P115 Batu by-election after Bagan Pinang?

Prior to the last general election, Batu MP Chua Tian Chang (Tian Chua) was charged under section 332 of the Penal Code where he bit a policeman voluntarily causing hurt to deter the same from his duty. Both the prosecution and defence closed their case last Friday and the court has fixed a decision date on 22.10.2009. If Tian Chua is found guilty, he shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

Is Tian Chua still the MP if convicted? Ironically, most of the PKR/Pakatan fans supported his action, even if there is another by-election, they believe a victory is of no sweat. Could this be the 10th by-election after Bagan Pinang? I doubt.

Under Article 48 of the Federal Constitution, a person is disqualified from being a member of either House of Parliament if …(e)…convicted of an offence and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than one year or to a fine of not less than two thousand ringgit. This will take effect upon the expiry of 14 days from the verdict day. However he has the right to appeal and apply for a stay of exection or filed a petition for a pardon.

Now, what is the effect of his disqualification? His parliamentary seat in Batu shall become vacant. Such vacancy shall be filled within 60 days where the EC shall decide whether an election to be held or an appointment made accordingly. If a by-election is called, parti Gerakan shall selects their candidate and move its machinery.

However in the case of Wee Choo Keong v Lee Chong Meng & Anor [1996], Lee who was the losing candidate, filed an election petition to disqualify Wee because the latter was actually fined RM7,000 for contempt of court. The election judge disqualified Wee and declared Lee as the properly-elected MP for Bukit Bintang. Subsequently Wee applied for an order to quash the decision but was dismissed. Similarly Wee’s appeal to the Federal Court in 1998 was also disallowed.

In my opinion, a distinction can be drawn from this case against possible Batu situation. In Wee’s case, his conviction occurred before the nomination day. Thus it allowed the election judge to declare that Wee had not been properly and legally elected under the Federal Constitution and Election Offences Act 1954. In Tian Chua’s case, he was duly elected before his conviction, thus a by-election is the likely outcome. In any event, I am sure that Tian Chua will instruct his counsel to appeal against any unfavourable decision and the finality is likely to take another year.

FINALLY PAKATAN RULES MALAYSIA !

Below is an imaginative headline news as if I have a crystal ball to predict the future. If there are obituaries in politics, the following would likely to appear (say in 2012):

[Breaking News! 3 March 2012, Kuala Lumpur - Opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat won a landslide victory in the 13th general elections; taking 152 out of 222 seats in Parliament, from the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional after 54 years of independence. The widely predicted victory deals a major blow to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak who had worked tiredlessly to reform and transform the government since taking over the premiership in 2009. The defeat also awakens many other leaders within the coalition. As a result, PM Najib, together with Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat and Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon conceded that BN had lost control of the government and announced their resignation to preside their respective party. None of them is available to comment when contacted.

Attention will now be riveted on who is the next premier of Malaysia as well as the aftermath and economic effect. Analysts believe that voters have expressed not so much their support for Pakatan as their mistrust of BN leaderships resulted from the tainted government linking to corruption, abuse of power and unethical conduct in every level of the system. In addition some believe that the falling popularity of BN, an economy in decline and growing public dissatisfaction with politics gave a historic opportunity to the opposition. The victory serves as a watershed moment in the country's electoral politics.

For those concerned about Parti Gerakan which decided to remain in BN despite internal and external forces to pull out can only blame the party leadership failing to recognise the inherent limitations. Gerakan was a party that many expect it to transform from a conservative into a modern catchall party or a third force drawing support from all social strata.

"The results proved that strong coffer and conspiracy with big corporates, GLCs, agriculturist and Malay support, NEP policy and elite bureaucracy do not guarantee permanent control. Gerakan has failed to respond to the fundamental changes in Malaysian society. The party didn't or refuse to understand rakyat tastes had changed and wanted something else. This is not about the party or political system but a desire for greater and better types of political participation" said a Gerakan youth leader.

Malaysia politics seems to have finally caught up with the rest of the modern world. Change has come at last.]

Do we want the above to happen?

Pn. Norlaila’s interview

“…bukan saja dari Pas, PKR atau DAP… ada juga dari Gerakan yang sokong…”

Adakah MCA, MIC dan Gerakan akan berkecai?

Sekelip mata cuti empat hari berlalu. Sudah jemu saya menikmati hidangan dan kuih-muih Melayu. Apa yang sedihnya adalah ramai meluangkan di perbualan keluarga, restoran, media internet dan am bahawa parti-parti seperti MCA, MIC dan Gerakan (“parti-parti tersebut”) sememangnya tidak lagi relevan untuk menunaikan harapan rakyat terutamanya kaum Cina dan India. Ramai tidak peduli sama ada Ong atau Chua, Samy atau Subra menjadi presiden bagi parti mereka. Reputasi Gerakan pula sebagai parti harapan kini hanya satu parti “moderate” atau “centrist” sahaja – dianggap tidak penting lagi.

Kecuali mereka yang terlibat di dalam parti-parti tersebut atau mempunyai perhubungan ‘erat’ dari segi perniagaan dan keuntungan secara langsung atau tidak, rakyat tidak lagi menyokong parti-parti tersebut. Ini bukan satu khabar angin atau khayalan tetapi KEBENARAN! Kronisme, wang politik, rasuah dan keuntungan haram adalah gejala syaitan yang tidak akan kekal selamanya.

Apa yang menyedihkan adalah pimpinan parti-parti tersebut masih tidak sedar, ikhlas dan bertaubat untuk benar-benar memperjuangkan kepentingan rakyat. Selagi mereka masih angkuh dan berangan atas harapan UMNO masih boleh melindungi mereka, pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat akan tersenyum riang. Sesiapa di luar situ sama ada Ali, Ah Beng atau Muthu pun tahu bahawa kuasa yang masih dipegang kuat oleh UMNO adalah disebabkan oleh ‘peti wang’ mereka. Peneroka Felda dan mereka di kawasan pertanian atau kampung masih tidak memperdulikan betapa pentingnya harapan baru itu. Ini adalah aset UMNO. Ada juga memberi kepercayaan atas dasar pengalaman kerajaan BN dari risiko kerajaan baru. Kemakmuran dan kestabilan juga merupakan faktor yang lain untuk memberi sedikit banyak sokongan.

Adakah ini dapat menyakinkan harapan baru kepada generasi muda kita? Adakah negara kita akan benar-benar menjadi bangsa Malaysia atas pemerintahan sekarang? Adakan rasuah dapat dihapuskan? Adakan sistem dan kualiti pelajaran akan dapat dipertingkatkan setanding dengan negara-negara maju? Ramai rakyat atau pengundi muda terutamanya di bandar meragui kerajaan BN dapat melaksanakan perkara-perkara tersebut. Begitu juga dengan mereka di Sabah dan Sarawak. Sehingga kini selain dari prestasi Perdana Menteri yang dianggap mengalakkan, pandangan rakyat terhadap parti-parti komponen dan pemimpin-pemimpin yang lain di BN sebenarnya tidak ada perubahan. Negatif, itu adalah satu kepastian.

Disebaliknya adakah wajar untuk memberi peluang kepada Pakatan sebagai harapan baru negara kita? Walaubagaimanapun ramai menganggap risiko ke atas Pakatan adalah lebih wajar dan masuk akal dari kepercayaan kepada UMNO atau BN. Jikalau sentimen sebegini dikekalkan tanpa tindakan yang tegas oleh PM untuk memulihkan pandangan rakyat dan keinsafan pemimpin-pemimpin BN untuk memahami setulus hati maksudnya perjuangan dan perkhidmatan untuk rakyat, nampaknya hanya kegagalan dan kejatuhan merupakan satu-satunya jalan sahaja. Adakah begitu sukarnya untuk melepaskan kepentingan seseorang itu demi perjuangan menghidupkan parti?

HAPPY HARI RAYA!

As PM Najib says not only we should have open house during this festive season but also celebrate it with an open heart. Selamat Hari Raya Aidilfitri kepada rakan-rakan dan saudara-saudara umat Islam. Enjoy!

CHANGE we can believe in

Surprisingly my favourite song, ‘One Moment In Time’ is used as a tribute for Obama’s election last year. Great choice. (1Malaysia) Yes, we can.

GTP = Gerakan Transformation Programme.

What has Gerakan accomplished to date? What lies ahead?

Needless to say, many of us aspire a different and strong Gerakan. When I was at a dinner hosted by the India Deputy High Commissioner and Counsellor last Tuesday, many of the distinguished intellectual guests spoke highly on Gerakan. They see the value in Gerakan worth more than MCA and MIC. Now, how can we transform Gerakan into a high-performing and a preferred party of the people? This may be crucial in the next 2 years or so. To facilitate this transformation, Gerakan must start moving from all sides whether it is from the main body, youth or wanita. Perhaps the GTP system used by Dr.Koh and Idris is applicable to the party. Make it as ‘Gerakan Transformation Programme’ instead – there must be a functional comprehensive guideline and program (eg effective grassroot service, ICT and delivery strategy). More importantly there must be a motivator to move the talents and aspired leaders of the party. There must be a reason to move or transform, this need to be explained clearly. Sometime a hope is just ain’t enough.

It is also high time for the party members to deliver and struggle together for the sake of Gerakan. Easier said than done? Well if one keeps on adding fuel to the fire to picture Gerakan as a hopeless party, for heaven sake, leave. Considering the current low favourable rating from the public in relation to Gerakan’s position in BN or relationship with UMNO, the party must persuade and convince the rakyats of the party’s relevance. I had once put together a set of questions which may be still worthwhile to consider:

1. What are the anticipated positive changes?
2. What does Gerakan stand for now?
3. What does Gerakan values?
4. What is Gerakan afraid of and why? What is most vulnerable and how to fix it?
5. What can Gerakan delivers well?
6. How does Gerakan differ from their opponents? What does Gerakan brings to the table that they cannot or will not do it?
7. What are Gerakan primary and secondary goals now? Are they the right ones?
8. What is the preferred and ideal leadership and where can Gerakan find or nurture it among the ranks?
9. What is Gerakan’s political compass and how far is too far when the game gets rough?
10. Is becoming a third force still an option?

“Fiat Justitia, Ruat Coelum”

Lawyer cum Politician

Section 46A of the Legal Profession Act 1976 states:

(1) A person shall be disqualified for being a member of the Bar Council or a Bar Committee, or any committee of the Bar Council or a Bar Committee -
(a) unless he is and has been an advocate and solicitor for a period of not less than seven years…or
(b) if he is a member of either House of Parliament or of a State Legislative Assembly, or of any local authority; or
(c) if he holds any office in … any political party.

Before I discuss construction of the said section, let me query why so many politicians are trained lawyers? This especially so in US, UK, Canada, India and perhaps even in Malaysia. Just look at the presidents globally and our past PMs or we dont even need to go that far, just look at Parti Gerakan. Let me see…I can easily think of names such as Ko Youn, Jayanthi, Chia, Gordon, Vincent, Teng Boon, Chee Kuan, Keng Liang, Baljit, [Si Pin], Raymond, Chai and of course myself. Similarly there are also many in other political parties. Is it because they (we) find the practice of law so dissatisfying, is it because the skills they possess match ideally with those required to become a politician or is it a combination of the two or are there other reasons?

It seems that lawyers just love leading and/or enjoy the fruits that comes with political positions. To be fair however, being a politician involves persuading a large group of people that you have the best ideas, that you can resolve their problems and generally that you are better than the next guy, just like the trail lawyer. It involves legislating and who better is able to understand laws and their application? It involves diligence to the task at hand and all lawyers are trained to function on a few hours sleep and then work like maniacs. It involves negotiating deals, agreements and treaties and lawyers particularly lawyers in civil litigation are often skilled negotiators and I could go on and on.

However outside of their skills and training are there other considerations for this relationship between the law and politics? How about economics as a factor. Many lawyers enter the field as it is viewed as a good money source but what is the connection with politics? They may see politics as a natural stepping stone where they can gain status or make contacts which will guarantee a continuation if not expansion of their already high earnings. If lawyers even fail at politics they can return to practice law with their new found contacts/potential clients in hand. Not a bad deal and it could in fact be considered another factor, namely flexibility. You leave law enter politics, lose elections return to law and the cycle continues.

Then there is the over abundance of lawyers. It seems given the numbers being bandied about that everyone is studying law. Yes the field of law is over saturated. So if there are so many of us grabbing for a share of the pie why not exit that rat race and join another? Become a politician and gain fame, fortune and of course more power.

This brings me to my original point about the dissatisfaction with the practice of law. Does that have any relevance here? I mean if we consider the drudgery involved in drafting and re-drafting fine print, battling for the last cent of your legal fees, scouring the planet for clients and fighting treachery in the court room and the firm well why not seek the glamour of the politician’s life. But in Gerakan? :) Maybe, just maybe lawyers have been so shaped by their training and the experiences gained in their careers that they have been molded to become politicians. But what about those who only experienced in corporate and conveyancing works?

Anyway Subang MP Sivarasa is applying to the Federal Court tomorrow to declare section 46A (1) of the LPA unconstitutional. When I checked out the section, I must admit that I am surprised by it because there have been so many lawyers became politicians particularly in the opposition. I can understand why a lawyer cum politician is barred from holding a committee position in the Bar Council but he shall also be disqualified for being a member if he is a member of either House of Parliament or State Legislative Assembly and even local authority? A member of the Bar cannot even holds any office in any political party, what about central committee or a bureau head? I hope the court will construe the said section in accordance to the reality and practicality aspect of it.

KJ pemandu teksi yang patriotik – 15Malaysia

Funny, pathetic but it happens.

Gerakan’s protest against the ISA

“Preventive detention is a very painful ordeal and should only apply to those who pose a serious and genuine risk to public safety”

Gerakan president Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon noted that the prime function of the ISA is preventive and not punitive as the country has criminal laws to deal with alleged criminal acts.

————————————————————————-

“We advocate a replacement of the ISA with a new statute called ‘Anti-Terrorism Act’ that would specifically deal with threats from terrorists”

“We do not want ISA to be abolished but we want its usage to be narrowed down” deputy president Datuk Chang Ko Youn told the Edge Malaysia recently.

————————————————————————-

[Nutgraph: "They Say It"
By Zedeck Siew]

“Gerakan Youth is of the opinion that struggles of organisations such as Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI) should be considered seriously for the sake of justice and recognition of human rights principles enshrined in the federal constitution.”

ANDY Yong, Gerakan Youth’s legal, public complaints and social welfare bureau chief, who declared the party youth wing’s interest in joining last month anti-Internal Security Act (ISA) rally in Kuala Lumpur (Source: Gerakan Youth to join anti-ISA rally, Malaysiakini, 13 July 2009) is of different perspective now.

Yong revealed that Gerakan’s national central committee had decided to push for true reform of the ISA, especially where it concerned detention without trial. Party leaders such as Penang Gerakan chairperson Datuk Dr Teng Hock Nan had previously stepped up to the plate to tackle the same issue.

——————————————————————————–

“We can shout, we can wave flags and don banners, none of that will achieve its purpose if the ‘people in power’ should continue to view us as pest.”

Gerakan Youth chief Lim Si Pin, in an entry on his blog about the furore since the wing movement. (Source: Move – Gerak(an), limsipin.com, 16 July 2009)

Lim argued that no amount of “peaceful assembly or march will turn the tide if the Govt [sic] is not prepared to change a certain policy.” While insisting that the youth wing’s intent was to “inculcate our next generation to be brave and be bold”, Lim stressed that if GMI’s march failed to receive a police permit, Gerakan members should not break the law by marching forward.

On 1 Aug itself, Lim announced that Gerakan Youth would “detach ourselves from the joint-march”, as “the ‘walk’ is deemed illegal under the Police Act.”

——————————————————————————–

“Street protests, especially those involving big crowds, are definitely undesirable as[,] if not careful[,] they can lead to untoward incidents or even violence[;] and the authorities, especially the police, would have a tough time controlling the situation.”

Gerakan vice-president Datuk Mah Siew Keong, who added that his party welcomed Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s suggestion that “suitable venues, including stadiums” be provided for citizens to “air their grievances peacefully and orderly.” (Source: Hold peaceful gatherings in stadiums, gerakan.org.my, 3 Aug 2009)

Mah maintained that any gathering should be a “win-win” situation — “allowing participants to air their grievances and opinions and allowing the government to better understand the issues at hand”.

Review of ISA

Kuala Lumpur, 9 September – In conjunction with Malaysian Human Rights Day 2009, Pemuda Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia urges the government to consider the relevance of the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) in urgency.

“Whether it is to be reviewed, amended or replaced, I hope the ultimate aim is to safeguard the existing peace and harmony in our country. But if the intention is not truly based on a fair and just government, there is no point of a review. If the government wants to preserve an unfettered power to detain at will or to deter political freedom and freedom of expression, the intention will not be respected by the people” said Andy Yong, head of legal, public complaints & social welfare bureau.
Last month the Home Minister said the ISA might be amended at the next sitting of Dewan Rakyat.

Andy further commented “in the meantime, I believe more ISA detainees are to be released soon, a decision that should be welcomed.”

Suhakam will also be holding a conference today to mark the Malaysian Human Rights Day 2009. They will propose a roadmap to enable the government to adopt a human rights action plan as a national strategy and to discuss how human rights in Malaysia can be strengthened further.

Green Light to rally?

With the party president recent statement, does that means Gerakan particularly the Youth wing can organise more peaceful assembly or rally to support a good cause for the people?

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 6 — Tan Sri Koh Tsu Koon today urged the police to act fairly in dealing with public demonstrations because of the perception that they are more effective in cracking down on rallies than on crime.

Koh’s criticism is the first from a minister in Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s administration, and comes in the face of mounting public concern over the neutrality of the police.

His remarks also come a day after police arrested 16 people in a peaceful candlelight vigil, a little more than a week after standing by while a group of Malay-Muslims threatened violence and stamped and spat on a sow’s head to protest the relocation of a Hindu temple to their neighbourhood.

Koh said the public was questioning why the cow-head protestors were not arrested.

His words appeared to be at odds with that of his Cabinet colleague Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, the Home Minister, who had defended the police last week.

“Current public perception towards the police is that they are more effective in catching demonstrators than criminals,” said Koh today.

“People who carry out candlelight vigils and people who are sitting in mamak shops wearing black clothes are arrested. I think that is not correct,” he said.

The police have taken a hardline approach by cracking down on dissent, particularly from activists and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) supporters.

During the height of the Perak constitutional crisis, IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan had even said that those wearing black T-shirts would be detained. Opposition activists had adopted the wearing of black T-shirts as a form of protest against what they said was an assault on democracy.

The police, Koh said, should come up with standard procedures to deal with public demonstrations to show they were fair.

He suggested police allow peaceful demonstrations, and use video cameras to record such rallies to later arrest those who break the law.

“If the police act harshly even before there are signs of aggression, not only will this bring displeasure to the group demonstrating but also to the public, who will view this as being unfair,” he said.

He said the police should only act if there were signs of violence erupting.

The police have also come under severe criticism after riot cops used tear gas to break up a mass rally to protest an anti-ISA rally last month.

Scenes of riot police assaulting opposition lawmakers and chasing peaceful protestors through the streets of Kuala Lumpur had severely damaged Najib’s reform image.

After the anti-ISA protests, Najib had suggested that demonstrations be held behind closed doors at stadiums instead.

(Source: MI)

Car faster than plane?

Generally an airplane has a larger engine that allows it to fly faster than a car can drive. What about at a ground speed? (I am not talking about Datuk Seri Tiong’s private jet but a jumbo). In a bid to rev up publicity for the F1 in Singapore, a race was organised between a jet plane and a Porsche 911 GT3. The latter won by 0.4 seconds in the 1.7 km race, unbelievable!

Some also say that a Buggati Veyrone can easily takes on a jet plane…can a small political party performs better than the larger ones?

Consensus or Emperor-styled leadership?

Over the weekend, unusually I browsed some Chinese ancient and historical books at the store. Confucius is always one of the character that I enjoy reading provided it is in English. I discovered that according to ancient Chinese beliefs, people first and foremost need nutrition and then education. I put it simply that our health is the most important thing before we talk about knowledge and capability.

In the last two state delegates conferences (Penang & Selangor), I must admit that the party president delivered sensible messages in his speech. His recent suggestion of recording a protest or demonstration before arrest to justify the latter is indeed a good one. At this juncture, it is becoming apparent that Gerakan is about Penang or Koh Tsu Koon in the eyes of the political nerds or junkies. What if Koh Tsu Koon retires tomorrow? Did anyone in the party knows how to fish in the political ocean?

One of Confucius’s disciples named Zisi noticed that the king at that time had developed an unseemly strategy, but all his ministers condoned it. Zisi made remarks that the king does not conduct himself like a ruler, and neither do the ministers behave like ministers. When questioned, Zisi dare to say this: “When a king thinks he is perfect, no one dares to voice any opinion. Even though a ruler acts correctly, without listening to others’ suggestions amounts to having rejected the advice of others. By the same token, the ministers will echo a false decision and favor a poor mindset”. So instead of enabling the ruler to discern which is right or wrong, the ruler basks in the flattery of his subjects. Rather than evaluating if the ruler’s decision is prudent, the ministers flatter him with outrageous praise. Consequently, ruling the nation from that vantage point makes the populace disgruntled and the nation will no longer be stable. The king and his cadres live with the illusion that they act righteously, and even the servants echo these views because they benefit from empty praise and pointing out his flaws is considered a crime. Now, how can that lead to a good outcome?

According to a Chinese proverb, “An ocean is vast, assimilating the waters from streams and rivers.” Other people’s opinions are like these water. No matter how large the ocean, without these streams flowing into it freely, it would soon dry up. Anyone thinking he is perfect operates from a basis of ignorance and egocentricity. To counteract such thought processes, we must remember the traditional values and be glad others point out one’s own shortcomings. A leader of any organisation or nation should not dams the water. Although new ideas or suggestion to any policy or decision of the leader may not be substantiated by statistics or facts, it is because the they are reflection of the current ones. One will never know the response of a better proposals until it is implemented. Sounds familiar? (please do not misinterpret me, I am not referring to the party president but the leadership in general)

Is Gerakan bleaking?

BN leaders, past and present, condemned the anti-ISA gathering last month. Some Gerakan leaders and members also echoed the same. With much respect the Youth has indeed did a great job by keeping our words not to join an illegal assembly particularly if we foresee violence. Unfortunately the media, Pakatan leaders and even Gerakan members twisted and spinned the good cause. Apparently some Gerakan leaders want the ISA to be replaced, a good way of wording it instead of to repeal or abolish, words that are commonly used by the opposition, NGOs and activists. No one mention about protocol when the pathetic sole pro-ISA fella managed to deliver the memo at the Istana even without a prior letter of appointment. No one prove or show what is exactly the protocol, neither is there any rules relating the same. Recent decision by Selangor Pas allowing the mosque officials to arrest Muslims for buying and drinking alcohol is made without consulting the Sultan. As a result, it angers the Sultan, being the Head of Islam of the state. No one talk about their foolishness for not following the protocol. During the week prior to the rally, my blog carried as high as 800 hits a day with aggressive comments in every related posting. I wonder where are these people now? Subsequently no one question or follow up with the Youth whether any action taken by us to pursue the same (which we did). Was it an interim act with ulterior motive?

As for the party, so far most of the state delegates conferences had not been encouraging especially after the official opening by the president. Anyway my concern is where is Gerakan heading since 308. Did the party rebrand or reform as intended? Can the comrades feel and see any difference? Or are we still ‘begging’ in BN? The only difference I can see is we have some representatives in the cabinet but are they actually there in the interest of the party? Maybe. Of course undeniably our CAT watchers are doing a great job in Penang but is that what the rakyats want? Would we see some ang pows in the party just like how they tease MCA? Maybe. Do the leaders have time for the grassroots before election or delegate conference? Maybe. How many of the Gerakan members have the mentality to serve the people now? Few. Is the party politics really about the elite group, patronage or a particular camp? Maybe. We have a minister in charge of the national unity, but is there a sincere unity in the party? Superficially yes. Is Sedar in KL and Penang of much help to produce results effectively? Maybe.

Talk about being a ‘beggar’, has UMNO change to justify Gerakan’s support in the coalition. Did the party or president has the influence to any of their policy or decision-making affecting BN or the people? As for now, it seems that the issue of being a third force is out of question, why? Are we going to take the risk hoping for a better outcome in the next general election? Or would it better to risk as an independent party? Tough questions indeed – very much depending on the dedication, spirit and unity of the leaders/members. Ironically there are numerous comrades hoping that our candidates will be wiped out so that the party can really revamp and start from scratch like the good old days – the genuine ’satu hati’ struggle.

Ultimately I am incline to believe that Gerakan’s future is not in bleak, it is only a question of how we travel the journey in the next 2 years or so.

Below is an interesting article emailed to me recently:

UMNO was born from demonstration

…The biggest blunder came from our own, Dr Mahathir Mohd. He says that the culture of illegal gathering is the culture of Anwar Ibrahim and not of Malaysian. Maybe he forgot that UMNO itself was born out of illegal gatherings.

Najib says that the ISA protest is an inconvenience. I bet the British said the same thing too when Malays came out in numbers protesting against Malayan Union back in 1946 in various illegal gatherings throughout the country.

Funny, because in major cities around the world, i.e. London, New York, Paris, Amsterdam etc, protests are a normal scene and yet none of the major leaders of the world had characterized these gatherings as being an inconvenience….(seditious statements deleted)…

So, I call upon every Malaysians to see this deliberate memory lapse of UMNO leaders in their condemnation of the ISA protest. If UMNO leaders wanted to protest the ISA demonstration, then they must also condemn the 1946 anti Malayan Union protest as well, because clearly the 1946 protests were illegal protests and has no permits from the authorities. Plus it was a nuisance for the British.
> Tulang Besi

“Enticement of the Forbidden”

Section 498 of the Penal Code states that: “Whoever takes or entices away any woman who is and whom he knows, or has reason to believe, to be the wife of any other man, from that man, or from any person having the care of her on behalf of that man, with intent that she may have illicit intercourse with any person, or conceals, or detains with that intent any such woman, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both”.

There are myriad ways the law shaped and defined marital relations and spousal identities and how individuals manipulated and reshaped the rules to fit their needs. Interestingly, what transpired in the pending case of Daphne Iking stirs debate among the legal practitioners recently. However there is no discussion of female subjectivity – of what it meant that a woman’s legal entity was controlled by her husband when she married, of what is meant to be a wife.

Some consider it as an archaic law while others support it to ensure the sanctity of marriage and promote the family institution. I am inclined to agree that the action for enticement derived from an archaic understanding of a wife as “the chattel of the husband, over which he had a complete and perfect dominion as property” (Barnes v Allen – a US case). Inevitably such motive and understanding cannot be applicable in today’s world. Women cannot be turned into ‘things’.

Marriage unites wife and husband, giving them a singular identity. In spite of marriage and for whatever reasons, the merger of wife existence into that of the husband, she remained in law an individual. She possessed separate rights and protected even against the husband. Those rights included the right to invoke and receive aid, employment, relationships, shelter and protection from others even strangers, against the oppressive and cruelty of the husband. Would that be an act of interference in the husband’s affairs? It is a separate issue of whether the aggrieved spouse has adequate legal remedy or protecting the sanctity of marriage. A civil court should not consider such matter by reference to any religion perspectives. Perhaps one can pleasurely refer to the book entitles “Enticement of the Forbidden” by Judy Starr or follow the series of “Desperate Housewives” to understand the modern mindset of women.

At the end of the day, whether the provision is relevant or not, related parties and policymakers should have a constructive discussion considering the sensitivity and rights of a woman. Women do play an important role in our society today.

Condolence

My condolences to the family of former Chief Justice Tun Abdul Hamid Omar who passed away today. Life is not measured by the breaths we take but by the moments that take our breath away. Rest in peace.