When Two Elephants Clash - aliran.com · lar and Malaysians in general who often bear witness and...

Aliran Monthly : Vol.22(7)

PP3739/12/2002 ISSN 0127 - 5127 / RM3.00 / 2002:Vol.22No.7

When TwoElephants Clash ...When TwoElephants Clash ...


ajah sama gajah berjuang,pelanduk mati di tengah-tengah. So goes the Malaysaying that when two el-

ephants fight, the mouse deer inbetween is trampled to death.

This threatens to be the case withthe Malay community in particu-lar and Malaysians in generalwho often bear witness and fallvictim to the protracted and acri-monious political battle betweenthe Malay-nationalist UMNO andIslamic-based PAS.

Unfortunately the fierce competi-tion between the two Malay par-ties to capture the hearts andminds of their political constitu-encies invariably involves name-calling, mudslinging, and outbid-ding the other, especially when itcomes to what they separatelyperceive to be the ‘true practice’ ofIslam.

Usually, UMNO’s actions aremore easily known and felt by theMalay community andMalaysians in general becausethis dominant party in the rulingcoalition has the political muscle

COVER STORY

The Mousedeer, T h e “ Ta l i b a n ”And A Sorry State

GGGGG

by Mustafa K Anuar

UMNO-PAS Battles

The result may be to produce two ‘extremist’ elephants that maywell trample all mousedeer caught between them.

Dr Mahathir : UMNO President

Hadi Awang : PAS President

Anwar : His expulsion caused UMNO tolose its political grip


Mustafa Anuar reflects on the protracted and acri-monious tussle between UMNO and PAS in thismonth’s cover story. He takes issue with UMNO’sunethical demonisation of PAS but also critiquesPAS’ single-minded pursuit of hudud. In our multi-ethnic and multi-religious society, he argues thatdogmatism and political opportunistism in mattersof religion will only result in the ‘mousedeer’ beingtrampled by the ‘elephants’.

The judiciary comes under the spotlight once again.Charles Hector, in the back-cover story, suggests thatrecent judicial decisions should prompt us to ques-tion whether our hopes for a renewed judiciary havebeen misplaced. Indeed, little change has taken placesince the appointment of Dzaiddin as Chief Justice.

Consider Ezam’s case. “I acted with a clear con-science to expose the greed of the powers-that-be,”he declares, upon being sentenced to two years’ jail.His crime? Revealing Anti-Corruption Agency re-ports into corrupt practices at the highest levels,deemed to be “official secrets”. “I am not a traitor,”he insists in his statement reproduced inside.

Tian Chua, like Ezam, still detained, calls on thepeople to rise up to save the judiciary.

There must also be justice for downtrodden com-munities, Kumar Devaraj reminds us. We carry areport on a talk he presented about “how the otherhalf lives.” For more insights on this doctor-turned-activist, read “We’ve got to muddy our feet”, AM’sinterview with him.

“Uncle Sam swaggers back” features JohanSaravanamuttu’s thoughts on US foreign policymoves in this region. He is most concerned thatASEAN countries, one after another, are falling backinto the US orbit.

C O N T E N T S

Printed by Angkatan Edaran Enterprise Sdn. Bhd. Lot 6, Jalan Tukang 16/4,Seksyen 16, 40000 Shah Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan.

EDITOR'S NOTE

COVER STORYCOVER STORYCOVER STORYCOVER STORYCOVER STORY••••• The Mousedeer, The Taliban AndThe Mousedeer, The Taliban AndThe Mousedeer, The Taliban AndThe Mousedeer, The Taliban AndThe Mousedeer, The Taliban And

A Sorry StateA Sorry StateA Sorry StateA Sorry StateA Sorry State 22222

FEATURESFEATURESFEATURESFEATURESFEATURES••••• I Am Not A TraitorI Am Not A TraitorI Am Not A TraitorI Am Not A TraitorI Am Not A Traitor 77777

••••• People Must Rise Up To SavePeople Must Rise Up To SavePeople Must Rise Up To SavePeople Must Rise Up To SavePeople Must Rise Up To Save

The JudiciaryThe JudiciaryThe JudiciaryThe JudiciaryThe Judiciary 1 41 41 41 41 4

••••• People's Struggle for JusticePeople's Struggle for JusticePeople's Struggle for JusticePeople's Struggle for JusticePeople's Struggle for Justice 1 51 51 51 51 5

••••• Poisonous Smog Back In SarawakPoisonous Smog Back In SarawakPoisonous Smog Back In SarawakPoisonous Smog Back In SarawakPoisonous Smog Back In Sarawak 2 22 22 22 22 2

••••• We're Got to Muddy Our FeetWe're Got to Muddy Our FeetWe're Got to Muddy Our FeetWe're Got to Muddy Our FeetWe're Got to Muddy Our Feet 2 42 42 42 42 4

••••• Uncle Sam Swaggers BackUncle Sam Swaggers BackUncle Sam Swaggers BackUncle Sam Swaggers BackUncle Sam Swaggers Back 2 92 92 92 92 9

••••• Is There Hope In The JudiciaryIs There Hope In The JudiciaryIs There Hope In The JudiciaryIs There Hope In The JudiciaryIs There Hope In The Judiciary 4 04 04 04 04 0

REGULARSREGULARSREGULARSREGULARSREGULARS••••• Thinking AllowedThinking AllowedThinking AllowedThinking AllowedThinking Allowed 1 91 91 91 91 9

••••• Current ConcernsCurrent ConcernsCurrent ConcernsCurrent ConcernsCurrent Concerns 3 23 23 23 23 2

••••• LettersLettersLettersLettersLetters 3 33 33 33 33 3

OTHERSOTHERSOTHERSOTHERSOTHERS••••• Poem: Enduring TerrorPoem: Enduring TerrorPoem: Enduring TerrorPoem: Enduring TerrorPoem: Enduring Terror 66666

••••• Subscription FormSubscription FormSubscription FormSubscription FormSubscription Form 1 71 71 71 71 7

••••• Does Aliran's Work Mean AnythingDoes Aliran's Work Mean AnythingDoes Aliran's Work Mean AnythingDoes Aliran's Work Mean AnythingDoes Aliran's Work Mean Anything

To You?To You?To You?To You?To You? 1 81 81 81 81 8

ALIRANALIRANALIRANALIRANALIRAN is a Reform Movement dedicated to is a Reform Movement dedicated to is a Reform Movement dedicated to is a Reform Movement dedicated to is a Reform Movement dedicated toJustice, Freedom & Solidarity and listed on theJustice, Freedom & Solidarity and listed on theJustice, Freedom & Solidarity and listed on theJustice, Freedom & Solidarity and listed on theJustice, Freedom & Solidarity and listed on theroster of the Economic and Social Council of theroster of the Economic and Social Council of theroster of the Economic and Social Council of theroster of the Economic and Social Council of theroster of the Economic and Social Council of theUnited Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliran welcomesUnited Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliran welcomesUnited Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliran welcomesUnited Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliran welcomesUnited Nations. Founded in 1977, Aliran welcomesall Malaysians above 21 to be members. Contactall Malaysians above 21 to be members. Contactall Malaysians above 21 to be members. Contactall Malaysians above 21 to be members. Contactall Malaysians above 21 to be members. Contactthe Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.the Hon. Secretary or visit our webpage.

Published byPublished byPublished byPublished byPublished by

Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN)Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN)Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN)Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN)Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN)103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Jelutong,

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

Tel : (04) 658 5251 Fax : (04) 658 5197Tel : (04) 658 5251 Fax : (04) 658 5197Tel : (04) 658 5251 Fax : (04) 658 5197Tel : (04) 658 5251 Fax : (04) 658 5197Tel : (04) 658 5251 Fax : (04) 658 5197

Homepage : http://www.malaysia.net/aliranHomepage : http://www.malaysia.net/aliranHomepage : http://www.malaysia.net/aliranHomepage : http://www.malaysia.net/aliranHomepage : http://www.malaysia.net/aliran


to translate its actions into newsin the mainstream media.

Ideological counter-attacks byPAS are usually less visible be-cause the mainstream media denyPAS any meaningful access. Butthis doesn’t mean that PAS is lessstrident in its political commen-taries and policies, and religiousprescriptions.

In their ideological warfare,UMNO typically demonises PASvia the mainstream media. Therethe UMNO bigwigs hurl all sortsof indecorous labels at the PASleadership.

Such antics are widespread in therun-up to a general election oreven by-election. At times thisdemonisation takes on an uglierform, such as when UMNO facesits own political crisis. This hasbeen clearly so in the aftermath ofAnwar’s expulsion from UMNOwhich caused the party to lose itspolitical grip on a large section ofthe Malay community – naturallyto the advantage of PAS, UMNO’snemesis.

To a large extent, that political con-text is still with us. Hence, UMNOhas repeatedly warned theMalaysian public against sup-porting the ‘religious extremist’PAS. Some quarters have gone sofar as to intimate that PAS is ‘Ma-laysia’s Taliban’!

In turn PAS and its members havetheir own labels for UMNO andthe latter’s leadership. However,these labels are seldom publicisedpartly because the mainstreammedia isn’t inclined to report badthings said about UMNO. They

only repeat them if it is useful forthe UMNO leadership to makeits calculated response.

But dangerous labels make fordangerous situations! Thedemonisation of a particularleader or political party over aperiod of time could justify a un-dignified, demeaning or undemo-cratic treatment of the party andindividuals concerned. Whensomeone or a party is exaggerat-edly portrayed as a vicious villain,it is as if the person or party de-serves to be ostracized or harshlytreated in proportion to their al-leged ‘misdeeds’.

When it is employed by those inpower, such a political strategy isoften calculated to create an airof anxiety, even alarm and collec-tive fear among the general pub-lic so that they consent, or at leastacquiesce, to undemocratic ac-tions taken against the vilifiedparty. The rest is merely rationali-zation: national security, Malayunity, or whatever is convenientfor the moment.

Malaysians must therefore takespecial notice of certain commentsmade by Prime Minister DrMahathir Mohamed in his recentspeech at a Harvard Club of Ma-laysia dinner. There Dr Mahathircharacterised PAS as a partywhich could destroy the countryand its inter-ethnic harmony if itwas voted into power. In one ofhis oft-repeated warnings aboutthe ‘danger of the wrong partybeing elected and forming the gov-ernment’, Dr Mahathir said thatcertain people will use democracy

to destroy democracy.

Remember, Dr Mahathir added,‘many so-called liberal democra-cies do not allow communists andfascists to participate in their elec-tions.’ Ominously, he then added,‘Can we take a leaf from their bookand risk condemnation for notbeing democratic?’

No Malaysian will be so stupidas not to see that the Prime Minis-ter was attempting to equate Paswith ‘communists and fascists’.The ‘communist’ label is, ofcourse, ideologically pregnantand explosive within Malaysianpolitics. Even UMNO memberstainted with the label of ‘commu-nist’ have been detained under ISAbefore, with almost no one daringto come to their rescue.

What kind of raw fear and hatredwas Dr Mahathir trying to evokeamong Malaysians towards PASby hinting that this Islamic party,as it were, is no different from‘communists and fascists’?

Whatever we think of PAS’s ideo-logical persuasion and theocraticinclination, we should not equatePAS with ‘communists and fas-cists’. Nor should we portray PASas ‘Malaysia’s Taliban’.

Whether we support or opposePAS’s programme, PAS has con-ducted itself as a political partyhitherto committed to makingchanges in society through con-stitutional means. Despite allkinds of unproven accusationsmade against it, PAS has neitheradvocated nor practised violence

Labelling Follies

Don ’ t Demonise PAS


political and financial propriety.Recently UMNO, through its defacto Law Minister Rais Yatim,expressed deep concern that the‘Pas-led Kelantan Governmenthad offered land to several inves-tigation and enforcement officers.’Of course, the mainstream mediamade a meal out of this alleged‘land graft in Kelantan’ episode,(NST Aug. 5, 2002)..

In contrast, the UMNO-led federalgovernment seemed to have satquietly on an allegation made byKeadilan Youth Chief Mohd EzamMohd Noor that InternationalTrade and Industry MinisterRafidah Aziz was involved in afinancial scandal and that formerMelaka chief minister RahimTamby Chik was implicated in acase of power abuse. In this in-stance, the result was that he whoblew the whistle went to jail. Ezamwas sentenced to two years’ jailfor having violated the OfficialSecrets Act.

The intense political fighting be-tween UMNO and PAS has alsowitnessed the government’s useof undemocratic means to checkthe feared advancement of PASespecially in the Malay heartland.Hence, numerous curbs havebeen imposed on the freedom ofexpression and assembly (such assales of party organs and politi-cal ceramah) that are primarily tar-geted against PAS. Needless tosay, the impact of these curbs iskeenly felt by other political par-ties and ordinary people.

Unfortunately for PAS, some of its

as its way of competing in the po-litical arena. PAS has conducteditself as a legitimate politicalparty and it has every right asdoes any other political groupingin Malaysia – including UMNO— to exist and participate lawfullyin the country’s different forms ofpolitical competition.

Indeed falsely labeling any partycan be dangerously counter-pro-ductive. It can frustrate, andradicalize, certain sections of apolitical party – including PASand UMNO – to such an extentthat the party’s ideological andpolitical stands on certain issuesare hardened. This might in turncompel the party’s rivals to be-come equally radicalized.

The result may be to produce two‘extremist’ elephants that maywell trample all mousedeercaught between them.

Those in power should take carenot to talk glibly about de-legiti-mizing any lawfully constitutedopposition party when publicsupport for the ruling party de-clines. There can never be an ac-ceptable solution to political prob-lems when a ruling party drivesits opposition , or at least certainsections of its membership, ‘un-derground’. When lawful dissentand legal opposition replaced bytruly militant means of politicalcompetition, the result can only bea national disaster for everybody.

It is not just PAS that claims to bemorally superior. UMNO alsostrives to portray itself as a partythat is morally more upright thanPAS in defending treasured secu-lar and Islamic values such as

A n t i - d e m o c r a t i cA c t i o n s

own actions only lend credenceto UMNO’s labeling of PAS. Nota few people, Muslims and non-Muslims perceive PAS to be aparty that is extremist in religion,intolerant of divergent views, andunsympathetic to women’s activeparticipation in social and politi-cal affairs.

PAS’s single-minded pursuit ofHudud is a case in point. Therehave been many calls from manyquarters for deeper reflections onthe impact of such a piece of legis-lation on Malaysian society; andfor engaged and meaningful dis-cussions with women’s groups,NGOs and other Muslim and non-Muslim organizations. The PASgovernment in Terengganu hasrefused to accede to all calls forthe deferment of the enactment ofHudud in the state.

Consequently, many Malaysiansconsider PAS to be an Islamicparty that is rushing to enhanceits Islamic credentials while bat-tling UMNO to the extent ofmarginalizing the real concernsand fears of Muslims and non-Muslims.

If anything, PAS’s haste only re-inforces suspicions that PAS, asa political party, is really ‘Islamicexclusivist’ and dogmatic, andoblivious of the multiethnic andmultireligious complexion of oursociety. No doubt these suspicionsare not different from those putforth by UMNO’s propagandamachines.

Its fight with PAS has alsoradicalized UMNO, or at least sec-tions within the party, in its ap-proach to seize the ‘Islamic imagi-


nation’ of the Malay-Muslim con-stituency. As everyone knows, DrMahathir went so far as to declarethat Malaysia is already an Is-lamic state. What was this unilat-eral declaration if not clearly aresponse to PAS’ initiatives in or-der to improve UMNO’s Islamicstanding.

Dr Mahathir’s sudden announce-ment itself raised fears, concernsand anxiety, particularly amongMalaysians of other faiths whohave yet to fathom what this an-nouncement entails in their dailylife.

In our multiethnic andmultireligious society, neitherdogmatic nor opportunisitic ap-proaches towards matters of reli-gion can bring mutual under-standing of each other’s culturesand religious traditions, or pro-mote better gender power-rela-tions, cultural enrichment, scien-tific development, democracy andjustice.

Nor can a genuine respect for theconcerns and interests of ordinarypeople emerge in the midst of afierce battle between the two big-gest Malay parties.

But let’s not be so easily discour-aged. Ordinary citizens, like thevery wise mousedeer of Malayfolklore, are not destined to suffer‘death between the elephants’. Intheir common decency and collec-tive wisdom they can reject theself-serving desires of political el-ephants who lay dubious claimto dominance via Islam – becauseIslam, ultimately, enjoins all peo-ple to celebrate our common hu-manity.

In the war on terroreach man is a demonundersuspicion;everywhere the presumptionof innocence is drowned.

Who is the enemy?Mother and infantgrandfather or soldier ...collateral damageexacts its vengeanceon each alike;smart bombsmake no distinction.

In the shrill clamouron either sideof the border ...rules are bentto suit the situation.

Our right to travelOur right to assembleOur right of expressionOur right to informationOur right to privacyOur right of confidentialityall are immolatedon the altar of expediency.

Internment without trialis now the norm ...And a `tolerable’ level

of torture is canvassedan `acceptable’ inextracting informationthat might leadto the lair of the devil

In our attemptto flush out terroristswe have flushed ourprinciples down the toilet.

And in our taxi-rank of prioritiesmeekly we surrenderthe wheel of governancehonour and justice;the Rights of manwoman and childhave been consignedto a `back seat’.Funk has taken over;Terror is the driver.

We now walk in fearof our own shadow;knock of a neighbourpolice or postmantrigger the same shudder.

The war on ...is doneHas blind terror won?

- Cecil Rajendra -

ENDURING TERROR

q


Your Honour,

Some years ago, I was appointedthe Political Secretary to the thenMinister of Finance, Dato’ SeriAnwar Ibrahim. As I was not even30 years old, this made me theyoungest Political Secretary atthat time. Though I was chosenby the Finance Minister, my ap-pointment was made by the PrimeMinister. My swearing-in was inthe presence of the Prime Minis-ter and witnessed by the Secretaryto the Government. Needless tosay, I felt honoured to be offeredan opportunity to serve the gov-ernment in a position of great im-portance at such a tender age.

A Political Secretary is required toattend Post-Cabinet meetingswhich are chaired by the Ministerand attended by all senior offic-ers of his Ministry. This is re-garded as the second most impor-tant meeting after the weeklyWednesday Cabinet meetings.

Towards the end of 1997, the coun-try’s economy experienced a cri-sis. Invariably, the weekly Post-Cabinet meetings became a battle-ground between those whowanted to fulfill the trust placedin them and those who wanted toraid the nation’s coffers. The Fi-nance Minister and senior govern-ment officers, dedicated to uphold-ing the people’s trust, resisted at-

tempts by the Prime Minister andhis cronies to plunder the nation’swealth to save their own necks.Those with interests in Perwaja,MAS, the Bakun Hydro Project,the Monorail project, MISC, andso on, all wanted their companiesand projects salvaged through theuse of funds belonging to the EPF,Petronas, Pilgrims’ Fund (LUTH),and the Armed Forces RetirementFund (LTAT), which, in the end,would have all been the victimsof this pillage.

We all know the outcome of thisturmoil - the Minister who tried toprotect the people’s interest wassacked. I am familiar with the de-tails because, one week before theevent, Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahimtold me, “Be prepared to face anyeventuality. I am perceived as anobstacle. They want me removedfrom the government. I cannotcompromise.”

This event is extremely significant,not only for me personally, but forthe entire nation. I was fated to bein a position to witness what re-ally happened. This is not my owninterpretation of the events but adocumented episode of confron-tation between responsibility andtransgression, between trust andcorruption.

That was when I resolved to fol-low my conscience and oppose

corruption and wrongdoing thatwas being committed before myvery eyes. Today, I stand before youto continue upholding this prin-ciple and maintain my faith inwhat I am fighting for. My resolu-tion to continue to oppose corrup-tion can be summed up in thewords of a distinguished writer,“In an era of great challenge, tostrive and struggle to uphold andpromote trustworthiness andkeeping under control of humangreed”.

Your Honour,

Guided by my principle and faith,I continued my struggle by join-ing a legally registered politicalparty, the National Justice Party(KeADILan). I made use of all av-enues allowed under the Consti-tution to inform the people of thetruth. Through political speeches,I exposed all the transgressionsthat had occurred - how the na-tion’s wealth had been squan-dered to salvage cronies who werein dire straits. The people have a

ACCOUNTABILITY

I Am Not A TraitorI acted with a clear conscience to exposethe greed of the powers-that-be.


right to know the truth as this af-fects their future and livelihood.Clearly, the mainstream mediawas not going to give coverage tomy revelations. In fact, they in-stead attacked me, declaring me atraitor and terrorist out to incitethe people.

Their objective was to smear myreputation and destroy my cred-ibility in an attempt to cast doubtson my revelations. But they failedas more people became curious toknow more. They tried to close allavenues for me to reveal the truth,to the extent that the police evendisrupted meetings held in myhouse on allegations that what Isaid was insidious and causedthe people to be divided. If this isthe real reason given, why not takelegal action against me on thesegrounds? They were not able todo so because what I had revealedvery specific and represented un-deniable facts, which detailedprojects, names of companies,people involved, and the amountsthat were plundered, which noone could dispute or disprove.

I was determined to fully exploitall legal avenues in accordancewith the Constitution. In thisspirit, I made numerous police re-ports so that investigations couldbe by the authorities initiated onthe various allegations of corrup-tion and abuse of power. In re-sponse to these police reports, Iwas summoned to the police sta-tion for my statement to be re-corded, which sometimes tookseveral hours.

However, all this was mere decep-tion, as the exercise was merely torecord my statement in order togive impression that action wasbeing taken on my police reports.

The police never summoned thoseparties implicated in my policereports for their statements to berecorded as well, specifically be-cause the personalities implicatedwere the Prime Minister, DeputyPrime Minister, Cabinet Ministers,and their family members andcronies. Most unfortunate is thefact that my reports against theseindividuals resulted in my beingbranded an enemy of the state.

I am not an enemy of the state. Iam rather an enemy of those cor-rupt leaders who transgress. And,for this, I was arrested and de-tained in the police lockup ontrumped-up charges and, finally,when they could no longer createcharges against me, I was de-tained under the Internal SecurityAct on the flimsy and preposter-ous excuse that I was a threat tonational security.

The real reason for my detentionis to ensure I can no longer comeforward to continue making po-lice reports which would threatenthe position of the corrupt lead-ers, not because I am a threat tonational security.

The OSA requires that a personwho comes into possession of anyclassified document must surren-der it to the police. In other words,if I wanted to avoid being arrested,I should have surrendered thedocuments I was holding to thepolice. But the question was, whatsort of police force are we talkingabout? A police force that upholdsthe law and the principle of jus-tice or a police force that allowsitself to be used as a tool of thepoliticians and is loyal to the cor-rupt powers-that-be?

Dozens of police reports have al-

ready been made that implicate thepowers-that-be, made not only byme but by my comrades as well.However, all of them have come tonaught. For example, one of thepolice reports involves a statementmade by the previous Director ofthe Anti-Corruption Agency, Dato’Shafie Yahya, implicating thePrime Minister, a fact which is nowknown to millions of Malaysian allover the country. But no action wastaken. Instead, one police reportwas made against me and, imme-diate action taken.

There was one incident whereUMNO Youth made a police reportagainst me and, in a mere twohours, the police sprang into action.In the process, my house wasraided and ransacked, in my ab-sence and in front of my entire fam-ily, on the guise of looking for evi-dence. That same day, I was ar-rested and thrown into a policelockup on a day when I shouldhave been at home celebrating avery important Muslim festival, EidAdha. Is this not reason enough forme to doubt and question the pro-fessionalism and sincerity of theMalaysian police force?

Today, the Malaysian courts havereinforced this belief that the po-lice are but instruments to protecta corrupt and authoritarian re-gime. On 9 July 1999, another po-lice report was made against theMinister of International Trade,Dato’ Seri Rafidah Aziz, and vari-ous other Cabinet Ministers by noless than the one-time Minister ofFinance and Deputy Prime Min-ister, Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim.The basis of the police caseagainst me refers to the same docu-ments that formed the foundationof Dato Seri Anwar’s police re-port. The police report against me


was made four months after DatoSeri Anwar’s police report wasmade. While the case against mehas been wrapped up, the caseagainst these corrupt leaders hasnot even commenced yet.

Recently, the Deputy InspectorGeneral of Police, Tan Sri JamilJohar, made a statement guaran-teeing Malaysians that investiga-tions would be instituted withinseven days of a police report be-ing made. In that same statement,Tan Sri Jamil declared thatprogress reports on the investiga-tions would be made public. I im-plore Tan Sri Jamil to retract hisstatement lest he be perceived asa fraud. Instead, he should amendhis statement to read “this wouldonly apply to police reports thatdo not implicate the Prime Minis-ter, Deputy Prime Minister, Cabi-net Ministers, and their croniesand family members. As tools ofthe corrupt powers-that-be, in-variably the police will not enter-tain reports of corruption andtransgression made against thesepeople.”

Dato’ Rais Yatim, a Cabinet Minis-ter, also made a statement aimed atdamage control. He proposed thatinvestigations should be institutedon all police reports made regard-less of whom they may implicate.He also once announced the set-ting up of a unit within his Minis-try to monitor all police reports thathave not been investigated withinresonable time. But no action wastaken after that. Dato Rais shouldresign for he has either lied to thepublic or is incapable of translat-ing words into action.

Your Honour,

Today I am being convicted. This

court has declared me a criminal.If revealing the excesses andtransgressions of corrupt leadersmake me a criminal, then I am pre-pared to be convicted a thousandtimes over and be declared a crimi-nal. My only crime is to fulfill mymoral obligation, follow my con-science, demonstrates my abhor-rence of corruption – more sowhen the acts are blatantly com-mitted with absolutely no fear ofretribution.

I am repulsed when I read theAnti-Corruption Agency reportson the various acts of corruption.Regretfully, not many have beenprivy to these reports. Even in thiscourt, only the investigating offic-ers, the prosecution and thedefense counsel are permitted toview these reports other than YourHonour, presiding over this case.Are they too not repulsed? I amcertain all those with a soul andconscience would be equally re-pulsed.

Certainly anyone would feel dis-gusted reading a report about aMinister that presides over a meet-ing approving millions of Ringgitworth of shares to her own son-in-law. Even more repulsive is to

read the said Minister’s confes-sion that she chaired the meeting,though she was aware of thecriminal implications, on the in-structions of the Prime Ministerhimself. The Prime Minister alsoinstructed her to ensure that hisown son would obtain approvalfor the shares that he, too, hadapplied for in that same corpora-tion. The contents of these docu-ments seem so shocking and dis-graceful that we may doubt theirauthencity. Yet the present courtproceedings confirm that they areindeed authentic, since they werevalidated by the Attorney Gener-al’s Office for the purposes of thiscase against me.

The investigation report offersproof of acts of corruption andabuses of power by the two lead-ers concerned; Dato’ Seri RafidahAziz and Tan Sri Abdul RahimTamby Chik. In the said investi-gation report, the Anti-CorruptionAgency had recommended crimi-nal proceedings against both theleaders and, in the same report,the Attorney General’s Chambershad supported the recommenda-tion.

The question now would be, how

Rafidah Aziz Rahim Tamby ChikDid the investigation report prove their acts of corruption and abuses of power?


can the individual who revealedthe existence of these crimes faceprosecution while the criminalsstill walk free? And how come oneof those individuals is not onlystill free, but is also still a Minis-ter? How can she remain a Minis-ter in that same Ministry that ap-proved millions of Ringgit worthof shares to her own son-in-law?

This can only happen in a rottenstate. He who exposes the corrup-tion and abuse of power is jailedwhile the transgressors remainfree, remain Ministers, and thecriminal acts. We should take cog-nizance of an episode a couple ofyears ago where a certain DeputyPrime Minister, who was deter-mined to break the network thatprotected corruption, personallytabled amendments to the anti-cor-ruption law in Parliament andconsequently was sacked andnow languishes in prison. Wemust be aware that, in this coun-try, the one who will be impris-oned is the one who opposes cor-ruption while the corrupt remainsfree on condition he or she is apolitical leader from the rulingparty who sucks up to the boss.On that score we should not besurprised with today’s judgment.

Your honour,

I am not interested in disputingtoday’s court’s decision. From thebeginning I was aware that myfight is not in this arena. The heartand soul of the case is not here. Ifight in a larger arena. I fight tooppose corrupt leaders. I opposethose who abuse their power andcommit corruption and formulatelaws to protect themselves againstprosecution.

This court does not have any op-

tions as the laws are such leavingvery little room to dispense justice.The Official Secrets Acts was for-mulated by Parliament by corruptleaders as a means to protect them-selves. Citing grounds of “Na-tional Security”, they have closedall avenues for their acts of cor-ruption to come to the attention ofthe public. They hide behind“TOP SECRET”, “CONFIDEN-TIAL”, “PRIVATE”, and “RE-STRICTED” and put the fear ofGod into every government officerand administration staff memberwho is confronted with their des-picable acts. The media, which isthe prime bearer of information,is constantly haunted by the fearof the Official Secrets Act hang-ing over their heads. This isclearly visible in the actions of thejournalists who were called aswitnesses in this case. In 1986,this Act was amended to increasethe stranglehold of the powers-that-be by making a jail sentencemandatory for whoever was boldenough to test the Act to its limit.

The judiciary has no power to doanything about it other than con-vict anyone unfortunate enoughto be caught with a document thatis stamped “SECRET”. What thedocument contains is not relevant.What is important is that the docu-ment has the word “SECRET”stamped on it. This means thereis no difference between toilet pa-per and a corruption report, as allthat matters is the word “SE-CRET” stamped on it.

I am not insulting the court. Theones who are insulting the courtare the corrupt individuals whorestrict the powers of the court.They formulate laws to deny thecourt powers and to ensure thatthey themselves remain in power

and deny the public informationabout the crimes they have com-mitted.

Lincoln once said, “Let the peo-ple know the facts and the coun-try will be safe. If given the truth,they can be depended on to meetany national crisis.” Lincoln is aleader who propagates, “I’m afirm believer in the people”.

It is foolish to expect the samespirit in this country, because inthis country the leaders alwaysblame the people. The people arethe cause of the problem – cannotbe trusted, are gullible, lazy, for-get easily, stupid, naïve, extremistand half-witted. The reality is, itis not the people, but the greedyleaders with insatiable lust, whoare destroying this nation.

Corrupt leaders do not have themoral conviction to formulatelaws that uphold the principle oftruth and justice. In the BritishParliament, an Act that is called‘Public Interest Disclosure Act’was formulated in the spirit ‘to en-courage people to blow the whis-tle about malpractice and to en-sure the authority respond by act-ing on the message rather thanagainst the messenger’. This typeof Act can never be introduced inthe present Malaysian Parliamentbecause we do not have the politi-cal will to uphold the truth on theprinciple of justice and responsi-bility.

Tan Sri Harun Hashim, founderand one-time head of the Anti-Corruption Agency once said,“Corruption can only be pre-vented, even eradicated to a largeextent, if there is political will.”

In an address during a dinner or-


ganised by the Malaysia Instituteof Management, he said, “In 1967,when I was appointed to estab-lish the ACA, the PM Tunku AbdulRahman, gave me a free hand toprevent corruption from spread-ing in the country. I was allowedto choose and pick officers for theagency from the public service andthe police, and unlimited fundsfrom the treasury. There was nointerference from the governmentin the workings of the agency.Even the Attorney-General wasnot allowed to interfere with pros-ecutions of corruption cases. As itis now, under the new corruptionlaw, the Director General has nolegal power”.

Finally, he stated, “The eradica-tion of corruption in the publicand private sectors should be eve-rybody’s concern. The corruptshould be looked upon as enemiesof the public. We do not want cor-ruption to be a way of life. TheACA should be independent, re-porting directly to the Parlia-ment”.

Your Honour,

My conviction today reinforcesthis fact. The documents that havebeen the basis of my convictiontoday justify the fear of the founderof the Anti-Corruption Agency.The Anti-Corruption Agency notonly lacks independence, but isshackled and stripped of all itspowers. I was arrested for distrib-uting the Anti-Corruption Agencyinvestigation report on Datuk SeriRafidah Aziz and Tan Sri AbdRahim Tamby Chik. If anyone wasto scrutinize the contents of thereport, it will be seen how thor-oughly the investigation againstthem was conducted. The evi-dence was sound and specific in-

formation such as how manybanks accounts they owned withmillions in assets was exposed ingreat detail. However, as was themillions of shares allocated tothem and properties owned bythem. All this was fruitless, be-cause the final say lies in thehands of the Prime Minister.

The Anti-Corruption Agency wasreduced to a weapon for ensuringtheir continued political loyalty.If you are loyal, no criminal pro-ceedings are taken against you.Not only that, but you are also en-sured of immunity. The investiga-tion papers are stamped “SE-CRET” primarily to ensure no oneknows about it. This is the foun-dation of the culture of impunity– immune from prosecution – cen-tral to the political elite of this na-tion.

For that reason, they resort to cor-ruption and abuse of power withno boundaries and with no fear. Idare to say here that almost all theCabinet Ministers in this countryhave skeletons in the closet thatcould open them to prosecutionunder charges of corruption andabuse of power. I take full respon-sibility for this allegation on con-dition the Anti-CorruptionAgency is allowed to investigateand reveal its investigation to thepublic. Do not use the “SECRET”stamp on any of the said investi-gation papers.

Recently, another previous Direc-tor of the Anti-Corruption Agencymade a statement that confirmsthe existence of the culture of im-punity. As a witness in the Dato’Seri Anwar Ibrahim trial, Dato’Shafie Yahya testified in the HighCourt that the Prime Minister hadprevented him from proceeding

with his investigation on a corrup-tion case involving a senior gov-ernment officer. This testimony iscrucial as it came from a one-timeDirector of the Anti-CorruptionAgency and was made in the HighCourt. The entire nation should beshocked by this revelation. TheAnti-Corruption Agency, the ulti-mate body entrusted with theeradication of corruption, a seri-ous disease afflicting society andthe nation, has been stripped ofall its powers to act effectively andjustly. My trial just reinforces thisbelief.

Serious efforts must be made toeradicate rampant corruption.Leaders who are steeped in cor-ruption will not be able to reformsociety. Ibn Khaldun has classi-fied such leaders such as deca-dent. They just cry crocodile tearsat their party conventions but, infact, as the ruling party, they caneradiate corruption without anyneed to cry in public, if only thereis political will.

Two years ago, we witnessed apolitical party in our neighboringcountry, Thailand, which had thepolitical will to reform and eradi-ate corruption. The ruling Demo-cratic Party then reformed thecountry to the point a NationalCounter-Corruption Commissionwas formed which was givenwide powers to act against corrup-tion. The world, subsequentlywitnessed how the Secretary Gen-eral of the party himself was pros-ecuted.

The Secretary General of UMNO,the ruling party in Malaysia, isimmune from charges of corrup-tion. It has been more than a yearsince a State Assemblyman madea police report against him with


regard to abuse of power involv-ing more than two million Ringgitworth of state wealth (timber)while he was the Chief Ministerof Pahang. But, to date, nothinghas come out of the police investi-gation on the matter. He is still aMinister and Secretary General ofthe party. In fact, recently, he wasthe one who announced the suc-cession plans of the present PrimeMinister. Are we still in any doubtas to what sort of country we areliving in?

Your Honour,

Allow me to stress herethat, though I am con-victed, my stand willnot waver nor will myfaith. I am being con-victed today on allega-tions that I revealedgovernment secrets thatcompromise the secu-rity of this nation. I amnot a traitor. I ratherwish to save the nation.I acted according to myprinciples and beliefthat corruption andabuse of power will re-sult in the destruction of the na-tion. I acted with a clear con-science to expose the greed of thepowers- that-be.

I obey Allah’s command as statedin the Quran, chapter 59, Al-Hashr, verse 7, translated byAbdullah Yusuf Ali as follows:

What God has bestowed on HisApostle (and taken away) from thepeople of the townships,- belongsto God,- to His Apostle and to kin-dred and orphans, the needy andthe wayfarer; In order that it maynot (merely) make a circuit be-tween the wealthy among you. So

take what the Apostle assigns toyou, and deny yourselves thatwhich he withholds from you.And fear God; for God is strict inPunishment.

Our history, as documented in the“History of the Malays” or Sulalat-al-Salatin, teaches us much. Thereare numerous episodes related init about the destruction of moralsof the powers-that-be as a resultof decadence, until the phrase “in-sanely rich” was coined. WangAnn Shih, a Chinese philosopherand Reformist, regards this as “asymptom of extreme wickedness

of the people and flawed laws”. Iam sure many have heard Gan-dhi said that human greed un-naturally restricts the richness ofthe world’s resources.

In the loneliness of the KamuntingDetention Camp, books have be-come my closest companion. Onesuch novel written by Hamka en-titled “Director Sir” is a storyabout the greed of the powers-that-be and their cronies. But whatreally touched my heart is one ofthe sayings of ProphetMuhammad narrated by Tarmizion the cover of the novel, “Everyperson will be tested and this test

is your asset.”

Today I have fulfilled my moralobligation. As a political leader, Ican only fulfill my responsibilityto the people and the nation. Asone of God’s creations, I fulfill myobligation as required of me. Is-lam stipulates the freedom of ex-pression - hurriyyat al-bayan orhurriyyat al-mu’aradah which isnot just about the right of the indi-vidual but his duty to upholdtruth. I have faith in the strengthof truth. I do not doubt one bit thattruth will one day prevail and his-tory will judge me right.

I am also confidentthat whatever hap-pens today willstrengthen the resolveof my colleagues, inparticular the youth,the younger genera-tion of this nation, tocontinue with thestruggle in opposingthe rampant corrup-tion and abuse ofpower that is stran-gling this nation. Theyounger generation

must ensure that the culture of im-punity amongst the political eliteis eradicated within their genera-tion. We really have no other al-ternative. In this era of globaliza-tion, the culture of impunity willdestroy the nation if not eradi-cated now.

Your Honour,

I have spent the one whole yearin incarceration so I know whatlife behind bars is like. I am onlytoo aware of the suffering espe-cially of my family and my chil-dren who are still so young. Buttheir suffering will not be in

I can only hope that my suffering family will understand the meaningof this sacrifice


Mohd Ezam Mohd Noor, theyouth chief of opposition partyKeadilan, was locked away fortwo years and the documentswhich allegedly exposed corrup-tion and abuse of power by Inter-national Trade and Industry Min-ister Rafidah and former MalaccaChief Minister Rahim Tamby Chikare safely locked up in some se-cret vault.

The Official Secrets Act is in-tended to deny the public infor-mation under the pretext of safe-guarding public security. But thepublic know better. The only in-formation that is kept away fromthe public domain is that whichmay be prejudicial to the interestsof corrupt crony politicians.

Ezam’s conviction has confirmedthe existence of documents impli-cating two ministers involved incorruption, as he had claimed.

His conviction has proved thatthese are the documents he wasreferring to when he asked theauthorities to take action againstthe two politicians for corruption.

Ezam’s conviction has estab-lished that corruption is safe andprotected by the Official SecretsAct. There is no other way of in-terpreting the charges broughtagainst him for trying to exposecorruption involving top-notchpoliticians or the price that he hadto pay for trying to do a favour tosociety by highlighting the cover-up.

There is yet another reason forgoing after Ezam. The BarisanNasional wanted to destroy himpolitically so that Keadilan willbe weakened considerably. Afterall, a genuinely multi-ethnic op-position party would pose a sig-nificant threat to the BN’s he-gemony.

The two-year custodial sentencehas effectively knocked him out ofelectoral politics for the next sevenyears. He would be disqualifiedfrom holding any position in anypolitical party or society. He can-not stand as a candidate for thenext five years after having servedhis sentence. In other words, hewon’t be able to take part in the

next general election, due by 2004but widely expected to be held ear-lier.

In any other society, Ezam wouldhave been hailed as a patriotic citi-zen responsibly discharging hiscivil duty by exposing corruption.But here, under the OSA, he ispunished for his trouble.

Aliran would like to challenge theBarisan Nasional to make publicthe documents Ezam exposed sothat Malaysians can judge forthemselves in what way theythreaten national security or posea danger to our common interests.We would like to know whetherthe government was justified inclassifying them as governmentsecrets.

Of course, we know that the BNwould not dare take up this chal-lenge. It would then confirm whatis open knowledge: that the OSAis meant to cover up crony corrup-tion, abuse of power and wrong-doings. As long as the OSA exists,it will remain a shameful piece oflegislation, crafted by politiciansonly concerned about coveringtheir sins.

P RamakrishnanPresident

8 August 2002

The above is Mohamad EzamMohd Nor’s full statement to thePetaling Jaya Sessions’ Courtafter his conviction under TheOfficial Secrets Act (OSA) on 7August 2002

Source:www.freeanwar.com/june2002/ezam_court 070802.htm

OSA - A Law ThatProtects The Corrupt?

vain. I can only pray that whenthey grow up they will under-stand the meaning of this sacri-fice, why I continue to havefaith, and why I continue tostruggle. From court to court,from lockup to lockup, and fromjail cell to jail cell, it is only forthe future of my children and foryour children too.

Prophet Muhammad SAW once

said:

“Within my people will be thosewho hold steadfast to the truth.They will not feel burdened by anyobstacle that they are faced with,until the time when Allah’s com-mands come to them.” (Narratedby Muslim and Bukhari)

Let us pray that we are includedin this category. q


he decision of the Fed-eral Court to uphold theunjust sentence onAnwar Ibrahim has ob-

literated whatever little trust wehave in the institution of the ju-diciary. Of course, the credibil-ity of the judiciary was erodedlong before Anwar’s case. Sincethe sacking of Tun Salleh Abas,the independence of theMalaysian judiciary has beensuffering continuous erosion inthe hands of Prime Minister Dr.Mahathir.

On April 14, 1999, when the HighCourt delivered a severe sentenceon Anwar based on flimsy inde-fensible evidence, the whole na-tion was angered. Outraged withthe judgement, thousands gath-ered peacefully in protest. Theydenounced the court and de-clared: “The people are thejudge!”

The persecution of Anwar wasone of the most blatant and brutalabuses of the institution of law. Ina typical authoritarian fashion,the government responded to themasses’ peaceful protest withwater cannons, dogs, FRU (riotpolice) and tear gas. Demonstra-tions went on for three days andresulted in several dozen arrestsand hundreds of protestors in-jured by police batons.

April 14 had awakened the peo-ple to the urgency to restore theintegrity of the judiciary. It alsospurred massive mobilizationacross the country calling for wideranging reforms in our political,economic and judicial systems.

The appointment of MohamedDzaiddin Abdullah as the ChiefJustice to replace the disreputedEusoff Chin was initially seen asa welcoming move. Dzaiddin hadpresented himself as a reformerwith an undertaking to revampthe system. Confidence had in-deed returned slightly as the pub-lic witnessed a series of bold land-mark judgements delivered by thecourt. Hence the people waitedpatiently for the outcome of thereforms. Unfortunately publichopes and expectations on thenew Chief Justice perished whenhe too succumbed to politicalpressure.

The rejection of Anwar’s appealends all illusion that the systemis about to reform itself. Just likehis predecessors, the Chief Justicefailed to display the courage todefy political instruction fromPutrajaya. This failure impliedthat the judiciary has allowed it-self to be an accomplice of thestate’s repressive instrument.

Nevertheless, there is no need for

despair. This signals not the endbut a new round of struggle. Thepeople must again rise up. Thejudiciary is one of the pillars ofdemocracy. In fact it is a most im-portant foundation for social, eco-nomic and political justice of acountry.

So long as the government con-tinues to interfere in the judicialprocesses, our legal institutionwill never restore its independ-ence. We anticipate more oppo-nents and critics of the govern-ment will be persecuted underthe law. We cannot delude our-selves that the judicial systemwill break free from politicaldomination. We have to fight tosave the judiciary.

It’s time for us to revive our mo-rale. We cannot allow our foun-dation of democracy to be abusedand controlled by political inter-ests. Political parties and civil or-ganisations should consolidateefforts to launch a massive cam-paign to rescue the judiciary. Wemust rebuild the strength of thepeople’s power. Only throughmassive mobilization of the peo-ple can democracy and justice bedefended.

Tian ChuaKamunting Detention Camp

10 July 2002

JUDICIARY

People Must Rise UpTo Save The Judiciary!

TTTTT


n his presentation,Kumar spoke of thestruggles faced by someof the communities his

group was involved with e.g., theSg Buloh farmers, the LadangKamiri workers, the Orang Aslifrom Kg Ulu Chenein and groundtenants from Perak HydroKampung II. Issues ranged fromlow wages and retrenchment toloss of land and evictions.

At the best of times these commu-nities are neglected by the pow-ers-that-be. At the worst of times,when their land is required for‘development’, they are evictedand their rights trampled upon.Some communities were beingdisplaced, with no regard for theirlength of stay on the land or thelength of time they had worked inthe area. Others had no access towater despite government prom-ises during the last elections.

For instance, 48 families of OrangAsli live in Kg Ulu Chenein. Theywere promised piped water in1999. Their current water supplycomes from a river that has beencontaminated with herbicidesused in the FELDA oil palm plan-tation. But the pipes that were laidnear the village did not reach eachhouse. The Department of OrangAsli Affairs told them to bear thecosts of connecting the pipesthemselves. The contractor gavethem an estimate of betweenRM300 to RM700.

Kumar said that thesemarginalised communities couldnot wait for political change totake place but had to take steps toensure their basic rights and ac-cess to justice. The way forwardwas to have the community cometogether to challenge such injus-tices. This requires an analysis ofthe situation, empowerment andmobilization of the people. Whilethe laws to safeguard these com-munities may be inadequate, thepeople should not be seen as pow-erless. By working together theyhave shown that they can exertpressure so that political discre-tion can be used to safeguard theirrights. The powers-that-be can illafford the negative publicity,which will ultimately lose themvotes.

So in the case of the Orang Aslifrom Kg Ulu Chenien, after wait-

ing for two years for the pipes tobe connected to their homes, thecommunity approached PSM. Anaction committee was formed. Let-ters were sent to relevant authori-ties and the action committee metwith different officials, includingthe Deputy State Director of De-partment of Orang Asli Affairs,Perak. Eventually each house inthe Kg Ulu Chenein had bothpiped water and electricity in-stalled without cost.

PSM believes in the empowermentof the marginalised communities.Working together with these com-munities, it facilitates the settingup of local action committees towork towards acceptable solu-tions to the problems, be it alter-native housing, land or better re-trenchment benefits. At times thelocal action committees havefaced tremendous pressure fromthe police, the developers, the con-tractors and even the courts.

The retrenched estate workersfrom Strathisla provide a goodexample. Although they are nowbeing given a 45 by 80 foot hous-ing lot each free of charge, RM650per year of service and 7 acres oflands for re-siting the school andtemple, it took a 4-year strugglebefore a Consent Agreement wasrecorded in the Ipoh High Courtbetween the State owned corpo-ration, PCBD, and the 20 former

COMMUNITIES

People’s Struggle For JusticeHow The Other Half Lives:

IIIII

Working TogetherPressure And Struggle


workers of Strathisla estate. Dur-ing this time, the state owned cor-poration had allegedly involvedboth the police and local gangstersin an attempt to intimidate theworkers. Eviction notices wereserved to the retrenched workers.

The workers fought back. Theystayed put, blocking any attemptby PCBD to work within their resi-dential area. More than 20,000leaflets regarding the evictionwere distributed to the Perak pub-lic. A signature campaign appeal-ing to the Menteri Besar to inter-vene on behalf of the workers re-sulted in 7, 000 signatures beingcollected and delivered to theMenteri Besar’s office. Lawyershelped the Strathisla residentsprepare a defence in court. Andin the end, there was a positiveoutcome.

Then there are the Sg Buloh farm-ers: 21 vegetable farmers and cat-tle rearers were served evictionnotices by the Land Office as theirland was required for low costhousing. They were not offeredalternative land. The farmersworked together with PSM. Theyheld a press conference. They metwith the Deputy Minister of Agri-culture and submitted a memo-randum to the Agriculture Minis-ter in Kuala Lumpur. After all theirefforts, eight farmers have beentold that they do not have to move,eight farmers have acceptedRM5,000 in lieu of alternative landand five farmers have been offeredalternative land. These five farm-ers continue farming while wait-ing for the land to be given.

While some of these marginalisedcommunities have had positiveoutcomes to their long struggles,there are others who are still strug-

gling for justice. These include therubber tappers from LadangKamiri. When Kumpulan GuthrieBhd decided to replant the rubberestate with oil palm in 1999, thesetappers were retrenched and onlyoffered RM330 per year of serviceas compensation. So a tapper whohas given 25 years of his/her lifeto the estate would receive ap-proximately RM8, 000. There wasno attempt to compensate theworkers for loss of housing,schooling, community hall or theirtemple. Guthrie has not re-sponded to any of the 10 letterssent to them by the workers. Re-cently Skrine (the legal firm repre-senting Guthrie) has sent themeviction notices. The workers havelodged a police report againstGuthrie’s high-handed behavior.The struggle for justice continues.

Kumar spoke of the strength andthe conviction shown by manyindividuals in the communities,especially the older women. Some

have been known to lie down infront of the bulldozers to preventthe demolition of houses. Othershave stood together in solidarityblocking the path of the bulldoz-ers. PSM and the communities usea non-violent approach. Commit-tee leaders, however, have beenphysically assaulted by develop-ers and thugs, while PSM/Alaigal activists continue to getarrested – 13 arrests in the lastcalender year. The fight for justicecontinues. With unjust laws, fewlegal safeguards, weak politicalwill, it is vital that people standtogether to fight for the respect andthe justice they truly deserve.

The talk was an eye opener formany who came that night, hear-ing first hand of the struggles, thestrategies, the gains and the lossesof the weak and marginalised sec-tions of our society. Many weremoved by the conviction of theordinary people and the PSMteam. The evening ended with anenthusiastic question and answersession.

N o n - V i o l e n c e

About the speaker:About the speaker:About the speaker:About the speaker:About the speaker:Aliran member Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj, an award-winningrespiratory physician, is actively involved in our CitizensHealth Initiative as well as grassroots group Alaigal. Kumar(as he is popularly known) is also a protem committee mem-ber of the yet-to-be registered Parti Socialis Malaysia (PSM)and had contested against Samy Vellu for the Sungai Siputparliamentary seat in Perak in the 1999 general election.Despite not winning the seat, Kumar kept his promise to thepeople of Sg Siput by setting up a PSM service centre in thearea. Since the Jan 2002 opening of the centre, which oper-ates 3 nights a week, PSM has received more than 750 casesas well as numerous requests for help from variousmarginalised communities in the area.

q


“Libertyof thought

meansliberty

to communicateone's thought.”

AM 2002: 22(7)

Send this form andpayment to

ALIRAN DISTRIBUTIONBUREAU

103, MEDAN PENAGA,11600 JELUTONG,PENANG, MALAYSIA

Salvador de Madariage1886 - 1973

Spanish diplomat, writer, critic

Please send this gift subscription to :

Mr./Ms.

Address

Profession Tel. No.

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

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

amounting to RM payable to Aliran.

This gift subscription is paid for and presented by:

Mr./Ms.

Address

Date Signature

ONE YEARONE YEARONE YEARONE YEARONE YEARRM25.00

S $ 2 8AIRAIRAIRAIRAIR

US$25US$28

US$30

SEASEASEASEASEAU S $ 2 1U S $ 2 1

U S $ 2 1

TWO YEARSTWO YEARSTWO YEARSTWO YEARSTWO YEARSRM50.00

S $ 5 0AIRAIRAIRAIRAIR

US$44US$50

US$54

SEASEASEASEASEAUS$38US$38

US$38

SUBSCRIPTION RATESCOUNTRYCOUNTRYCOUNTRYCOUNTRYCOUNTRYMALAYSIA

SINGAPORE & BRUNEI

ASIA & THE PACIFICEUROPE & EGYPT

AFRICA, NORTH AMERICA,SOUTH AMERICA, HAWAII

GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONORDER FORM

Mr./Ms.

Address

Profession Tel. No.

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

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

TOTAL Enclosed : Money Order / Postal Order / Cheque

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

ALIRAN MONTHLY SUBSCRIPTION FORM

AM 2002: 22(7)

AM 2002: 22(7)

AM 2002: 22(7)

A GIFTof one publication

of your choiceif you subscribe to

AliranMonthly

N O W(Tick one)

PandanganALIRAN

The NEP:Development andAlternativeConsciousness

RM

RM

RM


Does Aliran's WorkMean Anything To You?

Dear Fellow MalaysiansDear Fellow MalaysiansDear Fellow MalaysiansDear Fellow MalaysiansDear Fellow Malaysians

or 25 years, Aliran hasbeen a beacon forMalaysian society inmany important ways.

Aliran provides a rallying pointfor citizens and civic organisa-tions concerned with freedom,justice and democracy. Alirandefends civil liberties and hu-man rights, and promotes inter-ethnic and inter-religious re-spect. More than that, Aliranadvances the causes ofmarginalised communities, dis-advantaged groups and perse-cuted individuals who are toooften bereft of any opportunityto speak for themselves.

To carry out these tasks, Alirandepends on limited financial re-sources derived from AliranMonthly subscriptions and sales

FFFFFas well as donations made by ourmembers, subscribers and otherwell-wishers. Our writers, mem-bers and other supporters receiveno payment for their tireless serv-ices.

For our operational expenses, wereceive no funding whatsoeverfrom any government or opposi-tion political party, corporation orforeign source. We intend to keepthings that way to safeguard ourautonomy.

The cost of producing AliranMonthly, disseminating informa-tion and publications, networkingwith other civic organisations,and organising public talks andforums has risen considerably. Intruth, we are incurring deficitsevery month and we will run out

of funds in a few months.

To maintain our crucial publicservice, we sincerely appeal to youto respond in any of the followingways:

• Make a donation to Aliran.Send a cheque or draft madepayable to Aliran KesedaranNegara or directly transferyour contribution to our ac-count no. 507 246 118 995 withMalayan Banking Berhad,Green Lane branch, Penang.

• Take out or renew a two-yearsubscription to AliranMonthly (see reverse page).

• Take out a gift subscription forsomeone close to you (see re-verse page).

We, the trustees of Aliran, appeal to you to respond generously in our hour of need.

… … … … … … … … … … … . … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .P Ramakrishnan Datuk Dr T P Devaraj Tong Veng Wye(President, Aliran) Chairman, Aliran Trust Secretary, Aliran Trust

… … … … … … … … … … … . … … … … … . … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … . … … …YM Raja Aziz Addruse Dr Johan Saravanamuttu Joan Shori

… … . . … … … … … … … … . … … … … … … … … … … … … . … … . … … … … … … … … … …Datuk Dr R S McCoy Dr S P Subramaniam Tommy Thomas


The countdown to Oct 2003, fif-teen, nay, fourteen more months,to Dr M’s departure has begun.After 21 years as Malaysia’s PM,he had emerged larger than life.In recent years, there was hardlya day when the media did not re-port on what he was saying or do-ing, why he did what he did,where he was going, etc. His holi-days abroad were often a break notonly for him, but for us as well.Predictably, his June 22 resigna-tion announcement evoked allkinds of emotions and reactions.Those of Anwar’s supporters andthe reformasi-types were most pre-dictable: “another 15 months !?”was the typical reaction.

No doubt, among thoseMalaysians – government serv-ants and members of the BN par-ties – who have been bussed in toparticipate in those thank-you-and-farewell-Dr-M-rallies organ-ised throughout the country, thereare those who sincerely believethat Malaysia will be the worsewithout Dr M at the helm. Within

UMNO some have genuinely pro-tested against his departure. Butthere were also some others, whothough publicly protesting hisdeparture, in fact, were relievedthat a final date for his departurehas been specified. Maybe, justmaybe, there’ll be enough time toput UMNO’s house in orderagain.

Quite another response was tolink Dr M’s going to the need forsimilar rejuvenation of the otherBN parties. As long as Dr M wasin power, it was “sensitive” forwould-be BN leaders to talk aboutleaders overstaying their wel-come; after all, Dr M himself hadbeen in power since 1981. So trueto form, a week after Dr M’s an-nouncement, MCA No 2 Lim AhLek proposed that Ling, in powersince 1986, ought to step down too.Ah Lek offered to do the same.Come to think of it, this ought tobe the culmination of the “elec-tions without contest” operationmodel that the MCA has adoptedto renew the party yet avert inter-nal party strife. Just as rotating-the-Chief-Ministership was Dr

C o u n t d o w n

Lim Ah Lek: Proposed that Ling oughtto step down too

Samy: We're a separate party ... we makeour own decisions

Dr M to Taib: He wants to know whenyou plan to step down


M’s proposal for Sabah, electionswithout contest was Dr M’s con-tribution to the MCA.

However, Ling’s supporters didnot fall for Ah Lek’s claptrap.Ling’s continued leadership, theyproclaimed, was indispensable inview of pending elections, the es-tablishment of TAR University;and pulling the Chinese partiesand associations together in viewof new threats from PAS.

The focus next turned to theMIC. Samy V has been at thehelm since late 1979 and has vir-tually echoed support for everymove that Dr M has made in thepast. “The MIC will sink or swimwith UMNO”. And “I havelearnt everything from Dr M”.Thus it was a bit of a shocker tohear Samy declare: “We’re aseparate party and always makeour own decisions. Just becausethe UMNO leader vacates hisportfolio, it doesn’t mean thatthe MIC will also replace itsleader”. I don’t think that Samyhas decided to strike out on hisown. I suspect that it’s a case ofgetting nyanyuk. Indeed, theproblem has been around for awhile. Not so long ago we high-lighted that Samy had forgottenabout promises he made in theLunas (“I will move into the con-stituency if we lose”) and Perai(“I will make it the most beauti-ful constituency in Malaysia”)by-elections. And now, more evi-dence: Samy who heads theMIC-owned Asian Institute ofMedicine, Science and Technol-ogy, had apparently overlookedacquiring permission from theeducation ministry before start-ing its medical degree pro-gramme. So the course had to beabandoned in August 2002.

Elsewhere, before SNAP’s JamesWong, his son Richard and SNAPsecretary-general Jinggut couldthink through the implications ofDr M’s impending departure,rebel leaders led by WilliamMawan Ikom had challenged him.In a matter of weeks, Ikom hadheld an EGM, conducted electionsfor a new exco and displacedWong and his coterie. In this caseDr M’s departure has resulted ina bit of a circus reminding one ofthe Jeffrey Kitingan-Joseph Kurupfarce not so long ago.

But the cutest tale is this onewhich occurred in Kuching. Twoweeks following his announce-ment, Dr M officially visitedSarawak and addressed the PartiPesaka Bumiputera Bersatu(PBB)’s Convention. In his ad-dress, Dr M had advised all vet-eran politicians to consider step-ping down from office, along withhim. In the afternoon the PM de-clared open the new Majlis Islambuilding. Then at the press con-ference which followed, a seniorjournalist from KL asked Dr M’spermission to pose a question toTaib Mahmud, Sarawak’s chiefminister and PBB supremo, incharge since God knows when. Inview of Dr M’s decision, the journoenquired if and when TaibMahmud intended to step down.Taib responded that he did notcatch (i.e. hear) the question.Seated next to Taib, Dr M then saiddirectly to Taib “He wants toknow when you plan to stepdown”. Forced into an awkwardsituation, Taib said that he wouldinform the press when the timewas right. Then craaash, as eve-ryone was rising to leave, Taib’schair fell over backwards, the onlychair to do so. Now was that anact of God ? Or was he so agitated

by the question that he pushedover the chair? No doubt, thecountdown has started.

Another issue that has gotMalaysians including the BNleaders all anxious is the issueof teaching science and math-ematics in English. And here DrM’s intervention has also beencritical. Recall that the initialconcern was over some 40,000graduates of local universities,mostly Malays, who were unem-ployed. It was alleged, and thenassumed by all, that it was theirapparent lack of command ofEnglish and/or possession of ITskills that caused them to be un-employed. Dr M then floated theidea of re-introducing Englishmedium schools “if the peoplewanted it”. Before the peoplehad time to respond, the pro-posal was just as quickly with-drawn. For many powerfulgroups, in particular UMNOYouth, had objected to that pro-posal. Again, rather unexpect-edly, it was next announced thatscience and mathematics wouldbe taught in English instead, in-cluding in primary schools. DrM further stressed that the gov-ernment would not compromiseon the matter and even threat-ened stern action against thosewho opposed — you know whatthat means. It was left to Pak Lahto clarify that the decisionwhether to implement the samepolicy in the national-type pri-mary schools was still being dis-cussed. Accordingly, the Chi-nese BN parties claimed that nodecision had yet been taken bythe Cabinet and they called for

Q Q Q Q Q

Making EducationPolicy On The Run?


Islamic state, that the “No to929” leaflet addresses itself.

It looks as though that the onlygood thing going for us this pastmonth, and which Dr M has yetto touch upon, is…Bond girlMichelle Yeoh’s RM20 million ac-tion-romance blockbuster movieThe Touch. One week after it’s re-lease, apparently, she’d hit theRM1 million box office mark.Golden Screen Cinemas, by play-ing the movie in their 44 cinemasnation-wide, helped. Michelle,now Datuk, has also been hon-oured with various local awards.But wrote a local film critic: Ter-rific, spellbinding. A classic. Rest as-sured that these words will never beused to describe The Touch…. Con-sidering the way The Touch has beenpromoted in an irrational and un-fairly over-the-top manner, seeing theend product on screen cannot be any-thing but a big letdown….Yeoh isunremarkable… Her co-star Changis completely forgettable.” Hmmm.

Now is this why Michelle was soanxious to destroy any piratedVCD of her movie “Someone betterstop me. Otherwise I will go right tothe shop or stall and stomp on the pi-rated copy”. Way to go Michelle. Butwatch out for the Tontos. For some-one ought to tell this Ipoh lass, whoperhaps has been away too long,that these pirates are real, not sim-ply celluloid. For if you stompthem, they will do more than stompyou ! The Touch might be out oftouch with reality, but quitefrankly, if not for Michelle, whereis our escapism from those comicpolitico characters ? What then dowe do for relief?

rakyatboleh@my

more studies and that discus-sions be kept out of the press, as“we do not want the issue tobecome political”, as Lingstated. As the politicians, one af-ter another from within the BNitself, tried to hit the headlines,they further contributed towardsthe confusion.

UMNO Youth headHishamuddin, for instance,called upon the people to be pre-pared to master English. Appar-ently addressing himself to theChinese community who werereticent about the proposed policychange, Hisham declared: ‘TheChinese and the Japanese hadnow acknowledged the impor-tance of the English language”.Statistics of the numbers of Chi-nese attending English classes orstudying in the US were offered.But is the minister so daft ? Theissue is not a reluctance to studyEnglish and to face up to IT andglobalisation. Recalling the initialbrouhaha about the 40,000 unem-ployed graduates, the problem isreally the failure of the educationpolicy which had allowed thesestudents to emerge ill-equipped toface up to the demands of glo-balism – including a grasp of Eng-lish and IT skills. Indeed, even if aconsensus is reached with regardto the nature of the problem andthat certain initiatives needed tobe undertaken, wouldn’t we needtime to prepare teachers, teachingmaterials and various othersthings ? Recalling past fiascos re:the inability to supply adequatetext books in time, and even moredisconcerting, the contents of thetextbooks, are we not courting dis-aster by forcing the implementa-tion of a major policy shift withless than six months to the open-ing of the 2003 school year? Partof the problem really is that the

technocrats in the ministry of edu-cation were being by-passedagain. And educational policy, asso often the case in the past, wasbeing made by these politicians onthe run, and to score politicalpoints. Didn’t Dr M vacate theEducation portfolio quite sometime ago? Isn’t Hishamuddinmore adept in sports and youthmatters?

Only months ago, the Governmentseemed rock sure of Chinese sup-port, in the wake of the 911 attacksand pas’ move to introduce hududand qisa in Terennganu.

Things will look distinctly lessrosy for the Chinese parties in thebn however if they screw up onthis issue of teaching Science andMathematics in English.

Meanwhile the apparent policeharassment of Lim Kit Siang andother dap leaders, repeatedlyarrested on a who-knows-whatcharge, is raising eyebrows. Thepolice are caught in a bit of abind with Kit Siang at the mo-ment. Having arrested him oncefor distributing the DAP’s “Noto 929” leaflets, they seemobliged to keep doing it againand again, otherwise it lookslike an admission of error. Butevery time they arrest him, itmakes it more difficult to put itdown to individual errors orover-enthusiasm on the part ofofficers. The police have to keeparresting Kit Siang, but the morethey do, the more foolish theylook. In this matter, again, it isDr M who has sparked off thecontroversy. For it was his dec-laration on September 29 lastyear, that Malaysia is already an

Q Q Q Q Q

Q Q Q Q Q

Looking Foolish

The Touch


ENVIRONMENT

The Poisonous SmogIs Back In Sarawakby Libau Rentap


ell the poisonous smog(a.k.a. the “haze”) isback! And while it is notfrom outer space like the

aliens of “Men in Black”, it mightas well be since nobody is beingtold the cause of the smog, whereit is coming from, how bad the situ-ation is or what we have to do toprotect ourselves and our childrenfrom it.

In other words, not only is thesmog fast turning Sarawak into aenvironmental Twilight Zone, thegovernment is also giving it theTwilight Zone treatment by delib-erately keeping everyone in thedark about the real situation. Nei-ther is the government doingmuch by way of pressuring thoseresponsible to put out the fires.

The smog began almost impercep-tibly during the week of 11 Augustbut it soon gripped everyone andeverything in a choking veil oftoxic smog. The last time there wasthis much smog and poison in theair was in 1997. Then, the federalgovernment declared an “emer-gency” in Sarawak but did littleelse to assist people cope with thepoisonous smog. One stupid fed-eral minister even went so far asto suggest a possible evacuationof the total population ofSarawak! The Sarawak Meteoro-logical Department dutifully an-nounced the Air Pollution Index(API) daily before the governmentsuppressed it after it breached the800 mark.

Not only was there a sharp rise inrespiratory health complaintsthroughout the state then, it wasalso popularly believed that therewas a spate of “premature fatali-

ties” among the infirm caused bythe poisonous smog but not offi-cially reported as such. Economi-cally, Agence-French Press alsorecently estimated that the 1997toxic smog cost the SoutheastAsian region approximatelyUS$9.3 billion in economic losses.

Ironically, the only reliable sourceof meteorological information onthe present smog in Sarawak isthe Singapore MeteorologicalService website (see web addressbelow). As of 19 August, it re-ported 982 hotspots throughoutIndonesian Kalimantan, 169hotspots in Sumatra and numer-ous other hotspots in both Sabahand Sarawak. Web news portalMalaysiakini.com also reportedthat as of 21 August, visibility inSarawak was down by more than90 percent, with flights by manysmall aircraft cancelled.

The API has risen consistentlysince 11 August but the govern-ment refuses to say by how much.Indeed, it is arguable if the gov-ernment even officially acknowl-edges the present smog as a prob-lem. After all, to do so might affecttourist arrivals!

In 1997, the government promisedto tackle this issue decisively. Itannounced that it would push fora cessation of open burning of for-ests with local and Indonesianauthorities. And yet, the currentpoisonous smog only proves howineffective the government hasbeen in getting the Indonesians (aswell as Malaysians) to cease open

burning.

One is reminded how in 1997,when the poisonous smog firstappeared, the Chief Minister ofSarawak Abdul Taib Mahmudbeat a hasty retreat overseas viaprivate jet ostensibly to “seek atechnological solution to the‘haze’ problem”. By current eye-witness accounts, the return of thepoisonous smog this year onlyproves that his “mission” over-seas was an exercise in futility.Nevertheless, while Sarawakianscoughed, choked and gasped theirway through the 1997 smog, hecertainly enjoyed pristine air qual-ity overseas while “on mission”.Perhaps this time around, if he hasnot already left on another “over-seas mission” in search of a fur-ther “technological solution”, hewill show some solidarity with hisfellow suffering rakyat by cough-ing, choking and gasping his waythrough the smog too?

Meanwhile, the local Health De-partment has drawn up a contin-gency plan which includes an ut-terly ridiculous list of “Do’s andDon’t’s” - that it will put into placeif the toxic smog situation “dete-riorates ”. Perchance the list willinclude, “Don’t Breathe”. Nodoubt, this is the government’sbest Twilight Zone response to aTwilight Zone problem. With a bitof luck, the Health Department'scontingency plan will rememberto include for mass distribution a“Do-It-Yourself” CD-ROM onhow to beam oneself - Star Trek-style out of the smog.

WWWWW

Singapore Meteorological Service http://app10.internet.gov.sg/scripts/nea/cms/htdocs/category_sub.asp?cid=55

q


Aliran Monthly: What were theAliran Monthly: What were theAliran Monthly: What were theAliran Monthly: What were theAliran Monthly: What were theearly influences in your life thatearly influences in your life thatearly influences in your life thatearly influences in your life thatearly influences in your life thatprompted you to get into the kindprompted you to get into the kindprompted you to get into the kindprompted you to get into the kindprompted you to get into the kindof work you are doing now?of work you are doing now?of work you are doing now?of work you are doing now?of work you are doing now?

Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj: It wouldbe largely family and religion. Wewere brought up with the conceptof stewardship: that those who areendowed richly by God have anobligation to pay back. You can’tuse your attributes - your educa-tion, your intelligence, whateveryou are given – only for your ownself-advancement. Part of it at leasthas to go for the public good andthat is the right thing to do. Thisconcept is there in all the great re-ligions. My parents and the oldergeneration in my family hadcountless examples of this. Notonly were we taught these things,we were also shown by examplewhat we should do. I guess that

made very deep impressions – notonly on myself but also on my sib-lings, who are also involved insimilar kinds of work.

AM: When you filed an electionAM: When you filed an electionAM: When you filed an electionAM: When you filed an electionAM: When you filed an electionpetition alleging phantom voterspetition alleging phantom voterspetition alleging phantom voterspetition alleging phantom voterspetition alleging phantom votersafter losing against Samy Velluafter losing against Samy Velluafter losing against Samy Velluafter losing against Samy Velluafter losing against Samy Velluin the last general election, somein the last general election, somein the last general election, somein the last general election, somein the last general election, somepeople saw it as a hopeless cause.people saw it as a hopeless cause.people saw it as a hopeless cause.people saw it as a hopeless cause.people saw it as a hopeless cause.What prompted you to go aheadWhat prompted you to go aheadWhat prompted you to go aheadWhat prompted you to go aheadWhat prompted you to go aheadwith the case anyway?with the case anyway?with the case anyway?with the case anyway?with the case anyway?

Kumar: I think even standingagainst Samy Vellu was a hope-less cause! (Laughs) Sometimesyou have to stand up for a princi-ple even if you don’t think you canwin in the near term – becausewhen you raise the issues, peoplestart thinking about them. Thenthese issues become more popu-lar, more widely debated. And cer-tain things like electoral irregulari-

ties - when you highlight these,even if you don’t eradicate themaltogether, there is more fear on theparties who are actually misusingthe process.

There is no point just saying af-ter every election “It was unfair,the media was abused” and allthat; we must actually get solidevidence and if possible takecourt cases. Even if we don’t winthe case, the fact we filed thecase puts them on guard. Andnext time around, they will be abit more careful about bringingin - and SPR (the Election Com-mission) also will be more care-ful about accepting - more phan-tom voters.

AM: Why did you leave your full-AM: Why did you leave your full-AM: Why did you leave your full-AM: Why did you leave your full-AM: Why did you leave your full-time medical practice to worktime medical practice to worktime medical practice to worktime medical practice to worktime medical practice to workwith marginalized people?with marginalized people?with marginalized people?with marginalized people?with marginalized people?

INTERVIEW

“ We ’ ve Got To Muddy Our Fe e t ”Aliran interviews award-winning doctor-turned-activist DrJeyakumar Devaraj

Soft-spoken, thought-Soft-spoken, thought-Soft-spoken, thought-Soft-spoken, thought-Soft-spoken, thought-ful, articulate, Kumarful, articulate, Kumarful, articulate, Kumarful, articulate, Kumarful, articulate, Kumarhardly looks like ahardly looks like ahardly looks like ahardly looks like ahardly looks like afiery politician. But be-fiery politician. But be-fiery politician. But be-fiery politician. But be-fiery politician. But be-neath the calm exteriorneath the calm exteriorneath the calm exteriorneath the calm exteriorneath the calm exteriorlies a steely determina-lies a steely determina-lies a steely determina-lies a steely determina-lies a steely determina-tion to ensure justicetion to ensure justicetion to ensure justicetion to ensure justicetion to ensure justicefor the poor andfor the poor andfor the poor andfor the poor andfor the poor andmarginalised despitemarginalised despitemarginalised despitemarginalised despitemarginalised despitedaunting odds.daunting odds.daunting odds.daunting odds.daunting odds.


Kumar: I was already workingwith the marginalized peoplewhen I was working as a doctor.The reason I resigned was that itappeared my time in governmentwas over. I was facing a lot of pres-sure to take up a posting outsidePerak. In the course of a year, I hadbeen transferred three times: toPahang, to Kedah and toSarawak. And I perceived this asan attempt to remove me from thework we were doing in Ipoh andthe Kinta area for marginalizedgroups - in squatter areas, in es-tates. We perceived this as an at-tempt to weaken the group and toultimately stop our work. And forthat reason I refused to go.

At the time I resigned, there wasalready disciplinary action takenagainst me. I was practically sus-pended and asked not to report towork. It was going to end up in avery messy confrontation with mybeing pulled up and probably be-coming the first Malaysian doc-tor to be sacked from the service.

The elections had also come upand there were numerous re-quests for me to stand both fromthe people we were working withas well as from the BarisanAlternatif (BA). I wouldn’t haveleft government service if I wasn’tpressured. I quite enjoyed the workI was doing there. But the way itwas, it wasn’t possible to continuein government service.

AM: You mentioned the opposi-AM: You mentioned the opposi-AM: You mentioned the opposi-AM: You mentioned the opposi-AM: You mentioned the opposi-tion BA alliance. Is it the end oftion BA alliance. Is it the end oftion BA alliance. Is it the end oftion BA alliance. Is it the end oftion BA alliance. Is it the end ofthe road for the BA after thethe road for the BA after thethe road for the BA after thethe road for the BA after thethe road for the BA after thepullout of the DAP and differ-pullout of the DAP and differ-pullout of the DAP and differ-pullout of the DAP and differ-pullout of the DAP and differ-ences among the coalition part-ences among the coalition part-ences among the coalition part-ences among the coalition part-ences among the coalition part-ners?ners?ners?ners?ners?

Kumar: The fallout over the Is-lamic state issue is quite a bad

body blow to the BA. It will defi-nitely affect its chances in the nextgeneral election. But I think if youlook at the response the BA elic-ited from the Malaysian public - alot of Malaysians are unhappywith the kind of misgovernancethat now represents BN rule. Andthat misgovernance is there. Thesubstrate for political discontent,for opposition to the BN is stillthere. It has not halted at all.

Corruption is rife,. The govern-ment remains very pro-businessand pro-capitalist; there is notransparency; there are draconianlaws still in place – so all thesethings are there. The only thing iswe don’t have a proper politicalplatform that people can trust, tochannel these things through. So,I think it is a bit too early to writeoff the BA. The BA can still recon-stitute itself.

AM: What about your party –AM: What about your party –AM: What about your party –AM: What about your party –AM: What about your party –Party Socialis Malaysia (PSM) -Party Socialis Malaysia (PSM) -Party Socialis Malaysia (PSM) -Party Socialis Malaysia (PSM) -Party Socialis Malaysia (PSM) -it is not yet registered. Do youit is not yet registered. Do youit is not yet registered. Do youit is not yet registered. Do youit is not yet registered. Do youthink that’s another hopelessthink that’s another hopelessthink that’s another hopelessthink that’s another hopelessthink that’s another hopelesscause?cause?cause?cause?cause?

Kumar: We don’t think so. Be-cause we feel the government inthis situation is being very un-

democratic and very unfair. Whena group wants to register itself asa political party, it is the responsi-bility of the government to makesure that we comply with all therequirements - citizenship, age,whatever other requirements. Butif all things are met, then they haveno right to deny us registration. Ifwe are an irrelevant party, thenthe public are at liberty not to votefor us and kick us out at every elec-tion.

If they think we are going to be asecurity threat, then prove it – reg-ister us, monitor us, and if we doanything that is inimical toMalaysian public security, thenthey are so many laws – they haveexcessive laws – to charge us, forsedition, whatever they wish. Weare prepared to follow the laws,to be part of the parliamentaryprocess. But they use the bureau-cratic process to deny us our po-litical rights. That’s why we aretaking this to court; let’s see whatthe courts come up with. In themeantime, we will continue func-tioning as a party.

AM: Some people have asked ifAM: Some people have asked ifAM: Some people have asked ifAM: Some people have asked ifAM: Some people have asked ifsocialism is still relevant to Ma-socialism is still relevant to Ma-socialism is still relevant to Ma-socialism is still relevant to Ma-socialism is still relevant to Ma-laysia especially after the col-laysia especially after the col-laysia especially after the col-laysia especially after the col-laysia especially after the col-


lapse of the Soviet Union. Do youlapse of the Soviet Union. Do youlapse of the Soviet Union. Do youlapse of the Soviet Union. Do youlapse of the Soviet Union. Do youthink there is support for thisthink there is support for thisthink there is support for thisthink there is support for thisthink there is support for thiskind of politics?kind of politics?kind of politics?kind of politics?kind of politics?

Kumar: If we were to ask aboutsupport for the socialist cause inthe abstract, we would get blanklooks from people. The whole ide-ology of socialism is not very wellknown. But if we actually are in-volved in people’s day-to-daystruggles against oppression,against eviction, against retrench-ment, and by our actions we showwhat we stand for - we are gettinga tremendous amount of support,like in Sungai Siput. We find thatwhen we don’t go on an intellec-tual, abstract plane, when we(carry out) practical work on theground, we find that people doaccept and come and contribute.We are able to mobilise a numberof communities. In that way, prac-tically, it (socialism) is relevant.

If we look at a lot of what is hap-pening in Malaysia today, theanalysis is important. Is it reli-gion? Is it race? Or is it class? Andwhen you analyse a lot of thingslike the distribution of wealth inthe country, why certain groupsare getting evicted, displaced,even the whole globalisation de-bate, you find that socialist tools

for analysing economics and so-cial events are very powerful. Theygive us a very powerful way oflooking at society and under-standing what’s going on. And ifyou want to change anything,your understanding is very impor-tant. The socialist analysis of so-ciety is by far much superior ingetting to the truth of the matterthan the other analyses available(the ethnic analysis or the reli-gious analysis).

AM: You have been arrestedAM: You have been arrestedAM: You have been arrestedAM: You have been arrestedAM: You have been arrestedquite a number of times. Forquite a number of times. Forquite a number of times. Forquite a number of times. Forquite a number of times. Formany people, even getting ar-many people, even getting ar-many people, even getting ar-many people, even getting ar-many people, even getting ar-rested once would be quite trau-rested once would be quite trau-rested once would be quite trau-rested once would be quite trau-rested once would be quite trau-matic. How did you overcomematic. How did you overcomematic. How did you overcomematic. How did you overcomematic. How did you overcomethat fear, that psychological blockthat fear, that psychological blockthat fear, that psychological blockthat fear, that psychological blockthat fear, that psychological blockwhich holds back a lot of people?which holds back a lot of people?which holds back a lot of people?which holds back a lot of people?which holds back a lot of people?

Kumar: I was initially also veryfrightened of the police, even mak-ing police reports. This relativelack of fear has come over time –it’s the experience that brings it.Getting arrested is in a way a lib-erating experience. That’s theworst they can do to you. If youcan take the worst they can do toyou, then you can take anythingelse. The first time we got arrested- it was when we were having apicket with the ex-Klebang estateworkers who had been laid off in

1988. The management had cutall the basic facilities and the peo-ple were there without light andwater for four, five years before wemoved it to help them. At the endof the picket, when we were dis-banding, the police arrested us.They came mainly for the Alaigalcoordinators and members.

When they put us into the BlackMaria truck, the people of the es-tate came and said, “Arrest us”and just climbed into the BlackMaria without being arrested.And it became quite farcical whenthe police had to close the BlackMaria door so that more peoplecouldn’t get inside. Then they tooka headcount and said “Look, theregulations say only 20 can betransported here; you alreadyhave 30. So 10 of you, we want toleave you behind.”

But the people said, “No, no, no,we also want to be arrested, if youare arresting one person, arrest usall.” And the people outside thetruck were saying, “Arrest usalso.” It became quite ridiculous.Finally the police managed to per-suade 10 people to get down,promising them to send anothertruck to arrest them all.

The thing is in all those instanceswhere we have got arrested, wehad sent numerous letters, memo-randums asking for dialogue, fordiscussion to solve the problems.We have always indicated that weare prepared to discuss and solvethe problem over the dialogue ta-ble. At the end of that, when theyuse arrest as a weapon to intimi-date, then the only way is to takeit head-on and say, “Catch-lah,you don’t intimidate me.” If youallow them to intimidate you, itbecomes a weapon of intimida-


tion. When you turn the tables onthem, and you are prepared to getarrested, then their weapon nolonger brings fear. So wheneveranyone in our team gets arrested,within a few hours we will all beat the police station, asking ques-tions, asking for their release, ask-ing whether we can bail them out.Very often at that point the policewill say, “(We will) arrest all ofyou.”

We will say, “Go ahead, arrest allof us,” 50 of us, hundred of us.And it becomes difficult for thepolice then. In other words, youneutralise the weapon they use tofrighten people - it is completelyneutralised, in fact turned back onthem. Because then the press willcome. When the press comes andask, we say, “All these things havehappened. This land has beengiven to this well-connected po-litical figure…” It puts them in abad light. So the first thing is youmust be prepared to get arrested,because if you run, if you with-draw at the time in fear of arrest,then their tactic works.

AM: Are you disillusioned withAM: Are you disillusioned withAM: Are you disillusioned withAM: Are you disillusioned withAM: Are you disillusioned withthe medical profession? What dothe medical profession? What dothe medical profession? What dothe medical profession? What dothe medical profession? What doyou think is the biggest chal-you think is the biggest chal-you think is the biggest chal-you think is the biggest chal-you think is the biggest chal-lenge facing healthcare in Ma-lenge facing healthcare in Ma-lenge facing healthcare in Ma-lenge facing healthcare in Ma-lenge facing healthcare in Ma-laysia?laysia?laysia?laysia?laysia?

Kumar: You shouldn’t be too

harsh on the medical profession.Doctors generally come from theupper-middle class of society. Ifyou compare doctors with theother members of the upper-mid-dle class, I don’t think we havedone that much worse.

But I think in Malaysia, the wholehealthcare situation is really in abad state. What has basically hap-pened is there is a crisis of confi-dence in the government healthservices. It is still the major pro-vider of health services for themajority of people in the country.But the public confidence in thatsystem has been severely shakenlargely because of the growth ofthe private sector, which has at-tracted away some of the best doc-tors in the country, leaving thegovernment side relatively under-staffed in terms of experiencedsenior people. Because of that de-gree of inexperience in the govern-ment side, people have lost someconfidence.

But people can’t afford privatemedicine. So there is a crying needto have some kind of merger of thetwo systems. Reform is required.But in this climate, the way the BNdoes things, what many of us areafraid of is that when reforms docome, the money will go into pri-vate pockets. Some crony some-where is going to benefit. For ex-ample, if we have the the NationalHealth Financing Scheme, that weare all talking about, we are talk-ing about 10 or 12 billion ringgit ayear. If that money is actuallyploughed back into patient serv-ices, that would be fantastic.

But what guarantee do we havethat it won’t go back into inflatedcontracts and sub-contracts andcommissions? It has already hap-

pened in the way privatisationhas taken place in this country.We will spend more money onhealth but it will be going into thepockets of crony companies. Wehave a situation where reform isdesperately needed. But we can’ttrust the reformer.

AM: What have you learnt fromAM: What have you learnt fromAM: What have you learnt fromAM: What have you learnt fromAM: What have you learnt fromthe poor and the marginalized?the poor and the marginalized?the poor and the marginalized?the poor and the marginalized?the poor and the marginalized?

Kumar: I have been very im-pressed with their resourceful-ness. They have so much talentamong them, arts, acting, singing,organising. It’s not a homogenousgroup. You find in every commu-nity of the poor, there are a minor-ity who are brave, selfless, pre-pared to come and spend time.And that’s impressive, becausethey have so little, and yet they areprepared to give.

Like, for example, if an estate isfacing eviction and you turn upthere, you find there are peoplefrom the squatter area, the farm-ing community, and people fromother ethnic groups who haveturned up just to show solidarity.

It really touches me because youcan see that they see beyond theracial thing, beyond their ownpersonal individual problems.They are prepared to come andblock the developer and get ar-rested for another community,another racial group.

Basically in our Alaigal work orour PSM work, we have created akind of awareness; we have cre-ated meetings for them to have dis-cussions, and once we have giventhem the avenue for that, we seehow people’s power can take root.And that ultimately is what makesthe authorities reconsider…


AM: Tell me a bit about your spir-AM: Tell me a bit about your spir-AM: Tell me a bit about your spir-AM: Tell me a bit about your spir-AM: Tell me a bit about your spir-ituality. Is there any conflict be-ituality. Is there any conflict be-ituality. Is there any conflict be-ituality. Is there any conflict be-ituality. Is there any conflict be-tween your spirituality and yourtween your spirituality and yourtween your spirituality and yourtween your spirituality and yourtween your spirituality and yoursocialism?socialism?socialism?socialism?socialism?

Kumar: I don’t think so. In all reli-gions, there is a very strong hu-manistic core - concern for the dis-advantaged, the poor, the sick, thewidows, the aged, those in need.There are exhortations in every re-ligion that one should care forthese people. In every religionthere are very strong standsagainst excessive materialism,against greed. There is a conceptof moderation in pursuit of mate-rial pleasure. Basically, religions,being pre-capitalist formulations,have a lot of values which are notcapitalistic, which are quite criti-cal of the present society based onmaterialism, based on competi-tion, exploitation, based on ex-ploitation of nature as well.

Both religious values as well associalist/humanist values comefrom the human condition of be-ing mortal, of being a social ani-mal, of having to face death. Socompassion, for example, stemsfrom your very existence, capac-ity to feel for others, capacity tocare for others, reaching towardsjustice. Religions and socialismshare a lot of common values. Butof course we cannot condone me-dieval interpretations of religionjust as we can’t condone every-thing in religion. There will beconflicts. But as far as the corehumanist part of religion, there isno conflict at all.

AM: What’s your vision ofAM: What’s your vision ofAM: What’s your vision ofAM: What’s your vision ofAM: What’s your vision ofMalaysian society? What wouldMalaysian society? What wouldMalaysian society? What wouldMalaysian society? What wouldMalaysian society? What wouldyou like to see?you like to see?you like to see?you like to see?you like to see?

Kumar: If you take a long timespan, a lot can be achieved. There

are 2 things that we have to startwith.

The first is to go for a two-partysystem. We were very close to thatin the last elections. And if afterthe last elections, BA had playedthe cards right, if Pas had chosento take the more universal values,which are at the core of the Qur’anregarding the humanistic tradi-tion I mentioned earlier, and usedthat as the main prong of their Is-lamic programme - the humanis-tic values, they could have got alot of people on board and theycould have built it into a very pow-erful coalition. We could actuallynow be talking about taking overthe government in the next elec-tion. So we are not that far awayfrom a thing like that. Unfortu-nately, we didn’t have the leader-ship to do that.

The second important thing thatwe have to do is to build a pro-gressive secular movement com-prising the poorer 60% ofMalaysian Society so that theneeds of this group will featureprominently in the politicalagenda of the nation.

Coming back to the issue of theBA not being able to cease the oc-

casion and provide leadership?How critical and dismissive dowe have a right to be?

Aliran readers, for example,how many of us are involved inthe process? If we stay as by-standers, watching, then weshouldn’t bemoan the fact thatwe don’t have political leader-ship – because we stayed out ofit. If we feel strongly enough,we’ve got to get in, we’ve got tomuddy our feet, get involved inthe process. At the grassrootslevel, the work we are doing atAlaigal and in Sungai Siput asPSM can be multiplied manytimes over throughout the coun-try. I don’t believe it is only inSg Siput and Ipoh where peopleare getting marginalized andevicted and chased off. It is hap-pening everywhere in Malaysia.

Our vision is to form a people’smovement, a movement in civilsociety based on marginalizedgroups - comprising perhaps thepoorer 60 per cent of Malaysiansociety. Perhaps this can comeinto an opposition coalition andserve as a balancing, moderating,progressive influence. For the me-dium term, that is what we areworking towards.


he United States ofAmerica has alwaysbeen a major player inSoutheast Asia. Follow-

ing close on the heels of the Ko-rean War of 1951-53, the US soonembroiled itself in the VietnamWar for the next 21 years (1954-175). However, this was not beforeit engineered the first multilateralmilitary alliance in the region,called SEATO (Southeast AsianTreaty Organisation) in 1954,which involved the participationof the Philippines and Thailand,two staunch anti-communist al-lies during the Cold War. The Phil-ippines and Thailand (not to men-tion the client state ‘South Viet-nam’) housed some of the largestoverseas US military bases inworld such as the Subic Bay Na-val base and Clark Airfield.

Even with the end of the VietnamWar, forced upon the US by ahome public traumatised by thebody bags of some 50,000 Ameri-cans, not to mention the deaths of

some two million Vietnamese, theUS continued to maintain a strongpresence in non-communistSoutheast Asia. This was possi-ble, thanks to the formation of theAssociation of Southeast AsianNations (ASEAN) in 1967, whichwas a regional organisation witha decidedly pro-western and pro-capitalist tilt.

However, much changed after theend of the Cold War in 1989. Com-munism was no more a force to bereckoned with and before long allof Southeast Asia, including Viet-nam, Laos and Cambodia, turnedto the panacea of capitalist devel-opment and to establishing goodrelations with the West. As such,the US deemed it fit in the post-Cold War era to pull out its mili-tary presence from Southeast, dis-mantling its bases and allowingits treaties to lapse by the earlynineties. To be sure, social forceswithin Southeast Asian countries,such as the anti-bases movementin the Philippines and pro-democ-racy developments in Thailandand the general rapprochement ofthe Indochinese states with non-communist Southeast Asia con-tributed greatly to this process.And thus, US patronage of theovert sort became a thing of thepast and became by and large un-necessary. In the post-Cold Warera, it was more important, for themost part, to seek Japanese patron-age and investments.

Indeed, after a tumultuous anddestructive period of regional con-flict, Southeast Asia was nowkeen to get on with the businessof development. “Develomen-talism” also conveniently pro-vided for many Southeast Asiangovernments a respite from fullyimplementing democratic re-forms, since economic perform-ance could act as a substitute forpolitical legitimacy, or so it wasthought. A sort of implicit mottoof the ASEAN states seemed tohave been, ‘seek ye first develop-ment and all else shall be broughtunder control.’ However, the eco-nomic crisis of 1997-98 showedhow fragile was a political legiti-macy based entirely ondevelopmentalism.

But let me now return to the USpolicy towards the region. Afterthe Cold War and with the broadstability created by developmen-talism, the US had no real reasonto have a strong military or politi-cal presence as I have argued.However much has changed sinceSeptember 11,2002, and the USseems to be returning with avengeance to Southeast Asia in itsso-called “war against terrorism”.Some 1,000 US troops locatedthemselves on the island ofBasilan in the Southern Philip-pines to ‘assist’ the FilipinoArmed Forces to hunt down Abu

INTERNATIONAL

Uncle Sam Swaggers BackThoughts on US Foreign Policy in Southeast Asia Today

by Johan Saravanamuttu

Back In The US Orbit

TTTTT


Sayyaf militants. The operationsconducted over six months, end-ing this August, supposedlyeliminated an important AbuSayyaf leader (Abu Sabaya) andalso saved an American hostage.While these operations haveended for now, President GloriaMacapagal Arroyo has openlycalled for the maintenance ofstrong military links with the USamidst the protest of many civilforces who see the episode as avirtual return to the old US-Phil-ippine relations of the past.

A group of 14 parliamentarians,academics and activists from ninecountries visited Basilan to exam-ine the consequences of the USpresence on the island. Universityof the Philippines ProfessorRoland Simbulan, a member of theInternational Peace Mission, ques-tioned the necessity for US train-ing, arguing that the Philippinearmy, which has been fightingcounterinsurgency wars almostcontinuously for the last 50 years,has probably more to teach theUnited States. The mission sug-gested that the US operationswere merely an excuse to enableWashington to maintain its mili-tary presence in the region.

Never mind the US presence in thePhilippines, ASEAN as a wholeseems to have welcomed thenewly refurbished US role in theregion. The suave and smooth-talking Secretary of State, ColinPowell, made a swing througheight Asian countries in Augustbefore attending the ASEAN PostMinisterial Conference (PMC) inBandar Seri Begawan. There hewas presented with the prize ofASEAN member-country deci-sions to freeze the assets of allegedterrorists and their associates intheir respective countries.

But more was to come. ASEANwent on to sign an anti-terrorismpact with the US to “prevent, dis-rupt and combat” terrorism. Thepact would supposedly only fo-cus on exchanging informationand intelligence and buildingASEAN’s capability to combat ter-rorism. Indonesia and Vietnamwere thought to have played a rolein watering down the pact. TheSecretary of State was quick to as-sure questioners that the US hadno intention of setting up militarybases in the region but he didn’trule out bilateral military arrange-ments. This notwithstanding, it isclear that, willy nilly, ASEAN hasbeen steadily and surely broughtback into the US orbit.

The hawkish US Defence Secre-tary, Donald Rumsfeld, has beenquite unabashed about the kindof foreign policy he would like tosee pursued. For him, deposingthe Taliban in Afghanistan hasbeen the finest hour of US foreignpolicy post-911. ‘Wouldn’t it bewonderful’ he averred recently, ‘ifwe could do an Afghanistan onIraq’ or some words to that effect.In short, the global war on terror-ism is supposed to arrogate to theUS the mandate to upend all‘rogue’ and ‘pariah’ regimes inthe US book. Even the unfulfilledstate of Palestine under the PLO,more or less qualifies for that sortof policy.

The double standard of US policyis lost to Rumsfeld, who is blindto the fact that the support of un-democratic and militant clientstates has peppered US history uptill today. The CIA was particu-larly famous in the days of theCold War for plotting overthrowsand coups against unfriendly re-gimes, but as we said before, thewar then was against global com-

munism. Now, it’s against globalterrorism — or is it global politi-cal Islam?

Under the Bush Administration,the war against terrorism is notmuch different from the waragainst communism of the past.And for Bush, the logic is thesame, “if you’re not with us,you’re against us.” Thus it wasno surprise that Megawati, Gloriaand even Mahathir went in quicksuccession to pay homage to Bushin Washington, D.C.

The Philippines, Malaysia andSingapore also seemed to wastelittle time in responding to Bushby putting alleged terrorists andpotential terrorists behind bars.We have already mentioned theAbu Sayyaf operations in the Phil-ippines. The Philippine govern-ment also obliged with many ar-rests of alleged Islamic militants,particularly after bombing inci-dents in the South.

In January, Singapore arrested 13persons supposedly linked to theAl-Qaeda. The Singapore govern-ment has also been pressing In-donesia to arrest members of theJemaah Islamiah, especially itsleader Abu Bakar Bashir, in Indo-nesia.

In the case of Malaysia, one of thefirst acts of the government post-911 was to arrest 14 members ofthe Malaysian Mujahidin Groupunder the repugnant Internal Se-curity Act (ISA) in April 2002. Noevidence was given for the exist-ence of such an organisation norhad it ever been mentioned in thepast by government or policespokespersons. Malaysia, how-

Paying HomageTo Bush


ever, has been at great pains todeny that Al-Qaeda cells operatehere even though ZacariasMousaoui, an alleged 911con-spirator, had been seen in KualaLumpur.

Paradoxically the American-ledwar against terrorism has un-leashed a renewed response bypolitical Islam, which despite allthe denials on the US side, seesitself as the target of this newphase of US foreign policy. Thissaid, one should recognise thatthere are all sorts of shades of po-litical Islam, and common wis-dom accepts that there is a con-tinuum between ‘moderate’ and‘radical’ Islam. But when one sur-veys recent events in SoutheastAsia, now thought to be Ameri-ca’s “second front”, one cannot es-cape the conclusion that like com-munism before, the more onedemonises the enemy, the morelikely it will turn out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Add to this, the unresolved prob-lems of Southern Thailand, thequest for independence in Aceh,the perennial struggle of theMoros (and not just militant ‘so-cial bandits’ such as Abu Sayyaf),the political challenges of the mul-tifarious Islamic parties andgroups in Indonesia and Malay-sia, and we have a future scenarioof more not less conflict with ‘radi-cal’ Islam. This is a challengewhich the US is ultimately pow-erless to meet. Indeed, its very ac-tions to stem political Islam mayproduce just the opposite effect ofstrengthening Islamic forceswithin Muslim countries. It is thecountries and the societies in

which political Islam has emergedthat must find the means and wis-dom to meet the challenge of po-litical Islam.

The post-911 world, all wouldagree, has again brought to thefore the military and politicalmight of the foremost hegemonwith the prospect of US unilater-alism or dominance in world poli-tics for many years to come. How-ever, whether we have arrived ata unipolar era remains highlymoot. I believe there are enoughsignificant global actors andforces, including a global civil so-ciety, that can check the excessesof US unilateralism.

More immediately important isthat the post-911 world witnessesthe challenge of political Islam invarious regional and nationalcontexts. We have seen that na-tional states that are unreflexive,unresponsive and insensitive tominorities of Muslim populationsdo this at their peril and face theperpetual prospect of instability.Conversely, Muslim majoritystates which are insensitive to thepresence of non-Muslim minori-ties are also doomed to step intoan untenable political future,given the presence of non-Mus-lims in their midst.

The post-911 world cries out forthe recognition of certain globalrealities and for people to placeenough faith in human agents toinstitute appropriate anti-hegemonic programmes on vari-ous fronts of multicultural strug-gles.

Let me end this essay with three

broad conclusions:

• The so-called war againstterrorism, which essentiallytargets political Islam, ridesroughshod over the injus-tices perpetrated by the cur-rent globalised world orderin which a hegemonic‘West’, led by the US, stilldictates the terms of social,political and economic en-gagement in most societies.But if truth be told, the un-derlying problems of eco-nomic, social and politicalinjustice across the globecannot be ‘fixed’ by a newimperialism of the West.

• Virtually all territorial states(or so-called nation-states)are multi-ethnic, multi-reli-gious and multicultural incomposition and differ onthese dimensions only by de-grees and thus the imperativefor multicultural politicalpractices is self-evident.Models of multicultural prac-tices in liberal states, whileaddressing the problem, areusually flawed on ethnocen-tric grounds as are the mod-els of democracy emanatingfrom Asia based on so-called‘Asian’ values.

• The imperative for majorityand minority ethnic, reli-gious and cultural communi-ties to negotiate democraticand inter-communal politi-cal frameworks of co-exist-ence is ever more urgent. Suchnegotiations have to be ac-complished without the in-tervention and imposition orvia the political manipula-tion of hegemonic globalforces and powers.

The Challenge OfPolitical Islam

Imagine No Hegemon— I t ’ s Easy I f You Try…

q


Aliran is deeply disturbed by areport in The Star (1 Aug 2002)about 10 individuals accused ofmurder who were detained bypolice after they had been acquit-ted by the Ipoh High Court.

The report states they were de-tained under Sec. 3 of the Emer-gency (Public Order and Preven-tion of Crime) Ordinance 1969.This Emergency law allows thepolice to arrest and detain a per-son for up to 60 days, and thereaf-ter by virtue of Sec. 4 of the sameOrdinance, the Home Minister hasthe power to issue further deten-tion orders for any period not ex-

ceeding two years.

The Emergency (Public Order andPrevention of Crime) Ordinance1969 is one of three preventivedetention laws that allow for de-tention without trial. The notori-ous Internal Security Act is thebetter known. But the EmergencyOrdinance and the DangerousDrug (Special Preventive Meas-ures) Act also allow for preven-tive detention.

The provisions and the powers inall these three Acts are the same -the only difference is the purpose.For example, the Ordinance isused “...with a view of preventingany person from acting in anymanner prejudicial to public or-der…”

What is most shocking in thiscase is that the arrest and deten-tion was carried out after theCourt had heard the case, andhad acquitted the accused. Theact of the police in detainingthese persons is an insult (or caneven be said to be an act of “con-tempt”) to the integrity of ourcourts and the Judiciary, and therule of law.

If the prosecution is not happywith the decision of the HighCourt, then the law provides forappeal to the higher Courtsagainst the decision of the court.That is what must be done insteadof detaining (using preventivedetention laws) those acquitted bythe courts.

The failure of the police in obtain-ing sufficient evidence or the fail-ure of the prosecution to prove itscase beyond reasonable doubt - thestandard of proof required incriminal cases - is not the fault ofthe accused.

The responsibility of the court isto evaluate the evidence before it,and if the prosecution is not ableto prove its case beyond reason-able doubt, then the accused mustbe acquitted.

What happened in this case isoutrageous and most disturbing -it undermines the Rule of Law.Aliran condemns the actions ofthe police - and calls for the im-mediate release of all those whoare victims of detention withouttrial laws.

We also reiterate our call for therepeal of all preventive detentionlaws including the Emergency(Public Order and Prevention ofCrime) Ordinance 1969.

Executive Committee3 August 2002

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

Detention AfterA c q u i t t a l

An Act Of Contempt


The current debate on the teach-ing of science and mathematics inEnglish is indeed very complexinvolving different groups of peo-ple with different perspectives, in-terests, and agenda. As a ScienceEducator, I would like to offer aneducationisteducationisteducationisteducationisteducationist perspective bearingin mind the political and culturalsensitivities of the controversy. Isupport the idea of using Englishto teach science and mathematics,but I would like to address the is-sue of at what level should thestudents start learning these twosubjects in English.

Let us examine the rationale forusing English to teach mathemat-ics and science in our educationsystem. First, there is general

agreement that the overall stand-ard of English can be improved ifour students have greater expo-sure to the language. Of coursethe most effective way of gettingmore exposure is to have Englishmedium schools. But for whateverpolitical and practical constraintsthis has not been the favourablechoice, the next best choice is tohave more English lessons andmore subjects in the schools to betaught in English. As it turns out,the subjects that have been identi-fied to be taught in English arescience and mathematics. Theadvantage of learning these twosubjects in English can be drawnfrom the fact that much of the re-cent technological advancementand scientific knowledge is avail-able in English. Therefore, learn-ing science and mathematics inEnglish is not only aimed at im-proving English among our stu-

dents but also at enabling them togain direct access to innovativetechnology and new knowledge.

While there is less controversy onwhether we should use Englishto teach science and mathematicsin secondary schools, the debatehas shifted to whether science andmathematics should be taught inEnglish in primary schools. If so,at what level should it be intro-duced? In my opinion, I think thatthese two subjects should betaught in the students’ “first lan-guage” in primary schools. By“first language” I mean the me-dium of instruction of the primaryschool concerned (please notethat I am not using the term“mother-tongue” for I think it is amisnomer in many situations inthe Malaysian school system). Atthe primary level, most studentswould find difficulty in learningabstract concepts in a languagethat they are not familiar with. Itis extremely important that thechildren get a good understand-ing of the basic mathematical andscientific concepts that are taughtin primary schools because of thehierarchical structure of the sub-ject matter. If a student does nothave a good foundation in scienceand mathematics at the primarylevel, he or she will encountergreater difficulty in learning thesesubjects at the higher level.

In line with this argument, I donot think that science and math-ematics should be taught fully inEnglish in all the primary schools,may they be SKs , SRKs, or SRJKs.I support the idea that the stu-dents be exposed to Englishterminologies in science andmathematics at Year 4 and to se-lected bilingual text at Year 5 andYear 6 for this would help them to

Letters must not exceed 250 words and must include the writer'sname and address. Pseudonyms may be used. Send letters to :Editor, ALIRAN MONTHLY, 103, Medan Penaga, 11600 Penang,Malaysia or e-mail to : [email protected] Viewsexpressed need not reflect those of Aliran. If you are sendingby e-mail please include your message in the e-mail body itself.We do not open attachments to avoid viruses.

When To StartTeaching Science And

Mathematics In English


make the transition to learningscience and mathematics in Eng-lish at the secondary level. How-ever, what is of utmost importanceis that the teachers teaching thesetwo subjects should have a goodgrasp of the subject matter and astrong command of the languageof instruction. It will be disastrousto have a teacher who does notspeak English well nor know toomuch about science to be stand-ing in front of a class trying toteach science in English. At theend of the day, the students wouldlearn neither English nor science.This is called “double jeopardy”and none of us would want to seeour children going through this.

In debating whether science andmathematics should be taught inEnglish in primary schools or not,we must not forget the fundamen-tal issue of finding ways andmeans to improve the overall Eng-lish proficiency among students.The basic principle is to start themyoung and to have frequent prac-tice in using the language. There-fore, it is very necessary to provideample opportunities for the youngto have English lessons as soonas they start schooling, that is, inYear 1 itself or even at the pre-school level. Furthermore, thenumber of English language les-sons taught per week should beincreased in the timetable of alltypes of schools and at all level.

Dr. Molly N.N. LeePenang

Recently, I came across a fascinat-ing article in which former Courtof Appeal judge Shaik DaudMohd said “Abdul Malik best“Abdul Malik best“Abdul Malik best“Abdul Malik best“Abdul Malik best

choice to be new Chief Justice”choice to be new Chief Justice”choice to be new Chief Justice”choice to be new Chief Justice”choice to be new Chief Justice”

It was a timely reminder of my let-ter entitled “How Foreign Corrup-“How Foreign Corrup-“How Foreign Corrup-“How Foreign Corrup-“How Foreign Corrup-tion Hurts Malaysia” tion Hurts Malaysia” tion Hurts Malaysia” tion Hurts Malaysia” tion Hurts Malaysia” - AliranMonthly 1993; 13 (2): 26. Indeed,Justice Abdul Malek, who heardmy son Jarret’s medical negli-gence case against Catholic Arch-bishop, Assunta Hospital and DrGwen Smith (hereafter AssuntaAssuntaAssuntaAssuntaAssunta))))) in1985, was very courteous and pa-tient. Following defence testi-mony, and their counsels’ impres-sive submissions, some of hisHonour’s findings were:

1 . I had lost his nursing and feed-ing records.

2. Jarret’s jaundice was ‘physi-ological’ (mild), and did not re-quire treatment.

3. As such, he did not have Ker-Ker-Ker-Ker-Ker-nicterusnicterusnicterusnicterusnicterus (Brain-Damagecaused by Jaundice) .

Consequently, the learned Judgedismissed Jarret’s claim for severedisabilities caused by Kernicterus.

Besides courtesy, patience and le-gal knowledge, is there anotherrequirement for a future Chief Jus-tice of Malaysia? Yes, a judicialawareness of corporate greed orMedical Defence Conspiracy,Medical Defence Conspiracy,Medical Defence Conspiracy,Medical Defence Conspiracy,Medical Defence Conspiracy,which includes: the greed of in-surers; integrity of religious insti-tutions; the honesty of doctorsand the duplicity of lawyers forboth parties. The name “adver-sary system” is a misnomer: cli-ents may be adversaries, but theircounsels are colluding colleagues.Behind the clients’ back, lies a“corrupt system” where oppos-ing lawyers in many instancesscratch backs, share the spoils,and deceive judges and juries

In this regard, I am pleased to en-

close my paper Post KernictericPost KernictericPost KernictericPost KernictericPost KernictericSyndromeSyndromeSyndromeSyndromeSyndrome (Australian Family Phy-sician, March 2002), hereafter PKS.Jaundice in the newborn may be‘Physiological’ or ‘Pathological’,as depicted in Figure 1. Jarret’sjaundice, shown by the uppercurve, was clearly ‘pathological’.However, Dr Smith easily con-vinced Justice Abdul Malek thatit was ‘physiological’.

She and the other desperate de-fendants, purportedly aided bytheir insurers and lawyers, hadalledgedly indulged in deceit, mis-representation and conspiracy.The defendants, it is believed, mis-led the honourable Justice AbdulMalik to

decide for them, against the legiti-mate interests of a severely disa-bled young child. Despite Truthon his side and with an impartialjudge watching, David had beenslain by Goliath (as Right is de-stroyed by Might).

I am very pleased that independ-ent reviewers have expressed con-fidence that the article PKS wouldreduce the risk of newborns dy-ing or being disabled by untreatedjaundice. Paediatricians haveconfirmed that the medical testi-mony in AssuntaAssuntaAssuntaAssuntaAssunta is junk science,and counsels have advised thatthe defence strategies are illegaland fraudulent Accordingly,AssuntaAssuntaAssuntaAssuntaAssunta is an unjust and unsafe is an unjust and unsafe is an unjust and unsafe is an unjust and unsafe is an unjust and unsafedecision, which puts all infantsdecision, which puts all infantsdecision, which puts all infantsdecision, which puts all infantsdecision, which puts all infantswith jaundice at risk of death andwith jaundice at risk of death andwith jaundice at risk of death andwith jaundice at risk of death andwith jaundice at risk of death andbrain-damage. brain-damage. brain-damage. brain-damage. brain-damage. I have done all Ican to publicise AssuntaAssuntaAssuntaAssuntaAssunta..... Only hisHonour can correct an allegedlyflawed judgement and an alleg-edly gross miscarriage of justice,contributed entirely by the de-fendants and their lawyers, whoare supposed to be primarily of-

The Learned Judge,And The Good Doctor


ficers of the court.

Incredible but true, Justice AbdulMalik is just one of many learnedJudges in the Commonwealth al-legedly deceived by medical in-surers, defendant-doctors andtheir lawyers. Too many judges,unschooled of course in Medicine,are too easily fooled by too manyguilty defendant-doctors coachedby their insurers and lawyers. Asa medicolegal consultant, I havedocumented numerous caseswhere insurers unjustly deny le-gitimate compensation paymentsto patients injured by motor vehi-cles, work practices and unsafehospitals.

Moving from Law to Medicine, Iwas moved by an article entitled“Physician under pressure”“Physician under pressure”“Physician under pressure”“Physician under pressure”“Physician under pressure”(Aliran Monthly, August 1999). Mylong experience in the medical in-dustry tells me this - to be politi-cally incorrect is to be damned. Asa social activist fighting for qual-ity healthcare and the rights ofplantation workers, and squatters,Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj, althoughan award-winning doctor, had tobattle the bureaucracy to stay onin government service. Where isthe justice, cruel world?

As a whistle-blower on fraudu-fraudu-fraudu-fraudu-fraudu-lent defencelent defencelent defencelent defencelent defence by insurers and theirlawyers, I, like Dr Devaraj beforeme, have been black-listed. Un-able to obtain medical indemnityinsurance for no other reason, theNSW Medical Board warned thatI would be deregistered on 31 May2002, if I did not have indemnitycover. However, as the largestmedical insurer in Australia hasgone into liquidation, thousandsof my colleagues have been unin-sured. And the Board could notderegister them all without endan-

gering medical services. By theskin of my teeth, I have been saved- by an insurance disaster. Andthere are too many of them.

As long as there is abuse of power(and power corrupts), there is nojustice for social activists of themedical, legal, and whatever fra-ternity. Since its inception in1977, Aliran has achieved muchin helping the aggrieved public. I

Dear Prime Minister Sharon,

We are Malaysians who aredeeply concerned about thehumanitarian crisis created bythe Israeli occupation of Pales-tine. The isolation of Palestin-ian towns and villages has cre-ated a pressing shortage of foodand basic supplies threateningthe health and even lives of thePalestinian population. Thecity of Nablus is the most tell-ing example of this dangerousdevelopment. For 17 consecu-tive days the city has been un-der 24 hour strict curfew: theentire population of the city has

been locked up inside theirhouses unable to ensure suffi-cient food and other necessarysupplies for their families. Thesituation is most severe in theOld City of Nablus which hasbeen under siege for three days.There is extensive damage toinfrastructure and Israelitroops have cut the water sup-ply to the Old City. Currently30,000 people living inside theOld City are threatened by theongoing military operation inthe area.

We demand an immediate haltto the Israeli aggression and anend to the siege of the Occu-pied Palestinian Territories.The actions of your govern-ment are increasingly knownto people throughout the worldand we urge you to immedi-ately cease such barbarousacts.

Dr Chan Chee KhoonCitizens’ Health Initiative,Malaysia

know it has the personalities, thewill and the resources to continuethe trend – and eventually toachieve justice and dignity for all.

With best wishes for your continu-ing success in addressing socialequality and human dignity.

Dr Cary T OoiMedical Defence Conspiracy

(MDC) Inc

Halt The AggressionLetter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon


trial of the former Deputy PrimeMinster included:

• the choice of the judge and themanner by which the judgewas chosen to hear the case;

• refusing bail;• expunging of evidence given

under oath;• preventing the accused from

raising every possible andconceivable defence;

• compelling the defence to statebeforehand what evidence thedefence sought to adduce fromvarious witnesses;

• disallowing witnesses fromtestifying and making rulingsas to relevancy without firsthearing their testimony; and

• citing and threatening defencelawyers with contempt pro-ceedings including sentencingone of them to three month’sjail for contempt while dis-charging his legal duties to hisclient.

Second, there was the spectacleinitiated by comments of a HighCourt Judge, while delivering ajudgment in an accident case inthe Penang High Court, abouthow a certain Court of AppealJudge had been treating theformer through the latter's judg-ments. In his written judgment,Justice R.K. Nathan accused Courtof Appeal judge Gopal Sri Ram ofmaking personal attacks againstHigh Court judges, and targetinghim (Nathan) for personal vilifi-cation in open court.

It may be good to recapitulatebriefly the history of theMalaysian Judiciary, in particularthe events that led to the slide inthe public confidence of the Judi-

ciary.

The Judiciary is the third arm ofthe government; the other two arethe Executive and the Legislature.In a democracy, it is essential thatthere should be separation ofpowers among these three arms.Simply put, the Legislature (theParliament) makes the Law. TheExecutive (the Prime Minister andthe Cabinet) administers the af-fairs of state according to the Law.The Judiciary ensures that all isand was done according to law.The doctrine of separation ofpowers ensures a system of checkand balance, and that there is noabuse of powers.

As the late Justice EusoffeAbdulkader noted in his judge-ment in the Datuk Harun bin HajiIdris case, “The court stands asan arbiter in holding the balancebetween individuals and betweenthe state and the individual, andwill not have the slightest hesita-tion to condemn or strike downany statutory shelter for bureau-cratic discrimination, any legisla-tive refuge for the exercise of na-ked arbitrary power in violationof any of the provisions of the Con-stitution and equally any execu-tive action purported to be madethereunder”

To carry out its functions , the Ju-diciary must be independent, andJudges must be concerned onlywith upholding the cause of jus-tice without fear or favour. Thewords of Sultan Azlan Shah, a

former Lord President (or ChiefJustice as the office is now called),during a Public Lecture inUniversiti Sains Malaysia in 1986,adequately explains the need forjudges to be independent:

“..The Judges are independent ofall — the executive, Parliamentand from within themselves —and are free to act in an independ-ent and unbiased manner. Nomember of the Government, noMember of Parliament, and no of-ficial of any Government depart-ment has any right whatever todirect or influence the decision ofany of the judges. It is the sureknowledge of this that gives thepublic confidence in the judges.The judges are not beholden po-litically to any government...”

In fact, at one time the MalaysianJudiciary was held in very highregard. The Chairperson of theMalaysian Bar in 1963, Datuk SMYong, had this to say about thejudiciary:-

“...every person, whether he is rich orpoor, high or low, of whatever race,color or creed is equal in the eyes ofthe law. Justice will be administeredwithout fear or favor...[and for this]we must have an impartial, incorrupt-ible, and independent judiciary. OurFederal Court is such a judiciary.”

Wu Min Aun in his article, ‘Judi-ciary at the Crossroads’ (in PublicLaw in Contemporary Malaysia)best explains the events that ledto the erosion of public confidencein the judiciary.

“Public confidence in the judici-

I n d e p e n d e n tAnd Fearless

1988 Judicial Crisis

Role And Function

IS THERE HOPE IN OUR JUDICIARY? ... Continued from page 40


ary started to slide when the ex-ecutive commenced its attack as aresult of several decisions whichwent against the government. Po-litical rhetoric surrounding theamendments to Article 121 of theFederal Constitution merely exac-erbated it. It deteriorated furtherwhen the Lord President and twoSupreme Court judges were dis-missed.”

Then there was the controversialAyer Molek Rubber Co case,which saw the Court of Appealcriticize strongly the decision ofthe High Court. The Court ofAppeal went so far as to say thatfrom the facts, it may “...givethe impression to right thinkingpeople that litigants can choosethe judge before whom theywish to appear for their case tobe adjudicated upon.” TheCourt of Appeal pointed out thejudge had ignored provisions ofthe law, and also seemed to al-lege that injustice was perpe-trated by the court.

Then the Federal Court, upon fur-ther appeal, not only overruledthe Court of Appeal judgment but“also berated the appeal judges”for “bringing the administrationof justice into disrepute”. TheChief Justice, Tun Eusoff Chin, indelivering the judgment of the Fed-eral Court asked:

“Why should the learned judgesof the Court of Appeal go on afrolic of their own and find faultwith the High Court judge, criti-cize the conduct of the applicant’ssolicitors in a very disparagingmanner. Their own conductwould tend to show that they werethemselves biased.”

Wu Min Aun added :

“The Malaysian Bar [claimed] thatthe Federal Court was not prop-erly composed in accordance withthe constitution. It pointed out thatone of the panel members, a HighCourt judge, was not qualified tosit on the Federal Court bench. Itwas argued that apart from its per-manent judges, only Court of Ap-peal judges could sit as FederalCourt judges if the Chief Justicenominated them. The revelationthat the Federal Court might notbe properly constituted addedfuel to further speculation thatthere might have been an elemen-tary mistake at best and ‘stacking’of judges at worst. Whichever itwas, the case did enormous dam-age on perception of the judiciaryas an impartial adjudicator.”

The New Straits Times (3 Sept 1995)also stated in an article that“...questions are already beingasked as to why the courts andjudges are speedy in hearing com-mercial cases, especially when bigcompanies and big businesseswere involved, and the apparentease with which parties choosewhich courts to go to and whichjudge to seek out... This is inevita-ble when thousands of criminaland civil cases have been held upfor years. Some remand prisonershave to languish in jail for yearswhile waiting to stand trial.”

Let me again quote Wu Min Aun’sarticle: “Then, in early 1996 athirty-three page anonymousdocument alleging judicial mis-conduct surfaced. It was circulatedamong the legal fraternity accus-ing several judges of corruption,abuse of powers and personal

misconduct. It was an extraordi-nary document containing 112 al-legations comprising 39 chargesof corruption, 21 of abuse of powerand 52 of misconduct, immoral-ity or other indiscretions. Itclaimed corrupt payments ofRM50,000 with recipients gradu-ating to accepting millions fromnamed persons.” In July of thesame year, the Attorney Generalstated that police investigationshad revealed that the allegationscontained in the poison-pen let-ter were “wholly untrue and base-less”

To ensure the independence of thejudiciary, it is essential that theconduct and behaviour of a judgeshould not give rise to suspicionthat he is not impartial. In early1998, when photographs of TunEusoff Chin holidaying with alawyer who also had appearedbefore the same judge, were pub-lished on the Internet, it was amatter of public concern.

Later, in mid-2000, the Ministerin the Prime Minister’s Depart-ment, Datuk Dr Rais Yatim, in re-sponse to a a question about aphotograph showing the ChiefJustice, said that it had been inti-mated to the Chief Justice that thiswas improper behaviour and thatsuch socialising was not consist-ent with the proper behavious ofa judicial personality. Calls formore serious action to be takenwere not heeded.

In June 2001, High Court JudgeDatuk Muhammad Kamil binAhmad when declaring the State

Poison Pen Letter

CJ's Holiday

The Ayer Molek Case

Judge Receives“ D i r e c t i v e ”


election held in March 1999 forthe Likas Constituency in Sabah,null and void, stated that he hadreceived a directive over the phoneto strike out the two election peti-tions without a hearing. TheMalaysian Bar viewed this as an“affront to judicial integrity andindependence of the learned judgeand the Rule of Law” and calledfor action by the authorities con-cerned. Alas, nothing came out ofthat call.

Following the Federal Court deci-sion dismissing Anwar’s appeal,Mah Weng Kwai, the President ofthe Malaysian Bar was quoted inMalaysiakini as saying, “But theCourt of Appeal had found nomiscarriages of justice and so didthe Federal Court today. Anwar’strial has gone through the dueprocess of law, and we need to re-spect the decision of the court.”He was further quoted as saying,“If Anwar’s supporters, thereformasi group or the public feelthat the court has been unfair, thegeneral election is the best avenuefor them to show their discon-tent.”

Mah was barraged with criticismfrom members of the Bar, the KualaLumpur State Bar Committee,NGOs and political parties. Therewere calls for his resignation.

Six days later, Mah issued anotherstatement. Mah withdrew his ear-lier remarks, stating that they weremerely his personal comments,not the statement of the Presidentof the Malaysian Bar. In the sec-ond statement the Malaysian Barexpressed its dissatisfaction withthe “unusual manner in which

the trial itself was conducted.”This was consistent with the state-ment issued by R.R. Chelvarajahin his capacity as the Chairmanof the Bar Council on 17 April1999.

Mah is human and not infallible.He made a mistake, and it mustbe pointed out that previous presi-dents of the Malaysian Bar hadmade mistakes before.

Mah was the “soft target”, but inessence, the strong reaction to hisinitial remarks reflected the law-yers and the public’s dissatisfac-tion with the Federal Court deci-sion.

When Dzaiddin was appointed asthe Chief Justice of the FederalCourt, the Kuala Lumpur BarCommittee newsletter questioned:“Can Dzaiddin Deliver?” Thisquestion must now be askedagain.

The action of the police in re-ar-resting 10 men who were acquit-ted of quintuple murders by theIpoh High Court on 31July 2002is another cause for concern. Thepolice used the Emergency (Pub-lic Order and Prevention of Crime)Ordinance 1969, a preventive de-tention law with powers similarto the infamous Internal SecurityAct(ISA), to arrest these men. Likethe ISA, after 60 days, the Minis-ter can issue a 2-year detentionorder.

The 10 men had been tried in opencourt. The High Court Judge afterconsidering the evidence beforethe court had acquitted them. Theaction of the police is an act of

“disrespect” to the High Courtand the Judiciary. Is this sympto-matic of the “slide in the public[or police in this case] confidencein the Judiciary”

At its highest levels, judges of theJudiciary is made up of the HighCourt, Court of Appeal and Fed-eral Court. To place too high anexpectation on the Chief Justice ofthe Federal Court alone to stop theslide in public confidence in theJudiciary may be wishful think-ing.

Judges must understand that it istheir role and duty to act in anindependent and unbiased man-ner and to treat every person,whether rich or poor, of high orlow status, of whatever race, coloror creed equally in the eyes of thelaw. Judges must without fear orfavour administer justice. Ofcourse, when they are true to theiroffice, they may be subjected topersecution from certain quarters.They may be transferred to courtsin ‘far places’. They may never beelevated to higher courts. Theymay be victims of false charges.They may even be removed fromoffice. But judges must be true totheir office and calling.

The Malaysian Judiciary is notdirectly elected by the people. Thejudges are appointed. In somecountries, there are elections forthe members of the Judiciary.Maybe, it is time for us to seriouslyconsider whether the constitutionshould be amended to allowjudges to be elected.

Presently the appointment ofjudges is conducted under a

R e - a r r e s t e dAfter Acquittal

Impartial AndI n c o r r u p t i b l e

A n w a r ' sCorruption Case


shroud of secrecy. Maybe, there isa need to consider whether thenames of future judges and/or ju-dicial commissioners should bemade public, and public objec-tions be invited and consideredbefore appointing them.

With the advent of the Internet,there has been an increase in pub-lic criticism of judgments andjudges. This is important and nec-essary to stimulate judicial reformand improvements in the admin-istration of justice and to forge animpartial, incorruptible, and inde-pendent judiciary for Malaysia. Inthis regard, Lord Denning's wordsare worth repeating:

“It is the right of every man, inParliament or out of it, in the Pressor over the broadcast, to make faircomment, even outspoken com-ment, on matters of public inter-est. Those who comment can dealfaithfully with all that is done ina court of justice. They can say thatwe are mistaken, and our decisionerroneous, whether they are sub-ject to appeal or not. All that weask is that those who criticize uswill remember that, from the na-ture of our office, we cannot replytheir criticisms. We cannot enterinto public controversy. Still lessinto political controversy. We mustrely on our conduct itself to be itsvindication. Exposed as we are tothe winds of criticism, nothingwhich is said by this person orthat, nothing which is written bythis pen or that, will deter us fromdoing what is right’.

It is easy to give up hope in ourJudiciary, but if we do so all is lost.What we need more than ever be-fore is to strive for far-reachingreforms that will re-instil publicconfidence in the Judiciary.

Directed to strike out two electionpetitions

Went holidaying with a lawyer whohad appeared before him

Truly represented the Malaysian Bar'sview

q The expected rejuvenation of the MalaysianJudiciary under his tutelage remains a dream


hen in December 2000 ,Tan Sri Hj MohdDzaiddin Hj Abdullahwas appointed as the

Chief Justice of the Federal Court,and hence the head of the Judici-ary, the Bar Council had great ex-pectations of him to rejuvenate theMalaysian Judiciary Ever sincethe 1988 Judicial Crisis whichsaw the then Lord President andtwo Supreme Court Judges dis-missed, the Malaysian Bar neverplaced any great hope inDzaiddin’s two predecessors.

But two recent events have causedthe Malaysian public to questionwhether their hopes and aspira-tion for a renewed Dzaiddin-ledJudiciary showing greater com-mitment to justice and the Rule ofLaw have been misplaced

First, the recent Federal Court de-cision in Anwar Ibrahim’s cor-ruption case was basically an af-firmation of the High Court deci-sion which was earlier criticizednot only by the Malaysian Bar butalso international observers andgroups. Some of the criticisms andconcerns about the High Court

JUDICIARY

Is There HopeIn Our Judiciary?

by Charles Hector

WWWWW

We need to seriously strive for reforms thatwill re-instill public confidence in the Judiciary

Continued on page 36Continued on page 36Continued on page 36Continued on page 36Continued on page 36

When Two Elephants Clash - aliran.com · lar and Malaysians in general who often bear witness and...

Documents

Transcript of When Two Elephants Clash - aliran.com · lar and Malaysians in general who often bear witness and...