HacksHacks and andand Hussies Hussies Hussies · Hard though it may be for some to swallow, the...

Aliran Monthly 20(1)

HacksHacksHacksHacksHacksandandandandand Hussies Hussies Hussies Hussies Hussies

Crisis in Malaysian JournalismCrisis in Malaysian JournalismCrisis in Malaysian JournalismCrisis in Malaysian JournalismCrisis in Malaysian Journalism

PP3739/12/2000 ISSN 0127 - 5127 / RM3.00 / 2000:20(1)


COVER STORY

How much cruder and more vulgar can Malaysian mainstreammedia become?

by Zaharom Nain

NNNNN ever has such a largesegment of theMalaysian public beenmore disenchanted

with their leaders than at thepresent moment. Yet neverhave the Malaysian mainstreammedia been so out of touchwith this public sentiment.

Instead of addressing head-onthe people’s many legitimateconcerns and anxieties, themainstream media - and main-stream journalists, by andlarge - have ignored these con-cerns, dismissed them as thepreoccupations of agitatorsand troublemakers out to cre-ate discord in society, or givesorry excuses for the media’sown shortcomings.

In what can only be describedas a lame and pathetic attemptat defending the indefensible,a senior Malaysian reporterfrom the mainstream mediarecently wrote in a regionalmedia newsletter that despiteeverything that’s happened inMalaysia over the past coupleof years, there are still ‘consci-entious editors and journalistswho do what they can to pushthose imaginary boundaries (of

responsible journalism).’Surely she was talking about‘imaginary editors and journal-ists’ instead of imaginaryboundaries?

Evidently we live in a periodof contradictions. We haveseen politicians reminding usincessantly - especially duringthe general election campaignperiod - not to allow Malaysiato fall to its ‘enemies’ and notlet our country be ‘re-colo-nised’.

But recently, those politicians,the same sponsors of these ear-lier messages seemed to takean extended television com-mercial break from their ownmessages whenthey welcomedthe year 2000.They revealedtheir true iden-tities whenmany of themlost their head,and wildly cel-ebrated a mil-lennium thathad not quitearrived. They

were taken in and intoxicatedby the hype propagated prin-cipally by the very people whohad colonised us many yearsago.

Subsequently that ‘commercialbreak’ was transformed into a

Hacks and Hussies

Colonised Minds

Banning Harakah will not solveUMNO's problems

Harakah's soaring sales: Giving officials nightmares?


Hacks And HussiesHacks And HussiesHacks And HussiesHacks And HussiesHacks And Hussies 22222

Free Press Missing From MalaysiaFree Press Missing From MalaysiaFree Press Missing From MalaysiaFree Press Missing From MalaysiaFree Press Missing From Malaysia 66666

Who Received The Kickbacks?Who Received The Kickbacks?Who Received The Kickbacks?Who Received The Kickbacks?Who Received The Kickbacks? 88888

COVER STORY

FEATURES

REGULARS

C O N T E N T S

OTHERS

ALIRANALIRANALIRANALIRANALIRAN is a Reform Movement dedicated to Justice, is a Reform Movement dedicated to Justice, is a Reform Movement dedicated to Justice, is a Reform Movement dedicated to Justice, is a Reform Movement dedicated to Justice,Freedom & Solidarity and listed on the roster of theFreedom & Solidarity and listed on the roster of theFreedom & Solidarity and listed on the roster of theFreedom & Solidarity and listed on the roster of theFreedom & Solidarity and listed on the roster of theEconomic and Social Council of the United Nations.Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.Guided by universal spiritual values, Aliran has beenGuided by universal spiritual values, Aliran has beenGuided by universal spiritual values, Aliran has beenGuided by universal spiritual values, Aliran has beenGuided by universal spiritual values, Aliran has beenstriving for genuine unity by promoting social justicestriving for genuine unity by promoting social justicestriving for genuine unity by promoting social justicestriving for genuine unity by promoting social justicestriving for genuine unity by promoting social justiceand human dignity since 1977. Membership is openand human dignity since 1977. Membership is openand human dignity since 1977. Membership is openand human dignity since 1977. Membership is openand human dignity since 1977. Membership is opento all Malaysians above 21. If you are interested into all Malaysians above 21. If you are interested into all Malaysians above 21. If you are interested into all Malaysians above 21. If you are interested into all Malaysians above 21. If you are interested injoining Aliran, please contact the Hon Secretary atjoining Aliran, please contact the Hon Secretary atjoining Aliran, please contact the Hon Secretary atjoining Aliran, please contact the Hon Secretary atjoining Aliran, please contact the Hon Secretary atthe address shown in this page.the address shown in this page.the address shown in this page.the address shown in this page.the address shown in this page.

Thinking AllowedThinking AllowedThinking AllowedThinking AllowedThinking Allowed 1 91 91 91 91 9

LettersLettersLettersLettersLetters 3 03 03 03 03 0

Current ConcernsCurrent ConcernsCurrent ConcernsCurrent ConcernsCurrent Concerns 3 33 33 33 33 3

Mitsui KickbacksMitsui KickbacksMitsui KickbacksMitsui KickbacksMitsui Kickbacks 77777

Subscription FormSubscription FormSubscription FormSubscription FormSubscription Form 1 81 81 81 81 8

CartoonCartoonCartoonCartoonCartoon 2 72 72 72 72 7

CartoonCartoonCartoonCartoonCartoon 3 73 73 73 73 7

ALIRAN'S HOMEPAGEhttp://www.malaysia.net/aliran

PAS' Victory Is A Political OnePAS' Victory Is A Political OnePAS' Victory Is A Political OnePAS' Victory Is A Political OnePAS' Victory Is A Political One 99999

Imagine The Different We Can MakeImagine The Different We Can MakeImagine The Different We Can MakeImagine The Different We Can MakeImagine The Different We Can Make 1 41 41 41 41 4

Justice At CrossroadsJustice At CrossroadsJustice At CrossroadsJustice At CrossroadsJustice At Crossroads 2 32 32 32 32 3

CHI Calls For National Health FundCHI Calls For National Health FundCHI Calls For National Health FundCHI Calls For National Health FundCHI Calls For National Health Fund 2 52 52 52 52 5

Only Westerners Can Afford To Be IllOnly Westerners Can Afford To Be IllOnly Westerners Can Afford To Be IllOnly Westerners Can Afford To Be IllOnly Westerners Can Afford To Be Ill 2 82 82 82 82 8

Until Justice Is DoneUntil Justice Is DoneUntil Justice Is DoneUntil Justice Is DoneUntil Justice Is Done 4 04 04 04 04 0

Printed byPrinted byPrinted byPrinted byPrinted by

Swan Printing Sdn. Bhd.Swan Printing Sdn. Bhd.Swan Printing Sdn. Bhd.Swan Printing Sdn. Bhd.Swan Printing Sdn. Bhd.

28, Jalan PBS 14/15,28, Jalan PBS 14/15,28, Jalan PBS 14/15,28, Jalan PBS 14/15,28, Jalan PBS 14/15,

Taman Perindustrian Bukit Serdang,Taman Perindustrian Bukit Serdang,Taman Perindustrian Bukit Serdang,Taman Perindustrian Bukit Serdang,Taman Perindustrian Bukit Serdang,

43300 Seri Kembangan,43300 Seri Kembangan,43300 Seri Kembangan,43300 Seri Kembangan,43300 Seri Kembangan,

SelangorSelangorSelangorSelangorSelangor

Published byPublished byPublished byPublished byPublished by

Aliran Kesedaran NegaraAliran Kesedaran NegaraAliran Kesedaran NegaraAliran Kesedaran NegaraAliran Kesedaran Negara(ALIRAN)(ALIRAN)(ALIRAN)(ALIRAN)(ALIRAN)

103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,

Penang, Malaysia.Penang, Malaysia.Penang, Malaysia.Penang, Malaysia.Penang, Malaysia.

Tel: (04)6585251 Fax :(04)6585197Tel: (04)6585251 Fax :(04)6585197Tel: (04)6585251 Fax :(04)6585197Tel: (04)6585251 Fax :(04)6585197Tel: (04)6585251 Fax :(04)6585197


badly scripted scene from aMalay television drama. Justwhen Muslims had barely be-gun the season of ‘bermaaf-maafan’ (forgiveness), individu-als linked to opposition groupswere being nabbed andcharged under archaic lawswhich were introduced by thevery same people who colo-nised us many years ago.

Whatever the official explana-tions for that crackdown, theattacks on the opposition andthe ‘alternative media’ such asHarakah and Detik, do not bodewell for free speech and de-mocracy in our country. Itwould be more accurate tothink of such attacks as the con-tinuation of a rather barbaric‘politics of vengeance’.

These attacks reveal how des-perate some quarters have be-come, needing to use forcewhen reason and open debateshould prevail. They illustratehow undemocratic our politi-cal situation has become, de-spite the inane assertions byapologists that democracy ‘a laMalaysia’, whatever thatmeans, is alive and kicking.

This already pathetic situationbecomes even more deplor-able when mainstream so-called journalists and their un-ions utter not a single word ofprotest. All they do is to cowerand make excuses for not de-fending either principles ortheir colleagues.

But then these are the sameeditors and journalists whodid not raise even a whimperof protest when page afterpage of their newspapers wassplashed with Barisan Nasional‘advertisements’ clearly aimedat intimidating Malaysian citi-zens during the election cam-paign. No, these editors andjournalists were too scared tostand their ground and saythat these bully-boy tactics hadabsolutely no place in a democ-racy.

Forty-three years afterMerdeka, a step away from (thereal start of) a new millennium,and only a heartbeat awayfrom the oft-hyped year of2020, one would think thatMalaysian mainstream journal-ists who write or talk aboutdemocracy, caring society and‘developed country’ statuswould be above all that kindof crude and vulgar ‘journal-ism’. One would think that the‘editors’ would have the de-cency to exclude those crudeand vulgar images of violenceto be published in the pages oftheir ‘newspapers’.

Unfortunately, there are almostno limits to how low they cango. True to form, the main-stream media hacks offer‘analyses’ that are so one-sidedthat only they themselvescould have been convinced.For instance, there was this tab-loid which conducted two silly,unrepresentative ‘voter sur-

veys’. One survey was full ofholes. The other bore a glossof ‘scientific reliability’ just be-cause it was conducted by anacademic (hack!). Both studieswere roundly criticised byother respected academicswithout the ‘researchers’ beingable to defend the surveys.

Still, along came a lackey re-porter who probably could notread, who picked up the sorrypieces of data from the faultystudy, twisted the statistics fur-ther, and came out with grand,but false, claims that - surprise,surprise – supported BN. (I’vebeen told that this politicallyambitious lackey goes to thesame church as some top po-litical leaders in order to be no-ticed.). Only a hack like this canwrite with much pompositywithout realising that thethinking public regards hiswriting in the same light as thebraying of an ass.

Of course, he’s not the onlyone. Many more have crawledout of the woodwork, hopingto make their presence felt,each trying to outdo the medi-ocrity of the others. But suchmediocrity pales in comparisonwith the mediocrity of the so-called ‘broadcast journalists’ –sadly, nothing more than hackreporters, except made up likeBarbie dolls, and then, morehussy than brainy, they ear-nestly run down the opposi-tion.

Given the deplorable state of

Cringing andW h i n g e i n g

Mediocrity Rules

Opposite Effect


the mainstream media, popu-lar attempts to increase demo-cratic space must not be de-railed. Ironically the blatantarrogance and abuse of powerby those who supposedlyknow what’s good for the pub-lic have made the Malaysianpublic much more aware of theneed to defend and extend de-mocracy in our country.

Malaysians now demand morecritical and less compliant me-dia. Many have stopped buy-ing and reading what they con-sider to be purely propagandasheets. Many also treat localtelevision the way it deservesto be treated - as escapist en-tertainment and fiction, far re-moved from reality.Malaysians have indeed be-come more enlightened.

Surely the authorities can’t beso dumb as not to realise thatsilencing newspapers likeHarakah - even if on a techni-cality, even if temporarily - willhave the opposite effects to theones they desire.

It would be a monumental mis-take to silence Harakah andequate this silencing with asealing of the cracks. Even achild can see that far frommending the split in the Malaycommunity or helping to re-store so-called Malay unity,such a move will exacerbatethe split. Hard though it maybe for some to swallow, thefact is Harakah did not cause orprecipitate the split. The realcauses of the split lie closer to

home, in the backyard of a par-ticular party.

Moreover only someonewho’s spent his whole life incloud cuckoo land would be-lieve that silencing Harakah –or other ‘alternative media’ –will have disenchantedMalaysians rushing back tosubscribe to the mainstreampapers and lapping up what-ever these papers spew.

The fact is, these mainstreampapers have lost what littlecredibility they had because oftheir blatantly shabby, unpro-fessional, one-sided coverageof significant events over thepast couple of years. ManyMalaysians no longer trustthese papers. And trust is notsomething that can be regainedovernight, by closing down anopponent’s paper.

At a personal level, regainingtrust would require honestlyaddressing core issues, such asone’s dignity, professionalismand ethics. At an institutionallevel, it would require a re-questioning of structures ofpower and a consideration ofgenuine organisational reform,guided by professionalism thatmakes sense to the rakyat, notmerely to the powerful few.

Silencing Harakah will hit PASfinancially. But it is fanciful tobelieve that this alone will re-duce PAS’s influence. In thisage of the much-touted Multi-

media Super Corridor (MSC),unless computers and copymachines are banned as well,Harakah’s website will be up-dated, upgraded, made morecanggih (sophisticated or styl-ish); its pages will be more av-idly downloaded, copied andwidely distributed - irrespec-tive of the new multimedialaws, and regardless of the‘jamming’ devices that can beused.

Proponents of the MSC shouldbe thankful that while many ofour ministries (and ministers)are not quite up to speed as faras the new technology is con-cerned, many oppositiongroups, on the other hand,have taken up the call to uti-lise the technology.

Instead of going all out to si-lence Harakah, among otherthings, thus creating anothermajor national and interna-tional public relations blunder,driving a wedge deeper be-tween Malaysians, and furthershaming all of us, the authori-ties should start thinking aboutconciliatory strategies.

After all, we constantly callourselves a religious peopleand a pious nation. We boastabout becoming a ‘developedcountry’. Isn’t it time westopped allowing our countryto be shamed and held to ran-som by all manner of hacks andhussies?

Isn’t it time to say, ‘Enough isenough’?

Trust AndC r e d i b i l i t y

q


ince the financial crisisof July 1997,Malaysian authoritieshave responded to in-

ternational pressures forincreased transparency.Indeed, Deputy PrimeMinister AbdullahBadawi has gone so faras to assert that: “Goodgovernance and transpar-ency are two prerequi-sites if Malaysia is to im-prove its competitivenessand inspire confidence”.But a free press is not partof this agenda.

On the contrary, in themounting crackdown ongovernment critics, thealternative media havebecome a strategic targetof Malaysian authorities.Not only have theycharged the editor andprinter of the popularMalay-language Harakahwith sedition, they havethreatened to withdraw the li-cences of several other publi-cations.

The rhetoric about transpar-ency is not completely disin-genuous. Despite Prime Min-

ister Mahathir’s repudiation ofthe International MonetaryFund, Malaysia was among thefirst countries to commit to the

IMF’s Special Data Dissemina-tion Standards System. Disclo-sure rules for banks have alsorecently been tightened. Simi-larly, the Kuala Lumpur StockExchange requires public-listedcompanies to publish quarterly,rather than half-yearly, finan-

cial and corporate reports.

Significantly, state institutionshave been conspicuously insu-

lated from meaningfultransparency reform. Thegovernment regularlydeflects opposition re-quests for informationabout financial activitiesof government-linkedcompanies and statutoryboards. It is as difficultnow as before the crisisto extract details aboutthe terms and conditionsof privatisations andmega-deals.

In effect, the governmenthas embarked on an in-strumental program ofselective transparency re-form. Change has beenheavily skewed towardsproviding non-conten-tious factual informationof immediate market rel-

evance. Attempts to increasepolitical openness, especiallyvia the media, have beenstrongly resisted. Indeed, theMalaysian government has be-come progressively anxiousabout its diminished capacityto harness the media to its po-

MEDIA

Free Press Missing fromMalaysia Transparency Planby Garry Rodan

SSSSS

Mounting crackdown on government critics


litical objectives.

In 1997, Mahathir was quick tolump the international mediawith what he depicted as aconspiracy of internationalforces responsible for the eco-nomic crisis. It was, however,Anwar’s arrest in September1998 that unleashed an intenseand dynamic new phase instate-media relations in Malay-sia. Mahathir’s instinctivestrategy of reining in the do-mestic media to limit criticalreporting backfired.

The credibility of the tightlycontrolled local mainstreammedia, which are largelyowned by the ruling NationalFront and its corporate allies,plummeted. The public foundreports of the “Anwar affair”and subsequent street demon-strations hard to swallow.

One consequence was a sud-den boost in the status andreach of the international presswithin Malaysia. More pro-foundly, alternative domesticmedia blossomed, includingthe Internet. The star per-former has been Harakah, theofficial newspaper of Parti Is-lam Se-Malaysia (PAS), whichtook the states of Kelantan andTerengganu in the recent gen-eral election. Prior to Anwar’ssacking, the biweekly Harakahhad a circulation of 75,000. Bythe end of 1999, its circulationwas 360,000, making it thecountry’s most popular paper.The irreverent and criticaltenor of Harakah and other al-ternative media contrasted

sharply with the unswervinglypro-government disposition ofthe establishment media dur-ing the November election.

The Home Office is now threat-ening to withdraw Harakah’ spublishing license. The basis isthat PAS has been selling a po-litical paper to non-PAS mem-bers, and doing so via streetvendors and other non-PASoffices. Last week, police seizedcopies of the paper from fournews-stands in Kota Baru. Au-thorities have also threatenedto withdraw the annually re-newable permits of Tamadun,Wasilah, Detik and Eksklusiffor an assortment of allegedtechnical breaches of permitconditions.

Simultaneously, the pro-gov-ernment press appears to beundergoing managementchanges that express UMNOfrustration at the inability ofthese media to effectively pro-mote the government’s mes-sage. New Straits Times editor-in-chief Kadir Jasin has sud-denly taken “indefinite leave”.

Clamping down on alternativenewspapers is one thing. Re-storing the credibility of estab-lishment media is another. Theappetite of Malaysians hasbeen whetted for media thatscrutinises the exercise of pub-lic power - something quite atodds with the Malaysian gov-ernment’s limited conceptionof transparency.

Source: The Australian FinancialReview, 27 January 2000.

The story of the 300 mil-lion yen Mitsui Kickbacks,paid in 1997, was reportedin the Asahi Shimbun, Ja-pan on 11 February 2000.An AFP report was alsomade available on thesame day. The followingALIRAN media statementwas released on 12 Febru-ary but predictably didnot appear in any of themainstream newspapers.Nor over the television orradio. To our knowledge,the story was only firstcarried by the mainstreammedia on 15 February, af-ter the whole world ex-cept Malaysians had be-come aware of the story.Inefficient? Cover-up?Whatever, it’s not surpris-ing anymore.

Will there be some inves-tigative journalism? Orwill we be waiting for thefindings of the ACA? Orworse, the findings of aninternal Telecoms en-quiry?

If the latter two, then wemight as well tell you theconclusion now: that thereis no conclusive evidenceof a kickback.

M i t s u iK i c k b a c k s

Will there be someinvestigativejournalism?

q


he Anti-CorruptionAgency has re-cently asked formore powers to

combat corruption. Itsounds like they are reallyserious about wiping outcorruption, but manyMalaysians will be scepticalas long as it remains underthe Prime Minister’s De-partment. We are still wait-ing for action to be takenagainst ministers named byAnwar Ibrahim in' his po-lice reports backed bydocumentary evidence.

Even as we wait - and waitin vain - a new case of al-leged corruption hasemerged, this time involv-ing the biggest telecom firmin Malaysia. The Frenchnewsagency, AFP, reportedon 11 Feb 2000 that Japan’sMitsui and Co. had paidabout 300 million yen (2.8million U.S. dollars) in kick-backs to the Malaysian firmin return for its purchase oftelephone switchboards.

The money was reportedly

channelled to the Malaysianside through a consultant firmin Malaysia, which turned outto be a dummy company. In asyndicate with the high-tech gi-ant NEC Corp., Mitsui wassaid to have landed ordersfrom “Telecom Malaysia” inlate 1996 for the switchboardswith a total capacity of about800,000 circuits.

The Japanese syndicate re-portedly won the deal, esti-mated at more than 10 billionyen, by outdoing a number ofEuropean rival bids. Theswitchboards were appar-ently delivered to ‘’TelecomMalaysia’’ between 1996 and1998.

Mitsui was said to have treatedthe kickbacks, paid in 1997 tothe Malaysian agent under aconsultant contract, as “com-missions” which were con-strued as “losses”.

We call upon the ACA to probethe AFP report and informMalaysians of the outcome.

Specifically, Aliran would like

to know:

• Which Malaysian ‘’con-sultant firm” acted as theconduit in receiving thekickbacks and who werethe personalities behindthis dummy company?

• Who actually receivedthe 2.8 million US dollarsin kickbacks in the end?

• Was the Malaysiantelecom firm’s head andthe rest of the telecommanagement aware ofthe commission and didthey give the approvalfor the transaction?

• Was the Telecommunica-tions Minister and theCabinet aware thatshady kickbacks werebeing paid?

• How much more did theMalaysian telecom firm- and ultimately theMalaysian consumer -have to pay as a result ofselecting the Mitsuiswitchboards?

Meanwhile, the Telecom-munications Ministershould take full responsi-bility for this scandal. Heand the telecom firm’smanagement team owe afull explanation to theMalaysian public. We alsoexpect the media to high-light this scandal and de-mand full accountability.This is their social respon-sibility from which theycannot run away.

Anil NettoExecutive Committee Member

12 February 1999

TTTTT

We expect the media to highlight thisscandal and demand full accountability.This is their social responsibility fromwhich they cannot run away.

Who received theMitsui kickbacks?


he French philosopherMichel Foucault oncesaid that “the questionof Islam will remain

with us as a political issue forgenerations to come. The firstcondition to be met when ad-dressing this phenomenon,even with a modicum of intel-ligence, is not to approach itwith hate.” Unfortunately, hateand fear happen to be amongthe lesser human qualities thatare in abundant supply in theworld today, particularly in thesphere of mass media and(dis)information.

Witness, for instance, the man-ner in which the resoundingvictory of the Islamist partyPAS in the recent Malaysianelections (29 November 1999)has been described in the main-stream Malaysian and interna-tional media. Almost as soonas it became clear that the rul-ing UMNO-led BarisanNasional coalition had sufferedserious losses in the Malaystates of the north, the foreignmedia were already warningtheir readers of the dangers of‘Islamic fundamentalism’ andthe potential rise of another‘Iran-like’ Islamic state inSoutheast Asia. Foreign inves-tors promptly reacted by pull-ing out some of their invest-ments when the leadership of

the Islamic party announcedthat it would soon impose aban on gambling and other so-cial practices regarded as haramin Islam. (Of course, the factthat there were no casinos orgambling dens in Terengganuand Kelantan, the two Malaystates won by PAS, in the firstplace did not dawn on thesemedia ‘experts’ and investorsat all).

Sadly these fears have beenechoed and reflected in the lo-cal Malaysian media as well.The reduction of the complexPAS-UMNO conflict into onepredicated on the terms ‘Islamversus Secularism’ has been re-produced by the mainstreamMalaysian media ad infinitum,including some of the morecritical commentators on thepolitical fringe like M.G.G.Pillai. In his article ‘BNwins,UMNO loses: It’s now Is-lam vs Secularism’ (Harakah, 3Dec 1999) Pillai concludes hisassessment of the 10th generalelections in the followingterms: “The Prime Minister’smiscalculations reduces politicsto a contest between Islam andsecularism, with the non-Malays, especially the Chinese,having no supporting role inany capacity. That is the real-ity of what the tenth generalelections foretell, not the mas-

sive majority the BNwrought”.

That such a prognosis could beoffered at this juncture is notsurprising considering thesomewhat spectacular circum-stances leading to and after theelections themselves. Com-mentators like Pillai correctlynote that Chinese support forthe UMNO-led BN coalitioncame “with a near total aliena-tion (of UMNO) in the Malayheartland. It is all but wipedout in Terengganu andKelantan, with the groundshaken in Perlis, Kedah andPahang. The Malay groundwent against (the Prime Min-ister) , taking as casualties fourcabinet ministers, six deputyministers, one minister-to-be,one chief minister, several stateexecutive councillors”.

Such observations are tem-pered by the apparently fear-ful outcome of this major shiftin voting patterns and politi-cal perceptions among theMalays: “The loss of the Malayheartland is frightening. Thesilent majority - yes the sameevocative phrase RichardNixon used to justify his con-tinuance in power - from theMalay heartland does not sup-port him (the Prime Minister)or UMNO. …So, you now have

POLITICS

Need To Go Beyond Rhetoric of ‘Islam vs Secularism’

PA S ’ V i c t o ry is a Political One

by Farish A Noor

TTTTT


the Chinese-based Malay-con-trolled BN government pittingagainst the Malay-backed PAS,with no gradations in between.It does not augur well for Ma-laysia or the BN if this confron-tation proceeds along theselines.”

However, we need to under-stand and analyse the conflictbetween PAS and UMNO on anumber of levels, for the factof the matter is that the entirePAS-UMNO confrontation hasalways been one that was com-plex and confounding to ob-servers. Due to the fact thatmuch of this conflict has beenfought out on the level ofMalay-Islamist political dis-course, there has always beena tendency for both actors andobservers to read the conflictin purely narrative terms, andthus accept the narrative itselfas the substance of politics.What we hope to do is to showthat underlying this discursiveconflict between ‘Islam vs Secu-larism’ are actual political, so-cial and economic factors thatare themselves crucial in deter-mining the tenor and contentof the discourse itself. But be-fore we do that, we need toexamine how and why the con-flict between PAS and UMNOhas been fought on the discur-sive plane of Islamist rhetoricin the first place:

Why Islam? Or more appropri-ately, why the symbols, meta-phors, tropes, characters,myths and legends of Islam?Why couldn’t the ideologues

of PAS and UMNO choose tofight out their conflicts on thesite of economic or politicaldiscourse instead? Rather thanattacking the record of UMNOon economic and politicalgrounds, why did PAS chooseto pick on UMNO’s Islamiccredentials?

On the surface at least, the an-swer might seem quite simple:PAS is, after all, a self-confessedIslamist party with an Islamistagenda. It is therefore hardlysurprising if it attacks the gov-ernment by doing what it doesbest i.e. pushing its own Islam-ist project. The other obviousreason is that PAS is the onlyIslamist opposition party in thecountry. The Democratic ActionParty (DAP) that is predomi-nantly made up of non-MuslimChinese is hardly in a positionto tell UMNO what is Islamicand what is not.

But when we look at both par-ties we also see points of simi-larity that have often been ne-glected by commentators andanalysts who are more inclinedto simplify the subjects of theirstudy for the sake of arrivingat neat solutions. For bothUMNO and PAS are, in effect,Islamic parties in a sense. Whilethe Islamist agenda of PAS isclear for all to see, it is impor-tant to note that UMNO doesnot base its ideology on secu-larist grounds at all.

Unlike other nationalist-mod-ernist parties in the contempo-rary Islamic world (such as thesecular Kemalist regime in Tur-key or the various nationalistgovernments of Egypt, Syriaand Tunisia), the UMNO party

has always been one that hasbased its ideology on its com-mitment to defend both Malayinterests as well as the reli-gious beliefs and values of theMalays themselves: Islam.

It is precisely because both PASand UMNO inhabit a commondiscursive space (Islam) thatthe boundaries between thetwo need to be drawn everclearer and tighter. This ex-plains why both UMNO andPAS have embarked on theirrespective Islamisation pro-grammes, with the hope thatthey would not only dominatethe discursive space of Islambut also win the battle for thehearts and minds of the Malay-Muslim masses. That is why itis wrong for us to think thatPAS is the only party that hasbeen focusing on the goal ofIslamisation of the state. In acase of not seeing the wood forthe trees, most commentatorshave failed to note the fact thatUMNO has also been bent onits course of Islamisation sincethe 1980s, albeit on somewhatdifferent grounds.

For much of the 80s and 90s,both PAS and UMNO havebeen caught in this intense andintimate struggle within thesame discursive site. Both par-ties and their ideologues havesought to control the use andmeaning of crucial terms andsymbols in the repertoire ofIslamist discourse. PAS has con-tinually tried to gain the upperhand over UMNO by pushingtheir Islamist agenda to thelimit, identifying key themesand concerns in the Islamist dis-course such as Hudood law,apostasy (murtad), blasphemy

The Conf l i c t o f ‘ Is lamversus Secular ism’ as a

Narrative Device


and other controversial themesas the staging posts for theircampaigns. Why? The answerlies in the fact that these keythemes and concepts serve asthe crucial boundary posts inthe discursive war that hastaken place between UMNOand PAS. To put it simply: bylaying claim to such controver-sial issues like calling for thedeath penalty to be imposed onthose apostates who leave thefold of Islam, PAS has tried to‘out-Islamise’ UMNO and toshow that it’s own Islamist cre-dentials have been strongerand sounder.

For nearly two decades, be-tween 1982 to 1998, UMNOmanaged to contain the chal-lenge of PAS quite well. What-ever challenge that PAS couldthrow its way, UMNO man-aged to deflect their challengesby coming up with concreteevidence of its own commit-ment to Islamisation (such asthe creation of the Islamic uni-versity, the Islamic bank andnumerous Islamic think-tanksand research centres). Further-more, UMNO had one unique

and important asset to useagainst PAS: Anwar Ibrahim.

It cannot be denied that theentry of the ex-president andfounder of the Malaysian Is-lamic Youth Movement, AnwarIbrahim into UMNO in 1982was one of the biggest coupsever achieved by the UMNO-led government. Coming at atime when the tide of Islamicresurgence was beginning togain momentum, the pre-emptive move managed tosplit the Islamist opposition inthe country and it gave UMNOthe much-needed Islamist cre-dentials that it sought.

Why was Anwar so importantto UMNO, and what role didhe play in the UMNO-PAS con-flict?

When we discuss the role andimportance of Anwar Ibrahimto UMNO in the 80s and 90s,we need to distinguish be-tween the man and the sym-

bol and betweenthe politician andthe Islamist. Thosewho have studiedthe personality andhistory of Anwarwill know that hewas one of themost interestingfigures in theMalaysian politicalscene of the late20th century. Tosome extent, healso managed tocultivate (a some-what different) im-

age on the international sceneas well.

But in the Malaysian context,and in particular in the Malay-Islamic context, Anwar stoodfor a number of things: He be-came associated with the tideof resurgent political Islam,with the concerns of the Malay-Muslim constituency and animage of the progressive mod-ern Muslim. This added toUMNO’s claim that it was theonly party that could project apositive image of Islam as aprogressive and worldly reli-gion, that could meet the needsof modern Muslims in the 20thcentury. The interplay betweenPrime Minister Dr. MahathirMohamad and Anwar Ibrahimas his deputy created in the enda concert of mutually sustain-able and beneficial concerns. Itprojected an image of a Mus-lim Asian leadership that wasconsciously trying to addressproblems of global politics anddominance, uplifting the Mus-lims’ lot and broadening thehorizons of the Muslim mind.It was the presence of Anwarin UMNO which gave the poli-cies of the government muchof its Islamist credentials. Aslong as Anwar was there in thecabinet, the policies that werepursued were somehow re-garded to be ‘Islamically cor-rect’ and thus acceptable. Inthis sense, Anwar had becomean Islamist symbol, a ‘mastersignifier’ that somehow con-ferred additional meanings tothe other signifiers in the dis-cursive repertoire of UMNO.

It must be remembered, how-ever that Anwar the symbolwas also Anwar the politician.

UMNO’s u se o fAnwar Ibrahim as

Islamist symbol

Anwar gave UMNO the much-needed Islamist credentialsthat it sought.


In his capacity as an UMNOpolitician, Anwar also en-dorsed and participated inmany state-orchestrated cam-paigns against the Islamist op-position movements in thecountry. Anwar’s role in thecampaign to ban the al-Arqammovement in the mid-90s andhis part in numerous electioncampaigns against PAS shouldnot be overlooked. It wasthanks to Anwar’s presence inUMNO that allowed the gov-ernment to condemn PAS as aparty of religious extremistsand fanatics. In short, Anwar,as the Islamist symbol ofUMNO, was also one of themost important ideologicalweapons that UMNO had atits disposal in its efforts to con-tain the challenge of the Islam-ists in the country. This stateof affairs lasted nearly twodecades until Anwar’s dis-missal in 1998.

In a sense, it was the presenceof Anwar in UMNO that gavethe government the ability tocontrol and dominate the dis-cursive space of Islamism.With the sudden loss ofAnwar in 1998, UMNO sud-denly found that its mainweapon against the Islamistswas gone. What was worse,the loss of Anwar meant thatsuddenly all the policies ofUMNO were shorn of theirIslamist garb as well, reveal-ing only the more materialis-tic and commercial aspects ofUMNO’s developmentalpolicy open to the glare ofpublic attention.

The removal of Anwar, whohad been one of the key sym-bols in the public space of Is-lamist discourse, also openedup the space of discourse toother contenders as well. Assoon as UMNO experiencedthis traumatic schism within itranks, it became clear that the‘Islamist game’ was up forgrabs once again. In the breachwent the Islamists of PAS,ABIM and other Islamic or-ganisations, movements andNGOs. As a result, the dis-course of Islam became a siteof contestation once more,with various Islamist factionsand groupings trying tomanœuvre themselves into aposition where they could in-filtrate, take over and harnessthe discourse for their ownends.

PAS, which had been silencedfor so long thanks to UMNOand Anwar’s dominant pres-ence in the field, found that itcould now tear into UMNO’scredentials and mortally dam-age the latter’s standing as anIslamist party in the country. Itdid so with a vengeance, andin the process its discoursecame to borrow more andmore from the internationalpan-Islamist discourse of con-temporary Islamist politics.This is how and why the con-flict between PAS and UMNOcame to be reconfigured inquasi-mythical terms, as theperennial Jihad of Islam and thewar between the forces ofgood and the evil forces ofSecularism. From what was es-sentially a political conflict be-tween two parties withroughly similar ideologicalfoundations, the conflict be-

tween PAS and UMNO becamea war between the believersand the mushrikin andmunafikin. The myth of ‘Islamvs Secularism’ was thus born.

The biggest problem faced byoutside observers of this con-flict (and this includes the vastnumbers of non-Malays, non-Muslims, ‘secular Malays’, ex-ternal observers and the inter-national media and investorscommunity) is how to under-stand it. Do the supporters ofPAS (and to a lesser extent,UMNO) really believe that thepolitical conflict between thetwo parties is a conflict be-tween Islam and Secularism? Isthis really a war between thebelievers and the infidels?

Is this really going to lead thecountry towards similar ex-treme situations as found inTurkey, Algeria, Iran, Tunisiaand Pakistan?

In order to explain this situa-tion satisfactorily, we first needto understand the differencebetween Discourse and Real-ity, and the link between thetwo.

There are some empirically-minded political scientists whohold that all political phenom-ena can only be understood bylooking at actual, materialmechanisms. The language ofpolitics, they maintain, are butempty words and slogans thatare used to beguile the massesand to formulate grandiose

Between Discourseand Real i ty : ‘ Is lam vs

Secular ism’ as Symptomof Political Conflict

Loss of Anwar:Islamist DiscourseOpened Up Again


ideologies that colour the land-scape of politics without affect-ing it.

Yet if we take this view, wecannot explain how and whythe political behaviour and vot-ing patterns of everyday politi-cal actors (the public) changesso much due to the way thatthey understand and interpretthe political scene around them.For discourse not only de-scribes reality, but in the proc-ess of doing so, shapes it aswell. When the Iranian revo-lutionaries were condemningthe Shah of Iran as the ‘puppetof Satan’, this was not merelya nasty form of abuse: it waseffectively a means of drawingan ideological and political di-vide between them and theregime they sought to topple.Likewise when the supportersof PAS today condemn UMNOas being an anti-Islamic party,they are not merely hurlingabuse at the government. Whatthey are doing, in effect, is cre-ating a divisive and irreconcil-able frontier between them andthe state, thereby radically re-drawing the political terrain ofthe country.

Discourse therefore shapes re-ality, and reality (including po-litical reality) is discursively-constructed. We cannot di-vorce the language of politicsfrom the substance of politics:both are intermingled and in-terdependent.

But through understanding thelanguage of politics we alsocome to understand the sub-stance of politics that it reflectsand refers to. True, there aretimes when the language of

politics can become so inflatedand inflammatory that one can-not see beyond the hyperboleand polemics. This has certainlybecome the case here in Malay-sia where the opposition’s dis-course against the governmenthas been reworked into anelaborate myth of confronta-tion that requires ahermeneutic code of its own tounderstand. (This is also whysignificant sections of the popu-lation do not understand whatthe Islamists are on about, sim-ply because their discourse hasbecome so self-referential).

But nevertheless we can still tryto understand the actual stateof affairs in the country bylooking closely at both the ac-tions and enunciations of theprincipal actors closely. Theappeal of PAS, for instance, hasbeen based on its commitmentto reversing some of the moreunpopular economic and de-velopmental policies of theUMNO government. The factthat the party announced thatit will abolish road tolls in thestate of Terengganu as soon asit comes to power is proof, ifany was needed, that PAS isfundamentally a political partythat is rooted in real-life eco-nomic and political concerns ofthe here-and-now.

Despite the rhetoric of the Is-lamists, there is ample evidenceto show that their politics re-mains one of pragmaticworldly concerns: Of buildingalliances, constructing instru-mental political coalitions, ofwinning seats in Parliament,gaining greater representation,forming and implementingpolicies of their own. While the

q

Dr. Farish A Noor is aDr. Farish A Noor is aDr. Farish A Noor is aDr. Farish A Noor is aDr. Farish A Noor is aMalaysian political scien-Malaysian political scien-Malaysian political scien-Malaysian political scien-Malaysian political scien-tist and the Secretary-Gen-tist and the Secretary-Gen-tist and the Secretary-Gen-tist and the Secretary-Gen-tist and the Secretary-Gen-eral of the Internationaleral of the Internationaleral of the Internationaleral of the Internationaleral of the InternationalMovement for a Just World.Movement for a Just World.Movement for a Just World.Movement for a Just World.Movement for a Just World.He is currently researchingHe is currently researchingHe is currently researchingHe is currently researchingHe is currently researchingthe topic of political Islamthe topic of political Islamthe topic of political Islamthe topic of political Islamthe topic of political Islamin the Malay world.in the Malay world.in the Malay world.in the Malay world.in the Malay world.

opponents and enemies of PAShave bought the party’s Islam-ist rhetoric wholesale, andhave condemned it on thegrounds of its ‘un-worldli-ness’, evidence shows that theparty’s ownoverheated Islamist rhetoric isgrounded on its (sometimes in-accurate) perception of politi-cal realities.

These, then, are the real factorsthat underlie the strategy ofPAS. Despite the rhetoric of theparty’s senior ideologues likeUstaz Fadzil Noor, Ustaz HadiAwang and Haji Mustafa Ali,PAS remains committed to thepolitics of the here-and-now, ina profane secular world wherematerial gains and loses domatter. The emergence ofIslamism as the main politicaldiscourse in the country is thenatural result of a political con-flict that is unique to UMNOand PAS, and their own com-plex intermingled histories.This should not, however, dis-tract the supporters and oppo-nents of PAS from the impor-tant fact that the victory of theparty remains a political onethat has taken place in a worldshorn of mythical trappings.

Source: COMMENTARY, Interna-tional movement for a Just World,Number 31. (New Series) Dec. 1999


irst I must thank thehosts, especially MsIrene M. Santiago, con-vener of the Global Fo-

rum of Women Political Leaders,for the invitation to speak today.It was an invitation I couldn’trefuse; the subject matter is tooimportant and too relevant to ourtime. And Ms Santiago herselfshould be applauded for a life-time of work dedicated to thecause of making this world a bet-ter place, especially for women.

But my deepest gratitude goes toCory Aquino, who is the moralforce behind this forum. Cory, tome, is more than a friend. She isan inspiration. I would probablybe flattering myself if I say that ourlives are in some ways parallel.But events in my country sinceSeptember 1998 have drawn uscloser and I think I understandbetter now the pain and anguishthat she and her family wentthrough when Ninoy became thevictim of a dictator’s cowardice.Indeed, Cory – with her courage,her patience, her fortitude, her in-domitable spirit in the face ofgreat odds – is a tough act to fol-low. She will always be a guidinglight, a source of inspiration notonly to the women of Asia, but toall Asians who have to fight in-justice and oppression in theirmyriad forms. As one of the pio-

neers of women’s participation inpublic life, Cory belongs to thatgreat tradition which has givenus such luminaries as Kartini ofIndonesia and Sarojini Naidu ofIndia. Being here in the Philip-pines, I am reminded of her greatson Jose Rizal and of a poignantpassage in one of the many lettershe wrote to his friends:

The Filipino … remembers onlythe kindness he has received; heeasily forgets resentments, and ifhe has only smiles and tears forthose who have treated himharshly when he sees them de-part, what would he have for thosewho had been good when he seesthem in misfortune?

For this magnanimity, this tender-ness of the heart that Rizal speaksof, the Filipino is certainly fa-mous. I can attest to that, as canmany others who have been hereand who have made friendsamong the Filipinos. And the sub-ject is not unrelated to our discus-sion. Rizal is speaking of an at-tribute that springs from the samespirit that makes us able to loveour fellow humans. And love is apowerful force. It can change his-tory.

Which one of us women in this

WOMEN

Imagine The DifferenceWe Can Make

L o v e –A Powerful Force

FFFFF

Women cannot remain oblivious to the burning issues confrontingtheir society

When democracyfails, it is usually the

women who bearthe brunt of

suffering. Whentheir husbands

become the directvictims of

oppression, they arethe ones left to fendfor their children.

When, as oftenhappens, an erosionof democracy leadsto economic crisis,

women are the firstto lose their jobs.


hall can say that she is not proudthat God has given women a tre-mendous capacity for love? If loveand compassion were absent fromthe hearts of women, how couldlife itself continue? Few childrenwould survive if their motherswere motivated solely by a senseof duty. In his book The Asian Ren-aissance, Anwar Ibrahim assertsthat compassion is an essentialelement in the practice of polity ifleadership is not to be divorcedfrom ethics and morality. He saysit “liberates and takes us on to ahigher kind of loyalty, onto whatis true, just and virtuous.” I don’tbelieve there are psychological orideological barriers strongenough to defeat the power oflove. So we women are especiallywell-armed against them.

The importance of women in poli-tics is underscored by their sheernumbers. In my country, for in-stance, more than half of registeredvoters are women. Furthermore,they have shown that they areconscientious in their democraticduty, for they have always out-numbered men in voter turnout.

Even in active political life, womenhave played pivotal roles, particu-larly in Asia. Indeed, althoughAsia is still steeped in tradition, ithas produced more women politi-cal leaders than have the indus-trial countries of North Americaand Europe. Women have occu-pied the highest public office inall the four countries of SouthAsia - India, Pakistan, Bangladeshand Sri Lanka. In Indonesia,Megawati Sukarnoputri led herparty to victory in the first demo-cratic election in three decades,after playing a crucial role in end-ing the rule of Suharto, then thelongest-serving political head ofstate in Asia. And, of course, thereis Cory Aquino, who led her peo-

ple against an arrogant dictator-ship and revitalised democracy inthe Philippines.

The high visibility of women oc-cupying public office in our regionis a strong argument against thebelief that ideological or psycho-logical impediments are too greatto enable women to participateactively in politics. I grant thatthese obstacles exist, but they arenot insurmountable. Growingequality in educational, economicand social conditions has greatlypromoted gender equality. WhenToni Morrison was awarded theNobel Prize in literature in 1993,she did not win it because shewas a woman or because she wasblack. She won it simply becauseshe was a great writer.

Anwar Ibrahim has consistentlydescribed politics as an“uncharismatic and low-moraleprofession.” That was his viewwhen he was leading student andyouth movements in Malaysia inthe 1970s and early 1980s. Hemaintained that view when hewas part of the ruling administra-tion and a leader of the rulingparty. And that is still his viewtoday. One should not plunge intopolitics unless one has a cause tofight.

I was trained as a general physi-cian and, later on, as anopthalmologist. I had alwayswanted to be a doctor and I triedmy best to excel because I believed– and still do - that helping to curea person’s illness or at least reducehis or her pain is a noble-enoughcause for anyone. I worked as adoctor for many years and I didthe job with a great sense of self-fulfilment. But when Anwar be-came Deputy Prime Minister, I hadto give up my practice - grudgingly,in the beginning - because I had

to involve myself in general socialwork and assist him in his verydemanding public position.

Some women, to paraphraseShakespeare, “are thrust intogreatness.” Ready or not, theyhave to carry that burden, to liveup to expectations. But a great andnoble cause will enable anywoman to overcome any barrier,ideological or psychological. Inmy case, however, such barrierswere virtually non-existent. Peo-ple came readily to my support.Perhaps, in a paradoxical sense, Iwas luckier than most womenpoliticians because the injusticeagainst my husband was so obvi-ous and so extreme that the manyMalaysians who loved truth, jus-tice and decency rallied to thecause without worrying whetherthe call came from a woman or aman.

And there are still plenty of greatand noble causes to fight for ifyou love your fellow humans andhate to see them oppressed.

Three weeks ago, millions acrossthe globe awaited the tick of theclock that would usher in the newmillennium. For them, it would bea moment to celebrate, for it hap-pens only once in a thousandyears. But for hundreds of mil-lions of others, the tick of the clockis only part of a sequence in themarch of time in which they willcontinue their life under grindingpoverty. What is there to celebrateif you are homeless, if you are des-titute, or if you are a boy having tobeg in the streets, or one of thethousands of young girls forcedby circumstances to become sexworkers?

For Aung San Su Kyi, the first day

The Burning Issues


of the millennium was just an-other day of freedom denied. ForAnwar Ibrahim, it was anotherday in incarceration, another dayin which he suffers as a victim oftrumped-up charges.

There are thousands more politi-cal prisoners and prisoners of con-science who will continue to lan-guish in their cold and lonelycells, where the darkness is bro-ken only by the light of their forti-tude and unrelenting hope.

Undoubtedly, Asia has pro-gressed far ahead of the day whenRizal was killed for disturbing thepeace and tranquillity of Spanishrulers. Sedition was the crime theysaid he committed. But Rizalwanted only to tell the truth. Hewanted his readers to see the ills,the social cancers that infected hissociety, for what they were. Be-cause truth has a liberating power,it threatens those afraid of losingthe scepter. That is why they con-sider telling the truth seditiousand subversive.

It has been a century since Rizalleft us. And most Asians havelived for half a century as free na-tions. Thus one would expectcharges such as subversion andsedition against political enemiesas anachronistic. One would havethought that with the passing ofcolonialism, the kind of sufferingthat Rizal had to undergo wouldbe no more.

Yet, only last week, opposition fig-ures in my country were arrestedand accused of sedition. Theircrime was that they made state-ments pertaining to certain eventsthat did not agree with the officialview. In a related case, the so-called crime was publicising thefindings of official investigationsinto the corrupt practice of gov-

ernment ministers who, appar-ently, are protected from prosecu-tion.

Women of Asia cannot remainoblivious to the burning issuesconfronting their society, be theypolitical, economic or social. Thequest for democracy and civil so-ciety will remain high on ouragenda. When democracy fails, itis usually the women who bearthe brunt of suffering. When theirhusbands become the direct vic-tims of oppression, they are theones left to fend for their children.When, as often happens, an ero-sion of democracy leads to eco-nomic crisis, women are the firstto lose their jobs.

Many of the ills of our societyare the direct consequence of thefragility of our democracy, or ab-sence of it. Unless our democ-racy truly becomes the vehicle forvox populi, the voice of the peo-ple, the national agenda willcontinue to be nothing morethan a reflection of the en-trenched vested interests of theelite. In extreme cases, the na-tional agenda would be underthe direct dictate of the selfishfew. Denying a people their rightto a free flow of information andopinion means denying themthe right to educate themselvesand to think for themselves. Thelong-term consequences couldbe tragic. When people get usedto being fed only the informationallowed by the powerful elite,there might come a time whenthey would be hard put to an-swer T.S. Eliot’s questions:

Where is the Life we have lost in liv-ing?Where is the wisdom we have lost inknowledge?Where is the knowledge we have lostin information?

A democratic government mustexpend resources towards allevi-ating poverty, providing qualityeducation and health care, en-couraging the freedom of expres-sion and widening the range ofchoices. Democracy becomes amockery when, in its name, thepress is gagged, choices are re-duced and the provision of socialservices becomes a means offattening cronies.

For democracy to work, it must besupported by certain values andinstitutions. Fairness and a levelplaying field are crucial. A freepress is indispensible as a vehi-cle of expression so that the elec-torate is exposed to the widestrange of views possible in orderfor them to make informedchoices. A credible and independ-ent judiciary is fundamental.Without these supports, democ-racy is hollow, a body without asoul, a convenient tool of manipu-lation for ruthless and crafty poli-ticians. It gives them an air of le-gitimacy in their authoritarianrule. Indeed, democracy then be-comes a virtual tyranny.

This is precisely what is happen-ing in many new democracies. Anelected government thinks it isgiven the mandate to do anythingit likes, including denying thepeople their freedom and basicrights, withdrawing the publish-ing licences of publications thatcriticise it, harrasing the opposi-tion, and instilling fear in themind of citizens through system-atic fascist-like propaganda. It iswidely believed in Malaysia thatmost young people are reform-minded and pro-change. And itis safe to assume that they werethe majority among the nearly

Democracy: MoreThan Mere Elections


700,000 citizens who registered asvoters in the wake of our politicalcrisis. But in the election twomonths ago, they were robbed oftheir constitutional right. Theywere registered, but not gazetted,to vote. The election was manipu-lated to favour the ruling party.

It is most important for us to un-derstand that democracy is aboveall a process. For a government tocall itself democratic, it must sub-ject itself to the rigours of that proc-ess. An election whichdisenfrancises voters does notmake for a democracy. Democracycannot survive without a freepress. It is dead if the press is en-gineered to be submissive.

There is a palpable renewed andincreased interest in politics inMalaysia today. Young people arebecoming more politically aware.Professionals such as doctors,lawyers and journalists, who usedto be quite contented with theirprofessional achievements, havegone into the political fray in thewake of the crisis that followed thesacking of Anwar Ibrahim, his ar-rest and his beating at the handsof the police chief. Many in thisgroup are women who see a wor-thy cause to champion. Theircause is not to champion the rightof one man, but to champion jus-tice, democracy and freedom.They want to reform the countryand cure it of the cancer of nepo-tism, cronyism and rent-seeking.It has dawned upon them thatpower by itself is expansionaryand the thirst for it is un-quench-able. Power corrupts, and frailtyis the politician’s name. One mustnot believe that the average politi-cian has the angelic quality to re-sist the temptations of power. Evenhonest and well-meaning politi-cians must submit to the rigorousprocess because they must learnto steel themselves against the

whisperings of base motives. It isfor this reason that power mustbe reined in, checked and madesubject to democratic control.

Likewise, the rapacious greed ofthe cronies must be subjected totransparent corporate practice.Healthy competition must be pro-moted, in politics as well as inbusiness. Many economies havesuffered greatly from greed andthe wages of past economic sins –corruption, cronyism and nepo-tism. As the economy recovers, acleansing process must take place.An economy that stubbornlyrefuses to reform and instead per-petrates new sins will soon see itsday of reckoning. And the crisisthat follows will be severe andpainful.

The renewed interest in politicsand social activism attests to thefact that the spirit of reformasi isvery much alive. Its tremendousenergies are being channeled toparty organizations, NGOs andeven the popular arts. Therein, Ibelieve, lie the seeds of a trulydemocratic country.

As we enter the new century, eco-nomic and technological forceswill bring the region into greatercohesiveness. It is our duty to ac-celerate the process of democracyand deepen civil society in the re-gion. We can do this by forginggreater solidarity among demo-cratic forces in the region, includ-ing the latent but potent collectivepower of women. Gone are thedays when people used to iden-tify democracy only with elections.We must educate our people sothat they know what their rightsare. They must know that they arefree and they must treasure theirfreedom. They must know that

they have the right to informationand cannot be victimised bypropaganda. They must knowthat democracy also means thecontrol and distribution of power,transparency and the rule of law.

Certainly, we must be ever mind-ful that we must strike a middlepath in our quest for democracy.What we want is freedom, notchaos or anarchy. Our vision offreedom is based on law and or-der, but those laws must be justlaws, not laws legislated in orderto stifle and paralyse freedom, tosuppress dissent and to defeatpolitical opponents. There aremany laws, but there is little jus-tice. We all know that Germanyunder Hitler also had laws, as didStalin’s Russia. Those laws werebut iron claws against their ownpeople. Thus the revitalisation ofdemocracy requires the elimina-tion of repressive and draconianlaws. Only laws animated by thespirit of justice should have aplace in the new millennium.

These challenges are gender neu-tral. But women politicians andwomen’s organizations can con-tribute immensely to the realiza-tion of their noble objectives. If wecould somehow harness the tre-mendous collective power ofwomen – in the Southeast Asianregion, for instance — imaginethe difference we could make.

Thank you. Maraming salamat po.

The Spirit ofReformasi Is Alive

Dr Wan Azizah WanIsmail, MP and Presidentof KeADILan delivered thisspeech at the Forum ofWomen Political Leadersin Manila on 18 January,2000.

q


“Libertyof thought

meansliberty

to communicateone's thought.”

AM 2000: 20(1)

Send this form andpayment to

ALIRAN DISTRIBUTIONBUREAU

103, MEDAN PENAGA,11600 JELUTONG,PENANG, MALAYSIA

Salvador de Madariage1886 - 1973

Spanish diplomat, writer, critic

Please send this gift subscription to :

Mr./Ms.

Address

SubscriptionSubscriptionSubscriptionSubscriptionSubscription 1 year1 year1 year1 year1 year AIRAIRAIRAIRAIRfor 11 issuesfor 11 issuesfor 11 issuesfor 11 issuesfor 11 issues 2 years2 years2 years2 years2 years SEASEASEASEASEA

I enclose money order / postal order / cheque for the above order

amounting to RM payable to Aliran.

This gift subscription is paid for and presented by:

Mr./Ms.

Address

Date Signature

ONE YEARONE YEARONE YEARONE YEARONE YEARRM25.00

S $ 2 8AIRAIRAIRAIRAIR

US$25US$28

US$30

SEASEASEASEASEAU S $ 2 1U S $ 2 1

U S $ 2 1

TWO YEARSTWO YEARSTWO YEARSTWO YEARSTWO YEARSRM50.00

S $ 5 0AIRAIRAIRAIRAIR

US$44US$50

US$54

SEASEASEASEASEAUS$38US$38

US$38

SUBSCRIPTION RATESCOUNTRYCOUNTRYCOUNTRYCOUNTRYCOUNTRYMALAYSIA

SINGAPORE & BRUNEI

ASIA & THE PACIFICEUROPE & EGYPT

AFRICA, NORTH AMERICA,SOUTH AMERICA, HAWAII

GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONORDER FORM

Mr./Ms.

Address

SubscriptionSubscriptionSubscriptionSubscriptionSubscription 1 year1 year1 year1 year1 year AIRAIRAIRAIRAIRfor 11 issuesfor 11 issuesfor 11 issuesfor 11 issuesfor 11 issues 2 years2 years2 years2 years2 years SEASEASEASEASEA

Donation for Aliran ..............................................Donation for Aliran ..............................................Donation for Aliran ..............................................Donation for Aliran ..............................................Donation for Aliran ..............................................

TOTAL Enclosed : Money Order / Postal Order / Cheque

(No. ) payable to Aliranpayable to Aliranpayable to Aliranpayable to Aliranpayable to Aliran

RM

RM

RM

ALIRAN MONTHLY SUBSCRIPTION FORM

AM 2000: 20(1)

AM 2000: 20(1)

AM 2000: 20(1)

A GIFTof one publication

of your choiceif you subscribe to

AliranMonthly

N O W(Tick one)

PandanganALIRAN

The Arms Race:Humanity in Crisis


The old adage that we learn aschildren is “look before you leap”.It implies think, or fikir, before youdo anything. Apparently, FikiranSyndicate forgot about it.Whatwas initially promised as one ofthe greatest jumps on earth haseventually fallen flat on the facesof the organizers and participantsof the South Pole Jump. As we allknow, the Malaysia Boleh groupput together by Fikiran missed thecoveted spot by some 1,800 km. Ofcourse it was not their fault. Theforeigners, the Russians and theAmericans, had “misled” thegroup. This blaming of foreignersusually works. But not this time.For a rival team of Malaysianjumpers cried “foul”. Althoughaware that they had not jumpedover the geographical South Pole,the Fikiran team, apparently, ac-cording to their rivals, still claimedthat they had done so. The rivalsfurther revealed that Fikiran hadbeen loaned RM780,000 by theMinistry of Youth and Sports. Atwhich point, the Fikiran leadereven had the gall to say that otherMalaysians should mind theirown business and something else

about critics being unpatriotic. Heeven threatened to sue ! Is this fikiror tak fikir ? And despite the factthat the deputy minister of Youthand Sports Ong Tee Keat has an-nounced that the Ministry will begetting to the bottom of the matter,the Ministry, too, should have fikircarefully before loaning the peo-ple’s RM780,000 to the Syndicate(hmm).

There is an important lesson here.For everything and anything hasbecome Malaysia Boleh these days.Petronas Twin Towers – MalaysiaBoleh ! KLIA – i ! CommonwealthGames – Malaysia Boleh ! Con-quering Mt Everest – MalaysiaBoleh ! Circumnavigating theEarth solo on a new route with astop to replace a mast with thehelp of the RMAF – Malaysia Boleh! Tongkat Ali – Malaysia Boleh !Anna and the King of Siam – Ma-laysia Boleh ! Michelle Yeoh – Ma-laysia Boleh.! There is a real dan-ger that the syndicates out therewill begin to think that they caneven lay claims to deeds whichthey didn’t achieve. Tak Boleh !Really, we should specify apa bolehand apa tak boleh (what’s alright

and what isn’t). Then perhaps wewill hear cries of Malaysia Bolehfor rule of law, justice, transpar-ency, protecting the environmentand eliminating poverty. And takboleh for corruption, nepotism,ISA, and leaps into fantasy.

But there was a praiseworthy as-pect to this entire episode. Thanksto a particular Malaysian journal-ist details about the whole episodehave come to light. She inter-viewed the Fikiran group, the ri-val team and members of the Min-istry. Via the email clarificationswere sought and obtained fromthe Russian organisers and otherforeign third parties, some ofwhom jumped, as well as thosewho did not, and are trying to gettheir money back. Yes, theMalaysian media is wired to therest of the world. And there arejournalists who are capable of in-vestigative journalism. Now, letus see more of this kind of Malay-sia Boleh journalism. How aboutinvestigating the kickbacks thatMitsui has admitted to the Japa-nese tax office that it paid to aMalaysian company in order togain a Telecoms contract ? For allyou know the foreigners, in thiscase the Japanese, might be tryingto do us in again. And since theTelecoms and Anti-CorruptionAgency have announced that theyare investigating the issue, theMalaysian mass media would beperforming a patriotic duty, inmore than one sense, by lendingthem a helping hand.

Instead of six, we now have tenanchor banks. All the other banksand finance companies (exceptBank Rakyat) will be merging withthem. Predictably, this is consid-ered by some experts to be the cor-rect number of banks a country thesize of Malaysia ought to have.Such consolidation, it is argued,

Fikir Before You Leap

Malaysia Boleh

Mega Banks


will enhance efficiency and allowMalaysian banks to compete effec-tively in the international finan-cial system. But wait a minute.Didn’t Tun Diam insist, just somesix or so months ago that six wasjust the right number of banks? Wewill recall that there occurredmuch protest then, at least behindthe scenes. What seems to be thecriteria used for determiningwhether it ought to be ten, or sixbanks? Or eight or nine for thatmatter. Whatever the criteria, thewithdrawal of the initial order forthe banks and finance companiesto merge into six major groupingshelped the KLSE to come to lifeagain. For just prior to the recentbull run focused on IT and com-munications-related counters, thebanking and finance counterswere themselves being tradedheavily as a result of speculationon their future status – anchorbanks or otherwise. True or nottrue ? Some more investigative andanalytical business journalismneeded here.

This thing about efficiency is a bitof a red herring. If, really, efficiencyis the goal, the size of a bank haslittle direct bearing. Those of uswho have studied or lived in theUK for instance might recall thatmany Brits banked, not even withbanks, but with savings and loanssocieties or housing mortgage co-operatives. Or if one spent sometime in the US, one usually bankedwith the local bank, say FirstIdaho, or a savings and trust com-pany with its headquarters in thecounty itself. Invariably they wereas efficient, and usually morefriendly, than the big banks.Transfers of foreign funds posedsome delays but not a problem. Forthese local banks, cooperativesand trust companies weretwinned to the big banks. At anyrate, most ordinary folk did notneed to engage in foreign transac-

tions on a regular basis. No doubtthere were some scams and scan-dals involving some trust compa-nies. But many others were notinvolved. And they are alive andwell today, open borders or no.Besides, several big banksthroughout the globe were in-volved in scandals. RememberBarings ? Granted, Malaysia musthave a few banks with consider-able assets to compete against therest. Say, three or four. Being a trad-ing country, our business peoplewill need to depend on efficientand strong Malaysian banks.Hence why couldn’t the smaller,friendlier banks, often the resultof true entrepreneurship, be al-lowed to play a role in Malaysia’sfinancial system ? Why did theyhave to merge too ? In fact, someof them had been more efficientthan the big banks which amassedthe bulk of bad debts. Were therepolitical considerations involved? That apart, I suspect that it hassomething to do with our, not tomention our leader’s fetish formega projects. Hence mega bankstoo.

She describes her decision to con-test the top post of Wanita UMNOas a healthy sign for democracyin the party. She insists that itwould be “ very undemocratic” toprevent a contest for the post ofWanita chief. She does not, at thesame time, apply the same convic-tion to the Supreme Council’s “no-contest” decision for the partypresidency and deputy presi-dency. She, of course, adds that theCouncil’s “no-contest” stand“serves only as a guideline and isnot a directive”…albeit a “veryundemocratic” guideline?Rafidah Aziz is 56. She was theWanita chief for 12 years beforeshe lost by a small margin of 27votes in the 1996 party elections.

In an interview with the NewStraits Times (30 Jan 2000) she de-clared “I don’t want to be goingon and on”…then immediatelywent on to explain why shewanted to become the chief onceagain.

Speaking of “going on”, The Starquoted Rafidah recently as sayingthat the Anwar Ibrahim issue hadno impact on foreign investmentsin the country. She believed“genuine investors know the realstory…They know that peoplecome and go, prime ministerscome and go and deputy primeministers come and go.... “Some-times in their countries, they seesix prime ministers in 10 yearsand they don’t even recognisetheir deputy prime minister, letalone idol-worship him.”

It must be quite a big surprise tothem though that in Malaysia, af-ter 19 years, we still see one primeminister! And little wonder thatthere are those like Rafidah whoidol-worship him. (But to be fair,she did complain in a note toAnwar about Daim and that“Mahathir had better shape up onhis judgment of people...”)Rafidah also said that foreign in-vestors knew that the stability ofpolitics in their country was“much, much, much, much less”than that in Malaysia…where ittakes “much, much, much, muchless” than a rumour of the PM fall-ing from a horse to send the stockmarket diving? Much, much,much humbug here.

Rafidah claims that WanitaUMNO is divided. She is going tounite everyone by joining in thefray! We are all expected to believethat a contest in the Wanita wingwill bring about much-neededunity, whilst a contest for thepresidency and the vice-presi-dency would create greater divi-

Raf idah “Goes OnA n d O n ”


sion. And when suggested thatshe vie for a vice-president’s post,she replies: “I am not ghairah(overly eager) to do anythingmore. Nak tanding vice-president?Forget it.” (Star, 15 Jan 2000). Yet,very strangely there seems to beample place on her plate for theUMNO Wanita’s crown – a posi-tion (as one of her supporters hadhighlighted) that will demandeven greater responsibility thanbeing a vice-president!

Post-election Penang was joltedwhen the two Lims declared theirintention to leave Gerakan and,subsequently, did leave the partyfor the Malaysian Chinese Asso-ciation (MCA). There were someunpleasant exchanges betweenleaders of the two Chinese-major-ity parties in the ruling coalition.Apparently the Gerakan still don’tquite understand why the twoLims quit. A bit out of time, a bit

out of tune the Gerakan leadersare now singing (more likewhingeing actually) the VillagePeople’s, “Why MCA?” thesedays. No such confusion inKelantan and Terengganu. Appar-ently, the Carpenters’ tune “We’veOnly Just Begun” is a big hit inthe two states, among PAS mem-bers, of course.

The latest twist to the BahasaBaku controversy leaves manyconcerned Malaysians agape:pronounce it the standardisedway only when you teach BahasaMelayu, but not when teachinghistory, geography, etc.

A policy spelt out in this mannerpaves the way for Bahasa Baku tobe transformed into Bahasa Bekubecause the standardised Malayis “frozen” within the confines ofMalay-language teaching. Such arestriction obviously denies it

Top Of The Pops

Bahasa Bakuor Beku?

room to grow and survive.

This neither-here-nor-there policywill certainly cause unnecessaryconfusion among schoolchildrenwhose shoulders have alreadybeen burdened by heavy bags fullof textbooks. How are we to tellthem that history, for example,doesn’t qualify to be taught inBahasa Baku? Moreover, howdoes one teach in this particularsituation where language is putin its historical context: “Dalamsejarah bahasa Melayu di negara kita,suatu kacau bilau tercetus akibat dariperubahan polisi bahasa secaramendadak. (In our nation’s historyof the Malay language, a conun-drum broke out of a drastic policyshift.)”

What the government in generaland the Education Ministry inparticular sorely requires is astandardisation of inconsisten-cies that would earn them an ISO9000 award.

“ D O N ’ T L E T M O B R U L EL E A D U S ”

Four years ago, an unruly mobdisrupted an international con-ference on seeking a peacefuland just solution to the EastTimor conflict.

“ D O N ’ T L E T H ATREDW I N ”

The closed-door APCET (II) con-ference, held in Hotel Asia, KualaLumpur, was legal. It was ameeting to look for peaceful so-lutions to a troubled regionwhere 200,000 people had died.


“ D O N ’ T L E T V I O L E N C ET R I U M P H ”

The mob kicked open a partitionand barged into the conferencehall. They banged on tables,threw aside chairs, shouting,stomping and shoving.

“ D O N ’ T L E T A N A R C H YR U L E ”

Some of the women participantswere punched and pushed to theground. The mob circled the par-ticipants. They terrorised,taunted and threatened them.

“ M A L AYSIA BOLEH!”The riot, we are now told, wasorchestrated by senior officials ofthe Government – which warnsthe people of mob rule. The mobwas led by leaders of UMNOYouth. The Police were there lateto arrest the victims of the mob!

DON’T LET THEM FOOL YOU ANYMORE

MALAYSIA ’S MOBSTER?

“We take full responsibility for what happened…WeWe take full responsibility for what happened…WeWe take full responsibility for what happened…WeWe take full responsibility for what happened…WeWe take full responsibility for what happened…Weare proud of their (the three UMNO Youth leadersare proud of their (the three UMNO Youth leadersare proud of their (the three UMNO Youth leadersare proud of their (the three UMNO Youth leadersare proud of their (the three UMNO Youth leadersfined for rioting) bravery and their maturity......We arefined for rioting) bravery and their maturity......We arefined for rioting) bravery and their maturity......We arefined for rioting) bravery and their maturity......We arefined for rioting) bravery and their maturity......We arenot regretting what has happened.”not regretting what has happened.”not regretting what has happened.”not regretting what has happened.”not regretting what has happened.”

- Hishammuddin Hussein, the then deputy UMNO Youth leader(Star, 1 Feb 1997)


DEMOCRACY

Justice At CrossroadsRais Yatim on Democratic Rights and the Rule of Law

Rais Yatim is of the view that there isno rule of law and no independenceof the judiciary in Malaysia and thatthe Malaysian Parliament has failedto protect fundamental freedoms.

Two weeks ago, after the arrest and the charging ofDAP Deputy Chairman and former five-term MP forJelutong Karpal Singh, Parti keADILan NasionalVice President Marina Yusoff, keADILan Youth chiefMohamed Ezam Mohd Noor, Harakah editorZulkifly Sulong and Harakah printer Cheah LimThye under the Sedition Act or Official Secrets Act, Iposed eight questions to the Minister in the PrimeMinister’s Department in charge of law and justice,Datuk Dr. Rais Yatim.

These questions concerned the administration ofjustice in Malaysia, three of which deal specificallywith the rule of law, the independence of the judici-ary and Parliament’s role in defending the rule oflaw and fundamental freedoms.

I now have Rais’ answers to these three questions,as follows:

Question 1 Question 1 Question 1 Question 1 Question 1 : Whether in Malaysia there is no rule : Whether in Malaysia there is no rule : Whether in Malaysia there is no rule : Whether in Malaysia there is no rule : Whether in Malaysia there is no ruleofofofofof law but only rule law but only rule law but only rule law but only rule law but only rule by by by by by law - resulting in the widelaw - resulting in the widelaw - resulting in the widelaw - resulting in the widelaw - resulting in the widegulf between law and justice to the extent thatgulf between law and justice to the extent thatgulf between law and justice to the extent thatgulf between law and justice to the extent thatgulf between law and justice to the extent thatcourts of law have ceased to be courts of justice.courts of law have ceased to be courts of justice.courts of law have ceased to be courts of justice.courts of law have ceased to be courts of justice.courts of law have ceased to be courts of justice.

The future for the rule of law and hu-man rights in Malaysia is dismal.Rule by law and not rule of law su-persedes and takes priority in mostaspects of ruling the people. The de-cline of the rule of law and human

rights in Malaysia can be traced to the corruptednotion of democracy which the executive holds. Ithas been suggested that in Malaysia human rightsand the rule of law are precepts peculiar to the West

which, so the imputation goes, it is inappropriate toapply in Malaysia. This should be seen as a severedistortion because human rights and the rule of laware no longer within the confines of the geo-politi-cal parameters of each country. They are now uni-versal rights.

Question 2 Question 2 Question 2 Question 2 Question 2 : Whether in Malaysia there is no : Whether in Malaysia there is no : Whether in Malaysia there is no : Whether in Malaysia there is no : Whether in Malaysia there is noindependence of the judiciary.independence of the judiciary.independence of the judiciary.independence of the judiciary.independence of the judiciary.

The independence of the judiciary ismerely illusory.

The judiciary has lost its tussle withthe executive in controlling arbitraryexecutive power. The executive that

directly alters the affairs and status quo of the judi-ciary in a manner that the Malaysian executive hasdone is indeed a rarity and its mode of attack on theMalaysian judiciary in 1988 is not known to be prac-tised in the liberal democratic world. But again onemust understand, Malaysia is not a liberal demo-cratic country.

The executive has come to occupy a truly supremeposition that renders the other segments of govern-ment - Parliament and the judiciary - subservient toit.

Question 3 Question 3 Question 3 Question 3 Question 3 : Has Parliament failed to protect the : Has Parliament failed to protect the : Has Parliament failed to protect the : Has Parliament failed to protect the : Has Parliament failed to protect therule of law and fundamental freedoms and insteadrule of law and fundamental freedoms and insteadrule of law and fundamental freedoms and insteadrule of law and fundamental freedoms and insteadrule of law and fundamental freedoms and insteadaided and abetted in their serious violations?aided and abetted in their serious violations?aided and abetted in their serious violations?aided and abetted in their serious violations?aided and abetted in their serious violations?

With an overwhelming majority inParliament of the same political partysince Merdeka in 1957 it has now be-come a misconception to regard theMalaysian Parliament as the safe-guard of rights and freedoms. In many

respects that institution is the issuer of licence toviolate freedoms.


These are Rais’ considered views af-ter research and study from 1991 and1994, and they were extracted fromhis doctoral thesis at King’s College,University of London which are pub-lished in 1995 under the famous title,

“Freedom under Executive Power in Malaysia”.

I am particularly drawn to his lament about the cul-ture of fear and the lack of understanding and ap-preciation of the rule of law by the Malaysian peo-ple. Rais wrote:

“Equally perplexing hasbeen the seemingly calm andpatronising attitude of theMalaysian people in facingand accepting these excessesvis-a-vis their rights. It is as ifMalaysians have lost touchwith their basic rights in acountry that prides itself inbeing democratic and lead-ing the voice of liberation

within the third world countries. Even with the in-creasing number of the young and well-educated inthe country there appears to be little interest in theimportance of civil liberties. We have noted howexcessive executive powers, omnipresent and far-reaching as they have been, have rendered constitu-tional freedoms meaningless. And yet there appearsto be little or no resistance from the man on the streetto counter these inroads. There can be only one ex-planation to this: the culture of fear has set in. Theunderlying fear of executive reprisal has slowly butsurely reduced Malaysians into being reluctantlysubmissive in many respects of their daily life.”

The arrests of Karpal, Marina, Ezam,Zulfifly and Cheah mark a massiveassault on the rule of law, press free-dom, the right to information, funda-mental liberties and democracy andMalaysians must stand up to send a

clear signal to the powers-that-be that this is the laststraw. It should serve as a catalyst for a nationalawakening among Malaysians about the impor-tance of the rule of law and fundamental liberties inthe Malaysian nation-building process.

Karpal’s arrest violates international principles onfreedom of expression and democracy like the

Johannesburg Principles 1995 as well as all interna-tional standards and norms on the role of lawyerssuch as the United Nations Basic Principles on theRole of Lawyers 1990.

Principles 6 of the Johannesburg Principles providesthree situations where expression may be punishedas a threat to national security but they do not ap-ply in Karpal’s case, namely if the government candemonstrate that:

• the expression is intended to incite imminentviolence;

• it is likely to incite such violence; and• there is a direct and immediate connection be-

tween the expression and the likelihood or oc-currence of such violence.

If any of these three situations envisaged by theJohannesburg Principles existed in Karpal’s case, heshould have been arrested at the relevant time hesaid the offending terms in court, and not well afterthe general election.

Article 16 of the UN Basic Principles on the Role ofLawyers set out “Guarantees for the functioningof lawyers”, providing that governments shallensure that lawyers are able to perform all oftheir professional functions without intimida-tion, hindrance, harassment or improper inter-ference and shall not suffer, or be threatened with,prosecution or administrative, economic or othersanctions for any action taken in performance oftheir professional duties.

Speech by DAP National Chairman LimSpeech by DAP National Chairman LimSpeech by DAP National Chairman LimSpeech by DAP National Chairman LimSpeech by DAP National Chairman LimKit Siang at the DAP Forum: SupportKit Siang at the DAP Forum: SupportKit Siang at the DAP Forum: SupportKit Siang at the DAP Forum: SupportKit Siang at the DAP Forum: SupportKarpal, Uphold Rule of Law in PenangKarpal, Uphold Rule of Law in PenangKarpal, Uphold Rule of Law in PenangKarpal, Uphold Rule of Law in PenangKarpal, Uphold Rule of Law in Penangon 29 January 2000.on 29 January 2000.on 29 January 2000.on 29 January 2000.on 29 January 2000.

“Never did I for oncerealise that the judiciarycould so easily be at the

disposal of the executive“Source : Freedom Under Executive Power In MalaysiaSource : Freedom Under Executive Power In MalaysiaSource : Freedom Under Executive Power In MalaysiaSource : Freedom Under Executive Power In MalaysiaSource : Freedom Under Executive Power In Malaysia

q


ow that the 1999 generalelections have been“safely if not satisfacto-rily” concluded,

healthcare reforms has re-emerged as a reportable issue inthe mainstream media.

On January 18, 2000, the Star’sfront-page headlines announcedthat the Employees’ ProvidentFund (EPF) had entered into anagreement with the Life InsurersAssociation of Malaysia (LIAM)which would allow for “the esti-mated five million active EPFmembers [to] use their savings tosign up for a health insurancescheme [beginning] this June.Under [this] scheme, contributorscan authorise EPF to pay the pre-miums from their Account III(health) annually... Members canopt for a low-premium schemecovering 13 critical illnesses [orprocedures] — major organ trans-plants, coronary bypass surgery,heart valve replacement, surgeryto aorta, stroke, coma, cancer andbenign brain tumour, serious in-juries due to accidents, congeni-tal heart diseases, congestive car-diac failure, chronic renal failure,meningitis and encephalitis — or

for one covering 36 major ill-nesses [/procedures] at a higherpremium.”

The premiums payable, rangingfrom RM30 annually (RM10,000pay-out upon diagnosis, age 35years and below) to RM20,034annually (RM100,000 pay-outupon diagnosis, expanded cover-age, age 65-70 years) are to becharged in accordance with anage-gradient. Female EPF mem-bers would furthermore be givena 30% discount in premiums to re-flect a lower overall incidence ofthe designated illnesses, relativeto males.

It is unclear whether this initia-tive in healthcare financing willin time be markedly expanded tobecome a major component (fi-nancing mechanism) of thehealthcare reforms that the gov-ernment is quietly putting intoplace.

Quite apart from the adequacy ofthe pay-outs (even as supple-ments), for meeting the treatment

costs of these major illnesses, theCitizens’ Health Initiative (CHI)has serious reservations aboutthis scheme as a potential, majorvehicle for healthcare financing.

The CHI re-iterates its oppositionto the involvement of for-profitcommercial insurance in a na-tional health financing scheme, astand we have enunciated in ourfounding document, the Citizens’Health Manifesto <http://www.malaysia.net/aliran>.

An insurance scheme is a pro-foundly social undertaking.Whether in the form of a publiclymanaged scheme, a co-op ar-rangement, or a commercially pur-chased policy, it is in essence amechanism for pooling the risk ofcatastrophic events faced by indi-viduals who band together in acollective enterprise.

It is necessarily a group undertak-ing (familiar to those who partici-pate in tontines) because it is basedon the recognition that the unfor-tunate, random individual, rely-ing just on his or her resources,would be overwhelmed and un-able to cope with the catastrophe.

HEALTH

CHI calls forNational Health FundA health insurance scheme could institutionalisediscrimination against the aged and high-risk groups

by Dr Chan Chee Khoon

NNNNN

CHI Opposes UnequalHealthcare Access


Cross-subsidy is therefore theheart and soul of insurance, thewell subsidising the ill, with theimportant proviso that there is lit-tle prior indication as to whomight suffer the catastrophicevent. Such is the logic and ra-tionale which drives the system.

The logic of private enterprisehowever is to maximise profit. Inthe field of insurance this meansdiscriminating between risk cat-egories, fragmenting the marketinto those considered at higherrisk of illness, and those at lowerrisk.

This is why your insurance pre-miums increase when you crossthe risk threshold at age 40, andskyrockets when you enter your60s and beyond (as is the casewith the EPF-LIAM scheme). Fam-ily history of heritable illness, intime to be replaced by DNA screen-ing, will attempt even finer dis-crimination between risk catego-ries, notwithstanding the cau-tions of molecular geneticists, epi-demiologists and ethicists mostfamiliar with the limitations of theemerging technology. Or moresimply, just ask anyone with pre-existing chronic illness, or HIV se-ropositivity, who has attempted toenrol in a typical insurancescheme.

All this is understandable giventhe imperative of the commercialsector to turn a profit. But whathas happened here? An acknowl-edged and necessarily social un-dertaking is being subverted by aprocess of fragmentation and in-dividualisation of risk whose logi-cal end-point is its own antithesis: the sick to bear their own cost-

burden of illness, the healthy torejoice in their good fortune (or“good genes”?).

Is this the kind of health care sys-tem we want? Or the kind of soci-ety we feel comfortable living in?What has happened to our Asianvalues and ethics, which put thepriority of our collective welfareabove that of individualist con-cerns? Is insurance, a quintessen-tially social undertaking, compat-ible with the dictates of privateenterprise?

These are not alarmist fantasies.Other countries have taken heedof these socially corrosive, anti-communitarian tendencies. InAustralia, there are legislatedbans on risk rating, in favour ofuniform community rating. Par-tial solutions will not work as evi-denced by the experience of BlueCross/Blue Shield in the USA,who saw their younger, healthiersubscribers desert to the for-prof-its such as Aetna when they of-fered lower premiums to this low-risk group. Blue Cross/BlueShield was left carrying the baby,or more accurately, the elderly,who are intensive users of medi-cal resources. To no one’s sur-prise, the Blues eventually intro-duced their own risk rating just toremain viable. The lesson there-fore is quite clear—selective opt-ing-out by low-risk individuals,encouraged by profit-oriented un-derwriting, will thoroughly un-dermine the implicit compact andcross-subsidy that is the essenceand raison d’être of social insur-ance.

The EPF-LIAM scheme as pres-ently structured is an astute gam-bit by the health insurance indus-try to create market openings. Itseems to be cobbled together to

avoid strong resistance from pow-erful interests.

Healthcare providers (doctors,hospitals, pharmaceutical andsupportive services) would becomfortable with the present ar-rangement for reimbursement —“sum assured” upon diagnosis,payable direct to the policyholder,rather than itemised billing basedon treatment modality and inci-dentals. Most importantly, thethird-party payer (insurer) doesnot intrude itself as an intermedi-ary between the patient-sub-scriber and the provider, thusavoiding for the moment a per-ceived threat of imminent man-aged care. The insurers we canassume are more concerned withmarket building at this stage, withbelow-market premiums, so as tohabituate a larger public to thepractice of buying commercialhealth insurance. The price in-creases (and managed care?) cancome later, as long as the key ele-ment of differential risk-rating(unavoidable with unregulated,profit-driven underwriting) is in-stitutionalised.

In short, consumers and provid-ers may perceive that they don’thave much to grumble about forthe moment (if you accept the ar-gument that the most sick-proneshould pay the most, i.e. thosewho need healthcare most wouldbe least able to afford it), but thethin end of the wedge would bein.

It is particularly regrettable thatEPF, as an employee (social) secu-rity fund is being used as a TrojanHorse to institutionalise risk-pro-filing as a basis for differential,

Social UndertakingBeing Subverted

Ban Profit-OrientedI n s u r e r s


discriminatory premiums for theaged and high-risk subscribers(perfectly normal in for-profit un-derwriting but completely at oddswith principles of uniform risk-rating and solidarity in social in-surance).

It is for this reason that CHI hascalled for a ban on profit-orientedinsurers from health insurance, orat the very least a tight regulationof commercial insurers, to set pre-miums and to disallow discrimi-natory risk-rating.

Short of a UK-style national healthservice, CHI much prefers a Na-tional Health Fund - a payroll-based scheme (employer/em-ployee contributions) with sup-plementary contributions fromprogressive taxation to extend itsbenefits to all citizens and legalresidents. It would be operatedas a non-profit statutory institu-tion with effective and crediblecitizen participation.

We consider this a realistic, imme-diate-term goal on the assumptionof a continuing mix of public-pri-vate providers. A single-payerpublicly-operated healthcare fundwould be able to lean more effec-tively on private sector healthcareproviders (for cost control) whileensuring that mandated stand-ards in clinical care and institu-tional upkeep are not compro-mised, in other words, cost-effi-cient care which is in line withnorms of medical necessity.

20 January 2000

q

Dr Chan Chee Khoon, anDr Chan Chee Khoon, anDr Chan Chee Khoon, anDr Chan Chee Khoon, anDr Chan Chee Khoon, anAliran Exco Member, is co-Aliran Exco Member, is co-Aliran Exco Member, is co-Aliran Exco Member, is co-Aliran Exco Member, is co-ordinator of the Citizens’ordinator of the Citizens’ordinator of the Citizens’ordinator of the Citizens’ordinator of the Citizens’Health InitiativeHealth InitiativeHealth InitiativeHealth InitiativeHealth Initiative


lizabeth Kumai sat inone of the two tiny roomsthat, with a lavatory,constituted her home in

the township of Zonkizizwe, out-side Johannesburg.

A woman in her early 60s, Eliza-beth has lived here with her agedmother since the death from AIDSof her daughter last year. Nowshe’s anxious about her rebellious14-year-old granddaughter. Sinceher mother’s illness and death,the teenager has been living witha migrant worker in the vast bar-racks-like hostel that Elizabethcan see from her front door. It’sonly a matter of time, she fears, be-fore her granddaughter, too, is in-fected with the AIDS virus. If shedoes get it, there will be nothingher grandmother can do to slowthe girl’s swift passage throughchronic illness to death. NeitherElizabeth nor her government canafford the drugs that, in New Yorkor London, can make living withHIV almost as tolerable as livingwith diabetes. In South Africa theonly way to postpone a swiftdeath from AIDS is to avoid get-ting the virus in the first place. ForElizabeth’s granddaughter it may

already be too late.

There are an estimated 3.6 millionHIV-positive South Africans. Aschoolteacher today in South Af-rica can look at a high school classand know that one-third of thepupils will be dead within tenyears. The AIDS epidemic inSouth Africa is the more breath-taking for having emerged out ofa long silence. Under apartheid,health activists complain, thesteady growth of infection was ig-nored, and when Nelson Mandelacame to power, the ANC ignoredit, too. Over the past five years, thatinaction has been fatal. Now, insome South African antenatal clin-ics, an infection rate of one in threeexpectant mothers is reported.

We now recognise the connectionbetween underdevelopment andill-health: economists acknowl-edge that the chronic ill-health ofthe populations of tropical coun-tries is a drag on development.Intervene there, and the economicpay-off could be dramatic. InSouth Africa, for instance, leavingaside the direct medical costs ofthe Aids epidemic, industry andcommerce face a huge bill to re-

place personnel who have fallenvictim to AIDS.

This has become more than ahealth crisis. The South Africangovernment’s response to itsAIDS epidemic may become thefirst major test of the WorldTrade Organisation’s rules onintellectual property right. Atissue is a question that is beingposed with increasing urgencyin the developing world: howcan the governments of poorcountries get the drugs theyneed for the diseases that de-stroy their populations and rav-age their economies?

Of the fatal diseases that strikepeople in developing countries,tropical diseases are by far themost numerous. Some, such asmalaria, are well known andwidespread; others, such as leish-maniasis, are equally deadly butmore localised. But because theseare diseases of the poor, and thepoor - like their governments -have low purchasing power, themultinational drug companies arenot interested in developing ormarketing drugs for these dis-eases.

HEALTHCARE

Only Westerners CanAfford To Be IllPharmaceutical companies want to keep exclusive patents thatforce the price of medicines beyond the reach of the third worldpoor, reports Isabel Hilton

EEEEE

How can the governments of poor countries get the drugs they need for the diseasesHow can the governments of poor countries get the drugs they need for the diseasesHow can the governments of poor countries get the drugs they need for the diseasesHow can the governments of poor countries get the drugs they need for the diseasesHow can the governments of poor countries get the drugs they need for the diseasesthat destroy their populations and ravage their economies?that destroy their populations and ravage their economies?that destroy their populations and ravage their economies?that destroy their populations and ravage their economies?that destroy their populations and ravage their economies?


Drugs have been developed forAIDS for the western market, butbecause they are new and still pro-tected by patent rules, they re-main prohibitively expensive. Themonthly cost of treating a patientwith anti-retrovirals is nearly eighttimes the average household in-come in South Africa.

The drug companies’ response tothe AIDS crisis has been to offerlimited drug-donation pro-grammes, training and discountson certain supplies. The SouthAfrican government’s reactionhas been to attempt to implementsome provisions of the WTO rulesthat enable access to cheaperdrugs as of right. The result is aferocious dispute between thegovernment of South Africa andits supporters on one side and thepharmaceutical companies, thegovernments of the United Statesand the European Union on theother.

The roots of the row lie in theWTO’s ambition to build a uni-form system of patent protection.The Trade Related aspects of In-tellectual Property Rights (Trips)agreement was one of the mostfiercely negotiated parts of theWTO rules.

The agreement represented an at-tempt to mitigate the negative ef-fects of world-wide patent protec-tion, which renders pharmaceu-ticals more expensive in poorcountries. Trips allows govern-ments access to pharmaceuticalsat a reduced price in three ways:through compulsory licensing, inwhich a government can licensea manufacturer to produce a drugwithout the permission of the pat-ent holder; parallel importing, inwhich a government can shoparound for bargain supplies; and

generic substitution - in otherwords, it uses, where it exists, thecheaper generic alternative to apatent medicine.

When the South African govern-ment brought in the amendmentsto the Medicines Act that wouldlegalise these mechanisms inSouth Africa, the pharmaceuticalindustry reacted furiously. Itraised a lawsuit with 40 South Af-rica-based drug companies tochallenge the law. The industrylobbied for government support atan international level, too: the USgovernment began to lean on thegovernment of South Africa and,in April last year, South Africawas placed on the US Trade De-partment’s 301 watch-list - a sta-tus reserved for countries that areconsidered unsafe for US inves-tors. To get off the list, South Af-rica would have to adopt evenstricter rules on intellectual prop-erty right than those enforced bythe WTO.

Mark Otten, director of the Intel-lectual Property Division of theWTO, was reluctant to commenton the South African case, but hemade it clear that parallel importsand compulsory licensing wereallowed under Trips, and that theagreement had not been to the lik-ing of the US government.

Since the agreement the US hasbeen using its muscle bilaterallyto occupy some of the ground itfailed to win in the multilateralnegotiations - small countries areeasier to bully individually - andif South Africa were to win a casein the WTO, other developingcountries would be tempted to fol-low its example.

The issue is now hot politics inthe US, where AIDS activists ac-

cuse the drug companies ofputting profits before humanity.The drug companies point out,with some justice, that sub-Saha-ran Africa, including rural SouthAfrica, does not have the medicalinfrastructure to administer anti-retrovirals, even if the drug com-panies were to give them awayfree.

But the virulence of the industry’sreaction to the Medicines Act is asign of its determination to tightenthe Trips agreement in its favour.The legal case is now boggeddown in the South African courtsand the government has made noattempt to exercise its right of com-pulsory licensing. Whatever theoutcome, though, the issue ofmedicines for the poor is inescap-ably on the agenda both of thedrug companies and such inter-national bodies as the World Bankand the World Health Organisa-tion.

South Africa represents only 1 percent of the world-wide drug mar-ket but, for all the industry’s chari-table ventures, it still produces 2per cent of the profits. This is dueto the unusually high pricescharged for drugs in South Africa.There are several proposals on thetables of think-tanks and interna-tional agencies that could helpaddress what the economistJeffrey Sachs calls the “market fail-ure” which leaves millions of peo-ple without access to medicines,but the industry’s determinationto extend intellectual propertyrights at all costs bodes ill for anyof these initiatives. As far as themultinationals are concerned,there is more at stake than the livesof the world’s poor.

Source: New Statesman,Source: New Statesman,Source: New Statesman,Source: New Statesman,Source: New Statesman,Monday 17 January 2000Monday 17 January 2000Monday 17 January 2000Monday 17 January 2000Monday 17 January 2000


I would like to comment on the justconcluded parliamentary elec-tion.

Electoral victory went to the BN,but, more importantly, this elec-tion has shown that the people arecomfortable with the possibility ofhaving a two-party system in Ma-laysia. If the BA could tidy itselfup for the next electoral battle, itcould well be the victor.

In the interim, the BA shouldreach out to the grassroots to ex-plain its objectives and plans forthe people.

As I see it, the BN is at a cross-roads. It’s safe to say that about50 percent of the electorate havelost faith in the ideals the BN issupposed to espouse. The sce-

Letters should preferably be no more than 250 words and mustinclude the writer's name and address. Shorter letters will bepreferred and pseudonyms may be used. Letters should beaddressed to The Editor, ALIRAN MONTHLY, P.O. Box 1049, 10830Penang, Malaysia or e-mail to : [email protected]. Viewsexpressed need not necessarily reflect those of Aliran.

nario in the BN, especially inUMNO, is fertile ground for lead-ership and confidence crises toferment, a plus factor for the BA.

Razaleigh Hamzah somehow hasdiminished his chance of succeed-ing Mahathir because of thecrushing BN defeat in Kelantan.Najib’s shot at the PM’s seat hasbeen handed a similarly severeblow. Abdullah Badawi’s posi-tion may be better, but he is noclone of Mahathir. And we shouldnot forget Ghani Othman fromJohor, who delivered a massive BNwin for Mahathir; and has a fight-ing chance. Musa, the veterangame player, could be factored inif the succession problem drags ontoo long and becomes compli-cated. This is one headache forMahathir.

Another headache would be jock-

eying for posts. Whilst UMNO’spowerful share in the BN’s equa-tion of power has been whittledaway by PAS and, to a certain ex-tent, keADILan, Mahathirshouldn’t overlook the Sabah andSarawak pieces in his formulationof a bigger BN scheme of things.To do so risks causing a biggercrisis on the Malaysian politicalhorizon. Already a cacophonyhas been heard emanating fromthe MCA and MIC for extra minis-terial posts, besides Sabah. WhilstSarawak is quiet, it does not meanthat an extra portfolio from theLand of the Hornbill is not wel-come.

Whilst acknowledging thatMahathir is a shrewd Machiavel-lian, this time he has to employall the finesse of an acrobat towalk the tightrope. Even then, hehas to be extra careful. There is nonet under the rope.

Gimfil JamesPenampang, Sabah

We, the undersigned organisa-tions, wish to express our reliefthat the siege of Ratchburi Hos-pital has ended safely for thehostages and their families.However, we are saddened at theinjuries experienced by the au-thorities and at the deaths of thehostage-takers. We had hopedthat the situation could be re-solved peacefully.

It is important to note that the hos-tage-taking was not supported byrefugee and human rights groupsfrom Burma. The God’s Army is asplinter group that has worked inisolation from the policies and

UMNO Difficulties

The Struggle in Burma


principles of peace-loving groups.We note that the Karen NationalUnion, National Coalition Gov-ernment of the Union of Burmaand the National Council of theUnion of Burma (umbrella groupof Burman and ethnic oppositiongroups) promptly deplored thehostage-taking. The movementremains committed to a non-vio-lent political solution to Burma’sproblems. It wishes to avoid anddiscourage activities that maybring harm to people from Thai-land and Burma.

The incident is a result of the vio-lence that the Burmese militaryand its militias routinely inflict oninnocent civilians in Burma. In therecent past, Thai people have alsobeen subjected to border incur-sions, military attack, robbery andmurder by the Burmese militaryand its militias.

Thousands of innocent civilianscontinue to flee the fighting andthe atrocities in Burma, includingthose currently needing shelterand medical attention in SuanPhung. We must not forget thatthey are innocent civilians need-ing our help. We hope that theThai government and the Thaipeople will understand that therefugees are different from theGod’s Army members and con-tinue their valuable humanitariansupport.

The possibility of spill-over prob-lems will continue to threatenThailand until there is a long-term, peaceful political solution toBurma’s problems. This is why itis essential that the capacity ofpeople to pursue non-violentmeans be encouraged. We need tobreak the cycle of violence.

Asian Forum on Human Rightsand Development

Friends Without BordersUnion for Civil Liberty

Thai Action Committee forDemocracy in Burma

Altsean-Burma

I wonder what the education min-istry is up to. First, many childrenare deprived entrance to local uni-versities. Children of all races arechildren of Malaysia, with differ-ent-sounding names. Last year,about 43,000 children with SPMwere given an indirect admissionto local universities. This leaveschildren of the silent majority totry other ways of getting a tertiaryeducation, even though they couldhave obtained a matriculationseat of their choice. These childrenhave to either sit for the STPM orif they can afford it, do their A-levels. Here again there is a‘Bakun dam’: the ‘A’ level is notrecognised for admission to localuniversities. These children haveno choice but to sit for the STPM.

Wake up education minister. Keepyour local universities, but do notdeprive innocent children of a ter-tiary education. Open the ma-triculation to all Malaysian chil-dren!

Silent ParentMalacca

Article 152 of the Federation Con-stitution states that the nationallanguage of Malaysia shall be theMalay language. However, there

is no mention of a standard Malaylanguage. So, is it right to assumethat the Johor-Riau dialect is thestandard Malay language whenit has never been officially de-clared to be so.

At present the direction and de-velopment of the Malay languageseems to be at the whims and fan-cies of Cabinet Ministers as hap-pened recently with the on-off useof Bahasa Baku.

After 42 years of independence,we are still raising issues relatedto our national language and asusual our poor students inschools and institutions of higherlearning have become victims ofthe country’s inconsistent lan-guage policy.

What the country urgently needsnow is an independent and effec-tive central authority to oversee thedirection, development and imple-mentation of the Malay language.The existing Dewan Bahasa danPustaka is considered a govern-ment department and its views onthe Malay language are oftenbrushed aside and at times eventreated with contempt by CabinetMinisters.

Tunku Ismail JewaPenang

We are extremely disappointedwith your opinion that TAR Col-lege should be left alone. Al-though you gave many reasonswhich seem valid, the majority of

Open theMatriculation Course

to all Malaysians

On-Off Use of Baku

Why TAR Collegeshould be Upgraded

to a University

A Response to V K ChinA Response to V K ChinA Response to V K ChinA Response to V K ChinA Response to V K Chin


the people particularly the Chi-nese community cannot agreewith you anymore. The main rea-son why these people demandthat TAR College be turned into auniversity is because of the lim-ited places offered to them in allother local universities. The Chi-nese community makes up almost30 per cent of the total populationbut only around 20 per cent inevery university. This is totally in-sufficient as a large number ofthem are ambitious people andwould not want to stop mid-way.

While we totally understand yourreasons and opinions given in thelast two columns dated 24 and 25January, we also hope that thegovernment and you especiallyunderstand our feelings too. If thelocal universities were to take inmore Chinese students and if en-tering the university does notanymore require one’s luck, thenthere will be no demand for TARCollege to become a university.

We appeal to the government toconsider the quota system in es-tablishing a university. This sys-tem is extremely unfair as edu-cation opportunities cannot besimilar to the distribution ofwealth policies. How can youexpect these students to have asense of patriotism and to loveMalaysia if they are not given afair chance to excel in their be-loved country? The Chinesecommunity is not a rich one andtherefore you cannot expect usto pay through our noses tostudy in private colleges.

The Chinese community gavesolid support to the BN in thelast two general elections. It istime to reward them, and not

dismiss all their opinions anddemands as òutdated issues’made by some irresponsible poli-ticians. While it is unlikely forthe Chinese to vote for PAS andKeADILan, the DAP still com-mands substantial support forunderstanding the plight of thecommunity. But votes weregiven to the BN as the commu-nity believed that the BN wouldalso give attention to its needs.As for the younger Chinese, themajority of them have shown nointerest in the MCA or Gerakan.Whether they are immature ornot remains to be seen but thegovernment should understandwhy these students prefer sup-porting the ‘rocket’. Many Chi-nese teachers too are unhappywith the BN, not because of theAnwar issue but over issues af-fecting the community whichneeds urgent attention.

It is not an extremely hard task tomake TAR College a university.Kolej Mara succeeded in becom-ing one although the rationaledemand for it to become a univer-sity is obviously less than that ofTAR College. Instead of givingplenty of reasons why TAR Col-lege should not become a univer-sity and asking the Chinese com-munity to stop demanding, thegovernment and you in particu-lar, should first find out the rea-sons why these people are de-manding that TAR College beturned into a university.

Wong Fei Yan & FriendsIpoh

I should be very surprised if many

parents and teachers disagreewith me when I say that racialpolitics at the Ministry of Educa-tion has invaded all levels of theministry.

From university selection proce-dures [from filling up the column:- Agama : Islam/Bukan Islam –any valid reason for this? Whosaid PAS takes an extremely reli-gious slant?] to the promotion ofteachers.

But then again, I was one of thenumerous Malaysians over-whelmed by the inter-ethnic inter-action that existed among the BAcomponent parties, supportersand workers during the cam-paigning period.

It lifted my heart when I was ableto drive past and hoot at cars deco-rated with BA flags and put mythumbs up and be acknowledgedlikewise by total strangers.

It was common to see Malaysand Indians campaigning forthe DAP, KeADILan and thePRM while the Chinese and In-dians did likewise for PAS,KeADILan and the PRM. Thesame scene in the BN camp,however, had a different signifi-cance. The people in the BAhave everything to lose whereasin the BN, the factors of power,money and machinery come intoplay and effect.

These scenes give me reason tobelieve there is hope for a betterMalaysia – though regrettably Iwonder at what pace and at whatcost!

S MSelangor

Some hope for aBetter Tomorrow


A record of A record of A record of A record of A record of Aliran'sAliran'sAliran'sAliran'sAliran's stand on current affairs. stand on current affairs. stand on current affairs. stand on current affairs. stand on current affairs.

There is no valid earthly reasonfor the Barisan Nasional govern-ment to restrict the sale of the PASbulletin Harakah to the public.There is no justification whatso-ever for insisting that its circula-tion be confined to PAS’ member-ship only. Many party publica-tions in other countries through-out the world are available to allcitizens, not just party members.

What is the rationale for impos-ing this undemocratic ruling?Why shouldn’t ordinary citizensread the Harakah to be informedof PAS’ policies and pro-grammes? What harm can possi-bly befall this nation by allowingMalaysians access to a publica-tion that gives the other side of thestory?

In a democracy, citizens shouldnot be denied their fundamentalright of free access to information.It is only when information, bothpertaining to government and

opposition, is freely accessiblethat citizens will be able to makean intelligent decision. Only well-informed citizens will be able todifferentiate between propagandaand fact, to discern the truth, andmake meaningful choices.

Obviously, the government is notinterested in or concerned aboutthe emergence of an enlightenedcitizenry. A thinking and criticalcitizenry, it seems, is inimical tothe BN’s existence and thereforeit must be contained by whatevermeans.

Thinking Malaysians will askwhy it is only PAS and the DAPthat are required to confine theirparty matters to party members,thus denying Malaysians any ac-cess to news about their pro-grammes and policies. Why isn’tthe ruling equally applicable to allthe BN coalition parties? Why isit that every time UMNO holds itsGeneral Assembly - a three-dayaffair - so much time is allotted toradio and television to carry theproceedings to non-UMNO mem-bers? Why are the presidential

address, the daily proceedings,and the closing speeches beamedinto the sitting rooms of house-holds at the expense of the taxpay-ing rakyat? Why do other pro-grammes have to make way for theannual UMNO party affair? Whyshould their party function be partof the everyday life of the entirenation?

It is not only radio and televisionthat are made use of as if they be-long to UMNO. The BN-control-led newspapers - which resembleparty organs disguised as inde-pendent newspapers - go on arampage, publishing page afterpage of the assembly’s proceed-ings including trivial banter andsilly retorts among delegates. Whyshould Malaysians be bombardedwith this unrestrained partypropaganda? Why should publicfacilities and government employ-ees be deployed to give so muchcoverage?

If the BN government wants toconvince Malaysians that there isno bias or discrimination in theirruling requiring party matters tobe confined to party members andthat this ruling is equally and im-partially applied to all politicalparties, it must prove its sinceritythrough it actions. It must hence-forth desist from abusing publicfacilities for party matters. If theBN is not capable of conductingitself impartially, fairly, justly,honestly and honourably, thenconcerned Malaysians must forcetheir hands to do so.

If in May when the UMNO Gen-eral Assembly is held and the pro-ceedings are beamed ‘live’, think-ing Malaysians should switch offtheir radio and television sets.They should stop buying BN-con-

No Valid Reason ToRestrict Harakah To

PAS Members


trolled newspapers for three dayswhen their pages are filled withUMNO party matters. This is theonly way to confront an undemo-cratic and silly ruling. This is theonly way to send a strong signalthat we have had enough of theircrap.

P RamakrishnanPresident

5 January 2000

We take issue with Deputy PrimeMinister Abdullah Badawi’sstatement that the peace and sta-bility of the country is partly dueto the stern action taken by the po-lice. This statement ignores thepeace-loving nature and tolerancedisplayed by Malaysians of allethnic groups; instead, it glorifiesthe police’s aggressive tactics andsolely credits them for the peaceand harmony that the nation en-joys.

Abdullah reportedly added thatthe police have unfortunately be-come the victims in performingtheir duties. ‘’When they are thevictims, there are not many com-ments, but if the enemy becomesthe victim, there is much commentand dissatisfaction,’’ he said.

First, we want to ask Abdullahhow the police can become vic-tims when they are armed to theteeth - with batons, tear gas, wa-ter cannons and police dogs - infacing peaceful unarmed demon-strators. From eyewitness ac-counts, it is the police who haveoften acted aggressively in manyinstances when confrontingpeaceful demonstrators.

Second, we are appalled thatAbdullah can regard Malaysiancitizens as ‘the enemy’ just be-cause they do not share his politi-cal views. If this is the attitude ofthe Home Minister, is it any won-der then that the police often reactharshly when dealing with oppo-sition politicians and activistswho demonstrate peacefully?

Aliran demands the immediateand unconditional release of theeleven demonstrators - most ofthem from the opposition Na-tional Justice Party (keADILan) -who were detained in KualaLumpur this morning. Those de-tained were merely exercisingtheir constitutional right to gatherpeacefully to express their concernabout former deputy prime min-ister Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomytrial and their solidarity witheight others charged with illegalassembly in a separate case.

They were among a crowd ofabout 200 demonstrators whobravely showed up this morningoutside the Kuala Lumpur courtsto exercise their democratic rightto free assembly. At no point werethey a threat to national stabilityand security.

Malaysians are concerned thatthe government is becoming in-creasingly intolerant of dissentand is slowly but surely drift-ing towards the nightmare of apolice state. The authoritarianMahathir administration is at aloss over how to deal with criti-cism and appears to blindly be-lieve that only strong-arm tac-tics can quell the growing dis-quiet among the people.

Aliran Executive Committee25 January 2000

Peaceful DemonstratorsAre Not Enemies

Of The State

The conduct of the BN govern-ment is in the spotlight once againwith the shocking claim by aformer UMNO Youth leader,Saifuddin Nasution, that theBarisan Nasional governmentwas involved in the storming ofthe Asia Pacific Coalition for EastTimor II (APCET II) conference inKuala Lumpur in 1996.

The cyber newspaper, Malaysia-Kini, reported (see Box) thatSaifuddin apologised at a publicforum in Kuala Lumpur on 8 Febfor his shameful role in leading aBarisan Nasional-linked mob inbreaking up the peaceful meetingof international and local del-egates seeking a peaceful and justsolution to the East Timor conflict.He alleged that a senior govern-ment leader had instructed him todisrupt the conference and that hehad received the green light fromthe highest levels of government.

The government’s alleged in-volvement in aborting APCET IIthrough high-handed tactics is thelatest in a series of unsavoury she-nanigans that have been revealedsince the Anwar Ibrahim sagaerupted. Saifuddin’s disclosurecasts more damning aspersionson the integrity of the government,the police and other state appara-tuses. The ministers and UMNOYouth leaders whom Saifuddinimplicated must be made account-able for their actions.

Given the magnitude of this scan-dal, we call for the setting up ofan independent commission of in-quiry to probe the conduct of thegovernment and that of other pub-

O u t r a g e o u sRevelation Requires

Public Enquiry


WEDNESDAY - Feb 8, 2000WEDNESDAY - Feb 8, 2000WEDNESDAY - Feb 8, 2000WEDNESDAY - Feb 8, 2000WEDNESDAY - Feb 8, 2000Ajinder KaurAjinder KaurAjinder KaurAjinder KaurAjinder Kaur

1pm, WED: In a rare publicapology, a former Umno Youthleader, Saifuddin Nasution,said at a public forum lastnight that the storming of theAsia Pacific Coalition for EastTimor II (Apcet II) conferencein Kuala Lumpur four yearsago, was orchestrated by thegovernment.

“With deep regret, I am here tooffer my apology to all of you,”Saifuddin told a 400-strongcrowd who attended the pub-lic forum held at the FederalHotel in conjunction with thevisit of East Timor independ-ence leaders Xanana Gusmaoand Jose Ramos-Horta.

Recalling the events that led tothe storming, Saifuddin whowas then Umno Youth secre-tary, and now a KeADILan su-preme council member, saidthat he was asked to lead a moband stop the NGO-organisedconference by the then DeputyHome Affairs Minister MegatJunid Megat Ayob.

“At 4pm, Oct 9, 1996, I wascalled by Megat Junid. I wentto meet him, escorted by a fewsenior police officers,” he said.He added that the minister thentold him, “By hook or by crook,you must stop the conference.Kalau tidak, saya anggap

Pemuda Umno tiada telur (Oth-erwise, I would assume thatUmno Youth has no balls).”

Saifuddin added that as secre-tary he was No. 3 in the Youthwing. Youth chief ZahidHamidi was at that time awayin Ghana with Prime MinisterMahathir Mohamad whiledeputy Youth chief Hisham-muddin Hussein was inSentosa Island, Singapore, fora meeting with the republic'sPeoples Action Party Youthchief George Yeo.

“I called up Zahid (about theplan) and he consulted DrMahathir who gave his sup-port. Hishammuddin alsosupported the action. I then or-ganised a 1,000-strong teamwith the order to stop the con-ference,” Saifuddin said witha hint of regret in his voice.

Apcet II, held in Kuala Lumpurin November 1996 at the AsiaHotel, was an offshoot of ApcetI in Manila, held in May 1994.The conference had hardly be-gun when it was violentlystopped by a mob of BarisanNasional youth members ledby Saifuddin. The angry mobbroke the doors to the confer-ence hall, overturned tables,threw chairs and verbally aswell as physically assaultedthe participants.

The police, who are normally

lic institutions.

It is hoped that this commissionof inquiry will bring to book theculprits who have used andabused their positions. Such anoutcome will certainly help to safe-guard democracy, rule of law, andhuman dignity in the country andrestore public confidence in thedemocratic process. It would alsohelp to show that we are seriousin putting our new relations withEast Timor on a firmer footing andundoing the damage done by ourprevious misguided policies.

Dr Mustafa K AnuarAsst Secretary

10 February 2000

Apcet Mob Was OrganisedBy Governmentsays former Umno Youth leader


quick in stopping illegal dem-onstrations, did not appear forone full hour to stop the fra-cas. Fifty-nine participants andjournalists covering the inter-national conference were de-tained for up to six days underremand orders while a fewUmno Youth leaders who werealso arrested, were released thesame day. In addition, another40 overseas participants weredeported.

Saifuddin added that after thesuccessful attempt in stoppingthe conference, he was broughtto the Bunga Raya VIP room inthe Subang Airport by MegatJunid and was introduced toMahathir upon his arrival fromGhana.

“Megat told Mahathir that itwas all orchestrated,” he con-tinued.

“I do not have any significanceto the struggle of the independ-ence in East Timor. On thatspirit, I apologise to all of youand to those who were de-tained by the police,” saidSaifuddin to the applause ofthe crowd.

Also at last night's public fo-rum, Gusmao, who arrived inKuala Lumpur on Mondaynight for a three-day visit,thanked all Malaysian sup-porters and those who believedthat the values that theTimorese fought for were alsothe values desired by all.

“We have won a battle butwhat lies ahead is an eventougher and heavier fight,”Xanana said in halting Malay

and English.

“Independence is only a means toachieve liberty, peace and prosper-ity. The task ahead of us is of amammoth proportion. What thepeople of East Timor need is thecreation of a truly civil society,”said the leader who has earned therecognition of the internationalmedia as the “Mandela of Timor”.

Gusmao added that the interna-tional community could offermuch assistance to help rebuildthe half-island state that has suf-fered through three invasions: thePortuguese, Japanese and Indone-sian. “We ask for help from insti-tutions, governments and solidar-ity groups. We are now in a pe-riod of emergency. We lack every-thing - houses, food, health care -our people want to start a newlife,” Gusmao said.

Ramos-Horta, on the other hand,also thanked the people of Asia,with particular mention of SouthKorea's President Kim Dae Jongwho he claimed had worked be-hind the scenes with Japaneseand Chinese leaders to speak withJakarta in an attempt to resolve therecent violence in East Timor.Ramos-Horta later answeredquestions from the floor.

The two leaders had earliermet Mahathir, Foreign Af-fairs Minister Syed HamidAlbar and Defence MinisterNajib Tun Razak. Their visitto Kuala Lumpur is the lastleg of an 18-day six-nationAsian tour which began onJan 23.

Among the main objectives ofthe tour are to seek understand-ing, cooperation and diplo-matic relations with leaders ofAsean and East Timor and toget feedback on the possibilityof East Timor becoming a mem-ber, or at least, observers ofAsean.

Gusmao, a former guerillaleader, was arrested in 1992and later jailed in Indonesiafor 20 years on firearmscharges and for plottingagainst East Timor. He was re-leased from prison last year tohead a newly independent EastTimor after a historic referen-dum. Ramos-Horta, a Nobellaureate, had been the leadinginternational spokesman forEast Timor’s cause since thehalf island was invaded by In-donesia in 1975.

Source : Malaysia Kini

Organised hooliganism on the rampage


suffered a grievous blow in lastyear’s election hope to turnMalaysians into a nation of sheepthat will bleat their praises,blindly follow their commandsand keep them in power forever.

That is their motive: stifle dissentand silence the critics and theywill have “their way” with allother Malaysians. But that attemptto silence legitimate criticism andlegal dissent is not the“Malaysian way” no matter howmany times Dr Mahathir imitatesFrank Sinatra.

Since September 1998 whenAnwar was sacked, more andmore Malaysians understand thatthere is a right way in politics andin the conduct of public life thatreflects fairness and justice, truthand honesty.

However, that way is not theMahathir way, the AbdullahBadawi way, or any legal way thatreflects not a fair rule of law, but adespicable rule by law.

Maybe the authorities want us tobelieve that they are doing things

tion?

Or does law, under Mahathir, onlytake its course against legitimatecriticism and dissent? DoesMahathir’s way lead to prosecu-tion only for the Karpal Singhs,the Zulfifli Sulongs, MarinaYusoffs, Mohamad Ezams andChia Lim Thyes in our country?

Think for a moment about the lawunder which Karpal is beingcharged. It is none other than theSedition Act of 1948, an archaicand anachronistic piece of legis-lation, enacted by British coloni-alism to deal with nationalist dis-sent in the colonies under its con-trol.

Our present government whichclaims to be the most nationalis-tic one in our history will not evendiscard this utterly obnoxiouspiece of colonial legislation.Malaysians may have got rid ofcolonialism, but it seems our na-tionalistic government has re-tained colonial habits.

The government has only recentlycelebrated the end of the secondmillennium. And yet it adoptsand uses this Sedition Act of 1948that makes it an offence for any-body to “bring into hatred or con-tempt”, or “excite disaffectionagainst any government”. ThisSedition Act makes it an offencefor any citizen to “raise discon-tent or disaffection among the sub-jects or bring into hatred or con-tempt or to excite disaffectionagainst the administration of jus-

UNTIL JUSTICE IS DONE Continued from page 40

in an above-board manner andthat we should simply accept thatthe law is taking its course.

But we have learnt since the 1987UMNO crisis, the mass arrestsunder Operasi Lalang, the TunSalleh Abas dismissal, and theLim Guan Eng and AnwarIbrahim cases, that even a legalway of silencing critics doesn’tensure that the authorities actwithout bias and unfairness.

If the authorities are so scrupulousabout doing things the legal way,why don’t they prosecute DrMahathir for any of his numerousslanderous and seditious state-ments? If they don’t practise se-lective prosecution, why don’tthey prosecute the owners, pub-lishers and editors of the BarisanNasional-controlled media forcarrying the perverse and sicken-ing advertisements during theelection campaign period? If theyact without fear or favour, whyhaven’t they let the law take itscourse when Anwar Ibrahim hadlodged so many police reportsagainst Daim Zainuddin orRafidah Aziz for alleged corrup-

Resorting ToColonial LawZulkifli : Under his editorship, Harakah

emerged as an impressive and popularalternative newspaper

Chia Lim Thye would probably have beenunknown if he weren’t the Harakahprinter


tice.”

How ridiculous, how obsolete,and how non-Y2K compliant this1948 Sedition Act is!

It was drafted and introduced bypeople who wanted to keep thenatives in check. Yet today it isused by our government whichapplies it without any sense of de-mocracy.

Any decent Malaysian wouldhave pronounced this piece of leg-islation to be irrelevant. But thisgovernment insists on using it insuch ways as to mock us as a na-tion and make us contemptible inthe eyes of the world.

Is the Sedition Act necessary tomaintain law and order, as thegovernment claims? Or is thismerely a law that protects an inef-ficient, non-transparent and un-democratic government from pub-lic scrutiny and challenge by ademocratically-elected opposi-tion? Is the Sedition Act meant toprevent any criticism of the gov-ernment even if the government ispatently wrong and grossly cor-rupt? When the administration ofjustice is selective and discrimi-natory, are Malaysians to befrightened by the Sedition Act into

silence and to pretend that every-thing is fine?

Unfortunately for the government,I’m sure, not all Malaysians aresenile and ready to close theireyes, shut their mouths, and stu-pidly smile in the face of rampantinjustice.

In fact, the government knowsvery well that many Malaysianshave a conscience, and are pre-pared to struggle for justice. Thatis why, even where there is nothreat of public disorder, whenthere is no incitement over sensi-tive issues, that the governmentstill wants to retain the SeditionAct. And not just the Sedition Act,but the Official Secrets Act and thePrinting Presses and PublicationsAct.

Malaysians who believe in democ-racy know that we can’t toleratethe Sedition Act which curtailsour freedom of speech. We can’thave the Official Secrets Act whichhides official wrongdoing anddenies the public their right to in-formation. We must do away withthe Printing Presses and Publica-tions Act which undermines theright of citizens to disseminate

their ideas. And, of course, we sim-ply can’t live any more with theInternal Security Act, which is themother of oppressive acts.

The purpose of these differentlaws is to turn us into unthink-ing, unfeeling and uncaring ro-bots. But unjust laws and unfairways of government can only bechanged through dissent andstruggle.

We in Aliran, together with con-cerned Malaysians all over thecountry, realise that these unjustlaws can only be changed throughthe collective efforts ofMalaysians who conscientiouslydedicate themselves to the preser-vation and defence of democracyin our country.

In all this, we are indebted toKarpal’s selfless example. Karpalhas courageously shown that hecannot be cowed and that he can-not be silenced. Malaysians arefortunate that Karpal is a fighterwho has been present and whocontinues to be engaged in everyimportant defence of Malaysiandemocracy.

Today, when Karpal himselfneeds defending, I would like toassure him that we in Aliran, whohave long been dedicated to a simi-lar defence of justice and democ-racy, will stand by him, and allothers like him, until justice isdone.

P. Ramakrishnan, Presi-P. Ramakrishnan, Presi-P. Ramakrishnan, Presi-P. Ramakrishnan, Presi-P. Ramakrishnan, Presi-dent of Aliran deliv-dent of Aliran deliv-dent of Aliran deliv-dent of Aliran deliv-dent of Aliran deliv-ered this speech at aered this speech at aered this speech at aered this speech at aered this speech at aDAP Forum “Justice atDAP Forum “Justice atDAP Forum “Justice atDAP Forum “Justice atDAP Forum “Justice atCrossroads” in PenangCrossroads” in PenangCrossroads” in PenangCrossroads” in PenangCrossroads” in Penangon 29 January 2000.on 29 January 2000.on 29 January 2000.on 29 January 2000.on 29 January 2000.

q

Struggle UntilJustice Is Done

Marina Yusoff : A staunch critic ofDr Mahathir’s government

Mohamad Ezam : Chose to battle forReformasi


et me begin by paying avery brief tribute to thehonourable Malaysianin whose defence we

meet this evening. Over a long andillustrious career, Saudara KarpalSingh has chalked up an im-mensely inspiring record. TodayKarpal Singh is known not onlyto Malaysians but around theworld as a brilliant lawyer, a fear-less defender of human rights anda vociferous parliamentarian.

Please allow me to mention, too,several other honourableMalaysians who also need oursupport.

Fewer Malaysians would haveknown Saudara Zulkifli Sulongbefore Reformasi. But, underZulkifli’s editorship, Harakahemerged as an impressive andpopular alternative newspaperwhen the public was tired of liesand distortions in the mainstream

papers. Puan Marina Yusoff hasbeen a staunch critic of DrMahathir’s government. SaudaraMohamad Ezam chose to battle forReformasi when many of his erst-while colleagues preferred to re-main deaf and dumb to the injus-tices Anwar had to endure. EncikChia Lim Thye would probablyhave been unknown to virtuallyall of us here tonight if he weren’tthe Harakah printer until recently.

For Saudara Karpal and theseother honourable Malaysians fac-ing one or another charge, theseare indeed difficult times.

But these are very difficult timesnot just for them, but equally forwhat they represent and whatthey have tried to defend – whichis nothing less than Malaysian de-mocracy itself.

When the government chooses tomount an assault on people whochampion the cause of democracy,then the government in fact at-tacks the very foundations of de-mocracy. For it’s the defenders ofdemocracy who are the very peo-ple who keep freedom alive, whospeak up for the rights of all citi-zens, and who take up the griev-ances of the public.

When someone so prominent asKarpal Singh is hackled and har-

assed, more than just his freedomis threatened. When other people,such as Zulkifli Sulong, MarinaYusoff, Mohamad Ezam and ChiaLim Thye, are also hackled, morethan their civil rights and liber-ties are threatened.

In the end, it is the freedom of allMalaysians, our human rightsand civil liberties that are tar-geted.

What do those in power hope forwhen they try to stifle outspokencritics and vociferous dissidents?

Those in power hope to silencethem, and, in so doing, put fearand strike terror in the hearts ofordinary, decent and caringMalaysians. The authorities hopethereby to frighten Malaysians somuch so that no one will dare tostand up and point an accusingfinger at the authorities, and say,“Your ways are wrong, your lawsunfair; your policies discriminat-ing, your prosecution selective,and you protect your friends andharass your foes.”

Why do the authorities prosecuteKarpal now? Why do they pros-ecute Zulkifli, Marina, Ezam, andChia as well?

It is because the authorities who

DEMOCRACY

Until Justice Is Done:Struggle To Defend Karpal, Uphold Rule Of Law

LLLLL

Continued on page 38Continued on page 38Continued on page 38Continued on page 38Continued on page 38

Our Rights AndLiberties Targeted

Why Now?

Brilliant lawyer.., fearless defender ofhuman rights.. vociferous parliamentarian

HacksHacks and andand Hussies Hussies Hussies · Hard though it may be for some to swallow, the...

Documents

Transcript of HacksHacks and andand Hussies Hussies Hussies · Hard though it may be for some to swallow, the...