*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
{ Sila lawat Laman Hizbi-Net - http://www.hizbi.net }
{ Hantarkan mesej anda ke: [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
{ Iklan barangan? Hantarkan ke [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
PAS : KE ARAH PEMERINTAHAN ISLAM YANG ADIL
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CHANGING FACES OF POLITICS AND REPRESSION IN MALAYSIA
Dr Syed Husin Ali
(This paper formed the basis of addresses to students and academics in
Cambridge, London (LSE & SOAS), Manchester, Oxford and Warwick
Universities, during Syed Husin’s seven day “lecture tour” in the first
two weeks of May 2000. It traces the cause and effects of the sacking of
Anwar Ibrahim, former DPM of Malaysia and Deputy President of UMNO. It
shows how the main democratic institutions such as the judiciary, media
and police have been undermined. It also traces how the government
coalition (BN) was returned to power, with more than two-thirds
parliamentary majority, by using methods that were neither fair nor
clean. But despite its major victory, the BN has grown more repressive.
In fact the face of repression has changed recently. The writer offers
some reasons why.)
Causes of Mahathir-Anwar Conflict
It may be asserted that the economic crises which began from Thailand in
July 1997 and quickly spread to many countries in Asia, is a major
factor in changing the face of Malaysian politics. Prime Minister Dr
Mahathir Mohamad blamed foreign financial speculators as the primary
cause of this crisis. In order to get maximum political support from the
majority Malay/Muslim population within the country, he directed his
blame on one George Soros, pointing out that he is not only an American
but also of Jewish origin. While Mahathir put his blame mainly on
external factors, on the other hand, Anwar Ibrahim, his Deputy Prime
Minister, was subtly pointing out that the main cause was actually
internal, namely the deteriorating situation of corruption, cronyism and
nepotism within the country, and especially at top leadership level.
This undermined competitive capitalism. Perhaps the combination both
internal and external factors was responsible. A country weakened by a
long accumulating process of corruption, cronyism and nepotism can
easily be attacked by a virus from outside which takes the form of
financial speculation. Of course there can be other explanations or
analyses that can be offered as the cause of the crisis, such as the
effect of overproduction and so forth. But they appeared to be
irrelevant to the context of the Mahathir-Anwar conflict. Undoubtedly it
was Mahathir’s and Anwar’s opposing assertions that finally influenced
the political development that took place subsequently.
Anwar’s quite indirect attack and blame on Mahathir, at the beginning,
generated the PM’s suspicion that Anwar was mounting an attempt to oust
him. Mahathir seemed to have concluded that his suspicion was confirmed
when Anwar’s accusations were repeated especially by Zahid Hamidi, the
UMNO Youth leader considered to be Anwar’s protégé, during his opening
speech at the youth meeting, a day before the UMNO General Assembly in
June 1998. It so happened that in Indonesia, the reform movement
(reformasi) was beginning to heap allegations on President Suharto for
perpetrating corruption, cronyism and collusion in Indonesia. Although
Mahathir had always been a close ally of Suharto, yet he abhorred being
likened to him. Furthermore, under Suharto Indonesia had decided to
accept the IMF prescriptions and conditional loans for solving the
problems of her financial crisis. On the other hand, Mahathir was
vehemently against the IMF. Consistent with his claim to patriotism, he
rejected the IMF, which he branded and accused, quite correctly too, as
a tool of US neo-imperialism.
On September 2nd 1998, Mahathir removed Anwar as his deputy. The next
day he was sacked as Deputy President and member of UMNO. The impression
given for Anwar’s removal from office was that he was pro-IMF and in
favour of IMF prescriptions for overcoming the financial difficulties of
Malaysia then. Not long before this, the Governor of Bank Negara
(Central Bank), who was considered to be Anwar’s handpicked protégé, was
forced into retirement. After that a National Economic Action Committee
(NEAC) was formed with Daim Zainuddin as it CEO. This move was seen as
an attempt to undermine Anwar’s position. Daim, very close to Mahathir
but considered a rival of Anwar, had been an ex-Finance Minister before
and he was reappointed to the same position after Anwar was removed.
Just a day before Anwar’s removal, the government announced its own
recipe, without the help of IMF, for economic recovery. It included,
among other things, capital controls, pegging RM3.8 to an American
dollar and reducing the interest rate that had been raised earlier by
Anwar. The decrease in interest and the stabilising of the ringgit
through pegging, were welcome moves especially among businessmen, mainly
Chinese.
On the other hand, other reasons, that had nothing to do with finance or
economics, were given for the decision of the UMNO Supreme Council that
met on the same day, to sack Anwar. On the night he ceased to be DPM and
the following day, before he was sacked from UMNO, the media went to
town with the allegations that Anwar was involved in all types of sexual
misdemeanour. This included sodomy and sexual affairs with several women
that included the wife of his private secretary. It is interesting note
that not long before Anwar was removed, two chief editors of mainstream
Malay newspapers together with the head of programme for a private
telivision channel, were forced into early retirement. All three were
considered close to Anwar.
The allegations against Anwar were based on an affidavit produced by the
police against Nalakaruppan, a tennis partner of Anwar, who had been
earlier arrested for alleged possession of 150 live bullets, which could
carry a mandatory death sentence. Nalakaruppan was accused, by
insinuation and without any proof, that he was actually a procurer of
women for Anwar. This affidavit, which was prepared by the police, was
already available to the media, even before it was submitted to court.
Despite the fact that it was made public even before the trial, the
Attorney General did not make any effort to find out those responsible
or to bring them to book. The scandal that created headline in all the
media was used as a reason for the sacking Anwar. Mahathir emphasised
later that he would not have a sexually misbehaving person to be his
successor.
The Root Cause: Question of Succession
The two allegations raised against Anwar, relating to his views on plans
for economic recovery and his allegedly scandalous sexual pursuits did
not appear to be real reason behind his removal and sacking. These
appeared to be mere excuses. The economic reason would not go down well
among the people, because they would not be able to make sense out of
them. On the other hand, sexual misbehavior has been found to be quite
common among some government leaders, but they were not punished for
their amorous activities. But to be practising sodomy in addition to
having affairs with another person’s wife, especially by one who has
always been regarded as religious, would be most scandalous. Sodomy
particularly, is something looked down most despicably in Islam and
Malay culture. So, it was certainly the best allegation to make to
completely destroy Anwar politically. But, as it turned out to be, this
did not succeed. Instead most Malays did not believe these allegations
and tended to take pity on Anwar as a victim of lies (fitnah).
Perhaps, the real reason behind Mahathir’s swift and crushing action on
Anwar was the question of succession. Nearly ten years before, Mahathir
underwent a heart bye-pass surgery and there were rumours that he was
then not in the best of health. Some people around Mahathir and close to
him as his children and cronies, were very worried about who would
succeed in case anything suddenly happened to him. They had become very
wealthy because of their closeness to the Prime Minister and also thanks
to the government policy to help create big Malay capitalists. The most
powerful of them is Daim, because of his control over wealth and of
these capitalists, who had grown almost under his wings. This small
group of wealthy cronies was concerned if Anwar became successor, for
two reasons. Firstly, Anwar himself had around him a coterie of
ambitious young people who wanted to take the place of Mahathir’s
cronies. Naturally they were considered to be a threat by Daim and
company. Secondly, they were afraid that Anwar was capable of taking
action against them, for corruption or mismanagement, if not for other
more noble reason, at least to weaken them to make way for those
regarded as Anwar’s own cronies. To save their own position they had to
act fast. One way was to remove Anwar from power. This was what
subsequently happened.
The People’s Reactions
Anwar expected to be arrested, but this did not happen so soon. It gave
him the opportunity to protest and make his stand known. Every night he
addressed big crowds that gathered outside his house. Then he ventured
out to give speeches to huge gatherings all over the country. The police
and certainly Mahathir were growing more restless. On 20th September,
there was an immensely big rally; some estimated it to be 100,000 strong
that were addressed by Anwar. Later there was allegation by the
authorities that there was an attempt to burn down the PM’s residence,
which of course was not true. On the same night, troops in balaclava
suits broke into Anwar’s home and arrested him. Originally he was
arrested under section 377 of the Criminal Act in relation to his
alleged sexual acts. But a day later it was announced that he was
detained under the ISA. He was produced in court the following week with
black right eye. He claimed to have been beaten up by the police. As
subsequent investigations proved, the man responsible for it was none
other than the Inspector General of Police. He beat up Anwar almost
fatally on the night he was arrested, blindfolded and with his hands
tied to the back. Being arrested under a criminal act, it was necessary
to produce him in court within 24 hours for remand. But because he was
badly battered, this had to be postponed. Thus he had to be detained
under the ISA, which allows for detention without trial. But there was
public clamour for Anwar to be produced in court. But Mahathir said
Anwar could not be produced because the demonstrations would interfere
with the trial.
There was uproar and anger when Anwar was detained under the ISA. They
increased when a number of his followers were also roped in under the
same draconian law. There were two immediate reactions to these arrests.
Firstly, GAGASAN (Coalition of People’s Democracy), which was first
mooted by PRM and formed in November 1997, decided to hold its official
inaugural meeting on 27th September 1998. It comprised all opposition
parties and a number of NGOs, who met initially to discuss and
coordinate joint political actions in response to the economic crisis.
The meeting was scheduled to be held in Federal Hotel, but the police
forced the hotel not to allow the use of its hall. Anyhow, a press
conference was held to inaugurate it. GAGASAN committed itself to the
struggle for democracy as its main platform. Secondly, PAS called a
meeting on 22nd September of all opposition parties and some NGOs to
make a common stand on the ISA and the arrests. It was decided to form
GERAK (Movement for People’s Justice Council), dedicated to fight for
justice for all those detained under the ISA. Five days later, a huge
rally was held in the night, at the PAS headquarters in the outskirts of
Kuala Lumpur, as the first of a series of such protest rallies held all
over the country.
With all the local and foreign pressures brought to bear, the government
finally decided to produce Anwar in court on 29th September. To enable
this to happen, his detention under the ISA had to be revoked. When he
appeared in court with his famous black eye to be charged under the same
criminal law, public anger increased. But Anwar was not allowed to be
set free on bail. To add fire to fury, in response to a statement by
Anwar’s wife, the IGP was reported in the media a few days after beating
up Anwar, that he was “safe and sound”. Ironically, Mahathir claimed
that Anwar’s injury could have been self-inflicted. He repeated this
claim several times inside and outside the country. Anger gave vent to
street demonstrations that were held almost daily by the reformasi
people, to clamour for the release of all detainees and for Mahathir to
step down. The police often dispersed these demonstrations, which were
essentially peaceful assemblies, by using canes, water canons and brutal
force. Large number of demonstrators were arrested and remanded. There
were many stories of the police beating up some detainees while in
prison. This further eroded public confidence in the police force as
well as the Prime Minister.
Fight for Justice and Democracy
There was also disenchantment with the major governing party UMNO.
Thousands of people, many of them UMNO members who had abandoned the
party, joined opposition parties, especially PAS. Meanwhile, ADIL was
formed as an NGO, under the leadership of Anwar’s wife Dr Wan Azizah,
mainly to provide an organisational platform for the reformasi movement,
and perhaps also to check the flow into PAS. Soon ADIL was expanded and
transformed into a political party. It was launched in a very spirited
and enthusiastic way, with thousands of people attending, in Renaissance
Hotel on 4th April 1999. The new party, known as the National Justice
Party (or keADILan) was formed with Wan Azizah as President. Ten days
later, after a trial lasting about seven months, Anwar was sentenced to
six years imprisonment. He was actually tried for corruption i.e. using
his power to influence the police to act in his favour, and not for his
alleged sexual activities. The time he had to spend in jail during the
trial was not taken into account. Although Anwar appealed, yet he was
still denied bail and immediately imprisoned.
Soon there were rumours that PM Mahathir was going to call a snap
election. Unlike in some other countries, in Malaysia, there is no long
notice given for the general elections. The PM always keeps the date
close to his chest, and when he finds the most opportune time, he
springs a surprise. From past experiences, elections are held in less
than three weeks after the PM announces the dissolution of Parliament.
Usually, only nine days are allowed for campaigning, that is, between
nomination and Election Day. In expectation of early elections the four
opposition parties, namely, keADILan (Justice Party), PAS (Islamic
Party), PRM (People’s Party) and the DAP (Democratic Action Party) met
to discuss the possibility of forming an opposition front. On 24th
April, a meeting was held, chaired by keADILan’s Wan Azizah, to form a
Council for the four parties. This council was made up of two senior
leaders representing each party, the President and Secretary General or
Deputy President.
There was not much difficulty in cobbling together this opposition
coalition. They had already been working together earlier in GAGASAN and
GERAK. It is interesting to note that the opposition coalition, which
was later named Barisan Alternatif (Alternative Front or BA) was truly
multi-ethnic in membership. This was the first time that PAS and DAP
agreed to come under a common umbrella, together with the other parties.
In an earlier exercise, for the 1990 elections, two coalitions were
formed, one, including PAS but excluding DAP, and the other, vice-versa.
Both were led by PMS46 (Spirit of 46 Malay Party), which was formed by a
group that had earlier left UMNO. The PMS46 provided the link between
the two coalitions. At that time PAS and DAP did not dare come out in
the open as cooperating. PAS, being an Islamic party, feared that it
would lose Malay/Muslim votes. As for DAP, because of their
concentration on the Chinese and their issues, they feared that they
would lose Chinese votes if they were seen as openly cooperating with
PAS. The UMNO leadership and propaganda machinery would always play one
against the other, telling the Malay/Muslim that PAS had sold to the
DAP, and at the same time, telling the Chinese that DAP had sold out to
PAS.
Birth of Multi-Ethnic Opposition
The BA could be considered as being the first truly multi-ethnic
coalition. The keADILan, PRM and DAP open their membership to all ethnic
groups, although the majority members of DAP are Chinese, while in the
case of the first two, the majority membership is made up of Malays. As
for PAS, although it is a Muslim party open only to Muslims, yet it is
also multi-ethnic, to a certain extent, because Muslims from various
ethnic groups can qualify to be its members so long as they are Muslims.
This is quite different from the Barisan Nasional (National Front or
BN). The BN as a whole could be considered to be a multi-ethnic concept
because it included 13 parties belonging to various ethnic groups. But
on the other hand, except for one or two parties, each of the component
party in the BN is made up exclusively of only one ethnic group. For
example, taking the three biggest and most influential parties in the
BN, which are based, in Peninsular Malaysia, UMNO (Malay Nationalist
Organisation), MCA (Malaysian Chinese Association) and MIC (Malaysian
Indian Congress) are exclusively for Malays, Chinese and Indians
respectively. Even in Sabah and Sarawak, most of the political parties
are open exclusively to only one ethnic group. Anyhow, taking BN and BA
as a whole, we have a situation where both coalitions are multi-ethnic.
Theoretically this could encourage multi-ethnic politics in a
multi-ethnic society like Malaysia. But does this actually happen in
real politics?
Although the population composition of Malaysia is still multi-ethnic
yet there has been greater tendency for closer cooperation and
integration among the various groups in recent years. The process of
social transformation forged this tendency in all strata of society. At
the upper class level, for example among the political and economic
elite, there have emerged various type of political alliances and
economic joint ventures that cut across ethnic lines and strengthened
the bond of unity. At the same time, different social processes, such
as urbanisation, industrialisation and modern administration, have
promoted the growth of a bigger though not necessarily a stronger
working class. Members of this class, from various ethnic groups, work
together in same factories or industries and share common interests,
which have the effect of reducing ethnic differences and possible
conflicts. Furthermore, urbanisation and communication have reduced the
gap between the majority Malays in rural areas and the majority Chinese
in urban centres. As for the expanding middle classes, their members
come from different ethnic groups, who share more similarities in their
life style than differences. It can be said that compared to the
situation in the past, the Malaysian multi-ethnic society is now closer
and more united. Factors like shared or common political, economic and
educational systems, among others, have helped to bring this about.
A united Malaysian nation is slowly in the making. It follows that
multi-ethnic and not mono-ethnic party is going to be the trend of the
future. By being multi-ethnic in nature, the BA political component
parties are a more true reflection of the future than mono-ethnic
parties in the BN. Justice and democracy in all spheres of life are
considered to be important ideals to form the bases or preconditions for
establishing national unity in a multi-ethnic society. Therefore, the BA
parties commit themselves to these ideals. It is these ideals that
managed to pull the various parties together, despite their different
historical and ideological backgrounds. To concretise these ideals, the
BA set about a series of discussions that resulted in the formulation of
a manifesto, “Towards a Just Malaysia”. This manifesto spells out
changes or reforms required in various fields in order to achieve
greater justice for the people. The manifesto, together with several
joint statements issued by the BA leaders on various issues, and an
Alternative Budget that was presented a few days before the Government
Budget was tabled in Parliament, clarified the common positions taken by
the various parties on different issues affecting the people. Further,
they helped to strengthen the bond of unity among the component parties.
This also helped the BA to reach agreement more easily on the allocation
of seats, to ensure that there would be straight fight between the BN
and BA in the elections.
Unfair and Dirty Elections
The date for the general elections was finally fixed at 29th November
1999, just over two weeks after the dissolution of Parliament. Mahathir
himself billed it as going to be the “dirtiest election”. Right from the
start it was an unfair game on an uneven field that favoured the ruling
BN. This is testified by the following:
a) The campaigning period was short, confined to only nine days.
Although the BA parties were able to hold rallies and distribute
newspapers and pamphlets, these were very limited when compared to the
extensive use by the BN of all electronic and printed media for their
propaganda throughout the year.
b) During the nine days campaign period, the BN could make full use of
all the mainstream media; most of which they have control or influence
over. On the other hand, the BA was totally denied any access to the
electronics media. For instance, they were not given even one second to
air their views on television. As for the printed media, they were fully
used for distortion and disinformation on the BA
c) The BN was using all instruments and machinery of government to their
full advantage, although it was blatantly against the law. But they dare
defy the law because they know they have control over the Court,
especially after the government sacked the Lord President and two senior
judges a few years ago, for upholding the independence of the judiciary.
d) About 685,000 young voters, who registered nine months earlier were
denied the right to vote, apparently because, despite modern technology,
the Election Commission did not have enough time to include them in the
new voting register. The real reason was that a large number of them
were believed to be against the BN and for the BA.
e) There were more than 300,000 postal voters, consisting mainly of
soldiers, policemen and their wives, who have always been exercising
their voting rights without representatives of the different parties
being allowed to observe. Although there have been constant complaints
by the opposition parties of postal votes being misused in favour of the
ruling parties, yet there has been no attempt by the Election Commission
to reform the system.
f) The register of voters was not properly cleaned before the elections.
A great number of phantom voters, names of dead people and questionable
identity card numbers were found in the register all over the country.
There was possibility of cheating.
g) The BN had almost unlimited financial resources which they could use
for money politics. They were known to give cash, food and other
materials to voters. At the same time, even during the campaign period,
the BN, which was a caretaker government, continued to pour financial
allocations for selected projects, especially in rural communities.
This was undoubtedly a form of state bribery.
With the exception of (d) all these are merely repetition of well-known
practices in the past general elections. But more dangerous than these
was the BN government propaganda to create fear among the people,
particularly the Chinese voters. Even long before the elections,
Mahathir appeared to have realised that the BN had already lost a great
deal of Malay support. As mentioned earlier, the cruel treatment of
Anwar created a great deal of sympathy for him among a large number of
Malays. Mahathir’s strategy then was to gain more support from Chinese
and Indian voters. At the beginning’ the propaganda was aimed at showing
that the reformasi movement in Indonesia had led to instability that
affected badly the economy. It was also claimed that it had resulted in
the persecution and mass killing of Chinese there. They predicted that
if reformasi won, then there would be ethnic killing and political
chaos. It was implied that the reformasi forces in Malaysia too could
cause chaos and killings. But it so happened that after Suharto fell
and a democratic election was held, which brought Gus Dur to power as
the new president, the prophets of doom were proven wrong. It was
exposed that those who were causing the instability and killing were in
fact associated with the army. So, it was no more relevant to look for
negative examples from Indonesia.
Thereafter, the BN leaders turned to particularly two types of threat.
One, there was possibility that if the opposition won, similar communal
carnage that occurred on 13th May 1969 could be repeated. Two, that PAS
would try to establish an Islamic state, and following that many of the
things that the Chinese are free to practice now, like building and
going to temple, celebrating festival, eating pork and so forth will be
forbidden. During the campaign period, this propaganda was intensified,
although the BN realised that PAS would never be able to get enough
votes to come to power. For several days repeatedly, the mainstream
daily newspapers carried advertisements to depict all these. The dictum
that if a lie is repeated often enough it will finally be accepted as
truth was slowly proving to be true among the non-Malays, especially
those influenced by the government controlled media. At the same time,
the business community, made up largely of Chinese, were reluctant to
change and, as in the past, showed preference for the incumbent rather
than the challenger. Furthermore, signs of economic recovery were slowly
emerging, and they were more convinced that Mahathir was the only person
who could steer the country out of the present economic crisis.
Post-Election Repression
The elections returned BN to power with more than two-thirds
parliamentary majority, although they won only about 56 percent of the
votes cast. The UMNO was the biggest loser in the election. Its share of
the parliamentary seats decreased from 88 to 72, losing mainly to PAS
and keADILan. PAS recaptured Kelantan and gained control over
Terengganu. All constituencies having more than 90 percent Malay
majority voters returned PAS candidates. A number of UMNO ministers and
deputy ministers lost their seats. For a long time the UMNO leaders have
always held that UMNO equals Malay and Malay equals UMNO. This was the
formula they used to attract and retain Malay support. But the latest
general election results destroyed this myth. PAS made inroads into the
Malay heartland, while keADILan, though formed about seven months
earlier, managed to hold its own, although it won only five seats. As
expected, the BN succeeded to attract more Chinese and Indian votes than
the BA. This helped the MIC to win all the seats it stood for, and the
MCA almost all. It also helped the BN to win in Chinese majority mixed
constituencies. In East Malaysia (Sabah and Sarawak), the local
component parties also helped the BN, by wining big majority of the
parliamentary seats.
Many observers were expecting that after having done so well in the
elections, Mahathir and the government he leads would try to be more
liberal and widen the democratic space in the country. This was not to
be. Mahathir never hides his anger against the opposition. Almost
immediately after the elections, he launched several attacks against
them by taking several suppressive actions, as the following:
a) The BN government continued to manipulate the media in order to
discredit the opposition parties, especially PAS. It accused that PAS
was determined to pursue its Islamic state objective, when the media
reported that some PAS leaders said that the Terengganu government was
going to implement Kharaj (land tax). In actual fact, there was no
decision to implement it, but there were only preliminary discussions.
PAS managed to countervail the attempt to create suspicion and fear
among the Chinese towards it by announcing that slaughter and rearing of
pigs will be allowed in Kelantan and Terengganu. Then, in order to get
women support (especially the more modern among them), UMNO leaders
through their controlled media raised controversy over the use of tudung
(head cover), which certain PAS leaders in Kelantan and Terengganu had
advised Muslim women to wear.
b) The BN government began to control opposition newspapers and also
other publications that were considered to be critical of UMNO/BN. The
Home Ministry renewed the permit to publish Harakah, the PAS organ, only
at the last hour and ordered that it should be published only twice a
month instead of twice weekly, as in the past. The circulation of
Harakah had increased from 50,000 to about 300,000 following Anwar’s
sacking. It played a big role to help especially PAS to win the
elections. At the same time, the permit for three monthly, Detik,
Wasilah and Tamaddun, known to be quite supportive of reformasi and
critical of UMNO/BN (especially the leadership) was not renewed.
Recently the permit for Eksklusif, which had tried very hard to steer
neutral, has also been suspended. It looks as if there is no room even
for a neutral newspaper. PRM submitted an application to renew its
permit for Suara eight months ago, and still there is no reply, while
keADILan too is waiting for a response to its application to publish
Keadilan. Under the Printing Press and Publications Act, a permit must
be obtained from the Home Ministry first for any periodical, and this
permit has to be renewed annually and can be withdrawn or terminated at
any time.
c) In February 2000 the Deputy President of DAP (Karpal Singh),
Vice-President of keADILan (Marina Yusof), Youth Chief of keADILan (Ezam
Noor), Editor of Harakah (Zulkifli Sulong) and its printer (Chea Lim
Thye) were arrested to be charged in Court. Karpal was charged for
allegedly making some seditious remarks in the High Court, in the course
of defending Anwar during his trial. Marina was charged for a speech
that she made on the 13th May Incident (relating to racial conflict)
during one of her election campaign speeches. As for Zulkifly, he was
charged for publishing an allegedly seditious statement in Harakah and
Chea for printing it. All of them are charged under the Sedition Act. As
regards Ezam, he faces charges under the Official Secrets Act, in
connection with police reports he had made on corruption committed by
certain ministers.
d) Public rallies are no more allowed now. According to the law, permit
must be applied from the police 14 days before any public meeting can be
held. When the BA leaders met the IGP last year, he assured them that
there would be no difficulty in issuing permit, so long as conditions
are complied with. But in April this year, the head of police in Kuala
Lumpur announced that all public rallies or meetings would not be
allowed. As a result, several rallies already planned had to be
cancelled. Some leaders of keADILan, which had proceeded with a number
of rallies in connection with its first year anniversary celebration,
despite being warned by the police, have been called to the police
headquarters to record statements. There is every possibility that they
may be charged later. Now, the ban on public rallies has spread to
Selangor too. Apparently it is also in effect in the rest of the
country.
e) There have been very strict measures taken by he police against
public gatherings or demonstrations, even if they are peaceful. In the
past, the police often dispersed public gatherings by force and
arresting the suspected leaders and participants. Recently, there was an
attempt to organise a gathering at Dataran Merdeka, a field in front of
the Court where Anwar was facing his second trial, this time for alleged
sodomy. It was to commemorate the first year of Anwar’s imprisonment on
April 14th. Even days before the gathering was held, Mahathir had
accused the gathering as illegal and aimed at causing riot. He also
alleged that the organisers were planning to bring sticks and Molotov
cocktails. In fact, what Mahathir did was to create an atmosphere of
fear, to justify whatever action he planned to take. The police picked
up a few keADILan leaders who were accused of organising the gathering a
day or two before the gathering. Police blocks were put up on almost all
roads leading into Kuala Lumpur. There were several FRU trucks, with
hundreds of uniformed and non-uniformed police personnel, stationed at
different places, especially near Dataran Merdeka, the National Mosque
and the King’s Palace. Despite these strict measures, some people still
managed to gather at the National Mosque, near the KL railway station
and at Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman. The police chased them away with
canes and fired water cannons. Nearly fifty persons were arrested. A few
persons wanted by police were also detained. They were remanded between
five to six days. Sixteen persons, including the Vice President of
keADILan (Tian Chua) and its Youth Chief (Ezam Noor) were charged in
court for illegal assembly or inciting it.
f) The government has constantly alluded that the Malay community is
split, and this they claim has been caused mainly by an opposition
party. PAS has been accused of spreading wrong teachings of Islam,
causing split and thereby threatening national security. This appeared
to be a veiled threat to PAS. In the past people have been detained
under the ISA and organisations banned for being involved in so-called
deviationist teachings and accused of threatening national security. A
few years ago, government disbanded an organisation called Al-Arqam and
several of its leaders were detained under the ISA. Later a number of
persons, accused of being followers of the Shiite sect were also
arrested and held without trial under the same draconian law. They were
accused of being involved in deviationist teachings that threatened
national security. The PM has been quite persistent in his threats and
attacks on PAS for causing disunity among the Malays, by misrepresenting
some of the teachings of Islam. The Minister in the PM’s Department, who
holds the law portfolio, has indicated the possibility of government
forbidding any party to use any religion, as its ideology or for its
name, to operate in politics. As an initial move the government has set
up a National Religious Action Council (MATIN), to monitor and combat
deviationist teachings and groups using religion as a political tool to
create disunity among the Malays, which performed very well in the last
elections. It is clear that this is actually a move to combat the
growing influence of PAS
Important Institutions Undermined
Several events that took place during the past two years have shown how
the main institutions in the country, particularly the police, the
judiciary and the media, were undermined by the government itself. In
fact, the popular perception is that the government, or more
specifically the PM, has full control of all these institutions and that
they are often forced to carry out his bidding. The police conspiracy to
shame Anwar through their affidavit against Nalakaruppan, the IGP’s
cruelty inflicted upon Anwar, the FRU violence against people at
peaceful gatherings, and the recent police action on those who wanted to
commemorate Anwar’s first year in prison, did not help to convince the
public that the police force is people-friendly.
As for the judiciary, Anwar’s trial particularly, has created a strong
impression in the minds of the public that it is no more independent.
Since the case of Rahim Tamby Chik, the Melaka Chief Minister who was
freed by the Attorney General’s chamber from all charges for alleged
mandatory rape, confidence in the AG and the judges has eroded. It was
eroded further when Lim Guan Eng, a DAP Deputy Secretary General and MP
was prosecuted and convicted to one and a half year’s jail for
publicising the case of the CM. To make it worse a secret document was
circulated among certain circles, making allegations on and giving
specific examples of corruption among some judges. It turned out that
the writer of this document was also a judge, and he was retired because
of his action. No action was taken against him or the judges named in
the document. Anwar’s trials have made it clear even to a layman that
he was not getting full justice. This point was strongly made by Anwar
recently, after he failed in his bid to bring the PM to court to testify
in his case. The PM ignored warnings about contempt of court by
repeating several times that he believed Anwar was guilty of sodomy. He
also ignored it when he was subpoenaed to be present as witness. Later,
when there was a hearing to decide if he should be called, the same
judge who heard Anwar’s case decided that it was irrelevant to call the
PM. Anwar accused the judge of already making his decision even before
the hearing finished, perhaps to serve the interest of the PM, and the
judge had no answer to it. He did not even charge Anwar for contempt.
As regards the mainstream media, they have mostly lost their
credibility. Their role during the elections have been considered as
most unbecoming and an insult to press freedom. Most of them fear the
Home Ministry and the Printing Presses and Publications Act. In 1987,
during the Operasi Lalang, when about a hundred political and NGO
activists were detained under the ISA, three newspapers, namely The Star
(English), Nanyang Siang Pau (Chinese) and Watan (Malay) were closed
down by the government. These incidents still haunt the media. Before
Anwar was sacked, as mentioned earlier, two chief editors of the main
Malay newspapers – Nazri Abdullah of Berita Harian and Johan Jaafar of
Utusan Melayu group – and Yunus Said, the head of programme for TV3, a
private television channel were removed because they were considered to
be “Anwar’s boys”. Recently, Kadir Jassin, group editor of Straits Time,
who has always been considered a strong supporter of Mahathir and Daim
also lost his position. Apparently, the straw that broke the camel’s
back was that he allowed the paper to publish three articles which
questioned why the positions of UMNO President and his Deputy should not
be allowed to be challenged in the forthcoming party elections. It
looked as if 100 percent loyalty was still not enough. Further, as
already elaborated above, five monthly and weekly papers have had their
permits withdrawn or suspended for not being too supportive of the
government, or even for aspiring to be neutral.
Changing Face of Repression
Opposition parties and dissenting groups appear to continue being
hounded. In the past the government has quite easily resorted to the ISA
to curb their influence and activities. I myself had the unpleasant
experience of being incarcerated without trial for nearly six years.
There were many others who were detained for much longer periods, some
of them for up to 15 years. I was detained, together with Anwar, for
being involved with demonstrations to support rubber small holders
protesting against the fall in the price of rubber and the rise of price
of essentials, which caused hunger among some peasants. Initially about
2,000 students and lecturers were arrested. But later about 40 of them
were detained for two month under the ISA. Out of them 11 had their
detention extended. Anwar was detained for nearly twenty two months
then. A few weeks before Anwar was released, I was taken to Kuala
Lumpur, to be put in solitary confinement in an unknown place for more
than six months.
During solitary, I was slapped, spat on and mentally tortured for
refusing to admit that I was a communist, and that at one time I was
some kind of a link between the present PM with the communist
underground. I was promised early release if I admitted to both. But
how could I when I was neither? The basis of the allegation was that
when Mahathir was in a limbo after he was sacked from UMNO in 1969,
following his attack on the then PM’s (Tunku Abdul Rahman) handling of
the racial riot that year, he was reported to have made a speech in
Australia saying that there was possibility that Malaysia would turn
Socialist at the beginning of the 21st century. After he was readmitted
into the party and rose to become Deputy PM, there was an attempt by the
then Home Minister to frame him up so that he could be detained under
the ISA. Three deputy ministers, three opposition leaders and two
newspaper editors had already been picked up earlier, allegedly for
being pro-Communists or involved in communist activities. The then Home
Minister, Ghazalie Shafie, was an ambitious person who wanted the
position of Deputy PM position.
The ISA has long been criticised as undemocratic and violating
fundamental human rights. Under it, a person can be detained
indefinitely without trial. Following the detention of Anwar and his
colleagues under this draconian law in 1998, opposition against it
became much stronger nationally and internationally. As a result now, it
seems, the method of repression has been altered. A person held under
the ISA can still be active politically. In fact, a number of detainees
have stood for election, and one of them succeeded to get very big
majority votes. In view of this, the government has opted to use
different kinds of criminal or civil laws to act against those they wish
to cripple politically. That is why the ISA was used against Anwar only
for the short while when it was necessary to hide his injuries after
being beaten up by the IGP. He was later charged under criminal law.
That is the reason too many of the opposition leaders have been brought
to court under different types of criminal and civil charges. Although
the government does not favour this method because trials often take a
long time and may cause embarrassment to the authorities, yet they seem
to have decided that it is the better of the two evils. A person given a
sentence of more than RM2000 fine or exceeding a year’s jail will be
disqualified for five years to stand for election. An elected
representative to Parliament or the State Legislative Council, similarly
sentenced, would have to vacate his seat, and cannot stand for election
up to five years after his release, if he served a prison sentence. Thus
the law has been blatantly used to serve party political interests.
There have been allegations that prosecution has often been selective,
and in many cases the bases for these allegations have been strong. A
number of those held on remand before being charged have made official
complaints that they were physically injured by the police during that
period.
Another method used is to sue critics of government to court with demand
for huge sums of compensation. A well-known journalist, M.G.G. Pillay,
together with another journalist and an academic, was sued by a
corporate figure, Vincent Tan, who is known to be close to the PM. They
all lost and Pillay was ordered to pay Tan RM10 million, which he has
refused to do until now. An academician, Professor Jomo has been sued
for RM250 million by the same businessman for an article published in
the Asian Wall Street Journal, for allegedly suggesting that he was a
crony of PM Mahathir. This is one method of silencing fair criticism of
the government in public interest. But of course, it is not clear if
this businessman acted on his own accord or with the blessing of some
government figures. What seems to be clear is that the Malaysian courts
do not seem to entertain anymore “fair comment”. This trend has become
clearer especially after the dismissal of the Lord President (Chief
Justice) and two Judges a few years ago.
Conclusion
By way of a brief conclusion, it may be said that of late the face of
politics and repression has changed very fast in Malaysia. The state has
become more authoritarian, with power held increasingly in the hand of
one person. The opposition coalition has become multi-ethnic and more
united and stronger. It won more seats during the last elections,
although failing to reduce the two-thirds majority in Parliament, which
has been held by the government after almost every election. PAS has
emerged strongest of the parties in BA, winning most of the opposition
seats in Parliament and controlling two state governments. The UMNO and
the BN coalition government it leads appear to be threatened that they
might be defeated in the coming elections four years from now. In the
recent elections held in November 1999, they have lost many seats in
Malay majority constituencies to PAS and also keADILan and that their
voting majority has been significantly reduced in many ethnically mixed
constituencies. It is not surprising, therefore, that they have been
increasingly resorting to religious and communal bogies to create fear
among the people of any change in government.
The government has become more repressive, and has succeeded to control
the police, judiciary and media, thus undermining the neutrality and
independence of these important state institutions. It restricts
peaceful public meetings and assemblies, although the right to hold them
is guaranteed under the Federation Constitution. In order to curb the
opposition and punish groups and leaders, who are perceived as trying to
undermine the authority of government, the ISA is less often used now.
Instead the government chooses to charge them under various criminal or
civil laws. Changes that have taken place have put democracy and
justice in greater jeopardy now, since the government declared
emergency, suspended Parliament and established the National Operation
Council, following the 13th May Incident of 1969. That day marked a
great tragedy for Malaysia, when ethnic conflicts erupted in Kuala
Lumpur, causing deaths and destruction that were completely meaningless.
In every election the government resorts to fear tactics by manipulating
public memory of this tragedy. Now they are trying to continue with it
even after elections. These are very retrogressive steps to take.
Justice and democracy for the people could ultimately be killed. They
need to be saved.
Petaling Jaya
28th April 2000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
( Melanggan ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body : SUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Berhenti ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body: UNSUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Segala pendapat yang dikemukakan tidak menggambarkan )
( pandangan rasmi & bukan tanggungjawab HIZBI-Net )
( Bermasalah? Sila hubungi [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pengirim: "Haji Johari Adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
