Uncommon Sense with Wong Chin Huat: What does Bersih 3.0 want?

By Ding Jo-Ann | 28 April 2012 |

THIS afternoon, the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih 2.0) will hold its third major demonstration in the city. On 9 July last year, up to 50,000 protesters took to the streets to demand for clean and fair elections despite heavy-handed government tactics to clamp down on the civil society-led movement.

Supporters during the Bersih 2.0 rally on 9 July 2011. (Pic by Jeremy Choo @ Flickr)

Although the government denounced Bersih 2.0 as a dangerous, illegal entity, it eventually set up a parliamentary select committee (PSC) on electoral reform, which tabled its report to Parliament on 3 April 2012.

But Bersih 2.0 remains dissatisfied. Even before the report was tabled, it announced it would hold a sit-in at Dataran Merdeka, dubbing it Bersih 3.0. Why isn’t the movement satisfied and what, really, is its purpose? The Nut Graph asks Bersih 2.0 steering committee member and political scientist Wong Chin Huat to explain.

Bersih 2.0 announced its demonstration even before the Election Commission(EC) had met and discussed the PSC’s recommendations. Is Bersih 2.0 being impatient by not giving the EC a fair chance? And isn’t the setting up of a PSC already a step in the right direction?

The case for Bersih’s sit-in was based on two facts. First, the PSC cannot guarantee thorough electoral reforms before the next general election. Second, more electoral fraud and irregularities continue to emerge during and after the PSC’s operation.

From the PSC report, it is clear some of Bersih’s key demands will not be fulfilled. Crucially, the report was silent on corruption and dirty politics. It did call for long-term EC reform and the setting up of a caretaker government. But there were no concrete measures suggested to penalise and deter abuse of government machinery.

In fact, immediately after the release of the report, cartoons showing (Prime Minister Datuk Seri) Najib (Razak) as Superman were distributed in schools, and Barisan Nasional (BN) flags were hung in KTM stations in Selangor. If this is how things are now, how much worse will it get when elections are called?

(Courtesy of The Malaysian Insider)

Most shockingly, voters with the same names and birthdays but slightly different identity card (IC) numbers were found. This suggests cloning or “multiplication” of voters, to allow multiple voting or impersonation

The PSC report did not address this. It did not propose abolition of Section 9A of the Elections Act, which prevents electoral rolls from being challenged in court. How can you expect the electoral roll to be cleaned up when the system’s structural flaws remain? Civil society has submitted detailed proposed amendments to election laws, but the report refused to affirm the right of all overseas Malaysians to vote as absent voters.

The crux is, notwithstanding some good suggestions, the PSC’s recommendations will not ensure a clean 13th general election. Deciding not to waste time talking to the EC is therefore not denying the EC a fair chance. Rather it is about giving Malaysian citizens a fair chance at clean and fair elections so that voters can decide who runs this country when the next general election is called.

How would you respond to allegations that Bersih 3.0 is merely a political ploy of the opposition to garner support before the next general election?

Bersih 2.0 has always adopted a nonpartisan and multipartisan approach, namely that we will work with any party to pursue electoral reforms. If only the opposition parties demand clean elections, we should not question why they support the cause. Instead we should ask, where are the BN parties? Why doesn’t the BN want clean elections? Why doesn’t the BN garner support by implementing electoral reforms?

The EC has said some of the electoral roll’s discrepancies, including the existence of a 149-year-old voter, are because of mistakes in people’s ICs, which is not under their purview. It also said political parties themselves have been responsible for mistakes when they submit voter registration forms. Is it fair to blame everything on the EC?

I would never rule out genuine clerical errors, whether caused by assistant registrars or EC staff. However, the problems with the rolls don’t seem to go away. When complaints are made about fraudulent electoral records, those may be cleaned up but errors turn up again in new guises. We cannot eliminate the problems because new ones are being manufactured daily.

Unless the EC is willing to be transparent and expose those officials involved in these erroneous records, it cannot accuse others of blaming everything on it. The Federal Constitution requires EC members to enjoy public confidence. Can we have confidence with the current team when they make dead people alive and living people dead?

How has the government responded to talk of a rally this time? Have they been more responsive to Bersih 2.0′s aims?

Prime Minister Najib has been unusually quiet on Bersih 3.0. He suffered a severe drop in popularity after the Bersih 2.0 crackdown where six were detained without trial under theEmergency Ordinance and a record 1,667 persons arrested on the same day.

Heavy police presence in downtown Kuala Lumpur on the morning of 9 July 2011.

This time, Najib has chosen to use media blackout instead of police violence to contain the soaring support for Bersih 3.0 from all sectors. However, old habits die hard. This week, Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) and the police rejected our sit-in plan at Dataran Merdeka. DBKL even acted like the police in removing protesters at Dataran Merdeka last week, and a day before the sit-in declared that Bersih 3.0 had become a “security issue”. Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has also threatened that police will take the necessary action against demonstrators if they turn up at Dataran Merdeka.

Will DBKL, an unelected entity and an extension of the federal government, employ violence to forcibly remove Bersih 3.0 protesters? Will the police act in the same way they did last year? It depends. The larger the crowd, the safer everyone will be! DBKL or the police will find it difficult to accommodate 50,000 protesters in the lock-up.

If Bersih 3.0 doesn’t have the same turnout as Bersih 2.0, does that mean that previously disenchanted voters are now satisfied with the government’s measures to address complaints about the electoral system? Would it mean that Bersih 2.0′s cause no longer has the same level of public support as before?

Barring police and DBKL obstacles, if our numbers are smaller than or equals last year’s turnout, then Najib can say the public has bought his “reforms” and the EC can boast that the Malaysian electoral rolls are the cleanest on earth.

However, I doubt that is possible. I haven’t come across a single person who went to the Bersih 2.0 rally who has decided not to join Bersih 3.0. Conversely, I have met countless people who missed Bersih 2.0 and vow not to miss Bersih 3.0. Rain or shine, roadblocks or not, they will get as close as possible to Dataran Merdeka.

We have two simple directions to all participants. First, the sit-in starts the moment they get blocked from moving forward. Second, once the police start arresting peaceful protesters, others should turn themselves in. Last year, the police prepared nasi briyani for 1,667 persons. Let’s see if they have ordered enough for 5,000 or 10,000 people this time.

We are prepared to engage in civil disobedience to defy unjust authority. We will not be broken by the force of violence. Instead, DBKL and the police must be prepared to have their authority broken by brave Malaysians who will walk and sit in until they get arrested.

What will be the effect of other causes such as Occupy Dataran, Abolish PTPTNand Himpunan Hijau also converging on Bersih 3.0? Do you think the message of Bersih 3.0 will be diluted?

Not at all. The anti-Lynas group is there as Himpunan Hijau 3.0@Bersih 3.0. We have mothers who believe their children’s future is at stake if politicians are protected by dirty elections. They call themselves Mamas@Bersih 3.0. So, any group can be there as part of the national force demanding clean elections. If you have a specific cause to champion, come to Dataran Merdeka on 28 April as “Your Cause@Bersih 3.0″.

Himpunan Hijau 2.0 rally in February 2012. All are welcome to join the Bersih 3.0 gathering. (Pic by Gan Pei Ling)

Why is Bersih insisting on gathering at Dataran Merdeka? Why not one of the other venues suggested by DBKL?

Dataran Merdeka is historical and easy to access by public transport. No stadium can beat Dataran Merdeka on this. Getting us to move to Cheras or Titiwangsa would be irresponsible by creating traffic jams in nearby residential areas. How many taxis do you need to ferry 100,000 protesters or more? How many hours of traffic jams can you bring to those areas?

In comparison, as long as the police and DBKL do not put up roadblocks, and coach operators are not stopped from entering the city, traffic will not be much greater than on a normal busy Saturday. And we will bring in millions of ringgit of business to downtown Kuala Lumpur. I hereby urge Najib, the ultimate boss of DBKL and the police, not to sabotage the economy of downtown Kuala Lumpur.

As for Stadium Merdeka, which is in the heart of Kuala Lumpur, how do you do a sit-in in a closed stadium? What happens after the field is full? Do we ask people to sit on the seats? How do people move around with limited entry and exit points?

In contrast, Dataran Merdeka is perfect for a sit-in. People can come and go easily from its four open borders. If the crowd is too big, they can spill over to open spaces nearby like Taman Tasik. Why are they trying to stop us from using Dataran Merdeka, which is logistically superior? Is there a problem with the word “Merdeka” as with “Bersih”? 

Press pixmen nabbed over assault pictures

Several newspaper photographers have been arrested while photographing scenes of alleged police brutality.

It is unclear how many photographers are arrested. Among them isMalaysiakini photojournalist Koh Jun Lin.

“My camera and memory card have been confiscated,” Koh said. "They said they wanted it as evidence."

At 7.50pm, Koh was released unconditonally at the Police Training Centre (Pulapol) where other detainees were being processed.

He was taken to a officer who ordered for his release without any documentation process. 

"The memory card is not here. It is still with the officer that arrested me," he said, adding that he was in possession of the camera.

The police were engaged in a cat-and-mouse game for about three hours with protesters after Bersih 3.0 organisers urged participants to disperse at 3pm.

Violence involving both the police and protesters escalated as the minutes went.

Threatened

One photographer told Malaysiakini that after he refused to delete photographs of a melee, a police personnel removed his memory card and destroyed it.

It was confirmed by Guang Ming Daily that one of their photographers was arrested while taking photographs of the process of an arrest and alleged police assault.

A Channel News Asia video cameraman has vowed to lodge a police report after he was punched.

"Furthermore, they took our tripod," said the cameraman, Kenny Lew.

Meanwhile, a Merdeka Review photographer claimed she was assaulted by four police personnel who attempted to seize her camera and mobile phone. 

"They pulled my media accreditation card and kicked it aside. They then demanded that I leave or face arrest," she said.

Al Jazeera: Heavy handed violence

In a live crossover interview, Al Jazeera journalist Harry Fawcett reported that he and his cameraman were faced with alleged police violence as well. 

"I'm coming to you via Skype from an iPad because the Malaysian police has just busted our camera," said Fawcett.

"In a number of instances, we saw a policeman grabbing a protester while the other would punch, knee or slap the protester.

"We went to try to film that ourselves, and found ourselves subject to not that harsh treatment but not dissimilar.

"We were shoved and held, our camera pushed to the ground. Perhaps they were under instructions to prevent the media from filming this kind of thing," he added.

Fawcett puts the blame on the protesters for breaching the cordon, triggering the "heavy-handed" violence from the police.

High stakes for Bersih 3.0 rally

As the buzz surrounding Bersih grows louder, the stakes are rising. As the week began, many wrote off Bersih 3.0, suggesting that the outrage and momentum did not echo the sentiments of last July. They suggested that the playing the rally card again would backfire.

Yet, as the week unfolded, and with the DBKL’s (City Hall’s) response to the occupation of Dataran Merdeka and students calling for free tertiary education, the tide slowly began to turn. It was BN which appeared to be playing a bad hand.

While there was a decentralisation of who was on the frontline for the BN this time, local authorities rather than national leaders, the end result was the same – a failure to address deep-seated concerns about electoral integrity and unwillingness to accept the protest that has arisen by the failure to address these concerns.

While many remain undecided, the ground is moving. Like the earlier two rallies, Bersih 3.0 has evolved into an event that captures a broad range of concerns, from the environment, religious rights, 1Care health insurance scheme and corruption to electoral reform and free education.

The core of these issues involves a call for better governance and greater consultation with Malaysians. This has been the central nerve of Malaysian politics since 1998-1999, as leaders who are seen to be engaging in reform win power and those who don’t lose support.

This was the case in 2004 and 2008. The Bersih 3.0 rally will shape whether this will be the case in 2012 (or 2013).

Over the last few weeks, analysts have used online/social media and forums to highlight the need for electoral reform, pointing to serious problems in the electoral roll, electoral system, electoral rules and the independence of the Electoral Commission (EC).

By any measure and international standards, these problems are credible and cannot be dismissed. Many of these problems have been around for a long time; the EC’s independence was lost in 1962, for example.

Gerrymandering and malapportionment have been serious issues for decades, and were exacerbated after the 1969 racial riots. What makes the ‘old’ issues more salient is the competitiveness of the upcoming polls, as these factors have been shown to influence outcomes in the past.

Malaysia has long been touted as an example of electoral authoritarianism, where the electoral system is used to buttress the support of the incumbent in power.

Foreigners could well decide GE

What makes electoral reform even more potent this time around is the changes that have been brought into the system since 2008, often without proper review or adequate debate.

Here is where the discussion of the electoral roll fits in. To my knowledge, there is no place in the world that allows this many foreigners to vote for the strategic purpose of winning office.

Few can understand why authorities would sell out the interests of its citizens as a whole by bringing in non-Malaysians to vote. This is especially hard to understand when so many Malaysians abroad are clamouring to vote, but were denied this by both the EC and Malaysian courts.

Strategic political citizenship is sadly not new in Malaysia’s history, as Sabahans can attest to. Little attention is given on its long-term impact on the country’s social fabric and the marginalisation of different communities as the right to vote is given to immigrants for political expediency.

Foreigners, new postal voters, procedures that limit transparency in voting and more have raised serious red flags about Malaysia’s electoral processes and the sad fact is that if elections are held in these circumstances, the victory would not be a genuine one. It would be a hollow mandate fabricated through manipulation.

To use an analogy that football fans can understand, there is no longer a referee. The opposition has been told that they can only stand in their own side of the field and all the players in the incumbent team are offside near their rival’s goal. This is not a fair fight, but a fixed one.

Where has the sense of integrity gone? Does the BN need a victory so bad that it would play on such an unlevel field?

The reason these issues are so important is, to quote Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, the next election will be “the mother of all elections”.

Of the 222 seats up for grabs, I believe 170 are competitive – a swing of 10 percent either way will make a marked difference given the new configuration of younger voters and changing terrain. Of these 170 competitive seats, nearly 90 of these are “highly competitive” – meaning that in the fluid conditions of Malaysian politics, either side can win.

Up until Bersih, it was my view that BN had the advantage.

Prime Minister Najib Razak – through his hard work and use of finances (another problematic area in Malaysian elections – BR1M’s cash handouts involved 5.3 million households at a cost of RM2.3 billion, for example) had made headway and was steering BN into a comfortable win, relying heavily on seats in Sabah and Sarawak.

While there were the unknowns of infighting within his party, Umno, the inability of the opposition to formulate a unified message and move beyond capitalising on negative angst against the BN and Umno, continued to work in BN’s favour.

The big issue that boosted Najib was perceptions (not necessarily reality) that the economy was stronger than in 2008, as well as the impact of the attacks on Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim.

Now, this dynamic is again in flux. The competition has risen sharply, as seats in the BN’s hands are less secure. The recent questionable changes involving the electoral process are even more important, and contentious.

The battle for the middle ground

When Bersih 3.0 first began, it attracted the base that voted for the opposition, those that have already made up their minds.

The BN’s response – a hardline one that denied access to Dataran Merdeka, showcased the use of the police via DBKL, involved denial of electoral problems through the EC’s explanatory report as “anomalies” and even featured taxi drivers linked to BN in an appeal to move the venue elsewhere – involved three key elements:

1. Denial of problems.
2. A traditional attempt to tar the protesters as a threat to stability.
3. The failed attempt to use the racial card.

It mirrored the well-honed old political style. At its core, there are some in Umno who see similarities between Merdeka Square and Tahrir Square, and are worried this arena will be a focal point for change. These sort of concerns led to the siege mentality last July.

Yet, it has evolved into a new dynamic. To understand Malaysian politics today, it is important to appreciate its diversity and pluralism.

The days where power can be decided by a group of leaders meeting in private are gone. It is the people who have the power, not the politicians. Both sides are using numbers and people to win support. The BN-linked NGOs have come out to voice their own concerns, as have some of their beneficiaries. The opposition too is using its own links.

Yet this rally involves many politically-engaged Malaysians who are not tied directly to any party. Their focus is on the issues they represent. Many of these form what in political science is known as ‘critical citizens’ – those who view both sides with scepticism and want the system as a whole to improve.

This is what makes Bersih 3.0 so important, in that it is a reflection of Middle Malaysia – the middle ground led by critical citizens. In Middle Malaysia, there are four groups in particular that will shape the electoral outcome.

The first is youth. Young voters are crucial in the results, as they make up at least two million of the new voters. They are distributed across seats, although disproportionally less likely to vote as they are outstation. Malaysia remains one of the handful of countries in Asia which have a voting age of 21, considerably higher than the global average and this disenfranchises its youth.

They have now become more politically active, reminiscent of the 1960s. Today the issue of free education and treatment of students has made Bersih 3.0 highly emotive among many younger Malaysians, and their turnout will be a test for how the ground is moving.

The second group is middle-class voters. Many of these individuals had never been to a protest before July 2011 and if they show up in high numbers, then it will highlight the challenge the government faces in winning over key opinion leaders in various communities.

These are the doctors, the civil servants, the bankers and clerks, the community leaders who have social capital and can shape opinions. They make up the heart of critical citizens, informed and engaged in issues.

The third group that will matter this time round will be the regional events nationally and internationally, especially in East Malaysia.

These are not only the ‘fixed deposit’ areas, but are where many of the electoral problems are most acute, especially foreigner voters. Greater activism outside of Kuala Lumpur will illustrate that the concerns are not confined to the urban core, but national (and international) in scope.

Finally, the fourth group that will matter is the police and other security groups such as Rela (Volunteers Corps), whose actions will reflect on their professionalism. A crackdown will only serve to reinforce the sense of unfairness and the need for better governance that is essentially underlying the Bersih 3.0 rally.

As such, tensions are high and anger has risen on both sides, making Bersih 3.0 more intense than earlier rallies.

Competition for reform within Umno

Even when the dust eventually settle on Bersih 3.0, another fault line in Malaysian politics will be showcased – the ability of Najib to showcase himself as the champion of reform.

After Bersih 2.0, he made promises and many of them took the form of new bills. Some of which opened up space and many of which only served to bring in more draconian measures. Whether it involved free assembly or electoral changes, the end result is that the measures introduced are not yet fundamentally about reform.

They focus on form not substance, taking away old laws such as the Internal Security Act, while introducing more questionable – although untested ones, such as the Security Offences (Special Measures) Bill. The same focus on form underscores the government’s last-minute conciliatory offer of four alternative locations for Bersih 3.0.

Why this focus on form rather than substance? Cynics would suggest that this reflects the inability to trust Najib and his promises. Others would suggest that this reflects the reality in the system that he has to operate. He was a hardliner who is now claiming to be a reformer and/or adopting reformist rhetoric to win power. He is a product of Umno.
The majority of leaders in his party still are hardliners, and the handful of reformist leaders such as Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin are facing challenges inside the system, especially as they are showcased to defend the system they are in.

The bigger question that comes out of the handling of Bersih 3.0 will be whether Umno is capable of reforming.

What is interesting to date is that Najib has stayed largely out of the fray, handing over the spokesman role to his cousin, Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein. This issue is a national one and as a national leader, questions are being raised about his position.

He chose to go out of town in the last round, and the end result was that he came off as mishandling the event. Can he afford this again given that his campaign to date has been about his national leadership?

What happens tomorrow is not just about the opposition or Umno-BN. It is also not just about electoral reform, given the wide spectrum of concerns. Everyone will attempt to gain political capital.

Politically, Bersih 3.0 will reveal whether Malaysia will become more polarised or compromises can be reached. It will either provide momentum for the opposition, or signal an early election by Najib if turnout is low, in which he will win, in part due to the problems engendered in the system.

Ultimately this rally is not just about politics. The Bersih 3.0 rally is about Malaysia’s future – about whether a national leader will lead, about whether the field will be fair enough to be respectable, about whether a government treats its people with a modicum of respect and about whether politics in Malaysia will be a politics of the street or effective dialogue with a reasonable leadership.

Too much of late in Malaysia has been about negativity, anger and insecurity. Bersih 3.0 is moving politics away from that negativity to the promise of a better future for Malaysians, or at least trying to do so. Najib’s reaction to Bersih 3.0 is perhaps his most serious leadership test yet.

‘Help me understand why you need to rally’

For a free and fair Malaysia

My reasons for feeling as strongly as I do about Bersih 3.0 has nothing to do with jumping on the bandwagon nor has it anything to do with feeling the adrenalin rush of standing, marching, walking or sitting in solidarity with thousands of others in a yellow T-shirt.

My reasons for believing in Bersih 3.0, just like how I believed in Bersih 2.0, is because:

• I believe in the possibility of a free and equal Malaysia where everyone is privy to the same benefits and rights, no more, no less than another.
• I believe in a better Malaysia, because the Malaysia that existed when my father was a young man has gone the way of the dodo (bird).
• I am tired of the supposed powers-that-be thinking that we are just a bunch of stupid people who are okay with the wool being pulled over our eyes repeatedly.
• I am so done with reading in the international news (that) only rubbish happens in this country that I love.
• I am fed up with the corruption, the easy silencing of people who speak up and the thuggish attitudes of those in the seat of power.
• I am tired of reporting fairly and bringing to light issues which would otherwise go unreported, only to be questioned by the authorities and being forced to disclose my source.
• I am tired of having to justify my sexuality and to fear for the wellbeing and safety of my lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender friends who just want what is rightfully theirs – human rights in its essence.
• I also want to see genuine electoral reforms such as clean electoral rolls; reform postal ballot; use of indelible ink; minimum 21-day campaign period; free and fair access to media; strengthening public institutions; stopping corruption; and stopping dirty politics.
• And finally, to succinctly put it in the regal parlance of an ex-editor of mine, I am just so tired of the bullshit.

Solidarity sit-in

I’ll wager that there are thousands of Malaysians who want the same and more, who feel these emotions and then some.

So come tomorrow (April 28) officially from 2pm to 4pm, just like me, we will sit together in what is actually a common public area, which unifies us in our desire for the kind of Malaysia we know we can have.

We will all sit in solidarity in, ironically, Dataran Merderka or Freedom Square.

We will sit in solidarity for better governance, fair rule and the right to speak.

We will sit in solidarity for the right to live a fair existence and to love who we want to without fear or favour.

These are just some of the reasons I will be at Bersih 3.0 – and of course, that my job assigns me to it.

So there I will be, at where ever I’m stationed, pen and notebook in hand, press tag around my neck, positive thoughts in my head and my heart on my sleeve that I will see a new dawn in my lifetime, and maybe, just maybe, the possibility that my father will eventually see the point behind this.

To realise where his daughter and thousands of her fellow Malaysians are coming from.

One rural vote worth six urban ballots, favours BN, analysts say

PETALING JAYA April 25 — The Election Commission’s EC drawing of electoral boundaries makes a rural voter worth an average of six urban voters biasing elections towards Barisan Nasional BN as it is stronger in the countryside according to poll analysts Election watchdog Tindak Malaysia founder PY Wong said the ruling coalition won 112 out of the smallest 139 federal seats in Election 2008 giving it simple majority in Parliament with just 18 9 per cent of the popular vote The seats have not been changed for the next general election “Something is seriously wrong when you can win 50 4 per cent of Parliament with just 18 9 per cent of the votes ” he told a forum here last night Wong said malapportionment — unequally-sized constituencies — and gerrymandering — manipulation of electoral boundaries — also allowed the ruling coalition to rack up 62 of the smallest seats with just 6 2 per cent of the popular vote Something is seriously wrong when you can win 50 4 per cent of Parliament with just 18 9 per cent of the votes He pointed out how the smallest federal seat was Putrajaya won by BN with 6 008 voters while Kapar won by PKR had over 112 000 Another analyst Wong Chin Huat pointed out that the smallest 112 seats only represented 33 8 per cent of the electorate The Bersih steering committee member said this allowed for the lopsided results in 2004 where BN won 90 9 per cent of Parliament with just 63 9 per cent of the popular vote while Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail was PKR’s sole MP despite gaining 8 4 per cent of votes cast “This means one vote for BN was worth 26 votes for PKR ” he said Chin Huat said malapportionment and gerrymandering have been made easier after a constitutional provision which stated the largest and smallest seats may only have a 15 per cent differential was amended in 1962 to 50 per cent and then abolished completely in 1973 The lecturer at Monash University Sunway said Bersih proposed to solve the rural bias by ensuring that the maximum size of the largest state seat can only be half of the smallest federal seat “If they have small rural parliamentary seats this will only create many urban state seats and give urban voters control of the state governments By linking Parliament and state seats you avoid the bias ” he said Pakatan Rakyat PR denied BN its customary two-thirds supermajority of Parliament at the last general election by capturing 82 federal seats and five state governments Although the opposition coalition marginally won the popular vote in Peninsular Malaysia it only took 80 out of the 166 federal seats available there But it has now lost six seats as the winning lawmakers have turned independent and support BN in parliament Bersih will hold a sit-in rally this weekend to press its demands for electoral reforms despite a parliamentary select committee PSC making its recommendations to the EC.

You and me folks. Kita jadi Dunggu.

Recent article floating on the net. Good that the Malays are now questioning this stupidity......

Khazanah wants to dispose of the headache from their failed sayur project. After spending about RM150 million, they will be lucky to get back 20% or 30% of their total investment costs. In the same way, they may dispose Proton (a RM3.29 billion company) to Nadzmi at a fraction of the company's value. That will make Proton financially viable for Nadzmi. Then to make the business also viable, Nadzmi will ride on the AP crutches, on the Import Duties, Excise Duty and Other Taxes which inflates the prices of other imported cars in the country to survive for how many more years? So it is us the suffering taxpayers who will be keeping Nadzmi in the money. If Khazanah sells their stake to Nadzmi at 'besi buruk' price, it is us the taxpayer who suffers the loss. It is our money that will be given to Nadzmi.

Step 1 : he will buy Proton cheap.

Step 2 : he will enjoy the AP and import duty crutches. Then make an extra RM400 to RM500 million profit (Nadzmi's so called low hanging fruits) and you and me will have to pay three or four times the price for tin can cars.

Here are some numbers folks. I now have an AP in front of me. It is a realAP. Someone bought a recond car recently (UK car). The 'franchise AP' guys let us have the AP and the Customs documents. I am reading straight from the Customs Documents:

The nilai or value of the car is RM48,000.00
Import Duty RM14,000.00
Excise Duty RM65,000.00
Other Taxes Payable RM13,000.00
Subtotal RM140,000.00

Then on another page, there is a chop which says:
*Manifes / AP telah disemak di Pelabuhan Klang*.
The car dealer said this is the AP. The amount paid was RM15,500.

This makes the landed cost of the five year old recond car = RM140,000 +
RM15,500 = RM155,500.

Please note now the first line above ie the *'Nilai or value*' of the car
is RM48,000 only.

From RM48,000 the cost of the car has now ballooned to RM155,500.

*The AP holder made RM15,500.
*The Gomen made RM92,000. (The AP holder'sname is clearly written on the AP that I have in front of me. It says 'Dato Hj xxx bin Tan Sri yyy.)

*Tapi nanti dulu. What about the show room selling price of the car? The dealer sold the car for RM240,000.

So the car dealer made a profit ofRM85,000.00.

A five year old car with a value of RM48,000 (in the UK) sells here for RM240,000.

Bodohnya orang Malaysia.

These are all part of the low hanging fruits that will keep Nadzmi in the money - if he buys Proton. And lets not forget the AP Kings who still own their helicopters and their villas and have personal networth's in excess of RM2.0 billion. One guy flies in an Australian music band to play live music for his dinner guests. I heard it directly from a Deputy Minister that the AP is designed so that our businessmen can take the money they earn from the AP's and venture into other businesses, but they are not doing that'. Bro, if I can make such easy money from AP's and buy my own helicopter, build my own villa and fly in my own music band from Australia, then why the hell would I want to venture into any other business?

Here is a silly question : can anyone answer who pays for these AP Kings to make so much money, own helicopters and fly in Australian music bands? 
You and me folks. Kita jadi Dunggu.