Scientia Est Potestas

PAN V 2008 Part 5

2008-04-14T10:42:00.003+01:00

The last address of the session was given by Ahmad Shahizam Mohd Shariff, Director of the Managing Director's Office, Khazanah Nasional. He starts off by saying that the trade environment today was far different from the past, for example, when he was a student, the UK was struggling with low competitiveness compared to other EU countries, but today, it has reinvented itself to become more competitive and more dynamic.

"Malaysia is the second largest exporter in the South East Asian region, but in terms of FDI, we are far behind, so there seems to be a disconnection here." Social development indicators have shown that Malaysia is doing significantly better than ASEAN countries. In his opinion, Malaysia has done decently and that it had gotten a few things right, but is that sufficient? Reality is that it isn't.

Ahmad Shahizam mentioned that the core of economic competitiveness lies in the labour force and local entrepreneurs, since after all the country's competitiveness is the aggregate of individual competitiveness at the microlevel. In this light, he says that though Malaysia is doing a better job than other countries in terms of exports, we have been falling behind in the manufacturing and commodities sector. Being competitive entails become more adaptive and competitive.

Based on international business surveys, the main area of weakness when it comes to investing in Malaysia is the area of property rights. This does not mean concern the legal ownership of property, but rather it is a code that investors use when they try to ascertain the business environment of viable investment locations. They are concerned with whether they can repatriate profits and whether there are strict controls on capital flows. The general transparency and openness of the system is also unquantifiable, but it has an important bearing on investor's perception about the overall 'cleanliness' of the system.

At Khazanah, a powerful tool used to engage with investors is the diversity of Malaysia. The multicultural and multilingual background is considered as an asset to investors. Particularly with the impending (or already happening) recession in the US, the world is now looking towards Asian markets, and there is now a greater appreciation for the diverse opportunities available in the east. In Malaysia, we are actually able to capture much of this diversity, which is a good selling point with investors. However, he laments that we have not harnessed this asset to its full potential as yet.

He also highlights the importance of geographical location as another factor. For example, African countries are rich in resources but located in 'bad neighbourhoods'. On the other hand, Malaysia is in the relatively 'good neighbourhood' of South East Asia where various other countries in the region are developing rapidly, such as Thailand and Vietnam, and this he says, should be capitalised on.

Institutional set-ups and the stability of the investment environment is also a key factor that investors look for. He points out that after the GE, generally people have felt that it was a positive change and is reflected as the growing maturity in the mindset of the Malaysian population. Malaysia's transition to democracy has been bloodless compared to numerous coups in Thailand and Philippines. People on the outside are of the opinion that once we address and reexamine some of the issues like which things work and which don't, Malaysia would become more competitive.

During his speech, he also pointed out that whilst we have the institutional structures in place, we lack reasoning when it comes to working hard vs working smart, for example the output does not reflect the effort that goes into the inputs. Oddly enough, though Malaysia is considered one of the more competitive emerging markets, this does not get reflected in GDP per capita. Thus, it would do the Malaysian economy good if policy-makers can address the problem of GDP per capita not being as high as it should be.

Our inability to innovate is also an obstacle. Though Malaysia's economy is largely manufactures and commodities-based, it is becoming less competitive in terms of cost compared to other developing countries. Thus, he stresses the need to shift to more value-added products instead of relying too much on primary products. Another good indication of innovation is measured in terms of patents per capita, which again he says is low. To conclude, he stresses on the importance to break the mould and breakaway from the stereotyping of the Malaysian economy in order to achieve its developmental potential.

Below are some of the Q and As raised during this session

AS: Ahmad Shahizam
TZ: Tengku Zafrul
JR: Dato' Johan Raslan

Q: There seems to be mixed signals coming from different quarters. Some people are saying stay overseas and get a few years experience before coming back, on the other hand, some are saying come back now and be in the thick of the action where so much change is occurring. How bright is our future in Malaysia? What is your take on this?
AS: Capture the opportunities available to you now. The opportunity to gain a global experience is something that is not so easy to obtain once you're back in Malaysia. The reality is that overseas students have much higher potential.

Q: So when do we go back home?
AS: Luck and family factors. We can only tell and assess ourselves.

TZ: Be wary of employers. We need to know whether the job is good, and whether there are good prospects. Always ensure that you don't make any second-best decisions. If staying on does not add any value to your career, then there is not much point staying on.

AS: Its not the end to go back right after graduation, since many professionals who started out back home now go overseas to work, but this trend is reversing. But all that's said and done, it is still important to get a world view of things.

Q: What is your take on the competitiveness of Malaysia?
JR: I personally agree with the ranking. We are okay economically. The institutions in Malaysia are quite well-regarded these days. It is the innovative aspect that is lacking and the attitudes to corruption that is slowing us down. For example, the local banking industry is not so globalised due to protectionist policies, compared to the accounting industry where it is much more universal. There are cases of lawyers who start out in KL and move to Singapore to work with international firms, since they can't do that in Malaysia.

TZ: We are not considered a financial services hub compared to Singapore and Hong Kong. However, there seems to be a trend that these companies based in these countries have Malaysians as senior heads. The truth is that there is talent back home but the financial sector in Malaysia is so much more localised and protected, and does not give much room to grow. For this, Malaysia is thus not considered a place where you can develop your skills. It is better to gain experience from abroad then come back to contribute your expertise.

AS: Certain career paths have a better advantage if we work overseas first.

Q: (directed to Ahmad Shahizam) Economic growth has been spearheaded by GLCs which are politically connected like Khazanah. With this perceived economic instability because of the elections results, is it going to affect the economy adversely? Is this the only way to develop?
AS: Its business as usual, There are significant changes afoot to change how things are being done. We run the GLCs as privately as possible, and these are not state-owned. These corporations have international investors and are publicly listed. This is how we're trying to progressively move away from the categorisation of being a GLC. We are trying push GLCs t be more identified as a private sector player than being thought of as 'linked with the government'.
There is much less direct political influence on the GLCs and we aspire to become international Malaysian enterprises. The reality is that by regional standards, Malaysian companies are still very small. Only by creating the scale and the market share can they conquer international markets and develop new markets.

Q: (directed to Tengku Zafrul) Why is there an inability to have a global image of Malaysian corporations like YTL and Air Asia?
TZ: The key factor is becoming a global player. Unfortunately there is still very little innovation. Businesses like Tune Money and Air Asia still face stiff competition with GLCs, so there could be crowding-out. Malaysian firms still face a lot of competition locally and abroad so it is essential to innovate and persevere. There is also a dissonance between planning and execution. For example, Malaysian firms are good at planning but experience poor execution. The merger of Sime Darby for instance does not mean size is the deciding factor, but rather the emphasis should be on growth. Thus, we need companies that have the potential and capacity to grow, like those in China, India and Taiwan.

Q: (directed to Dato' Johan Raslan) Will Malaysia be affected by the financial turmoil that is brewing in the US now?
JR: We have several drivers of economic growth like private enterprise entities, whether large or small. Many companies have already been around for awhile. They say when the US catches a cold, the rest of the world sneezes. A global recession will certainly squeeze Malaysia. Th But in a way, we are decoupled from these markets, largely due to the fact that Malaysia trades primarily with Asia, so we're not too dependent on Western markets.
The credit crunch started with banks lending irresponsibly to people who simply cannot afford the loans, and now they are facing a high number of repossessions. However in Malaysia, we do not such lending on a large scale or any mass purchases of securitized loans. These do not constitute a large portion of the transactions undertaken by local corporations, thus we are largely decoupled from the adverse effects.

Q: The "Malaysian experience" is mostly seen to be insufficient as it is lacking of a global perspective. Is there really a reason to serve back home beyond loyalty? Is it possible to contribute though we are physically overseas??
TZ: It depends on the profession. We are a lot like mercenaries these days. What we look for today are people who are mobile, who can adapt, learn and change. When we hire people, we do not expect them to stay here their entire careers, we simply groom and train them until they are ready to leave. On a macrolevel though, some people have left the country for awhile then returned to work expecting to be able to contribute, but its going to be difficult. There are opportunities in Malaysia, but whether its the right one is unclear. So try to get a job that helps your ambitions and matches your skills.

AS: The reality is that it is becoming a global workplace. Its becoming less of an issue as to whether an international experience can be obtained. It is now expected of people to travel and work internationally, for example agencies like Khazanah are always looking for investments globally.

Q: There seems to be a discrepancy between competitiveness and GDP per capita as mentioned previously, like how we should we doing better but we don't seem to be. How is competitiveness measured?
A: The rankings were not compiled based on size, but looks at indigenous factors. One of the most competitive countries are like Finland. Though it is small and mostly homogenous, they are able to innovate and push for the right things. For places like Singapore, on the other hand, depends on how efficiently are resources used.

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. -Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

PAN V 2008 Part 4

2008-04-12T15:01:00.007+01:00

On the second day of PAN V, we started off with the third session, entitled Corporate Malaysia: "Where are we heading as a global player?"

from left to right: Dato' Johan Raslan, Tengku Zafrul and Ahmad Shahizam

For the first address, we had Dato' Johan Raslan, Chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers Malaysia. His speech was split into three sections, namely "economic competitiveness", "people competitiveness" and "what's hot and what's not".

His introduction posed a question for us: Malaysia has an oklah future, but is that good enough? Or could we achieve more?

The World Economic Forum (WEF) recently ranked Malaysia as being the second most competitive nation in the South East Asian region, behind Singapore, and 21st in the world in terms of competitiveness. He goes on to mention that Malaysia does in fact have good infrastructure in place and a sound regulatory environment with good regulatory institutions, as well as a flexible labour market which are attractive for investors.

However, he does point out a few obstacles, one of which is excessive government bureaucracy, for example it takes a fairly longer time to start up a business in Malaysia compared to more competitive nations, say Singapore. Secondly, corporate governance was described as 'not too good' and neither is the 'knowledge-based workforce'. He cites examples like Scandinavian countries, where though in terms of size and population these are smaller, they are home to many household brands and innovative products, and he cites the lack of innovation in Malaysia as another problem.

But he says this certainly does not spell the end of Malaysia's competitiveness. Recent elections results have shown that we are able to cope with the changing face of democracy in Malaysia peacefully, unlike in 1969, and that we are moving towards democracy much rapidly compared to other countries in South East Asia. Though Malaysia's economy is heavily commodity-based, the economic growth is currently on track. He also observes the dynamic rebalancing of powers to BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and to the "second BRIC countries" in South East Asia. These countries are experiencing a good growth projection at the moment.

The Malaysian economy has also proven to be quite adaptive, considering that two-thirds of the trade conducted today are with Asian countries, and we are no longer so reliant on developed economies. He also feels that the command of the English language is rapidly improving as well as innovation, with more and more Malaysian-based brands being developed. He cites domestic demand as the primary driver of growth as well as businesses which are rapidly diversifying.

He also points out a few caveats along the way, by bringing up the rich vs poor debate, and how income inequality could widen between the rural and urban areas. There are also other issues at stake here, such as the increasing cost of living, corruption, social issues such as immigration etc and the social welfare of the people. Here he brings up the NEP and how there are some problems that should be rectified within the system.

With respect to the labour market, he feels that the competition between corporations for the best and brightest brains have become more and more competitive. He mentions that young and smart professionals these days have become more mobile and less loyal, as they now want to have a more global experience, and to experience what the world holds for them. He thus stresses that there should be a new kind of language developed to engage and relate to the younger generation or "Gen Y". He also contends that competition in the labour market is also healthy, and that jobs should be opened up to foreigners. Foreign competition should be allowed to compete with us to ensure that we adapt to remain relevant.

Next, he moved on to people competitiveness. "Does getting educated overseas mean getting a global mindset? Have we worked with or against foreigners?" Dato' Johan reminds us that while in university, we should learn more about competition and diversity, and ideas about integrity. "Always ask yourself: Will I get involved in corruption? or will I give handouts to corrupt bureaucrats?" He also says that when we start work, there should always be this inner compass of integrity, which tells us when what we're doing is wrong.

Lastly, he talks about What's Hot and What's Not.
What's Not Hot:

Behave like educational tourists- meaning don't just stick to fellow Malaysians. In other words: get out more, and immerse yourself in different cultures and obtain a global mindset.
"knowing who" is insufficient these days. You must actually "know how".
Coming home now is not hot. He tells us that if we have the opportunity to work overseas, do it for a few years and then come back once you're ready, so that you learn more about working with different people from different backgrounds and to have a truly global mindset.

What's Hot:

Soft skills like developing a high EQ is important. We should develop people skills and teamwork ability, as well as the ability to influence people's opinions.
Doing the right thing. We should learn to say NO to people and tell them why certain things are not 'right', and should not be carried out.

He ends his speech by saying that Malaysia can go down one of two paths. It can become a mediocre nation, with an oklah future, or we can harness our resources to become a highly competitive nation.

The second address was delivered by Tengku Zafrul, CEO of TuneMoney. He thinks that Malaysia is not yet a global player, and in fact in terms of equity markets, the size of the market in Malaysia has actually shrunk, and has not recovered to the pre-1997 economic crisis level. After the 1997 crisis, Malaysia became more protectionist, and the governments in South East Asia since then have not been very progressive. Thus, he feels that Malaysia needs more people with international exposure to come back to Malaysia. Therefore, he encouraged us students to get some experience in international cities like London, Hong Kong, Singapore etc to first get international experience before coming back.

"This generation is different, more mercenary,and there's much less loyalty". He cites having a blobal mentality and adaptability as the way to go, since especially the emphasis is now moving towards services which is less tangible than the manufacturing industry for example. Thus, the greater the international exposure, the greater your perceived value.

He is also of the opinion that the whole of Malaysia should become more open, and not just certain pockets of areas of 'corridors'. Opening up the financial sector and attracting more foreign talent is important for improving competitiveness. He also reminds students to make sure that they make the best of use of their time in the UK to learn the culture and to become more exposed.

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. -Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

PAN V 2008 Part 3

2008-04-09T10:32:00.003+01:00

The last session of the day was entitled the Third Way: Making student voices heard by Wan Mohd Firdaus who was UKEC chairman from 2005 to 2007. He starts off by saying that students have been trained to comply and not taught to challenge the establishment. Back in Malaysia, student movements have forgotten their roots and the reasons they were even established in the first place from the 1940s to the 1960s.

Even though we believe in certain political ideals, it does not automatically mean that we are not allowed to question these ideals and the leadership that stand for them. Firdaus also mentions that the only people who are suitable to speak for our society are student movements, since they are neutral in terms of political affiliations. "obviously, the politicians cannot represent society, since many of them speak for themselves; Neither can we have the middle-age group to speak for us, since they may have certain biasness, thus the only ones remaining are students".

Unfortunately, our education system has been engineered to churnout loyalists to the establishment. This is unlike the situation in the UK where the media is mostly independent, excepting a few which have a slight political tinge. Thus, students studying in the UK have the opportunity to reindoctrinate ourselves with the awareness of such freedoms, but these opportunities are not shared by students back home.

He contends that univeristy education is about building your understanding about the political environment, debate and to agree to disagree. It is up to the students whether or not the country is heading in the right direction. Here in the UK, there is a level of openness that still has not been achieved by local universities. For example, members of the Islamic Society have theological debates with members of the Christian Society during events like Islam Awareness of Week. Are we able to replicate such intellectual and peaceful discourse back home?

Some people refer to restraints such as the University and University Colleges Act as their reasons for not getting involved in civil society. Firdaus argues that the main hurdle that we face is the one that lies within ourselves, and that we must overcome our complacence and apathy. To initiate change, more and more people must get involved and care for the country.

How do we achieve increased involvement in civil society? Firstly, Firdaus says, it starts with oneself. We must educate ourselves by reading and writing; "read the newspapers and magazines", and that we should also do our part to help minorities like the disabled. We should also be proactive in organising events to mobilize people, because writing in journals and newsletters are not enough to get people to participate. Events such as forums, debates, getting involved in NGOs are the way to go to encourage people to initiate change.

During his speech, he also lists the utopian conditions for student organisations to flourish. The first of these is to establish legal independence from the university. Student movements should e allowed to occupy and run their own buildings and facilities and its decision-making should be independent of the administration. Financial independence is also crucial for a student movement to remain politically neutral. Next, student movements should also actively publish independent newsletters for the benefit of the student population and to enlighten them about political issues. The elections of student organisations should also be run by students for students, without the interference of the administrative bureaucracy of their universities.

His speech was centered around encouraging students to take part in more societies and to get real exposure to western culture by socialising with the British and other international students, "because otherwise, your education here is going to be a waste of time and money".

Stay tuned for the next part of PAN, where we have distinguished speakers like Dato' Johan Raslan and Tengku Zafrul coming up next.

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. -Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

PAN V 2008 Part 2

2008-04-08T22:52:00.003+01:00

The second session was entitled National Leadership: the role of integrity in leadership and the qualities necessary to lead a nation.

This session started off with Dato' Dr. Toh Kin Woon, who is Gerakan Central Committee Member and Chairman of SEDAR. His speech, by far was the most structured one of all, so I think I will list them out in bullet points:

Importance of intergrity:

The recent GE indicated that Malaysians are concerned about the integrity of governance, especially with BN losing 4 more states and its 2/3 majority in Parliament. Another cause of its poor showing could be attributed to rising living costs, rising income inequality between the rural and urban areas, the haves and the have nots, which were caused by certain policies.
There have been many scandals involving all 3 branches of the government. Examples such as chronicwastage of funds, the Lingam video scandal, an inefficient public delivery system and gender offensive remarks have eroded the integrity of governance.
Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi also promised that he would eradicate corruption during the 2004 GE. He even set out a National Integrity Plan, which aims to improve awareness to enhance integrity and to promote an efficient government. He also promised to address inequalities. But 5 years down the road, these were not achieved which destroyed their credibility.

Obstacles in establishing integrity

idealogical: the current system nurtured a class of capitalists through state power (contracts, APs) which led to the abuse of power and no transparency. To change the system means resistance against the people who wield immense power and influence.
there is a perceived threat of losing perks deters efforts to eradicate cronyism. This lack of courage is seen to be a sign of weakness of component parties within he BN.
There is a lot of stress on the legalistic aspect without concern for the moral aspect of it.
The mainstream media is controlled by the government, thus there is no access to idealogical stands or manifestos of different opposition parties. The government does not believe that there should be an open contest of ideas in a open democracy.
Denial of access of the opposition to developmental funds. They regard access to funds as something only they have the authority decide on. There are no morals, ethics and good practices.
Leaders lack common moral calues, eg freedom of speech without fear of a backlash, eg in the UK, a Labour MP will defend the right of a Tory MP to free speech without encumbrances. All legalistic prohibitions that encumber freedom of speech and association should be opposed.
Strict application of the party whip: this prohibits government MPs from supporting the motions of opposition MPs even though it benefits the country. Contrarian stands are considered intolerable so there is very little space for reform within.
The arrogance of the electoral dominance also stems from their long-term hold on power, which caused them to become insensitive to social needs and think that they can get away with abuses and corrupt practices.

How to promote integrity?

Having ideal leadership is what Malaysians want, and to some extent is reflected in the 2008 GE. How do we achieve transparency, accountability and good governance?
By voting in a strong opposition. The space for dissent can be broadened and deepened. There seems to be good prospects, ie demand for accountability and inquiries into scandals.
We need a strong civil society to press for the resolution of civil rights and related issues. There are some sectarian or communal NGOs, but there are others which are progressive, and these should be supported along with opposition initiatives to initiate change.
Institutionalisation of dissent is crucial to strengthen alternative media and there must be reform within the mainstream media to allow space for the opposition to voice their opinions.

Subsequently, Prof Shamsul 'Superstar' came to complete his 'second shift' by giving the second address of the session. He introduced the concept of 'leadership' and 'kepimpinan' and contends that these two notions are distinct from one another, 'leadership' being authoritarian, but effective in executing measures; and 'kepimpinan' being a person who constantly seeks compromise and consensus before acting, and implementation-wise is not as effective as 'leadership'.

He asks "Are we witnessing the failure of a 'pemimpin' and the rising notion in favour of 'leadership'?" He compares the administration of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Mahathir. "Abdullah said 'work with me, not work for me'", but was this a truly effective measure? Prof Shamsul then said that we may be seeing a trend that favours the emergence of a strong leadership instead of a 'pemimpin'.

The last speech was given by Premesh Chandran, who is CEO and co-founder of Malaysiakini. He says that what we really want is the emergence of real democracy and this was the most meaningful point of the elections. "The biggest act of leadership has, in fact been demonstrated by the people who were willing to make a stand and to effect change".

There is also a generation of leaders whom have forgotten what it means to be a leader, and that a leader must demonstrate certain qualities, eg they must be knowledgeable and responsible in their leadership. They must also have a long-term vision, ie a common future for all Malaysians. They must be quick to acknowledge these divisions so that we can move forward and envisage a common future for all citizens. To him, a leader is someone who can bridge the gaps between the different communities and not make the divisions deeper.

This vision must also be envisaged in terms of small and tangible steps, instead of resorting to grandiose visions which ultimately end in failure. Our success should also be measured with certain milestones and yardsticks, and the leaders should always set short-term and long-term goals to achieve.

Unfortunately, instead of seeing real and practical implementation of strategic policies, we see instead, a lot pf posturing on the part of politicians, and he cited the example of Hishamuddin. Instead of using practical strategies and actual plans, these politicians resort to militant tactics to scare the people into submission. He also laments that the process for change is going to be difficult as he feels that there has been a generation which had already lost the skills and ability to envision a new Malaysia.

According the Premesh, leaders must also always be accountable to the people for what they do. They must be willing to accept criticism and engage in debates and discourse. At the same time, the people must also be encouraged to hold their elected leaders accountable to them. He also gave an example of how royalty is resisting governmental pressures especially in the MB issue in Terengganu.

Premesh also reminds us that we must always be wary of the temptation of a hedonistic lifestyle. Many people get caught up in it and neglect their responsibilities to the nation. He ends by saying that "the young people are the ones who will encapsulate the vision of a Malaysian Malaysia and drive the country forwards".

Here are some interesting Q & As that were discussed by the panelists.

Q: (directed to Dato' Dr.Toh) Gerakan origally started off with an agenda for reform, but since joining the BN, this agenda has faded into the background and there have been constraints towards reform. Is there any hope for the reformists' agenda?
A: In 1982, a group of reformists founded Gerakan, which then comprised of reformist figures like Kerk Choo Ting. Though they seem to be sectarian, they were in fact fighting for a bigger cause and a broader agenda, for instance for greater democratic soace and greater social justice. But the agenda has probably been forgotten by now, and the leaders are not prepared to challenge their policies of the government. There are thus 3 options for Gerakan today: the first is to stay with BN and probably become irrelevant, the second is to seriously pursue the agenda of the founding fathers of Gerakan. But Gerakan has departed from the agenda and has become distant from its raison d'etre. The 3rd option is to leave BN and to join a multiracial movement like it was originally intended to be to save itself.

Q: Based on the election results, especially the votes for the opposition, were these protest votes or were these actually support for the opposition agenda?
A: It is true that we should be cautious in the interpretation of the election results. It could be protest votes, but the people have not voted for BN for several factors. If the BN does not learn from its mistakes, then it will be in dire straits during the next GE. However, in the past, it was impossible for DAP to win a mixed constituency but they have made significant inroads in this aspect. It is thus important to find out why the voting pattern has altered, and it is in fact the middle ground where the most changes were effected, especially by PKR. On the other hand, though there have been protest votes, there have also be a substantial number of racially-motivated votes.

Q: To what extent was Kelantan affected by the leadership of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi? (Because they seem to defy typical voting patterns in other parts of Malaysia)
A: Kelantan is unique because the elections in Kelantan were very different from the West Coast. Even historically, there has always been a cultural isolation from the other parts of Malaysia and the East Coast. It has been stereotyped in a way to be seen as any other Malay heartland, where the issues of religion and ethnicity is perpetuated. But here, the issue of ethnicity is a question of whether the candidates are Kelantanese or not, and not race.

Q: What is the significance of universities in the political landscape?
A: Pre-'69, UM and UKM was where dissent bred among young students and intellectuals. But today, the universities in Malaysia have been subjugated to creating a pool of middle-class government supporters whose loyalties are ensured to BN.

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. -Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

PAN V 2008 Part 1

2008-04-08T21:12:00.004+01:00

Last weekend, I had the great opportunity to attend the Fifth Projek Amanat Negara, which was held at the Malaysian Student's Department as Bayswater on the 5th and 6th of April 2008. It was a two-day event which hosted various speakers from different fields to speak on a range of topics of which I will mention later. I couldn't get all the points down, but I will try to mention the main points brought up by each speaker. However there is a caveat: do be aware that I may have gotten down a few points erroneously, of which I appreciate anyone willing to correct such errors. So read with caution!

The first session pertained to National Unity and Race Relations: Why do problems still exist for born and bred young Malaysians?

The first speaker for this session was Jacqueline Ann Surin, co-founder of Malaysiavotes.com. Her speech was mainly about civil society initiatives back in Malaysia which brought Malaysians together regardless of race, religious adherence, sexual orientation and gender. The first that was mentioned was the Women's Candidacy Initiative (WCI) and its aims were to promote the participation of civil society in the electoral process, to raise awareness of women's concerns and needs, and to encourage the participation of women in government. Find out more about the WCI here.

Another civil society movement was Rhythm In Bronze (RIB) initiated by the Five Arts Centre which brought Malaysians together through the Gamelan. Among their projects include Prima Selayang 1 and Prima Selayang 2 where they have outreach programmes for impoverished youths living in the area to teach them musical appreciation as well as musical composition.

The last that was mentioned was the Tugu Drum Circle, whose aim is to bring together Malaysians from all walks of life and to forge a strong community spirit through a collective love for percussions and drumming. Find out more about them here.

These were the examples she gave which exemplified community-driven initiatives to bring civil society together and to empower people by giving them a chance to contribute towards a Malaysia they want to see in the future. She also reminds us that racial categorisation should be made irrelevant, and it is critical for us to remember that we're all Malaysians first and foremost.

She also thinks that change is not going to come from the government, but rather, change must come from the people. "We have to act to reclaim the public space, because it is not in the interest of the government to do this. The top-down rhetoric should always be challenged".

The next speaker was Prof Dato' Dr. Shamsul Amri Baharuddin, Director of the Institute of the Malay World and Civilisation at UKM. I had the good fortune of meeting him the night before over dinner, and he was the antithesis of a stereotype of a person in academia. He was such a funny and witty guy who entertained a number of us participants with his jokes and anecdotes, and that made him really endearing.

Prof Shamsul was speaking on how was it that Malaysia was characterised by Malaysians. Some sections of society see Malaysia through what he termed the 'Consensus Lens', where society is always transient, and always seeking for negotiation and consensus. Another section of society on the other hand constitute the conflicting social group, where they experience conflicts because of various contradictions. He then brought up the concept of a 'stable tension', where there are various contradictions in the law affecting our rights and freedoms. For example, how is it possible to reconcile between the need for equality and special privileges for the Malays? How about the need for free speech and the ISA/OSA?

However, based on his analysis, he contends that civil society is moving towards the need for discourse and debates, and not to settle scores through violent means, and that society is becoming increasingly politically-conscious, especially with the rapid dissemination of information through the internet. He also contends that ethnic relations cannot be taken for granted, and that goodwill and that discourse and discussions are essential to improve ethnic relations.

The last speaker on this topic was Dr. Farish A Noor, who is Senior Fellow at the Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Nanyang Tech. He was, without a doubt, the most passionate speaker among all who spoke at PAN. He is also well-articulated, which helps since everyone pays attention whilst he speaks. His presence was one of the main reasons why I took part in PAN to begin with and he was an excellent stand-in for Prof Ungku Aziz who cancelled his slot at the eleventh hour. Dr. Farish's website at othermalaysia.org is certainly worth a visit.

Essentially, he was speaking on how Malaysians are trying to reclaim the public space for themselves from the hegemony of the state. He asks 'Why after 50 years are we still in this state?" He also asks "why do we face so many dilemmas with race and religion?" He contends that where we are today is not coincidental, and was in fact shaped by forces long before the independence of Malaya. The constant repetition of 1969 is also used by politicians to foreclose the possibility of other alternatives, other paths that the nation could have taken.

There have also a been lot of deliberate historical erasure and that 1969 has been the turning point in Malaysia's history, but even from 1957, Malaysia was birthed on a hybrid footing, with the amalgamation of diverse cultures. Colonial race relations emerged when the occidental view raise racial differences, and this was essentially the colonial construct: to divide and rule, which resulted in what he terms 'an exploitative mode of capitalism' that was the race-based economic identity. Colonial influences also placed the Malay ethnic community above the others and thus we are still paying the price of our forefather's mistakes today.

Dr. Farish ponders on the different roads that the nation could have taken. "We could have accepted the diversity and worked with it to build a nation, but no, we are told that race relations are a fact, and that there must be negotiations between the races'. He says that "if we build a Malaysia based on fictitious differences, it will always hinder any effort in dispelling this notion'. The political elite has always raised 1969 to their advantage, and to make it seem as if the 3 days of rioting encapsulates the history of Malaysia. But how about the previous centuries of intercultural relations that already existed within the country? "This is about Malaysia getting reclaimed, but the institutions and political culture are not geared to bridge divisions and to deconstruct ethnic differences".

From 1981 onwards, the state institutions served its own interests by giving out patronage to sectarians to perpetuate divisive politics. Post 1969, not one leader has come up with the concept of a Malaysian Malaysia. "This is the tragedy, no leaders are Malaysian-minded"At one point or another, they constantly fall back to communal relations and politics and end up playing the race of religious cards.

2006 to 2008 saw the emergence of a new fractured civil society in the political landscape, which saw protests from Bersih and Hindraf. He also brought up the issue of the 88 muslim NGOs which stand for the rejection of secularism and the declaration of Malaysia being an Islamic state. He says that there is a fracture along the lines that were already set during the colonial era, and we have internalised these divisions and accepted it.

"The challenge for civil society is to establish a Malaysian Malaysia, where only your citizenship identifies you and it should be the only identification that counts towards participation in civil society". He also contends that Malaysians must share fundamental human and ethical values where no support can be garnered for a divisive state that systematically compartmentalizes people into racial and religious categories.

He also reminds us that the current change in rhetoric is due to the change in the political climate. If the results were more like the results in 2004, there will no attempt to engage with the Malaysian public. The fact that they are beginning to deal with the grouses on the ground is important for their relevance, and thus their political survival. The point is that a Malaysian Malaysia can happen with or without the government because it has survived prior to independence.

Continued in Part 2

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. -Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

On Close Proximity

2008-04-04T15:03:00.005+01:00

Based on the Star's report on the 3rd of April 2008

Proposal to prosecute non-Muslims for khalwat

You can read the report here. Based on a two-day seminar organised by the Islamic Institute of Understanding Malaysia (Ikim) and the Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia, a few proposals were suggested, among which included to hold liable non-muslims for the offence of khalwat or close proximity with muslims.

It is interesting to note here whether these parties have actually learnt their lessons from the general elections. Have they become so detached from the general public that they still refuse to face reality? As people become more and more urbanised and aware of current issues and debates regarding the emergence of fundamentalist Islam and its consequences, we vote based on the view that moderate Islam is what we aspire to. PAS's rhetoric used to be undeniably Islamist, but they were 'penalised' during the past GE for it. By acknowledging that a tolerant, moderate interpretation is what the people want, they changed their rhetoric and the people have responded to them. But on the other hand, have these parties not realised their mistakes yet? Are their ears deafened towards the dissonance on the ground?

The idea of a 'khalwat' offence is already considered as abhorrent by some quarters, but now do they see fit to compel non-muslims to abide by Islamic laws as well? Talk about unconstitutional. Why should non-muslims be subject to the jurisdiction of Islamic laws? Is a khalwat law even necessary to preserve the moral fabric of society in the first place?

Besides, the implementation of such a ruling will certainly prove to be even more divisive and deepen sentiments of racial sectarianism which are the very obstacles we are trying to overcome! In a time where it is crucial for unity of the citizenry to be maintained, such laws will surely obstruct social cohesion and integration between the races especially to counter racial polarisation which is becoming an increasingly prevalent phenomenon, eg in schools and in the workplace.

With these laws in place, how are men and women supposed to be able to work with one another even on professional terms? How about on personal terms? Isn't it time for the government to stop behaving as if they are the moral compass of our society? Especially with the hypocrisy of certain government officials, one tends to second-guess the agenda of people proselytizing our moral obligations when there are scandals of some officials being guilty of greed and corruption.

Also, the presence of such laws are also inhibitive towards people, who are not free to express themselves to others. Also, what could be the point of such a rule? Is it to reduce the rate of moral decline within society? Because if it is, such a rule would be equivalent to barking up the wrong tree, considering it does not actually address the issues that underlie the moral decay the authorities would like to overcome. In fact, based on armchair reasoning at least, this could actually make the problem worse as young people especially, who are naturally experimentative and curious, would find it tempting 'to taste the forbidden fruit', as it were.

Another proposal includes the rehabilitation of effeminate men. How, I wonder is it wrong the behave as oneself, when one is not even offending the sensitivities of others? Why is it by their very nature, are they considered necessary to be rehabilitated? Is there an innate characteristic that causes them to commit a disproportionate number of crimes?? Why don't they devote more attention towards the rehabilitation of youths with criminal backgrounds so that they can be reassimilated into society and give them skills to keep them out of unemployment, instead of getting caught in a vicious circle of poverty and moral degradation?

Instead of ruthlessly and zealously acting as a moral police for our society, perhaps it would do us good to instead divert resources and time into initiatives that improve the standards of living for the poor of the country, or improve the education system, or encourage entrepreneurship, eradicate corruption etc etc. Why do something so futile and ultimately unproductive towards the development of the country?

Hopefully, the legislature would think these proposals through and realize that this is not the direction we want this country to be heading. To insist on such rulings would be regressing back to a backward era of society, and it would be counter to the progressive ideals that we are working towards, not to mention it would challenge the reality that our country is still a secular state.

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. -Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

Hypocritical Inclinations

2008-03-28T16:28:00.003Z

Some of you might have read the report of Zaid Ibrahim saying that an apology to dismissed Supreme Court justices like Tun Salleh Abas during the 1988 Judicial Crisis was being considered by the government.

In response, former Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohammad today issued a retort amid calls for him to apologise for his wrongdoings during the Malaysian constitutional crisis. Based on the report by Malaysiakini, he said that the dismissal of former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas and Supreme Court judges George Seah and Wan Sulaiman Pawanteh were not caused by his actions. Instead, if there were any apologies to be made, he contends that it should be initiated by the tribunal who dismissed them, headed by Hamid Omar.

Very rich, coming from the man whom the dire consequences of the 1988 Malaysian Constitutional Crisis is widely touted to be attributed to. For those who are not familiar with this, I will give a brief snippet of what transpired during what has been termed the 'darkest days of the Malaysian Judiciary'.

It all began in 1987, during the UMNO elections, when UMNO was split into two factions, Team A under Mahathir, and Team B under Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Ku Li). Mahathir was challenged by Ku Li for the position of party president of UMNO. However, after the elections, it was officially declared that Mahathir had won, but the results were disputed by the Team B camp, who claimed that the results had been tampered with. Mahathir went on to purge all Team B members from the cabinet, which led the filing of a lawsuit by Team B to void the election results and to initiate another election. It was alleged that some delegates were selected from branches that were not registered under the Registrar of Societies, which effectively nullified their votes.

The trial ended with Harun Hashim ruling that UMNO was an illegal organisation as the provisions in the law stated that an organisation is rendered illegal if any of its branches are not registered under the Registrar of Societies. In response, the registration of UMNO Baru was declared by Mahathir.

The judiciary then continued to exacerbate the ire of Mahathir who felt that the executive and legislative branches of government should always reign supreme over the judiciary, and he was increasingly irritated with the how the independence of the judiciary manifested itself. A notable example includes overturning the cancellation of an Asian Wall Street Journal journalist's work permit after he was not given an opportunity to answer to his charges (he wrote articles regarding the dubious nature-legally and ethically-of certain financial transactions carried out by the government). The ban on the Asian Wall Street Journal was also lifted.

The last straw was when the High Court granted Karpal Singh's application to be released from detention after the Operasi Lalang which saw many political dissidents detained under the ISA. Mahathir retaliated by suggesting constitutional changes which reduced the judicial powers of the courts to a level such that as Parliament may grant them. A group of Supreme and High Court judges then convened which resulted in the submission of a confidential letter written by Salleh Abas to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong explaining their grievances.

Tun Salleh Abas was then called to answer charges of misconduct from a tribunal headed by Hamid Omar. He then challenged the constitutionality of the tribunal through the courts. Five Supreme Court judges then granted Salleh Abas an interlocutory order against the tribunal. The five judges were then suspended, which effectively led to the suspension of the Supreme Court, which could no longer hear the challenge against the legality of the tribunal. The tribunal then dismissed Tun Salleh Abas, Datuk George Seah and Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman. The federal constitution was then amended to institute Mahathir's submission, and judicial independence was rendered nonexistent in one fell swoop.

Because of the consitutional crisis, the Malaysian judiciary has been cowed to such an extent that they have never recovered their previously independent decision-making powers.

Thus, it is so unreasonable to call for Mahathir's administration to accept responsibility for rendering toothless the last bastion of civil justice? At the end of the day, when you have a parliament that is dominated by the ruling party, and a government staffed by pro-government members, the only bulwark against the injustices and abuse of power by the very people who wield all-encompassing authority against civil society is the judiciary.

And frankly, to deny responsibility for what happened 20 years ago is blatantly saying that he's not the least bit sorry for what he has done, and the far-reaching complications of his actions. The judiciary now has its hands tied whenever a 'difficult' case comes to court which potentially involves prominent political figures, like the murder of Altantuya Sharibuu. We can only hope that the Lingam video will be handled competently by the judiciary, and civil society will definitely be watching out for the outcome of this landmark case where the issue of judicial independence comes into question.

However, an apology is not enough to address the rot permeating the judiciary. It is important for the government, especially newly appointed de facto law minister Zaid Ibrahim to restore the rakyat's faith in the integrity of the judiciary and to reinstate judicial independence. Only then, then maybe the 3 wrongfully dismissed justices would truly be vindicated.

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. -Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

Cabinet Lineup

2008-03-19T09:21:00.002Z

Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has just named his cabinet ministers and some ministries have been downsized to reduce redundancies. Another major change is that 50% of the ministers are new faces, which could be a herald for change in the way the government is run.

Here is the list of Cabinet ministers:

Prime Minister
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Umno)

Deputy Prime Minister
Najib Razak (Umno)

Finance Minister
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Umno)

Second Finance Minister
Nor Mohamed Yakcop (Umno)

Deputies: Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah (Umno), Kong Cho Ha (MCA)

Defence Minister
Najib Razak (Umno)

Deputy: Abu Seman Yusop (Umno)

Housing and Local Government Minister
Ong Ka Chuan (MCA)

Deputy: Robert Lau Hoi Chew (Supp), Hamzah Zainuddin (Umno)

Works Minister
Mohd Zin Mohamed (Umno)

Deputy: Yong Khoon Seng (Supp)

Energy, Water and Communications Minister
Shaziman Abu Mansor

Deputy: Joseph Salang Gandum

Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry Minister
Mustapa Mohamad (Umno)

Deputy: Rohani Abdul Karim (Umno)

International Trade and Industry Minister
Muhyiddin Yassin (Umno)

Deputy: Leow Wei Keong (LDP), Yaakob Dungau Sagan

Foreign Minister
Rais Yatim

Deputy: Tengku Azlan Abu Bakar (Umno)

Education Minister
Hishammuddin Hussein (Umno)

Deputies: Dr Wee Ka Siong (MCA), Razali Ismail (Umno)

Transport Minister
Ong Tee Keat (MCA)

Deputy: Anifah Aman

Health Minister
Liow Tiong Lai (MCA)

Deputy: Dr Abdul Latiff Ahmad (Umno)

Human Resources Minister
S Subramaniam (MIC)

Deputy: Noraini Ahmad (Umno)

Home Affairs and Internal Security Minister
Syed Hamid Albar (Umno)

Deputies: Chor Chee Heung (MCA), Wan Ahmad Farid (Umno)

Women, Family and Community Development Minister
Dr Ng Yen Yen (MCA)

Deputy: Norliah Kasmon

Culture, Arts, Heritage and National Unity Minister
Shafie Apdal (Umno)

Deputy: Teng Boon Soon (MCA)

Science, Technology and Innovation Minister
Dr Maximum Ongkili

Deputy: Fadillah Yusof

Entrepreneurial and Cooperative Development Minister
Noh Omar (Umno)

Deputy: Saifudin Abdullah

Higher Education Minister
Khaled Nordin (Umno)

Deputies: Idris Haron (Umno), Dr Hou Kok Chung (MCA)

Information Minister
Ahmad Shabery Cheek (Umno)

Deputy: Tan Lian Hoe (Gerakan)

Natural Resources and Environment Minister
Douglas Uggah Embas (PPB)

Deputy: Abdul Ghapur Salleh (Umno)

Rural and Regional Development Minister
Senator Muhammad Muhammad Taib (Umno)

Deputy: Joseph Entulu

Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister
Abdul Shahrir Samad (Umno)

Deputy:

Plantation Industries and Commodities Minister
Peter Chin Fah Kui (Supp)

Deputy: Kohilan Pillay (Gerakan)

Youth and Sports Minister
Ismail Sabri Yaakob (Umno)

Deputy: Wee Jack Seng (MCA)

Tourism Minister
Azalina Othman Said (Umno)

Deputy: Sulaiman Abu Taib (PBB)

Federal Territories Minister
Zulhasnan Rafique (Umno)

Deputy: M Saravanan (MIC)

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department
Zaid Ibrahim (to be appointed senator) - legal affairs
Zahid Hamidi (Umno)
Bernard Dompok (Upko)
Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz (Umno)
Dr Abdullah Md Zin (Umno)

Alternatively, check out Marina Mahathir's take on the new cabinet lineup, with some snide remarks along the way.

A few high-profile changes include the non-inclusion of Wanita Umno chief, Rafidah Aziz. Shahrizat's place has also been taken over by Ng Yen Yen, but Shahrizat has been appointed Special Advisor to the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development and with ministerial status.

However, there are still some old faces whose presence seem to be conspicuously obvious, among which include Mat Taib and Nazri. RPK no doubt will have his two cents worth to say about their appointments. Some appointments were also surprising, like Rais Yatim swapping his Culture, Arts and Heritage portfolio for the Foreign Affairs portfolio. His new tasks no doubt will be a far cry from his previous responsibilities.

There also some positive changes, like the appointment of lawyer, Zaid Ibrahim who is now in charge of legal affairs in the Prime Minister's Department. Hopefully, from here on out, structural reforms in the judiciary to ensure their independence would be implemented, after its reputation has been severely dented and its independence called into question due the Lingam video controversy and other cases.

Hopefully this is a signal that the administration is acknowledging the need for reform. However, we are yet to see for ourselves whether these changes are merely cosmetic changes or more substantial reforms. We shall wait and see...

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. -Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

Will He Ever Get It?

2008-03-17T14:36:00.004Z

According to The Star:

Samy: Time not ripe for Barisan to be a single party

He is also quoted as saying “In today’s political situation, such an action will dilute the rights of the Indian community,” and that "smaller communities like the Indians still had to fight for their rights and this could only be done through MIC".

What exactly is he attempting to do? Salvage the last shreds of MIC's relevance within the Indian community? One would think that he has learned his lessons from the recent elections that racial politics are no longer relevant before making such highly debatable remarks, as was clearly demonstrated at the polls on March 8. Indian voters, who for years have been assumed to be BN supporters have been taken for granted and neglected. Furthermore, the MIC's claim to be the champion of Indian rights and causes have been proven to be severely flawed: Where was MIC when Hindraf decided to take to the streets? Where was MIC when Hindraf's leaders were imprisoned under the draconian ISA? Where was MIC when Hindu temples were demolished?

Now, they have shown their disgruntlement and dissatisfaction at the ballot box by voting for opposition parties. Perhaps they have realized that they could no longer rely on MIC to defend their rights considering it has become a lame-duck within BN politics. And yet, here is Samy, who's own irrelevance has become apparent after he lost his Sungai Siput constituency , making all these statements about the Indian community still requiring the leadership of MIC.

Well I say WAKE UP! MIC sustained one of the worst casualties at the polls, due to the losses of not only the President and the Vice-President, but even the head of the Wanita division. If this is not incontrovertible proof of their irrelevance, I do not know what is.

The funny thing is that he also made some contradicting statements, like:

He said the results of the just-concluded general election showed that the electorate did not vote according to the racial background of the candidates.

Then in that case, why is he still harping on the issue that the Indian community still needs MIC? It has been demonstrated clearly that they no longer trust the ruling government to increase their standards of living and to alleviate many of them still mired in poverty. If the electorate did not vote for candidates based on racial backgrounds, then racial politics have ceased to play a role in Malaysian politics. As I mentioned in my previous post, racial politics are extremely divisive, and all that it will achieve is the breeding of resentment against other races.

What is important for people like Samy Vellu to realize, is that rights should no longer be fought for based on divisive racial justifications, but based on the notions of fairness and equity. The rights of Malaysian citizens should be advanced collectively, and no race should be discriminated against in favour of another. For example, policies that alleviate those who still live in poverty should be implemented in general for all Malaysians, regardless of race.

It is only if such leaders change their mindsets, can such negative perceptions and policies cease. And the best way to start is to abolish the notion of 'fight for each race's rights separately' and to replace such ideologies with 'Bangsa Malaysia' concept. This objective could certainly be achieved through a single party concept within BN.

If BN is not ready to become single party which encompasses 'Bangsa Malaysia', if not now, then when will it ever be?

Images of Democracy

2008-03-15T19:51:00.009Z

Today, as I was walking along Tottenham Court Road this afternoon, I saw this:

There was a demonstration going on outside Lom Bok. Upon closer inspection, they were wearing V for Vendetta masks.

As it turns out, they were protesting against the proliferation of Scientology, and the demonstrators were situated just opposite the Scientology store along the Goodge Street Station stretch. And they were shouting slogans and singing songs whilst carrying posters with provocative messages like 'Scientology Kills" and "Scientology should be free"...

I am personally unfamiliar with Scientology beliefs, so I will refrain from commenting about it. But that's not the point of this post anyway.

However, notice the police presence at the protest to maintain the peace. There were police officers standing guard in the vicinity of the demonstrators as well as police officers stationed at the Scientology shop. There were also police vans parked along the main road.

What do you think is the difference between these scenes here and scenes of protests back in Malaysia? It could be the noticeable lack of water cannons, tear gas and scores of riot police here, not to mention the fact that no one was bundled up into black marias. These demonstrators were allowed to protest peacefully and exercise their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights under Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association). And the police were there to facilitate the peaceful exercise of rights by citizens.

This is an example of how a democracy should work, where people are allowed to exercise their civil freedoms peacefully without the threat of backlash from the government. Malaysia could learn a lesson or two from these scenes, after their severe, unjustified and unmitigated response against previous protests demanding for civil rights and liberties like Bersih and Hindraf.

Will Malaysia ever become a country with such developed civil freedoms?

(Photo and video credits courtesy of Siew Mei)

Double Standards

2008-03-14T16:46:00.008Z

The Star reported on the 14th of March

"I am willing to listen, says Guan Eng"

In the report, it was said

"Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said Umno leaders need not take to the streets to express their disappointment as they can always meet him on issues affecting Penang Malays."

The report is in response to the demonstrations led by Umno members and supporters who took to the streets in Penang after Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng's remarks regarding the NEP.

Also according to The Star,

"They held banners with messages such as “Kami Penduduk Pulau Pinang Menyokong Penuh Kepimpinan Pak Lah” (We fully support Pak Lah’s leadership), “Anwar Ibrahim Pengkhianat Bangsa” (Anwar Ibrahim, traitor of the Malay race), “Tak akan Melayu Hilang di Pulau Pinang” (Malays will not be sidelined in Penang) and "Kepimpinan DAP dibantah oleh Melayu Pulau Pinang” (Penang Malays Protest Against the DAP-led goverment)."

Ironic, isn't it? Whenever Umno goons take to the streets, they seem to be doing nothing more than exercising the rights of their citizenry.( Anyway, don't they even realize that DAP won fair and square?) It seems to be a different story with groups like Bersih and Hindraf however, who gets treated like a national security threat.

Neither should we forget about Khairy Jamaluddin's infamous ILLEGAL demonstration during the Asean Ministerial meeting at KLCC. Oddly enough, he doesn't get the same treatment as the Hindraf and Bersih supporters by getting gassed or shot at by water cannons. Neither does he get detained under the ISA for the disruptive chaos he caused.

Say much about double-standards?

Lessons from the GE 2008

2008-03-14T16:27:00.003Z

Based on whatever news and reports I could get my hands on about the elections, Bridget Welsh's report on the post-mortem of the general elections is one of the more comprehensive reports available about the reasons why the BN faced the worst election outcome in the span of 50 years.

Her report highlights the various factors that contributed to the 'winds of change' or the 'political tsunami' that eventually led to the shocking defeat of BN in 5 states and the loss of its two-thirds majority.

In the report, she cited factors such as the mediocre leadership of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, failure to fulfill 2004 election promises, infighting within the ranks of the ruling coalition and others.

Malaysia's New Dawn III

2008-03-12T10:58:00.000Z

Thus, it was with great joy and jubilation when I woke up on the 9th of March feeling that dear Malaysia has achieved a great milestone in history, and I now look towards the future with hope and optimism. The opposition should certainly not rest on their laurels as they have now been given the opportunity to prove their worth to the people, and let us hope they do not let us down either.

There are also a few wishes I would like to see realized in the future:
i) Abolish draconian laws like the ISA, OSA and the Printing Presses and Publications Act to restore our civil liberties which are inseparable concepts from democracy. These laws are no longer relevant in this time and age and only serves to protect the interests of the ruling party.

ii) Restore the independence of the judiciary and the Election Commission. These two institutions are the most important bulwarks against injustice and abuse of power.

iii) Cessation of racial politics. This definitely has to end. Racial politics and race-based policies only result in a more divided society, and it has no place in the concept of a Bangsa Malaysia. The rights of Malaysians should be fought for collectively, especially Malaysians who are still mired in poverty and atrocious living standards.

iv) significance of a strong opposition. The rakyat should also realize that a strong opposition is always needed to prevent the government from running roughshod over the rights of the rakyat, and to amend the constitution according to their whims.

The ruling government, whether or not it is the BN or the opposition should never ever forget that they are accountable to the rakyat, and should not become complacent nor rest too comfortably in their positions by taking the rakyat's support for granted.

If we the people can put you up there, we the people can also bring you down.

makkal sakti

Malaysia's New Dawn II

2008-03-12T10:20:00.001Z

The government has also been plagued with charges of corruption and rampant cronyism, and example being Khairy Jamaluddin's rapid rise to significance within UMNO and the ECM-Libra scandal. The NEP has also been misused to such an extent that only a small percentage of the rakyat, particularly the ruling elite has benefited from it. Government contracts are another example of how all sense of justice and meritocracy have been sidelined in favour of corruption and nepotism.

BN is also guilty of playing the divide and rule strategy by igniting racial sentiments and by playing racial politics. It also insults the rakyat's intelligence by thinking we are little children easily scared into submission every time they bring up the spectre of May 13. They sought to play on our fears and ignorance to gain from this election. Well, I am proud to say that finally the rakyat have finally stood up to such codswallop and are no longer taken in by such threats.

The hegemony of UMNO has reduced the roles of MCA and MIC to the role of running dogs, which may explain their spectacular defeat in this election. The cessation is racial politics is essential for the development of the country for all the rakyat especially those who are still mired in poverty, instead of getting stuck in the quagmire of ketuanan melayu, which is a dangerous concept.

The Election Commission itself has also faced accusation of gerrymandering with the elections in favour of the ruling government. The fact that the Abdul Rashid the chairman of the EC is also credited with saying 'there is only one regime capable of ruling this country'. Malaysian for free and fair elections (Mafrel) have also uncovered voters who possess multiple identity cards registered to vote at different places in the country.

The opposition also discovered that certain postal voters were issued with two ballot sheets, and these sheets had serial numbers to identify the voter, so it is obvious to check whether they voted for the opposition. Opposition members have also observed the arrival of buses carrying what they suspect to be phantom voters into their contested constituencies. Vote-buying was also reported in several areas of the country. Also, the last-minute decision to cancel the usage of indelible ink have also been considered suspicious by many.

Malaysia's New Dawn I

2008-03-12T09:21:00.003Z

March 8 is indeed a historical moment for all Malaysians, as for the first time since Independence, we can finally call ourselves a democracy. The winds of change have certainly affected us, hopefully in a positive way for the future of Malaysia. The opposition has swept 5 states, and 82 parliamentary seats, which saw an increase of 62 seats from 20. The opposition now has 37% representation in parliament, which is a far cry from their previous 9% representation.

The results of the General Election 2008 has been considered shocking to most, but in truth, should it be? In my opinion, the ruling government have let down the rakyat in many ways who gave them a strong mandate to rule in 2004. Some people might think that these opinions could be biased. After all, aren't university students supposed to be at their peak of anti-establishment sentiment? This post would be for you to judge, but the following are the few things I feel the BN has failed all of us in.

Firstly, the ruling government has displayed a blatant disregard for civil rights and liberties. This is particularly hypocritical considering it calls Malaysia a democracy, and there are several examples of this dangerous tendency. The government has repeatedly misused the ISA to imprison without trial political activists, members of the opposition and outspoken
dissenters. One of the most recent would be the imprisonment of M Manoharan, one of the Hindraf 5 who went on to contest the Kota Alam Shah state seat in absentia, and won.

The OSA has also been repeatedly used by the government to silent calls from civil liberties groups for more transparency, which was one of the core election promises of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in 2004. The Printing Presses and Publications Act has also usurped the media's role as the conscience of the people. Need I even mention the infamous Ops Lalang where many journalists were threatened with imprisonment under the ISA. Since then, many mainstream newspapers have become controlled by the government which makes it impossible to report the news fairly and without bias.

The government has also trampled with impunity on our fundamental right to freedom of expression. Last year, when BERSIH demonstrators took to the streets for and clean and fair election, Can anyone of us forget the embarrassing interview of Zainuddin Maidin on Al-Jazeera saying 'we're not Burma, we're not Myanmar' amid scenes of demonstrators being gassed by the police. Hindraf supporters also met with the same fate in November.

Of New Beginnings

2008-03-11T11:09:00.002Z

Perhaps this would be considered an apt moment to commence this blog which I have been planning to start on for awhile now. And for a few months, a few friends have tried to get me into the habit, but I was reluctant to start then, for reasons I will mention later (as fodder for future posts).

One of the issues I have been pondering about was the issues I would be discussing on this blog. Would it be a private blog about my personal life? I know of many, many friends who used this means to (unfortunately) brag about their personal lives and achievements, but I am wont to avoid such transgressions, and it isn't my wish to bore you with such mundane everyday life events.

So in a way, the events of the past few weeks, notably the advent of the elections, and its peak on March 8 gave me a good justification to start this blog, and it gave me a niche, something to blog about apart from my personal life. So the main purpose of this blog is to shift the main focus to socio-political issues.

I have always been quite interested in the social and political aspects of society, and I would love to get more involved (but i am sadly 10,550 km away from home in sunny Petaling Jaya). I will certainly try my best to give good insights (though this is of course, debatable) about social issues affecting us today, and especially us Malaysians. Along the way, I would occasionally include various anecdotes from my everyday life, and events which have notable significance to me.

So hopefully, I would keep up this healthy habit of blogging as consistently as possible!