It is appalling to read Utusan Malaysia run a frontpage article titled “Bangkitlah Melayu”, urging the Malays to rise against the other races who are allegedly demanding way too much. But maybe the answer lies in the fact that the paper is linked to the ruling UMNO.
Although at first glance the verbal diarrhea by Datuk Ibrahim Ali, the Member of Parliament of Pasir Mas seems to pour cold water on Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s 1Malaysia concept, the lines blur upon careful scrutiny.
If Najib is serious about getting rid of racist language that strife to divide the Malaysian society even further, then he should formally put an end to the affirmative action policies which have only lined the wallets of the ruling elite.
But, on a different note, mere rhetoric by Ibrahim, Utusan Malaysia and other UMNO members would not help achieve Najib’s call to Malaysians to break away from their “ethnic prison”.
Picking up on Najib’s statement after chairing his first cabinet meeting, I urge the premier to act sternly on Utusan Malaysia, which practices obsequious journalism to pander to the whims and fancies of its UMNO bosses.
The country is facing enough economic problems without a whole new franchise cashing in with their bully–boy tactics. Najib’s top job and concern should be about the economy, which is handicapped by rising unemployment and declining demand.
The effect of massive job loss may increase the national unemployment rate, which currently sits at 3.5 percent, to 4.5 percent. The country’s manufacturing sector recorded a 26.1 per cent decline in sales in February. The Malaysian Institute of Economic Research, a government-linked think tank, has said that the country’s export-driven economy would shrink 2.2 percent this year, more than the government and central bank are forecasting.
Bursa Malaysia Bhd early this week reported a net profit decline of 63 per cent from RM 42.1 million a year ago to net profit of RM 15.5 million in March of this year largely due to the decline in equities trading revenue
Malaysia’s GDP grew just 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter from a year ago, as exports continue to drop due to sagging global demand.
Utusan, Ibrahim Ali and Najib should be aware that pushing the racial line when the country’s economy is sliding fast would not help the people. These groups should strive instead to promote an enabling environment for every Malaysian, especially the poor.
Specifically, Najib’s slogan should not be persuasive language used to hoodwink the people even further. He is after all not competing to win the best slogan title against former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad who chanted Bersih, Cekap, Amanah and his one-time blue-eyed boy Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s “Work With Me, Not For Me.
In short, we do not need mere political slogans, racist rhetoric and bigotry. The country needs to focus on the economy.
Charles Santiago
Member of Parliament, Klang
016-6267797
Saturday, April 18, 2009
மதமாற்ற விவகாரம்: இந்து சங்கம் அமைச்சரவை உதவியை நாடுகிறது
தாயாரின் அனுமதியின்றி வலுக்கட்டாயமாக மூன்று இளங்குழந்தைகள் ஈப்போவில் மதமாற்றம் செய்யப்பட்ட விவகாரத்தில் இந்து சங்கத் தலைவர் எ. வைத்திலிங்கம் புதிய அமைச்சரவையின் உதவியை நாடியுள்ளார்.
“இப்பிரச்னை துணைப் பிரதமர் முகைதின், பிரதமர்துறை அமைச்சர் கோ சூ கூன் மற்றும் மனிதவள அமைச்சர் எஸ். சுப்ரமணியம் ஆகியோரின் கவனத்திற்கு கொண்டுவரப்பட்டபின், இது ஒரு கடுமையான பிரச்னையாகக் கருதப்படுகிறது”, என்று அவர் ஓர் அறிக்கையில் கூறியுள்ளார்.
இப்பிரச்னையைக் கையாள்வதற்கு கோ, சுப்ரமணியம் மற்றும் இஸ்லாமிய விவகாரங்களுக்கு பொறுப்பேற்றுள்ள பிரதமர்துறை அமைச்சர் ஜமில் கீர் பகாரும் ஆகியோர் அடங்கிய குழு ஒன்றை துணைப் பிரதமர் முகைதின் அமைத்துள்ளார் என்றாவர்.
“இதற்கிடையில், சம்பந்தப்பட்ட அனைவரும் அமைதி காத்து இப்பிரச்னைக்கு நியாயமான தீர்வு காண உதவுமாறு இந்து சங்கம் வேண்டுகோள் விடுக்கிறது. நீதிக்காகப் பிராத்னை செய்வோம்”, என்று வைத்திலிங்கம் கூறினார்.
வயது ஒன்றிலிருந்து பன்னிரண்டு வயதுடைய மூன்று குழந்தைகளை அவர்களுடைய தகப்பனார் முகமட் ரிட்ஜுவான் அப்துல்லா ஏப்ரல் 12 ஆம் தேதி அக்குழந்தைகளின் பிறப்புப் பத்திரங்களை மட்டுமே முன்வைத்து மதமாற்றம் செய்தார். குழந்தைகளைத் தன்னுடைய பாதுகாப்பில் வைத்துக்கொள்வதற்கான உத்தரவைப் பெறுவதற்கு ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்துள்ளார்.
அக்குழந்தைகளின் தாயார், எம். இந்திரா காந்தி, 35, அவருடைய குழந்தைகள் இந்து மதத்தைப் பின்பற்ற அனுமதிக்குமாறு கோரியுள்ளார்.
தற்போது, அத்தம்பதிகளின் இளையமகள் பிரசன்னா திக்சா, முகமட் ரிட்ஜ்வானுடன் இருக்கிறார். இதர இரண்டு குழந்தைகளும் - தேவி தர்க்ஷிணி, 12, மற்றும் காரன் தினேஷ் - தாயார் இந்திராவுடன் இருக்கின்றனர்.
இஸ்லாமிய இலாகா அதிகாரிகள் அவ்விரு குழந்தைகளையும் எடுத்துக்கொண்டுபோய் விடுவார்கள் என்ற அச்சத்தில் அந்த பாலர்பள்ளி ஆசிரியர் தன்னுடைய உறவினரிடம் தஞ்சம் அடைந்துள்ளார்.
அமைச்சரவைக்குழு என்ன செய்ய முடியும்?
அடுத்த வாரம் குழந்தைகளை தாயாரின் பொறுப்பில் விடுவதற்கான மனு தாக்கல் செய்யப்படும். பின்னர் மதமாற்றம் சம்பந்தமான விசயங்கள் கவனிக்கப்படும் என்று இந்திராவின் வழக்குரைஞர் எ. சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.
“இம்மாதிரியான விவகாரங்களில் நீதி கிடைப்பதில்லை.”
“நான் பலரைப் பார்த்திருக்கிறேன். அவர்களுடைய வேதனைகளைப் பார்த்திருக்கிறேன், குறிப்பாக முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களின் வேதனையை”, என்று அவர் மலேசியாகினியிடம் கூறினார்.
அமைச்சரவைக்குழுமீது தமக்கு நம்பிக்கை இல்லை என்று சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.
” புதிய குழு என்ன செய்யப்போகிறது? மூவர் அடங்கிய குழு அமைக்கப்பட்டதன் மூலம் அக்குழு பிரச்னையை எப்படி தீர்க்கப்போகிறது”, என்று அவர் வினவினார்.
மதமாற்றம் செய்ய விரும்புகிறவர் இஸ்லாமிய இலாகாவில் தனது மதமாற்றத்தைப் பதிவு செய்துகொள்வதற்குமுன் அவர் சிவில் சட்டப்படி செய்து கொண்ட திருமணம் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட அனைத்து விவகாரங்களையும் முறையாக செய்து முடித்துவிட்டது கட்டாயமாக்கப்படுவதின் வழி மாற்றங்கள் கொண்டுவரப்பட வேண்டும் என்று சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.
“இரு தரப்பினரும் மதம் மாறினால், பிரச்னை இல்லை. ஆனால், ஒருவர் மதம் மாறி இன்னொருவர் மாற விரும்பவில்லை என்றால், அவர்களுடைய குழந்தைகள் 18 வயதை அடைந்து அவர்கள் தாங்களாகவே ஒரு முடிவு எடுப்பதற்கு அனுமதிக்க வேண்டும்”, என்று அவர் மேலும் கூறினார்.
சர்ச்சைக்குரிய பிரச்னை
சிவில் சட்டப்படி திருமணம் செய்துகொண்ட முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களின் மதமாற்றம் - ஒருவர் மதம் மாற விரும்புவதும் இன்னொருவர் மறுப்பதும் - எப்போதும் பெரும் சர்ச்சையை கிளரிவிடுகிறது. ஏனென்றால் இது சம்பந்தப்பட்ட சட்ட நிவாரணங்கள் தெளிவற்றவைகளாக இருப்பதுடன் முஸ்லிம் தரப்பிற்கு மட்டுமே சாதகமாக இருக்கிறது.
2006 ஆம் ஆண்டில் தங்களுடைய குழந்தைகள் யாருடைய பொறுப்பில் இருக்க வேண்டும் என்பது குறித்து இந்து மனைவி ஆர். சுபாஷினிக்கும் முஸ்லிமாக மாறி முகம்மட் சாபி என்ற பெயர் கொண்ட டி. சரவணனுக்கும் இடையிலான சட்டப் போராட்டம் பிரசித்தி பெற்றதாக இருந்தது.
முகம்மட் சாபி தன்னுடைய மனைவியை விவாகரத்து செய்வதற்கும், குழந்தைகளை தன் பொறுப்பில் வைத்துக்கொள்வதற்கும் ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தின் தீர்ப்பை நாடினார்.
இதன் பின்னர், தன்னுடைய பிரிந்துவிட்ட கணவர் ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தில் தொடர்ந்துள்ள நடவடிக்கைகளுக்குத் தடை விதிக்கக்கோரி சுபாஷினி செய்து கொண்ட மனு உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் வரையில் ஒவ்வொரு கட்டத்திலும் நிராகரிக்கப்பட்டது.
2007 ஆம் ஆண்டில், நாட்டின் உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் அரசமைப்புச் சட்ட விதி 12(4) இன் கீழ் ஒரு குழந்தையின் மதமாற்றத்திற்கு பெற்றோர்களில் ஒருவரின் ஒப்புதல் போதுமானது என்று தீர்ப்பளித்தது.
ஆனால், இந்த வழக்கில் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட இரு குழந்தைகள் யாருடைய பொறுப்பில் இருப்பது என்பது பற்றி தெளிவான தீர்ப்பு அளிக்கவில்லை. அது குறித்து கணவனும் மனைவியும் அவரவர் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட சட்ட அடிப்படையில் நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கலாம் என்று தீர்ப்பளித்தது.
இப்பிரச்னை பலதடவைகளில் எழுப்பப்பட்டபோதிலும் அரசாங்கம் இது குறித்து மௌனமாக இருந்து வந்திருக்கிறத
“இப்பிரச்னை துணைப் பிரதமர் முகைதின், பிரதமர்துறை அமைச்சர் கோ சூ கூன் மற்றும் மனிதவள அமைச்சர் எஸ். சுப்ரமணியம் ஆகியோரின் கவனத்திற்கு கொண்டுவரப்பட்டபின், இது ஒரு கடுமையான பிரச்னையாகக் கருதப்படுகிறது”, என்று அவர் ஓர் அறிக்கையில் கூறியுள்ளார்.
இப்பிரச்னையைக் கையாள்வதற்கு கோ, சுப்ரமணியம் மற்றும் இஸ்லாமிய விவகாரங்களுக்கு பொறுப்பேற்றுள்ள பிரதமர்துறை அமைச்சர் ஜமில் கீர் பகாரும் ஆகியோர் அடங்கிய குழு ஒன்றை துணைப் பிரதமர் முகைதின் அமைத்துள்ளார் என்றாவர்.
“இதற்கிடையில், சம்பந்தப்பட்ட அனைவரும் அமைதி காத்து இப்பிரச்னைக்கு நியாயமான தீர்வு காண உதவுமாறு இந்து சங்கம் வேண்டுகோள் விடுக்கிறது. நீதிக்காகப் பிராத்னை செய்வோம்”, என்று வைத்திலிங்கம் கூறினார்.
வயது ஒன்றிலிருந்து பன்னிரண்டு வயதுடைய மூன்று குழந்தைகளை அவர்களுடைய தகப்பனார் முகமட் ரிட்ஜுவான் அப்துல்லா ஏப்ரல் 12 ஆம் தேதி அக்குழந்தைகளின் பிறப்புப் பத்திரங்களை மட்டுமே முன்வைத்து மதமாற்றம் செய்தார். குழந்தைகளைத் தன்னுடைய பாதுகாப்பில் வைத்துக்கொள்வதற்கான உத்தரவைப் பெறுவதற்கு ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்துள்ளார்.
அக்குழந்தைகளின் தாயார், எம். இந்திரா காந்தி, 35, அவருடைய குழந்தைகள் இந்து மதத்தைப் பின்பற்ற அனுமதிக்குமாறு கோரியுள்ளார்.
தற்போது, அத்தம்பதிகளின் இளையமகள் பிரசன்னா திக்சா, முகமட் ரிட்ஜ்வானுடன் இருக்கிறார். இதர இரண்டு குழந்தைகளும் - தேவி தர்க்ஷிணி, 12, மற்றும் காரன் தினேஷ் - தாயார் இந்திராவுடன் இருக்கின்றனர்.
இஸ்லாமிய இலாகா அதிகாரிகள் அவ்விரு குழந்தைகளையும் எடுத்துக்கொண்டுபோய் விடுவார்கள் என்ற அச்சத்தில் அந்த பாலர்பள்ளி ஆசிரியர் தன்னுடைய உறவினரிடம் தஞ்சம் அடைந்துள்ளார்.
அமைச்சரவைக்குழு என்ன செய்ய முடியும்?
அடுத்த வாரம் குழந்தைகளை தாயாரின் பொறுப்பில் விடுவதற்கான மனு தாக்கல் செய்யப்படும். பின்னர் மதமாற்றம் சம்பந்தமான விசயங்கள் கவனிக்கப்படும் என்று இந்திராவின் வழக்குரைஞர் எ. சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.
“இம்மாதிரியான விவகாரங்களில் நீதி கிடைப்பதில்லை.”
“நான் பலரைப் பார்த்திருக்கிறேன். அவர்களுடைய வேதனைகளைப் பார்த்திருக்கிறேன், குறிப்பாக முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களின் வேதனையை”, என்று அவர் மலேசியாகினியிடம் கூறினார்.
அமைச்சரவைக்குழுமீது தமக்கு நம்பிக்கை இல்லை என்று சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.
” புதிய குழு என்ன செய்யப்போகிறது? மூவர் அடங்கிய குழு அமைக்கப்பட்டதன் மூலம் அக்குழு பிரச்னையை எப்படி தீர்க்கப்போகிறது”, என்று அவர் வினவினார்.
மதமாற்றம் செய்ய விரும்புகிறவர் இஸ்லாமிய இலாகாவில் தனது மதமாற்றத்தைப் பதிவு செய்துகொள்வதற்குமுன் அவர் சிவில் சட்டப்படி செய்து கொண்ட திருமணம் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட அனைத்து விவகாரங்களையும் முறையாக செய்து முடித்துவிட்டது கட்டாயமாக்கப்படுவதின் வழி மாற்றங்கள் கொண்டுவரப்பட வேண்டும் என்று சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.
“இரு தரப்பினரும் மதம் மாறினால், பிரச்னை இல்லை. ஆனால், ஒருவர் மதம் மாறி இன்னொருவர் மாற விரும்பவில்லை என்றால், அவர்களுடைய குழந்தைகள் 18 வயதை அடைந்து அவர்கள் தாங்களாகவே ஒரு முடிவு எடுப்பதற்கு அனுமதிக்க வேண்டும்”, என்று அவர் மேலும் கூறினார்.
சர்ச்சைக்குரிய பிரச்னை
சிவில் சட்டப்படி திருமணம் செய்துகொண்ட முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களின் மதமாற்றம் - ஒருவர் மதம் மாற விரும்புவதும் இன்னொருவர் மறுப்பதும் - எப்போதும் பெரும் சர்ச்சையை கிளரிவிடுகிறது. ஏனென்றால் இது சம்பந்தப்பட்ட சட்ட நிவாரணங்கள் தெளிவற்றவைகளாக இருப்பதுடன் முஸ்லிம் தரப்பிற்கு மட்டுமே சாதகமாக இருக்கிறது.
2006 ஆம் ஆண்டில் தங்களுடைய குழந்தைகள் யாருடைய பொறுப்பில் இருக்க வேண்டும் என்பது குறித்து இந்து மனைவி ஆர். சுபாஷினிக்கும் முஸ்லிமாக மாறி முகம்மட் சாபி என்ற பெயர் கொண்ட டி. சரவணனுக்கும் இடையிலான சட்டப் போராட்டம் பிரசித்தி பெற்றதாக இருந்தது.
முகம்மட் சாபி தன்னுடைய மனைவியை விவாகரத்து செய்வதற்கும், குழந்தைகளை தன் பொறுப்பில் வைத்துக்கொள்வதற்கும் ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தின் தீர்ப்பை நாடினார்.
இதன் பின்னர், தன்னுடைய பிரிந்துவிட்ட கணவர் ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தில் தொடர்ந்துள்ள நடவடிக்கைகளுக்குத் தடை விதிக்கக்கோரி சுபாஷினி செய்து கொண்ட மனு உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் வரையில் ஒவ்வொரு கட்டத்திலும் நிராகரிக்கப்பட்டது.
2007 ஆம் ஆண்டில், நாட்டின் உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் அரசமைப்புச் சட்ட விதி 12(4) இன் கீழ் ஒரு குழந்தையின் மதமாற்றத்திற்கு பெற்றோர்களில் ஒருவரின் ஒப்புதல் போதுமானது என்று தீர்ப்பளித்தது.
ஆனால், இந்த வழக்கில் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட இரு குழந்தைகள் யாருடைய பொறுப்பில் இருப்பது என்பது பற்றி தெளிவான தீர்ப்பு அளிக்கவில்லை. அது குறித்து கணவனும் மனைவியும் அவரவர் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட சட்ட அடிப்படையில் நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கலாம் என்று தீர்ப்பளித்தது.
இப்பிரச்னை பலதடவைகளில் எழுப்பப்பட்டபோதிலும் அரசாங்கம் இது குறித்து மௌனமாக இருந்து வந்திருக்கிறத
மை அல்மா மேட்டர்
High School Klang
SMK Tinggi Klang
Motto : Probitas Et Fides (Loyalty and Integrity)
Established : 1928
School Type : Government Secondary school
Session : Double
Enrollment : 1843
Grades : Form 1 - Form 6
Location : Jalan Meru, Selangor, Malaysia
District : Klang
Colours : Green, Yellow, White
High School Klang, also known as Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tinggi Klang or SMK Tinggi Klang for short, is a government secondary school located in Jalan Meru about one km away from the Klang town centre in Selangor, Malaysia. It is a male-only school from Form 1 to Form 5. At the Sixth Form level, where students take their STPM, the classes are mixed.
History
High School Klang was originally named Temporary English School and was open to students in the town of Klang on January 14, 1928 with the beginning of the academic school year.
The main school block was opened by the Sultan of Selangor on March 20, 1930. Since then the school has expanded to accommodate its ever increasing student population.
In 1941, the Klang High School was used as the headquarters of the Medical Auxiliary Service for Klang. There were two doctors assisted by 52 nurses. The school reopened after the WWII having been used as a military hospital by the British Military Authority.
After Malaysia's independence, it was known as Sekolah Tinggi Klang or by its acronym S.T.K. By the end of 1990s, the name was changed in accordance with Ministry of Education regulations to its current name.
School buildings
The school has nine blocks. The blocks are named below, with the date each came into use:
• 1928 – Hostel block. Later used as the laboratories (Block B)
• 1930 – Main block (Block A)
• 1948 – Block H and I
• 1961 – Afternoon session laboratories (Block F)
• 1969 – School Library
• 1972 – Biology, physics and chemistry laboratories (Block D)
• 1980 – Physics and chemistry laboratories with the staff room (Block C)
• 1982 – Block E
• 1991 – New block for sixth form classes
School Song
Probitas Et Fides
O God almighty, we give thee thanks
For our school, the High School Klang
And for the teachers who daily guide us
With answers to questions asked
Onward the spirit of close fellowship
And towards others in friendship and love
May we never be found wanting
The great courage of living and striving
Dear High School Klang
Our High School Klang
Thee our dear Alma Mater
Forward to serve we go now
May we love thee forever more
SMK Tinggi Klang
Motto : Probitas Et Fides (Loyalty and Integrity)
Established : 1928
School Type : Government Secondary school
Session : Double
Enrollment : 1843
Grades : Form 1 - Form 6
Location : Jalan Meru, Selangor, Malaysia
District : Klang
Colours : Green, Yellow, White
High School Klang, also known as Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tinggi Klang or SMK Tinggi Klang for short, is a government secondary school located in Jalan Meru about one km away from the Klang town centre in Selangor, Malaysia. It is a male-only school from Form 1 to Form 5. At the Sixth Form level, where students take their STPM, the classes are mixed.
History
High School Klang was originally named Temporary English School and was open to students in the town of Klang on January 14, 1928 with the beginning of the academic school year.
The main school block was opened by the Sultan of Selangor on March 20, 1930. Since then the school has expanded to accommodate its ever increasing student population.
In 1941, the Klang High School was used as the headquarters of the Medical Auxiliary Service for Klang. There were two doctors assisted by 52 nurses. The school reopened after the WWII having been used as a military hospital by the British Military Authority.
After Malaysia's independence, it was known as Sekolah Tinggi Klang or by its acronym S.T.K. By the end of 1990s, the name was changed in accordance with Ministry of Education regulations to its current name.
School buildings
The school has nine blocks. The blocks are named below, with the date each came into use:
• 1928 – Hostel block. Later used as the laboratories (Block B)
• 1930 – Main block (Block A)
• 1948 – Block H and I
• 1961 – Afternoon session laboratories (Block F)
• 1969 – School Library
• 1972 – Biology, physics and chemistry laboratories (Block D)
• 1980 – Physics and chemistry laboratories with the staff room (Block C)
• 1982 – Block E
• 1991 – New block for sixth form classes
School Song
Probitas Et Fides
O God almighty, we give thee thanks
For our school, the High School Klang
And for the teachers who daily guide us
With answers to questions asked
Onward the spirit of close fellowship
And towards others in friendship and love
May we never be found wanting
The great courage of living and striving
Dear High School Klang
Our High School Klang
Thee our dear Alma Mater
Forward to serve we go now
May we love thee forever more
Long live the king(makers)!
I have always thought of Muhyiddin Yassin as a reasonable, restrained and urbane Umno leader; in fact, he used to be one of my favourite cabinet ministers.
When he ascended to the exalted position of deputy prime minister, I was a touch worried that he might just be the new face and the new voice that Umno and BN need to regain the support of the voters who had swung en masse to the opposition coalition in the last general election.
My worry turned out to be both unfounded and unwarranted. Within a week of assuming the second highest office in the land, the public statement of the new DPM has shown that he is just like the past Umno and BN leading lights - arrogant, insensitive and quite removed from reality.
When MIC boss S Samy Vellu made disgruntled noises about not getting enough ministerial appointment, Muhyiddin practically told him to shut up, and Samy Vellu dutifully complied.
This little bit of melodrama played out in front of a national audience must have entrenched the belief among many Indian voters that MIC is indeed a subservient serf to their Umno masters in the BN coalition, and therefore no longer worthy of support.
Soon after, while reflecting upon the results of the by-elections in the two Bukit, Muhyiddin opined aloud that the Chinese voters were ungrateful or “unappreciative”.
This is evidence that the new DPM is very much the prisoner of the kind of Umno racial narrative that used to be both popular and effective in those Mahathir years. Unfortunately for BN, this kind of vocabulary has outlived its shelf life.
The Chinese electorate throughout Malaysia have changed. The unexpected election results of March 8, 2008 have opened their eyes to new political possibilities in Malaysia. They have tasted the nectar of change, and their ravenous hunger for greater and more fundamental change has grown. Just note their increased support for PAS and PKR in the two Bukit.
This talk of Chinese being ungrateful must have touched a raw Chinese nerve throughout our fair land. Instead of apologising for his insensitive remark, Muhyiddin blamed it on the media, as BN ministers are wont to do. This must have riled up the media fraternity, even if they keep quiet, as mainstream journalists are wont to do.
The new MCA boss Ong Tee Kiat was silent on the DPM’s insensitive remarks against Chinese voters, displaying to a national audience once again that indeed MCA is subservient to Umno in all things Chinese, and they do not deserve support from the Chinese community in the next election.
Finally, Muhyiddin more or less warned the Chinese people on the peril of seeing themselves as king-makers.
The ramification of such a seemingly innocent statement had to be played out in the ultra-right Malay press: if the non-Malay people become king-makers, the Malays are in danger of losing their Ketuanan Melayu and their grip on political power will be loosened. The existence of the Malay race would be threatened on their own homeland.
The clarion call for the Malays to rise and unite is only to be expected.
Political narrative aimed to spook non-Malays
That is the sort of political narrative that could frighten the non-Malays into voting for the BN in the past. I doubt it will do the trick now in our new Malaysia. It will probably whip up the appetite of the Chinese and the Indians for change even more.
Given the Malay voting trends in the two Bukit, it is also unlikely that this scare tactic aimed at the Malay masses can generate the usual communal panic as it used to do.
Even when Anwar Ibrahim was still spending his enforced vacation in Sungai Buloh, I had predicted that the Chinese and the Indian voters could play the role of king-makers in national politics.
As soon as PKR and PAS could split the Malay votes in the urban and the rural constituencies, the minority Chinese and Indian voters in the mixed and even the Malay-majority seats could determine the outcome of a contest between Umno and PKR or PAS.
There is nothing wrong with the Chinese and the Indians playing the king-maker role. The only casualty will be the idea of Ketuanan Melayu and Umno. This new found significance of the two minority ethnic groups will not be a threat to the Malays, because they will need to vote alongside those Malays who believe in the new collective ideology of Ketuanan Rakyat.
Thanks to people like Ong Kian Ming and Wong Chin Huat, we now have very professional empirical analysis of past election results, constituency by constituency, and even polling stream by polling stream.
The latest addition to such collection of meticulous election researcher is Kenny Gan. His recent letter to Malaysiakini entitled 'Can East Malaysia again save BN in 2013' is particularly sobering for watchers of Malaysian politics.
The following is his speculation of what the next general election would look like:
“There are 51 non-Malay majority seats, 44 mixed seats and 70 Malay-majority seats in the Peninsula. A non-Malay majority seat is defined as having less than 50% Malay voters, a mixed seat from 50% to less than 66% and a Malay-majority seat equal to or greater than 66% Malay voters.
“Based on the current voter sentiment, BN will be expected to lose all 51 non-Malay majority seats. Based on 30% non-Malay support and not more than 60% Malay support, BN should theoretically lose all 44 mixed seats too.”
At the end of his analysis, Kenny Gan has this to conclude:
“So BN's tally in the Peninsula is nine mixed seats and 45 Malay-majority seats making a dismal total of 54. Can the East Malaysian states save BN this time?”
Again, the spotlight is turned onto the two powerful blocs of parliamentary seats in Sarawak and Sabah. With BN federal power in doubt, the Chinese and the non-Malay indigenous voters would now have a different set of political parameters to consider when casting their votes.
The Chinese-majority seats in those two eastern states are especially gullible to the Pakatan Rakyat assault. The tone of the campaign and the issues raised would be considerably different from past elections.
The Sarawakian and Sabahan Chinese voters may just decide to emulate the fine example set by their ethnic counterparts in the Peninsula, and vote en masse for the Pakatan Rakyat candidates. Those few Chinese seats may just be king-makers again in a hung Parliament in 2013.
Horse trading involving Sabah, Sarawak
Another possibility is that once the dust has settled in the 2013 general election, and the BN and Pakatan have more or less similar number of seats in Parliament, there would be intense horse trading involving Sarawak and Sabah MPs. The torrid history of politics in those two states has shown that political loyalty can be bought and sold to the highest bidder.
Bought or sold, such MPs would be toxic assets to the political coalition which they would choose to belong at the end of the bargaining session, so I am not so excited about this prospect. But it does illustrate that Malaysian politics cannot be business as usual as it was done before 2008. Many new variables have crept into the confused equation.
The same unknown variable has also crept into the 70 Malay seats in the Peninsula.
According to Kenny Gan, there are 70 Malay-majority seats in West Malaysia, of which 25 were won by PKR and PAS in 2008.
Gan has defined a Malay seat as one where there are 66% or more Malay voters. If the results in Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau are an indication, the Umno base support cannot exceed 57%.
Again, in a keen contest, the 34% or less king-maker in those Malay majority seats may just want to try switching their political allegiance from BN to Pakatan. The end game in national politics would then be anybody’s guess.
How the Chinese, Indian, and “other” ethnic voters will vote in the next general election depends on how our political drama plays out before the entire national audience.
They are watching with great interest, slowly realising perhaps that for the first time, the so-called minority ethnic groups suddenly have power to change the destiny of politicians and that of the country far out of proportion with their numerical strength.
The new ruling class within Umno and BN are obviously oblivious to this new development. They are stuck in the time-capsule of their old paradigm and talking in the antiquated language of race and violent threat.
That is why Muhyiddin talked and behaved as he did. He is just adding another nail to the closing coffin. We should encourage him to do more of the same.
Written in Malaysiakini by:SIM KWANG YANG was MP of Bandar Kuching in Sarawak between 1982 and 1995. He can be reached at kenyalang578@hotmail.com.
When he ascended to the exalted position of deputy prime minister, I was a touch worried that he might just be the new face and the new voice that Umno and BN need to regain the support of the voters who had swung en masse to the opposition coalition in the last general election.
My worry turned out to be both unfounded and unwarranted. Within a week of assuming the second highest office in the land, the public statement of the new DPM has shown that he is just like the past Umno and BN leading lights - arrogant, insensitive and quite removed from reality.
When MIC boss S Samy Vellu made disgruntled noises about not getting enough ministerial appointment, Muhyiddin practically told him to shut up, and Samy Vellu dutifully complied.
This little bit of melodrama played out in front of a national audience must have entrenched the belief among many Indian voters that MIC is indeed a subservient serf to their Umno masters in the BN coalition, and therefore no longer worthy of support.
Soon after, while reflecting upon the results of the by-elections in the two Bukit, Muhyiddin opined aloud that the Chinese voters were ungrateful or “unappreciative”.
This is evidence that the new DPM is very much the prisoner of the kind of Umno racial narrative that used to be both popular and effective in those Mahathir years. Unfortunately for BN, this kind of vocabulary has outlived its shelf life.
The Chinese electorate throughout Malaysia have changed. The unexpected election results of March 8, 2008 have opened their eyes to new political possibilities in Malaysia. They have tasted the nectar of change, and their ravenous hunger for greater and more fundamental change has grown. Just note their increased support for PAS and PKR in the two Bukit.
This talk of Chinese being ungrateful must have touched a raw Chinese nerve throughout our fair land. Instead of apologising for his insensitive remark, Muhyiddin blamed it on the media, as BN ministers are wont to do. This must have riled up the media fraternity, even if they keep quiet, as mainstream journalists are wont to do.
The new MCA boss Ong Tee Kiat was silent on the DPM’s insensitive remarks against Chinese voters, displaying to a national audience once again that indeed MCA is subservient to Umno in all things Chinese, and they do not deserve support from the Chinese community in the next election.
Finally, Muhyiddin more or less warned the Chinese people on the peril of seeing themselves as king-makers.
The ramification of such a seemingly innocent statement had to be played out in the ultra-right Malay press: if the non-Malay people become king-makers, the Malays are in danger of losing their Ketuanan Melayu and their grip on political power will be loosened. The existence of the Malay race would be threatened on their own homeland.
The clarion call for the Malays to rise and unite is only to be expected.
Political narrative aimed to spook non-Malays
That is the sort of political narrative that could frighten the non-Malays into voting for the BN in the past. I doubt it will do the trick now in our new Malaysia. It will probably whip up the appetite of the Chinese and the Indians for change even more.
Given the Malay voting trends in the two Bukit, it is also unlikely that this scare tactic aimed at the Malay masses can generate the usual communal panic as it used to do.
Even when Anwar Ibrahim was still spending his enforced vacation in Sungai Buloh, I had predicted that the Chinese and the Indian voters could play the role of king-makers in national politics.
As soon as PKR and PAS could split the Malay votes in the urban and the rural constituencies, the minority Chinese and Indian voters in the mixed and even the Malay-majority seats could determine the outcome of a contest between Umno and PKR or PAS.
There is nothing wrong with the Chinese and the Indians playing the king-maker role. The only casualty will be the idea of Ketuanan Melayu and Umno. This new found significance of the two minority ethnic groups will not be a threat to the Malays, because they will need to vote alongside those Malays who believe in the new collective ideology of Ketuanan Rakyat.
Thanks to people like Ong Kian Ming and Wong Chin Huat, we now have very professional empirical analysis of past election results, constituency by constituency, and even polling stream by polling stream.
The latest addition to such collection of meticulous election researcher is Kenny Gan. His recent letter to Malaysiakini entitled 'Can East Malaysia again save BN in 2013' is particularly sobering for watchers of Malaysian politics.
The following is his speculation of what the next general election would look like:
“There are 51 non-Malay majority seats, 44 mixed seats and 70 Malay-majority seats in the Peninsula. A non-Malay majority seat is defined as having less than 50% Malay voters, a mixed seat from 50% to less than 66% and a Malay-majority seat equal to or greater than 66% Malay voters.
“Based on the current voter sentiment, BN will be expected to lose all 51 non-Malay majority seats. Based on 30% non-Malay support and not more than 60% Malay support, BN should theoretically lose all 44 mixed seats too.”
At the end of his analysis, Kenny Gan has this to conclude:
“So BN's tally in the Peninsula is nine mixed seats and 45 Malay-majority seats making a dismal total of 54. Can the East Malaysian states save BN this time?”
Again, the spotlight is turned onto the two powerful blocs of parliamentary seats in Sarawak and Sabah. With BN federal power in doubt, the Chinese and the non-Malay indigenous voters would now have a different set of political parameters to consider when casting their votes.
The Chinese-majority seats in those two eastern states are especially gullible to the Pakatan Rakyat assault. The tone of the campaign and the issues raised would be considerably different from past elections.
The Sarawakian and Sabahan Chinese voters may just decide to emulate the fine example set by their ethnic counterparts in the Peninsula, and vote en masse for the Pakatan Rakyat candidates. Those few Chinese seats may just be king-makers again in a hung Parliament in 2013.
Horse trading involving Sabah, Sarawak
Another possibility is that once the dust has settled in the 2013 general election, and the BN and Pakatan have more or less similar number of seats in Parliament, there would be intense horse trading involving Sarawak and Sabah MPs. The torrid history of politics in those two states has shown that political loyalty can be bought and sold to the highest bidder.
Bought or sold, such MPs would be toxic assets to the political coalition which they would choose to belong at the end of the bargaining session, so I am not so excited about this prospect. But it does illustrate that Malaysian politics cannot be business as usual as it was done before 2008. Many new variables have crept into the confused equation.
The same unknown variable has also crept into the 70 Malay seats in the Peninsula.
According to Kenny Gan, there are 70 Malay-majority seats in West Malaysia, of which 25 were won by PKR and PAS in 2008.
Gan has defined a Malay seat as one where there are 66% or more Malay voters. If the results in Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau are an indication, the Umno base support cannot exceed 57%.
Again, in a keen contest, the 34% or less king-maker in those Malay majority seats may just want to try switching their political allegiance from BN to Pakatan. The end game in national politics would then be anybody’s guess.
How the Chinese, Indian, and “other” ethnic voters will vote in the next general election depends on how our political drama plays out before the entire national audience.
They are watching with great interest, slowly realising perhaps that for the first time, the so-called minority ethnic groups suddenly have power to change the destiny of politicians and that of the country far out of proportion with their numerical strength.
The new ruling class within Umno and BN are obviously oblivious to this new development. They are stuck in the time-capsule of their old paradigm and talking in the antiquated language of race and violent threat.
That is why Muhyiddin talked and behaved as he did. He is just adding another nail to the closing coffin. We should encourage him to do more of the same.
Written in Malaysiakini by:SIM KWANG YANG was MP of Bandar Kuching in Sarawak between 1982 and 1995. He can be reached at kenyalang578@hotmail.com.
Perak crisis: Judges have let Najib down
The Federal Court decision that Perak speaker V Sivakumar did not have the right to suspend BN Menteri Besar Zambry Abd Kadir and his six cabinet members is a perverse judgment.
It is perverse because it is a decision that was made in blatant defiance of Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution which says, "The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court".
The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words, the judges have refused to do justice according to law.
Incidentally, ultra vires does not mean "outside the law". It means "outside one's jurisdiction, beyond the scope of one's power or authority".
And we may ask, who is the Federal Court to say what is beyond the jurisdiction of the speaker when the supreme law of the country says that "the validity of any proceedngs in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court".
Don't these judges realise that they have actually done a disservice to the government of the day? Perhaps they have never heard of the Taff Vale case.
In 1900, the English House of Lords, which is the highest court in the land just as our Federal Court is the highest court in this country, handed down an outrageous decision which was unpopular to the common people of England.
Voters threw out gov’t after judges erred
The judges of the House of Lords by their judgment had unwittingly done a great disservice to the Conservative government of the day because in the general election of 1906, it was toppled by a landslide.
The case which was the cause of the fall of the Conservative government was Taff Vale Rly Co v Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants.
It is best that I let Lord Denning take up the story from his book ‘Landmarks in the Law’:
“There was the great Taff Vale case. To understand it, you must know that the trade unions were virtually friendly societies. The members paid their subscriptions into a fund, out of which benefits could be paid to members if they were ill or out of employment.
“Now in the Taff Vale case, the railwaymen's union called a strike at the railway station at Cardiff. The men left work and set up peaceful pickets so as to persuade others not to go to work. The trains could not run, and the company lost money. The railway were advised to bring an action against the union itself, seeking an injunction and damages. The Court of Appeal threw out the action.
“But the House of Lords, in a startling judgment, overruled the Court of Appeal. They issued an interlocutory injunction against the trade union itself, restraining it from setting up the pickets, and said that the railway company could recover damages which could be enforced against trade union funds.
“Later, at the trial itself, the damages were assessed at £23,000 and that sum was paid out of the funds of the trade union. £23,000 in 1900. What would that be now?
“In the eyes of trade unions, that was an outrageous decision. It meant that the railway company could take all the funds subscribed by the members so as to meet the damages. It meant that, in future, a trade union could never call a strike, else it would be in peril of losing all its funds. It meant virtually the end of trade unions. As GM Trevelyan says in his History: 'It struck at the very heart of trade union action'.
“That case had immense political consequences. At the general election of 1906, there came into being a new political party. It was the Labour party. They ran a host of candidates themselves. They pledged complete immunity for trade unions. Many of the Liberal candidates gave the same pledge.
“The result of the general election was like an earthquake. Liberals had 397 seats. The new Labour party had 50 seats. The Conservatives only 157. It was a sweeping victory for the trade unions.
“Parliament immediately passed the Trade Disputes Act 1906. It is probably the most important Act ever put into the Statute Book. It reversed all the judicial decisions against trade unions. The Taff Vale case was overruled. No trade union could thereafter be sued for damages for any wrongs done by its members. Its funds were unassailable."
I think the message of the Taff Vale case to our judges of the Federal Court should be clear enough. The electorate may decide, just as the voters did in 1906 England to throw out the Conservative government, to use the power of their vote to unseat the BN government in the next general election because they do not trust the judges.
What if speaker ignore court decision?
Poor Najib Abdul Razak, our new prime minister, it is the judges who have let him down. Unfortunately it would be the prime minister who has to carry the baby, but not the irresponsible judges who did all the damage by not administering justice according to law.
The law, in the present context, is the Federal Constitution, in particular, Article 72 which states:
7 (1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.
(2) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof.
(3) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything published by or under the authority of the Legislative Assembly of any State.
Suppose Sivakumar were to ignore the declarative decree of the Federal Court, what then?
Clause (2) of Article 72 of the Federal Constitution says that "No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof'.
The Federal Court can say anything they like but the speaker is not liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the legislative assembly.
The order of the Federal Court seems to me to be a ‘brutum fulmen’, which in Latin means "ineffectual thunderbolt” - an action which is loud but ineffective.
Written by: NH Chan
NH CHAN is a former Court of Appeal judge famous for his ‘All is not well in the House of Denmark’ comment regarding judicial corruption. He was then referring to High Court’s commercial division which was located in Wisma Denmark, Kuala Lumpur. The quote is based on Shakespeare’s ‘Something is rotten in the state of Denmark’. He now lives in Ipoh.
It is perverse because it is a decision that was made in blatant defiance of Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution which says, "The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court".
The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words, the judges have refused to do justice according to law.
Incidentally, ultra vires does not mean "outside the law". It means "outside one's jurisdiction, beyond the scope of one's power or authority".
And we may ask, who is the Federal Court to say what is beyond the jurisdiction of the speaker when the supreme law of the country says that "the validity of any proceedngs in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court".
Don't these judges realise that they have actually done a disservice to the government of the day? Perhaps they have never heard of the Taff Vale case.
In 1900, the English House of Lords, which is the highest court in the land just as our Federal Court is the highest court in this country, handed down an outrageous decision which was unpopular to the common people of England.
Voters threw out gov’t after judges erred
The judges of the House of Lords by their judgment had unwittingly done a great disservice to the Conservative government of the day because in the general election of 1906, it was toppled by a landslide.
The case which was the cause of the fall of the Conservative government was Taff Vale Rly Co v Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants.
It is best that I let Lord Denning take up the story from his book ‘Landmarks in the Law’:
“There was the great Taff Vale case. To understand it, you must know that the trade unions were virtually friendly societies. The members paid their subscriptions into a fund, out of which benefits could be paid to members if they were ill or out of employment.
“Now in the Taff Vale case, the railwaymen's union called a strike at the railway station at Cardiff. The men left work and set up peaceful pickets so as to persuade others not to go to work. The trains could not run, and the company lost money. The railway were advised to bring an action against the union itself, seeking an injunction and damages. The Court of Appeal threw out the action.
“But the House of Lords, in a startling judgment, overruled the Court of Appeal. They issued an interlocutory injunction against the trade union itself, restraining it from setting up the pickets, and said that the railway company could recover damages which could be enforced against trade union funds.
“Later, at the trial itself, the damages were assessed at £23,000 and that sum was paid out of the funds of the trade union. £23,000 in 1900. What would that be now?
“In the eyes of trade unions, that was an outrageous decision. It meant that the railway company could take all the funds subscribed by the members so as to meet the damages. It meant that, in future, a trade union could never call a strike, else it would be in peril of losing all its funds. It meant virtually the end of trade unions. As GM Trevelyan says in his History: 'It struck at the very heart of trade union action'.
“That case had immense political consequences. At the general election of 1906, there came into being a new political party. It was the Labour party. They ran a host of candidates themselves. They pledged complete immunity for trade unions. Many of the Liberal candidates gave the same pledge.
“The result of the general election was like an earthquake. Liberals had 397 seats. The new Labour party had 50 seats. The Conservatives only 157. It was a sweeping victory for the trade unions.
“Parliament immediately passed the Trade Disputes Act 1906. It is probably the most important Act ever put into the Statute Book. It reversed all the judicial decisions against trade unions. The Taff Vale case was overruled. No trade union could thereafter be sued for damages for any wrongs done by its members. Its funds were unassailable."
I think the message of the Taff Vale case to our judges of the Federal Court should be clear enough. The electorate may decide, just as the voters did in 1906 England to throw out the Conservative government, to use the power of their vote to unseat the BN government in the next general election because they do not trust the judges.
What if speaker ignore court decision?
Poor Najib Abdul Razak, our new prime minister, it is the judges who have let him down. Unfortunately it would be the prime minister who has to carry the baby, but not the irresponsible judges who did all the damage by not administering justice according to law.
The law, in the present context, is the Federal Constitution, in particular, Article 72 which states:
7 (1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.
(2) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof.
(3) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything published by or under the authority of the Legislative Assembly of any State.
Suppose Sivakumar were to ignore the declarative decree of the Federal Court, what then?
Clause (2) of Article 72 of the Federal Constitution says that "No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof'.
The Federal Court can say anything they like but the speaker is not liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the legislative assembly.
The order of the Federal Court seems to me to be a ‘brutum fulmen’, which in Latin means "ineffectual thunderbolt” - an action which is loud but ineffective.
Written by: NH Chan
NH CHAN is a former Court of Appeal judge famous for his ‘All is not well in the House of Denmark’ comment regarding judicial corruption. He was then referring to High Court’s commercial division which was located in Wisma Denmark, Kuala Lumpur. The quote is based on Shakespeare’s ‘Something is rotten in the state of Denmark’. He now lives in Ipoh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
