Stepping into the 53^rd year of independence, yet continuing debates manifest that Malaysian national identity remains clouded. In Malaysia, we have Bahasa Malaysia as our national language. As the national language, it is the language of the peoples of Malaysia and functions as a national symbol.  It applies to the entire nation and its nationalities.

At the same time, the citizens also have the opportunity to learn other languages such as English, Mandarin and Tamil in the schools. Comparing with our neighboring countries such as the Philippines and Indonesia, Malaysians are much luckier as we get the chance to learn additional languages in the schools.

Almost every ethnic group in Malaysia speaks more than one language, leading to a fascinating amount of linguistic diversity. And this is precisely one of the reasons of why many foreigners are amazed with us.

The fate of national language

Here is the general perception for many to our national language –- there is no need to have a good command of Bahasa Malaysia as long as we pass the exam with credits because in the working environment, we will only need English. It is also apprehended that the Bahasa has limited economic and commercial value which indirectly brings to a significant lack in sense of belonging and the pride to the national language.

Bahasa is not being look upon in a respectable level as we can see from the media for example through the Malay dramas particularly. It is very rare to have the chance to watch a ‘pure’ and ‘original’ drama using the proper Bahasa Malaysia nowadays because it is all mixed up with English. It sounds something like this – “I nak jumpa you tonight. You free tak?” I believe this dialogue must sounds very familiar to you.

The connotation is that when the actor or actress uses English in their dialogue, he or she is seen coming from a middle-class or higher, otherwise working in the corporate world. It is indeed very sad that many Malaysians look down at their own national language and treat it as a level lower than the commercially-used English.

One of the main reasons is merely to attract more viewers and to gain a higher rating. If a drama is mix with the English, it is seen as a higher quality production. It is perceived that such usage indicates modernization. However if the dialogue is being conduct in full Bahasa, it is seen as ‘kampungan’.

This troubling situation also could be noticed in local films, radio shows and entertainment shows. So imagine the target group that actually being instilled with this type of mindset?

On the other hand, there are also limited websites that use Bahasa Malaysia as the main medium of presentation. If this being let to continue, in another 10 years’ time, it is not surprising that Malaysians will be more fluent in English and not Bahasa.

Our responsibility

We should not feel ashamed of our national language. Take a peep at the Philippines, majority of the Filipina have no problem to converse in their own national language — Tagalog but at the same time they are also one of the nations in the world that has a big population that command the English. They juggle both languages pretty well.

Just look around, many parents send their kids to English classes but there is hardly anyone who actually sends their kids to Bahasa Malaysia classes. Bahasa has never been a cause for our children’s poor command of the English. This language ‘crisis’ has haunted us for a long time and it is the nick of time that Bahasa be conferred with the distinguished linguistic honor all Malaysians can bestow on it.

In order to enhance awareness of the importance of Bahasa Malaysia as a toll of unity, the Malaysian government has declared that October each year will be National Language Month. State governments and government agencies have been directed to implement programmes for National Language Month throughout October.

It is a sharing responsibility of all Malaysians to uphold the value of the national language, and not merely the government. The citizens have to realize that Bahasa Malaysia has a major role in fostering socialization and creating national unity.

It is not that English language is not necessary for the country; it is just that we must at the same time master and respect our own national language. It is although crucial to master the English, but it is far more important of not forgetting our own national language.

Malay language will not disappear, but it risks losing its originality. Without a common language in a country, there will be no unity.

In 2007, the ASEAN nations decided to celebrate the Founding Day of ASEAN on every 8 August. The intention is to stimulate the sentiment of “Think, Feel and Act ASEAN”, building an ASEAN identity, promoting ASEAN awareness and also bringing ASEAN into the familiarity of its people in the Southeast Asia region.

“Bridging Markets, Connecting People” is the theme of this year’s ASEAN Day celebration. Although there is a lack of oomph to its theme, nevertheless it articulates two significant elements — an ASEAN single market and a common identity. Amplifying connectivity does not mean that we are only connected through physical instruments but also required the connecting of the hearts and minds of the ASEAN people.

I made a google search on how our government celebrates this special day. It turned out to be only one relevant search result. Bernama reported that a two-day exhibition on ASEAN was held at the IIUM Gombak Campus to commemorate this special day. The event was opened by the Information Department director-general Datuk Abdullah Morad.

I wonder how we are going to win the game of similarity versus diversity if this is how we celebrate and promote the significance of the ASEAN Day for our people.

A dream far away from the reality

Talking about ASEAN, it remains as a familiar term for many of us but little are actually in the know of the impact of this sub-regional grouping on our daily life. With the introduction of the ASEAN Charter in 2008, ASEAN hopes to expedite its integration by putting it on a similar legal footing to the European Union.

By 2015, an ASEAN Community is expected to be formed, premised on the three pillars of cooperation — the ASEAN Political-Security Community (APSC), the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC).

ASEAN has in many occasions reiterated that it wants to move towards closer integration by 2015 and is hoping to make it more relevant to the people in the region. Although it is hard to imagine ASEAN with a single currency any time before the deadline set.

The Charter is designed to be ‘people-oriented’. To us, this phrase seems to pave a way for constructive change for this intergovernmental body that has always been referred to as a ‘no action talk only’ because of the lack of involvement of other entities in its process.

But the Charter is surrounded by more state-centric wordings, since it was prepared by the government officials without thorough consultations with the civil society groups. Furthermore, ASEAN as a whole has failed to respect the voices of the civil society groups and the grassroots.

There have been several dismal events. For instance, during the 5^th ASEAN Summit in October 2009, some civil society representatives were barred from attending as government officials from Burma and Singapore, among others, refused to meet or hold interface dialogues with human rights activists from their countries.

What have the government done to create an ASEAN spirit?

Come to think about the ASEAN Day in a simpler form, how many people around us that clearly aware on the developments of the ASEAN?

Much concern heightened on ASEAN and there remains very few that are optimistic on the future of this sub-regional grouping as long as there is still insistence on its non-interference policy. The establishment of ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) marks its early journey to human rights. Within a year, the Commission has been flooded with mainly criticisms from its choices of representatives to its mandate.

Among the 10 nations, the Indonesia and Philippines are always deemed as more progressive comparing with the others like Malaysia. The Indonesia has been active in this grouping since Jakarta is the ASEAN headquarter, while the Philippines has constantly offered itself to host the office of the AICHR.

The attitude of the Malaysian government towards the ASEAN progress generally has not been responsive; rather it is unenthusiastic. In many events, the Malaysian government is still reluctant to take the diplomatic leap of genuinely addressing the issues.

One of the glaring examples is the appointment of Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, former SUHAKAM Commissioner as the representative of the Malaysia to the AICHR. His appointment came sudden with barely any consultation with the civil society groups. Thus far, I have not heard any comments or recommendations raised by our AICHR representative in human rights violations cases that rampantly happen in the country.

With the Charter and the AICHR now in force, is there any one of us who know how to sing the ASEAN Anthem?

How many are aware or even care to give some attention to the week-long 43^rd ASEAN Ministerial Meeting that has just closed its curtain on 23 July in Hanoi, Vietnam?

How many of us know the recent launched ASEAN Computer Game called “The ASEAN Chronicles: The Legend of the Golden Talisman”?

And do you also heard of the ASEAN Basketball League, which is the first international basketball league in South-East Asia?

There have been criticisms that since its inception, ASEAN has been all about the summits and meetings, and never about its people. I echoed this sentiment.

There is undeniable a growing awareness among the ASEAN people to discover their neighboring countries through the budget airlines offering cheap air fares. But when it comes to the role and function of the ASEAN, I doubt that many are familiar.

It is pivotal that Malaysia playing the leading role in the Southeast Asia, should work harder in identifying new emerging trends, and consolidate common views and strategies in the region.

The challenge for ASEAN is simple and clear – it needs to be more interactive with the people and to be seen and hear in every single corner. The approach of the Malaysian government must change to go according to the wish of the people. All these must start within the country before it looks into the regional perspective.

At its 43rd year, unfortunately the ASEAN in the heart of Malaysians is still remaining as an alien concept. At this stage, it could be said that the attempt of the ASEAN governments to make ASEAN a people-oriented community has failed.

I personally like the idea of Termsak Chalermpalanupap, the Director of Political and Security Directorate of the ASEAN Secretariat. He suggested making August 8 a public holiday. That could be an immediate way to create awareness to the people.

The Malaysian government has a huge responsibility to popularize the idea of an ASEAN community to its citizens. Behind the success of the European Community are not only its effective implementation of its policies and most importantly the political will of its leaders.

The Malaysian should be encouraged to become familiar with the region as a whole, not only its history and culture, but also to develop admiration to the region. This could be done through educational activities for example.

ASEAN has indeed come a long way; it has created favorable conditions for the development of the region. But in order for it to move forward, the ASEAN people must feel a growing sense of common ASEAN citizenship and be more connected to each other. The Malaysian government alone cannot make it happen. Rather they should start engaging closely with all sectors in the society including the private sectors, the civil society, as well as each and every one of us, to push forward an ASEAN Community for all.

We are now ostentatiously re-elected as one of the 47 members sitting in the United Nations Human Rights Council for the second term covering 2010-2013. We also ‘passed with distinction’ in the newly-established Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism in February and June last year. The UPR could be well understood as a peer-to-peer review. We have however, yet to see the concrete follow-up actions by the government in many areas as promised.

When it comes to the human rights promotion and protection in the national level, I am afraid there is no need for a lengthy description or explanation on how much we have fared. This leads to the main focus of the discussion in this article — the need for a national human rights action plan (NHRAP). A NHRAP for Malaysia will provide a fundamental reference and guidance for action on many human rights issues facing by the country.

The ideal that every country should have its own NHRAP was initially advocated at the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna.

In Malaysia for example; with the NHRAP, the human rights commitments could be well-put in the context of public policy, so that the government can further practice and implement the human rights goals step-by-step, through the engagement with all relevant sectors.

There are now quite a number of countries in the Asia Pacific region that have established their own NHRAPs. The latest is the Chinese government. In the Southeast Asia region itself, three countries with the existing national human rights institutions have established their NHRAPs, i.e. Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines.

Elements not to be missed

So why exactly we need the NHRAP for?

There are numerous benefits for having a NHRAP. Such a plan is able to foster a more comprehensive assessment of the human rights needs in the country.

Not to mention, such a plan could be practical in orientation which means it allows the room for achievable targets and realistic activities aimed at improving the human rights protection of its citizens. In short, a NHRAP could help in strengthening the rule of law and enhancing the management of the country.

In the normal practice, a NHRAP needs to be consistently referred to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 and other international instruments and standards. Most plans provide for an all-inclusive approach embracing civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and many of it accords priority to the needs of vulnerable groups as well as thematic issues of major concern within the country.

The role of SUHAKAM and the non-governmental organisations

It is of course very important for the plan to emphasize the importance of broad public participation in the processes associated with the plan. In many cases, the planning for such a plan involves the establishment of a national coordinating committee.

As early as in 2001, SUHAKAM has highlighted the importance for the government to draft a NHRAP in its Annual Report. Subsequently in February 2006, SUHAKAM presented a draft NHRAP for the government’s consideration. As reported, the response received at the time was that there was no need for such a plan because the Federal Constitution is deemed as sufficiently covers the area of human rights.

Nevertheless, SUHAKAM in various occasions reiterated the need for the government to produce its own NHRAP. The latest, it has further raised the importance of such a plan in its UPR 5-page statement last year.

There is a need for the mutual understanding that although such a plan could be initiated by the national human rights institutions or the non-governmental organisations, it should still be clearly recognized that the commitments in the plan impose obligations on the government to take suitable actions.

Lessons to be learned

In 1994, the Australia was the first country to adopt the idea of establishing its own national human rights action plan following the recommendations made from the Vienna Conference. The plan was developed by an inter-departmental committee of governmental officials, including the Attorney General’s Chambers. The plan at that period of time was highly comprehensive and provided much attention to particularly the economic, social and cultural rights as well as specific consideration for the vulnerable groups.

Nevertheless, one of the glaring weaknesses was that the Australia Plan did not specify a clear time-frame for its implementation period, although later on, the Australian government officials indicated that it was intended to be applicable from 1994-1998. Also only limited consultations with the civil society groups took place.

The first Philippines Human Rights Plan applied from 1996-2000 which later on extended to 2002. Also resulted from the Vienna Conference, the Commission on Human Rights of Philippines (CHRP) in 1994 has independently initiated the proposal to have a NHRAP for the country. Following the proposal of the CHRP, a President Memorandum was issued in the following year, and that paved the way for the establishment of the specific team to spearhead the plan which led to the official adoption of the plan in 1996.

Mr. Prime Minister, we need the plan

Of course there will be many who are not quite optimistic and rather skeptical with the commitments of our government in drawing up such a plan for the country. But come to think about it rationally, it is better than no plan at all to promote and protect the human rights in the country.

At least if we have this plan in place one day, it could be utilized as the platform for the public to ensure the government implement on what it has promised.

The idea of such a plan focuses on encouraging change within the country and thus, it is concerned with mobilizing the will to change and developing appropriate mechanisms.

One of the main challenges of a NHRAP is to move the human rights activities from the idealistic sphere into the practical sphere. If Najib administration is serious in making a reform, I would suggest the government to start drawing up such plan. 

Constant interferences are imposed by the authorities to journalists and editors through warning letters and other forms of intimidation. In 2007, police detained a Malaysiakini journalist who reportedly asking a police officer for information in an anti-price hike protest, he was held in custody for two days and charged with ‘obstructing a police officer’. In 2008, a Sin Chew Daily reporter Tan Hoon Cheng created ‘history’ when she was dramatically arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA), and held for questioning for 16 hours.

And now a senior producer of RTM2’s Galeri Mandarin Nasional, Tan Ean Nee is axed, joining her ex-comrade Chou Z Lam who has his contract terminated in May this year. This development has been apprehended as a plan to eliminate all the senior producers of the said documentary programme. Tan’s documentary has focused on the long-drawn protest by the residents of Rawang New Village’s against the construction of high-tension cable towers by the Tenaga Nasional Berhad (picture).

Gloomy future

This situation not only endangered the profession of the journalists, it has also posed vulnerability to the educators particularly the mass media lecturers in carrying out their daily teaching.

How the lecturer should responds when a student questioned the uncertain future in the media? How do the lecturers position themselves in this situation? How to teach journalism in a country where journalism is under political pressure? The students see the lessons of ethic and freedom of press with skepticism, while they see their senior being intimidated from carrying out their duty and responsibility.

The number of professional journalists will decrease in the country if this fragile and limited press freedom is let to continue. Although the fate of our journalists is not as bad as in some neighboring countries where journalists are kidnapped, tortured and even killed, but journalism is proved to be a difficult and unsecured profession from day to day.

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly stipulates that, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Our own Federal Constitution provides each citizen with the right to freedom of speech and expression, but it does not guarantee the freedom of press.

In Malaysia, we have an arsenal of restrictive laws to limit the freedom of expression and information in the media. The 1984 Printing Presses and Publications Act require all publishers and printing firms to renew their permit on a yearly basis, subject to the Home Ministry’s approval. Then we also have the Broadcasting Act 1988, the Official Secrets Act, the Sedition Act and many others that used to impose constraints on the press, and any ‘misbehavior’ is punishable by several years in prison.

Fear is gripping the country and that people may stop speaking up, moreover without an aggressive and independent journalism, the country will not be able to produce a productive generation. Within a system which denies the existence of basic human rights, fear tends to be the order of the day. In the long run, we will produce a robotic society and not a free society.

The journalist represents a powerful voice in presenting the truth to the public — their job is to provide information to the public on matters of public interest. But the government rips off the civil rights and liberties of the people; they have also robbed our people of their freedom and fundamental rights.

Malaysians now probably familiar with the name Joshua Wong, former producer of Editor’s Time who resigned from the NTV7 in April 2010 following his dissatisfaction with the alleged political interference by the Prime Minister’s office and the Prime Minister’s wife. His resignation puts the public attention on how corrupt the stifled system has become. We are severely short of credible talk shows on current affairs and socio-political issues; instead, the citizens are overwhelmed with the entertainment and reality shows.

In the post-Soeharto era in Indonesia, the print media is no longer required to have publishing and printing permits. While Malaysia, as a much advanced state, the publishers must apply for yearly publishing and printing permits. Journalists are constantly being watched and the news are continuously being filtered and censored.

With the deteriorating of media climate in the country and oppression driven by the government, it is difficult for journalists to make an effective stance unless they are willing to risk their career. Therefore, when we talk about journalism education, there is a need to be ready to defend freedom of speech and not as the mouthpiece of the government.

For the journalism graduates, a career full of challenges is awaited. For one that the journalism graduates must know — they are not the slave of the state.

Do you like what you see in the mirror when you wake up in the morning?

Here is one case. A Filipina teenage singer, Charice Pempengco (picture), once dubbed by Oprah the “Most Talented Girl in the World” stirred national and worldwide debate, after having Botox injections and minor surgery to narrow her face ahead of her debut on the highly-rated US television show, “Glee”.

What intrigued me is that the whole procedure conducted by celebrity cosmetic surgeon Vicki Belo in her Tomas Morato clinic was actually aired “live” via the ABS-CBN channel, a Philippine national TV network.

Criticisms and concerns came flying in about Charice’s decision to go under the knife at 18 years’ of age. This instantly raised a question — the social effects of plastic surgery.

Without us realising it, we have in fact long been obsessed with appearances, either in school, at work or even in the family. This has created unhealthy pressure. Many feel looking better gives them an edge in pursuing their dreams.

In a recent issue of Newsweek magazine, it was reported that employers show a marked preference for attractive people when making hiring decisions. This is sadly a fact that we cannot deny as some companies are constantly looking for people who are attractive. This trend is even more obvious in sales and marketing, customer service, public relations and other areas.

For example if you want to be qualified as a flight attendant, you will need to have a certain height and weight — not too tall, not too short, not too fat and not too thin. Any obvious marks on your face or your hands will decrease your chances of becoming one.

“Plastic Surgery Street” in South Korea

When it comes to plastic surgery, the first thing which comes to my mind is South Korea. You can even find an entire street nicknamed “Plastic Surgery Street”.

If you happen to visit South Korea, do walk around the fashion district of Apgujeong-dong, and you will find an exceptionally high concentration of beautiful people. You will also find a lot of clinics devoted to the lucrative industry of plastic surgery.

It is also not strange to find articles on various clinics and the procedures they perform in popular Korean magazines. Recently, a teen magazine featured an extensive layout entitled “Winter Vacation, Plastic Operation.”

This reminds me of a Korean friend who was at that time based in Malaysia. She made a special trip back to Korea during her college break just to “fix” her eyelids. She also told me that the whole procedure was sponsored by her mother. That really caught me by surprise!

Leg-lengthening in China

Let us also take a look at China. More than a decade ago, cosmetic surgery was banned in China, but today, it has turned into a profitable industry.

According to a study by the China Medical Treatment Orthopaedics and Beauty Association, an increasing number of high school and college students are lining up for cosmetic surgery during summer vacation with the hopes of looking better and believing that it will eventually help them to land better jobs.

The double-eyelid surgery is among the most popular requests. Why is this happening? Blame the overexposure to Western beauty ideals. This rising trend of Asians trying to remake themselves to look more Caucasian is rather worrying socially and culturally.

You might also have heard about this “gruesome” and controversial surgery — the leg lengthening surgery, which is believed to be able to make you taller, from a few inches to a full foot.

Although this largely unregulated beauty industry has been banned by the Chinese government in 2006, the ban has not managed to stop the people from venturing into surgery for cosmetic reasons.

In China, a person’s height represents a sign of status. It goes to the extent where some jobs actually set the requirement of a minimum height. With a population of 1.3 billion, it is definitely not easy to get a job. As a result, a short person not only experiences difficulty in getting a job, but also in their social life and other areas.

So, what’s fuelling this phenomenon?

Excessive employment pressures and higher beauty standards are the leading reasons for the popularity of cosmetic operations. The influence of the media is also a contributing factor. Of particular concern are the effects reality television shows like “Extreme Makeover”, for example, have on young people who are self-conscious about their body and appearance.

Moreover, plastic surgery has now become more available and affordable to the public. They consider plastic surgery as an easy way to transform their looks or lives.

Although there have been surgical mishaps, this does not seem to stop people going under the knife.

Better looks do not guarantee better jobs, which should be earned. Not all employers are that shallow — but it is also no secret that we are living within a culture consumed by image.

In Malaysia itself, Botox injections are very popular. Now, the trend is still rather confined within the circle of celebrities and the rich due to the hefty costs involved. We have not had big numbers of younger people opting for plastic surgery. Yet. The next question, will this dangerous mindset arrive here one day?

I hope not.

My big ‘kudos’ to Chief Secretary to the Government Mohd Sidek Hassan for announcing the government’s willingness to permit graduate education service officers of DG41 to DG48 to be involved in politics from Aug 1. 

This makes up about 190,000 graduate teachers throughout the country.

Previously, only officers in the support group were allowed to contest or to hold any position in any political party, provided that they acquired prior written approval from the director-general of the Public Service Department or the secretary-general of the relevant ministry.

Like many others, I feel puzzled.

Why confine this only to teachers of grades DS41 to DS48? How about the rest? Headmasters, principals and education department officers are not granted similar ‘privilege’. I couldn’t help but see this as a form of discrimination. 

And this privilege doesn’t come without conditions. Teachers have to get written permission from the secretary-general of the Education Ministry before they can participate in politics. This actually defeats the whole idea of freeing teachers to join politics and begs the question, what happens if they decide to join parties that are not friendly to the present government?

Not thought through

Prime Minister Najib Razak said the government’s decision to allow graduate teachers to enter politics is motivated by the desire to create a morally-sound political environment. He said this will eventually enhance the country’s political leadership through intellectual leadership. 

Sounds pretty good, don’t you think? 

The prime minister’s rationale for this liberalisation is that graduate teachers do not have executive powers, therefore there is no danger where conflict interest is concerned. So officers with executive powers, sorry but you are unlucky this time. 

The announcement has many grey areas, and is obviously not well thought-out, just like many of the government’s previous announcements, such as the scrapping of the PMR and UPSR, the PPSMI issue, the list goes on. 

It is undeniable that teachers have played an important role as community leaders in the local political scenario in the past, and will continue to do so, but they are but one of the subsets within the civil service. 

Umno’s agenda?

This announcement has received diverse public reactions, even among the teachers themselves , while the opposition suspects an Umno agenda behind the move.

Many expressed anxiety that the new policy has several far-reaching implications on the deteriorating quality of education, for example neglect of their basic teaching responsibilities, and leadership issues within the school hierarchy.

The National Union of the Teaching Profession (NUTP) backed the move but warned that it should not be at the expense of the children’s education.

Historically, teachers’s involvement in political parties is not something new, and it was only banned in 1993 during Mahathir’s administration. Umno in its prime was filled with teachers. 

It is a known fact that many of the existing graduate teachers are already “active” in politics, although operating in low profile.This group of people has no choice but to become two-faced because their right to political expression is shackled by restrictive laws. 

Unfortunately, it will be only teachers who from Aug 1 be ‘legalised’ to take up politics.

Everyone’s right

Regardless of whether it is Umno’s agenda or for other reasons, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 guarantees equal rights to all.Hence, everyone deserves the right to participate in any association they wish. Joining a political party will not jeopardise the work quality or productivity of an individual. It is about equality of opportunity. 

The decision to allow graduate teachers to enter politics is a good one, provided they are given total freedom in expressing their own political preferences, but this right should also be accorded to all citizens. 

If we are to create a morally-sound political environment, it is of paramount importance that all civil servants be also allowed to engage in politics and to join any party they want, without fear of being dismissed or victimised for taking a stand. The government should not deny their right to vote and affiliate with any party. If he or she fails to perform at work, then action should be taken against that person.

The situation now is that once you wear the hat of a civil servant, you have to give up your fundamental rights.

The question then arises whether civil servants are obliged to serve the government foolishly, or should they be permitted to use their judgment in the interest of the nation? In other words, should politicians, for their own interests, attempt to interfere with or influence civil servants?

In the end, this hasty decision exposes not only the cowardice of the government, but also the immaturity in understanding the concept of human rights for all.

The BN Backbenchers Club Deputy Chairman Bung Mokhtar Radin (picture) said that all the BN MPs receives an additional RM500, 000 funds on top of the RM1million allocation. The money is meant to be channeled to each constituency for the development purposes.

Bung Mokhtar also added that the additional allocation is normally depends on the economy. If the economy is good, then there will be more allocation.

Well, seriously I have no idea that the economic situation of the country could be revive so quickly and so sudden!

As reported, it is understood that the allocations given out to BN MPs each year come from the Prime Minister himself, under a development fund monitored by a unit called Implementation Coordination Unit (ICU).

The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department office, Nazri Aziz when asked about the sudden increase of the allocation, confirmed that the BN MPs are given additional funds of RM500, 000 because the government has extra money. The government’s business is not to keep the money but to spend the money, he said.

This again fuelled the speculation that there will be an early snap election. The opposition MPs is predicting a snap election soon judging by the way the Najib administration dishes out money for the BN MPs.

Given that there are a total of 222 parliamentary constituencies, the additional allocation will amount to an extra outlay of RM111 million.

Just not long ago, I believe everyone must recall that the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Idris Jala has said that Malaysia risks becoming the next Greece because the country will go bankrupt a year before our Vision 2020 if the government does not cut the subsidies. He said that the country’s debt would rise to 100percent of GDP by 2019 from the current 54% if subsidies are not being cut.

However the UMNO MPs including our former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir dismissed the bankruptcy warning by Idris Jala and deemed the figures provided are exaggerating. The Treasury Department also disputed the calculation of Idris Jala. The Treasury claimed that the subsidy bill was only RM18.6billion and not RM74billion as indicated by Idris Jala.

Also we have not forgotten the big fuss on the moving of the Parliament to the Putrajaya recently. Again, it was also due to the so-called shortage of budget. Earlier on it was reported that the cabinet had already decided on a new building for Parliament, which would cost about RM800million taking into consideration aspects of comfort, needs, facilities and the increased number of seats.

Then a week later, Nazri said that Parliament might move to Putrajaya International Convention Centre while renovation works were carried out on the Parliament building.

On 30 June, Nazri further on apologised to the Dewan Rakyat for misinformation pertaining to the proposed relocation of Parliament, which the decision has in fact have not been made. He said he was mislead by the officers and considered this as merely an internal issue.

We often heard conflicting answers coming from the government. Needless to say, both events have already shaken the confidence and trust of the people on the government.

So are we getting rich now? I am rather confused, how about you?

Abraham Lincoln once wisely said that, if you want to test a man’s character, you give him power.

A power struggle occurs when a person or party asserts on running its own show. It usually actualizes from a person’s cemented beliefs about what is deemed as the right thing. The power struggle is a common term that not only applies to the political arena but also in our personal and work life. You must be extremely lucky if you have not experienced one!

Well, it takes two to create a power struggle. The easiest example is to take a quick peep into the marriage or relationship around you or even yourself. When two individuals decide to be involved in a romantic relationship, each brings a distinguish demeanor into the mix. One partner may be naturally aggressive in dealing with other people, while the other may remain more passive. But not many people can actually remain completely complaisant on important matters which affect their lives.

In Malaysia itself, we have witnessed many examples of the political power struggle. Some with happy endings, some with sad endings while some remain hanging and unresolved.

The MCA

In the past, the power equilibrium was the key focus that emphasized by the leaderships of the MCA. But the pattern changed.

The former Health Minister, Chua Soi Lek once disgraced by a sex video scandal was locked in a power struggle with the former Transport Minister Ong Tee Keat.

The conflict exploded to the public when the MCA presidential council decided to accept the disciplinary committee’s recommendation to expel Chua for his involvement in the sex video scandal which had seriously damaged the public image of the MCA.

In the end Chua in the party central committee re-election further won the top post of the MCA in March 2010 after the dramatic leadership fracas.

On whether he can revive the MCA and win the respect of the BN and the people, I am afraid it all will only be reveal in the next General Election.

The power struggle between the two “heavy-weights” of the MCA was an interesting one at that point of time. The fracas resulted to the major loss of Ong Tee Keat in needing to let go the top post in the party and being dropped from the cabinet.

Khalid Ibrahim vs. Azmin Ali

Another recent example which has made the headlines is the “fight” between the Selangor MB Khalid Ibrahim and PKR Vice President Azmin Ali. Much speculation has been raised. Although both denied their rivalry openly, but it is rather obvious that there is no such need for a cover-up.

Both have their own way and leadership styles. Khalid is deemed as one carrying out his duty in his own corporate style, while the latter is often described as “ambitious” and has what it takes.

Azmin was said to lead a group of 15 Member of Parliaments to oust Khalid and to have him removed from the MB post. He has also tendered his resignation as a board member of the Selangor State Corporation Development (PKNS), which is helmed by Khalid.

The PKR made some changes to their leadership structure after their retreat last weekend. This resulted to the take over of Azmin Ali as the chief of the Selangor PKR replacing Khalid.

However the main problem in a compromise deal is to get both sides to realize that the price of continued struggle is higher than the costs and consequences of reducing demands.

This deal I am afraid might not last long.

Barisan Nasional vs. Pakatan Rakyat

In a bigger picture, there is the political power struggles between the two alliance — the ruling BN and the opposition PR.

With a weaker government after the unprecedented losses in the last General Election, Najib and the BN government are under high pressure to make some radical adjustments in government policies in order to increase the credibility of running the government.

While the PR with its rhetoric about “People Power” is still a fragile coalition and has much to pursue in order to win over a renewal of public confidence and trust of the people.

It is undeniable that many people are angry at the BN, but do PR offers better alternatives to the problems?

At the same time, the social and economic issues that have long frustrated the people, and which were highlighted during the March 2008 election, are continually being ignored and unattended.

In the midst of the prevailing negative circumstances, the struggle for political power between the two continues unabated.

Balance of Power

Power does not bring growth unless we understand the essence of sharing that power.

Currently, the real threat to the political stability in the country does not seem to only come from the coalition conflicts over unresolved issues; but also concerning the economic in character, particularly the rural-urban income disparity and the price hikes.

The continuing political turmoil is not simply a battle between Najib and Anwar on who to be the next Prime Minister, but reflects the frustration of the people, among other issues; over the deteriorating living standards and the inconsistency of the government policies.

Neither the government nor the opposition is capable of resolving the underlying economic crisis at this stage.

It is understandable that the quest to acquire the power can be equally destructive and offensive most of the time, but there is also need to be fully aware that the concept of power struggle is as certain and as worrisome in this modern day as it ever was.

(This article is first published in the Malaysiakini.)

Twenty-three ‘yes’ votes, 13 ‘no’ votes and 13 abstentions – the application of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) for ‘consultative status’ at the UN Economic and Social Council (Ecosoc) finally gets approval.

Among those who voted ‘no’ was Malaysia along with Egypt, China, Russia, Niger, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Venezuela – they cited procedural reasons. Those voting in favour included the US, Britain, Canada, Germany, Brazil and Japan.

With the Ecosoc status, the group will now enjoy the privilege to attend the UN meetings, submit oral and print statements and not to mention, more collaboration opportunities with both government and UN agencies on human rights for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.

Currently, only nine of the 3,200 groups with consultative status at Ecosoc are gay and lesbian organisations.

The IGLHRC is a leading international organisation dedicated to human rights advocacy for people who face discrimination on the basis of their actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity. It is currently based in the US and has offices in South Africa, Argentina and the Philippines.

It is interesting to note that there are the Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Law in Relation to Issues of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in place. This landmark document was adopted by a meeting of experts in Yogyakarta back in November 2006 as a response to the increasing patterns of abuse to the LGBT groups. The exact venue was the Gadjah Mada University, a leading educational institution in Indonesia.

The document sets as a milestone achievement for the struggle for basic human rights as well as gender equality in the region and is intended to serve as an international standard relating to sexual orientation and gender identity. Still in its early stage, the Yogyakarta Principles nevertheless have been well-received by some of the organisations in the Asia-Pacific region.

In May 2009, a workshop on a re-look at the Yogyakarta Principles was hosted by the National Human Rights Commission of Indonesia (Komnas Ham) with the support of the Asia-Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (APF). It is a lauded effort for the forward-thinking role that Komnas Ham has played in leading human rights promotion and protection efforts for the LGBT people in the Asia Pacific region.

Nine national human rights institutions’ members of the APF including Malaysia’s Suhakam gathered for a workshop in Yogyakarta to consider the role of such institutions in the protection and promotion of the human rights of LGBT people.

A consensus statement was produced as the outcome of the workshop and listed several actions that the national human rights institutions could consider to use their mandates in addressing the discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.

The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRCT) has been a very supportive institution and they have used the Yogyakarta Principles in their lobbying work on the new constitution in 2007. The NHRCT has also been involved in several public events publicising the Principles.

While the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHR) has also openly supported the work of the LGBT people including the undivided support for Ang Ladlad, a Philippines- based LGBT political party in their accreditation bid with the Philippines Commission on Elections. Although the CHR is not prepared to declare that the Yogyakarta Principles contain norms that are obligatory on the Philippines, it is nonetheless a step forward.

Suhakam, who also attended the workshop, however, has remained rather passive on the issue. Suhakam took the stand that the institution was not familiar with the LGBT rights issues and that the LGBT in Malaysia enjoys all the fundamental rights under the federal constitution as the non-LGBT.

The institution also mentioned that the extent of the LGBT rights as well as the non-LGBT must not disrespect the position of Islam as the official religion of and the sensitivity of the diverse society on the whole.

In Malaysia itself, the government’s stand is very clear – the LGBT rights are not recognised, just as simple as that. In 1994, the government of Malaysia banned the LGBT people from appearing in the state-controlled media.

The issue of homosexuality is further complicated in Malaysia primarily due to religion. Discrimination against LGBT people is a serious problem in the country. Just in last two months, we witnessed the unprofessional reporting by these two newspapers,Harian Metro and Kosmo that carried disparaging words to describe the group.

The LGBT people’s voice has been suppressed for a long time and remains unchanged. It is therefore important to ensure that these voices not being silenced and that their human rights are not being denied.

We are all equal and their rights should not allow to be swept under the carpet because of religion.

(This article has appeared in several online news portal.)

Hahaha, what a joke!

In the response to the Malaysia’s 141^st position in the US-based NGO Freedom House global press freedom rankings across the world, Rais Yatim (picture) told the Dewan Rakyat today that the existence of two million bloggers in Malaysia and the alternative media show that the mass media in the country are free to publish their views and criticisms.

The level of media freedom is different between different countries. The ranking given by the Freedom House is not accurate simply because the lifestyle in different continents formed the media cultures and practices in each country.

Is that so?

I wonder if the government has only ONE answer for all the problems in the country, we are unique. Malaysia is unique, Malaysia is different.

Earlier, in a reply to a question from Azmin Ali, Foreign Affairs Deputy Minister A. Kohilan Pillay told the Dewan Rakyat that Malaysia could not ratify the various international instruments on human rights because it has to consider the country’s social, culture, and multi-racial history.

See, we are unique again.

And now blogger proliferation proves freedom of media?

I beg to differ, Mr. Rais Yatim. I believe there are many netizens too share the same feeling as I do.

Malaysia serves as a good case study for the intellectuals and researchers, I am afraid not for a good reason, but it is being chosen because of its escalation of online news portals, and bloggers over the years due to the biased and control reporting by the mainstream media.

Online news portal and blogging are the result of a restricted media.

We choose alternative media because we lost confidence and hope to our mainstream media, Datuk Seri.