Categories
Events Liberty Politics & government

[2050] Of how many are protesting against ISA, on the ground?

And so, Kuala Lumpur is again the center of a struggle for liberty.

Estimating the number of protesters against ISA is hard but Twitter, specifically from the accounts of The Edge and The Malaysian Insider may be helpful.

The Malaysian Insider reports that there are about 5,000 protesters in Sogo area while another more or less 5,000 gathered near Masjid Negara.[1]

The Edge reports that 1,000 individuals are in Dang Wangi.[2]

Others estimate another 1,000 persons are in Masjid Jamek.

If these numbers are reliable, that makes 12,000 protesters at around 15:00 hours Malaysian time, making it much smaller than Bersih, but large nonetheless by Malaysian standard.

These numbers unfortunately are hard to be aggregated because these sources come from different time points. Crowds in one place may have traveled from one point to another, making double counting a risk. Or, even underestimating because these numbers may swell after time of reporting.

In any case, what about the pro-ISA number? Unknown and likely insignificant.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — ISA – Anti-ISA protesters from Sogo number some 5,000, another 5,000 from National Mosque. [The Malaysian Insider. Twitter. August 1 2009]

[2] — Crowd of more than a thousand at Dang Wangi start moving behind Unit Amal human shield, chants “Reformasi”. No police yet. [The Edge. Twitter. August 1 2009]

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s — as the dust settled, better estimation. It is over 20,000:

News services estimated that the rally on Saturday, which was broken up by thousands of police officers using tear gas and water cannons, drew about 20,000 protesters, making it the largest demonstration in two years. [Malaysia Cracks Down on Protests. Thomas Fuller. New York Times. August 2 2009]

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[2049] Of Malay as a community is not pro-ISA or anti-ISA

Pewaris, widely reported as the foremost pro-Internal Security Act  group as the Act comes under heavy opposition on August 1, the date when massive protest is expected to take place in Kuala Lumpur. The ISA is a controversial piece of legislation that allows detention with trial.

Expressing support for the Act, even when the Act is abhorrent to the concept of individual liberty, is a person’s right to do so. Whether it is oxymoron or not, one has to be mindful that the transgression of liberty happens when there is actual trangression. Expression alone does not transgression.

But the Act is in force and indeed, the Act transgresses liberty. That justifies opposition to the Act.

Here, however is not the place and time where I want to discuss the subject of liberty in foundational terms. Rather, I would very much like to touch how the positioning of Pewaris and other pro-ISA group, as taken by them or described by the mainstream media is ultimately misleading.

It is with alarm that I note that it is typical for the press to describe these pro-ISA groups as Malay groups.[1] Being pro-ISA and idenfitied as Malay groups, inevitably, it implies, on purpose or accidentally, that the position of the Malays are pro-ISA. It further implies that these groups represent the Malays as a whole.

Clearly, this is absolutely false. While the pro-ISA groups may be dominated by, if not all of their members are, Malays, it no whatsoever way says that these groups represent the Malays as a whole. These groups are not even elected by all the Malays. A large majority of Malays are likely not members of the groups too.

For the press to identify these pro-ISA groups as Malay groups, it appeals to the flawed idea that the Malays as a community are a monolithic group. Opinion of individual Malays on the matter is clearly not uniform on the matters. The clearest proof is the presence of Malays in the anti-ISA groups. Another proof: I am a Malay and I am unfriendly to the ISA.

The press needs to stop calling these pro-ISA groups as Malay groups to stop the unnecessary confusion and the unnecessary implication that the Malays are for ISA.

More accurate description or qualification will be required if the press continue to insist on associating these groups with the Malays. ‘Pro-Barisan Nasional Malay groups’, ‘Pro-UMNO Malay groups’ are two phrases that comes to my mind as better alternatives to term ‘Malay groups’.

The Malays, as a community, does not have one mind about being for or against ISA. Individual Malays however may.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — One example:

GEORGE TOWN: Some 50 people from two Malay non-governmental organisations (NGOs) staged a peaceful protest in support of the Internal Security Act (ISA) at the ground floor foyer of Komtar here.

The Persatuan Putra Pulau Pinang and Pertubuhan Al-Ehsan Malaysia members held banners in support of the ISA at 10am and dispersed some 30 minutes later following police advice. [Two Malay NGOs want ISA to remain. The Star. July 29 2009]

Yet another example:

KUALA LUMPUR: Representatives from an umbrella body of Malay and Muslim non-governmental organisations lodged five police reports Sunday over several issues which they claimed endangered Muslim and Malay unity.

The Heritage Associations, Malay Cultural Organisations and Related Bodies Cooperation Network (Pewaris) urged the Government to act against groups which are asking for the abolition of the Internal Security Act (ISA). [Malay, Muslim NGOs lodge police reports. Zulkipli Abdul Rahman. The Star. November 23 2008]

Categories
Liberty

[2048] Of freedom of expression is not freedom from criticism

Freedom of expression is not freedom from criticism. Yet, too many people confuse it and equate freedom of expression to freedom from criticism.

Here is an example of such misunderstanding:

Journalists in Malaysia often stay away from criticising the writings of another journalist, be it in another publication or an online portal. It’s an unwritten rule. As much as we do not agree with the views or slant of the article, we refrain from voicing our unhappiness as we believe in the freedom of expression. [Yasmin Ahmad: Journos angry over Kosmo article. Wong Chun Wai. New Malaysia. July 29 2009]

That comes from a top editor in Malaysia. Does one really wonder why the mainstream media is in such a mess?

Categories
Liberty

[2046] Of my position on Islamic headscarf, burqa, etc and France

A person asked me what do I think of Sarkozy’s hostility to burqa and why I have not written against it.

I have not written against it because I generally dislike repeating myself.

It is an old issue and I have made myself clear with respect to Turkey (back in 2008) and the Netherlands (2006).

But for the benefit of that person, banning or forcing the wearing of burqa, Islamic headscarf, etc, is a transgression of liberty.

Now, I have work to do. Bugger off.

And really, try to read my old stuff before any of you insinuate anything.

Categories
ASEAN Conflict & disaster Liberty

[2044] Of a liberal democratic Domino Theory

Indonesia can be an important factor in the creation of a liberal democratic Malaysia.

Its sheer size, its proximity to Malaysia and deep ties that bind both countries prevent any pretension that our developmental path is independently of each other. It is for this reason that recent liberal, democratic, and economic advancements in Indonesia are a cause for celebration among liberals and democrats in Malaysia. For the same reason, the latest bombing in Jakarta should be a source of concern for them.

Indonesia’s transition from an authoritarian state to the most democratic one in the region has been nothing less than impressive. The violent manner of the transition is less than ideal but it was a transition for the better nevertheless. With all else being equal, Indonesians are potentially set to reap the dividend of democratic peace and progress. Already its economy has been growing consistently above 4 per cent since 2000. Furthermore, the archipelagic country is still growing despite the ongoing crisis that has forced many others, including Malaysia, to go into recession.

I celebrate the much talked about progress in Indonesia, first and foremost, because of the ideal of a liberal democracy. That is the only form of government that is supportive of individual liberty. Only that system is capable of balancing individual liberty against state power as well as any majority power. It guards individual liberty tightly against the ugly side of gross majoritarianism: tyranny of the majority.

To have one more state — in the case of Indonesia, a major state — embracing liberal democracy as a system, and having it working, enhances the influence of the idea all over the world. To have one more state as a liberal democracy further gives credence to the statement that the most successful countries in modern times, by and large, have been liberal democracies.

A point that is more relevant is the effect of Indonesian progress on Malaysia. Its success as a liberal democracy is important to Malaysian democrats and liberals because if Indonesia, during this period of its liberal democracy, can achieve unprecedented socioeconomic progress to catch up with Malaysia, it can provide Malaysia with a liberal democratic model to follow.

This is an important point that demands stressing. It provides a strong alternative to the development model preferred by the government of the People’s Republic of China. For Malaysian democrats and liberals, between deep statism as practised in mainland China and democracy, the answer does not demand too much mental manoeuvring.

This idea may in a way parallel the Domino Theory in a restricted sense. The Domino Theory in its original form postulates that if one country fell to communism, others in the region would fall to communism too, just as a domino piece in a well-arranged deck only waits toppling after the fall of the first piece. Except this time around, the force that pushes the first piece sits on the opposite side of communism, and decades after communism was ideologically defeated.

The liberal democratic Domino Theory could even affect Singapore. Any big change in Malaysia will affect Singapore, just as a big change in Indonesia will affect Malaysia. A liberal democratic Malaysia will present unwanted pressure for the Singapore establishment to be more flexible in matters concerning democracy and liberty.

For Singapore, in times when it is surrounded by illiberal states — Malaysia and Indonesia that from time to time presented a cold front to it — it can find allies in other liberal democracies in the West, even when Singapore itself is an illiberal state. When, and if, it is surrounded by liberal democracies, Singapore’s ties to Western liberal democracies would somewhat diminish as attention would shift from Malaysia and Indonesia’s record to Singapore’s.

On top of that, liberal democracies tend to be noisy about illiberal conducts. If the governments of Malaysia and Indonesia are unwilling to do so, then the civil society in both countries would. Consequently, the domino deck would exert strong pressure on Singapore to democratise and liberalise.

Before that can happen, Indonesia must make significant progress. Without that, Indonesia will not have a significant role in democratising and liberalising Malaysia and give currency to the theory. One barrier to that progress was exemplified by the recent bombing in its capital.

What happened in Jakarta is disheartening because it can adversely affect confidence in the country. Confidence is a precious commodity in the making of a successful economy. Without it, Indonesian economy can falter to undo the progress made on the political front. Without a healthy economy, a liberal democratic Indonesia will not command respect from others. That will easily cancel out the possibility of the Domino Theory.

Thankfully, the bombing so far has not significantly impacted the Indonesian economy. It may be that the momentum of progress there is so big compared to the negative impact of the bombing. If that is so, that is great. Yet, one may never know what is in store next.

An Indonesia in chaos will not only remove an external factor that catalyses the realisation of a liberal democratic Malaysia, it can also contribute to a setback. Indonesia after all is not so far away and it has been pointed out that the network of terrorism consists also of Malaysians. These Malaysians may target Malaysia some day.

If ever that happens, it is likely that individual liberty in the country will suffer further erosion. In the United States, with its strong tradition in liberty and credible institutions, a strong challenge against the transgression of liberty can be mounted by its civil society. In Malaysia with smaller cache as far as the idea of liberty is concerned, the same challenge will be hard to mount. After all, laws irreverent to liberal democratic values introduced during the Emergency era are still in place. For instance, when was the last time Malaysia held a local election?

For Malaysian democrats and liberals, it is in their interest to ensure that what is in store for Indonesia is peace instead of chaos. They can do this by requiring their own government to cooperate earnestly with the Indonesian government on the matter of anti-terrorism. Successful cooperation will lessen the possibility of Malaysia facing such attacks at home and avoid the oft-mentioned dilemma between liberty and security.

The dilemma between the two is a false one, since liberty requires protection to remain firm. That, after all, is the purpose of a liberal democracy. But convincing the masses of that reasoning will be a difficult task during dangerous times. With an illiberal government at the helm, the government will certainly make use of that opportunity to rob liberty from individuals, either consciously or indirectly.

The cause of terrorism is clearly multifold but I am convinced that poor economic conditions — which in turn affects other factors like good education that are crucial in sustaining a liberal democracy — play a large role in it. A developing Indonesian economy can address that, and that makes the progress in Indonesia all the more important; economic success is the real anti-terrorism measure.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

First published in The Malaysian Insider on July 27 2009.