Home Blog Page 548

Can Abdullah save Umno and the BN?

Anil Netto
-
15

I have been wondering about Zaid’s remarks on the 1988 Judicial Crisis. Has he really turned over a new leaf compared to the immediate aftermath of the 1988 crisis, especially in the light of his statements that he has apologised?

This report from The Star:

Zaid: I never endorsed Lord President Salleh Abas’ dismissal
By SHAHANAAZ HABIB

KUALA LUMPUR: Minister-in-charge of law Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has denied ever supporting the sacking of Lord President Tun Salleh Abas in 1988.

“In fact, I say to you today that it was not right,” he said.

However, as the Muslim Lawyers Association president then, he had said that it was legal, according to the Constitution, for Tun Hamid Omar, Salleh’s number two, to chair the tribunal set up to try Salleh.

But while Hamid’s appointment was legal, it was morally wrong and a conflict of interest for Hamid to have accepted the tribunal chairman post as he had stood to gain from Salleh’s dismissal, said Zaid.

“Whether he used that position to benefit from it only God knows,” he said yesterday at a press conference.

In 1988, Salleh as Lord President wrote to the King on behalf of all judges expressing disappointment over the then prime minister (Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s accusations against the judiciary.

Salleh was then suspended and sacked by a tribunal chaired by Hamid who later became Lord President.

Zaid said yesterday that he had opposed the Bar Council’s boycott of Hamid as Lord President then but stressed it would be wrong for anyone to construe that as his endorsement of Salleh’s dismissal.

“I don’t recollect ever having said that the grounds of dismissal were fair or just.”

A friend of mine said Zaid’s comments reminds him of Bill Clinton’s response to whether he smoked marijuana when he was young: he said he took puffs of it but did not inhale!

Okay, he has apologised – but Zaid is being a bit disingenuous here. He should have known that Hamid would benefit from his position on the tribunal then. Any independent observer would say that Hamid had to know that if Salleh was sacked, he (Hamid) would take over as Lord President. It was as simple as that. And Mahathir – along with the challenge to his position within Umno – was instrumental in triggering the whole crisis, no doubt about that. Anyway, let’s wait and see what Zaid has in store for the judiciary.

A political analyst friend of mine wrote a response to my recent Asia Times piece, which I have adapted into an interview format:

Q: Should we rely on Zaid to reform the judiciary?

Analyst: People can change, and that’s good. But it does appear that too many have forgotten Zaid’s early incarnation as the Muslim lawyers association president. It was then a breakaway faction from the Bar Council, constituted on racial-religious lines. And I don’t think it an accident that Sulaiman Abdullah has welcomed his remarks most warmly, including the remark of his intending to stay around for a long time to see through the reforms — that’s a comment left by Sulaiman on the Bar’s website carrying the report on Zaid.

I think we should call for the tribunal proceedings to be released in full. That would be a start.

What do you think of the proposed regional economic corridors? Are they a more effective alternative to Mahathir’s model of development and all his mega projects?

The Corridors — they are the ultimate in patronage/corruption. We think Mahathir’s mega-projects were bad? They are nothing compared to these Corridors. Don’t know about SJER and NCER, but there wasn’t even a proper study done for Score (the Sarawak one); it just came out of the blue. ECER was done by Petronas in-house, by someone who really isn’t equipped to do the necessary background work.

And we are committing RM1.2 trillion to them! The strange thing about the Corridors is that I’ve been trying to find out who the consultants were — heck, they call in consultants for smaller things — and it seems no one knows. Also been rummaging around to get hold of the background technical reports; again, no luck. So maybe they just don’t exist.

What are the chances of Abdullah pushing through meaningful reforms to improve his – and Umno/BN’s – present dismal position?

Come on — if he didn’t, or couldn’t do it, when he was riding high with that huge mandate, there’s no way he can do it now. Look at Mahathir, who was a much more tough-minded character — after he was weakened by the Anwar affair, he was a lame duck, biding time. All the earlier moves towards dismantling NEP restrictions came to a screeching halt.

Is Abdullah more open to press freedom than Mahathir?

…what i heard was that (during Abdullah’s tenure) there were more instructions to the editorial rooms on coverage of stories than ever before. In Mahathir’s time, it wasn’t so much instructions, as that either people had been removed — serving as examples — or else there was just all this second-guessing and of course the closure (of more independent-minded newspapers) in 1987 to serve as instruction.

What do you think of Anwar forcing a by-election after his ban on politics expires in April?

I think we should say no to anyone stepping down to force a by-election. These things are costly affairs. Let him bide his time, spend it providing the leadership to pull together the state governments, setting the overall tone. Then next round he can go in, or if there’s a necessary by-election.

How was it those in the BN were unaware that they were heading for a major setback? Didn’t they know?

(I) just heard from someone (who chatted with someone close to the ruling elite just before polling day that)… (those close to the top felt that there) was no way they would lose the two-thirds (majority). They knew Kelantan was gone, but that was it.

… the content of that conversation bore out my earlier fears that this was a dry run for Umno going it alone. They thought they had the Malay vote — somehow they couldn’t read it — and (there was this view held by certain quarters) that in ten years time, the Chinese would only be (a much smaller minority) of the population.

… perhaps that shows up their incompetence — but it’s indicative that they were calculating that even without the Chinese vote, they could do it. Their calculation was that they would have 40 per cent of the Indian vote — and it appears they weren’t far off overall — and 40 per cent of the Chinese vote — on which they were optimistic. They figured the top MIC guys would go, but figured the MCA and Gerakan guys would pull through.

Problem of course is that global percentages are useless in elections, as each seat is fought on its own. So they probably got 60 per cent of the Indian vote in Johor and possibly in Malacca and Negri Sembilan, but in the seats in the rebel states, where Indian votes played a big role, they generally got less than 40 per cent.

A vulnerable Abdullah casts a wary eye at rivals

Anil Netto
-
7

From now onwards, Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi will be casting a wary eye on all sides as rivals such as Tengku Razaleigh and Anwar sense his considerably weakened position, never mind that the BN is just eight seats short of a two-thirds majority.

After all, under his stewardship, the BN lost five states and received less than 50 per cent of the popular vote in the peninsula – its worst ever performance.

Meanwhile, folks like Khairy, Patrick Lim and even Nazri have been ever so quiet….

The only hope for Umno is if it introduces wide-ranging reforms. But the KL-based political commentator mentioned in the article below told me that Umno is incapable of that, so deep is the rot.

Here is an article I wrote for Asia Times:


Knives out for Malaysia’s Abdullah
By Anil Netto

PENANG – Malaysia’s politics is still in flux after this month’s watershed general election in which opposition parties made their sharpest inroads into the government since the country gained independence in 1957. And the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, comprised of 13 component parties, is still struggling to come to terms with the implications of the setback.

Although BN parties won 140 of Parliament’s 222 seats, it lost five states to the opposition, including three of the wealthiest and economically important ones in the federation. Now the ruling coalition is being unnerved by talk of possible defections of its parliamentarians to opposition ranks, which now has 82 seats.

Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, who predicted the BN would garner a two-thirds majority at the polls, looks considerably weaker inside his once dominant United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party. Full article

Christian leaders must denounce the US war in Iraq

Anil Netto
-
18

Robert Waldrop

Meet Robert Waldrop (left), one of the leading lights of the Catholic Worker movement in the United States. Bob runs the Oscar Romero Catholic Worker House in Oklahoma, US. His powerful words – more than the way he looks – remind me of a biblical Old Testament prophet speaking truth to power!

The Catholic Worker movement was founded by the late Dorothy Day, who campaigned in defence of the poor, forsaken, hungry and homeless, and Peter Maurin. On her 75th birthday, Day was described by a Jesuit magazine as the individual who best exemplified “the aspiration and action of the American Catholic community during the past forty years.”

In the best traditions of the Catholic Worker movement, Bob has also been vocal in the anti-war movement within the Catholic Church, in line with Pope John Paul II’s opposition to the war in Iraq. He feels that US Catholic Bishops have not done enough to conscientise Catholics about the evils of war, invasion and occupation.

This is an open letter from Bob to His Eminence Francis Cardinal George, OMI, Archbishop of Chicago

Dear Cardinal George

I have read the news reports and the Archdiocesan statement concerning the disruption of an Easter mass that you celebrated at your Cathedral. Your official statement says, in part. . . “This is a profoundly disturbing action. . . It is a sacrilege that should be condemned by all people of faith and good will.”

Although I actively oppose the unjust war the United States is waging on the people of Iraq, I agree that the demonstrators action was disturbing and sacrilegious.

However, theirs was not the first sacrilegious act of that day. The sacrilege commenced when you ascended to the Altar of God and began to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with your hands dripping with the blood of the innocent in Iraq whom you and most of the other United States Catholic Bishops have so callously abandoned to their grisly and violent fates. Like the rest of the US Bishops save one, you issued no canonical declaration forbidding Catholics of the Archdiocese of Chicago from participation in the unjust war on the people of Iraq. A review of your website finds no pastoral letter instructing the souls entrusted to your care about the Church’s teachings on unjust war and condemning the war on the people of Iraq as unjust. Like nearly all of your confreres in the US hierarchy, you have preached a gospel of moral relativism and moral laxism that makes a mockery of the Church’s teachings on life. You claim you want “peace”, but you have done nothing to actually support peace other than to offer pious platitudes and hypocritical rhetoric from your position of safety in your palatial Chicago residence.

Your holidays and festivals I detest, they weigh me down, I tire of the load. When you spread out your hands, I close my eyes to you; though you pray the more, I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood! Wash yourselves clean! Put away your misdeeds before my eyes; cease doing evil, learn to do good. Make justice your aim, redress the wronged, hear the orphan’s plea, defend the widow. Isaiah 1

I am obviously just an obscure Catholic Worker. You and all the other bishops have consistently ignored everything I have had to say to you since I started writing bishops on the Feast of the Holy Innocents in 2001. Which is fine with me, I am not interested in collecting letters of denial from bishops and cardinals making excuses for their moral cowardice. The charism of the Catholic Worker movement is faithfulness to the Gospel of Justice and Peace – even when all of the United States bishops save a small handful choose Nationalism over Catholicism. So once more I write again these words of inconvenient faithfulness, to remind you that God is watching every moment of your reign as Archbishop and Cardinal and you will one day be accountable for these actions.

God was watching when you refused to properly catechize your people about unjust war.

God was watching when you refused to forbid Chicago Catholics from participating in an unjust war.

God was watching when you dined with the Tyrant-Emperor George Bush, and you did not condemn him as a murderer and prosecutor of an unjust war.

A reading from the book of the Prophet Micah. . .

And I said, Listen you leaders of Jacob, house of Israel! Is it not your duty to know what is right, you who hate what is good, and love evil? You who tear their skin from them and their flesh from their bones? They eat the flesh of my people and flay their skin from them, and break their bones. They chop them in pieces like flesh in a kettle, and like meat in a caldron. When they cry to the Lord, he shall not answer them, rather shall God hide from them at that time, because of the evil they have done.

Thus says the LORD regarding the prophets who lead my people astray; Who, when their teeth have something to bite, announce peace, But when one fails to put something in their mouth, proclaim war against him.

Therefore you shall have night, not vision, darkness, not divination; The sun shall go down upon the prophets, and the day shall be dark for them.

Then shall the seers be put to shame, and the diviners confounded; They shall cover their lips, all of them, because there is no answer from God. . . .

Therefore, because of you, Zion shall be plowed like a field, and Jerusalem reduced to rubble, And the mount of the temple to a forest ridge.

So as it turns out, when you condemn these young people, you condemn yourself.

Which is worse? A prince of the church who by any objective judgment is a moral coward who has preached a false gospel of moral laxism and relativism regarding an unjust war? Or a few young people, who hear the cries of the victims, and in despair act out in such a public manner? Is it not true that your own abject failure as a Cardinal Archbishop provoked these young people to such a rash action? Are you not, then, a “secondary disrupter” of your own Mass, and thus have a significant share in the responsibility for their deeds? Have not your actions — or rather, inactions — violated the inalienable rights of the people of Iraq to life? Who, then, is really at fault in this matter? These young protestors? Or a cowardly Cardinal Archbishop, who shuts his eyes, ears, and heart to the cries of the people of Iraq for justice and peace and is a scandal before the entire world?

I write these words to you, in remembrance of the hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and soldiers who have died in this unjust war on the people of Iraq. One day you will meet them and they will tell you of their terror, pain, and fear and they will ask you, “Why, in the name of God, did you not do something serious to stop this from happening?”

I pray that God has mercy on your soul and brings you to an understanding of the grave evil and moral disorders that you and the other United States Catholic Bishops foster and encourage by your moral cowardice in the face of this unjust war on the people of Iraq

Sincerely,

Bob Waldrop
Oscar Romero Catholic Worker House
1524 NW 21st
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73106
www.justpeace.org

A Prayer to Our Lady of Sorrows for Those Who Will Die Today in War

Our Lady of Sorrows,
we pray for all those who will die
today because of war and economic chaos,
especially the children.
Prepare them for the agony, despair,
and terror of the violence that is upon them.
Comfort them and
hold them close to the bosom of
thy most Immaculate Heart
as they drink deeply of the bitter cup
which is forced upon them.
Wipe their tears, calm their fears,
welcome them to peace and safety.
Eternal rest grant to them,
and may perpetual light shine upon them.

Our Most Holy Lady of Sorrows,
Overturn the thrones of tyranny, scatter the unjust,
give us your grace and strength to
stand against the demonic powers
which prowl about the world
seeking the ruin of souls.
Amen.

State official forces last-minute change of venue for election talk

Anil Netto
-
12

More little Napoleons at work.

Just received the following from Suaram Penang:

A ban has been ordered by the state authority on SUARAM election talks!

SUARAM Penang has received a last-minute call from the Caring Society Complex person-in-charge last night (26/3/08), who claimed that the Penang state Secretariat has ordered a ban on the coming Friday and Saturday’s democracy talks.

The ban has been ordered by the vice state secretary Muhammad Yusoff bin Wazir who commented ‘the talks look and smell political’, thus it contradicts with the ‘caring and harmony’ image of Caring Society Complex. Despite the ban, the talks will remain on Friday and Saturday nights. The venue has been switched to Penang Chinese Town Hall in Jalan Kapitan Keling (or known as Pitt street).

The analysis of general election talk titled “To Where Democratization of Malaysia” has proudly invited speakers like Datuk Dr. Toh Kin Woon, Mr. Wong Chin Huat, Jeff Ooi and Ani Netto. All press is welcomed to do coverage on the two-day event.

Date: 28 March 2008

Time: 8pm

Venue: Penang Chinese Town Hall

Speakers: Datuk Dr Toh Kin Woo, Mr. Wong Chin Huat and Jeff Ooi.

Moderator: Yeo Siew Yean

Language: Mandarin

 

Date: 29 March 2008

Time: 8pm

Venue: Penang Chinese Town Hall

Speakers: Mr. Wong Chin Huat and Anil Netto

Moderator: Ng Eng Kiat

Language: English

Mr. Wong Chin Huat is a journalism lecturer of the School of Arts and Sciences in Arts Discipline, Monash University, Sunway campus (Malaysia).He completed/He obtained his PhD in the University of Essex in electoral system and party politics in West Malaysia, 1982-2004. Before joining the academia, he had been working as a political columnist and lobbyist. He co-initiated the “People Are the Boss” declaration in 1999 and is currently the chairperson of the Writers Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI)

Mr. Anil Netto, an Exco member of ALIRAN, is a famous blogger (small-time only-lah!) that also writes for Aliran Monthly, Inter Press Service, Asia Times and The Herald

We first saw denying the BN two-thirds majority as an insurmountable task, but have been pleasantly shocked and surprised. This time around, BN has been denied a two-third majority in parliament for the first time.

Apart from discussing why the results were the way they were, it is also important for us to discuss what the next is for people.

For those who interested in better understanding of political develepment in Malaysia, all are welcome to the talk, free admission.

Any inquiry please contacts Lau Shu Shi 012-8756179 or 04-6582285.

Lau Shu Shi

Coordinator of SUARAM Penang branch

012-8756179/04-6582285

The Caring Society Complex is supposed to be for civil society groups. But it looks as if you are not supposed to be “caring” about the political situation.

Will Gerakan leave BN?

Anil Netto
-
57

Over the years, Gerakan has tried to change or reform the Barisan “from within” – or so it likes to claim. Clearly, it has failed. Did the BN instead end up changing Gerakan? The question on many people’s minds is, now what for the party that had governed Penang for close to 40 years?

In a personal comment piece for the New Sunday Times, the former state exco member for Penang, Toh Kin Woon, suggested several options for Gerakan after its disastrous performance in the general election:

One is to stay in BN and have more of the same, with the party unable to abandon its racial character. This is the least desirable for it may lead to the party’s oblivion.

The second is to stay and seek reforms from within. One major reform, and one which had been advocated earlier by the party’s Youth chief, is for all component parties to merge to form a truly multiracial BN.

Besides doing away with racial appeals, it will avert the seemingly lack of parity in the relationship between Umno and the rest.

It was this that had, in part, cost MCA, MIC and Gerakan dearly in the recent elections. The party must, however, give itself a time frame to pursue this major change.

Should it fail to achieve this within the given time span, it must then consider leaving BN and independently develop the party as a multiracial social democratic party.

It could, for instance, join forces with other like-minded parties outside BN to forge an even larger multiracial movement for greater democracy, ethnic equality, gender parity and social justice.

Ultimately, it is up to the leaders and party members to consider these, and other, options for a revival of the party. But reform and change it must, if it is to remain a force that can fulfil the ever-rising tide of expectations of the Malaysian electorate in a rapidly changing world.

This prompted Dr Choong Sim Poey, a life member of Gerakan, to send a letter to the NST. Unfortunately, what was published was only an “emasculated” version. Here is the full version. (The bits that the NST left out are in bold. It looks like you are still not allowed to be critical of Umno in the NST):

I refer to Dr Toh’s analysis of Gerakan’s problems (New SundayTimes, 23 March 2008). His concluding lines on the possibility of Gerakan leaving the BN coalition as one of their options to revive the Party is not as radical a suggestion as the public may think. It is an issue familiar to many senior party members.

Even in the 1980s when Tun Lim Chong Eu was the CM in Penang (and de facto leader of the Gerakan), the ‘unfair’ allocation of seats to component parties was a chronic bone of contention. Suggestions raised to break away for this reason were rejected as unseemly and opportunistic. Nevertheless, it was generally agreed that this should remain an option when key issues were in dispute especially when it went against our basic party principles and objectives

Unfortunately, over the years of BN/Umno dominance, this seemed to have been put aside in favour of ‘pragmatic’ politics. This meant accepting anything that the Umno leadership came out with to curry favour with their own members with a total disregard for the position of their coalition partners.

This was tested when Umno sought to undermine Pas by becoming an Islamic State and ‘Ketuanan Melayu‘ became the battle cry for Umno to regain their grass-roots support during which time there was not even a squeak from any Gerakan leaders.

This pragmatic approach to politics by Gerakan included condoning blatant opportunism and cronyism by Umno leaders in the name of the NEP. All this Gerakan willingly accepted in exchange for remaining ‘permanently’ under the BN’s comfort zone, nominally governing the state of Penang, until this shock election defeat.

I am writing this to put in historical perspective the position of Gerakan vis-a-vis the BN. I maintain that there was never any acceptance or assumption that Gerakan’s membership in the BN coalition was a permanent partnership to be maintained at all costs! The Gerakan leadership will now have to seriously consider if the cost paid in this election has been too high!

Dr Choong Sim Poey

Penang

So do you think Gerakan should remain in the BN and hope to influence any reform process in the ruling coalition – or do you think the BN is beyond redemption and Gerakan should leave?

1988 judicial crisis: Is an apology sufficient?

Anil Netto
-
23

Former Lord President Salleh Abas has reacted positively to Zaid Ibrahim’s proposal that the government should apologise to him and the other top judges who were victimised and sacked in the 1988 judicial onslaught by the Mahathir administration.

Of course, Karpal Singh has a point that when he says that it is not the present administration who should apologise but Mahathir himself. He said that the two tribunals that were convened in 1988 were initiated by Mahathir.

While it is great that the government may acknowledge the terrible injustice that occurred in 1988, a mere apology without concrete measures won’t suffice. Those involved in the crisis must also be held accountable. I am thinking of the role played by people like Hamid Omar (who took over from Salleh Abas) and Haidar apart from Mahathir himself. Mahathir has a lot to answer for – and this time he should not be allowed to plead memory loss. If he is allowed to get away scot free – without any sign of remorse – what message are we sending to future PM’s who might be tempted to trample on the judiciary and subvert the system of check and balance?

We also need to set up an independent commission to revamp the whole judiciary, remove all those tainted judges and ensure that future judges are selected based on integrity, competence and independence. Of course, they must be committed to upholding basic rights.

Here’s what a friend told me: “I just read NST’s editorial though that argues for only an apology because anything more will amount to a witch hunt. Strange logic. How could it be a witch hunt when the culprits are well known?

“On the other hand, I think Badawi is interested in offering just the apology because it will be symbolically enough to shame Mahathir. Getting the latter to apologise is probably difficult because it will involve at least a hearing and/or review and Badawi may risk public dissatisfaction for going after Mahathir in his old age and with a recent bypass. A mere apology may get Badawi to appear more statesmanlike and project him as interested in cleaning up the judiciary.”

I believe that no attempt at reforming the judiciary can succeed until and unless we probe the events of 1988, cleanse/purge the system, and put in place legal and institutional safeguards to ensure that such a scandal can never be repeated.

What’s your take on this?

Penang school heads told not to invite State Govt leaders as VIPs

Anil Netto
-
72

School heads in Penang have been instructed or “advised” not to invite State Government leaders and other elected representatives in Penang as VIPs and guests-of-honour. The message was conveyed during a briefing last Wednesday by a senior official from the Penang Education Department, which comes under the federal-level Education Ministry.

The directive/”advice” to play on the safe-side was made verbally (and not in writing), according to a principal of a school in Penang and confirmed by another senior staff member from the same school. They were understandably indignant at the ruling.

This just shows the kind of small-mindedness among certain Education Dept/Ministry officials. I believe even DAP-PKR state assembly members who are not holding exco posts may now not be invited as VIPs/guests-of-honour to schools.

Take a look at this year’s Penang Schools Sports Council (MSSPP) meet, which is opening today in Batu Kawan and closing on Friday. The Penang school sports meet traditionally has been officially opened by the Governor of Penang and closed by the Penang Chief Minister. But this time around, my second source said that the invitation cards issued to schools indicates that the closing ceremony will be officiated by the State Education Director.

I wonder if there is a similar ruling/”advice” in the other four opposition-controlled states. Perhaps readers of this blog who are school heads can tell us.

But I think there is a silver lining. This directive will, unwittingly, give the new Penang State Government leaders more time to spend on running the state efficiently, instead of wasting time officiating at routine school functions. Though I am sure the Education Department officials did not have that in mind!

Now, the question is, will USM officials follow suit and avoid State Government leaders like the plague?

Big Brother is watching – via CCTV

Anil Netto
-
6

I am not alone in expressing reservations about the proliferation of CCTV cameras as the solution to crime prevention.

A couple of friends have just sent me a few links.

UK is CCTV capital

It is estimated that there are some 4.2 million Closed Circuit TV (CCTV) cameras in Britain, one for every 14 people. An individual might be captured by more than 300 separate cameras on an average day.

Such all-pervasive video surveillance, combined with the ability to exploit the information contained in numerous government and private databases, enables the almost seamless monitoring of the population.

The list of places monitored by CCTV is endless. Most of Britain’s urban centres are under surveillance, as are motorways, hospitals, schools, banks, museums, shopping malls, sports facilities and travel hubs such as railway stations and airports.

CCTV cameras are operated by the police, the security services, various national and local government agencies and a myriad of institutions and private companies.

Their insidious spread has seriously eroded long-standing democratic rights. The routine recording of video footage in both public and private spaces represents a massive intrusion into individual privacy.

CCTV is increasingly being used to monitor so-called antisocial behaviour, including minor offences such as littering, urinating in a public place and drunkenness.

All demonstrations are now routinely recorded by specialist police video units on the ground, and from helicopters. Even if no crime or public order offence has been committed, the footage is kept by the police, providing evidence of an individual’s political stance on issues such as the war in Iraq, nuclear energy, pensioners’ rights, hunting, etc.

And another relevant link: Urbaneye, a research study on the use of CCTV in the EU, which concludes:

that given the combination of opaque surveillance practices and uninformed citizens, the ‘black box’ of increasingly networked CCTV should be opened to ensure democratic control. The extent of surveillance should be made transparent by registration; the proportionality of deployment and its fitness for purpose should be assessed by a licensing system; managers and operators should be made accountable and regular inspection should guarantee compliance with a common and consistent set of codes of practice.

Rather than focusing solely on the manifestation of criminal behaviour, we should probe deeper into its root causes. Another friend alerted me to this article from the Law Library website, suggesting that urban ecology is a major factor in the rise in crime in cities:

In the period between 1920 and World War II, sociologists associated with the University of Chicago began to construct explanations concerning why cities might have higher crime rates than the hinterland. But more importantly, they were interested in documenting and explaining variations in crime levels within cities (Park, Burgess, and McKenzie; Shaw and McKay). At the time, many believed that crime in the city, and especially in particular sections of the city, was caused by the influx of immigrants, and especially those from “crime prone” ethnic groups. However, researchers from the Chicago School observed in their studies that some sections of cities consistently had higher crime rates than others, regardless of who populated those areas. They argued and demonstrated with data that crime rates can be explained more accurately by focusing on the ecology of areas in the city, rather than on the ethnic composition of the population inhabiting those areas. They described a process whereby immigrants, upon arrival into the United States, typically moved into the poor, blighted neighborhoods because that is where they could afford to live. Crime in these areas was high and reflected poor living conditions, as these neighborhoods experienced great levels of poverty, racial heterogeneity, transience, and family disruption. However, as succeeding generations of these immigrant families improved their lot they moved to better neighborhoods, and as a result, their ethnic groups’ crime rate declined. Meanwhile, new immigrants from different ethnic groups repopulated the neighborhoods that the earlier arrivals had vacated. Despite the near complete change in population composition, crime levels in these transitory areas remained high. Chicago School criminologists thus concluded that it was not criminogenic characteristics of ethnic groups that led to elevated rates of crime, but the nature of the urban ecology in which they lived.

To attack the rising crime rate, we also need to look at some of the socio-economic causes of criminal behaviour. Another excerpt from the same website:

Crime is said to be more likely in communities that are economically deprived, large in size, high in multiunit housing like apartments, high in residential mobility (people frequently move into and out of the community), and high in family disruption (high rates of divorce, single-parent families). These factors are said to reduce the ability or willingness of community residents to exercise effective social control, that is, to exercise direct control, provide young people with a stake in conformity, and socialize young people so that they condemn delinquency and develop self-control.

The residents of high crime communities often lack the skills and resources to effectively assist others. They are poor and many are single parents struggling with family responsibilities. As such, they often face problems in socializing their children against crime and providing them with a stake in conformity, like the skills to do well in school or the connections to secure a good job. These residents are also less likely to have close ties to their neighbors and to care about their community. They typically do not own their own homes, which lowers their investment in the community. They may hope to move to a more desirable community as soon as they are able, which also lowers their investment in the community. And they often do not know their neighbors well, since people frequently move into and out of the community. As a consequence, they are less likely to intervene in neighborhood affairs—like monitoring the behavior of neighborhood residents and sanctioning crime. Finally, these residents are less likely to form or support community organizations, including educational, religious, and recreational organizations. This is partly a consequence of their limited resources and lower attachment to the community. This further reduces control, since these organizations help exercise direct control, provide people with a stake in conformity, and socialize people. Also, these organizations help secure resources from the larger society, like better schools and police protection. Recent data provide some support for these arguments.

Social disorganization theorists and other criminologists, such as John Hagan, point out that the number of communities with characteristics conducive to crime—particularly high concentrations of poor people—has increased since the 1960s. These communities exist primarily in inner city areas and they are populated largely by members of minority groups (due to the effects of discrimination). Such communities have increased for several reasons. First, there has been a dramatic decline in manufacturing jobs in central city areas, partly due to the relocation of factories to suburban areas and overseas. Also, the wages in manufacturing jobs have become less competitive, due to factors like foreign competition, the increase in the size of the work force, and the decline in unions. Second, the increase in very poor communities is due to the migration of many working- and middle-class African Americans to more affluent communities, leaving the poor behind. This migration was stimulated by a reduction in discriminatory housing and employment practices. Third, certain government policies—like the placement of public housing projects in inner-city communities and the reduction of certain social services—have contributed to the increased concentration of poverty.

So let’s tackle some of these socio-economic factors – poverty, relative deprivation, low wages vs increased cost of living, lack of social services, lowcost highrise flats – and urban ecology issues if we are really serious about tackling the rising crime rate. Also we need to ask how our model of industrial development has alienated many people and contributed to the rising crime rate.

More police patrols, guards and CCTV cameras merely attack the symptoms – not the root causes.

We should also look at why white-collar crime – the crimes of the high-flying wheelers and dealers of the corporate world, not to mention the crooked politicians who siphon off millions of ringgit – does not receive the same publicity and concern.

Trengganu MB crisis: Follow the money trail

Anil Netto
-
31

I spent a couple of years in Trengganu when I was a kid. I have fond memories of a tranquil and rustic state, wonderful childhood neighbours – whom I have recently been reacquainted with after all these years – and family picnics at Pantai Chendering.

So the high stakes battle in Trengganu over the choice of Mentri Besar is of special interest to me.

While much has been said about the constitutional position, there is more to it than just the letter and spirit of the law.

There is more to it than that – and it is essential that we consider this dimension in any discussion of the political situation in Trengganu.

Follow the money trail.

One of the key issues, I believe, is how the Petronas oil royalties due to the state amounting to some RM1 billion annually should be spent – for the benefit of the people or for vested interests. Despite its oil wealth, Trengganu is one of the poorest states in the federation.

The royalty payments are no small change. In the past, the money was paid directly to the state government and dispensed under its supervision.

But when Trengganu fell to opposition hands (Pas) in 1999, then prime minister Mahathir changed the rules. He couldn’t bear to see all that money going to an opposition-controlled state government.

Instead of the Petronas royalties (amounting to 5 per cent of oil extraction and sales) going directly to the Trengganu state government, they were now channelled to a federally administered Special Fund Financing Programme (the Fund), which was established in December 2000. The money in this new Fund was euphemistically renamed “goodwill money” (wang ihsan) and it was supposed to directly finance development programmes for the people of Terengganu, largely bypassing the state government.

Since then, there has been little accountability over how this money has been spent and whether the projects really benefit the ordinary people.

The missing Accounts Committee

Basically, the Treasury is supposed to make allocations out of the Fund to various ministries (and via these ministries to federal agencies), financial institutions, and federal and state-level offices.

According to the Auditor General’s Report 2005, in line with a directive, the Treasury was supposed to create an Accounts Committee, chaired by the Treasury’s Chief Secretary, to administer the Fund. The Committee was supposed to comprise representatives from the Prime Minister’s Department (including the Economic Planning Unit), the Treasury, and the Finance Ministry.

But the Auditor General (AG) said then that such a Committee had not been set up – surely this must be of serious concern.

Instead, a “Central-level Committee”, which appears less high-powered, was formed. This Committee, which includes representatives from ministries and implementation agencies, meets twice a year to discuss and approve allocations. It is not clear who exactly is in this Committee. PM Abdullah must reveal the composition of this committee.

This Central-level Committee is supposed to evaluate projects and recommend to the Cabinet financial allocations for the various states. But the AG said he found that allocations for the various states were not decided during the Committee’s meetings. Instead, the “allocations were based on the approval of the Finance Minister and they were forwarded straight to the relevant state Menteris Besar”. The Finance Minister is of course the Prime Minister.

Would that explain why Abdullah Badawi is so keen on retaining Idris as MB?

In an article for Aliran Monthly, ‘Buying goodwill – RM4 billion worth of it’, I wrote back then that although the AG had said that the people had benefited from the Fund, his finding was not backed up by empirical evidence. He conceded that, at the state level, “expenditure that should not have been financed from the Special Fund allocation had occurred and this had more or less jeopardised the objective of the programme”.

He also found that not all ministries, departments and agencies had submitted their quarterly expenditure statements as required (though he said their monitoring work was adequate). This meant the Treasury’s records related to the Fund were incomplete. More seriously, there was no evidence to show that the Treasury had taken follow-up action. He also stressed that all allocations should be approved by the Central-level Committee.

Reading between the lines, it seemed to me, that there was a lot of arbitrary discretion being exercised as to how the fund was being administered – most likely to serve the interests of the ruling party while benefiting certain vested interests.

The best solution is to return the royalties to the state governments. High-powered independent audit committees with opposition representation, reporting to the respective state assemblies, should be set up to ensure that such funds are used on projects that really empower the rural poor. This will dispel the perception that this ‘goodwill money’ is being used as a patronage tool to boost political ‘goodwill’ for the Barisan Nasional while also benefiting vested interests.

I would hazard a guess that the Agong, who is the Sultan of Trengganu, knows what is going on and is deeply concerned.

Here’s one intriguing question: If a new MB who is not the PM’s choice is sworn in, would the files of yet another state government disappear?

Right now, it’s a battle of wills.

Even though Abdullah’s choice of MB (supposedly) has the backing of all the BN assembly members, would the weakened PM ram him through and risk having to face another state election in Trengganu? This time, Pas and PKR, fresh from their successes on the west coast, could well pose a stronger challenge.

He is risen!

Anil Netto
-
9

Penang Island1

Easter morning in Penang: A new beginning

Easter is the greatest festival in the Christian calendar – more important than Christmas.

Christians believe that was the day Jesus triumphed over Death and appeared to his followers.

As theologian Marcus Borg notes, he was executed by the Empire but vindicated by God. Too often, we only look at the message of personal and spiritual transformation that Easter heralds.

But there is also a political message. Jesus advocated a politics of compassion – he had a vision of society that is just and inclusive, where even the outcasts and the marginalised would be invited to the heavenly banquet.

He challenged the ruling elite of his time who were oppressing and exploiting the poor. During the time of Jesus, Palestine was under Roman occupation. He lived in a peasant society in which burdensome taxes were imposed on the 90 per cent of the population who were peasants. The elites and their retainers, who made up the remaining 10 per cent, controlled two-thirds of the wealth.

Early Christians proclaimed “Jesus is Lord!” That itself was a subversive post-Easter message – for Caesar was then the Emperor and deemed by Roman imperial theology to be divine. In the context of the times – and even today – that proclamation carries an added meaning: God, rather than Caesar or any other worldly overlords, is the real Lord!

When Jesus appeared after the resurrection, he passed a message to his followers that he could be found in Galilee. Galilee was the place that Jesus first proclaimed that the kingdom of God was at hand – a kingdom of justice, peace and compassion. Thus, anyone working to realise that kingdom, which Jesus so passionately proclaimed, would find and be guided by the presence of the living Spirit of God.

God has conquered Death and is very much interested in the Lives of the people of his kingdom. His Spirit lives on in all those who participate in building a kingdom that is just, compassionate and inclusive. His Spirit will guide us towards refashioning and recreating the world the way God wants it to be.

1...547548549...569Page 548 of 569