Proton to loose management control to a foreign firm?

I’m appalled to see that the Govt. may finally give management control of Proton to a foreign company.

My points:-

* You don’t need to have a 51% stake to gain management control of a public-listed company. Just to highlight the distinction between management-control and majority–control.

* Whilst the latter automatically leads you to gaining management control through your board representation (if you so desire), the former means that you can gain management control after obtaining approval from other shareholders only if their stakes after combining with yours, makes up to more than 50% of the said company.

* Sometimes stake as low as 20% could lead you to gain management control, by virtue of you emerging as the single largest shareholder and with approval from other key shareholders. The only difference is how much share of future profits (as well as liabilities) that you get. Also if there’s room for other shareholders to collectively veto certain management decisions that you make through their board representations.

* Whilst there could be potential synergies and benefits arising from a tie-up with a reputable foreign partner like VW, this doesn’t necessary mean that the Govt through its various investment companies like Khazanah should cede management control of Proton to a foreign company. It’s like taking an easy way-out to me. Can’t the Govt. just allow them to have board representation to reflect the 40% shareholding instead of giving management control? Our locals not up for the job?

* By the way, is this 40% sell-off necessary in the first place?

* Even though the Govt’s strategy is to set-up a new company to house those key business units for this partnership with VW, I don’t see this as different as ceding management control of Proton. If you strip Proton of those key business units, what would Proton be left then that is of value?

* I could even go further by arguing that such tie-ups for those synergies to potentially materialize may not necessarily mean that a foreign partner must end up having a direct stake in Proton or this new company. Why hurry into a “marriage” if you can get similar benefits with less obligations. (pls don’t turn this into a religious issue lah…)

* It could just be a collaboration in specific areas or target markets, setting up subsidiaries, on R&D etc as a start. What puzzles me is why would the Govt. want to sell-off a company such as Proton that has remained profitable for some time and has a huge cash pile? Other options like I briefly mentioned above could be explored to begin with.

* Can the Govt. give a guarantee that selling-off part of Proton is the only way to arrest its decline in market share and improve profitability? When can we start seeing those gains? By what percent?

* Is the objective of the Govt. in Proton only to improve profitability by increasing market share and improving efficiency? What about other objectives?

* I believe the Govt. must be able to prioritise it’s objectives well. If the main objective is 100% profitability/efficiency for Proton, then why not just take the easy way out to house Proton’s manufacturing plants in Indonesia or China, or simply buy its components 100% from China. Then we all can have cheaper cars. But in the process, we will kill-off over 100,000 jobs, thus defeating other Govt’s objectives like creating employment, improving local content, creating entrepreneurs etc. Just
citing an example.

* It’s a tough balancing act for the Govt. indeed. But before we can understand the rationale for this “sell-off” of Proton, we need to first understand what is the main priority (or order of priorities) now for Proton from the Govt’s perspective?

* Does the Govt. (especially the PM) have a view at all on this matter? Or take the easy way-out to delegate to agencies like Khazanah to think and make the decisions. Is Khazanah looking at this only from their perspective (say improving returns) or isit wearing the hat of the Govt. & doing the balancing act?

* It’s not surprising for me to see the spin-doctors been busily portraying Proton as a company that has been steadily losing its market share, made loses last quarter etc to justify this sell-off.

Maybe Mahathir has seen this “sell-off” of Proton coming for some time.

When asked to comment on MAS intentions to hire a foreigner as it’s CEO a few months ago, I was completely stunned by his sarcastic reply which was aired on primetime TV3 news. He said something like “You can even hire a foreigner to be the Prime Minister. As long as he has brains!”

What is he trying to tell us?

Crisis in Higher Education

On the one hand, it is great to know that substantial initiatives has been taken to assist students in our universities such as holding meets-, roadshows-, career guidance-like programmes etc

On a larger policy level, I feel the situation in our higher education institutions today are getting from bad to worse, particularly with the strict enforcement of the oppressive-styled legislation such as UUCA. The recent boycott of campus elections, issues of e-voting, altercations on campus resulting from the campus elections, akujanji, the Terence Gomez affair, Azly Rahman affair etc evidence dissatisfaction in the way our higher educations institutions are being run; particularly, when the institutions are led by political appointees rather than purely, first-class academicians.

My humble view is that we should now look at this broader picture of securing first-class graduates from our institutions to build a first-class Malaysia. Already recently a Minister has said in Parliament that the UUCA will be reviewed. We should take this impetus and press for true reform and loosen the shackes of repressive and retrogressive practices in the institutions.

Numerous complaints have been made to SUHAKAM, and memos filed. The student groups have been advised to draft a comprehensive list of complaints, and the reports taken from Malaysiakini gives dim light that the list would appear to go on for some time to come.

It is further embarrasing that the Higher Education Minister always appears unfazed or recalcitrant when questions are posed to him on these issues. In one of the cases where one student who has been suspended for more than 4 years now pending his trial of participating in an "assembly without a permit" at Masjid Negara, and where the student was acquitted, but is still now suspended due to a provision of the UUCA. The student have been writing numerous letters for a reply but have yet to receive a reply. Imagine being suspended for 4 years and then acquitted but you are still suspended because the university says you have "finished your term of education after the 4 years" (the student had only 1 year to finish his course when he was suspended) and because the UUCA says that pending an appeal against any acquittal, the student remains suspended.

Well, it’s just sad to see such situation happening in some of our local universities. I agree that our students should be given some “space” to exercise their freedom of expression and assembly. Unless the authorities wants to create a society full of “yes-men” who can’t even think on their own feet.

The World's Number One

The future is bright for Aramco

AMERICANS were treated this week to the spectacle of oil-company bosses, including the heads of Exxon Mobil and Chevron Texaco, being cross-examined on Capitol Hill. The bosses of big western firms stand accused of “price gouging” and other supposed crimes. What the politicians rarely say is that it is OPEC that fixes prices on the world market—and that even the biggest western firm is but a pygmy compared to Saudi Arabia's national energy company.

Aramco, which controls nearly all Saudi oil production, is 20 times the size of Exxon. The Saudis are the world's leading producers and exporters of oil today, cranking out perhaps 11m barrels per day (bpd). The company has recently unveiled a $50 billion investment plan designed to lift Saudi output to 12.5m bpd by 2009. For comparison, Iraq and Venezuela produce less than 3m bpd of oil each, and no big private-sector company produces even that much. In short, Aramco is the Goliath of the oil world.

But for how long? Critics have been attacking the firm on two fronts. Petro-pessimists, including some independent geologists, have argued that the Saudis do not really have all the oil reserves in the ground that they claim, and that the world is nearing the peak of oil production. Matthew Simmons, an energy investment banker, has argued in a recent book that Saudi fields are in such bad shape that even Aramco's current production levels are unsustainable.

Happily for the world economy, there is reason to think the critics are too pessimistic. This week, the International Energy Agency (IEA), a quasi-governmental outfit, released its annual World Energy Outlook. The focus of this hefty tome is energy from the Middle East and North Africa—especially Saudi oil. After exhaustive analysis, the IEA concludes that the sceptics are wrong: there is more than enough oil in the ground to meet expected demand beyond 2030. It argues that Saudi Arabia's production levels can not only be sustained, but expanded dramatically to over 18m bpd by 2030. Aramco's talk of sustaining an output of 15m bpd for 50 years does not seem so unreasonable.

All is not good news, however. Aramco's oil could indeed keep gas-guzzlers humming for many years yet. But if energy demand continues to soar at the current scorching pace, especially in America and China, the only place those extra barrels of oil can come from is the Middle East. That, warns the IEA, means a sharp rise in the market share and pricing power of Aramco and its neighbours in the Persian Gulf—and with it, the prospects for a future oil shock.

-The Economist Nov 10th 2005

A Husband's Grief - TIME

After losing his wife to cancer, can Malaysia's Prime Minister recover the will to lead?
BY SIMON ELEGANT

Monday, Oct. 24, 2005
For a few days last week, Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi set aside his responsibilities as the nation's leader and took up another, more difficult role: that of a grieving husband. Abdullah's wife of four decades, Endon Mahmood, died on Oct. 20 at age 64 after a four-year battle with breast cancer. In a relatively conservati! ve country with a Muslim majority, the couple were known for their public displays of affection, often hugging or bestowing pecks on each other's cheeks. During the funeral, Abdullah, 65, did his best to appear stoic. Wearing a traditional black songkok hat, a high-collared blue shirt and a checked cotton sarong, he comforted friends at the funeral who broke down as they bade his wife a last goodbye.

Because Abdullah and Endon, the daughter of a Japanese woman and a Malay civil servant, were so close, and because the Prime Minister openly acknowledged his wife as his savviest political adviser and most trusted confidante, Malaysians are fretting over how her death might affect his leadership. For months, as Endon's condition deteriorated, political speculation in the capital Kuala Lumpur has centered on whether Abdullah has the resolve to go it alone, or if the loss of his wife might lead him to resign.

Such concerns come ! at a critical time for Abdullah, who became Prime Minister two years ago, taking over when his long-serving predecessor Mahathir Mohamad retired. The two men could not be more different. The soft-spoken, affable Abdullah is noted for his non-confrontational, consensus-seeking style, while Mahathir was more blunt and autocratic. When general elections were held a year ago, Abdullah campaigned on a platform of change, promising to root out corruption and to introduce greater transparency in government; he and his political party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), won a landslide victory. Abdullah quickly got to work, postponing or scaling back several of the huge—and hugely expensive—infrastructure projects that Mahathir favored. The government's previously somnolent Anti-Corruption Agency swung into action, launching a series of prosecutions of politicians and businessmen. And a special commission was established to look into corruption in the police force. In recent months, however, prosecutions against corruption have dried up, and the police commission's recommendations have yet to be implemented. "Abdullah has appeared strangely indecisive," says human-rights activist S. Arulchelvam. "He speaks the reform language, but his reforms have run out of steam."

Abdullah's supporters say their man is more likely to dedicate himself anew to reform. "Prepare to be surprised," says a senior UMNO official. "Worrying about Endon has been a distraction for the Prime Minister. Once he has had a chance to mourn her passing, you'll find that he comes back much more focused and more determined than ever to fulfill his agenda." Abdul Razak Baginda, who heads a
pro-administration think tank, the Malaysian Strategic Research Center, observes: "He may even be stronger. After all, he promised his wife that he would soldier on and leave behind an enduring political legacy."

A simmering dispute between Abdullah's predecessor and one of his most senior cabinet ministers could be a bellwether of his commitment to reform. Mahathir and Rafidah Aziz, the International Trade and Industry Minister, are engaged in a very public spat over thousands of permits issued by her ministry to import cars. The ex-PM says the permit holders are circumventing heavy tariffs aimed at propping up the country's automobile industry, crippling Proton, the national car company he set up while in office. Mahathir has also noted that the largest recipient of import permits is a former senior official in Rafidah's ministry. (Rafidah has defended the awarding of licenses and denied any impropriety.)

Last week, Promuda, an élite organization of young professionals, urged Abdullah to fire Rafidah and to order a thorough probe into how and why a few individuals were awarded these highly lucrative permits! "The PM cannot act as though he is an innocent bystander," wrote Promuda chairman Don Rahim in an Oct. 16 e-mail to members. "The public is looking for leadership and decision." Other critics take an even stronger line, urging Abdullah to shake up the entire cabinet, which they argue is heavy with holdovers from the Mahathir era.

But for a few days, at least, Abdullah will be forgiven for devoting his thoughts to the memory of Endon. Speaking to reporters on the day after her death, Abdullah replied "lonely, lonely" when asked how he felt. The question for many Malaysians is whether, without his companion of 40 years, their Prime Minister will find the rough and tumble world of politics lonelier then he can bear.

—Reported by Baradan Kuppusamy/Kuala Lumpur

http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/article/0,13673,501051031-1122060,00.html

Hubaya Hubaya Mahathir dan AP-APnya

I think the article below which was circulating in the MCOBA (Malay College Old Boys Association) mailing list is a sad attempt to justify the unjustifiable. It gives the impression that corruption should be condoned and tolerated.

I refer to the paragraph.

"AP ini bukan isu Rafidah rasuah. Isu rasuah ini untuk saya tidak timbul kerana dalam kerajaan hari ini hampir mustahil untuk menemui menteri yang tidak mengambil bahagian dalam rasuah. Rasuah itu adalah sebahagian dari amalan politik kerajaan hari ini. Jadi saya menolak heboh-heboh AP ini sebagai tuduhan terhadap aktiviti rasuah Rafidah Aziz. Malah apa yang telah dijalankan oleh Rafidah telah mengikut dasar-dasar yang telah ditetapkan."

I believe we should be smart in making the distinction on whether to blindly support the personalities, or to support issues that have been brought up by such personalities. The points or questions raised by Mahathir on this AP issue warrant serious attention , despite whatever shortcomings that he has or whether we like him or not. But have the answers given or actions taken by the Govt been satisfactory?

There is no point for the current Administration to preach about transparency and fighting corruption, yet behind the scenes it is perceived to be doing otherwise. For example, they talk about open tender in the Govt. Is it really happening now? Or are we made to believe that this is happening?

The issue here is simple , the current Administration must walk the talk. No point coming up with endless slogans. We just want to see actions. If not, they will be labeled as hypocrites i.e "cakap tak serupa bikin".

---end---

HUBAYA HUBAYA MAHATHIR DAN AP-AP-NYA

Minggu lalu seorang pegawai tinggi dari sebuah bank internasional telah bertanya kepada kawan saya kenapa Mahathir Muhamad terus menimbulkan isu AP dan mempertikaikan semua kenyataan Rafidah Aziz.

Kawan saya ini seorang ahli perniagaan lalu menyusulkan pertanyaan itu kepada saya. Ini bukan satu soalan yang baru bagi saya. Saya juga telah berkali-kali ditanya oleh anak-anak muda dari Universiti Bangsar Utama dengan persoalan yang sama.

Bila soalan tentang Mahathir Muhamad ini timbul saya teringat di zaman Mao dan Deng di Tanah Besar China. Penyokong-penyokong Mao terus menggodam Deng tentang garis politik yang diambilnya. Penggudaman yang berkali-kali ini telah disifatkan oleh Deng seperti – membelasah anjing yang sudah mati. Ini jugalah rasanya apabila saya menulis tentang Mahathir Muhamad. Saya tidak mahu dilihat seperti membelasah anjing yang sudah mati.

Tetapi dalam hal Mahathir dan arus politik Malaysia ini ada sedikit perbezaan. Di kampung, di zaman saya kanak-kanak dahulu, jika kami – anak-anak - terserempak dengan ular maka kami akan tergesa- gesa mencari buluh untuk membelasah ular itu. Setelah dibelasah kami memastikan yang ular itu telah betul-betul mati. Kepalanya akan digodam hingga hancur.

Kemudian barulah kami bawa ular ini dan dibuangkan ke dalam sungai. Mitos antara kami ialah jika kepala ular ini tidak hancur dia akan datang membalas dendam.

Itu hanya mitos kanak-kanak tetapi boleh diambil sebagai ilmu politik. Musuh politik wajib di digodam sehingga tidak ada kemungkinan ianya kembali bernafas. Kepalanya wajib dipastikan telah betul-betul hancur. Ular yang telah dipukul oleh gerakan Reformasi pada tahun 1999 dahulu sebenarnya telah mengundur diri sebelum sempat digodam kepalanya sehingga lumat.

Dengan licik ular ini telah bersalin kulit. Malah ramai pula yang menyangka bahawa ular ini telah mati. Ini tidak tepat. Walau pun ular ini telah patah tulang belakangnya tetapi seperti ular senduk ianya masih berupaya untuk berdengus dan menakut-nakutkan musuhnya.

Kembali kepada persoalan Mahathir dan kenapa dia terus menimbulkan isu AP; saya memiliki beberapa pandangan. Untuk memahami apa yang sedang terjadi kita wajib melihat kembali kepada budaya politik United Malay National Organisations. Dalam badan politik ini penghormatan hanya diberikan kepada pemimpin yang memiliki kuasa. Pemimpin yang tidak berkuasa tidak akan menerima apa-apa penghormatan.

Hormat ini akan sampai tinggi menggunung jika yang memiliki kuasa berupaya untuk mengagih-agihkan kontrak, lesen balak, meluluskan projek dan segala macam kepentingan ekonomi. Pemimpin-pemimpin yang telah bersara dalam United Malay National Organisations pasti tidak memiliki kuasa untuk menjadi Santa Klaus justeru hamba Allah ini tidak akan dihormati. Taraf mereka bukan lagi sebagai Quran buruk tetapi telah menjadi surat khabar lama.

Budaya ini bukan sahaja difahami oleh Mahathir Muhamad, malah dia sendiri pun semasa berkuasa telah mengamalkan dan memperkasa ciri-ciri budaya ini. Jangan lupa apa yang telah terjadi kepada Tengku Abdul Rahman dan Hussein Onn. Dua hamba Allah ini pernah menjadi kepala kepada United Malay National Organisations. Ingatilah bagaimana kedua hamba Allah ini telah di kucing kurapkan oleh Mahathir Muhamad.

Ciri-ciri dan pola-pola untuk mengkucing kurapkan Mahathir Muhamad telah mula kelihatan. Mari sama-sama kita kembali mengingati berita di tv pada malam Anwar Ibrahim dibebaskan tahun lalu. Seperti tikus basah Mahathir Muhamad dengan anak isterinya telah memanggil sidang akhbar di bangunan Petronas. Rakyat melihat betapa moyoknya si Mahathir Muhamad pada petang itu. Dia hanya dikelilingi oleh isteri dan anak-anaknya yang masih setia. Para juak, hulubalang dan tukang sorak semuanya hilang lesap menikus lari.

Menyedari hakikat ini Mahathir Muhamad telah mengambil langkah untuk terus menyerang melalui media. Serangan melalui media ini penting untuk strategi Mahathir. Dengan muncul di media maka Mahathir inginkan rakyat Malaysia melihat susuknya bukan kucing yang berkurap tetapi masih seorang negarawan yang relevan.

Pada awal persaraan universiti-universiti di seluruh negara, kecuali Universiti Bangsar Utama, telah menganugerahkan ijazah kehormat kepada Mahathir Muhamad. Ini terjadi pada tahun pertama, kini semuanya telah berlangsung dan lihat bagaimana Mahathir Muhamad kini telah sanggup untuk datang ke majlis penyampaian hadiah di Sekolah Menengah Kampong Esok, Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Sinadorrai malah telah dilaporkan bahawa Mahathir Muhamad sanggup datang ke majlis penyampian hadiah Tadika Seri Murni.

Serangan terhadap Rafidah Aziz ini sebenarnya hanyalah satu helah politik Mahathir Muhamad. Di sini saya bukan hendak menyebelahi Rafidah Aziz. Tetapi hakikatnya semasa Rafidah Aziz diserang di parlimen ada unsur-unsur ‘sexist’ telah berlaku. Para Yang Berhormat telah cuba memperlihatkan kejantanan mereka. Mereka melihat Rafidah dari gendir yang lemah dan wajib diserang.

Sikap ‘sexist’ ini amat jelas kerana pada anggapan saya Rafidah Aziz memiliki keupayaan yang cekap sebagai seorang menteri. Malah jika dia bukan perempuan saya yakin Rafidah memiliki keupayaan dan keterampilan untuk menjadi Perdana Menteri. Jika dibandingkan dengan banyak menteri-menteri kabinet, saya akui Rafidah ini lebih berkualiti sebagai seorang menteri. Lakonan yang dimainkan oleh Rafidah ini sama seperti lakonan Benazir Bhutto jika dibandingkan dengan ahli-ahli parlimen lain yang hanya boleh berlakon ke tahap Napsiah Omar atau Ibrahim Ali.

AP ini bukan isu Rafidah rasuah. Isu rasuah ini untuk saya tidak timbul kerana dalam kerajaan hari ini hampir mustahil untuk menemui menteri yang tidak mengambil bahagian dalam rasuah. Rasuah itu adalah sebahagian dari amalan politik kerajaan hari ini. Jadi saya menolak heboh-heboh AP ini sebagai tuduhan terhadap aktiviti rasuah Rafidah Aziz. Malah apa yang telah dijalankan oleh Rafidah telah mengikut dasar-dasar yang telah ditetapkan.

Dasar Ekonomi Baru ialah memberi lesen kepada Bumiputera. Maka Bumiputera yang disebutkan ini termasuklah para kroni, penyokong parti, anak bini dan kaum keluarga. Dari segi dasar inilah yang telah dipersetujui. Malah Rafidah telah mengikut apa yang telah pernah dijalankan oleh Mahathir sendiri. Untuk saya Rafidah Aziz telah menjalankan dasar yang sama-sama diketahui dan diluluskan oleh Mahathir Muhamad. Apakah Mahathir Muhamad lupa bahawa dia dahulunya ialah ‘boss’ kepada Rafidah Aziz.

Jika tidak bersetuju dengan apa yang telah berlaku maka yang wajib dikritik dan diubah ialah dasarnya. Mahathir Muhamad telah menimbulkan agenda AP bukan kerana dia menentang rasuah atau menentang dasar memberi lesen kepada kroni. Ini bukan niat Mahathir. Mahathir Muhamad sedang menggunakan isu AP ini untuk menyediakan alasan kegagalan Syarikat Proton. Fakta ekonomi yang ada pada hari ini menunjukkan Proton adalah sebuah syarikat yang telah lama muflis. Proton hanya dapat bergerak kerana membaham duit rakyat.

Jika Proton betul-betul bergerak seperti syarikat pembuat kereta maka ianya telah lama ditalkinkan. Disinilah peranan jahat Mahathir Muhamad. Tanpa dijemput tanpa diminta dia terus menawarkan dirinya untuk menjadi penasihat Proton. Ini dilakukan kerana Mahathir Muhamad berkeras kepala ingin membuktikan bahawa babi boleh terbang dan ikan tilapia memerlukan basikal.

Dua minggu lalu Delphi syarikat vendor General Motors Corpration (GM) telah jatuh muflis. The filing in bankruptcy court is the latest sign that the U.S. auto industry's unionized workers face the painful restructuring efforts forced on airline and steel workers amid bankruptcies in those industries.(1) Syarikat Delphi ini bukan kecik anak. Jika dibandingkan Proton dengan Delphi sama lah seperti
membandingkan Siti Nurhaliza dengan Mariah Carrey. Delphi memiliki 45 buah kilang pembuatan injin di Amerika dan Canada dengan 49,000 orang pekerja. Kilang-kilang ini menyediakan pelbagai barangan untuk syarikat kereta GM.

Dari sejarah Proton , dari awal lagi para akademik dan ahli ekonomi tempatan telah bersuara dan mengatakan bahawa kerja membuat kereta untuk negara seperti Malaysia samalah seperti mimpi Erma Fatimah untuk berkahwin dengan Antonio Bandera. Atau sama seperti menghantar Sangkaran Pillay untuk menjadi juara 100 meter dalam sukan Olimpik.

Tetapi dengan angkuh sekali Mahathir Muhamad telah memperli dan memperlekehkan pandangan para akademik dan para ekonomis ini. Hasilnya hari ini semua rakyat Malaysia dipaksa membayar untuk terus menghidupkan bangkai bernyawa yang bernama Proton.

Penutupan syarikat pembuat kereta bukan satu yang baru. Satu ketika dahulu Australia juga telah mengeluarkan kereta Holden. Akhirnya syarikat ini ditutup. Banyak syarikat-syarikat pembuat kereta dalam dunia ini sedang menghadapi saingan hebat dari China dan Jepun. Fiat dari Italy dan Volkwagen dari Germany juga sedang mengalami keperitan.

Pembuatan kereta bukan hanya untuk jualan dalam negara sahaja. Industri kereta kita tidak mungkin dapat hidup dengan daya beli rakyat Malaysia. Negara kita bukan seperti China atau India. Hakikat ini disedari oleh Mahathir Muhamad. Kerana itu, kita jangan lupa, pada satu ketika dahulu Mahathir cuba menggalakkan rakyat bersenggama siang dan malam sebanyak mungkin agar penduduk Malaysia menjadi 75 juta orang. Ini kerana niatnya untuk menjual kereta Proton.

Sepanyol yang penduduknya hanya sekali ganda dari Malaysia berjaya dengan industri keretanya kerana - Spain’s auto industry held up well in 2004, producing just over 3 million vehicles, of which 2.4 million were cars and the rest industrial vehicles. The sector exported 82% of its products, 0.6% fewer than the previous year. The results mean Spain maintains its position as Europe’s third biggest carmaker and the number seven producer in the world. It is also number one in Europe in industrial vehicles. (2)

Amat jelas dalam kes negara Sepanyol ini, kunci kejayaan ialah bersaing dan dapat menjual kereta ke luar negara. Jadi saya melihat isu AP ini memiliki udang di sebalik batu. Ada satu lagi perkara yang paling penting dalam memahami heboh-heboh AP Rafidaz Aziz ini. Apabila Mahathir menyerang dan menimbulkan isu AP maka rakyat diharap-harap akan terlupa kepada lebih banyak jenayah-jenayah ekonomi, kes-kes rasuah dan tahi masam yang telah ditinggalkan bersepah-sepah oleh Mahathir Muhamad.

Jangan lupa tentang projek Bakun. Berapa bilion ringgit yang telah hangus dibaham oleh kroni Mahathir Muhamad. Jangan lupa dengan projek Pewaja. Berapa bilion ringgit yang telah hilang hangus. Jangan lupa tentang Bank Bumiputera yang hilang dua bilion ringgit. Dan pergilah berjalan dan lihat dengan rapi rupa bentuk bangunan di Putrajaya. Banyak yang mula terkehel, robek, berlubang, bocor dan pecah. Plastik- plastik murah, besi-besi tidak berkualiti , batu bata cekai telah digunakan dalam mendirikan bangunan-bangunan yang dimimpikan Mahathir Muhamad. Malah rumah resmi Perdana Menteri yang belum dipakai telah wajib diperbaiki. Cuba tanya kerja jahat siapa ini? Berapa bilion ringgit agaknya yang telah masuk ke dalam saku para kroni?

Bagaimana pula dengan Convention Center yang sedang menjadi lipas menjalar di atas bukit yang hanya baru dua kali digunakan untuk persidangan antarabangsa. Bagaimana pula dengan stadium Bukit Jalil yang telah mula bocor. Dan bagaimana pula dengan berita 700 juta ringgit dari Bank Islam yang tiba-tiba hilang. Duit sebanyak ini tidak mungkin berlayar ke Bosnia atau ke Afrika tanpa ada hamba Allah yang membenarkannya.

Bayangkan berapa ramai generasi anak-anak muda yang telah memasuki universiti dan lembaga-lembaga pengajian tinggi telah di bebalkan oleh Mahathir Muhamad. Mereka telah dibonsaikan otak fikrahnya sehingga mereka terlupa untuk bertanya - apa telah terjadi tentang heboh-heboh Multimedia Super Corridor dahulu? Apa telah terjadi kepada E-Village? Apakah tujuan mendirikan Cyberjaya itu hanya untuk membuat kajian tentang lalang dan belukar ? Berapa bilion ringgit telah tercurah di sini?

Woit! Isu AP Rafidah ini adalah amat kecil berbanding dengan berbilion ringgit yang hilang, lenyap dan lupus kerana projek-projek mega Mahathir Muhamad. Kes Rafidah dengan Mahathir ini samalah seperti kes Saddam dengan Bush. Saddam Hussein menghukum rakyat Iraq yang menentang beliau. Tetapi George membunuh semua rakyat Iraq.

Akhir-akhir ini Mahathir Muhamad sedang cuba sedaya upaya menunjukkan bahawa dia telah begitu berusaha untuk mendirikan kilang kereta nasional. Dalam usaha suci lagi murni ini dia telah berputar belit bersilat lidah.

Bayangkan seorang perdana menteri sebuah negara dan seorang Wira Dunia Ketiga telah ditipu oleh Naza seorang penjual kereta secondhand. Ini bukan tohmah dari saya. Ini pengakuan Mahathir Muhamad sendiri.

Ha.Ha.Ha. Betapa cekainya Mahathir Muhamad. Rupa-rupanya selama 20 tahun ini negara kita ini telah dipimpin oleh Mat Bebal yang boleh dikelentong oleh seorang penjual kereta second hand. Saya amat yakin tentang fakta ini. Lim Goh Tong tidak bersekolah. Tan Pek Keng hanya seorang driver. Vincent Tan hanya seorang penjual tayar dan insurans. Jika dibandingkan kelihatan si Naza ini ada belajar sedikit. Semua ini menimbulkan kesangsian. Apakah Mahathir Muhamad ini betul-betul pernah belajar di King Edward College di Singapura. Atau dia telah membeli ijazahnya dari Universiti Kerala yang memiliki cawangan di Chulia Street Penang?

Saya kasihan terhadap para Yang Berhormat di parlimen yang telah tertelan ‘decoy’ yang telah dipasang oleh Mahathir Muhamad. Serangan-serangan terhadap Rafidah adalah taktik mempertahankan diri untuk memastikan kes dan fail rasuah dirinya sendiri tidak akan dibuka. Rafidah dan AP akan dipersalahkan apabila Proton menjadi perniagaan buluh kasap – hujung hilang pangkal lesap.

Saya di sini tidak ingin membelasah anjing yang telah mati. Saya hanya terkenang kepada mitos zaman kanak-kanak saya dahulu. Kalau bunuh ular kepalanya mesti dihancurkan. Jangan silap anggap ular ini bukan mentor dan bukan ayah angkat. Kerana itu datuk nenek moyang kita telah meninggalkan pesan - jika jumpa ular dan jumpa ayam hutan ketuk kepala Mahathir dahulu.

Jika ini dilakukan pasti dapat kita buktikan bahawa babi memang tidak boleh terbang dan ikan tilapia memang tidak memerlukan basikal. END

NOTA
1 - Money CCN 10/10/2005
2 - Global Update MarketNewZealand.Com. 9/6/2005

AP Revisited...

I think now I'm beginning to see why the PM and the Govt haven't or appear not willing to act. If you refer to the response given in Parliament on Tuesday by Datuk Nazri Aziz, Minister in the PM's Dept, you can perhaps try to understand why.

http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v3/news.php?id=161133

He said there is no need for a Royal Commission to be set-up to investigate the allegations because this is a PRIVATE issue between two individuals. I guess he must be talking on behalf of the PM and the Govt.

So, all along the PM and the Govt thinks this is a private issue, thus no need for them to be involved.

I believe this is where he, the PM and the Govt has got it all wrong. This mindset of 'this being a private issue' needs to be corrected.

So eveything starts with the mindset in my view.

Maybe the Govt should do a poll and ask the public if they think the issues raised are serious allegations of national importance, or simply a private matter between two individuals. If the PM and the Govt thinks this is a private issue, then I believe they're completely out of touch with what's happening on the ground.

Setting up a Royal Commission to investigate is a good idea. PM can always set-one immediately and it only takes a whisper. He can still spend time with his wife and family. Give the Royal Commission one month to investigate and publish the results after Raya. Miss AP can still enjoy her Raya.

If you're a leader, responsibility to the public comes before your family. I'm sure the PM knows this before he assumes office. Given that he's spent only a short time with his wife (may Allah bless her soul) despite her ailing conditions demonstrates his sense of responsibility and understanding of his responsibilities as the PM.

But what I'm concern now is the mindset displayed by the PM and the Govt on this issue, perhaps leading to this inaction. Unless they say Nazri Aziz is talking on behalf of himself.

I could be jumping the gun a little bit, but I think Malaysia is ripe for a revolution. Personally, I'm inspired by the Bolivarians.

It's no longer time for cabinet 'renovation'. It's time for re-construction. And that means replacement of the old guards, either through political means or by revolutionary forces.

In a country with more than 60% majority voters are below 40 years of age, I'd expect, revolutionary forces to be at work unless the politicians succeed in keeping us occupied with EPL, AF3, Warung Uncle Don etc. whilst they and their friends are stealing from the nation's coffers.

This is 2005, every politician must stands on its own. Patronage breeds weaklings..

Al Fatihah to Datin Seri Endon

My deepest condolences to the PM and his family on the passing of his beloved wife. The nation will definitely mourn with him in this loss. Our prayers are with the PM and his family in this difficult time.

KUALA LUMPUR (Dow Jones)--Endon Mahmood, wife of Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, died at 2355 GMT Thursday, Bernama news agency said.

"The Prime Minister's wife, Datin Seri Endon Mahmood, passed away at 7:55 a.m. today at the Prime Minister's official residence Seri Perdana Putrajaya Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi told Bernama," the report said. The report didn't say what Endon died of, but she has been receiving treatment for cancer. Endon was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2002 following a checkup after her twin sister, Noraini, was earlier found to have the disease. Noraini died in January last year.

A peom for our dearest Prime Minister in this difficult times.

I see your eyes,
one final glance as you look back at me,
and we both know it is time.
Although I swore
I would never have to let you go
It's a promise I cannot keep.

I need to live
and you need to grow.

My heart folds back onto itself
And I just bend my knees and lower my center
To withstand the buffet of the winds
That will blow by me,
and through me
Without you standing there to shelter me.

The tether is cut,
and you are free to fly
and I lose an anchor,
and my cheeks burn,
from the icy wind
and the few tears that sneak past the wall
That I am leaning on
so that I can stand
and watch you go.

And someday soon I think
I will find a haven
Where I can cry the tears
And let the salt water cleanse the wounds
So they can begin to heal
But now is not the time.

One hand raised
I salute you
With a wave of good-bye
Wishing you all the blessings of this earth
And when we meet again
it won't be the same
But we will always know

How much we loved
and trusted
and shared
Victories, losses, adventures
and just the passage of time.

Look back no more
Eyes to the future
And I will just stand here
and watch you go.

The Power of Three Little Words

Some of the most significant messages people deliver to one another often come in just three words. When spoken or conveyed, those statements have the power to forge new friendships, deepen old ones and restore relationships that have cooled. The following three-word phrases can enrich every relationship.

I'LL BE THERE - Being there for another person is the greatest gift we can give. When we are truly present for other people, important things happen to them and to us. We are renewed in love and friendship. We are restored emotionally and spiritually. 'Being there' is at the very very core of civility.


I MISS YOU - Perhaps more marriages could be salvaged and strengthened if couples simply and sincerely said to each other, "I miss you." This powerful affirmation tells partners they are wanted, needed, desired and loved.

I RESPECT YOU - Respect is another way of showing love. Respect conveys the feeling that another person is a true equal. It is a powerful way to affirm the importance of a relationship.

MAYBE YOU'RE RIGHT - This phrase is highly effective in diffusing an argument and restoring frayed emotions. The flip side of "maybe you're right" is the humility of admitting "maybe I'm wrong."

PLEASE FORGIVE ME - Many broken relationships could be restored and healed if people would admit their mistakes and ask for forgiveness. All of us are vulnerable to faults, foibles and failures. A man should never be ashamed to own he has been in the wrong, which is but saying, in other words, that he is wiser today than he was yesterday.

I THANK YOU - Gratitude is an exquisite form of courtesy. People who enjoy the companionship of good, close friends are those who don't take daily courtesies for granted. They are quick to thank their friends for their many expressions of kindness. On the other hand, people whose circle of friends is severely constricted often do not have the attitude of gratitude.

COUNT ON ME - "A friend is one who walks in when others walk out," Loyalty is an essential ingredient for true friendship; it is the emotional glue that bonds people. Those who are rich in their relationships tend to be steady and true friends. When troubles come, a good friend is there, indicating "you can count on me."

LET ME HELP - The best of friends see a need and try to fill it. When they spot a hurt they do what they can to heal it. Without being asked, they pitch in and help.

I UNDERSTAND YOU - People become closer and enjoy each other more if they feel the other person accepts and understands them. Letting others know in so many little ways that you understand him or her is one of the most powerful tools for healing your relationship.

GO FOR IT - Some of your friends may be non conformists, have unique projects and unusual hobbies. Support them in pursuing their interests. Rather than urging your loved ones to conform, encourage their uniqueness-everyone has dreams that no one else has.

I suppose the 3 little words that you were expecting to see have to be reserved for those who are special; that is I LOVE YOU.

Have a great day loving yourself and loving your loved ones!

AP Issue - PM Need to Act Now

I would like to refer to the interview given by the former PM, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamed, in the Exchange program aired on TV3 recently. For those of you wandering what happened, check this pages out:

http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2005/10/15/nation/12331652&sec=nation
http://www.jeffooi.com/

Since the AP issue was raised 5mths ago, the former PM, MPs, UMNO Youth, members at the UMNO General Assembly, opposition parties etc have all demanded that the Minister in charge gave an explanation for the alleged irregularities and abuses. Sadly no satisfactory answers have been given so far. Yet more and more questions crop up.

So far none of the culprits have been charged for under-declaration despite the huhaa. On the other had, the former Customs D-G was thrown into the spotlight for the alleged RM5mio retirement parties.

No investigation was carried out into why those without proper business set-up like showrooms or assembly plants as required, were given thousands of APs. Yet the Govt still talks about transparency.

Proton problems brought up by the former CEO were not addressed, yet the CEO was indirectly 'punished' by his contract not renewed for speaking up.

The ACA was sent into MITI to investigate a few months ago (as per report in the newspapers), yet until today we don't hear any progress of their investigations.

There is really something wrong with this country. Even the combined weight of the former PM, MPs, UMNO Youth, members at the UMNO General Assembly etc can't seem to get things done. It appears that things only move in this country if the Prime Minister says so.

So what does it say about lesser mortals like us in trying to fight for transparency and justice in this country?

As a citizen, I am very angry and sad to see this state of affairs.

As a Bumi, I am further angry by the fact policies which are intended to help the majority of Bumis seems to only benefit a few people i.e the cronies under the pretex of helping Bumis, as evidenced by this AP issue.

I am angry that no heads have rolled so far i.e those that should be made accountable haven't been made to do so.

The PM needs to close this issue once and for all. He can act by simply:-

1. Sack the Minister. She has been given over 5mths to provide satisfactory explanation but she hasn't. Public patience has worn out. There is also no point for the Minister to respond since she has lost credibility. Let an independent third party to investigate and respond to all allegations.

2. Then sent in ACA to investigate MITI. Give them one month to complete and publish the investigation. Provide detailed answers to the allegations brought up by the former PM. Other heads who're involved should roll as well.

3. Investigate the AP abusers especially the 2 AP Kings who unlike NAZA the 3rd AP King, do not have a proper business set-up , yet were given thousand of APs. Was corruption involved somewhere.

4. Give the Customs-Dept one month to bring to book the culprits who under-declared.

5. Open up MITI's 'books' for further investigation eg. allocation of shares to Bumis. If there is alleged irregularities in one area i.e AP, there is a chance that other areas could be affected as well. Maybe if the Govt disclose the list of recipients for the Bumi shares, it might suffer the same fate as the APs i.e only a few cronies monopoly the awards.

The PM cannot act as though he is like an innocent bystander, whereas the public is looking for his leadership and decision. If he doesn't act, it appears he's giving immunity to the Minister. Worst case is we might lose confidence on his ability to govern the country if this small issue can't be resolved soon.

As soon to be young professionals, we support his policies to weed out corruption and to bring more transparency into the system. We sincerely hope his words can be translated into effective actions.

Malaysia may raise fuel prices gradually to contain fiscal deficit - Hasan Jafri

Malaysia could lose its status as home of the second-cheapest gasoline in Southeast Asia as Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi focuses his efforts to rein in the country's fiscal deficit on increasingly expensive fuel subsidies.

The prime minister, in his second full year in office, faces a tricky balancing act. He has successfully slashed the budget deficit to 3.8% of gross domestic product from 5.6% in 2002. But the energy-subsidy bill has emerged as a concern, and reducing it will be politically difficult.

Under Malaysia's 2006 budget, unveiled Sept. 30, the government will spend 15.7 billion ringgit ($4.17 billion) this year to cap retail fuel prices, up sharply from six billion ringgit two years ago. State-owned oil company Petroliam Nasional Bhd., or Petronas, will pay nine billion ringgit to subsidize natural gas sold to local utility companies.

The total energy bill of almost 25 billion ringgit is higher than the projected 18.44 billion ringgit fiscal deficit for 2006, twice as much as Malaysia's security spending and 6.4% more than what the government plans to spend on education.

Analysts expect that Malaysia will increase fuel prices at a gradual pace, unlike the Indonesian government, which this month increased retail prices by an average of more than 125%. Analysts say Malaysia is in a stronger financial position to bear the cost of the subsidies compared with Indonesia, which was under pressure from a sinking currency, to take tough action.

Malaysia's weaker economic performance this year, compared with last year, also argues for a more gradual approach. Economic growth is forecast by the government to slow to 5% in 2005 from 7.1% in 2004, partly because the rising cost of oil has increased the cost of doing business. Year-to-year inflation hit 3.7% in August, the highest rate since February 1999.

Malaysia exports high-quality sweet, light crude to the world and has gained enormously from the record crude prices. It doesn't have enough domestic refining capacity and is forced to import gasoline, kerosene oil and diesel fuel.

The government this year has increased gasoline prices by 6.6% and diesel prices by 45.6%. At 43 U.S. cents a liter, Malaysia has the region's second-lowest retail gasoline price after Brunei, where the price is 32 cents a liter.

Indonesia's recent fuel-price increases pushed the gasoline price there to 44 cents a liter. Thailand sells gasoline for 55 cents a liter, while in Singapore a liter of gasoline costs as much as a $1.

Mr. Abdullah isn't expected to follow Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's lead and shock the economy with a massive one-time rise. Instead, he is more likely to continue to gradually raise prices after doing the same three times this year.

Officials argue that because of Malaysia's financial position is stronger than Indonesia's, Mr. Abdullah has more leeway in weaning the public off cheap gasoline. The incremental approach will also keep political pressure off Mr. Abdullah, as well as ensure that inflation doesn't spike and that economic growth doesn't falter.

"You need a period of adjustment and just can't go cold turkey," says a senior government official who doesn't want to be identified. Other government officials say that Mr. Abdullah's administration is treading carefully because of fears of a backlash, particularly from the politically dominant ethnic Malay community. "The whole issue is very political. There is a lot of opposition against removing subsidies from within government", says a Finance Ministry official.

The government has said it won't raise prices further this year but has stopped short of saying what it intends to do in 2006.

Assuming crude oil continues to trade above $60 a barrel, some economists expect Mr. Abdullah to raise retail gasoline prices by 12% to 25% next year. The higher prices would help the government reduce both its budget deficit and its subsidy bill, perhaps by as much as three billion ringgit.

Still, Raising fuel prices too sharply could lead to a backlash from consumers and from industries such as fishing in rural areas, which rely heavily on subsidies and are poorer than middle-class residents of Kuala Lumpur.

DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

The New Kofi Annan?

The British Sunday Times on 2nd Oct 05 recently ran a half page article on Anwar Ibrahim titled ' Voice of moderate Islam wins support'. The article, by Michael Sheridan, lists out Anwars background and informs readers that the ex DPM is now teaching at Georgetown University in US...where he and all his six children are currently living. The article ends with hints that Anwar might be considered as a candidate to replace Koffi Annan as Secretary General of the UN.....hmm wonder what the Malaysian media would make of that? Would Malaysians rejoice in the news that their 'tarnished' son is being considered for such an 'esteemed' post ?

___end___

Voice of moderate Islam wins support

Michael Sheridan, Kuala Lumpur

THERE has rarely been a political comeback like this one. For a man barred from office until 2008, Anwar Ibrahim, politician and former prisoner, is receiving a rapturous welcome on what looks distinctly like an election campaign in villages and towns across Malaysia.

“I’m talking about corruption,” he said. “Nepotism is still part of the game. Nothing has changed. I’d say we are 10 years behind the times here.”

The Malaysian government has every reason to be worried, because Anwar, 58, has become much more than a local figure.

He is emerging as an international spokesman for moderate Islam, with a teaching position at Georgetown University in the United States, invitations to Oxford and a demanding schedule of speeches and seminars around the globe.

He opposes the war in Iraq but attacks “the delusions” of those who worship Saddam Hussein rather than face home truths about the crisis in Muslim societies. He argues with Malaysia’s fundamentalists because, he says, “you have to draw a line” against compulsion in religion.

This week he is a speaker at a conference in London organised by the Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability.

It is quite a renaissance for a man who was sacked from high office, convicted on charges of abuse of power, accused by the prime minister of being homosexual, beaten up by the country’s top policeman and imprisoned from 1998 to 2004.

Few politicians have experienced such a dizzying sequence of reversals: fewer still have survived them to return, as Anwar has, more dangerous to his rivals than before.

His nemesis, the retired prime minister Mahathir Mohamad, has become a cranky 80-year-old who recently accused Britain and the United States of terrorism.

Many Malaysians see Anwar’s conviction for abuse of power as a political conspiracy orchestrated by Mahathir. The Malaysian federal court threw out charges of homosexuality, which Mahathir used to destroy Anwar’s reputation among conservative voters.

Anwar won more than £500,000 in libel damages from the author of a book entitled 50 Reasons Why Anwar Cannot Become Prime Minister, which had repeated the sexual allegations.

He will not be collecting the award, however: the writer, Khalid Jafri, died last August.

Anwar is now suing Mahathir, who continues to repeat the slurs. “When I came out of prison I said I would forgive and forget,” said Anwar, “but this man is evil.”

The man speaking in quiet, confident tones is sitting in an almost empty home in the hills above Kuala Lumpur. He is greyer round the temples than on the night in 1998 when he gave a fiery press conference in this house to launch his reform movement after being sacked as deputy prime minister.

He still has the air of a member of the global elite, who numbers Chris Patten and Gordon Brown among his friends. He has been on good terms with Paul Wolfowitz, the American neo-conservative who heads the World Bank, for 20 years.

His wife, Wan Azizah Ismail, has been bustling around on political work and cheerfully excuses herself as she goes off to a meeting in parliament.
Their six children no longer live in Malaysia. Anwar took them to America when he was offered the post at Georgetown. He flies home every month or so for an intensive bout of politics.

“My wife was very strong,” said Anwar. “It was very unpleasant for her but she has come through it.”

Prison was difficult, he said. “You are in excruciating pain. You are in solitary confinement. There were threats to my wife and daughters.”

Once in custody, Anwar was beaten up by Rahim Noor, the inspector general of police, leaving him to make a court appearance with a black eye.

“The forensic evidence is that it was a professional, potentially lethal attack,” Anwar said. “Without pressure from the international media and foreign governments, they would have left me to rot.”

The police chief was later forced to resign. He was fined, served 20 days in jail and settled a compensation case with Anwar out of court.

The beating and solitary confinement seem to have strengthened Anwar’s will to contest ideologies that try to confine the human spirit.

He is aware that the world changed while he was behind bars but he shocked an Arab audience in Dubai recently by attacking Saddam and criticising anti-Americanism in the Middle East.

“I told them we must transcend the rhetoric of the crusades,” he said. “It is a ploy by authoritarian leaders and dictators to deflect attention from central issues like corruption by posing as champions of the Muslims so that their crimes against humanity are forgiven.

“I am opposed to the war in Iraq and I’ve told my American friends so. The best thing now would be a quick withdrawal and the arrival of a multinational force. That way you can still defuse this idea that America is against the Arabs, against the Muslims.”

Anwar’s stint at Georgetown has taught him that the United States has an unbeatable ability to innovate. “America is so dynamic because the society is basically democratic. That is the key,” he said.

Anwar will get a chance to test his strength at a democratic poll in 2008, when Malaysia is due to hold a general election.

Abdullah Badawi, Mahathir’s successor, has softened the government’s tone and taken steps against corruption. The ruling party’s grip remains strong.

However, Anwar could tempt its members to join a reformist alliance that he is building with Malaysia’s entrepreneurial Chinese minority, Muslim scholars and young professionals of all races.

Anwar’s aides think that he could become prime minister — unless an alternative future awaits. A quiet search is on for a candidate from Asia to succeed Kofi Annan as secretary-general of the United Nations.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1807093,00.html

Another Achievement by Our Fellow Malaysian

Just want to share this with everyone. Fadlee, who is a UPM scholar, is currently doing his PhD at Loughborough University. He's due for his viva next week, and will get his doctorate degree by next month.

____end___

THE MOBILE PHONE WITH VITAL SIGNALS

BY HANNAH DAVIES

10:30 - 06 October 2005

It's taken years to perfect, but patients could soon benefit from a gadget which keeps tabs on their health through their mobile phone.

Professors at Loughborough University have invented the system, which uses a mobile phone to transmit a person's vital signs to a hospital computer.

Doctors can monitor heart signals, blood pressure, oxygen saturation and body temperature of patients miles away.

It means that patients in rural areas could be monitored without having to book hospital trips.

Sensors attached to the patient's wrists are used to transfer the signals via a mobile.

Professor Bryan Woodward and Dr Fadlee Rasid from the university's department of electronic and electrical engineering, created the device.

Prof Woodward said: "The idea is that a doctor can monitor a patient who can be anywhere, perhaps hundreds or thousands of miles away, and they can speak to each other at the same time.

"When the new system is fully developed its main use will be in healthcare, where the technology could improve the quality of life of patients, particularly for those undergoing post-operative care or living remotely from a hospital.

"It will allow medical services to be delivered to any location within the coverage of cellular networks.

"A patient from a rural area can be given a check-up by mobile phone without having to commute regularly to a hospital.

"Routine inspections and monitoring could be done while the patient is at home, travelling, at work or at leisure, relieving resources for more demanding hospital cases."

The university was given a £160,000 grant to develop a prototype of the system. After seven years in the pipeline, it has now been tested successfully under realistic conditions.

The technology is thought to be a world first. Although landline phones can already be used to transfer vital signs, a mobile increases freedom for patients.

Prof Woodward said: "I came up with the idea after thinking there was no reason why a mobile phone couldn't be used for this. We thought we'd just go for it.

"Fortunately, the only limitations appear to be the temporary loss of mobile phone signal when going through a tunnel, or other areas not covered by a mobile network"

Heart patient Mabel Johnson, 100, who lives in the city centre, said: "I think it sounds like a very good idea. It's much better for people who go to hospital to have their heart signals checked to get it done without leaving the house, or if they were on holiday they could be checked without having to cut their trip short."

At Loughborough University, the system will also be used in the area of sport and exercise. In the build-up to the 2012 Olympics, the technology would allow coaches and physiologists to monitor performance of athletes remotely, and the data could be stored for later analysis.

Sothi vs. Bung & Aziz

Warning letter for duo who broke ranks

KUALA LUMPUR: The two Barisan Nasional MPs who broke ranks by supporting an opposition motion got away with a stern warning.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz said Datuk Bung Mokhtar Radin (BN – Kinabatangan) and Datuk Mohamed Aziz (BN – Sri Gading) would be issued with warning letters by the Barisan whip for supporting Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang.

The two had supported his motion to refer International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz and her secretary-general Datuk Mohd Sidek Hassan to the Parliamentary Privileges Committee for giving MPs letters on approved permits without following parliamentary procedure.

Nazri said the two only breached party discipline.

“We have to discipline party members. The party whip will issue stern warning letters to them so that they will not repeat their actions,” he told reporters at Parliament lobby.

Since they had expressed regret and had apologised, issuing them warning letters would be sufficient, he added.

He added that Cabinet sought the Attorney-General Chamber's view on the status of the MPs and was advised that there was no need to discuss the matter during the Cabinet meeting, as they were not administrative members.

___end___

The Malaysian government system is derived from the British system courtesy of the occupation. Similar to Australia, in a parliamentary system, party discipline is considered highly important for the government to function – otherwise, we would have a House full of individual opinions and then they cannot arrive at any decision. If there are certain stands not popular with either Opposition nor Government, the Rakyat can elect Independents to represent them. Therefore, if we elect a BN MP, we have to expect them to vote along BN lines. Dissent is not allowed in open parliament sessions but MPs are free to voice their opinions and debate in closed-door BN-only sessions.

The US system is not completely free-voting as well. They keep party members in check by way of a rewards and punishment system meted out by the party whip. Party discipline in US is a lot less than in UK, Australian and Malaysian House but their elected representatives are kept in check by a system of rewards – e.g. funds to the constituent, election to sub-committees which are very powerful. If you are not a party-line follower, you will almost never get selected into these sub-committees which oversee almost everything and decide on budgets, policies, etc. Dissenters can also expect themselves kicked out of these subcommittees.

We must also understand that partisan discipline is a lot more important to a Prime Minister as his powers are different from that of a President, who has, in general greater executive powers. A PM needs party support a lot more because the ruling party elects the PM whereas in US the President is elected by an electoral college system. You can therefore have a president from a minority party – if I’m not mistaken Bush had to contend with a Democrat-controlled Congress in his 1st term.

Review: Malaysian 2006 Budget Report

Just recently, our Prime Minister Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi annouced the 2006 budget. It took me awhile to finish reading the whole budget report since it was pretty long. But I managed to follow through some of the interesting points that I think are rather weak or can be critized on.

(i) the expected growth of 2006 is 5.5% (world 4.3 and Asean 5.4).

I don't think that it is realistically achievable given that the main GDP components such as Public consumption, public demand and private consumption are all contracting.

This is further supported by the fact that we are experiencing negative growth of savings rate (37.1% in 2004 to 34.7% in 2005). Economic equilibrium is when saving equals investment and when savings is down - investment will follow suit. Thus , it further downgrades growth. (In fact, if I am not mistaken, this is the 1st time that the Minister of Finance did not share, and take pride on, the savings rate vs GDP in his budget speech)

Manufacturing is expected to grow at 4.9% (from 4.8% in 2005) - very-very low for Malaysian standard that has always been 8% plus.

(ii) In managing national economy

The common targets are GDP growth, inflation rate and unemployment rate. As on the inflation rate – The civil servants’ bonus (as a start, giving bonus as its helps to stimulate spending and expanding the economy) but it can trigger inflationary pressures and I think that is one of the reasons of PM’s campaign for thrifty spending immediately after the budget presentation. On monthly basis, the consumer price index and producer price index are going up.

As regards the unemployment rate. I do not think that the target of 3.4% (from 3.5% last year) is achievable given the promotions of mergers and acquisitions that will lead to retrenchments. Further the unemployed graduates training schemes are not tailored to the promoted sector i.e. agriculture.

(iii) Rural development.

Coming from the city, I appraise the allocation of RM5.7 billion for rural development positively, particularly the infra sector.

(iv) Poverty.

Efforts are made to reduce poverty. However, the efforts need to be planned properly and of target-base.

I noted that the poverty eradication efforts are only concentrating on the rural poor – so – how about the urban poor? The malays say: orang kampung – susah cara kampong, orang Bandar – susah cara Bandar but the latter is worst as they have to pay their needs based on city prices.

The other finding is on agriculture and poverty that has evolved from a mere relationship to an identity. Basically one can divide the agricultural activities into two: land and water economies. I realised that not much impetus is given on water activities i.e. the fishing industry. If we were to check on which sector of the agricultural activities that has the most of hard core poverties – the common answer is fisheries, especially the small scale fisheries who depends on the increasingly depleted near-shore fish stocks. However no great things are proposed for this sector. Fishing registered negative growth of -0.4% in 2005 and is expected to grow by 5.3% in 2006 – how can it grow (and growing from negative to positive) without fiscal supports?

(v) Halal Food.

It tickles me whenever I read about halal food initiatives in the budget as halal food has always been the key words for many years and yet yields no powerful and impactful results. We are one of the key countries of the OIC and should leverage the position to be a halal food hub, this is further supported by our demography and food-producing resources.

The 2006 budget put forth proposals to increase our ability to do research on halal food. I think, the better way is to locate the money for :

(a) certification of halal food – to build up the capacity and efficiency in terms of certification and monitoring. Last year or 2 years back, months after the budget dealt with halal food hub – the nation was served with a surprise on issues like non halal sausages that carry halal certificates, lack of enforcements and monitoring of JAKIM and rumours on tradeable halal certificates. I think the government should invest on building up an body to certify halal food with proper enforcement officers. Make it Badan Pensijilan dan Pemantauan Makanan Halal Malaysia.

(b) building the brands of Malaysian halal food

(c) building overseas channel managements for the Malaysian halal food industries

Europe and Islam - the way ahead - Anwar Ibrahim

About seven years ago, someone wrote a book entitled 50 Reasons Why Anwar Ibrahim Should Not Be Prime Minister. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what kind of book this was or what sort of person the author of such a book would be. But just let me share with you some thoughts about this matter.

This book was part and parcel of a despicable political conspiracy to assassinate my character. And this was no low-level, ordinary conspiracy but one orchestrated at the highest levels backed by virtually unlimited financial resources. The ultimate objective was of course to destroy my political career and to do whatever it takes to see that I would never become prime minister of Malaysia.

Of course, I took legal action against these culprits for defamation of character then itself and the High Court granted me an injunction in 1998. But the matter dragged on with no resolution in sight.

Fortunately, after my acquittal and release from incarceration, the Kuala Lumpur High Court gave a judgment in my favour in respect of this defamation suit. The judge set Aug 16 for assessment of damages (and the hearing is in progress this week).

Suffice to say that the outrageous lies and allegations in the book caused great pain to me and my family, particularly my children, and also my friends. And as a result of the heinous acts of the conspirators, I was harshly removed from all my positions in the government as well as the party and then subjected to those preposterous, but nonetheless, very cruel criminal charges.

Anyway, I don't wish to harp on this too much. This matter is way overdue. So I want and I pray it will be resolved soon. The sooner, the better, so that I can put this entire episode behind me. As they say, you just have to move on.

‘Terrorism and Benladism’

So on that note, let me now say a few things about Islam and Europe.

The great Belgian historian Henri Pirenne has said that the cause of Europe's break with the tradition of antiquity was the rapid and unexpected advance of Islam. It is not that the blame game on Islam was invented by him but, to my mind, this radical thesis set in train a new era in evaluating the impact of religion on civilisation, an impact which is still pervasive today.

According to Pirenne, Islam shattered the classic tradition of the Roman Empire and destroyed the ancient unity of the Mediterranean states. The Muslim conquest was totally unlike the previous invasions. The Germans, for example, had conquered the region earlier but they were absorbed by the populations. The Arabs were completely immune to their influence and this had nothing to do with language or a sense of ethnic or cultural superiority. According to Pirenne, the only reason was religion.

To quote him,"While the Germans had nothing with which to oppose the Christianity of the Roman Empire, the Arabs were exalted by the new religion of Islam. It was this and this alone that prevented their assimilation."

It is not my intention to re-ignite the old flames of controversy by either suggesting that Pirenne was right or wrong, but I believe I am not alone in saying that this historical burden of the Arab conquests of the Mediterranean continues to colour, if not altogether dominate, the kind of discourse that we are having today.

In current discourses, for example, the notion of a clash of civilisations resonates well among certain quarters. The spectre of Islamic fundamentalism haunts our forums and this term is now interchangeable with ‘terrorism’ or ‘Benladism’. If it was religion then, it is religion now, even more so. But the irony is that these are not religious discourses but discourses on democracy.

It has been said that this is all symptomatic of Islamophobia. To be sure, the terms ‘democracy’ and ‘terrorism’ are worlds apart. They are as opposed to each other as paradise is to inferno. As I have said before in other forums, while democracy is associated with the rule of law, terrorism is invariably linked to the rule of violence. Democracy liberates man and gives him freedom and equality and the institutions of civil society. Terrorism holds man hostage and gives him fear and uncertainty.

Let me just go back to the thesis which says that it was the religion of Islam and this alone that prevented Muslims from assimilation and try to relate how political discourses have fallen prey to the ravages of Islamophobia.

Islamophobia is the irrational fear of Islam or Muslims subsumed under a belief that they are religious fanatics who hate non-Muslims. This blind fear also leads to the association of Islam with violence, extremism and terrorism and the rejection of democracy and human rights. This has led to irrational and racist chanting such as was expressed recently by a senior European politician that ‘Muslim civilisation is inferior to (that of) Europe’. Writers have also capitalised on this fear by resorting to using sensational and often racist titles in order to sell their books.

Islamic state ideals

And to my mind, of even greater importance is that Muslim leaders should break free of the obsession of sloganeering about the setting up of the ideal Islamic society, that is, the Islamic state, and get on with the task of establishing the institutions of civil society so that freedom and democracy can have free rein; so that social justice will be an essential part of governance; and so that poverty will be eliminated and education will be made a birth right.

Let me take a moment to move from Europe to Southeast Asia (and) all this talk about fundamentalism and how democracy cannot work in Muslim countries. Let's just look at Indonesia and I dare say it can serve as a model of democracy for the world.

There were attempts to galvanise Islamic radicalism, but when Muslims in Indonesia were asked to choose between ideological exclusivism and moderation they overwhelmingly chose the latter. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying they are perfect but mind you, they had languished for over 30 years under corrupt dictatorship. So when they decided to seize the day, they opted for a free press, an independent judiciary and free speech. They voted for freedom and democracy. And the changes brought about now provide an enduring lesson on making that giant leap from autocracy to democracy without violence or bloodshed.

The other important lesson from Indonesia is that the impetus for democratisation of the Muslim world can and must come from Muslims themselves. And that is what Indonesia has done. Why must such a process be driven by America or Europe or any other region for that matter? But I am not saying to the West to keep their hands off.

I call on Muslims who are opposed to democracy to change their mind set and work towards developing a vibrant democracy. Marshall the forces of freedom and harness them so that Muslims may stand up for their fundamental dignity and establish the institutions of democracy, freedom and civil society.

While the history of Islam's expansion is replete with the stories of conquest, it is equally true that Islam was also spread through commerce and trade, notwithstanding Pirenne's theory. Even as it spread its wings, multi-cultural and multi-religious societies evolved.

Muslim societies in this regard stood out for their tolerance and moderation, not chauvinism or bigotry. Isn't it therefore conceivable that when the seeds of democracy and freedom are planted in the hearts of Islamists, these values will germinate in the psyche of their worldview?

In the current tide to move to democracy, Islamist political parties, and for that matter other parties as well, should be bound by a compact to respect and honour the values and principles of democracy and freedom, and not to renounce them upon gaining power.

Embracing democracy

For the Muslim world, a more productive pursuit lies in finding how democracy and freedom can resonate through Islam's public and private realms. For Islamists in particular, embracing democracy and freedom should carry no stigma. Accepting democracy and freedom is not converting to Western values or ideals, nor does it mean that they will have to stop criticising European or US foreign policy, culture or values.

Likewise, it is also misconceived for Europe to view the movement of Islamists to democracy from the prism of so-called die hard fundamentalist groups in the Arab world. This fallacy has led to the assumption that Islamists are diametrically opposed to the West and will have nothing to do with them, or worse, that they will work towards the destruction of Europe.

While the bloodshed of Algeria's aborted elections of 1992 continues to haunt us, the lessons of history should fortify instead of weaken our conviction to pursue freedom and democracy.

(The attacks on the US on) Sept 11 (2001) should never be allowed to take us backwards. That there is a need to wage war on terror is not in dispute in as much as terrorism terrorises all. But the zeal with which this war is being prosecuted should be reinforced by the conviction to forge ahead to promote the principles of freedom and democracy where they are needed most, not sacrifice them on the altar of expediency.

All Muslim countries must seize the moment now to adopt modern, democratic constitutions, hold free and fair elections, ensure the separation of powers and guarantee fundamental civil liberties including allowing the full participation of women in political life. They must put a stop to extra-judicial procedures, arbitrary arrests, and the use of the state apparatus to silence political opposition.

With these institutions and practices in place, abuse of power will be checked, corruption can be more effectively dealt with, and economic wealth can be more equitably distributed to the people.

In principle I maintain that the philosophy should be ‘ask not what Europe or the West can do for you but ask what you can do for yourselves to secure freedom and democracy’. And of course, I am not talking about nominal democracy but real democracy - liberal or constitutional democracy.

Real commitment

Having said that, I recognise that merely asking questions is not going to take us anywhere. The fact remains that Europe or at least the European Union has made some significant efforts in promoting democracy.

However, I would characterise the European approach as being overly cautious because of the fear of rocking the boat. All this rhetoric about social justice, freedom and human rights - where is the action?

Is there a real commitment given to establishing contacts with Arab NGOs? And if you keep funding only ‘safe’ groups, that is, those with a decidedly secular, pro-Western outlook you are not dealing with it holistically. Are we saying that the traditionalists don't count for anything?

Arab states of the Mediterranean continue to be dominated by autocratic governments that restrict political freedoms and that is to put it mildly. Institutional and political reform, if any, has been limited and transient. Of course, I am not saying that the European Union must be the keeper of the conscience of the Middle East.

But to have any meaningful impact, the over-riding objective should be to promote political, economic, and social reform which is sustainable in the long run. Anything less would be an exercise in futility.

Between religion, culture and tradition - Raja Petra Kamarudin

To the Malays, religion means Islam, culture means Umno, and tradition means the New Economic Policy

There are those who feel that Anwar Ibrahim’s recent call for the New Economic Policy (NEP) to be abolished tantamount to political suicide. Parti Keadilan Rakyat, they argue, may be a multi-racial, or as its Deputy President Dr Syed Husin Ali would say, a non-race based party, but its support base is still undeniably Malay.

One needs only look at the photographs of its annual convention, conferences, seminars, meetings and so on to be convinced of this. The photographs would show a sea of Malay faces with the women in tudung (scarfs) and an occasional Chinese or Indian face. One would not be blamed if one was to suspect that the photographs were lifted from an Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) meeting.

Prior to that, Anwar called upon PAS to drop its Islamic State agenda to ensure that the opposition coalition, Barisan Alternatif, returns to viability. The Democratic Action Party (DAP) has made it clear it will not even sit at the same table as PAS, let alone rejoin the coalition, until PAS agrees to bury its aspiration to turn Malaysia into an Islamic State.

At the moment, PAS has not agreed to bury this aspiration so it would appear that the coalition would instead get buried.

The NEP and Islam, in that order of priority, are two issues very dear to the hearts of the Malays, who are predominantly Muslim -- unlike the Chinese, to whom education and a strong economy are issues that matter most, also in that order of priority.

One just cannot separate the NEP and Islam from the Malays.

So, how can Anwar so carelessly ask Umno to drop the NEP and for PAS to drop the Islamic State? Would this not, therefore, be committing political suicide?

Actually, Anwar has not just recently said this. He said the same thin g way back in 1999 but maybe people did not notice then. Then, it was considered a very wise call. Why, now, is it considered rash?

In 1999, Anwar launched a document called AGENDA FOR CHANGE or AGENDA REFORMASI. Basically, this explained what the Reformasi struggle is all about. And this was Anwar’s opening statement in that document:

The principal objective of Parti Keadilan Nasional’s (keADILan’s) struggle is to build a society and a Malaysian nation centred on religious faith and noble humanitarian values.

On how the various communities, in particular those deserving and those who need assistance, shall benefit from development and economic growth, this is what Anwar said:

We wish to accelerate economic development through the public sector, with the private sector serving as a catalyst, to ensure that the principles of integrity and responsibility are upheld and to end the distribution of licences, shares, contracts and privatised projects to friends and cronies.

The practice where opportunities are monopolised by the few rich, while the majority are ignored, will cease. Though the Bumiputera policy and the Special Position of the Bumiputera will be defended, its implementation will be reviewed to guarantee opportunities and exposure to more deserving people, and not to just the same cronies.

Opportunities for wider participation in the economy by the non-Bumiputeras will be practiced, not just to a small select group, but to a bigger group of entrepreneurs, especially in the small and medium enterprises category. Ability and excellence will be recognised and rewarded to ensure that Malaysian society continues to prog ress and prosper.

Anwar did not say that the Malays would be abandoned and left to the mercy of the capitalists, who are perceived as mostly non-Malays. Instead, this is what Anwar said:

To defend the special position of the Bumiputera community while protecting the rights of all other communities by giving emphasis plus offering opportunities to all other communities on the principle of justice.

What Anwar called for, to quote his own words, was: “to distribute the nation's wealth fairly and also reduce the gap between the rich and the poor.”

On Islam, this is what Anwar said in 1999:

To provide the Muslim community with the environment and the educational and legal systems conducive to the realisation of Islam as a complete way of life (ad-Deen) while the rights of all non-Muslims to uphold their respective religions or faiths will be protected.

Anwar also called for the establishment and elevation of the Syariah Court in accordance with the Federal and State Constitutions, with a Syariah Judicial Commission at Federal level and to reduce the influence of party politics in the State Islamic Councils, mosques and other Islamic institutions.

Yes, Anwar was very clear way back in 1999 what he wanted as far as the NEP and Islam are concerned. He has remained very clear-headed and consistent and has not wavered one bit. There is no confusion in his mind as to the direction (hala tuju) that must be charted. He has also remained steadfast and is not singing one tune to one community and another to the others.

One thing t hat all Malays must remember, you cannot be a good Muslim yet uphold the aspiration of the NEP at the same time, as both run contra to each other. Islam is about justice, as what Anwar said above -- and synonymous with the name of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (Peoples’ Justice Party). In Islam, justice is paramount and anything that violates this tenet goes against the very fundamentals of the religion.

And the NEP goes by the concept of robbing Peter to pay Paul. Islam does not allow one race to get ahead by denying another race what is due to them. What is due to them is due to them and Islam would go to great pains to protect their right to this.

Malays talk about Jihad. But very few understand the spirit of the word. To the Malays, Jihad means Muslims fighting against non-Muslims. This is not so. Jihad means opposing oppression, resisting oppressors and fighting in defence of the oppressed -- whether it is in defence of religion, life, liberty, territory, home and family that may be under threat from oppressors. If non-Muslims in Malaysia face oppression because of the NEP, then it is the duty of all good Muslims to oppose it even if they need to resist fellow Muslims in doing so. In this case, Muslims are oppressing non-Muslims, so Muslims must oppose Muslims to ensure that non-Muslims are not denied their rights.

Therefore, going by the spirit of Islam, Anwar is just being a good Muslim and is following to the letter what is demanded of all Muslims.

Nationalism is not allowed in Islam. Therefore the concept of Ketuanan Melayu violates Islamic teachings. And anything that the Ketuanan Melayu propagates, such as the NEP, becomes forbidden in Islam.

Anyway, putting religion aside, the original concept of the NEP was to reduce the gap between the different races and to reduce the gap between the haves and the have-nots. This may not necessarily mean Malays, as there are as many disadvantaged Chinese and Indians as there are Malays. This means, if the poor Chinese and Indians were included in the NEP, as it was originally intended, they too would become beneficiaries of the policy.

But the way it has been implemented, it is as if the NEP is only for the Malays. This is a fallacy and a great departure from what the architects of the NEP had intended. And the implementation rules seem to change ever so often that it becomes difficult to keep up with what is the latest policy.

For example, one day they say a certain industry (like car imports that require APs) must be 30% Bumiputera. Then, along the way, it changes to 51% Bumiputera. Just as you are settling in to the new rule, it changes yet again to 70% Bumiputera. Finally, the new ruling comes out that says only 100% Bumiputera is allowed.

When a certain industry starts going into the doldrums because they just cannot manage it based on 100% Bumiputera, they ‘relax’ the rules and say that non-Bumiputera equity is now allowed as long as they are export oriented. For certain industries, the Bumiputera content will be adjusted according to the ratio of exports.

Confusing isn’t it? But then, what about the poor Indians and Chinese? Where do they fit into all this? They don’t! They are left out of the equation, against the spirit of the NEP as intended when first conjured.

The NEP is an aspiration, not law. For all intents and purposes, the NEP violates the Federal Constitution. And any law or ‘aspiration’ introduced after Merdeka (Independence) of 31st August 1957 that violates the Federal Constitution automatically becomes invalid.

Article 4
(1) This Constitution is the supreme law of the Federation and any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.

Article 8
(1) Al l persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.
(2) Except as expressly authorized by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.

Article 4 of the Federal Constitution clearly spells out what can and cannot be done while Article 8 forbids such a thing called the NEP.

So we do not even have to look to Islam for the answer if we want to remain ‘secular’ about the whole thing. Article 8 (2) makes the NEP unconstitutional. Islam says so. Malaysia’s Constitution also says so. So what are we arguing about?

Any good fatwa sighted lately? - Salbiah Ahmad

A fatwa issued on July 18 by the British Muslim Forum (BMF) condemned the London bombings inter alia on the grounds that “Islam strictly, strongly and severely condemns the use of violence and the destruction of innocent lives”. There “is no justification in Islam for extremism, fanaticism and terrorism”.

The BMF has 250 member organisations. It issued the fatwa (edict) with approval of 500 UK Muslim clerics, scholars and imams. The “formal legal opinion” was issued “so that Muslims and non-Muslims can be clear about Islam’s stance on such acts”.

Muslims in Canada and the US followed suit. On July 28, 100 American Muslim organisations endorsed a fatwa condemning the use of violence and acts of terrorism. Americans hope that the fatwa adds moral authority to their often-stated condemnation of terrorism.

John Voll, professor of Islamic Studies at Georgetown University, said the fatwa represents a very important reminder to Muslim Americans of their need to be actively aware of the non-Islamic nature of violent extremism.

It is a pity that there was no scramble to rush a fatwa by our Muslim scholar associations on the July 18 pre-dawn attack on a peaceful village in Besut, Terengganu by a Malay-Muslim mob.

Perhaps civil society groups should take the lead from ‘Western Muslims’ and issue a fatwa condemning the attack in the fight against extremism. Lets go glokal.

Ziauddin Sardar writing, My Fatwa on the fanatics in The Observer, UK, proposed that “we must also reclaim a more balanced view of Islamic terms like fatwa”. Now that Islam has “become beset with the fatwa culture, it becomes necessary for moderate voices to issue their own fatwas”.

Muslims continue to be implicated in the unchecked rise of fanaticism in Muslim
societies unless we stand up against them. The silent Muslim majority must now become vocal.

Malaysians as a whole have been trained to be in awe of the fatwa-issuing alim or ulama associations not to mention a government fatwa council.

For the silent Muslim majority especially, Sardar’s fatwa-making suggestion may seem outrageous. Frankly, even as I write this, I have no idea who this ‘silent Muslim majority’ may be. The difficulty is some of the Muslims and the groups they belong to may sometimes come out with all sorts of statements on some other occasion and then none at all on something like this.

Oppose extremism

There is also this troubling response I read on the Internet. A Muslim lawyer wrote in response to human rights lawyer, Edmund Bon’s query on representation of the Sky Kingdom accused. It was on the Malaysian Bar Forum e-news on Aug 5. The message offered an explanation as to why Muslim lawyers should not defend the villagers of the Sky Kingdom who are charged with disobeying a 1997 state fatwa on deviant teachings.

According to this lawyer “as Muslims”, they are obliged to uphold the sanctity and purity of Islam from ‘ridicule’ by believers or not believers (memelihara kesucian ugama dari dipersendakan sama ada oleh penganutnya atau bukan penganutnya).

Although she claims that she does not lend support to the “state government’s demolishing act” (referring to the July 31 state-sanctioned destruction of buildings), she cannot support the “personal belief” of the community and would not ipso facto defend the accused. She ends her message with, “There are reasons why they (lawyers) refuse to take the case and only they know the reasons why”.

Will this silent majority allow others to speak on their behalf?

This of course, opens another can of worms as to how our young people are taught law and Muslim law and practice (or not at all) in our local universities, which is a matter which requires national scrutiny other than scrutiny by the Malaysian Bar Council in approving admission for practice.

I wonder what was the whole national rationale of having syariah courts and syariah judges and syariah lawyers in the first place? Was it to merely implement executive decrees issued via fatwa? Is this in accordance with Islam and democratic practice as we know it?

And how many Muslims and Malays think that the accused should be left to defend themselves against all the elements including the mob extremist attack on them? As Sardar has opined in My Fatwa against the fanatics, the extremists and terrorists are among us, the Muslim communities of the world. They are part of our body politic. It is our duty to stand up against them. But I digress. Let us see how the legal profession faces up to this challenge in due course.

An e-mail dispatch from Jakarta last week informed me that the government-sanctioned Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) issued 11 fatwa on Jul 29. One was to outlaw “liberal Islamic thoughts” declaring “secularism and pluralism forbidden under Islam”. The “edict” was issued as a reaction to the Liberal Islam Network (JIL) and the Muhammadiyah Youth Intellectuals Network (JIMM).

MUI deputy chairman Umar Shihab was quoted as saying that both the “Western-infuenced” JIL and JIMM had strayed from the Indonesian brand of Islam. “The views that are developing in Europe and America are heretical and not allowed here,” he said. “However, we must not counter them with violence, but with logical arguments”. (Jakarta Post)

The MUI also renewed a fatwa against the Ahmadiyah sect. Many observers allege that it was this ban by the MUI that had an Ahmadiyah community south of Jakarta attacked by a mob of some 10,000 people in late July. National Human Rights commissioner (Komnas-HAM), M Billah condemned the attack as a human rights violation.

Peaceful dialogue

The MUI decrees came as a shock to other scholars and the human rights community as it came after Indonesia’s successful hosting of an interfaith dialogue involving 39 Asian and European countries in Bali. The MUI ban was seen as closing the door on interfaith initiatives including intra-faith dialogue among Muslims.

Muslim intellectuals and human rights defenders came together on Aug 2 to counter the decrees with logical arguments.

Public intellectual and Muslim scholar Azyumardi Azra dismissed the MUI fatwa on liberal Islam as counter-productive. “The state cannot enforce it for Muslims as it’s not legally binding. Muslims can or will ignore it”. The fatwa had the potential to divide non-Muslims and Muslims themselves. “The fatwas are not in line with the principles of Islam which promotes tolerance and peaceful dialogue with people of differing views.”

He said the ban on liberal thoughts reflected the intolerance being promoted by the MUI and indicated that it was trying to curb freedom of thought. He urged the MUI to hold an open discussion with people from different fields of expertise, not only Islamic jurisprudence.

In their statement the coalition of scholars and human rights defenders said that the MUI ban was out of line with the development of democracy which requires pluralism and the protection of citizens’ rights. Muslim scholar Ulil Abshar Abdalla advised MUI to promote interfaith and intra-faith dialogue if it wants to remain relevant.

The coalition which came together under the banner, the Democratic Education Association (P2D), called upon President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration to maintain pluralism and protect constitutional rights. The constitution is supported by all society, says human rights lawyer T Mulya Lubis, and it cannot be undermined or negated.

Fatwa culture

Are we beset with the fatwa culture of late? There is some confusion even with top politicians as to the place of fatwa in the country’s political regime.

In June, Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak announced that the government will request for a fatwa from the National Fatwa Council (NFC) before deciding on the implementation of a HIV plan involving free condoms and treatment using methadone to intravenous drug users. The NFC members include all state muftis.

The fatwa request was seen as irrelevant by some quarters as the issue of HIV prevention is a medical and a public health issue. It should not be left to the discretion of Muslim scholars in multi-ethnic, multi-religious Malaysia. NFC member and Perak Mufti Dr Harussani Zakaria was quoted in the press as saying that the proposals in the plan “are tantamount to condoning drug addiction and free sex”.

Government sources however defended their move to elicit a fatwa on the basis that all sectors of society need to be consulted on the successful implementation of the HIV plan. Pursuant to that the Health Minister Dr Chua Soi Lek, announced that the government will distribute free needles and condoms to intravenous drug users in January next year “after discussion” with Muslim
scholars. The NFC subsequently issued a statement to the effect that a fatwa will not issue on matters involving the medical aspects of the pandemic.

I am fascinated by a move led by Saari Sungib, of Jemaah Islah Malaysia (JIM) to petition the Council of Muftis on the Internal Security Act (ISA). The former ISA detainee and past JIM president, with 21 others had on Aug 5 last year petitioned this body to issue a fatwa on the ISA which “is clearly prohibited in Islam”. There has been no fatwa sighted on the ISA to date.

On Oct 22 last year, Saari called upon the muftis to play an advisory role to affect social change. Zaid Kamarudin of JIM has the same opinion. “The power of the mufti lies in his persuasive power with the people. If he feels strongly about something, he should call upon the other muftis and threaten to take drastic measures, such as resigning en bloc”.

While perhaps there is some consensus on the fatwa as persuasive advice or as a moral authority, we still have not grapple with the implications of a government-issued fatwa (an executive device) becoming legislation upon publication in the Government Gazette as provided for under state law. On the face of it, this process runs against the rule of law as enshrined in the Federal
Constitution. Laws are made by legislative bodies and that is Parliament at the federal level and state legislatures at state levels.

There is also the wider concern of selected interpretations of particular schools of thought which may be used in the formulation of fatwa and state Muslim law by the Muslim elite which offends the notion of plurality of interpretations in the Islamic tradition and the notion of state-neutrality in matters of conscience even in Islamic law.

Further, as we desire to build a system based on shared values of democracy and human rights in our multi-cultural society, it becomes incumbent upon us to continue to scrutinise, critique and challenge all our process, both Islamic and civil in origin. All opinions, scholar and the laity must be subject to the rigours of debate; the “logical arguments”.

Non-scholars arguably should be able to exert an influence to a public discourse that informs the sensibilities of the scholar and vice-versa. No one is unlearned. We have different experiences and different scholarship that would through the test of debate and speech strengthen our direction and vision.