Pembangkang perlu menang 110 kerusi Parlimen terajui kerajaan
Muhammad Yusri Amin Tue Dec 11, 07 2:19:05 pm MYT
KOTA BHARU, 11 Dis (Hrkh) – Pakatan pembangkang di negara ini perlu memenangi sekurang-kurang 110 kerusi pada pilihan raya umum akan datang bagi membolehkan kerajaan baru dibentuk.
Jumlah tersebut adalah separuh daripada bilangan kerusi di parlimen sekarang. Dan jumlah yang sama juga dimenangi Umno pada pilihan raya umum Mac 2004.
Bilangan kerusi yang dimenangi Barisan Nasional (BN) pada pilihan raya tersebut sebanyak 199 daripada 219 kerusi Parlimen, manakala pembangkang memenangi 20 kerusi iaitu PAS (enam), DAP (12) dan PKR serta Bebas masing-masing satu kerusi.
Pensyarah Undang-Undang Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia, Prof Dr Abdul Aziz Bari berkata, sekiranya pembangkang mampu meraih 110 kerusi pada pilihan raya umum akan datang, sudah tentu kerajaan baru dapat dibentuk di Malaysia.
Beliau berkata demikian ketika menjawab soalan seorang peserta Seminar Memperkasakan Solat Melalui Pendidikan dan Penguatkuasaan Undang-Undang di Balai Islam, dekat sini baru-baru ini.
Sebelum itu ketika membentang kertas kerja bertajuk ‘Peranan Undang-Undang Dalam Penghayatan Solat’ katanya, ada dua jenis undang-undang dalam sistem perundangan di negara ini iaitu undang-undang yang diluluskan dewan perundangan sama ada di Parlimen atau Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN) dalam bentuk Akta atau Enakmen.
Keduanya, undang-undang kecil yang selalunya dilulus pihak eksekutif atau kerajaan.
“Selain itu mahkamah juga turut membuat undang-undang dalam bentuk proses penghakimannya ketika membuat keputusan sesuatu kes yang dibicarakan dan ia mesti tertakluk kepada kerangka dan ketetapan Perlembagaan,” katanya.
Mengenai undang-undang atau peraturan mengenai solat, kata beliau ia adalah di bawah bidang kuasa kerajaan negeri.
Menurutnya undang-undang syariah adalah di bawah bidang kuasa kerajaan negeri.
Pada seminar itu beliau juga menjelaskan kerajaan Pusat mahu rakyat mematuhi undang-undang ditetapkan dalam perlembagaan, sebaliknya mereka melanggarnya sesuka hati.
Mengenai pemerkasaan solat katanya, pihak berkuasa hendaklah lebih berhati-hati dalam melaksanakan peraturan mengenainya kerana ia mudah diputarbelit media massa.
“Misalnya isu kharaj di Terengganu sebelum ini menimbulkan kontroversi sehingga diberi imej negatif pihak lawan terhadap perundangan Islam,” katanya.
Turut menjadi ahli panel pada seminar anjuran Jabatan Hal Agama Islam Kelantan, ketua pegawai eksekutif Kolej Teknologi Kelantan Darulnaim, Dr Abdullah Sudin.

Losing the plot
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin

Umno cannot be brought down, at least not from the outside. That’s what 50 years of Umno rule has taught us. Actually it is 52 years if you consider the first elections in 1955, though general elections were not held until 1959, two years after Merdeka.The Prime Minister cannot be brought d! own, at least not from the outside. That’s what 22 years of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s rule has taught us. But 22 years of Mahathir’s rule has taught us another thing. The Prime Minister can be brought down from the inside. And he almost was in 1987. But Mahathir was smart, he still is, so he closed down Umno and set up a new party which excluded all his rivals who had no choice but to go form a new party.From the ‘ashes’ of Team B arose Semangat 46. And after more than a decade it proved, yet again, that the Prime Minister plus Umno cannot be brought down from the outside. Semangat 46 was eventually wound up and all the members and leaders rejoined Umno en bloc -- or almost en bloc because some have refused, until today, to rejoin Umno. In fact, some have since died and they died outside Umno, refusing until their last breath to rejoin Umno.But these ex-Semangat 46 members and leaders did not rejoin Umno to resume the plan to topple the Prime Minister. They rejoined Umno to bide their time, waiting for the day when Mahathir would relinquish his post, or die in office, when they can then take over the reins of power.Today, Mahathir is no longer Prime Minister. And those who were once branded as traitors to Umno and to the Malay race, those who were defiled and cursed as enemies of the nation, are today walking in the corridors of power. But not all are ex-Semangat 46 members or leaders. True, they were in Team B and bitterly opposed to Mahathir. But some, like current Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, refused to follow their mentor, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, into the ranks of the opposition when Semangat 46 was launched. Abdullah and his ilk preferred sitting it out in the political wilderness and wait for the time when they can be ‘rehabilitated’ and allowed back into Umno. Abdullah may not look smart. But he is smart enough to know that the Prime Minister and Umno cannot be brought down from the outside. You must get back into Umno to do that. So he waited until he was allowed back into Umno so that he could eventually climb back up the Umno ladder and into the seat of the Prime Minister.No sooner had Abdullah taken over as Prime Minister did he call for fresh general elections. He did not want to just be Mahathir’s successor. That was not good enough. Mahathir was, after all, the enemy and no way would Abdullah receive charity from he whom he once bitterly opposed. He wanted his own mandate from the people. He wanted to be his own man, not somebody’s man, especially not Mahathir’s man. And the people gave him that mandate. The people gave him 92% of the seats in Parliament, the most impressive election performance ever which not even the great Mahathir could duplicate. And once he had safely planted himself into the seat of the Prime Minister by virtue of his own landslide mandate from the people, he set about dismantling the Mahathir legacy and to erase from the history books all the good Mahathir had done while allowing all the bad to surface so that the Grand Old Man of Malaysian politics will be remembered for the worst of times.A direct attack on Mahathir may not work. After all, the Old Man still has some clout and enough loyalists within the government to thwart any ‘assassination’ attempt. So, true to Malay fashion, indirect hits were made. Targets were chosen that will not appear as if Mahathir is the target but would invariably lead to his door. And one of the many targets was Lingam.Actually, Abdullah, or at least his advisers on the fourth floor led by his son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin, very brilliantly leaked the Lingam Tape. How the Lingam conversation was recorded and who leaked the videotape is not known and may never be known. Some say it was Lingam’s own brother who recorded it and leaked it, but then even his brother is not aware of the videotape. He is certainly in the know about many things and his long police report and testimony are proof of this. But the Lingam Tape is not amongst that testimony; so some other hands must be behind it.The audio of the videotape is very clear. The visuals are not. And it is a recording of a monologue, not a dialogue. But, hazy as it may be, it is enough to raise doubts that the video might be authentic. And a Royal Commission of Enquiry has been set up to get to the bottom of the whole incident and verify whether the recording is a fake or for real.The authenticity or otherwise of the recording is not really that crucial. What is important is that the matter has surfaced. And the incident leads to Mahathir’s door. Now Mahathir has to seriously consider whether he wants to resume his attacks on Abdullah or be a good boy and save himself the embarrassment of the Lingam Tape becoming Malaysia’s version of Watergate. They have got Mahathir by the short and curly, or so they thought.Abdullah may have his Watergate a.k.a Lingamgate hanging over Mahathir’s head. Mahathir, however, has his own Watergate a.k.a Dolahgate hanging over Abdullah’s head as well. Is it a checkmate? Or is it a case of who blinks first dies?The Royal Commission will be hard-pressed in proving the Lingam Tape authentic. Chances are they will conclude that the authenticity of the videotape cannot be proven. In a court of law, the evidence alone is not enough. The maker also needs to be revealed. Even if you adduce a signed document in court, the court will not accept it as tangible evidence until the maker testifies in court that he or she is indeed the maker. Will the ‘maker’ of the Lingam Tape come forward to testify or will he or she remain an anonymous whistleblower? Unless the maker comes forward there would be no way to prove that the videotape is authentic and not a fake.The Dolahgate issue is another thing altogether though. A police report has been made and the police are currently investigating the matter. Abdullah chaired the Umno Supreme Council meeting of 28 August 2006 and instructed the Deputy Minister of Internal Security and the Menteri Besar of Kedah to ensure that Mahathir loses his bid in the Kubang Pasu division election of 9 September 2006 to become one of the delegates to the Umno General Assembly. On the eve of the division election, the Umno Disciplinary Board members held a gathering at the Kubang Pasu golf club and told the delegates to not vote for Mahathir. An amount of RM200 in an envelope was then handed out to each and every delegate.Five of the delegates subsequently made police reports testifying to this. And an official report was made to the Umno headquarters with these police reports and signed Affidavits as evidence. Subsequently, one of those who made this report was beaten up in his home in front of his family and he made another police report on the matter. Thus far no action has been taken on the complaint, the Affidavits or the police reports. The matter was still pending until the latest police report lodged by Johari Ismail on 6 November 2007. Now the police are looking into it.It is now more than a year since this 9 September 2006 incident in Kubang Pasu and the Umno Supreme Council meeting of 28 August 2006. It is also four years since Abdullah took over as Prime Minister. The honeymoon is now over. It has been over for some time now. And Umno is getting restless. The members and leaders are beginning to get worried and are asking where Umno and the country are heading to. They see a bleak future over the horizon. And they feel it is now time for a leadership change.Yes, the Prime Minister cannot be brought down from the outside. Umno cannot be brought down from the outside. Time and time again history has proven this. But the Prime Minister can be brought down from the inside. And the Umno members and leaders would be prepared to bring the Prime Minister down as long as Umno itself is not brought down. The Malays prefer to remove hair from flour without spilling the flour. But if the flour is destroyed in the process then better the hair is left where it is.Abdullah is bad for the country. The people know this. The opposition knows this. And now Umno is beginning to accept this fact as well. But Umno will rally behind Abdullah if Umno is in jeopardy. They will support Abdullah if Umno’s fate is in question. They will not oppose Abdullah if Umno’s future is at risk. They will only abandon Abdullah if in the process Umno does not suffer.Our first task in hand is not to topple the ruling party. That can come later if it ever comes at all. We need to save the nation and get rid of that which is detrimental to this nation’s health. And that cancer which will eventually see the death of this nation is the man who leads us in the corridors of power.So we, the people, must not oppose Umno. The ruling party is not the enemy. The enemy is he who leads Umno and who will affect the future of all of us, those in the opposition as well as in the ruling party.A campaign is ongoing by those in Umno. It is a whispering campaign that seldom reaches the ears of those in the opposition but is heard by those in Umno who congregate at the coffee houses and Mamak shops. Flying letters are being photocopied and passed around to all and sundry. Some are believable and some are not. Some are so incredible it makes one wonder how in heaven’s name they are able to come out with such a spin. But the more incredible, the more people tend to believe the stories, mainly because the stories are so incredible it would be impossible for anyone to come out with such a yarn. It is left to the imagination of the audience whether to believe them or not. But when many repeat the stories, and if they are repeated often enough, eventually fiction becomes fact and it would be very difficult to distinguish one from the other.They relate stories about Jeanne Danker’s marriage. Abdullah is the third and not second husband, goes the spin. Some Umno types even swear they have seen the documents. What documents they do not make clear but it involves the divorce papers of Jeanne’s second marriage. They divorced without any papers, say the story-tellers. And that was why Abdullah’s marriage to Jeanne was delayed many months. They had to go seek out Jeanne’s second husband to settle the papers before Abdullah could marry her.Is this a well-kept secret, Jeanne’s skeleton in the closet, or is this a sign of desperate people spinning a tall yarn in a desperate bid to destroy Abdullah’s image and credibility? I could never understand the Umno culture anyway so I will not even begin to try to understand the logic in this spin. Well, argue the story-tellers, who would believe Anwar Ibrahim is gay? Finally it was proven that he is. So is it so hard to believe the story about Abdullah and Jeanne? Okay, that sounds logical. But the problem with this ‘logic’, though, is that I am not convinced Anwar Ibrahim is gay. So the analogy does not quite work on me.Whatever it may be, Malaysia Today deals with facts and the untold stories from eyewitnesses and those involved in whatever sequence of events is being related. Sure, granted, not all ‘facts’ can be proven by way of documents. Even courts of law take eyewitness testimonies into account in the absence of documents. But eyewitness testimonies must be confined to first party and not second party accounts, which would be rejected as hearsay by the courts. And while the courts insist on the testimony of the witness in an open court, Malaysia Today is well-prepared to allow Deep Throats to remain anonymous in the interest of protecting the identity of our whistleblowers.Stories of Jeanne’s and Abdullah’s love-life may not be enough to bring down the Prime Minister. But an internal revolt within Umno and Barisan Nasional can. And it appears like a silent and underground revolt is currently at play. Johari Ismail’s police report implicating Abdullah in a criminal act is one such issue. Not only has the Societies Act been violated on 28 August 2006, but Umno’s party constitution and Code of Ethics as well. In fact, Abdullah’s act can jeopardise the entire Umno as it did 20 years ago when the party got wound up by the Registrar of Societies.It seems a few Umno Supreme Council members are prepared to come forward to testify if this case goes to court. And there is talk that the case will go to court. If those who were present in the Umno Supreme Council meeting plus those who received instructions to sabotage Mahathir on 9 September 2006 confirm this to be so, then Abdullah would have to step down as Prime Minister. The fact he does not spend six years in jail for abusing his authority like what happened to Anwar Ibrahim is blessing enough although that is what should actually be his fate.Further to that, there is a case that will be filed in the Kota Kinabalu High Court at 11.00am on 12 December 2007 that does not augur well for Abdullah. The Mufti of Sabah issued a fatwah (religious decree) that declared all Buddhist statues haram (forbidden). With that fatwah the Thean Hou Foundation was forbidden from erecting the Goddess of the Sea statue and was ordered to halt all work although they had already brought in the statue and work had progressed halfway.Chong Kah Kiat went to meet the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister in an attempt to try and resolve the matter. Recently, Abdullah said he has big ears and is prepared to listen. He also said he knows what is going on and is not as blur as many claim. The Deputy Prime Minister urged Abdullah to do something as this matter can be very explosive. Article 11 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia allows freedom of religion. While this freedom is not extended to Muslims, and Muslims may not leave Islam or convert to another religion, the government cannot interfere in non-Islamic religions as stipulated under the Constitution.The largest Buddhist statue is in the ‘Islamic’ Sate of Kelantan. Umno says that PAS is an extremist party and very intolerant towards non-Muslims or towards other non-Islamic religions. But PAS allows the largest Buddhist statue in Malaysia in the state that it rules. And it was during the rule of PAS that its Menteri Besar summoned the Hindus to a meeting and offered them a site to build a Hindu temple. He approved the Hindu temple on the spot without any requirement for a formal application or for any committees to be formed to look into the matter. In fact, the Hindus had previously applied for permission during the time that Umno was ruling the state so Nik Aziz just resurrected that decades-old application and approved it without the need for a fresh application.Umno comes out with fatwahs declaring Buddhist statues haram and forbids its erection while PAS allows the largest Buddhist statue in the country. Umno demolishes Hindu temples while PAS summons Hindus for a meeting and offers them permission to build one though they never asked for it thinking that surely PAS would say no if Umno says no. So this Sabah situation does not look good for Umno, argued Najib, who was trying to get Abdullah to reverse the decision of the Sabah State Government and override the fatwah of the Sabah Mufti.Abdullah says he has big ears and that he listens to the people. He does not want the Hindus to organise demonstrations and protests but instead come talk to him. The Deputy Chief Minister of Sabah, Chong Kah Kiat, not a mere estate worker or labourer from HINDRAF, did go talk to him. Even the Deputy Prime Minister tried convincing him, though it was an exercise in futility. But at 11.00am tomorrow, 12 December 2007, Chong Kah Kiat will be filing a suit in the Kota Kinabalu High Court because Abdullah is not listening.Chong Kah Kiat has discovered something new today. PAS is not really the ‘Taliban’ party that Umno says it is. And Abdullah’s Islam Hadhari is not as liberal as what Umno says it is. And this will make the Chinese sit up and take note. Whether Abdullah is Jeanne’s second or third husband matters not one bit to the Chinese, although the Umno chaps are whispering this in the coffee houses and Mamak shops. However, whether the Umno government and Abdullah’s Islam Hadhari is tolerant to Buddhists and Hindus does. And luckily the Umno Member of Parliament’s resolution in Parliament that missionary schools be made to remove all Christian religious symbols, statues and crosses was vetoed. If not the Christians too would join the Buddhists and Hindus in opposing the government. And, as if this is not enough, today, the Attorney-General sent the Deputy Minister of Internal Security a letter instructing him to release ‘Tengku’ Goh from restricted residence. The Deputy Minister is just the number two. The number one, the Minister, is the Prime Minister himself. Would the Attorney-General dare send the Deputy Minister a letter instructing him to release the boss of bosses of the underworld crime syndicate if the man above that Deputy Minister, the Prime Minister, did not endorse this?Yes, when we first came out with episode one of our ten-part series on the organised crime syndicate we said “All roads lead to Putrajaya”. Today, that has been proven. Today, the Attorney-General has proven that the Prime Minister is the patron of the Chinese organised crime syndicate just like he is the patron of the Malay underworld, PEKIDA.And what happens to the man who detained ‘Tengku’ Goh? If ‘Tengku’ Goh is innocent and must be released by the order of the Attorney-General and the endorsement of the Prime Minister, what fate awaits he who detained ‘Tengku’ Goh?Well, it is said that the Director of the Commercial Crime Division is being investigated for not declaring RM27 million in assets. He is not being investigated for amassing RM27 million in assets. He is being investigated for not declaring it. And he was arrested and charged. And he has been suspended from duty pending the outcome of his trial.But he was not charged for not declaring RM27 million in assets -- and certainly not for acquiring those assets. This issue of RM27 million assets is no longer the issue. This is because there are no RM27 million in assets, whether he declared them or not. He is being charged for flying in a police aeroplane. Yes, the man who was the Police Commissioner of Sabah and who drives around with a flag adorning the bonnet of his car just like the Governor of the state has been charged for flying in a police aeroplane that was his to use anyway.Abdullah too flies in a government plane. He takes his whole family on these plane rides. And he does not just fly around the jungles of Sabah. He flies all over the world even when he goes on private holidays. And he even brings Jeanne Danker along on these plane rides though at that time he was not married to her yet. And Jeanne joins Abdullah on these family holidays in the government plane and stays at the home of Patrick Lim though she and Abdullah were not yet husband and wife.But Abdullah is not arrested and charged for using a government plane for private purposes even though his whole family and retinue of friends, together with his girl friend, were brought along. The Director of the Commercial Crime Division is.Abdullah has lost the plot. Even those close to him have become very worried. Too many things are not right. BERSIH, HINDRAF, and the host of other issues are just the tip of the iceberg. Abdullah has launched an OPS PADAM. This Ops Padam is the codename for an operation to wipe out all those opposed to him. Today, about two dozen were arrested. On Sunday, a dozen were arrested. More than 60 Indians will face attempted murder charges. Abdullah thinks that if he erases (padam) the opposition then his problems will be solved.But his problems will not be solved. They will not be solved because the opposition is not his real enemy. The opposition cannot topple him. The opposition cannot topple Umno. Only those within Umno and Barisan Nasional can do that. When ‘Tengku’ Goh walks free, those within the police will become disgusted. When the Director of the Commercial Crime Division who arrested ‘Tengku’ Goh gets sent to jail for the ‘crime’ of flying over the Sabah jungles in a police plane, more police will get angry. When Chong Kah Kiat files his suit against the government in the Kota Kinabalu High Court because of the fatwah by the Sabah Mufti that Buddhist statues are haram and can’t be allowed, that would make the Buddhists angry. When the attempted murder trial of the HINDRAF supporters starts, that would make the Hindus angry. And when they act on the police report against Abdullah for his crime of sabotaging Mahathir in the Kubang Pasu division election, many in the top echelons of Umno will come forward to testify to ensure that the noose around Abdullah’s neck will become tighter.Yes, that will be how Abdullah will be sent into retirement -- not whether he is Jeanne’s second or third husband, but all those issues which Abdullah has closed his eyes and ears to. But Najib did try to warn him. But Khairy does not want Abdullah to take advice from Najib. Abdullah has his fourth floor advisers led by Khairy, so only these people must be allowed to advice Abdullah. And their advice is to launch Ops Padam and erase all opposition to the Prime Minister. But they have no plan on how to padam opposition within Umno and Barisan Nasional. And that will be how Abdullah eventually falls.

Pakistan : The Meaning of a Moratorium

Pakistan : The Meaning of a Moratorium

Tanah Rezab Melayu di bandar semakin hilang, kata Ku Li

Tanah Rezab Melayu di bandar semakin hilang, kata Ku Li
Muda Mohd Noor
Sep 23, 06 Malaysiakini

Bekas Menteri Kewangan, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah berkata sedikit demi sedikit tanah rezab Melayu di kawasan bandar dibatalkan statusnya tanpa sebarang gantian.

“Sekalipun perlembagaan negara menuntut mereka yang berkuasa berbuat demikian (menggantikanya), namun tuntutan ini semakin tidak dihiraukan. Semuanya atas nama pembangunan,” kata dalam syarahan perdana di majlis dialog Kongres Kepentingan Bangsa peringkat Wilayah Persekutuan semalam

Katanya, dulu pembangunan negara dilihat sbagai dokumen mulia yang mesti dipatuhi dan ia menjadi dokumen kontrak sosial yang menjadi bentang terakhir kepada perjuangan orang Melayu.

“Kini ramai yang melihatnya sebagai bebanan yang menyusahkan. Sebab itulah walaupun perlembagaan kita menjelaskan seiap anak Melayu dan Bumiputera yang ingin belajar setinggi-tingginya berhak mendapat biasiswa.

“Kita sendiri menganggap ini adalah tuntutan yang menyusahkan dan tidak munasabah, sedangkan ini hak kita yang tak sepatutnya dipertikaikan oleh sesiapa,” tegasnya.

Majlis yang berlangsung di ibukota semalam dianjurkan oleh Sekretariat Kongres Kepentingan Bangsa dengan kerjasama Persatuan Peniaga dan Penjaja Kecil Melayu Wilayah Persekutuan. Ia dihadiri kira-kira 300 orang.

Tiga ahli penal majlis dialog tersebut ialah bekas Pengarah Institut Teknologi Mara, Tan Sri Dr Arshard Ayub, Tan Sri Basir Ismail dan bekas Ketua Pengarah Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP), Datuk Dr Hassan Ahmad.

Perbandarkan Melayu
.
Mereka membicarakan mengenai masa depan ekonomi, pendidikan dan sosiao budaya bangsa Melayu:antara impian, realiti, status quo dan reformasi.

Tengku Razaleigh juga berkata, sasaran 30 peratus pencapaian Melayu dalam semua bidang telah gagal dicapai dan bangsa Melayu kini semakin jauh kebelakang.

“Bangsa lain semakin jauh ke depan dan jumlahnya boleh menelan kita pada bila-bila masa. Sekiranya landasan sosial, ekonomi dan politik kita berada pada asas yang rapuh, kita boleh dimusnahkan pada bila-bila masa.

“Dulu kita ghairah bercakap tentang pencapaian 30 peratus penglibatan Melayu dalam semua bidang. Kini sasaran ini telah gagal, tetapi tidak ada sasaran baru yang hendak dituju. Bahkan tidak banyak lagi suara yang bercakap mengenai apa-apa sasaran” katanya dalam syarahan perdana di majlis dialog Kongres Kepentingan Bangsa peringkat Wilayah Persekutuan semalam.

“Benar, jumlah anak-anak Melayu dalam bidang profesional dan usahawan semakin meningkat, tetapi hakikatnya kita semakin jauh kebelakang. Bangsa lain semakin jauh ke depan dan jumlahnya boleh menelan kita pada bila-bila masa.

“Kerana itu kita mahu satu sasaran baru untuk orang Melayu..berapa ramaikah jurutera dan doktor Melayu dalam tempoh lima tahun akan datang,” kata Tengku Razaleigh.

Beliau berkata, tiada jalan singkat untuk mengangkat mertabat bangsa Melayu kerana pelbagai sebab seperti amalan rasuah, menjual kontrak dan menjual baja subsidi, pukat dan enjin nelayan.

Melayu Pulau Pinang

Katanya, jika amalan ini tidak dikikis di kalangan orang Melayu, maka yang akan menghancurkan orang Melayu adalah bangsa mereka sendiri.

Tengku Razaleigh juga mencadangkan supaya dikaji semula program membandarkan orang Melayu dengan cara mengajak mereka secara beramai-ramai datang ke Kuala Lumpur.

Beliau berkata, membandarkan orang Melayu bukan sekadar untuk meletak mereka di pinggiran dan hidup sebagai buruh murah.

“Kemiskinan Melayu di Pulau Pinang adalah isu lama tetapi dinyanyikan semula dan kita dengan mudah menyalahkan pucuk pimpinan kerajaan negeri kerana ia bukan Melayu.

“Namun, suara Melayu tidak kurangnya. Kenapa suara itu tidak cukup lantang? Atau kita sudah ketandusan idea dalam menghadapi kemelut kemunduran orang Melayu yang tidak dapat diselesaikan,” katanya lagi.

Tengku Razaleigh berkata, sedikit demi sedikit tanah rezab Melayu di bandar dibatalkan statusnya tanpa sebarang gantian walaupun perlembagaan negara menuntut supaya tanah-tanah diganti semula.

Katanya, perlembagaan negara merupakan satu kontrak sosial yang menjadi benteng terakhir kepada perjuangan orang Melayu tetapi kini ramai yang menganggapnya sebagai bebanan.

Pemimpin Melayu tidak berkualiti?

Pemimpin Melayu tidak berkualiti?
Muda Mohd noor
Sep 23, 06 Malaysiakini

Bekas Ketua Pengarah Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DEB), Datuk Dr Hassan Ahmad berkata ramai yang beranggapan bahawa kuasa politik orang Melayu masih kuat, tetapi pada hakikat sebenarnya ia semakin lemah.

Katanya, ianya berlaku kerana orang Melayu tidak bersatu dalam politik kerana mereka yang tidak sealiran akan dianggap sebagai musuh.

“Orang Umno kata orang PAS musuh dan sebaliknya. Jika orang yang menyertai parti alternatif juga dianggap musuh,” tambahnya.

Menurutnya, kelemahan orang Melayu ialah pemimpin mereka termasuk alim ulama tidak berkualiti dalam bidang bidang, termasuk ekonomi, politik dan pendidikan.

Mengenai ekonomi, Dr Hassan berkata dasar penswastaan kerajaan yang bertujuan untuk melatih orang Melayu dalam bidang pengurusan ekonomi gagal kerana kerajaan melantik mereka yang tidak berkemampuan untuk melaksanakannya.

Menurutnya, sebahagian besar mereka yang menggerakkan dasar penswastaan adalah orang Melayu.

Diejek bangsa sendiri

“Akibat daripada kegagalan tersebut mereka telah diejek oleh orang Melayu sendiri. Orang Melayu tidak percaya kepada bangsa mereka sendiri,” katanya ketika menyampaikan ucapan dalam majlis dialog Kongres Kepentingan Bangsa peringkat Wilayah Persekutuan di ibu negara semalam.

Dua lagi anggota panel adalah bekas Pengarah Institut Teknologi Mara (ITM), Tan Sri Dr Arshard Ayub dan bekas Pengerusi Malaysia Airports Holding Berhad (MAB) Tan Sri Basir Ismail.

Dr Hassan berkata, dasar penswastaan yang diperkenalkan pada awal 80-an oleh bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad adalah untuk menggantikan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) yang bertujuan untuk menyusun semula ekonomi khususnya membantu orang Melayu.

“Tetapi apa yang berlaku kepada dasar itu? DEB sendiri tidak menguntungkan orang Melayu,” katanya lagi.

Sementara itu, Basir berkata, identiti Melayu sudah ditukar menjadi bumiputera tetapi tidak ada pihak yang mempedulikannya.

Katanya, penukaran istilah tersebut adalah salah kerana orang Melayu dan bumiputera adalah berbeza.

“Apakah orang Melayu sama dengan kaum minoriti di Sabah dan Sarawak? Oleh itu kita kena jaga masyarakat kita. Kalau kita tidak menjaganya, apa akan terjadi kepada negara kita pada masa akan datang,” katanya.

Istilah Melayu

Menurutnya, bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Abdul Razak Hussein tidak menukar istilah Melayu menjadi bumiputera apabila beliau memperkenalkan DEB pada 1970.

“Tetapi dalam buku Rancangan Malaysia Kesembilan (RMK9) tidak ada satupun istilah Melayu...semuanya menjadi bumiputera,” tambahnya.

Arshard pula menggesa supaya kerajaan mengkaji semula dasar pendidikan dengan mengadakan lebih banyak kursus kemahiran dan vokesional.

Beliau berkata, ini kerana orang Melayu masih memandang kepada ijazah dan bukannya kemahiran yang mereka perolehi dari pusat pengajian tinggi.

“Jangan hanya memikirkan untuk memasuki universiti sahaja. Adakah orang yang kelulusannya lebih rendah mahu memasuki universiti juga?

“Saya mencadangkan anak-anak muda yang gagal memasuki universiti mencari kemahiran dan bekerja dalam bidang itu,” katanya.

Mahathir: LKY 'arrogant and not very clever'

Mahathir: LKY 'arrogant and not very clever'

Sep 23, 06 Malaysiakini

Former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad rained criticism on Singapore’s Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, whom he said has been marginalised by the Chinese around the world.

Mahathir, who shared anything but a rosy relationship with the former Singapore premier during his 22-year tenure, described Lee as “arrogant and not very clever”.

According to Bernama, he was responding to Lee’s recent remark that the Chinese in Malaysia and Indonesia had been systematically marginalised.

The 81-year-old former premier said the 83-year-old statesman had no respect for his neighbours.

“He (Lee) thinks he is strong, he has become arrogant and he does not bother about his neighbours. That is why he raised the issue (of marginalisation) knowing it is a sensitive issue,” he told reporters after a function in Terengganu yesterday.

Singapore’s former premier ruffled feathers when he claimed that Malaysia and Indonesia had problems with the Chinese because the community was successful through hard work.

Malays in Singapore

Continuing his attack, Mahathir said Malaysia could also ask why the Malays in Singapore were marginalised.

“We can also ask what is the status of Malays in Singapore, why are they not allowed to carry arms in the army or be provided with firearms training. Why are Malays in Malaysia so skilled in the military field but in Singapore, they cannot hold high positions?

“Why are the Malays marginalised to the point that they have no standing at all. This is done deliberately by Singapore. No other country does this,” he added.

In Malaysia, Mahathir said Chinese officers in the army could reach high ranks.

“The Chinese here can hold positions such as General, Major-General and so forth. But (what about) the Malays in Singapore, what is their per capita income compared to the Chinese there.

“Have an independent inquiry, why are the Malays being left behind in Singapore. Not that they are any less than the Malays in Malaysia but they are pressured, marginalised and victimised. That is the government formed on the views of Lee Kuan Yew,” he added.

Mahathir had also criticised the minister mentor in his speech earlier.

“You (Lee) take care of your own rice bowl. You are not clever. In a small group, you may look clever. (But) when he goes to China. The Chinese there don’t listen (to him).

The Chinese don’t respect him because he has been marginalised by the Chinese around the world,” he said.

Study: 30% bumi equity target exceeded

Study: 30% bumi equity target exceeded
Andrew Ong
Sep 23, 06

The New Economic Policy (NEP) target of 30 percent bumiputera corporate equity ownership has been well exceeded but the method is an inefficient barometer of Malay wealth, suggested a new study.

The study, by the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (Asli), estimated that the rightful figure should be around 45 percent, when based on September 2005 Bursa Malaysia figures.

In making that estimation, the study - titled 'Corporate Equity Distribution: Past Trends and Future Policy' - estimated that 70 percent ownership of government-linked companies (GLCs) was attributable to bumiputeras.

Based on a 2005 report by UBS Equity Research Malaysia, the study said GLCs made up about one-third of total market value at the time.

Met recently, Asli’s Centre for Public Policy Studies director Dr Lim Teck Ghee said from the UBS report, the top-10 GLCs alone - which include Tenaga Nasional, Telekom Malaysia, Maybank Bhd - roughly made up around one-third of the market value in 2005.

Asked to substantiate the 70 percent estimation, he said: “Our study was established based on the best available information and informed opinion. The government does not make data available easily (to the public).”

Wrong priorities

According to Lim, Asli’s study was aimed at providing updated facts to support the argument that the NEP’s 30-percent target had been achieved.

“I and many other experts believe that the 30 percent bumiputera corporate equity requirement should either be removed or reformed,” he said.

“Firstly, it was part of the larger NEP programme which was supposed to end in 1990. It is now more than 15 years.

“The NEP programme has already long achieved its objective of nurturing a dynamic Malay business community and strong Malay wealthy and middle class,” he added.

Lim warned that if such ‘crutches’ continued, it would only encourage rent-seeking and induce other distortions and inefficiencies that would hurt our national interests.

Instead of encouraging race-based corporate equity ownership, he said it would be better if the government encouraged efficiency, competition and productivity of our economy.

Transparency needed

In view of the study’s findings, Lim hoped the government would exercise more transparency and publicise the methodology used by the government in providing its own figures.

Asli’s proposal was published in February this year meant for various government agencies, but it was also distributed to various groups including a number of members of parliament.

The NEP was born after the 1969 racial riots and was aimed at bridging socio-economic disparities between the races.

The Ninth Malaysia Plan had revised yet again the 30 percent target until the year 2020, and stated that between 2000 and 2004, bumiputera equity ownership remained stagnant at 18.9 percent.

DAP agrees with LKY, slams BN leaders

DAP agrees with LKY, slams BN leaders

Sep 23, 06

Politics of denial!

This is how opposition party DAP views the objection raised by Barisan Nasional (BN) leaders to Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew’s claim that Chinese Malaysians are marginalised.

DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng expressed ‘disgust’ with MCA president Ong Ka Ting and Gerakan top leaders Dr Lim Keng Yaik and Dr Koh Tsu Koon for denying an ‘obvious fact’.

“... The Chinese and other non-Chinese have been systematically marginalised by discriminatory government policies that only favour the rich and politically connected,” he said in a statement today.

“Such politics of denial is dishonest as BN leaders themselves have stated that discriminatory policies such as quotas and the New Economic Policy (NEP) are necessary for racial harmony and national stability,” he added.

He said as long as BN leaders, including former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad, cannot rely on reason, facts and logic to disprove Lee’s claim, then “their emotional denials are like empty vessels making the most noise to cover up the politics of Umno dominance and discrimination.”

Perverse logic

The DAP leader also took Koh to task for saying that the minister mentor did not understand and appreciate the challenges in administering a country bigger, more complicated and diverse than Singapore.

“This is perverse logic. If so, then can we support the apartheid policies of South Africa in the 1980s just because South Africa is bigger, more diverse and complicated than Malaysia?

“How can Koh (who is also Penang chief minister) be so thick skin to say the Chinese are not compliant when he was compliant towards Umno by not daring to even respond to the attacks by Penang Umno Youth leaders who humiliated him publicly with demonstrations and banners?” he asked.

Lim then trained his crosshairs on the MCA president, who argued that it was unfair and subjective to say the Chinese in Malaysia are marginalised because any injustices will be resolved by MCA.

“If that is the case, why is it that in cabinet, four MCA ministers could not convince but had to submit and bow to one Education Minister Hishammuddin Hussein?” he asked.

He was referring to Hishammuddin’s public admonishing of Deputy Higher Education Minister and MCA vice-president Ong Tee Keat over a disclosure that Education Ministry officials had allegedly pocketed funds meant for vernacular schools.

Tee Keat was also reprimanded by the cabinet for his action.

“(What is) worse, Ong has not explained why he supported the Ninth Malaysia Plan’s refusal to build a single Chinese or Tamil school out of the 180 new primary schools proposed,” he added.

'Selfish acts'

As for Keng Yaik’s statement that the “Chinese here will not follow and listen to what he says”, Lim said it reflected how out of touch BN leaders are with the feelings of ordinary Malaysians.

At a press conference yesterday, Keng Yaik, who is Gerakan president, urged journalists to report that what Lee had said “was wrong, wrong.”

Meanwhile, Lim described the ‘false denials’ by BN’s Chinese leaders as ‘selfish and politically motivated’ to enable them to cling on to their government posts.

Lee ruffled feathers recently when he said that the Chinese in Malaysia and Indonesia have been systematically marginalised.

He said this was because Malaysia and Indonesia had problems with the Chinese because the community was successful through their hard work.

“In fact, Lee is half right in that it is not only the Chinese who are marginalised. The Indians and poor Malays are also marginalised,” said the DAP secretary-general.

Malaysia: Challenges facing a multicultural society

Challenges facing a multicultural society
By Maznah Mohamad

The Straits Times
Publication Date: 23-09-2006


Malaysian society is now gripped by a fundamental question: Is the country, which is more than half Muslim, an Islamic state? In practice, various religious and ethnic groups give Malaysia a distinctly multicultural character. But the Malaysian Constitution provides room for arguments on both sides of the question, and the relatively secular status quo is facing a serious challenge.

Drafted by a group of experts in 1957, under the auspices of the country's former British rulers, the Constitution includes two seemingly contradictory clauses. Article 3 states that Islam is the religion of the federation, and that only Islam can be preached to Muslims. But Article 11 guarantees freedom of religion for all. As a result, Malaysia has developed both a general civil code, which is applied universally; and Islamic law, which is applied only to Muslims in personal and family matters.

But recently, some Muslim groups have pressed the government to proclaim Malaysia an Islamic state, on the basis of Article 3 and the Muslims' population majority. Ultimately, they would like Malaysia to be governed by Islamic law.

For years, there was little need to resolve this constitutional issue. For example, if a Muslim decided to renounce his faith, the matter would be handled outside the legal system, or conversion records would be sealed. Today, however, every Malaysian must declare a religious affiliation, which is registered with the government - a requirement that has made it difficult for a Muslim to leave Islam without formalising the change of status through the legal process.

The country's attention is now fixed on the fate of ordinary citizens such as sales assistant Lina Joy and former religious teacher Kamariah Ali, who are trying to change their religious affiliation through the legal system. Muslim professional organisations and the Islamic opposition political party hold the view that renunciation of Islam is punishable by death. Likewise, the defence by civil reform movements of individuals' freedom of conscience has been denounced by some religious leaders as an attack on Islam.

Malaysia has no law that imposes the death penalty on apostates. Yet public movements have been formed to highlight this Islamic tenet. If it is not applied, the argument goes, there will be a massive exodus of Muslims to other faiths. The immediate goal is to keep the courts from allowing Lina Joy or Kamariah Ali to convert.

Attempts by other democratic civil society groups to debate this issue in peaceful public forums have been thwarted by threats of violence from a coalition of Muslim non-governmental groups calling themselves Badai (the Malay acronym for Coalition Against The Inter-Faith Commission).

Concerned about sparking an ethnic clash, Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi has proclaimed a ban on open discussion of these issues, threatening to arrest Internet news providers and activists if they continue to fan such debates.

Datuk Seri Abdullah is right to be worried. Since independence, national politics in Malaysia has reinforced group identity, especially among ethnic Malays, an exclusively Muslim community. Identity politics allowed ethnic Malays to assert their claims to control over land, language and religion. All attempts to reduce Malay influence serve to mobilise this community - in ethnic and religious terms. Malay politicians have learnt to play this card very effectively.

Ethnic Malays' special status has long been codified in affirmative action policies giving them special economic benefits. However, as Malaysia engages with the global economy, these privileges may eventually be removed in order to heighten the country's competitiveness. As a result, many Malay-Muslims increasingly worry about the loss of familiar economic and political safeguards. In particular, tensions have grown between the Malay majority and the country's large Chinese minority, which has been quicker to benefit from Malaysia's economic opening to the world.

Moreover, efforts to Islamicise the state come at a time when conflict in the Middle East has further politicised Muslim movements in Malaysia. They view themselves as counter-forces to cultural domination by the West, asserting their religious identity in the face of what they regard as imperialising ideas such as secularism and human rights.

Small disputes are magnified by this underlying conflict. Disagreements are increasingly depicted as being rooted in an East-West divide, as a struggle between believers and apostates.

Many Muslims are wary of this brand of identity politics. They recognise that the intolerance of Islamist groups can easily be turned against moderate Muslims.

But all Malaysians must learn how to manage pressures that seem to be pushing their country's constituent communities away from one another. Defending a multicultural national identity in the face of religious intolerance is thus the great challenge facing Malaysia's state and society.

The writer is deputy dean of graduate studies at the School of Social Sciences of Universiti Sains Malaysia.

"Half of French Prisoners are Muslims"

"Half of French Prisoners are Muslims"

by Emre Demir ("Zaman Online," June 01, 2006)

Strasbourg, France - Half of those being detained in French prisons are said to be Muslims.

A Le Monde news article wrote that according to a poll run by “Religions World” magazine, although Muslims constitute 7-8 percent of the French population, 50 percent of all prisoners are Muslim immigrants.

The percentage rises to 80 percent in suburbs mostly populated by immigrants.

International Prison Observation Center President Gabriel Mouesca said that socio-economic conditions not the religion is effective in why half of all French prisoners are Muslims. Despite Islam being the most common religion in prisons, Muslim convicts have many problems. The biggest one is not being able to exercise their religious obligations comfortably. The lack of small mosques, in addition to religious officials, is another concern for Muslims who are also complaining about the food served in prisons.

Secular Syria allows Islam to flourish"

"Secular Syria allows Islam to flourish"

("IRIN News," June 01, 2006)

Damascus, Syria - The three Muhammads were all sure of one thing. "I want to be the imam of a mosque," says ten-year old Muhammad, on his way home from a lesson in Aleppo's Islamic school. "I want to be a preacher too," chimes his friend, also named after the Prophet of Islam, dressed in his finest black gelab.

"We like to study the Qu'ran," explains the third Muhammad, also a resident of Syria's second city, "because it's our religion."

Internationally isolated and facing continuing domestic opposition, Syria is witnessing a revival of Islam in public and private life two decades after the secular government fought a bloody campaign to suppress an armed uprising against the state by Islamic extremists.

"The relationship between the government and the direction of Islam is now suitable," said Muhammad Habbash, the country's leading Islamist MP and head of the Islamic Studies Centre in Damascus. "We can now speak about what role Islam can play in people's lives."

Habbash's recent invitation to lecture army cadets on religious morals – the first time the Syrian military has officially cooperated with Islamist figures since the ruling Ba'ath party came to power in 1963 – is just one of a series of recent moves to allow Islam into public life by a state that once stopped at nothing to suppress it.

In 1982, following a three-year terrorist campaign against the state by the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, security officers ordered the shelling of the central city of Hama, which the Brotherhood had declared an Islamic emirate. The offensive resulted in the deaths of an estimated 20,000 people.

Hamed Haji, the 73-year-old muezzin whose call to prayer draws students – like the three young Muhammads – to Aleppo's Islamic school, remembers the violence. "In the 1980s, bullets hit the minaret," he recalls, pointing up to the pock-marked circles of stone. "And beards were not allowed; but we have more freedoms now."

Indeed, the past few months have seen a number of moves aimed at institutionalising Islam into Syria's old secular state. Mosques have been re-opened between prayer times, the president has begun ending public speeches with invocations to Allah and state auditoriums have been used for the country's first Qur'an reading competition.

In February, Syrian protesters burned and looted the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus in a display of anger against the publication of cartoons negatively depicting the Prophet Mohammed. At the time, security officials did little to quell the demonstrations, which were organised by Islamic study centres in the capital.

Among citizens, too, overt signs of religious devotion are becoming more frequent. An increasing number of young women are wearing headscarves, while green flags – representing Islam – adorned private shops on the Prophet's birthday in April.

Though three quarters of Syria's population are Sunni Muslim, the ruling party has long drawn its leaders from the minority Allawi sect, an offshoot of Shi'a Islam, which – along with Druze and other Muslim sects – makes up just 16 percent of the national population. Pan-Arab and secular, the Ba'ath Party has historically ruled on a domestic platform of protecting the rights of Syria's minorities.

For Habbash, the state's changing approach to Islam comes against a backdrop of regional upheaval since the launch of the US-led "war on terrorism", which has seen Islamist parties winning elections in Iraq and Palestine, escalating conflict between Israel and Islamist militia groups in Lebanon and an increasingly influential role for long-time Syrian ally and theocratic republic Iran. "The Syrian regime realised it has the same agenda as conservative Islamists," said Habbash. "They've formed an alliance to resist the current US administration's plan to change the region."

However, warns Aleppo's Mufti Ibrahim Salkeeni, US intervention in the Middle East has also served to radicalise many young Syrians. "American practises in Iraq and Palestine are pushing some young people in Aleppo to become like time bombs – and we don't know when these will explode," he said. "The more the pressure increases, the more explosions there will be."

With daily terror attacks in neighbouring Iraq, many ostensibly claimed by Islamic extremist organisations, security forces have waged a public campaign against Islamist groups operating inside Syria. Dozens of clashes between Syrian anti-terrorism forces and militant groups have been reported by official state news agency SANA. One such group, Jund as-Sham, or "Soldiers of the Levant", has reportedly planned terror attacks against public buildings in Damascus.

"Syria is aiming to change its policy of silence on these issues," said Imad Fauzi Shueibi, head of the Data and Strategic Studies Centre in Damascus, in an interview last year. "It wants to show the US that Syria is supporting the campaign against terrorism."

The Muslim Brotherhood, whose exiled leader Ali Sadradeen Bayanouni recently united with former Syrian Vice President Abdel-Halim Khaddam to lead an opposition group calling for regime change in Damascus, remains outlawed. Association with the group is punishable by death. "The Muslim Brotherhood represents perhaps two percent of Syrian Muslims," said Sheikh Mahmoud Abu Hudda, an Aleppo dentist and Islamic scholar who has lectured in Europe and the US on Islam's place in what he calls the "global culture".

Though independent political parties are not legal under the autocratic Syrian regime, senior members of the Ba'ath party are currently negotiating the introduction of a new Parties Law that would grant licenses to those parties not based on ethnic identity or religion.

For Mohammed Akam, professor of Arabic-language studies at Aleppo University, the state's increasing acceptance of Islam's role in society is a welcome development. Nevertheless, he added, the new strategy is no substitute for the reformation of an outdated political system. "The conflict between the state and the Muslim Brotherhood was actually a conflict of ideologies," he argued. "We need a party without ideology. Between secularism and freedom, I prefer freedom. Secularism is a kind of ideology, but democracy is a way of including all."

Remembering Tun Razak

Remembering Tun Razak
M. Bakri Musa
www.bakrimusa.com


Thirty years ago on January 14, 1976, our nation was stunned with the sudden and unexpected announcement of the death of its Prime Minister, Tun Razak. He was only 53 years old, much younger than some UMNO Youth leaders. It turned out later that only the announcement was unexpected.
The Tun had been suffering for a few years from a lethal form of cancer. His physicians and advisors had kept that news secret not only from the citizens but also presumably from his family. This great patriot died in a foreign land among strangers and without his loving family at his bedside.
I had always wondered what advice the Tun’s physicians and closest advisors gave him when they knew the end was near. I could not fathom why he and they did not take the nation into their confidence and share the grim news of his serious illness much earlier.
As a surgeon, I am intimately involved in the care of my patients who are at the end of their life. When death is imminent, I always apprise them and their families of the sad reality so I could discern their wishes. I do everything possible to comply with their requests.


Inspiring Role Model

Tun Razak’s death came a few days after I returned to Malaysia with the intention of staying permanently. I had been away for over a decade; he was the reason for my returning.
A few years earlier I had finished my training and started my private practice abroad. I also had a young family on the way, and life was good. However I had the unsettled feeling that I was not quite ready for the life of a suburbanite with a station wagon and a dog, together with a cottage at the lakeside.
Longing for my roots, I began reading about Malaysia, and came upon a sympathetic article on the late Tun. While hitherto my heroes had been the brilliant scientists and legendary surgeons I work with, now I had someone from my own culture to look up to.
I was impressed by the Tun’s outstanding achievements at Malay College, where he excelled academically as well as on the playing field. Later as a brilliant young civil servant, his British superiors recognized his talent and sent him to Britain to read law.
Looking over his early life, I could not help but admire his willingness to give up what seemed like a very promising and secure career in the civil service to pursue the then highly unpredictable and uncertain field of politics. Many of its practitioners had ended up being jailed, exiled, or worse.
Even more admirable, the Tun could just as easily have stayed back in Britain and started a lucrative practice as a barrister there, or applied his considerable managerial and executive talent working for one of the British corporations. He could have had a very rewarding career over there.
That he opted not to do so and returned home to serve his country inspired me to do likewise. I was unabashedly modeling myself after him except for this very significant difference. I had no love for politics; I would serve in my chosen profession instead.
Nearly two decades earlier, the Tun had visited my old school in Kuala Pilah and had exhorted us, especially Malay students, to opt for the sciences. Fortunately, science, especially medicine, is my passion, and I will serve in that field. That they were then too few Malays pursuing the sciences only increased my resolve to do my part in remedying the situation.
When I returned I settled my young family in my parent’s home in Seremban while I was busy making frequent day trips to Kuala Lumpur to arrange for my job. I had greatly underestimated the ability of the Malaysian bureaucracy to throw hurdles on my path. As one of the few Malay surgeons then (or even now), I had expected a welcome just short of that reserved for the return of the prodigal son. Far from it!
It was after a frustrating trip to the Ministry of Health that I returned to my parent’s home only to be stunned by that tragic news of the Tun’s death. I felt as if the air had been sucked out of me. There was a sudden emptiness in me. The tribulations I had earlier with the recalcitrant civil servants at the ministry seemed so trivial.


Enduring Legacy

Tun Razak saw early the importance of investing in his people as shown by his commitment to rural development and to education. On looking back, the one sight that I took very much for granted during my youth in the 1950s was the ubiquitous building of new schools especially in rural areas. I also remember seeing the joy in the eyes of illiterate villagers who could now read the daily papers, thanks to the adult literacy classes started by Tun Razak. He also expanded Malay education hitherto available only at the primary level, right up to the university.
His education policy was not without blemish. While he modernized education in the Malay language, but others read that as a signal for them to ignore English. While he could restrain the more extremist language nationalists, his successors were more than eager to pander to them.
His modernizing education in the Malay stream encouraged many Malays to pursue their education. The Tun however was pragmatic; he sent his own children to English schools, in Britain no less. Others may charge hypocrisy, but I am certain that his children are grateful that their father had chosen for them a superior education despite the considerable political risks he would incur.
It was the Tun, together with Indonesia’s Adam Malik, who ended the totally unnecessary and utterly destructive konfrontasi that had wasted so much resources and energy from the two nations. Both leaders successfully overcame the egotistic stubbornness of their superior (the Tunku for the Tun, and Sukarno for Adam Malik) and quickly came to an agreement.
A few years later, the Tun would once again be the nation’s savior, literally. It was he, and not the hapless Tunku, who brought law and order – and then peace – following the nation’s most harrowing experience, the 1969 race riots.
Two of the Tun’s greatest legacies deserve deeper scrutiny: The New Economic Policy (NEP), spawned immediately following the 1969 riots, and the Government-Linked Companies (GLCs).
In the NEP, the Tun implicitly recognized that economic growth alone, unless accompanied by social and economic equities, would be very destabilizing and thus not sustainable. In this, he anticipated the thinking of progressive development economists by decades. Today it is the accepted wisdom.
When he formulated the NEP, the Tun did not hesitate to challenge accepted orthodoxy. Today, a generation later, we must again emulate the Tun’s boldness in challenging the status quo in revamping the successors to the NEP.
Similarly, establishing the GLCs was the Tun’s creative way to overcome the creakiness and rigidities of the civil service. It was also his recognition that the prevailing economic milieu then in Malaysia was far from being truly competitive. He used the power of government through these GLCs to open up the market and break down the de facto monopolies then in existence. The role played by his GLCs is a far cry from the resource-consuming and corruption-ridden variety in existence today.
I had never had the privilege of meeting the late Tun. Yet thirty years after his death, reminded by his many achievements and enduring legacy, I am still inspired by this great Malaysian.

For the DAP it’s once bitten, twice shy

The New Straits Times, Kuala Lumpur
14 January 2006


OPINION: For the DAP it’s once bitten, twice shy
Chow Kum Hor

Despite toying with the idea of strategic alliances and cooperating
with other Opposition parties, the DAP is likely to go it alone in
the next elections, writes CHOW KUM HOR.

PICTURE Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim addressing the Democratic Action
Party top brass in a retreat, throw in the element of secrecy
surrounding the meeting and it won’t take long for speculation about
the party reviving formal ties with other Opposition parties to gain
a foothold.

Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) information chief Tian Chua may have
added to the rumour mill when he told the Chinese newspapers that
Anwar, the PKR adviser, had called on the DAP to forge an Opposition
alliance during his speech.

DAP leaders, including secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, have denied
that Anwar even broached the subject during the latter’s 20-minute
talk in Cameron Highlands last weekend.

"But we are open to co-operation with any party which does not have
the setting up of an Islamic State as its agenda," says Lim.

Despite the semantics about whether "co-operation" is preferable to
"coalition", the truth is DAP leaders are now deeply wary about how
even the slightest link with other Opposition groups could affect the
party.

After all, the DAP walked out of the Opposition Front (better known
by its Malay acronym, BA) in 2001, following disenchantment with
fellow coalition member Pas over the latter’s insistence on setting
up an Islamic state.

This came about after the DAP’s dismal showing in the 1999 general
election, where even its traditional supporters deserted the Chinese-
based party faster than Karpal Singh could repeat his infamous "over
my dead body" remark. (Karpal had made the comment in 1990 on Pas’
plans to set up an Islamic state.)

The party’s decision to go solo in the 2004 poll paid off when it won
12 parliamentary seats, making it the largest Opposition party in the
Dewan Rakyat.

Lim Kit Siang was reinstated as Opposition Leader while Karpal also
returned to the legislature after their defeat five years earlier.

But has the party, by even toying with the idea of co-operation with
other Opposition parties, forgotten the bitter lesson of 1999 when it
suffered its worst-ever electoral performance?

Those in favour of some form of arrangement with other Opposition
parties argue that the situation has changed considerably since then.

PKR vice-president Azmin Ali, who was invited with Anwar to Cameron
Highlands, says the PKR has publicly asked Pas to reconsider its
platform if Pas is serious about winning over the Malaysian public.

"Pas has not been raising the Islamic state issue for some time now.
In fact, Pas has started to moderate its image after the last general
election. It is a non-issue at the moment," he says.

The argument goes that if the prickly issue of an Islamic state is
out of the way, DAP would have no problem fighting alongside Pas in
the next general election.

But Pas’ re-branding exercise, to shed its hardline Islamic image in
favour of a more moderate one, still falls short of the DAP’s demand
that Pas drop its Islamic state stance.

Even the most optimistic DAP leader does not see Pas abandoning its
Islamic state objective, which has formed one of the party’s core
principles.

The Merdeka Centre think-tank’s Ibrahim Suffian says there are also
lingering trust issues between the DAP and Pas, especially after the
debacle over BA’s 1999 manifesto.

The common manifesto was silent on the setting up of an Islamic state
but no sooner had the general election been concluded than Pas was
back to insisting that it would set up an Islamic state if it came to
power. But for PKR, some form of understanding with the DAP could
alleviate the problem of both parties contesting in the same
constituency — a phenomenon that resulted in split Opposition votes
in 2004 in some areas.

As much as PKR needs to extend its base beyond the Malay ground, DAP
also wants to shed its Chinese-centric image as a long-term strategic
move.

"There are also people in the DAP who take a long view of the party,"
says Ibrahim.

"With dwindling Chinese-majority seats, the DAP has to look at co-
operation with other parties for its long-term survival.

"It cannot continue to be boxed up as a Chinese party."

While DAP leaders such as Lim have not ruled out ties within the
Opposition, political reality suggests that they stand to gain more
as a "niche party". The experience in 1999 has taught the DAP that
the groundswell, which saw the Opposition as a whole making
significant inroads, may not necessarily benefit the party.

In fact, DAP took a severe beating.

A DAP insider says the poll was a wake-up call for the party to stay
true to its principles of defending the 1957 Constitution, instead of
working with a party with the expressed aim of setting up an Islamic
state.

"It is pointless for the party to think long-term (on matters such as
forging links with Malay-based parties) if in the short term, the
party cannot even stay afloat by winning elections," he says.

Emerging wiser from the lesson, the party appears to have adopted the
"DAP-first" mentality, as opposed to "Opposition first".

As for Anwar, a DAP central executive committee (CEC) member says:
"Between the DAP and Pas, I believe Anwar, with his Islamic
background, is more inclined towards Pas, notwithstanding his
rhetoric about asking the party to review its Islamic state position.

"He needs the Malay-Muslim platform more.

"His support base has always been this group of people. Personally, I
think we have to tread carefully."

Lim says there are many issues to be thrashed out before the DAP
moves towards forming an alliance — loose or otherwise — with other
Opposition parties.

But the underlying principle is that the "partner" must not have the
setting up of an Islamic state as its objective.

"We want a coalition of substance, not convenience. We do not want
political spins."

But would DAP agree to an alliance with PKR and not Pas? In the 1990
and 1995 polls, the DAP and Malay-based Semangat 46 were under the
Gagasan Rakyat coalition.

Semangat 46, on the other hand, joined forces with Pas and other
Islamic parties in another Opposition coalition, the Angkatan
Perpaduan Ummah (APU).

Although Lim says it is too early to tell, party leaders are still
spooked by the idea of being associated with other Opposition
parties, even non-Islamic ones which share the same platform as Pas.

"You can’t divorce a person and then regularly meet him or her in
public.

"This is especially so after DAP slammed its door on BA," the DAP
insider says.

"Having even an indirect link with Pas now is just as bad, if not
worse than the time when DAP and Pas were coalition partners.

"If we go back in any way, we will be treated with suspicion."

The DAP has learnt a lesson the hard way — that they can do without
voters’ suspicion, which can be unforgiving.

Ends

Judas the Misunderstood

The Times, London


Europe

The Times
January 12, 2006

Judas the Misunderstood
From Richard Owen, in Rome
Vatican moves to clear reviled disciple’s name


JUDAS ISCARIOT, the disciple who betrayed Jesus with a kiss, is to be
given a makeover by Vatican scholars.

The proposed “rehabilitation” of the man who was paid 30 pieces of
silver to identify Jesus to Roman soldiers in the Garden of
Gethsemane, comes on the ground that he was not deliberately evil,
but was just “fulfilling his part in God’s plan”.

Christians have traditionally blamed Judas for aiding and abetting
the Crucifixion, and his name is synonymous with treachery. According
to St Luke, Judas was “possessed by Satan”.

Now, a campaign led by Monsignor Walter Brandmuller, head of the
Pontifical Committee for Historical Science, is aimed at persuading
believers to look kindly at a man reviled for 2,000 years.

Mgr Brandmuller told fellow scholars it was time for a “re-reading”
of the Judas story. He is supported by Vittorio Messori, a prominent
Catholic writer close to both Pope Benedict XVI and the late John
Paul II.

Signor Messori said that the rehabilitation of Judas would “resolve
the problem of an apparent lack of mercy by Jesus toward one of his
closest collaborators”.

He told La Stampa that there was a Christian tradition that held that
Judas was forgiven by Jesus and ordered to purify himself with
“spiritual exercises” in the desert.

In scholarly circles, it has long been unfashionable to demonise
Judas and Catholics in Britain are likely to welcome Judas’s
rehabilitation.

Father Allen Morris, Christian Life and Worship secretary for the
Catholic Bishops of England and Wales, said: “If Christ died for all
— is it possible that Judas too was redeemed through the Master he
betrayed?” The “rehabilitation” of Judas could help the Pope’s drive
to improve Christian-Jewish relations, which he has made a priority
of his pontificate.

Some Bible experts say Judas was “a victim of a theological libel
which helped to create anti Semitism” by forming an image of him as a
“sinister villain” prepared to betray for money.

In many medieval plays and paintings Judas is portrayed with a hooked
nose and exaggerated Semitic features. In Dante’s Inferno, Judas is
relegated to the lowest pits of Hell, where he is devoured by a three-
headed demon.

The move to clear Judas’s name coincides with plans to publish the
alleged Gospel of Judas for the first time in English, German and
French. Though not written by Judas, it is said to reflect the belief
among early Christians — now gaining ground in the Vatican — that in
betraying Christ Judas was fulfilling a divine mission, which led to
the arrest and Crucifixion of Jesus and hence to man’s salvation.

Mgr Brandmuller said that he expected “no new historical evidence”
from the supposed gospel, which had been excluded from the canon of
accepted Scripture.

But it could “serve to reconstruct the events and context of Christ’s
teachings as they were seen by the early Christians”. This included
that Jesus had always preached “forgiveness for one’s enemies”.

Some Vatican scholars have expressed concern over the reconsideration
of Judas. Monsignor Giovanni D’Ercole, a Vatican theologian, said it
was “dangerous to re-evaulate Judas and muddy the Gospel accounts by
reference to apocryphal writings. This can only create confusion in
believers.” The Gospels tell how Judas later returned the 30 pieces
of silver — his “blood money” — and h anged himself, or according to
the Acts of the Apostles, “fell headlong and burst open so that all
his entrails burst out”.

Some accounts suggest he acted out of disappointment that Jesus was
not a revolutionary who intended to overthrow Roman occupation and
establish “God’s Kingdom on Earth”.

In the Gospel accounts, Jesus reveals to the disciples at the Last
Supper that one of them will betray him, but does not say which. He
adds “Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would
have been better for that man if he had not been born.”

But he also — according to St Matthew — acknowledged that Judas had a
divine function to fulfil, saying to him during the arrest, “Friend,
do what you are here to do” and adding that “the prophecies of the
Scriptures must be fulfilled”.

The “Gospel of Judas”, a 62-page worn and tattered papyrus, was found
in Egypt half a century ago and later sold by antiquities dealers to
the Maecenas Foundation in Basle, Switzerland.

MOCK OF AGES

In Dante’s Inferno, Judas is relegated to the lowest pits of Hell,
where he is eaten, head first, by a three-headed demon with flapping
bat-like wings

In Cecil B. DeMille’s 1927 silent film The King of Kings, Judas’s
attraction for Mary Magdalene and the resulting jealousy contributes
to his betrayal of Jesus

Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd-Webber’s musical Jesus Christ Superstar
depicts Judas as a disillusioned, angry character. In the 1973 film
version he is presented as more of a victim than villain

Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ shows Judas hounded by demon-
like street children who send him to his death amid a sea of insects
and maggots

Apa Muslihat Persidangan Meja Bulat DAP di Parlimen, Jan 2006

Apa Muslihat Persidangan Meja Bulat DAP di Parlimen

ROSLAN SMS

Adakah Allahyarham Sarjan Mohammad bin Abdullah a.k.a Moorthy seorang Muslim ataupun tidak? Menurut proses undang-undang, Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah setelah mendengar permohonan pihak Jabatan Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan (JAWI) dan telah pun memutuskan bahawa berdasarkan bukti-bukti yang telah dibentangkan Allahyarham SAH seorang Muslim dan perlu dikebumikan menurut peraturan Islam.

Pihak keluarga Allahyarham yang masih belum beragama Islam telah melalui proses undang-undang membuat! pula permohonan di Mahkamah Tinggi Sivil bagi membatalkan keputusan ini dan mengisytiharkan bahawa Allahyarham sebenarnya seorang HINDU dan bukan Muslim.



Mahkamah Tinggi Rayuan Khas telah mendengar permohonan isteri Allahyarham itu dan telah memutuskan berdasarkan Perkara 121 (1) (A) Perlembagaan Persekutuan, mahkamah sivil tidak memiliki bidangkuasa menyemak atau membatalkan mana-mana keputusan Mahkamah Syariah dan oleh itu telah menolak permohonan tersebut. Lalu jenazah Allahyarham telah disemadikan menurut peraturan Islam pada hari itu juga setelah mahkamah yang sama enggan memberi perintah tahanan. Isteri Allahyarham telah pun memfailkan rayuan ke Mahkamah Rayuan.

Apa yang mahu saya utarakan di sini bahawa segala-gala sorotan di atas telah melalui proses undang-undang d! an bukannya dibuat melalui pintu belakang. Walaupun secara peribadi ada beberapa perkara yang saya tidak bersetuju dengan pihak JAWI namun dalam hal ini saya kira sebagai badan yang berwibawa dan memelihara hal-ehwal masayarakat Islam pihak JAWI telah melakukan tugasnya.

Kalaulah mayat tersebut contohnya adalah mayat Joshua Jamaluddin (hamba Allah paderi Kristian Melayu yang pernah ditahan di bawah ISA dahulu) siapa pun tidak akan berminat menuntutnya kerana jelas telah mengisytiharkan dirinya murtad dan memeluk Kristian. Manakala dalam kes Allahyarham ini beliau meninggal dalam keadaan beragama Islam dan tidak pula pernah membuat permohonan sebaliknya sehinggalah meninggal dunia.

Isu ini memang sensitif dan rakyat Malaysia khasnya pimpinan DAP, Hindu Sangam dan lain-lain NGO bukan Islam perlu sedar bahawa bukan hanya isteri Allahyarham malah kami masyarakat Islam pun terhiris hati dan perasaan apabila masyarakat bukan Islam secara terbuka membahas dan mengkritik! perkara ini serta memperlekehkan kuasa dan wibawa JAWI.

Tidak pernah dalam sejarah hidup saya menyaksikan ISLAM secara terbuka duduk dikandang orang salah dan diperbahaskan secara terang-terangan oleh masyarakat bukan Islam.

Memang kita mahu mengamalkan kebasan dan hak bersuara akan tetapi janganlah sampai keadilan dan kesaksamaan ISLAM turut menjadi bahan perbahasan dan pertikaian sehingga seolah-olah masyarakat Islam dalam negara ini dilihat sebagai dungu, bisu dan buta belaka!

Kit Siang dan pemuka-pemukanya marah kepada Perkara 121 (1) (A) Perlembagaan Persekutuan kerana kononnya mematikan hak masyarakat bukan Islam untuk membuat permohonan di mahkamah sivil berkenaan pertikaian mengenai ISLAM. Artikel tersebut kononnya merampas hak masyarakat bukan Islam.

Kit Siang juga marahkan sikap hakim mahkamah rayuan tempoh hari kerana enggan melaksanakan kuasanya dan memberikan pentafsiran yang sempit terhadap Perkara 121 (1) (A), tidakkah ini CONTEMPT OF COUR! T ataupun penghinaan terhadap mahkamah!

Antara resolusi persidangan Meja Bulat Kit Siang itu yang telah pun diserahkan ke kerajaan adalah:

Resolution 1
Mengembalikan Perkara 121 Perlembagaan Persekutuan ke maksud asalnya pada tahun 1988 sebelum dipinda

Resolution 2
Mendesak Perdana Menteri menubuhkan JK Terpilih Parlimen untuk membincangkan masalah yang ditimbulkan oleh Perkara 121 (1) (A)

Resolution 3
Masyarakat kebanyakkan merasa bimbang dan tidak berpuas hati terhadap penafian keadilan dalam kes Moorthy dan kes-kes lain seumpamanya.

Resolution 4
Forum ini merakamkan kebimbangannya terhadap sikap kebanyakkan pihak berkuasa agama negeri-negeri dalam perlaksanaan undag-undang Islam khasnya yang melibatkan masyrarakt bukan Islam.

Resolution 5
Mendesak agar Peguam Negara bertindak demi kepentingan masyarakat ramai dalam kes Moorthy dan kes-kes seumpamanya bagi mencerminkan hak persamaan semua rakyat dengan mengambil kira nilai-nilai persamaan tanpa mengira kaum dan agam yang dijamin oleh perlembagaan persekutuan.

Saya kongsi bersama berikut beberapa reaksi dalam BLOG Kit Siang berkenaan persidangan ini:

yangyang Said:January 5th, 2006 at 19: 14.21
Uncle Lim, as always – u r our jiu xin.Happy New Year!

Libra2 Said:January 5th, 2006 at 19: 27.54
Syabas to kit for calling for this round table conference. The remarkable attendance is a clear indication of the non Muslims concern over the recent Moorty! s case and the seriousness of the issue. I am also proud of the Malays who attended the conference. Malik and Zaid have always been upright and level headed man.

But I am disappointed none of the MCA and MIC leaders bothered to attend this function. As though this is a non-issue. To all MCA, MIC leaders, – come next election, dont enter my house compound to fish for votes. You will be chased out, I promise you.

sheriff singh Said:January 5th, 2006 at 19: 51.15
The position of Islam vis a vis the other religions must be clarified so that there is no ambiguity. There should not be a position of one religion being superior or having preference over the others whenever there is a conflict. The amendments must put in place a mechanism for resolving religious conflicts or ambiguities. There must be mutual respe! ct, sensitivity and fairness for all believers.

Most importantly, any proposed amendments must clarify the statement once a muslim, always a muslim i.e. you can get in but you cant get out.

There have been too many cases where born and converted muslims want out as they have joined other faiths but it is the muslim religious authorities that decides their fate even though these non-believers now no longer recognise their authority. They have been left in limbo and helpless to do anything. Statutory declarations don’t get you anywhere, you are still recognised as muslims. This anomaly must be removed so that those who leave Islam can have their new faiths registered and recognised by the government. And there will be no disputes as to their religious belief when they die. Let God be the judge.

Dan akhbar NST hari ini memaparkan satu muka penuh tajuk berikut:

It wont happen again. Government looki! ng at options to prevent a recurrence of legal wrangling.

Ianya tidak akan terjadi lagi. Kerajaan sedang menimbangkan pilihan untuk memastikan pertikaian undang-undang seumpama ini tidak berulang lagi.

Saya berharap pihak kerajaan janganlah seghairah Kit Siang dalam menangani isu ini. Kita mahu keadilan untuk semua dan dalam kes Allahyarham DAP sendiri sehingga menghantar ahli parlimennya Kulasegaran sebagai salah seorang peguam untuk isteri beliau. Namun mereka tidak berjaya, dan kini menunggu proses rayuan di mahkamah.

Keadilan bermula apabila semua pihak mematuhi undang-undang dan dalam hal ini Perkara 121 (1) (A) adalah jelas. Jika Kit Siang dan pemuka-pemukanya tidak berpuas hati maka buatlah pindaan di Parlimen, itulah proses sebenar yang perlu dilalui. Menjaja perkara se sensitif ini di tepi-tepi jalan akan hanya membakar api permusuhan dan akhirnya yang akan mati adalah keadilan itu sendiri.

Saya harap DAP dan NGO yang besertany! a akan mematuhi proses undang-undang. Dan sebanyak mana mereka mahukan hak mereka itu dihormati dan dipelihara, mereka juga seharusnya menghormati dan memelihara hak masyarakat Islam yang merupakan majoriti dalam negara ini, yang merupakan masyarakat yang sentiasa toleran dan terbuka dalam hal-hal perbezaan kaum dan agama. Jangan sampai ianya berubah!

Time for a change of players?

The Star, Kuala Lumpur
08 January 2006


Time for a change of players?

The guessing game may soon be over as the Prime Minister is said to be
in the final stages of deciding on changes to his Cabinet. But
opinions about whether it will be a major or minor reshuffle vary,
writes JOCELINE TAN.

DATUK Annuar Zaini’s football analogy for the impending Cabinet
reshuffle seems to have captured the imagination of many.

Annuar, who is also Bernama chairman, had likened Prime Minister Datuk
Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to the team manager, the Cabinet to the
football team and the expected reshuffle as half-time in the game.

“The first half of the game is about over and it’s now nearing
half-time. Time to make some changes,” said Annuar.

His analogy has caught on particularly given that the European
football season or what some call the “gila-gila bola” season is now
in full swing.

“This is the time the team manager will substitute players ? people
who are not playing well, lost their stamina or who are injured. Or he
may reposition the players,” Annuar added.

So will the team manager be making major changes at half-time?

Said Annuar rather enigmatically: “Big, small or medium, it’s all very
subjective. How the manager reads the game can be quite different from
the expectations of the spectators.”

For that matter, the team manager himself has been difficult to read.

Abdullah has kept the reshuffle plans close to his chest.

It has been a mother of all headaches, trying to second-guess the
Prime Minister, so much so that some in Umno Youth have begun
referring to the reshuffle as “Rahsia besar Pak Lah” (Pak Lah’s big
secret).

Predictions that the Prime Minister would announce the reshuffle late
last year had resulted in egg on the face of those doing the
predicting. It has been very embarrassing, especially for the
journalists involved.

But as political insider Annuar said, now is about half-time and many
are convinced that the reshuffle will take place very soon.

“It's around the corner,” said a top aide to a minister.

Said another ministerial aide: “The general view is that it’s
overdue.”

This time around, those in the political loop are convinced that it is
going to take place very soon.

Abdullah hinted as much when inspecting the floods situation in
Terengganu several weeks ago.

He confirmed there would be a reshuffle and that if it did not happen
in December then it would take place in January.

Like many of his Cabinet members, the No 1 took a family holiday
abroad towards the year end.

Many of his party members assumed he would spend his holiday thinking
about the reshuffle but the family man in him probably turned his
attention entirely to his family during the break.

Other ministers on their own vacations probably spent more time
thinking about the reshuffle than him, particularly about whether they
would be affected.

Abdullah returned from abroad on Jan 1 and is still on leave.

He is said to be using the time away from the office to seriously
dwell on the Cabinet changes needed to take the Barisan Nasional into
the next general election.

But the 64-million-dollar-question still remains: Is the Prime
Minister looking at a major or minor reshuffle?

One would have thought that after so many months speculating on the
reshuffle and trying to read into Abdullah’s words and statements,
people would be more enlightened.

“Better not ask me, I’m also confused. The PM is tougher to read than
Dr Mahathir,” said a senior Cabinet member.

Names of who may rise or fall or who is moving where have been talked
and written about but a great deal of it is still largely speculation
and conjecture.

And it explains why opinions about the nature of the changes vary so
dramatically.

One school of thought is convinced that the reshuffle will be big with
some pretty senior names being dropped.

Despite the fact that Abdullah replaced a total of five full ministers
when he formed his Cabinet after the general election, this group is
of the view that there are still too many top figures who have
overstayed.

For instance, this group thinks that International Trade and Industry
Minister Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz should pay the price for the AP
issue.

“I think most people, especially those in Umno, are expecting a major
Cabinet reshuffle. They gave him a strong mandate, so why not use it,”
said a think-tank figure.

The other school of thought insists it would be so minor that it would
not even constitute a reshuffle, that it would just be about filling
in vacancies and moving people around at levels below that of the
minister.

One obvious ministry to fill is the Federal Territories post and the
money seems to be on the current deputy moving up.

The senior faces, this group insist, will likely stay put and that
includes Rafidah because the Wanita Umno chief, warts and all, is
still unparalleled as trade minister.

This group argues that there are only about a dozen or so Cabinet
members who can be considered senior members and there is no pressing
need to replace them.

The Prime Minister really has people flummoxed about his plans.

According to another Cabinet member, the criteria that Abdullah
applies will be based on performance and function rather than pure
political considerations.

“I see him addressing the problem of over-lapping functions and
powers. He's very concerned about the efficiency of his ministries.

“I don't see him dropping any senior faces either.

“They form the senior tier and any PM needs that sort of experience
alongside newer faces in the second and third echelon,” said the
minister.

A source close to the Prime Minister's office added: “It's not about
how long they have been around but how they have performed. The PM has
been keeping tabs on their work and performance.”

Abdullah has, from the start of his administration, stressed that
party posts should not be associated with government posts and he
stuck to his conviction by retaining the three Umno ministers who lost
in the Umno supreme council contest in 2004.

He knew he was going against the tide, for the Umno ground wanted
Datuk Azmi Khalid (Home Affairs), Datuk Shafie Salleh (Higher
Education) and Datuk Paduka Kadir Sheikh Fadzir (Information) to be
replaced.

But he wanted to send a strong message against the way some Umno
politicians used whatever means to secure a party post.

Abdullah will have to grapple with this dilemma now.

Can he afford to ignore the ground feeling and retain all three or
will he try to strike a balance?

Said a top Putrajaya official: “Essentially, this Cabinet reshuffle is
about getting the right fit. It’s important that ministers really
perform in their roles otherwise it compromises efficiency and the
delivery system.

“The PM will want to put the right people in the right ministry
because that is what’s going to drive the administration in the right
direction.”

When Abdullah came to power in 2003, he had captured the national
imagination when he urged people to “work with me.”

He not only needs a Cabinet that can work with him but one which can
take his ideas and the policies of his administration to the next
level.

And that is necessary if, as political insider Annuar said, “the Prime
Minister wants to win the game when the whistle blows.”

The brilliant man of all seasons, especially if he is cabinet minister, is usually a nobody

[MGG] The brilliant man of all seasons, especially if he is cabinet minister, is usually a nobody
8 Jan 2006

THE PRIME MNISTER IS an Islamic scholar because he has a degree in
Islamic studies. But while he is a deeply religious man, as many are,
even he would admit he is no scholar. But he has been built into one
when he became prime minister. Tun Mahathir is a doctor, a great one
at that, although he stopped practicing more than 30 years ago. The
health minister, Doctor Chua Soi Lek graduated as a doctor, but gave
it up for politics about the same time. But both are described as
medical doctors. News reports, then of Tun Mahathir and Dato' Chua
now, speak of their expertise in medicine, but neither would admit to
all that. Dato' Ling Liong Sik, a medical graduate from Singapore,
gave up his medical practice about a quarter of a centry ago, but he
was treated in office as if he knew more than the specialists at the
University Hospital. Dato' Seri S. Samy Vellu, before he entered
Parliament, was known for his brawn than brain; but today in office
it is reversed.

They have beaten the odds and became what they are. They are tall
without these attributes. But in office, they are presumed to know
about everything. It is often a mockey when the Malaysian mass media
treat them as philosphers one day, teachers the next, and moralists
the day after that. It is thought, usually by officials, that people
will not believe the leader unless he is what he is not. They are
decent people, with foibles and setbacks like everyone else, but are
regarded as next to the Almighty when they reach the heights of
political office. This gives them the "right" to order their people
around and stand on their presumed dignity. But once out of office,
they are discarded by the very officials, and ignored by the people.
They are no more the cardboard figures they were in politics, even if
many of them put on airs for the rest of their lives.

This is why they cling to office. They are zeros once they leave it.
I once had lunch with a former cabinet minister, when a senior civil
servant from his former office, came across the floor to greet me. He
ignored the minister, although he had daily meetings with him only
weeks earlier when he was cabinet minister. As he left my table, I
had to call him back and introduce my host. He had already dismissed
from his mind his former minister. The man was history, and
Malaysians prefer to forget their history. Very sheepishly, he
greeted him. But it is life in Malaysia. He left the cabinet just
before Hari Raya. The previous year he had a full house in Gombak
where he stayed, of fellow cabinet ministers, ambassadors, and the
movers and shakers of the capital. But as an ex-minister, the food
went to waste. Only two people from that rarified list turned up.

Putting to pasture those who spent their life in politics, often
believing they had the attributes they are given. From one day to the
next, they experience the height of their fame and their nadir. This
is probably why there cling on to their official positions. There
are ministers in the cabinet who have been there for nearly thirty
years. But they do not have a life after they leave it. My cabinet
minister friend died a lonely death, the papers reporting it after
his burial. Another minister is on dialysis, forgotten in UMNO and
the cabinet. Those around him now do not know the power he then had.
He is a shadow of his old self, and is often lost in a crowd. There
are ministers in the cabinet who would be lost if they are dropped.
They do not have a life of their own, and being dropped is the
biggest tragedy in their lives.

Rare exceptions are Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim, the former deputy prime
minister who has emerged as an opposition leader after his stint in
prison, apparently on trumped up charges; Dato' Shahrir who was
sacked from the cabinet twenty years ago, but remains a credible
political figure and has built a life outside it; the late Tun
Mustapha, who became successively Yang Di Pertua and chief minister
of Sabah, and rejected Kuala Lumpur's offer of defence minister in
1974. But he had a vision, and that kept him a key figure in
Malaysian politics. There are few politicians in the National Front
who could emulate them in politics. Many wither away once out of
politics. If anything, the fight to stay in politics, especially in
the cabinet, have become stronger with the passing years. The late
Tun Sardon Jubir, said his decision to leave the cabinet was made by
an extraneous confrontation: he was told bluntly by the younger
Malays in his constituency that he should leave the cabinet and allow
them to make money, that if he had not, it was tough luck!

Pak Lah, whom I first knew as a civil servant, was not expected then
to be secretary-general of a ministry. He would have teh tariks in
Bangsar even when he was foreign minister. But that does not mean he
is a pushover. He was secretary of the National Operations Council
when the country was under civilian, or rather UMNO, "martial" law.
He was not known then for the attributes he is now said to have. But
no one in political office can be other than super human, unless he
is not from the National Front. A minister can go to Bejing and
apologize for a Malay girl, so we are told, doing nude squats, but it
is two reporters from the Chinese press who reported, like the
others, that the girl was a Chinese national. The home minister,
Dato' Azmi Khalid, is excused however although his actions allowed
China to dictate terms to Malaysia. He has denied that in Malaysia,
but he told the press there he did just that The Malaysian media
ignores what the minister said or does outside the country on a
contentious issue, and concentrates on statements in the country that
make him look good.

The spin has started to justify the resignation of the two Chinese
reporters. But It was to tell the papers owned by other than UMNO in
the National Front that they report with peril what UMNO does not
want reported, usually long after the fact. It was done so clumsily
that the deputy prime minister had to say the resignations were not
racial. But it was. The Star was taught a lesson when it was shot
down in the 1980s. When it returned after the suspension, it lost a
lot of money and its former verve in reporting. To make an
increasingly skeptical Malaysians it, a MCA deputy minister is called
in what the deputy prime minister did. The two reporters had resigned
as an offering for the paper to exist. It was this China Press that
had first reported the woman in the nude squat was a Chinese
national. The emphasis now is on the race of the woman, not the
police resorting to nude squats of women they arrest.

M.G.G.Pillai
pillai@streamyx.com

Anwar back on the Malaysian political stage

Malaysia Today
07 January 2006


Anwar back on the Malaysian political stage

SPECIAL REPORTS ARCHIVES

By John Roberts
wsws.org


Anwar Ibrahim, previously the deputy prime minister of Malaysia and
deputy president of the governing United Malays National Organisation
(UMNO), signalled his return to politics by participating in the
campaign for a by-election in the state assembly seat of Pengkalan
Pasir, held in the northern state of Kelantan on December 6.

Anwar’s foray into the campaign, on behalf of a Parti Islam se-
Malaysia (PAS) candidate who was narrowly defeated by UMNO, was his
first public political activity since his release from jail in
September 2004. He was imprisoned in 1999 after a crude frame-up
organised by his former mentor, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad.

Mahathir and Anwar fell out in 1998 over how to respond to the Asian
economic crisis of 1997. While Mahathir sought to protect business
cronies connected to UMNO, Anwar advocated the IMF’s open market
policies. In a bitter political struggle, Mahathir imposed capital
and currency controls then sacked Anwar and expelled him and his
supporters from UMNO. When he began to campaign against the
government, Anwar was arrested, beaten and charged with sodomy and
abuse of power.

The Malaysian Federal Court belatedly overturned the sodomy charge in
September 2004 and ordered Anwar’s release from prison, but refused
to lift the corruption conviction. As a result, Anwar is ineligible
to stand for office until 2008. The court decision came after the
replacement of Mahathir as prime minister by Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in
2003.

Last August, in a further indication of Anwar’s political
rehabilitation, a court ruled that a booklet, entitled “50 Reasons
Why Anwar Cannot Be PM,” was libelous and written solely to destroy
Anwar’s career. There is a certain irony to the court decision as the
booklet, authored in early 1998 by UMNO member Jafri Khalid, was the
main source of the allegations and charges against Anwar later that
year. The libel case was settled for $US1.2 million in damages to Anwar.

In an interview in the same month with AFP, Anwar strongly hinted
that he intended to play a more visible political role by criticising
UMNO’s economic policies. He particularly condemned the government
for presiding over the large losses and scandals at major companies
such as Malaysian Airlines, auto manufacturer Proton and Bank Islam.

Anwar’s return to active political life was confirmed by his
involvement in the Kelantan by-election. He participated as an
advisor for the National Justice Party (Keadilan), which was
nominally formed by his wife, Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, while he was in
prison. Keadilan maintains a loose anti-government coalition with the
Islamic fundamentalist PAS.

Keadilan’s basic program consists of what Anwar advocated in 1998—the
greater opening up of the Malaysian economy to foreign investment and
competition. That was also the main theme of his speech to a rally of
10,000 on November 27. Anwar declared that he was “getting back the
motion” for politics. “There’s talk about strong efforts by UMNO to
prevent me,” he told the crowd. “Some cited the law, saying it would
be contempt of court. But if I’m free, I have a voice.”

Anwar accused Badawi of failing to honour his 2004 election promise
to root out corruption from Malay business. “The fact remains that
corruption is more endemic now, is more rampant.” Badawi, he
declared, “has to review the entire policy. If you continue to keep
corrupt ministers, corrupt UMNO leaders, and you go and shout about
anti-corruption, very soon we are going to be a laughing stock.”

The fact that Anwar was able to make such a speech, without legal
repercussions, is a sign that the debate over economic policy that
was behind the events of 1998 has never really been settled. There
are concerns in ruling circles that Mahathir’s currency and capital
controls, while helping to stabilise the economy, left Malaysia
lagging behind its competitors. Capital restrictions were eased under
Mahathir.

Last July, Badawi formally ended the 1998 currency controls that
pegged the Malay ringgit at 3.80 to the US dollar. The result was a
sharp increase in the flow of capital into the country. Interest
rates have also been permitted to rise for the first time in seven
years and tax incentives are being offered to investors, particularly
in the IT industry.

Sections of the business elite and foreign investors are demanding
the government go further to cut back various tariffs and regulations
that protect local companies and to crack down on official
corruption. There have also been calls for major cuts in fuel
subsidies in order to slash government spending. There is no doubt
that some sections of the ruling class, including in UMNO, see Anwar
as the political vehicle for carrying out such policies.

Significantly Anwar told journalists at a Keadilan conference on
December 22: “I have many friends in UMNO, especially at the
divisional level. They meet me to talk and discuss issues. I have
never at any time refused to meet them. In discussions with me, they
have always asked me if I could rejoin UMNO and my answer has always
been no.” While declaring the organisation had become too “corrupt”
to join, Anwar did not rule out the possibility of reentering the
ruling party if it “underwent a change”.

The return of Anwar to a leading position in UMNO is not beyond the
bounds of possibility. Under Malaysia’s autocratic form of rule,
political brawls in the ruling elite have taken similar, rather
bizarre forms before. Leading UMNO figures have been vilified,
expelled and jailed on trumped-up charges, only to be rehabilitated
and brought back onto the political stage when the need arose.