Kesedaran politik anak muda harus dipupuk

IMG-20170815-WA0049

forum-Anak-muda-boikot-PRU14-1

KUALA LUMPUR: Majoriti pengundi muda berbangsa Cina dijangka mungkin memboikot pilihan raya umum (PRU) akan datang kerana mereka tidak percaya mengundi akan membawa sebarang perubahan, seorang pemimpin Gerakan memberitahu sebuah forum malam tadi.

Timbalan Ketua Pemuda Gerakan, Andy Yong anak muda Cina pada ketika ini lebih berminat menumpukan kepada soal mencari rezeki.

“Bagi mereka, tidak ada perbezaan sama ada keluar mengundi atau tidak, ia kerana sebarang keputusan memihak Barisan Nasional (BN) atau Pakatan Harapan (PH) tidak akan bawa perubahan,” katanya pada forum “Anak Muda Boikot PRU14?” di Dewan Perhimpunan Cina Kuala Lumpur dan Selangor (KLSCAH), malam tadi.

Statistik menunjukkan lebih 4.1 juta rakyat Malaysia yang layak mengundi masih belum mendaftar sebagai pengundi pada PRU depan. Menurut Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR), daripada jumlah itu, majoriti adalah golongan muda berusia sekitar bawah 30 tahun.

Andy tidak menolak kemungkinan trend yang berlaku pada pengundi muda berbangsa Cina akan menjangkiti pengundi muda berbangsa Melayu.

Katanya, adalah sukar menarik minat anak muda.

“Sukar pengaruhi anak muda untuk mendaftar mengundi. Sering saya ditanya anak muda, apa yang mereka akan dapat jika mengundi.”

Katanya, masih ada anak muda memiliki idealisme dan mahukan perubahan, “tetapi hanya minoriti”.

Advertisements

Beware of fake news in social medias…

images

My recent experience reaffirms the potential dangers and damages that could occur due to spinned or twisted messages/comments and fake news. It can be economically, socially and of course politically destructive.

A professional foreign social-media analyst told me in America there are hubs for conspiracy theories and fake stories. Websites such as Centre for Research for Globalisation, Cernovich and Infowars (funded by George Soros) are some classic examples. Hmm…perhaps this is something where the Opposition has looked into years ago.

We need to understand the revolution that has taken place in information and communication, which has completely upended the traditional world. Much has been written about this new media landscape that has made news and information available to everyone round the clock, turned mainstream media business on its head, removed the traditional gatekeepers of information and made authorities everywhere more accountable for their words and action than ever before.

But, the more profound effect has been on how people consume and respond to news and information. They no longer do so passively, but want to be active participants, posting and reposting them to their social circles, acting as gatekeepers. They become active filters, deciding what to pass on and what to suppress depending on their interests and biases.

I am glad that the federal government has realised this few months ago. Though necessary actions and policies are required, there is always a need to balance so that our fundamental liberties are not violated.

So guys do verify or take it with a pinch of salt in whatever news, messages, videos and pictures we received in wassapp, wechat, fb etc.

FB_IMG_1453348063119

Can a sick old man execute a will?

FB_IMG_1495326728995

Currently I am handling a disputed will case.   The other side is challenging that due to health problems and old age, when the testator executed his will, he did not understood the nature and extent of the properties he was disposing under the will.

It is trite law that for a will to be valid, a testator must have testamentary capacity.  Whether a testator has testamentary capacity depends on the facts of each case.  The testator shall be able to comprehend and appreciate the claims to which he ought to give effect and with a view of the latter object, that no disorder of the mind shall poison his affections, pervert his sense of right, or prevent the exercise of his natural faculties.

In deciding upon the capacity of the testator to make his will, one must look into the soundness of the mind and not the particular state of bodily health at the time he executes the will.  He should possess sufficient understanding to direct how his property shall be disposed of.

The onus of proving the above lies on me.  Indeed a challenging case…

All I wanted to do is to help the OKU investors…

IMG-20170510-WA0016

Why is it so difficult to do a good deed openly? Is it because I am from Gerakan which is part of the BN government?

It has been depressing for the last 3 days. I received countless messages, calls, emails and comments since I facilitated the refund to JJPTR OKU investors. They consist of sarcastic remarks, criticisms and condemnation.

There are people who accused me that the whole episode was to help Johnson to regain his reputation. Some even alleged that I am part of the game in trying to “con” the public.

I have repeatedly said the background of JJPTR or founder Johnson Lee is none of my business. I do not know them or him. I met them for the first time last Wednesday. All I care was the unfortunate handicap OKUs. It was because of them that I am willing to stick my neck out. Prior to that there were also other ordinary investors seeked my help but I refused.

Hence all we intended was to ensure and witness the refund. I also took the opportunity to share my legal views to some of them.

I do not deny the medias were called for publicity sake. As a matter of fact most of us including the reporters did not believe that Johnson will turn up.

However I am very thankful for the encouragement and motivation. It is moment like this I can see the true colours of people esp comrades. I am particularly touched by the words of support from Senator Chong Sin Woon, a good political friend indeed.

Ultimately all I want to make it clear is there was no hidden agenda whatsoever for me to help the OKUs.

Parti Gerakan plays no part or is involve in it. Any misunderstanding or negative perception caused are wholly my responsibility and fault. I apologise for that.

EC: Follow the law please.

Screenshot_20170503-105831.png

The Election Commission is legally required to provide copies of the draft voter registry when the document is on public display, said Gerakan Youth deputy chief Andy Yong.

Yong, who is also a lawyer, said Section 15(2)(l) of the Elections Act 1958 had stated that a registrar is required to “supply to any such persons as may be prescribed copies of any electoral roll or part of it, whether free of charge or on payment of such fee as may be prescribed in it”.

“Unless amended, clearly under this provision, the EC is obliged to provide the said copies,” Yong told Malaysiakini.

The EC, he said, under Section 15 of the Elections Act 1958 may, with the approval of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, make regulations for the registration of electors and for all matters incidental to it.

“Is the directive a new regulation? If yes, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s approval is required,” he added.

New practice

Yesterday, the EC confirmed it was no longer providing copies of draft voter list during the display period as it feels that their public display is sufficient to inform voters of their status.

EC secretary Abdul Ghani Salleh said the commission will send a formal letter to all political parties on the decision to no longer supply the draft voter list in both book and compact disc forms from this year onwards.

Citing Regulation 13 of the Election Regulations 2002, Abdul Ghani said the draft voter list has to be displayed at a gazetted public area for 14 days, to show a list of voters who are seeking to be included into the list and those seeking to change their voting areas.

As interested parties can still view the list, the new directive does not restrict access, he said.

Why is it so important to have a truly independent Judiciary?

Screenshot_2015-04-21-21-02-37.png

Some in the legal fraternity ponder over the appointment of our new Chief Justice recently.  With one retired and the short tenure of the new one, who should take over subsequently?  Like it or not, the CJ can control the judiciary.  Since 1988, the tension between the Executive and the Judiciary is the result – I would say the inevitable result of the doctrine of separation of powers that may “disturb” the affairs of the government of the day.  Legally and strictly under that doctrine, the political system of a nation divides its governmental power between a legislature, an executive and a judiciary. In theory, the doctrine constructs a system that avoids concentrating too much power in any one body of government – the three powers are separated from one another and none is supposed to trespass into the other’s province.  Furthermore, no arm of government is supposed to abdicate power to another arm.  The premise of this construct is not a harmonious relationship but a checking and balancing of power. Inevitably, the checking provides the blueprint for, and generates, tension between the three arms of government.

Political theory regard this tension between the arms of power as indicating a healthy and well-oiled, working government.  They do not see the tension as a cause for alarm.  Writing extra-judicially, Lord Woolf has said:

“the tension … is acceptable because it demonstrates that the courts are performing their role of ensuring that the actions of the Government of the day are being taken in accordance with the law. The tension is a necessary consequence of maintaining the balance of power between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary …”

Lord Woolf has also said that the tension between the arms of government is:

“… no more than that created by the unseen chains which … hold the three spheres of government in position. If one chain slackens, then another needs to take the strain. However, so long as there is no danger of the chains breaking, the fact that this happens is not a manifestation of weakness but of strength.”

Tension between the Executive and the Judiciary is inevitable. It is unrealistic to think that it can be eliminated. But it can be reduced, if the Executive and the Judiciary recognise that each has a role to perform and that each is better equipped to carry it out than the other.  For the good of our society, it is better for the combatants to realise that they are there to serve the people, not their own ends, and to adapt their conduct accordingly.

GE14 around the corner?

FB_IMG_1492494617705.jpg

I have been often asked when is the next GE. And I always answered only the PM knows.

Apparently after attending some of BN retreats and workshops (and being part of the Naziran team in Selangor), I am inclined to say that they are still very much believe in the 3Ms ie money, machinery and medias as the main strategies to win election.  Yes undeniably these are important requirements but previous results proved there is no guarantee to win comfortably with such strengths.

Some say Umno is prepared to sacrifice seats with a majority of Chinese voters. That is why they decided to concentrate on “focussed seats”.  On how they decide the latter, it is questionable.  I always warn some of the Malay politicians in BN, do not be surprised in GE14 it could be a Malay tsunami. So it is not wise to sacrifice the Chinese and Indian votes.

After the last 2 general elections some Malaysian Chinese as a community appears to have reached a crossroad both politically and socioeconomically.  In an age where democratic values have become a norm around the world and with the increased awareness of liberty and equality as universal values, they look set to settle nothing short of equal treatment among all races in Malaysia (putting aside other issues such as corruption; where ironically some BN leaders see it as only a perception issue).

By now most Chinese community realised that RUU355 or Hudud Pas is all about their political games. Perhaps not some of the Malay community or Umno and Pas members (or they prefer to be ignorant).

They are not prepared or do not want to change. Some especially the division chiefs are still in arrogance mode and of course the same applies to the opposition (the more so in Penang as they can afford to be so).

The reality is majority rules; like it or not it is about the numbers game for the time being. If one is to do the political calculation in depth, BN/Umno is unlikely to be defeated in GE14 especially with the support of rural and East Malaysia voters. As a result Chinese have to live with it or earn their living in the usual ways.

Those who are discontented and have the qualification or wealth could migrate but the harsh fact is most are not able to do so. Brain drain will always be a concern issue.  The country will never truly progress into a developed nation, so long as the conservative and narrow-minded mentality exists.

Sadly the ambition of being truly One Malaysia or Bangsa Malaysia or Malaysia Malaysians is still a long way to go.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑