... and moving on from Election Day, the first priority of our Opposition State governments and the now very substantial Opposition bloc in the Federal Parliament, is to REIGN IN the Civil Service - with particular emphasis on the POLICE who must be brought to task, reformed, re-engineered, re-trained and otherwise re-organised to reduce the country's crime rate.
Corrupt and inefficient officers interested only in bullying HINDRAF lawyers and booking cars with Singapore licence plates in the hope of earning a fast buck must be punished - in clear, certain and painful terms.
Forensics training, and the mastery of other types of basic evidence gathering, retention and delivery for the purposes of successful prosecution must be the order of the day. No more reliance only on informers, anonymous "tip-offs", and the extraction of doubtful confessions under torture.
Makkal Ossai, Makkal Shakti!!
Lawman
LawMan's Dogs
Killer Beasts Doing Breakfast
Showing posts with label Malaysia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Malaysia. Show all posts
Sunday, March 09, 2008
What Happens When You Try to Kill All the Lawyers
The impossible has happened - the BN has lost its two-thirds majority for the first time since 1969, and the Opposition controls 5 states and all Parliamentary seats for the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur (which is not a State).
The DAP, PAS and Keadilan will, operating as a loose coalition, form the State Governments of Penang, Kedah, Perak, and Selangor. In addition, PAS will rule Kelantan with a much stronger majority than it obtained in the last election in 2004.
As President Musharraf discovered much to his dismay when he decided to Kill All the Lawyers - figuratively speaking - Abdullah Badawi's BN has realised, too late, what happens in any functioning society which wants to maintain at least a semblance of democracy: when you find yourself trying to put down (well, at least ignore or denigrate) street protests mounted by lawyers, you are at the deep end of the pool and will drown in the next election.
A tip for politicians in future elections: be careful how you treat the professional class. You start dumping them in jail, it's a good leading indicator that you will fare poorly at the next (honest) polls.
For a better idea of what I'm talking about, go here and here.
And of course, Mr Shakespeare's famous line about Killing All the Lawyers, which when read in context was actually a Major Compliment to the Legal Profession, can be found here (Act IV, Scene 2, Henry VI Part 2).
One compliment to the ruling party though; the Malaysian elections were by and large, free and fair, and allegations and fears of rigging were basically unfounded, going by all currently available evidence.
Unfortunately, as Musharraf discovered in Pakistan, if you rig the vote you lose the elections no matter what the official outcome may be, and if you don't rig the vote then you lose the elections fair and square - either way, you lose.
Like I said, don't put the lawyers down, or you are looking at losing the next polls.
Now, some will say the BN hasn't actually lost the polls, at least not in the way that Musharraf was wiped out in Pakistan. Musharraf wasn't actually up for election; his party lost big and lost all control of Pakistan whereas Badawi WAS up for election, and the BN managed to retain all of East Malaysia and the southern and eastern regions of Peninsular Malaysia. But I say the BN very obviously lost in the sense that despite having gerrymandered election seats over many years in its favour, lopsided media coverage, the devotion of massive resources to a PR campaign, and the detention without trial of its most extreme recent critics (Manoharan & company, of HINDRAF), the BN received an absolute whopping in states it had considered reasonably safe - Selangor, Perak, Kedah - and in the capital, Kuala Lumpur, previously divided between Opposition and BN but as of yesterday TOTALLY Opposition (bar 1 seat). AND the BN lost Penang, was wiped out in Kelantan, AND lost its 2/3 majority - the holy grail of Opposition politicians. The Barisan Nasional has NEVER been beaten so badly since Independence. In Malaysian terms, it counts as a certain defeat.
For the first time in all recorded history, we have 5 Opposition Menteris Besar - one each from Keadilan and the DAP, and 3 from PAS. My congratulations to them all. I just hope they don't waste the chance to Just Change It!
and, for good measure: MAKKAL SHAKTI!!!
- Lawman -
The DAP, PAS and Keadilan will, operating as a loose coalition, form the State Governments of Penang, Kedah, Perak, and Selangor. In addition, PAS will rule Kelantan with a much stronger majority than it obtained in the last election in 2004.
As President Musharraf discovered much to his dismay when he decided to Kill All the Lawyers - figuratively speaking - Abdullah Badawi's BN has realised, too late, what happens in any functioning society which wants to maintain at least a semblance of democracy: when you find yourself trying to put down (well, at least ignore or denigrate) street protests mounted by lawyers, you are at the deep end of the pool and will drown in the next election.
A tip for politicians in future elections: be careful how you treat the professional class. You start dumping them in jail, it's a good leading indicator that you will fare poorly at the next (honest) polls.
For a better idea of what I'm talking about, go here and here.
And of course, Mr Shakespeare's famous line about Killing All the Lawyers, which when read in context was actually a Major Compliment to the Legal Profession, can be found here (Act IV, Scene 2, Henry VI Part 2).
One compliment to the ruling party though; the Malaysian elections were by and large, free and fair, and allegations and fears of rigging were basically unfounded, going by all currently available evidence.
Unfortunately, as Musharraf discovered in Pakistan, if you rig the vote you lose the elections no matter what the official outcome may be, and if you don't rig the vote then you lose the elections fair and square - either way, you lose.
Like I said, don't put the lawyers down, or you are looking at losing the next polls.
Now, some will say the BN hasn't actually lost the polls, at least not in the way that Musharraf was wiped out in Pakistan. Musharraf wasn't actually up for election; his party lost big and lost all control of Pakistan whereas Badawi WAS up for election, and the BN managed to retain all of East Malaysia and the southern and eastern regions of Peninsular Malaysia. But I say the BN very obviously lost in the sense that despite having gerrymandered election seats over many years in its favour, lopsided media coverage, the devotion of massive resources to a PR campaign, and the detention without trial of its most extreme recent critics (Manoharan & company, of HINDRAF), the BN received an absolute whopping in states it had considered reasonably safe - Selangor, Perak, Kedah - and in the capital, Kuala Lumpur, previously divided between Opposition and BN but as of yesterday TOTALLY Opposition (bar 1 seat). AND the BN lost Penang, was wiped out in Kelantan, AND lost its 2/3 majority - the holy grail of Opposition politicians. The Barisan Nasional has NEVER been beaten so badly since Independence. In Malaysian terms, it counts as a certain defeat.
For the first time in all recorded history, we have 5 Opposition Menteris Besar - one each from Keadilan and the DAP, and 3 from PAS. My congratulations to them all. I just hope they don't waste the chance to Just Change It!
and, for good measure: MAKKAL SHAKTI!!!
- Lawman -
Thursday, February 15, 2007
How To Get into Trouble With the Law in A Certain Country
For those of you who wish to have a DIFFERENT kind of travel experience, go no further than A Certain Country. Make sure you are a FOREIGNER, this is essential, and bring your passport with you.
Make sure you enter the country from the SOUTH, again this is essential. Make sure you DRIVE in, and make sure you hand your passport over to Immigration for the usual endorsement as you come in.
Make sure you DO NOT CHECK that the said endorsement has been made before driving off, and I guarantee you a very pleasant stay at the pleasure of His Majesty the Yang Dipertuan Agong (Supreme Ruler) of A Certain Country, upon your attempt to exit the country after your tour.
Malaysia must be the only country in the civilized world (disfunctional regimes in Africa do not count) where Immigration has every right under the law to punish legitimate visitors to the country for the failure - whether deliberate or otherwise - of their OWN officers at valid entry checkpoints to the country to endorse visitors' passports with the appropriate rubberstamps.
Other countries would readily admit that it was THEIR problem if, upon presentation of valid passports, their OWN officers (whether by way of oversight or just a general dislike of foreigners in general and Singaporeans in particular) failed to endorse those passports when they should have.
But in Malaysia, NOOOOOO, they have to really put you through the dry-wringer when you attempt, of all things, to EXIT the country validly, as opposed to hopping on a fishing boat somewhere near Kukup for a midnight trip to Sumatra.
So we are put in this truly embarrassing position where bona fide visitors entering by bona fide means in to Malaysia are put in jail for mistakes committed by Immigration - and the only excuse Malaysia can give is that those visitors were, by law, obliged to check if Immigration officers had done the job for which they are paid by their own country's taxpayers. Obviously, we can all see who this law was designed for and enacted to protect.
"Berkhidmat Untuk Negara!!" - my A**.
LMT.
Make sure you enter the country from the SOUTH, again this is essential. Make sure you DRIVE in, and make sure you hand your passport over to Immigration for the usual endorsement as you come in.
Make sure you DO NOT CHECK that the said endorsement has been made before driving off, and I guarantee you a very pleasant stay at the pleasure of His Majesty the Yang Dipertuan Agong (Supreme Ruler) of A Certain Country, upon your attempt to exit the country after your tour.
Malaysia must be the only country in the civilized world (disfunctional regimes in Africa do not count) where Immigration has every right under the law to punish legitimate visitors to the country for the failure - whether deliberate or otherwise - of their OWN officers at valid entry checkpoints to the country to endorse visitors' passports with the appropriate rubberstamps.
Other countries would readily admit that it was THEIR problem if, upon presentation of valid passports, their OWN officers (whether by way of oversight or just a general dislike of foreigners in general and Singaporeans in particular) failed to endorse those passports when they should have.
But in Malaysia, NOOOOOO, they have to really put you through the dry-wringer when you attempt, of all things, to EXIT the country validly, as opposed to hopping on a fishing boat somewhere near Kukup for a midnight trip to Sumatra.
So we are put in this truly embarrassing position where bona fide visitors entering by bona fide means in to Malaysia are put in jail for mistakes committed by Immigration - and the only excuse Malaysia can give is that those visitors were, by law, obliged to check if Immigration officers had done the job for which they are paid by their own country's taxpayers. Obviously, we can all see who this law was designed for and enacted to protect.
"Berkhidmat Untuk Negara!!" - my A**.
LMT.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Electronic Judiciary system launched
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/1/11/nation/20070111191206&sec=nation
I remember a certain system called LAWNET. It was launched in Malaysia around maybe one or two years before Singapore launched its own Lawnet. The Malaysian Lawnet featured a search engine called EXCALIBUR. I organised talks on this for the Bar, of which I was then a member. Speakers were invited from Lawnet. Subscribers were welcomed. Proclamations from hilltops were proudly made that the system was way ahead of what any of Malaysia's neighbours had. Since basically all of Malaysia's neighbours had nothing close to Malaysia where government IT initiatives were concerned, save and except for the Little Red Dot down south, such proclamations had to be read as a taunt to Singapore.
Then the system died. And it remained quiet for many years before being re-launched - in a very limited form, lacking any search capacity whatsoever and featuring only legislation (no case law, commentary, digest or any other sources of law or value-add for lawyers).
Lawnet was (and still is) a project of a government owned company - Percetakan Nasional Malaysia Berhad or PNMB. This is the official government printers, "privatised" and hence a "private" entity, even if government-owned.
Now, Singapore's very own Crimson Logic (another "private" company, owned and run basically by the Singapore government) has had Lawnet for many years, and it features integrated law reports, digests, commentaries, scholarly articles, and legislation resources - all of which are searchable any number of ways.
About the only advantage Malaysia's Lawnet has over Singapore's Lawnet is that Malaysia's may be somewhat cheaper to subscribe to. And even on this point I am not very sure, since I have not enquired recently and Singapore is always looking at keeping costs down while for Malaysia costs can only go up (to the tune of some RM30 million bucks...).
Well. Good luck, "Malaysia". Boleh. U gonna need it.
LMT.
"PUTRAJAYA: After numerous delays, the initial phase of the Electronic Judiciary (E-Judiciary) system has been launched.
There will be smoother court processes to reduce the acute backlog of cases, numbering over 8,000.
Case Management System (CMS), Court Recording and Transcription System (CRT), and Common IT Infrastructure (CIT) are among the functions to be implemented in 11 courts involved in a pilot project in Kuala Lumpur and here.
The project, which began in Sept 2004,cost over RM27mil.
The system, which will enable Internet registration of cases and easy access to court records and past cases, will be eventually extended to the 410 courts nationwide.
Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who presided over a symbolic ceremony to signify the completion of the systemsaid the "Malaysian-made" system was more comprehensive than the electronic system in the US, UK, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore.
"It would be good if this Malaysian product can be extended to other countries which do not have a system of their own," he told reporters on Thursday."
I remember a certain system called LAWNET. It was launched in Malaysia around maybe one or two years before Singapore launched its own Lawnet. The Malaysian Lawnet featured a search engine called EXCALIBUR. I organised talks on this for the Bar, of which I was then a member. Speakers were invited from Lawnet. Subscribers were welcomed. Proclamations from hilltops were proudly made that the system was way ahead of what any of Malaysia's neighbours had. Since basically all of Malaysia's neighbours had nothing close to Malaysia where government IT initiatives were concerned, save and except for the Little Red Dot down south, such proclamations had to be read as a taunt to Singapore.
Then the system died. And it remained quiet for many years before being re-launched - in a very limited form, lacking any search capacity whatsoever and featuring only legislation (no case law, commentary, digest or any other sources of law or value-add for lawyers).
Lawnet was (and still is) a project of a government owned company - Percetakan Nasional Malaysia Berhad or PNMB. This is the official government printers, "privatised" and hence a "private" entity, even if government-owned.
Now, Singapore's very own Crimson Logic (another "private" company, owned and run basically by the Singapore government) has had Lawnet for many years, and it features integrated law reports, digests, commentaries, scholarly articles, and legislation resources - all of which are searchable any number of ways.
About the only advantage Malaysia's Lawnet has over Singapore's Lawnet is that Malaysia's may be somewhat cheaper to subscribe to. And even on this point I am not very sure, since I have not enquired recently and Singapore is always looking at keeping costs down while for Malaysia costs can only go up (to the tune of some RM30 million bucks...).
Well. Good luck, "Malaysia". Boleh. U gonna need it.
LMT.
"PUTRAJAYA: After numerous delays, the initial phase of the Electronic Judiciary (E-Judiciary) system has been launched.
There will be smoother court processes to reduce the acute backlog of cases, numbering over 8,000.
Case Management System (CMS), Court Recording and Transcription System (CRT), and Common IT Infrastructure (CIT) are among the functions to be implemented in 11 courts involved in a pilot project in Kuala Lumpur and here.
The project, which began in Sept 2004,cost over RM27mil.
The system, which will enable Internet registration of cases and easy access to court records and past cases, will be eventually extended to the 410 courts nationwide.
Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who presided over a symbolic ceremony to signify the completion of the systemsaid the "Malaysian-made" system was more comprehensive than the electronic system in the US, UK, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore.
"It would be good if this Malaysian product can be extended to other countries which do not have a system of their own," he told reporters on Thursday."
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
PAC: Get rid of 'agents' for NS transport service
http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=16595
This is an example of what goes wrong when you allow a massive Ali Baba mentality to take root. It's been a real disease for decades in Malaysia - the government does not do the simplest thing by open tender, but instead hands all contracts out to people whose kulit is of a particular colour, and whose religion is of a certain type, and then those with the right kulit subcontract down the line to others with the right kulit , with the final subcontractor (the one who actually does the work) being not only of the wrong kulit but also the wrong religion, language and culture. For instance, that last subcontractor will actually know what he's doing, and be a hardworking fella who understands that you actually require technical skills and cost-control savvy to survive in a hard business world, whereas all the others above him have become experts at taking commissions and calling themselves great businessmen.
So now it has come down to bus services getting all mucked up because - basically - some commissions got stuck somewhere - or the commission-getters took the payments and forgot to actually get the bus drivers. O man, this is rich. Malaysia Boleh - semua pun boleh.
LMT
This is an example of what goes wrong when you allow a massive Ali Baba mentality to take root. It's been a real disease for decades in Malaysia - the government does not do the simplest thing by open tender, but instead hands all contracts out to people whose kulit is of a particular colour, and whose religion is of a certain type, and then those with the right kulit subcontract down the line to others with the right kulit , with the final subcontractor (the one who actually does the work) being not only of the wrong kulit but also the wrong religion, language and culture. For instance, that last subcontractor will actually know what he's doing, and be a hardworking fella who understands that you actually require technical skills and cost-control savvy to survive in a hard business world, whereas all the others above him have become experts at taking commissions and calling themselves great businessmen.
So now it has come down to bus services getting all mucked up because - basically - some commissions got stuck somewhere - or the commission-getters took the payments and forgot to actually get the bus drivers. O man, this is rich. Malaysia Boleh - semua pun boleh.
LMT
Thursday, January 04, 2007
This is going to Kill MAS?
Lately I've been hearing horror stories about MAS, in particular its standard of service. Seems that morale is very low, and employees are merely going through the motions. Was it like this before the sale of MAS to a certain (now former) cellphone tycoon a decade ago? I cannot remember, so it probably was not (I would remember bad service, not good service - that, I would take for granted).
Well, this is not going to make the folks at MAS jump for joy - it might make a few jump ship, or jump plane, at any rate jump airline, but if you owned shares in MAS you wouldn't be looking to add to your holdings right now.
For a first, I'm going to do both the link and the entire article - talk about unnecessary infringements of copyright - however, the source is named (BERNAMA):
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/news_business.php?id=239622
"Business
January 04, 2007 21:21 PM
Malaysian Aviation Industry Takes A Quantum Leap
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 4 (Bernama) -- The Malaysian aviation industry is taking a quantum leap following the government's vision of making the country a regional hub, when it gave Fly Asian Express (FAX) the nod to divert from its normal domestic routes to offer budget long-haul services to Asia, Australia and Europe.
FAX is 50 per cent owned by AirAsia Bhd chief executive officer, Datuk Tony Fernandes, while the other two shareholders -- Kamarudin and Raja Mohd Azmi -- owned 30 per cent and 20 per cent respectively. It operates a rural air services in Sabah and Sarawak since Aug 1, 2006.
The move augurs well for Visit Malaysia Year 2007 in attracting more tourists, further boost the tourism industry and will have a spin-off effects on the economy.
It would also enable locals to travel abroad at much cheaper rates.
"Such efforts would promote travelling both inbound and outbound," said AmResearch Sdn Bhd head of research, Gan Kim Khoon.
Being the first business model of a budget long-haul service itself gives a sense of pride to the country as well as for operators, FAX and AirAsia Bhd.
However, for some it came as a surprise.
"It is a surprise. I feel a bit peculiar that AirAsia or FAX would depart from their original point-to-point destinations and test flights that are more than 3.5 hours," said Standard&Poors Equity Research airline analysts, Shukor Yusof.
FAX, together with Richard Branson's Virgin Group and Stelios Haji-Ioannou's easyGroup, the parent company of Britain's easyJet, is expected to announce tomorrow plans to offer long-haul low-cost services to the three continents.
Shukor said the market for long-haul flights was different from low-cost models or structures which were currently used by AirAsia and other low-cost carriers (LCCs) in the region.
"It really depends on what FAX or AirAsia hopes to achieve in the new venture because they have to price it differently. But then again pricing alone is not the only factor in the business," he said.
He said a passenger's decision to fly is not purely based on pricing alone but a combination of factors including connectivity, services and route selection.
"Hence, the model would be flawed if the company decides to design the long-haul budget business based on pricing structure alone.
"The model will be flawed if it is going to be based on pricing alone as long-haul flights need certain number of business class passengers who are able to pay more compared with casual travellers or backpackers.
"You got to fill your flights everyday. If you don't have enough people using your aircraft to go abroad, long distance flying becomes insignificant and your cost will rise and margins eroded," he said.
Asked on the impact on the aviation industry in Malaysia given that this would be the longest LCC route, Shukor said there would not be much in the near future.
He said this could very well serve the company and country in the long run.
Reports, quoting sources, said if the FAX-easyJet-Virgin alliance decides to fly to London as well, they could also use the Luton airport as a hub because Virgin already operates a rail link from there to central London.
The alliance would also give Virgin and easyJet an access to Kuala Lumpur's LCC terminal, the gateway to a dream Asian hub for their Europe to Australia routes.
Shukor was optimistic this local venture could be successful if there was a bigger market for such services.
Asked on Malaysia's aim to become the aviation hub for the region, both Shukor and Gan agreed there was a possibility of it being realised.
Both believed it was important to have substantial inter-connectivity and bigger volume of airlines flying in and out of Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA).
"Arguably, Malaysia does not really have prominent inter-connectivity, which is a fact," said Gan.
"But should FAX pull off this feat, it would entice more airlines to touch base with KLIA," said Shukor.
On a more personal note, he said, this was the beginning of an even more adventurous journey for Fernandes and company.
"He has proven pundits wrong when he started AirAsia, which is currently the most successful and profitable low-cost airline in the region," he said."
-- BERNAMA
Well, this is not going to make the folks at MAS jump for joy - it might make a few jump ship, or jump plane, at any rate jump airline, but if you owned shares in MAS you wouldn't be looking to add to your holdings right now.
For a first, I'm going to do both the link and the entire article - talk about unnecessary infringements of copyright - however, the source is named (BERNAMA):
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/news_business.php?id=239622
"Business
January 04, 2007 21:21 PM
Malaysian Aviation Industry Takes A Quantum Leap
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 4 (Bernama) -- The Malaysian aviation industry is taking a quantum leap following the government's vision of making the country a regional hub, when it gave Fly Asian Express (FAX) the nod to divert from its normal domestic routes to offer budget long-haul services to Asia, Australia and Europe.
FAX is 50 per cent owned by AirAsia Bhd chief executive officer, Datuk Tony Fernandes, while the other two shareholders -- Kamarudin and Raja Mohd Azmi -- owned 30 per cent and 20 per cent respectively. It operates a rural air services in Sabah and Sarawak since Aug 1, 2006.
The move augurs well for Visit Malaysia Year 2007 in attracting more tourists, further boost the tourism industry and will have a spin-off effects on the economy.
It would also enable locals to travel abroad at much cheaper rates.
"Such efforts would promote travelling both inbound and outbound," said AmResearch Sdn Bhd head of research, Gan Kim Khoon.
Being the first business model of a budget long-haul service itself gives a sense of pride to the country as well as for operators, FAX and AirAsia Bhd.
However, for some it came as a surprise.
"It is a surprise. I feel a bit peculiar that AirAsia or FAX would depart from their original point-to-point destinations and test flights that are more than 3.5 hours," said Standard&Poors Equity Research airline analysts, Shukor Yusof.
FAX, together with Richard Branson's Virgin Group and Stelios Haji-Ioannou's easyGroup, the parent company of Britain's easyJet, is expected to announce tomorrow plans to offer long-haul low-cost services to the three continents.
Shukor said the market for long-haul flights was different from low-cost models or structures which were currently used by AirAsia and other low-cost carriers (LCCs) in the region.
"It really depends on what FAX or AirAsia hopes to achieve in the new venture because they have to price it differently. But then again pricing alone is not the only factor in the business," he said.
He said a passenger's decision to fly is not purely based on pricing alone but a combination of factors including connectivity, services and route selection.
"Hence, the model would be flawed if the company decides to design the long-haul budget business based on pricing structure alone.
"The model will be flawed if it is going to be based on pricing alone as long-haul flights need certain number of business class passengers who are able to pay more compared with casual travellers or backpackers.
"You got to fill your flights everyday. If you don't have enough people using your aircraft to go abroad, long distance flying becomes insignificant and your cost will rise and margins eroded," he said.
Asked on the impact on the aviation industry in Malaysia given that this would be the longest LCC route, Shukor said there would not be much in the near future.
He said this could very well serve the company and country in the long run.
Reports, quoting sources, said if the FAX-easyJet-Virgin alliance decides to fly to London as well, they could also use the Luton airport as a hub because Virgin already operates a rail link from there to central London.
The alliance would also give Virgin and easyJet an access to Kuala Lumpur's LCC terminal, the gateway to a dream Asian hub for their Europe to Australia routes.
Shukor was optimistic this local venture could be successful if there was a bigger market for such services.
Asked on Malaysia's aim to become the aviation hub for the region, both Shukor and Gan agreed there was a possibility of it being realised.
Both believed it was important to have substantial inter-connectivity and bigger volume of airlines flying in and out of Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA).
"Arguably, Malaysia does not really have prominent inter-connectivity, which is a fact," said Gan.
"But should FAX pull off this feat, it would entice more airlines to touch base with KLIA," said Shukor.
On a more personal note, he said, this was the beginning of an even more adventurous journey for Fernandes and company.
"He has proven pundits wrong when he started AirAsia, which is currently the most successful and profitable low-cost airline in the region," he said."
-- BERNAMA
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Genting Gets the Singapore I.R. - Smart Political Move
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/246100/1/.html
Oh I'm sure Genting got the Sentosa IR on merit, everything in its proposal having been tried, tested and nothing too weird, but the political benefits couldn't have hurt.
All along I'd been saying in face-to-face though not online that Kerzner's "robotic fish" would be too... robotic... heh, and Eighth Wonder's Harry's Island was just too "tacky"; not to mention too kiss-a&*@ - given that Lee Kuan Yew is also known as Harry Lee. Lots of Singaporeans must have winced at the obvious sucker-u**er connotations of the name.
But the clincher - I speculate - and this this is never admitted in the official grounds of decision - is that a failure to award to Genting would have resulted in intense, totally unfriendly and uncertain competition with the region's most established (by far) resorts operator. Genting's operations in Australia (Perth - Burswood), the Phillipines and finally in Malaysia where the casino is a prosperous national landmark in a majority-Muslim country clearly viewable from Kuala Lumpur (more than a hundred kilometres away) - on a good day - gave it a location-specific performance record nobody else could match, least of all the angmolang from Las Vegas.
Giving it to Genting totally killed the idea of a Universal theme park in Southern Johor (in consideration since 1998, when Renong still ran Nusajaya), co-opted Genting into making the resort work together with all its other operations and not in do-or-die competition against them, and was tightly worded enough to minimise any risk that Genting would try a typical Microsoft "buy-it-to-kill-it" strategy. As for political risk vis-a-vis Malaysia (always a difficult relationship where Singapore is concerned), Lim Goh Tong & Co owe nothing to the Malay-dominated government of Malaysia; Malaysia is fortunate to have received what it did (and is, to receive what it still does) by way of tax revenues and other tourism-related benefits from the Genting group and if Goh Tong had to he'd leave Malaysia with his whole family and business in a flash, say, if PAS came to power in the Federal government.
All in, the correct decision to make, which is nothing less than what I would expect of the world's best civil service.
LMT
Oh I'm sure Genting got the Sentosa IR on merit, everything in its proposal having been tried, tested and nothing too weird, but the political benefits couldn't have hurt.
All along I'd been saying in face-to-face though not online that Kerzner's "robotic fish" would be too... robotic... heh, and Eighth Wonder's Harry's Island was just too "tacky"; not to mention too kiss-a&*@ - given that Lee Kuan Yew is also known as Harry Lee. Lots of Singaporeans must have winced at the obvious sucker-u**er connotations of the name.
But the clincher - I speculate - and this this is never admitted in the official grounds of decision - is that a failure to award to Genting would have resulted in intense, totally unfriendly and uncertain competition with the region's most established (by far) resorts operator. Genting's operations in Australia (Perth - Burswood), the Phillipines and finally in Malaysia where the casino is a prosperous national landmark in a majority-Muslim country clearly viewable from Kuala Lumpur (more than a hundred kilometres away) - on a good day - gave it a location-specific performance record nobody else could match, least of all the angmolang from Las Vegas.
Giving it to Genting totally killed the idea of a Universal theme park in Southern Johor (in consideration since 1998, when Renong still ran Nusajaya), co-opted Genting into making the resort work together with all its other operations and not in do-or-die competition against them, and was tightly worded enough to minimise any risk that Genting would try a typical Microsoft "buy-it-to-kill-it" strategy. As for political risk vis-a-vis Malaysia (always a difficult relationship where Singapore is concerned), Lim Goh Tong & Co owe nothing to the Malay-dominated government of Malaysia; Malaysia is fortunate to have received what it did (and is, to receive what it still does) by way of tax revenues and other tourism-related benefits from the Genting group and if Goh Tong had to he'd leave Malaysia with his whole family and business in a flash, say, if PAS came to power in the Federal government.
All in, the correct decision to make, which is nothing less than what I would expect of the world's best civil service.
LMT
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
The Pope's Visit to Turkey
Pope Benedict XVI is visiting Turkey. Today. Or, well, yesterday, since it is already 1am local time.
This is going to be interesting to watch.
The Pope will fight for the rights of religious minorities in Muslim countries.
He will confront Muslim thinkers about that arm of their religion that genuinely believes that violence against non-believers (and of course, for this particular arm the category of "non-believers" is very wide) is sanctioned by God.
He may attempt a closer relationship (a reconciliation?) between the Greek and Latin Churches, a schism which predates the Protestant Reformation.
I for one am happy to see a Pope who doesn't mince his words, doesn't toe the politically correct line, and who says what needs to be said.
Where fighting for minority rights is concerned, he is not advocating some fresh Crusade, nor does he support religious bigotry. Instead, he is simply being honest about the experience that Christians and other non-Muslims have living in modern-day Muslim-majority countries (we are not talking history here, just modern-day reality). He is asking the Muslim majority-countries for the kind of treatment towards their non-Muslim minorities that Muslims in the minority in the secular West have received and come to take for granted, nay, demand, from their host governments. He is not afraid to annoy and offend, he is only concerned to speak the truth. That's the way it should be.
Where violence by Muslims who explicitly justify their actions by reference to their God is concerned, the Pope, I hope, will be asking some very hard questions of the "Ulama" (term used very loosely here) who wrote that letter explaining the Islamic position to him after he made his now famous (or notorious, of course, depending on your point of view) speech at Regensburg. Why is it that such a significant number of Muslims - perhaps a majority of the total "Umah" in some countries - do NOT behave as might be expected if, as the Muslim scholars claimed, Islam is essentially a peaceful and tolerant religion? Why did these Muslims - followers of a peace-loving religion, it is claimed - feel entitled to commit murder, arson, and vandalism in the name of protecting the "dignity" of their religion, when all that the Pope did was to make a speech in a faraway land where a majority of the population are no longer really Christian, nor anti-Muslim? Did Christians burn their mosques, kill their women and children, destroy their livelihoods on the basis and as a consequence of the Regensburg address?
And finally - on the issue of reconciliation with the Greeks - it is good that the various denominations are finding common ground, as there are bigger fish to fry. It is time for Christians of all stripes, pre- and post- Reformation, to unite and confront the Islamic extremist - both the out-in-the-open Al Qaeda/Taliban variety and the more insidious "quiet Islamist" attempting to slowly drive currently secular countries such as Malaysia into becoming "Islamic" kingdoms or republics. It is time to "fight the good fight" - the Christian JIHAD - by which I mean "STRUGGLE, NOT WAR" which may be "NON-VIOLENT as well as violent" - yep, I can borrow from the Muslim lexicon as well as anyone - to show that non-Muslims are not, for the sake of political correctness, going to back down in the face of increasingly arrogant and unreasonable demands from their Muslim compatriots.
LMT
This is going to be interesting to watch.
The Pope will fight for the rights of religious minorities in Muslim countries.
He will confront Muslim thinkers about that arm of their religion that genuinely believes that violence against non-believers (and of course, for this particular arm the category of "non-believers" is very wide) is sanctioned by God.
He may attempt a closer relationship (a reconciliation?) between the Greek and Latin Churches, a schism which predates the Protestant Reformation.
I for one am happy to see a Pope who doesn't mince his words, doesn't toe the politically correct line, and who says what needs to be said.
Where fighting for minority rights is concerned, he is not advocating some fresh Crusade, nor does he support religious bigotry. Instead, he is simply being honest about the experience that Christians and other non-Muslims have living in modern-day Muslim-majority countries (we are not talking history here, just modern-day reality). He is asking the Muslim majority-countries for the kind of treatment towards their non-Muslim minorities that Muslims in the minority in the secular West have received and come to take for granted, nay, demand, from their host governments. He is not afraid to annoy and offend, he is only concerned to speak the truth. That's the way it should be.
Where violence by Muslims who explicitly justify their actions by reference to their God is concerned, the Pope, I hope, will be asking some very hard questions of the "Ulama" (term used very loosely here) who wrote that letter explaining the Islamic position to him after he made his now famous (or notorious, of course, depending on your point of view) speech at Regensburg. Why is it that such a significant number of Muslims - perhaps a majority of the total "Umah" in some countries - do NOT behave as might be expected if, as the Muslim scholars claimed, Islam is essentially a peaceful and tolerant religion? Why did these Muslims - followers of a peace-loving religion, it is claimed - feel entitled to commit murder, arson, and vandalism in the name of protecting the "dignity" of their religion, when all that the Pope did was to make a speech in a faraway land where a majority of the population are no longer really Christian, nor anti-Muslim? Did Christians burn their mosques, kill their women and children, destroy their livelihoods on the basis and as a consequence of the Regensburg address?
And finally - on the issue of reconciliation with the Greeks - it is good that the various denominations are finding common ground, as there are bigger fish to fry. It is time for Christians of all stripes, pre- and post- Reformation, to unite and confront the Islamic extremist - both the out-in-the-open Al Qaeda/Taliban variety and the more insidious "quiet Islamist" attempting to slowly drive currently secular countries such as Malaysia into becoming "Islamic" kingdoms or republics. It is time to "fight the good fight" - the Christian JIHAD - by which I mean "STRUGGLE, NOT WAR" which may be "NON-VIOLENT as well as violent" - yep, I can borrow from the Muslim lexicon as well as anyone - to show that non-Muslims are not, for the sake of political correctness, going to back down in the face of increasingly arrogant and unreasonable demands from their Muslim compatriots.
LMT
Monday, November 06, 2006
There is No Compulsion in Religion. Amen.
.... and so, it is ok to create a reasonable apprehension of violence to Indian children about to take their first Holy Communion. I guess we should all look on the bright side: the police, for once, were on the side of the good guys, the ones with any sense at all in this, and the Pious, God-fearing, Self Righteous, "We-Shall-Be- Saved-and-You-Shall-Burn" Muslim Heroes of Ipoh attempting to save their fellow co-religionists from Apostasy by, if necessary, violence, and against those co-religionists' free will to boot, were taught a lesson in humility, not to mention actually getting their basic facts right.
The Star Online: Print Edition < Previous | Home | Print Edition | Next > Monday November 6, 2006 Cops to probe baptism SMS By CHAN LI LEEN IPOH: The police are investigating a rumour which spread like wildfire through SMS, claiming that a group of Muslims will be baptised at a church here. As a result, a large crowd gathered at the Church of Our Lady of Lourdes in Silibin from 7.30am yesterday to protest against the alleged baptism only to find out that it was actually the first Holy Communion for 98 Indian children. State police chief Deputy Comm Datuk Aziz Bulat said the police would verify how the SMS had started. “There could be some people out there who have a personal agenda to create disharmony among the races,” he said when met at the church. DCP Aziz said the police had also received the text message and had, therefore, placed the Federal Reserve Unit on standby since 7am. He advised the public to be wary of such messages. “Don't accept everything you read or hear as total truth,” he said, adding that he would call on all involved parties to help with the investigation. The protesters, who included members of opposition parties and non-governmental organisations, gathered for some four hours and refused to disperse initially despite warnings from the police. They finally started to leave at 11.20am after Deputy OCPD (II) Supt Lai Yong Heng issued a stern warning. Perak Religious Department director Datuk Jamry Sury, who was present to monitor the situation, said the department would also investigate the incident. “We will take action against the culprit,” he added. Perak Pusat Khidmat Islam secretary Mohd Nazri Sahad said he was there to check if there was any truth to the message. The police were still on standby at the church last night. Father Fabian Dicom, spokesman for the Catholic Diocese of Penang, which covers Perak, said the church was extremely concerned that a group of people had been sowing ill-will through rumours. “We are concerned as to how others have come to believe these rumours,” he added. He noted that the incident had also infringed on the church members' right to worship. “The Catholic Church has always believed that dialogue is the best platform to resolve issues and as such is extremely disappointed that there was no attempt whatsoever for dialogue,” he said. < Previous | Home | Print Edition | Next > Copyright 1995-2006 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd
The Star Online: Print Edition < Previous | Home | Print Edition | Next > Monday November 6, 2006 Cops to probe baptism SMS By CHAN LI LEEN IPOH: The police are investigating a rumour which spread like wildfire through SMS, claiming that a group of Muslims will be baptised at a church here. As a result, a large crowd gathered at the Church of Our Lady of Lourdes in Silibin from 7.30am yesterday to protest against the alleged baptism only to find out that it was actually the first Holy Communion for 98 Indian children. State police chief Deputy Comm Datuk Aziz Bulat said the police would verify how the SMS had started. “There could be some people out there who have a personal agenda to create disharmony among the races,” he said when met at the church. DCP Aziz said the police had also received the text message and had, therefore, placed the Federal Reserve Unit on standby since 7am. He advised the public to be wary of such messages. “Don't accept everything you read or hear as total truth,” he said, adding that he would call on all involved parties to help with the investigation. The protesters, who included members of opposition parties and non-governmental organisations, gathered for some four hours and refused to disperse initially despite warnings from the police. They finally started to leave at 11.20am after Deputy OCPD (II) Supt Lai Yong Heng issued a stern warning. Perak Religious Department director Datuk Jamry Sury, who was present to monitor the situation, said the department would also investigate the incident. “We will take action against the culprit,” he added. Perak Pusat Khidmat Islam secretary Mohd Nazri Sahad said he was there to check if there was any truth to the message. The police were still on standby at the church last night. Father Fabian Dicom, spokesman for the Catholic Diocese of Penang, which covers Perak, said the church was extremely concerned that a group of people had been sowing ill-will through rumours. “We are concerned as to how others have come to believe these rumours,” he added. He noted that the incident had also infringed on the church members' right to worship. “The Catholic Church has always believed that dialogue is the best platform to resolve issues and as such is extremely disappointed that there was no attempt whatsoever for dialogue,” he said. < Previous | Home | Print Edition | Next > Copyright 1995-2006 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd
Chinese NOT marginalized in Malaysia: and here's the proof
Look carefully at the text in bold: So, err, when exactly is he coming back to Malaysia? Again?
The Star Online: Print Edition < Previous | Home | Print Edition | Next > Monday November 6, 2006 Malaysian wins Rhodes Scholarship MELBOURNE: A Malaysian student who teaches debating at an Islamic college here and performs stand-up comedy in his spare time, has won the prestigious Rhodes Scholarship. Lee Hann Leng, a final year student at University of Melbourne who is pursuing double degrees in law and commerce, will go to Britain next year to start his PhD programme in Economic Geography at Oxford University. An outstanding student, keen sportsman and community volunteer, Lee, 25, was also a runner-up in the 2006 Campus Comedy State Final. At Oxford, the Malacca-born Lee will research geographical patterns of economic growth in China and the Asia-Pacific region. “China is very important to Australia and the Asia-Pacific region in general, so a greater understanding of economic changes and outlook in that country are really important. “On returning to Australia, I would like to work in foreign policy or maybe in politics. I'm hoping a few jokes along the way will help,” he quipped. On his off-campus work, Lee said: “I provide drama lessons and homework support for young people within the YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association). “A lot of our students are recent migrants from the Horn of Africa. Their English skills are limited, so I think it is especially important that the system caters for their needs.” He also coaches students in debating at the East Preston Islamic College where there are many Malaysian students. Lee said he owed a lot to his parents Lee Song Wa and Lan Fong who were a great source of inspiration. The two-year Rhodes Scholarship is one of the most prestigious awards offered to students and selection is based on excellent academic, sporting and community service records. Past Australian Rhodes scholars include former prime minister Bob Hawke, former governor-general Sir Zelman Cowen and current Opposition Leader Kim Beazley. – Bernama < Previous | Home | Print Edition | Next > Copyright 1995-2006 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd
The Star Online: Print Edition < Previous | Home | Print Edition | Next > Monday November 6, 2006 Malaysian wins Rhodes Scholarship MELBOURNE: A Malaysian student who teaches debating at an Islamic college here and performs stand-up comedy in his spare time, has won the prestigious Rhodes Scholarship. Lee Hann Leng, a final year student at University of Melbourne who is pursuing double degrees in law and commerce, will go to Britain next year to start his PhD programme in Economic Geography at Oxford University. An outstanding student, keen sportsman and community volunteer, Lee, 25, was also a runner-up in the 2006 Campus Comedy State Final. At Oxford, the Malacca-born Lee will research geographical patterns of economic growth in China and the Asia-Pacific region. “China is very important to Australia and the Asia-Pacific region in general, so a greater understanding of economic changes and outlook in that country are really important. “On returning to Australia, I would like to work in foreign policy or maybe in politics. I'm hoping a few jokes along the way will help,” he quipped. On his off-campus work, Lee said: “I provide drama lessons and homework support for young people within the YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association). “A lot of our students are recent migrants from the Horn of Africa. Their English skills are limited, so I think it is especially important that the system caters for their needs.” He also coaches students in debating at the East Preston Islamic College where there are many Malaysian students. Lee said he owed a lot to his parents Lee Song Wa and Lan Fong who were a great source of inspiration. The two-year Rhodes Scholarship is one of the most prestigious awards offered to students and selection is based on excellent academic, sporting and community service records. Past Australian Rhodes scholars include former prime minister Bob Hawke, former governor-general Sir Zelman Cowen and current Opposition Leader Kim Beazley. – Bernama < Previous | Home | Print Edition | Next > Copyright 1995-2006 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
The Old Man Must Learn to Let Go
The Old Man has to learn that his time is past. When he was PM he created a culture of fear. Operation Lallang was his doing. Anwar's sodomy trial and related actions were his doing. Twas he who sacked Tun Salleh Abbas. So Malaysia is no less an oppressed society now than when he was at the helm.
The Old Man can be praised for doing great things. I won't go through the list of his achievements here. No space. Suffice to say that when Al Gore came to KL and insulted the entire nation at a dinner at which he was the guest of honour and we were the host, I felt sufficiently annoyed to register an email address in the Old Man's name for myself and to circulate a non-anonymous email to all my friends at that time, denouncing Al Gore's lack of any grasp whatsoever of the subject matter of his speech. I thought it was a defining moment of the Old Man's career when, irregardless of who he may have annoyed, the entire nation stepped back and gave him its full backing against what was an obviously unwarranted attack by a rude, arrogant guest. Hopefully the guest has learned something in the intervening decade. He has, after all lost a US Presidential election in the meantime.
Anyway, back to the core of this post: whatever great things the Old Man did, his time is past. He did it to himself; no one else. So to now try to do a Jesus or a Lazarus (come back from the political dead) is downright bad taste. Let go. Your time is over, Old Man. You retired. It was your choice. Now stay retired so the rest of us can get on with our lives.
LMT.
The Old Man can be praised for doing great things. I won't go through the list of his achievements here. No space. Suffice to say that when Al Gore came to KL and insulted the entire nation at a dinner at which he was the guest of honour and we were the host, I felt sufficiently annoyed to register an email address in the Old Man's name for myself and to circulate a non-anonymous email to all my friends at that time, denouncing Al Gore's lack of any grasp whatsoever of the subject matter of his speech. I thought it was a defining moment of the Old Man's career when, irregardless of who he may have annoyed, the entire nation stepped back and gave him its full backing against what was an obviously unwarranted attack by a rude, arrogant guest. Hopefully the guest has learned something in the intervening decade. He has, after all lost a US Presidential election in the meantime.
Anyway, back to the core of this post: whatever great things the Old Man did, his time is past. He did it to himself; no one else. So to now try to do a Jesus or a Lazarus (come back from the political dead) is downright bad taste. Let go. Your time is over, Old Man. You retired. It was your choice. Now stay retired so the rest of us can get on with our lives.
LMT.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Freedom of Speech
I have always thought that it is important not to give in to bullies.
When someone wants to shut off all debate on an issue because of some perceived or alleged (meaning it has not actually happened) threat to society's general wellbeing, I get a little worried. I cannot help but suspect that the rush to shut the debate down before it has even begun is happening not so much because of any threat to society but because of a threat to the establishment and the established order, and vested interests who do not wish things to change - not for any high moral reason, but because they are gaining too much from the status quo.
IN other words, killing debate in many instances serves the bullies who are in power and who know that their position cannot be defended by rational argument. Rather than be proven wrong on the level playing field of rational debate, they decide to strong-arm a solution from a position of physical strength.
In recent history this has included certain American politicians trying to employ the war on terror as a flag to kill off proper and important debate on the limitations to individual freedoms; and the Hindu religious chauvinists mentioned in this article from the Sun,Malaysia, below.
LMT.
--- Article Information ---
This article was printed from Welcome to Sun2Surf
Article's URL: http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=15714
---------------------------
Preserve the right to free expression
By: Jacqueline Ann Surin (Thu, 05 Oct 2006)
The UK's Daily Telegraph recently ran an article headlined "Hindus threaten cinemas over film exposing plight of India's 'City of Widows'."
The film is Indian-born director Deepa Mehta's Water which highlights the cruel Hindu tradition of treating widows as social outcasts. According to this tradition, it is a widow's bad karma that caused her husband's demise.
As a result, many of India's 40 million widows are cast out of family and society, and have to fend for themselves. They are forced to shave their heads and dress in white.
About 10,000 seek sanctuary in Vrindavan - the City of Widows - a holy town in northern India where they rely on charity. Those not fortunate enough are forced into prostitution and begging.
The film is being nominated for an Oscar for best foreign language film, but it is not being nominated by India, but by Mehta's adopted homeland, Canada.
See, Mehta has received death threats for her film and had to finish making it abroad. Protesting mobs attacked her film set and no cinema in India will show her film for fear of reprisals.
Hindu nationalist groups have accused the filmmaker of "insulting" Hindu culture, and of a "conspiracy to tarnish India's image".
The Daily Telegraph quotes World Hindu Council national convenor Prakash Sharma as declaring, "We will not tolerate a screening under any circumstances. We will attack cinemas if necessary."
The furore over Mehta and her film in India should resonate in Malaysia.
Sure, the context and actors may be different, but it wasn't too long ago when protesting mobs tried to prevent two Article 11 forums on Malaysians' constitutional rights from proceeding. Unfortunately, with the government ban on any other Article 11 forum, the use of threats and mob rule has proven highly effective in Malaysia.
And, wasn't it just last month that death threats against Muslim lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar circulated on the Internet, purportedly in the name of defending Islam - a great religion that seeks peace and justice, and that has a rich tradition of diversity and consultation.
Groups like Sisters in Islam and public intellectuals such as Farish Noor, who speak out against unjust practices committed in the name of religion, are also constantly accused of "belittling" and "insulting" Islam. They, too, have been labelled and threatened in attempts to suppress and silence.
Freedom of expression is a necessary prerequisite of any thinking, thriving democracy. Freedom of expression ensures that different voices, representing a plurality of interests that is inevitable in any human society, have the space to be heard and the opportunity to engage in public discourse.
It ensures that injustices such as the inhumane ostracisation of Hindu widows can be highlighted and addressed, rather than left to perpetuate and fester.
We know that it's not just in religion that strong threats against freedom of expression exist in Malaysia.
Movies, most recently Lelaki Komunis Terakhir, numerous publications and theatre performances are repeatedly and arbitrarily banned or censored in Malaysia.
Academics and students, meanwhile, are effectively prevented from speaking up publicly, for example, through the media, by the Universities and University Colleges Act and the Aku Janji pledge.
Those who would want to silence the people who speak out against the wrongs in our society - be they cultural or religious practices or in institutions like universities - are asking us to acquiesce to ongoing injustices.
You can usually tell when that happens from the arguments that they use, whether they be in India, Malaysia or any other part of the world.
To speak out is to "tarnish", "insult", "attack", "disparage" or "undermine" the sanctity of a religion, an institution, "Asian values" or whatever notion of social harmony is being promoted.
We would all do well to remember these arguments. It's usually an effective test to discern if freedom of expression is being suppressed to our collective detriment.
LAST month, to commemorate International Right to Know Day on Sept 28, the Freedom of Information (FOI) Coalition launched a campaign to advocate for a FOI Act in Malaysia.
The call for "No More Secrets" is long overdue, and the 10 principles for the FOI campaign (see www.cijmalaysia.org/info_cafe) are crucial and commendable.
What was highly disappointing, however, was the poor turnout at the launch.
Although the FOI Coalition comprises more than 32 organisations, none of their representatives, except for the Centre for Independent Journalism, turned up.
No political party representative or MP turned up either, despite being invited. In fact, only 10 people turned up, two of whom were foreigners.
"People must like their secrets very much," one foreign observer remarked.
It was hard to dispute that especially since coalition members themselves could not be present to show support for a campaign they want the public to embrace.
Jacqueline Ann Surin believes that you cannot be neutral on a moving train. She is an assistant news editor at theSun. Comments: feedback@thesundaily.com
--- end ---
When someone wants to shut off all debate on an issue because of some perceived or alleged (meaning it has not actually happened) threat to society's general wellbeing, I get a little worried. I cannot help but suspect that the rush to shut the debate down before it has even begun is happening not so much because of any threat to society but because of a threat to the establishment and the established order, and vested interests who do not wish things to change - not for any high moral reason, but because they are gaining too much from the status quo.
IN other words, killing debate in many instances serves the bullies who are in power and who know that their position cannot be defended by rational argument. Rather than be proven wrong on the level playing field of rational debate, they decide to strong-arm a solution from a position of physical strength.
In recent history this has included certain American politicians trying to employ the war on terror as a flag to kill off proper and important debate on the limitations to individual freedoms; and the Hindu religious chauvinists mentioned in this article from the Sun,Malaysia, below.
LMT.
--- Article Information ---
This article was printed from Welcome to Sun2Surf
Article's URL: http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=15714
---------------------------
Preserve the right to free expression
By: Jacqueline Ann Surin (Thu, 05 Oct 2006)
The UK's Daily Telegraph recently ran an article headlined "Hindus threaten cinemas over film exposing plight of India's 'City of Widows'."
The film is Indian-born director Deepa Mehta's Water which highlights the cruel Hindu tradition of treating widows as social outcasts. According to this tradition, it is a widow's bad karma that caused her husband's demise.
As a result, many of India's 40 million widows are cast out of family and society, and have to fend for themselves. They are forced to shave their heads and dress in white.
About 10,000 seek sanctuary in Vrindavan - the City of Widows - a holy town in northern India where they rely on charity. Those not fortunate enough are forced into prostitution and begging.
The film is being nominated for an Oscar for best foreign language film, but it is not being nominated by India, but by Mehta's adopted homeland, Canada.
See, Mehta has received death threats for her film and had to finish making it abroad. Protesting mobs attacked her film set and no cinema in India will show her film for fear of reprisals.
Hindu nationalist groups have accused the filmmaker of "insulting" Hindu culture, and of a "conspiracy to tarnish India's image".
The Daily Telegraph quotes World Hindu Council national convenor Prakash Sharma as declaring, "We will not tolerate a screening under any circumstances. We will attack cinemas if necessary."
The furore over Mehta and her film in India should resonate in Malaysia.
Sure, the context and actors may be different, but it wasn't too long ago when protesting mobs tried to prevent two Article 11 forums on Malaysians' constitutional rights from proceeding. Unfortunately, with the government ban on any other Article 11 forum, the use of threats and mob rule has proven highly effective in Malaysia.
And, wasn't it just last month that death threats against Muslim lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar circulated on the Internet, purportedly in the name of defending Islam - a great religion that seeks peace and justice, and that has a rich tradition of diversity and consultation.
Groups like Sisters in Islam and public intellectuals such as Farish Noor, who speak out against unjust practices committed in the name of religion, are also constantly accused of "belittling" and "insulting" Islam. They, too, have been labelled and threatened in attempts to suppress and silence.
Freedom of expression is a necessary prerequisite of any thinking, thriving democracy. Freedom of expression ensures that different voices, representing a plurality of interests that is inevitable in any human society, have the space to be heard and the opportunity to engage in public discourse.
It ensures that injustices such as the inhumane ostracisation of Hindu widows can be highlighted and addressed, rather than left to perpetuate and fester.
We know that it's not just in religion that strong threats against freedom of expression exist in Malaysia.
Movies, most recently Lelaki Komunis Terakhir, numerous publications and theatre performances are repeatedly and arbitrarily banned or censored in Malaysia.
Academics and students, meanwhile, are effectively prevented from speaking up publicly, for example, through the media, by the Universities and University Colleges Act and the Aku Janji pledge.
Those who would want to silence the people who speak out against the wrongs in our society - be they cultural or religious practices or in institutions like universities - are asking us to acquiesce to ongoing injustices.
You can usually tell when that happens from the arguments that they use, whether they be in India, Malaysia or any other part of the world.
To speak out is to "tarnish", "insult", "attack", "disparage" or "undermine" the sanctity of a religion, an institution, "Asian values" or whatever notion of social harmony is being promoted.
We would all do well to remember these arguments. It's usually an effective test to discern if freedom of expression is being suppressed to our collective detriment.
LAST month, to commemorate International Right to Know Day on Sept 28, the Freedom of Information (FOI) Coalition launched a campaign to advocate for a FOI Act in Malaysia.
The call for "No More Secrets" is long overdue, and the 10 principles for the FOI campaign (see www.cijmalaysia.org/info_cafe) are crucial and commendable.
What was highly disappointing, however, was the poor turnout at the launch.
Although the FOI Coalition comprises more than 32 organisations, none of their representatives, except for the Centre for Independent Journalism, turned up.
No political party representative or MP turned up either, despite being invited. In fact, only 10 people turned up, two of whom were foreigners.
"People must like their secrets very much," one foreign observer remarked.
It was hard to dispute that especially since coalition members themselves could not be present to show support for a campaign they want the public to embrace.
Jacqueline Ann Surin believes that you cannot be neutral on a moving train. She is an assistant news editor at theSun. Comments: feedback@thesundaily.com
--- end ---
Thursday, September 28, 2006
What Goh Chok Tong said in response to Mahathir
For those who may be wondering what it was Goh said exactly (I referred to it in my last post):-
South China Morning Post
January 26, 2001
IAN STEWART in Kuala Lumpur
RELATED:
Meritocracy comes under attack
Book fuels mistrust of meritocracy
A NEW row between Malaysia and Singapore has underscored the racial tensions that have adversely affected relations between the Chinese-run island republic and its predominantly Malay neighbour since they became independent.
Singapore's Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, has angered Malaysian leaders by saying that Malays in his country do better educationally on a percentage basis than Malays in Malaysia, where they are aided by affirmative action programmes.
He also said a higher percentage of Singapore Malays held administrative and managerial positions, although Malaysia proportionately had more Malay doctors, lawyers and millionaires.
Hishammuddin Tun Hussein, head of the youth wing of the United Malays National Organisation (Umno), the dominant government party, accused the Singapore leader of "undermining, intentionally or otherwise" the achievements of Malays in Malaysia.
Other Umno officials said it was unfair to compare Malays in Singapore with Malaysian Malays because the island republic was small and had a higher per capita income than Malaysia.
Mr Goh's assertion, which was based on a government survey, goes to the heart of the different political ideologies of Singapore, which espouses meritocracy, and Malaysia, which rejects it.
He was responding to charges by Malays in both countries that their race was marginalised in Singapore.
Mr Goh said a book on the subject by a Singapore Malay writer "provided the excuse for Malaysian media interest in the fate of Malay Singaporeans".
Malaysian commentators said the book, Singapore Dilemma, by Lily Zubaidah Rahim, shattered the myth of meritocracy and vindicated Kuala Lumpur's policy of giving special privileges to Malays.
Mr Goh said that in Singapore, where admission into universities and polytechnics was on the basis of merit, the Malay community had made significant improvements in the number of passes at all levels.
He said that last year, 25 per cent of the Singapore Malay workforce had upper secondary or higher qualifications. In 1998, the latest year for which Malaysian statistics were available, the equivalent figure for Malaysian Malays was 14 per cent. The figures for Malays holding administrative and managerial or professional and technical positions in Singapore and Malaysia were 23 per cent and 16 per cent.
The affirmative action issue has recently been a hot topic in Malaysia, with the Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, blasting members of a Chinese community group as "extremists" for suggesting Malay privileges be abolished. But he also has scolded Malays for not doing as well as Chinese in schools and universities.
South China Morning Post
January 26, 2001
IAN STEWART in Kuala Lumpur
RELATED:
Meritocracy comes under attack
Book fuels mistrust of meritocracy
A NEW row between Malaysia and Singapore has underscored the racial tensions that have adversely affected relations between the Chinese-run island republic and its predominantly Malay neighbour since they became independent.
Singapore's Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, has angered Malaysian leaders by saying that Malays in his country do better educationally on a percentage basis than Malays in Malaysia, where they are aided by affirmative action programmes.
He also said a higher percentage of Singapore Malays held administrative and managerial positions, although Malaysia proportionately had more Malay doctors, lawyers and millionaires.
Hishammuddin Tun Hussein, head of the youth wing of the United Malays National Organisation (Umno), the dominant government party, accused the Singapore leader of "undermining, intentionally or otherwise" the achievements of Malays in Malaysia.
Other Umno officials said it was unfair to compare Malays in Singapore with Malaysian Malays because the island republic was small and had a higher per capita income than Malaysia.
Mr Goh's assertion, which was based on a government survey, goes to the heart of the different political ideologies of Singapore, which espouses meritocracy, and Malaysia, which rejects it.
He was responding to charges by Malays in both countries that their race was marginalised in Singapore.
Mr Goh said a book on the subject by a Singapore Malay writer "provided the excuse for Malaysian media interest in the fate of Malay Singaporeans".
Malaysian commentators said the book, Singapore Dilemma, by Lily Zubaidah Rahim, shattered the myth of meritocracy and vindicated Kuala Lumpur's policy of giving special privileges to Malays.
Mr Goh said that in Singapore, where admission into universities and polytechnics was on the basis of merit, the Malay community had made significant improvements in the number of passes at all levels.
He said that last year, 25 per cent of the Singapore Malay workforce had upper secondary or higher qualifications. In 1998, the latest year for which Malaysian statistics were available, the equivalent figure for Malaysian Malays was 14 per cent. The figures for Malays holding administrative and managerial or professional and technical positions in Singapore and Malaysia were 23 per cent and 16 per cent.
The affirmative action issue has recently been a hot topic in Malaysia, with the Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, blasting members of a Chinese community group as "extremists" for suggesting Malay privileges be abolished. But he also has scolded Malays for not doing as well as Chinese in schools and universities.
Non Malays marginalised in Malaysia and Indonesia: why is this news now?
Lee Kuan Yew's comments about Singapore having to adopt (in effect) a "kiasu" stance towards Malaysia and Indonesia because these 2 countries systematically marginalise their Chinese communities have - it seems - caused a real ruckus in Malaysia.
This comes hot on the heels of Badawi's son in law's obviously bigoted, ignorant, racist, politically opportunist and completely non-factual anti-Chinese comments, for which he has not apologised and shown absolutely no intention of apologising.
Malaysia has asked Singapore's high commissioner to offer an explanation for Lee Kuan Yew's comments (reported on Channel News Asia, tonight 28/9/06 at about 9.20pm). Malaysia has further stated that Lee's comments count as interference in Malaysia's affairs and could incite racial trouble. Malaysia's foreign minister has said he wants an apology.
I'm surprised.
Lee Kuan Yew's fight for a Malaysian Malaysia is why (among other things, admittedly) Singapore had to leave the Federation. Lee has for the past more than 4 decades that he has been active in politics strongly opposed the idea of affirmative action for the majority ethnic group in this region. He has never minced his words about Malay rights as the concept is understood in Malaysia. Why is he being called to apologise or explain now?
It is **precisely** because of this - what Lee referred to as systematic marginalisation - that so many of my relatives and secondary school and other childhood friends have declined to join the civil service, or even to stay in Malaysia, and opted instead to live and work overseas, principally in Singapore and Hongkong / China, with Australia and Canada/US/UK coming close behind.
Many English-educated Malaysian Chinese now have PR in Australia, Canada or some other country, as an escape route for in case things get really ugly in Malaysia. Why do our great beloved leaders think they feel so insecure in what is, like it or not, their own country, the land of their birth?
When you have fantastic bigots like Khairy spouting anti-Chinese comments without being properly penalised, what do you expect those who are observing you to think?
Heck, Mahathir has never minced his words about Singapore either, come to think of it. Singapore has never asked Mahathir to apologise for anything he said about, for instance, the Malays' position in Singapore, even when what he said was manifestly inaccurate. Remember Goh Chok Tong's speech in reply to allegations by Mahathir that the Malays had been marginalised in Singapore? Yep, Singapore had fewer Malay doctors and lawyers, Goh said, but on almost every other measure of material and vocational wellbeing the Malays in Singapore were better off than their compatriots in Malaysia. The fact that Malays in Singapore are on average richer than Malays in Malaysia and have full and satisfying careers - after 4 decades of independence - should have given our beloved leaders in the good ol' Malaysian hinterland pause for thought, but hey, these guys are, going by their appearances, not interested in thinking. They're interested in politics, which in Malaysia is of course a whole different thing from actual, rational, thinking (and announcing it).
I say Lee Kuan Yew was right to say what he did, that he should continue saying it, and that Malaysian leaders who demand some sort of apology should be shown their own past record of misdeeds and asked to apologise first. Say sorry for denying hardworking non-Malays their due in Malaysia. Say sorry for dispossessing many of them of a disproportionate share of their wealth, to squander (ie. mis-spend, NOT just spend per se) on the majority ethnic group. Say sorry for the various racist slurs made by top Malay politicians in the ruling coalition over time - starting with the late Dato Harun of Selangor, and ending with the not-so-late Khairy J. Say sorry for mismanagement on a massive scale, measured both temporally as well as materially. Say sorry for everything. Then Lee can offer an apology in return, for telling the truth - it hurts, so I'm sorry, but it's true, and for that there can be no apology.
LMT.
This comes hot on the heels of Badawi's son in law's obviously bigoted, ignorant, racist, politically opportunist and completely non-factual anti-Chinese comments, for which he has not apologised and shown absolutely no intention of apologising.
Malaysia has asked Singapore's high commissioner to offer an explanation for Lee Kuan Yew's comments (reported on Channel News Asia, tonight 28/9/06 at about 9.20pm). Malaysia has further stated that Lee's comments count as interference in Malaysia's affairs and could incite racial trouble. Malaysia's foreign minister has said he wants an apology.
I'm surprised.
Lee Kuan Yew's fight for a Malaysian Malaysia is why (among other things, admittedly) Singapore had to leave the Federation. Lee has for the past more than 4 decades that he has been active in politics strongly opposed the idea of affirmative action for the majority ethnic group in this region. He has never minced his words about Malay rights as the concept is understood in Malaysia. Why is he being called to apologise or explain now?
It is **precisely** because of this - what Lee referred to as systematic marginalisation - that so many of my relatives and secondary school and other childhood friends have declined to join the civil service, or even to stay in Malaysia, and opted instead to live and work overseas, principally in Singapore and Hongkong / China, with Australia and Canada/US/UK coming close behind.
Many English-educated Malaysian Chinese now have PR in Australia, Canada or some other country, as an escape route for in case things get really ugly in Malaysia. Why do our great beloved leaders think they feel so insecure in what is, like it or not, their own country, the land of their birth?
When you have fantastic bigots like Khairy spouting anti-Chinese comments without being properly penalised, what do you expect those who are observing you to think?
Heck, Mahathir has never minced his words about Singapore either, come to think of it. Singapore has never asked Mahathir to apologise for anything he said about, for instance, the Malays' position in Singapore, even when what he said was manifestly inaccurate. Remember Goh Chok Tong's speech in reply to allegations by Mahathir that the Malays had been marginalised in Singapore? Yep, Singapore had fewer Malay doctors and lawyers, Goh said, but on almost every other measure of material and vocational wellbeing the Malays in Singapore were better off than their compatriots in Malaysia. The fact that Malays in Singapore are on average richer than Malays in Malaysia and have full and satisfying careers - after 4 decades of independence - should have given our beloved leaders in the good ol' Malaysian hinterland pause for thought, but hey, these guys are, going by their appearances, not interested in thinking. They're interested in politics, which in Malaysia is of course a whole different thing from actual, rational, thinking (and announcing it).
I say Lee Kuan Yew was right to say what he did, that he should continue saying it, and that Malaysian leaders who demand some sort of apology should be shown their own past record of misdeeds and asked to apologise first. Say sorry for denying hardworking non-Malays their due in Malaysia. Say sorry for dispossessing many of them of a disproportionate share of their wealth, to squander (ie. mis-spend, NOT just spend per se) on the majority ethnic group. Say sorry for the various racist slurs made by top Malay politicians in the ruling coalition over time - starting with the late Dato Harun of Selangor, and ending with the not-so-late Khairy J. Say sorry for mismanagement on a massive scale, measured both temporally as well as materially. Say sorry for everything. Then Lee can offer an apology in return, for telling the truth - it hurts, so I'm sorry, but it's true, and for that there can be no apology.
LMT.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
From THE SUN, Malaysia
The SUN, Malaysia, is Malaysia's fastest growing English language newspaper. It is chasing up on The Star, still Malaysia's most popular English language newspaper, and both are leaving the New Straits Times to bite the dust.
The Sun is independently owned and managed, ie. (in this context) no political party owns it. Any bias is therefore likely to be "apolitical", in a manner of speaking.
The Star is owned by the MCA, but takes a somewhat independent line. Good on the MCA! They know what makes the press really tick.
The NST is essentially an UMNO-owned and run mouthpiece. The Editor is a party man and toes the party line when he has to, just like any MP.
No prizes for guessing why it's slipping in circulation ;-))
LMT.
Keep up the watchdog role
The Sun is independently owned and managed, ie. (in this context) no political party owns it. Any bias is therefore likely to be "apolitical", in a manner of speaking.
The Star is owned by the MCA, but takes a somewhat independent line. Good on the MCA! They know what makes the press really tick.
The NST is essentially an UMNO-owned and run mouthpiece. The Editor is a party man and toes the party line when he has to, just like any MP.
No prizes for guessing why it's slipping in circulation ;-))
LMT.
Keep up the watchdog role
The congratulations that have been bestowed upon theSun are absolutely deserving, but it is the impact they have brought about that really matters.
theSun was able to expose the infractions of a state management that involved businessmen, politicians and the management of MBPJ, for the good of the public who being the stakeholders have given their trust to all the parties stated. It appears that theSun is committed to prove wrong the denials of the state administration.
Identifying, recognising and exposing the ills and malpractices of authorities is a task for one who has no fear or favour. theSun should continue its crusade without excuse to any quarter to spot and expose the violations of business ethics and help reduce the bureaucratic red tape in the public delivery system. theSun has exhibited this dedication and the public should rally behind it for their own good.
In relation to the billboard issue, we read with concern that no action will be taken against the officers involved in this fiasco. This is most improper and the MB can be construed as an accomplice to the violation of procedure. To create an atmosphere of fairness in the state administration, one in which rules and standards are equally applied, the principles of just cause and due process must operate.
Just cause requires that reasons directly linked with job performance be clearly established for disciplinary action or discharge.
Due process refers to fairness of the procedures an organisation uses to impose sanctions on employees. The state should uphold integrity of the due process and the MB should not influence the process or the outcome.
Let us all help Pak Lah with his National Integrity Plan and the state governments should be role models in executing actions to achieve this natio- nal agenda. Perhaps from time to time, Pak Lah should get the message across to his officers about integrity in the state administration.
Another brilliant score by theSun. Heartiest congratulations to Citizen Nades and his team.
Dr Zainal Abidin Abdul Majid
Director, Business Ethics Institute of Malaysia
Racist Malays
Racist bigots claiming to be Malay are at it again... every time it is inconvenient to explain or take the blame or admit any wrongdoing, wave the MALAY UNITY banner cynically, manipulate emotions, play on the Malay community's deep-seated inferiority complex, a.k.a. fear of being marginalised in their own country even though they control the politics, the military, the police and very large portions of the economy, and shout THE CHINESE WILL RIP US OFF IF YOU KEEP CRITICISING ME, YOUR FELLOW MALAY!
The amazing thing is how successful this ploy is even after so many years, at diverting attention from one's own wrongdoing, actual or perceived.
From The Sun:
Hishammuddin urged to lead moderate UMNO youth
The amazing thing is how successful this ploy is even after so many years, at diverting attention from one's own wrongdoing, actual or perceived.
From The Sun:
Hishammuddin urged to lead moderate UMNO youth
KUALA LUMPUR: The controversial remark by Umno Youth leader Khairy Jamaluddin that a non-Malay political party will take advantage of a weak Umno has not subsided.
Following the MCA annual general assembly last week during which Khairy was criticised, another BN coalition party Gerakan also expressed dissatisfaction over the matter.
At the party's 19th Wanita and Youth National Delegates Conference on Friday (1 Sept), Gerakan Youth chief Datuk Mah Siew Keong said although it is fair for someone to defend his own community, it should not hurt the feeling of other communities.
"If you want to play racial sentiments to gain political mileage, you are not a hero," he said, without naming names.
Khairy did not attend the convention. However, BN Youth and Umno Youth chief Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein was seated on the stage with other Gerakan leaders.
In his speech, Mah also urged Hishammuddin to continue taking care of all communities regardless of ethincity.
"We should clap to encourage him to lead a more moderate Umno Youth and to face the pressure of racism he faces," he said, to a round of applause.
On the same note, Gerakan Wanita chief Tan Lian Hoe said one should not forget the needs and sentiments of others.
"Respecting each other should not only extend to Umno but to other BN component parties," she said.
She said the situation is likely to split the BN and encourage criticisms from the rakyat, thus giving the opposition the opportunity to gather votes.
She noted that leaders of the component parties and leaders should abandon selfishness to prevent conflict which may weaken the coalition.
In a press conference later, Hishammuddin reiterated the issue will be resolved within the BN.
"When the temperature is lower, it's for my deputy (Khairy) to explain what the misunderstanding is. I think that is not a problem," he said.
He said the most important thing is the relationship of the top leadership.
"Nobody can exploit short term publicity for short term gain, this applies to other issues also...We need wisdom in doing this," he said.
He said inciting racial sentiments to gain popularity at the respective community will not last long.
"Their future will be tainted by the (racist) perception. This applies to all BN Youth," he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)