Anwar at Permatang Pauh

The announcement was made yesterday that Dr. Wan Azizah, the opposition leader has tendered her resignation as a Member of Parliament for Permatang Pauh Parliamentary seat, her husband, Anwar’s stronghold. With her resignation, the seat is now considered “vacant”. It is for the Dewan Rakyat speaker to declare that the seat is vacant and until and unless the Speaker makes the declaration and inform the Election Commission of the vacancy, no by-election will be held. It has to be understood that when a seat is vacant, a by-election is not a must. It all depends on the situation and circumstances at that time. For example when Dr. Chua Soi Lek announced his decision to quit all party’s and government’s posts as well as his Parliamentary seat early this year following the DVD sex scandal involving him, there was no by-election held (though the seat was declared vacant) because there was no more Parliament sitting at that point of time. Further, the general election was just around the corner. But in Permatang Pauh’s case, I truly believe that a by-election will and should be called.
.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/1/2/nation/20080102155121&sec=nation
.
Having said that, though the announcement was made yesterday, much have been said about it. As expected, while positive remarks came from Pakatan Rakyat leaders, the Barisan Nasional leaders made fun of it with Noh Omar said that Anwar tidak jantan (not gentleman) for contesting in his stronghold area, Permatang Pauh.
.
People had started talking about a by-election to give way for Anwar to return to Parliament even before the recent general election. At first, I was of the opinion that it is not proper, though legal, for Anwar to make a come back to Parliament through the “back door”. I mean, during election, the voters had made their choice and they have put their trust to their elected representative to fight and care for them. So, if any of the PKR MP resigns to give way to Anwar, I felt like they betrayed the trust that the voters had in them. In other words, they do not respect the voters’ decision.
.
However, close to five months after the general election, I do not see much change in the way Barisan Nasional leads the country. Even their elected representatives are still arrogant. I do not think that Barisan Nasional learnt their lesson after the general election, though they claimed they did (I don’t believe that). Despite si Bedol’s many blunders and flip flopping decisions and policies, the Barisan Nasional and only the Barisan Nasional leaders still have confidence in si Bedol. The Barisan Nasional leaders’ move to continue to give the undivided support to si Bedol is actually does not help us in any way. I think they make things from bad to worst. They failed to listen to the wish of the rakyat. They chose to turn deaf their ears and blind their eyes. As much as it is the people’s power to decide on which party should run the administration of the country, the people can’t do much in term of who should be the Prime Minister. It is the Barisan Nasional leaders who can decide but they dare not to make such a move as I think they care about themselves more than they care for us, the rakyat.
.
Having said that, I am now thinking that if a by-election in Permatang Pauh can bring a change for betterment, why not? Though as I said earlier that while it is legally right, it is morally wrong for Anwar to do so, with what has happened for the past five months in the country, I am now for a by-election to be held if this is the only way we can have change for betterment.

.

p/s: now that the authorities have found out that there was no eveidence of sabotage on the use of the indelible ink, I think the EC should seriously consider using the indelible ink for the first time.

Cabinet Didn't Approve of Indelible Ink, said EC Chairman

What a twist now!!! Now, it is a totally new story. It was the cabinet and not the EC who scrapped the idea of using the indelible ink. Read full story here http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/5/17/nation/20080517143340&sec=nation

There can be two (2) possibilities here and few consequences: -

Possibility No. 1 and The Consequence
What the EC Chairman said is true. If that is the case, one peculiar issue here is why was there cabinet's involvement in EC's business. EC should be independent and impartial in discharging its duties. No one political party, not even the government should have any sort of influence over EC. EC should be allowed to discharge its duties without fear or favour. But the question here is, why did the cabinet has to disapprove the use of indelible ink? After all these hanky panky, are we supposed to believe the excuse given i.e. security reason? WHY??? This is absolutely amounting to abuse of power and I believe the ACA, without having to wait for any report should commence the investigation without any due delay. The ACA should get to the bottom of the issue. The allegation by the EC Chairman is very serious (perhaps more serious than Karpal's statement) because it involves the process of formation of the government. As such, I do not see why the ACA should not commence its investigation immediately unless there is also an instruction from the cabinet that no investigation should be carried out. This is very interesting, as I am waiting, what's next.

Possibility No. 2 and The Consequence
The EC Chairman tell lies. If that is the case, then I believe that the EC Chairman should be charge under the infamous Sedition Act. Simply because his statement (if indeed untrue) can cause public to lose confidence in the present government.

So, whatever the possibility is, there is always a consequence. So, let us see the reaction from Pak Lah, or may be Najib (as Pak Lah is good is pushing the responsibility to his deputy) or may be Nazri Aziz because I think this is the best time for him to be a hero to save his Boss or his Boss to be.

Having said that, there is a strong indication from the EC Chairman's statement that there was or were interference from the government. I mean, if we really analyse his statement as a whole and in particular the following: -

He said he was told to take responsibility for agreeing to it...It’s not easy being EC chairperson

I just do not see how we can interpret the above two statements other than serious interference from the government in the business of EC. I think everybody will agree with me. The whole statement quoted above shows that after the Cabinet made the decision (to scrap the use of the ink), the Chairman left with no option but to agree with it and after having been made to agree (may be unwillingly) with the decision, he was told to take responsibility. What an irresponsible cabinet the nation had then. Well, for the EC Chairman, you were made a scapegoat.

No Evidence Indelible Ink was Brought In

I do not understand. What is this all about? Is it supposed to be a joke? If it is, it is not funny!!! The foreigners are laughing at us. To them, it is damn funny because those in power makes us, Malaysian looks stupid.

At first, the Election Commission announced the usage of the indelible ink during the PRU12. Click here to read more: - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/6/2/nation/17912828&sec=nation

Next they annouced the arrival of the indelible ink from India, which cost the country more than RM2million. Click here to read more: - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/2/22/election2008/20080222192408&sec=election2008

Then it was reported few days before the election on March 8 that EC has scrapped the usage of indelible ink for the following reasons: -

(a) It will be unconstitutional to use the indelible ink during election;
(b) It was not practical to use the ink during election;
(c) Police Reports lodged on the possibility of sabotage i.e. that some irresponsible quarters had purchased indelible ink from abroad with the intention of creating confusion and suspicion as to the status of voters.

Click here to read more: - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/3/4/election2008/20080304175316&sec=election2008

The best part was the police reports were lodged on Feb 16 and 21. Click here to read more: -http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/3/5/nation/20544069&sec=nation

Now, the government announced in Parliament that investigation revealed that there is no evidence that indelible ink was brought in. Click here to read more: -http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/5/6/nation/20080506155918&sec=nation

Now, the questions: -

(a) Since the reports were lodged weeks before the election and now that the finding is very simple i.e it was rumours, was it impossible for the police to conclude their investigation within few days, so that annoucement could be made before election?
(b) Why there was no earlier announcement made on findings?
(c) What action does the police takes against those who lodge the police report, as I consider this as an act of sabotage, thus it tantamounts to lodging false police reports?
(d) What happened to the ink which was purchased at a cost of more than RM2million?
(e) Were the police reports genuine or was it just to cover EC's overlook on their side on unconstitutionality of the ink?

I wish if I can ask the Minister in charge those questions in Parliament.

Was it really an act of Sabotage???

Was it really an act of sabotage or it was just an attempt by Pak Lah to deviate the attention of Malaysian public on the criticism made on him by various parties? People are asking him to be responsible for the dismal performance of BN during the PRU12, not to find excuse and try to shift the blame to others. In doing so, Pak Lah is adding salt to the wound. He will just make the situation more complicated. I can say that his statement that BN should now work harder to regain the people’s confidence was just a political gimmick and I am very sure he has not learnt his lesson, just like Nazri Aziz (Gosh! I do not know what is so great about Nazri Aziz that makes Pak Lah reappoint him as a Minister!!!).

Why I said so (about Pak Lah, not Nazri Aziz)? Simply because during a press conference after the briefing session to UMNO members at PWTC last week, Pak Lah was quoted as saying that the reason BN suffered such a big losses (bear in mind, Pak Lah has repeatedly, before the press conference, said that BN recorded big win. Only 8 seats deny BN of 2/3 majority) because of act of sabotage by insiders in UMNO. That was what he found to be the reason for the BN’s dismal performance (Gosh!!! Again not his fault). However, when asked further by reporters as to why there was a need for people to sabotage UMNO, he did not offer any explanation, as he said that he will provide the information to the UMNO disciplinary committee. Easy way out after making baseless statement with the hope that people will forget on the issue. That was what Pak Lah said at PWTC in the presence of his Deputy.

Now, let me share with you what is reported in today’s The Sun on Najib’s statement on the same issue. I quoted in verbatim what was reported: -

Umno deputy president Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak wants those with information on the act of sabotage by party members, which had caused Barisan Nasional (BN) to lose Perak and Kedah in the general election, to lodge official reports so that the disciplinary committee can investigate them.

He said as of now, the information available is only hearsay.

My goodness!!! What does he mean by “hearsay”? Is he saying the Pak Lah gave information and made press statement based on hearsay? Does not Pak Lah knows better that hearsay information has no credibility in it? That we can’t rely and use the information that is hearsay in nature? Even in Court, hearsay evidence is inadmissible. So, why Pak Lah was so confidence is making the statement of sabotage?

Come on! With sabotage is now only hearsay, what is the main reason of BN’s dismal performance during the PRU12, in Pak Lah's opinion? Have Pak Lah and his team found the new answer? Or they will just let the issue swept under the carpet? I am eagerly waiting what other things that Pak Lah and his team are going to b*lls***t the people?

Wisdom behind the BN's dismal performance

I always believe in whatever happened, good or bad, whether somthing that we like or otherwise, there is always a wisdom behind it.

The wisdom for UMNO is that they should wake up and realise that they have diverted from their path...and now is the time for them to return to where they used to start, and in doing so, of course without KJ. They will never be able to find where they started if they do it with KJ. After all, KJ was not even born when UMNO was formed

As for the Indian Community, the dismal performance of the biggest Indian party, MIC has at least brought four leaders, who previously could not see each other eye-to-eye to unity. They are Kayveas, Subramaniam (former Deputy President of MIC), MG Pandithan and of course Samy Vellu. Well, actully it was Samy who could not see the other three eye-to-eye and he liked to have an open war with them while the other three, I do not think they have problem against each other. Thier readiness to unite is evidenced in today's The Star report, and I quoted verbatimly what Samy said: -

"I have already had discussions with Subramaniam and PPP president Datuk M. Kayveas and will have similar discussions with IPF president Tan Sri M.G. Pandithan."

Post election analysis

A lot have been said about the aftermath of the 12th general election. People have came out with various theory as to why BN suffered such a big losses, the worst ever in the coalition’s history since its formation prior to Independence Day. Even on Monday, like in any other places, in my office, we were talking about this. While we were talking on serious note about the result, there were also few jokes made to make us feel better. Well, after all, the result shocked everybody including the opposition. While the BN coalition did not expect to suffer such big losses, the opposition on the other hand did not expect to enjoy such big victories. Before election, BN was so confident is wresting Kelantan from PAS. That was pre-election. However, post-election, not only BN failed to wrest Kelantan from PAS, they also lost Penang, Kedah, Perak, Selangor and Kuala Lumpur for that matter to opposition. Well, I do not think I have to touch much on that, as it is a judicial notice (it goes without saying).

Like anyone else, I have also been coming up with my own theory as to why the election results came out in the most unexpected manner. I have been thinking about this since Saturday night but because so many things that came to my mind, I just do not know where to start. So, finally, I made up my mind and these are, for me, the contributing factors that led to the dismal performance of BN during the 12th general election.

A lot of people said that Malaysians have spoken. Yes, I do agree but why Malaysians spoken in that manner. I personally do not think that it is because majority Malaysians supports the opposition but rather majority Malaysians was unhappy with Pak Lah’s government. So, at the end, they used their voting power to wake Pak Lah up. So, it is not that they want to give their votes to the opposition but they do not want their vote to go to BN. What choice do they have? Vote for the opposition. I think the current situation is not really that bad for BN to restore the rakyat confidence in them. They just need to buck up and show to the rakyat that BN is really care for them. BN needs to really listen to the rakyat’s voice, which has been unheard for the past four years. If they can do that for the next four years, I do not see why they can’t repossess the five states plus one FT from the opposition in the next coming general election. It is different if the rakyat really support the opposition. Then, BN has an uphill task to do, as not only they need to prove their relevance in Malaysia but also they need to create unhappiness among the rakyat towards the opposition, which for all intent and purposes, is actually not within their control.

What are then the factors that cause unhappiness among the rakyat towards BN, their government for the past 51 years? There are a lot and among those: -

KJ Factor
This, to me is the most contributing factors. When Pak Lah took over from Tun Mahathir, the rakyat regarded him as Mr. Nice Guy and with his clean image he managed to lead BN to the most successful victory for BN in the 11th general election. The best ever, since the formation of the coalition more than 50 years ago. However, people started to talk about him (not in a positive manner) when KJ was made popular by being elected as the No. 2 in UMNO youth movement. Though Pak Lah and KJ said that it was the grassroots who wanted KJ to be the No. 2, it is not easy to fool the rakyat. We all know nobody dares to tell Pak Lah that they do not want KJ, as by doing so, it would mean the end of their political career. So, it is actually Pak Lah who is supposed to tell KJ not to contest for the No. 2 post. Despite that, Pak Lah did nothing. Who was KJ before Pak Lah became our PM? I did not know KJ then and I believe a lot of people out there were in the same boat with me. Suddenly everybody wants KJ. Don’t you think it is weird? In politics, especially in Malaysia, the party leaders have to show support of what their president is doing, whether it is the right or wrong thing to do. No one dares to go against their leaders. Not even Anwar Ibrahim when he was the DPM (only now that he makes the noise). From that moment (KJ became No. 2 in UMNO youth wing), rakyat’s confidence towards Pak Lah has started to erode, as rakyat believe that KJ is the de facto PM of Malaysia. A lot of people have been talking about this and Pak Lah knew it. But he lets his son in law to remain to be seen to be in power. So, who’s fault? In fact, Pak Lah made another blunder when KJ was allowed to contest in Rembau. What’s wrong with the then incumbent? After all, the then incumbent for Rembau Parliament, Datuk Firdaus Mohd Rom Harun won with a huge majority of 18,656 votes in 2004. The reason given was because KJ is No. 2 in UMNO youth wing. Do you think rakyat believe in that? Or is it the personal request from KJ or the instruction from Pak Lah? I bet the rakyat would believe the latter than the former. After all, if we look at KJ’s majority, which was ONLY 5,746 votes as compared to the then incumbent who recorded 18,656 mojority, it is a very clear message to KJ and Pak Lah that KJ is actually not welcomed in Rembau. The rakyat does not want KJ. Full stop.

With such big losses for BN, Pak Lah said he has learnt the lesson. However, to me, that is not the case if Pak Lah appointed KJ into his cabinet whether as full ministers or otherwise. He will make another blunder and we, as the rakyat needs to put a stop to this practice and in the end, the rakyat will suffer (for choosing the opposition). To have KJ in Pak Lah’s cabinet is a, to borrow the words of Chandra Muzaffar, an unmitigating disaster for Malaysia.

2004 Factor
After recording the biggest win ever for BN in 2004, the BN government proudly said that there were given big mandate by the rakyat. To certain extent, I do agree with the statement. However, with the big mandate from the rakyat, Pak Lah’s government seems to be arrogance in one way or another. They got distracted with such a big mandate. They thought they can do whatever they wanted to do. They heard what the rakyat said but they never listen.

Look at how Nazri Aziz spoken. Most of the times, he talked rubbish in his arrogance manner and there is nothing Pak Lah did about it. He was allowed to keep on talking. The same goes to the untouchable but in the end, disposable Uncle Sam (Samy Vellu). Last but not least, KJ of course. He looks arrogance when he talks. Not to forget is Khir Toyo. Look at how he handled the environment issue in Selangor. Look also at how he handled the Dto’ Zakaria’s case. Both were badly handled. But who could correct him? No one.

They must remember that they were actually appointed by the rakyat. They knew this but the pretend not to be aware about it. They do not listen to rakyat. They only listen to their own instinct and greed. In the end, what choice do they give to the rakyat, other than to vote them out?

Talking about the arrogance of BN leaders, this was further proven when some of them like Uncle Sam and Khir Toyo (I hope I spell his father’s name correctly…did I leave the letter L”?) lost in the election. They were very frustrated. They were the sore losers. They were so arrogant. They can’t accept the defeat. They can’t accept democracy though they have been upholding the system before. In the same note, I must say that I respect Dr. Koh Tsu Koon and Dr Awang Adek, who conceded the losses in the most respected way.

Hindraf Factor
The illegal Hindraf rally caused a big blow to MIC directly and BN indirectly. The plight of the Indians through Hindraf shows that MIC and the government have not done enough for the Indian community. Whether it is true or not, that is different issue. When people are not happy with BN leadership on many issues, they would be easily influenced to believe anything that is against the government and that is actually happen in Hindraf case. People are not happy with BN and suddenly Hindraf came into the picture with a very interesting message, what do you think the Indian community will do? After all, they also were not happy with Uncle Sam (though Uncle Sam always said that the Indian community is with the MIC…I tell you that is a bluff).

Samy Velly has been at the helm for the past 30 years or may be close to it, which means almost half of his age. Even if you have done much for the community, somehow or rather people will get bored with you. Further, the way he speaks…oh my God!!! So arrogance and untouchable but in the end disposable. Anybody goes against him will feel the pain. He thought he was so powerful. But he is not. A lot of people told him to step down but he refused as he claimed that the Indian community still want him to lead them without him knowing that most if not every Indian and Malaysian wants him to give way to other leaders. So, when he refused to step down, people use their voting power to let him go. Not only him but other MIC leaders as well. After all, that was his own wish i.e. to step down when the Indian community want him to step down. It is just that he stepped down in the most ungraceful manner.

Dr. M Factor
I must admit that though he is no longer in power, his influence is till there. Everywhere. People are still listening to him. So, when Dr. M attacked Pak Lah on the latter’s administration and the involvement of KJ, people tend to believe Dr. M than Pak Lah because if we were to compare between the two of them, I would say that Dr. M’s credibility as a leader is far above Pak Lah’s. While it is not fair to compare Pak Lah with his predecessor, but people will still do that.

So, when rakyat listen more to what Tun said, their confidence in Pak Lah as their leader, which has eroded became worst.

Candidacy Factor
It is another big hu ha for BN in naming their candidates. Look at what happened in Perlis. When rumours spread out that Shahidan will not be the next MB for Perlis, BN supporters started to torn down BN’s flags and sprayed Pak Lah’s posters in red paint.

Rakyat are not happy with certain candidates. Kayveas, for example, he was asked by either MCA or Gerakan, I can’t remember, to return the seat to them and asked Kayveas to contest somewhere. But Kayveas insisted to contest in Taiping and Pak Lah allowed it to happen though the supporters of the party asking for the return of the seat had vowed to go against Kayveas. So, I do not really surprise when Kayveas lost his seat.

A lot of seats, be it state or parliament, we could see father gave way to their children. Lim Keng Yeik gave way to Si Pin, Chua Soi Lek gave way to his son, Dato’ Zakaria of Port Klang (arwah) gave way to his daughter in law and few others. Except for Chua Soi Lek’s son who won the election (because he contested in Johor), the other two lost their election. The way they did it looks as if there was no other suitable or more credible candidate to contest other then their children. They wanted to create legacy and people are not happy. Look at What Dato’ Zakaria did. He submitted his name for Port Klang, followed by his son and daughter in law as the substitute candidates. In the end, his daughter in law, Roslinda was nominated. It was a clear cut legacy. If he was not selected, then he will make sure his son gets it and if his son does not, his daughter in law then. And it works. But in the end, she lost in her first bid. She may be a good candidate but people looked at it in different way.

On another note, the naming of Tengku Adenan as candidate to contest in Putrajaya also, I think is a big blow to BN. Whether he is clean or not is not the issue but as I said earlier, he needs to be seen as clean. His name was implicated in Lingam’s inquiry on the appointment of judges. His answers during the proceeding were far from convincing. Even I think my ten years old nephew can give better answers. And yet he was nominated. Though he won in Putrajaya, the effect can be somewhere else.

Also the nomination of KJ, as I discussed earlier.

The rakyat’s unhappiness on the candidacy has led them to give their vote to the opposition.

Islam Hadhari Factor
What is Islam Hadhari? I do not know. I came from Islamic school and based o what I studied, there is only one Islam, the one that was brought by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). BN leaders have been talking about Islam Hadhari but I bet, if we were to ask any ministers about Islam Hadhari, most if not all of them cannot talk on the subject matter. If they tak, they are actually bluffing. After all, they are politicians. That is their specialty.

What difference Islam n Malaysia per and post Islam Hadhari. I would say, apart from the perkampungan Hadhari, there is none. So, Pak Lah is using the Islam Hadhari concept to show his Islamic image. At first people do believe in him. That belief and trust then started to erode. A very simple question for something very basic in Islam. How many of the muslim ministers’ wife are wearing tudung? Not only they do not wear tudung, there are some or at least one, who always berkemban. Is that hadhari? I mean, if they cannot control their wife for the basic thing in Islam, forget about Islam Hadhari. After all, what is Islam Hadhari?

Other Factors
Abuse of power among BN leaders. Again, the most notorious one is the case of Dato’ Zakaria. Remember of his mansion? Remember of him not paying his taxes to local authority for ten years? Remember of the court case against him by the Company Commission, which was later withdrawn? Remember of his illegal sate stall? The best part was he escaped.

Remember the then Jasin MP who fought for his own cause in Parliament? He was then known as “close one eye MP”. Simply because he gave unlawful instruction, which amounted to abuse of power to the customs and excise department. He escaped.

EC Factors
Remember the two blunders by EC just before the election? I mean the indelible ink and the stamping issues? People has not only lost confidence in the EC, but it can also be seen as the dirty tactics employed by BN to win the election in the dirty way.

There are a lot of factors that contributed to the worst performance for BN in Malaysia’s election history. In 1999, there was one major issue i.e. the sacking of Anwar Ibrahim. People were so angry with Dr. But then BN still managed to win 2/3 majority. This year, there were no really major issues but the so called not major issues when combined together is actually bigger than the one that BN had in 1999

So for Pak Lah, it is either he steps down or remain in power and listen…I mean really listen to the rakyat. If he cannot do any one of those, believe me, BN will disappear from local politics in the next coming general election. Pak La said that his cabinet will be the rakyat’s cabinet. Let me tell you, rakyat’s cabinet is a cabinet without KJ, not even his influence.

Let us see the new cabinet line up, where it is really what the rakyat want?

Don't be too skeptical

With the then opposition is now ruling five states, a lot of people are talking about their capability to deliver what they promised the rakyat in their manifesto. The question is whether they can deliver or not? Well, for me it is too early to talk about that. Why don't we given them times to deliver their promises. Then only we judge them. Even for BN, I do not think that they have fully delivered what they have promised in the 11th general election. Came the 12th general election, there are projects that are still on going. May be some of us might say, "hey! it is on going project, which meanse BN has kept to its promises". To me that is not the case, as any project has the prospect of being abandoned at any time and at any stage. So, until and unless the projects have completed, BN cannot be said to have fulfilled their promises made in 2004 general election. So, we need to be fair to both parties in evaluating and assessing their performances.

Let us not be skeptical with the new government in Kedah, Penang, Perak, Selangor and Kelatan. Let the time decide.

p/s: Can't wait to see Khir Toyo being the opposition leader...hahaha

Do it right

Are you ready to vote? Have you made up your mind? If you are still undecisive, never mind, do not rush, you have until 5.00 pm tomoroow to cast your vote. While it is our responsibility to vote, do vote wisely. Put aside your anger or whatever ill feelings that you have. Go to the polling station in clear and peaceful mind. Make sure that the decision that you make will not cause you any regret, at least for the next four years.

SELAMAT MENGUNDI

Right or Wrong?

In Islam, politics and religion is not separated. Politics is part of Islam. That is the difference between Islam and secular as the latter separates religion from politics.

Since Islam and politics is not separated, does it mean we can use masjid, especially druing friday sermon to campaign for election? While I agree that politics is part of Islam, I do not quite agree if masjid especially friday sermon is used as a forum to campaign, as more often than not, when we campign, we tend to talk bad about others. Don't get me wrong. I am not totally against it as long as they talk on purely religious issues.

So, to certain extend, I personally do agree with Najib's statement comdemning PAS for using the masjid especially during friday sermon to campaign.

That notwithstanding, while I think it is not religously right to campaign during friday sermon, I also think that it is morally wrong for BN to use the mass media like television and newspaper to do their campaign. This is totally not fair to the opposition, as the opposition does not have access to these mass media. BN is at full advantage by using the mass media, as they can easily reach the Malaysians by using the media.

So, I think BN, in condemning PAS for campagning in masjid, I regard it as "ketam mengajar anaknya berjalan" because BN is not competent to speak about it.

Sing different song for the same issue

Different treatment for the same issue. That is how I sum up the two reports by The Star on the way two candidates carried out their campaign. One was from DAP while the other from MIC.

These two candidates were reportedly resorted to standing at the junction near the traffic light while waving at the motorists. While the act of the DAP man was described as "extreme tactics", the same act done by the MIC man was described as "bizarre campaign style". If you were to read the full reports by The Star (the DAP on 27/2/2008 and the MIC on 6/3/2008) you can see different impression were given to both candidates. And of course I am talking about positive impression about MIC and adverse impression on the DAP.

While I am neither the supporter of MIC nor DAP, I think our mass media should give a fair and equal treatment to all parties contesting in the general election. I mean, tell the truth!!!

Do they Walk the Talk or they don't?

During election campaign, a lot of candidates used, what they called it, character assasination (serangan peribadi). Well, this bad attitute is always associated with the opposition. Pak Lah and many top BN leaders always condemned this personal attacks and always advise their own people not to indulge to such style. More often than not, they proudly said that it is not their (BN) style to resort to such tactics and BN candidates won't do such thing.

While to certain extent I personally agree that candidates should not resort to personal attacks, on the other hand, we as the rakyat definitely need to know if there is immoral candidates contesting in the general election, as we do not want an immoral person to lead us. That was what Dr. M did when he expelled Anwar Ibrahim for alleged engagement in immoral activities (though ANwar was later freed of those charges by the Federal @ apex Court). An immoral person should not be our leader. After all, we need to be led by example. So, when a fact is presented to us about the immoral activities of certain candidates, I do not think that it amounts to character assasination. So, to me if you want to talk about other candidates' personal life, make sure it is fact and not a slander. It is a personal attack when it is a slander and it is information when it is a fact.

Going back to what Pak Lah and other BN leaders said about character assasination, I would like to bring you to what Khairy Jamaluddin (KJ), Pak Lah's blue eyed boy cum son-in-law said during his campaign. I have watched and listen to the video clip and to my surprise KJ who is the one that supposed to listen to Pak Lah's advice, his own father-in-law had lauched a personal attack on Anwar Ibrahim. In one of his campaigns, KJ amongst other had stated that the opposition always resorted to muta'ah (contract marriage). They would marry before election and divorce thereafter. To be accurate, this is what KJ said:

"dia (those engage in muta'ah marriage) kawin satu malam, dia main malam tu, esok hari dia cerai untuk menghalalkan maksiat. Parti pembangkang ini, dia kawin muta'ah. Dia kawin, PAS main DAP ikut kiri, DAP main PAS ikut kanan, ANWAR MAIN DUA-DUA IKUT BELAKANG, lepas tu bila kalah, dia cerai..."

Look at the one that I bold. Do not you think that it is a personal attack? Not only a personal attack, it was also amounted to a libel and contempt of court, as the Federal Court had freed Anwar from sodomy charges. So, who is KJ to tell otherwise? Well, what BN leaders including KJ's very own father-in-law and his deputy has got to say about this? Do you think that the BN leaders including Najib and Pak Lah dares to tell KJ that what he said was, not only factually wrong, but it was also go against the spirit of BN. I bet no one dares. C'on! After all, we are talking about KJ here. Understood.

So, BN leaders, do they walk the talk? Not at all!!!
.
You may watch the clip by clicking at the video bar with KJ's image

Development Model

I read a news report in Utusan online just now about Datuk Seri Najib's statement on the development issue in Kelantan.

In a statement made in Marang today, Najib was quoted as saying that BN will use Terengganu as the model to develop Kelantan, if BN is given the power to do so. This is because, within the last four years, after BN took over from PAS, BN has brought in development to Terengganu as opposed to Kelantan, which was under the administration of PAS for the past 18 years, has seen no development.

I must admit that I have not been to Terengganu since BN took over from PAS in 2004. Other than what was reported in TV and newspaper, I do not know how develop Terengganu is? But with due respect to our DPM, I was in Terenggau for four years. I studied there. When I first came to Kuala Terengganu in 1995, I was so shocked that the "petroleum" state was just like Melaka in the ealy 80's. You get what I mean? I would say, in term of development in 1995, they were far behind. And that, I am talking about Terengganu while they were under the administration of BN and Tan Seri Wan Mokhtar Ahmad was the then Menteri Besar. How long was BN in power in Terengganu before PAS took over in 1999? If BN could not bring the development in Terengganu before 1999, what do they expect the PAS government to do in just four years in power? Well, I am not speaking on behalf of PAS but I am annoyed with this type of comparison. It is like comparing our petrol price with Singapore while converting Singapore Dollar to Ringgit Malaysia. If you want to compare, do it genuinely. Do not simply look at the development in the last four years. Look also at the "development" before 1999. Then only you are justified to comment.

After all, BN is so proud in talking about the development they brought in Malaysia. While we can see the worldly development, what are the effort made by the Hadhari government in preparing Malaysian for the hereafter?

Another 11th Hour Decision

Again, Election Commission (EC) made a u-turn to their decision. This time, the decision made with regard to the use of indelible ink, which, earlier on the EC said that the use of the ink could prevent phantom voters i.e. to avoid voters from voting for more than one time. The cost for the said ink, which was imported from India was reported to be RM2.4million. The decision was made yesterday as a result from four police reports lodged claiming that there are attempts to sabotage the using of the ink on the voters especially those in the rural area. There are possibility that some voters may be deprived of their constitutional rights to vote, as it is said that irresponsible parties will tell the rural voters that they have to put the ink on their finger before voting.

To certain extend, after reading the explanation by the EC on their latest "u-turn" decision in the newspaper, I personally agree with the steps taken by the EC. If the use of indelible ink can cause some voters being denied their constitutional right to vote, by all means, the usage of the ink should not take place.

However, there are certain issues that made me puzzle on the EC's decision to introduce the usage of the indelible ink, which caused the country around RM2.4million and of course by using the tax payers' money).

First-According to the Attorney General, for the ink to be used, Article 119 of the Federal Constitution must be amended. Article 119 of the Constitution talks about qualification of electors/voters. However, until the dissolution of Parliament on 13/2/2008, Article 119 has not been amended, thus legally speaking, the usage of the indelible ink on the polling day on 8/3/2008 is unconctitutional and have no legal effect. In other words, it simply means EC can't use the ink on 8/3/2008. To what extent the unconstitutonality of the usage of ink will affect the validity of the election. Well, that needs a very thorough discussion, which I am not going to discuss here and the Court is the best forum to highlight the issue but one of the possibilities is that it can nullify the election.

Second-Perlis CID chief Supt Mat Nassir Hussein was reported to have said that before the Parliament was dissolved on 13/2/2008, two police reports were lodged at Padang Besar and Mata Ayer police station with regard to some people purchasing the ink from neighbouring country (the very same reason given for not using the ink) and the same to be used for sabotaging purposes. The question is, if that is really the reason for not using the ink on the polling day, why didn't the EC made such decision even before the Parliament was dissolved i.e. after the two police reports lodged in Perlis? Why do they have to wait until yesterday? Why do they need to wait until four police reports to be lodged? What is special about number four? From feng shui point of view, I do not think it brings any luck. I think, we as the tax payers, whose money of RM2.4million was wasted on something "useless" have every right to know and the EC owes us a plausible explanation and not something like melepaskan batuk ditangga.

Linking the statement by the AG and the Perlis CID, it made me now wonder, is it really the "sabotage" being the cause of such "u-turn" decision or because of its constitutionality issue that caused such decision to be made? I strongly believe it is the latter rather than the earlier but to make it sounds nicer and to save face (after making blunder on the issue of stamping of statutory declaration), the EC has to use the "sabotage" issue as an "excuse" for the second "blunder". This is my theory.

With this, the people in powe in EC has lost credibility thus cauding the EC to lose its credibility as well. Two blunders within the span of two weeks. What else? We have another three days before Malaysians select the next government and we simply can't afford to have another blunder from the EC. As I put in my earlier posting, w have had enough with the Lingam Tape Inquiry and please do not make us a laughing stock.

Perhaps, the EC Chairman and those responsbile for the two blunders (or may be more to come in the next few days) should really consider their position in the EC soon after the election.

Reasons and impact of not voting

During every election, be it general or by-election, most of the times, if not every time, we can see less than 100% voters’ turnout to cast their votes. Have we ever wondered why? Well, at least for sure I know one of the reasons, i.e. those people who have this in their mind-what difference do I make with my one vote? This is because I was one of those. I had that in mind way back in 1999 (well, I was 23 then).

Coming this 12th general election, a lot of efforts have been made by the parties contesting in the election to ensure that people go out to cast their votes (with the hope that people will vote their party). There are advertisements in electronic media as well as the public places like the LRT stations to encourage people to cast their votes, providing buses for the people to go back to their hometown to cast their votes, paying petrol and toll money for the same reason (I do not know how far this is true but I was told it happen), etc, etc.

For the last few weeks, I have had conversation with few people about election, which some of them told me that they are not going to exercise their once-in-four-year right to determine the next government to run the country. There are various reasons for that.

One of my friends told me that he is not going back to his hometown to vote, as it is not worth the expenses to be incurred i.e. toll and petrol unless any party is willing to give him money. Upfront, I would say that this is not a healthy practice but do I totally blame my friend? Partly yes, partly no. Assuming that what I was told (about giving money for toll and petrol) is true, then it is the parties) that providing such “services” is to be faulted. Casting vote should be made voluntary and sincere. However, once we make an offer of giving money for people to vote, there is no more voluntary and sincerity in voting. I would say that it amounts to vote buying or should I say money politics? While money politics normally refers to individual buying vote for himself, are we to extend the definition of money politics into political party? I do not see any difference between an individual and a political party and as such, such definition of money politics should also be extended to political party as well. But then, who is to take action against the political party? The answer is no one will.

The question is, is it legally and morally right for the voters to be paid to do what they are obliged to do? Assuming of a police officer who is supposed to issue traffic summon to a driver and the driver, to avoid from getting the summon, gave money to the police officer. Straightaway, we would think of bribery. If you have that in mind, you are definitely right.

Now, we, as the Malaysian citizen, our duty are to cast vote during election. So, if certain party pay us in order for us to vote (what we are obliged to do) or provide some sort of “assistance” for that matter, is there any difference with the case of the police officer above? I do not see any. So, in my humble opinion, such practice is not only legally wrong, as it tantamounts to corruption, but t is also morally wrong, as we should carry out our rsponsibilities wholeheartedly and honestly and with sincerity. So, in the future, if such practice continue to happen, I won’t be surprise if there many more cases of corruption happening in our society.

Another friend of mine told me that he is not going to vote, as the candidates in his place are not from the political party that he supports. Casting our vote is not only about voting for the party that we support. While that is the main priority, casting vote, in that situation can also be done by ensuring that the party/candidate that we like the least or we don’t like or we hate the most, losses in the election. If we can’t help our party to win, on the same note, we can “help” our opponent to lose. To borrow the words of my colleague-"Your enemy’s enemy is your friend".

Few of the people that I spoken to, told me of the most common reason i.e. what difference will they make with their one vote? Believe me folk, every vote counts. While it is not commonly happen in Malaysia (majority by one vote), believe me it can happen and it was so close to happen in the 11th general election in 2004 at DUN Kemuning, Kelantan whereby PAS’ candidate, Zakaria bin Yaacob, a.k.a Cikgu Ya (6078 votes) won the state seat by majority of TWO (2) votes only over BN’s candidate Dato’ Wan Mohamad Zin Bin Mat Amin (6076 votes). If we can still remember, in the 11th general election, PAS won in Kelantan by the difference of TWO (2) seats (that was before the Pengkalan Pasir by-election). After the by-election, the state seat (which was held by PAS before the by-election), changed hand to BN. With that, PAS ruled Kelantan with the advantage of only one (1) seat.

Now, imagine these two scenarios.

First, assuming three (3) of PAS voters in that state seat (who had voted) decided not to vote in the 11th general election, that would mean BN would win the seat by majority of one (1) vote. That would further mean, after the Pengkalan Pasir by-election, Kelantan would have a mix government, as PAS and BN would hold the same number of state seats. What a losses to PAS isn’t it and at least a small victory for BN?

Second, BN would win the state seats if they have another three (3) more votes but they didn’t. It could due to at least three (3) of their voters decided not to vote (as they might think what difference would their one (1) vote made?). In this situation, BN was the one who suffered the losses. If the three (3) BN voters decided to vote, they would, at least caused a mixed government to be formed and simultaneously, limited PAS’ authority in Kelantan.

So, who said that one vote does not count? From the above, we can see clearly the impact of not voting.

There are also people who do not bother about who is running the country. This group of people, I would say, live in their own circle like a Malay proverb, “seperti katak di bawah tempurung”. They are only concern about their own “world”. Who runs the country is none of their business.

So, have our EC done enough to create awareness among the rakyat on the importance for them to cast their votes for any reason whatsoever? The EC could have done enough to ask people to register as voters but not in good enough in encouraging them to vote. This function or role should not be left to the political parties contesting in the election to perform, as it may lead to money politics or better known as corruption. Political parties are interested parties while EC is independent. So, definitely EC could have done it more effectively and sincerely.

So, whatever reason that you may have not to cast your votes, put that aside, as sometimes, we need to put the country’s interesst over ours. So folk, vote!!!

For those who do not vote on 8th March, you have waived your right to criticise the next government in power at least for the next four (4) years. Shame on you!!!

To stamp or not to stamp???

What a joke!!! That is how I describe the Election Commission (EC) over the issue of stamping the statutory declaration by the candidates.

On Thursday (21/2/2008), EC made an announcement that all Statutory Declaration (SD) must be stamped, causing the uproar among the candidates, especially the opposition, as it would mean that candidates would have either Friday (22/2/2008) or Saturday (23/2/2008) to have their SD stamped. It was a last minute call by the EC. The EC said that such requirement is valid in law. That made me wonder!!! Is it so crucial to have the SD stamped? Few questions are in my mind. If it is so vital to have the SD stamped: –

(1) why is it implemented only now and not during the past 11 general elections?
(2) what would be the effect of not having the SD tamped?
(3) why was the announcement made last minute?

People have been speculating and talking about the 12th general election months ago and the EC, as the body in charge of the country’s election had also made their very own preparation, including the usage of the indelible ink. But I just could not understand and I think that it is unexplainable as to why such an important announcement was made last minute and not earlier. I think the issue of stamping is as important as the indelible ink. This is because, without the stamped SD, the nomination can be rejected, which would result in no candidate to contest. If no candidate to contest, then there is no casting of vote. If there is no casting of vote, then on whose finger the EC is to use the indelible ink at? Perhaps, on their own fingers.

But yesterday, the EC made a u-turn to their early announcement. I read a report in The Sun today that (I quote in verbatim): -

“The Election Commission has decided that all candidates who submitted their nomination papers without the accompanying statutory declaration being stamped are qualified to stand as candidates in the general election”.

The EC Secretary further said on the effect of failing to have the SD stamped that (I quote in verbatim): -

“…although the law required the duty stamp on nomination papers, it was the decision of the commission, which comprises the chairman, deputy chairman and five commissioners, to qualify the candidates”

Wow! The EC is now being very nice. Allowing the candidates to contest though they are not complying with the legal requirement. What does this mean?

It was also reported in the newspaper that “under Regulation 6(2A)(c) of the Election Regulation (Conduct of Elections) 1981, returning officers can reject nomination papers of a candidate if the statutory declaration did not adhere to Regulation 4(7) of the Election Regulations”. However, there was no further elaboration on the provision of Regulation 4(7) of the Election Regulation".

I do not have the privileged of reading the said provision of Regulation 4 (7) but I read the Malaysian Bar website yesterday whereby a senior lawyer by the name of Roger Tan, who is also the Malaysian Bar Council’s Conveyancing Practice Committee chairman, said it was legally wrong to reject any nomination if the statutory declaration was not stamped immediately. He said the Regulation 4(7) of the Election Regulation (Conduct of Election) 1981 only provided that the original copy of the statutory declaration must be submitted and did not say it had to be stamped.

Well, if what Roger Tan said is correct, I just don’t understand the move by the EC to make the stamping of the SD mandatory.

EC! Please do not make our country a laughing stock. We have had enough with the Lingam Video Clip Inquiry . Let’s be serious in discharging our duties.

The Tension is over

That is how I describe the naming of the candidates for Perlis BN. From my reading in the newspaper report (The Star on line), the grassroots supporters torn down BN flags and some were reported to have sprayed red Pak Lah's posters. That's not all, some 65 UMNO committee members had tendered their resignation. These were due to the rumours spread out that Shahidan will not be defending his state seat (that he might contest in Parliament).

Well, is that people's power? Looks like it. Anyway, I think Shahidan must have done a very good job that could create tension in Perlis when rumours were spread out about possibility that he is not Perlis MB after the general election.

As for the 65 UMNO committee members who resigned, if it is true that they resigned due to the rumours, I would say it was an immature action. So now, with Shahidan going to retain his state seat, are they going to retract their resignation??? Laugh...Unless they wanted to show people power...

What is "Fasiq"?

I read this report in The Star online today. I find it really interesting on Shahidan Kassim's statement (verbatimly extracted from The Star online): -

When asked about talk that he would not be contesting in this general election, Shahidan said, “In Islam, you should not obtain information from people who are fasik (sinner) (the emphasised in mine), instead you should be careful of them. If you want to get the truth, you must get it from the source.”

He used the word "fasiq". "Fasiq" is an arabic word which means people who go against Allah's instruction and do what Allah prohibits, but the person who is fasiq is still a Muslim. What Shahidan meant was if you want to get the information, get from those who are not "fasiq". Very interesting, Where can i find people who are not fasiq. Perhaps, it is very little. I am not saying that there is none. But even if I can find one, does that person who is not "fasiq" knows anything about election, more so about candidacy?

Stay or go?

I have read today’s The Star and of course, the free daily, The Sun. As usual, the news were centered at the 12th general election. There were so many until I do not know which one to write about. Finally, I made up my mind and chose to write on various issues that really interesting in my opinion.

The Sun reported that “MIC goes for new bloods”. Hahaha…remember in my previous posting? Every general rule there is an exception. So, reading the headlines will give different impression but after reading the reports, it is not really new bloods. It is mix of old and new bloods because the old bloods are still there to contest.

The Star, on the other hand reported that the “close-one-eye” MP of Jasin has been dropped…hehehe…remember him? Oklah. My prayers answered…at last…hahaha!!! That was what I highlighted in my previous posting. If you want to be a candidate or if you are chosen to be a candidate (sounds like you have no choice but to follow the decision of pucuk pimpinan), make sure that you have what it takes to be a good leader. Do not simply contest for the sake of popularity and monetary benefits.

I read an email about election. I do not really remember the exact story bit it goes something like this. An MP passed away and was told by the angel that he can choose either to go to heaven or to hell. He chose heaven instead of hell (of course, no person on the right frame of mind will choose hell!!!). But the angel said, no, you have to spend your time for one week in hell and one week in heaven before you can choose. So, the MP was sent to spend his time in hell for one week. When he entered the hell, he was greeted by his supporters and colleagues. They were actually at the golf course, playing golf, good food was served, it was like…in heaven. Before he could really enjoy his good time in hell, he was told by the angel to go to heaven. As he reached the heaven, he was greeted by normal citizens and nothing was interesting as compared to what he enjoyed in Hell. So, when the time comes for him to make up his mind, he chose hell instead of heaven. So, the angel took him back to the hell. To his surprise, as he entered the hell, he was still greeted by his supporters but this time around they were in dump site with full of garbage, very stinky, they were all with torn dress. So, he asked the angel, what happened. The angel said, “when you first came here, it was during your campaign period, but now you have won the election”.

Labelling

As everbody is fully aware, now is the election time. The fever has started. The war has started. This is the time when we can hear one party praising himself for all his good deeds and condemning other party and vice versa. It is more like "masuk bakul angkat sendiri" Let me translate that, "put yourself in a basket and you lift the basket yourself".

While, I personally think that it is not a good thing to do i.e. "masuk bakul angkat sendiri", but during election time, it is acceptable. Every general rule, there is an exception.

During election, people are free to talk even about the bad things of other people but to label other party, human being, as an animal, I think that is just too much. I belive there are more proper way to do your campaigning. What if the people who are labelled as animal suddenly joined the party of the "labellor" (Is there such a word?). Are they then human being or animal? Wow! it sounds like Charles Darwin's evolution theory.

Allah said in the holy Qur'an: -

"Ud 'u ila sabili rabbika bil hikmati wal mau 'izatil hasanah" which means "serulah ke jalan tuhan mu (Allah) dengan hikmah (bijaksana) dan nasihat yang baik"

To borrow the infamous phrase of RTM newscaster of Dunia Hari ini (I forgot his name), "renung-renungkanlah, fikir-fikirkanlah".

Wallahualam...

I am ready to go

That is what was reported in the local free daily, The Sun today. A statement from a long serving minister.

The minister was quoted as saying that whether he remains as the president or steps down will be decided by his own community and not others. I think that is a very fair statement and request. If we don't like others to meddle in our own internal affair, leave others alone. Don't do what we don't want or like others to do to us. As simple as that.

However, the said minister went ahead to say that (now I better produce the excerpt from the newspaper), "If the Indian community in the whole country decide that they don't want me, I am prepared to go even now (emphasised is mine)".

In another paragraph, he was reported to have said this (again, the exceprts from the newspaper) "...adding that he would leave at an appropriate time. "If I leave the party now, MIC will go into disarray..." (emphasised is mine)"

What a contradictory statement??? At one time, he prepares to step down even now and later telling the bad consequences if he goes now. It is like, thanks but no thanks. This also reminds me when we were all small (as I believe, a lot of parents used this reversed physchology) when our parents would say, "panjatlah! panjat! jatuh nanti, siaplah!!! Sounds familiar??? hehehe