NEP policy - Never Enough Protection

The NEP is a Communist-inspired Policy
By blogger batsman

There is an old Chinese adage that goes something like “Know your enemy and know yourself and you will always be victorious …. (I paraphrase)” So while Lee Kuan Yew was a fierce anti-communist, he was not unwilling to learn from them. The PAP consequently is organized much like a communist party. In like manner, UMNO,although fierce anti-communists, has not been unwilling to learn from communist policies. The NEP is communist-inspired.

My arguments are as follows:

The Russian communists found themselves in charge of a largely peasant country. It was a struggle to win the peasants whom they looked down upon to their side so that it would be easier to achieve their communist aims. They did it by many means but chief of all was the tactic of placing communist cadres in every influential nook and cranny and in every position of power. This is the inevitable result of rule by political party rather than rule by class.

To compare, the western countries by contrast have their political parties, but individual capitalists are already ensconced at the head of every big and small business – hence in most influential nooks and crannies. The western countries are therefore ruled by default by the capitalist class which is tried and tested by the market (even if the market is highly biased in their favour).

In Malaysia, UMNO was originally of the Malay high classes (it is debatable whether it is high class now). To win the Malays over, after Malays voters showed that high class arrogance, self-interest and corruption was not compatible with low class aspirations in the General Election of 1969, it was necessary to come up with the NEP. Malays were offered all sorts of goodies, but this was not the main instrument of control. The main strength of UMNO is to place its die hard supporters in every influential nook and cranny and in every position of power.

Unfortunately, it did not have enough qualified people to fill all these positions. The net result was that mediocre and often stupidly boorish UMNO supporters were forcibly placed in high positions in education, judiciary, police and other civil service branches as well as GLCs. These people owe their positions to political power, not to skill or ability. They became outright racists and in time came to protect their positions against all comers including better trained and more capable Malays themselves.

The mediocrity of these “people in high places” has cost the country dear with rampant corruption, incredible wastage and loss of skilled manpower emigrating to other countries. Malays too, if they are intelligent, skilled and capable became the victims of the NEP. The suppression of capable Malays was even more severe than against the Chinese and Indians (how many Malays are in ISA detention against the number of Chinese and Indians?), especially if these Malays showed even a modicum of social conscience in protesting that the NEP has not benefited the Malay community in many different ways and especially in taking away their ability to compete and also in the NEP’s tendency to discriminate against the poor and marginalized Malays – the very people it was supposed to help.

So it is, that rule by political party will always lead to stupidly boorish people ensconced in power. This happened in communist countries and since the NEP is communist-inspired, it is happening in Malaysia as well.

Now, Rt Hon. Lim Kit Siang… isn’t this better than pandering to the misery of students and parents (both of those who were unable to get into universities as well as those who have been there and now unable to find jobs)? Explaining it and allowing people to understand is always better than pandering to emotions, don’t you think? Stop sabotaging the KT by-election.

.

Politics volleyball

No such thing as a sure thing

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Malaysia Today
The Pink Panther

They say: justice delayed is justice denied. But who says the wheels of justice always move slowly. Justice can sometimes move extremely fast when they want it to, especially when it is court cases involving Raja Petra Kamarudin and when it relates to the Altantuya murder.

Raja Petra’s lawyer had not yet walked into his office after their court appearance at the Jalan Duta Court Complex this morning when a fax was waiting for him on his table. And even before he could digest the contents of the fax another fax came in. The Shah Alam High Court will hear the appeal by the Prosecution at 2.45pm tomorrow, Friday, 5 December 2008. So Raja Petra will, again, be in court -- tomorrow 2.45pm at the Shah Alam court.

This morning, Raja Petra and his lawyers were in court to confirm the date of the appeal on the criminal defamation case. Yesterday, by order of the court, these same lawyers spent eight hours at Bukit Aman for a forensic test on the computers the police confiscated from his house related to the sedition case. And tomorrow is the Prosecution’s appeal on the amendment of the charge on the sedition case.

Wow! Seldom have Malaysians seen the courts move so fast. There are so many court cases going on at the same time that it is beginning to become very difficult to keep track of who is the defender and who is the defendee, and who is the appealer and who is the appealee.

The issues before the various courts are as follows -- the Shah Alam court, the Petaling Jaya court and the Kuala Lumpur court. The prosecution tried to amend the charge in Raja Petra’s sedition case in the Petaling Jaya court but the judge turned it down. So the prosecution is appealing the judge’s decision in the Shah Alam court. And that is going to be heard tomorrow at 2.45pm.

Then, the prosecution is not happy that they did not find the evidence of any crime in the two computers the police confiscated -- meaning a copy of the article ‘Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell’. So they asked the Petaling Jaya court for permission to check both computers again in the hope that this time they might find something. They checked the first computer over eight hours in Bukit Aman yesterday and will do a forensic test on the second unit next Tuesday.

Then, Raja Petra’s lawyers are appealing against the decision to transfer the criminal defamation case from the Kuala Lumpur Magistrates Court to the Sessions Court and this appeal was slotted for mention this morning in the Kuala Lumpur High Court. The court ordered Raja Petra’s lawyers to file their submission on 12 December 2008 and for the Prosecution to reply to it on 19 December. The hearing will be on 20 January 2009 when the judge will probably deliver his judgment as to whether the case will be heard in the Sessions Court (as what the Prosecution wants) or whether it has to be sent back to the Magistrates Court (as what Raja Petra wants).

In the meantime, while the Shah Alam and Petaling Jaya and Kuala Lumpur courts hear the various appeals and counter-appeals and applications to amend the charge and applications to oppose the amendment to the charge and application to do a second forensic on the two computers and so on and so forth, the hearings related to the crimes Raja Petra has been alleged to have committed are being delayed even further. And this has upset those who walk in the corridors of power.

The Prosecution has been told to wrap up all these many cases as soon as possible, preferably way before March 2009. March 2009 is when Najib Tun Razak is supposed to take over from Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as Prime Minister of Malaysia. Abdullah wants these cases settled fast but Najib would rather they drag on until way past March 2009.

Abdullah wants all the cases settled now in the hope that damaging evidence will surface during the trial, which will implicate Najib, or at least his wife, in the murder of Altantuya. If this happens, this will disqualify Najib from taking over as Prime Minister. Najib, however, wants things to remain as they are until he takes over so that, when he is already Prime Minister, he can sweep everything under the carpet and suffer no damage.

How he is going to sweep everything under the carpet will be a bridge he crosses when he comes to it. Dropping the charges would be one way or making sure the judge shouts ‘irrelevant’ every five minutes could probably work as well, as it did in Anwar Ibrahim’s trial in 1998-1999.

Raja Petra never dreamt how important his trials were going to be in deciding who would become the Prime Minister of Malaysia come March 2009. Everyone assumed that Najib would automatically be taking over from Abdullah at the ‘agreed’ time. But it appears like nothing has really been agreed yet. And this is troubling Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as well who is banking on Najib taking over in March 2009 as planned.

However, according to Murphy’s Law, what can go wrong will go wrong. And the plan for Najib taking over from Abdullah in March 2009 can certainly go wrong. So Abdullah wants to see to it that it will definitely go wrong. And Mahathir is fully aware of this and he is already lamenting about it even before the plan can be put in place. Call it a preemptive strike if you wish and Mahathir is the master of preemption, amongst other things. So he is preempting Abdullah’s move to block Najib from taking over as Prime Minister in March 2009.

Mahathir realises that you need not be the Umno President to become Prime Minister. Tun Abdul Razak Hussein became Prime Minister without becoming the Umno President, till much later. Mahathir himself stayed on as Prime Minister in 1988 even though be had no party (when Umno closed down) and was an independent Member of Parliament (calun bebas) while Ling Liong Sik was the Barisan Nasional Chairman at that time. In fact, Ghafar Baba became Deputy Prime Minister in 1986 without ever becoming an Umno (Lama) member until Umno Baru was formed in 1988.

Yes, who says you must first become the Umno President or the Barisan Nasional Chairman to become Prime Minister of Malaysia. All the Constitution says is that you must be a Member of Parliament whom, in the opinion of the Agong, commands the confidence of the majority of the Members of the House -- in other words, the 222 Members of Parliament.

Let’s say Anwar Ibrahim has the confidence of the 82 Pakatan Rakyat Members of Parliament. This leaves another 140 who are not with Anwar. Then, say, Abdullah has half the 140 with him, meaning 70. This leaves another 70. Let’s also say 20 abstain. This leaves 50. And, say, these 50 are with Najib.

In this case, Anwar Ibrahim has the confidence of the majority because he has 82, Abdullah has only 70, Najib 50, while 20 are ‘sitting on the fence’ and are not supporting any side.

It must be noted that Umno has only 66 Members of Parliament in Peninsular Malaysia. Even if the 13 Umno Sabah Members of Parliament stay united that would come to only 79. Pakatan Rakyat still has more at 82. Abdullah is said to control at least 20 Umno Members of Parliament. So Najib will be reduced to 59 against Pakatan Rakyat’s 82. The question would be: will Abdullah’s 20 remain neutral or will they swing to Pakatan Rakyat to give it 102? Either way, with only 59 Umno Members of Parliament, Najib would be far short and would need the other component members of Barisan Nasional to take the chair as Prime Minister.

MCA (15), MIC (3) and Gerakan (2) total another 20. These three parties plus PPP (which has no Parliamentarians) are totally pissed with Umno. They may not throw their lot behind Pakatan Rakyat but they would certainly stay neutral and become the ‘third force’ or ‘independents’. Though Pakatan Rakyat may not benefit from MCA’s, MIC’s and Gerakan’s 20 seats, neither would Umno, or rather Najib.

Najib would need the 30 non-Umno Members of Parliament from Sarawak and the balance 11 from Sabah (totaling 41) to make up his majority. If they too decide to follow MCA, MIC, Gerakan and PPP and stay ‘neutral’, then Najib is sunk. His 59 against Pakatan Rakyat’s 82, Abdullah’s ‘neutral’ 20, and the MCA’s, MIC’s, Gerakan’s, Sabah’s and Sarawak’s ‘neutral’ 61, would mean that he does not have the confidence of the majority and the Agong just can’t appoint him as the new Prime Minister.

Yes, many are looking forward to the 30 Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament crossing over to Pakatan Rakyat to give it 112 seats in Parliament (111 of 222 is exactly 50% so it will be 50% plus one seat). But what if they don’t cross over? What if they just remain neutral or leave Barisan Nasional to create an ‘independent third force’? This too would be enough to deny Najib the Prime Ministership. And there is more than one reason for them to want to remain neutral or to leave Barisan Nasional to become a third force.

This is the dilemma facing Najib. And Mahathir is also greatly concerned. They both know that March 2009 is a long way away. And many things can happen from now till March 2009. The non-Umno component members of Barisan Nasional are reevaluating their relationship with Umno. It is no longer a matter of whether to abandon Umno, and in the process abandon Najib as well. Leaving Umno is almost a foregone conclusion. What they are undecided about is whether they should leave Barisan Nasional to join Pakatan Rakyat or leave to become an independent third force. Both have its merits. In Pakatan Rakyat there is good and bad, as an independent third force there is also good and bad. That is what is preoccupying the minds of the non-Umno component members of Barisan Nasional. And the more mistakes Umno makes the more reason for them to proceed with the divorce. And Umno is making mistakes by the dozen these days.

So they want Raja Petra’s various cases in the Shah Alam, Petaling Jaya and Kuala Lumpur courts to be settled super-fast. The legal brains are mind-boggled as to how fast the courts seem to move in dispensing with justice when it comes to Raja Petra’s cases, when other cases are sometimes known to stretch over ten or twenty years with no end in sight. Why the hurry when it comes to Raja Petra? Is the hurriedness more about Najib than about Raja Petra? Are they hoping that what will be revealed in Raja Petra’s cases will be the noose around Najib’s neck? I can only speculate on the reason but it does not take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.

Sure, Abdullah said that Najib will take over in March 2009. He even did not contest the Umno Presidency and allowed Najib a walkover as part of this plan. But it was not an unqualified assurance. It certainly is subject to certain conditions. And one of those conditions would be that he is free from any legal problems such as being implicated in a murder. The second would be he procures the confidence of the majority of the Members of the House. The failure to fulfill any one of these conditions is enough to disqualify him. And Abdullah has four months to work on the disqualification.

There is no such thing as a sure thing. Najib and Mahathir of all people should know this by now. And who said Abdullah is stupid? He may not be smart but this does not mean he is stupid. And Abdullah may yet prove he is sneakier than most people give him credit for. I think Malaysians should launch a ‘No to Najib’ campaign. Maybe they should collect 100,000 signatures for a petition to the Agong to appeal to His Majesty not to appoint Najib as Prime Minister in March 2009. Maybe it is not a bad idea after all that Abdullah stays on. At least Pakatan Rakyat can take him on come the next general election in 2012-2013 and finish the job they started on 8 March 2008.
.

The King is dumbfounded

The twists and turns of mala fide
Monday, 01 December 2008 12:33

NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin

The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) was created persuant to the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission Act (1998) as a new regulator for the communications and multimedia industry in Malaysia. At the same time, the Communications and Multimedia Act (1998) was passed, to fulfil the need to regulate an increasingly convergent communications and multimedia industry.

The Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 is based on the basic principles of transparency and clarity; more competition and less regulation; flexibility; bias towards generic rules; regulatory forbearance; emphasis on process rather than content; administrative and sector transparency; and industry self-regulation.

The Act seeks to provide a generic set of regulatory provisions based on generic definitions of market and service activities and services. The jurisdiction of this Act is restricted to networked services and activities only.

The MCMC took over regulation of the Postal Services on 1 November 2002. On the same day it also was appointed the Certifying Agency under the Digital Signature Act (1997).
(http://www.skmm.gov.my/the_law/legislation.asp )

The above is what they say on the MCMC website. In the section called WHAT WE DO (http://www.skmm.gov.my/what_we_do/licensing/licensing.asp ), the MCMC website says: The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission issues licences under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, the Postal Services Act 1991 and the Digital Signature Act 1997.

In the section titled ENFORCEMENT (http://www.skmm.gov.my/what_we_do/Enforcement/enforcement.asp ), this is what the MCMC website says:

The primary function of enforcement is to conduct investigation upon receiving reports relating to the commission of offences under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA), the Postal Services Act 1991 (PSA), the Digital Signatures Act 1997 (DSA) and the relevant subsidiary legislations.

The objective of the investigation is to ascertain whether or not the offender has committed the offence and also to gather sufficient evidence on the offender. After the investigation is completed, the investigation paper will be submitted to the Deputy Public Prosecutor for his decision on the appropriate action to be taken on the case investigated by MCMC.

Effective enforcement carried out by MCMC is to ensure the rights of the licensees, investors, consumers and the public are always protected and the confidence in communications, multimedia and postal services are maintained at all times.

Okay, now read the above again and note the following sentences or clauses:

1) The jurisdiction of this Act is restricted to networked services and activities only.

2) …….emphasis on process rather than content……

3) ……. more competition and less regulation…….

4) Effective enforcement carried out by MCMC is to ensure the rights of the licensees, investors, consumers and the public are always protected…….

At 6.00pm on 26 August 2008, Malaysia Today suddenly ‘disappeared’. We thought it was a technical glitch and called the hosting company. The hosting company, who was located overseas, said that the site is working fine and that they have no problems accessing it. We insisted we can’t access it from Malaysia and on further investigation they confirmed what we said and told us that Malaysia Today can’t be accessed only in Malaysia but there are no problems if accessing the site from other countries outside Malaysia.

It was soon established that Malaysia Today could not be accessed because the MCMC had written to the 20 or so Malaysian ISPs (Internet Service Providers; such as Jaring, TMNet, Maxis, Celcom, etc.) and ordered them to block malaysia-today.net. They did not unblock malaysia-today.net until barely a few hours before the police detained me under the Internal Security Act around noon of 12 September 2008.

The reason given to the ISPs was that Malaysia Today had broken the law. Which law was never specified but then Malaysian companies that need the goodwill of the Malaysian government to renew their licences or to ensure that their licences do not get withdrawn do not ask for clarification. They just do what they are told.

Before the MCMC acted on 26 August, they had been summoned for a few meetings to be told that the Cabinet was not happy with the countless revelations and exposes that Malaysia Today had dragged up the last four years since 2004. The MCMC was told the Cabinet is of the view that they (MCMC) are not doing their job and the Cabinet wants them to act against Malaysia Today.

The fact that the MCMC, as charted in its website above, does not have that power (read items 1, 2, 3 and 4 above) to block Malaysia Today appears lost to the powers-that-be. The Cabinet is not concerned about what the law says. They just want Malaysia Today closed down and it is the MCMC’s job to do that. The MCMC replied that it would be difficult to block malaysia-today.net on political grounds as this would look too obvious. It would be better that they use ‘insulting Islam’ and ‘insulting Prophet Muhammad’ as that reason. This would look more ‘legitimate’.

So, on 26 August 2008, the MCMC ordered all the Malaysia ISPs to block malaysia-today.net, which they did. But they still needed a reason to block malaysia-today.net and they found this reason in a comment posted by anti-jihadist. The problem is anti-jihadist posted that comment on 28 August 2008, two days after malaysia-today.net was put out of action. Is the MCMC clairvoyant and could see into the future? Did it have a crystal ball and knew, two days in advance, that anti-jihadist was going to post a ‘damaging’ comment? It is mind-boggling that the MCMC was able to block malaysia-today.net two days before the comment that caused it to be blocked was posted.

Soon after malaysia-today.net went out of action, overseas friends of Malaysia Today floated a new website and tried to restore as much of the old data as possible. Some were saved but much was lost when the servers that hosted malaysia-today.net were closed down and sold off.

This posed another problem. I am facing a charge under the Sedition Act and the Attorney-General did not attach an original copy of the article ‘Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell’ with the charge. Instead, they manually typed out the article -- so, for all intents and purposes, the ‘evidence’ of my ‘crime’ had been fabricated. They are now trying to amend the charge but the court has rejected the motion to amend the charge. (The Attorney-General has now appealed this decision in the High Court so we are yet to know if they will be allowed to amend the charge).

Nevertheless, because malaysia-today.net no longer exists, they are not able to adduce the evidence to support the charge and even the amended charge is based on the manually typed copy of the article -- meaning the evidence is still ‘fabricated’. It would be interesting to see how the prosecution now pursues its case against me in the absence of the original article from malaysia-today.net.

Anyway, on 3 December 2008, the prosecution will be embarking on a ‘fishing expedition’ to see if they can find the original copy of that article in my two computers which they have confiscated. They hope, since they can no longer obtain the original copy of the article from malaysia-today.net, that they can instead find it in one of the computers. They are really desperate to find the evidence with which they can use to nail my balls to the wall.

The MCMC realised that they could not justify blocking malaysia-today.net based on a comment by anti-jihadist that was posted two days AFTER the site was blocked. So they decided to unblock malaysia-today.net and instead detain me under Section 73 of the Internal Security Act, barely a few hours later, on vague grounds that I posted articles that incite Malaysians to hate its leaders plus insult Islam and the Prophet.

My wife then filed a writ of habeas corpus and it appeared like the court might agree with my wife’s contention that my detention was vague and mala fide. The court was due to hear our petition on 23 September 2008. On 22 September 2008, they quickly re-detained me under Section 8 of the Internal security Act and on the morning of 23 September they sent me packing off to Kamunting. This torpedoed the habeas corpus hearing due to be held that same day and my wife had to start all over again and file a new habeas corpus action.

A day or two after the MCMC blocked malaysia-today.net, I received a phone call from that big chap who runs the Chawan restaurant in Bangsar, across the road from The Outback in Bangsar Village, who said he wants to discus how malaysia-today-net can be unblocked. My wife and I went to meet him and he told us that the MCMC wants to explore how to unblock malaysia-today.net but this must be based on certain terms and conditions. He told me that he is an emissary from Mohamed Shahril Tarmizi, the senior manager of the MCMC, the man who ordered Malaysia Today closed down.

The problem, they told me, was not my articles, but the comments. Currently, the comments in Malaysia Today are not moderated. Would I be prepared to moderate them? I asked them how to do that when we receive thousands of comments and they are posted 24-7. I would have to employ at least ten staff and that would cost me maybe RM15,000-RM20,000 per month. I do not have the money to do that. I then asked them what solutions they could recommend.

They admitted that they have been pondering over this problem for some time and also do not have any solutions to suggest. Okay, I replied, I am prepared to hand over the job of moderating the comments in Malaysia Today to the government. The government can take over and moderate the comments in Malaysia Today. Would they be prepared to do that?

They admitted that the government would not be able to do that, as it would require a massive operation to do so. Never mind, they told me, they will unblock malaysia-today.net and give us six months to come out with a solution. On 10 September 2008, I received a phone call telling me that the MCMC has decided to unblock malaysia-today.net and that they will give us six months to come out with a plan on how to moderate the comments in Malaysia Today. On 11 September 2008, malaysia-today.net was unblocked. On 12 September 2008, they detained me under the Internal Security Act.

Can any of you figure out what is going on here? I, for one, can’t imagine what game they are playing.

While under ISA detention, I related this whole episode to SAC1 Dato’ Zamri, the man in-charge of the six-member team of interrogators assigned to me. I am not sure of his ‘surname’ but he is probably the best-looking Special Branch officer in Bukit Aman and most likely will be the head of the Special Branch in time to come.

He was very accommodating (even bought me a packet of cigarettes; which is not allowed when you are in jail) but what concerned me was his insistence that my articles could mislead the readers because the majority of Malaysians have a much lower intellectual level and may not understand what I write. It is not that I have committed a crime as such. It is just that the way I write may confuse Malaysians. In short, my crime is for having a higher intellectual level than the average Malaysian and they might misunderstand what I write. This is why the government regards me as a threat to society.

I do not regard myself as an intellectual or even as being smarter than most Malaysians. But this was the argument THEY were using to justify my detention and this bothered me. Based on what they were tying to tell me, I have to be sent to Kamunting because I am smart and most Malaysians are stupid. So Malaysians need to be protected from me.

I asked Dato’ Zamri: would it not be better that I be allowed to go free and continue to educate Malaysians through Malaysia Today so that, in time, they too can be ‘smart like me’ (tongue-in-cheek of course because I did not buy the “Raja Petra is too smart and Malaysians too stupid” argument)? No, they did not think so. They felt that the best solution would be to lock me up so that the ‘stupid’ Malaysians can be ‘protected’.

I suppose there must be a good reason why the government would rather keep Malaysians stupid and why they lock me up so that I can’t continue my attempts to wake Malaysians up and educate them. Could it be because stupid Malaysians can be easily manipulated while smart Malaysians would vote opposition? Maybe Dato’ Zamri can help reply to this question.

In the meantime, the government has appealed the court’s decision to release me from ISA detention on 7 November 2008. They want me back in Kamunting where they feel I belong and which they feel would be safer for Malaysians. Let’s see what the court has to say about this. Will the court agree that Malaysians should be ‘protected’ and that I should not be allowed to awaken and educate them, or will the court feel that it is time Malaysians received the right information and not the crap that the school history textbooks and mainstream media spews forth?
.

The amazing "race" that started the ball rolling

Revisiting the 2006 UMNO General Assembly
Amri Baharuddin Shamsul

http://www.opinionasia.org/

14 Dec 2006

It was in mid-2006 when Mahathir fired his first salvo against Abdullah Badawi and his government, gaining front-page prominence in the widely circulating Malaysian daily, the New Straits Times. Since the paper is UMNO-controlled, Abdullah Badawi must have been aware of these criticisms and perhaps even gave the green-light for them to be published, in line with his "open-government" philosophy.

What shocked many within and without UMNO were not Mahathir's criticisms per se, but the vitriol and vehemence that accompanied them. Many ministers and the Barisan Nasional leaders responded by rallying around Abdullah.

Mahathir's unhappiness stemmed from the abandonment of the crooked bridge project, the future fate of the national car company that he inspired, Proton, of corruption in high places among UMNO members, but especially within Abdullah's family and over the general nature of affairs in Malaysia, which he described as a "police state".

With the UMNO General Assembly approaching and no indication that the Mahathir-Abdullah crisis would be resolved, Malaysia was bracing itself for open confrontation during the Assembly after Mahathir announced that he was attending too. Only a mild heart attack prevented him from doing so. Pleas from close friends and family to consider his national legacy against a concerted anti-Abdullah campaign also seem to have borne fruit, despite the ex-premier making it clear that his struggle would go on.

Abdullah dominated the stage at the UMNO General Assembly with his opening and closing speeches. For once, everyone present felt that he sounded authoritative and convincing. The Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange also shared this new confidence, breaching the 1,000 mark for the first time since Abdullah became Prime Minister.

However, the overall mood and tenor of the debate during the General Assembly was decidedly negative, prompting a largely pessimistic reaction from the non-Malays, who opined the assembly was marked by too much chauvinistic drama epitomised by the image of the Malay dagger, or kris, and threats from some UMNO members to "run amok", if the social contract that has held Malaysia together since 1969 was fundamentally altered.

For the first time in Malaysia's history, the General Assembly was telecast live on ASTRO, the Malaysian cable channel, and UMNO TV on the web. Selected speeches were also telecast live on TV3, RTM1, NTV7, and TV9. It was estimated that around six million viewers watched this UMNO "reality show", including a large number of non-Malays.

Most UMNO representatives did not realise they were being watched by millions. The assembly proceeded as usual, complete with philosophical speeches, pantuns and dirty jokes. Hishammudin, the UMNO Youth leader, yet again, did not forget to bring his kris along and kissed it in public - prompting some commentators to ask when he planned to use it. The assembly was also peppered with chauvinistic comments and gender slurs, while some raised totally petty and irrelevant personal matters, such as the "unIslamic dress" of one minister's wife.

The overall impact of the assembly was not really understood until the final day of the meeting, when Abdullah Badawi, in his summing-up speech, told the UMNO delegates that their speeches and behaviour during the meeting were closely watched and scrutinised by the Malaysian public - both Malay and non-Malay.

It was quite clear when Abdullah spoke that he had received reports that there were negative reactions to some chauvinistic speeches and Hishamuddin's kris-waving histrionics. The Prime Minister then spent about 30 minutes trying to pacify the Malaysian non-Malay public, stressing that UMNO leaders were both leaders of the ruling coalition, Barisan Nasional and all Malaysians. This effort was only partially successful it seems.

The first reaction emanated from the leaders of the Barisan Nasional constituent parties. They were clearly unhappy with what was said about them during the assembly and responded by publicly charging UMNO leaders of creating unnecessary ethnic tension in the country.

Then came an avalanche of public responses from different community leaders as well from the NGOs. Again, UMNO leaders were brunt of their attacks.

Suddenly, UMNO was under siege. Rather than raise a spirited defence of the party, to the surprise of many within the party, senior UMNO politicians warned some of the delegates who spoke during the general assembly that they could be charged in court under the Sedition Act of 1970 for making chauvinistic and ethnically-sensitive "public" speeches. "Public" simply because the General Assembly was telecast live. Needless to say, the 2006 General Assembly will probably be the first and last as far as live broadcast is concerned.

UMNO General Assemblies in the coming years are likely to take on a similar form if the assemblies of 2005 and 2006 are anything to go by. Abdullah, UMNO and their Barisan Nasional colleagues continue to be boxed in by the New Economic Policy (NEP) discourse, a debate that so far has not addressed a more basic issue that pertains to the Federal Constitution, in particular to Article 8 "on Equality" which "allows for 'special privileges' to the 'minority' (disabled, etc.), principally, as an exception" and Article 153 "on Special Privileges of the Natives".

Article 153 allows for "special privileges" for the majority, based on the historical agreement that it is a pre-condition to equality. This is supposed to help bumiputeras achieve economic parity with non-Malays. However, unlike in the NEP of 1970, no quantitative targets and no timetables were set in the 1957 Constitution.

Unless the Malaysian social contract, and by extension the constitution is "renegotiated" and Article 153 is made much clearer in terms of its objectives, quantitative targets and fixed time schedules, the New Economic Policy will be repackaged again and again, eventually living up to its more popular abbreviation, the Never Ending Policy. Only UMNO has the real power required to effect this renegotiation - until such a time, politics in Malaysia will simply be a rehash of issues previously raised.

Ultimately, UMNO has to rise above it all and consider what is good for Malaysia and UMNO, rather than just UMNO alone.


What they said and thereafter

The 2006 UMNO Annual General Assembly was the first ever to be telecast live. Hasnoor Sidang Hussein was among the delegates permitted to address the assembly, and like all others, his speech was carried live.

In the course of his remarks, Hasnoor stated that non-Malay citizens needed to be grateful for having been granted citizenship at independence under the Malaysian social contract. He also spoke out against the non-Malays who were critical of the special position of the Malays and other members of the bumiputra (indigenous people) ethnic majority, stating: "If they (non-Malays) question our rights, then we should question theirs. So far we have not heard the Malays questioning their right to citizenship when they came in droves from other countries."

The most controversial of his remarks, however, was his declaration that "Umno is willing to risk lives and bathe in blood to defend the race and religion (Islam, the official religion of Malaysia and of the Malays). Don't play with fire. If they (non-Malays) mess with our rights, we will mess with theirs."Hasnoor's remarks formed one third of the three disputed speeches made; another one was that by UMNO Youth Information Chief Azimi Daim, who said "when tension rises, the blood of Malay warriors will run in our veins", while the third was made by a delegate from Perak, Hashim Suboh, who referred to UMNO Youth Chief and Education Minister Hishammuddin Hussein's act of brandishing the kris (Malay dagger): "Datuk Hisham has unsheathed his keris, waved his keris, kissed his keris. We want to ask Datuk Hisham when is he going to use it."

As a result of the controversy, UMNO Deputy President and Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak announced that "we are seriously looking into the wisdom of having (a) live telecast" of the proceedings.

The speeches later became the subject of a debate in Parliament. Leader of the Opposition, Lim Kit Siang from the Democratic Action Party (DAP), said that "The speeches have upset non-Malays and they are feeling insecure. It is sad that Malay leaders can still speak like this 50 years after independence. We feel excluded and threatened." He filed a motion to have the Dewan Rakyat (the lower house of Parliament) consider the subject of the speeches, but it was rejected by the Speaker. Another lawmaker from the DAP, Karpal Singh, accused Hasnoor and the other delegates of having committed sedition, which under the Sedition Act is a crime in Malaysia. Lim Keng Yaik, President of the Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (Malaysian People's Movement), a major party in the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition government led by UMNO, also expressed worry about "where these sentiments will lead to". Najib responded that "Some inexperienced speakers got carried away," and assured them that "We reject such sentiments ... this is not official policy." He also stated that the speakers were being investigated by the Police for the crime of sedition.

Soon after, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, President of UMNO and the Prime Minister, announced that three unidentified speakers at the assembly had been officially reprimanded for their statements. In Singapore, the Straits Times described this as "the first time that Umno has taken action based on police reports and complaints by the opposition and non-Malay communities over the years on the same issue."The following day, the UMNO-owned English daily, the New Straits Times, identified the three speakers as Hasnoor, Azimi and Hashim. Hasnoor said he "told the party leadership that I was sorry for what I had said. It was not my intention to touch on racial sensitivities and to hurt the feelings of the other races." He also suggested that the proceedings of UMNO assemblies not be carried live in the future.
.

Fast forward - March 8, 2008

Opposition parties won 82 seats (out of 222 seats in parliament) or 36.9% of parliamentary seats while BN (UMNO, MCA, MIC, Gerakan) only managing to secure the remaining 140 seats or 63.1%. It marked also the first time since the 1969 election that the coalition did not win a 2/3 supermajority in Malaysia parliament required to pass the amendments to the Malaysian Constitution. In addition, 5 of 13 state legislatures were won by the opposition (PKR, DAP, PAS), compared with only one in the last election.

.