Constitution is nothing if not secular, says Umno man

The Federal Constitution in its current form cannot be interpreted as Islamic, Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah said last night, amid recent bids to expand the authority of Shariah law.

The former deputy minister said it is a problem when Muslim leaders try to rewrite the country’s supreme law “through backdoor channels” in a bid to asset an Islamic interpretation of what is essentially a secular document.

“As a Muslims, I would like to say the constitution is Islamic. But how do I spin the argument to say that it is something that it is not?” he said at a public forum in conjunction with Human Rights Day 2014.

“As it is, the constitution is secular, and it is supreme. I am not saying it cannot be amended, only the Quran cannot be amended... (but) you cannot look at the constitution and expect it to do something it is not supposed to do.

“We really need to look at the constitution in that perspective, and then debate it. Don’t go labelling people as ‘liberal’ or whatnots, that is not how adults behave,” he added.

- See more at: http://m.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/constitution-is-nothing-if-not-secular-says-umno-man#sthash.ZfcLh2wq.dpuf

Religious tension has been at a constant simmer over the past few years, with a string of cases challenging the legal limits of Islamic jurisprudence in the country.

The most recent was a landmark ruling by the Court of Appeal on November 7 that found Section 66 of the Negri Sembilan Shariah Criminal Enactment 1992, which prohibits Muslim men from cross-dressing, to be unconstitutional and void.

The case prompted the minister in charge of Islamic Affairs, Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, to claim that Muslim transgenders, among others, were colluding with Islam’s enemies to put its religious institutions on trial in a secular court, and that Muslims must defend their faith from liberal ideologies “by any method”.

It also prompted Islamic authorities to confirm plans to create a Shariah equivalent of the Federal Court that would prevent the civil courts from ruling on matters concerning Islam.

Islamic authorities have also been gradually widening their enforcement beyond Muslims, and in January, Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) confiscated over 300 Malay— and Iban-language Bibles from the premises of the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM).

Though the holy books — which were bound for Sarawak — were eventually released last week, Christians in the country’s largest state were livid after discovering that the Bibles were stamped with a warning that they were not to be printed or distributed in Selangor or to Muslims.

Saifuddin last night stressed that Muslim leaders, especially those in government, must go back to the basic tenets of their faith and follow the example of Prophet Muhammad who had no issues with allowing non-Muslims to practice their faith.

“The Prophet did not go around seizing Bibles. Just be a good Muslim, and be a good Malay as outlined in Article 153 (of the Federal Constitution),” he said.

Association for the Promotion of Human Rights (Proham) chairman Datuk Khutubul Zaman Bukhari noted that there is already a clear precedent in the Federal Court set by former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas, who ruled in a case that the Federal Constitution is secular and not Islamic.

“To me, Malaysia has a secular constitution, and it is not an Islamic country... and I am the chairman of the Bar Council Shariah Law Committee,” he said for emphasis.

Former Bar Council President Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan said a secular constitution trumps an apex law that is based on any religion, as it guarantees protection for all regardless of creed.

She said India is the best example of this, as its secular constitution ensures the rights of minority religious groups even if the majority are Hindu, including current Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

“Secular is good, because it protects everybody,” she said.

- See more at: http://m.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/constitution-is-nothing-if-not-secular-says-umno-man#sthash.ZfcLh2wq.dpuf

Pas a DICTATORSHIP run by Hadi - Should DAP, PKR assist PAS in duping voters?

Kelantan Deputy MB Nik Amar Abdullah should be careful when asking DAP to leave PR.

Something seems to be wrong with him. Whilst we in DAP ask PAS President Abdul Hadi Awang to attend meetings to strengthen PR, this man accuses us of trying to push PAS out of PR. He doesn't seem to understand simple things.

If there are no useful meetings, the existence of PR itself would be illusory.

This is not a small issue. It is a very serious matter. It goes to the heart of PR itself.

Hadi has openly said he will choose when to attend PR meetings or not. He has chosen to again behave as if he is the all supreme in PR who will decide when and what, if at all, anything will be done.

This kind of attitude is a show of total and utter disrespect not only to the component parties of PR but more so to the many Malaysians who expect that leaders in PR will put their hearts and minds together to build an alternative party which is capable of leading this country in place of BN.

But instead of reassuring people, we find a repeat of what we saw of Hadi during the Selangor MB crisis.

We in DAP have said many times that if PR is to work, if it is to succeed, there must be serious efforts put into it by all component parties concerned.

Dictatorship

We are not pinning things down to Hadi personally but from what we see in the past, it is clear that PAS is governed by one man and he is Hadi. He is able to overrule anyone or any body in the party.

So, there is nothing wrong in asking for him to be present at meetings if decisions must be made over the future of PR.

There is just no point in having meetings if the main person doesn't bother attending and all discussions are on a "we will consult our leader basis" and nothing is firmed up in the end.

Gobind Singh Deo is MP for Puchong

CONVERTS EXPLOIT MALAYSIA’S SYARIAH COURT TO GET CUSTODY OF KIDS

THE separate jurisdictions of Malaysia's Islamic and civil courts are being exploited by estranged spouses to gain custody of children, a situation that poses risks to national harmony, the Attorney-General has said.

Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail was referring in particular to inter-racial marriages where one spouse converts to Islam after marriage, and when the relationship sours, gains custody of their children through the Syariah court while ignoring the civil court's ruling.

He did not cite specific cases in his speech on Nov 11 at the National Law Conference. However, there have been two high-profile cases recently in which two non-Muslim women's ex-husbands, who were Muslim converts, made away with their children after gaining custody through the Syariah court, while ignoring civil court rulings in their ex-wives' favour. Both cases are now with the Court of Appeal.

There is no data on such cases but activists say there are a handful of cases in each state annually.

Civil rights activists responded to Mr Abdul Gani's comments by urging the authorities to lay out clear policies and amend laws to clarify how custody of children from mixed marriages involving a Muslim should be decided.

Mr Abdul Gani also noted in his speech that the increasing number of such cases has led to allegations of racial discrimination by the courts and the authorities, including the police and the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC), which dent their credibility.

"The failure of the converting spouses to resolve the family arrangements prior to conversion, and in fact attempting to use the different jurisdictions of the civil and Syariah courts to their advantage, jeopardises not only family harmony but also potentially national harmony," he said.

He added that proposed amendments in 2009 to laws governing marriages under both judicial systems were still pending. These amendments would allow matters such as child custody to be decided by the court where the marriage was registered.

Malaysia's dual-track legal system means that while it is governed by civil law, the Federal Constitution allows for Syariah Courts to adjudicate for Muslims who make up 60 per cent of the 30 million population.

Civil courts have largely deferred to Islamic courts even where one party is non-Muslim, such as in interfaith marriages, and the Syariah judges have consistently granted the Muslim parent custody of children so that they will remain in the faith.

Sisters in Islam, a group that promotes women's rights, referring to disputes in which children were converted to Islam by one spouse without the other's knowledge, said the majority of these cases involved spouses who were both non-Muslim when they wedded but with one of them converting during marriage.

"It's the ambiguity of the law which results in such conflicts," its programme director Suriani Kempe told The Straits Times. 

"If the A-G does not want the integrity of the police or AGC to be questioned, he should push for the 2009 amendments to be tabled in Parliament and let it debate the merits."

Lawyers for Liberty, a human rights group, said there was a lack of political will to close the legal loopholes. Executive director Eric Paulsen said: "No one wants to be seen as not prioritising Islam."

Right-wing Muslim groups have defended the unilateral conversion of children and even the abduction of a child by its Muslim parent who said it was for the child's "protection".

Religious conversion rears its ugly head again-Mariam Mokhtar

When Muslim clerics claim that Muslims are being converted in churches throughout Selangor and Perak, all hell breaks loose. When Muslims are accused of converting people of other faiths against their will, nothing happens.

On Oct 10, Sarawak DAP vice-chairman Leon Jimat Donald said that some parents had complained that their children had been enticed into converting to Islam, in their schools, in Betong. Children were allegedly prevented from bringing their Bibles to the MRSM boarding schools and boys had been forced to wear the “songkok”.

The parents’ fears were heightened after reading reports that a group had been visiting longhouses in Belaga, to convert the communities. It was alleged that the group had misused the “goodwill and welfare” programme, to entice them to become Muslims, with an offer of RM6,000 per person.

Earlier this May, another peninsular-based NGO, Himpunan Lepas Institusi Pendidikan Malaysia (Haluan) was alleged to have set up “religious camps”, under the programme called “Anak Angkat”, in schools in Kuching.

Following feedback from their children, parents had voiced their concerns to the Balai Ringin assemblyman, Snowdan Lawan. They met Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) president, Tan Sri Dr James Masing to tell him about the alleged conversions. They said that some of the speakers from Haluan were religious teachers (ustaz), who lectured the children on things like how to differentiate between holy water and “Air ZamZam.” The programme was subsequently suspended prior to re-evaluation.

Of the 1.3 million Dayaks in Sarawak, 80% are Christian, but the indigenous people of Sarawak are not the only people who are the targets of religious conversion. Another vulnerable group of people is the Orang Asli (OA) community.

In 2006, it was reported that in an effort to propagate the spread of Islam, Kelantan offered Muslim preachers RM10,000 to marry OA women. Other incentives included free accommodation, a four-wheel drive vehicle and a fixed monthly allowance of RM1,000.

For the interior people of Sarawak, most of whom do not have a fixed income, RM50 is considered a blessing, RM300 a king’s ransom, and RM6,000 as heaven sent. The financial incentive to the Muslim preachers of Kelantan is morally wrong. These acts are objectionable and deceitful.

These underhand tactics, to convert non-Muslims, give Islam a bad name. A person who wishes to convert should only do so if there is a sincere desire to follow and adhere to the teachings of that particular faith.

He should not do it because of financial reward, a house, a 4WD or because he is to be married to one. We need only look at another part of the world, where the minority Kurdish Yazidis, are prepared to face death, when members of the extremist cult Islamic State (IS) warn them, that they will be executed unless they convert to Islam.

In the Kelantan case, did the state stop to consider that the financial reward would encourage bogus preachers? The idea of a marriage of convenience, because of material rewards is abhorrent.

What if the marriage breaks down and the OA woman wishes to return to her community and culture? She will find it an impossibility. Any children from the union will be subject to the same torture which is faced by Perakian Indira Gandhi, who after her divorce, found that her husband had converted to Islam, and forced all his children to convert. Despite a High Court order to return the youngest daughter to her mother, the husband has refused to comply and remains a fugitive. A very inept IGP has been unable to apprehend him.

In Malaysia, it is apparent that some Muslim NGOs and the Islamic state departments have the backing of the Umno-Baru government to play politics with religion. All of them give Islam a bad name. They forget that being a Muslim is not about scoring points or a numbers game.

Hasan Ali a Selangor politician, Harussani Zakaria, the Perak Mufti and other infamous Muslim politicians have used apostasy as a scaremongering tactic amongst Muslims, presumably to divide the Malays. Hasan said that a solar powered talking bible was used to convert Muslims. To date, not one solar powered bible has been produced.

Harussani said that a church in Ipoh, was used to convert Muslims. His irresponsible lies, nearly caused a riot. A church in Kuala Lumpur was said to be the seat of Malay conversions and two reporters infiltrated Sunday mass and desecrated the Holy Communion service. A dinner in the Methodist Church in Petaling Jaya was raided, because of reports of Muslims being proselytised.

In each of these cases, no Muslim has been produced, as evidence of their conversion to Christianity. The perpetrators have not been prosecuted for spreading seditious rumours.  No apology has been forthcoming.

Muslim preachers and politicians should leave the non-Muslims alone. Enough damage has been done to their communities. They threaten to burn their holy books. The authorities take years to approve the building of a church or temple. They grab the OA or indigenous peoples’ lands and deny them their rightful place in society. Their social and political dues are withheld, their identities removed, their culture and language downgraded, and when they die, their bodies are confiscated. 

The actions of these religious zealots, makes one ashamed to be Muslim.

Mariam Mokhtar is "a Malaysian who dares to speak the truth.”

Let’s stop this pendatang nonsense by Khairie Hisyam Aliman

So finally someone shot back in style to the Malay supremacists. Last Sunday, a Gerakan man told UMNO last Sunday that Malays are supposedly ‘pendatang’ to this land as well. And for his troubles, Gerakan member Tan Lai Soon was immediately suspended from the party.

Various non-government organisations (NGOs) including ISMA — who once called the Chinese ‘pendatang’ — lodged police reports against him. Federal minister Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim reportedly wants action against Tan. On the other hand Tan Sri Zainuddin Maidin said yes, Malays are ‘pendatang’ too but we came first.

But lurking beneath the fascinating responses to Tan’s statement is the point that this catchy rhetoric simply perpetuates a conversation that is fundamentally flawed.

The very concept of citizenship means that once you are granted a Malaysian citizenship, through birth or otherwise, you are Malaysian. You would have to pay taxes, obey the law, uphold the Constitution and swear allegiance to the King and country, just like any other citizen before you.

Once you’re in, you’re in — until such time that you renounce your citizenship. Apart from political alignment, citizens of this nation are all on the same side: Team Malaysia.

As a nation, there is no ‘us’ or ‘them’. Just ‘us’. So why are we still talking about whose fathers came from where like it is the single overarching factor of everything today? 

Our identity, past and present

History, of course, is important. Malaysia’s history is rich and the nation today has a wealth of diversified cultural heritage. Remembering where our forebears come from lends perspective.

Yes, Malays were in what would become Malaya long before the Chinese and the Indian immigrants came. But as our history unfolded, citizenship was extended to the immigrants, who in turn pledge loyalty to the nation.

Sarawak and Sabah had their own history and joined with Malaya to form Malaysia, which many seem to forget or dismiss today.

More importantly, the granting of citizenship back then was not conditional upon forgoing cultural heritage and identity. Unlike Indonesia for example, there were no nationwide assimilation policies per se to homogenise our national identity.

Hence today we do not have a homogenous identity as a nation. Rather, we have a multi-cultural identity forged by our various races brought together under one roof.

And we supposedly celebrate our diversity, going by how we advertise ourselves as a tourism destination. Yet we continue to talk about who came here first and who are supposedly superior because they came first.

This talk of ‘pendatang’, among others, tries to tackle an issue that is long past our control: that the immigrants of so many decades ago were eventually granted citizenships and their children were subsequently born citizens of the land just like any other Malaysian today.

But trying to undo the past is futile. None of us can choose who our fathers are, where our ancestors came from. Nor can we change what our fathers chose to do in the past.

Now Malaysia is what it is and there is no going back, nor should there be. Having each other with all the implications that brings enrich us further collectively.

We all own Malaysia

What we should talk about today instead is making the arrangement work for all of us, not just some of us. Like it or not every single Malaysian has rights to the nation as provided by the Constitution and the law.

While we cannot undo the past, we can shape the present and choose the future. We cannot choose our ancestors but we can choose who we are, what we do today and what we leave for our descendants.

For my fellow citizens who did not and do not wish to migrate away from this country, their choice is, essentially, to be Malaysians.

They are choosing to be loyal to this land they are born to and which they call home.

They are choosing to live here, to start families here, to fulfil what is expected of citizens here. And sometimes they even go above and beyond that for their fellow citizens.

It is something that many take for granted but nonetheless no less important. That choice to be Malaysian, to pledge loyalty to this nation and to serve it, should matter more today than lineage and ancestry.

Who is to say that the so-called ‘pendatang’ Malaysians are not as willing as, if not more than, other Malaysians to give their all for the country? Or that the other Malaysians are more patriotic solely by virtue of their ancestry?

The better measure of a good Malaysian, to my mind, is what service a person does for the betterment of the nation. And, in turn, how we can all prosper together while we are at it.

That, unlike who our fathers were and where our fathers came from, is something we can all do something about.

Bigots can be the role model for Malaysian activists.......Nany JHaron

It has been a quite challenging year for Malaysians. Countless and countless times bigots have tried their best to keep pace on their momentum so that their followers will continue to have faith in them and their causes. Like any average (radical) activists, bigots have their own way to spread their propaganda consistently and without fail. Personally, I admire their determinations and their togetherness. Even though what they did and what they preach are something that I am against wholeheartedly, but I cannot deny their tenacity in their causes. Yet, I wonder why many Malaysians could not let them go as in by how Malaysians keep on talking about them, their causes and their propaganda.

Ironically, I didn't see much tenacity, persistence and determinations from my country's left wing and far-left wing activists. Of course, for every educated left wing and far-left wing activists, they have their own arguments over technologies and capitalism etc etc etc. You be the judge, but what is the fundamental brand mantra for activism? Man-made rules are meant to be broken. Activism goes hand in hand with majority fundamentalism of anarchism. Why is it a struggle for many non-governmental institutions in Malaysia? Why aren't there many noises made by individuals and groups within the non-governmental institutions circle? Why aren't these noises made by them does not have the same weight of bigots' advocacy?

The reality is, the non-governmental institutions have its own double standards and hypocrisy just like any average society existentialism. Typical. Malaysian radicalism has its own signature and it is best not compare it with other countries. In Malaysia activism case, bigots are on the role of becoming the underdog of activism. Personally (again), bigots way of activism could be Malaysian activists' best example to implement, improvise, adapt and pursue it without fail. Take the good, and ditch the bad. For a simple example is freedom of speech. You can't put limitations over freedom of speech. No one can. The only two things that you could do are either to ignore or face it like a human being. You also have the right to be offended or offend someone. But, Karma will come right back at you with a hard knocking pain of consequences. So it is up to you on how you could control your life, and how you could deal with whatever come passes by you. Who else is the master of your life if it is not you? And what is worth of living your own life if it is not you who control your life?

Bigots have their own way to 'take care' of their own community. They use a lot of 'Us' and 'We', and they will never give up. They will continue to spread their own propaganda until that propaganda sticks to everyone's minds like a super glue. I guess that is a simple and direct way of showing how bigots practice their own activism. It has been fun over the years by just observing bigots from afar, and watch how they spread their propaganda via social media and press statements. I admire their determinations. It's all about getting the job done. Making advocacy an important tool and also an important part of activism. To cone people into believing in their propaganda that they have flourish it since day one. Bigots make their circle of community tighter and tighter, and they will never allow anyone to break that circle except for the community within that circle. So, the important part of activism is to break rules, the man-made law. Bigots have successfully breaking and playing around with the man-made law for years, so what is holding Malaysian activists' backs?

'If you can't fight them, then join them'. Why not? Why don't WE use their tactics and strategies to advocate our own causes that affect greatly upon OUR own communities. If they are able to get their job done, so could WE.

Top 20 things to ban in Malaysia by Ramesh Rajaratnam

 I have been following the pace of events that suggests there is a move to ban or declare illegal certain activities in this country because we are no longer sensitive to others' feelings. I am now fully convinced that our moral guardians are acting in our best interest because we are weak of faith and morals.
 
So, being a good citizen who is ever ready to assist the politicians to discharge their very heavy workload, I have compiled a list of things that we should ban and the reasons for doing so:
 
1) Thaipusam - because the chariot procession causes chaos in certain parts of Kuala Lumpur, Penang and Johor Bahru at 3am and parading Hindu deities on our streets may offend some people's sensitivities and this should not be tolerated.

2) Hungry Ghost festival - we definitely do not want to feed the ‘syaitans’ and encourage belief in the supernatural. Furthermore, it too may offend some people's sensitivities.
 
3) Bars and pubs - there is already a move to ban them in some parts of Malaysia, I think. Instead of making it a district-based ban, as we are a country that believes in fairness, I propose that all bars and pubs that serve foreign alcohol be banned. In this way, some people with weak faith shall not be tempted to imbibe.
 
But here we must exempt the ‘tapai’ sellers because they don't offend our sensitivities. Unlike Chivas and VSOP, the alcohol in ‘tapai’ is locally made and therefore perfectly tolerable as it will promote SMIs (small-minded investors).
 
4) Astro - there is unnecessary truth and transparency portrayed on this satellite TV. Besides, channels like CNN and BBC, with their decadent sense of independence, do not meet the high journalistic standards of local media reporting where the people are daily told what is necessary and what is right for them.
 
5) Facebook - because this application is owned by a Zionist who reportedly ‘locked out’ a past Malaysian leader, and perhaps plotting to topple a current one by meddling in Malaysian affairs with his Jewish capitalist friends and backed by the Christians.
 
6) Cone-shaped ice-cream - because the way people lick the ice-cream is totally disgusting and may hurt some people's sensitivities. In fact, it may even encourage people to engage in oral sex in a country where such acts are never practised by sensitive people.
 
7) The image of KLCC- because the shape of the towers is phallic looking and may hurt the sensitivities of some people whose faith is weak. Besides two phallic images next to each other may tempt the morally weak to engage in homosexual activities.
 
8) Hindu/Chinese/Buddhist temples - because these shrines tend to carry statues or idols that may hurt the sensitivities of certain people. Besides, if these places of worship are torn down, then people who go to pray there will no longer park their cars indiscriminately all over public roads and cause a general inconvenience to other road users on a weekly basis.
 
9) Women's tennis - because the dressing of these athletes is too revealing and may hurt the sensitivities of some people. They will be, however, allowed to be seen/shown if we could persuade the ladies to wear track-bottoms under their skirts so that people of weak faith may not be tempted to commit rapes after watching these games.
 
10) Men's wrestling (‘gusti’) - because watching two or more grown men in tight leotards/underpants grapple each other may lead us to engage in homosexual activities. Besides, we should not turn our back on such public display of groping as it would hurt the sensitivities of some people.
 
11) Bak kut teh - well, it should have been long ago banned simply because it was the centre of some insensitivities recently. Besides, people whose faith is weak may be tempted to take mushroom during fasting season.
 
12) Public swimming pools - obviously having dozens of semi-naked people in one place can only mean that they will be tempted to engage in sexual orgies and we cannot have this in a morally righteous country like Malaysia. Surely we cannot have 78 percent of MPPJ/DBKL officers stationed in such places to arrest indecent bathers.
 
13) Opposition parties - the BN government has taken good care of Malaysians since independence. Why waste taxpayers money on the lame-duck opposition MPs who cannot do much anyway. We should be grateful to the government for it has wonderful rakyat-centric policies.
 
14) Indian Muslim restaurants - besides the vernacular schools where potential DAP and Hindraf members are groomed, I think this is where most PKR and PAS supporters meet to hatch plans to topple the government democratically. A word of caution, calling these ‘mamak’ shops can land you a sedition charge.
 
15) International schools - these places breed future intellectuals who will speak English well and possess high IQs. They will be a danger to our society of underachievers where we can always adjust the passing mark to meet national aspirations.
 
Imagine if we were a society that was based on meritocracy - oh no, it will never work here as this type of liberated thinking will only support the opposition cause.
 
16) Ipomoea aquatica - ah, got you there, didn't I? This vegetable's name has been used in vain and it's such a bad word now that we can even charge the user with sedition. Therefore ban this vegetable so that nobody can use this word to describe a certain hardworking politician in Malaysia.
 
While at it, ban the word ‘yellow’ also, because it's an unclean word used to fool the people into doing the right things and hurt the sensitivity of those who don't.
 
17) Condoms - this is a product of Zionist capitalism and it will literally enter your body without you realising it, especially the super fine types. When Astro, pubs and bars are banned, the people can devote their time towards fulfilling the population target of 70 million. In other words, let us screw ourselves properly...
 
18) The letter ‘C’ and number ‘4' - because we are a nation whose students get some 17,000 straight As in every major examinations and about 120,000 Bs. So we have no use for the letter C.
 
The number 4 can mean ‘death’ in Cantonese and because we are sensitive to the feelings of the Cantonese people, we should avoid using this number. Because Malaysians these days don't have a good command of a second or third language, we may translate these words/numbers wrongly and ‘blow’ it out of proportion.
 
19) Sepak takraw - because we are now behind Myanmar in this sport. Most Myanmar people only heard of this game when they came to work in Malaysia. Now they can soundly "sepak" Malaysia.
 
To respect the feelings of the people who once used to reign supreme in this game, it's best that nobody plays this game so that we can proudly say we came sixth in the next Asian games even though we don't play it anymore.
 
In Malaysia, we should be proud that we can consistently lower standards to meet national expectations. After all, there are some 42 other universities that fare worse than Universiti Malaya in the world’s top 250.
 
20) MIC - well, might as well, anyway, since they represent an insignificant minority. I think there is another Indian party that says it has more members. Either way, both are immaterial.
 

Putrajaya working to keep Malaysians apart, says Ambiga

There is a concerted effort by Putrajaya to keep the races in Malaysia apart, said Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, singling out the government's education policies for promoting racism.

In a forum held in Petaling Jaya last night titled "Stemming the tide of racism in our nation"‎, the activist also noted that the government had an agenda behind its efforts to widen the racial gap through education in schools, to enhance its "divide-and-rule" policy.

"They may set up the NUCC (National Unity Consultative Council) and they may do a lot of things but actually there is a‎ concerted effort to keep the races apart‎. ‎That is what we Malaysians are up against," she said.

"Ultimately, it is about power. It is creating first- and second-class citizens in Malaysia."

‎The Negara-ku patron said the Malaysian education system had played a big part in creating this mentality among the young and it went on throughout their schooling life.

"It is the systems that are put in place‎ where the Malays are told and are made to understand that they are better, the others are merely 'pendatang'.

"And this goes on throughout their schooling life. Then we try to fix it through the National Service programme when they're 18 after they finish school.‎ But too much damage has been done by then," Ambiga added.

‎The former Bersih co-chair was commenting on the recent attack on a purdah-wearing Muslim woman known as Melati‎ for joining DAP, which is a Chinese-majority party.

"‎The kind of attacks she has faced is unbelievable. What has happened to us that we have gone to that extreme, where they feel it is wrong for a Malay to be in the same party as a Chinese?

‎"So when people think this way, we, in urban areas, know it's ridiculous and wrong when anti-Chinese or anti-Malay statements are made.

"‎But there are many people in this country who have been through our education system‎ and think that it's fine to say things like that‎."

‎Melati was slammed for joining DAP, with one blogger even saying that it was better for the purdah-wearing 22-year-old to have become a prostitute instead.

In a posting entitled "Melati, lebih baik jadi pelacur dari sertai DAP”, the writer – KuntaKinte – said the action of Muslim girls or any Muslim youth in joining the DAP was actually strengthening the party's efforts to weaken the role and position of Islam in the country.

He had implied that a prostitute who sold herself would not decay the position of Islam in the country, but those who joined DAP were helping them destroy Islam in Malaysia.

"The reality is, it is more noble to be a prostitute who sells herself for a mouthful of rice, than being those in tudung and purdah who 'sell themselves' to the DAP for the riches of the world until it weakens Islam',” he said in www.mykmu.net.

However, Ambiga said this was a game that Putrajaya was playing, to make out that Malays and Islam were under continuous attack.

"We also have ministers saying that. So 65% of the population is under attack by 35% of the population? How is that even possible? It doesn't make sense.

"But unfortunately, when indoctrination takes place on and on, that's how people feel and that's why people think it's all right to make the racist statements like they do," she added.

Ambiga also said the government was "rewriting ‎history" or distorting historical facts in schools to promote only a certain race and their role in the nation's history.

"They are trying to change our cultural and historical background ‎to discount the role of non-Muslims.

"We have to be vigilant about what our children are learning. Let us ask for a study into the education system.

"We should act to object to anything that our children are taught that are bigoted, racist and are based on lies. We have to speak up." 

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/putrajaya-working-to-keep-malaysians-apart-says-ambiga#sthash.VPmyH26i.XCva2Hue.dpuf

A dangerous precedent in Selangor By P Gunasegaram

QUESTION TIME Most legal authorities and previous judgments on such issues are clear on one thing – the sultan/governor/Agong must choose the candidate who is most likely to command the support of the majority of the state assembly or Parliament for the post of menteri besar/chief minister/prime minister.

And where it is clear that a single candidate commands that majority support, there is no need for the titular head of state to ask for any other names to be nominated but he has to follow the constitutional duty of endorsing the candidate who legally commands the majority support.

This is what a constitutional monarchy is about, where the the head of state lies above politics, does not interfere in the administration of the state, and whose only role here is an important, non-partisan one of ensuring the person who commands the support of the majority of the assembly is the chosen one.

That is the essence of Parliamentary democracy and this must not be allowed to be played around with by any party as the will of the people is reflected through elections in the composition of the state assembly and Parliament. The role of the monarch is to ensure that the will prevails no matter what.

The sultan of Selangor had insisted on other names to be submitted for consideration, but this was not done by PKR, who said that they need to submit only one name. And indeed, according to most sane legal opinion, that is correct.

What happened in Selangor is a dangerous precedent because the candidate who enjoyed the majority support of the Selangor state assembly, PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, as indicated in statutory declarations, was not even so much as considered for the position of menteri besar, let alone chosen.

Imagine if you will a situation in the next general elections: if BN wins, can the Agong demand that the coalition submit a few names for him to consider for prime minister? And if the Pakatan Rakyat coalition wins, can the Agong turn down the person who commands a majority in Parliament for prime minister when he satisfies all other conditions?

Yes, unthinkable. So what’s the difference now?

The issue is not that Dr Wan Azizah is Anwar Ibrahim’s wife or of nepotism, whether it exists or not. What matters is that, if she meets qualifying conditions, then she is entitled to become the menteri besar so long she commands the majority support in the assembly.

But PKR’s decision to name only one candidate was pilloried in the mainstream press which supports the BN, including one that is currently making a big show of endorsing bold and brave views towards moderation.

It was made to appear as if Anwar was being rude and even treasonous to the sultan, and Anwar uncharacteristically apologised to the sultan while gently maintaining that the decision to nominate one person was correct. Indeed it was.

Constitutional crisis?

PKR had its infamous differences with PAS over the issue. The way the whole thing proceeded, it threatened to take the nation into a constitutional crisis which promised to be long, drawn-out, and involve a series of battles in court.

But in what seems to involve backstage bargaining and posturing, the eventual person chosen as menteri besar, Azmin Ali (left), was not even on the list of candidates submitted to the sultan by PKR and PAS.

How can that be? And why are all parties so quick to accept a solution that goes so much against constitutional law in Malaysia? Why has PKR backed down on its insistence that just one candidate is all that it should nominate and now supports Azmin?

Perhaps for PKR, the consolation is that the new menteri besar is from PKR and is its deputy president. For BN and the sultan, the acceptance from PKR avoids a potentially damaging and embarrassing constitutional crisis whichever way the courts decide. And for Selangor and the nation, it means things can go forward.

The question that remains unanswered in this sad and sorry saga is this – why is Azmin, deputy president of PKR, acceptable as menteri besar, and why is Dr Wan Azizah, the president of PKR not? Especially when she commanded majority support of the assembly in the first place.

One more question – why is everyone now agreeing that Azmin be menteri besar? Expediency perhaps, political expediency. But this does not come without a cost.

The biggest loser from this prolonged crisis and its eventual unsatisfactory outcome is the rakyat because the people’s right to chose their leaders has been eroded. An incident like this one is only likely to encourage the palace’s greater interference in choosing the country’s leaders.

And in future, together with the politics of brinkmanship which Malaysia is increasingly heading towards, one wonders what this means towards a smooth transition of power according to the wishes of the people.

Democracy was the major loser in how the Selangor menteri besar was chosen, and by extension, the people whose right to choose had been curtailed.