Bersih 3.0: Police car crash victim speaks out

By Kow Gah Chie | May 2, 2012
Malaysiakini

Coming out to admit that he is one of the four Bersih 3.0 rally protesters a police car crashed into outside the Sogo shopping complex on Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman last Saturday, Su Kuang Hong said he was doing so to clear the air on the matter.

He was coming forward, Su said, because of the efforts by the police to paint the crowd as an angry mob of rioters and to refute the inspector-general of police (IGP) Ismail Omar’s statement that there was no one pinned underneath the police car after the crash.

“I was hit by a Proton Waja police car,” said Su, 25, who is warded at Hospital Kuala Lumpur.

He claimed he was hit at the back and the impact threw him on to the bonnet of the car, which continued to move and its sudden stop soon after sent him crashing against a wall in front of Sogo.

As a result, Su obtained at least five injuries – on his forehead, jaw, wrist and thigh.

Su works as a service engineer with a government-linked company and is the first victim of the crash to speak up.

In an interview with Malaysiakini yesterday, Su said he lodged two police reports earlier yesterday.

He said the police officer who attended to him said he was the third complainant to lodge a report on the incident.

“I lodged the report because I want to be a piece of the puzzle so that the truth can be uncovered, and I need a record to claim my medical expenses,” Su said.

Trapped in a coffee shop for an hour

Su said he had an expensive medical bill, totalling RM6,789, because he needed treatment at a private hospital as well, with experts to ascertain if he had suffered internal injuries.

Su comes from a big family and he said on the rally day, he and 21 of his relatives went to Kuala Lumpur for the rally. Some of his relatives even flew back from Sabah and as far as China to take part in Bersih 3.0.

He said this was the first time he was taking part in a public protest because he wanted to see clean and fair elections held in the country.

Su and his relatives arrived at the city centre in the morning, and it was all over for them by 3pm and they went to have a drink at a coffee shop at Wisma Bandar on Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman.

“Then came the attack, the coffee shop operator acted fast and closed the main door… and we saw from inside how the police arrested protesters,” he said.

“Tear gas filtered into the coffee shop. It was hot and we had to struggle to breathe… our faces and eyes were burning from the chemicals,” he said, adding that he spent one long and painful hour in the shop.

Su and his friends got back to the street to go home at around 4pm and he started looking for his other relatives who could not join them inside the coffee shop before the doors were closed.

“We went back to the Bandaraya LRT station, but it was closed, and we came under siege again, with the tear gas attacks coming from both sides,” he said.

Su said he was contacting his cousin with his mobile phone, while standing with the crowd in the middle of the closed road, when he saw a car driven towards them.

Saw the driver, but he seemed conscious

“I saw the police Proton Waja coming towards me (from the direction of Pertama Complex) and I ran towards Sogo to avoid being hit, but the car too headed the same way and I was hit,” Su said.

He was in great pain and felt dizzy after the crash, but was still conscious.

When he was taken into an ambulance van for treatment, he saw a police officer in uniform already inside and suspected he was the driver of the police car.

Some protesters, he said, opened the ambulance door and shouted angry words at the officer. A few blamed him, saying, “Itu sebab you… ada orang cedera (because of you, some people are injured).

“I was feeling physically hurt, but I felt no anger towards the police officer,” Su said.

Su noted the police officer moved agilely when asked by ambulance staff to move further into the vehicle, as the ambulance needed to fit in another wounded man on a stretcher.

The police officer who drove the Proton Waja that day, Mohamad Kamil Paimin, told the media that he had passed out, resulting in the crash, and be recovered consciousness only after receiving treatment at the hospital.

Su also showed two video clips that have been posted online after the incident with his laptop, and pointed to a man wearing a white shirt.

“That guy in white shirt, with both legs pointed to the sky, is me,” he said, pointing to the screen.

The video clip, titled “Kejadian sebenar Polis langgar 4 peserta BERSIH 3.0 depan SOGO (Real truth of police hitting 4 Bersih participants in front Sogo)”, is a one-minute clip showing the police car plunging into the crowd.

Another seven-minute clip titled “Insiden kereta polis langgar peserta Bersih (Incident of police car hitting Bersih participants)”, offers a more complete picture of the scene.

Police not entirely to be blamed

Su said the crash wasn’t entirely the police car driver’s fault for he had spotted something hit the man while he was driving.

He is also unhappy with the scene showing a few protesters attacking the police officer, saying it should have been a peaceful rally.

Asked about IGP Ismail’s denial that the police car hit protesters, Su said this was nothing unusual and from what he usually reads in news, the country’s leaders tend to distort the facts.

Su admitted he hesitated to lodge a police report and to speak up for fear losing his job. He only decided to do so on Monday.

“I am still under the six months’ probation… my company offers good welfare benefits, a five-day work week, 22 days of annual leave and insurance coverage,” he said.

“The company also partially subsidises interests on house and car loans taken by employees,” Su said.

Asked what would happen if the company sacked him, Su quipped, “Possibly I may have to look at joining politics.”

Altantuya murder: There was a "motive", but it can't be revealed or Putrajaya will crumble

By J.D Loverencriar 

The long awaited but only just concluded verdict by Shah Alam High Court Judge, Mohd Zaki Md Yasin on the Mongolian Altantuya case is not only causing a spasmodic arrest within the legal circuit in Malaysia but is also the very talk of the simpletons – Ahmad, Muthu and Ah Beng nationwide.

Legal students and practicing professionals are shocked at the Judge’s conclusion. Teaching lawyers will have nightmares in trying to make sense of the verdict that has completely negated “motive” from murders.

The learned Judge is reported to have said that “motive, although relevant, has never been the essential to constitute murder.”

Now even High School students are asking if motive is not essential then what is, in so far as a murder goes? Just the act of killing? Or just the person who carried out the actual killing?

Malaysia's legal standards under the spotlight

The Judge’s verdict also places Malaysia’s legal standards on the global legal table of scrutiny. It has far reaching ramification not only from the socio-political perspective of human rights but also from socio-economic as well as judicial dimensions.

Indeed we have with this concluding verdict demonstrated to the world in no uncertain terms that the way we interpret the law around here need not conform to what universally acceptable law books teach and how justice is dispensed in the democratic worldover.

In our own backyard, this verdict also delves a lethal blow to the government of the day. Voters will all the more connect one plus one and make three. The BN party will be the one that must now carry this yoke of suspicion transpiring from the conclusion of the judge.

Why would 2 special squad cops want to do such a thing without 'motivation'

Citizens are asking a simple yet profound and logical question: How could two trained, disciplined and uniformed members of the elite forces who are known and reputed to carry out their duties to the last letter of command have killed (murdered) a helpless, unarmed, defenseless and solitary woman?

People are asking, even the very murder was planned to completely annihilate all traces of evidence by blowing a fragile female lass with deadly military grade C4 explosives and yet “motive’ is not “essential”?

The Judge stated that ‘motive (is) relevant’. But he went on to disqualify the crucial importance of motive in this case.

And so the citizens are now asking why. Why is motive not essential in this grisly, brutal and heinous crime against humanity when all indicators bleep that motive was the cause of the murder? They are reasoning at kopitiam outlets in the big cities and the humble warongs in villages that how could two salaried, uniformed and specially tasked armed personnel carry out this murder of helpless lady with whom they had no relationship with nor knowledge of?

But there was a "motive"

People are saying that there was a motive for the act of killing to take place. And they want the law to establish that motive so that the person or persons who are party to the crime will be dealt with by the law adequately and with fair justice.

But alas, “motive” has just flown out of the window of Malaysia’s judiciary. The precedent has been set. The rakyat are drawing down their blinds. There is now a foregone conclusion in the minds and hearts of the citizens here – a verdict that will be almost insurmountable in the resurrection of Malaysia’s justice system and its reputation.

Some citizens are even going the distance to say that if this transpired in another civil and democratic nation, by now the entire legal fraternity would have downed their tools of trade and demanded right-thinking action. Will this happen in Malaysia? Only time can tell. But in the meantime the credibility of leaders and political parties and government systems have been dealt a lethal blow by this verdict on the Altantuya case.

Malaysia Chronicle

(http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=29613:when-%E2%80%9Cmotive%E2%80%9D-flew-out-of-the-window-of-justice-in-malaysia&Itemid=2)

We are driving towards somewhere nice (^^,)LOL~~

by Eunice Tan

"Malaysia adalah sebuah negara yang CUKUP indah, tetapi ada BANYAK masalah."

~Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah through "UNDILAH" video clip~

Though it may sound bitter, I have to agree with the statement at this stage. This essay is my attempt to summarise "Masalah Malaysia" + possible solutions to curb the masalah, based on the car analogy. It is hoped that in the end this essay may inspire us to become MORE aware of our role(s) and hence, focus on our role(s) to help the car to be driven towards somewhere nice? :)

Let's first see how "check and balance" system should work in Malaysia, which can be illustrated through the car analogy. 

(google image "check and balance" as reference to what I am talking about) 

Our country = car

The national policies = roadmap

legislative branch = those sitting at the 2 front seats of the car (ie BN and PR)

executive branch = wheels and engine 

judiciary branch = petrol

I hope we all are clear with the car analogy? 

Good. :)

Then let's move on to the identify "Masalah Malaysia" + possible solutions for each masalah.

Masalah #1:

Instead of making the existence of PR to strengthen the legislative branch, some people make it something to weaken the legislative branch. The one in the driver seat is supposed to focus on driving the car but instead, wasting so much time quarreling and belittling the one sitting next to him, falling asleep or doing anything which can distract himself from focusing. The one sitting next to the driver on the other hand just like to indulge in distracting the driver by whining, criticising and complaining so much about when is his turn to take over the driver seat. Has he forgotten that without a clear roadmap, it's very likely for him to drive the car towards a dead end if he were to be in the driver seat? Or perhaps both sitting at the front seats have forgotten that: the only reason they can sit at the front seats is because of the existence of every component of the car, AS WELL AS the passengers?

Solution:

BN and PR have to realise that regardless who is in the driver seat, they are BOTH sitting at the front seats of the car - they are the ones in the car who are in the best position to see the road ahead. The one in the driver seat should just focus on driving and improving his driving skill + roadmap from time to time. The one sitting next to the driver, should just focus on looking at the road ahead, study the roadmap and come out with a better one if he can. He has to realise that he will sure get his turn to be in the driver seat, when the passengers feel that the current driver is not doing his job properly, AND that they feel that the he has at least mastered the existing roadmap. 

Regardless of who's in the driver seat, can't these 2 work hand-in-hand if they really have the heart to bring the car to somewhere nice? (",)

Masalah #2:

The wheels and engine used are not being properly maintained, while the company supplying petrol to the car can't seem to keep up with their quality. Worse still, both the driver and the one sitting next to him are too "BUSY" to check on the engine, wheels and the petrol used. Also, the driver seems to prefer petrol, engine and wheels which are expensive but with doubtful quality. But we can't blame those who are in charge to maintain the petrol, engine and wheels, can we? When there're no better resources, when the workers working to maintain the quality of engine, wheels and petrol are not doing their job based on work ethics, how can we expect the car to have good petrol, engine and wheels? 

Solution: 

BOTH sitting at the front seats of the car should be more alert and diligent to check on the car's wheels, engine and petrol company from time to time. The passengers should feedback and suggest ways to improve the performance of the wheels, engine and petrol from time to time. To the ones who are in charge to maintain the quality of engine, wheels and petrol: Just be more diligent and do your job based on work ethics even if people have no time to check on you la ya? =)

Masalah #3:

The passengers in the car either pour too much emotions on the issues which can distract the driver, or don't care to alert those who are sitting at the front seats at all even if they notice something's wrong with the car (or is it because the driver refuses to listen because he thinks he knows best?). While some on the other hand, are just too vulnerable to notice what's happening because their presence have been ignored and taken for granted for too long......

Solution:

We need more passengers who are alert of threats and care about where the car is heading. If they wanna stay in the car, ideally they should just keep quiet - haha, applicable if and ONLY if the car is in good condition and is on the right track. If they think they wanna do something to empower both who are sitting at the front seats, make sure they do it without creating chaos in the car. While on the other hand, the driver has to be more open to feedbacks from the passengers and solve any problems promptly according to right priority.

The passengers of the car should be more accepting of one another. They should mutually respect one another regardless of their difference in race, religion, socioeconomic background, opinion and personality. Difference is something to be celebrated, not a factor to segregate! They should also be more aware of one another's well-being, help and support those who are in vulnerable and deprieved state, especially those who are still tinggal atas pokok/dalam gua.......

Sometimes, we will have a bunch of passengers who are just uncomfortable or feel wasted to be in the car. Instead of forcing them to stay in the car, why not they be given more freedom to get down from the car so that they can involve themselves in grassroots movements, NGO, charity bodies, which can act as the insurance, lubricant for the engine, any other maintenance work for the car. And if they want to, they can also involve themselves in building good roads, road lights and bridges for the car. Of course, they have to be reminded that the only reason they get off the car is to further help maintaining the performance of the car and protect the car from any external threats. 

Now here comes another problem:

Should we let too many passengers get off the car, especially when they are getting off to board onto another car(s)?

Before we label those who opt to migrate to other countries as "irresponsible and unpatriotic traitors", let's consider the following:

Would you prefer a Malaysian who is working

a) in a company located in a FOREIGN country which can help improve Malaysia's reputation/economy (especially a company which has links to Malaysia)

OR 

b) IN Malaysia but in fields which can jeopardise Malaysia's reputation/economy (eg spies to sell Malaysia military top secret to other countries)? 

We need passengers who can go out there and exchange ideas with passengers in other cars about ideas to improve our car, right?

We also need passengers who can go out there and promote the beauty of our car to passengers from other cars to form friendship and collaboration, right? =)

Yes! You and I have role(s) to play! It doesn't matter if we choose to be in part of the front seats, the engine, the wheel, the petrol, the lubricant, the road builder or just a passenger. The point is: we must work towards bringing the car to somewhere nice. 

http://www.peterpatau.com/2009_01_04_archive.html

Wait a minute!

Are we supposed to be that naive to think that there won't be other cars on the road which we are driving on?

Yeap, you are right. What we are facing is actually THIS:

http://www.autoevolution.com/news-image/how-to-avoid-city-traffic-jams-35319-2.html

So I hope all of us here are MORE aware of our role(s) by now?  =)

Together, let's help the car to be driven towards somewhere really nice. (^^,)LOL~~ 

Inspiration credits to:

1. Zee Kin's statuses

 - http://www.facebook.com/taizeekin/posts/10150663012725306- http://www.facebook.com/taizeekin/posts/10150684319710306?notif_t=feed_comment_reply 

2. Winds of change may blow hot air by Chandra Muzzafar @ http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2012%2F2%2F16%2Ffocus%2F10742741&sec=focus#.Tz2RPxpQnto.facebook

3. You know nothing, west Malaysians by Erna Mahyuni @

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/opinion/article/you-know-nothing-west-malaysians/

4. The Malaysian Man by Henry Yew @ http://www.ukeconline.com/CEKU/?p=781

5. Losing Sight of Our Vision 2020 by Yizhen Fung @ http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/opinion/article/losing-sight-of-our-vision-2020/ 

6. "UNDILAH" video clip @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1hllAhSXLA

7. "INTEGRITY: YOU KNOW IT BUT DO YOU HAVE IT?" by Tun Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Mohamad (Former Chief Justice of Malaysia) @ Madeline Berma's note:  http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=368907839804039

8. PEMANDU official website on GTP and ETP 

- http://www.pemandu.gov.my/

- http://www.pemandu.gov.my/gtp/perspectives/index.html

9. Model of Vicious Cycle Affecting Every Country in this world @ http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150574071733678&set=a.382563788677.164024.821563677&type=3&theater

10. It’s an election handout by Jian Wei Ang @http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/opinion/article/its-an-election-handout/

Last updated on 24/2, 8.30am Malaysian time => It's a public jam that we are facing.

Jessie Ooi: Vindictive or Victim?

Much has been made over the Selangor MCA Beliawanis Chief Jessie Ooi in light of her outburst against the Penang Chief Minister during the televised Chua-Lim Debate on Saturday last week. Although the debate is now history, her one-minute of fame has now given more her more notoriety than all of her previous public appearances put together.

She was not the only culprit for that evening, especially when MCA members began throwing highly charged and loaded questions against YAB Lim Guan Eng, who remained calm despite receiving tirade after tirade from the floor. However, Jessie Ooi received the spotlight not just by the aggressive nature of the question, but the content of it. The question remains as to whether it was a legitimate question out of genuine concern for the rakyat or was it completely senseless and she should have done better by keeping quiet?

"I am half a penangnite"

When one introduces oneself as half a penangnite, would one reasonably imply from that statement that she wanted to bring up an issue concerning Penang state? I do not want to go into how she is "half a penangnite", but Jessie Ooi in her own defence said that her question was misinterpreted by the public and the press. She wanted to question Lim Guan Eng as to why the Selangor State government had not reduced assessment rates (cukai pintu) when they have promised to do so. This is indeed a legitimate question, albeit posed to the wrong person and off-topic, but if it were in fact the crux of the question, why do you want bring up an irrelevant issue?

Furthermore, she would know that there are many other people who would want to ask questions and her time would most certainly be limited. If she wanted to give a ceramah and bring up all these issues, that would be perfectly fine in her own time. But to basically spend her time to ask about the MPPP towing cars after 10:30pm in Lebuh Pantai in Penang, can we reasonably expect to believe she intended to talk about assessment rates?

It is fine to be passionate about issues and it is fantastic that as a member of the Selangor state opposition, she should ask about the lack of follow-through in the policies of the state government. However, to go on a "shiok-sendiri" rant about an unrelated issue hardly does her justice. In all fairness, does that mean that Pakatan Rakyat representatives do not rant when they ask questions? Of course they do, and they do so often. However, if you want to prove to the people that you are more capable of governing, do not use the "they can do it, so why can't I?" excuse to justify raging and ranting on national television.

So let me rephrase and pose the question she failed to ask, to the Pakatan Rakyat State Government:

"The Selangor State Government has made a manifesto promise to lower assessment rates in the state in order to reduce the Rakyat's burden. However, despite these promises, the MCA is concerned with the lack of implementation of this promise. How does the Selangor State Government intend to address this issue?" 

Is this alright, Jessie?

Lack of Parking

Now let us come back to the question she did ask. Here is the transcript of her question below:

"CM Lim Guan Eng, I am half a penangnite. You just said that you want to reduce the people's burdens. Secondly, you have earned a lot of money. I want to say that you have been misleading the people. Cukai Pintu is going up and the cost of living is going up. Also at 10:30pm, I witnessed it twice. Despite there being no cars on the road, you have asked your enforcement officers to tow cars away, causing bloody fights. How do you intend to solve these kind of problems? Is this what you call reducing the people's burden?"

Yes, she had mentioned assessment rates. But why did she make an issue out of cars being towed in Penang? Of course every government wants to reduce the burden on the people, but the rule of law must be upheld. So what if it is 10:30pm at night? It is not uncommon in KL to receive summons for illegal parking at night! If it is Barisan Nasional policy to issues summons and tow cars only during the day, why not put it in their manifesto? Or is this Jessie Ooi's personal opinion? 

The MPPP has reacted by issuing a statement that they were merely carrying out their duties. When the question regarding the lack of parking was raised, this was somewhat puzzling as there are more than 1000 parking spaces in the Lebuh Pantai Area. As Jessie Ooi had already said, there were no cars around. So would it be reasonable to assume that there was ample parking available as well? 

Secondly, the brawl in question has been clarified by the MPPP to have been started by the individual, who assaulted the officer on duty. A police report has been filed and an investigation is under way. How can we equate a hot-headed individual's attack on an enforcement officer to the state government being unable to handle social ills? Incidents like these do happen, but we have laws in this country which deals with these kind of things. The government's responsibility is to ensure that the law is enforced. 

I would like to ask Ms Jessie Ooi, can she tell me how it would reduce social ills and the rakyat's burden if we allow social responsibility to be diminished? In other words, it is alright to sin, just do it after hours? Despite her moral high ground, the complete lack of respect for the rule of law is concerning and she came crashing down as a result of this. 

Deeper Problems

It would be unfair to blame Jessie Ooi's outburst solely on her. The MCA has been languishing in the doldrums and unfamiliarity of being an opposition party for the first time in history in the state of Selangor. Wanita MCA Beliawanis Chief Tee Hooi Ling has also jumped to Ooi's defence saying that netizens and bloggers have been overly obsessed about the "tow-truck" issue and should instead focus on the debate itself. 

This is a good point from Tee, but only if the MCA that day would follow their own advice. Despite the persistent, off-topic, personal attacks toward the DAP and the Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng did not level a single personal attack at his opponent or the floor. It is essential that Pakatan MPs do not get sucked into gutter politics which the Barisan Nasional government is so fond of. 

MCA Youth Secretary General Chai Kim Sen also attacked Lim Guan Eng by saying the latter side-stepped a lot of issues raised including the lack of a socio-economic plan to be implemented. He went on to say that Pakatan lacked ideas as to how to govern. I say to him, all evidence points to the contrary. 

The Pakatan run states of Penang and Selangor are the top two investment destinations in Malaysia despite having their federal allocations severely cut by the Federal Government. Local developers and businessmen can testify to the incredible changes under the Lim Guan Eng government in contrast to the Koh Tsu Koon government. Singaporeans are now flocking to Penang which is now cleaner and greener than before, and the international accolades continue to pour in. 

Naturally the Federal Government downplay the statistics by saying that Penang topped the foreign direct investment list due to the hard work of the Ministry in promoting the state. Well indeed, but in that case how about the increased allocations into Johor but still the under-par performance? Why then reduce the federal allocation to Pakatan states if you want to flourish? The Barisan Nasional government are good at giving excuses and taking credit for things they do not do, and are shamed when others can prove that they are incompetent. 

The Rule of Law 

A final point to ponder would be whether or not Malaysia has gotten to the point of moral bankruptcy that flouting the law is allowable as it is now ingrained in our culture? Coffee shop conversations can revolve around the amount of the bribe one has to prepare when stopped by a traffic cop: RM20 for a Kancil, RM30 for a Saga or Myvi, RM50 for a Vios and RM100 for a BMW. 

Tony Pua has already publicly declared that he is no longer interested in corruption scandals amounting to less than one billion ringgit as he is already so busy dealing with the billion ringgit scandals! No wonder people like Jessie Ooi believes that the law is there to be flouted, because it is not just that the Barisan Nasional government believes that it is alright to flout the law, but it has become an ingrained habit!

Take Kedai Rakyat 1Malaysia as an example. The oyster sauce was proven to have no oyster extract in it, the ice cream did not have enough milk fat to qualify as ice cream and the milk was ridden by E. Coli bacteria. This was all proven by the Ministry of Health to be true. 

So what action was taking against Mydin? None whatsoever. No fine, no trial, no investigation. Why? Because the Ministry felt that since Mydin decided to recall the product, and no harm was done, it is all ok. How can we accept this or stand by this? What happens if there was an outbreak of E. Coli and people suffer and die from it? Or we have a repeat of the China Melamine scandal in Malaysia? The Health Ministry and Liow Tiong Lai would sweep it under the carpet simply because Mydin is an Umno crony? 

Because of the millions of ringgit in contribution which Ali Ameer Mydin gives to Umno-BN, he gets free publicity, a RM40 million subsidy and ensures that the Umno politicians are in his pocket to prevent free market competition in the hypermarket industry. In short, we get screwed while he lines his pockets. Who's interests do they have at heart? Their own! 

When Jessie Ooi's boss Liow Tiong Lai is as impotent as any other MCA minister to uphold the rule of law, how can we possibly give our trust back to them? They are not even consistent or constructive with their criticism! 

My message to the MCA is to pull yourselves together, uphold the rule of law, develop a work ethic and get back to work in restoring the people's trust. As for Jessie, please get comfortable being the opposition as I fear you and your colleagues would soon be sitting on the other side of the fence come the general elections.

Published in the Malaysia Chronicle (23rd February 2012) and Free Malaysia Today (24th February 2012)
(http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=28601:jessie-ooi-victim-or-vindictive?&Itemid=2)
(http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2012/02/24/jessie-ooi-vindictive-or-a-just-victim/)

I am not Anti-Government

It has been a while since I have written a piece. Yes, there have been plenty issues of issues cropping up over the political landscape since Chinese New Year. There was the Sharizat leave of absence, Dr Chua Soi Lek saying that the Chinese owe their prosperity to BN, Ibrahim Ali handing out 'pak kam' as ang pows to elderly folk, 1Care and the epic debate between Dr Chua and Lim Guan Eng. Despite all of these juicy topics, I did not feel the inclination to write, and I'm sure that my fellow colleagues in the online media world have done a brilliant job.

However, I want to tackle an issue which has been bugging me since I began writing as a columnist, and also campaigning actively for the Opposition, and in particular, the DAP. I have been frequently asked why many young people and myself are so anti-government, and so intent in causing trouble and instability. I believe that is a fair question which deserves a fair explanation.

"Evangelis DAP" 

I make no secrets of my political affiliation. I am proudly and unashamedly an active member of the DAP and I believe in what the party does and in their plans for our nation, where every citizen is treated fairly regardless of race, language or creed. Does this mean by any stretch of the imagination that I believe the DAP is perfect? Certainly not. No political party can claim to be free from corruption, cronyism or favouritism. However, the concern would be the severity of these political vices and whether it would severely impact the ability to govern a nation effectively.

When I wrote on the DAP National Convention, I was roundly criticized by Helen Ang who accused me of being an "Evangelis DAP" (Evangelist for the DAP) and also condemned me for my faith. She wrote that people like me spew out an extremely one-sided and unbalanced view and that our country would descend into Nazism and Communist dictatorship if left unchecked.

Despite finding her article to be generally offensive, I could not help but laugh at the irony of her comments. I did not respond initially as I did not believe that I should dignify her comments with a response. But I would like to make a point that the reason why I think and write this way is because I have intimately seen both sides of the coin and formed my own conclusion.

Justified bias?

Was I biased when I wrote my article on the DAP National Convention? Of course I was. Was it one-sided? Most definitely. Why did I do this? The reason is simple. Politics is perception. Journalists are supposed to frame up the truth in a manner which is supposed to be even-handed and impartial. The fact of the matter is that we are human. We would tend to favour one side over another. Is this correct? In an ideal world, perhaps not, but we do not live in an ideal world.

In the world of the free press, differing opinions of political events offer the reader a variety of view points and allows the individual to make up their own mind on the matter. In the United Kingdom, The Guardian is a well known conservative paper, The Times is more politically in the centre and The Daily Mail is unabashedly right-wing.

How does this compare to our situation here in Malaysia? The Star is the mouthpiece of the MCA, and the New Straits Times is so blatantly pro-UMNO it has to be given away to schools and hospitals for free! Then there is the blatantly divisive Utusan Malaysia and the Metro Harian carries their opinions derived from Bernama. The only semblance of favourable reporting towards the Opposition parties come from the Chinese press including the China Press and Sin Chew. But even then, the political leaning would always be more towards BN.

So how about The Rocket, Harakah Daily, Suara Keadilan, Malaysia Today, Malaysiakini, Free Malaysia Today, The Malaysian Insider and Malaysia Chronicle? As party newspapers and online news portals, do they even attempt to offer a balanced point of view? Or is our desire for free media driven to the extent that it would appear that we have to write articles to the other extreme? Is this necessarily in order for opposing viewpoints to meet in the middle in the mind of the reader?

Anti-government rhetoric?

The fact of the matter is that in the arena of press and broadcast media, it is simply not fair. The Opposition's only saving grace is the Internet for the dissemination of information. Despite all of this, and despite the argument for a fair media, is the Opposition and pro-Opposition journalists like myself guilty of disseminating misinformation? To a certain extent, yes we are all guilty of this.

Does this make us anti-government at all? No it does not. Until today, as the UMNO-BN government has been in power coming to 55 years, Malaysians are unable to distinguish between the Barisan Nasional party and the government. We cannot really be blamed for saying things like "The Opposition control Penang, Kelantan, Kedah and Selangor." As a matter of fact, this statement is fundamentally wrong. When the Opposition becomes a state-government, they are no longer the opposition, but the ruling coalition.

This idea is incredibly difficult to grasp, as Malaysia, like Singapore, is an example of an extremely successful pseudo-democratic system. The reason behind this is that no other party or coalition has ever governed these countries in their short histories. Furthermore, UMNO-BN holds the Guinness World Record for being the longest serving party or coalition in any country which calls itself a democracy. This is not necessarily a bad thing in itself, but it throws up serious questions of accountability.

My Government, My Country

I sincerely believe that not a single citizen of this beautiful country wants anything but the best for our country. When we have a government that does the right thing, and operates efficiency and professionally for the betterment of our lives, why would we not have any reason to support this? At the end of the day, it is the goal, not the political party, which is the ultimate concern of the Rakyat.

Though there are indeed anarchists, hardcore Perkasa supports and die-hard DAP supporters, the vast majority of the country wants a government which puts our collective interests first, before the interests of any individual groups, lobbies or parties.

What we want is a sincere, accountable and transparent government that implements policies without favour which would stimulate a more competitive, market-driven economic environment, eradicate poverty and ensure sustainable and practical social advancement. Barisan Nasional was incredibly successful in doing all these things for many years, but with mounting financial scandals, unchecked spending, a ballooning subsidy bill, mounting government debt, immeasurable capital outflow and excruciating inflation, I would now call their governing ability into question.

Can the Opposition govern? They have been incredibly successful in Penang, moderately successful in Selangor and consistent in Kedah and Kelantan. Does this mean that they can take the reins of power at the Federal Government? No, it is not an automatic entitlement. Running a country is dramatically different from running a state.

Many members of the public are driven to political apathy by the sheer volume of politicking and finger pointing both sides engage in. Pakatan Rakyat, need to take the manifesto promises and resolutions they have made and actively put it into action now. Wakil Rakyat have to eat, drink and sleep around the interests of the Rakyat. With all the anti-Opposition propaganda being expounded, the final resort is roll up their sleeps and tie up their sarongs and get to work with the personal touch.

Would I vote for Barisan Nasional if they truly had the people's interests at heart? Absolutely 100%. I am not anti-government, nor shall I ever be anti-government. But I do think it's time for a change, don't you?


Published in The Malaysian Chronicle (20th February 2012)
(http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=28403:i-am-not-anti-government&Itemid=2)
Free Malaysia Today (3rd March 2012) 
(http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2012/03/05/i-am-not-anti-government/)
Malaysiakini (23rd February 2012)
(http://malaysiakini.com/letters/190040)
Malaysia Today (5th March 2012)
(http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/47812-i-am-not-anti-government)