It is one of my greatest regret not being able to watch them play live at the Bukit Jalil stadium. After watching the match at Indonesia at one of my friend's house I cannot say anything else but ride on my bike tour around to see the celebration happening at KL city.
I was so amazed seeing the groups at one of a traffic light juncture in Cheras - all wearing the yellow national squad shirt and honoring our flag while shouting the Malaysia Boleh! solgan, everyone else was cheering - that moment brought strangers together.
Well, I am not going to write much but to continue riding in KL to see more of the celebration.
Malaysia Boleh!
Finally I can see A Better Malaysia!
Showing posts with label Malaysia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Malaysia. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Perak's MB Crisis: Between Legal Standing & Emotion...
I have made several remarks concerning the Perak MB's crisis. I am not changing the stand that I am taking of which I disagree with the finding of the court that it is suffice by the action of the Royal to pick a new Menteri Besar that at the same time it causes the effectiveness of non-confidence motion against the previous Menteri Besar.
The court on that particular situation was faced with the question whether the appointment of the new MB is valid in the absence of the motion of vote of no confidence. The court decided on behalf of the Barisan Nasional that appointment alone suffice to constitute that the previous MB have lost its majority. It was reasoned that extraneous circumstances revolving in Perak in connection of the event of the appointment is sufficient to consider that the previous MB have lost his majority.
There was reference made to the case in Sabah or Sarawak where a particular State Minister challenge the validity of resignation of the Chief Minister, in which he argued that only through the vote of no-confidence that can show a State Chief Minister cease from office, as such the court on the Perak's MB case, decided that in this situation the fact that the Chief Minister resigned is the extraneous circumstances taken to constitute that the Chief Minister cease to have office.
The application of this case is rebuttable in its application to the case concerning the Perak's MB crisis where the case which was relied on is where the Chief Minister tendered resignation letter but in Perak, there was no resignation letter tendered, as such if the correct interpretation of this case were to be used, it can be deduced that in event where there was no voluntary resignation made, extraneous circumstances cannot be applied, this the act of appointing the new MB is invalid.
On the vote of no confidence, this is the only method available to oust an Executive leader in a parliamentary system, when he refuses to resign when he does not command the support of the majority, this is the position provided by numerous Indian cases that I can't remember their names. So, here, although that BN in Perak may have the majority of assemblymen, they must put foward the motion of no-confidence as this is the only way to constitute a valid sacking of the current Menteri Besar of Perak, only through this manner that the respect upon the rights of the people in Perak is honoured, through the trust that they have placed in their representatives.
But since, the act of the Royal to appoint new MB is where the court bases its support, clearly the decision made transgressing the rights of the people of which this country belongs to. It defeats democracy and allows Royal anarchy in this country that supposed to have been a constitutional monarchy. I never disputed the right of the Royal to select the MB of their own choice but that can only be done after the decision of the people is honored.
I have a few videos that I have taken from the UMNO official website, judging the conduct of Pakatan Rakyat members in response of their protest over the appointment of the new BN's MB. I think their conduct is something so extreme and should have not happened, it is such a regret from them to be selected, but despite their conduct what should prevail is the right of the people.
Please correct or add my supportive authority, I am not at the luxury of time to make extensive research...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vusiidBzjZc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyqHgzBh5F4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB5-vxtzItI&feature=related
The court on that particular situation was faced with the question whether the appointment of the new MB is valid in the absence of the motion of vote of no confidence. The court decided on behalf of the Barisan Nasional that appointment alone suffice to constitute that the previous MB have lost its majority. It was reasoned that extraneous circumstances revolving in Perak in connection of the event of the appointment is sufficient to consider that the previous MB have lost his majority.
There was reference made to the case in Sabah or Sarawak where a particular State Minister challenge the validity of resignation of the Chief Minister, in which he argued that only through the vote of no-confidence that can show a State Chief Minister cease from office, as such the court on the Perak's MB case, decided that in this situation the fact that the Chief Minister resigned is the extraneous circumstances taken to constitute that the Chief Minister cease to have office.
The application of this case is rebuttable in its application to the case concerning the Perak's MB crisis where the case which was relied on is where the Chief Minister tendered resignation letter but in Perak, there was no resignation letter tendered, as such if the correct interpretation of this case were to be used, it can be deduced that in event where there was no voluntary resignation made, extraneous circumstances cannot be applied, this the act of appointing the new MB is invalid.
On the vote of no confidence, this is the only method available to oust an Executive leader in a parliamentary system, when he refuses to resign when he does not command the support of the majority, this is the position provided by numerous Indian cases that I can't remember their names. So, here, although that BN in Perak may have the majority of assemblymen, they must put foward the motion of no-confidence as this is the only way to constitute a valid sacking of the current Menteri Besar of Perak, only through this manner that the respect upon the rights of the people in Perak is honoured, through the trust that they have placed in their representatives.
But since, the act of the Royal to appoint new MB is where the court bases its support, clearly the decision made transgressing the rights of the people of which this country belongs to. It defeats democracy and allows Royal anarchy in this country that supposed to have been a constitutional monarchy. I never disputed the right of the Royal to select the MB of their own choice but that can only be done after the decision of the people is honored.
I have a few videos that I have taken from the UMNO official website, judging the conduct of Pakatan Rakyat members in response of their protest over the appointment of the new BN's MB. I think their conduct is something so extreme and should have not happened, it is such a regret from them to be selected, but despite their conduct what should prevail is the right of the people.
Please correct or add my supportive authority, I am not at the luxury of time to make extensive research...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vusiidBzjZc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyqHgzBh5F4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB5-vxtzItI&feature=related
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Bagan Pinang: The outcome is everything...
I have made numerous remarks about the lection in Bagan Pinang, now to stop making it, let me just put it all here so there is no need for me to keep on saying about it all the time.
Bagan Pinang by election is very important because I believe that if the Pakatan Rakyat can win here, there is no doubt that they may be the federal government one day. Negeri Sembilan has always been the place that was once regerded as one of UMNO strongholds aside from Johor. If we were to look at the 8th general election, the swift was so clear that UMNO not just not that strong anymore but is heading to its destruction.
It is of no doubt that the supports of the non-malays will definitely go to the Pakatan Rakyat because they had been consistent in fighting for equality for all races in this country. But what make me say Bagan Pinang is important, is that it will show, who actually will be chosen by the Malays, whether UMNO or the Pakatan Rakyat, as such despite the votes of the non-Malays will be the determining factor, the dfference of the vote will reflect Pakatan Rakyat's chance of winning the next general election.
Some may say that Isa Samad is a famous man there and that he is highly regarded by the locals. I think this is not true, if I am not mistken, during the Mahathir's reign despite the people of Negeri Sembilan supports UMNO, they don't view Isa as an old and strong favourable factor but rather a disease that is difficult to get rid of. It was lucky for the people of Negeri Sembilan when Isa chose Mohamad Hassan to replace him.
Mohamad Hassan on the other hand is a man of progress, before his rule, Negeri Sembilan had an abundance of money but under Mohamad's administration, those money are spent, not we can see alot of progress in Negeri Sembilan. He is a thinker of some sort, where he always preach his ideas of how can we go futher. He is also good in a sense that, when he go on campaigning for the election, he'll rarely crticize people personally but he focus on what should be done for the benefit of all. He also strive for the change of Malay negative cultures. I do have the confidence that if Mohamad Hassan were to campaign for Isa, there are some handsome possibility for Isa to win. But as a piece of advise, the regime of which he is staying now is going down because they don't give way to changes, I suggest that Mohamad join Pakatan Rakyat, only here his voices of change will be heard by the leaders but not in UMNO.
Back on Isa, I believe that people don't vote because of the candidate, people will look at the party at large, only that a person is so good, like Shahrir Samad, Mohamad Hassan, Tengku Razaleigh, Zaid Ibrahim, and not many more, where people vote because of the candidate. The indication was people now vote according to the party line, this is reflected with the recent general election where Samy Vellu and Shahrizat were defeated at their constituencies. Shahrizat to me is very good at performance but the desire of the people to reject UMNO were to strong to be shadowed by Shahrizat's good reputation. Now we have Isa, when he was the Menteri Besar of Negeri Sembilan was highly critisized by the supporter of government and further involved in bribing the UMNO delegates to become UMNO's naib presiden, I think judging from this respect Isa is going to lose.
As for UMNO, they will lose, because they say and admit the need for change but they never acted as such they are heading to that direction, still they have no respect for the mutual respects with a country with different race composition. Pakatan Rakyat will win because they are supported by almost all non-Malays and most of the Malays as UMNO promise to help Malays, they don't do so anymore now and that is why they keep on harping on UMNO's past glory and contributions.
For A Better Malaysia...
Bagan Pinang by election is very important because I believe that if the Pakatan Rakyat can win here, there is no doubt that they may be the federal government one day. Negeri Sembilan has always been the place that was once regerded as one of UMNO strongholds aside from Johor. If we were to look at the 8th general election, the swift was so clear that UMNO not just not that strong anymore but is heading to its destruction.
It is of no doubt that the supports of the non-malays will definitely go to the Pakatan Rakyat because they had been consistent in fighting for equality for all races in this country. But what make me say Bagan Pinang is important, is that it will show, who actually will be chosen by the Malays, whether UMNO or the Pakatan Rakyat, as such despite the votes of the non-Malays will be the determining factor, the dfference of the vote will reflect Pakatan Rakyat's chance of winning the next general election.
Some may say that Isa Samad is a famous man there and that he is highly regarded by the locals. I think this is not true, if I am not mistken, during the Mahathir's reign despite the people of Negeri Sembilan supports UMNO, they don't view Isa as an old and strong favourable factor but rather a disease that is difficult to get rid of. It was lucky for the people of Negeri Sembilan when Isa chose Mohamad Hassan to replace him.
Mohamad Hassan on the other hand is a man of progress, before his rule, Negeri Sembilan had an abundance of money but under Mohamad's administration, those money are spent, not we can see alot of progress in Negeri Sembilan. He is a thinker of some sort, where he always preach his ideas of how can we go futher. He is also good in a sense that, when he go on campaigning for the election, he'll rarely crticize people personally but he focus on what should be done for the benefit of all. He also strive for the change of Malay negative cultures. I do have the confidence that if Mohamad Hassan were to campaign for Isa, there are some handsome possibility for Isa to win. But as a piece of advise, the regime of which he is staying now is going down because they don't give way to changes, I suggest that Mohamad join Pakatan Rakyat, only here his voices of change will be heard by the leaders but not in UMNO.
Back on Isa, I believe that people don't vote because of the candidate, people will look at the party at large, only that a person is so good, like Shahrir Samad, Mohamad Hassan, Tengku Razaleigh, Zaid Ibrahim, and not many more, where people vote because of the candidate. The indication was people now vote according to the party line, this is reflected with the recent general election where Samy Vellu and Shahrizat were defeated at their constituencies. Shahrizat to me is very good at performance but the desire of the people to reject UMNO were to strong to be shadowed by Shahrizat's good reputation. Now we have Isa, when he was the Menteri Besar of Negeri Sembilan was highly critisized by the supporter of government and further involved in bribing the UMNO delegates to become UMNO's naib presiden, I think judging from this respect Isa is going to lose.
As for UMNO, they will lose, because they say and admit the need for change but they never acted as such they are heading to that direction, still they have no respect for the mutual respects with a country with different race composition. Pakatan Rakyat will win because they are supported by almost all non-Malays and most of the Malays as UMNO promise to help Malays, they don't do so anymore now and that is why they keep on harping on UMNO's past glory and contributions.
For A Better Malaysia...
Monday, September 14, 2009
This is a response to a post by another blogger, in good faith...
This is the url, al you can read straight to the source:
Vote PAS: You'll be in heaven
The issue is simple, this is the result that a person should get when he support Islam. Islam have prescribe everything in our way of live, even on the manner of how this country should be administered and how the constitution should be. We have a constitution that says, 'this constitution is supreme law of the land, other law against or contradictory, ultra vire, thus becoming null and void, Art. 4 of the Federal Constitution. We have in the constitution that says, this country is a parliamentary democracy country, where people are regarded as the most supreme in this country and no other.
We have Islam that says, that you are a muslim and that you are ought to obey all what has been compelled upon you, in which adherance will entitle you heaven but defiance will grant us hell. We have before us that we must in any way upheld what was given by our God through the devine revelation, al-Quran and through the hadith, conduct and teachings of the prophet, pbuh. Our religion teaches us that we must and under duty to protect Islam with our life, if that is necessary. Further Islam only recognise a country that upheld Allah as the most supreme not human or people, that a country must have Islamic law and all things done must in good faith promotes Islam.
When we say that UMNO people does not promote Islam that they are not really into recognising God's law nor that they want Allah to be the supreme authority in the constitution of this country, we can say that when you do this, you go to hell and when you agaist this you'll go to heaven. Al-Quran and Hadith is quite clear on this, so what is wrong by saying UMNO people go to hell?
Allowing Lina Joy to renounce her religion
This issue has been a hot issue for quite sometime. It is very easy to comprehend. We must note that cases of murtad causes a negative impact on the face of Islam, when people convert out of Islam, thus showing the diminishing credibility of faith in Islam. One's faith in Islam is the work of God, as only Him allows or rejects that someone should have this 'hidayah'. We must also remember that murtad is a serious crime in Islam, that it is punishable with death, upon the attemp to revive the faith through advise.
Given the situation and time that we are living in, do you think that we actually can kill those who are murtad, in this country? The answer is no. Another question is, if you don't allow a no more believer to be called as muslim, will that in fact and also to God imply that she is a muslim? Again, the answer is no.
Many people are not aware that by having alot of people who, as to the law, called muslim, but their hearts doesn't give a shit about Islam is something wrong, from logical sense I suppose. Even one of the Malaysian greatest mufti stated that, what is the point of keeping this non-believers as muslim, it will invite more problems and more damage on the face of Islam. If the image of Islam were damaged by the muslims itself, can you imagine the image of Islam where, those who do not believe are called as muslim.
Even, the Syariah Court, in the state of Ngerei Sembilan have granted many application to convert out of Islam, not on the basis that convertion out of Islam is terribly wrong, but to the point of not keeping these people who are faithless in Islam, to be called muslim. Given that we cannot kill this people, still we call them muslim, we are we going?
I will continue further...
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
A piece of advise to Pakatan Rakyat
Please make Zaid Ibrahim as your next leader, he is the most suitable person to bring different people of various races and parties together, he have a moderate approach that acts as a good stabilizers of conflicts.
I may not be able to write much, but please take a look at these videos just for the why am I saying what I just stated above...
Enjoy...
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Taken from The Star, useful for Malaysians...
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Posted by: mdnorhafiz
Have you watched Potong Saga produced by 15Malaysia? Yes, its funny, but full with message. That's a reality happened in
Myth No. 1: All Malays born as Muslims. Once you convert Islam, you are convert to Malays too.
The truth is Islam is not an exclusive religion. Its universal, all are welcome to embrace it. No single race in the world can claim such statement. Even Arabs never claim they 100% are Muslims. Just google Arab Christians. Surprisingly Baath Party (ruled by Saddam) founded by an Arab Christian, Michel Aflaq. Plus popular songbird in Middle East, Najwa Karam also a Christian. Interestingly,
Have you ever notice any Chinese, Indian, African, American, or Australian declared themselves as Malays once they convert to Islam in another country? They still hold their ethnicities and races.
Myth No. 2: Once a Chinese or Indian convert to Islam, you have to change your name into Arabs name and put Abdullah as your father's name.
Maybe Malay Muslims never heard or came across of Hui Liangyu (
Even some Malays also having pure Malays name instead of Arabs (eg: Cempaka, Puteri, Dayang, Awang, Tuah) but still Islam.
Apa ada pada nama? As long as the meaning of the name is good, whatever language is allowed.
Myth no. 3: Non Muslims not allowed to use Assalamualaikum. Its exclusive for Muslims, otherwise you insulting Islam.
The fact is Assalamualaikum is word with good meaning, peace be upon you. Widely used in
Myth No. 4: A Muslims must not follow Chinese and Indian cultures, otherwise you are deviate from pure Islamic teaching.
A Muslim cannot eat by chopstick, cannot speak mandarin or tamil in mosque, cannot wear cheongsam, or saree, cannot enter church and temple, cannot paid final respect on Chinese and Indian funeral, . The list goes on.
Hey, culture is unique, to differentiate between one people in one place to another. Islam does recognize culture in its teaching as long as not compromise the believe or faith itself. So, what's on earth a Muslim cannot eat by chopstick even talk Tamil or Mandarin inside a mosque? Maybe Chinese Muslim in China eat by hand like Malays. And maybe Indian Muslims in India and Chinese Muslims in China talk Malays in their mosque too.
Have you ever saw Chinese Muslims in China or India Muslims in India wearing baju Melayu or baju kurung? Ironically Malays Muslims in Malaysia allowed to wear suit, hat and necktie like a westerners.
Caliph Umar even once paid a visit to church in Jerusalem, he even invited by the priest to pray inside church, yet he declines as it will create wrong impression that Islam want to take over the church. Even non-Muslims are allowed to enter a mosque in certain conditions.
It is narrated that Prophet Muhammad stood up when a Jewish funeral procession pass in front of him as a sign of respect among men relationship.
These are examples of several myth practised by Malay Muslims resulted from narrow interpretation.
Maybe they forget, Islam come to
Sunday, August 23, 2009
If war is what they want, then, so be it...
This is a piece of writing that I feel somehow must be read with care and with full understanding. We must never forget the very fact that the world that we are living in today is all based on when most of the people say so. Thus do to this fact, there are some quarters of the societies who are rather called as those who choose the unnatural way of doing things against what is natural as prescribed by God.
God have made it clear that they are certain rules that we must abide in order to serve these purposes that somehow not for us to comprehend because of simple fact that we are not God. We are humans, the extent of our reach is only those as allowed to happen by God, regardless of the fact that those things that goes beyond happen. A simple way to say it here is that, everything happens only at the will of God, despite it go against what God have set the limits before us. As an example, child raping is something not allowed by God, but it happens.
We are only small creatures of all the creatures that was created by God. The logical principle here is that, when a person creates something, he and no other understands his creation and no other at best to tell or comprehend in and absolute way of the concerned creation. This assumption is some rebut-able when it is used on Proton and the cars that they produced but take it this way, Mercedez Benz, one of the top car manufacturer understand very well about its creation, I mean, the cars that they produced, can Proton be expected to understand those creations unless they were told about it. This is an example on humans, now back to God, we will only understand things in this world when God tells us about it, if not, then we can figure it out but subject to the limits that were clearly laid before us.
Back to the advantage of what most people say is correct, I think these quarters of people that I have spoken of, are in the act of desperation, calling others who are actually not them, in their pursuit of some sort of recruitment, thus increasing their support and justifying their way of looking at things and act the way as they deems fit.
Looking at it carefully, it is a clear cut psychological war and if we, those who refer themselves to the natural order of things, unable to see this, we somehow may fall into being them and thus be a victim of their attempts of becoming established and strong, because of having the support of most of the people.
Many may not have the comprehension of what I am trying to say here, just apply it to your everyday situation, it is lucky enough that we allow these people to live with what they believe and feel, if not they may have always end their lives in the gallows in some countries.
Till then, the natural way of thins must be uphold at all cost in necessary...
God have made it clear that they are certain rules that we must abide in order to serve these purposes that somehow not for us to comprehend because of simple fact that we are not God. We are humans, the extent of our reach is only those as allowed to happen by God, regardless of the fact that those things that goes beyond happen. A simple way to say it here is that, everything happens only at the will of God, despite it go against what God have set the limits before us. As an example, child raping is something not allowed by God, but it happens.
We are only small creatures of all the creatures that was created by God. The logical principle here is that, when a person creates something, he and no other understands his creation and no other at best to tell or comprehend in and absolute way of the concerned creation. This assumption is some rebut-able when it is used on Proton and the cars that they produced but take it this way, Mercedez Benz, one of the top car manufacturer understand very well about its creation, I mean, the cars that they produced, can Proton be expected to understand those creations unless they were told about it. This is an example on humans, now back to God, we will only understand things in this world when God tells us about it, if not, then we can figure it out but subject to the limits that were clearly laid before us.
Back to the advantage of what most people say is correct, I think these quarters of people that I have spoken of, are in the act of desperation, calling others who are actually not them, in their pursuit of some sort of recruitment, thus increasing their support and justifying their way of looking at things and act the way as they deems fit.
Looking at it carefully, it is a clear cut psychological war and if we, those who refer themselves to the natural order of things, unable to see this, we somehow may fall into being them and thus be a victim of their attempts of becoming established and strong, because of having the support of most of the people.
Many may not have the comprehension of what I am trying to say here, just apply it to your everyday situation, it is lucky enough that we allow these people to live with what they believe and feel, if not they may have always end their lives in the gallows in some countries.
Till then, the natural way of thins must be uphold at all cost in necessary...
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Islam in Malaysia...
Before I proceed with this writing, I must say that negative comments and perceptions are somehow expected. What am I about to say, not for me to judge as the final and absolute truth, but suffice to say, people will become very incited with the feeling of calling others as blasphemous.
Malaysia was formed on the basis that it is a democratic country and constitutional monarchy, this can be traced in the Federal Constitution, enough said. The social contract claimed by certain quarters of the people of this country says that Malays are the owner of this country, having the political control over this nation. This in implication, tell us that this country is a Muslim country because those who are in-charge more to its political powers are Muslims and well it is guided by socio-economical Islamic maintenance over the majority Muslim population.
If we were to truly look at the notion of Islamic country, we must first understand the very basic required of an Islamic country. In Islam, the most supreme is the one God, that is Allah. In everything that a Muslim do is labored into serving the purpose of your existence for God. As for a country, the country serve God, in its simple language. An Islamic country will in its most supreme law admit that the most supreme is Allah and no others. This will bring in the other obligations supposedly be expected of an Islamic country, to have God's law be practiced and assumed as the Supreme law of the nation.
But what we have in Malaysia is a country akin to parliamentary democratic country, taken example from the British system and having the common law in practiced and assumed as the supreme law of the nation. This is clearly seen in the Constitution. Despite Art. 3 of the federal Constitution states that, Islam is the religion of the federation, still they are many other provisions that will show a contradictory from the literary meaning of Art.3. Looking at the practice of the laws in this country, Islamic law are practice in a very peculiar way, through the Shariah Court, having a very limited jurisdiction upon the Muslims, as such the punishment allowed to be prescribed to the convicted offenders are confined within the limits of the ratio 2:3:6, meaning fine RM 2000, imprisonment not exceeding 3 months and caning not exceeding 6 strokes.
If these are to be compared with what the common and civil law of this country allow in respect of its jurisdiction, it is like comparing the heavens and the earth. Still people say that Islam prevails, here I don't see Islam prevails, I see Islam deprived in a very humiliating way! The rulers continue to say that they have been the protectors of Islam, the word rulers does not refer to the Sultans but rather the political control enjoyed by the ruling government, but in reality they have failed such tasks. Islam is not about building big mosque, Islam is about when you by your conduct not merely by promise and words say that you upheld God as the most supreme over everything else, to be clear against the laws that are not Islamic in nature. This is missing in this country.
Back to Islamic country, but here I feel like talking on the duties of the Muslims in an Islamic country and a kuffar country. In Islamic country, the systems where the people in it are Muslims, they have to upheld every principles in Islam including in the law and administration but in kuffar country you do not have such duties, as what you need to accomplish is your basic compulsory requirements towards God, that are your prayers, your fasting, your zakat, to the extent as allowed by that country as you are residing and having protection in that country.
Looking at us I don't think that we are actually living in an Islamic country, the real and simple way to say it is that we are living in a kuffar country, why because our official sworn to protect the constitution as the most supreme law in this country, and our constitution says, being a democratic country, that people is most supreme not God, despite that our predesessor leader kindly put the clause in RUKUN NEGARA, kepercayaan kepada tuhan as one of the most important element as it is the first that must be mentioned, still, that does not deny the very fact that this country does not admit Allah as master but rather the people.
Now, when the people like Nik Aziz questioned about the extent of how Islam is one over the other, the reference is exactly on the reasons that I have stated above and no other. It is true that none may judge others before God, but here we are living in a real world, where reasons are everything for our existence. Is it suffice to say that we cannot judge others when you have the power of reason to justify such action? To give much clear perspective, God have made promise that those who does not promotes God teachings and rulings will inevitably be in hell? There are guidelines set by God, they are clear, why we refuse to look into them? What actually that we are supporting people for or otherwise?
Whatever you do will not deter you from learning that you are convincing yourself with something clearly not the truth...
Now, when the people like Nik Aziz questioned about the extent of how Islam is one over the other, the reference is exactly on the reasons that I have stated above and no other. It is true that none may judge others before God, but here we are living in a real world, where reasons are everything for our existence. Is it suffice to say that we cannot judge others when you have the power of reason to justify such action? To give much clear perspective, God have made promise that those who does not promotes God teachings and rulings will inevitably be in hell? There are guidelines set by God, they are clear, why we refuse to look into them? What actually that we are supporting people for or otherwise?
Whatever you do will not deter you from learning that you are convincing yourself with something clearly not the truth...
Monday, August 3, 2009
Malaysia: Of Malay Supremacy, Democracy, and Islam...
This morning I had a conversation about the Malaysian politics, I must admit that I didn't convey my point well, for that is the reason why, I am here writing what I should have said in the conversation. It has been awhile since I cared so much about Malaysian politics, that now I don't give a shit about it, but the provocation was too strong for me, I have no choice but to write.
Who owns this country?
The concept of Malay Supremacy can only be defined as where the Malays are presumed to be the owner of this country, this impliedly concludes that non-Malays are not owners, despite the fact that they owe their allegiance to this country. My personal stance is, I don't agree with this concept as I believe that everyone have a fair share to a country as a citizen. This is because everyone who declare themselves or given the status of citizenship of this country must to the extent of shedding their blood to defend it, with all cost. So, no one can say that they are more entitled to this country compared to any other citizens, all are equal in this respect.
One may say that the Chinese can return to their motherland, China;and that the Indians can go back to India; still I choose not to agree with this as I have many Chinese and Indian friends who thinks that if this concept is true, then we, the non-Malays shouldn't bother about the fate of this country, that we should center our energy and thoughts to our motherland, after all we are just not suppose to care about this country, when the implication is as such we are returning back to China and India and that imply that we are not the citizen of this country. This statement is enough to prove that there should be no difference as to the ownership of citizens to the country.
Looking back at the pre-independence period, indeed the non-Malays came here as merchants, labourers, imported by the British colonial power, where these immigrants supposedly should return to their country upon the Malays gaining their independence. But this was not the case, the situation was that Tunku Abdul Rahman and the Malays back then has to consider, what will happen if these people were to go back as the Britain will not grant independence nor that we are, the Malays are economically independent without the aid of these people. So, because of these reasons that we now have Chinese and Indians are part of our citizens. The agreement was clear that the Malays surrender citizenship and in return the non-Malays will agree on the condition that the Malays have extra rights with respect to the political power, that comes later in interpretation, respectively in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.
Now that, we are here for more than 50 years, the generations that was the former of this so called social contract have predeceased us, only a few remains. The question to ask here are, can we really say that these non-Malays still have the desire to return to their original country? Or is it fair for us to presume that they have the opportunity to turn their backs against us by subscribing back to nationalism of their original country? If we are being honest and fair, we will not say such things, the reason that we are saying these things is mainly because that we are jealous of their achievement, there is no doubt about it, selfishness is the key.
100% Democracy is good for Islam
I am a Muslim who think that Islamic Law should be the law that regulate the Muslims and no other, but if I am to stick with this thinking, I am being blind to the reality as we do not have Islamic Law is this country, political leaders may say that this is an Islamic country, but the fact was clearly stipulated out in the Federal Court case of Che Omar Che Soh v. Govt of Malaysia, that Malaysia is not an Islamic country, that Islam is subject to Malaysian Law, meaning, here Islam which suppose to be more supreme than anything else is subject to the rules of this country, it is a shame but, this is the fact.
The fact that we are a multiracial country gives the credit that we should have democracy that should be perfectly practiced, only by this means we have citizens of different races that does not question about other races living in this country, only by this way we can attain peace. Some say that when you have 100% democracy, for the Muslims, they will not hear azan anymore, I think these people are naive about what democracy is all about. Democracy is not just about government selected by the people but it also includes respect upon one another and together coupled with democracy is freedom of religion. Meaning to say if you have 100% democracy, you will have azan on every praying times, because of the respect on freedom of religion.
Another point is propogation upon the Muslims on the ideals of non-Islamic teachings coming from other religions, as when we are in full democracy, other religions may have the oppurtunity to cloud the minds of the Muslims to convert to their religion, like through the media. I think this is true but the question here is what is the best way for a Muslim to be strong in his faith, is it by forbidding negative elements or non Islamic elements from him or is it by, he himself to study and practice Islam with determination and grace, so as for him to have the inner strength to pick and choose what laid before him?
Everyone is well aware that the world we are living in is a globalized world, you cannot expect you children not to see all the negative elements is his life, that they only see good things, if we think this way, we are being ignorance to reality. The only way for us to live in this age is to have a strong inner strength as we cannot forever block all the negativeness that comes in our way. That we must empower our children with the teachings of Islam so that they themselves will have the rejection of the negative elements in an open world. This is a fact, where when you limit everything from your child in your fear that he will be influenced, will do no better compared to not to limit the horizons of your child but to equipped him with knowledge and strength to determine what is right and what is wrong.
Islam in the west is being widely accepted because of freedom of religion, why must we limit democracy that promotes freedom of religion, that in itself promotes Islam? In religion, there are beliefs, a Muslim believe that Allah is the only God and Mohamed (Peace be Upon Him) is his messenger and all Islamic teachings, can you expect a Hindu to believe what are the pillars in Islam? Same to the question like, can you expect others non-Muslims to believe that Islam is the best to apply to them, I mean Islamic Law. I f a person who have a strong faith in Islam will always want the best for Islam.
Let us look into the movie FITNA and the way Muslims all over the world respond to it, most Muslims criticized it like hell because it mocked Islam and the prophet by selectively pick and choose what thought in Islam about fighting the non-Muslims. Fairly speaking, this is expected when something so holy in Islam being subject to criticism but we are being ignorant, but responding violently, what was portrayed in the movie becomes the conviction among the non-Muslims, that now they fear Islam, here we are losing. Islam gain nothing but the feel of winning in arrogance. The same can be seen in Malaysian Muslims, look at the way they respond to the discussion on Islam by non-Muslims in this country. Most of these discussions, the Muslims are invited to have a say, but most of the time we choose to protest outside of the building, I do not think that this conduct is civilized nor it brings any benefit for Islam.
We must remember that Islam is not at the peak as once we were, we are many but we are weak and pathetic. The reason behind this is not the fault of non-Muslims but rather it is our own mistake, we left the beauty of our religion behind. Prophet p.b.u.h. stated that, there will be an age where his people will be like bubbles at the sea, many but useless. Now is the time for us to go back in Islam to make people accept Islam not to chase away the non-Muslims from Islam.
The affirmative action upon the Malays
For more than 30 years that this affirmative action policy is in practice in this country. Well affirmative action is an American term while the British term is positive discrimination. This is done by giving extra rights and assistance to a particular of society to elevate their underrated position. Normally this is done through addressing their economic problem. In Malaysia, this policy is called by the name of New Economic Policy or by the Malay name Dasar Ekonomi Baru.
From my personal observation, I think this policy worked well to elevate the lifestyle of the Malays, as looking back at the initial period of its implementation, the Malays are mostly coming from the agricultural background, and many of them are poor, to an extent of failing to provide the necessity of education to their children. Now, we have many professionals who are Malays. To me it is insufficient just to state the number of professionals, for that is the reason why we must also look at the birth of many Malaysian middle class which mostly consist of the Malays at large. This, to me, can be taken to be the success of this affirmative action policy.
It must also be noted that, DEB, also come with benchmark that the leader back then sought to achieve and specifically speaking, the target of having 30% share of the Malaysian economic pie of the country. For once the Malays reach more than 20% share but the number ever since decreased to 18% now. This indicates that the NEP is a failure.
It is also insufficient to look by the figures. This is to say that I think it is also necessary to look into the collective behavior of the Malays. If we were to make comparisons upon the Malays and the non-Malays, they are inferior in many ways. Their determination is all aspect cannot be matched upon the non-Malays, I believe that it is very true that the Malays should be called slackers. In business, the Malays are very pessimist, they fear taking risk in business, that causes most of the Malays to be hired employees. The most, I should say is very negative, is their tendency to back stab their friends in business and in anything they do. The Malays also don't have faith in Malay businessman which is very important for the advancement of Malay business.
The fact that all of us must bear is that Malays are feeling so contented with what they have, including all the safeguards that exist for them, which supposedly be temporary as promised by Tun Abdul Razak when he announced the implementation of NEP. To me, this feeling of being contented have made us complacent of what we have and the drive to fight for more to cease to exist. This is reflected in the economic performance of the Malays, from a single individual to the larger population of the Malays at large.
Most of us are not producers but users, most of us work with people but not working for ourselves, most of us have this attitude of not supporting our own people when it comes to business, most of our businessman are not as eager as the non-Malays to give the best of our service, most of us easily irritated by the success of others of our own kind to an extent of even bringing our business brothers to their doom, most of us are so pessimist about people who try to make a difference, most of us will have negative perception to those who are trying to be successful in many ways and more...
If we be honest to ourselves, do we, the Malays need this shameful affirmative action assistance? The answer is yes, if all of the traits that I have described just now are the truth that goes undisputed. It will be otherwise, if we believe in ourselves, if we are honest in what we do, if we are as hardworking as the non-Malays. Some may pose the question, the Malays should be helped, if not, what will happen to the villagers and their future. I say that these are the people that must always be helped by the government regardless of their races and religions not all of the Malays who can actually stand up on their own.
Some may also pose the question of what will happen to our children in future, I say we produce a better and stronger and much more resilient breed of our race, where we can boast to others that we are the Malays, that we stand on our own. But if we keep on denying the pride of our race, then the children that we will have in the future will just be similar of those before them, with no improvement and without anything to be proud of.
I believe that all man are equal, subject to the limitations as set by God only, as he only understand his own creation. I also believe that we can be a powerful race as the whites, Chinese, Indian all across the globe, that our number increase with quality and that we help other countries to build their economy like the Chinese in all over the world. But as for now, where are we? Is there anything to be proud of when you can actually walk, but still you are given stick to walk, which will only weaken you.
Who owns this country?
The concept of Malay Supremacy can only be defined as where the Malays are presumed to be the owner of this country, this impliedly concludes that non-Malays are not owners, despite the fact that they owe their allegiance to this country. My personal stance is, I don't agree with this concept as I believe that everyone have a fair share to a country as a citizen. This is because everyone who declare themselves or given the status of citizenship of this country must to the extent of shedding their blood to defend it, with all cost. So, no one can say that they are more entitled to this country compared to any other citizens, all are equal in this respect.
One may say that the Chinese can return to their motherland, China;and that the Indians can go back to India; still I choose not to agree with this as I have many Chinese and Indian friends who thinks that if this concept is true, then we, the non-Malays shouldn't bother about the fate of this country, that we should center our energy and thoughts to our motherland, after all we are just not suppose to care about this country, when the implication is as such we are returning back to China and India and that imply that we are not the citizen of this country. This statement is enough to prove that there should be no difference as to the ownership of citizens to the country.
Looking back at the pre-independence period, indeed the non-Malays came here as merchants, labourers, imported by the British colonial power, where these immigrants supposedly should return to their country upon the Malays gaining their independence. But this was not the case, the situation was that Tunku Abdul Rahman and the Malays back then has to consider, what will happen if these people were to go back as the Britain will not grant independence nor that we are, the Malays are economically independent without the aid of these people. So, because of these reasons that we now have Chinese and Indians are part of our citizens. The agreement was clear that the Malays surrender citizenship and in return the non-Malays will agree on the condition that the Malays have extra rights with respect to the political power, that comes later in interpretation, respectively in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.
Now that, we are here for more than 50 years, the generations that was the former of this so called social contract have predeceased us, only a few remains. The question to ask here are, can we really say that these non-Malays still have the desire to return to their original country? Or is it fair for us to presume that they have the opportunity to turn their backs against us by subscribing back to nationalism of their original country? If we are being honest and fair, we will not say such things, the reason that we are saying these things is mainly because that we are jealous of their achievement, there is no doubt about it, selfishness is the key.
100% Democracy is good for Islam
I am a Muslim who think that Islamic Law should be the law that regulate the Muslims and no other, but if I am to stick with this thinking, I am being blind to the reality as we do not have Islamic Law is this country, political leaders may say that this is an Islamic country, but the fact was clearly stipulated out in the Federal Court case of Che Omar Che Soh v. Govt of Malaysia, that Malaysia is not an Islamic country, that Islam is subject to Malaysian Law, meaning, here Islam which suppose to be more supreme than anything else is subject to the rules of this country, it is a shame but, this is the fact.
The fact that we are a multiracial country gives the credit that we should have democracy that should be perfectly practiced, only by this means we have citizens of different races that does not question about other races living in this country, only by this way we can attain peace. Some say that when you have 100% democracy, for the Muslims, they will not hear azan anymore, I think these people are naive about what democracy is all about. Democracy is not just about government selected by the people but it also includes respect upon one another and together coupled with democracy is freedom of religion. Meaning to say if you have 100% democracy, you will have azan on every praying times, because of the respect on freedom of religion.
Another point is propogation upon the Muslims on the ideals of non-Islamic teachings coming from other religions, as when we are in full democracy, other religions may have the oppurtunity to cloud the minds of the Muslims to convert to their religion, like through the media. I think this is true but the question here is what is the best way for a Muslim to be strong in his faith, is it by forbidding negative elements or non Islamic elements from him or is it by, he himself to study and practice Islam with determination and grace, so as for him to have the inner strength to pick and choose what laid before him?
Everyone is well aware that the world we are living in is a globalized world, you cannot expect you children not to see all the negative elements is his life, that they only see good things, if we think this way, we are being ignorance to reality. The only way for us to live in this age is to have a strong inner strength as we cannot forever block all the negativeness that comes in our way. That we must empower our children with the teachings of Islam so that they themselves will have the rejection of the negative elements in an open world. This is a fact, where when you limit everything from your child in your fear that he will be influenced, will do no better compared to not to limit the horizons of your child but to equipped him with knowledge and strength to determine what is right and what is wrong.
Islam in the west is being widely accepted because of freedom of religion, why must we limit democracy that promotes freedom of religion, that in itself promotes Islam? In religion, there are beliefs, a Muslim believe that Allah is the only God and Mohamed (Peace be Upon Him) is his messenger and all Islamic teachings, can you expect a Hindu to believe what are the pillars in Islam? Same to the question like, can you expect others non-Muslims to believe that Islam is the best to apply to them, I mean Islamic Law. I f a person who have a strong faith in Islam will always want the best for Islam.
Let us look into the movie FITNA and the way Muslims all over the world respond to it, most Muslims criticized it like hell because it mocked Islam and the prophet by selectively pick and choose what thought in Islam about fighting the non-Muslims. Fairly speaking, this is expected when something so holy in Islam being subject to criticism but we are being ignorant, but responding violently, what was portrayed in the movie becomes the conviction among the non-Muslims, that now they fear Islam, here we are losing. Islam gain nothing but the feel of winning in arrogance. The same can be seen in Malaysian Muslims, look at the way they respond to the discussion on Islam by non-Muslims in this country. Most of these discussions, the Muslims are invited to have a say, but most of the time we choose to protest outside of the building, I do not think that this conduct is civilized nor it brings any benefit for Islam.
We must remember that Islam is not at the peak as once we were, we are many but we are weak and pathetic. The reason behind this is not the fault of non-Muslims but rather it is our own mistake, we left the beauty of our religion behind. Prophet p.b.u.h. stated that, there will be an age where his people will be like bubbles at the sea, many but useless. Now is the time for us to go back in Islam to make people accept Islam not to chase away the non-Muslims from Islam.
The affirmative action upon the Malays
For more than 30 years that this affirmative action policy is in practice in this country. Well affirmative action is an American term while the British term is positive discrimination. This is done by giving extra rights and assistance to a particular of society to elevate their underrated position. Normally this is done through addressing their economic problem. In Malaysia, this policy is called by the name of New Economic Policy or by the Malay name Dasar Ekonomi Baru.
From my personal observation, I think this policy worked well to elevate the lifestyle of the Malays, as looking back at the initial period of its implementation, the Malays are mostly coming from the agricultural background, and many of them are poor, to an extent of failing to provide the necessity of education to their children. Now, we have many professionals who are Malays. To me it is insufficient just to state the number of professionals, for that is the reason why we must also look at the birth of many Malaysian middle class which mostly consist of the Malays at large. This, to me, can be taken to be the success of this affirmative action policy.
It must also be noted that, DEB, also come with benchmark that the leader back then sought to achieve and specifically speaking, the target of having 30% share of the Malaysian economic pie of the country. For once the Malays reach more than 20% share but the number ever since decreased to 18% now. This indicates that the NEP is a failure.
It is also insufficient to look by the figures. This is to say that I think it is also necessary to look into the collective behavior of the Malays. If we were to make comparisons upon the Malays and the non-Malays, they are inferior in many ways. Their determination is all aspect cannot be matched upon the non-Malays, I believe that it is very true that the Malays should be called slackers. In business, the Malays are very pessimist, they fear taking risk in business, that causes most of the Malays to be hired employees. The most, I should say is very negative, is their tendency to back stab their friends in business and in anything they do. The Malays also don't have faith in Malay businessman which is very important for the advancement of Malay business.
The fact that all of us must bear is that Malays are feeling so contented with what they have, including all the safeguards that exist for them, which supposedly be temporary as promised by Tun Abdul Razak when he announced the implementation of NEP. To me, this feeling of being contented have made us complacent of what we have and the drive to fight for more to cease to exist. This is reflected in the economic performance of the Malays, from a single individual to the larger population of the Malays at large.
Most of us are not producers but users, most of us work with people but not working for ourselves, most of us have this attitude of not supporting our own people when it comes to business, most of our businessman are not as eager as the non-Malays to give the best of our service, most of us easily irritated by the success of others of our own kind to an extent of even bringing our business brothers to their doom, most of us are so pessimist about people who try to make a difference, most of us will have negative perception to those who are trying to be successful in many ways and more...
If we be honest to ourselves, do we, the Malays need this shameful affirmative action assistance? The answer is yes, if all of the traits that I have described just now are the truth that goes undisputed. It will be otherwise, if we believe in ourselves, if we are honest in what we do, if we are as hardworking as the non-Malays. Some may pose the question, the Malays should be helped, if not, what will happen to the villagers and their future. I say that these are the people that must always be helped by the government regardless of their races and religions not all of the Malays who can actually stand up on their own.
Some may also pose the question of what will happen to our children in future, I say we produce a better and stronger and much more resilient breed of our race, where we can boast to others that we are the Malays, that we stand on our own. But if we keep on denying the pride of our race, then the children that we will have in the future will just be similar of those before them, with no improvement and without anything to be proud of.
I believe that all man are equal, subject to the limitations as set by God only, as he only understand his own creation. I also believe that we can be a powerful race as the whites, Chinese, Indian all across the globe, that our number increase with quality and that we help other countries to build their economy like the Chinese in all over the world. But as for now, where are we? Is there anything to be proud of when you can actually walk, but still you are given stick to walk, which will only weaken you.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Perak's MB crisis: Pakatan Rakyat is rightful
I'm writing this post just to share my point of view regarding this recent Perak fiasco. Indeed, democracy in this country is getting better, meaning to say the developments, or for some, is getting worse as well. No one prefer to live in a country or state where you have a frequent change of government, to me frequent means, today you have a government selected by electorate and tomorrow you have a different government, for various reasons, which to me very obvious.
In any democratic country the most supreme is the people, meaning everything, structures, systems, and even constitutions exist because their purpose is to serve the people. Looking at Malaysia, the constitution says that Malaysia is a parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarcy country. So, here, we can infer that democracy must be subject to restrictions as provided in the rules of having a parliamentry democracy.
One simple example to illustrate this is by looking at how the federal government is established. It is not neccesaary for them to have the popular support of the people, enough that they rule majority constituencies that provide seats in the house of parliament. Barisan Nasional, for long years have ruled this country by not having a popular vote but by concuering majority of the parliamentary seats, with most, of small difference of votes to the opposition.
How does a popular democracy works? Well, when the head of executive or government is directly selected by the people not by the consideration of having the majority seats in house of parliament. This is one of those, to me, a restriction towards the notion of democracy. As you can see, the mojarity rules in democracy, but by this rule, the less majority rules by not having the support of the majority, interesting isn't it?
On Perak, I believe that the people are of the utmost entity of the country that should be heard, aside from that the laws, specifically the constitution must also be respected, without prejudice, in order for us to have stability in this country. Despite, in law, the three ADUNs that hopped to Barisan Nasional, by supporting them to form a government, that they are justified in doing so, as according to a case on anti-hopping law in Kelantan, still, in principle they are not justified.
They are two matters that we have to balance here. One, that assemblyman are selected to represent the people, they are conferred with this burden to decide for the people of what is best for the people, as that is the main purpose of their selection. Two, that people haved voted an assemblyman according to the party which he represents, as people decide who should be their government and of that reason it is quite absolute that they don't expect the assemblyman to decide to hopp.
Here I prefer the second point, simply because, in Malaysia, the assemblyman that we have is not good enough for them to be regarded as chosen based on thier characteristics. To be clear, my benchmark here is Shahrir Samad, he resigned from the assembly to contest as a free candidate as he had a disagreement with the government, he won, he was one of that was selected on his own account. Malaysians, particularly those candidates for election are not fit to attain this benchmark, so, the people in this country make selection based on parties available in election.
When you have all of these, how can you say that you are justified in deciding for the people's best to hopp and support another party to form a government?
On the law, specifically the constitution, I said earlier that should always be respected. Indeed, but what happen when you have a question that need interpretation of any clause of the constitution? Meaning both litigating parties are on the balance to be decided on thier behalf. At one hand, you can choose whether to live with the principles of democracy by strictly applying the rules in parliamentary democracy, which to me were established hundred of years before us and practiced until today or you about to ignore that by saying that the Rulers should prevail, instead of the people?
So, it seems to me, in Perak, and to the extent of the appeal court, the judges have more belief of the constitutional monarch supremacy rather than what should have been supreme, above all else, that is democracy. One after another, the democractic principles are fading or declared to be overcomed by some greater elements of a certain country.
The people, have seen this, if they do nothing to change this government and to return the position to how it should have been, I can say that Malaysians are stupid, because that they are blind about democracy, and I am not really sure, of the majority composititon, what do they fear really, all are equally equipped by God with brain, intelligence, hands and legs, strong body and etc...
What is there to fear fellow Malaysians or should I be specific, 'fellow brothers and sisters'?
In any democratic country the most supreme is the people, meaning everything, structures, systems, and even constitutions exist because their purpose is to serve the people. Looking at Malaysia, the constitution says that Malaysia is a parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarcy country. So, here, we can infer that democracy must be subject to restrictions as provided in the rules of having a parliamentry democracy.
One simple example to illustrate this is by looking at how the federal government is established. It is not neccesaary for them to have the popular support of the people, enough that they rule majority constituencies that provide seats in the house of parliament. Barisan Nasional, for long years have ruled this country by not having a popular vote but by concuering majority of the parliamentary seats, with most, of small difference of votes to the opposition.
How does a popular democracy works? Well, when the head of executive or government is directly selected by the people not by the consideration of having the majority seats in house of parliament. This is one of those, to me, a restriction towards the notion of democracy. As you can see, the mojarity rules in democracy, but by this rule, the less majority rules by not having the support of the majority, interesting isn't it?
On Perak, I believe that the people are of the utmost entity of the country that should be heard, aside from that the laws, specifically the constitution must also be respected, without prejudice, in order for us to have stability in this country. Despite, in law, the three ADUNs that hopped to Barisan Nasional, by supporting them to form a government, that they are justified in doing so, as according to a case on anti-hopping law in Kelantan, still, in principle they are not justified.
They are two matters that we have to balance here. One, that assemblyman are selected to represent the people, they are conferred with this burden to decide for the people of what is best for the people, as that is the main purpose of their selection. Two, that people haved voted an assemblyman according to the party which he represents, as people decide who should be their government and of that reason it is quite absolute that they don't expect the assemblyman to decide to hopp.
Here I prefer the second point, simply because, in Malaysia, the assemblyman that we have is not good enough for them to be regarded as chosen based on thier characteristics. To be clear, my benchmark here is Shahrir Samad, he resigned from the assembly to contest as a free candidate as he had a disagreement with the government, he won, he was one of that was selected on his own account. Malaysians, particularly those candidates for election are not fit to attain this benchmark, so, the people in this country make selection based on parties available in election.
When you have all of these, how can you say that you are justified in deciding for the people's best to hopp and support another party to form a government?
On the law, specifically the constitution, I said earlier that should always be respected. Indeed, but what happen when you have a question that need interpretation of any clause of the constitution? Meaning both litigating parties are on the balance to be decided on thier behalf. At one hand, you can choose whether to live with the principles of democracy by strictly applying the rules in parliamentary democracy, which to me were established hundred of years before us and practiced until today or you about to ignore that by saying that the Rulers should prevail, instead of the people?
So, it seems to me, in Perak, and to the extent of the appeal court, the judges have more belief of the constitutional monarch supremacy rather than what should have been supreme, above all else, that is democracy. One after another, the democractic principles are fading or declared to be overcomed by some greater elements of a certain country.
The people, have seen this, if they do nothing to change this government and to return the position to how it should have been, I can say that Malaysians are stupid, because that they are blind about democracy, and I am not really sure, of the majority composititon, what do they fear really, all are equally equipped by God with brain, intelligence, hands and legs, strong body and etc...
What is there to fear fellow Malaysians or should I be specific, 'fellow brothers and sisters'?
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Malaysia perlu ini sekarang...
PEMBANGUNAN FIZIKAL TIDAK SEHARUSNYA MENINGGALKAN PEMBANGUNAN SOSIAL
Negara kita sudah mencapai satu tahap dimana, pembangunan infrasruktur adalah memuaskan atau boleh dikatakan sebagai sesuatu yang boleh kita banggakan sebagai sebuah Negara membangun.
Rakyat hidup dalam keadaan yang cukup serba-serbi dengan pelbagai perkhidmatan yang diberikan, mahupun di dalam bidang pendidikan sehinggalah ke jalan2 yang kita punyai pada hari ini, memandangkan pertambahan penduduk, kini, kita dapat bahawa jalan2 kita sekarang amatlah sesak. Tetapi itu bukanlah initipati ucapan saya pada hari ini.
Tuan2 dan puan2 yang saya hormati, di dalam pembangunan sesebuah tamadun, aspek kemajuan fizikal perlu seimbang dengan kemajuan social masyarakat. Ini adalah penting kerana tidak guna kalau kita punyai segala kemodenan teapi kita meninggalkan apa yang baik yang patut diamalkan oleh setiap individu.
Ibnu Khaldun di dalam kitabnya, al mukaddimah pernah mengatakan bahawa tanda kejatuhan sesebuah empayar bermula dengan berleluasa masalah social. Disebabkan itulah, mengapa perlunya pembangunan dapat diseimbangkan dengan pembangunan social masyarakat.
Untuk memastikan bahawa pembangunan social masyarakat, apa yang amat penting adalah kepuasan dan kesenangan hati dikalangan semua golongan masyarakat, daripada ini, lahirlah perasaan dikalangan masyarakat yang tertentu, yang tidak tertekan dengan beban hidup. Apabila tekanan terhadap beban hidup dikurang maka, barulah tumpuan dapat diberikan kepada pembangunan social.
Itulah yang menjadi isu saya pada hari ini, walaupun kita bergerak maju, dengan pembangunan yang begitu pesat, masih banyak lagi, kemiskinan atau kalau tak miskin, ketidakcukupan pendapatan serta ketidak seimbangan ekonomi antara satu golongan kecil dan golongan yang besar yang lain. Ini amat menyedihkan kerana, walaupun kita bergerak maju dari segi infrastrukturnya, kita masih lagi mempunyai masalah kemiskinan dan ketinggalan, terutamanya apabila ia amat berkaitan dengan bangsa2 tertentu.
Ini sudah tentu akan mewujudkan suasana yang tegang dan tidak puas hati di dalam masyarakat dan seterusnya, menghampakan harapan untuk pembangunan social dalam usaha mencapai keseimbangan diantara pembangunan fizikal dan social. Lihat Singapura, walaupun mereka maju, tetapi mereka tidak memberi perhatian kepada golongan minority, dan golongan minoriti kebanyakannya lari ke Negara lain untuk mendapat nasib dan layanan yang lebih baik. Lihat bagaimana golongan minority mereka tertindas akibat kerakusan dan ketamakan mereka dalam mengejar pembangunan. Adakah situasi yang sama patut berlaku keapda kita di Pulau Pinang?
Ini adalah penting untuk ditangani, lebih banyak program yang bersifat, melengkapkan golongan2 yang kurang statusnya dari segi keewangan untuk bersama2 mempunyai kemampuan untuk mencapai tahap dimana mereka selesa dengan keewangan mereka dan bangga dengan golongan mereka. Ini sudah tentu mampu menyelesaikan masalah tidak puas hati dari satu golongan yang dikatakan kurang kemampuan ekonomi dengan golongan yang lebih mampu.
Sebagai hasilnya yang jelas, kita akan memperolehi masyarakat yang bukan sahaja maju dari segi fizikal, malah stabil dari soal social.
DEMOKRASI MALAYSIA: MENGAPA PATUT PILIH CALON BEBAS
Tuan2 dan puan2 yang saya hormati sekalian.
Jikalau kita lihat di dalam amalan demokrasi di Negara kita, saya berpendapat kita tidak matang lagi, lihatlah situasi di Perak, dimana rakyat, pada akhirnya terpaksa menanggung kerugian dan malu akibat daripada perebutan kuasa dari dua belah pihak. Pakatan Rakyat sibuk dengan perjuangan mereka yang menegakkan suara rakyat – entah betulkah itu yang mereka fikir dan juga Barisan Nasional yang tidak sabar2 nak memerintah sehingga tidak boleh menunggu untuk pilihanraya yang akan dating untuk menawan semula negeri perak.
Situasi begini, bagi saya adalah amat memalukan, tidakkah kita patut menghormati keputusan yang telah dibuat oleh rakyat dan tidakkah jua kita patut menghormati undang2 dan system raja berpelambagaan yang kita ada. Dalam hal ini, saya letakkan pada pihak tuan2 dan puan2 untuk memikirkannya.
Selain dari itu, lihat di dalam politik berparti di peringkat nasional, di dalam parlimen, adalah dianggap suatu yang salah apabila ahli mana2 parti pembangkang mahupun parti kerajaan menyokong apa yang dikatan oleh pihak dari bukan parti mereka, walaupun hal yang dikatakan itu benar dan baik. Walaupun Barisan Nasional mempunyai peraturan yang menyebabkan digantungnya seseorang ahli itu jikalau menyokong usul pembangkang, pihak pembangkang walaupun tidak mempunyai peraturan sedemikian, turut mempunyai sikap yang serupa.
Ini adalah sesuatu yang amat menyedihkan di dalam negara kita, walaupun mana usul tidak kira datang dari pihak mana sekali pun, kalau baik, tidak akan dapat sokongan disebabkan peraturan atau amalan ini. Sepatutnya wakil rakyat bertanggungjawab menjaga kebajikan rakyat mereka, tempat dimana mereka diundi, dengan ini suara mereka lebih terjaga. Inilah buruknya sekarang kalau, wakil kita datang dari mana2 parti.
Dalam keadaan begini adalah amat baik jika kita memilih calon bebas, kerana mereka tidak terikat dengan amalan ini. Mereka bebas menyuarakan masalah rakyat dan menyokong usul2 yang baik tanpa perlu menghiraukan kesan buruk yang akan diterima dari parti masing2. Dengan cara ini, nasib rakyat lebih terbela, dimana suara rakyat akan lebih berkuasa daripada suara sesebuah parti.
KERAJAAN YANG STABIL PENTING
Adalah lebih naik jikalau kita punyai ramai wakil bebas dengan ini, tidak kisah apa usul daripada mana2 parti sama ada kerajaan atau pembangkang, pihak bebas dapat memberi kata putus tentang apa yang baik untuk Negara.
Dalam scenario politik Negara kita ini, dimana sokongan terhadap kerajaan terbahagi dua, adalah penting untuk kita memilih calon bebas kerana kerajaan atau pembangkang mungkin mempunyai agenda tersendiri, tetapi calon bebas tidak terikat kepada kepentingan ini. Dengan ini rakyat lebih terbela apabila calon2 bebas dapat menyokong mana2 usul yang difikirkan baik untuk rakyat terutama yang dipilih dari kawasannya sendiri.
Secara tidak langsung ini akan mewujudkan situasi kerajaan yang stabil dimana, kerajaan akan berfikir panjang untuk mengambil sesuatu tindakan, serupa juga untuk pembangkang.
Jikalau situasi ini dapat diwujubkan dalam satu jangka masa yang panjang, kita akan mempunyai sebuah Negara dengan amaln demokrasi yang matang dimana, ahli2 wakil2 rakyat akan turut sama menyokong usul yang baik dan bukan apa yang parti mereka mahukan. Sekali lagi, nasib rakyat lebih terbela. Golongan minority terutama dari segi ekonomi akan mendapat manfaat, kerana dengan cara inilah wujudnya kerajaan yang lebih adil, tidak kira Barisan nasional atau Pakatan Rakyat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)