Body painting actress indonesia and musician Mulan KwokWednesday, October 5, 2011
Monday, October 3, 2011
Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #84
Society and individual may be the two sides of the same coin; nonetheless our attitude or more importantly the attitude of those in power as to which side to be viewed first, involves more than just a simple toss of the coin. The difference between a totalitarian state versus a civil one is that with the former, the individual serves the state; in a civilized society, the state is there for the citizens. This seminal distinction makes all the difference.
Rantings over the great hudud debate
This writer has vehemently argued that for as long as there are leaders in the opposition parties who are bent on saying that this Federal Constitution is secular or Islamic and that the Islamic Penal Code is unconstitutional, Pakatan Rakyat would forever be subjected to this unending acrimonious debate.
Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, The Malaysian Insider
Much as I hate this acrimonious debate on hudud, especially with the general election looming ever so close, I no longer believe that delaying it is going to do any good to anyone either. Not to Non-Muslims, Muslims and much less to Islam.
Conventional wisdom would have it that deferring the debate and focusing on more major issues of a dysfunctional democracy such as gross mismanagement of the nation’s wealth and finances, endemic corruption, unbridled crony capitalism, gross income inequality would be in order.
Accordingly, this writer was earliest in reprimanding everyone, especially the PAS and other Pakatan leaders. His frantic attempt, as usual, fell on deaf ears. In no time, Pakatan leaders, nay the entire nation, are embroiled in the debate.
Once again, the “ugly” head of hudud, or such as it were described by many a less-than-friendly commentator, is “splitting” the nation, as if the nation were a one united country prior to the appearance of hudud on the national debate.
This writer would want to believe that, as a nation, we are only united in one cause, i.e. to make this beloved nation of ours, a better place for everyone.
So why should PAS and Pakatan take this issue upfront now?
For obvious reasons.
Allow it to be ventilated; the rantings, the ramblings and all the concerns and anxiety, perhaps misunderstandings. Let it out. Say what you really think of it. Perhaps in the free enterprise of ideas, it can no longer be suppressed anyway.
In the course of this national debate, the conversation has at least brought one unknown fact to the fore i.e. that the Islamic Penal Code is only enforceable on Muslims.
As to how it would be given an iron-clad assurance, as demanded by the Catholic Bishop Dr Paul Tan, who seems friendly with Tok Guru, it has yet to be meticulously articulated.
There are some who proposed that PAS conduct a referendum to assess and determine the level of support of the Kelantanese on the implementation of the enactment, now that Tok Guru’s chief ministership has spanned well over 20 years.
The hudud debate has also been instrumental in assessing that there are many non-Muslims who no longer have any fear of hudud, while many more continue to feel terrorised by the mere mention of the word. It has sadly become a rather bad word.
Debate, discourse and the many good writings of scholars and columnists provide useful insights to this once-very-misunderstood-transcendental Law of God, grossly misrepresented and demonised as barbaric and uncivilised.
For once, this writer noted the earnestness of many who wish to understand the wisdom of Islamic jurisprudence beyond its purely punitive dimension. That is both reassuring and informative.
For all these “happenings”, I retrospectively thought that this is not that bad after all. Yes, if all sensitive issues of religion and race get to be swept under the carpet, this nation would never be “enlightened”.
Indeed, that would be the greatest assault on Reason! Only Perkasa and right-winged religious and racial bigots thrive in the ambience of fear, ignorance and under-siege kind of mentality.
More strategically though, imagine if this polemical topic is to come any closer to the finishing line or during the raging campaign period of the 13th general election.
God forbid, Pakatan would arguably be dead meat. The “master strategist” Tun M has his way of putting a wedge between the Pakatan coalition partners. Already we have witnessed Pakatan leaders all too willing to cross swords openly and the BN-controlled media ever so ready to fan it up.
We, obliviously perhaps, went headlong into the pit in a self-destruct mode. For days, the issue occupied front page of The Star, NST, Utusan, et al; Hudud Feud, Hadi speaks up etc. We have seen enough of these shooting at each other episodes.
Fast forward, we thank God that Pakatan survived the nerve-racking hudud debate in a three-hour closed-door meeting. This writer, who was also a secretariat member of the Barisan Alternatif (BA), a forerunner of the PR, witnessed its demise after PAS launched the Islamic Document.
This grim reminder was very much in our minds in those critical moments during the hudud debate.
Admittedly, this writer would have no qualms revealing the fact that “Islamic state” and “hudud” are the Achilles’ Heel of the opposition front; before, in the BA, now, in PR and indeed to eternity.
This writer has vehemently argued that for as long as there are leaders in the opposition parties who are bent on saying that this Federal Constitution is secular or Islamic and that the Islamic Penal Code is unconstitutional, Pakatan Rakyat would forever be subjected to this unending acrimonious debate.
Pakatan’s strategic trajectory to Putrajaya
Pakatan has again reasserted its Common Policy Framework (CPF) and of its policy advocacy as spelt out in Buku Jingga or the “Orange Book.” Pakatan has again categorically announced its undivided commitment to the Federal Constitution, namely as highlighted by the provisions of Articles 3, 152 and 153 and its resolute vision of bringing about a New Malaysia.
In the context of the hudud debate, PAS and many Muslim constituencies would have hoped for a better treatment and recognition of the work of implementing the Islamic Penal Code — namely the Enakmen Jenayah Syariah 2 (1993), which actually predated the existence of Pakatan Rakyat or in fact the BA. In brief, they wanted it endorsed by the Pakatan presidential council.
That was not to be the case, as collectively decided by the Pakatan presidential council. Implementation of the Islamic Penal Code is not part of the CPF. The hudud debate has revolved around its constitutionality as posited by some legally trained leaders, while others were arguing from the perspectives of politics and strategy, which also invariably concluded that the agenda be best addressed after the 13th general election.
The meeting finally acknowledged and respected the difference amongst parties in Pakatan Rakyat as a democratic alliance particularly with respect to PAS’s position on the implementation of syariah law.
Difficult though it may seem for PAS but the DAP would similarly be in a rancorous position should Pakatan allow PAS to take the hudud law on board.
PAS would have to suffer the mockery of the Umno media for failing to convince her Pakatan partners to support its implementation in Kelantan. It would reinforce the notion of PAS being dictated to or saddled by the DAP.
Religious Harmony
ZAID UNTUK RAKYAT
The Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (ASLI) recently organised a roundtable dialogue on building bridges among religions. Fr Miguel Ángel Ayuso Guixot, Rector of the Pontifical Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies at the Vatican, was the main guest, and he was accompanied by other distinguished figures including the Most Rev Archbishop Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam, Senator Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon of the Prime Minister’s Office as well as social activists.
As expected, the Muslim side was somewhat under-represented. This was no fault of the organisers: Muslim religious leaders and intellectuals somehow do not see the value in this kind of discourse and engagement.
That in the nutshell is the problem in this country. Muslim religious leaders generally are fond of taking a hardline approach to issues involving religious discourse. There is no talk, no discussion and certainly no discourse. These hardliners are fond of reminding Muslims that Islam is not for discussion like other religions, and that Muslims must be cautious of attempts to convert them or to subvert their faith. They remind Muslims that human rights, dignity and personal freedoms have “limits” in a country where the Islamic faith is the official creed. This attitude is very unMalay and unIslamic, but regrettably it is the prevailing situation today.
Segregation in schools, where non-Malays attend Moral classes and Muslims attend religious classes, has had its desired effect. Now there is complete distrust and separation between the Muslims and non-Muslims. It has reached a critical point when even teachers are unable convey basic concepts like respect for, and tolerance of, others who profess different beliefs.
Even at the highest levels, our leaders and Parliamentarians have shown themselves to be too scared to discuss and debate these issues in three important bills in 2009: the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993, and the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act 1984. If passed, amendments would have helped resolve issues of conversion and some of the problems faced by parents of different faiths when they divorce.
The amendments would have enabled Muslim converts to file for divorce in civil courts and would have allowed civil courts to decide cases dealing with child custody, alimony, the division of harta sepencarian (jointly-acquired matrimonial property), the religious conversion of children, and the administration of the assets of a Muslim convert who dies before the annulment of his civil marriage(this would also have included rights of burial).
Termakan budi, tergadai jiwa dan raga?
SAKMONGKOL AK47
Ada seorang pembaca blog saya menegaskan janganlah menganggap apabila orang Melayu menyokong UMNO dan BN, mereka itu bodoh. Izinkan saya memberitahu terlebih dahulu, saya tidak berkata demikian- yang saya sebut ialah pemimpin membodohkan orang Melayu. Ada perbezaan besar antara bodoh dan di perbodohkan. Tapi itu menjadi topic lain pula yang kita tidak akan bahas disini.
Itu bukan bodoh, itu membalas budi kata nya. Mereka hanya membalas budi kepada sebuah kerajaan yang telah memberi mereka banyak nikmat kehidupan. Orang berbudi kita berbahasa, demikian natijah dari pendapat nya.
Saya amat bersetuju dengan pendapat pembaca ini. Kerana ini akan bermakna, orang Melayu yang menyokong kerajaan2 di negeri Kelantan, Kedah, Selangor dan Pulau Pinang mesti di lihat sebagai berterima kasih juga. Mereka pun tidak bodoh tapi sekadar berterima kasih. Mereka berterima kasih kepada kerajaan2 yang telah membantu mereka dalam pelbagai cara. Bukan begitu? Mustahil apabila orang Melayu menyokong UMNO mereka berterima kasih, tapi bila mereka menyokong parti lain, perbuatan tersebut tidak di kira sebagai berterima kasih?
Saya berharap pembaca tersebut tidak bermaksud hanya UMNO sahaja berhak menerima terima kasih dari orang Melayu. Sudah tentu pandangan seperti ini tidak boleh di terima kerana UMNO tidak ada hakmilik mutlak keatas sokongan orang Melayu. Malah dalam pilihanraya 2008, UMNO tidak mampu menyatakan bahawa mereka mewakili suara majorti orang Melayu. Dalam PRU itu, lebih ramai orang Melayu menyokong parti bukan UMNO. Bagaimana kita mengklasifikasikan mereka? Murtad Melayu? Tidak mengenang budi?
Di sebalik kenyataan yang pious ini sebetulnya terkandung cerita mengenai pertalian antara rakyat dengan kerajaan. Tersirat dalam kenyataan tersebut ialah bagaimana orang Melayu melihat peranan kerajaan dalam kehidupan mereka. Kalau di Amerika, mesej nya lebih kurang akan berbunyi- jangan soalkan apa negara kamu boleh buat kepada kamu, tanyakan apa yang kamu boleh buat untuk negara kamu. Negara dalam konteks ini, kerajaan lah. Atau gantikan negara dengan istilah kerajaan. Dari sini kita akan lihat pertalian antara manusia dengan kerajaan nya.
Dari komen pembaca itu, kita dapat mengagak bahawa kerajaan di lihat sebagai penjaga dan rakyat di lihat sebagai yang di jaga. Dan itu membawa 2 pengertian besar; Pertama, kerajaan adalah penjaga yang penuh dengan sifat keibuan menjaga anak anak. Kedua, tanngung jawab menentu masa depan kita di serahkan keatas bahu kerajaan.
Mungkin disinilah, iaitu didalam cara orang Melayu melihat peranan dan tempat kerajaan dalam kehidupan mereka, terkandung benih2 kemunduran. Inilah sikap inherent weakness yang kita mesti kikis- yakni menganggap kerajaan itu tempat kita bergantung segala nya dan tempat sumber rezeki hidup. Sikap seperti ini lah yang menyebabkan pemegang tampuk kerajaan membuli kita, angkuh dan sombong kepada rakyat kerdil. Kerajaan itu penaung dan kita yang bernaung , kerajaan itu tuan, kita hamba. Dan kepada si pengampu , konsep kerajaan seperti ini mahu mereka kekalkan. Selagi kerajaan di lihat demikian rupa, ianya memberi mereka a sense of supremacy dan mungkin juga khayalan godlike.
Sikap melihat kerajaan sebagai deity yang mesti di taati dan di puja, paling ketara di kalangan orang Melayu dan UMNO bertanggung jawab memanjangkan sikap yang melemahkan bangsa Melayu. Selagi kita mempunyai sikap yang demikian, selagi itulah kita terus bertongkat kepada kerajaan. Orang Melayu akan jadi tamby yang tertunduk tunduk tidak ada keyakinan diri. Kita tidak boleh meneruskan ketergantungan sebegini kerana dengan melakukan demikian, memberi peluang kepada pimpinan politik yang licik mengeksploitasi ketergantungan kita itu.
Berbalik kepada komen yang di berikan oleh pembaca tersebut, saya tidak menyebut nya demikian rupa- saya hanya memberitahu bahawa pemimpin Melayu membodohkan bangsa nya sendiri supaya mempercayai mereka mempunyai banyak kelemahan. Seolah olah lemah dan tidak bermaya itu adalah kesemulajadian orang Melayu. Mereka di bodohkan dengan tahyul bahawa jalan selamat ialah melalui bergantung terus kepada kerajaan. Dan bukan nya kerajaan yang mana mana tapi suatu kerajaan yang khusus iaitu UMNO. Tidakkah kenyataan seperti ini self serving?
Ini kenyataan yang self serving sebab kerajaan yang di maksudkan itu terdiri dari kerajaan yang di ujudkan oleh satu parti politik khusus sahaja. Tidak kah layak kerajaan dari parti bukan UMNO di jadikan sumber rujukan? Selagi bangsa Melayu terus percaya kepada pembodohan ini, maka bangsa Melayu akan terus menjadi suatu bangsa yang dependent.
Kita mesti konsisten dalam gesaan kita. Jika menyokong UMNO di anggap sebagai terima kasih kepada kerajaan yang memberi faedah serta kemudahan kepada mereka, prinsip yang sama mesti juga di pakai keatas kerajaan2 yang bukan UMNO. Kerajaan bukan UMNO di Kelantan, Kedah, Pulau Pinang dan Selangor semua nya menabur budi kepada orang Melayu. Berdasarkan gesaaan pembaca blog yang saya rujuk, maka orang Melayu dalam negeri negeri ini mesti juga berterima kasih kepada kerajaan2 ini dan terus menyokong mereka. Hanya dengan cara demikian, kita konsisten dalam pandangan kita. Jika menyokong itu bermakna berterima kasih, ia nya mesti di gunakan dalam semua keadaan. Berterima kasih dan mendapat sokongan tidak lagi menjadi hak ekslusif UMNO.
Cuba kita orang Melayu fikirkan. Jika orang Melayu bersikap bergantung kepada kerajaan secara membabi buta, ianya bertentangan dengan piagam seorang manusia yang mereka.
Apakah piagam seorang manusia yang merdeka? Seoarang manusia yang merdeka dan mempunyai jati diri( bukankah pemimpin UMNO sentiasa berkhutbah mengenai jati diri dan yakindiri) meyakini bahawa masa depan mereka adalah tanggung jawab mereka sendiri bukan menyerahkan tanggung jawab tersebut pada kerajaan. Kerajaan bukan lah tuan kepada orang yang menghambakan diri mereka.
Sebuah kerajaan hanyalah suatu wadah dan jalan, bukan nya pemberi nikmat dan keistimewaan jauh sekali sesuatu yang mesti di sembah. Manusia yang merdeka itu bertanya apakah yang mereka dapat lakukan melalui kerajaan untuk melaksanakan tanggungjawab bagi mencapai matlamat hidup dan yang paling penting sekali melindungi kemerdekaan mereka sebagai manusia.
Ini titik tolak perjuangan orang Melayu sebenarnya. Kerajaan yang di bentuk oleh PAS, UMNO, DAP atau PKR sekali pun bukanlah tuan kepada kita yang hamba. Bukan mereka sesuatu yang harus kita sembah dan takuti. Kerajaan ialah sesuatu yang kita ujudkan melalui persetujuan atau consensus bersama bukan sesuatu yang ujud diatas kita. Tidak ada wawasan nasional kecuali yang di kongsi bersama oleh rakyat dan matlamat kerajaan adalah matlamat yang di yakini bersama dan yang di perjuangkan bersama. The government cannot impose something over us which we the people find disagreeable.
Dan di sanalah letak nya bahaya kepada UMNO. Sebab UMNO masih kekal dengan mentaliti bahawa dia kerajaan yang menjadi tuan kepada orang Melayu dan bersikap dia pemberi sumber kehidupan kepada orang Melayu. UMNO tiada, orang Melayu mati. Dan UMNO itu Melayu , Melayu itu UMNO.
Mari kita analisa kenyataan yang mengandung 2 bahagian ini- Melayu itu UMNO dan UMNO itu Melayu.
Kedua bahagian kenyataan atau pernyataan tersebut tidak mencerminkan aspirasi seorang Melayu yang berjiwa merdeka. Sama seperti tanggapan orang Melayu terhadap sebuah kerajaan,demikian lah tanggapan orang Melayu kepada UMNO. UMNO itu tunjang kerajaan yang menjadi tuan kepada orang Melayu, UMNO itu penjaga dan kita yang di jaga. Orang Melayu memuliakan UMNO sebagai sesuatu yang mesti di taati malahan di sembah dan apa orang Melayu boleh buat ialah mengharapkan pemberian dari UMNO.
Oleh sebab kepercayaan ini, nilai pemimpin UMNO bersifat sombong, angkuh, membuli dan memandang rendah kepada rakyat. Nilai silai ini di perlihatkan dalam gaya hidup seharian majority pemimpin UMNO. Inilah yang membawa kecundang kepada UMNO dalam pilihanraya yang akan datang.
Bagaimana keadaan begini dapat kekal untuk masa yang lama? Ianya kekal kerana tahap kejahilan dan kesedaran social dan politik orang Melayu relative masih rendah. Dimana tahap kejahilan berkurang, dan kesedaran politik dan social meningkat, pengaruh UMNO menurun.
Nampak nya UMNO hanya mampu ujud dan survive selagi sebahagian besar masyarakat Melayu khususnya kekal dalam kejahilan. Kita boleh lihat di hadapan mata kita sendiri bagaimana kekuatan UMNO menjadi lemah apabila kesedaran rakyat khususnya orang Melayu meningkat. Dalam kawasan bandar di mana kejahilan orang Melayu berkurangan sama ada melalui tahap pendidikan yang di capai atau melalui interaksi sosial yang rancak, sokongan dan keyakinan kepada UMNO merosot.
Najib’s reform package underway
In Parliament today, the government is proposing to repeal the Restricted Residence Act and the Banishment Act, and to form the PSC on poll reforms.
(Free Malaysia Today) - Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak moved to repeal the Restricted Residence Act and the Banishment Act today, fulfilling his vows to implement quick political reforms to improve civil liberties.
At the same time, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Aziz also tabled a motion to form the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on poll reforms.
Najib promised the formation of the PSC after his government received widespread condemnation for its strong-arm response to the July 9 rally that called for Putrajaya to clean up Malaysia’s electoral system.
The rally, where close to 1,700 protesters were arrested while scores were injured, was organised by polls reform group Bersih 2.0.
The committee members’ composition will reflect current Parliamentary numbers – five from Barisan Nasional, three from Pakatan Rakyat and one independent.
While tabling the motion, Nazri reiterated that setting up the PSC was not a nod to accusation that election in Malaysia was corrupt but instead a way to deflect the allegations.
“The formation of the PSC is to ensure there are no more accusations against the Election Commission,” the law minister told the Dewan Rakyat.
The PSC will have six months to look into poll reforms and make recommendations on ways to improve the election system.
The panel’s terms of references included all key eight demands made by Bersih, including the possible use of indelible ink, fair access to media, longer campaigning period and the abolishment of postal votes.
Winning back middle Malaysia
The repeal of the two laws are among the slew of political reforms announcements made by Najib on the eve of Malaysia day.
He also made a landmark announcement to scrap the British-inherited Internal Security Act which allows detention without trial.
Najib said the ISA, a law which the opposition claimed BN had thrived on to crush dissent, will be repealed in March next year as his government needed time to draft two new laws to replace it.
Muhyiddin tells Perkasa not to jump the gun
NST) - Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said Perkasa should not "jump the gun" on the meeting between three Malaysian personalities with Singapore's top politicians two months ago.
He said Malaysians often held meetings with representatives of Singapore ministries and the People's Action Party to discuss bilateral matters or improve business ties.
"Meetings between Malaysian politicians and businessmen with PAP politicians are a norm," he told a press conference yesterday.
He was commenting on claims by Perkasa information chief Ruslan Kasim about a dinner meeting between businessman Datuk Seri Kalimullah Hassan, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and several senior PAP leaders.
Ruslan also claimed that a member of Malaysia Airlines board of directors, Datuk Mohamad Azman Yahya, was aware of a secret meeting that took place during the dinner.
Azman, however, has denied any knowledge of the meeting.
Muhyiddin said: "As a Barisan Nasional representative, I often meet PAP representatives to discuss various issues.
"But I do not know if Lim had met the ministers in his capacity as chief minister. Other BN chief ministers also meet PAP leaders in that capacity. They could have met to discuss about business. Let's not jump the gun."
