Category: Politics & government

Categories
Conflict & disaster Politics & government

[2033] Of a few days after the first 100 days

Shocked.

That was exactly how I felt when I found out that a political secretary of a Selangor assemblyman was found dead near the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission headquarters. The MACC put the aide, Teoh Beng Hock, through questioning regarding activities of DAP assemblypersons just hours earlier before the time of death.[1] Granted, the cause of death — did the aide commit suicide? Did somebody push him from the top of the building? Was it defenestation? — is still a mystery but it surely, rightly or wrongly, incriminates the MACC.

To many, especially for Pakatan Rakyat sympathizers I suspect, judgment may have already been passed: the MACC is somehow guilty of causing the death. While it definitely an unfair position to assume, it is not hard to reach to that conclusion given that individuals have died in the custody of the authority, namely the police.

The MACC is already seen as biased arm of the government, embarking on selective investigation by targeting Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen but continue to leave Barisan Nasional politicians with suspicious record like Khir Toyo free from investigation. The death of the aide can only further damage whatever public confidence — if it has any left — that MACC has right now.

As for the Najib administration, looks like its 100-day celebration has just been cut short. On his 100th day as the Prime Minister, he announced six key result areas and one of them is the prevention of crime. [2] A government body now is being perceived as a perpetrator of crime. It is not just any crime but murder, perhaps the gravest of all crimes.

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

[1] — SHAH ALAM, July 16 — The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) controversial probe into several DAP assemblymen’s activities was thrown into more turmoil today with the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock at the anti-graft authority’s Selangor headquarters.

The 30-year-old’s death will put more pressure on the MACC, which has been accused by the opposition of conducting selective investigations.

[…]

At a press conference, the MACC director of investigations Datuk Mohd Shukri Abdul said Teoh was questioned from 5pm yesterday to 3.45am and was released soon after.bod

However, Teoh apparently said he was tired and so he rested on a settee in the lobby. He was seen sleeping on the settee at 6am.

At about 1.30pm, Shukri said, they heard that a body had been found on the 5th floor of the adjacent building and when one of the MACC officers went to investigate, he realised it was one of their witnesses.

Shukri said Teoh was not a suspect but was questioned as part of their investigations into the misuse of state allocations. [Ean Yong’s political secretary dead at MACC HQ. Neville Spykerman. The Malaysian Insider. July 16 2009]

[2] — KUALA LUMPUR, July 11 (Bernama) — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak on Saturday announced six national key result areas for more effective attainment of the targets of the key performance indicators (KPI).

He said these were crime prevention, fighting of corruption, widening access to quality and affordable education, raising the living standard of the low-income people, upgrading infrastructure in the rural and interior regions, and improving public transportation in a moderate period of time. [Najib Identifies Key Areas For KPI Targets.Bernama. July 11 2009]

Categories
ASEAN Photography Politics & government

[2028] Of Indonesian presidential election accidentally reached to my home

The postal service mistakenly sent the following letter to my house:

Fair Use. Obtained from The Star.

I do not know the content of the letter for sure because I do not have the authority to open it. Judging from the envelope however, I would risk guessing that it contains a ballot for Indonesian living abroad to use to partipate in yesterday’s presidential race.

Categories
Politics & government Society

[2021] Of we, the people

If you had switched on the television, listened to the radio or read the newspapers for the past number of weeks, you may have noticed how so many individuals and entities are claiming to represent the people. The people wish for this and the people wish for that but oddly enough, your wish never coincides with that of the people.

So, who exactly are these people?

There are incessant talks of the people’s opinion. It is in the air but it is just not there. It is as elusive as god, or Shangri-La, or El Dorado, or the princess on top of Ledang, or simply a dodo bird.

More confusingly, somebody claiming to speak for the people would say one thing and then another somebody would insist the people seek another different agenda altogether. It is almost hilarious how the people would hold diametrically opposing thoughts at a particular point in time without a pause for reflection. It seems that contradiction is of no concern to the people. Unless if these representatives are telling convoluted truth.

We could gauge the people’s opinion and ignore the representatives. In this country however, the absence of free press and liberty in general generates a reason to be skeptical of any sampling done to measure public opinion. Instead of reflecting the public opinion, such sampling is used to shape the opinion of the masses.

Furthermore, the culture of gauging public opinion through the use of good sampling method is not widespread in Malaysia. Or at least, the organizers of the poll do not have the reputation of neutrality and the desire to produce reliable and trustworthy surveys. Thus, public surveys forever skillfully evade the opinion of those that actually make up the people.

But who needs surveys anyway. There are three types of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics, so said Benjamin Disraeli.

And so, our only recourse is the self-proclaimed representatives of the people that, if I may, are popping like mushrooms after the rain lately. The problem is, I do not remember electing these representatives to speak for me. In fact, I do not recall of them winning elections to public offices. Yet, they claim to speak for the people. They certainly do not represent me but maybe, I am just not part of the people.

Here’s a question: do they speak for you? Are you part of this elusive “people”? Let me put it this way — take a breath — the representatives speak for the people and you are part of the people but the representatives do not speak for you. Huh?

Something is terribly wrong here, do you not think so?

The truth is numbers as well as perception matter and there are those that seek to create the illusion of numbers. It is far easier to make claim that millions of people support an individual rather than having that individual going down to the ground to convince the people to join his cause. This has encouraged many to abuse the phrase “the people”, even when the people — you and I and some dudes out there collectively — have nothing to do with those self-elected and unsanctioned representatives.

On top of that, there are those that — sincerely confused or otherwise — think that society is a monolithic entity. To refer to the people as a monolithic entity sadly falsely assumes that there is uniformity of opinion within the society. It ignores the diversity of opinion of the people. To me personally, it gravely disrespects individuality; it is an insult to intelligence.

The people are not of one mind; they are of millions.

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

First published in Bolehland on December 17 2007.

Categories
Politics & government

[2017] Of PAS-UMNO unity must remain dead if PAS is to live

The proposal to form a so-called unity government between PAS and UMNO finally finds its rightful place — in a dustbin. Nothing guarantees any PAS member from rummaging through the trash to rejuvenate the idea however. If the dream still lingers, I am here to offer a dire possibility. If PAS-UMNO unity comes true, PAS may break up as internal and external forces pull the political party in different directions.

Why is it a possibility?

PAS-UMNO unity will significantly affect the status quo balance of power. It will grant BN a proper majority in Perak. Selangor will suffer from a hung assembly. Other notable changes include the weakening of the opposition in many states and the absence of one in Perlis.

In sum, PAS-UMNO unity will be a major setback for Pakatan Rakyat.

That scenario has one caveat: it assumes all PAS members will remain united if the party defects from Pakatan Rakyat to work with UMNO. Given the kind of rift caused by the PAS-UMNO unity talks, that is a big assumption.

It is not every day one can expect Nik Aziz Nik Mat as the leader of PAS to tell off one of his prominent party members — Nasharuddin Mat Isa — to quit the party and join UMNO after Nasharuddin spoke warmly of the possibility of PAS-UMNO unity.

Later, 10 PAS members of Parliament went out to support Nik Aziz and to oppose any pro-UMNO activity within PAS.

The action of the 10 MPs is particularly revealing. For the more liberal members of PAS, or the Erdogans as they have come to be known, they have every incentive to not associate themselves with a pro-UMNO PAS. Many of the Erdogans contested in areas where voters come from diverse backgrounds. These Erdogans understand that they won on March 8, 2009 because they appealed to inclusive politics. They campaigned by convincing voters that PAS is for all and not just for the Muslims or the Malays, i.e. exclusive politics.

To have PAS working in concert with UMNO — as Onn Yeoh writes in The Edge[0] — amounts to betrayal of these voters. The very notion of unity between PAS and UMNO is based on the idea of exclusive politics, running contrary to the kind of campaign the Erdogans ran in the last general election. By the next election if the Erdogans are still part of a pro-UMNO PAS, these voters will not vote for the Erdogans. Hence, the future holds very little prospect for the Erdogans.

These Erdogans can of course undergo a rebranding exercise to adjust to exclusive-based politics that a PAS-UMNO coalition is expected to play. Notwithstanding the very appropriate accusation of hypocrisy that may come, these Erdogans will face stiff competition from the real conservatives within PAS as all compete for smaller pool of seats any exclusivist politician can expect to win. Furthermore, it is unrealistic to expect UMNO to surrender their seats to PAS in order to accommodate the Erdogans-turned-conservatives.

If PAS-UMNO unity happens, the only way for the Erdogans to secure their future is for them to demonstrate their commitment to inclusive politics and, inevitably, Pakatan Rakyat. This may translate into having the Erdogans or more generally the pro-Pakatan Rakyat members of PAS to either eject pro-UMNO members out of PAS, leave PAS in favor of PKR or even form a new party that DAP and PKR can work together under the banner of Pakatan Rakyat. In any case, the result will leave PAS utterly broken.

Only through this can they hope to secure their political future. The existing seat distribution formula within Pakatan Rakyat can continue to be used to accommodate these Erdogans, as long as they remain loyal to the coalition even as PAS finds itself in cahoots with UMNO.

For DAP and PKR, the stake is simply too high that both parties cannot allow PAS to defect so easily. It will in the best interest of PKR and DAP to embolden the Erdogans to mount a revolt against any movement towards PAS-UMNO unity, possibly leading to a breakup as described earlier.

The breaking up of PAS will limit any gain made by UMNO. It may prevent Selangor — the jewel of the crown — from experiencing a hung assembly. If Pakatan Rakyat is lucky, the maneuver can even prevent BN from gaining the coveted two-third majority in Parliament.

For PKR especially, there is an extra motivation to break PAS apart in case PAS-UMNO unity becomes a reality. PKR may enjoy an influx of high-quality members from PAS, especially if the pro-Pakatan Rakyat members of PAS decide to leave the party and not form a new party. PKR may need high-caliber individuals to strengthen its ranks and the Erdogan MPs do just that, if ever the Erdogans have a reason to part from PAS.

But, at the end of the day, the most preferable solution for DAP and PKR is to have PAS as a committed member of Pakatan Rakyat. Both DAP and PKR will want work to keep PAS within the young three-party coalition to build on the existing momentum. As we have seen, this is exactly the path taken by DAP and PKR.

As long as the most preferred option works, there is no need to resort to the second most preferred option. This is something everybody who wishes to see a strong PAS must understand.

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 June 24 2009.

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

[0] — The much-hyped, but now abandoned, unity-government concept, first touted by PAS President Datuk Seri Hadi Awang in March, and welcomed by all and sundry within Umno is a betrayal.

From Pakatan Rakyat’s perspective, it is a betrayal of voters’ trust. Malays who voted for PAS did so because they preferred it over Umno. Non-Malays who voted for PAS didn’t do so because they wanted PAS but because they rejected Umno. In either case, PAS teaming up with Umno is the last thing these Malay and non-Malay voters want. [Unity govt a betrayal all around. Oon Yeoh. The Edge. June 22 2009]

Categories
Economics Politics & government

[2013] Of regretfully, fiscal deficit is a non-issue

The consistent fiscal deficit the federal government currently experiences is an issue far removed from everyday life. For many, it is an abstraction without concrete consequences. Hence, it is highly unlikely that the issue will be able to capture public attention and directly become a determinant in any election. This gives the federal government too much free hand in managing its fiscal position.

Despite the lag in effect, the persistent fiscal deficit presents real challenges to the economy and perhaps, more tangibly, to all taxpayers. It is so because the idea of scarcity is not something that is only valid within the theoretical world of economics.

It is because of scarcity that the concept of deficit exists. It is also because of scarcity that any deficit requires financing.

As far as the fiscal deficit of the Malaysian government is concerned, it is being financed through borrowings. The government issues debts in which market participants — be they individuals living within Malaysia or financial firms based abroad — purchase in return for greater payoff in the future.

So far, the federal government is fulfilling its existing debt obligations by issuing more debts. The situation on the ground at the moment allows that to happen but it does not take a leap in imagination to understand how a snowball may cause an avalanche. Argentina in 2001, for instance, defaulted from fulfilling its debt payments; it borrowed to finance its deficit for the longest time until its repayment requirement became too big for it to comply.

Malaysia still has a long way to go before that happens. Nevertheless, eventually, our deficit has to be attended. There are at least three ways to address the deficit: increase revenue, decrease government spending or default.

For any self-respecting government, defaulting is not much of a choice. The Argentine economy was in ruinous state after it defaulted on its payment; capital fled and dried up, bringing the economy to a screeching halt. Regardless of preference, the current local scenario that includes the maintenance of strong foreign reserves by Malaysia makes the likelihood of default very small.

Decreasing government spending is the policy path that libertarians favor because it necessarily reduces the size of government. Unfortunately, this will not occur anytime soon. Even during the Abdullah administration when the fiscal deficit finally saw relaxation, government spending continued to rise. Keynesian thinking meanwhile reigns supreme in the Najib administration; the government has expressed its intention to spend to stimulate the economy. The two factors set the momentum for the federal government’s fiscal position in the near future.

The third way is to increase revenue. This can happen by having enough growth in either non-tax revenue, tax revenue or both. With a healthy economy, those items can help in balancing the fiscal position. Without a sufficiently healthy economy, however, taxes simply have to increase to meet the gap eventually.

A tax increase is the clearest credible solution because it is increasingly clear that the fiscal deficit is structural in nature, and not cyclical. It is structural because it is arguable that we may have seen or are seeing the completion of a business cycle. In that cycle, the federal government has been running on a persistent fiscal deficit. Year 2009 will be the 12th consecutive year that the government has either failed or refused to close the gap and there is no reason to believe why year 2010 will not be registered in red ink.

A tax hike, however, is an unpopular policy, even when it is a potent tool in arresting the runaway fiscal deficit. Under the current political atmosphere where the Barisan Nasional-led federal government faces a considerable number of hostile voters, raising taxes is committing harakiri. The political situation demands spending.

In fact, the pressure is on Barisan Nasional to continue to spend in order to keep the economy going. More importantly, it has to keep voters happy by shoring up the economy in the short term to push its expiry date farther into the future.

Government spending is not necessarily bad or undesirable even in times of deficit. Yet, unless the government spends the money for the purpose of investment, spending for the sake of spending — as the two fiscal stimulus packages are doing — will further widen the difference between revenue and expenditure. For deficit hawks, the situation is gloomy because between investment and spending, the effect of the latter comes quicker than the former. Naturally, political expediency favors quick wins; quick wins mean the deficit will continue to take a hit.

Given the situation of a structural fiscal deficit, weak economic environment and political unpopularity, the only palatable short-term option is to continue to borrow to finance the deficit.

As a result, the present generation will be free from the burden of increased taxes and so too subsequent generations that are lucky enough to live during times when the economic situation allows the government to keep borrowing to finance its deficit. With the problem being out of sight and out of mind among the current generations, regretfully, there is no pressure to address the issue of fiscal deficit.

Somebody, however, eventually will have to pay those debts. By the time that happens, it is likely that the problem will become too big to handle.

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 June 15 2009.