The MCA President Datuk Seri Dr. Chua Soi Lek is playing the destructive role of Utusan Malaysia seeking to frighten Chinese voters with lies and falsehoods in the same manner Utusan has been trying in the past three years to scare Malay voters with its daily staple of lies and falsehoods.
The role of Utusan Malaysia, the official organ of UMNO, is to violate all ethics of journalism to systematically and unconscionably concoct and dispense lies and falsehoods about the DAP and the Pakatan Rakyat to stampede the Malay voters to vote solidly for UMNO.
For instance, Utusan Malaysia had been publishing downright lies and falsehoods about the DAP, spreading the completely baseless allegation that the DAP is anti-Malay, anti-Islam and anti-Malay Rulers, that the DAP wants to create a Christian Malaysia to replace Islam as the official religion, appoint a Christian Prime Minister, establish a Republic and abolish the system of Malay monarchy.
In the past months, it has become obvious that the MCA President is playing the irresponsible and divisive role of Utusan Malaysia by seeking to frighten the Chinese voters to stampede them to vote for MCA through what MCA strategists believe is the MCA trump card – the issue of Islamic state and hudud implementation.
DAP’s stand on Malaysia as a secular state has always been constant and consistent.
We hold firm to our fundamental principle that an Islamic state and hudud laws are inappropriate and unsuitable for Malaysia as a plural society.
We do not hide our fundamental principle and beliefs, whether from PAS or any other political party or the Malaysian people. We know PAS’ stand on Islamic State and hukum hudud, just as PAS knows our different stand on these two issues.
Although DAP, PAS and PKR have our differences, the Pakatan Rakyat leadership has repeatedly reaffirmed our unswerving commitment to common policy agreements reached by the three component parties, whether before or after the 13th General Election, in the PR Common Policy Framework of December 19, 2009, Buku Jingga of 20th December 2010 or other Joint PR Leadership statements and documents.
The PR Leadership has also repeatedly reaffirmed the principle that there must be consensus among the three PR component parties before there could be any change in any agreed PR policy.
The PR Leadership has also repeatedly emphasized that the implementation of hudud is not part of the PR Common Policy Framework.
This means that if Pakatan Rakyat wins the 13th General Election and forms the Federal Government in Putrajaya, for the next five years from 2012/2013 to 2017/8, the implementation of hudud will not be part of the Pakatan Rakyat Federal Government policy or programme unless all the three PR parties can reach a consensus on it.
This position is very clear, simple and straightforward but the MCA President is doing his utmost in his politics of desperation, fear and irresponsibility to try to cause panic and fear so as to stampede the Chinese voters to vote for MCA in the 13th General Election.
One of Chua’s favourite gambits is to cite the PAS Deputy President Mohamad Sabu claiming that Mohamad Sabu had announced that PAS will amend the Federal Constitution to implement hudud if Pakatan Rakyat comes into power – totally ignoring Mohamad Sabu’s denial of ever having made such a statement and the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council’s policy pronouncement that the implementation of hudud is not part of Pakatan Rakyat policies, a policy position which binds all Pakatan Rakyat parties for the next four to five years until the 14th General Elections.
Another favourite Chua gambit is to shout from the rooftops that hudud implementation is a certainty if Pakatan Rakyat wins in the 13th general election, claiming that “judging from the 222 MPs, of whom most were Muslims, PAS could easily obtain the two-thirds majority to implement its version of hudud”.
Chua had gone on public record in saying: “So, this is a political reality that all non-Muslims must face. This is not a threat. It is something that all of us most think about carefully.”
This is a downright lie and utter rubbish. It shows that in his politics of desperation, Chua Soi Lek has utter contempt for figures, facts and the truth.
Firstly, the number of Muslim MPs, as it stands, still falls short of the two-thirds majority required to amend the constitution.
After the 2008 GE, for Peninsular Malaysia, there were 107 Muslim MPs, i.e. 65 MPs from BN and 42 MPs – a far cry from the two-thirds majority of 148 MPs required to amend the constitution.
Even when Sabah and Sarawak are included (and Sabah and Sarawak must be considered separately, as Malaysia’s position as a secular state is specifically underlined in Sabah’s 20-Point Agreement and Sarawak’s 18-Point Agreement in the formation of Malaysia in 1963), the total number of Muslim MPs still fall short of two-thirds majority.
Including Sabah and Sarawak, the 2008 GE elected 130 Muslim MPs out of 222 or 59%, 18 MPs short of a two-thirds majority – with 88 Muslim MPs from BN and 42 Muslim MPs are from PR. (Table 1 below)
Table 1: Muslim and Non-Muslim MPs by BN / PR and by Region / State post GE2008
| Region / State | BN | PR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muslim | Non-Muslim | Muslim | Non-Muslim | |
| P.Malaysia | 65 | 20 | 42 | 38 |
| Sabah | 14 | 11 | – | 1 |
| Sarawak | 9 | 21 | – | 1 |
| Total | 88 | 52 | 42 | 40 |
It would be simplistic to assume that the Muslim MPs from BN in East Malaysia would blindly support a motion to declare Malaysia as an Islamic state especially since some of these MPs, such as those from PBB in Sarawak, are from parties with non-Muslim members and representatives among their midst.
If we consider only the Muslim MPs in Peninsular Malaysia, they only constitute 107 MPs, less than 50% of the total number of MPs in Malaysia, far short of the two-thirds of 66.7% required for any constitutional amendment.
Table 2: Muslim and Non-Muslim Majority seats by Region / State
| Region / State | Muslim Majority | Non-Muslim Majority | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| P.Malaysia | 113 | 52 | 165 |
| Sabah | 15 | 11 | 26 |
| Sarawak | 8 | 23 | 31 |
| Total | 136 | 86 | 222 |
Even if we take the number of Muslim majority versus Non-Muslim majority seats, there are only 136 Muslim majority seats in the whole country (61%), still 12 short of a two thirds majority of 148.
Again, the rationale of Sabah and Sarawak Muslim MPs not necessarily supporting such a motion still holds.
From Table 1 and 2, even in the most extreme circumstances where ALL of the MPs in Muslim majority seats vote to support an Islamic state motion, it would still not be sufficient to reach a two-thirds majority.
These two tables debunk the lie that the MCA President is spreading all over the country, that it is virtually a certainty that there would be two-thirds parliamentary majority of Muslim MPs to support a constitutional amendment to implement hudud when Pakatan Rakyat comes into power in Putrajaya in the 13th General Election.
I would advise the MCA President to cease and desist and halt all his politics of fear, desperation and irresponsibility. Let him act responsibly for a change and show greater respect for figures, facts and the truth.
(Speech at the DAP Pasir Pinji 919 UBAH nite in Ipoh on Wednesday, 19th September 2012 at 9pm)
To vast majority Malaysian Chinese…MCA is a dead party.
CSL can talk as much as he likes.
All MCA candidates needs umno B voters to have a fighting chance.
CSL has taken the role to frighten Malaysian Chinese voters?
That’s an outdated tactic….since after 12th GE.
CSL’s argument – hudud is certainty if PR wins since majority 222 MPs from both sides are Muslims- cuts both ways cos if BN wins and intends to implement hudud, PR’s muslim politicians will also support it to give 2/3 constitutional passage. But CSL argues BN won’t implement unlike PAS of PR since PAS’s top leaders said they won’t abandon Hudud implementation. What makes him think so? Johor UMNO assemblyman proposed hudud for Johor and CSL told him off (because proposer is small political fry in UMNO’s firmament) but dares not tell off UMNO’s no 2 Muhyiddin who said that UMNO has always been clear that it supports hudud in principle but cannot enact the Islamic laws as Malaysia was not ready for them yet. If DAP were sleeping with a partner of different ideology, so is CSL/MCA cos UMNO is in principle for Hudud (whilst MCA against). In context of political marital analogy DAP’s partner (PAS) says it wants to commit political adultery now whereas MCA’s partner says it agrees in principle with political adultery but wait for right time/partner: that’s about the only tenuous difference between the two! Of course against such expressions of intent by their partners, neither MCA nor DAP could give ideological explanation why it does not divorce its partner speaking along unfaithful lines (not officially sanctioned per political marriage rules/laws).
There are 3 realities : (1) politicians/ political parties from BOTH SIDES are using Hudud to play to respective galleries `vote markets’ (in preparation for the next GE) – for Hudud, in case of Malay/Muslim votes, and against, for non muslim votes. Seats/power is and will be driving motivation. (2) Unfortunately politicians vying for votes of majority race are using majority numbers to oppressively tell off others. Eg when Karpal reiterated DAP’s stand against on Hudud, no less a political personage as Nik Aziz said it did not matter to him if the DAP wanted to quit the PR if PAS implemented hudud & a fully Islamic state, should it come into power. “DAP had previously pulled out from the Opposition pact Angakatan Perpaduan Ummah (APU) because of this (implementing hudud laws).”If now they want to do the same (pull out from the Pakatan coalition because of hudud laws, that is their problem,” he added. Anwar plays fence sitter. Likewise UMNO’s no.2 tweeted that if CSL/MCA objected strongly to Hudud that UMNO supported in principle but need to consider timing when to implement, MCA could pull out of BN! (3) this 2/3 constitutional amendment for Hudud based on muslim MPs coalescing across political divide is nonsense. Mahathir had no problem declaring this an Islamic state. If there’d no common stand on hudud in PR’s Buku Jingga, so there’s no hudud in BN’s manifesto : does that change anything? When is constitution a problem? Salleh Abas already declared from Federal Court that this a secular nation/laws. Did it bother anyone who proposes Hudud’s implementation???
CSL strategy is anachronistically dumb..Its simply Ah Pek or bumpkin thinking..The problem with using Islamic state issue is that UMNO/BN has been exposed to not being a bulwark against it either. Its not simply Mahathir’s declaration of Malaysia Islamic state but rather its clear the likes of Najib, the ones who understand the downside of Islamic state and against it, are IMPOTENT against the forces of the right in UMNO like Muhiyiddin and Perkasa..
Like it or not whether its UMNO or PAS, there is no difference in likelihood of Islamic state. If an Islamic state is to be averted, the only real bulwark is basically true democratic rights of the states. Like it or not the ultimate bulwark is Sarawak & Sabah rights that can put a stop to the march of the Islamist which they will never give up..
“Oooooo.
Ahhhhhhh.
Yes yes yes.
Ooooooooo.
Ooooooooo.”
He went to press with these statements. And the mca journalists are expected to decipher them.
Another favorite gambit of CSL is that if there is no Chinese representative in BN, the Chinese community will lose out. Such scare tactic will not work as most Chinese voters know that BN with or without MCA is not going to make any difference as MCA has no say in BN.