Stop playing race game in Malaysian politics

The country has changed so much since 1969 that to keep using the argument that we are on the verge of race war is rather obsolete.

I WAS wondering when it was going to happen; when certain quarters were going to dust off that old chestnut of May 13, 1969, and use it as a political tool.

It all seems terribly coincidental that as the general election draws nearer, suddenly race riots get inserted into political speech, and a movie about May 13 is apparently waiting to be released.

The country has changed so much since 1969 that to keep using the argument that we are on the verge of race war is rather obsolete.

Let’s look at some facts. Firstly, the vast majority of the Malaysian population were not even born in 1969.

This means that first-hand knowledge of that terrible time is simply not part of most of us. Without that emotional connection, I believe that younger Malaysians are willing to question the feasibility of such a thing happening again.

And really, could it? In 1969, the politics of the nation was so very clearly divided along racial lines. The Opposition was not united as it is today. PAS won 12 seats, DAP 13 and Gerakan 8.

They were not part of a coalition and each stood on its own, therefore it was possible to play the race game because, in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor in particular, the Opposition had the face of “the other”.

Today, with the Pakatan coalition in existence, the Opposition is a much more complex animal. If the Opposition wins, how can the race card be played when two of the component parties are so predominantly Malay?

Let’s take a look at recent events that has got some powerful people’s knickers in a twist.

In particular the Bersih demonstrations of 2007, 2011 and 2012. The demographics of these events were multi-ethnic and became even more multi-ethnic with each progressive one.

By the time of this year’s Bersih demonstration, the make-up of the people who took part was much closer to the make-up of the country as a whole. However, the predominant ethnic group was still Malay.

This goes to show that the political divide, not of political parties but of ordinary citizens, can no longer be conveniently divided along ethnic lines.

Significant numbers of Malaysians, regardless of their background, can be united when they have a common political goal, in this case clean and fair elections.

Furthermore, ethnic Malays can be vocally unhappy with the status quo. In the present-day scenario, it is ridiculous to say that the politics in Malaysia is simply a matter of Malays versus Non-Malays.

And let us look at the 2008 elections. The results were unprecedented and surprised most people. I remember that night very well, as the results became clear that Barisan had lost their two-thirds majority and five state governments.

I decided to drive around Kuala Lumpur, just to see what would happen. And what happened? Nothing.
The streets were quiet. No celebratory parties, no processions, no fireworks; nothing.

The Opposition and their supporters on the streets were as muted as the Barisan and their supporters.

No gloating, no taunting, no excuses at all to provoke a reaction from the supporters of the powers-that-be.

I am certain that if a similar result is achieved in the next elections, the same would happen. There will be no provocation from the opposition and their supporters.

That is not to say there will not be any trouble. Recent events in this country have proven that there are gangs of thugs who are willing to be violent for political purposes.

The thing is though, I believe that the Malaysian public are not going to rise to the bait.

I fervently hope we will show them that we are better than them, we are nobler than them and they are nothing but hooligans with delusions of grandeur.

No, the danger that faces this country will not come from race riots.

If we have trouble in Malaysia, it will be if there is a prolonged disrespect for true democratic principles.

If the election process is not transparent and fair, if the result of a clean election is not respected, then and only then should we start to worry.

BRAVE NEW WORLD

By AZMI SHAROM

Learn more about Malaysian new Assembly Act

Previously, everything was prohibited unless permitted. Now everything is permitted unless prohibited. This is a significant shift in civil rights thinking.

IN early legal systems, the primary end of the law was to keep the peace. In modern legal orders, a just balance between the might of the state and the rights of the citizens is attempted. No field better exemplifies the difficulty of achieving this fair balance than Malaysia’s law relating to assembly and procession.

The recently enacted Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 has received much criticism in the media and deserves scrutiny of its high and low points.

Police permit: Previously under Sections 27 of the Police Act, citizens had to apply for a police permit for gatherings or processions of more than three people.

Under the new Act, there is no requirement for a police permit, but organisers of assemblies must notify the authorities 10 days in advance under Section 9(1). No notice is required for meetings in designated places or if the assembly is an exempted assembly.

If in response to a notification the police do nothing, then under Section 14(2) silence is deemed as consent.

Previously, everything was prohibited unless permitted. Now everything is permitted unless prohibited. This is a significant shift in civil rights thinking.

No power to ban: Under the Police Act, assemblies and processions could be prohibited outright or conditions imposed.

The new Act in Section 15 permits the OCPD to impose significant restrictions and conditions including the date, time and place of the assembly. However, there is no power to issue an outright “No” before the assembly takes place.

Time limits: Just as citizens are required to give advance notification of 10 days, the police response must also be communicated within a stated time limit of five days: Section 14(1). An appeal to the Home Minis­ter must be decided within 48 hours: Section 16(2).

Designated places: The Act permits the minister to designate places where assemblies may be held without notification to the police. Critics have charged that this is an attempt to isolate Opposition gatherings in distant and low-impact places.

This is an overly cynical view. Actually it is a good idea to designate some fields, stadiums and Speakers’ Corners for public assemblies.

What would be improper is if the owners of designated places indulged in the selective granting or refusal of permission. If this happens, judicial review is likely on the (Article 8) principle of equality or the administrative law principles of reasonableness, irrationality or abuse of power.

Exempted assemblies: This Act does not apply to election campaigns, strikes, lock-outs and pickets under the Industrial Relations Act and the Trade Union Act: Section 1(3).

It is also inapplicable to religious assemblies, funeral processions, weddings, open houses, family get-togethers, family days and meetings of societies or associations: Third Schedule Paragraph 9(2)(b).

The words “meetings of societies and associations” are very broad and permit vast possibilities.
Right to object: All persons likely to be affected by a proposed assembly have a right to be informed and to raise objections. In principle this is acceptable.

However, there is a perception that the police may pander to extremist groups; subordinate minority rights to majority concerns, and discourage lawful but unpopular assemblies. This perception needs to be proved wrong.

Judicial review: Mercifully, the Act has no ouster clauses for excluding judicial review.

Counter-assemblies: The Act takes admirable note of counter- and simultaneous assemblies, and seeks to regulate them by giving preference to the assembly first in place. It also provides for alternative sites, times and dates for the counter- or simultaneous assembly or assemblies.

Spontaneous gatherings: These are not contemplated by the law and are presumably not illegal.

Involuntary presence: The definition of “participant” leaves out anyone who is unintentionally or involuntarily present at an assembly. This will be a useful defence to a citizen who is the subject of a prosecution.

Despite the above wholesome features, the reformed law still bristles with some controversial provisions.
Street protests: These are a form of assembly in motion, a procession or a demonstration. They were permitted (within limits) subject to regulation under Section 27 of the Police Act, but are now absolutely banned.

Other ambiguous aspects of the law are that a street protest by definition involves “walking in a mass march or rally.” So if there is no walking but a motorcade of cars or bikes, that will not be caught by this law and the authorities may have to use Section 268 of the Penal Code or some provision in the Road Traffic Act 1987.

Further, although “street protests” are banned, the Act refers here and there to “processions” and “assemblies in motion.” One has to struggle to understand the distinction bet­ween a lawful procession and an unlawful street protest.

Police discretion: Under the Police Act, police discretion to grant or withhold a permit was more or less unfettered and the power to impose conditions was very wide, although subject to occasional judicial review as in Chai Choon Hon v Ketua Polis Kampar (1986) and Patto v CPO Perak (1986).

Similar to the Police Act, the new law in Section 15 still confers on the men in blue very wide discretion to impose “restrictions and conditions,” arrest without a warrant any person failing to comply with a restriction or condition, or order the assembly to disperse.

It must be acknowledged, however, that such wide discretion is known in other jurisdictions like Britain, Finland and the state of Queensland in Australia, but subject to external review.

External control: Unlike the recent Security Offences (Special Measures) Act which subjected the powers of the police and the Minister to judicial control, this Act makes no effort to subject police discretion to external, non-executive control.

An appeal lies with the minister, which basically means there is an appeal from the executive to the executive.

Fortunately, however, there is no ouster clause, and judicial review on the first principles of administrative law is a possibility.

Public places: These are defined too broadly, so they include private places open to or used by the public by the express or implied consent of the owner or on payment of money. This means that private premises, hotels and halls to which members of the public are invited or permitted are deemed public places!

Constitutionality: It remains to be seen whether the courts will review the constitutionality of some parts of this law. Issues germane for discussion are:

> The total ban of street protests without linking it to public order and national security may well fall foul of Article 10(2).

> The ban on people under 21 organising an assembly may be challenged as a violation of Article 10 (free speech) and Article 8 (equality). It is noteworthy that case law has established that parliamentary res­tric­tions on human rights must be reasonable by objective standards (Hilman Idham).

> One of the grounds on which the police may exercise the power to regulate assemblies is “the protection of the rights and freedom of other persons” (sections 2, 3 and 15). These words of limitation do not occur in Article 10(2), and may therefore be seen as an extra constitutional limitation.

In most countries including the US and Malaysia, courts have accepted implied limits on human freedoms and have often carved out common law restrictions on fundamental freedoms.

In sum, the Act has many wholesome features. But it is defective in that it imposes no objective restraints on the police and ministerial discretion.

Nevertheless, as judicial review is not excluded, courts may provide a proper balance between police powers and fundamental freedoms. Whether the courts will play such a balancing role remains to be seen.

REFLECTING ON THE LAW By SHAD SALEEM FARUQI

> Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of Law at UiTM.

Bersih 3: 'Hand Gesture Politics' to 'Occupy Dataran' ?

Anwar has some explaining to do, says The Economist

KUALA LUMPUR: Video footage of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim during Bersih 3.0 posted on YouTube shows him making a curious rolling gesture with his hands to PKR deputy president Azmin Ali.

Within seconds, PKR supporters breached the police barricades and charged into Dataran Merdeka, prompting the police to respond with tear gas and water cannons to prevent a stampede.

In an interview with Radio Australia on Tuesday, Anwar denied that his hand gesture was a signal to protestors to breach the barricades, instead claiming that it meant “negotiate with the police”.

While the hand gesture is open to interpretation, a few outside observers had their own take on it.

“Mr Anwar has some explaining to do”, was The Economist's verdict and, here in Malaysia, Anwar's role in Bersih 3.0 has been criticised by people from both ends of the political spectrum.

At a PKR press conference on Monday, independent filmmaker Benji Lim accused Anwar of endangering the lives of protesters, as well as jeopardising Bersih's cause.

“The protest was completely hijacked by the opposition,” he claimed, before being bundled unceremoniously out of the room.

Even Bersih 3.0 chief organiser Datuk S. Ambiga noted Bersih's politicisation by opposition leaders, telling journalists that she “cannot control what they say”.

Anwar has dismissed any criticism of his conduct. Instead, at the press conference, he launched an attack on the government, accusing the Barisan Nasional leadership of behaving like Stalin and Hitler.

He went on to suggest his fate was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp victim a claim made on the exact anniversary of Hitler's death.

Political observers say that Anwar has often been seen indulging in “hand gesture politics”, revelling in grand spectacles but offering voters little in terms of a detailed blueprint for transformation.

Some say Anwar's “hand gesture politics” appears to have backfired.

Don't be surprised to see him spend much of the coming weeks and months explaining what his Bersih hand gesture really meant. -Bernama

Related posts:
More tests for Malaysian democracy
Bersih 3.0 rally: Malaysia braces for electoral reform protests 
Bersih 3.0: the good, bad and ugly Malaysians 
Malaysian police fire tear gas at more than 25,000 protesters, Bersih 3.0 rally 
More than 20000 Malaysians march for election reforms ... 

Bersih 3.0: More tests for Malaysian democracy

Bersih 3.0 and its aftermath show deep divisions in our society but many participants deemed it a good day for Malaysian democracy, despite the ugly end.

FEW events have generated so much commentary in so short a time as Bersih 3.0. By now gigabytes of photographs and video material must have been uploaded and shared, despite the recorded cases of seizure and smashing of equipment that occurred on the day.

One might have thought that this sheer amount of data might be able to provide a comprehensive picture of what really happened.

On the contrary, amid accusations of photo manipulation and devious cut-and-paste there seems to be enough material for those who have already taken sides to harden their stances, with no quantity of counter-evidence being sufficient to sway their positions.

As Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah — possibly the most erudite member of the Government — has said, Bersih 3.0 (and its aftermath) show deep divisions in our society.

Big turnout: Thousands of protesters outside Dataran Merdeka last Saturday.

I was not a frontline witness on Saturday. In the morning I attended the Global Donors Forum organised by the World Congress of Muslim Philanthropists outside the Middle East for the first time.

The event brought together civil society organisations from across the Muslim world to discuss how to improve and target charitable giving to strengthen the ummah.

I argued that philanthropy thrives when wealth thrives, and that Muslim societies should pursue open economies and democratic government so that they can compete intellectually, culturally and economically.

En route to the event, I had to negotiate through a police roadblock at Jalan Parlimen, and immediately saw columns of people percolating through the Bank Negara roundabout towards Dataran Merdeka.

Later in the afternoon, I was on Jalan Ampang and witnessed an orderly line of policemen guiding a horde of protesters outside KLCC in a scene reminiscent of the many marches I saw in London.

I was very impressed and excited by this, and thought of having a closer look after my previously set appointments at the former Istana Negara and lunch in town, as I was due at the nearby Royal Lake Club at 3.30pm (which had earlier been a starting point for many marchers).

Alas, it was around that time that chemical compounds were fired and sprayed into the crowd at Dataran Merdeka — whether due to a breach by agent provocateurs or genuine protesters who were goaded, encouraged or given false pretences — and the whole thing deteriorated.

This is where accounts diverge. It’s worth pointing out, however, that across the country and globe where simultaneous protests were held in dozens of cities (easily the biggest international Malaysian rally in history), there were no reports of violence at all.

As I have written before, I agree with many of Bersih’s demands. But I fully support the right of peaceful protest and have the utmost respect for my relatives, friends and colleagues (and many of their elderly parents) who took part that day, fully in the knowledge that they might be confronted.

They included people who might have little in common with each other, but were generally united in pursuing cleaner elections in our country.

Some friends did complain that the politicians took too visible a role, and it should have been more solidly a civil society effort, but this seems to be true peculiarly at Dataran Merdeka itself.

Certainly, many participants deemed it a good day for Malaysian democracy, despite the ugly end.

Most ugly of all — and indeed, heartbreaking — were the instances of alleged police aggression that day.

Though the aggression was later attributed to rumours of a policeman being killed by protesters, that these violent instances occurred have now been recognised either tacitly (by way of apology to victims) or explicitly by the Prime Minister, Home Minister and Inspector-General of Police.

Now that they have been admitted, every Malaysian should hope that investigations are conducted properly.

If, as some photographs suggest, some of these thugs are not policemen at all, they and whoever issued them with uniforms must be punished. Of course, any thugs among the protesters should also face justice.

> Tunku ’Abidin Muhriz is the president of IDEAS.

Related posts:
Bersih 3.0 rally: Malaysia braces for electoral reform protests 
Bersih 3.0: the good, bad and ugly Malaysians 
Malaysian police fire tear gas at more than 25,000 protesters, Bersih 3.0 rally 
More than 20000 Malaysians march for election reforms ...

Bersih 3.0: the good, bad and ugly Malaysians

When people who want change take to the streets, some stick to the perimeters of the law while others, with ulterior motives, break barriers and turn things unruly. 

BERSIH 3.0 co-chairman Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan's call for people to show their displeasure and demand for electoral reforms on Saturday brought out thousands of Malaysians from all races and walks of life in a colourful expression of free will.

But Ambiga's calls also brought out the professionals the hardcore saboteurs who dreamt of regime change and the provocateurs who simply wanted chaos and trigger a mass protest that could eventually lead to the toppling of a democratically-elected government.

These people dream of sustained protests on the streets that eventually drive away tourists and worry investors.

Taking law into their own hands: Rioters using sticks and helmets to smash a car carrying the TV3 news crew as it was leaving Jalan Tun Perak, Kuala Lumpur, in 1999, soon after the verdict on Anwar was delivered.

 

Such sustained protests were last seen during the reformasi years in the 1990s with the arrest and jailing of the then Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

The same man was present on Saturday, after warning months earlier that Middle East-style protests could hit South-East Asian countries if the reforms were delayed.



If Ambiga thought she could keep everyone within limits, then she was sadly mistaken.

Different people read differently into a mass protest and the hardcore politicians in the crowd have other ideas too.

Reportedly, PKR deputy president Azmin Ali had egged on the crowd to break down the police barriers at Dataran Merdeka that were put up due to a court order declaring the place “out of bounds”.

Ambiga had given the order to disperse at about 3pm, but some marched forward and broke thorough the barriers.

They pelted a police car with bottles and stones, jumped on it and smashed the windscreen and later overturned it. They then attacked a police motorcycle and tried to grab a policeman's gun.

The attack on the police car was reminiscent of an incident in 1999 when a TV3 car was set upon during the reformasi protest.

At a press conference later, Ambiga expressed shock over the turn of events.

The initial carnival mood where people were giving flowers to FRU personnel, who reciprocated by wearing them, was hijacked by a section of the crowd.

Ambiga described the violence as “highly unusual” and suspected that it could have been instigated by agent provocateurs.

The problem is that while Ambiga heads a civil rights movement which is winning support by the day from young people, who incidentally make up the bulk of new voters, she has chosen to tie that movement with Opposition politics.

She has given Opposition leaders an opportunity to ride on the Bersih movement.

Ostensibly, independent non-politicians fill the Bersih steering committee but they are also enthusiastic Pakatan Rakyat supporters.

The Opposition leaders are hardened politicians who have served time in jail, have courted arrest many times and are willing to take greater risk to trigger mass action.

During the two previous Bersih rallies in November 2007 and July 9 last year, a similar scene took place; a section of the crowd taking over the protest and turning it violent.

The same police force, which was peaceful in the morning, was forced to fire tear gas and arrest protesters in the afternoon.

It brings to mind DAP vice-chairman Senator Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim's warning that by not using the stadiums offered, Bersih 3.0 “encourages Malaysians to break the law”.

He had said he supported an individual's constitutional right to assembly but felt that it must be exercised within the provisions of the law. “As a lawmaker I am not willing to break the law.”

That same advice could also apply to Ambiga, a lawyer, but for politicians who desire regime change it is another matter.

The clock has been turned back on a burgeoning civil rights movement, and what could have been a shining example of peaceful protest, turned into a violent demonstration.

There were no warnings of reprisals in the days leading to Bersih 3.0, no roadblocks set around the city and no arrest of people streaming in for the protest.

But all that was blown away after some protesters breached the police barriers.

Many of the protesters who turned up on Saturday were those who genuinely wanted to bring about positive change. They had meant well and they represented middle Malaysia.

And, for the thousands of young Malaysians who braved Ambiga's call for a sit-in protest over the slow pace of electoral reforms, it was their first baptism of fire and one that they can wear as a badge of honour.

Comment by BARADAN KUPPUSAMY

Related posts:
Bersih 3.0 rally: Malaysia braces for electoral reform protests 
More than 20,000 Malaysians march for election reforms, Bersih 3.0 rally 
Malaysian police fire tear gas at more than 25,000 protesters, Bersih 3.0 rally 
When the Malaysia's Elections will be after Bersih 3 & Occupy Dataran? 
More tests for Malaysian democracy

Malaysian police fire tear gas at more than 25,000 protesters, Bersih 3.0 rally

Riot police use force to disperse crowd of 25,000 protesters seeking electoral reform in capital, Kuala Lumpur.

 
Lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar tells Al Jazeera the demonstrators should have been allowed to protest peacefully

Malaysian riot police have fired tear gas and used water cannon on a crowd of demonstrators demanding an overhaul in electoral policies in the centre of the capital, Kuala Lumpur.

At least 25,000 demonstrators have swamped Malaysia's largest city on Saturday in one of the Southeast Asian nation's biggest street rallies in the past decade.

They massed near the city's historic Merdeka (Independence) Square that police had sealed off with barbed wire and barricades.

Authorities say Bersih, or Coalition for Free and Fair Elections - the opposition-backed pressure group that organised the rally - has no right to use the square.

Some of the demonstrators apparently breached the barriers and police began firing tear gas at them.



Al Jazeera's Harry Fawcett, reporting from Kuala Lumpur, said: "The protest organisers said that they would simply sit down at the barrier’s edge. But an hour after the main part of the protest, they broke through and this confrontation happened."

The rally reflects concerns that Prime Minister Najib Razak's long-ruling coalition will have an unfair upper hand in elections that could be called as early as June.

Activists have alleged the Election Commission is biased and claimed that voter registration lists are tainted with fraudulent voters.



March to the barricades

"We will march to the barrier," Ambiga Sreenivasan, Bersih's chairwoman, said.

Our correspondent added: "As far as the protesters are concerned, the government haven’t met their demands. They want a series of improvements to the electoral system. They are calling for better electoral role. They also want the electoral commission, which runs elections this country, to be entirely reformed.

Saturday's demonstration was organised by an opposition-backed reform group, Bersih [AFP]

“The protest was not what both sides [government and protesters] were talking about. They were talking about peaceful protests. Ideally, the protesters wanted to protest inside Independence Square."

Saturday's gathering follows one crushed by police last July, when 1,600 people were arrested.

That rally for clean elections prompted a police crackdown with tear gas and water cannon.

A resulting backlash prompted Najib, Malaysia's prime minister, to set up a parliamentary panel whose eventual report suggested a range of changes to the electoral system.

But Bersih and the opposition are demanding a complete overhaul of a voter roll considered fraudulent and reform of an Election Commission they say is biased in favour of the governing coalition.

Najib has launched a campaign to repeal authoritarian laws in a bid to create what he called "the greatest democracy".

His ruling coalition has governed Malaysia for more than five decades but made a dismal showing against the opposition in 2008, and Najib is under pressure to improve on that.

Source:

Al Jazeera and agencies

 Newscribe : get free news in real time 

More than 20,000 Malaysians march for election reforms, Bersih 3.0 rally

Protesters of the Bersih (Clean) group shout slogans near Dataran Merdeka, also known as Independence Square, in Kuala Lumpur Photograph: Bazuki Muhammad/REUTERS

Up to 20,000 protesters calling for fair elections and greater accountability marched on Kuala Lumpur's centre on Saturday in a show of force that will test the Malaysian government's reformist pledges and may affect the timing of national polls.

Police shut down much of the city centre and closed off the historic Merdeka (Independence) Square with barriers and barbed wire, enforcing a court order that the protesters should not enter the symbolically important site.

The Bersih (Clean) group that is leading the protest says it will obey the ban but will march as close as possible to the square, raising the possibility of a repeat of violent clashes that marred Bersih's last major protest in July 2011.

"Now it looks like we will have to fight for our right to gather at Merdeka Square as well as fight for free and fair elections," said Muhammed Hafiz, a 28-year-old store clerk who was preparing to join the protest.

Organisers hope the protest will draw 100,000 people, including thousands demonstrating against a controversial rare earths plant being built by Australian firm Lynas on the country's east coast. That would make it the biggest protest since the "Reformasi" (Reform) demonstrations in 1998 against then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad.



A police official estimated the protesters numbered 15,000 to 20,000 by midday with just one arrest reported.

The protest is a delicate challenge for the government of Prime Minister Najib Razak, possibly affecting the timing of elections that he is preparing to call as early as June.

A violent response by police would risk alienating middle-class voters and handing the advantage to the opposition in what is shaping up as the closest election in Malaysia's history, possibly forcing Najib to delay the poll date.

But Najib must be mindful of conservatives in his party who are wary that his moves to relax tough security laws and push limited election reforms could threaten their 55-year hold on power.

Last July's rally, more than 10,000-strong, ended in violence when police fired tear gas and water cannons at the yellow-shirted protesters, drawing criticism of a heavy-handed response and sending Najib's popularity sliding. His approval rating has since rebounded to 69%, according to one poll.

Police helicopters buzzed overhead on Saturday morning as protesters gathered. Reuters correspondents saw about 200 riot police stationed in the square and five water cannons heading to the site where Malaysia declared independence from Britain.

Bersih, an independent movement whose goals are backed by the opposition, has a history of staging influential rallies as Malaysians have demanded more freedoms and democratic rights in the former British colony that has an authoritarian streak.

Younger Malaysians have become more politically active in recent years, chafing at restrictions on student activism.

"The younger generation, especially my generation, want to be involved. Look at Lynas and Bersih. We cannot be quiet," said 19-year-old university student Chan Mei Fong.

The July protest was a watershed moment for Najib, prompting him to promise reform of an electoral system that the opposition says favours the long-ruling National Front coalition.

The National Front is trying to recover from its worst ever election result in 2008 when it lost its two-thirds majority in parliament, giving the diverse, three-party opposition led by former finance minister Anwar Ibrahim real hope of taking power.

Najib has replaced tough security laws - ending indefinite detention without trial - relaxed some media controls, and pushed reforms to the electoral system that critics have long complained is rigged in the government's favour.

A bipartisan parliamentary committee set up by Najib this month issued 22 proposals for electoral reform, including steps to clean up electoral rolls and equal access to media.

But the government gave no guarantee that any of the steps will be in place for the next election.

Bersih says the proposals do not meet most of its key demands, including lengthening the campaign period to at least 21 days from the current seven days. It also wants an independent audit of the electoral roll and international observers at polling stations. Bersih and opposition parties say they have unearthed multiple instances of irregularities in voter rolls, including over 50 voters registered at one address.

Source: guardian.co.uk

Related posts:
Bersih 3.0 rally: Malaysia braces for electoral reform protests
Malaysian police fire tear gas at more than 25,000 protesters, Bersih 3.0 rally 

When the Malaysia's Elections will be after Bersih 3 & Occupy Dataran? 

Bersih 3.0 rally: Malaysia braces for electoral reform protests

KUALA LUMPUR (April 27, 2012): The Police have obtained a court order to bar the organisers of Bersih 3.0 and members of the public from entering Dataran Merdeka beginning April 28 until May 1.

Kuala Lumpur Police Chief Datuk Mohmad Salleh said that the court order obtained from the Kuala Lumpur Magistrate Court last night under Section 98 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) bars the respondent and the public from gathering or having any activities in Dataran Merdeka beginning tomorrow (April 28) until May 1.



He added that taking into consideration the safety and peace of the public in Kuala Lumpur, especially Dataran Merdeka, the police have obtained the court order.

The areas that are barred is all the land surface bordering Jalan Sultan Hishamuddin, Jalan Raja and Jalan Kelab except the area the area occupied by the Royal Selangor Club.

"Seeing that the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) has denied the permission for Bersih 3.0 to have its gathering at Dataran Merdeka, therefore the respondents and the members of the public are prohibited from being or taking part in any gathering in these areas beginning tomorrow until May 1," said Mohmad in a press conference at the Kuala Lumpur Police Contingent headquarters today.

He explained that anyone who defies the court order will violate Section 188 of the Penal Code which carries a jail term of six months, a penalty of up to RM2,000 or both.

Asked if there will be road closures in areas surrounding Dataran Merdeka or leading to the gathering points, Mohmad said it depends on the situation.

When probed further on the matter: "We don't need to inform, that depends on us."

Asked if people are allowed to gather at the six planned meeting points by Bersih, Mohmad said they are allowed to gather but are prohibited from marching as stipulated under the Peaceful Assembly Act 2011, which was enforced on Monday, adding that those who march or conduct street protests may face possible arrests.

The six planned meeting points are Masjid Negara, Jalan Sultan, Jalan Masjid India, Central Market, Brickfields and Kuala Lumpur City Centre (KLCC).

Asked if there will be road closures during the marching of environmental coalition Himpunan Hijau which will make its way from KLCC to the Australian High Commission tomorrow, Mohmad said: "It depends on the situation "

On the Bersih related paraphernalia, including the famous yellow colored T-shirts, Mohmad said people are entitled to wear what they want.

At the last year's Bersih 2.0 rally in July, any paraphernalia related to the election reform coalition was banned from making its appearance in public.

DBKL and Bersih 3.0 organisers are deadlocked over Dataran Merdeka as the venue for the rally, with either side refusing to yield on their respective stands.

Both the Home Ministry and DBKL have offered alternative venues, including Stadium Merdeka, Titiwangsa Stadium and Bukit Jalil Stadium, but the election reform group has rejected the suggestion, saying it had come at too short a notice.

By Hemananthani Sivanandam newsdesk@thesundaily.com

Malaysia Braces for Latest Round of Bersih Protests

 By James Hookway and Celine Fernandez

Today is Bersih day in Malaysia. It’s an increasingly regular phenomenon where prodemocracy activists gather to push for more transparency in elections and complicating life for Prime Minister Najib Razak, who previously has found it difficult to keep the country’s riot police under control.

Last year, police broke up a similar rally with tear gas and water cannons, and briefly detained around 1,600 members of the Bersih group, whose name means ‘clean’ in Malay. That earned Mr. Najib’s government international condemnation, and prompted him to move forward on a series of political reforms, including ending Malaysia’s feared Internal Security Act, which allows for indefinite, warrantless detention.

Despite the changes, Malaysia’s authorities are still leery of letting protesters do anything they like. Analysts say that Malaysia, one of Southeast Asia’s powerhouse economies and a major global exporter of computer parts, energy and palm oil is still a conservative place where many voters and political power-brokers are fearful of large street protests despite the rapid growth of Internet penetration and a proliferation of independent news websites which often are critical of the government.

For instance, the organizers for today’s rally want to muster at Merdeka, or Independence, Square, the swath of land in downtown Kuala Lumpur where Malaysia first hoisted its national flag after securing independence from Britain in 1957. They are demanding that the country’s electoral rolls are cleaned up to prevent fraudulent voting and that alleged biases within the country’s election agency are removed. In addition, they want international observers to monitor the polls – which must be called by next March – and also ensure that all political parties get similar access to government-controlled broadcasters and newspapers, who dominate the media landscape in Malaysia. The protests also want to enable Malaysians living overseas to be able to cast ballots.

Authorities, though, don’t consider Merdeka Square an appropriate venue, and have offered to provide nearby stadiums for the protesters. Bersih leaders say the offer came too late.

Now, Merdeka Square is cordoned off with barricades and razor wires, and the Bersih protesters intend to mass outside the area instead – a move which could lead to another confrontation with police and further embarrass Mr. Najib who has been trying to make a name for himself as one of Asia’s quieter, but more effective, reformers. Commuter trains leading from Kuala Lumpur’s suburbs to the center of the city meanwhile are carrying large numbers of protesters wearing Bersih’s distinctive yellow t-shirts.

“It is a bit déjà vu, isn’t it?” Ambiga Sreenevasan, one of the Bersih group’s co-founders, said Friday. “To be fair, it is not the same (as last year). There is a recognition that we have the right to assemble. I think no one has disputed that. There is a recognition that we are not a security threat… I think the only dispute is where (we can protest).”

That alone seems to be a difficult point for both sides to resolve, however. Ms. Ambiga said the easiest way for the authorities to handle the problem is to simply lift the barriers to Merdeka Square – but that’s likely a move too far for Malaysia’s cautious leaders.

Malaysia braces for electoral reform rally

Security tightened in the capital as protesters gather to demand reform of the electoral system.

Malaysian authorities sealed off Independence Square on Friday ahead of the sit-in [AFP]

Hundreds of police and civilian security officers have been deployed in the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur, where protesters began to gather hours before a scheduled mass rally calling for electoral reforms. Supporters of the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections gathered in an open park in central Kuala Lumpur for Friday's demonstration. The Kuala Lumpur city government on Friday cordoned off the park after securing a court order to prevent the protest. Protesters have said they will march to the barricades and demand access but vowed to remain peaceful. "We will march to the barrier," said Ambiga Sreenivasan, chairwoman of Bersih, an electotal reform pressure group. Al Jazeera's Harry Fawcett reporting from Kuala Lumpur says: "Already we are hearing that thousands are near Independence Square, there will be a significant turnout." "The police say they will intervene if people defy the order and cross into the square," said our correspondent. Public backlash The mass rally follows one crushed by police last July, when 1,600 people were arrested, and marks a major test for Prime Minister Najib Razak ahead of widely expected elections. Last July's rally for clean elections brought tens of thousands to the streets of the capital, prompting a police crackdown with tear gas and water cannon. A resulting backlash prompted Najib to set up a parliamentary panel whose eventual report suggested a range of changes to the electoral system. But Bersih and the opposition are demanding a complete overhaul of a voter roll considered fraudulent and reform of an Election Commission they say is biased in favour of the ruling coalition. The rally is a direct challenge to Najib, who since last year's crackdown, has launched a campaign to repeal authoritarian laws in a bid to create what he called "the greatest democracy". His ruling coalition has governed Malaysia for more than five decades but made a dismal showing against the opposition in 2008, and Najib is under pressure to improve on that. Elections are not due until next year but speculation is rife that Najib could call them as early as June.

Source: Al Jazeera and agencies

Newscribe : get free news in real time Related posts: Bersih rally awakening the young voters in Malaysian ... Bersih 2.0 Winners or Losers? Time to move on! Yellow: What's behind the shade & Bersih 2.0?  Bersih_PR - UMNO_BN Cyberbattle to own the 'truth'  Yellow: What's behind the shade & Bersih 2.0?

PTPTN student loan, Bersih 3.0, 'Occupy Dataran' ...

The case for PTPTN to stay....

Higher education is not a right but a privilege and the Government cannot provide subsidies for everything. And European countries famous for fully subsidising tertiary education are moving away from that system. 

A PROPOSED overhaul in the way tertiary education is funded in our country has added to the number of causes being combined with Bersih 3.0 due tomorrow.

The suggestion is that the National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN), which provides loans to students pursuing their higher education, should be replaced by a fully subsidised system in which (most/all) students receive fully government-funded tertiary education.

PTPTN abolitionists charge that it is administratively inefficient and unfair to leave graduates with a mountain of debt, costly to the taxpayer because of low repayment rates (and subsequent costs of having to forcibly recover dues), and un-Islamic due to the charging of interest.

Though I was not a beneficiary of PTPTN, I routinely meet young people who are, through the education sub-committee of Yayasan Munarah, the royal foundation funded solely by private and corporate donations.

Since the start of our education fund last year, we have screened over a thousand applications for financial aid and I have personally interviewed hundreds of them at our office in Seremban.

Of the nearly RM500,000 disbursed so far, most cases involve the “topping up” of the amount students had already received from PTPTN, Mara and private sources.

In these 15-minute interviews, no student has ever complained about PTPTN; rather, the hardworking students often show gratitude to the fund, providing a contrast to the attitude of the Dataran Merdeka protesters.

What has impressed me in the denunciation of replacing a voluntary loan system with a compulsory subsidised system is that many commentators in the mainstream and alternative media object to the loss of individual responsibility that this will entail; young citizens will no longer feel that they owe anyone anything in exchange for the tuition, and this does not encourage responsible citizenship.

Higher education is not a right but a privilege, they say, and the Government cannot provide subsidies for everything.

Articles also point out that European countries famous for fully subsidising tertiary education are moving away from that system, though even so, those countries embedded competition between universities enabled by sponsoring students directly, rather than fully funding universities, so that a market mechanism is at work to reward the cleverest students and the best universities.

Indeed the potential impact of this proposal on our universities needs to be highlighted.

European universities possess much more autonomy than ours do – even if they are state-funded – allowing for areas of specialisation and different preferences to be accommodated.

Our public universities are not used to such competition, and may end up decomposing into a stultifying heap of monotonous, mediocre institutions unless autonomy is granted first.

The opposite approach is taken in the US, where universities are very independent and often expensive; but a deep tradition of alumni endowments for scholarships and bursaries enable academic merit to remain the main criteria of admission.

At the same time, one of the assumptions in effect in this whole debate is the idea that the primary purpose of tertiary education is to prepare one for a job that can pay back the cost of that education while contributing to national economic growth.

This offends the very principle of education for its own sake as well as the idea that the arts have merely an economic value.

I have long objected to Government attempts to engineer society by providing scholarships or loans for some subjects and not others.

If public money is being used to subsidise education, then it must grant every young Malaysian access to that money without discrimination.

I have met dozens of young Malaysians whose dreams of becoming historians or performers have been scuppered because they are discriminated against in favour of those who want to become doctors or engineers (tellingly, Aswara comes under the Culture Ministry, not the Higher Education Ministry).

The academic profile of the next generation of Malaysians should be shaped by their own preferences and perceptions of their futures, not by the dictate of someone with a crystal ball in Putrajaya.

If you agree that tertiary education funding should be designed to allow maximum freedom for students on the one hand to pursue the disciplines of their choosing without guilt, and institutions of higher learning on the other to compete amongst themselves – then it is more likely that this will be achieved by reviewing the current loan system (including repayment mechanisms), developing vocational options and granting much more autonomy to universities, including on financial matters.

> Tunku ’Abidin Muhriz is President of IDEAS.

Related posts:
PTPTN l student loans: stick to its guns, written off, learn ...
Half a million Malaysians banned from leaving country, PTPTN loan an 
Angry with the Malaysian education system in a mess 
Angers to the deception of Malaysian Chinese education 
To teach or to manage?
Education Doesn't Increase Support for Affirmative ... 
Malaysian education heavily politicised, Quality ...

2011 was year for the protester

Tweet

This image released by Time Magazine shows the Person of the Year issue featuring "The Protester." The magazine on Wednesday, Dec. 14, 2011 cited dissent across the Middle East that has spread to Europe and the United States, and says these protesters are reshaping global politics. (AP Photo/Time Magazine) >>

Year that was for the protester

The silly season is already on us and no doubt will be a fractious and prolonged one going into 2012. 

 MUSINGS By MARINA MAHATHIR

IT’S the end of the year and, like everyone else, I’m going to try and summarise what made it an interesting year indeed.

Time magazine named The Protester as its Person of the Year in 2011.

I couldn’t agree more, because really few people have made an impact on society than protesters this year.

From the protesters in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya and Syria to the Occupy Wall Street protesters and its many offshoots, these largely peaceful protests have forced things to change in their societies.

In the Middle East, corrupt and authoritarian leaders have been forced to step down. In some, it’s still an ongoing battle.

Of course, these steps towards democracy are not perfect. Nor are the results. But that’s democracy for you.



Just because people don’t know what they want is no reason to dismiss democracy.

It is the fact that they finally have choices is the triumph, after so many years of not having any.

For those who insist on equating the London riots with the Arab Spring, do get your facts right.

The former was not about changing an authoritarian government for a more democratic one, nor was it meant to be peaceful.

The latter was a peaceful demand for change; the violence came from the government response.

If you want to equate the London riots with the Syrian government’s response, perhaps it would be more accurate.

Time magazine has mostly recognised the Arab, Spanish and American protesters in their essay.

But perhaps they should have also looked eastwards.

I think the Bersih rally goers, protesting peacefully for clean and fair elections, are also deserving of the award.

For the first time, ordinary Malaysians went out to demand what should be their right, to be able to vote fairly.

Young and old of all races and religions, Malaysians marched to protect this basic human right. And were demonised because of it.

While the Government responded to the Bersih demands by establishing the Parliamentary Special Committee on electoral reforms, at the same time the so-called Peaceful Assembly Act – aimed at curbing any other rallies like Bersih – was passed.

In any case, it is delusional to think that curbing protests will curb rebellious thoughts. These will continue to thrive in 2012, that’s for sure.

Perhaps 2011 was also the year of the Strong Woman.

On the international scene, not one but three women won the Nobel Peace Prize this year: President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia, Leymah Gbowee, also of Liberia, and Tawakkol Karman of Yemen, the youngest-ever recipient.

It’s interesting that all of these women are rebellious women, who refused to accept the established, and patriarchal, way of doing things.

Instead, they found their own way, and worked for peace in their countries.

Malaysia, too, has its share of strong women. Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan is the prime example of someone who has had to withstand personal attacks from all quarters like no other person has had to in our country, yet still carries on with her strong principles.

Let it never be said that she lacks courage.

For women to get ahead, it really is imperative that they have the sort of integrity and display the sort of ethical behaviour that we often find lacking in men.

This year is, of course, also the year of the Obedient Wives Club, hardly a great leap forward for womankind.

Nevertheless, the OWC knew exactly how to get publicity for their causes.

And, I suspect, despite the sniggers over their sex manual, there are many who actually agree with their basic premise, that a good wife is one who blindly obeys her husband even when she doesn’t feel like it.

Finally, this year has been a bad year for justice and equality.

Children born less than six months after their parents married are considered illegitimate, thus forcing them to bear the sins of their parents.

Even if legitimate, children can be married off at even 10 years old, surely a blight on our society if we are to consider ourselves progressive.

Muslim women still don’t have the same rights as their non-Muslim sisters when it comes to marriage, property and inheritance.

And people of different sexual orientations are not regarded as full citizens.

I’d like to be optimistic about 2012 but that does not look likely.

The silly season is already on us and no doubt will be a fractious and prolonged one.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, folks!

PAS Deputy President, Mat Sabu, In the spotlight for wrong reason?

Tweet

In the spotlight for wrong reason

INSIGHT: By JOCELINE TAN

Mohamad Sabu’s provocative style is being scrutinised in the hot glare of the spotlight now that he is deputy president of PAS, and he is making news. 

IT was not surprising that Mohamad Sabu’s latest “eruption” happened in Tasik Gelugor, the rural Malay outskirts on the mainland side of Penang.

The PAS deputy president, better known as Mat Sabu, has his sights set on Penang in the next general election and Tasik Gelugor is one of the parliamentary seats he is eyeing.

The plan is one of those poorly kept secrets among Penang Pakatan Rakyat leaders who hope that the fiery orator who shoots from the hip will lend his weight in the defence of Penang and help the Chinese-dominated coalition connect with the Malay ground.

Provocative style: Mat Sabu’s shoot-from-the-hip political style is changing the image of PAS. He is seen here in a wheelchair with his wife Norma Alwi (left) arriving for a dinner-cum-ceramah not long after the Bersih protest.

Mat Sabu and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng are what some call NBF, that is, New Best Friends. He is the DAP’s idea of what a PAS leader should be. He speaks their lingo, does not always go around dressed like some Middle-Eastern citizen and is clued in on current issues. His political style is not very different from that of DAP leaders; he is a street-fighter whose speeches are as witty as they are about banging and slamming his opponents.

In fact, he has often told friends, “I am a bazaari (an Iranian term for street-fighter).”

Mat Sabu is without a doubt the most controversial leader in PAS today. He has been making headline news since becoming the PAS No. 2 in June and he is trying to make his presence felt in Penang where he was born.

The trouble is that he not only shoots from the hip, he also sometimes shoots himself in the foot.
His remarks about the Bukit Kepong affairs, made in the heat of a ceramah and used as an analogy of how history is often written by the victors, were one such instance.

Historical interpretation is not against the law but the tone of his remarks, coming on the eve of National Day, was tasteless timing and simply politically incorrect. And it is up in YouTube where everyone can hear for themselves what he said.

Batang Kali massacre [In Cold Blood - BBC]

There is no denying that he referred to the pro-Communist attackers in Bukit Kepong as “those fighting for independence” while the police personnel under attack were dismissed as belonging “to the British” and thus part of the colonialists. The fact is that home-grown policemen and soldiers fought alongside the British during the insurgency years and many died for their country.



Mat Sabu is not pro-Communist but his words came across as irreverent of the role of the security forces in the nation’s struggle for independence and against communism.

His Pakatan colleagues have defended him but he has been made mincemeat by Utusan Malaysia, which has devoted pages of coverage on the issue, and including reports of noted historian Prof Emeritus Tan Sri Khoo Kay Khim and DAP chairman Karpal Singh chiding him for his version of Bukit Kepong.

This is barely two months after his spectacular clash with the police during the Bersih protests. His knee, which he injured during the protests, has yet to recover and these days, he sits down when speaking at ceramah. The circumstances surrounding his knee injury is still a matter of dispute and even the injury itself is surrounded by mystery.

Immediately after the Bersih demonstrations, he had appeared at a string of high-profile functions in a wheelchair, claiming that a police Land Rover had rammed into him as he was riding pillion on a motorcycle. He was hailed as an injured hero.

It made the police look really bad, but when the police released a video showing otherwise, Mat Sabu’s attacks ground to a stop and he told reporters pursuing the story that he would respond to them in court.

He has since stopped talking about the incident and is now confronted by queries over his billing of the medical treatment for the injury to the Penang Water Authority of which he is a board member.

“But the most shocking part about the Bukit Kepong issue was that he said he could not really remember what he said. To me, that was more terrible than if he had really said all those things. A leader cannot say something and then a few days later, tell us he cannot remember,” said restaurateur Juhaidi Yean Abdullah.

Juhaidi recalled hearing Mat Sabu and several other PAS politicians speak at a ceramah shortly after the Al Mauna incident, where a cult of Islamic extremists had attacked a military camp, seized ammunition and then proceeded to kill the hostages one by one.

“They claimed it was a sandiwara (shadow play or conspiracy) engineered by the Government to discredit the Islamists. I remember feeling quite sad when the mother of one of those killed asked: ‘If it is a sandiwara, why has my son not come home?’” said Juhaidi.

A more thorough investigation of that tragic episode has been screened on Astro’s Discovery channel and it has helped put the matter to rest.

Drama king

But it does seem that Mat Sabu, like many of his friends who dominate the ceramah circuit, has a tendency to make dramatic claims and statements.

“He once told me that even if he is sick and down with fever, if you give him a microphone, he will recover and does not need to see the doctor. He is the sort of guy – you put a microphone in his hand, put him on a stage and he becomes a different person. But once the curtain comes down, he is back to his normal self,” said blogger Syed Azidi Syed Aziz, also known as Kickdefella.

Mat Sabu has always had a no-holds barred style. At the height of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sacking, Mat Sabu who has had issues with Anwar dating back to their days in Abim was going around, giving ceramah and talking about “Al Juburi”, which is Arab for the A-word.

The Malays call it mulut tak ada insuran (uninsured mouth, meaning that what is said could be libellous).
Not everybody likes his aggressive style, especially his habit of calling people names. He was deemed so controversial at one stage that he was not invited to speak at ceramah during by-elections.

There is no denying that Mat Sabu has a folksy charm and a certain boyishness about him although he is now 57 and rather overweight. He is a crowd-puller and PAS members flock to listen to him because they are guaranteed of entertainment. He is often the last person to speak so that the crowd will stay on till the end.

“His enemies are frightened when he speaks. At the same time, his style attracts the bullets of Umno,” said Harakahdaily editor-in-chief Zulkifli Sulong.

The Umno assemblyman for Ketereh in Kelantan, Datuk Alwi Che Ahmad, has a cynical but witty take on Mat Sabu.

“I will remember him forever. I became a political secretary to a minister because of him,” he said with a laugh.

Mat Sabu had contested against Tan Sri Annuar Musa in Nilam Puri, Kelantan, in the 1990 general election. It was a big fight with lots of ceramah going on. At one ceramah, the Kelantan-born Annuar had said in jest: “Why do you want to vote for Mat Sabu? He is an outsider. I am a local boy, more educated. I studied in two universities. I am taller and more handsome.”

Mat Sabu rebutted in similar vein at his own ceramah: “Anuar Musa is better educated, taller, more handsome but I am more popular, especially among the women.”

He went on to crush Annuar with a majority of 8,000 votes. Annuar was subsequently appointed a senator and minister and that was how Alwi became his political secretary.

Mat Sabu’s political enemies had been quite willing to forget the khalwat episode where he was apprehended with another woman in a Kota Baru hotel in 1995. After all, he had won a discharge and acquittal after two witnesses contradicted each other on the hotel room number.

But now that he is on top, his detractors are digging out the dirt again. A video titled Skandal Sexs Mat Sabu (sex scandal of Mat Sabu) has been making the rounds in the Ampang area. However, the video was apparently about another Pakatan leader.

PAS MP for Parit Buntar Mujahid Yusof accused the mainstream media of picking on Mat Sabu especially after he became the party No. 2.

“He has always been the sort to provoke, and he is bringing the party to a new audience. But why is it that in the last three months, he is always in the media? The media is manipulating it,” said Mujahid.

It is true the media is taking a more intense look at Mat Sabu following his rise in PAS; that is only natural. When one is up there, one cannot go on acting or talking in the same way as when one was down there.

And especially when one is the No. 2 in the party, everything said and done is scrutinised and analysed. Mat Sabu is learning that it is now harder to get away with outlandish statements. He will be held accountable because the public will read the statements as the party’s stand.

Mat Sabu’s latest trouble may also be connected to the way Pakatan politicians have been chipping away at the system and institutions like the judiciary, the police and security forces, and even the civil service. They have questioned the reputation of bodies like the MACC and the Election Commission. These are institutions which they believe have been unfair to them and which are standing in the way of their quest to control Putrajaya.

They are so used to criticising the police that Mat Sabu may not have realised he had stepped beyond the boundary when talking about Bukit Kepong.

The outcry over his remarks is not purely about politics. It is also because there are very few Malay families who do not have a family member or relative in the police or army. As such, criticism of these bodies is bound to hit sensitive nerves all over the place. There is a limit to criticising the men and women who put their lives on the line for our security and well-being.

But Mat Sabu, controversial firebrand and all, was the party’s choice. Members were disenchanted with the passivity of some of their ulama leaders and they saw in Mat Sabu someone who could push their cause on a more political path. He has given them their money’s worth thus far.

He is such a contrast to the studied style of his president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang although some wish that he was a little more like Hadi.

But Mat Sabu will always be Mat Sabu, and the roller-coaster ride he is taking his party on has just begun.