“I have always thought of Christmas time, when it has come round, as a good time; a kind, forgiving, charitable time; the only time I know of, in the long calendar of the year, when men and women seem by one consent to open their shut-up hearts freely, and to think of people below them as if they really were fellow passengers to the grave, and not another race of creatures bound on other journeys.” ~ Charles Dickens
What a wonderful world!
G-Youth meets Tun Dr. Mahathir
G-Youth Keng Liang vs Edmund Bon
Malaysiakini, 12.11.2011 – A Twitter dare turned into a vibrant debate session on the Peaceful Assembly Bill 2011 between Kedah Gerakan youth chief Tan Keng Liang and prominent human rights lawyer Edmund Bon.
Held at the Pusat Rakyat Loyar Burok in Bangsar Utama, Kuala Lumpur before a packed audience of about 100, Tan faced an audience mostly ‘hostile’ to his points defending the Bill.
Tan (right) feels it is alright for the government to ban street protests, but this must come with a proper definition of designated protest areas.
“The view from Gerakan is to fight for more designated areas, this is something the government has not announced yet.
“I believe we can work together on this to request more places in every state including Putrajaya; why can’t we have it in Putrajaya? This is the centre of power,” he said.
Pointing out that no police permit was required at designated areas, he added his view that this is a better alternative as street protests were no longer “viable” in a civilised society with the advent of Facebook and Twitter.
“In the 60s and 70s, there was no other way to bring out people’s views; going to a street protest was the best option at that time but we have evolved, now is the age of technology,” he said.
Tan was rebutting an earlier point made by Bon who explained that street protests was a necessary instrument for democracy, citing how Onn Jaafar had led 15,000 people to demonstrate against the Malayan Union before Independence.
Sabotuers vs the 99 percent
While acknowledging that Malaysians have generally been well behaved in street protests, Tan adds that there has always been the possibility protestors may take advantage of the demonstration to cause problems.
“I trust Bon, I believe he will be well behaved in a street demonstration, but you don’t know if anyone will try to take advantage of him,” he quipped.
He stressed that it only takes one percent of bad hats in a protest to cause things to go awry. Therefore, he said the ban on street protests was justified, based on the interest of non-protesters
However, Bon replied pointing out that the 99 percent others need not be dictated by the one percent as there are several existing laws to deal with the scenario, including the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code.
“But if the government and police refuse to do their job and are politically partisan, what can we do?
“We can just be peaceful… It is the clampdown by the institutions that make our peaceful assembly violent.”
Street protests, Bon adds, is more effective in creating exposure about a cause, such as an anti-domestic abuse march or cancer awareness march, than a static rally.
‘BN ignored us, Pakatan walked out’
The debate today was moderated by Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas) CEO Wan Saiful Wan Jan and is a culmination of exchanges on Twitter over the Bill.
While Tan and Bon were at odds over the legislation, they agreed that the MPs had let the rakyat down.
“We have 222 MPs in Parliament but they do not listen to you, some of the MPs just walked out, and the other MPs totally ignored the alternative bill (proposed by the Bar Council).
“We need to start making the roles of politicians extinct as mere administrators, (in that) for every law (they propose) they must come back and consult the people. That is people power,” said Bon.
“I have said certain things that may be sensitive but he (Bon) did not stage a walkout,” quipped Tan.
G-Youth Sabah is working hard…
“They are there not to lord over others but because they genuinely want to lead and serve those under them”
G-Youth needs leaders who are creating resonance with a vision or shared mission so compelling that others will follow, showing a genuine interest in cultivating people’s abilities, recognising the need for change and the ability to generate collegiality (teamwork). Put simply, it is indispensable to have a leader who has political astuteness; an ability to detect significant social networks and power relationships.
Gerakan leaders have to be much more knowledgeable than ignorant; open rather than close-minded; willing to accept new ideas and discard old ones; bold rather than indecisive; to make decisions that will bring benefit to the country. Whether the basis of a leader’s strength was demonstrated by his physique and being dexterous with the sword, or his oratory skills, and even his good looks and charm, they all share one common denominator, that of having the ability to lead and motivate people. Is there any of such in Gerakan, grooming and laying the path for G-Youth, for the sake of the party?
Many were impressed with Raymond Tan and Liew Yun Fah’s powerful speeches and astuteness, intimidating the long-serving ones and wanting to follow their style. Could they be the hope of the party’s future?
Looking at the current political landscape, realpolitik or dominance game will bring the party into oblivion.
G-Youth leadership is a critical factor within the overall context of leadership in the next few years especially after the 13GE. They form an integral part of society and of the nation. They can be seen as a feeder into higher levels of leadership. We need new thinking and innovation in order to meet the challenges of a highly competitive globalised world.
One of the issue much spoken at the recent National Delegates Conference is about unity – to support the selected candidates and to close rank; possible? Yes if we are sincere. Only if we eradicate the faction and control game. It is ironic to preach one thing but not practising it.
Finally to those who know the party inside out; can Teo Kok Chee sincerely serve for the sake of the party, patching up with Wong Gow? Can Kohilan, Lim Tuan Seng, Lum Weng Keong and Lau Yan Peng work as satu hati? Can Lim Keng Guan, Ng Chiang Chin or Khoo Soo Chai serve the party and not their mentor? Can Gooi Hoe Hin stop playing the devil advocate or calling leaders to follow his instruction? Can Lee Ah Fat and Chang Kee Choong start to build up the party in their respective states not for personal agenda? Is it possible for Teng Hock Nan and Chia Kwang Chye to consolidate? Above all can the leaders not influence by favouritism or sychophancy and materialism?
G-Youth National Delegates Conference 2011
KUALA LUMPUR, 15 OCTOBER, 2011: Two of the 11 resolutions proposed by Gerakan Youth were not passed by the delegations at the Gerakan National Youth Delegates Conference 2011, today.
One was to change the name of Gerakan Youth to Belia Gerakan to attract female youths to take part in programmes organised by the party’s youth wing.
The other was to reduce the age limit of Gerakan Youth to 40 from 45, to enable youth leaders to be trained and made more prominent in the party.
Gerakan Nasional Youth chief Lim Si Pin, when contacted after the conference, said the two resolutions were rejected because the delegates regarded that they were not suitable for implementation at the moment.
He said the changing of Gerakan Youth to Belia Gerakan was still not suitable for implementation because there were not much dialogues between Gerakan Youth members and the Gerakan Beliawanis Bureau on the proposal.
“We need to have many more dialogues between the two to carry out the name change and subsequently merging them.
On the resolution on the age limit, Lim said: “The delegates regarded the age 40 as ‘still raw’ as they are just starting to learn about politics. The five years is a learning period before they venture into politics”.
Gerakan Youth approved a proposal to the government to amend Section 15 of the Universities and University Colleges Act (AUKU) to enable undergraduates to be more free to involve themselves in politics.
Other than that, Gerakan Youth is seeking the setting up of a Student Consultative Council which combined student leaders and the administration of public and private Institutions of Higher Learning to discuss problems that would crop up as a result of the amendment.
Gerakan Youth also proposed to the government to give full freedom to the media to report news and the media should be given full power to supervise the publication of their reports.
Seven other resolutions mostly proposing to the government that the interests and need of the people be given priority, among others, in tackling the high cost of living and education.
The conference was opened by Gerakan vice-president Datuk Mah Siew Keong and it was also attended by Barisan Nasional Youth chairman Khairy Jamaluddin.
- Bernama
G-Youth meets the Attorney General
Putrajaya, 13.10.2011 – Sekumpulan Pemuda Nasional Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia yang diketuai oleh YB Liang Teck Meng, Ahli Parlimen Simpang Renggam, David Ang Naib Ketua Pemuda dan Andy Yong, Ketua Biro Perundangan bersama dengan 5 peguam parti berjumpa dengan Peguam Negara Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail pagi ini. Antara lain perbincangan utama melibatkan rang undang-undang baru yang akan menggantikan Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri 1960 (ISA) dan isu mengenai undang-undang hudud.
Pemuda Gerakan telahpun memberi pandangan dan cadangan mengenai Akta yang akan menggantikan ISA terutamanya dalam aspek hak asasi manusia, jangka masa penahanan tanpa bicara dan kuasa menteri. Adalah difahamkan oleh Peguam Negara bahawa rang undang-undang tersebut berkemungkinan besar akan dibentangkan pada persidangan Parlimen pada bulan Mac atau April 2012. Kesemua pihak juga bersetuju bahawa adalah tidak praktikal bagi negara menggunakan hukum hudud buat masa kini.
YB Liang mengatakan “secara keseluruhan, apa yang penting adalah pasukan kami mengetahui bahawa pihak Jabatan Peguam Negara bekerja dengan cara yang sistematik dan tidak dipengaruhi oleh mana-mana ahli politik atau pihak berkuasa”.
Pemuda Gerakan menyeru semua pihak yang berkenaan terutamanya ahli-ahli Parlimen untuk memahami rang undang-undang yang baru itu secara terperinci sebelum ia dibentangkan dalam Parlimen. Sedemikian akan menjadikan sesuatu Akta itu berkesan dan adil tanpa menjejaskan hak asasi manusia yang diperuntukkan di dalam Perlembagaan Perksekutuan.
[Google Translation] Sinchew: KUALA LUMPUR – Man Group’s chief secretary Liu Qing said before, young people have been tabled before the Executive Committee of the CPC Central Committee on behalf of the Home National Front election battle green candidate for the people, young people want to maintain the 308 seats contested in the election.
Youth competed in 12 parliament and 7 state seats in the last election.
Liu was speaking at a press conference today, the number of youth candidates from Gerakan Youth, remain unchanged.
At the same time, Gerakan Youth Vice-Chairman and Gerakan Deputy Secretary-General YB Liang Teck Ming added, the youth will compete in the coming general election 12 parliaments and 35 state seats, including three state seats in Sabah.
Except for the hardworking and sincere ones, the old faces from Gerakan are unlikely to draw votes anymore.
In addition, Liu was pointed out that the October 15 meeting of National Youth Delegates Conference theme of “differences in seeking the same.”。 In addition, unlike in previous years, the youth and women’s group will also convene the Delegates Conference.
“Last year, National Youth Delegates Conference, an attendance rate of 40%, Therefore, I call for more representatives present at the meeting.”
He pointed out that the people in the Conference on the eve of Youth delegates also have the opportunity to include the party elders (life members council), including Dr Lim dialogue attended, to explore for the party’s transformation.
“This year the National Conference also invited the BN youth leader Khairy to attend, and his representatives have the opportunity to exchange for political issues.”
On the other hand, for the International Islamic University Malaysia, a survey showed that 65% of people believe that the election to general election voters will not vote for the party’s problems, Liang Teck Ming said, by the Prime Minister to present the next fiscal year If the Waste Management and Budget by the fall, so voters will certainly be re-elected more than one party.
“However, our feedback also showed that voters attach great importance to the candidates, voters in the end it is difficult to assess the party or election candidate.”
Liu was then that people will not vote for the party election is very dangerous, since the tsunami from the 308, the opposition state how good the quality of state legislators, therefore, in his opinion, to vote for the party is more important than elections.
Party members and voters were 3 hot topic at National Chengchi University will communicate with Najib.
Liang Teck Ming said Gerakan CC has on 16 October representatives of the National Delegates Conference, will have the opportunity and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib for the party offered up by the hot topics of the three exchanges.
“Rarely party have a communication platform with the Prime Minister, so the party headquarters a month ago, asked the delegates to be properly prepared to ask questions to the Prime Minister, we received a total of more than 200 questions, and finally sorted out the three most popular questions. “
The theme of “China hand” in the National Delegates Conference is expected to have 70 percent represented。 With the Delegates Conference, Gerakan also will host the exhibition and the history of electronic night dinner.
Winnable 13GE?
Are the party leaders willing to set aside their agenda and to encourage the success of others?
Some say November, some say March and some say it does not matter when: ABU. Of late the word “winnable candidate” has been a popular one among aspiring politicians who want to contest in the coming general election. There are various interpretation of it. So do we still play the conventional method; allowing the division chief or ‘king-maker’ to decide?
What is more important – a blue-eye boy, Umno’s choice, a decent professional or a popular proxy or member in that particular division/state? None because it all lies on the rakyats, maybe a bit of influence within other component party but ultimately it is still the people: vox populi, vox dei. Nay, our politics is still very much about money and connection? Wish you good luck.
Now, is it necessary to identify the candidate much earlier than before? I guess so, fear of sabotage should be out of the question. After all when the wind blows against you, as it is commonly said “letak kucing atau anjing pun boleh menang”. At the very least there will be a direction, a map to strategise if candidate can be confirmed (not acha saja) soon. Of course he or she must be dedicated, sincere and work hard, the very basic criterias regardless of background.
From there that individual must start planning and form his/her machinery. Getting good, solid statistics from the last few election campaign results in the race you plan on running in lets you determine a lot of information that will help you win at the polls. With this information, you’ll be able to determine which precincts are favorable to candidates from your party regardless of the individual candidate’s strength.
Additionally, this valuable election campaign information will let you see which precincts are unfavorable to candidates in your party, where the swing voters are located, and which have an issue that might motivate voters at the polls on election day.
You can build on the base of voters who identify with you in your election campaign because your party affiliation, but you cannot presume on them. You will have to campaign to these people, but elections are won and lost by reaching the swing voters, the people who are up for grabs.
A successful candidate must take his election campaign to the swing voters. Once he has determined what the base vote will be, one can see how many swing voters will need to win. The statistics will tell you where they are.
You have to go through the campaign statistics, precinct by precinct, and think to yourself, “I can get so many votes in this precinct, but not so many in this one, and I will lose by a lot of votes in the other one” and so forth. When you have done your precinct-by-precinct analysis, you will have a much better idea of how you can get that magic number of votes.
After choosing a political campaign slogan in the race for office, the next step as a candidate should be to get his hands on elections statistics from the last two or three cycles. The election statistics will tell him the results in the last elections, the total number who voted, the number who voted in the race, the number who voted in similar races.
With this information, he comes up with an average number of people who are likely to vote in your race. Divide that by two, and you have you target number of votes to win your political campaign. Local issues or problems are not in time to solve now, unwise to promise or emphasize anything.
Once picked your number, he/she has to sit down with your campaign people and decide how you are going to get to that number, precinct by precinct. If, on the other hand, they just had a testimonial dinner at the new recreation centre, and 100 people showed up, you can forget about winning there. But take note of the ‘shiok-sendiri’ culture.
Try to locate the swing precincts, that is, the precincts with swing voters. In some constituencies, many people are voting a straight nowadays as above said ABU or ABBN, but party affiliation still counts to some extent. Even many who call themselves independents still tend, all things being equal, to vote more for candidates of one party more than the other. A swing voter can be defined as one who votes for the particular candidate, but not on the basis of party affiliation.
Apa itu EIA?
Someone queried me recently on the brouhaha against the development of Penang Hill by our Party President during his tenure as the Penang Chief Minister a couple of weeks ago. He is particularly curious on the rules affecting the land development process and regulation of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). By now, those of us who followed the news would have a general idea that the requirements to submit EIA report to authorities for controlling and monitoring purpose may halt and affect the development period or process.
In a nutshell, just like other proposed or implemented policies, the public should be informed or educated on such issue to establish a genuine agenda of sustainable development with a fusion of idealism and pragmatism for the people.
In a pluralistic society such as Penang, the urban land issues seem to have a conflict between environmental rules and the land development policy. On the one hand, the government promotes land development in the country for a more phosphorous and balanced society and, on the other hand, there are certain precautionary environmental rules laid down to protect its hazards. However, I am inclined to think that economic development must take precedence over environmental concerns.
The objective of the economic policy is to eradicate poverty and restructure wealth. Therefore, the implementation of land policy and environmental planning measures is taken alongside these aims. The effort of the government to emulate industrial countries for the 2020 vision, for example, sought to provide proportionate ration of infrastructure, water supplies and sanitation development. At the same time, we had tried to mitigate industrial pollution (or haphazard, like the Lynas issue) with the technology available. However, to a certain extent, the overall implementation of land policy and environemental planning measures face difficulties due to some distortions associated with political, social and economic influences which created a complex but not insurmountable environmental issues. Worst still if those potential stakeholders are there just for the sole purpose of financial gain.
Ultimately I feel that using an institutional economic perspective, formal and informal rules within socio-economic, political and administrative frameworks need to be amended from time to time when necessary due to the dynamics of institutional changes affecting the land development decision.
- Andy Yong
G-Youth welcomes ISA repeal.
KOTA KINABALU: Pemuda Gerakan has called for the abolishment of the Emergency Ordinance (EO), following Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s announcement that the Internal Security Act (ISA) would be repealed and replaced with new laws.
Gerakan’s national youth chief Lim Si Pin said the PM’s announcement was highly welcomed but the party was of the opinion that abolishing ISA alone was not sufficient if the government was serious in doing away with oppressive laws.
“We welcome the PM’s announcement on the abolishment of the ISA, but there should be a comprehensive change to our security laws. We need to amend or even do away with the EO as well. Otherwise, it could still be used the same way as the ISA,” he said.
Met at the Sabah Gerakan Youth Delegates Conference here yesterday, Lim stressed the government has to be cautious when changing laws and not to appear as if it was just taking away certain things because it is popular to do so but not committed in fully addressing the whole issue.
“We don’t want a situation where ISA is no longer there but you still have the EO in existence, which means we can use it on anybody we want.
“Parti Sosialis Malaysia is a classic example; does it mean if a person wears yellow shirt you can link him with Bersih? No.
“We want to do away with the ISA but everybody seems to forget that we still have the ordinance. We would like to see a comprehensive change in terms of our security laws,” he said, adding that there should be at least some visible amendments to the outdated ordinance.
Najib in his special Malaysia Day message on Thursday, announced that the government would repeal the Banishment Act 1959 and reviewing other laws to be in line with current needs.
He said two new laws would be formulated to prevent subversive elements as well as fighting organised crime, in order to safeguard peace and public order.
The new laws replacing the ISA would provide a shorter period of detention period and shifts the power to extend the detention period from the executive to the judiciary, except in matters concerning terrorism where the power remained with the minister.
In his officiating speech earlier, Lim said Gerakan made a historical march to Istana Negara back in 2009 and became the first political party to call for the abolishment of the ISA.
He recalled that some of the party members from Sabah were present and braved the police tear gas and water canon together with their counterparts from the peninsula.
“We were booed everywhere, on YouTube and Facebook. They laughed at us and said we were stupid fools. We did not react and we just kept at it… and yesterday we are happy to hear about the abolishment of the ISA.
“We are not claiming credit but it’s true that we were the first. What I am trying to say is that political work is a long journey. It is never a sprint and always a marathon, and Gerakan will continue its work and press forward for the (full) abolishment of the ISA.
G-Youth lauds the abolition of ISA
One of his agenda after taking the premiership was to look into ISA seriously. At least he did what he promised. Without blowing its trumpet, G-Youth had been consistently pushed and supported such move through resolution, media and participation in related events. We welcome such reform.
Malaysiakini, 7.9.2011 – The call for Malacca Gerakan election candidates to contest under their own party flag is gaining strength.
The deputy head of the national Youth central working committee has voiced support for Gerakan secretary-general Teng Chang Yeow’s proposal.
In a statement today, David Ang said all Malacca Gerakan members should support Teng’s (right) call to contest under the party flag in the coming election.
This should not only apply to the Bachang division but “all other areas” in Malacca where the party feels its candidates have a chance of winning, said Ang.
Telling BN leaders not to “push Gerakan to the edge”, Ang said the party “will fight back with dignity”.
“We will not be a punching bag of Umno and we will no longer keep quiet when you shout. Gerakan is now 43 years old and we are old enough and experienced enough to decide our own destiny and direction. We do not need Umno or any other party to tell us where we should contest.
“We will decide where we should contest and we will let them know when (the) time is right,” Ang added in his tersely-worded statement.
He was responding to remarks by Umno supreme council member Mohd Ali Rustam that the state BN would field a “winnable candidate” from either Umno or MCA – instead of Gerakan – for the Bachang state constituency in the next general election.
Gerakan has been contesting the seat since 1995, but its candidate Wendy Ngo Kim Hwa lost to DAP’s Lim Jak Wong in the March 2008 election.
“At this point of time, we have a strong feeling that the winnable candidate would come either from Umno or MCA, and not Gerakan, which has been contesting the seat from 1995.
“We need a candidate who is able to secure the votes and win in Bachang. This would not only make work easier for us, but a victory is also assured,” Ali was quoted as saying.
If Gerakan had no winnable candidate for Bachang, he added, then it would be better for Umno to contest in its place.
“If I am given an option, my first choice is that the candidate comes from Umno, followed by MCA and maybe then, Gerakan.”
Teng, in an open letter to party members in Malacca, urged them to be “mentally prepared” to contest the Bachang seat under the party’s symbol.
“I want (Malacca) Gerakan to be mentally prepared to contest the Bachang seat on our own party symbol, if the state BN chair defies the coalition spirit,” the New Straits Times quoted him as saying in the Sept 3 letter.
In today’s statement, Ang said he would even propose to the party’s central committee and president Koh Tsu Koon as to where Gerakan Youth felt its candidates have good chances of winning in the next general election.
Malaysiakini, 6.9.2011 – Gerakan Youth secretary-general Dr Dominic Lau today launched a broadside against Malacca Chief Minister Mohd Ali Rustam for what he claims as double standards against his party.
On August 24, Mohd Ali had told the press immediately after a meeting with MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek that BN stood a better chance of winning if the Bachang seat was given to Umno or MCA to contest.
The seat was contested by Gerakan’s Wendy Ngo Kim Hua in the 2008 general election but she was narrowly defeated by DAP’s Lim Jak Wong by 517 votes.
Ali Rustam’s forthrightness has not gone down well with Gerakan.
“When it comes to Bachang, Ali Rustam behaved in a very unfriendly manner by giving pressure to Gerakan,” said Lau in a statement, adding that obviously, Ali Rustam practices double standards and bullied the weak.
Describing the chief minister’s statement as “hilarious” and “ridiculous”, Lau dismissed the claim that Gerakan was not strong enough to wrestle back the state seat as just Mohd Ali’s personal opinion.
“Gerakan is very confident to win the Bachang constituency, hence, I hereby urge Ali Rustam to stop making all these destructive and demoralising remarks. As chairman of BN Malacca, he should be helpful and supportive of Gerakan and not continue hitting Gerakan.”
The Bachang constituency is the only state seat in Malacca that is traditionally contested by the party.
However, Gerakan in Malacca, like its counterpart in the party’s home state of Penang, was completely wiped out in the last general election.
Lau also lamented that when PPP had requested for MCA’s state seat of Kota Laksamana, Mohd Ali had politely promised to discuss it with MCA but Gerakan has not been extended the same consideration.
“I don’t understand why the Malacca chief minister is so courteous to MCA yet to unreasonable to Gerakan,” said Lau.
G-Youth and Lee Chong Wei
Gerakan or Gandhi’s Way
Many in the party often say the President prefer the moderate, constructive and soft approach. But sometimes the only way to fight fire is to use fire. Mahatma Gandhi fought oppression and injustice non-violently with Satyagraha or Soul-force. He used the “weapons” of truth, harmlessness, and self-sacrifice. He was seeking social change against the seemingly unconquerable adversaries of state power and prejudice. His campaigns successfully exposed the ultimate weakness of falsehood and injustice upon which the dominant oppressive force was based. The foundations of Satyagraha are beyond religious doctrine and political ideology. Satyagraha is a weapon of the strong; it admits of no violence under any circumstance whatever; and it ever insists upon truth.
In a situation of extremism, bigotry, hegemonism and corruption in our country, seeking targets of hate and fear, how can we even consider a superior force based on love and harmlessness? Stealth and torture seem the order of the day as the rats of war run round and round in their cages of hypocrisy. Some politicians today, as in the past, have a “godly” purpose. The political culture seems bent on creating distrust and revenge, destroying itself along with its enemies in the name of “righteousness.” Surely it is the extreme of cynicism and lack of faith in the goodness of the human spirit to seek a common ground based on violence. What the cold warriors of the last century called the “balance of power” has morphed in the early days of this century into the “balance of terror”. Like it or not, we live in a multiracial society since independence and many years to go. Prime Minister’s concept of tolerance, acceptance and inclusiveness is good but some look at it conservatively.
We must now see how Satyagraha as strategy for social change can become the foundation of a new political culture and the driving force of public policy and international relations. If we can instill the concept of harmlessness into the political life of nations the power of “Sat” or “truth” will manifest. When facing opposition Satyagraha is a revolutionary force, because “truth” will always expose falsehood revealing its pitiful and destructive struggle to dominate others, rationalize injustice and hide its incompetence. If, however, governments embrace Satyagraha it will manifest as goodwill, pragmatic problem solving and integrity.
While Gandhi was a religious figure, he did not rely on “religion” to solve his problems. His “religious” expression was integrity and humanitarianism — Soul-force. Soul-force is the active search for truth and the improvement of the human condition. Contrast this with our current combative leaders who give lip service to “a culture of life” while practicing war, torture, capital punishment, intolerance, selfish greed, and neglect of human and environmental well-being.
Integrity is super pragmatic. It is at the same time diametrically opposed to the doctrine of “ends justify the means” and “might makes right.” Integrity produces healing and solves problems because the methods used tap the resources latent in people and in nature and give them life. Integrity is change with the cooperation of all resources. It only “fights” with the inherent forces of inertia, and can overpower inertia using the spiritual forces that nurture and transform. The power of integrity is that the means and ends are inseparable so that the goal is realized in the reaching of it. It can change the formula of current political powerbrokers from “might makes right” to “right makes might.” The latter formula is the foundation of Satyagraha or Soul-force.
The safety valve to prevent “right makes might,” being an excuse for narrow-minded religious fanaticism is the test of tolerance and universal respect of diversity. “Right” does not belong to any doctrine or ideology, “god-given” or otherwise. “Right” is revealed if it produces unity, greater love, health and harmony. Any group claiming to be “right” must pass that test. Then they must prove that they can cooperate with others who may have different viewpoints to improve life for all. “Right” attracts people to unite, and is proved by beneficial results; it cannot be forced upon others.
While Gandhi struggled against the colonial oppression of the British Empire, the current adversaries are no less powerful and resistant. Gerakan can use Satyagraha as the political strategy to mobilize all resources to fight the battle against illness, hunger, ignorance, fanaticism, greed, environmental degradation, and hatred. All people must become a leader in their own sphere of influence to bring about “Sat.” Integrity leads to harmony, which leads to health, the result of a conflict being resolved. When everyone is oriented towards solving problems non-violently on any level, then we will be on the road to peace and prosperity.
G-Youth CC dinner gathering
G-Youth Workshop at Redang
G-Youth at Thailand GE 2011
Sinchew Daily – [Translated by Google] KUALA LUMPUR (29.6.2011) Gerakan Youth chief Lim Si Pin said although the MIC Youth and the People’s Progressive Party Youth have responded to the support UMNO Youth 709, Gerakan Youth firmly opposed to the rally.
He said today at a press conference that if there is any unfortunate event of riots in 709 rally, Gerakan Youth will provide legal aid to assist businesses and property damage suffered by the public due to the rally against the organizations responsible persons.
Therefore, he urged a clean and fair electoral alliance, Bersih to show authority to be responsible of their true identity.
He said that Gerakan Youth is willing to provide a coordination platform, playing an intermediary role, between Bersih and the Election Commission.
Lim Si Pin revealed that, although Gerakan Youth believe that everyone has freedom of speech and assembly, but we have to be for their own actions and behavior to take responsibility.
709 has entered the parties and large gatherings are very emotional and not rational thinking.
He said police and Home Ministry have been repeatedly shown not to issue permits, so if the organization continued to host large gatherings, will have to face all the consequences. Interests of the people, rally should be canceled. He called for a rally to the person in charge of making the people and national interests, and to seriously consider scrapping of the assembly or to replace other forms of signature campaign rallies to express their aspirations.
He also urged parents to pay more attention to the youths, to persuade them not to participate in a rally induced people to avoid unnecessary incidents.
Also attended by Gerakan Youth Vice-chairman YB Liang Teck Ming and Legal, Social Welfare and Public Complaints Bureau chairperson Andy Yong.
Enough of saying ‘walk the talk’. In politics, the task of politicians first and foremost, in whatever political system, is to serve the people and not to expect good appraisals. Gerakan’s popularity can be considered as at all time low. Like it or not, people do not see Gerakan as championing a truly multi-racial party anymore. Perhaps it is never an easy objective, not even through PPP, PKR or DAP or even the 1Malaysia concept.
Why are urban and Chinese voters not receptive to Gerakan? Or Gerakan shall ask: why should they vote for them? Services provided by Gerakan leaders as seen in the media, cabinet or those who hold government positions and MP/Aduns have nothing to brag about. Pointing at potholes and gutters are outdated politics. Issuing press statement just for the sake of publicity or echoing others would not make any difference. Anyone in their position can perform the same if not better. After all it is their obligation to serve.
It is not difficult to guess that among others, grouses such as bread-and-butter issues; low incomes, healthcare, fundamental liberties, good governance, corruption, transparency/fairness/efficiency of the police force, judiciary and MACC should be tackled by any potential candidates or politician who want to win support. Are Gerakan representatives or coordinators (candidates) doing any of these?
Everyone knows, the party cannot just be doing the same thing or hoping for a change from external factor. Something must be done. There must be a reason for doing so.
Guan Eng: “Let’s play the blame game”
“It is easier to blame Koh Tsu Koon than to explain. After all, whatever I do, Penangites will still support”
Voice of Grassroots and Concerned Members
Gerakan (or perhaps Pemuda) needs leader who is creating resonance with a vision or shared mission so compelling that others will follow, showing a genuine interest in cultivating people’s abilities, recognising the need for change and the ability to generate collegiality (teamwork). Put simply, it is indispensable to have a leader who has political astuteness; an ability to detect significant social networks and power relationships.
Why I stayed in Malaysia?
A remarkable comment/letter is reproduced herein from MalaysianInsider:
JUNE 2 — My name is Yee Ziherng and I am a Malaysian. I stand firmly on the ground that I am a Malaysian first, Chinese second. So there are no debatable issues about races and religion here.
I have been gravely disheartened by the recent deluge of stories of Malaysians migrating. More and more people are jumping on the bandwagon of supporting the move while enumerating lists of alleged flaws and problems facing those who choose to remain, all the while without providing viable solutions to the problem.
I am not against people who work abroad; far from it, in fact, I admire them for working far away from their family in alien countries, earning in different currencies and, hopefully accumulating knowledge acquired abroad to contribute back to our country.
So what is the problem?
It would be very convenient if we were blessed with complete equality (in terms of education, work and business opportunities, etc). Convenient, but no more than a utopian dream. Race is not the question, nor the answer; how can it be, when emigrants consist of Malaysians of all races and faiths?
People leave for various reasons: be it due to low pay, rising inflation, poor governance at the helm, lack of structure and initiative to retain, attract, or nurture talents, flaws in the education system, or even because they feel that they or their talents would be better appreciated elsewhere.
Those who studied or worked abroad are being asked to remain abroad by their parents; peers complain that their salaries just about make ends meet; and every day we see new lows as politicians bicker about anything and everything except the economy and pressing social issues.
So after 54 years, the problem still boils back down to the issue of “equality, education, standard of living and, not to forget, dirty politics.”
Why has the situation kept its unsatisfactory status quo?
Simple, we only complain!
How many of us have actually tried to change? I am certainly not expecting Malaysians to think of “changing” as an act of running around the streets shouting (and later being hit by tear gas and water cannons). Change comes in many forms, and can be as simple as registering yourself as a voter. We have no right to complain if we don’t even bother exercising our basic rights as a Malaysian.
Here are some popular sentences that you might have heard before: “It doesn’t make a difference, so why vote?” “I will return to Malaysia when things get better.” or “I will be back when the country starts to appreciate me.” Sounds familiar?
Let me get things straight, change doesn’t happen overnight! You can’t expect things to be great and wonderful the next day when you just fold their hands and sit back. We should also stop blaming the system, the government and the country — basically everyone else but “us” — while enjoying perceived “equality” overseas.
We have people constantly blaming the politicians for failing to change, but the fundamental thing is, change actually starts within us, politicians are just a medium to represent the voices of the people.
Reasons to stay:
It’s a truism that nothing will change for the better while we rest on our laurels: What matters is our initiative to work for it.
I too have friends who refuse to come back after graduating from foreign universities. They’ve seen the wider world, and are afraid of being ill-treated if they return, moreover they received no discouragement for their plans to pursue their careers overseas.
As I’ve mentioned, there is absolutely nothing wrong with not working in Malaysia, or even being an “ex-Malaysian”, but surely for every person who chooses to chase their overseas dreams, there is one who can’t, for financial or social reasons.
This latter group of people have no choice but to stay in the country and face the problems head-on, participating in the change they wish to see, while those who supposedly have a more worldly mentality and have had the advantage of a broader, wider education have rushed on ahead to allegedly greener pastures with nary a glance back.
Does the phrase ‘“Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country” by John F. Kennedy ring a bell? Most of us have directly or indirectly taken something from Malaysia — at the very least it shaped us into who we are today.
So why can’t we temporarily set aside our personal interests and fulfil our duty as a Malaysian? Of course if it critically concerns a person’s survival if he continues to stay in Malaysia then leaving might be justifiable. But how many of us leave because eking a living in Malaysia is no longer a viable option?
I am certainly not a jingoistic type of a Malaysian, but I will proudly declare that I am Malaysian. For this is the place I grew up in, this is home.
Trust me, Malaysia has not “gone to the dogs” yet, nor is it “doomed to fail” — there is huge potential for this country we love so long as we all do our part. We stay and we fight not only for ourselves, but also for a better future for future generations.
The question remains: “If all the Malaysians who are capable of contributing/changing the country left, who is left to save Malaysia?”
Gerakan can regain support but…
Forget about whether there is a movement to oust the President, relevance of the party today, who is going to lead next, who are the candidates, integrity of the leaders/members or the hope to regain Penang.
“What did Gerakan stand for when it was founded? It stood for human rights. It stood against corruption. It demanded justice for all ethnic communities. It grabbed the middle ground between the extremism of the DAP and the Alliance.
It had a strong leadership who could have made it a formidable force that might even have resulted in a change of government. After all, they had the brains and the guts to put their ideals into practice through policies. Moreover, Gerakan was truly a multiracial party, seeing as how one of its foremost leaders was the renowned Malay intellectual Syed Hussein Alatas.
So what happened along the way to Gerakan? It joined the Barisan Nasional coalition after the catastrophic racial riots of 13 May 1969 — although they did not do so immediately, it seems that the riots were the main catalyst for this decision.
Unfortunately, what happened when Gerakan joined BN is that BN continued to cling to the old Alliance concept, marginalising the non-Alliance parties. To this day, the three most powerful parties in the country are UMNO, MCA and MIC, in that order.
What happened to Gerakan and the other parties which joined BN, such as the People’s Progressive Party? They got the scraps that the three major parties threw them, and were also forced to conform to the ethnic-minded niches that the Alliance favoured.
That’s why Gerakan lost so much of its multiracial nature. Today, look at Gerakan — they talk the multiracial talk, but they are walking the monoracial walk. It’s sickening to hear them talk of the need for multiracialism when the party leaders are addressing are almost uniformly Chinese.
The main reason Gerakan is in such a sad state is mainly due to its roots — it was an offshoot of the MCA that happened to have people like Tan Chee Khoon and Syed Hussein Alatas join its ranks. These brave people tried to make the fundamental premises of Gerakan work, but in the aftermath of May 13, the ex-MCA men like Lim Chong Eu steered it back to the BN fold, having been jolted by the riots. Then after that Lim Keng Yaik, another ex-MCA man, took the helm.
Basically, Gerakan gets the scraps of the MCA — the misfits who don’t belong in the MCA, but still want the benefits of being in the government. It’s truly saddening, because every time I hear the rhetoric of Gerakan’s leaders, it reminds me of the promise Gerakan held, and the promise which was snatched away by their ill-fated decision to rejoin the government, which has marginalised Gerakan’s pitiful efforts to restore a semblance of sensible multiracialism and liberalism to how this country is run…
Gerakan can still make its founding premises work — it just can’t make them work as long as it’s a member of BN.”
- Infernal Ramblings
Unity & Comradeship !
In a family, we talk about love; in sports they say team spirit; even in a triad they emphasize brotherhood; what about G-Youth?
Happy Wesak Day
“Practice Inclusiveness for Harmony ”
The theme for Wesak Day 2011 as announced by the Malaysian Buddhist Association, “Cultivate Loving Kindness, Foster Harmony” is most appropriate indeed.
I believe that if all of us can exhibit our compassion and practise moral conduct in our daily life, we can promote harmony within our family and extend it to our community, society and country.
In the context of peace and stability, we can then achieve our national vision to become an advanced nation. This year’s Wesak Day theme is very much in line with the 1Malaysia spirit because promoting harmony in a multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural society such as Malaysia is of utmost importance.
In fact, this spirit is very much based on the true teaching of every Great Religion of the world. “1 Malaysia” emphasises the basic principle of unity in diversity, through the values of acceptance, mutual respect and inclusiveness.
If all of us can persist, promote and practice this principle, then, we, the moderates, will be able to overwhelm the extreme, radical and opportunistic words and behaviours of a few.
A very important tenet in Buddhism is the belief in karma, causality and predestined relationship meaning inter-relationship amongst all sentient beings, hence the need to help, and not harm one another. This is a basic value that is very much needed in our multi-religious society.
Finally, my prayers and best wishes together with all Buddhists for a peaceful and prosperous future for all Malaysians.
- Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon
National President for Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia
Truly Multiracial 1Malaysia
It is a truism that the future is unknowable. It is not my intention to predict nor forecast about Malaysia’s coming years but I am optimistic that it will become a mature democracy. Can we?
Needless do I have to comment on the impact of the [recent racism/religion issues] as the people are never too astute not to realize that where the country is heading towards. It is this challenge that I am keen to see – that Malaysia professes to become a developed nation by 2020 – to reaffirm the non-discriminatory basis of the Federal Constitution.
Article 8 (1) and 12 (1) of the Federal Constitution clearly states the principle of equality of all Malaysians with no discrimination. In any event as we confront the challenges of the globalised world in the twenty first century, we cannot afford to cling on to laws and policies which are more reminiscent of a third world nation.
Malaysia is a prosperous, modern secular/Islamic-friendly nation in which three main ethnic groups co-exist peacefully, while maintaining their unique cultural identities. Thus we must uphold human rights principles which are strictly anti-racist. As the enlightened world condemns racism as relics of pre-war facism, we find that such an ideology is still practiced in various guises. In our society, we know, as well as the foreigners do, that ‘protectionism’ founded upon a form of ‘affirmative action’ has led to condemnation of Malaysia as an inherently racist society.
Racial discrimination have been part of the Malaysian political, social and economic realties where it remains a key factor in determining the benefits from policies of government development, education and social order. Gone are the days where the Malays are considered as not urbanized. They too realized that free lunches cannot go on forever and the NEP did not actually benefit all of them. The non-Malays too realized that their votes did indeed created an impact and they too want a fair slice of the cake. While it is widely recognized that racial polarization exists in many institutions, there have also been deliberate attempts by those in power to create divisions among the people even among the non-Malay leaders. The government must get rid of all the racism factors in their policies and racist politicians in order to have a better tomorrow.
As a result, it is high time that we have a consensus and focus on solutions-based actions that will accentuate the non-racial factors for Malaysia to prosper with regards to political institutions, economic development, social development and education. It is only then that we can build real unity, based on adherence to human rights, equality and interests of a true multi-racial Malaysians.
- Andy Yong
“You are guilty until proven innocent”
妻：警指買賊贓未查清‧商人緊急令扣60天
楊錦成：警方扣留我的當事人後，多次在扣留所內向推事申請延長扣留令，有濫用權力之嫌。（圖：光明日報）
(雪蘭莪‧八打靈再也9日訊）來自新山的二手汽車零件商涉嫌購買賊贓而被警方逮捕，妻子吳艷玲向記者申訴，丈夫自4月9日被捕後一直延扣至今，雖然他們出示買賣證明澄清貨源來歷，警方仍堅持援引緊急法令扣留丈夫長達60天，導致他們上訴無門。
吳艷玲目前在新山，她週一接受本報記者電訪時指出，她的32歲丈夫歐健年與友人合伙經營二手汽車零件廠，不過，丈夫的合伙人沒因此被捕。
警無視車零件來源文件
她說，警方是在4月9日傍晚5時，攜帶一名證人前往丈夫位於茂奧斯汀的工廠調查，雖然她丈夫出示汽車零件的買賣證明和資料，但警方還是把丈夫帶走。
她提到，丈夫在事發時致電通知她，不過，他們當時以為是小事一樁。豈料丈夫隔天被帶到吉隆坡協助調查，並被警方一再延長扣留，令她不知所措，只好委託律師處理。
“自從他被捕後，我一直沒機會見他，據知他曾被帶到蕉賴、蒲種、鵝嘜及安邦警局延長扣留，律師說他扣留在安邦警局。”
她於5月4日接到警方來電，要她隔天（5日）到吉隆坡會見丈夫。“我和丈夫的朋友赶抵吉隆坡後，警方發出一封緊急逮捕令，說要扣留丈夫60天。”
她表示，她4歲和8歲的孩子每天都問爸爸去了哪裡，她擔心孩子傷心而不敢說出實情，加上孩子要上學，她在吉隆坡又沒親戚，所以，無法長時間逗留。
斥濫用緊急法令
她聲稱，丈夫只是購買汽車零件，根本不知道貨物來源，警方應調查清楚，避免丈夫遭受無妄之災。
代表律師楊錦成週一在靈市辦公室召開記者會時指出，警方扣留他的當事人後，多次在扣留所內向推事申請延長扣留令，有濫用權力之嫌。
他認為，警方如有證據應援引刑事法典411條文（擁有賊贓）把當事人提控上庭，避免濫用緊急法令扣留無辜者.
- Guangming
The Sun 10.5.2011
EO detainee’s rights violated, says lawyer
PETALING JAYA: Gerakan lawyer for a detainee under the Emergency Ordinance (EO) is appealing to the Home Ministry to reconsider his client’s detention which he claims is unlawful. Andy Yong said at a press conference yesterday that police are violating the rights of his client and urged Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussin to revoke the detention order in light of new evidence that has emerged.
Relating the incident, Yong said Au was arrested in Johor Baru on April 9 for alleged involvement in a syndicate that stole cars and stripped their parts for sale. “Au was taken to the Ampang police headquarters and later for questioning to police stations in Cheras, Kajang, Puchong and Gombak,” he said. “After a series of intense interrogation sessions, Au was sent back to Ampang where he is currently being detained under the EO for 60 days. My client has provided the police with proof of invoice and receipts of his purchase of the spare parts,” Yong said.
“In fact, police detained five men in connection with stealing cars and selling their parts during an operation at the same time that Au was arrested. The five include the master-mind of the syndicate and his accomplice.” Yong said Au had no prior criminal record and is the sole breadwinner of his family.
“The family is traumatised; why is Au being treated like a hardcore criminal when all he did was buy spare parts for his business. If at all the police have evidence, they should charge him under the Penal Code for possession of stolen items, not detain him without trial,” Yong said.
He said he had sent a registered letter to Deputy Home Minister Datuk Abu Seman Yusop and IGP Tan Sri Ismail Omar, detailing the “highhanded actions of the police”.
A police spokesman when contacted said any decision on the ordinance rests with the ministry.
“LEADERSHIP is a subject that transcends and affects all of us. We all have a stake in leadership, for leaders cannot exist in a void. After all, the raison d’etre of leadership is followers. So long as you have someone to lead, you will have leadership…
With globalisation, modern states are faced with a greater challenge of trying to strike a balance; on the one hand, the need to take bold steps to change what needs to be changed for the betterment of the society, and on the other hand, to preserving the good things that we cherish as a nation and as a society. As such, leaders have to be much more knowledgeable than ignorant; open rather than close-minded; willing to accept new ideas and discard old ones; bold rather than indecisive; to make decisions that will bring benefit to the country…Whether the basis of a leader’s strength was demonstrated by his physique and being dexterous with the sword, or his oratory skills, and even his good looks and charm, they all share one common denominator, that of having the ability to lead and motivate people.
I see youth leadership as a critical factor within the overall context of leadership. They form an integral part of society and of the nation. They can be seen as a feeder into higher levels of leadership…We need new thinking and innovation in order to meet the challenges of a highly competitive globalised world…
In and around the world, we are in dire needs of leaders of sufficient benevolence to preside over our societies. As society becomes more sophisticated so is the requirement for leaders. Leaders must be bold enough to not only make predictions but be able to create the future itself. Leaders today are to take and must take the lead and to perform – for these are the essence of leadership in a globalised world.”
- Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak
In Malaysia, some say there is actually no change since 308 as promised by both BN and PR. Except for realising the significance of the online social medias (and also blogging, facebooking and tweeting), each respectively are still playing the blaming game and gutter politics. They even tend not to realise who is the government or opposition in some states. Both sides will politicise every issues of the day. Ultimately, the rakyats are on the losing end.
Lee Kuan Yew did visited several states in Malaysia after 308. He was afraid the same may happen in his country. In the coming general elections of Singapore, the long ruling PAP fielded 24 new young faces. They know what the electorate wants. They want to stay cohesive and able to understand the younger generation. Opposition parties like the Workers’ Party or Singapore Democratic Party also acknowledge the importance to put high-calibre young candidates.
It is high time for political parties in Malaysia to start changing, not a mere slogan. To certain party, it may be their last straw, so change now or else be changed by the people.
Lagu 1Malaysia
We are into 54 years old as a nation. Racism, division and superiority should not be an issue today. We must live in a just and equal society regardless of our religion, colour and race. Our diversity is an asset not a liability.
Selfish politicians and individuals who play such despicable game and adamant to change must be condemned. From the beginning, we in Gerakan had always believe in such notion although it is an uphill battle to be a truly multi-racial party. We love our country and proud to be Malaysians. Above all, unity is an indispensable condition and foundation for us to be globally competitive and live in harmony, peace and prosperity.
Like it or not, close our eyes; be positive and then pay attention to the lyrics:
BN wins, Chinese also wins but divided.
If Confucius is here today, the Master would say: “A man should be slow to speak, blog, fb or tweet and quick to do. The men of old were loth to speak, for not to live up to their words would have shamed them.”
Aduhai dia yang membenarkan gundul sedemikian bukan memberi peluang keemasan tetapi kehancuran terhadap parti. Bukan begitu mudah untuk mecapai kejayaan di politik. Keupayaan berceramah memang digalakkan tapi taklah terjadi persona non grata. Yang pentingnya keikhlasan dan bukan nyalakan tak bermerit. Dia yang melantik “pemuda-pemuda” ini harus memastikan tugasnya sepertimana yang diperlukan dan bukan kebongkaran kurang matang. Kemungkinan besar penglibatan mereka tidak akan membawa keuntungan malah diketawakan. Nak jadi wira, terjadi badut pulak…
Isu utama adalah kenapa pengundi Cina tetap melawan BN? Kenapakah strategi DAP berjaya menarik sokongan dan kepercayaan masyarakat Cina di Sarawak walaupun DAP merupakan sebuah parti semenanjung? Pada dahulunya ada yang mengatakan bahawa orang Cina tetap menyokong BN kerana kepentingan ekonomi dan perniagaan mereka tetapi kini merekalah yang menentang kuat. Adakah wujudnya persengketaan di antara orang Cina? Ataupun DAP lebih ikhlas dalam memainkan peranan yang lebih efektif?
Sistem penaungan sebagai faktor politik dalam parti adalah amat penting. Jelas DAP mengikut jejak taktik parti KMT di Taiwan dan Obama (“Change”) di Amerika. Nescaya sokongan terhadap pemimpin-pemimpin atau calon-calon Gerakan atau MCA tidak akan menambah selagi perjuangan mereka tidak tulen. Begitu juga disebabkan isu perkauman, polisi nasional dan kepentingan hak orang Cina yang sebenarnya berjaya dimanipulasikan oleh DAP, menjadikan Gerakan atau MCA sebagai kaki-bodek kepada UMNO. Pada mereka pertolongan dari segi pendidikan, tanah, kuil dan sebagainya tidak akan tergugat jika DAP dapat memegang jawatan menteri yang berkenaan malah akan lebih baik. Sedemikian slogan “UBAH” disokong sanubari para reformis dan golongan muda.
Ironiknya Gerakan kini dilihat sebagai sebuah parti Cina, walaupun sememangnya tidak mudah untuk menjadikan parti majmuk. Satu cabaran yang besar oleh MCA dan Gerakan untuk memenangi kembali kepercayaan masyarakat Cina khususnya golongan muda di PRU masa depan.
Patutlah dikatakan semakin tua cili itu, semakin pedasnya:
check out – http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10150157623434310&oid=162808643747330&comments
Politicians & Voters, be mature…
speaks…
KOTA BARU: Malaysia is in need of mature politicians and voters as the country comes to grips with a heightened sense of politics amid the challenging economic and environmental issues confronting the world.
In view of the ongoing Sarawak state election, Gerakan Youth vice-chairman Ong Khang Woon is urging voters and candidates to be mature and to focus on issues which affect the laymen and not just on dogmatic issues of race, religions and personalities.
People nowadays are joining political parties for the sake of either personal publicity or looking for economic opportunities without even understanding what politics is all about, he said in a statement.
“Politics is not as simple as that. It is about sacrificing personal interests to ensure the livelihood of the people is taken care of,” said Ong, who is the former Kelantan Gerakan Youth head.
Politics, he quotes, is “to teach people how to fish so they can enjoy their own catches” instead of just “giving them fish to eat”.
The current political climate is inclining towards merely giving fish to the people so they (politicians) can get votes from them and remain as their elected representatives, Ong said.
“This is wrong. Such a problem arises due to the immaturity of the voters. People tend to vote for persons that make them happy by giving ‘these’ and ‘that’ during the campaigning period. The voters feel that they deserve them without realising that they have created a corrupt environment that only encourages corrupt politicians.”
Voters have to change their mindset and choose the right candidates who can really help them instead of the ones who give them the most goodies during elections and disappear after winning, he added.
Mature politicians and civil-minded voters are crucial in changing, developing and improving the political landscape.
“We may have first-class facilities in our lives but, if we cannot detach ourselves from a third-class mentality and make sacrifices, then we will head nowhere and our world is merely a dance stage for
us to move forward and backwards without any sense of direction.”
“There is this incident in a by-election when voters told me that both candidates are devils, one is a blood-sucking one and the other is not, so they will vote for the non-blood sucking chap. I’d said they are wrong! Both candidates should not deserve any votes. The voters should either spoil their ballot papers or do not vote at all.”
According to Ong, this will become an eye-opener to both political parties as a message is effectively relayed that they have fielded wrong candidates, especially those who come across as opportunists.
This is important for the country to continue with its progressive policies as well as managing the people’s welfare, he said.
If the mindset of the people is not changed, the country would be left far behind compared to other developing nations.
“Last but not the least, I am urging the people to realise their past mistakes and to think seriously, if they really love this country, by voting wisely for the future generations,” Ong said.
- freemalaysiatoday
Lagu Setia – Those were the days…
We shall not be too emotional. We must be pragmatic. It is never an easy task to transform a country, not to mention to eradicate corruption and racism. The PM seems to be on the right track. He and we know what are the problems.
In the 80s, hopeful Malaysians of all races, especially the students were united and more patriotic when they sing this song. Perhaps it is time we truly strive for the nation as 1Malaysian or Bangsa Malaysia.
Demi negara yang tercinta
Di curahkan bakti penuh setia
Demi raja yang disanjung tinggi
Kesetiaan tak berbelah bagi
Kepada pemimpin kepada rakyat
Khidmat diberi penuh taat
Sama bekerja sama berusaha
Setia berkhidmat untuk semua
Rela berkorban apa saja
Amanah bangsa tetap dijaga
Kami berikrar penuh setia
Untuk agama, bangsa dan negara
United We Stand, Divided We Fall.
Speaking of ‘unity’ is not a new thing. Recent trip to Sarawak reminds some G-Youth members the significance of unity. As the common saying in Bahasa Malaysia that: “Bersatu Kita Teguh, Bercerai Kita Roboh”. It was apparent that several political parties including ourselves were directionless and not moving together. It is ironic to say “satu hati” when everyone do things their own way with personal agenda.
In order for us to survive in the ‘political turbulence’, we have to join forces within one another particularly against the common enemy. It was indeed a sad thing to note how all were scrambling around trying in vain to come to terms with our unfounded political differences. All other political parties, big and small, in Sarawak, kept fuelling the differences amongst the immature political leaders, should be a warning.
Many of us have not learnt the bitter lesson of disunity as yet.
Whether it is for the general elections or not, it is high time for Gerakan leaders/members to come together to face the challenges for now and the future. We should join forces from all divisiions/states. It can never be about one person or one state.
We need to articulate our position and decide our future by ourselves and this will not be achieved if we do not unite.
G-Youth at Sarawak Elections – Kuching
G-Youth Leadership Transformation Workshop
G-Youth at BN Youth Job Fair, PWTC
Importance of Youth in Politics
There are many reasons why a person joins politics in Malaysia. Some are in there due to passion and interest in the current affairs, political and government system/issues. Others are because of their need to serve and contribute to the society, while unfortunately many are for power, money, position and selfish interest. Unsurprisingly some are also there just for the fun, support and mere satisfaction without apparent objectives.
Some politicians always believe that without revolutions, politics would not be an important factor in our government. The youth are usually influenced to play an important role here. Where there are people there are differences of opinions, and what would government be without disagreements? Would we even need government?
Young people today think little about politics and how politics affects them. They often overlook the significance of understanding the relevance of politics in their lives. They rather join the sports/hobby clubs, lepak at the mamak restaurants, or join fun professional organisation. Plainly put, politics is on a different level of intelligence and interest than what we are used to. Some are manipulated by political parties as ‘armies’ during election or demonstration. Many began to get excited about politics after the 308 or Obama elections.
They need to understand it is important to have some understanding of what is happening in our current society. Politics is vital to our society since it is present issues that affect us all. Strong political parties and politicians are necessary for a healthy government.
Our founding fathers proved it could work, and it has thus far. For our political system to flourish, older adults must realize that younger people must be educated about politics: why it exists, why it is important, and what our generation can do. They ought to be given the opportunity to lead. They must realise the only way is to get involved and and changing the system from the inside.
It is time the youth in Malaysia look at the importance of getting involved in politics. Inspiration does not come in the form of an elegant stump speech, excitement of revolution or reformation. It comes from the actions of the individual. Look around our community. If it doesn’t work the way you think it should, don’t wait for someone else to inspire you to change it. Put some research into it and find out how it could be changed.
Attend the local information meeting. Insist that your local representative explain his or her position to you and why they came to this conclusion. Listen to their answer. Sometimes even the most unpolished answer can have some substance if you take the time to listen. Sometimes, a complex issue can only be described in a way that you may find “boring” or “uninspiring”.
Find a leader or candidate who can explain their position and able to help change things.
This is how some political parties, clubs, NGOs are so effective to lure youth – people volunteered to help. If you think the issues aren’t being communicated effectively by representatives, help them. One of the best parts of our system is that we can walk up to our elected representatives and engage with them. If he or she is only concern about national issues or getting limelight from the media, we shall know what to do in the coming election. Thus it is important to register as a voter.
Change cannot be expected to come easily or quickly.
Every generation complained about being misunderstood. We have had our time to complain. Now it’s time to act. Get involved.
G-YOUTH shines again!
The Sun, KUALA LUMPUR: Liang Teck Meng (BN-Simpang Renggam)(Parti Gerakan) started his debate on the motion of condolence to Japan with a two-minute speech in the Japanese language.
He said he spent four years in Japan as a student in one of the universities in the Sendai area, the city worst hit by the 8.9-magnitude earthquake and tsunami last week.
“I felt restless when I heard the news and tried to contact my friends in Sendai to find out their situation. Clearly, I was disappointed. Thus, I can feel the same sadness and anxiety that the people in Japan feel now,” he said.
The translation of his short speech in Japanese was:
“As my thoughts go out to the victims of the earthquake and those who are assisting the survivors, those who are suffering, we here can’t help but feel helpless in our hearts.
“To those survivors of this devastating calamity, I would like to express and give words of encouragement.
“I can’t but be inspired by the courage and the unity of the Japanese in such sad times. I deeply believe with the strength and wisdom that is so evident, the Japanese will overcome this difficult time.
“It is my hope that normality will return to Japan as soon as possible. Remember, you are not alone in this endeavour and that we will face it hand in hand together.
“Let Malaysia and Japan become as one and continues to support the Japanese in this time.”
It was received by applause from both sides before he continued with his speech in Bahasa Malaysia.
Back To Where We Belong
Gerakan – A True Story
As far back as the 60s, my first exposure to Malaysian politics was when my father jubilantly announced the formation of Parti Gerakan. This came as a surprise for we had known him to be anti-politicians.
“Gerakan is the first multi-racial party in Malaysia!” my father excitedly told us. “This is the party of the future. This party will reform the country.” “Reform”? Yes, an interesting word then.
“Do you know this is the first party where Malay, Indians and Chinese are all equal? This is the future for Malaysia. The Alliance is no longer suitable” he continued. My father was definitely feeling on top of the world but I just did not see what there was to get so excited about.
Inevitably during school days, whenever I picked up the newspaper, the only political party news that drew my attention was Parti Gerakan. My father made me to remember names like Syed Hussain Alatas, Dr.Lim Chong Eu, Dr. JB Peter, Mr. V.Veerapan, Dr. Tan Chee Koon and Prof. Wang Gungwu. Gerakan was known to be an intellectual party with the quality of it leaders and candidates. I promised myself to join Gerakan’s struggle when I grow up.
Subsequently I was told that due to some conflicts between Syed Hussain and Chong Eu, the party was not seemed to pursue the multi-racial ideals. Parti Gerakan joined the Alliance. My father was awared of it, there were times he mumbled his dissatisfaction: “a wrong move…”. Eventually Gerakan became just another Chinese party (as dominated) and my father’s hopes for the intellectual pioneers of the party to bring this country to great heights got dashed. No genuine efforts were initiated to attract the non-Chinese. Perhaps it was a very difficult task after all. Even then Gerakan was a brave party, never a subservient to any other component party. Compromising with positions or favours was not a problem then, members voluntarily and freely served passionately. Unity and party’s stand was a priority.
After that my father never spoke about Gerakan again. A few years later he died while still in his mid-40s.
After the huge loss in 2008 general election, I was excited to hear that senior members of the party wanted to work hard from the basic again, that is a truly multi-racial and intellectual party. Lately such aspiration and ideals are perceived to be more relevant towards other parties like PKR and DAP. All the hopes and encouragements of my father for Gerakan is deteriorating. Conveniently most politicians are no more concern about their ideals including Gerakan, once a party of hope to many.
How can we build towards national unity as long as there remain politicians who continue to harp on and on about the myth of racial unity?
How can we ever dream of a Malaysian nation that is Malaysian in character as long as we cannot make that simple leap beyond communitarian and sectarian politics? My days are limited lying on the hospital bed. Now I understand what my father say in the future of Malaysia that he thought Gerakan could offer – reformation, is as good as being stolen. > Anonymous [previously posted in 8/2009]
What is a “winnable” candidate?
Many have been speculating when would be the 13th general election. Does it really matters to Malaysians? Of course but for different reasons.
Whatever it is ‘one can never trust a politician’, a common phrase used locally and globally. One must also realise that if he is to be put into that position, he may have does the same thing. Whatever the agenda and motive, ultimately one cannot deny that the following criterias are sine quo non (indispensable condition) for any aspired or potential candidate in today’s political arena:
- sincerity to serve and help the people;
- a conviction of his belief and idealism for a just and equal society, a truly one Malaysia;
- acknowledge the significance of unity/team work who will fight for the good cause at any price – it can never be one-man show;
- recognise the need to upgrade oneself intellectually;
- an open mind;
- clean and honest;
- humility and hardworking;
- the ability and courage to articulate his struggles convincingly, without fear or favour;
- passion and integrity;
- a good personality: mentally and physically healthy and
- financial support or capability.
It is an uphill battle for those who want to change.
If we go by the prime minister’s advice, “winnable” candidate must be free from four major ailments — amnesia, inertia, delusion and arrogance. These four ills were identified as reasons why long-serving political parties fell from grace and were no longer considered relevant. Apparently and unfortunately not many of those politicians realise the latter.
G-YOUTH strongly condemns selfish politicians and money-politics at all levels (such as buying votes or support with money or the wilingness to assist depending on the money or favour given). Naive? We shall see.
Students and politics.
Last Monday, our National Youth Vice-Chairman, YB Liang Teck Meng officiated an event at UPM on behalf of Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon. UPM Zhonghua Society organised the event at a high level and professionally. Impressively from the moment YB Liang and Sdr. Andy entered the university compound to the VIP room and then the entrance of the function hall, every programme was well-planned. Indeed the youth today are of different breed and exposure. Among others, topics such as students’ involvement in politics and the recent election furore were discussed in the waiting room. Some are in favour while others are against it. Perhaps the issue of AUKU amendment on politics need to be revisited as can be explored on the following sharing:
Should undergraduates be allowed to take active part in national politics? Previously there was a live debate on the related topic between VC Tan Sri Ibrahim Abu Shah of UiTM and Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah. And what a duel it was. Both had strong views and did not mince their words as they argued their way through.
University students have been barred from active partisan politics for many years. In the 1970s, student leaders, including those who are now very much part of the establishment, led protests against the government in and outside campuses.
There were many reasons for this. Pressing socio-political and economic problems of the day were some of them. Quite a number of the student leaders and their followers were taken in as government guests under the Internal Security Act.
They have since been released, of course, and a number have gone on to pursue their political careers, sought and even held high offices in the national administration.
But student lives changed after that. Laws were passed restricting undergraduates from actively pursuing a political career as long as they were in campus.
The order was out — focus on your studies!
But really, you can’t put a total stop to students being interested in national politics. National politics is part of everyday life after all. We do know that many students, in their own way, lean towards one political party or the other.
They may not be card-carrying members but they work behind the scenes, giving whatever assistance and input to the party of choice.
It is also a fact that many would return to their kampung and hometowns and advise or influence their parents, siblings, friends and relatives on how to cast their votes.
Saifuddin said he was all for undergraduates taking part in partisan politics. He was of the opinion that in a participatory democracy, the students had a right to be active in politics.
Not to mention that many students were already of voting age, including graduate students who had gone back to campus to pursue their second or third degrees.
The deputy minister, himself a former university lecturer, also believes that undergraduates are already exposed to partisan politics.
Allowing them to be active politically was part of the maturing process of national politics, he said.
Ibrahim, however, expressed concern about undergraduates being allowed to be active politically. He cautioned that this might not necessarily be productive.
He was of the opinion that they could be distracted from their studies but the real concern was that campuses would be a hot hunting ground for political parties.
The changing political landscape is making Ibrahim wary of such a move. While he may have strong reasons for disapproving such a move, the fact is also true that university students are a maturing lot and can make their choices wisely.
I suppose political parties will have to tread carefully and responsibly when entering campuses for their outreach programme and membership drive. The students are not going to be easily convinced by empty promises or rhetoric.
On the world stage, university students have been made aware of their political responsibilities. Their early involvement helps prepare them for national leadership, should they be so inclined.
Obviously, a decision on whether or not to allow undergraduates to be politically active will only be made after considering the pros and cons. If Saifuddin has his way, this ought to be allowed. The sooner, the better.
‘Pemuda’ menang di Merlimau dan Kerdau
Di dalam kedua-dua pilihanraya kecil N27 dan N28 calon-calon adalah di bawah 45 tahun iaitu boleh dianggap sebagai dalam kategori pemuda.
Calon BN bagi DUN Merlimau, Roslan Ahmad, 44, ditentang calon PAS Yuhaizad Abdullah, 38. Sementara, calon BN bagi DUN Kerdau, Syed Ibrahim Syed Ahmad, 44, dicabar calon PAS, Hassanuddin Salim, 43. Kebetulannya calon-calon BN yang berumur 44 tahun menang dengan majoriti yang lebih tinggi kali ini.
Kedua-dua piliharaya kecil disebabkan kematian akibat sakit jantung oleh wakil sebelum ini yang berumur lebih dari 55 tahun. Dari pengalaman ini, apakah implikasi yang wajar diberi perhatian dalam pilihanraya depan? Secara amnya, apakah persepsi atau pandangan rakyat/pengundi jikalau seseorang calon itu adalah tua, gemuk, lemah dari segi fizikal dan bermuka sombong? Apakah sebenarnya yang dimaksudkan oleh PM Najib dengan calon “winnable”?
Memories of G-YOUTH
It’s the youth world!
Like it or not, B. Obama is considerably a young president, so as the successful entrepreneurs like Mark Zuckerberg and Matt Mullenweg. Even in the recent 83rd Academy Award hosts; Anne Hathaway and James Franco were there to lure the younger audience. Today we know how influential can the youth be in our local political scene. It is the foundation and a significant resource of any rising organisation in the future.
Democracy is the buzz word for our political system. But is it really so? Is it democracy that a nation where a majority of population is below 40 elects a majority of people above 60 to power? Are we really satisfied with the way our country is being governed? Should it not bother us that at the age people generally take retirement and rest, our politicians actually become eligible to be at the helm of affairs? Why is it so that people below 45 years are considered as inexperience politicians? Why is that members of below 45 years in are still in the youth?
The country desperately needs some young leaders who personify energy, enthusiasm, morality, and diligence. No doubt we have progressed a lot in the last 54 years but the development pace would have been completely different had some young torchbearers led this process of development. Malaysia and G-Youth is lacking of that now.
There can be two reasons for this deplorable scene of local politics. One may be that the youth today are not interested in actively participating in the political field. They are content with what they are doing and how the country is being governed. But this reason seems to hold no ground seeing the discontent shown by the youngsters towards cases like TBH, PPSMI. The youth of modern Malaysia are aware of the problems facing our country and the world at large. Given a chance they would be ready to change the political condition of the country for better.
Second reason may be that young people are not given opportunities to prove themselves claiming that they are not equipped with experience to participate actively in the governance of the country. This reason seems to be more logical seeing the monopoly of old leaders in almost all the major political parties of the country. Old people should realize that proper development can take place only when they make way for younger people to take control of the activities.
There are few things which need to be clarified. One that youngsters do not mean people who are 20 years old with no experience at all. Youth in this context is meant to refer people in their 30’s or early 40’s with a good mix of energy, qualification and experience. Two, it is not intended to mean that old people should leave the political scene and rest. What is wanted is that they should be there but for guidance because they are treasures of invaluable experience.
As for the youth of our country, they can contribute in more ways than just contesting elections. Much can be done in areas like educating people, raising awareness about various social ills, and many other areas.
We can just wish that the next time we go to vote we find more names of youngsters who can make our country a better place to live in.
—————————————–
“What you do when you are young is practice for what you will do when you are old. In my experience, the only people who became rich and successful as they grew older were the ones who formed good habits when you are young and poor.” – Irwin Dubinsky.
G-YOUTH at Merlimau By-Election
Absurdity of Bruce Lee clips on Teoh’s death
By now many in the Chinese community especially the urbanites and younger generation have watched the video clips about Bruce Lee’s demand for justice in relation to Teoh Beng Hock’s death. BN government and leaders are ridiculed and humiliated. So as the 1Malaysia concept. Obviously there is a sense of fear. They are afraid of the truth and increase support of 1Malaysia, it is an apparent threat to increase their votes in the next election. They are doing it at all cost as well as at the expense of some unrepentance BN leaders.
By the way it is claimed that those Bruce Lee’s clips are edited, scripted and modified by Nasi Lemak Production. If one is to observe them carefully, it does not requires a rocket scientist to figure out which political party did it.
Indeed they have been effective in spinning an issue to stir and gain public support. I symphatise with Teoh’s family not only on the demise but being manipulated and exploited. From day one, they are quick to make use of the internet via emails, smses, tweeters, blogs, youtube, online news portal etc to gain support. If they are sincerely wanting to help and fight for justice, I give my highest respect but if for selfish political motive, it will be a despicable act altogether.
Malaysians especially the Chinese need to be reasonable and rational in analysing the case. Being fierce and emotional in the media can be a sham. There are several possibilities that may caused the death. No one emphasize on the negative aspect, where the underworld and their leaders play a part. The mushrooming of vice and illegal activities in the state since 308 has been cleverly avoided to be an issue. The councillor’s presence is almost forgotten. Any sensible murderer is unlikely to expose the death of his victim openly not to mention in his own premise. But all the latter are made a smokecreen.
A benevolent act and strategy has no selfish agendas. Integrity of an organisation is vital not only in business but politics. Enough is enough, they should play a constructive role, not childish politics.
Revisit Affirmative Action II
Read about the Egyptians (living in Malaysia) say on their current government at page 3 of the Sun today. Many would not disagree that their disgruntleness sounds familiar to our country. So, not possible to happen in Malaysia?
Not only to revisit but to rethink and perhaps time to change.
Whether the preferential treatment involves NEP, NEM, quotas, positions, scholarships, grants, local universities admission, projects etc, they will be given the priority. In toto, this is actually not helping them in the long run.
In reality, Malaysians of multi-races/religion community will never be 1. Historically they’ve succeeded in controlling the population to ensure that the majority prevails and the mindset of hegemony is deeply ingrained. It doesn’t matter who rules, this will last for a long time. Although other races will unlikely to be eradicated due to economic and humanitarian grounds, to be a truly one and only Malaysian is a very long road.
The non-Malays have worked hard in every aspect to dominate the private sectors both in business and education. Some bigots will never or refuse to understand the significant of bringing this beautiful country into 1. That is why some say they dont even need the support of the non-Malay voters to be in control.
They have plundered the nation, when they should have treated it as a sapling and nurtured it to maturity. They profited from its natural resources and exploited its other most important resource – its people (MT).
We are in a different era now, old teachings and beliefs are no more pragmatic, the prophets are likely to agree with this. Instead of helping the people, they are actually ruining or restricting their capability and lives.
As a result, some of the non-Malays are forced to earn their livelihood in vice and unlawful trades. Inevitably, they fight for their cultural and educational rights, although it may be a cause of dissemination.
Like it or not, the non-Malays will not be given priority although they need us to develop the nation. It will be frivolous to expect return of the talents by setting up Talent Corp, uncompetitive wages is not the only reason but racial politics and unjust preference.
PM Najib may be on the right track but his subordinates and people? A sincere and strong political will? Of course corruption is the biggest killer and most importantly the source is from the non-Malays, not to mention taxes. Ironically and expectedly the rich and powerful non-Malays will not antagonise their policies but what about the rest?
Think of our future generation. It is not a question of being a less Malaysian but a truly one and only Malaysian with the spirit of togetherness to move forward.
Happy Lunar New Year !
Revisit Affirmative Action I
“Always remember, we are Malaysians…being a Malaysian does not mean one is less of a Malay, a Chinese, an Indian, a Kadazan, a Murut … and so on.” – the late Tun Lim Chong Eu (a man who never play destructive racial or religious politicking).
Last evening I had a drink with a group of laymen, to be precise: two foremen, a mechanic and a wireman. To my surprise the scruffy-looking wireman said that the 1Malaysia concept is indeed a propaganda and slogan unless the PM get rid of Article 153 of the Federal Constitution, treating everyone in a fair and equal manner.
I explained that one need to understand that the affirmative action policies by way of preferential treatment envisaged under Article 153 are mainly to alleviate the Malays and the natives from poverty and economic disadvantage. The intention and purpose of Article 153 when read as whole clearly provide a balance between two competing interests, namely the protection of the special position of the bumiputera and at the same time safeguarding the legitimate interest of other communities as well. In fact the wireman agreed if there is no such assistance, the non-Malay will dominate the economy as well as the positions in the public sector and privileges/scholarship in education.
It shall also be noted that under Article 153, the phrase ‘legitimate interest of other communities’ means that the Federal Constitution does not allow simply any kind of preferential treatment in favour of the ‘Bumiputera’. It is not a ‘blank cheque’, but merely confers limited power on the government and Parliament, pursuant to Article 153, to derogate from the principle of equality and equal protection the law (also see Article 8). Therefore, the problem lies not with Article 153 but with its implementation. Anyway ambiguity arises when one realises that the scope and meaning of the words “legitimate interest of other commmunities” are not defined. Otherwise it will solves the issues relating Class F licensed contractors, local universities entry, quotas of appointment/promotion of public companies and GLCs and yes, even the legal firms. Those implementation has clearly gone beyond the limits of Article 153.
To me, it is clear that the true meaning and purpose of Article 153 has not been followed strictly. In fact it has been hijacked by certian quarter to favour a particular group who are linked to the ruling elites and as a result the benefits as provided under Article 153 have not trickled down to the masses of the bumiputera populace. This also explains such affirmative policies has contributed significantly to the deteriorating race relations and the current brain drain that is currently plaguing our country.
To those who still insist the need to distance themselves from the ‘orang kafir’ (pagans), believing in ‘ethnic-cleansing’, instilling the fear of racial integration repercussion, ‘balik Cina or India’ (go back to China or India) or even having the mentality that the country does not need the non-Malays, I am certain that Malaysia can and will never go far, not to mention achieving the developed nation status. Remember our diversity and multi-racial society is an asset not a liability.
Adoption – the making of a new family
Kuala Lumpur, 22.01.2011 – Married couples often wish to build upon their matrimony by bearing children and watch their children grow up and form their own families.
However, with the increasing cost of living, it is not uncommon for both parents to be working full time, just to make ends meet.
With stress being cited as one of the reasons that couples are unable to conceive children, more and more couples had tried fertility treatments, counseling, artificial insemination, surrogacy and also adoption.
While adoption is legalized in Malaysia, there are still several issues that a couple must consider before proceeding.
Klik4Malaysia (K4M) had the opportunity to speak to Andy Yong, a lawyer and Gerakan Youth legal bureau chairperson who has been involved in family law for the past 10 years.
In general, the law only specifies two types of adoption – the adoption of a Muslim child and the adoption of non-Muslim child.
As the adoption of a Muslim child is governed by the Syariah law, K4M would be focusing on the adoption of a non-Muslim child in this article.
It goes without saying that a non-Muslim couple can only adopt non-Muslim children and that there is a strict procedure to be followed in the adoption of a child.
The adoption of a non-Muslim child in Peninsular Malaysia is governed by the Adoption Act of 1952 (Act 257) and the Act spells out the stipulated conditions.
A married couple and a female single parent are allowed to adopt a male or female child while a single male parent can only adopt a male child.
On top of that, the age difference between the adopting parent and the child must be at least 21 years while the child being adopted must not be over 21 years of age.
For blood-relation adoptions, the adopting parent must be at least 21 years of age while for non-blood-related adoptions, the adopting parent must be at least 25 years or older (for couples, the age of the elder couple will be counted).
“In the event that both parents die in the same instant, either due to an accident or sickness, and the children have no other relatives who are willing to take care of them, the eldest child, if below the age of 21, would not be able to stop his or her younger siblings from being adopted by others,” Yong said.
It is important to at least seek the advice of a family lawyer when contemplating adoption and for couples who are unable to afford legal fees, they can also approach the Malaysian Social Welfare Department for more information about the whole adoption process.
As there are no adoption agencies in Malaysia, prospective adopting parents must first approach the Malaysian Social Welfare Department at level 19 of Menara Tun Ismail Mohamed Ali that is located at Jalan Raja Laut.
Once a child has been identified, the prospective adopting parent(s) must obtain a statutory declaration from the biological parent(s) relinquishing all parental rights to the child before proceeding with the Court Adoption process.
The judge who presides over the hearing will then appoint a Social Welfare Officer to monitor the adopting parents for a period of not less than three months to gauge their capabilities in taking care of the child.
After the officer submits a full report to the judge, another court hearing will be called to decide on whether the adopting couple has been granted the adoption order or not.
“The Court Adoption process could take between six to nine months, so aspiring couples must be prepared,” Yong said.
Once the order was granted, there would be no reversal and the biological parents could no longer lay claim to anything.
Even if the biological parent(s) was terminally ill, they cannot compel the child to donate blood or bone marrow as all ties are legally severed.
The adopting parents are also not allowed to “return” the child to the biological parents after the court order has been granted.
“Both biological parents and adopting parents must make full use of the three months to think carefully on their decision before the order is granted,” said Yong.
With regards to the criteria for an adopting parent(s), Yong said that the judge would be looking at the overall capability of the adopting parent(s) in taking care of the child.
“Apart from financial standings, the prospective adopting parent(s) must show that they are able to spend time with the child and care for the child. This is why a Social Welfare Officer will be assigned to monitor the progress,” he said.
On whether a parent who has been released from prison or rehabilitation would be able to challenge for custody of their child because their spouse had given up the child for adoption without consulting them, Yong said that it was highly unlikely that the judge would reverse the adoption order.
“Once the adoption order has been granted, it will be next to impossible to reverse the order, barring exceptional circumstances. However, the chances are very slim,” Yong explained, adding that he has yet to come across a case like that.
“The signing of the statutory declaration to relinquish parental rights is a legally binding document that cannot be reversed.
“Even a single parent is allowed to sign the statutory declaration without informing the other parent,” added Yong.
Merry X’mas & Happy 2011 !
It is impossible to forget that Christmas Day has arrived!
Coloured lights don many streets and shops, along with shiny decorations, and artificial snow painted on shop windows. Huge Christmas trees are set up with lights and ornaments.
Shopping malls become busier and stay open till late; traditional Christmas songs being played in the background. Children and adults alike anxiously wait for their Christmas presents, dropping hints weeks before their wish lists.
The Chistmas season is always a time of endings and beginnings. The sense of time condensing and then unfolding again is palpable. For years, we have heard messages that Christmas is about Christ, peace or goodwill (it is not about party in pubs or discos). It should also be a time to reflect the real meaning of Christmas and life.
Have a joyous and wonderful days ahead!
What do we want to be remembered for?
What is the big fuss of WikiLeaks on Anwar? Why Malaysiakini is so excited about it? If one is to analyse and observe, again it is a political calculation attempting to manipulate the people. I was trying to think deeply when Tun Mahathir said in order to set up and nail Anwar on the sodomy charges, the judge, prosecutors, police, doctors, chemist etc must be bought over, so is it that easy? Are all of them devils?
Those who support Anwar, will condemn everyone involve in this latest saga. Do the ordinary person really care about the truth of the sodomy act? Does a layman who struggle to make his end meets benefit anything from the outcome or objective of the politicians here? One thing for sure, the lawyers do care, even if to give up their dignity. We shall see another mode of delay in the trial…
After reading “The Leadership Secrets Of Genghis Khan” recently, I sought of understand what it really means to become a true leader.
First of all, the desire to help others succeed is the mark. Synergy is created when a leader truly invests his eforts in the success of others. As Zig Ziglar says: “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care about them”. That is why a good leader or representative of the people must have that criteria of having people’s interest in mind always and sincerely.
Many good leaders fall into the trap of getting “stuck on level four…egotistical, charismatic, driven by short-term gains and unable to look after his succession.” To me, Tony Blair (watch the show “Special Relationship”) springs to mind.
A saudara discussed about ‘legacy’ among leaders. I do not think it is not about leaving a legacy, it’s about living a legacy. Leaders have been conditioned to think about the future. But in doing so, they have forgotten about the present. And the present is how they create their legacy. Yes, it is about what you give then what you receive.
BN ‘diseases’ = Gerakan’s problem?
Yesterday, someone asked me which faction do I belong to in Gerakan? Do I have a peculiar role? I replied; absurdity and outrageous. I am shocked that the party has entrenched such culture. I hope the late Tun Lim Chong Eu will give his blessing to the party’s transformation.
PM Najib said in the BN Convention today – “The four ailments are delusion, amnesia, inertia and arrogance. As a matter of fact, parties that had been in power for long rarely became introspective of their own weaknesses”. For Gerakan, I will sum up as we are in a different era now, we cannot stand alone out there. We cannot play ‘gutter’ politics anymore nor sycophantic, money, faction, opportunistic and selfish games, we just cannot afford it now.
Sincerity is the only way to go, for the people, for the party.
“Being seen of doing something, is completely different from actually doing it” – Tony Blair
1. Pemuda Gerakan berpendapat, Biro Tata Negara hendaklah dikaji semula dan diubah menjadi Biro 1 Malaysia. Kandungan kursus haruslah berdasarkan semua kaum di Malaysia. Tujuan Biro 1 Malaysia adalah untuk memastikan ideology yang ekstremis tidak boleh diamalkan dalam masyarakat majmuk di Malaysia dan tidak sesuai dengan gagasan 1Malaysia.
2. Pemuda Gerakan menyeru sebagai parti komponen Barisan Nasional, pengagihan kerusi pilihanraya harus disaksamakan. Parti komponen Barisan Nasional harus diperuntukan pengagihan kerusi yang sewajarnya tanpa kehilangan kerusi yang sedia ada.
3. Pemuda Gerakan menyeru kerajaan agar perlantikan pengarah syarikat ‘government linked companies (GLC) haruslah mencerminkan sistem merit, kepakaran dan professionalism.
4. Pemuda Gerakan mencadangkan kepada pihak kerajaan agar dapat memastikan keseimbangan kakitangan bukan-bumiputra di jabatan kerajaan terutamanya yang menguruskan perkhidmatan awam haruslah terdiri daripada pegawai-pegawai pelbagai kaum. Ini akan memastikan pihak kerajaan dapat meningkatkan mutu sistem penyampaian kerajaan kepada masyarakat Malaysia yang terdiri daripada pelbagai kaum, kebudayaan dan agama.
5. Pemuda Gerakan menyeru kerajaan agar kementerian pelajaran meunubuhkan satu majlis perundingan untuk memantau, merancang dan memberi cadangan kepada kementerian pelajaran mengenai pengurusan dan pembangunan SRJK (C) dan SRJK (T) yang sering dipinggirkan.
6. Pemuda Gerakan mencadangkan agar kerajaan harus merancang agihan kewangan dan projek pembangunan secara telus dan adil. Agihan secara tidak bersistematik seumpamanya semasa pilihanraya kecil tidak mencerminkan sistem pentadbiran yang cekap dan berkesan. Ini juga tidak membawa kesan yang diinginkan malah secara tidak langsung meningkatkan kegiatan rasuah.
7. Pemuda Gerakan berpendapat bahawa segala hukuman mati secara mandatory adalah satu halangan arbitrary kebebasan hayat seseorang. Pihak kehakiman harus memberi pertimbangan yang sewajarnya terhadap tertuduh tersebut dan latar belakang seserang individu itu. Justeru, hukuman mati di Negara kita tidak sepatutnya dijadikan mandatory dari segi undang-undang di dalam apa-apa keadaan, kesalahan dan tuduhan.
8. Pemuda Gerakan menyeru kerajaan memansuhkan Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri 1960 (“ISA”); mendakwa mereka yang disyaki di bawah Kanun Keseksaan ke mahkamah ataupun dilepaskan tanpa sekatan jika tidak mempunyai bukti.
9. Seiring dengan hasrat kerajaan mengkaji-semula ISA, tanpa kelengahan lagi, Pemuda Gerakan menyeru kerajaan agar:
(a) menggantikan ISA dengan Akta Pengganas atau Ekstremis.
(b) mengurangkan tempoh tahanan suspek jenayah untuk siasatan bagi 30 hari sahaja.
(c) mengkali semula seksyen 8(1) ISA iaitu budi bicara mutlak Menteri.
(d) Tiada tahanan tanpa perbicaraan, kebenaran hak untuk representasi peguam, lawatan dari ahli-ahli keluarga dan peninjauan kehakiman yang ditulis secara explisit.
(e) penukaran Lembaga Penasihat ke Mahkamah Khas yang terdiri dari Hakim, ahli-ahli dari badan-badan perfessional dan juga orang awam.
10. Pemuda Gerakan menyeru Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi untuk mengubal Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti terutamanya seksyen 15 yang melarang penglibatan mahasiswa bergiat dalam politik. Pemuda Gerakan percaya para mahasiswa mempunyai kematangan untuk membahagikan masa dalam pembelajaran dan masa untuk bergiat aktif dalam politik.
11. Pemuda Gerakan menyeru kerajaan agar mengkaji dan jika dapat dilaksanakan, untuk menurunkan umur pengundi dari 21 tahun ke 18 tahun. Pemuda Gerakan percaya pengundi dapat membuat keputusan yang matang pada usia se-awal umur 18. Pemuda Gerakan juga mencadangkan agar kerajaan memperkenalkan pendaftaran SPR secara otomatik ke atas warganegara yang telah mencapai usia mengundi.
12. Pemuda Gerakan dengan besar hati menyambut dan menerima cadangan penyertaan Beliawanis ke dalam sayap Pemuda serta bersetujui untuk bersama-sama berkongsi wawasan dalam usaha merajui kempimpinan generasi muda. Selain itu, kita kuga bersetuju untuk bekerjasama dan mengiatkan aktiviti-aktiviti parti khasnya melibatkan generasi muda.
We who are in the legal profession, know that most if not all of the High Court (and above) judges do not mind when we use English language as a medium in trial. In fact most of them prefer and will also speak in English due to their educational background, peculiarity of the legal words and historical reasons.
Yesterday the Federal Court decided that judges have the discretion to deliver their grounds of judgment either in BM or English. This is because section 8 of the National Language Act 1963/67 “gives the court the discretion, either on its own motion or on the application of any party, to order the proceeding to be conducted partly in the national language and partly in English as justice demands”. I will also add that if the Rules of High Court emphasizes that the court shall consider the merits and justice of every case instead of the trivial technicality or objection, the decision of the apex court is justifiable. However I am surprised that why J. Malik Ishak threw out an appeal by Anwar last year when the latter’s memorandum of appeal was drafted in English? In fact from my experience, J. Malik is someone who is fond of using English ever since he was in the bench at the Johor Bahru High Court. Section 8 mentions about the “proceeding…as justice demands” not specifically the grounds or memorandum. Although it is quite inevitable that the judiciary may side the government of the day in most country, I do hope that the integrity of the courts will be uplifted in order to gain trust from the public as well as the foreign investors. Yes, the legal arena needs to be flexible at this information age.
R.I.P. Tun Lim Chong Eu
Tun Dr. Lim Chong Eu was a Malaysian politician who served as the second Chief Minister of Penang for a record 21 years. He was also the founding president of Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia, a member of the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional.
Dr Lim was born in 1919 in Penang. He attended school at the Penang Free School, where he was the King’s Scholar in 1937. He later obtained a degree in medical and surgery from the University of Edinburgh, in Scotland, in 1944.
In 1951, he was appointed to the Penang Local Council and in 1955, he was appointed a member of the Federal Legislature.
In the March 1958 party elections, he challenged Tun Tan Cheng Lock and won the presidency with a majority of 22 votes.
After the victory, he called an extraordinary general meeting to amend the Constitution consolidate the power of the Central Committee. This was met with strong resistance by Tun Tan Siew Sin and his supporters.
Although the proposal was passed with a single-vote majority, the move left the Party split. At the same time, the MCA under Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu also had severe political differences with the then Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman.
The crisis worsened especially on the eve of the 1959 general elections when Tun Dr Lim demanded 40 parliamentary seats and also wanted to make Chinese an official language.
The Tunku increased the seats allocated to MCA from 28 to 31 but this was rejected and their relationship worsened.
During the one-year period when the MCA was under Tun Dr Lim, the party was under tremendous pressure from within and outside. In December 1960, Tun Dr Lim left the MCA and in 1962, he formed the United Democratic Party. Dr Cheah Toon Lock became the Acting President with the resignation of Tun Dr Lim.
He was one of the founder members of the Opposition Party Gerakan before the 1969 General Election. The formation the of Gerakan party threw the Chinese Malyasian aggregate into a dilemma, weakened their political strength and above all, eroded the political representation of the MCA as the only party for the Chinese community. Gerakan joined the ruling Barisan Nasional after winning the Penang State Government in 1969.
Dr Lim served as Chief Minister of Penang from 1969 to 1990. In the Malaysian General Elections of October 1990, a crisis occurred as the incumbent Chief Minister Lim Chong Eu lost his state seat and Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (Gerakan) had less seats than UMNO in the Penang State Assembly. A crisis was averted when Tun Dr Lim Keng Yaik, the then president of Gerakan, was able to convince the then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohammad to allow an ethnic Chinese person to continue on in the role of the Chief Minister.
Dr Lim had retired from politics and was concentrating on business. He was at the time of his currently the chairman and advisor for several large corporations. In 2007, Dr Lim was named founding chancellor of Wawasan Open University.
In late October 2010, he was admitted to the Penang Hospital after suffering a stroke. He later passed away on Wednesday, November 24, 2010 at his home in Hillside, Taman Bungah at about 9.07 pm. (source – Wikipedia).
My deepest condolence to Tun’s family. Gerakan and many Penangites will miss this political hero. God bless his soul.
Funeral day on 28.11.2010
The Ideal Candidate
Klik4Malaysia, 19.11.2010 – There is no such thing as a perfect candidate; certain personalities may be appealing to some voters, but not to others.
Many things determine a candidate’s appeal – sincerity, accomplishments, appearance, qualification, and position.
Forget about the guessing game as to when the next general election will be held?
Because, as the Barisan Nasional (BN) component parties gear up and prepare for the next general election, the Prime Minister and party chiefs would be well aware that the selection of candidates would remain an important factor.
The continuing initiative on the part of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak to propagate the 1Malaysia concept of people first, performance now, is a laudable effort and a move in the right direction.
However, to support the Prime Minister is one thing, to vote for their ‘wakil rakyat’ is another, gone are the days when people would decide primarily on the respective party logo.
Political communication is said to have become more personalized after the last general election – at the expense of the online media and modern technology – and it is likely that the voters’ decision-making would be based on candidates’ characteristics.
Therefore, putting an affable face to what is sometimes perceived by the public at large as materialistic, stoic, corrupted, mundane and weak would most likely dampen its chances of winning.
In this era of knowledge and informed society, every political party needs to wise up to ways of churning out potential winners, whether the choice of candidates is young or old, generation X or Y, with or without title, male or female, the voters out there do not really care.
They want someone who is genuinely concerned and committed for the welfare and development of that particular constituency and they want someone who has the ability, courage, skills, and knowledge to voice out their problems.
Simply put, they want someone who has a sincere concern for their well being, embracing the attitude and practice of caring.
Thus, this time round, Parti Gerakan would be more cautious and would not take anything for granted.
The party has over the last few months, short-listed and conducted interviews among the potential candidates in every state and constituency.
It is my humble opinion that pursuing a sincere and egalitarian approach of candidate selection remains an indispensable condition that should be the benchmark because the party needs candidates who will transcend materialism, arrogance, and self-indulgence.
Sometimes a political party may be troubled by the contagion of greed and creed of ‘survival of the fittest’ without due regard to current political sentiments.
It is time the President and central working committee members take stock of the situation and act with accountability, although it is always easier said than done but Gerakan cannot afford to play with fire.
It was reported in the recent national delegates’ conference that the party would reveal the candidates’ list after Chinese New Year.
Therefore it is essential that the central leadership disregard pressure by lobbyists, warlords and sycophants in the next three months.
The party must never underestimate the significance of people’s power and impression, after all the people often say democracy is the People’s Government.”
It may not be the only way but perceptions, allegiances, and aspirations of the people are surely the important characteristics for the party to consider.
Forget about commitment, just wait & see?
During my last visit to the party HQ, while staring at the pictures of the past presidents, we joked that only those who wear glasses and have the title “Dr.” are the potential future chief.
Some of us do not care, but some of us do.
The risk of being disappointed, dimissed or “chopped-off” or perceived to be affiliated to someone is ever so present, so much so that our reaction become personal not for the party or common objective but face value or selfish interest.
The Prime Minister introduced the concept of 1Malaysia; a Malaysia where people are united through diversity, where there is a place for everyone under the sun, and where people come first and performance now. To the critics, it is just another propaganda but if we look at it positively, it is something worth pushing forward. Perhaps the only obstacle is the outdated and selfish Umno/BN politicians. Anyway, it is a beautiful concept which roused hope and excitement in people of a brighter and better future.
When Gerakan Youth chief announced that he will not be retaining or standing in any position when his term ends, some comrades are in a wavering vision of where their political future lies. Some could not be bothered so long as the President is still around otherwise their plan will fails terribly. Anyway the youth (although many are in their 40s) are vibrant, snazzy and have hope, vision and ambitions that belie them but unfortunately for some reasons, the negative culture of selfish politics is in play.
When the party announced that the candidates list for the next GE will be revealed after Chinese New Year, some have been excitedly looking forward to gain mileage for the next 3 months. There is no doubt behind every frame and mind, there is brilliance, intelligence, charisma and a force to lead new generation to a better future. All of us have a role to play in the party. We do not get elected or appointed for the sake of position but a responsibility. Yes, people want to see new and ambitious faces but not a timid one.
Sincerity must be the priority, not the opportunity as many are waiting in the party. Forget about exploitation and manipulation, people are no more fools. Moderate and constructive approach may be an ideal way to move forward but sometime the only way to fight fire is to use fire.
The outcome of 308 GE had inadvertently caused some people inside and outside of the party, lost confidence and hope in the party but the Deputy Prime Minister had recently said Gerakan ‘beh -si” (not dead yet). Many in the party old and young are adopting the ‘wait and see’ attitude. They are good in voicing out against the party but do nothing to serve. Evidently we witnessed some during the recent national delegates conference.
To them Kennedy’s wise words of asking what we can do for the country and not otherwise is no more viable. However there are still a pathetic number serving and contributing to the party (or the President) and I hope they are sincere. And of course sometimes money and promises can buy ‘sincerity’ which is also an ongoing practice in the party.
It does not matter why we are in politics. In life we have to contribute and serve in one way or another. In the youth wing, no matter who we are, what we do, where we come from, we share something in common – we want to see the party excels and we are the leaders of tomorrow. We have reserved a special place in the country and we want to contribute to a certain extent to the society by using the party as a platform. Trust me, the opportunists and selfish ones with personal agenda will not last.
Yes, performance and contribution is and should be the only thing that matters. In a time when the world is getting smaller and globalisation is on the rise, the last thing we need to do is to keep on focussing on our differences (this applies to the entire country too). If we really want to build the 1Hati (or 1Malaysia) spirit, then we need to recognise that the real ‘enemy’ is outside and not inside. We can then move forward as one and to achieve the next level of progress.
“Let nothing dim the light that shines from within” – Maya Angelou
“If you’re walking down the right path and you’re willing to keep walking, eventually you’ll make progress” – Barrack Obama.
And Happy Conference Day too !
PARTI GERAKAN NASIONAL DELEGATES CONFERENCE 2010
Date: 6 & 7 November, 2010
Time: 3.00 pm
Venue: Dewan Wawasan, Menara PGRM, Jalan Cheras.
SATU HATI !
“Whoever you are, remember see something funny in whatever life throws at us along the way. Laughter causes the release of endorphins, which makes us feel better as well as giving us a better perspective on life”.
A true leader is a servant to all
Someone asked about my stand on the party leadership in a previous post entitled “Gerakan Matters”. Well, all I can say is we need a servant; an ambitious, brave and humble one. Read an article in the Malay Mail recently, can’t agree more with the writer:
“They are there not to lord over others but because they genuinely want to lead and serve those under them”
THERE are leaders in all walks of life — politics, bureaucracy, business, academia, sports, in the community and at home. Some have even attained iconic status.
While many possess the mantle of leadership, it is sad only a few really enlighten and inspire confidence and trust in those whom they lead or make them want to emulate their example.
We might have heard the proverb, “When the good have authority, the people rejoice; but when the bad rule, the people mourn.”
The leadership role demands uprightness, integrity, morality and justice at all times. It comes as a rude shock to us when we find those in positions of responsibility or those whom we look up to are associated with, or worse, implicated in acts of criminality, depravity, dishonesty or injustice.
There can be no excuse due to ignorance or being misled or that committing something wrongful is personal and should not be a matter of concern to others.
We must remember leadership in any form involves others, often the public, and a leader should, at all times, be held to the highest public scrutiny.
Leaders really care for those over whom they have responsibility. They serve as leaders, not to lord it over those whom they lead, but they do so because they genuinely want to serve.
And by their service, they set an example for others to follow. In other words, a true leader is a dedicated and diligent servant.
There is an ancient Middle Eastern story of a master who had to travel on a long journey. He gave one of his servants the responsibility to manage his other household servants and take care of them.
When the master returned after a long absence, he found the servant had done such a good job he rewarded him by putting him in charge of all he owned, for it is only such a faithful, sensible servant who can truly be a leader.
Good examples of leadership often start from the home, where the father and mother have different leadership roles, and must exercise these with care, faith and conscientiousness and provide the right direction to all family members.
As time goes by, children, too, have leadership roles in various situations and they often follow the example set by their parents in carrying out these tasks.
It is often said that unless one knows how to lead and guide one’s own home and family, it is difficult to fathom how that person can provide good leadership to the people who trust him or her to lead them.
A good leader must live as far as possible a scrupulous life and eschew committing anything that is unlawful, unfair, corrupt and deceitful, avoiding self-aggrandisement, arrogance and any form of extremism.
Good leadership is recognised by the qualities of decency, goodness, patience and humility demonstrated.
Showing kindness and faith in those whom one leads, but still being firm, decisive, prompt and action-oriented are qualities that are appreciated, even if not immediately, but definitely in the long run, and which will bring results to benefit all — those being led and the leader.
Leaders must be ready to stand up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of the less privileged and the downtrodden.
They must seek to judge fairly and defend the rights of the poor and needy, including, for instance, the widows, orphans, elderly, the sick, disabled, destitute and aliens.
The responsibility for seeing that justice is dispensed speedily, impartially and in a fair manner rests on the shoulders of the leadership concerned.
Leaders, above all, should not lose heart and grow weary in executing their responsibilities according to the highest ethical standards.
Such leaders, by not slackening and who remain strong and true to what is required of them, in due time, will reap a rich harvest of success for the nation, to the satisfaction of all whom they lead and serve, and who look up to them as worthy role models to follow.
Finally, leaders must realise that much responsibility is placed in them and as people have fully committed to them by way of accepting their leadership, much will also be expected of them as leaders.
Rueben Dudley
Petaling Jaya, Selangor
ISA in a nutshell
Last evening someone argued with me the need of ISA in our country. When asked about Gerakan stand, without haste I replied that the Youth wing is against such law. However due to obvious reason, the main body dare not antagonise it except for favouring a review or replacement. Again it is ironic that the party’s ideals lay on the fundamental liberties in the Federal Constitution as well as the UDHR, indirectly support the need of ISA. A detention without trial simply cannot be accepted. Hence I am inclined to write the same herein, very much similar to my explanation given to that friend.
Evidently, most of the ISA arrests were due to political reason. Gone are the days of Mahathirism or using it as a political tool as well as infringing the very basic of our liberty.
In a nutshell, the ISA provides for preventive detention of targeted persons initially for 60 days and then for up to two years with the possibility of renewal every two years. Apparently the renewals can be made indefinitely. The police may, without a warrant, arrest and detain anyone who has given “reason to believe” that he or she has acted or likely to act in “any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia.” When invoked, the ISA also allows for restrictions on freedom of assembly, association, and expression, freedom of movement, residence and employment. It allows for the closing of schools and educational institutions if they are used as a meeting place for an unlawful organization or for any other reason are deemed detrimental to the interests of Malaysia or the public.
Because of the breath of the language of Article 149(1), the legal effect derived from basing the ISA on it is that any provision of the ISA directed at any action enumerated in Article 149(1) is “valid, nothwithstanding any inconsistency with specified articles of the Federal Constitution, namely Articles 5 (personal liberty), 9 (freedom of movement), 10 (freedom of speech) or 13 (rights of property), or which would apart from the articles be outside the legislative power of Parliament”.
The ISA can be traced to the practices of the British during the colonial period. When necessary, the Special Branch flexed unrestrained power for the purpose of maintaining the status quo. During a period of armed conflict such as the Emergency (1948-1960, although the most dangerous period of guerilla warfare ended by 1954), when the survival of democratic principles in Malaya was at issue, the use of such police state tactics may find qualified justification. However, the Malayan communist insurrection was broken and Merdeka Day arrived on August 31, 1957. Aside from a short episode of armed Confrontation with Sukarno’s Indonesia, modern Malaysia had never been threatened with any war or armed rebellion that can be viewed as being a threat to her sovereignty. Nevertheless, the legacy of the special branch can be seen in the letter of the ISA and felt in its continued implementation against selected persons. One might say that the mischievous spirit and a certain tradition of diabolical dirty tricks were passed on from the departing British to the new government of Malaysia through the corpus of the ISA.
Despite the draconian nature of the ISA, a number of rights vital to personal liberty have been preserved by judicial action. The right to counsel is available. An arrested person has the right to be informed of the charges that form the basis of the arrest. By the way I am also aware of the abuse by the police to arrest Selvachandran who is the witness in the Gunasegaran’s inquest who died in police custody. Stop intimidating the people, police are not legal thugs whatsoever!
Anyway back to ISA, Professor R. H. Hickling, a parliamentary draftsman in post-independence Malaya who took part in drafting the ISA once commented:
“Since I drafted the original act, the ISA has been tightened up and tightened up until now there’s no provision for judicial review. Unfortunately over the year the powers have been abused. Instead of locking up people suspected of organizing violence, which is the phrase used in the preamble to the ISA, it’s been used to lock up political opponents, quite harmless people.”
The judiciary, through self-restraint bordering on compliance, will not question the basis for detention. This applies even when irregularities such as when the cause for detaining a person proffered in court is not the same as that written in the original detention order. The caprice and arbitrariness of the government cannot be challenged unless it was rendered in male fide. In the case of Karam Singh it was held that the law did not impose a burden on the part of the detaining authority to show its good faith. Thus, the onus of proving improper motive on the part of the authorities lies on the detainee.
The scope of judicial review, including habeas corpus, was weakened further in 1989 when Parliament amended to the ISA to actually prevent acts of the government taken under the ISA from being questioned in the courts. Section 8B(1) as amended read:
“There shall be no judicial review in any court of, and no court shall have or exercise any jurisdiction in respect of, any act done or decision made by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Minister in the exercise of their discretionary power in accordance with this Act, save in regard to any question on compliance with any procedural requirement in this Act governing such act or decision.”
Section 8C included habeas corpus as within the judicial powers curtailed. Dr. Mahathir was supportive of the legislation giving the government the unfettered discretion to determine what action was necessary to preserve the country’s stability and security.
The court’s jurisdiction to protect a detainee from unlawful and improper detention will have been removed although the security of the nation must at all times remain paramount, yet to completely remove the court’s supervisory jurisdiction on grounds that the executive is the best judge to decide on national security cannot be justified legally or morally.
There is a glimmer of hope in the direction of judicial oversight of the puissant Executive. In the rare instance of Lee Guan Seng case, the High Court held that “acting mechanically or a non-application of mind” would render a detention ultra vires, and therefore, void for having failed to conform to provisions of the Ordinance.
I, therefore simply cannot accept that all ISA arrests are subject to the ministerial power which is arbitrary and easily abused. Thus the substantive interests of the Executive overrode procedural niceties. At the end of the day, failure of the government or judges to do justice may compel people to take their continuing grievances that surely involve compelling questions of life and liberty down other less rational and more dangerous footpaths.
Sampah Masyarakat di Malaysia
Seorang aktivis sosial memberi saya satu senarai yang berkenaan ‘social ills’ dan ‘uncivilisation in Malaysia”. Apabila saya membacanya, ia terbukti bahawa negara kita mempunyai apa yang dikatakan “1st class infrastructure, 3rd class mentality”. Antara lain ia dinyatakan seperti berikut:
1. Masih terdapat ramai rakyat berludah dan membuang sampah merata-rata terutamanya di kawasan penghuni berpendapatan rendah dan semasa memandu;
2. Semakin banyak kereta mempunyai ‘tinted glass’ yang gelap dan nombor plate yang melanggar peraturan;
3. Rasuah, banyak polis blok diadakan semasa tugas untuk carian sampingan. Yang pelik ia biasanya diadakan di kawasana perumahan rakyat yang miskin atau sederhana. Jarang dilihat ada blok di Bangsar, Mont Kiara, Bukit Damansara dsb. Sebab? Ramai ahli kerajaan berpangkat tinggi, ahli politik, menteri dan datuk/tan sri tinggal di situlah!;
4. Iklan terutamanya dari ‘ah long’ (pinjaman berfaedah rendah) dilekatkan di merata-rata tempat seperti papan tanda, papan jalan, mesin letak kereta, pondok telefon, dinding dsb. Sepatutnya iklan-iklan ini secara mudah memberi peluang kepada pihak berkuasa untuk menangkap pesalah tetapi tidak dilaksanankan kerana ? – adik berumur 6 tahun pun jawapannya;
5. Meletak kereta tanpa peduli dan mengikut peraturan. Teksi dan ibubapa yang menjemput pelanggan/anak-anak akan berhenti di tengah jalan sesuka hati;
6. Setiap tempat yang mempunyai lampu isyarat, tentu mempunyai banyak kenderaan terutamanya motosikal melanggar peraturan. Sekurang-kurang 50% motosikal kecil di Malaysia tidak menyalakan lampu belakang (sama ada rosak atau disengajakan);
7. Ramai penghuni pangsapuri, kondominium dan ‘gated community’ masih enggan membayar fee dan caj penyelerasan (maintenance) atau ‘security’ bulanan;
8. Sebahagian besar rakyat Malaysia tidak mempedulikan apa itu kitar semula ‘recycle’ atau kepentingan alam sekitar (environmental unfriendly) maka tong-tong 3 warna yang disediakan itu adalah membazir;
9. Hisap rokok di kawasan ‘Dilarang merokok’ terutamanya di pejabat kerajaan, dalam lif dan pondok perhentian bas;
10. Potong Q, nak jimat masa;
11. Yang paling buruk: menggalakan pemberian/penerimaan rasuah untuk meluluskan apa-apa sahaja di dalam negara ini terutamanya dari pihak kerajaan tempatan.
12. Tidak tahu senyum, mahupun ucap ‘terima kasih’ terutamanya di antara masyarakat/jiran bukan Melayu.
13. Masuk lif atau naik bas tanpa memberi laluan kepada mereka untuk keluar/turun dahulu.
14. Budaya lepak terutamanya pelajar-pelajar selepas masa sekolah dan kakitangan kerajaan.
15. Masalah ‘Mat Rempit’ dan ‘gangsterism’ di kalangan budak-budak sekolah.
Adalah dipercayai punca utama ke atas masalah-masalah di atas adalah kelemahan sistem pelajaran dan pengajaran, rasuah, polisi atau peraturan yang tidak efektif dan kos kehidupan yang tinggi berbanding dengan pendapatan secara am.
‘Gerakan Matters’
A friend showed me an article posted in Loyarburok.com, I find it interesting (as it concerns the party) and decided to reproduce here:
LB – I was at Line Clear Nasi Kandar, having my nasi with juicy ayam goreng masala, blanched bendi, papadoms on the side with the best curry ever and a cup of teh tarik kurang manis while this uncle at the next table was singing Ji Ba Pan. No, that is not a curse word, although we use plenty of those daily.
You see people, I’m a Penangite, and we Penangites find so much bliss in eating delicious foods. We love Penang – the smell of the beach, the warm weather, the history, the big beautiful green trees, the unique people, the culture, and just about every single thing about Penang!
We are very nostalgic people. We like memories. We like to eat and talk, mostly al-fresco. We are simple people and we take great pride in being Penangites. Ever noticed how people from Penang always say “I’m from Penang” with a certain sense of confidence and pride? Yes, most of us do think being Penangite is so cool and so special. In Penang, as long as you can curse in Hokkien, we are brothers. I know, how crude right? But that’s the case for many of us, cursing has become a habit and soon to be culture.
We are straight forward people. We tak pandai pusing-pusing – if we think you stupid we say you are stupid, or mangkuk, and if your worse than that its mangkuk hayun. I’m used to hearing “Ask him go die la” so many times that it is simply a phrase to express disappointment. People here can be very harsh with their language, but that doesn’t mean they are rude or anything, it’s usually only between close friends. Ironic, isn’t it? We use curse words to a certain degree to portray closeness.
On my table was a copy of GERAKAN Matters – Apa Anak Malaysia Mahu?, the official newsletter of Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia. Why on earth is Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia not in Pakatan Rakyat? This is probably because they are not listening to the rakyat.
I think I share the sentiments of the younger generation of Penangites with regards to Gerakan. I flipped through the pages of that zine, I saw the spirit of Penang encompassed in it. It contained articles written in or translated into Malay, Chinese and Tamil; okay, maybe just a little bit of Tamil.
So why did they loose big? Simple, because they refused to listen.
We love Gerakan, oh yes, the whole idea of it. The founding father, the principles, the ideology, the opposition voice in the Barisan Nasional, our homegrown Party – our pride! But they have failed us. Failed us by compromising too much, failed us for not opposing when they should, failed us by remaining silent. However, as I have said, we are sentimental a people and our love is true.
So if anybody from Gerakan is reading this, then hear this; we love Gerakan, oh yes we do! We are Penangites, we could even sweep DAP out the next election if we want to, so listen and listen well.
Just leave the coalition! Repent already! We are ever willing to forgive you and only you, so please join us, the Rakyat. Listen to us, we are asking you to leave Barisan Nasional, just leave. We are not asking you to join Pakatan but we are asking you to join the Rakyat! Well, you can join Pakatan if you want to, but leave Barisan Nasional; this is the will of Penangites! Listen to us, not UMNO, not the Prime Minister, not Khoo Tsu Koon, but us the younger generation.
Yeah, we do like our current Chief Minister, and I am sure he is going to be around for a while, as long as he doesn’t play us off. Nice guy la, but not so authentic, I mean we are proud of a person who holds true to good values, but we wished we had a Penangite like him. Not so important but we wished lah… it’s a state nationalism kinda thing. As things are now, Gerakan would most probably disappear soon if they don’t listen to Penangites. They should, because we love them, we want them out of Barisan Nasional. We don’t promise them the state, but we would like to see them as strong and wise oppositions.
Gerakan needs no rejuvenation plans; it just needs to leave Barisan Nasional, now. That is all, we are ever willing to forgive you, we want you back, do not disappoint us. I believe this is your last call, if you do not leave now I guess you have betrayed us for the last time. By the way, Line Clear Nasi Kandar, damn nice la wei!
Another Top Malaysian Brain Goes Into Drain
Well not really into drain but a greener pasture elsewhere or at least a fairer and more competitive environment. News about the Malaysian, Tan Zhongshan who emerged as the top student in his final-year law examinations at Cambridge University is not something new. I believe more than 90% of our top students especially the non-Malays will prefer or end up residing oversea. Singapore government have been taking full advantage of our talents and best performers many years ago. It is reported that Tan will join the island judicial legal service upon graduation. After all it was Singapore who awarded him the Asean scholarship to pursue his law degree; not MARA.
Inevitably when I read the news, I know many will talk about such wasted talent especially the opposition Chinese leaders. I do not always buy their comments not because I am from a BN component party but on the basis of rationality. Apparently Lim Kit Siang is one of them blogging and tweeting about this young man. Just imagine if Tan is Atan Bin Bujang? A truly national pride indeed. They all know about such predicament, although wanting to retain our best brain and attract their return, while instilling the fear of losing among a particular race. I just can’t think of a good reason for the top brains to come back or stay except for being their country of birth.
Not only the non-Malays, I believe even the talented and outstanding Malays will prefer other countries as well particularly US or Europe. It is ironic some of my Malay friends confirm the latter as they felt unfairly treated due to their liberalism. In fact one even said people will always see him being on top of a corporate because he is a Malay not his real capability.
However, why is it the Chinese still make it to the top list of the richest people in the country? Hardworking and entrepreneurship skills is a factor. Cronyism and nepotism is another, again not something new. Tell me is there any Chinese millionaires in the country did not pull string or bribe the government at any levels?
One of the main reason our country is not developed to where it should be with all the resources was due to lack of quality human capital. It will be an uphill task, but not impossible to educate the people of Malaysia that we truly need to look and treat each other as One regardless of race and religion. Forget about special treatment or privileges, it is high time to move forward.
