My take on the Sabah issue

This is what troubles me. I dont care about the 12. Whether they stay or go does not concern me one bit. But if they were offered a deal and then were sold down the river then my vote is with the 12, notwithstanding what crime they committed.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

On 28 October 2009, Dr Jeffrey Kitingan tenders his resignation as the PKR vice president while Christina Liew resigns as a supreme council member. However, they both stay on as party members.

Slightly over a week later, on 6 November 2009, Tian Chua, Michael Bong, Jeffrey, and the group now known as the dirty dozen, sit down to hammer out a peace treaty. Jeffrey and the 12 renegades hand the delegation from Kuala Lumpur a list of demands.

About a month later, on 4 December 2009, the 12 PKR division leaders submit an application to the Registrar of Societies to form a new party called Parti Cinta Sabah.

Two days later, on 6 December 2009, the application is withdrawn after the PKR Sabah leaders make a trip to Kuala Lumpur and a behind-the-scenes negotiation reaches a settlement.

A week later, on 13 December 2009, the party rejects Jeffreys resignation as vice president.

Another week later, on 20 December 2009, during the partys Sabah convention, Anwar announces that those who had submitted an application to form a new party are traitors who must be sacked. He also announces that the issue of Jeffreys and Christinas resignations plus the appointment of Thamrin as the new PKR Sabah head have been amicably resolved. Christina is reinstated to her post while Jeffrey is given the task of overseeing Sabah and Sarawak.

On 10 January 2010, the Sabah issue is considered resolved.

On 7 June 2010, the party receives a complaint against the 12 who had earlier filed an application to form a new party but two days later had withdrawn that app! lication .

On 23 July 2010, a show-cause letter is issued to the 12.

On 30 July 2010, the 12 reply to the show-cause letter.

On 24 August 2010, the partys disciplinary committee investigates the 12 and recommends a one-year suspension.

Tomorrow, 29 August 2010, the partys supreme council will meet to decide the fate of the 12.

**************************************

Well, this looks like a very straightforward case. 12 PKR Sabah leaders have breached party discipline and ethics by attempting to form a new party and must now be made to pay for it. There is not a more cut-and-dry case than this.

Or so at least thats what it looks like. But it is not that cut-and-dry. There are more issues than that to be considered, including what was agreed in the behind-the-scenes negotiations.

Note one crucial point. On 4 December 2009, the 12 filed an application to form a new party. Two days later, a few top leaders from PKR Sabah went down to Kuala Lumpur for a peace negotiation and that same day the application to form a new party was withdrawn.

Now, what begs answers is why did the 12 withdraw their application to form a new party merely two days later, the same day that the Sabah leaders went down to Kuala Lumpur to negotiate a settlement?

Logic would tell us that the 12 withdrew their application to form a new party the day they sat down for negotiations because they had arrived at an amicable solution. If the negotiation had broken down then why the need to withdraw the application? And if during the negotiations it was made clear that the 12 would need to be punished then what is the purpose of withdrawing the application? Might as well they proceed with the formation of the new party if PKR is going to kick them out anyway.

This is the part that I am a bit disturbed with. Yes, the 12 have breached party discipline and ethics by filing an application to form a new party. There must be no compromise on this. They need to be axed -- no two ways about it.

! However, if they had been called to the negotiation table and part of the peace treaty was that they would withdraw their application to form a new party -- which they did -- then they have been sold out.

We either fight or we talk. Let the 12 go and form their new party. Let Jeffrey and Christina resign -- to hell with the whole lot. But if we call them for negotiations and reject their resignation and ask them to withdraw the application to form a new party, then a deal is a deal.

That is what troubles me.

The argument the dissident Sabah faction offers is that Anwar Ibrahim knew that the 12 had filed an application to form a new party and, of course, that Jeffrey and Christina had tendered their resignations. But Anwar wanted them to stay on and the party even turned down their resignations and persuaded the 12 to withdraw their application to form a new party.

Was this the deal? Then why renege on the deal?

We need to know why the 12 withdrew their application to form a new party merely two days later. Who asked them to do this and what was the inducement? Was this done on their own initiative or at the behest of the negotiators.

Forget about whether the 12 did or did not breach party discipline and ethics. Of course they did. There is no doubt about that and we need not waste any time debating this issue. The most crucial, and to me, the only question is, was there a deal and has this deal now been violated?

These 12 did a u-turn merely two days later. Why did they do a u-turn?

The partys credibility plus that of Anwar may take a plunge if this question is not satisfactorily answered. People need to know that PKRs and Anwars word is as good as gold. If there are allegations that PKR or Anwar make promises but never keeps them then we are as good as dead in the water.

This is what troubles me. I dont care about the 12. Whether they stay or go does not concern me one bit. But if they were offered a deal and then were sold down the river then my vote is wit! h the 12 , notwithstanding what crime they committed.

Another factor to not ignore is that these 12 represent the biggest ethic group in Sabah. Look at the following breakdown.

Kadazan-Dusun: 17.8%

Bajau: 13.4%

Malays: 11.5%

Murut: 3.3%

Other Bumiputras: 14.6%

Chinese (majority Hakka): 13.2%

The Sabah crisis is being made to appear like it is the Malays-Muslims versus the others. This is the second thing that troubles me. We cant turn Sabah politics into a Malay-Muslim dominated situation. We must accept the fact that the Malays-Muslims are the minority in both Sabah and Sarawak. So, if we want the Malays-Muslims to dominate Sabah-Sarawak politics, then PKR is as good as dead.

And if we fail in Sabah and Sarawak then, as I said earlier, we can kiss Putrajaya goodbye. Now do you understand what I mean when I say that race and religion can screw up the country big-time? Sigh.

See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

Sacked but KP Samy stills get show-cause letter

By G Vinod

PETALING JAYA: In a strange turn of event, expelled MIC central working committee (CWC) member KP Samy was slapped with a show-cause letter by the MIC headquarters yesterday.The former party leader, who is also a coordinator for Gerakan Anti-Samy Vellu (GAS), was reprimanded for not attending the 64th MIC annual general meeting (AGM) held on July 10 and 11 and asked to explain. But KP Samy was sacked from the party on May 24.

In the show-cause letter dated Aug 16, MIC secretary-general T Rajagopalu stated that KP Samy was absent from the party's AGM in July, implying that the event was an important avenue to discuss various matters pertaining to the Indian community.

Rajagopalu gave KP Samy two weeks to reply to the show-cause letter, failing which action will be taken against him.

Speaking to FMT, KP Samy said that he is perplexed when he received the letter yesterday.

I was shocked and out of words when I received the letter. As far as I know, I was sacked by party president S Samy Vellu in May itself.

I was never reinstated as my expulsion was upheld by the CWC on July 22.

I am surprised the party still considers me a member,said KP Samy.

The former MIC veteran said the letter proved that the party still recognised his contributions to the party and community as a whole.

This letter signalled that the party still recognises my contributions and holds me in high regard, he said, adding that he will reply.

Though I am not sure what is going on, I will explain my absence to the party, he said, declining to divulge more details.

I will elaborate on my reply at a press conference on Monday.

All I can say now is that the letter confirmed that I am still an MIC member and I will re! sume my duties as a party member, said KP Samy.

See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

Cakap cakap....Anwar & Kamarulbahrin

To be Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim needs to tread a fine line between idealism and the pragmatism of political reality. Nobody can get that exactly right. Anwar can only try.

He will struggle to contain PAS and DAP within the confines of Pakatan Rakyat and amidst the close quarters of religion and dogma. With the timing of the general election still to be decided there are already soothsayers who pronounced Sabah already lost. There are those who are certain that Zaid is going for the number Two post, which by inference indicates he is actually aiming for the number one post! There are already question asked if the Malays will accept Lim Guan Eng as Prime Minister, Lim Kit Siang and Karpal as Governor of Penang and Malacca? And was one being mischievous when Jui Meng was suggested as Mentri Besar of Johor?
All this before the year when a general election year is to be called was set not day or month but the year! Do you wonder sometimes how our Pakatan Rakyat leaders cope?
Yes we know that they need to be prepared for all eventualities....but steadylah! Be confident that within Pakatan Rakyat there is enough wisdom and common sense to meet our aspirations. Our hope, our expectations and our dreams of living a good life in a good country.
So for now hold your tongue. We are family. Discuss our differences, and our misgivings as a family should within our self and within the four walls that is our home. Do not let others who are not with us interfere in our dealings and with how we run our life. Not all can be trusted to understand our fight. Not all can be depended upon to help us up when we fall. Trust only those who through their actions and deeds understand our cause. Reject those that seek to engage us in discussions where the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the language we talk, the color of our skin and the religion we practice is reason enough for them to call us a friends or an enemy.
Think in depth about the issues that matters to you. Understand your limitations and ac! centuate your strengths. Commit yourself by your deeds to making a decent future for our children and above all be true to yourself. It will take courage to live the life of our conviction. There will be enough courage and wisdom in the leaders of Pakatan Rakyat to lead us if we falter.

READ MORE HERE

See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

DAP to SUPP: Make your stand on Taib

By Joseph Tawie

KUCHING: Sarawak DAP is curious to know why Sarawak United Peoples Party (SUPP) has not expressed its stand on the leadership of Chief Minster Taib Mahmud.All other parties in the state Barisan Nasional like Parti Rakyat Sarawak and Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party have expressed their full support to the leadership of the chief minister. They want Taib to lead them into the next state election.

But so far nothing comes from SUPP, said state DAP treasurer Violet Yong, who is state assemblywoman for Pending.

Since SUPP represents the Chinese community, we want it to make its stand clear on whether it supports Taib to continue leading the Sarawak BN government in the coming state election or to ask him to step down, she said.

Yong was commenting on various reactions of support for Taib after he expressed his intention to step down if he was no longer needed.

Said Yong: If SUPP is a responsible BN party, then it should make its stand very clear. We want to know and the people deserve to know.

But do not hide behind the chief minister. Do not become a puppet, she added.

On a statement by SUPP secretary-general Sim Kheng Hui that land and the education issues had been resolved, Yong said that it was clear that SUPP had lost touch with the people.

The statement is clear evidence that the party is totally out of touch with the people, who have no reason to support SUPP any longer, she said.

Yong added that the public wanted Section 47 of the Land Code to be revoked. They also wanted an annual budget for the Chinese schools and an open tender system.

But SUPP did not dare say anything on all these, she said, adding that it was sad to see that the party had stooped so low.

It is not brave enough to tell the chief minister whether people favour BN policies, she added.

Last Tuesday, Taib told reporters ! that he wanted to step down in 2006, but he was stopped.

Now a lot of people say I am not needed. So, if I am not needed, then I go out, he said in an obvious reference to SUPP leaders who wanted Taib to step down as they considered him no longer an asset, but a huge liability.

Taibs remarks came in the wake of SUPPs secret meeting in Kuala Lumpur early this month. The party had planned to meet Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

It was said that SUPP leaders wanted Najib to exert pressure on Taib to step down if BN leaders wants the party to win in the next election.

Taib has helmed the state government for nearly 30 years.
See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

Malaysia's New Journey

Common cause Malaysia's three major races are reflected in one train carriage

By Michael Schuman (TIME)

Malaysia is that rare country with an unequivocal national narrative. It goes something like this: Malaysia's 28 million people, comprising mainly Malays, Chinese and Indians, make up a moderate and modern emerging democracy. Unlike members of other multiethnic countries, they respect one another's beliefs and values and share a commitment to achieving prosperity. The official religion is Islam, but other faiths are freely allowed and celebrated. This is one harmonious place.

Much of that narrative is true but not all of it.

Malaysia's economic miracle has stalled, and while the nation is, indeed, somewhat pluralistic, it is no melting pot. Indeed, it is a society where people define themselves first and foremost by race. (See pictures of Islam in Asia.)

The country's political leadership has in some respects reinforced those ethnic identities. For the past 40 years, policymakers have doled out special privileges in education and business to one community: the majority Malays. The program is one of modern history's greatest experiments in social engineering and possibly the world's most extensive attempt at affirmative action. But the policies have also bred resentment among minorities, distorted the economy and undermined the concept of a single Malaysian identity.

Now a movement is gaining strength to finally change the system and it's coming from the very top. Prime Minister Najib Razak, 57, has surprised the country by advocating a fundamental reform of the pro-Malay program first introduced, ironically, by his father, who was Malaysia's Prime Minister in the 1970s. T! hough th e specifics of the new policies remain hazy, Najib's intent is not. "I want Malaysia to be globally competitive," he told TIME in an exclusive interview. "For that, we need to get every single Malaysian to be together."

Najib's proposals have simultaneously raised hopes, ire and fear. The mere idea of changing the affirmative-action system has reopened old wounds in Malaysian society and reactivated the long-running debate on how best to fuse Malays, Chinese and Indians into one nation. The direction Malaysia takes, moreover, has repercussions beyond its shores. The issues raised by Najib's proposals are relevant to any upwardly mobile developing economy, especially a multicultural one: how to increase wealth and do so equitably. (Read "Why the Honeymoon is Over for Malaysia's New PM.")

In confronting these sensitive challenges, Najib is taking enormous political risks. The primary base of electoral support for Najib's political party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), is the Malay community, and altering decades-old perquisites could cause voters to defect to the opposition. But Najib believes he has little choice. If Malaysia's economy is to compete with China, India and other rapidly emerging neighbors, Najib sees no other route but reform. "The competition is much greater and some would describe it even as cutthroat," Najib says. "There is a realization that what has worked in the past may not necessarily work in the future."

The Malay Card
Najib is facing the same dilemma his predecessors have since the earliest days of Malaysian independence: balancing the perceived needs of the Malays, both political and economic, with those of the country as a whole. At the heart of the problem is the reverse-pyramid shape of the Malaysian economy. Though the Malays and other indigenous peoples, together known as bumiputra in Malay, make up about 60% of the population, they have traditionally been poorer than th! e Chines e and Indian immigrants, who have long dominated the nation's business and trade. After Kuala Lumpur was struck by race riots in 1969, a shaken leadership determined that communal peace was impossible without economic balance. The result was the New Economic Policy (NEP), introduced in 1971, which aimed to raise the Malays' share of the economic pie. Malays were given preferential access to public contracts and university scholarships. Any company listing on the stock market had to sell 30% of its shares to bumiputra investors. Though some measures have been softened or eliminated over the past two decades, many pro-Malay privileges remain. Certain government contracts are available only to bumiputra-controlled firms, for example. Malays even receive special discounts on home purchases. The affirmative-action program has become so ingrained in the Malaysian psyche that it is akin to a national ideology.

It is also controversial. Critics contend that the pro-Malay program too often benefits the connected few over its intended targets: the poor and struggling. All car-import permits, for example, are awarded to bumiputra-controlled firms, a policy intended to foster entrepreneurs in the community. But government audits have revealed that Malay businessmen with access to the permits sometimes sell them to minority traders who don't at an instant profit. (The Ministry of Trade and Industry, recognizing the problem, says it will phase out the permit system by 2020.) "Unfortunately, as [the NEP] was implemented over time, some of the zealots, politicians and bureaucrats included, tended to become more racial and emphasized more on the people who have relationships with them," says Razaleigh Hamzah, an UMNO dignitary and former Finance Minister. "That's where it went wrong."

Despite four decades of special aid, 3 in 4 of the poorest people in Malaysia are still bumiputra. Adli Ahmad Ghazi, the Malay co-owner of Malaysian Defensive Driving & Riding, a 70-employe! e drivin g school in Kuala Lumpur, complains that the pro-Malay policies do little to help a small businessman like himself. In 2008, Adli tried to get financing from three agencies tasked with supporting Malay businessmen or small enterprises, but got rejected. When he has to deal with the bureaucracy, Adli says, he faces the same red tape as any other businessman. It took him two years to buy a parcel of land for his company from the local government. "The [NEP] rules don't really apply to people on the ground," Adli says. "They say the NEP would help the Malays, but it only helps a small percentage of the Malays."

Comfort Zone
Affirmative action may not be helping the overall Malaysian economy either. Though Malaysia has been among the best-performing economies in the world since World War II and boasts a spectacular record of improving human welfare the percentage of the population living in absolute poverty has plummeted from 50% in 1970 to less than 4% today the story is now stuck on the same chapter. Malaysia has fallen into what is called the "middle-income trap." Having elevated itself to a comfortable level of income, Malaysia has been unable to take that next leap into the realm of advanced economies. While growth has slowed, Malaysians have watched other fast-paced Asian rivals zip by. In 1970, the gross national income per capita of South Korea, at $260, was below Malaysia's $380, but by 2009, South Korea's was almost three times larger, at $19,830 vs. $7,230, according to the World Bank. (See pictures of Malaysia.)

Malaysia's struggles reflect those facing Southeast Asia as a whole. The region's economies once seemed among the world's most promising emerging markets, but in recent years, progress in almost all of them has been stymied by upheaval and poor governance. Thailand remains rudderless as its fragile democracy has degenerated into perpetual factional strife. The promise of the Philippin! es remai ns unrealized as its feeble government has continually failed to enact the tough reforms needed to turn around the underperforming economy. Indonesia is only now returning to its place as one of the world's premier emerging economies after a decade of political uncertainty scared off foreign investors.

If it is able to change its economic system, Malaysia could show its neighbors the way forward. Malaysia's essential problem is that its growth model export-oriented manufacturing, often by foreign-invested factories has become mismatched with its needs. Malaysia must become more innovative if its rapid development is to continue. But that's not happening. Private investment has fallen from a third of GDP in the mid-1990s to only about 10% today, labor-productivity growth has slowed, and R&D spending remains anemic. Instead of developing new products with highly skilled technicians, Malaysia's manufacturing sector still too often assembles goods designed by others, using imported technology and low-skilled foreign workers. "There is a growing realization that Malaysia's relative position compared to other countries that are catching up very quickly is not improving," says Philip Schellekens, a senior economist at the World Bank. "Relative to where they want to be, there is still a long road." (Read "Fortress Asia: Is a Powerful New Trade Bloc Forming?")

Though it would be incorrect to blame the pro-Malay policies for the economy's woes Malaysia did, once, achieve remarkable rates of growth with the perquisites in place they are nevertheless dampening business sentiment, scaring off talent, curtailing investment and stifling domestic competition. Chua Tiam Wee, president of the SMI Association of Malaysia, a small-enterprise organization, believes relaxing the NEP preferences would create a more level playing field on which the most capable firms could advance, making the economy more merit-based and upgrad! ing Mala ysian industry. The affirmative-action policy is "a source of a lot of distortions to the economic system," Chua says. By limiting the opportunities available to minorities, the NEP is likely contributing to a brain drain, in which some of the country's most talented people choose to work elsewhere. The government estimates that more than half of the 350,000 Malaysians working abroad have a college education. Stphane Garelli, director of the World Competitiveness Center at IMD, a business school in Switzerland, believes that the affirmative-action regulations have made Malaysia less attractive to foreign investors. Malaysia's "bargaining power to put such restrictions on foreign investors is not as big as other nations'," he says.

Chinese and Indian entrepreneurs in Malaysia certainly believe the pro-Malay policies cap their business opportunities. Pardip Kumar Kukreja, the Malaysian-Indian chairman of Grand Paradise Holdings, a Kuala Lumpur based firm that manages and owns hotels and operates travel agencies, laments that he can't get access to lucrative contracts providing travel services to the government due to regulations that favor Malay-owned enterprises. Removing such restrictions, he says, can act as an incentive to invest. Kukreja recently decided to launch an Internet-based business to sell travel services worldwide because Najib's administration liberalized affirmative-action rules for the tourism sector last year. "There are many things we'd like to do, which we hope we'll be able to do in the near future," he says. "To a small and medium entrepreneur, he wants to make his own decisions."

New and Untested
Najib is convinced the old ways must go. The centerpiece of his economic reform program, introduced in March, is called the New Economic Model (NEM). The plan envisions reducing red tape to encourage more private investment and internal competition, decreasing the state role in the economy and improving the education system t! o produc e more skilled workers. "For us to move up a few notches, we have to address the structural problems," Najib says. "We cannot be in denial." Most of all, the NEM also proposes a major reform of affirmative-action policies to phase out remaining racial quotas and focus efforts on uplifting the poorest 40% of the population irrespective of race. Says Najib: "I don't want anyone to feel that they've been left out or marginalized."

There are urgent political reasons he feels that way. UMNO, which has ruled Malaysia in coalition since its independence from Britain in 1957, lost ground to opposition parties in a hotly contested 2008 general election, and Najib is faced with the daunting prospect of expanding UMNO's political base outside its core Malay constituency. The NEM is an effort by Najib to turn stodgy UMNO into the party of change and outmaneuver its rivals. Some powerful voices within UMNO are egging on Najib to push his reforms. "We have to be bold and brave to ensure [our] long-term competitiveness," says Khairy Jamaluddin, an UMNO member of Parliament. (Read "Will Sodomy Charges End Malaysia's Opposition?")

Yet Najib has also come under pressure from conservative elements in the Malay community to hold back. "The bumiputra are still lagging behind," complains Ibrahim Ali, president of Malay nationalist organization Perkasa. "If the economy is not balanced, then everything will lead to trouble." As a result, Najib doesn't have full support from an UMNO worried about scaring off Malay voters. Najib's reform program "is a tough sell within the party," admits Khairy. "There will be people who resist the changes."

The split in UMNO reflects the greater divide within the Malay community over the future of affirmative action. Some Malays believe that they still don't possess the skills and resources to contend against Chinese businessmen, making continued affirmative-action policies indispensable. The program "should stay in place and im! prove," says Rizal Faris, president of the Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce. "What [officials] want to achieve is a level playing field where all parties are able to compete on their merits, but we need to ensure that the Malay community has been sufficiently skilled and pulled up." But others believe the time has come for Malays to step up and compete on their own, without special government aid. Akmal Syahirah, a 21-year-old law student at the University of Malaya, says that affirmative action should be eliminated, even though her family has greatly benefited from it in the past. Her father acquired land to produce palm oil through a pro-Malay development scheme, and her three younger sisters received tuition for extra after-school studies. But now, "I think we need to change," she says. "We can't just let Malays stay in their comfort zone."

Balancing Act
Faced with such contending forces, Najib is trying to please everybody. Affirmative action won't be eliminated entirely under the NEM, but altered to weed out abusive practices, target money where it is most needed and support the most worthy Malay businessmen, all the while trying to open up opportunities for minorities. Najib sees no contradiction in such a strategy. "Affirmative action remains in place, but the way it is carried out would be different," he says. "When it comes to helping the poor and the vulnerable groups, it should be irrespective of race. But there are certain affirmative actions which are still necessary, because the bumiputra are still very much behind and they must be helped. We want to help those bumiputra who are potential winners."

Even as he faces the daunting task of reforming Malaysia, Najib must deal with the domestic and international fallout from the divisive trial of Anwar Ibrahim, the opposition's most prominent leader. In 2008, only months after the opposition's electoral success, Anwar was charged with sodomy, a serious crime in Malaysia. The trial has a d! j vu fla vor. Anwar was convicted of sodomy in 2000 (and abuse of power a year earlier), but the ruling was overturned in 2004 and he was freed after six years in prison. Anwar has pleaded not guilty to the latest charge and attacked his trial as a politically motivated attempt to discredit the opposition. The government denies that, saying the courts have a duty to conduct a fair trial. Yet the case has tainted Najib's administration. In a joint essay in the Wall Street Journal, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz wrote that Anwar's trial threatens "all those in Malaysia who have struggled for a freer and more democratic nation."

The biggest test for Najib still awaits. All eyes are watching for the detailed policy prescriptions of Najib's NEM, which could be released in October. Some Malaysia experts expect the final package to be underwhelming. Najib "doesn't have the strength to follow through, whether politically or personally," says John Malott, a former U.S. ambassador to Malaysia. "He's not a transformational figure." Najib insists his critics underestimate him. "I want to transform Malaysia," Najib says. "I want Malaysia to be a 21st century nation and I am determined to do that." Malaysia's future and new narrative depends on it.

with reporting by Liz Gooch And M. Krishnamoorthy / Kuala Lumpur

See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

What the NEP meant and means

By P. Gunasegaram, TheStar

We need more debate and less rhetoric in ironing out the real issues of affirmative action.

WITH all the brouhaha over Malay and non-Malay rights and the relentless rhetoric of race-based politics coming to the fore in the economic arena yet again, it is time to revisit the tenets of the original New Economic Policy (NEP) and separate fact from fiction.

Sadly, the major problem with the NEP is that the 30% equity target for Malays and other bumiputras became the very visible and de facto criterion for measurement of the very success of the NEP.

The other contentious part was quotas for all manner of things and preference given to bumiputra companies and individuals when it is related to procurements and contracts from the Government, often as a means to achieve that 30% target.

Both of these were administrative measures and targets and did not even form part of the policy aims of the NEP.

Very few people, if any, are likely to disagree that the broad twin aims of the NEP, formulated in the wake of the racial riots of 1969, were to eradicate poverty irrespective of race and to eliminate the identification of race with economic function.

The first aim, according to government figures, was very much achieved with hardcore poverty being virtually eradicated. And there have been major strides made in terms of Malays and bumiputras, and jobs with them making major inroads into all areas.

These are achievements of the NEP which no one can deny, although there are valid arguments and concerns such as whether the poverty line figure is a realistic one and whether there is too ! high rep resentation of Malays in Government services even as they made inroads into the private sector.

While no one questions the twin aims of the NEP everyone, including the Opposition, is in agreement the problem is with the administrative measures that have been put in place.

These are being challenged by all sides: some sides want more and some less, some want them to be dismantled and others want them to not only be continued but reinforced.

So, lets agree on the aims and move on from there.

Thus, it will not be seditious if someone questions the 30% bumiputra equity target or says the measurement criteria are seriously flawed.

If someone said quotas should be reconsidered given the progress that Malays have made in some areas, that should not be interpreted as questioning Malay rights. Under the Constitution, the Government has the right to undertake affirmative action provided it is justified and it has the right not to.

The NEP (technically, the NEP has expired but the present policy still relies on the original NEP) and its future form will benefit substantially from the right kind of debate about it without emotions clouding the issues.

But there are some bodies and people who are bent on bringing in emotions precisely because it will cloud the issues. They must not be allowed to have their way.

Lets take the 30% equity target for instance. It cannot be taken as the sole or even the most important part of NEP achievement because there are other things which are far more important poverty eradication and racial balance in employment to name just two.

There is therefore nothing wrong in asking that this target be reviewed so that we can have better measurement of Malay and bumiputra participation in the economy and to avoid all the perils of patronage that come with this.!

The same applies to quotas and bumiputra discounts for high-end property.

It is because the NEP has done so much in narrowing the gap between the races that there is a need to review some of its administrative targets to ensure that the wrong people do not benefit from it.

Bumiputras who have already made it dont need quotas and affirmative action anymore. But others might.

But we must expect that some of those who will lose their so-called privileges will fight a rearguard action to preserve them, for thats a way to quick riches when abused. These are the people who will benefit most by obscuring the real issues under a cloud of emotional rhetoric.

The time has come for all Malaysians to see beyond these and do what is right for everyone. Help everyone who is needy and if any particular race is more needy than another, it will automatically be helped more too.

Move to a needs-based system and you eliminate racial posturing and fighting just like that.

Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

Who to trust in Selangor water battle?

By Deborah Loh

ALARM bells were rung recently about an impending water crisis in Selangor. The federal government blames the state government for delaying the Pahang-Selangor raw water transfer project by refusing to let building of the Langat 2 water treatment plant begin. The Barisan Nasional (BN) government says this will result in a water crisis as early as 2014, with shortages to be felt from 2012.

It all comes back to data. And what seems to have been forgotten is that the figures for the project crisis that the federal government arrived at have been contested. A group of non-governmental organisations, the Coalition for Sustainable Water Management (CSWM), has since 2009 alleged that projected water demand is grossly inflated to justify the RM9 billion interstate water transfer project.

In 2009, CSWM called into question the National Water Resources Study 2000-2050, commissioned by the federal Economic Planning Unit (EPU) in 2000. This is the study the federal government is citing to support their argument for the water transfer project. CSWM’s objections are well documented, available online, and have been given to the federal government. Until today, however, Putrajaya hasn’t explained the questions raised by the coalition. Instead, the BN appears bent on pushing the project through.

But who is the consumer supposed to trust, then?

(Pic by Bongani | sxc.hu)

Inflated data?

The federal government should explain the methodology used in the National Water Resources Study. CSWM contends that the recommended method for estimating water demand was not used. This method is adapted from the 1989 Public Works Department (JKR) Design Criteria and Standards for Water Supply Systems, and is endorsed by the Malaysian Water Association (MWA).

Instead, the method used in the National Water Resources Study was to estimate water demand by taking into account several parameters such as future Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth, per capita GDP, and manufacturing sector output growth.

CSWM says such a method involving macroeconomic indices involves “unsupported assumptions” in projecting water demand. For one, it does not take into account changes in development plans and unforeseen economic scenarios.

The MWA/JKR method also recommends 320 litres per capita per day (l/c/d) in urban areas as the guideline for estimating water consumption. This rate is calculated from overall water usage by commercial, industrial and domestic use, and includes an estimated loss of 25% due to non-revenue water loss.

However, the EPU’s National Water Resources Study method breaks down water usage by sectors to estimate demand. CWSM argues that making separate projections for domestic, commercial, industrial and non-revenue water results in larger overall figures when projecting demand.

Using the MWA/JKR method would have concluded a projected water demand of 147 l/c/d in the year 2020 for the whole state. The National Water Resources Study method, however, arrived at demand that ranged from 139 to 611 l/c/d for the industrial sector alone.

Using the National Water Resources Study, the Energy, Green Technology and Water Ministry has asserted that daily demand for water in Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya will reach 4,907 million litres. Without the interstate project and the Langat 2 plant, water supply will be 476 million litres short daily in 2014, the ministry claimed.

Khalid

Flaws

So is the EPU’s projected demand for water inflated or not? The Selangor government has different projections by which it claims the state has enough water without Pahang’s help until 2019. Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, who said the state is looking at alternative water sources, has been challenged by Selangor Umno politicians to justify this position.

Additionally, Water and Energy Consumer Association of Malaysia (Wecam) secretary-general S Piarapakaran says Selangor’s estimate of sufficient supply until 2019 is only true if water demand grows at a rate of 1% a year from now until then. Citing figures from the Malaysian Industry Water Guide, he says water demand growth is expected to be about 3% yearly, based on the 3.4% demand figure between 2007 and 2008.

Piarapakaran (Courtesy of S Piarapakaran)

Piarapakaran, a water engineer, tells The Nut Graph in a phone interview that other flaws in the National Water Resources Study, if rectified, would project an even higher demand for water. Hence, he says there may even be an increased likelihood of a water shortage sooner rather than later.

Three key flaws in the study, he says, were firstly, failure to take into account the worst-case low water flow scenario, which was what happened during the 1997-1998 water crisis aggravated by the El Nino phenomenon. The second flaw was for the study to fix non-revenue water loss at around 20% when the actual rate of loss now is higher at over 30%. And thirdly, the study, in estimating population growth, did not consider the high number of foreign migrants, legal and illegal, living and working in the state.

“The National Water Resources Study as a 50-year study is questionable. When you plan for 50 years for something like water supply and demand, you need to be able to adjust for every five-year planning cycle. This doesn’t seem to have been the case,” Piarapakaran said.

But he also takes issue with CWSM’s assertion that deriving an average l/c/d demand estimate from lumping together sectoral consumption is a better measurement than a breaking down water usage by sector. Piarapakaran thinks it’s less accurate if an overall average figure is used, in the same way gross per capita income is not a true reflection of individual income.

Will there really be a water crisis?

Who is correct? Water supply is an emotive issue and many remember the dry years of 1997-1998. The delay in restructuring Selangor’s water industry, and now the Langat 2 treatment plant under the inter-tate water transfer project, has been politicised to stoke fears of a repeat crisis.

The quality of data and methodology is important, and state and federal governments, as well as water industry players, have to be transparent about what they put into their projections. Selangor is commissioning a new study on water demand.

Compounding the public’s confusion about whether there is an imminent water crisis in Selangor is the standoff between the federal and state governments over the restructuring of four private water concessions.

Pua

The restructuring of the state’s water industry is a first step towards averting a near-term crisis, says DAP publicity chief Tony Pua, who also worked on the restructuring plan. He argues that if the state can take over the four water concessionaires – Syabas, Splash, Puncak Niaga and Abbas – and manage a consolidated treatment and supply operation, progress to cut non-revenue water loss can be stepped up.

That’s not likely to happen anytime soon, however. Syabas, for example, claims that Selangor is preventing it from continuing maintenance of pipes pending completion of the restructuring. Pua disagrees, saying the company’s inability to conduct pipe repairs and replacements is due to its cash flow problems, which began even before the restructuring exercise.

“If Syabas wants to resolve its cash flow problems to continue maintenance, they either let the federal government bail them out or accept the Selangor government’s RM5.71 billion takeover offer so the state can continue the work,” Pua tells The Nut Graph.

Right now, the battle over water in Selangor has become a battle of political wills and business interests. At the end of the day, consumers need to know if their tax money is being put to the best use to avert a water crisis. But in order for that to happen, greater transparency is needed on how studies are conducted, on water concession agreements, and on who stands to lose if the Pahang-Selangor water transfer project is delayed. For now, there seems little consumers can do or say to influence the outcome.

All eyes on 'racist' headmistresses after surau youths charged

In a move that heightens attention to two headmistress who allegedly uttered racist remarks but no action has been taken, three youths pleaded guilty at the magistrate's court to splashing red paint at a surau in Taman Pulai Impian nearby to Seremban.

“Of course, we must take into account their youth but we cannot spare the rod and spoil the child. The thing is, the police should not place youths in detention for such a long period of time. They should not be allowed to mix with the seasoned criminals,” PKR strategic director Tian Chua told Malaysia Chronicle.

"As for the two school principals, they are adults and there should be even less excuse for them. Let's see if the government will act fairly, especially Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin. If he lets them off, then it will obviously be a case of blatant racism and Prime Minister Najib Razak should drop him from the Cabinet."

Apology not enough, must be punished

According to the Star, the three youths aged between 16 and 17 were each charged with two counts of defiling a place of worship on Sunday, August 22. They were later released on bail of RM2,000 each and will be sentenced on Sept 22.

The trio was arrested on Aug 23 and has been in remand since. State police chief Osman Salleh said four youths were arrested for the vandalism. It is unclear if the fourth teenager will be charged or freed.

Police investigations revealed the four had been playing with firecrackers near to the surau on Sunday and had been told off. Dissatisfied, the youths decided to splash paint at the prayer hall, according to Osman.

"This is purely a case of mischief. It has nothing to do with religion or politics," Osman.said.

What about the two principals?

On Thursday, the parents of the four teenagers apologized to the surau management committee and Muslims in the country over the incident. Cheng Kok Foo, 38, Wong Seow Wai, 43, Loh Teck Ai, 53, and Leong Foong Kuen, 53, apologised to the surau management committee chairman, Mohd Hasbi Ismail.

“I hope that there will be no repeat of this incident and that they could impress upon their children that religion is a sensitive matter. This should not happen to any house of worship. This is a sensitive issue which hurt the feelings of Muslims,” said Hasbi.

But despite Mohd Hasbi accepting their apologies, there are calls from the public to make sure teenagers are also punished.

Meanwhile, the Education ministry is still silent on the fate on the two principals - one in Kulai and the other in Johor. Both had told their Chinese pupils they could go back to China and one of them even likened Indians to dogs.

"The special task force set up by Muhyiddin is taking too long. Police reports have already been made and the cases are quite clear cut. We hope Muhyiddin is not trying to play the race card. The Malays should actually reject such overtures, it harms their race and their integrity rather than help them," said Tian.

Trouble brewing in SPDP

By Joseph Tawie

KUCHING: Trouble is brewing in the Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party (SPDP) with the continued absence of eight members in its supreme council meetings.This is cause for concern for the SPDP, especially when it is preparing itself for the coming state election.

It is a big headache for SPDP president William Mawan as he is unable to solve it, said an observer.

The eight are Peter Nansian (Tasik Biru), Sylvester Enteri (Marudi), Rosey Yunus (Bekenu), Paulus Gumbang (Batu Danau), MP Tiki Lafe (Mas Gading), and supreme council members George Garai, Peter Gani and Ida Egar.

For the third consecutive time, they have failed to attend the supreme council meeting. But this time they gave various reasons, including some stupid ones, for not being able to attend.

Had it not been for their excuses, the eight, according to the party constitution, would have been automatically dismissed as supreme council members.

In yesterday's meeting, their deliberate absence was the subject of heated debate. It appeared that the council members were split on how to solve the issue.

The hawkish members demanded that stern action, including dismissal, be taken against them, but the more liberal ones preferred to give them another chance.

In an interview with FMT, Mawan said he personally wrote each one of them a letter, pleading with them to attend the meeting as it was discussing, among others, the partys preparation for the coming election.

We want them to come back to work as a team. Teamwork is important to ensure victory and to uphold the interest of the Barisan Nasional.

Our quarrel is just like a husband-wife tiff. I am sure they will return. I am sure of that, he said, adding that taking action against them would not solve the problem.

Mawan pledged to the state assemblymen that they would be nominated to defend thei! r seats.

But of course, it all depends on the decision of the BN. If anyone, including me, cannot win the seat, then we will be replaced. We are looking for winnable candidates, he added.

'Godfather in SPDP'

When contacted, a member of the SPDP 5 said that he received the letter asking him to return to the party. Mawan made a number of promises, including nominating him as a candidate to defend his seat in the coming election.

But what is the point if he (Mawan) cannot keep his words. How committed is he to his words? he asked.

Mawan does not make any decision, if I know him well. The decision is being made by his godfather, he added.

He did not identify who was the godfather in SPDP.

The trouble in SPDP began when the eight members walked out of a supreme council meeting in January in protest against Mawan who allegedly failed to honour his promise to maintain the status quo in the party.

The status quo was that Enteri should be retained as secretary-general if he did not offer himself as a candidate for the post of deputy president.

For this reason, Enteri declined nominations although he had very strong support from the grassroots leaders and delegates.

However, after the party election, Enteri was replaced with Nelson Balang as secretary-general and this triggered the walkout.

Meanwhile, the four state assemblymen have been actively visiting their constituencies in preparation for the coming election.

They are said to be closely working with another member of the BN coalition, Parti Rakyat Sarawak, which is headed by James Masing.

It is also understood that Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud is fully aware of their activities in their respective constituencies.



See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

'Umno wants to kill off Taib

By FMT Staff

KUALA LUMPUR: A desperate Umno is aiming to kill off Chief Minister Taib Mahmud and assume power of the vast state.Unable to stomach further humiliation following the Sarawak BNs loss in Sibu in May, Umno, according to PAS, is aiming its daggers at Taib.

Said PAS information chief Idris Ahmad: Umno is putting pressure on Taib... it is the same pressure Umno put when it was aiming to oust (former prime ministers) (Dr) Mahathir ((Mohamad) and later Pak Llah (Abdullah Ahmad Badawi). This was when both were blamed for BNs losses in 1999 and 2008.

According to Idris, Umno is desperately wanting to take over Sarawak from Taib , who is also the president of Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB).

He said this desperation was because Umno in the peninsula had lost its clout and a large chunk of its Malay supporters.

"PAS sees the fall of Taib as the beginning of the dissolution of PBB, the way Usno disappeared after Umno stepped into Sabah.

Umno has now nowhere to go and needs a crutch its aiming to turn Sarawak into its latest destination, especially since BN still has the support of people there, which will allow it space to breathe and recover.

He said PAS was aware of the opinion other BN component parties had of Umno.

Our advice to component BN parties is for each one of them to think real hard about how relevant they are to the raykat and Umno, which is now looking to be the Maharajah in BN'.



Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

Anwar Ibrahim Again Battles Dubious Sex Sharges

The odds do seem stacked against Mr. Anwar, a former deputy prime minister who was once considered the rising star of Malaysian politics. But to hear him tell it, his dj-vu legal ordeal is evidence that Prime Minister Najib Razak and his party are losing their grip on power, and they know it well.

Mark MacKinnon, The Globe and Mail

There is an uncomfortable pattern to life for Anwar Ibrahim, the charismatic leader of Malaysias opposition. In 1998, shortly after he quit the authoritarian government of Mahathir bin Mohamad, he was convicted and jailed on trumped-up sodomy charges.

Six years after that conviction was quashed and he was released from prison and just as it looked like he and his multi-ethnic coalition might finally oust the long-ruling United National Malays Organization from office Mr. Anwar finds himself trapped in the most awkward of reruns, once more accused of consensual intercourse against the order of nature.

The charges again look to be a thinly veiled attempt to ruin Mr. Anwars reputation and sabotage his political career in this Muslim-majority country. The trial to date dubbed Sodomy II in Malaysias unsubtle government-controlled press has produced a succession of lurid headlines about lubricant tubes and stained underwear, while Mr. Anwar and his lawyers have been denied the right even to see the medical records of the man with which he is alleged to have had anal sex.

But instead of letting the scandalous court proceedings force him to the sidelines, the eternally optimistic Mr. Anwar has been using good humour and his ever-present BlackBerry to turn even the most awkward of headlines to his advantage, holding up the charges against him as proof of the absurdity of the system! hes try ing to change.

As a lone judge contemplates whether there is evidence to convict Mr. Anwar and sentence him to up to 20 years in prison, as well as a flogging, Mr. Anwar has continued his ferocious assault on a government he derides as repressive and corrupt, blogging from the courtroom and sending cheeky and upbeat 140-character updates to his followers via Twitter.

Sodomy circus turns into sex opera! reads one of Mr. Anwars mid-trial posts, which linked to a video of a lawyer discussing the lurid details of the case. Courage of conviction.Que sera sera, was his response to a fellow Twitter user who worried the energetic 63-year-old was headed back to jail.

The odds do seem stacked against Mr. Anwar, a former deputy prime minister who was once considered the rising star of Malaysian politics. But to hear him tell it, his dj-vu legal ordeal is evidence that Prime Minister Najib Razak and his party are losing their grip on power, and they know it well.

They cant deal with me politically either my economic programs or policies. They cant debate me. So they resort to this ludicrous exercise to demonize me, he said in an interview at the offices of his Peoples Justice Party in western Kuala Lumpur, a confident grin fixed on his narrow, goateed face. We will win the next election and we will change the courts.

It seems unlikely things will go quite that smoothly. Mr. Anwars political career has seen his fortunes change as often and as quickly as the weather in this peninsula thrust between the Indian and Pacific oceans. The leader of a Muslim youth organization during his student days, he shocked his followers by joining UNMO in the early 1980s and taking a succession of cabinet posts in the authoritarian government of Mr. Mahathir, eventually rising to become his powerful finance minister and deputy prime minister.

But the two men never saw eye-to-eye on key issues, and t! hey even tually fell out during the 1997 Asian financial crisis over economic policy and Mr. Anwars accusation that cronyism at the top was hurting the countrys economy. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Anwar frequently held up in the West as an example of a moderate Muslim democrat was in jail.

Though initially barred from politics upon his release, Mr. Anwar steered the opposition to a surprisingly strong finish in 2008 elections, and even as the new sodomy charges were being laid very nearly won the long-sought prime ministers chair in the aftermath when he called for a vote of non-confidence in Mr. Najibs government. Mr. Anwar said he had the support of a majority in parliament, including an unspecified number of UMNO defectors, but the vote never happened. Instead, 40 key lawmakers were sent on a government junket to Taiwan during which some were apparently convinced to rethink supporting Mr. Anwars bid for power.

The next election, which can be called any time before 2013, is set to be a high-stakes affair in this rapidly developing country of 28 million, which has seen freedom of speech blossom since the 2003 retirement of Mr. Mahathir and the rise of the Internet. Any kind of conviction would keep Mr. Anwar who heads an improbable coalition that consists of liberal reformers like himself and an Islamist party that seeks to impose Koranic law on the sidelines for another five years.

Mr. Anwar, a married father of six children, denies the new charges that he had sex with a 25-year-old former aide to Mr. Najib. (The sodomy law, which dates back to the British colonial era, has only been used seven times since independence, with four of those charges being levelled against Mr. Anwar.)

The case recently devolved into further farce when it surfaced that the complainant was having an affair with a member of the prosecution team. Though Judge Mohamad Zabidin Diah acknowledged the affair as fact, he denied Mr. Anwars applicatio! n to hav e the charges thrown out on that basis.

Mr. Anwar, who counts Al Gore, Nelson Mandela and former Canadian prime minister Paul Martin among his friends, said that while the Malaysian court system would do him no favours, he thinks his case is high-profile enough that the government wont dare jail him again. Its a catch-22 for them. If they put me in jail, they invoke more sympathy, certainly the government will lose And unlike Mahathir, Najib wants to be seen to be acceptable in the international community.

Mr. Anwars undimmed ambition to be prime minister clearly infuriates his political opponents. Even in retirement, his mentor-turned-nemesis Mr. Mahathir uses his own blog to mock his former protg and lash back at accusations that the case against Mr. Anwar is trumped up. Could it be that it was actually the victim of anal rape who decided to tell things as they happened? I would like to say we should wait for the court to decide, but that can take a very long, long time or even never, Mr. Mahathir wrote recently.

Despite a near-complete ban on his speaking to the official media, Mr. Anwar appears to be winning the public-relations battle, in part because of his savvy online efforts. A poll conducted by the independent Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research shortly after the new charges were filed found that only 11 per cent of the more than 1,000 respondents believed the new sodomy allegations against Mr. Anwar. Two-thirds said they agreed with the statement that the trial was a politically motivated action to disrupt Anwar Ibrahims political career.

Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

'Musa playing a bluffing game'

By Charlie Rudai

KOTA KINABALU: Chief Minister Musa Aman is playing a game of bluff when he said all is well within the Sabah Barisan Nasional, says Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP).SAPP claims that the Sabah BN is wrecked with fierce dissent, giving the lie to Musa's assertion that the relationship among the state component parties was cordial.

The state BN is trying to hide the fact that there is fierce dissent in the coalition over Musa's leadership, it says.

SAPP supreme council member, David Chong, said the discord was revealed when Musa, who is also the Sabah BN chief, was forced to say that the component parties were united.

He said Musa tried to forestall a bitter fallout during the BN meeting on Tuesday with Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) leaders over his failure to act on certain issues. This showed that the coalition is not united, he added.

On Wednesday, LDP deputy president Chin Su Phin, who represented his president VK Liew at the state BN meeting, announced that the party had lost confidence in Musa's leadership and could no longer work with him.

The fact is the chief minister was only bluffing the people when he said that the state BN component parties are united, Chong said in a statement here yesterday.

It shows that the BN component parties cannot cooperate with one another because they only care about their personal interests and not the rakyat and state, he said.

Chong said that a sign of the disunity in the state BN was also reflected through Chins statement that Musa simply did not want to listen to the views of the BN partners.

On Thursday, Musa, when responding to Chin, reiterated that the state BN was as strong as ever.

Musa was reported as saying that the issues raised by Chin were personal like the Kudat Mazu statue project.

'I hope Musa is telling the truth'
Mus a expressed regret that some LDP leaders chose to raise personal issues at the state BN meeting on Tuesday and insisted that the relationship among the component parties remained cordial.

I hope Musa is telling the truth... he should tell the people what actually happened during the meeting or he would be called a liar, said Chong.

He also said Musa should exercise his power as the state BN chairman to suspend and expel the one or two component parties for insubordination.

He said it was clear that the state BN leadership did not care about LDP as could be seen in the group photo published in the newspapers the next day. There were no LDP leaders in it.

Even if Chin was only representing his president, surely Deputy Chief Minister Peter Pang, who is a LDP vice-president and representing the Chinese community in Sabah, qualifies to be among the state BN leaders.

But it has been proven that the BN cannot cooperate... PBS president Joseph Pairin Kitingans statement that Chins remarks did not represent the views of LDP but his own was just an attempt to cover up for Musa, said Chong.

See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

Malaysian students and social revolutions

We must demand that our schools and universities produce documents of change in the way we teach students about freedom of speech and improvement of thinking. We cannot allow our students to develop into leaders that we have now -- those interested in maintaining the status quo of a sinking ship.

A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE

Azly Rahman

I congratulate our students in Malaysia for being interested in activism again. At a time when race issues and racism is on the rise, we need voices in the wilderness to speak in unisonen masse, eerily shattering the silence of the forest. We need those voices to haunt the corridors of academia; corridors that have been busy merely with issues of politicization of this or that, instead of becoming fertile areas to plant the seeds of philosophy and social revolutions.Our universities need to discuss critical issues in society and invite promoters of freedom. A few years ago Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was invited to Columbia University in New York raise issues of global concern.

More importantly, Ahmadinejad was invited in the name of promoting and continuing the tradition of academic freedom. Our universities are more interested in inviting Mawi and Siti Norhaliza so that the students can continue to be glued to images of pop idols, and so that they will be turned into one-dimensional beings. We cannot continue to feed our students with bread and circuses. They need philosophy, political economy, multiculturalism, and scientific socialism on a daily basis.

The Mawi-Siti Norhaliza culture of thinking constructed in our universities are still reflective of false consciousness, mass deception, 1Malaysia, Hadhari-pop mania and iconoclasm, and emblematic of talking heads of money-making machines that prey especially upon the weakness of the Malay spirit.

How did we come to a stage in history that Kennedy-era econo! mist Wal t Rostow would call the age of mass consumption of mass deception? It is our fault that the state of affairs is nauseating.

We are being denied justice in virtually all aspects of governance. This is the legacy of hegemony wrought upon the nation through the 22-year rule of former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad.This is the danger of letting one stay in power for way too long.Power corrupts and absolute power can corrupt absolutely.

We have not developed a critically conscious citizenry, we let the three branches of government collapse from the tree of knowledge that we artificially plant in order to showcase democracy to the world. We let the system silence the people and we dumb-down our educational institutions. We don't know exactly how the next general election will favour the despotic regime.

Danton of the French Revolutionary period lamented days before his execution: "... better be a fisherman than engage in all these". He may be wrong. We must all be like Robespierre, I suppose, and fight on until we conspire with fate to change the scheme of things.

I believe we will see natural justice take its course. As Rousseau said: "Everything is Good in the hands of the author of Things, everything degenerate in the Hands of man". Indeed the challenge is to stop the rot. Only with regime change will this be possible. Only through education for critical consciousness can the nation survive intact.

Our universities need to be turned into more intellectually challenging places and more systematically be forced to open their doors to critical dialogue. They must allow radical speakers to be invited. Students must not be denied the need to hear critical perspectives. Their minds must be cultivated with revolutionary theories that would teach them to revolt against all forms of oppression and domination.

We must demand that our schools and universities produce documents of change in the way we teach students about freedom of speech and improvement of thinking. We cannot allow ou! r studen ts to develop into leaders that we have now -- those interested in maintaining the status quo of a sinking ship.

The documents of change must succinctly state our commitment to raise the level of thinking of all students from pre-school to post-graduate schools. A higher order of thinking skills, critical thinking, and creative thinking must be made explicit goals. Benchmarks of higher-order thinking skills must be set and standards put in place.

Schools must bridge the achievement gap, educational resources must be allocated with equity so that we do not produce classes of people that will antagonise each other and lead the way for the kind of revolution we do not want to see - as in the case of France that culminated with the burning of Paris a few years back.

Multi-culturalism must be the foundation of our schools and educational institutions; the meeting of diverse needs of the learners and the creation of a nation of people who will not only respect one another's struggle but collaborate in removing regimes that create divisions in society; regimes that antagonize classes of people, using race and religion as tools of hatred.

We have a lot to do, as a nation. But we must begin with the unshackling of our mentality in solving problems. If our universities are merely interested in maintaining the hegemony of the ruling class and a corporatist despotic regime that thrives on slogans of economic progress via political stability, we cannot see deep into our national psyche, let alone heal it.

We cannot see the desire within that we wish to subjugate, tame, and put to moral and ethical use. Desire here means the maintaining of the entity called thekerajaan,which produces men and machines that help run the mechanistic world of rampant corruption.

The machinery that supports this system is plagued with individuals and institutions that legitimise the propping-up of a broken judicial system, the advancing of sub-intelligent values in the way we teach our students in our un! iversiti es, the empasis on material gains over spiritual cultivation, the prioritizing of wants over needs, the creation of hate groups, and the maintaining of a parliamentary culture that is fast degenerating into a state of denial.

Stop the rot in our educational institutions. Open our minds to possibilities of progressive changes. Let our imagination and hope for a just society run wild. Honor Socrates and the great thinkers of revolutionary change. Express rage against the machine.We do not have anything to lose except our mental chains.

OUR USUAL REMINDER, FOLKS:
While the opinion in the article is mine,
the comments are yours;
present them rationally and ethically.
AND -- ABOLISH THE ISA -- NOW!

facebook:http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=689079971

blog:http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/


See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

Racism is a sin

The government should also initiate legal action against irresponsible writers, like the controversial Mingguan Malaysia columnist Dr Mohd Ridhuan Tee Abdullah who provokes the non-Malays with his weekly diatribe against them, saying that minorities who cannot respect the special position of Islam and the Malays should return to their "homeland", which he means China and India.

Thomas Lee, MySinchew

Several years ago, the great Christian evangelist Dr Billy Graham made this very profound observation: "Racial and ethnic hostility is the foremost social problem facing our world today. From the systematic horror of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia to the random violence ravaging our inner cities, our world seems to be caught in a tidal wave of racial and ethnic tension."

Racial prejudice is certainly on the lose and on the rise everywhere in this global village of ours, and we in Malaysia are not spared the onslaught of this evil viral malady. Currently we are experiencing the vibration and trepidation of a high wave of racial tremor building up momentum into a possible deadly racial tsunami that could destroy the fragile harmony and peace among the people.

Many people are feeling that the evil of racism is increasingly dominating our socio-political arena, with irresponsible politicians and Little Napoleons in the civil servants vocally and visibly demonstrating their racial bias and discrimination in almost all areas of life -- religion, culture, education, politics, business, employment, and even in sports.

Like performers playing to the gallery, these racist politicians and Little Napoleons create scene after scene of what used to be inconceivable scenarios of postulated sequence of persuasive poisonous racial rhetoric in the very sensitive multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-cultural and multi-lingual soci! ety.

Unfortunately, the government of the day has not only not done much to arrest the deteriorating race relationship trend, but has actually contributed to its rapid escalation with policies perceived as unjust and discriminating.

For example, the ban on the use of certain Bahasa Malaysia words in the worship, practice, teaching and publications of some non-Muslim religions is certainly a violation of the human, civil and constitutional rights of the non-Muslim community, as Bahasa Malaysia is their beloved national language and they have every right to use every word in its vocabulary for whatever purpose.

I will not harp on issues that had been resolved (sic), such as the decade-long unjust and unjustified bureaucratic restriction on the formation of non-Muslim religious clubs and societies in schools, but would like the powers-that-be to learn from the blunders created by some smart alec Little Napoleons, and ensure that such a serious lapse will never recur.

Fast and decisive action need

There is also a need for the government to act fast and decisively against those who are propogating the supremacy of any one race and, in the process, running down and offending the people of other races. These people, like the racist principals who insult, outrage and hurt the feelings of their students with racial umbrage, should be hashly punished, including being sacked, or even charged for sedition or for disturbing the peace of the nation.

The government should also initiate legal action against irresponsible writers, like the controversial Mingguan Malaysia columnist Dr Mohd Ridhuan Tee Abdullah who provokes the non-Malays with his weekly diatribe against them, saying that minorities who cannot respect the special position of Islam and the Malays should return to their "homeland", which he means China and India. He has also sneered that Malaysia should be renamed Cinasia or Indiasia if every demand by non-Muslims was accommodated.! Tee sho uld not forget his own racial root!

Lately, there have been many insensitive uncouth statements made by the insecure plebeians who are inferior in intellect and bankrupt in integrity, but are holding high positions in the academic circle. Such unhealthy developments reflect a very sad state of the questionable quality of the intellectual and scholastic standard in our country. This is also reflected distinctly in the case of one person who wrote a doctorate thesis on the evil of the Internal Security Act (ISA), but embraced, supported and promoted the oppressive law when he was appointed to a high position. We got many such shameless pseudo intellectuals in our midst.

Racial problems must be dealt with fast and decisively as they cause severe pain in our people and country. There are people who are deeply hurt, carrying within themselves the deep, painful, wounds that have been inflicted by the racial actions and attitudes of others.

The biblical illustration of the church community as one body is very apt in this context. If one part of the body suffers, every part suffers with it. Similarly, if any community in the nation is hurt, the whole nation suffers.

Racism hurts and it takes a long time to heal. If our children are hurt by racist principals and teachers at school, it is not easy for them to forgive and certainly harder for them to forget. These childern will grow up with a racial thorn in their heart and will live a life coloured by fear of racial slurs and stigma.

Not a skin problem, but a sin problem

We need to know and understand that racism is not a skin problem. It is a sin problem. Racism has its roots in the sins of pride and arrogance. Racism is perhaps the most demonic tool for the destruction of a nation. It destroys the unity, harmony and peace of the nation by creating hatred, animosity and antagonism among the people of various races. It hurts the person who hates and the person who is hated. Co! nsider a ll the sins that have their roots in racism -- bitterness, anger, hostility, enmity, and even murder.

People tends to perceive and value or devalue each other according to physical differences and abilities, but as we, or least those of us who believe in God, know that we should not judge by external appearance another person whom we should accept and honour without any racial bias or discrimination, because he or she is a creature of God. We should learn to respect and evaluate all individuals according to our common humanity, and conduct our relationship without any partiality and prejudice. We should never look down on another human being, irrespective of colour, gender, creed, culture, and class, because we know that each and every human life is infinitely precious, created by God who loves and cares for him or her.

There is no place for racism in our nation, and as we celebrate the 53rd birthday of our nation, and join in the celebration of Hari Raya Aidifitri with our Muslim brothers and sisters, let us assign infinite worth to each of our fellow citizen, and take the lead in eliminating racism in our midst because we know that racism is a sin.

Happy Medeka and Selamat Hari Raya Aidifitri!

See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?