Seriously, Najib?

9 October, 2011

by Lim Kit Siang

 The malicious and selective prosecution of PAS Deputy President Mohamad Sabu for criminal defamation should dampen the euphoria in certain quarters sparked by the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s latest gambit to brand himself as the reformer par excellence to make Malaysia the “best democracy in the world”.

The proposals to set up a parliamentary select committee on electoral reforms, to repeal the nefarious Internal Security Act (ISA) and to amend various laws such as Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) have not been able to stand up to close scrutiny that they are intended to usher in a major democratisation of the country.

The proposed parliamentary select committee will only be meaningful if it results in changes to the electoral system to ensure free and fair elections as envisaged in the Eight Demands of Bersih 2.0, and most important of all, that such reforms are all effected before the dissolution of Parliament and the holding of the next general elections.

Only promises, no serious commitment

The very fact that the Prime Minister is not prepared to give an undertaking that Parliament would not be dissolved until the parliamentary select committee has made recommendations for a free and fair electoral system and their full implementation raises the question whether this is just a political ploy or a meaningful reform exercise.

The repeal of the ISA will be tested as to whether the two replacement laws for it would only result in spawning new ISA-like detention-without-trial laws without the term of “ISA”.

The PPPA amendment to do away with annual licensing for newspapers will not lead to free and responsible press so long as the government continues to exercise a media stranglehold through other measures as licensing of newspapers and political party ownership and control of newspapers.

At a time when Najib’s bona fides for political reforms has come to the very national forefront, the malicious and selective prosecution of Mat Sabu for criminal defamation has come as a reminder that if Malaysia is to make progress towards a more democratic society, upholding human rights and the rule of law, it is equally important to end the gross abuses of power so rampant in the present system – as illustrated by the case of the malicious and selective prosecution of Mat Sabu for criminal defamation.

There are incidents galore in the past two years of reckless and irresponsible incitement of racial and religious hatred and tensions, as in the lies and falsehoods alleging a DAP conspiracy for a Christian Malaysia and and a Christian Prime Minister, but which enjoy utter immunity and impunity from prosecution.

There must not only be far-reaching reforms to abolish draconian and undemocratic laws but also a restoration of the independence, professionalism and integrity of key national institutions, whether the Judiciary, Attorney-General’s Chambers, Police, Election Commission or MACC, if Malaysia is to become a normal democratic country.

Seri Perdana and Putrjaya belong to UMNO only?

Within 48 hours after announcing the so-called reforms, Najib demonstrated that he has neither the political commitment nor the necessary mindset to “walk the talk” of making Malaysia “the best democracy in the world” when he spoke to the Association of Former Members of the Social Welfare Department (PBAKM) calling for assistance to defend Putrajaya by declaring that Seri Perdana is the residence of UMNO and a BN Prime Minister.

Najib cannot be more wrong as Sri Perdana is not the private property of UMNO and BN but the public property of the people of Malaysia, regardless of the outcome of any general election.

No Prime Minister can be serious in wanting make Malaysia “the best democracy in the world” when he refuses to accept the verdict of the people in a general election and uphold the important distinctions among public, party and personal spheres of responsibility, which is the root cause of the rampant corruption, abuse of power and flawed democracy in the country.

Malaysians are reminded of Najib’s deplorable speech at the UMNO General Assembly last year when he used the language of “crushed bodies, lives lost” for UMNO to defend power at any cost in Putrajaya.

The first thing Najib should do to demonstrate his sincerity and credibility by retracting his “crushed bodies, lives lost” declaration to the UMNO General Assembly last year and make a firm public commitment that he, UMNO and BN will accept the verdict of the people, including for a change of government in Sri Perdana, Putrajaya in the next general election.

If Najib is not prepared to make such a retraction and publicly declare acceptance of the general election verdict of the people, the sincerity and credibility of his claim of wanting to make Malaysia “the best democracy in the world” stands immediately exposed as an empty and meaningless stance.

Freedom still in fetters, judiciary still in shackles

The BN government is not qualified to talk about wanting to be the “best democracy in the world” when it has not revoked its unjustified ban on Bersih 2.0 declaring it as an illegal organisation and dropped all charges against those arrested in connection with the Bersih 2.0 campaign.

For this reason, I welcome the dropping of the charges against the 30 activists of Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM), including the six who were detained earlier under the Emergency Ordinance (EO), in connection with their support of the July 9 Bersih 2.0 rally.

The question next is when the unreasonable and undemocratic ban on Bersih 2.0 will be revoked?

Malaysia’s judiciary has a long way to go to recover its judicial professionalism, independence and integrity which it enjoyed before the series of executive assaults on the judiciary for over two decades – beginning with the 1988 judicial crisis resulting in the sacking of the Lord President, Tun Salleh Abas and two Supreme Court judges.

Malaysia cannot be said to be on the path to become the “best democracy in the world” without a total overhaul of undemocratic laws – including repressive legislation like the Universities and Universities Colleges Ac, Official Secrets Act and Sedition Act – and key institutions in the country as ensuring an independent, professional and incorruptible judiciary, Attorney-General’s Chambers, Police, Civil Service, Election Commission, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency, etc.

At present, Malaysia is among the “worst democracy in the world” where citizens could be arrested for wearing yellow T-shirts and attract the full might of the law for supporting a peaceful rally in pursuit of a perfectly legitimate and democratic campaign for free and fair elections, including mass arrests and the firing of teargas and chemically-laced water cannons at unarmed and defenceless Malaysians. -The Rocket

This article was written by on Sunday, October 9, 2011 at 3:19 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed. Tags:

Comments are closed.

Other News

The story behind parliamentary written replies

23 July, 2014 0 Comments

By Lu Wei Hoong Early last month, PKR’s Bagan Serai MP N Surendran slammed the institution of Parliament as “a waste of money”, because recent events have shown that it merely acts as a “rubber stamp” for the government of the day. To members of the media who cover the ... Full Article →

Artist Zunar, relentless fighter against tyranny (Part 2)

23 July, 2014 0 Comments

(…continuation from part 1) Since 2009, we still haven’t seen other cartoonists who shine other than yourself. Why is that so? Ok. With regard to this, I can only provide the space and guidance for cartoonists, I wont be able to turn them into successful cartoonists. That is for themselves ... Full Article →

Thank you, veterans! Because of you, DAP prevails

2 April, 2014 0 Comments

On 2 March, Penang Chief Minister and DAP MP for Bagan Lim Guan Eng hosted a private dinner in honor of the Penang state DAP veterans. There are over 120 veterans in the state who have been party members for over 30 years. Of the number, about 70 turned up ... Full Article →

What’s wrong with the Terengganu crisis?

5 June, 2014 0 Comments

by Political Studies for Change (KPRU) Election fever has become a phenomenon in this equatorial country ever since the March 8 political tsunami, which has changed the political landscape, though the political transformation has not completed yet. To a certain extent, each legislature at federal and state level has put a different complexion on politics. The recent Terengganu political crisis and the storming of the Penang state assembly by UMNO members have to do with legislative politics. Legislative politics is different from election politics. From the parliament to legislature assembly in each state, the most frequent question that has been asked by people is about the attendance of members of elected representative, and as for some other incidents that have happened in legislature they have merely formed a part of their memory as people might find them obscure. Obscurity has become a byword for these pieces of memory due to the fact that people might not have the foggiest about these floating debris of memory. The most unforgettable legislative incident to the people goes to the seizure of power in the Perak state, and despite that, people did not necessarily follow on all the details and issues arising from the incident of seizing power in Perak state. This time - the Terengganu crisis is not only a political crisis, but also a ‘legislative crisis’. The lack of pressure from people in Terengganu lies in the insufficient knowledge about legislative which has saved Najib Razak’s shaky hold on power, as well as the dying Terengganu political and legislative crises from the jaws of death. The incident got serious. Media started to report extensively and non-UMNO members in BN also thought that it was a red flag. However, from the Prime Minister Najib’s statement announcing that the Sultan of Terengganu, Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin had consented to the resignation of Ahmad Said as well as the appointment of Ahmad Razif Abd Rahman as the new Terengganu Menteri Besar; to the dramatic twist of events where Ahmad Said and and two other UMNO state assemblymen quited the party and then later returned to the party, there appeared an unification in media reporting of the incident from the preparedness to deal with the incidents from different angles. As stability wins over anything else, water leaves behind no trails in its path. From Najib’s statement on 12th May 2014 to the new Menteri Besar Ahman Razif’s taking of oath of office before Sultan Mizan; and to the former Menteri Besar Ahmad Said’s announcement made at his official residence in Kemaman as to his decision to withdraw his resignation from UMNO, the whole process took shorter than two days. Nonetheless, all of the incidents that have occurred in the midst of the Terengganu crisis must not be dismissed out of hand, particularly when comes to the interpretation of matters involving legislative, which calls for some clarification and so that when similar event takes place in future, people in the particular state would no longer stay static in the face of the crisis. This Terengganu crisis, after Ahmad Said and two other UMNO state assemblymen quited the party, left Barisan Nasional with 14 state seats, against Pakatan Rakyat’s 15 in the assembly, giving an equation of 15:14:3, with 3 being the “independent reps”. On the same day, that is, 13th May, the Terengganu state legal advisor Datuk Azhar Abdul Hamid, when contacted by Bernama, has claimed that despite the fact that the number of BN assemblymen had dropped from 17 to 14, the state assembly Speaker was counted as a representative of the ruling state government, thereby giving an equation of 15:15:3. It was Wesak day, which is also a public holiday. After founding director of think tank Political Studies for Change (KPRU), Ooi Heng and his family offered prayers in a Buddhist temple and after he came across Azhar’s misleading statement, Ooi Heng shared his personal view on Facebook, taking the view that the Speaker shall have the casting vote only when the voting comes down to a tie. After talking to a journalist, Ooi Heng is even convinced that the real reason behind Terengganu state legal advisor making misleading statement was to buy some time for UMNO’s political power, so as to resolve the political and legislative crisis. The Federal Constitution has given exposition on legislative power, which includes both parliament and state assembly, and under which the Speaker’s voting right is also covered. The Federal Constitution is basically modeled on the Westminster parliamentary system. Schedule 8, Paragraph 10 (1B) of the Federal Constitution makes it clear that the Speaker of legislative assembly who is not an elected representative has no voting power. Whereas according to the Article 27 (1B) of the Constitution of Terengganu, non-member of the Assembly elected as Speaker has no voting right. Terengganu assembly speaker, Mohd Zubir Embong, is not an elected representative, as he was appointed as assembly speaker on 16th June 2013 after being defeated in the election for Kuala Terengganu parliamentary seat. Hence, the controversy over the question of whether the speaker’s vote can be counted shall not even arise. In fact, not only does the state assembly follow the Westminster legislative custom, but the parliament of Malaysia is also following the system. The Article 57 (1A) of the Federal Constitution clearly provides that any person elected as Speaker of the House of Representatives who is not a member of the House of Representatives has no voting right. Furthermore, according to the Standing Order 45(1), the speaker shall be entitled to give his deciding ballot only when the voting comes down to a tie where ayes are equal to noes. This deciding ballot can be known as the casting vote, or ‘undi pemutus’ in Malay. The aim of this article is to clear doubts on this legislative incident, and as far as the Speaker’s voting right is concerned, no critical comment is intended to be directed at the roles that both government and the opposition have played in this political power crisis. However, I am of the opinion that despite the misleading statement by the state legal advisor, government and opposition elites should still be held responsible politically for this legislative incident. It is indeed bizarre that both government and opposition have no idea about the legislative procedures in the Terengganu state assembly when most of the assembly members are from UMNO and PAS. In the two days within which the 3 UMNO state assemblymen became ‘independent reps’ (Less than 48 hours), Terengganu state assembly has actually been beset with crisis. While there was likely UMNO fall down in Terengganu, UMNO has nonetheless got themselves some time to stabilise their shaky hold on power. Apart from UMNO taking the lead in this incident, the fact that PAS was being indifferent to the misleading statement will go down in the history of legislative politics. History is bound to repeat when political elite’s political action has not been properly examined. -The Rocket * The views expressed in this article are the personal opinion of the columnist ... Full Article →