There are three critical issues which the Cabinet cannot delay and procrastinate tomorrow, viz:
- A New Deal to end the long-standing marginalization of the Malaysian Indians and all marginalized groups;
- Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam Tape scandal and restore the national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and competence of the judiciary; and
- Make public the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) Bill.
If there is no immediate announcement of the establishment of the Royal Commission of Inquiry after the Cabinet meeting tomorrow, on its composition and terms of reference, the Malaysian public and international community cannot be blamed for coming to adverse inferences about the bona fides and political will of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to come to grips with the nettlesome problem of the 19-year degradation of the system of justice.
Malaysians had been expecting announcements from the Prime Minister about the Royal Commission of Inquiry since last Wednesday’s Cabinet meeting but the past week had passed with the daily disappointment of no news on the matter.
Although the past week had been overshadowed by the after-effects and shocks of the 30,000-strong Hindraf demonstration on November 25, with almost daily condemnation by the Prime Minister of the Hindraf allegation of “ethnic cleansing” of Indians in Malaysia, it is a grave misjudgment for anyone to think that the issue of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam Tape and to restore the independence, integrity and quality of the judiciary could be sidestepped and even swept under carpet as a result of the Hindraf furore.
Let me remind Abdullah that Malaysians expect positive and concrete announcements about the establishment of the Royal Commission of Inquiry after the Cabinet meeting tomorrow or it will be another blackmark on his administration.
Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Nazri Aziz has confirmed that the IPCMC Bill will be presented for debate in the current meeting of Parliament and that the Cabinet meeting tomorrow will be the final stage of government approval of the bill.
This will mean that there may only be a week or so for MPs and the civil society to study the Bill before parliamentary debate , as I would not want to see the IPCMC bill, which should have been set up 18 months ago in June 2006 going by the recommendation of the Royal Police Commission, to be further delayed and deferred to the next parliamentary meeting next year.
In the circumstances, the IPCMC Bill should be immediately made available to MPs after the Cabinet meeting tomorrow so that they have as much time as possible to study the proposed legislation.
No one is sure if Badawi is in town to chair the meeting. If not, Najib will chair and then announce that the cabinet has not decided on anything. Sounds familiar ?
They are all just trying to buy time, so don’t be taken in by the promises of this and that. There is no such thing as honour amongst thieves. Just be prepared for the elections.
For the moment, the Monsoon Cup and LIMA is more important and urgent.
I like the word “New Deal†to end (1) the long-standing marginalization of the Malaysian Indians and (2) all marginalized groups.
The expression “New Deal†is reminiscent of US President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s legislative agenda for 1933 to 1938 for rescuing the United States from the Great Depression after Wall Street Crash in 1929 and ensuing banking crisis.
Such a Deal envisages two steps – immediate relief of problem at hand and longer term structural reform which in our local context would be (i) immediate relief of Indian community’s grouses raised by Hindraf and (ii) longer term reform program to redress the grievances of the marginalized of all communities, the restoration by RC of independence of judiciary and by IPCMC combating corruption.
From what I hear from Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Abdul Aziz, the only Deal on the table for the time being is the old one – the so called “Social contract reached 50 years ago by representatives of the racial communitiesâ€Â.
“If there is any unhappiness, then it is entirely up to the future generations of Malaysians, regardless of whether they are Indians, Chinese or Malays, for them to sit down (and discuss),†he said. “It’s not just about what the Indian and Chinese (youths) want. You have to ask the Malays also, whether they want the social contract to be renegotiated. It’s up to them…. As of today, I know the Malays are not prepared to renegotiate,†he added.
On immediate problem – claims by Hindraf that Indians are discriminated, marginalised and exploited – Deputy Rural and Regional Development Minister Zainal Abidin Osman (BN-Nibong Tebal) chipped in citing facts and figures:
· the monthly household income for Indians in 2004 was RM3,456, while it was RM2,711 for Malay households and RM4,437 for Chinese. This was a five percent improvement for the Indians compared to 1999 when their household income was RM2,702;
· poverty rate and hardcore poverty in 2004 among Indians was at 2.9 percent, 8.3 percent among Malays and 0.6 percent among the Chinese. There was also an improvement for the Indians from 1999, where the rate was 3.5 percent.
“Because of this, we must hold on to the true facts and figures and not allow emotions and tall tales to influence the people,†he said (Source Malaysiakini reports of Dec 3rd by Fauwaz Abdul Aziz.
So judging from such mindsets, where would there be any deal much less “New†Deal for us?
Overlooked poor bite back at Chávez
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4976cc94-a1d2-11dc-a13b-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
I have a question, can a RCI be totally independent even though the terms of reference and members are decided by the cabinet?
The proposed “New Deal†before the GE will turn out to be just a “New Bluff†after the GE
Procrastination is not just a habit with Badawi, its literally his modus operandi. Procrastination by Badawi is why Hindraf is so justified. Common, 4 years after he came into power promising change in style and Samy Vellu is still lord of his land. Mat Deros can built his palace in the midst of Indian poverty in Kelang.
Procrastination is not just a habit with Badawi, its literally his modus operandi.
Can a RCI be totally independent even though the terms of reference and members are decided by the cabinet? – St0rmFury.
What has to be accepted at the outset is that there is no choice but for Royal Commissioners to be appointed by Yang Di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of cabinet as per provisions of our Federal Constitution.
In answer to the question, the fact that Royal Commissioners are appointed on Cabinet advice does not by itself suggest anything wrong provided their appointments are based on Merits, and frame of reference foir enquiry is right.
Merits means they have proven ability and capability. Not fools.
But that’s not enough. They must have actual as well as perceived integrity in public eye. Integrity is inferred from repute and character being “Independent†and “Impartialâ€Â, the difference being independence is a status and relationship and impartiality an attribute of character based on known public service or service in professional field.
Therefore the requirement of independence would disqualify serving or ex members of the government (Whether Mahathir’s or Badawi’s), or the ruling party/coalition. Ex Judges embroiled in controversy are definitely out. But even Ex Attorney Generals and Judges not so embroiled would not be suitable because they may not be impartial – may be even against, as in having an axe to grind against – the ex CJ (Tun Ahmad Fairuz), their old boss for some failure in promotion.
For “impartiality†is trickier criterion.
To be impartial or fair, means the Royal commissioner must not be perceived having a record or reason to be biased whether in favour of or against the government/ruling party. For this reason Opposition members and known critics of the government, no matter how much integrity, are also ruled out.
One cannot satisfy everybody or all criteria fully.
However as long as the Royal Commissioners are recommended by the Cabinet after (i) consulting civil society, NGOs like HAKAM and the stakeholders of the administration of Justice such as the Bar Council or, where there is no consultation, at least (ii) not criticized, repudiated or denounced by them, it should be OK.
Acceptability of government recommended Royal Commissioners will be adjudged then by two aspects:
(1) the merits of the candidates initially appointed as commissioners based on the above criteria and parameters
outlined, and, after appointment,
(2) whether the Royal Commissioners who have powers to subpoena witnesses on oath and provide their testimony with immunity would use their powers properly by (a) consulting widely from a diverse range of people and groups who could give valuable input in respect of the enquiry under consideration to the RC to reach sound and conclusions and (b) being fearless and bold in subpoenaing all material witnesses without fear or favour of their high, influential powerful or low powerless status or influence.
The above all proceed of course on the assumption that terms of enquiry of Royal Commission are acceptable to the public and its opinion makers and movers.
No point we have commissioners of independence and impartiality where the question to be investigated by the commission is just limited to whether the video clip is authentic and whether it was VK Lingam holding the cell phone!
What RCI that interest you here ?
Everyone involved in this scandal are larger than the country now.
Do you really believe that VKL doing all these at his fancies , come on …
This Indian is not a macha on the street , my friend.
He have seen more things than most of us in the world of politics and royality affairs.
He is just bought his immunity by doing all the arrangement in the national affairs accordingly and now, you all tends to believe that this case is going to bring him down.
Dream on ….
Now, the fact is more of the top rank ‘involved’ group are being briefed of the story and what to say to the public to covered up the issue as certain royal members will be put to shame when the truth is out. Who are more afraid now ? VKL or the royal members ?
Who will AAB save now ? VKL or the royal members ? Who will just laugh at the issue and move forward bravely with his dreams ?
TDM will be praying that all his doings can be just buried and no more leakage of his past to the public … ha…ha.. Do you think KJ will stop at this point ? TDM , sit back and enjoy KJ’s performances … HE will be all Malaysian’s answer in seeking the truth about all your ‘uncalled for’ doings to us in the past.
Remember TYA’s incident ? Who played God that day ?
Ah, I see. Thanks for the info.
Jeffrey,
While the “impartiality†criterion may be tricky, do you see that an even trickier part could be the terms of reference for the RCI.
If for self-preservation purposes, cabinet draws up a limited TOR, what can be done to ensure such sleight of hand does not proceed?
What defines acceptability per your “all proceed of course on the assumption that terms of enquiry of Royal Commission are acceptable to the public and its opinion makers and movers” Who, then, is the arbitrator?
The terms of reference of Royal Commission are of course the trickiest part that will be used for political damage control.
“On immediate problem – claims by Hindraf that Indians are discriminated, marginalised and exploited – Deputy Rural and Regional Development Minister Zainal Abidin Osman (BN-Nibong Tebal) chipped in citing facts and figures:
· the monthly household income for Indians in 2004 was RM3,456, while it was RM2,711 for Malay households and RM4,437 for Chinese. This was a five percent improvement for the Indians compared to 1999 when their household income was RM2,702”
The RM 2,711 average monthly household income for Malays does tell the true story. The UMNOputras have an average monthly household income far in excess of that of the Chinese population and these are the leeches that demand that the NEP should continue, and that the other races have nothing to complain about.
But if one thinks it is the trickest part, I have not come across any one from civil society making any suggestion, putting down in wordings, of what that frame or scope of reference ought to be that could address any one or more or all of the following relating the both narrow issue of the clip and broader issues of Judiciary’s independence eg. (i) the immediate issue of the Lingam Video clip and who were implicated and (ii) whether the contents of the video clip were carried out thereby tainting judicial appointments after the date of the telephone conversation clip (iii) what to do to rectify existing judicial appointments if so tainted (iv) what to do with existing judgments made from courts presided by judges whose original appointments were so tainted and (v) what to do as regards future appointments of judges whether by judicial commission or still by existing system of appointment by Kind at recommendation of PM on the advice from existing CJ with input from council of rulers.
Typo error – “by King” not “kind”. Sorry.
Nazri: “It’s not just about what the Indian and Chinese (youths) want. You have to ask the Malays also, whether they want the social contract to be renegotiated. It’s up to them…. As of today, I know the Malays are not prepared to renegotiate.â€Â
Have you asked the Malays if they share your interpretation of the underlying social contract? What of the 600 plus (and counting) amendments to the ‘sacred’ document we call the Federation of Malaya Constitution of 1957. How could any document be considered ‘sacred’ if you mutilate it with impunity over the years? What has become of the underlying social contract said to represent the consensus reached among the country’s ethnic communities? Does it not change with all these amendments?
“This will mean that there may only be a week or so for MPs and the civil society to study the Bill before parliamentary debate…”
YB Kit,
What was the longest time allowed or given to debate any bill before it is passed and become law?? Rushing a bill without a meaningful debate is an abuse of Parliamentary procedure and the principle of due process.
ABSOLUTE MISINFORMATION
Our leaders make mind numbing statement after another. Our PM said in the [Star] said:
The country had gained tremendous ground in eradicating poverty, cutting it down from 50% in 1971 to 5.7% at present.
With practised selective amnesia, he overlook the Ministry of Finance Malaysia, in it’s Economic Report 1999/2000 which said that in Malaysia, poverty “dropped from 20.7% in 1985 to 6.8% in 1997â€Â
We Malaysians are not that dumb. The Ministry report stated the poverty level at 20.7% in 1985. How and where did our PM get the figure of 58% in 1971. This must either be the figment of his imagination or the poverty rose from 20.7% in 1985 to 50% in 1971.
‘Did someone plan all these demonstrations? Umno Youth chief Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein obviously think so. Does it ever occur to him that he Malaysian public has accepted so much and no more. There is evidently a growing groundswell of discontent by Malaysians of whatever creed or race. This negative response by the Youth Chief does not auger well for BN who is destroying its image as one senior leader [led by our PM] makes one dumb statement after another. Instead of addressing the real reasons for this sudden surge of discontent and examine the underlying socio-economic reason. Instead the Youth Chief vowed: “I think we have to dig deep to find out who is behind all this,†The issues raised BERSIH, Bar Council and Hindraf are messages from the rakyat crying out the injustices within the system and the need to redress these injustices. Or at least recognise them.
Just as we were trying to get over this absurd denial stance, we get a mindless statement from the Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar that Hindraf leaders can fight their cause within the country [ Star 5 November] instead of seeking overseas support. The foreign minister obviously is not aware of the fact that ALL the Hindraf’s applications were rejected by the police. On instructions from the ministry of Internal security Perhaps the foreign minister and the whole BN set up is now embarrassed by the international spotlight on Malaysia but mind-dead statements like this is not going to garner many votes. Indeed the mood of the whole country is such that voters are not only anti –BN abut the statements by these leaders push many Malaysians to feel that even PAS is a better alternative to BN. The dominant conversation in coffee shops today , are exhortations not to vote BN but choose any other party – even PAS. BN makes PAS
now palatable.
It is clear that if an election is held shortly, BN in general will get a hefty reduction of seats and MIC a trouncing. This will abe a vote for tehe marginaled Indians.
IF INfRAF WERE TO CONTEST TEH SUNGEI SIPUT SEATA, SAMY VELU WILL LOSE HIS PANTS.