3739/12/2012(031205) ISSN 0127 - 5127 RM4.00 RM4.00 RM4.00 RM4.00 RM4.00 2014:Vol.33No.92014:Vol.33No.92014:Vol.33No.92014:Vol.33No.92014:Vol.33No.9For Justice, Freedom & SolidarityFor Justice, Freedom & SolidarityFor Justice, Freedom & SolidarityFor Justice, Freedom & SolidarityFor Justice, Freedom & Solidarity

MONTHLYMONTHLYMONTHLYMONTHLYMONTHLY

Aliran Monthly : Vol.33(9) Page 2

visit to the local wetmarket is enough to giveyou palpitations. Pricesof vegetables and fruit

have soared, perhaps by as muchas a third over the last few years.One news report even said that theprice of kangkung rose in Decem-ber 2013.

The higher prices of basic food-stuff, along with the overall highercost of living, is a major issue inthe Kajang by-election. In anUmcedel survey, 69 per cent of re-spondents in Kajang reportedlyfelt that the increasing cost of liv-ing would raise support forPakatan Rakyat.

This may be a fair reflection of sen-timent across the country andcould favour opposition parties.The soaring price of produce,along with higher property andmotor vehicle prices, has emptiedthe pockets of low-income andeven middle-class households. Incoffee-shops and private homes,

COVER STORY

Seven reasons whyMalaysians are strugglingto put food on the tableby Anil Netto

AAAAA


The Kajang by-election on 23 March is fast approach-ing. And the higher cost of living, especially soar-ing food prices, is proving to be a major issue. In ourcover-story, Anil Netto suggests seven reasons whyMalaysians are struggling to put food on the table –which could have a bearing on the outcome of theby-election.

The poll could be a game-changer but was the‘Kajang Move’ a wise strategy? Azmil Tayeb analy-ses the backdrop. But wise or not, some quartersappear anxious to put Anwar away, notes PRamakrishnan. There even seems to be exceptionalinterest in the government's appeal against Anwar’sacquittal says Hishamuddin Yahaya. Meanwhile,there are those who want to put away another op-position stalwart, Karpal Singh, laments Rama, whoalso wonders why no action has been taken againstsome real trouble-makers.

In these difficult times, we desperately need realstatesmen, writes Henry Loh in our back-cover story.Malaysians must step up to the plate. Douglas Teohsays it is time we look beyond Mahathir’s Old Poli-tics and he apologises to East Malaysians many ofwhom feel they have not been treated fairly. If wedon’t tackle some of these issues, more Malaysiansmight leave the country – an issue that SyerleenaAbdul Rashid tackles in her article on Bangsa Ma-laysia and citizenship. In a separate piece, she saysit is no point censoring critical views in this digitalage when intellectual argument should be used toengage with the people.

Finally, a couple of readers, Henry Soon and TihSeong Pin, have responded to our previous cover-story, ‘Education system in crisis?’ We feature theirperceptive insights in our centre pages.

C O N T E N T S

EDITOR'S NOTE

COVER STORYCOVER STORYCOVER STORYCOVER STORYCOVER STORY••••• Seven Reasons Why MalaysiansSeven Reasons Why MalaysiansSeven Reasons Why MalaysiansSeven Reasons Why MalaysiansSeven Reasons Why Malaysians

Are Struggling To Put FoodAre Struggling To Put FoodAre Struggling To Put FoodAre Struggling To Put FoodAre Struggling To Put FoodOn The TableOn The TableOn The TableOn The TableOn The Table 22222

FEATURESFEATURESFEATURESFEATURESFEATURES••••• The Dark Treacherous Road ToThe Dark Treacherous Road ToThe Dark Treacherous Road ToThe Dark Treacherous Road ToThe Dark Treacherous Road To

PutrajayPutrajayPutrajayPutrajayPutrajay 88888••••• Anwar Has To Be Put Away,Anwar Has To Be Put Away,Anwar Has To Be Put Away,Anwar Has To Be Put Away,Anwar Has To Be Put Away,

Otherwise Umno Is Doomed!Otherwise Umno Is Doomed!Otherwise Umno Is Doomed!Otherwise Umno Is Doomed!Otherwise Umno Is Doomed! 1 11 11 11 11 1••••• Unexceptional Case WithUnexceptional Case WithUnexceptional Case WithUnexceptional Case WithUnexceptional Case With

Exceptional InterestExceptional InterestExceptional InterestExceptional InterestExceptional Interest 1 31 31 31 31 3••••• Karpal - A Victiom Of PoliticalKarpal - A Victiom Of PoliticalKarpal - A Victiom Of PoliticalKarpal - A Victiom Of PoliticalKarpal - A Victiom Of Political

ProsecutionProsecutionProsecutionProsecutionProsecution 1 51 51 51 51 5••••• Are We Heading For EmergencyAre We Heading For EmergencyAre We Heading For EmergencyAre We Heading For EmergencyAre We Heading For Emergency

Rule?Rule?Rule?Rule?Rule? 1 61 61 61 61 6••••• Education System: Take The BullEducation System: Take The BullEducation System: Take The BullEducation System: Take The BullEducation System: Take The Bull

By The HornsBy The HornsBy The HornsBy The HornsBy The Horns 1 91 91 91 91 9••••• Pseudo-Theory On Origins OfPseudo-Theory On Origins OfPseudo-Theory On Origins OfPseudo-Theory On Origins OfPseudo-Theory On Origins Of

The ‘Malay Race’The ‘Malay Race’The ‘Malay Race’The ‘Malay Race’The ‘Malay Race’ 2 52 52 52 52 5••••• Time To Move On: BeyondTime To Move On: BeyondTime To Move On: BeyondTime To Move On: BeyondTime To Move On: Beyond

Mahathir's Old PoliticsMahathir's Old PoliticsMahathir's Old PoliticsMahathir's Old PoliticsMahathir's Old Politics 2 82 82 82 82 8••••• Bangsa Malaysia: Our CitizenshipBangsa Malaysia: Our CitizenshipBangsa Malaysia: Our CitizenshipBangsa Malaysia: Our CitizenshipBangsa Malaysia: Our Citizenship

DefinedDefinedDefinedDefinedDefined 3 13 13 13 13 1••••• An Open Letter Of ApologyAn Open Letter Of ApologyAn Open Letter Of ApologyAn Open Letter Of ApologyAn Open Letter Of Apology

(And Hope) To East Malaysians(And Hope) To East Malaysians(And Hope) To East Malaysians(And Hope) To East Malaysians(And Hope) To East Malaysians 3 33 33 33 33 3••••• With Rise Of Internet-SavvyWith Rise Of Internet-SavvyWith Rise Of Internet-SavvyWith Rise Of Internet-SavvyWith Rise Of Internet-Savvy

Communities, CensorshipCommunities, CensorshipCommunities, CensorshipCommunities, CensorshipCommunities, CensorshipNo Longer EffectiveNo Longer EffectiveNo Longer EffectiveNo Longer EffectiveNo Longer Effective 3 53 53 53 53 5

••••• The Rakyat Expect Political LeadersThe Rakyat Expect Political LeadersThe Rakyat Expect Political LeadersThe Rakyat Expect Political LeadersThe Rakyat Expect Political LeadersTo Be StatesmenTo Be StatesmenTo Be StatesmenTo Be StatesmenTo Be Statesmen 4040404040

Printed by Konway Industries Sdn. Bhd.Plot 78, Lebuhraya Kampung Jawa, 11900 Bayan Lepas, Penang

Published byPublished byPublished byPublished byPublished byPersatuan Aliran Kesedaran NegaraPersatuan Aliran Kesedaran NegaraPersatuan Aliran Kesedaran NegaraPersatuan Aliran Kesedaran NegaraPersatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara

(ALIRAN)(ALIRAN)(ALIRAN)(ALIRAN)(ALIRAN)103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,

Penang, Malaysia.Penang, Malaysia.Penang, Malaysia.Penang, Malaysia.Penang, Malaysia.Tel: (04) 658 5251 Fax: (04) 658 5197Tel: (04) 658 5251 Fax: (04) 658 5197Tel: (04) 658 5251 Fax: (04) 658 5197Tel: (04) 658 5251 Fax: (04) 658 5197Tel: (04) 658 5251 Fax: (04) 658 5197

Email: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected] indicate if it is a letter to the editor

Homepage : http://www.aliran.comHomepage : http://www.aliran.comHomepage : http://www.aliran.comHomepage : http://www.aliran.comHomepage : http://www.aliran.com

Aliran is an organisation for social and democraticAliran is an organisation for social and democraticAliran is an organisation for social and democraticAliran is an organisation for social and democraticAliran is an organisation for social and democraticreform. We advocate freedom, justice andreform. We advocate freedom, justice andreform. We advocate freedom, justice andreform. We advocate freedom, justice andreform. We advocate freedom, justice andsolidarity; comment critically on social issues, offersolidarity; comment critically on social issues, offersolidarity; comment critically on social issues, offersolidarity; comment critically on social issues, offersolidarity; comment critically on social issues, offeranalysis and alternative ideas keeping in mindanalysis and alternative ideas keeping in mindanalysis and alternative ideas keeping in mindanalysis and alternative ideas keeping in mindanalysis and alternative ideas keeping in mindthe national and global picture based on universalthe national and global picture based on universalthe national and global picture based on universalthe national and global picture based on universalthe national and global picture based on universalhuman rights and spiritual values. We are listedhuman rights and spiritual values. We are listedhuman rights and spiritual values. We are listedhuman rights and spiritual values. We are listedhuman rights and spiritual values. We are listedon the on the on the on the on the roster of the Economic and Social Council ofroster of the Economic and Social Council ofroster of the Economic and Social Council ofroster of the Economic and Social Council ofroster of the Economic and Social Council ofthe United Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliranthe United Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliranthe United Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliranthe United Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliranthe United Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliranwelcomes all Malaysians above 21 to be members.welcomes all Malaysians above 21 to be members.welcomes all Malaysians above 21 to be members.welcomes all Malaysians above 21 to be members.welcomes all Malaysians above 21 to be members.Contact the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.Contact the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.Contact the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.Contact the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.Contact the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.


friends and relatives huddle to-gether and grumble about the lat-est price increases in the local wetmarket. Soaring food prices is a symptomof something deeper at work andsignals that all is not well withthe economy, which is also ex-posed to global forces. This article will discuss some pos-sible reasons why people are feel-ing burdened despite fairly rosyGDP growth figures.

The removal of subsidies for oiland higher electricity and gas tar-iffs will result in higher costs(shipping, lorry transport, refrig-eration etc) incurred in bringingfruit and vegetables to the public.These charges will invariably bepassed on by food vendors andsuppliers through higher prices. The removal of subsidies followedconcerns expressed by an interna-tional rating agencies, whichdowngraded Malaysia’s creditrating from stable to negative.Fitch Ratings cited concerns overpublic finance as a key issue. But instead of cracking down onwasteful spending and rampantcorruption, the governmentadopted a neoliberal approach byslashing subsidies. While somesubsidies like those on petrol mayalso benefit the rich, the govern-ment has not invested enough inpublic transport across the coun-try to ease the burden of the lower-income group who will find thehigher fuel prices a burden. The removal of subsidies has

had the effect of reducing dis-posable income among the ordi-nary people, making it more dif-ficult for them to afford higherfood prices.

When basic food supplies such asrice and sugar are controlled bywell-connected monopolies orcartels then the public is at themercy of these companies whenprices are set. For example, the PadiberasNasional Berhad (Bernas) groupof companies, owned by SyedMokhtar Al-Bukhary, is involvedin the procurement and process-ing of paddy along with the im-portation, warehousing, distribu-tion and marketing of rice in Ma-laysia. The firm controls about 24per cent of the paddy market and45 per cent of local rice demand. With the removal of rice subsidiesin Thailand, more Thai rice couldreportedly be made available onthe international market and withthe increased supply in the re-gional market, the price of riceimports into Malaysia could fall.Concern has been expressed thatthe benefit of this lower-priced ricecould be reaped by Bernas whilethe public and the 142,000 localrice farmers may not be any betteroff. Or take the sugar market, whichis controlled by the well-con-nected Malaysian Sugar Manu-facturing Bhd and TradewindsBhd. Opposition politicians haveclaimed that the removal of thesugar subsidy at the last Budgetwould result in higher profits ofup to 100 per cent.

In addition, MP Tony Pua claimedthat the government had commit-ted to a three-year raw sugar im-port deal at US$26 (RM78.54) per100lbs (45.3kg) in January 2012,when the global market price forraw sugar then was at US$23.42(RM73.57). But by January 2014,the global price had dipped to be-low US$16.

Increasingly, as agricultural landin urban centres and their fringesis converted to ‘mixed develop-ment’, high-rise condos havesprouted on former farm lands.Elsewhere, priority has been givento monocropping and cash crops,which can damage the overallenvironment and reducebiodiversity.

Urban vegetable farms are vanish-ing as they make way for high-risesuper condos. Unfortunately, wedo not have community organicgardens to make up for the loss oflocal supply. Where once it wascommon to see banana trees grow-ing in our neighbourhood, that isnot so anymore. Local bananas,which used to cost RM3.50 per kg,are now sold at RM5. This means more food has to betransported from a longer distance,usually Cameron Highlands oreven imported. It is not uncommonto see people waiting at a vegetablestall for the lorry from CameronHighlands to arrive. As petrol prices inch upwards,the cost of transporting food fol-lows suit, what more when foodhas to be transported from fartheraway, and this invariably pushesup the price of food.

Removal of subsidies

M o n o p o l i e sand cartels

S h r i n k i n gagriculture land


flooded this region, speculation inproperty development intensifiedas people tried to maximise theirreturns. This has driven up prop-erty prices and rentals in the coun-try. In turn, the cost of doing busi-ness has risen. As property prices and rentals goup, two things happen. These higher business costs havecut into business profits, thus put-ting downward pressure on work-ers’ wages, which in turn reducesthe purchasing power of ordinarypeople. They also translate into higherprices of foodstuff as fruit andvegetable wholesalers and retail-ers, who themselves are con-

Let’s take a look at why eat-ing out is no longer as afford-able as it once was and howthis could be linked to higherproperty prices. As property prices soar,those who have investedtheir funds in property ex-pect higher returns from theproperty they already have.Thus rentals are increased.In one case in Penang, aproperty owner was said tohave asked his tenant, afood court operator, tocough up a whopping 66per cent increase inmonthly rental for the foodcourt premises. The foodcourt operator, who had

sub-let stalls to about two dozenhawkers, felt the higher rentalwould reduce his profits sub-stantially. Unwilling to pay such a highrental, the food court operator de-cided to shut down the food courthe was operating and moved out.The hawkers - many of whomwere selling low-priced meals (be-low RM5) to students, nearby resi-dents and working adults on atight budget - were relocated bythe operator to another food courthe was operating, much furtheraway. Meanwhile, the landlord of thefood court, now closed down,found a new tenant, believed to

be an upmarket ‘kopitiam’operator or a car showroombusiness, willing to pay thehigher rental. For the local residents andstudents, what this meansis that a food court thatthey had patronised forthe affordable meals it of-fered has d isappeared ,leaving behind more up-market res taurants andkopit iams in their area.These eateries charge 50-100 per cent more for themeals they serve in orderfor their owners to meetthe steeper property loanrepayments or rentals aris-ing from higher propertyprices.

If you visit a stall selling veg-etables and fruit, chances are halfthe produce is likely to be im-ported from countries such as theUnited States, China, Australia,New Zealand, India and SouthAfrica. Imported fruit may even bedisplayed more prominently thantheir local counterparts in suchstalls. Moreover, a significant por-tion of our rice requirements isalso imported. We may be self-suf-ficient in poultry, eggs and fisher-ies – but we are also importingbeef, mutton and milk.

This makes us highly dependenton imports for our food security.

No wonder our food trade deficithas soared from RM1bn in 1990to RM13bn in 2013.

Along with this external depen-dency comes vulnerability to fluc-tuations in the exchange rate ofthe ringgit against the US dollar.Over the last year, the ringgit hassteadily weakened against the USdollar from about 3.00 last May toabout 3.30 now. That is a weaken-ing of about 10 per cent and it isbound to be reflected in the risingprice of imported produce.

Over time, as interest rates werekept low and as cheap money

Case study: Eating out becomes more expensive too

Food importsand depreciation

of the ringgit

P r o p e r t ydevelopment and

higher business costs


fronted with higher propertyprices and rentals, pass on theircosts to customers. Even the priceof food and drinks at hawkerstalls and food courts has esca-lated.

Despite years of economic growthas indicated by positive GDPgrowth figure, many people donot feel better off. For one thing, in many house-holds, real wages have not keptpace with the cost of living andproductivity increases. The share of wages compared tothe overall income of the coun-try has fallen. Wages make uponly 28 per cent of MalaysianGDP (based on the income

method) while business profitsaccount for a whopping 67 percent. And 78 per cent of EPF con-tributors earn less than RM3000per month. This suggests that many work-ers are being underpaid relativeto productivity increases whilefirms and banks post large prof-its. This disconnect is beingaided by the existing policy ofusing (exploiting?) migrantworkers to depress local wageswhile workers’ and trade unionrights are suppressed. This unhappy situation is maskedby unrealistic official householdpoverty line income levels ofRM830 in the peninsula, RM1090in Sabah and RM920 in Sarawak.These figures are unrealisticallylow and seriously understate the

real poverty rates.

The real poverty line threshold fora household should be closer toRM2000 while even the BR1Mhandouts recognise that house-holds earning below RM4,000 permonth need assistance.

As for the official minimum wageof RM900 (RM800 for Sabah andSarawak), that is hardly enoughfor a household of four or fivepeople to meet food, rental, trans-port, education, and health careexpenses. Why food expenditurealone would swallow a hugechunk of that RM900!

The neoliberal system ofprivatisation that favours Big

Stagnant real wages

GST will makethings worse


Business – reducing corporate taxrates for the wealthy, cutting sub-sidies, and privatisation of essen-tial services – has resulted inhigher tariffs that have weigheddown on the people. Moreover, speculation in housingand poor public transport haveforced many Malaysians to takeup burdensome housing and carloans. The removal of subsidies forhigher education and thecorporatisation of state-run uni-versities have led to higher uni-versity fees, forcing many stu-dents to take up study loans. Taken together, these loans havedriven up household debt. Loaninstalments and debt servicinghave whittled away the disposalincome of many households.

Meanwhile, doctors’ fees, phar-

maceutical charges and evenhealth supplements have soared.And now, the Ministry of Healthhas approved higher consultationfees for doctors – which adds tothe people misery. These highermedical charges have furthershrunk the disposable income ofmany Malaysians, making it dif-ficult for them to cope with thehigher prices of fruit and veg-etables. As the government introduces aregressive taxation system, (GST),available disposable income inmany households will shrinkeven further, adding to the burdenof the lower-income group.

It is obvious that rising food pricesare a major issue among the folks

in Kajang and elsewhere in Ma-laysia. Unfortunately, the BN govern-ment does not appear to havezeroed in on the real factors be-hind these significant price in-creases. Without accuratelyidentifying the root causes of theprice increases, how is it goingto lighten the people’s burden,other than by the occasionalBR1M payments, which are likeband-aids too small to plasterover festering gashes? Meanwhile, Malaysians are beinghit by a triple whammy: as house-hold debts soar following thesharp increase in property prices;as disposable income shrinks fol-lowing the removal of subsidiesand the suppression of real wage(and with GST looming), the ris-ing food prices come at the worstpossible time. In such a situation, news thatGDP is rising and FDI is doing finemeans very little to the person onthe street, struggling to put foodon the table. For this, the BN federal govern-ment’s misplaced economicpolicies and priorities (includ-ing property-centric develop-ment and cash crop cultivation)and its inability to remove cronycartels and wipe out corruptionmust take the blame. The vari-ous state governments’ failure toprotect farmland and prioritisefood security is also disappoint-ing and worrying.

Anil Netto is treasurer ofAnil Netto is treasurer ofAnil Netto is treasurer ofAnil Netto is treasurer ofAnil Netto is treasurer ofAliran.Aliran.Aliran.Aliran.Aliran.

q

C o n c l u s i o n


ince when have Malay-sians ever voted for thePrime Minister? The na-ture of the parliamentary

system is such that the electoratechooses which political partiesthat best govern the country,which in turn choose whoamongst their leaders shouldhead up the executive branch i.e.to become the Prime Minister.There is no direct election forPrime Ministership, unlike in aPresidential system.

Thus, I am utterly puzzled at theexamples proffered by the sup-porters of Anwar Ibrahim’s latestmove to contest in the soon-to-be-held Kajang state seat by-election.The comparison to JacquesChirac, Lee Myung-Bak, ReccepErdogan, Joko Widodo, amongothers, is totally inept and simplystrains credulity.

It is established then that the po-litical party is the lead actor in aparliamentary system, not the in-dividual politician. So what is thepoint of having Anwar Ibrahim totake over the Chief Ministershipof Selangor from Khalid Ibrahim(as much as Anwar is playing it

ELECTIONS

The dark treacherous roadto PutrajayaRafizi Ramli is right; the Kajang by-election will be a game-changer – but not in the manner that he thinks

by Azmil Tayeb

SSSSS

down for now)? The electoratevotes for the party, not the person-ality that embodies it. AnwarIbrahim is not the be-all, end-allof the Opposition.

If it is about showcasing achieve-ments of an Opposition-led stategovernment to garner the people’svote of confidence for the ultimateprize, Putrajaya, then replacingthe Chief Minister of a well-per-forming state such as Selangor forno good reason is just folly. It isnot clear what Anwar Ibrahimcan do to promote the success ofan Opposition-led state especiallyin the Umno/BN strongholds in

the rural areas.

The questions remain: 1) Howdoes showcasing the achieve-ments of Selangor, Penang andKelantan governments translateinto possible victory of Pakatan inthe next general election? 2) Sincethe successes of the Selangor andPenang governments have beenevident since 2008 but somehowdid not help Pakatan to win otherstates in the last general election,what else is new now? But thesetwo questions are heavily pre-mised on Pakatan’s eventual vic-tory in a highly flawed and biasedelectoral system.

Rafizi RamliRafizi RamliRafizi RamliRafizi RamliRafizi Ramli


Instead of replacing the Chief Min-ister and creating unnecessaryattention to its own ineptnessmaybe Pakatan should find bet-ter and more effective ways topublicise and market the achieve-ments of Selangor and Penang tothe wider audience against thestifling restrictions on the freedomof press and speech. It does notmatter who is at the helm of theSelangor state government if thestories of its success only rever-berate among its supporters andfail to make a dent among non-Pakatan voters.

There is also the 800-pound go-rilla that still sits uneasily in theroom: Why did LeeChin Cheh abruptlyresign from his stateseat? So far no expla-nation has been of-fered by PKR. If LeeChin Cheh had re-signed with reasonsthat are less than dire,then it is a derelictionof his duty to serve thepeople who over-whelmingly voted forhim in the last gen-eral election.

It is a sheer betrayalof the Kajangpeople’s trust of theirrepresentative andthe political party heis part of. It is simplyimpossible to claim amoral high groundwhen the party is en-gaging in the samemanipulative politicsas its nemesis. One isthen left to choose be-tween Tweedledeeand Tweedledum.

In the end the rakyat may just votefor the “evil that we know,” asopposed to the “angel we don’tknow,” thus fulfilling MahathirMohamad’s crystal-gazing prog-nostication. Is this the Machiavel-lian “democracy” that PKR, andby extension Pakatan, envisionsfor Malaysia? A victory broughton by any means necessary ringshollow if the rakyat ends up asthe collateral damage.

In regards to being an effectivewakil rakyat, is it advisable oreven possible to simultaneouslyservice two constituencies thatdiffer greatly in geography, cul-ture, socio-economic background

and ethnic makeup? Is it evendemocratic to begin with?

Being elected into office meanscarrying the heavy burden of therakyat’s hopes, dreams and aspi-rations and trying to fulfil them tothe best of one’s ability. It does notgive the wakil rakyat the carteblanche to treat the constituentslike some meaningless pawns onthe grand political chessboard tobe manipulated with whenever itis politically expedient.

How will Anwar Ibrahim explainthis to both the constituencies ofPermatang Pauh and Kajang?Simply setting up legislative ser-

vice centres in the con-stituency while onlyvisiting it right beforethe general electiondoes not make for aneffective and trustwor-thy people’s represen-tative.

Plus, the job scope andfocus of an MP andthat of a state assem-bly member differ inmany ways: one dealswith the burgeoningnational deficit in theDewan Rakyat andthe other deals withpotholes behind PakMat’s house in TamanKajang Bestari – andhow does AnwarIbrahim plan to recon-cile them?

The whole brouhahastarted with the inter-nal party bickering be-tween Khalid Ibrahimand Azmin Ali, whichsomehow necessitated


Anwar Ibrahim’s foray into statepolitics to purportedly defuse thetension. In what way does includ-ing Anwar Ibrahim in the stategovernment – either as a state as-sembly member and/or ChiefMinister – help quell the infight-ing within Selangor PKR?

More pointedly, what has KhalidIbrahim done wrong in the pastsix years for him to be replacedbefore his term ends? Rafizi Ramli,PKR’s MP for Pandan, states thatwith Anwar at the helm nobodywill be able to mess with him po-litically because he is the headhoncho.

But what about using Anwar’sgravitas instead to prop up KhalidIbrahim’s creaky position withinand without the party and makeit unassailable? If Anwar Ibrahimmakes it perfectly clear to everyPKR cadre, especially the ones inAzmin Ali’s camp, that he is sol-idly behind Khalid Ibrahim andall are required to put on a unitedfront, then this fiasco would nothave escalated and festered intowhat it is now.

Rafizi Ramli’s sincere but ratheropaque written statement regard-ing this issue also mentions theneed to fortify Selangor against animpending BN onslaught, hell-bent on wresting back the richeststate in the federation even if it lit-erally ends up in ashes and em-bers.

But the reasoning begs the ques-tion: what is the BN, or particu-larly Selangor Umno, doing nowor planning to do later that is dif-ferent than from what they haddone in the past? Lest we forget,the Selangor Umno launched theSelamatkan Selangor campaign

right after the 2008 general elec-tion to spread misinformation, liesand slander and concoct manynefarious plans to sabotage thePakatan state government, includ-ing stoking racial and religiousflames.

But instead, the Selangor votersreturned Pakatan to the state gov-ernment in the last general elec-tion with an even bigger majority.If anything, setting up AnwarIbrahim at the top of the state gov-ernment will only serve as a light-ning rod for Pakatan’s detractors,as opposed to the more low-pro-file Khalid Ibrahim.

If proof is what Pakatan needs inorder to show the public that it caneffectively govern at the nationallevel, then one of the better waysis to form a shadow cabinet. Thisidea has been mooted many timesover the years but somehow per-plexedly has never been taken upby the Pakatan leadership.

A shadow cabinet would demon-strate first, the Pakatan compo-nent parties’s ability to work to-gether and agree on specific poli-cies in response to the official onesissued by the BN government;and second, the Pakatan’s readi-ness to govern and hit the groundrunning when the time finallycomes.

The current uproar concerningthe Allah use in Malay-languagebibles is a good case in point high-lighting the need for a shadowcabinet. If there had been ashadow Home Minister or ashadow Minister in-charge of Is-lamic affairs in the PrimeMinister’s Office issuing unifiedstatements to counter the cynicalploys of Umno to politically ex-

Azmil Tayeb, an AliranAzmil Tayeb, an AliranAzmil Tayeb, an AliranAzmil Tayeb, an AliranAzmil Tayeb, an Aliranmember, is a PhD candi-member, is a PhD candi-member, is a PhD candi-member, is a PhD candi-member, is a PhD candi-date at the Department ofdate at the Department ofdate at the Department ofdate at the Department ofdate at the Department ofPolitical and SocialPolitical and SocialPolitical and SocialPolitical and SocialPolitical and SocialChange, College of AsiaChange, College of AsiaChange, College of AsiaChange, College of AsiaChange, College of Asiaand the Pacific, Australianand the Pacific, Australianand the Pacific, Australianand the Pacific, Australianand the Pacific, AustralianNational University.National University.National University.National University.National University.

ploit this issue, the crisis might nothave ratcheted up to the level weare seeing now.

Instead, we have contradictingand convoluting pronounce-ments coming out of the Pakatancamp regarding this matter.Maybe Pakatan should tackle thisissue first and successfully so, asa way to show the general publicit is able to govern and solve prob-lems cohesively as a coalition,which would be no mean featsince it is comprised of partnersof equal standing; unlike BN,which is overwhelmingly domi-nated by Umno, hence the enact-ment of Umno-centric policies.

Rafizi Ramli is right. The Kajangby-election will be a game-changer but not in the mannerthat he thinks. It is indeed a darkchapter in Malaysian democracy,and more importantly, thecountry’s transition to a genuinetwo-party system. One commen-tator in Malaysiakini wrote thatthis will be Anwar Ibrahim’s Wa-terloo. Maybe that is what it takesfor a more people-centric demo-cratic practice and a generation ofyoung leaders unencumbered byold political culture to blossom inMalaysia. In the meantime, it isgoing to be a long dark journey toPutrajaya for Pakatan with de-mocracy taking a back seat. q


he survival of Umno inthe forthcoming GE14is hanging by a thread.By all counts, it may be

the end of the road for the partythat has dominated Malaysianpolitics for more than half a cen-tury.

Umno is aware of this. And thatis why it is desperately trying toput Anwar Ibrahim away to saveits skin. A free Anwar will soundthe death-knell for Umno.

Politically it may not succeed inits attempt to do away withAnwar because his influence iswide and far-reaching. He is seenby the majority of Malaysians asthe only hope of toppling Umnofrom its power base — which willpave the way for an alternativegovernment.

All the lies that Umno has con-cocted against Anwar have notmade any impact on the people.This approach has been tried since1998 — to tarnish his reputationand smear his image — but every

attempt failed miserably. Peoplehave wised up to the tricks andmanipulations resorted to byUmno at every opportunity andduring elections, but such ployshave had no effect to benefitUmno.

Moreover, the people are awarethat Umno is no longer the solemouth-piece for the Malays. Pasand Keadilan are equally capableof representing the Malays and farmore effectively when comparedto Umno. To add to their headache,the Malays are even turning to theDAP and supporting their candi-dates. Clearly, it is a losing battlefor Umno.

This is why Anwar’s pendingcourt cases are so crucial. Malay-sians are convinced that whatcannot be achieved politically byUmno can perhaps be achievedthrough the courts. This is pos-sible simply because only a fewjudges seem to be pro justicewhereas many are inclined to dis-miss cases based on mere techni-calities.

Anwar’s application to recallformer investigation officer SuptJude Blacious Pereira was basedon the fact that the Kuala LumpurHigh Court had found him “not afit and proper person” to be ad-mitted as a lawyer to practise atthe High Court of Malaysia. Butthe court dismissed Anwar’s ap-plication on the grounds thatthere was no need to adduce fur-ther evidence from Pereira.

Suhakam in its investigation withregard to the detention of lawyershad concluded that Pereira wasnot a reliable and trustworthywitness.

When a person’s integrity is inserious doubt, it is natural to won-der whether he could have actedhonourably and truthfully inAnwar’s first sodomy trial. It wasalso established in that trial thathe had tampered with an exhibitconcerning the DNA.

It is, therefore, reasonable to be-lieve that a person of such char-acter might not have told the

Anwar Ibrahim has to beput away, otherwiseUmno is doomed!

POLITICS

by P Ramakrishnan

TTTTT

But all the lies concocted against Anwar have not madeany impact on the people


whole truth during the trial. IfAnwar wants him to be recalledto be further questioned, what iswrong? Isn’t he entitled to maxi-mum defence in all fairness?

Then we have the other casewhere Anwar wanted to removeMuhammad Shafee Abdullahfrom leading the prosecution teamin the government’s appealagainst the Sodomy II verdict.Anwar depended heavily onKuala Lumpur CID chief MatZain Ibrahim’s statutory declara-tion to disqualify Shafee from pros-ecuting Anwar. In that declara-tion, Shafee was painted as some-one who was part of a plot thattook place in Tun Dr Mahathir’shouse.

The court ruled that since MatZain did not affirm any affidavitin support of Anwar’s applica-tion, the former’s statutory decla-ration was viewed as statementsthat were made outside the courtand, as such, there was no primafacie material before the court to

establish a case. And hence,Anwar’s application was dis-missed.

Much earlier, in the case concern-ing whether Anwar could submitMat Zain’s statutory declarationas a supporting document, thecourt threw out the statutory dec-laration on technical grounds: thename and address had been leftout, the IC was wrong – all notserious omissions. In any case, thecourt had its inherent right tosummon Mat Zain to affirm hisdeclaration and rectify the errorsin it. That would have been in theinterest of justice. But unfortu-nately that wasn’t the case. It wasrigid justice, which ThomasFuller, the writer, termed as “thegreatest injustice”.

How fatal was this error?Shouldn’t the accused be givenevery means and opportunity todefend himself? If that defence isdenied through technicalities, thecourt is grossly unfair to the ac-cused. It is the accused who has

to prove his innocence and for thathe needs the assistance of thecourt.

If the court deprives him of thisassistance and becomes an ob-stacle to his defence, then the ju-dicial process becomes a farce. Atthe conclusion of the hearing,people should not come to the con-clusion that the court was preju-diced against the accused.

It is no use to quote this law andthat regulation to prevent accessto material that may be crucial tothe accused to establish his inno-cence. In the end, what is impor-tant in any hearing is fairness tothe accused. But certain judgesdon’t seem to be very botheredabout this principle. It is to themonly cut and dried, applying rulesand regulations without any no-tion of fairness.

If this were the case in Anwar’sappeal, then the judiciary will putaway Anwar for good and savethe skin of Umno. q


ith regard to Dato SeriAnwar’s case, the pros-ecution decided to ap-peal against his acquit-

tal. After a long lapse, followinghis acquittal, when the publicthought that a fair hearing hadbeen given and the verdict had putthe case to rest, it suddenly hit theheadllines once again. The search-ing question is, why didn't theprosecution appeal as soon as theverdict was given, which is nor-mally the case? It only acted longafter the verdict was pronouncedwhen the complainant’s relativeurged through the press that thegovernment should appeal on be-half of the complainant.

We are prompted to ask whetherthe prosecution was interested inappealing or was it an after-thought. Taking into consider-ation that the prosecutor con-ducted the case, witnessed theentire proceedings, saw thedemeanour of the witnesses andendured the unrelenting assaultby the defence that eventuallyshred the prosecution’s evidenceto pieces - surely, by then, the pros-ecutor lamed and injured, knewand accepted that it was a casefor the defence. The DNA evidence

in particular, which the prosecu-tion depended so much upon tosecure a conviction, was ruled outas absolutely unreliable. As an ex-perienced lawyer and based onevidence adduced, the prosecutorcould agree with the Judge’s in-evitable conclusion that the casehad not been proved beyond rea-sonable doubt. With that, the pros-ecution had no case to appeal. Infact, it would have been againsthis conscience to do so.

Of course, an appeal by the ag-grieved party is a fundamentalright — whether it has merit or

no merit, it is the right of the ag-grieved party. Experienced law-yers will study the merits and de-merits of the case before proceed-ing with the appeal. This is to savecosts and the court’s time. In bor-derline cases, an appeal is alwaysencouraged if it is of constitu-tional importance or where it in-volves an important interpreta-tion of the law. But in other cases,there must be a strong basis forthe appeal - for example, if thejudge had made a glaring mistakeand the judgment delivered wascontrary to the evidence given orif the judge was seen to be biased

JUDICIARY

Unexceptional case withexceptional interest

WWWWW

by Hishamuddin Yahaya

Why didn’t the prosecution appeal as soon as the verdict wasgiven, which is normally the case


in his or her judgment.

Anwar is a political maverick. Heis a politician feared by the rulingparty for his unblemished trackrecord and his commitment to thepolitics of the downtrodden. Fear-less and selfless and known foroutmanoeuvring his political op-ponents, he has won electionswithout much effort and is ac-cepted as a potential PM by thepeople. The ruling party, on theother hand, regards him as a ma-lignant tumour that must be elimi-nated for its own good. Ironically,Anwar is more known interna-tionally than any of the leaders inthis country. What he said to methe other day is true: “They arerestless as long as I am stillaround.”

Because this being Anwar’s case,with the prosecution finally ap-pealing against his acquittal, itcreates the public perception thatthis is a “forced appeal”. Thisperception is further strenghtenedby the fact that a senior counseloutside the AG’s Chambers has

Dato Hishamuddin binDato Hishamuddin binDato Hishamuddin binDato Hishamuddin binDato Hishamuddin binHaji Yahaya, lawyer byHaji Yahaya, lawyer byHaji Yahaya, lawyer byHaji Yahaya, lawyer byHaji Yahaya, lawyer byprofession, is the formerprofession, is the formerprofession, is the formerprofession, is the formerprofession, is the formerMP for Maran.MP for Maran.MP for Maran.MP for Maran.MP for Maran.

to be appointed to lead the appeal.Is it because no one in the AG'sChambers believed that it was ajustified action to take?

The appointment of someone fromoutside the AG’s Chambers is per-fectly lawful and proper but ratherunsavoury. Whether there is a pre-cedent or not is not our concern.Under normal circumstances, thiscase would be regarded as un-usual and exceptional to warrantexternal expertise. Or is it becauseit has all to do with Anwar?

We cannot avoid several negativeperceptions one of which is thatthe appeal is a joke. The appeal isa “forced appeal”. It is indeed astrange move initiated by the AG'sChambers. Are there no seniorFederal Counsels experiencedenough to lead the appeal? Is it acomplicated case? Are the AG'sboys happy to be bypassed thisway, belittling their professionalcapability to handle a simple ap-peal as this? Above all, whoseidea was it to appoint someonefrom outside the AG’s Chambers?

The most negative public per-ception is the outcome of theappeal. This is not to cast anyaspersion on the court. But hu-man beings being what they are,the build-up of the mindset isnatural and unavoidable, moreso if the appeal is seen by themas a “forced appeal”. For thepowers that be, it is not theirconcern or their doing; it will beprojected as the decision of an“independent tribunal” (thecourt), for which they are not re-sponsible and therefore cannotbe blamed.

When the judgment is delivered,we hope that our judges will bemindful of the Hadith (saying ofthe Prophet s.a.w) that out ofthree judges, two are dwellers ofhell. q


Karpal – a vict im ofpolitical prosecution

f what he had said during the 2009 consti-tutional crisis after the overthrow of the le-gitimately elected Perak state governmentwas deemed as seditious, why then has the

Sedition Act not been applied to the many recentcases when so many extremists had uttered state-ments that were inciting and provoking?

It is clearly an act of selective persecution and pros-ecution. Malaysians are wondering if this is the fore-runner to more court convictions of other opposi-tion leaders and critical social activists whose casesare still pending?

Karpal had consistently maintained that it was nothis intention to criticise His Highness, the Sultan ofPerak. His stand was that he had expressed an opin-ion based on the Constitution, which provides forspecial courts for the Rulers to be charged. His opin-ion was based on the fact that there was room forthis expression as provided for in the Constitution.

Karpal Singh had not shown any deliberate disre-spect to the Sultan of Perak. But police reports werelodged against Karpal in defence of the royalty –which set in motion the process for Karpal to beformally charged.

It is an irony that no one felt offended when, wayback in the 1980s, mammoth Semarak rallies wereheld to vilify the royalty by the then prime minister,Mahathir Mohamad. No one was outraged. Theyfollowed their leader and cheered him on in his on-slaught on the royalty. Mahathir condemned theirlifestyle, ridiculed their court language and clippedtheir wings.

Those who can remember may recall the incident

when the Johor hockey coach, Douglas Gomez, wassummoned and slapped by His Highness, the Sul-tan of Johor. It was this incident that led to the con-stitutional amendment that removed the legal im-munity of the royalty and provided for the settingup of special courts.

Karpal was obviously referring to this provision inthe constitution.

The Bill that Parliament subsequently passed al-lowed for rulers who violated the laws to be pros-ecuted, while the Sedition Act of 1948 was alsoamended to allow public criticism of the rulers. Aspecial court was created – presided by the LordPresident of the Federal Court – to empower andprosecute members of the rulers’ coterie and imme-diate members of the royal household.

Under the circumstance, Aliran is really upset bythis turn of events.

RULE OF LAW

by P Ramakrishnan

IIIII

q


t was reminiscent of thelawless Wild West whenrough-necks went on arampage to assert their

authority over the helpless townfolks.

There was nobody brave enoughto stand up to the mayhem theycreated. There was no Sheriff, noDeputy and no hero to take onthese hooligans.

That was what happened lastThursday, 6 February 2014, whentroublemakers took to the streetsin a frenzy of hatred to incite andprovoke Malay extremists to par-take in acts that would threatenour peace and harmony. It was noordinary gathering; it was a gath-ering of racists and bigotsout to create mischief.

In blatant defiance of the law,these members of severalMuslim NGOs gathered inthe afternoon near the busyPuduraya bus terminal andgovernment offices at JalanTun Perak in Kuala Lumpur.

Some participants stomped

on the banner bearing the faces ofDAP and PKR representatives.They then slaughtered four chick-ens and smeared their blood onthe faces of Teresa Kok, PenangChief Minister Lim Guan Eng,DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang andMachang Bubuk assembly mem-ber Lee Khai Loon (PKR) in aritual intended to cause calamityin the country.

This bloody act was committed bythese trouble-makers claiming tobelong to the Council of IslamicNGOs as proclaimed in the ban-ner to “Protest against insults ofMalay leadership, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and Islam andMalay dignity by a splinter of poli-ticians, leaders and Chinese chau-

vinists”.

These claims are clearly far-fetched without any justification.Who in their right minds wouldwant to insult the Yang di-PertuanAgong? He is the national sym-bol of our unity. He is respectedand held in high esteem.

But these mischief-makers bla-tantly claimed that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong was insulted. Canthey provide concrete evidencewhen this insult was perpetratedand by whom?

Who would want to insult Islam?Malaysians are peaceful peopleand are sensitive to the ethos ofthe different communities and tra-

ditions. Who would want tocourt trouble consciouslyand disturb our harmony bybeing disrespectful?

What Malay leadership wasinsulted? Please don’t lie ifyou are truly a believer in thetrue sense of your religion.

Disagreeing with the poli-cies and criticising leaders

POLITICS

Are we heading foremergency rule?Is that why no action is taken against trouble-makers who whipup ethno-religious sentiment – because unrest is necessary foremergency rule

by P Ramakrishnan

IIIII


of the government doesn’t consti-tute an insult to the Malay leader-ship. In any case, the governmentmay be dominated by Umno butessentially it is a coalition govern-ment albeit without MCA repre-sentation. But there are Chineseministers and others from variouscommunities in the cabinet whichwould suggest that the disagree-ment and criticism is not aimedsolely at the Malay leadership butagainst the Barisan Nasional.

But these trouble-makers deliber-ately twisted the facts to give aracial angle to arouse the emo-tions of unthinking people whocan be easily misled.

What was said was clearly anddeliberately provocative and incit-ing.

Zulkifly Sharif from PertubuhanPermuafakatan Majlis AyahandaMalaysia (Permas) toldMalaysiakini that “the chickenslaughter and blood smearingritual was a hark back to the‘bloody’ May 13, 1969 racial ri-ots”.

“The blood represents the May 13incident…It should be easily un-derstood,” he said.

In other words, he is actuallythreatening a repeat of the May 13incident. This is clearly seditious;it is an incitement; it is definitelya provocation. It had the poten-tial to spark chaos and disturb ourharmony. Things could go out ofhand to the detriment of the na-tion.

It should have been nipped in thebud. The full force of the law

should have landed on them sothat it would not encourage simi-lar provocative demonstrationsand protests elsewhere.

But that was not the case. Wherewas the AG? Where were the po-lice, the guardians of law and or-der? Above all, where was thePrime Minister, the supremeleader of the nation? Why didnone of them criticise this act oflawlessness? Why were these rac-ists and bigots not condemned fortheir reckless irresponsibility?

It is this lack of response from thekeepers of the law that encouragesthis unbecoming behaviour. For itcan be construed with justifica-tion that they will not face thewrath of the law and that theyhave the implicit backing of thelaw enforcement agencies.

This demonstration was held ap-parently as a reaction to SeputehMP Teresa Kok’s New Year videoentitled ‘OnederfulMalaysia CNY2014’ .

Various claims and accusationswere made in connection withthis video. But what was it allabout? Was there any disrespectshown to the Yang di-PertuanAgong? Was Islam insulted in thisvideo?

It is very disturbing for Zulkifly tostate with reference to the slaugh-tering of the chicken, “It is sym-bolic of the bloody incident, –meaning May 13 – this means weare sending a serious warning toTeresa Kok not to provoke and cre-ate something that threatens thepeace and feelings of the Malays.”

Was he correct in what he stated?Did Teresa “provoke and create

something that threatens thepeace and feelings of theMalays”?

It seems that the video was inMandarin. Do these rabble-rous-ers understand Mandarin? Couldit be possible that while translat-ing misrepresentation could haveoccurred?

Why not broadcast this video overTV so that the truth can be un-veiled and facts revealed to theentire nation before things get outof hand through misunderstand-ing and misrepresentation? Thisis what should be done if we arereally interested in the truth. Butwould the BN dare to do this? Orwill it take advantage of this mind-less reaction for its own politicalpurposes?

These mischief-makers went be-yond threatening. They even of-fered a bounty to anyone who iswilling to slap Teresa. Just like inthe Wild West when rewards wereoffered to bring in the outlaws“dead or alive”, and bounty hunt-ers would take up the offer and goafter their quarry. Similarly, in thisinstance, a reward of RM500 wasoffered which was later increasedto RM1,200.

Imagine if one stupid hotheadgoes up to Teresa and slaps her,what would happen? Perhapsthose with her may react and as-sault him which could in turnlead to a racial conflict. Is thiswhat they want to happen? Is it aploy to create unrest and unleashan ethnic clash that would ben-efit the BN?

The situation was so serious

I n c i t i n g

T r i v i a l i s e d


and yet there was no urgency toaddress it. Even Home MinisterDatuk Seri Dr Ahmad ZahidHamidi foolishly and flippantlytrivialised the whole episode byclaiming that it was not a threatto Teresa and unbelievablystated that it would haveamounted to nothing except if adeath threat had been issuedagainst Teresa. For a Home Min-ister not to see the danger in thisemotionally-charged affair ismind-boggling.

Not to be outdone in foolishness,the Housing and UrbanWellbeing Minister Datuk AbdulRahman Dahlan also criticisedKok, saying that she should notplay victim when threatened byMuslim groups as the DAP had“relentlessly attacked the positionof Malays and Muslims…TheDAP had also insulted the Yangdi-Pertuan Agong and Islam”.

If that was the case, how did theDAP garner so many Malay votes,make a break-through in theUmno fortress of Johor, and get itsMalay members elected as mem-bers of parliament? WithoutMalay votes, all this could nothave been possible.

How ridiculous they are can beseen when Zulkifly accused thepoliticians whose faces adornedthe banner of manipulating theprice hike issue. According to him,“The increase of prices of goodshas been turned into a kind of pro-paganda to bring down Malayleadership. They are trying to pro-voke hatred and belittle Malayleadership.”

The lives of Malaysians have be-come a nightmare because of pricehikes which have made life very

difficult for people. It is felt by ev-eryone on a daily basis and theirsufferings are nation-wide. It is notconfined to any ethnic commu-nity.

To blame these four leaders asmanipulating the price hike tobring down the Malay leadershipis grossly unfair and wrong. It isutter nonsense!

The price hike demonstrationorganised by various NGOs inPenang effectively debunked theatrocious statements and thesweeping claims made by thetrouble-makers.

More than 1,000 turned up to op-pose the price hikes and the imple-mentation of the GST. The crowdwas largely Malay with good sup-port from the Chinese and the In-dians. What transpired was heart-warming and encouraging. Itshowed that whatever ploy thatis used by Umno and its hench-men to drive a wedge between theMalays and non-Malays will notwork.

The Seberang Jaya MunicipalCouncillor Zulkifli Saad said thegathering was a show of solidar-ity among Malays, Chinese andIndians.”We are not racists, thisis a gathering of people.”

Solidariti Anak Muda Malaysia(SAMM) spokesperson BadrulHisham Shaharin, better knownas Chegubard, asked who werethe Malays who felt insulted byLee’s act of stuffing kangkung intoa replica of Najib.

“Hello! Who says Malays are in-sulted? We are insulted because

we have a PM who cannot man-age the country,” he said.

He also warned groups whothreatened violence and racial ri-ots, saying that their non-Malaybrothers and sisters would be pro-tected even if “one hair of yours isdisturbed”.

Pandan MP Rafizi Ramli saidthat anti-price hikes groupswould protest in all the states,culminating in a massive protestin Kuala Lumpur on 1 May,themed Gasak Sampai Tumbang(GST).

Rafizi emphatically said, “Thereis also no link between race andprice hikes.”

“It is just their way of putting fearin us as they are racists,” heclaimed.

“If there is one Chinese youthamong us who is threatened, 10Malays among us will be there toprotect him,” he assured, fol-lowed by shouts of support.

Afif Bahardin, the Seberang Jayarepresentative, drove home a validpoint rather forcefully, “The pricehike is suffered by not only DAP,PKR or Pas but by Umno membersas well.”

It is this kind of solidarity build-ing up that is worrying Umno.Their usual divide-and-rulepolicy is no longer working. Raceand religion can no longer be aneffective campaign strategy to re-tain power.

So, it seems, an unrest is neces-sary for emergency rule and is thatwhy no action is taken againstthese trouble-makers?

H e a r t - w a r m i n g

q


he dismal performanceof our students in theProgramme for Interna-tional Student Assess-

ment (Pisa) in 2013, where 51.8per cent of our 15-year-old stu-dents failed to reach even thebaseline level for Reading, Math-

ematics and Science, has rightlyalarmed many concerned Malay-sian parents and educationists.

It bears repeating that the qualityof an education system simplycannot exceed the quality of itsteachers, no matter how many bil-

lions of ringgit wepour into grandi-ose educationald e v e l o p m e n tplans or blueprintsto improve ourschool system.

Zaid Ibrahim,merely calls aspade a spadewhen he wrote inhis book “I, Too,Am Malay” that “... We are afraid toadmit that theteachers, most ofwhom are Malays,are poor in quality;that the school cur-riculum is irrel-evant and the ad-ministrators toopolitical....”( Chap-ter 7, Pg 245).

And the very fact that 70 per centof our English teachers failed tomake the grade in the CambridgePlacement Test speaks volumes ofwhy and how we continue to wit-ness a drastic decline in Englishproficiency in our schools anduniversities over the years.

And if it is true that a large num-ber of our teachers are incompe-tent and of poor quality, then itstands to reason that before westart to make drastic changes tofine-tune or transform our educa-tion system, the policy-makershave to do certain things. Theyhave to get the views of all the

EDUCATION

Education system:Take the bull by the hornsThe Education Ministry must have the courage to admit theserious shortcomings in the system and to think out of the box

by Henry Soon

TTTTT

Think beforet i n k e r i n g

Our cover story in theOur cover story in theOur cover story in theOur cover story in theOur cover story in theprevious issue ‘Politicalprevious issue ‘Politicalprevious issue ‘Politicalprevious issue ‘Politicalprevious issue ‘Politicalparties, stay out of ourparties, stay out of ourparties, stay out of ourparties, stay out of ourparties, stay out of ourschools!’ by Francis Lohschools!’ by Francis Lohschools!’ by Francis Lohschools!’ by Francis Lohschools!’ by Francis Lohdrew reaction from adrew reaction from adrew reaction from adrew reaction from adrew reaction from acouple of readers. We re-couple of readers. We re-couple of readers. We re-couple of readers. We re-couple of readers. We re-produce them below.produce them below.produce them below.produce them below.produce them below.More readers' reactionsMore readers' reactionsMore readers' reactionsMore readers' reactionsMore readers' reactionsare welcome. Email toare welcome. Email toare welcome. Email toare welcome. Email toare welcome. Email [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]


major stakeholders, be willing toaccept sound suggestions fromvarious quarters, do some realhard thinking of the pros andcons of their proposed changesbefore they attempt to tinker withour school system.

M Bakri Musa, the good doctorwho, wrote among other books,“An Education System Worthy ofMalaysia”, has pointed out thatthe greatest weakness of all oureducational reforms is thegovernment’s exclusive depen-dence on in-house or Ministry ofEducation staff. The personnelhave somehow failed to improvethe quality of our education sys-tem over the years - in spite of alltheir grand dreams and schemes.

Let’s just take a trip down memory

lane to review how effective, prac-tical or meaningful the educa-tional reforms or changes that theEducation Ministry has imple-mented in our schools over theyears to see how things really areat the school level.

When the co-curricular pointssystem was first implementedin our schools, it did appear tomany that it would be a goodway to motivate our students toparticipate more actively insports clubs, societies and uni-form bodies to enable the latterto become more well-roundedstudents. But as they say, theroad to hell is paved with goodintentions.

In the first place, the system wasnever implemented in good faith.Students sitting for the toughSTPM exams are already facing aserious handicap when it comesto applying for admission to localuniversities for critical degreecourses compared to Matricula-tion students, who study for ashorter period of time and sit fortheir relatively easy internallymarked exam papers.

And as if things are not badenough for STPM students, itlooks like the co-curricular pointssystem was designed to make uni-versity admission even easier forMatriculation students by makingit relatively easy for them to securehigh marks for their co-curricularactivities, which account for 10per cent of the entry-score require-

Unfair co-curricularpoints system


ments for public university ad-mission.

Co-curricular activities amonghostel block members in Ma-triculation Colleges are givenmarks meant for district level;activities within Matriculationcolleges are deemed fit for marksmeant for state level and merelycompeting against another Ma-triculation college in a particu-lar game is good enough to beawarded marks meant for na-tional level!

Now, any wonder why so manySPM students choose not to dotheir Form Six? Well, not when the

system is so biased in favour ofMatriculation students and theacademic playing field is sounlevel that to gain universityadmission to their dream degreecourses is often a pipe dream forForm Six students, even thoughthey may have worked doublyhard and secured four solid A’sin the so much tougher STPM ex-ams.

As such, many bright post-SPMstudents simply don’t want to doForm Six and experience the men-tal agony of getting four straightA’s in the STPM exams and beingdenied places to pursue criticaldegree courses like medicine and

pharmacy on the simple pretextthat their co-curricular marks werenot good enough compared to oth-ers.

Simple common sense will dictatethat we should only deny thesebrilliant students their dreamcourses in favour of other univer-sity applicants who obtained simi-lar results but scored better co-curricular marks - if our publicuniversity admission process istruly based on merit. Using the co-curricular points system so inflex-ibly and indiscriminately as anend in itself will only do injusticeto many of our nation’s talentedstudents.

I refer to the Aliran MonthlyVol.33 No.8 cover story‘Malaysia’s Education Sys-tem in Crisis?’ and as a patri-otic and forward-looking Ma-laysian, I would like to re-spond in two areas.

English is now the thirdmost spoken languageworldwide (after Chineseand Hindi) with some 400mspeakers. Due to its wide-spread use in many sectors,it is now the most widelylearned second language inthe world. Many studentsacross the world are re-quired to learn and masterEnglish, both spoken andwritten. A working knowl-edge of English is a must foranyone to excel in any field.

Since the phasing out of Englishas a medium of instruction in theMalaysian education system be-ginning in the 1970s and withEnglish being relegated to a sec-ond language in our schools, thestandard of the language hasplunged. Consequently, Englishhas become the weaker languageof most Malaysians - which is det-rimental to national interest in thelong term.

Many local graduates are unableto find employment in the privatesector due to their poor commandof English - which is not their faultas they are the product of the na-tional education system. It painsme to see so many young Malay-sians both in the private and pub-lic sectors struggling even to com-municate in simple language.

How do we expect them to rep-resent the country on interna-tional assignments?

The government has realisedthe seriousness of the declinein English among our studentsby making English a compul-sory subject to pass in the SPMexamination, starting from2016. This is something to belauded. But as students onlystudy and learn English as asingle subject, more must bedone by the government, par-ents, and the community toboost its learning, especiallyspoken English. Many stu-dents struggle to communicatein English due to limited op-portunities, the environment,their mindset and a lack of self-confidence.

Stem the tide of frustration over educationby Tih Seong Pin


Brain research suggests that su-perior learning takes place whenclassroom experiences are enjoy-able and relevant to students’ lives,interest and experiences.

But our education system is al-ready failing to provide studentswith appropriate problem-solv-ing, critical and analytical skillsand knowledge contents espe-cially in Science and Mathemat-ics to enable them to compete inthe challenging global environ-ment. At a time like this, it is ratherunfortunate that our policy-mak-ers saw it fit to make all students

study History (now made a com-pulsory subject to pass in the SPMexams) with a syllabus and con-tent that seem hell-bent to promotecrass nationalism and blatantIslamisation - all in the name ofpromoting patriotism and na-tional unity.

Instead of learning World Historyand exposing our students to allthe lessons we can learn fromworld-shaking historical events,much of our Form Four Historytextbook alone is devoted to thestudy of Islamic civilisation anda detailed study of the life ofProphet Muhammad. This hasgiven rise to suspicions that the

school history syllabus is writtenfrom a religiously biased view-point for the political and reli-gious indoctrination of our stu-dents.

Pray, tell me, when we impose aparticular version of our past andforce it down the throats of stu-dents to study a racially and reli-giously bigoted history, can thelearning of History ever serve tofoster patriotism and nationalunity? Or will it, on the contrary,breed resentment and contributeto greater racial and religiouspolarisation in our school system?

And why bother to introduce the

Being knowledgeable andcompetent in English, besidesour own mother tongue andthe national language, is vitalin today’s globalised and com-petitive world. Fail to masterEnglish and we will be left be-hind; this is the reality we haveto accept. Therefore, the gov-ernment urgently needs tobring back English-mediumschools in the country to ar-rest the total decline of Englishin Malaysia and start produc-ing students who are well-versed in the language to meetthe needs of the country.

Another equally important is-sue is the question of the offi-cial recognition of The UnifiedExamination Certificate(UEC), which was first estab-lished in 1975 by the Associa-tion of Chinese School Teach-ers and Trustees (Dong JiaoZong). This is a standardisedexam taken by all students of

all 60 Chinese independent sec-ondary schools in Malaysia.These independent schools aresupported by students’ fees anddonations by the public (mainlythe Chinese Malaysian commu-nity). These students also sit forthe SPM as private students.

At present, the UEC is recognisedas an entrance qualification bymany educational institutions inthe UK, US, Taiwan, Macau, HongKong, Singapore and most localprivate colleges. But strangely andsadly, after 39 years, the Malay-sian government has not yet offi-cially recognised the UEC for en-try into local public universities.This has created much frustrationand unhappiness among the Chi-nese community.

Along with mission and Englishschools, Chinese education hasbeen around in this country for along time, way before Merdeka.They have played an important

and meaningful role in nation-building.

There is no reason for the gov-ernment not to recognise theUEC. For the ultimate good andprosperity of the nation, the au-thorities must view the UECsolely from the education andlabour point of view and comeup with a positive announce-ment soon.

Otherwise, we would con-tinue to lose many talented,bright and capable studentsto other countries like Taiwanand Singapore. With just sixyears left beforee we attainVision 2020 in turning Ma-laysia into a fully developedand high-income country, wecannot afford to lose anymore talent. We must harnessour people’s talent and usethem fully to propel the na-tion forward to achieve itsnoble goals.

Uninspiring subjects


SPM Open Certification Exam inthe first place when we have noreal intention to offer our studentsreal flexibility in their choice ofsubjects and electives based ontheir interests, abilities and apti-tudes?

Why should we stifle our stu-dents’ initiative, curiosity and cre-ativity by burdening them withmore and more uninspiring andquite unnecessary subjects thathave made school life such adreadful and boring affair for somany of our students.

And yet, despite repeated calls toscrap the subject of Moral Educa-tion that hardly serves to makeour students more ethical and de-velop high moral standards asmoral values are really ‘caught’and not taught, such pleas fell ondeaf ears. The Moral Educationtaught in our schools, instead ofexploring how we can effectivelyteach and test moral reasoningand present moral dilemmas with-out prejudice (which do not insiston yes or no answers), only servesto indoctrinate our students withnorms and subject them to mind-less memorisation of core values.

To make things worse, after someyears, our policy-makers decidedthat learning Moral Education isnot good enough. In order to makeour students more civic-con-scious, public-spirited and patri-otic, they went on to introduce yetanother subject called Civics andCitizenship for our secondaryschool students starting fromForm One in 2005.

Little wonder, why our students’time-tables are so bloated thesedays and why they have to carry

such heavy satchels to school. Andit may not be long before other sub-jects such as Consumerism and Fi-nancial Literacy will make theirappearance in our schools.

Our National Education Philoso-phy emphasises the holistic de-velopment of our students. Thatbeing the case, surely PhysicalEducation plays an importantrole in schools to produce physi-cally fit and well-rounded stu-dents?

And yet with our students experi-encing so much stress in theirschool life and so eager to havegames and exercises in their dailyschool routine, they have to makedo with just two miserable peri-ods for Physical Education! If thatis not bad enough, some schoolseven use those periods to teach“more important subjects” in theirrespective schools.

But sorry, students in reality can’teven enjoy these two measly peri-ods of Physical Education per

week as they have to study HealthEducation as well once a fortnightor so during such periods!

And what about our PBS orschool-based assessment? Vari-ous concerned quarters have al-ready pointed out that simplyscrapping the UPSR and PMRexams to introduce the currentPBS may not necessarily serve toenhance learning and makeschool life more enjoyable for ourstudents.

When PBS was introduced toschools in 2011, it was assumedthat individual schools andteachers are capable and betterequipped and strategically placedto assess their students’ abilitiesand potential.

But with so many poor qualityteachers in our schools, it is reallya false assumption to claim that allteachers are sufficiently and

So little PE

Are teachers readyfor school-based

a s s e s s m e n t s ?


equally equipped to evaluate theirstudents based on internally pre-pared assessments, and that theywould take pains to assess theirstudents properly, and that they areunbiased towards their students.Well, that’s really a tall order.

Already we have heard storiesfrom schools of incompetent andindifferent teachers teachingweak classes and yet awardingtheir students Band Six, no less,in their respective subjects! Andas usual, many schools are al-ready resorting to buying PBSworkbooks in the market insteadof getting their teachers to comeup with their own worksheets andmaterials to assess accuratelywhat they really need to assess intheir students, making a mockeryof introducing the school-basedassessment in the first place.

But we can hardly blame the poorteachers, not when they are over-whelmed with so much paper-work and keying data online intothe SPPBS (System PengurusanPentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah).

It is worth noting that our currentPBS , at the end of the day, is notmuch different to the A-B-C-D-Egrade system or even the Percent-age Score system. So why shouldteachers need to waste time withthe banding exercise when theyin their daily dealings with theiryoung charges can easily discernthe band(s) the latter actually de-serve for the topics taught?

Wouldn’t it be much better to giveour teachers more time to reflectand deliberate on their teachingapproaches and methodologiesand enhance their professionalknowledge of their respective sub-jects rather than wasting so much

Henry Soon is a retiredHenry Soon is a retiredHenry Soon is a retiredHenry Soon is a retiredHenry Soon is a retiredteacher who has servedteacher who has servedteacher who has servedteacher who has servedteacher who has servedover 32 years inover 32 years inover 32 years inover 32 years inover 32 years ingoveernment service. Hegoveernment service. Hegoveernment service. Hegoveernment service. Hegoveernment service. Heis currently serving asis currently serving asis currently serving asis currently serving asis currently serving asthe head of the Englishthe head of the Englishthe head of the Englishthe head of the Englishthe head of the EnglishDepartment in a privateDepartment in a privateDepartment in a privateDepartment in a privateDepartment in a privateschool.school.school.school.school.

time with all the paperwork andkeying data online into the com-puters?

Really, it is high time to addressimmediately the woes facing oureducation system. For a start thegovernment should really take theeducational bull by the horns. Itshould undertake greaterdecentralisation of power andgrant greater autonomy to goodschools in both urban and ruralareas to adopt a broad based cur-riculum, save for a few core sub-jects under the supervision of theEducation Ministry, to let stu-dents learn what they ought tolearn in this challenging age ofglobalisation.

Get dynamic and open-mindedschool principals to head suchschools and empower them tomake decisions on significantmatters related to school opera-tions with the active participationof parents and the local schoolcommunities.

Such school principals can be em-powered to hire competent teach-ing staff, even from the private sec-tor, if need be, by charging schoolfees and being accountable fortheir performance to parents andthe local school communities.Then perhaps we stand a betterchance to make flexible and effec-tive changes to improve the qual-ity our education system at theschool level, especially when weare now in a position to comparethe performance of such autono-mous schools with our nationalschools.

With so many parents paying so

much money for tuition classes fortheir children these days whenthey lose faith in the school sys-tem, they would gladly pay someschool fees to get their children tostudy in such autonomousschools. When such schools, es-pecially when they are allowed toteach Science and Mathematics inEnglish, gain a reputation forsolid and sound education, thecurse of our Malaysian tuitionsyndrome will slowly die a natu-ral death. More non-Malay par-ents would then choose to placetheir children in such schoolsrather than vernacular schools orinternational schools, resulting ina truly win-win situation!

With the current rot in the schoolsystem, the Education Ministryand policy-makers should nolonger guard their educationalturf so jealously.They must havethe courage to admit the seriousshortcomings of their plans andpolicies and display greater cour-age to think out of the box. Theymust do what needs to be done tomeet the expectations of the long-suffering Malaysian parents fromall walks of life who yearn to havetheir children educated in linewith the best educational prac-tices in the world.

The ball is really in the EducationMinistry’s court.

Take the bullby the horns

q


nthropological theory israrely the subject of newsheadlines. In Malaysia,however, over the past

several months, a new ‘theory’ ofthe racial origins of ‘bangsaMelayu’ (Malay race) has caughtthe attention of the media andgenerated reactions from the pub-lic. Some have embraced theset h e o r i e suncritically asbreakthroughsin anthropologi-cal and scientificresearch whileothers have con-demned them asbeing downrightracist.

These reactions,largely ex-p r e s s e dthrough socialmedia, have yet,however, to leadto a criticalscholarly and public debate.Such a debate should interrogatenot just the content of the theoryitself, but also the very persis-tence of the concept of ‘race’ inMalaysian public life. Why does‘race’, an outdated category in

so many parts of the world, stillmatter so much in Malaysia?And what does the rise in re-search on racial origins and au-thenticity actually reveal?

The ‘theory’ surfaced publically

on 28 September 2013, whenZahara Sulaiman, a so-called his-torian affiliated with the Malay-sian Archaeological Association,came under the media spotlightfor her now-infamous Nam Tienlecture.

In her presentation, Zahara inven-tively extended the concept of‘Nam Tien’, a term long-used torefer to the migration from the RedRiver Delta to the Mekong Deltathat occurred between the 11thand 18th century, to present anargument that the Malay race (acategory in which she includedMons, Khmers and Chams) has

for thousands ofyears been the tar-get of a deliberatesouthbound inva-sion from theNorthern peoples(namely, the Chi-nese) who havebeen allegedlyjealous of the su-periority of Malaycivilisation andinnovation.

Zahara ’s ‘ re-search findings’came from a re-search project that

seeks to trace the origins of theMalay race. Datuk Seri Mohd AliRustam, former Chief Minister ofMalacca and president of thestate-linked organisation DuniaMelayu Dunia Islam (Malay-Is-lamic World) announced that the

ETHNICITY

Pseudo-theory on originso f t h e ‘ M a l a y r a c e ’A new ‘Malay race’ theory reveals the rise of folk-scholarsready to deploy racialised historiographies in the service of apolitical hegemony, observes Lilianne Fan

AAAAA

Southbound invasionsand civilisational envy

Zaharah SulaimanZaharah SulaimanZaharah SulaimanZaharah SulaimanZaharah Sulaiman


project, which also involves pro-fessors from UniversitiKebangsaan Malaysia and theUniversity of Malaya, apparentlyafter some 20 years of ‘scientific’research, has generated ‘ground-breaking’ new findings that tracethe origins of the Malay race allthe way to the Middle East.

Neither scientific nor anthropo-logical research seem to have beentaken seriously in the develop-ment of Malaysia’s latest racialorigin theory. While this pseudo-theory was presented as an impor-tant contribution to ‘scholarship’,it bears, alas, little trace of aca-demic rigour.

In late November, a video show-ing Zahara expounding the find-ings of the new research at a semi-nar began circulating onYouTube. In her introduction, shestates that the Malay race “is themost-envied race”, envied, in-deed, “by the entire world”.

She then goes on to describe theprehistoric nature and wide-spread existence of the ‘Malayrace’, a label conveniently appliedto all Austronesian linguisticpopulations, from Madagascar tothe Pacific.

The story becomes more complex,however, as a category of ‘pureMalays’ (‘Melayu Tulen’) emergesfrom the wider Malay stock withthe migration of the lineage ofCyrus the Great (Zulkarnain yangAgung) whose ancestry can ap-parently be traced directly toProphet Abraham.

While this pseudo-theory was pre-sented as an important contribu-tion to ‘scholarship’, it bears, alas,little trace of academic rigour. Con-

tradictory theories are clumsilylumped together as ‘evidence’ tosupport three principal claims —that the ‘Malay race’ is ancient,populous and superior; that theAbrahamic religions (namely, Is-lam) are not external influencesbut an originary structure of‘Malayness’; and that the great-ness of the ‘Malay race’ has re-sulted in jealousy from foreigners,Chinese invasions, colonialism,and ongoing plots to weaken anddestroy Malay civilisation.

Indeed, the theory blatantly ig-nores decades of sound scientificand anthropological research onhuman variation and diversitythat indicate that the whole cat-egory of ‘race’ as a classifier of hu-man difference is ultimately aproduct of philosophical, politi-cal and colonial history, not, as itis still assumed in some circles, ofreal biological variation.

The idea of a Malay race was firstproposed by the German anato-mist and anthropologist, JohannFriedrich Blumenbach, who in-cluded ‘Malay’ in the 1795 tax-onomy of the five major races inhis highly influential but long-denounced system of racial clas-sification.

The concept was reinforced andelaborated by British colonial ad-ministrators of the likes of ThomasStamford Raffles and FrankSwettenham, through their highlyinfluential writings, and was in-scribed as a legal category whenthe 1891 Straits Settlements cen-sus replaced the 48 ethnicitiesregistered in the previous censusinto six major racial categories:

Europeans, Americans, Malaysand Other Natives of the Archi-pelago, Chinese, Tamils and otherIndians, and Other Races.

Today, however, the typology of‘race’ is regarded as out-of-date inmost parts of the world. This isnot only because it has come to beconsidered increasingly politi-cally incorrect in a post-colonialworld, but also because it is nowrecognised that there is, in fact, noscientific evidence that race basedon unambiguous groupings withvisible physical traits (skincolour, hair texture, bone struc-ture, etc.) is a natural category atall.

On the contrary, recent genetic re-search, including that conductedby the Human Genome Project,has shown that the concept of‘race’ as a biological reality con-ceals the fact that human beingsare 99.9 per cent genetically iden-tical, and that 94 per cent of physi-cal variation actually takes placewithin so-called racial groups.

In the social sciences, the disci-pline of anthropology has come along way from its own colonialroots and the study of ‘nativetribes’ and is now at the forefrontof critiquing race and situating itin its historic context as a sociallyconstructed and politically salientconcept.

In 1998 the American Anthropo-logical Association issued a‘Statement on Race’, which de-clared:

Race… evolved as a worldview, abody of prejudgments that distortsour ideas about human differ-ences and group behavior. Racialbeliefs constitute myths about the

Race, nativism, andorigin myths


diversity in the human speciesand about the abilities and behav-ior of people homogenized into‘racial’ categories. The mythsfused behavior and physical fea-tures together in the public mind,impeding our comprehension ofboth biological variations andcultural behavior, implying thatboth are genetically determined…Scientists today find that relianceon such folk beliefs about humandifferences in research has led tocountless errors.

But neither scientific nor anthro-pological research seem to havebeen taken seriously in the devel-opment of Malaysia’s latest racialorigin theory.

In place of credible evidence andrigorous academic analysis, whatthe so-called theory does possessare the workings of an originmyth, with its meta-narratives ofthe genealogical purity of apeople who share a single trace-able point of origin, both biologi-cally and culturally.

The subtext of the narrative is ateleological message of a pre-des-tined return to the original stateof glory, but one that will only bepossible with a conscious strivingto protect the ‘native race’ from ex-ternal threats.

In 1981, renowned Harvard evo-lutionary biologist Stephen JayGould published his now-classicbook, The Mismeasure of Man, cri-tiquing scientific racism and theways in which academics ma-nipulated research to conform toparticular ideological agendas,

both consciously and uncon-sciously.

These are lessons worth learningin Malaysia. If anything, what thenew ‘Malay race’ theory revealedis the rise of a new class of folk-scholars who are ready to deployracialised historiographies in theservice of a political hegemonythat depends upon the reinforce-ment of racial difference and privi-leges.

Indeed, it reveals the degree towhich academic institutions aremotivated by particular politicalideologies and the readiness toput research so thoroughly at theservice of politics. One need onlyexamine the institutional contextswithin which the theories weregenerated to understand that theywere both more political than aca-demic.

‘Nam Tien’ was presented at asymposium entitled ‘Malay Lead-ership Crisis: Facing the ForeignAgenda’, discussing key ‘threats’to Malays (identified as the Chi-nese invasion, Shia teachings, freetrade agreements,Americanisation andChristianisation). In addition, theclose political links of many of theuniversity institutions involved inrace/civilisational research toUmno compromise their academiccredibility.

The issue is not one that is limitedto the ruling coalition, as the ex-act same concerns would applyto the opposition and any linksthey may have with academia. Theissue here is the subsuming of aca-demic freedom and integrity to po-litical agendas, which is the big-gest threat to the very principlesof objectivity, neutrality and inde-

pendence on which academia isfounded. This in itself should beof concern to the Malaysian pub-lic, who, regardless of politicalviews or affiliation, are entitled toexpect that scholarship and aca-demic institutions are impartial,credible and independent frompolitical influence.

In a country as diverse and com-plex as Malaysia we need to findways of moving beyond the prob-lematic discourse of race that re-duces people to one-dimensionalracialised caricatures and fore-closes the emergence of a civic sen-sibility and nationalism that isbased on equality, respect for di-versity of all kinds — cultural,socio-economic, intellectual andeven political.

Perhaps what is needed is a muchmore systematic public critique ofrace-thinking, its intellectual ge-nealogy, its political beneficiaries,and the institutions that producethe power/knowledge that main-tain the hegemony of racial dis-course. Anthropology, preciselybecause of its reckoning with itsown colonial and racialised his-tory, has a lot to offer in the way ofcontributing to that critique, and,possibly, in finding ways of mov-ing beyond it.

The rise of folk-scholarship and decline

of academic integrityLilianne Fan is an anthro-Lilianne Fan is an anthro-Lilianne Fan is an anthro-Lilianne Fan is an anthro-Lilianne Fan is an anthro-pologist and independentpologist and independentpologist and independentpologist and independentpologist and independentresearcher on religion,researcher on religion,researcher on religion,researcher on religion,researcher on religion,race, nativism and politi-race, nativism and politi-race, nativism and politi-race, nativism and politi-race, nativism and politi-cal violence in Southeastcal violence in Southeastcal violence in Southeastcal violence in Southeastcal violence in SoutheastAsia.Asia.Asia.Asia.Asia.

Source:Source:Source:Source:Source:themalaysianinsider.comthemalaysianinsider.comthemalaysianinsider.comthemalaysianinsider.comthemalaysianinsider.com

q


n a particularly alarm-ing tenth-anniversary-of-retirement interview,Dr Mahathir has reiter-

ated (and added new commentsto) his views on Malaysian poli-tics and intercultural differencesin Malaysia.

Sad to say, any serious listener inpolitics and human rights wouldcome to the same conclusion –that the Malaysian Maverick hasoverstayed his welcome as a po-litical advisor to Malaysia.

Even more worrisome is the factthat there are still staunch andloyal Mahathirists (such as formerMinister Zainuddin Maidin) whoadvocate the ex-premier’s returnto politics to “set things straight”.

I don’t think this is a good idea atall. Mahathir’s perspective onpolitics are not just dated (follow-ing from his days of writing theMalay Dilemma); it is also, for bet-ter or for worse, easily contestablewith some knowledge and basicreasoning.

In my understanding of

Mahathir’s thoughts, bad thingshappen when one attempts toquestion and subvert conventionsand traditions associated withour past. We have achieved har-mony in the past, whether betweenethnic groups, between religions,and/or between parties throughefforts to respect (a supposedlycrucial ingredient in all inter-group communications) one an-other.

These days – Mahathir wouldprobably argue – such respectful-ness is totally absent from our dis-courses, in which selfish people(presumably the Catholics, liber-als, Chinese, so on and so forth)attempt to manipulate the situa-tion to best benefit themselves atthe cost of others.

Regardless of how it’s articulated,Mahathir’s philosophy can per-haps be exemplified and tracedback to his archaic conception ofthe social contract, presumablyfollowing the footsteps of one ofhis predecessors (who set thestage nicely for the Malay capital-ists post-May 13th; see Kua KiaSoong’s May 13: Declassified Docu-

ments).

My aim in writing this essay istwo-fold: firstly, to refute and pro-vide some arguments as to whyhis ideas are altogether obsolete,as well as to contemplate and sug-gest an alternative conceptionwhich I find to be more useful andapplicable.

Mahathir’s views on the socialcontract have never changed, andit probably can be summarisedthus: that the Malays and non-Malays have always lived inpeace post-1969 because theyhonour and respect the implicit,unwritten agreement which wasput in place.

This agreement is basically apromise of sorts. In return for Ma-laysian citizenship (which, ac-cording to him, is only possibledue to the niceness, tolerance, andaccommodative attitude of theMalays), it is mandatory for the

POLITICS

Time to move on: BeyondMahath i r ’ s O ld PoliticsMahathir, stuck in his framework of Old Politics, is wrong inhis conception of human beings – we are fluid, dynamic,and capable of progress

by Douglas Teoh

IIIII

Mahathirism: Socialcontract and harmony

between groups


non-Malays to respect and notquestion Malay special rights andthe Islamic religion.

Disruption of harmony happensonly as a result of either partyturning their back against thiscontract. Since the Malays neveractually demand that the Chineseor Indians turn in their citizenshipthanks to their laid-back attitude,the fault (presumably) would liewith the non-Malays, who are ask-ing for more (and the unaccept-able).

The non-Malays, he reasoned, nolonger want the Malays to havespecial rights only because theyno longer need governmental helpthemselves. These ‘ingrates’ areunable to empathise with theplight of the Malays, and wish to

‘remove the crutches from the dis-abled’ (Dr M talks about this inhis blog post: ‘Hijacking the So-cial Contract’) simply becausethey themselves are no longer dis-abled. They forget that it was thegovernment and the Malays whoallowed them to live good lives.

But what Mahathir neglects (orrather, hides from plain sight) isthe fact that this social contract,or the harmony that results fromit, can never be attributed to re-spect. In fact, it is an innate fear,as a consequence of the constantdisplay of media manipulationand politicisation of history — ofimprisonment, of harm, and of the‘Other’ race which threatens thelivelihood of its own. The Malaysconstantly fear the insatiable Chi-nese greed, who take more and

more of the pie while the Malaysare not looking — while the Chi-nese are always afraid of forcefulsilencing and violence by theMalays. Fear and threats fuel thisrelationship between Malays andthe Chinese.

Our inter-ethnic (or indeed inter-faith) relationships have seen aturn for the worse lately, with eth-nic and religious sentimentsdominating our headlines. But Ishudder when considering this:have our ethnic relations (post-in-dependence) ever been good inthe first place? Building relation-ships between ethnicities hasnever been much of a consider-ation as much as the economic in-equalities and working our waysaround it.

This, I argue, is the result ofMahathir’s policies on media con-trol, education, as well as demo-cratic institutions such as elec-tions, Parliament, and the Judi-ciary. By focusing on progress anddevelopmentalism (Francis Loh,Old vs New Politics in Malaysia),the never-resolved tension be-tween races has been swept un-der the rug and is allowed to fes-ter and boil over a good numberof years – only to emerge with avengeance.

In my opinion, there is also a hid-den paradox that Mahathir’slogic would always fail to accountfor: in engaging different commu-nities of various ethnicities orfaiths, differences should never be

The Manicheanrelation: Fundamental

d i f f e r e n c e sbetween Yellow,Brown and Black


the emphasis. Breaking downMahathir’s philosophy ultimatelyleads to one fundamental conclu-sion: that of human determinism.

The Malays HAVE TO be the lordsof the lands. They can’t ever be asbusiness-savvy as the Chinese.The Chinese HAVE TO be busi-nessmen. They can’t ever be poli-ticians because they are unscru-pulous immigrants.

This is the consequence of a con-ception of society based on differ-ences – if everybody is given afixed role to play, then the imagi-nation of our present as well asfuture hits a stalemate. Indeed,morality itself arrives at an im-passe. After all, quoting Orwell:“All animals are equal, but someare more equal than others”. A re-lation of differences is conse-quently a relation of hierarchyand of dominance and subordi-nation.

My question regarding the socialcontract is ultimately this: at a timewhen the understanding of egali-tarianism is advanced, pluralitiesof perspectives appreciated, andempathy crucial to the communi-cation between people – can westill hold on to a dated social con-tract whose origins come from fearand threats and results in an un-changing and stagnant human-ity? I do not believe so. There needsto be a more optimistic, more openand more empathetic way of en-gaging different ethnicities.

Mahathir’s views are obsolete.His ideas of stability and progressfor the nation are found on dis-turbing building blocks – that offear and threats (disguised andideologically manufactured as“respect”) – which paints a bleak

picture of humanity as a wholeand grants an ethics no longersuitable for our times.

Going beyond Old Politics is dif-ficult – it requires us to recognisethat in terms of inter-ethnic con-flict, it is mostly a personal irra-tional judgement of the other racethat fuels it. By attributing race tobeing a “floating signifier”, StuartHall asserts that difference in racesare constructed – people givemeaning to ‘race’ before it is un-derstood as something that is im-portant.

Hence, these conceptions aboutothers always originate from ourfickle minds, which are perfectlycapable of making mistakes andprejudicial errors. The “intimateenemy” (aptly described by politi-cal psychologist Ashis Nandy) isone who originates from and con-stantly intertwines with our self.Improving relations between theSelf and the Other is a constantre-negotiation of our own moral-istic positions in relation to oth-ers.

Aiya, the Malays always workslow-slow one. Chinaman mah,everything also money. Stupid In-dians always con people.

But are those statements above inany way true – or are they butunfair thoughts which we forceour ‘opponents’ to accept? In fact,are we not playing into the fun-damental determinism of humanbeings (not unlike Mahathir’s so-cial contract) by doing so?

Moving beyond into a harmoni-ous future, then, requires self-re-

Time to move on:Beyond Old Politics

Douglas Teoh is currentlyDouglas Teoh is currentlyDouglas Teoh is currentlyDouglas Teoh is currentlyDouglas Teoh is currentlya psychology tutor in a lo-a psychology tutor in a lo-a psychology tutor in a lo-a psychology tutor in a lo-a psychology tutor in a lo-cal private university whocal private university whocal private university whocal private university whocal private university whointends to pursue his post-intends to pursue his post-intends to pursue his post-intends to pursue his post-intends to pursue his post-graduate degree in politics.graduate degree in politics.graduate degree in politics.graduate degree in politics.graduate degree in politics.

flexivity; one that does not at-tribute mistakes to others withoutfirst evaluating ourselves. Ofcourse, this is difficult to do: it re-quires us to take apart the beliefswhich we hold so strongly aboutthe Others and rely on to build ourown identities. “Maybe I’m mis-taken here. Maybe I’m the one whomisjudged these people. Do theyhave any other reasons for doingthis?” are possible starting pointsto critically evaluating people.

This is related to what AshisNandy proposes: “the tradition ofreinterpretation of traditions tocreate new traditions”. By ques-tioning our own assumptions, wecan come up with more insightfulanswers to and (as importantly)further questions about how tomake progress in Malaysia.

To conclude, Mahathir is wrongin his conception of human be-ings – we are fluid, dynamic, andcapable of progress. We need notbe boxed into a predeterminednotion that someone constructson our behalf – but then the op-posite has to be logically true aswell. Getting out of a prejudicialethnic- and faith-based system re-quires us to actively deconstructthe boxes which we force uponothers. When more and morepeople do the same, ethnic- andfaith-based politics and violencewill eventually cease being an is-sue. q


he issue of citizenshiphas always been a sen-sitive topic for Malay-sians

And xenophobia appears to beescalating: look at how Malay-sians handled anyone who“looked” foreign during GE13and note the incessant remarksmade by several politicians tell-ing other Malaysians to “Balik to… (wherever they are assumed tohave come from…insert ancestralcountry here)”.

In the midst of this, we need to askourselves what is our citizenshipworth? Citizenship has been de-fined as ‘a state (that) consists ofa number of people’; however, notall of its people may be citizens.

Generally, a person’s citizenshipis assumed by the passport theyhold. Whatever it is, citizens aremembers of a state, who owe alle-giance to it and are entitled to itsprotections or benefits, whicheveris prioritised by the immediategovernment.

These benefits come with condi-

tions and these conditions guar-antee several important politicalrights, such as the right to vote,and civil and basic rights such aspublic health care. (Public healthcare is a basic human right whichcan be claimed by migrants also.)

In addition to the rather technicalaspects of citizenship, positiveconcepts are also distinguished bymodern thinkers. Citizens arehighly encouraged to participatein active roles and contribute tothe community to the fullest ex-tent possible. They must engageand facilitate societal advance-ments in terms of morale and ma-terial progression.

Education must be a governmentpriority, with the quality and level,well considered. This enables fel-low citizens to form intelligentopinions in public affairs. Why isthis important? To ensure that ac-tions and ideas which are pre-sented, at any level, are conduciveto the general well- being of thecommunity.

In Malaysia, it has become strik-ingly evident that our communi-

ties are broken into three classes:citizens who enjoy full benefits,citizens who do not enjoy full ben-efits, even though they are citi-zens, and foreigners.

Up to a certain level, the first twoclasses may enjoy the same privi-leges but these come with condi-tions such as the enforced quotasystem by our government. Addi-tionally, these two classes mayboth receive the protection of thestate in which they live, in respectof their life and property. Both areexpected to pay taxes and respectexisting laws.

But there are important differ-ences between the rights andprivileges conferred on thesetwo classes of people by thestate. Enter the ‘Bumiputera sta-tus’ that clearly influences whowill get a bigger slice of the Ma-laysian pie between the first twoclasses.

This policy provides preferentialquotas for places in the local uni-versities and comfortable govern-ment jobs. Under this quota sys-tem, ethnic considerations and not

CITIZENSHIP

Bangsa Malaysia:Our citizenship definedWith the jarring inequalities and discrimination targeted atsome Malaysian communities, can we really blame those whopursue greener pastures elsewhere

by Syerleena Abdul Rashid

TTTTT


just academic achievements deter-mine which candidates are suc-cessful.

Malaysia has certain policies andregulations that exclude non-Bumiputeras from receiving cer-tain privileges, although the Con-stitution provides certain guaran-tees of rights to all citizens regard-less of racial/ethnic background.

To further drive a wedge betweencommunities in society, a hand-ful of politicians insist on play-ing a dangerous political game of(mis)using religion, fear and igno-rance. These three elements makeup a malevolent concoction thatthreatens our constitution andsocietal well-being.

Some politicians are aware of howvital the role of education is andhow it can be used as a tool tomanipulate and regulate thepeople. Escalating issues of rac-ism and crumbling morality canbe blamed on our lack of educa-tion standards.

Having our ministers assure usthat our education level is on par(if not, better than) European stan-dards is a cruel joke. In presentday society, achieving 20 A’s doesnot mean a thing when our stu-dents are incapable of formingcritical opinions and lateralthoughts.

The third class is a class by it-self: the foreigners. The foreign-ers do not possess citizenshipand are not allowed to enjoy thebenefits, privileges and rights ofthe first two classes. They maybe migrants, expatriates (al-though expats may enjoy certainbenefits more so then the others),undocumented immigrants,

refugees (in the eyes of the gov-ernment and the law, a refugeeis considered an “illegal immi-grant”; therefore subject to de-portation and other acts thatbreach human rights), and state-less Malaysians.

The issue of ‘stateless Malay-sians’ and how a thing like thiscould happen to any one of “us”needs serious attention. There aremany reasons why, but it all boilsdown to two factors: exploitationand manipulation. There is nodenying that a majority of state-less Malaysians are illiterate andare of a lower socio-economic sta-tus.

But what makes the whole issueunnerving is that just like the firsttwo classes, stateless Malaysianswere born in Malaysia. The sys-tem that oversees citizenship ap-plication processes needs furtherscrutiny and if possible, an over-haul.

At present, the Malaysian gov-ernment does not implement jussoli, where, if a person is bornwithin the jurisdiction of thestate (i.e. Malaysia), he or sheacquires citizenship irrespec-tive of the nationality of the par-ents. The notion was aggres-sively refuted during theFederation’s infant years. So, itis not uncommon to come acrossa ‘Malaysian’, born and raisedhere, but after 50 years is stillwaiting to obtain a simpleMyKad, however fundamen-tally wrong this may be.

‘State less Malaysians ’ , a l -though born and raised here, aredenied proper health care andeducation, and are not permit-ted to contribute to society. But

their skills are permitted to beexploited (e.g. in estates wherea majority of stateless Malay-sians are reported to have comefrom)! And just because the me-dia have stopped reporting theirplight, it does not mean the prob-lem ceases to exist.

With the jarring inequalities anddiscrimination targeted at someMalaysian communities, can wereally blame those who willinglygive up their citizenship to pur-sue greener pastures elsewhere?

And how can we justify overlook-ing the foreigners and statelessMalaysians who want nothingmore than to be integrated into oursociety, hoping that one day, theytoo, can be Malaysians?

Malaysians are fond of takingthings for granted. We are famousfor our apathy and complacencybut in the light of the recent inci-dents that violate our basic humanrights, just what is our citizenshipworth? But we just can’t afford tocontinue with our apathetic ways,if we are to fully embrace a BangsaMalaysia – which surpasses theMalay, Chinese, Indian and “lain-lain” communal categories.

We still have a long way to go tofigure out what Bangsa Malaysiareally means.

Syerleena Abdul Rashid,Syerleena Abdul Rashid,Syerleena Abdul Rashid,Syerleena Abdul Rashid,Syerleena Abdul Rashid,an Aliran member, is aan Aliran member, is aan Aliran member, is aan Aliran member, is aan Aliran member, is awater sports instructorwater sports instructorwater sports instructorwater sports instructorwater sports instructorand part-time postgradu-and part-time postgradu-and part-time postgradu-and part-time postgradu-and part-time postgradu-ate student in tourism de-ate student in tourism de-ate student in tourism de-ate student in tourism de-ate student in tourism de-velopment.velopment.velopment.velopment.velopment.

q


am Douglas Teoh, aWest Malaysian. I don’tprofess to be the voice ofour leaders nor the ma-

jority in Malaysia.

But I write this as a letter of apol-ogy from someone who is resid-ing in the West, peninsular-Ma-laysian – just to say I am sorry forthe plight and the gross injusticethat permeate the daily lives ofSabahans and Sarawakians.

There is little doubt that in manyways, there is disparity betweenEast and West Malaysia (ironi-cally, not unlike the East-West di-chotomy globally) in almost allsectors. You are understandablydissatisfied, after all, over theshare of revenue and resources.East Malaysia contributes a ma-jor portion to the development ofthe nation, but relatively little isseen of the gains which are sup-posed to go into your states’s de-velopment.

I apologise also, for the crony poli-ticians, many of whom are con-tent with having the stream ofwealth flow into Putrajaya –which hoards the resources andenriches select families without

much regard to the average EastMalaysian, who lives in condi-tions far less comfortable thanthey deserve. Worse are the liesspun to magically weave a fabricof illusion to drape over the eyesof the expectant poor.

But most importantly, I apologisefor our inability to reconcile dif-ferences amongst ourselves. Thegap between East and West ismore than one of geographicaldistance; there is a fissure in re-lating to one another as human

beings who are equal in the truesense of the word. The constantedging of race, religion, class ofWest Malaysia presses unfairlyagainst the tradition and spirit (oreven soul) of Sabah and Sarawak.

Indeed, under such circum-stances, many amongst you mightfeel it makes more sense to havean autonomous space away fromthe petty politics played solely forthe benefit of the West.

I have no excuses to offer; those

HEART TO HEART

An open letter of apologyAn open letter of apologyAn open letter of apologyAn open letter of apologyAn open letter of apology(and hope) to East Malaysians(and hope) to East Malaysians(and hope) to East Malaysians(and hope) to East Malaysians(and hope) to East MalaysiansDouglas Teoh says sorry to Sabahans and Sarawakians forthe fissure in relating to one another as equal human beings

IIIII

"What comes from the lips reaches the ear,what comes from the heart reaches the heart" - Arab proverb


who do merely wish to play theblame game, deceiving the otherside only as a pretext for their owngains. “If it’s not my fault, it’s mostdefinitely yours.” But this is agame of politics; and ordinary citi-zens need not engross themselvesin these discourses.

What I’d like to offer, however, isan ideal – an olive branch for thefuture which I carry.

My hope for the future of Malay-sia is to see a land where all haveequal access to facilities and re-sources.

A land where politicians have toheed the concerns of the peopleand are held accountable by them.

A land where tradition is culti-vated and passed on without theinterference of self-servingorganisations.

A land where there is no divisionbetween you and me.

Douglas Teoh is currentlyDouglas Teoh is currentlyDouglas Teoh is currentlyDouglas Teoh is currentlyDouglas Teoh is currentlya psychology tutor in a lo-a psychology tutor in a lo-a psychology tutor in a lo-a psychology tutor in a lo-a psychology tutor in a lo-cal private university whocal private university whocal private university whocal private university whocal private university whointends to pursue his post-intends to pursue his post-intends to pursue his post-intends to pursue his post-intends to pursue his post-graduate degree in poli-graduate degree in poli-graduate degree in poli-graduate degree in poli-graduate degree in poli-ticsticsticsticstics .....

And most importantly, a landwhich allows us to truly appreci-ate one another as fellow Malay-sians.

What we have to vanquish is theevil of selfish desires and of greedand corruption.

But we have to do this together.

If we hold the same hopes, the wayforward is unity, not separation.

Certainly, we can turn inwardsand evoke our self-preservingmechanisms and protect what isimportant by isolating ourselves,but development and progresscan only be possible if we lookoutwards and truly engage withone another.

There will be opportunities tolearn from one another in terms ofvalues, traditions and spirit.

There is also room for disagree-ment – so very vital for the ad-

vancement of our thoughts andfeelings.

Finally – together, there is safetyin numbers, a much louder voicefor reform, and a far more enor-mous possibility for positivechange.

Thus, what we need is just a fun-damental piece: a solid, unitedfront – which rejects all forms ofdeceptions, all forms of extremism,and all forms of injustice.

As long as we have that, the Eastand West will be many, and at thesame time. q


very now and then, Ma-laysian government (orthe state) propagatesmoral crusades against

obscene literature, offensive ma-terial and anything considered athreat to Malaysian way of life.

It is not uncommon when thepowers that be go all the way toban books and movies. They mayeven go as far as censoring ‘sensi-tive’ words like beer, Allah, drugsand any human reproductivepart.

This is nothing but a form of es-capism, an easy way out that thegovernment adapts when dealingwith anything complex or subjec-tive. It can potentially be a decep-tive system to command and forcedown moral standards accreditedby the ruling elite (or coalition).

In general, the rulers of the state(the authorities) consider them-selves the custodians of virtue.There is an unmistaken sense of

self-righteousness to suppressany ‘threats’ that may influenceor weaken their support. Again,the Malaysian government hassystematically eliminated allthings considered haram, immoralor politically sensitive – even ifsuch material may have scientificevidence or can be proven to behistorically accurate.

How effective is censoring litera-ture or articles, where one can ob-tain an uncensored copy throughthe Internet?

And how can Malaysians dealwith this form of ‘bluenose’ tyr-anny namely selective censor-ship?

Where do we draw the line be-tween artistic freedom and publicoffence?

How do we define what is mor-ally and culturally acceptablewithout being smothered by theauthorities?

The controversy of censorshipand debates over freedom ofspeech are not recent phenomena.Issues surrounding the ethics ofcensorship go back to the earliesttimes and continue to surface tothis day. For instance, Plato oncefamously banished all poets andwriters in Greece – simply becausehe thought of the harmful influ-ences they would have in his idealrepublic. To him, the arts, in hissociety at least, should subscribeto his brand of moral and politi-cal acquiescence. As a result, Platosingle-handedly subjected them toabsolute government control.

Such matters are sometimes diffi-cult to justify and quite delicate tomention, as it revolves aroundmatters that affect public moral-ity. It is a form of public control,dictated by the authorities thatmay or may not have vested inter-ests when implementing suchpolicies.

In Malaysia, the unfortunate co-

CENSORSHIP

With rise of internet-savvycommunities, censorship nolonger effectiveIntellectual embargos and absolute censorship are far lesseffective than literate intellectualism and sound moral logic inkeeping society on a level course

by Syerleena Abdul Rashid

EEEEE


nundrum of Lena Hendry ofKomas who is still waiting fortrial, scheduled for the end of nextmonth, has been the highlight ofsuch unnerving hypocrisy. Heronly ‘crime’ was to publiclyscreen No Fire Zone: The KillingFields of Sri Lanka, a movie whichour government felt could damageour country’s political ties withSri Lanka.

But the reported atrocities com-mitted by the Sri Lankan govern-ment are no secret and are wellpublicised at the internationallevel. A simple Internet search willpresent you with a cornucopia ofinformation on any desired topic.

Also, the demolition of Candi 11at Bujang Valley exhibits a disre-gard towards historically accurateaccount that unmasks the true ori-gins of a pre-Umno, pro-Hindusovereign state. The fact that thegovernment chose not to givemuch publicity to the excavationsof the past is a sure tell-tale signof the contempt our governmenthas for anything that can destroythe propaganda it uses to lullmany gullible citizens.

At the opposite end of the spec-trum lies a position that insists onthe importance of unfettered free-dom of the arts and the ultimate,freedom of expression. JohnMilton, an advocate of such a con-cept urged us to reconnect withliterate intellectualism and strongacts of faith that exist in humannature. The two elements are emo-tionally robust and less corrupt-ible than Plato’s view of censor-ship. According to Milton, indi-viduals should be armed withsound moral education and a ba-sic understanding of human psy-chology, to be able to interpret both

good and evil. It is through thisthat a person will be able to choosethe good.

The notion of censorship is theadaptation of both the above ideasby borrowing something fromboth. It argues that the governmentshould not determine what mate-rial, art or literature should besubjected to censorship. It looselypromotes the idea of permittingsociety some form of control overthe government, for example –this is the middle ground adoptedby developed nations.

Freedom of expression and otherartistic activities can be viewed asa form of contribution or a form ofslander to human welfare. In otherwords, it can and does have aneffect on a community, society andultimately, a country; therefore,there should be at least some formof minimal control. In a way, cen-sorship is viewed as a way to pro-tect the adolescent, the emotion-ally unbalanced and the foolishlygullible from those who may seekprofit from obscene industries andtwisted ideologies – such as por-nography, neo-fascist movementsand religious extremism.

Although, it is evident that theMalaysian government takes ona position which advocates totalpolitical control over the mediaand the arts, there are some localgroups that lobby for a moremiddle-ground approach to cen-sorship.

Recently, the Home Ministry an-nounced the ban of 12 books – lit-erature by authors who pose ‘greatdanger’ to our homogenous brandof Islam. In a just world, the gov-ernment would be required to givevalid reasons why they’ve de-

cided to impose such a move.

Alas, Malaysians are taught neverto question the motives of our lead-ers , as questioning is a form ofdissent and that could result in aperson being branded an enemyof the state. This, in turn, couldaffect any bank loan or studentloan applications made in the fu-ture.

Nevertheless, every once in awhilewe hear of the underdogs like NikRaina Nik Abdul Aziz, theBorder’s manager who foughtback and held on to her principlesby challenging the government’sban on Irshad Manji’s book, “Al-lah, Liberty and Love”.

In this era of modernglobalisation, with the rise ofinternet-savvy communities andthe popularity of social media, weshould realise that intellectualembargos and absolute censor-ship are far less effective than lit-erate intellectualism and soundmoral logic.

It is only through a complete un-derstanding of our human mo-tives and consequences that evilmay bring that the virtue of mo-rality will be sounder and societywill be incapable of being ledastray.

The human nature is, after all,less fragile than what the govern-ment wants you to believe.

Syerleena Abdul Rashid,Syerleena Abdul Rashid,Syerleena Abdul Rashid,Syerleena Abdul Rashid,Syerleena Abdul Rashid,an Aliran member, is aan Aliran member, is aan Aliran member, is aan Aliran member, is aan Aliran member, is awater sports instructorwater sports instructorwater sports instructorwater sports instructorwater sports instructorand part-time postgradu-and part-time postgradu-and part-time postgradu-and part-time postgradu-and part-time postgradu-ate student in tourism de-ate student in tourism de-ate student in tourism de-ate student in tourism de-ate student in tourism de-velopment.velopment.velopment.velopment.velopment.

q


was becoming unbearable to livein the sea due to the “rising costof living”. The ‘Minister’, in hisinfinite wisdom, responded to thecomplaint by informing the ‘fish’that if you are not happy living inthe sea, then you should jolly wellgo and live somewhere else.

The author also made another in-teresting observation: it was the‘small fish’, the ‘common fish’ thatwere jumping onto land while the‘big fish’ (read that as the rich andwell-connected) remained strongand secure and presumably livedon happily in the sea.

The story was of course facetious,meant to entertain and make uslaugh, but it was also social com-mentary, that we, the ordinaryrakyat, could easily relate to.

The Kuantan Wanita Umno chief,Zaiton Mat, was quoted as say-ing, “.... those that dislike theBarisan Nasional governmentshould just leave the country”(theSun, 30 December 2013). It wasa blatant display of arrogance forher to imply that there is no roomfor dissent in this country.

The news report indicated that theUmno leader was reacting to therumour that a group of peoplewere planning a New Year Eve’srally with the intention of topplingthe government. In fact, the pro-test rally was organised by a groupthat called themselves, GerakanTurun Kos Sara Hidup (Turun),led by its chairman, MuhamadAzan Safar. He explained that the

gathering was organised for theordinary people to express theirdissastisfaction with the risingcost of living.

Zaiton’s statement received brick-bats from various quarters. MCAdeputy president Dr Wee KaSiong, said Zaiton’s statementwas “unbecoming and uncalledfor”. A University Putra Malaysiapolitical scientist Dr Jayum Jawansaid, “..people expressing differ-ent views from the governmenthas nothing to do with them be-ing unpatriotic or disloyal to-wards the country.”

PKR Vice-President N. Surendran,for his part, said, “It is those whocriticise and question who aremore patriotic then the ones whoremain silent when there arewrongdoings. To question andcriticise is an act of patriotism. Tohold the government responsibleis an act of patriotism” (theSun, 30December 2013).

Eyewitness accounts of the thou-sands that attended the rally re-vealed that the gathering wasmade up of people from all walksof life and consisted of Malaysiansof different ethnic groups. This isthe reality that the government ofthe day should realise and findworkable solutions to ease the fi-nancial burden of the rakyat.

Our political leaders shouldrealise that we are not just talkingabout old and infirmed Malay-sians who are living in abject pov-erty. Quite recently, for example,The Star (13 January 2014) high-lighted the plight of a small groupof abandoned elderly folk unable

to provide and fend for them-selves. Such reports tug at theheartstrings of generous Malay-sians, who then unhesitatinglyrallied around to provide assis-tance. In fact as soon as theirplight was highlighted, it shouldbe the duty and responsibility ofthe government’s social welfaredepartment to attend to theirneeds.

No, we are referring to averagefamilies with three to five school-going children and where thecombined income of the parentsis only RM2000-3000. We are re-ferring to those Malaysians whoneed to take on at least two jobs orwork 18-hour shifts so that theycan put food on the table. Theseare the ordinary Malaysiansstruggling to balance their bud-gets, and there are thousands ifnot millions in our country whofall into this category.

In the past, such Malaysians mayhave been able to make ends meet.But with the rise in prices of es-sential items such as petrol andelectricty tariffs and the inflation-ary effects on other goods and ser-vices, many families have startedto experience serious financialdifficulties.

It is these ordinary Rakyat - yourregular wage earner, petty trader,construction worker, farmer, plan-tation or factory worker - facing afinancial predicament who madethe effort to attend the anti-pricehike rally. Accompanying themwould be friends and supporterswho sympathise with their plightand yearn to see a more just andfair Malaysia. Standing shoulder

Who was behind theTurun rally?

THE RAKYAT EXPECT... STATESMEN Continued from page 40


to shoulder in unity,they proclaimthis message to the leaders: “pro-vide us with solutions don’t justtell us to tighten our belts”

By now, most Malaysian wouldbe familiar with the gaffe made bythe Prime Minister in a speech inwhich he stressed, “Prices havenot gone up for everything, theprice of kangkung (water spinach)has come down”; so why don’tthe the people acknowledge that?

What followed was a flurry ofparodies, spoofs and sarcasticjokes made at the expense of thePrime Minister for his remarks,and it will be very difficult for himto live it down. The remarks haveprovided excellent (vegetarian)fodder for both professional andaspiring stand-up comedians.

The question we should ask andperhaps more importantly, thatthe Prime Minister himself shouldreflect on is, why have the rakyatreacted so strongly to this state-ment?

If the remark had been made bypast prime ministers like TunHussein Onn or PM Najib’s father,Tun Abdul Razak, there wouldhave been little or merely mutedreaction. Unfortunately, our PMdoes not have the trust and respectof significant segments of theRakyat. He is far from being aMandela, whom people from allover the world would readilyrecognise as a true statesman.

A statesman for instance wouldnot let the issue of the seizure ofBibles from the Bible Society of

Malaysia or the controversial “Al-lah” issue simmer and cause dis-quiet, suspicion, anger and mis-trust among the multireligiousand multi-ethnic population ofthe country.

A statesman would ensure that hefully upholds and complies withthe principles of good governance.He would not tolerate corruptionand any mismanagement of theRakyat’s money.

A statesman would certainly takefirm action and respond effec-tively to the many cases of mis-management of funds, leakages,abuse of power and other discrep-ancies highlighted in theAuditor’s General’s Report, yearin and year out.

Each year, the funds that are mis-managed run into millions ofringgit; yet the Rakyat have not

Where are the reals t a t e s m e n ?

L e a d e r s h i p ,k a n g k u n g - s t y l e


though there are those who maydisagree with Nik Aziz’s politi-cal beliefs, the majority no doubtadmire and respect his simplelifestyle choices.

During such tough and difficulttimes, a true statesman wouldlead by example and take neces-sary measures to promote auster-ity and avoid ostentation. Unfor-tunately, that is not the case withour Prime Minister, judging fromavailable reports.

Is it any wonder then that theRakyat has reacted so strongly tothe kangkung debacle?

There have been many calls forthe Prime Minister to show lead-ership and take a firm stand tostem out any form of unrulybehaviour that may cuase ten-sion among the people of Malay-sia. A case in point is the 30roadshows planned by Umnoand some Muslim groups, es-sentially to send a message thatnon-Muslims should not be al-lowed to use the word Allah. Astatesman would stand up andstop any protests that may leadto violence.

On this matter, the Oppositionshould also take heed that theirprotests and dissent, however le-gitimate, must never take the formof provocation that could lead toviolence. For instance, did theflash mob organised by MachangBubok Adun Lee Khai Loon crossthe line (Malaysia Chronicle, 21January 2014)?

All concerned should take heedof the wisdom of Mahatma

witnessed significant prosecu-tions let alone convictions of theculprits who should be held ac-countable.

Then we have the issue of thegovernment’s spending on officialtravels. A report in the MalaysianChronicle (22 November 2013)claimed that PM Najib and hiswife Rosmah had not flown onMalaysian Airlines planes sincehe took office in 2008.

Then there was the controversial‘official’ trip by Rosmah and herentourage to Qatar for which agovernment jet was used (TheMalaysian Insider, 20 November2013). The Prime Minister did notgo on this trip. Was this an abuseof privileges?

Contrast this with the lifestyle thatPas spiritual advisor Nik AzizNik Mat, who as Chief Minister ofKelantan, had avoided the trap-pings of a lavish lifestyle. He hadchosen to live in his own humbleabode and eschewed the officialresidence provided for him. Al-

Rely on peace-lovingM a l a y s i a n s

Henry Loh is honoraryHenry Loh is honoraryHenry Loh is honoraryHenry Loh is honoraryHenry Loh is honoraryassistant secretary ofassistant secretary ofassistant secretary ofassistant secretary ofassistant secretary ofAliran.Aliran.Aliran.Aliran.Aliran.

Gandhi, a great statesman whosaid, “An eye for an eye will makethe whole world blind.”

Level headed, right-thinking, rea-sonable, mature and rational Ma-laysians would very much like tosee our political leaders becometrue statesmen.

It is a huge challenge but if ourleaders are guided by and holdfast to the principles of justice, fair-ness, good governance,accountabilty, peace, goodwilland truly have the interests of theRakyat at heart, then they have afighting chance of becoming realstatesmen.

But we cannot wait for our lead-ers to become statesmen and pro-vide us with much needed lead-ership. It may be in vain.

Our best bet would be to rely onour fellow peace-loving Malay-sians who value and treasurethe harmony, understandingand goodwill that have beenbuilt and enjoyed by the multi-religious and multi-ethnic citi-zenry for generations. Let usunite and build on those tiesand resist being influenced byminority, extremist, narrow-minded and bigoted views.

Remember 1Malaysia is just a slo-gan for those who manipulate itfor their own ends. But for thoseof us who have lived out that spiritall of our lives, let us reclaim it astruly ours....

Nik Aziz: Humble lifestyleNik Aziz: Humble lifestyleNik Aziz: Humble lifestyleNik Aziz: Humble lifestyleNik Aziz: Humble lifestyle

q


ometime towards theend of 2013, the socialmedia was abuzz withan amateur video record-

ing of a very large school of fishthat inexplicably swam out of thesea on to the shore and the rocks,off the coast of Sabah, thereby,meeting an untimely end.

This led to concerned friendsmessaging one another to avoidthe coasts as they predicted thiscould be a prelude to a disas-trous tsunami. As it turned out,there was no tsunami and sci-entists were not able to providea definite explanation for thebehaviour of the fish.

A week or so later after this strangephenomenon was observed, ananonymous person wrote an in-teresting explanation that dulywent viral.

This person suggested that the‘fish’ had complained to the “Min-ister in charge of the sea” that it

COMMENTARY

The Rakyat expect politicalleaders to be statesmenBut we cannot wait in vain for our leaders to becomestatesmen. Our best bet would be to rely on ourfellow peace-loving Malaysians, says Henry Loh

SSSSS

Continued on page 37Continued on page 37Continued on page 37Continued on page 37Continued on page 37

Documents

MONTHLY - aliran.com · Aliran Monthly : Vol.33(9) Page 3 The Kajang by-election on 23 March is fast approach-ing. And the higher cost of living, especially soar-ing food prices,