Indeed many today are pining for his return to the MB post. The charismatic PAS leader recounts to the Rocket’s T.K Tan on some of challenges PR faced during its short period in government and talks about the challenges in winning back Perak and the Malays, the kingmakers in state.

What is the political mood and scenario in Perak now?

Many in Perak have been waiting for the dissolution of the state assembly since February 2009. The Bukit Gantang by-election which followed took place soon after the power grab, was a referendum on the power grab.

In addition to the fact that it was held in a former UMNO stronghold, it was an abnormal by-election. Never in history has a PAS candidate won more than 80 per cent of the Chinese votes. It was almost like D-day when Perak citizens exercised their rights.

PR’s support level in Perak is highly volatile. At the height of the crisis, the Malays were with us. Since then their support level, especially among the rural Malays had subsided.

Why was the Malay ground unfavourable to PR in the aftermath of the power grab?

Three reasons stood out. First, in order for UMNO to justify the grab, I was vilified as being a stooge of DAP and Chinese as PAS was the minority party in the state government. They told the Malays it was incumbent on them to reinstate a Malay government to protect their interest.

Secondly, UMNO charged me as being treasonous to the Sultan as I had refused to resign as MB. In the Malay eyes it is a cardinal sin to defy the Sultan even though the constitution does not provide for my dismissal as MB by the Sultan.

UMNO also lied about me selling much Malay land to Chinese businessmen. In addition the mainstream media spun much half-truths about PR’s policy of giving freehold land titles to the Malay resettlement and Chinese new village families.

Though the Malays were the biggest beneficiary of this policy, I was painted as only approving the titles for the Chinese new villagers.

Why are the Malays so susceptible towards these allegations?

Under decades of UMNO’s brainwashing of the Malay community’s mindset, being seen as cosy to the ‘Chinese chauvinist’ DAP and espousing policies that seemingly favoured Chinese is tantamount to selling out the Malays. Hence, the easy acceptance on their part of UMNO’s lies.

Many Malays were sceptical of our egalitarian policies as they, particularly the UMNO and rural ones, still had racialist mindsets. PR’s policies were interpreted as favouring the non-Malays. Which is not true, we are fair to all.

If the similar situation in 2008 reoccurs where DAP wins the most seats while PAS and PKR gets less seats overall, we will need to do some adjustments to resolve the allocation of the excos and authority positions. This is to counter UMNO’s accusations that Malays would lose power under us.

In your recent interviews with other media, you said the Malays’ support is flowing back. How true is this?

When the FELDA listing issue cropped up, some rural Malays began to show receptiveness towards our message. The NFC cows and condos scandal have jacked that up a little higher for us.

However, the federal government’s populist measures such as BR1M have dented our support level a tad. Overall, one can see that it is a fluctuating situation.

What about the civil servants? Are they an obstacle for PR? 

There are around 7,900 civil servants in the state, the majority being Malays. Initially many of them were uncooperative and sceptical of us.

But we ploughed on with our work, emphasising on the five principles of justice, equality, integrity, openness and welfare. After five months, the lower level civil servants began to appreciate our efforts and determination.

Under 50 years of BN and PR’s 11 months, they have seen the difference. They had no pressure from the PR politicians to ‘look’ into their business. There was autonomy to do their work without interference. That is why almost 80 percent of the civil servants are supportive of us, till this day.

However, many top-ranking officials were not playing ball with us. Some of these heads of department already had their private agendas early on. They were fighting us through insubordination or sabotaging us. The state secretary in particular, was leaking EXCO meeting minutes and subverting our directives.

I had appealed to the chief secretary of the civil service to replace the state secretary, but to no avail. Their (the civil servants and BN plot masters) sabotage in the state government were deep reaching and pervasive; it took place from day one.

Were the allegations that DAP were controlling you and the state government true?

To say that DAP, in particular Perak DAP state chairman Ngeh Koo Ham and state secretary Nga Kor Ming were controlling the state government during PR’s tenure in 2008 is categorically untrue.

Many of the PR policies carried out during our tenure were based on the manifesto of Barisan Alternatif (BA), in which PAS and PKR were a part of then.

In fact DAP didn’t have a manifesto as specific as the BA’s edition before 2008. As I was responsible for drafting the BA manifesto, many of the policies were from my input.

Some of the tangible welfare policies that benefitted the Malays were suggested by Ngeh. As he had been an ADUN and opposition leader in the DUN before, he was well informed of the level of poverty in the state.

Through his input the state government provided rice and sugar for the hard core poor, who were mostly Malays. Even the idea to support the Islamic religious schools (SAR) came from him too.

Choosing the MB

On 9 March 2008, PAS was given the mandate by PR to submit a candidate for the MB’s post. There were six of us (PAS had won six state seats then). The Perak PAS state leadership deliberated for more than three and a half hours to choose the candidate.

It was a tense atmosphere. They pointed to me first. I turned it down. Then it went round the table. All of us rejected and deferred it to the other.

The state commissioner (Datuk Ahmad Awang) asked me a second time, ‘You have to take it, the people are waiting for us to make a decision.’ I refused again and so did the other five.

Finally the leaders decided for us. For 40 minutes the six of us waited anxiously outside the room. And then I was ordered to take up the post.

Though it was a challenging 11 months, it was reassuring that many came to my help. I was guided and ably supported by the PR team and federal PAS leaders.

Unbeknownst to many, Kelantan MB Datuk Nik Aziz would personally call and advise me regularly on how to run the government and handle the opposition from UMNO. -The Rocket

The rising support for Pakatan in Perak has so unsettled BN that Najib and other BN leaders have visited the state numerous times and promising millions of goodies. But many are unfazed; PR’s policies during 2008 have brought unprecedented changes, benefitted many and left a deep impression upon the people. Perak DAP state chairman Ngeh Koo Ham outlines PR’s vision for Perak with the Rocket:

“Whatever that has been promised during our previous administration will be continued if we win power again,” Ngeh said. The Beruas MP said that PR’s manifesto has brought an upbeat mood that has definitely spread around the state. He explained PR’s guiding principles to manage Perak as underlined in the manifesto.

Land For The People

“First of all, we will be issuing freehold land titles to the 349 Malay kampong tersusun (settlement villages) whereby 102,000 titles will be granted and for the 134 Chinese new villages, 47,000 titles. PR wants all legitimate and deserving Perak state residents to get freehold land titles for their properties, be it homes or land.”

Ngeh explains that during the Emergency period, the new villages were akin to detention camps for the Chinese, as they were forced to congregate there. “Why punish them for the second time by withholding their land titles, since the threat of communism is now over?” he asked.

He points out that PR’s policies are meant to enrich and empower the state’s residents through granting of land titles. Through studies made by property valuers, PR’s land title conversion policy would have increased the net value of the property owners in the villages by RM 5 billion without the state forking out a single sen.

“Many of these villagers were unable to get loans from banks as they were unable to pledge their temporary occupied license (TOL) properties as deposits, which were what their homes were. They would also be able to get loans to rebuild their dilapidated houses,” he explained.

Through this rebuilding process, PR hopes to also stimulate the state economy through the accompanying construction booms in these villages.

“This policy would benefit many poor people in the state, especially the Malays as they would receive the most land titles from this exercise. It is part of the positive discrimination that the deserving would receive aid tangibly.”

Another noteworthy policy is title granting for agricultural land. Perak has 63,000 acres of ‘illegal’ land where many are already farming them for food, aquaculture and fruits.

Ngeh points out that as a result of the collapse of the tin mining industry in the 1980s, there were financial hardships in the state. ‘Many went into farming these lands for survival. Not only did the BN state government do nothing for them, they even classified these lands as illegal.’

“Many of these farmers are in limbo; they can’t expand their business through bank loans as their land is “illegal.” PR has studied and looked into granting lease hold titles of varying tenure for these lands to enable them to gain financial certainty.”

However, since 2009 BN has put a freeze on this policy, refusing to continue it.

Guided welfare

One of the welfare policy started in Perak under PR that was emulated by other states was providing food to hardcore poor in the state. Many in the state, especially the Malays were provided food worth RM 100 every month. PR intends continue with this policy.

Also other policies such as gifts for university entering students, non-Muslim affairs endowment will be continued. Perak was the first state to establish a non-Muslim affairs bureau that was continued by the BN government. “PR will strengthen and bolster its funding further,” Ngeh added.

Another of PR’s policies that will be continued is giving discount on land conversion premium and fees for non-profit and religious organisations and charging low, nominal fees for conversion of private and vernacular school sites into permanent school status. “This is to recognise these institutions’ contribution to society,” he said.

Unfortunately BN has chosen to discontinue this policy as well.

Continuing Honesty

Ngeh says the core of the manifesto is about promising the people a clean, transparent and conscientious government that has been reflected in its financial performance.

In less than one year the Perak state government’s revenue increased by RM 103 million, resulting in a budget surplus of RM 13 million and FDI increased by RM 1.09 billion to more than RM 3.2 billion.

“Under our tenure there has been no increase in land and local council taxes,” Ngeh said. With its people-centric policies, PR’s track record in Perak is there for the public scrutiny.

Close knit cooperation

Perak PR is the first state to have joint secretariats in every parliamentary seat that is also active. “Since 2009 we have been campaigning non-stop in anticipation of the dissolution of the state assembly. We have been on the ground and in touch with the people almost daily. We are ready to govern,” he asserts.

Ngeh said PR will be resolute this time around in dealing with civil servants who have ulterior agendas and questionable loyalty to the state government. As for the other civil servants, PR will not cause problems for them. Civil servants will be looked after as long as the state government policies are carried out, he promised.

Vision for Perak

In its vision, PR aims to establish Perak as a vibrant tertiary education centre that can produce technically equipped and competent graduates.

“We will encourage more quality research centres to be set up here. Perak has many world-class researchers and scientists based all over the world. However, the constant lament from them was the lack of employment opportunities here,” he explains.

To nurture and attract back critical knowledge workers, PR will look into fostering research and development in cooperation with the help of local universities. “We will be providing more incentives such as extending leasehold tenure of the research centres, which was already initiated in 2008,” Ngeh said.

“Ipoh is dire need of an international convention centre that can attract business activities and expositions. In addition, Perak’s tourism is in need of better promotion and coordination efforts. We have some of the most scenic sites in the country, but it’s generally unknown outside of Malaysia,” he points out.

“With all this vision requires implementation. As Malaysians have observed from PR’s performance in other states, we can deliver,” Ngeh says.

Learning from others

“PR will be looking to implement open tenders in all possible and logical avenues that can benefit the state government yet deliver the goods to the people. We have held open tenders in timber harvesting that netted the state government 150 per cent in extra royalty revenue in 2008.”

“Another area of transparency that will be implemented is the personal asset declarations by the Menteri Besar and EXCOs,” Ngeh ended. -The Rocket

2009 was the year of infamy for Malaysia as Malaysians witnessed the legitimately elected Perak Pakatan Rakyat state government toppled in the most brusque manner. A flashback of the year’s events reminds us why the fight for justice and democracy in this lopsided playing field is a call all Malaysians must heed to protect the freedom we cherish.

BN’s illegal coup of the Perak state government in February 2009 was a watershed event in Malaysian political history.

Even by BN’s standard of past underhanded tactics, the 2009 power grab took it to putrefying lows in the annals of dubious takeover of opposition-held state governments by BN. The public’s confidence and trust in the legal institutions and separation of powers was damaged, perhaps irreparably.

When the saga of defections of the three ADUNs unfolded, PR took the morally right and logical step of seeking the dissolution of the state assembly (DUN) and holding fresh elections. What transpired took many by surprise.

Not only was Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin’s request for the state assembly’s dissolution denied, he was sacked by the palace. In his place BN’s Datuk Zambry Kadir was appointed MB.

Though it was not the first time that rulers in Perak and other states have decided the appointment of the Menteri Besar (MB), Nizar’s dismissal as MB raised many questions.

In the Perak state constitution it states, ‘If the MB ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly, then, unless at his request His Royal Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council.’

In addition, His Royal Highness Sultan Azlan Shah had once written in an article ‘The Role of Constitutional Ruler’ that “under normal circumstances, it is taken for granted that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong would not withhold his consent to a request for dissolution of the parliament. His role under such a situation is purely formal.”

Legislative mockery

As the crisis unfolded, PR sought to prove Zambry’s appointment was unconstitutional. State speaker V. Sivakumar call’s for an emergency sitting of the assembly to ratify support for Nizar was disavowed by the state secretary. The PR ADUNs were barred from entering the DUN by the state secretary, in clear defiance of the speaker’s authority.

The emergency assembly which was then conducted in the car park of an adjacent lot approved a motion of confidence for Nizar as MB. However, the state government continued to operate under the instruction of Zambry.

The legislative faceoff finally culminated in a showdown more akin to a hooligan brawl, dragging Malaysian democratic image to a new low. The speaker of the State Legislative Assembly was shouted at and forcibly carried away from his seat, and in his place a new speaker installed ignominiously.

During the ordeal, public dissent was clamped in a draconian manner. Some were charged for sedition for writing articles critical of the coup including DAP national chairman Karpal Singh, for merely stating a Ruler can be sued, a provision stated in the federal constitution.

Judiciary fiasco

Perhaps the greatest damage was to the judiciary for its handling of the legal proceedings. Nizar, who had challenged Zambry’s appointment as MB in court, was ruled as the legitimate MB on 11 May 2009 by the KL High Court.

Barely 18 hours later, the appeal court hastily granted Zambry a stay of execution on the decision by a single judge, unprecedented in Malaysian history.

On 22 May, the appeal court ruled that Zambry was the legitimate MB. On February the Federal Court followed suit in its decision. A past case, Stephen Kalong Ningkan vs the Malaysian Government, had clearly spelt that a Chief Minister or MB can only be removed by a vote of confidence in the legislative assembly.¹

Even constitutional expert Shad Saleem Faruqi, who wrote a favourable opinion defending the Federal Court’s decision, conceded that ‘the procedure by which Nizar was removed raises issues of constitutional propriety. There was undue haste in dismissing the leader of a popularly elected coalition.’ ²

Further mockery of the judiciary ensued. The Ipoh High Court judge struck out a civil suit by V Sivakumar against BN speaker R Ganesan on his legality as speaker, citing that the court could not interfere with what had been decided by the Perak assemblymen at their sitting on May 7 in accordance with Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution.

However the same judge ruled that the decision of the same legislative assembly to remove the plaintiff as speaker and to appoint the defendant was conclusive and had been fairly determined by the state assembly on May 7, 2009.³

The power grab has eroded people’s trust towards the government. Malaysian’s aspiration for cleaner and just governance cannot take place if this government is still in place. Perak has reminded us of that. Will we take heed?

Source

1. The Dismissal and Appointment of Menteri Besars in Perak, Hardial Singh Khaira. Pg 5

2. Perak: A State of Crisis, LoyarBurok. Pg 160

3. A Clever, Conveniently Contradictory and Convoluted Judgment, Martin Jalleh.

While the move to create wealth in Malaysia is laudable, the real beneficiaries appear to have been side-stepped out of their fair share, creating a society ill at ease especially with those who are savoring the wealth of the economic booms of the past.

Ever since the inception of Merdeka, independence wrought and wrestled from the British colonialists in 1957, the nation has moved forward in pushing for industrialization and development and is expectedly hoping to come on-stream as a fully developed country by 2020.

In the push towards this direction, especially since the advent of the Mahathir administration, much wealth has invariably been created in the process. Malaysia has witnessed dramatic growth in the standard of living and it is easily evident much development has brought much wealth and prosperity to the people.

But there has to be certain words of caution to those bent on getting richer and richer – be sensible about wealth creation – as the push and thrust to become wealthier has also attracted an unhealthy influx of economic migrants into the country who hope to compete and reap the spoils that are seemingly spilling over in their direction as well.

This specious belief that creating wealth and prosperity is the way forward to a better life does make sense. But what, unfortunately, that has transpired in this country and a significant number of other countries in the Asian belt are that wealth has mostly been created for the higher end of society, by gross indulgences in acts of cheating and corruption.

Thus, while wealth creation is always a good idea and there is nothing wrong with it, the path to creating wealth is more often than not littered with the acts of cheating and corruption. This creation of wealth in Malaysia seems to have created a sizeable number of wealthy, titled persons but whose success, when under scrutiny, appear to be very hollow and oftentimes even of a suspicious and dubious nature.

While everyone will achieve an end result in whatever they undertake to do, it is really not the end result that counts and matters, it is the ways and means that are used and employed to achieve the end result that really counts and matters.

In the case of a significant number of highly successful and glorified Malaysian personalities, while there are persons who really have a solid track record in having achieved fame and having created wealth for themselves, there appear to be far more who are guilty of having climbed up the ladder of success by way of cheating and by subscribing to corrupt practices.

This is the reason why the average Malaysian usually views with a pinch of salt the claim of persons to have achieved success and created their wealth by way of industry, hard work and the use of acceptable ways and means to achieve the end result.

It is usually in the arena of politics, business and the professions, that we find a noble lot of individuals who have been side-stepped from the glory of fame and fortune by persons who have an uncanny learning of the tricks of their trade to place themselves in a better position by the use of cunning, cheating and corruption.

Therefore, in the eyes of ordinary Malaysians,  a certain number of the persons in this country who lay claim to having been bestowed with titles, positions and having amassed their wealth in the process, actually fail to impress and convince Malaysians as a whole that their success have been achieved by fair and square means.

It is especially unbecoming and even embarrassing to witness persons who are titled, in positions of authority and supposedly to be leaders of the nation, being subject to much ridicule and contempt as their ostentatious and lavish display of wealth is more often than not accredited to cheating and corruption.

With more Malaysians being better educated, they are now able to know that high society individuals should not be judged by the externals by which men judge their fellow men. For more and more Malaysians, they have learnt not to “judge a book by its cover.”

Owing to the largess of wealth created since the days of the Mahathir regime, most of the high end of Malaysian society has further prospered. But there has been a price to pay. The effects of the wealth that has been created have been largely negated by a growing disparity between the haves and the have not’s, a spiral in the prices of goods and services favoring the wealthy, and the spawning of arrogant, ill behavior by the rich and powerful oppressing the rest of Malaysia especially the working class.

While it is true much wealth has been created, the outcome of wealth creation in Malaysian society is that it has been unfairly distributed with the vast majority of Malaysians being displaced from being the real beneficiaries of wealth and instead being put to labor and toil to keep the upper class, who through their corrupt and crony network, tick away with an opulent lifestyle for themselves and their families.

While Mahathir’s vision of creating wealth was a bright idea to begin with, like all short-sighted individuals, the erstwhile former prime minister failed to put in place mechanisms to distribute the wealth that was created in accordance to fair-play and justice.

This subscription by the government to partisan politics has caused much disillusionment and disappointment among the large majority of Malaysians causing them to vote their displeasure in the 12th GE in the form of a political tsunami to awaken the BN-UMNO fraternity to the possibility that their stronghold, Malaysia, was drawing to an end.

Wealth creation is a thorny subject for any society especially for a country aspiring to become a developed nation in the years to come. But in Malaysia, the economic booms of the past has engendered feelings of ill will, racial discord and the general sentiment that the powers-that-be who have been ruling especially over the last three decades have failed to practice meritocracy and favored more often than not the wrong individuals and organizations to benefit from the efforts of wealth creation.

The disproportionate distribution of wealth that has so far been undertaken should prove to play a pivotal role in the casting of votes by voters in the 13^th GE. Unimpressive attempts by the Najib Administration of late to spend millions of ringgit in trying to curry favor with voters have so far been viewed with growing skepticism as Malaysians are beginning to realize that for the last 30-odd years or so most of them have been deprived of much of the wealth that has been created.

Besides being sensible about wealth creation, Malaysians should also collectively push for their rightful dues from the BN government and not be shortchanged anymore. This should be payback time now. If the BN-UMNO collaboration fail to practice fair-play and justice and ensure the equitable distribution of wealth, it is high time for Malaysians with their power to vote to boot the cheats and the corrupt for a better Malaysia. -The Rocket

* Christopher Fernandez has been writing and teaching throughout Asia since 1984.

credit: Penang Monthly

by Karl Lee

I was recently struck by the news that Malaysians have once again failed to gain admission into Harvard University after the last Malaysian student, Avinaash Subramaniam, was accepted into the prestigious university two years ago.

According to the university’s selection panel chief, Datuk Dr. Goh Cheng Teik, the failure of the applicants to be shortlisted for interviews showed the serious deterioration of the quality of our local students.

At this point, two big questions must to be answered: Are we producing enough secondary school graduates who are considered competitive by international standards? What are the fundamental reasons behind such a setback?

To answer the first question, let us look at the results by the latest Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA) 2009+ which was released by Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) in December last year. In the study which tested a total of 1.377 million 15-year olds of the ten partner countries to the core Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Malaysia is not only ranked much lower than the OECD countries in reading, mathematics and science performances but also trailed behind a few of the ten countries surveyed in the report.

In terms of reading performance, Malaysia is ranked at 55, far behind those in the countries which our Deputy Prime Minister had recently claimed that our education system is better than─ Germany (19), the US (15) and the UK (25). In addition, the report stated that only 56% of our students are able to possess the level of reading literacy needed for effective participation and productivity in life.

In both science and mathematics, Malaysia is again ranked at 52 and 57 respectively. 57% of our students demonstrated proficiency at least at the baseline level to enable them to participate in life situations involving science and technology. Alarmingly, only 41% of our students were said to have acquired the necessary mathematical skills for their future development.

Worst still, Malaysia has been faring behind Costa Rica, Malta and United Arab Emirates, in all three literacy areas evaluated in the report. Overall, Malaysian students are positioned in the third quartile of the total 74 countries being surveyed.

Translating these results into economic terms, our current students lack the standard skills to effectively compete in this global, market-driven economy relative to their peers in most countries. This is what we, average Malaysians, should be worried about.

Reforming our education policy

credit: Penang Monthly

So what are the reasons behind such deterioration in the quality of our school graduates?

No doubt the government’s mentality in planning and implementing education policy is the main cause to the predicament we are in. The lack of recognition, urgency and innovation among the ruling party’s policymakers in coming out with measures to address the current stalemate in our education system has become the greatest impediment towards positive change of the education policy in our country.

The Najib administration lags behind in education reform. It has been slow in recognizing and solving the lingering problems that continue to affect the healthy developments of our schoolchildren.

Take the recent remark made by the Deputy Prime Minister cum Education Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin on the results of the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2011/2012 released in April earlier. Instead of judging the report in an impartial manner, he jumped into the outright conclusion that we produce more competitive students than some of our counterparts in the advanced countries.

The ‘feel good’ statement clearly represented the reluctance of our policymakers to brace up to the reality that we are actually mired in abundant problems: inequality of access to education between urban and rural students, having significant number of school drop-outs, decreased capacity to acquire the three essential skills of reading, science and mathematics literacy (as evident in the PISA 2009+ report) and falling behind countries such as Thailand and Vietnam in the number of students entering Ivy League universities.

Likewise, the Najib administration’s decision to abolish the PPSMI (the teaching and learning of science and mathematics in English) in July 2009 without prior public feedback and better solutions at hand exerted damage.

While seemingly offering a short-term solution to solve the inequality of literacy rate between rural and poor students, the decision does not take into account the broader negative impact on the proportion of students who can compete with the rest of the world.

What matters most at this juncture is to promptly get our policy right and consistent in order to avoid more future ‘casualties’. The young cohorts that were treated as ‘experimental subjects’ already bear the ill effects of identity crisis.

Last but not least, we are in dire need of an innovative education policy. In contrast to its other policies (such as the 1Malaysia Clinic, 1Malaysia Housing, 1Care for 1Malaysia, etc.), the Najib administration somehow has not injected any creative approach in its education policy.

Instead, the government appeared to stick on decades-long education policy of maintaining the status quo without implementing major reform measures to tackle the socio-economic changes in our society today.

As the inequality of literacy rates between urban and rural students is becoming more pronounced today, the government should consider having two-tier education policy of allowing schools which choose to teach science and mathematics in English to do so; while providing those schools which opt for teaching these subjects in Bahasa Malaysia with a set of measures to evaluate their students’ reading (especially English), science and mathematics performances from time to time.

Furthermore, the government should delegate some of its federal powers in the education ministry to the state governments and local authorities to decide and implement education-related measures attuned to their local conditions. To avoid confusion arising from such complicated policy, effective coordination and support from relevant federal, state and local agencies is needed to implement the necessary educational reform.

Our current education policy is a product of a bygone era when the impact of globalisation was less likely to be felt. In the current environment where states and companies seek advantages over each other, having the right talent often determines the success and failure of these institutions.

Since we cannot prevent our brightest talents from leaving Malaysia to work and migrate overseas, we should treat our younger generation as national treasures and spare no effort to equip them with the necessary skills to excel in this challenging world. In a decade’s time, they will be our best hope for a high-income Malaysia. –The Rocket

The book chronicles the political journey of Lim Kit Siang and answers basic questions that baffles the younger generation who have long been bombarded with the image of Kit Siang as a Communist, a Chinese-chauvinist who cares not for the welfare of the Malays nor respects the throne. Ooi mindfully gathers the answers to those allegations and presents it to the readers as a matter of fact.

Reading the Malay version of the book was intriguing. The cover photo alone was eye opening enough. You see a younger Lim Kit Siang posing with friends, his hands in his pocket, jaw line perfectly defined, old school black plastic frame glasses, chin slightly tilted up; as if saying, “What?” to a gang of unruly UMNO bullies.

Taking the reader back in time, we are walked through the early life of Kit Siang, as if sitting in his living room, perched on a couch, looking at old family albums and personally chit chatting about his ambition and hopes for a better Malaysia, while starting off at an early age in the field of journalism before taking on law and finally jumping head on into Malaysian politics.

Special focus is given on the events leading to the black dot in Malaysian history that is the May 13^th riots in 1969. UMNO has never ceased to blame the turn of events on Kit Siang, who according to his account in the book was not even in Kuala Lumpur during the riots.

What is also interesting about the book is the number of appendix it includes, among them speeches, letters and press statements by Kit Siang. Most interesting was an excerpt from his speech during the DAP-Gerakan Cultural Debate, late November 1968, where Kit Siang takes on Dr Syed Naguib Al-Attas on issues pertaining to language, art, political beings and other entities that shape the minds and thought pattern of humans.

One is presented with a different perspective at how Kit Siang, the fighter of justice and political activist can also demonstrate his intellectual side.

Another interesting speech would be the Student Power-like lecture he gave in April 1968, organized by UM’s Student Union regarding the role of students in Malaysian politics. Many believe this sparked the minibus roadshow campaign by the students which contributed to a landslide Perikatan loss during the General Elections about a year later.

The book, aptly titled The Right to Differ portrays the very essence of Kit Siang’s political thought. After twice detained under the dreaded Internal Security Act – once in 1969 and the other during Ops Lalang, Kit Siang has always emerged with the same conviction and dedication towards what he believes to be true and just. Always emerging with a smile on his face.

The results of March 2008 have greatly changed the course of Malaysian history, together with other Pakatan Rakyat leaders, Kit Siang is set to chart a new course for Malaysian politics. To some the path might be tedious, but to Kit Siang, surely he will just acknowledge the hardships with the exact expression he has on the cover of the book – a simple smile. – The Rocket

* Available for sale here

One might seem to think that Bunohan is a story of murder, Thai kick-boxing, or even go to the extent of assuming that it is a horror film. Director Dain Said however has masterfully amalgamated every other story into this one.

You are first served with a scene from an underground fight club of sorts where the youngest of the three sons nearly loses a fight and gets whisked off away after obtaining serious injuries and being brought back to his home town in Bunohan.

Adil, the fighter, gets chased by the lawi-ayam wielding assassin, Ilham who happens to be his older brother. They both find their way back to their home just in time as the eldest brother, Bakar sets to coerce the village people to sell their land to some Datuk from KL in the name of development.

Bakar has a very UMNO-like quality to his character. Tucked in shirt, well-kept goatee, he comes home claiming to want to look after the ailing father. He quietly conspires with people to take over the villagers’ land. His greed is evidenced by his final act of treachery by murdering his father in order to get the final piece of land.

Listening carefully, the audience might detect political nuances within the dialogue; most glaring of all would of course be the part where Adil hoping that the second fight to be clean (read: bersih). Subliminal political messaging is abundant in the movie, for those sensitive to the language of politics.

But the movie, as far as I was concerned, was a train wreck. Allow me to extend my heartiest congratulations to you if you happen to belong to the handful of people who made it out of the theatres without a confused look on your face after nearly two hours trying to comprehend it.

Firstly, the thick Kelantanese dialogue throws the viewer off (the title is pronounced as ‘boo-know-hair’). That alone managed to score a few laughs among the numerous KL-ites who have little encounters with the east coast dialect. I however failed to see what was so funny.

The movie was an abomination. Non-existent plot centred around a mishmash of Malay mysticism and the usual troubled and dysfunctional Malay family. Mom is a traditional healer with magical powers, dad is a shadow puppet master with his own idiosyncrasies, and three sons of which this film is built upon. By some unlucky turn of events, the mother dies, and the children leaves home to nurture their inner demons, only to come back at a certain point in time to meet those demons face to face. Blah blah blah.

The director must have a fondness for everything olive green, he played extensively with water and sand, making Bunohan an extremely wet and dull picture. Mind you, the cinematography is oh so beautiful. Charin Pengpanich’s work was astounding, making the dull and wet scenes seem artful and fancy. Utilizing wide angles in every other frame he could, the picture was photographically perfect.

The film’s only other redeeming quality is its success in pulling us out from the dark that is the slurry of typical Malaysian films, always going in circles with love, betrayal, comedy and horror. It enlightened many viewers to the culture of ‘main puteri’ and introduced ‘saka buaya’ as undertones to the grand theme of mysticism.

My rating? Three and a half stars for Bunohan; one for the gorgeous cinematography, one for Faisal Hussein’s performance, another for the political innuendoes and half a star for the effort at enlightenment. – The Rocket

No thanks to the Barisan Nasional (BN) regime, Sabah is the poorest state in Malaysia by a clear margin, but why should there be an outrageous population growth in the state in the last 40 years?

During the Parliament session on 16^th March 2011, the Prime Minister’s Department released the following population statistics for the country, concentrating on Sarawak and Sabah, from 1970 to 2010, and the statistics shows that there must be something very wrong in Sabah:

Is there a possible explanation how Sabah’s population grows by 390% in just 40 years?

It matters not a jot that the BN regime had denied this, but one needs only to walk in the streets and back lanes of Sabah, and you are bound to meet face to face many foreigners. They live like Sabahans, in towns, suburbs and floating villages. They are employed in restaurants and cafes, construction sites, markets, timber concessions, factories, road and drain works, fishing trawlers, taxis, godowns and warehouses, school canteens, and even in town halls.

Newspapers have published this often, and the above figures of the Prime Minister’s Department bear testimony, these illegal immigrants have Malaysian identity cards, the “MyKad”! Most ironic, many genuine Malaysians have to wait for years before they get their MyKads.

Worse, many of these illegals are registered voters!

Politicians from the ruling and Opposition parties in Sabah had complained of all these, but the BN Government will simply brush them aside, because these illegal immigrants are BN’s vote bank! They have turned Sabah to become what Najib has called the “BN’s fixed deposit state”!

The fact that these illegal immigrants have outnumbered locals and are competing with local Sabahans for jobs and create social problems is of little concern to the BN. To the BN, political expediency outweighs everything.

Many Malaysians in Sabah and beyond know that the BN Government had registered illegal immigrants as voters. The electoral roll in Sabah had become so foul and doctored that the High Court annulled it and ordered the Likas by-election. The Election Commission owes an explanation why illegal immigrants have been registered in the rolls, only to see the BN use its brute majority in Parliament to legislate that the electoral rolls are henceforth unimpeachable in Court.

Until there is a Royal Commission of Inquiry, we may never know when had the BN Government started legalizing illegal immigrants as voters in Sabah.

It could have been during the Pairin era, when the Kadazandusuns had a political awakening that saw Pairin Kitingan coming to power in Sabah. In order to wrest back the state, something very foul had to be done. Sabahans called it the “Project IC”.

“Project IC” was presented to the Parliament Select Committee on Electoral Reform. All MPs were jubilant when the PSC’s Interim Report that was presented in Parliament in December 2011 proposed for a reconfirmation or revalidation of the electoral rolls in Sabah and the establishment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the countless allegations of illegal immigrants afforded voting rights as phantom voters in Sabah.

The PSC was headed by Datuk Maximus Ongkili, a Sabahan who knows only too well about the influx of illegal immigrants registered as voters in Sabah over the past 4 decades.

But when the Final Report of PSC was tabled in Parliament on 3^rd April, 2012, all that were recommended in the Interim Report about reconfirming or revalidating the electoral rolls in Sabah and the establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry into illegals becoming voters in Sabah vanished into thin air.

The increase in the population of Sabah owes everything to these illegal immigrants but political expediency rules the day. A clean and fair 13^th general election was a foregone conclusion. Najib would not have a Royal Commission to wash the BN’s dirty linen in public.

What about Sarawak? They say statistics do not lie. I am prepared to accept as realistic the growth rate of the national population over each decade. But one also has to consider that compared to the 1970’s, modern families tend to be smaller rather than bigger. An average household size is 4.3 persons (Department of Statistics, 2006) but it might well be closer to 5 persons in the 1970’s. This is particularly valid if one considers that Sarawakians are generally poorer, and poorer families tend to have more children.

I am also prepared to assume that “Project IC” was not a phenomenon in Sarawak, and that there are little geographical differences between Sarawak and Sabah.

Comparing the population growth of Sarawak with the national total, it is not difficult to note the steady decline, from 9.35% of the nation’s population in 1970 to 8.78% 40 years later. On the other hand, Sabah’s population growth registered an upward surge.

I have been to many longhouses all over Sarawak. Many Dayak couples have 6 to 7 children. Malays and Melanaus in Sarawak tend to have big families too. The Chinese have comparatively smaller families.

Overall, I would have been prepared to argue that the ratio of Sarawak’s population vis a vis the national total should at least be maintained at 9.35%.

Should its population be 9.35% of the national total, Sarawak should have a population of 2,577,404 in 2010. There ought to be some explanation to the difference of 157,395. Where have these people gone to?

I told the Dewan Undangan Negeri in November 2011 close to 100,000 Dayaks and anak-anak Sarawak have lost faith in Sarawak, as they seek employment in Singapore, Johor and the Klang Valley. If development distribution is equitable, the children of Sarawak will not have to leave their homeland.

157,395 Sarawakians have voted with their feet, by leaving the state and losing confidence in his Government. I cannot see how the present system will change under the BN Government. A lot of Sarawakians had promised to come back only after the BN has been replaced. I am looking forward to that historic day! –The Rocket

Postal votes

The April 2 report by the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on electoral reform produced 22 recommendations, in which four of the 22 were opposed by Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

Loke explains PR’s first contention- expanding postal voting to media personnel, “PR’s principle is to reduce and reform the postal voting process. The postal vote has always been a contentious issue because of the element of fear hanging on the postal voters and its accuracy.”

“Previously, with both the police and military personnel counted together, there were more than 200,000 postal voters. With the recommendation of using advance voting this should have resolved the issue.”

According to the Election Commission (EC) there were more than 140,000 EC staffs who voted through postal voting in the last general elections (GE). “In this coming GE, EC says that more than 240,000 on-duty EC official and staffs may potentially be assigned as postal voters,” he said.

“We do not object to early voting for media personnel. We want them and the EC personnel to vote through advance voting as well.”

Campaign period

For the minimum campaign period, Loke disputes the reasonableness of a 10 day period for campaigning.

“In campaigning, the candidates need time to go to the ground to campaign. In Sarawak, some of the parliamentary constituencies are as big as states in Peninsular Malaysia. Candidates wouldn’t be able to meet majority of the voters in 10 days, let alone talk to them meaningfully,” Loke says.

“EC’s argument that it is costly to conduct longer period is not valid. It is costly to the candidates, not to EC or the government,” he chastised.

In addition, Loke points out that if postal voting were to be extended to overseas voters, the 10 day campaign period would be insufficient as the whole mechanics of postal voting takes time. First, the votes need to be sent to the voters by post; subsequently the voters need to send it back to the embassy to be forwarded to the constituencies in Malaysia. That would easily take around two weeks,” he explains.

Automatic voter registration

The PSC’s recommendation to pre-register citizens upon reaching 20 years old as voters has complicated the core issue, which is automatic registration of voters.

“Malaysia has a comprehensive system of registering a newborn citizen. Every citizen will be issued a birth certificate upon birth. Upon reaching 12 years of age, they would be issued an identity card (IC). Upon reaching 18 years the IC will be changed to a MyKad.”

“The moment a Malaysian changes his IC to a MyKad, his name can be listed on the EC database. Their names and addresses can be inserted into the ER automatically.”

“If a person was to register himself EC will have to engage manpower to register them separately and manually. Automatic registration will cut down the cost of voter registration,” Loke elaborated.

Voting age should be 18

“PR had asked for the legal voting age to be lowered to 18 from the current 21, though BN has objected to it. Any sane Malaysian can marry at the age of 18 without parental consent; he or she is by definition an adult. More than 150 countries in the world have adopted 18 as the official voting age. Automatic registration is not the same as compulsory voting. The people still have a choice whether or not to vote.”

“Secondly, by asking that EC study the option of automatic registrations, with no assurance of implementing it, these two recommendations point to one thing, the EC and BN doesn’t want to the lower voting age and automatic voter registration.”

“Saying EC requires a long time frame to adopt it due to the ongoing electoral roll (ER) cleaning process and to study and take action on it only within 12 months is not acceptable. The government is just buying time and space for its survival,” he said.

Cleaning the Electoral Roll

Apart from the objections to the four recommendations, PR submitted a minority report that specifically addresses the issues in the electoral roll.

“The MIMOS audit of the electoral roll (ER) had shown that there were no repetitive IC numbers, no dead people listed and no voters below 21 years old in the ER. However, these findings do not vindicate EC in this matter.”

The biggest issue that MIMOS found was the presence of multiple voters in one address, with 51 to 100 voters in 938 locations and 100 and more voters in 324 locations with the same addresses.

“The contentious part is EC’s refusal to take action against the 42,000 dubious voters in the ER after uncovering them. These are voters who are not on the National Registration Department (NRD) list but are on the ER.”

“EC says that these may be legitimate voters who haven’t received or updated their MyKad, hence the need to maintain them. This is unacceptable; no voters can be admitted without a MyKad,” he pointed out.

The EC had done a round of cleaning up the ER and found 42,000 voters with uncertain nationality and dubious status before the MIMOS audit was carried out.

Relocated without consent

In addition, EC had relocated some voters outside of its mandated period and without the consent of the voters. “EC gave the excuse that they have wrongly keyed in locality for the voters and they were amending it after GE.”

“This would confuse the voters. When they go to their previous voting stations and can’t find their names on the ER, it will create havoc and distress for the voters in looking for their changed constituencies. This will discourage the voters from exercising their voting right. EC can’t do that; the voters should be reverted back to their original voting constituencies.”

The fact that a prominent personality such as Selangor Menteri Besar (MB) Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim ’s voting locality can be changed to a different state without his knowledge, raises questions about EC’s system of relocating voter’s locality. “They are contradicting their own stated principles. They are not following it,” Loke queried.

“PR had also raised other objections on the current ER; however the EC and the government have ignored it. PR can’t do much beyond this point. The people need to give public pressure to the government to reform. Even if we were to explore the option of taking EC to court to force them to take action, it will take years before we see results.”

Fulfilling the BERSIH Demands

Loke gives a failing grade to the government on the eight demands by BERSIH 2.0. “On cleaning the electoral roll, there are many aspects that have yet to be addressed. Hence the need for PR’s minority report.”

“As for the other three namely free and fair access to media, stop corruption and stop dirty politics the proposals language is still vague. There are no specific steps to address these demands. Only the use of indelible ink is satisfactory,” Loke commented.

As for the 22 PSC recommendations, “it is a report, not a law. It is not binding; unless Parliament adopts the recommendations, it remains just that.”

“The entire exercise was meant to give the impression that Najib is a reformist who is implementing transformation in the country. BN is looking to win political goodwill from the people in order to win the next GE.”

Why BERSIH, again

Why then the BERSIH rally? Loke reminds Malaysians it is crucial for several reasons. “It is part of the civic education for the people on the issues involved.”

“It will act as huge pressure on the EC and government to rectify the flaws that were identified. This government is reactionary; as a result of BERSIH 2.0, the PSC on electoral reform came about.”

“BERSIH 3.0 will create awareness for the people of the electoral fraud that has gone on for decades. BN will not easily change a system that has served them so well. BERSIH is needed to bring people together for a common cause.”

“Lest we think a rally wouldn’t affect the results, let’s be reminded that after the previous rally, it finally pressured to EC to come out with the 42,000 dubious voters list.” – The Rocket

Ampang MP Zuraida told the media last August that illegal immigrants were being made to take an oath of allegiance to support Umno and BN in order to be part of the amnesty programme.

There are an estimated two million registered migrant workers and with an equally large number of illegal ones in Malaysia. Most of them are working in the Selangor and Kuala Lumpur area.

The presence of such large number of migrant workers in the two states raises the question if they would be registered as Malaysian citizens and voters. Indeed since 2008 there has been an unusually large increase of number of voters in Selangor.

Since 1990, the national rate for increase of voters between general elections (GE) has averaged around 8.50 percent, with the highest figure of 13 percent recorded in the period of 1990-1995.

From 2008 to September 2011, Selangor registered a 20 percent increase in voters. An analysis of the voters increase by parliamentary seat breakdown (refer table) shows unusually large increases in the seats won marginally by PR in the 2008 GE.

In the rural and sparsely populated constituency of Hulu Selangor, there has been an increase of 24 percent. By comparison, the densely populated PJ North seat saw an increase of 5,603 voters, a 7 percent hike.

Engineering A Fraud

Past cases of electoral engineering have been well documented in showing how sudden increases of number of voters has helped BN win back states it lost.

In 1990 PBS left BN. Sabah, which was then ruled by PBS, witnessed a 17.6 percent increase in registered voters from 1990 to 1994. As a result, in the 1994 state elections, PBS narrowly won the state elections. Within two weeks of the elections, Sabah fell to BN after PBS ADUNs defected.

In 1999, PAS won Terengganu with 28 seats to BN’s four seat tally. Voter turnout was around 81 percent.

From 1999 to 2004, the number of voters in the state increased by 18 percent against 6 percent for the national rate. In the 2004 GE, voter turnout reached 87 percent. PAS lost the state with a reverse tally of 4 to 28 for BN.

The two past precedents portend an insidious omen for Selangor. The presence of the unusually large number of voters in Selangor is matter of grave concern.

Citizens of Selangor, indeed all of Malaysia even, stand to lose all that was gained in 2008. Unless the electoral roll is cleaned up, Selangor may be the next victim of this impending electoral fraud. –The Rocket