The Najib government’s gross mishandling of Bersih 3.0 of April 28 is proving to be even more disastrous than its initial mishandling of Bersih 2.0 of July 9, 2011.
At least, the Najib administration realized in the nick of time and reined in its excessive over-reactions to the Bersih 2.0, performing a volte face two months later by announcing on Malaysia Day on Sept. 16 a slew of repeal or reform of draconian laws like the abolition of Internal Security Act to make Malaysia “the best democracy in the world”.
Ever since, the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has taken pains to emphasise that no one else but the Barisan Nasional should take credit for the slew of reform of draconian laws, like the revocation of the four Emergency Proclamations, the repeal of the Internal Security Act, amendments to the Printing Presses and Publications Act and enactment of the Peaceful Assembly Act because the Barisan Nasional government is prepared to “listen to Malaysians who want change”.
I concede that Najib and the Barisan Nasional Government had attempted to listen to Malaysians who wanted change as represented by the Bersih 2.0 rally which saw 50,000 Malaysians peacefully gathering in Kuala Lumpur for free, fair and clean elections.
But the government had not listened fully or attentively, which is why four or even five times the number of people who turned out on Bersih 2.0 – some 250,000 Malaysians – gathered peacefully in Kuala Lumpur on April 28 in response to Bersih 3.0 call for free, fair and clean elections.
The Najib government at least made an effort to the listen to the people’s demands in Bersih 2.0 although the efforts at reform proved to be half-hearted, half-baked and generally unsatisfactory like the recommendations of the Parliamentary Select Committee on electoral reforms.
But what has distinguished the Najib administration’s reaction to Bersih 3.0 as compared to Bersih 2.0 is its complete inability and refusal to “listen to the people’s demands for change”. Continue reading “Najib has discarded the robes of “the Great Transformer” for those of “the Great Reactionary” signaling he is no more prepared to listen to the real voices of the people for change”