Malaysia after regime change - With or Without Barisan Nasional: Regime Change and Identity Politics in Post Authoritarian Malaysia

Why are you interested in Malaysia? If asked such a question, the majority of foreign observers, scholars and students of Malaysian politics would most likely mention ethnicity, religion (Islam) or what is broadly categorised as “identity politics.” Even if identity is not their primary interest, not one of them is likely to deny that collective identities are a crucial aspect of contemporary Malaysian politics dominated by the multi-ethnic ruling coalition, National Front (Barisan Nasional, BN).

What will Malaysian politics look like if BN ever lost power? Would identity, either ethnic or religious, recede from politics if the opposition, People’s Alliance (Pakatan Rakyat, PR), came to power? Or would it fuel politicisation of identity even further to threaten otherwise relatively oppressive but peaceful inter-communal relations?

Possible answers to these questions in part depend on the type of regime that the opposition coalition—comprised of the People’s Justice Party (PKR), Democratic Action Party (DAP), and the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS)—wishes to establish. The opposition pact was first and foremost formed and sustained to challenge and bring down the authoritarian rule of BN where the Malay-Muslim based United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) is dominant. The establishment of some form of democratic rule is their next goal. Indeed, their platform, “Ubah Sekarang, Selamatkan Malaysia! (Change Now, Save Malaysia!)”, published in the run-up to the 2008 elections emphasizes the following initiatives: expansion of democratic rights and institutions such as independent judiciary; creation of a just and fair society that provides all people with equal opportunities regardless of ethnicity, religion and culture; elimination of corruption and other unfair and discriminatory practices that hinder equal and fair distribution of public resources; growth with equity; and elimination of undemocratic apparatuses and practices, most notably the Internal Security Act (ISA). The absence of aforementioned initiatives under the current regime provided a common ground for opposition parties to come and fight together, leading to their impressive electoral ascendancy in 2008. The question remains however: Is the PR platform sufficient to convince their multi-ethnic constituencies to oust BN from power to build a new democratic Malaysia?

Complication about Malaysia’s regime change and democratic transition is derived from the very nature of the current regime. It is not only authoritarian in a conventional sense of the term, but also highly ethnocentric and illiberal, thereby denying equal rights and freedom to minority citizens based on their ethnic/religious identities. Under this regime, the majority Malay (and therefore Muslim) population have gained an unparalleled amount of power, wealth, status and opportunities as their birth rights since independence. UMNO and its major coalition partners in BN, the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), were formed and allowed to survive primarily to represent and protect political and material interests of Chinese and Indian minority communities. In the post-NEP period, the regime has become even more protective of the communal interests of the Muslim-Malays while gaining authoritarian characters.

Under this ethnocentric pro-Malay regime, state institutions and a bureaucratic infrastructure were constructed in a manner to buttress supremacy of the state, UMNO and the Muslim-Malay community, while undermining civil society, civil rights and the well being of minority communities. Furthermore, the same regime has granted an unprecedented amount of power, resources and authority to the Islamic state bureaucracies in order to cater to the religious interests and spiritual well being of a growingly pious Muslim-Malay community. The results of such maneuvering are now obvious in a wide range of policy areas including law, education, welfare and economy. Consequently, post-NEP generations of minority populations feel increasingly alienated and discriminated against despite the fact that some communal grievances were mitigated by the inclusive multi-ethnic national vision and continuous growth under Mahathir (together with currently opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim) till the multiple crises following 1998.

Against this backdrop, it is of little surprise that the Hindu-Indian community has formed a powerful opposition against the regime. In 2007, the opposition was organised to form an ethno-nationalistic movement, Hindraf (Hindu Rights Action Force), to express the socio-economic grievances and political demands of the community. The state’s violent suppression of a street protest organised by the movement further deteriorated the already uneasy relations between the BN regime and minority communities, arousing anti-regime sentiments even further with particular damage done in urban areas.

Opposition parties, while certainly sharing such unusually strong anti-regime sentiments emanating from civil society, were not able to translate these divisive ethnocentric sentiments and demands directly into political action. Instead, they have chosen to stay mute on fundamental issues that they do not wish to discuss or negotiate, that is, issues related to communal identities and religion. Moreover, they strategically framed their anti-regime cause in universal democratic terms so as to forge a critical coalition with civil society forces across communal boundaries. They did so precisely because they need one another to maintain a multi-ethnic coalition front in order to beat BN. They and electorates are aware that the opposition parties and their interests, just like their opponents in the ruling coalition, are defined and restrained by competing identities: PKR is Malay-Muslim dominant and led by the most charismatic and powerful Malaysian Muslim leader to date, Anwar Ibrahim; DAP is non-Muslim based and dominated by ethnic Chinese; and PAS is a puritanical Islamist party. These constituencies have made significant efforts to compromise on issues regarding their core identities and interests in order to achieve their political goals and survival. Such compromise was handsomely rewarded with a significant 2008 increase in votes for the PR.

The tragedy of Malaysian authoritarianism is that authoritarian rule has grown stronger alongside the growing dominance of UMNO in BN and the Malaysian polity as well as its avidly pro-Malay and pro-Islam characters throughout 1980s and 1990s. The highly politicised identities—and state, political, economic and socio-cultural institutions created to serve the identity-based interests over several decades—will not easily go away even if regime change rids Malaysia of authoritarian rule and the BN falls from power. Popular interests and demands will continue to be defined and organised through collective identities based on ethnicity, religion, culture, or some combination of these characteristics.

This situation will lead to another tragedy: a tragedy of Malaysian democracy and regime change. As a result of the institutionalisation of politicised identities, demands for democracy, freedom and equal rights for all Malaysians are readily interpreted in zero-sum terms to connote a reduction of the special rights and privileges preserved for the Malay-Muslim majority. Regardless of whoever takes over the BN, the new regime will have to negotiate and balance contending communal demands and interests.

The key question here is whether Malaysians, especially the Malay-Muslim community, are ready to accept a new set of deals, terms and conditions set by the new democratic regime along the line suggested by PR. All possible signs thus far seem to suggest that they are not. According to public surveys conducted by the Merdeka Center between 2008 and 2010, a large majority of Malays, especially those in the lower income categories, strongly favour the reservation of special rights and privileges. They are also extremely anxious about policies and concessions that appear favourable to non-Malay communities. It is important to remember that Malay votes for UMNO/BN were constant between 2004 and 2008 and many still think that UMNO supremacy is necessary to protect their special rights.

More alarmingly, such anxiety among a community perceived to be under threat or siege at a time when the regime is undergoing unpredictable transition is a ready recipe for communal tension and potential violence. Indeed, it was when the BN adopted policies and allocated resources in ways seen disproportionately favorable to the non-Malay communities, especially Chinese, that ultra-nationalistic Malay movements such as Perkasa gained popular approval and appeal. Some UMNO elites were willing to allow these movements to exploit racist rhetoric and symbols in an effort to provoke anti-minority sentiment and violence.

Regime transition means that UMNO will be in the opposition. It is not unlikely that UMNO elites will use such racist rhetoric and movements more freely and aggressively to regain power they have lost, deteriorating already uneasy ethnic relations even further. We are also unsure if PAS will remain moderate once it gains power in order to have access to the conservative religious bureaucracies and patronage that have expanded dramatically under UMNO. According to Ashutosh Varshney, a renowned scholar of ethnic violence, ethnic peace is more likely when rivaling communities have developed associational interactions and ties—and social capital—across ethnic boundaries so as to withstand attempts to instigate racial hatred or antagonism. If this proposition and legacies of institutionalized political identities mentioned above offer some guide to predict Malaysia’s democratic future, we are left uncertain whether the much-waited transition to democracy will in fact bring a peaceful and happy future for all Malaysians as many had wished.

Kikue Hamayotsu is Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA. Her research focuses on comparative politics, identity politics, religion and politics and regime transition and quality of democracy in the Muslim world with special reference to Indonesia and Malaysia. Her current interest include: religious parties and electoral politics, religious intolerance and violence, and finding a way to move Australia closer to North America.

Whither the Indian community?

Their votes may be pivotal in the 13th GE but they are a species under threat and the future looks dim unless concerted efforts are made to safeguard their future.


Najib Tun Razak was a beleaguered politician at the Thaipusam celebrations at Batu Caves on Feb 7, 2012. Many listened intently as he appealed to the Indian community of largely Tamil descent to place and put their "Nambikei" (trust) in him.

This was not a whimsical appeal. In the run up to the last general election, towards the end of 2007, the Hindraf episode was the wake up call to Umno-BN that their long held sway and hold on Malaysians was now to be put to a stern test.

A much maligned BN tottered virtually on the edge of defeat and only just managed to stave off the effects of a political tsunami. The lessons of that episode still rankles in the minds of BN leaders and they are aware that the Indian votes in the 13th GE could prove decisive to both sides of the political divide.

The Indians are savouring their moments of glory and greatly relishing the overtures of Najib’s “Nambikei” and have even cheekily requested for a two-day Deepavali holiday. The BN views them as prime voters whose votes they want to build upon to maintain their grip on power, and later, as envisaged, to firm up and tighten this grip once more as before.

While the Chinese community appear to have all but deserted the MCA and Gerakan to opt for DAP, and the Malays are skewered three-ways between PAS, PKR and Umno, the Indians are being wooed by BN as Pakatan appear to have offered them not much so far.

Can and should Indians put their trust in the call of the prime minister? Perhaps it is up to each individual Indian voter to do some soul searching before casting their precious vote, as much is at stake and they should certainly not play their cards wrongly.

The Indian community is under much stress and things are not looking up for them right. Their future is in limbo and this is due to a number of factors. But the community should learn to sit up and pay heed to where they are heading in the quagmire of the currently changing Malaysian political landscape.

Dwindling population
Long considered the third largest ethnic group in Malaysia, the community’s dwindling population needs to be addressed or they will see themselves being eclipsed by persons of Indonesian origin as the third largest race in the country.

In the past, if the community had any difficulty, it was the exceedingly high birth rate. The birth of large numbers of infants in an Indian family caused much hardship and deprivation to them.

This was especially true among the families working and residing in the rubber plantations in the rural areas. While in the past this population explosion was viewed with concern, now it is the declining birth rate among Indians that is of concern.

Falling birth rates among Indians have reached alarming proportions. Indians constitute only 9% of the population of the nation as opposed to much higher percentages in the last few decades.

Wither the Indian community in Malaysia? This certainly means that Indians as a race have in all probability been displaced as the third major component or racial group with the influx of Indonesian immigrants.

There are a number of factors that have led to the Malaysian Indian population dwindling. The most important is that the strength of their economic status has been downgraded, causing them to either not marry or have few children in the event they are married couples.

Another important factor is the emigration of highly qualified and educated individuals, who have left Malaysia for greener pastures. Their departure along with their families in tow has resulted in the Indian population to dwindle further.

What is now becoming a bigger worry is the number of Indian youth who are opting to stay single or tying the knot at much older ages, usually well past their prime and causing the number of childless marriages among Indians to go on the rise.

While the Chinese community has addressed this problem by forming Cupid Clubs to play matchmaker and get single Chinese men and women to court and marry, the same measure may have to be adopted by Indian groups representing the community.

The formation of Cupid Clubs have resulted in a greater number of marriages taking place within the Chinese community. The Indian groups can also play a similar matchmaker role among single Indian men and women.

Wake up call for Indians
While the Indian community needs to repopulate itself, there is also a dire need for them to reinvent themselves in the sphere of economic activity so as to gain a larger share of the economic pie.

While on this front, several groups representing the interests of the Indian community have taken upon themselves the role to empower Indians by creating business and educational opportunities, the momentum needs to be sustained and to grow much further.

The admission of Indian students to public and private institutions of higher learning in this country has also witnessed a drastic drop in numbers. The reluctance of a growing number of Indian youths to secure a sound education and a brighter future is now glaringly evident.

Instead, what is happening is that Indian youth are more likely to be associated or linked with criminal and underworld activities, with Malaysian jails housing large numbers of Indian prisoners in ratio to the numbers of their population.

This has caused the socio-economic status of the Indian to downgrade rapidly. There is a need by Indian groups representing and leading the Indian community to be more watchful and vigilant and to steer Indians, especially Indian youth, in the right direction.

While all is not lost, the Indian community needs to wake up to the challenges of a globalised world or they will only have themselves to blame for becoming failures in their own country.

The need is urgent and pressing that Indians in Malaysia not go into a time warp but be aware that they are a species under threat and in all likelihood may not count or favour anymore as voters or as an important ethnic group in the years to come.

It is therefore imperative that Indians rise up and answer this wake up call to pull the community out of the doldrums and to strive to contribute in a greater and more meaningful and impactful way towards building a better Malaysian society.





Christopher Fernandez

The writer has been teaching and writing throughout Asia since 1984.

Malaysia’s RM456 billion of federal government debt does not take into consideration additional RM96.9 billion of “contingent liabilities”.

Based on the Government’s Economic Report 2011/2 published last year, our Federal Government debt will hit RM455.7 billion as at the end of 2011. This was a 11.9% increase from RM407.1 billion incurred in 2010. Our debt levels have been increasing rapidly in recent years compared to RM242 billion in 2006 and RM146 billion in 2002.

As it stands, our Federal Government debt has hit 53.8% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) compared to 53.1% in 2010 and 44.6% in 2006.

However, what is of greater concern is the Government “off-balance sheet” financing which isn’t reported as Federal Government Debt. In recent years, the Government has increasingly issued debt papers via its statutory bodies and corporatised entities. These loans are obtain with guarantees provided by the Government, but are not reflected as Federal Government borrowings.

In 2010, the “off-balance sheet” financing activities has hit a record high of RM96.9 billion in 2010, a 14.9% increase from RM84.3 billion in 2009. These are loans which have been taken with a Government guarantee i.e., the Government is obligated to pay should the borrowers fail to settle the debts. As an example, if the Federal Territories Foundation is unable to repay the proposed RM300 million loan from EPF to provide financing for the low-cost housing purchasers, then the Government will have to step in to make the RM300 million payment to EPF.

Hence for all intents and purposes, even though these loans are not taken by the Government, they are essentially government debt or otherwise known as contingent liabilities. Adding RM96.9 billion to the current debt of RM455.7 billion, the effective debt which Malaysian tax-payers are liable for is RM552.6 billion. This expanded figure would then constitute 65.2% of our GDP, well above the 55% federal government loan limit as defined in the Loan (Local) Act 1959 and Government Funding Act 1983.

The list of statutory bodies and corporate entities which have been given Government guarantees are as per Table 1 at the bottom. Based on the list, there are some serious concerns over the performance or non-performance of these loans which will require bail outs by the Federal Government.

For example, the PTPTN and Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd owes RM17.0 billion (17.5%) and RM9.1 billion (9.4%) respectively and they have both been heavily criticized by the Auditor-General for their weak financial management and their inability to repay their loans.

The list also includes Syarikat Penerbangan Malaysia Bhd (RM7.0 billion) which was set up to bail out Malaysian Airlines System (MAS); 1MDB (RM5.0 billion) which in turn lent nearly all its money to a questionable foreign company, PetroSaudi International Limited and Silterra Bhd (RM1.0 billion) which has made more than RM2 billion in losses to date.

What is interesting is also the fact that loans of Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary-owned Port of Tanjong Pelepas (PTP) also received financial guarantees from the Government. PTP’s “guaranteed” loans have in fact increased from RM715 million in 2009 to RM1.275 billion in 2010.

Expert testimonies in 2009 in the United Kingdom Parliament has heavily criticized Government guarantees to statutory bodies, government-linked companies or “private-finance initiatives” as an attempt to hide real debt levels in order to achieve better credit ratings. Professor Dieter Helm of Oxford University said that such initiatives had succeeded as "an exercise to get investment off the public balance sheet so that the debt numbers look better than they otherwise would have done." The Greek financial crisis has similarly unraveled as a result of hidden contingent liabilities not reflected as official government debt or reported in its balance sheet.

For a start the BN government must reflect all its guarantees and contingent liabilities in the annual Economic Report and Budget to be debated in Parliament and it must impose measures to slow down the rate of growth of Malaysia’s debt levels. Malaysia should not wait for a major financial crisis of Greek proportions before attempting to reform our public sector finance. At the pace which our debts are increasing, we are accelerating and plunging headlong into a financial disaster.

Tony Pua is the DAP MP for PJ Utara

Bankrupt in no time: Desperate BN set to raise borrowing limit again?

The Barisan Nasional has modified the Statutory Borrowing Ceiling at its whims and fancies over the past decade rendering meaningless the legal debt ceiling for Federal Government.

The Loan (Local) Act 1959 and Government Funding Act 1983 puts in place a 55% federal government debt limit relative to Malaysia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as determined by the Ministry of Finance (MoF). Based on the Government’s Economic Report 2011/2, our federal government debt will hit RM455.7 billion as at the end of 2011 which works out to 53.8% of our GDP, or a whisker away from the statutory borrowing ceiling.

However, what is worrying is the fact that the “statutory borrowing ceiling” has actually been raised multiple times by the Barisan Nasional (BN) Government over the past decade to “legalise” the federal government debt level which has been increasing at a much faster pace than our GDP.

The 55% statutory borrowing ceiling only came into effect in July 2009 by order of current Second Finance Minister Dato’ Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah. Prior to the revised limit, the limit was set at 45% in June 2008, barely 13 months before by the then Second Finance Minister Tan Sri Nor Md Yakcop.

It was 5 years before that when the limit was raised to 40% in April 2003 by the then Second Finance Minister Dato’ Sri Jamaluddin Jarjis.

15% of GDP jump in just 6 years

Hence our statutory borrowing ceiling has been raised by 15% of our GDP in just 6 years. The question is if the ceiling is repeatedly raised with such nonchalance, why did the Government bother setting a limit at all? Given that our debt level is expected to increase beyond 55% over the next 2 years, are we expecting the Federal Government to once again raise the ceiling in Parliament to circumvent the breach?

In fact, we are extremely concerned that the Federal Government, which is mindful of their debt level relative to the GDP, is using all sorts of creative measures to by-pass the limit set by law.

It should be noted that the MoF will be raising approximately RM20 billion to fund the first phase of the Klang Valley MRT mega-project this year. However, based on the fact that the MRT was never debated in the 2012 Budget tabled in Parliament for approval last year, it is clear that the funding will be raised by a wholly-owned “special purpose vehicle” (SPV) known as Dana Infra, and guaranteed by the Government.

This way, the BN Federal Government kills two birds with one stone. Firstly, the debt raised will not be part of the Federal Government debt (because Dana Infra is “not” Federal Government) and hence will not be perceived to jeopardise our credit standings. This is despite the fact that all parties are expecting MRT to be a financially loss-making project and that the Federal Government will have to fund Dana Infra’s debt repayments at some point in the future.

Secondly, by placing the debt and expenditure of the MRT project in a SPV, such expenditure then escapes the purview of direct parliamentary oversight because it is never debated in Parliament as an official Budget item. As mentioned earlier, there is not a single line item in the 2012 Budget approved at the last parliamentary sitting for the purposes of constructing an MRT despite the fact that this will be Malaysia’s largest ever infrastructure project by far.

Creatiive manipulation will bankrupt Malaysia

Such creative manipulation of our federal government debt and expenditure is not limited to just the MRT project but many other multi-billion ringgit projects such as the construction of 74 police headquarters with government-guaranteed RM10 billion debt by MoF-owned Pembinaan BLT Sdn Bhd, or the proposed RM20 billion sukuk plan by Pengurusan Aset Air Bhd (PAAB) to restructure the country’s water assets.

Governments all over the world, especially in developed countries like the United Kingdom and Germany, are now changing their laws to require such debts and contingent liabilities to be incorporated into the Government’s financial statement to ensure greater transparency and financial accountability. This is to avert a financial crisis which has already enveloped the Euro-zone over the past 2 years.

However, it appears that the Malaysian government is still sitting back and resting easy, while making full use of the “loop-hole” in our government financial reporting standards to continue to recklessly in-debt future Malaysians with none of the checks put in place.

Tony Pua is the DAP MP for PJ Utara

Najib crowned Champion of Doubletalk by top US paper despite splurging millions on 'image'

What a deafening silence from Prime Minister Najib Razak! While the world shook its head over the FBC Media scandal, where his administration used Malaysian tax-payers money to ‘buy’ favorable mentions on international prime-time television, Najib is no where to be heard or seen. It could be he is hiding his head in shame but given his past record, the Malaysian PM doesn't feel remorse or guilt easily.

In a statement posted on the BBC website, the broadcaster said the “small number” of programmes that were aired on BBC World News between Feb 2009 and July 2011, broke the internal rules aimed at protecting its editorial integrity.

“These rules ensure that programmes are free, and are seen to be free, from commercial or other outside pressures,” read the statement.

Financial relationship

Although the nature of the programmes related to Malaysia were mentioned without much details, the BBC made it clear that 8 of these appeared to have a' financial relationship' with the Malaysian government.

After much public tongue-lashing from the opposition, Najib finally admitted to Parliament that it had paid RM84 million to FBC Media between 2007 and 2010 for ‘consultancy services, advice and management of a communication campaign’ to spruce up Malaysia’s image. Apart from painting a falsely flattering image image of himself, the documentaries also painted a rosy picture of Malaysia's oil palm industry and its treatment of indigenous peoples - which are in stark contract to the views from the ground.

British daily The Independent, the newspaper that broke the scandal, reported that the BBC would be apologizing to an estimated 74 million people globally over the matter. The report said viewers from “Kuala Lumpur to Khartoum” will be able to watch the broadcast which is available to 295 million homes, 1.7 million hotel rooms, 81 cruise ships, 46 airlines and 35 mobile phone platforms, at four different time zones. According to the BBC statement, the BBC Trust’s editorial standards committee had identified various breaches in editorial guidelines due to the errant programmes.

“It agreed that given the serious nature of the breaches an on-air apology to the audience was appropriate,” read the statement.

But not a word from Najib or his team. Such a public roasting, and yet Utusan, Star and all its media organs carried not a word on the matter.

Correct to demand an apology

So when Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng demanded an apology from the Prime Minister, he was cheered on by the public even though they Najib would pretend to ignore the entire incident or condemn it as being as "opposition-instigated" demand. But did Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim's Pakatan Rakyat pay RM84 million to the UK publicity firm? Who was it who instructed FBC to polish Najib's image, give an overly glowing report about the benefits of consuming palm oil, and praise the BN's handling of indigenous people?

“Datuk Seri Najib Razak should direct his Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to apologise for paying RM84 million to burnish the Najib administration’s image... just as the BBC is apologising for accepting payments in exchange for a positive image for countries with a poor record of democratic practices and corruption,” Guan Eng wrote in a statement.

However, in a sad reflection of his caliber, Najib has chosen to hide his head in the sand.

The same goes for the UMNO-BN government he leads. They all seem content to stick their heads in the sand and wait for the whole matter to blow away. Who then apart from the opposition will keep an eye out for the Malaysian people? Will MCA ask Najib about the RM84 million sloshed down the drain? Will Gerakan, or the MIC? How about Umno?

Yet, it is more than just another embarrassing moment for Malaysia and one which Najib should apologize for. That is the minimum to restore some degree of the global esteem lost through the ill-judged and unethical act of paying a mercenary media firm to basically plant false news and disseminate it to an unsuspecting audience.

There was also APCO, Mr Cool and Ah Jib Gor ...

No doubt, following the FBC expose, Putrajaya ended its RM96 million contract with FBC, which Najib began in 2009. But FBC is not the only media scandal. In his vanity and thirst to be larger than life, Najib had signed on other public relation strategists including the Zionist-backed APCO Worldwide to polish his personal image.

Given his attack against arch rival Anwar Ibrahim for supporting a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, such an appointment is hypocritical to say the least, especially since Najib even gave APCO staff access to key communications facilities in the country. It is well-know that many of the top staff at APCO are former high-level officers at Shin Bet and Mossad, the Israeli secret services. What an awful joke and when Anwar, DAP chairman Karpal Singh, PKR leaders Azmin Ali and Sivarasa Rasiah took issue on the matter, fearing breach of national security, Najib had them suspended and locked out of Parliament for 6 months!

Indeed, APCO’s time in Malaysia was marked by controversy. So too was the most recent hire of a team purportedly comprising ex-staff of former British PM Tony Blair’s “New Labour” campaign. This group was tasked to turn Najib into a 'Mr Cool' and to reinvent him as a moderate reformist. Once the news leaked, it was clear Najib had bungled again, losing millions of public money. Malaysian either laughed or disapproved at the 'nonsense' he was dishing out. Even his 'Ah Jib Gor' Facebook website has failed miserably. Aimed to attract the Chinese, it has been taunted as being silly, in bad taste, and a desperate political move.

And the result - Najib crowned Champion of Doubletalk

Proof that Najib's exorbitant media scams are not working and instead backfiring comes in the form of a stinging rebuke from the highly influential Washington post editorial, which describes Najib's government as the "champion of doubletalk". Mind you, even President Obama and Hillary Clinton read the Washington Post. 

"His persecution has been facilitated by another champion of double-talk, the government of Malaysia, which claims to respect the rule of law but bundled Mr Kashgari onto a private Saudi jet Sunday in spite of a court order prohibiting his deportation," said the Washington Post.

The Post was referring to Saudi journalist Hamza Kashgari whom Najib's cousin and Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein illegally deported to face near certain death in his own country over several tweets the Saudi authorities deemed blasphemous. As human rights activists the world over have warned, if Hamza is executed, there will be blood on Najib's hand. 

So enough of the doublespeak. The game is up. You have been rumbled. Own up and apologize. Najib owes Malaysia an apology over the media scandals he created in his vanity, and for wasting the people's money so foolishly and flagrantly.

Malaysia Chronicle

Nurul wants an answer: Why were residents' funds channeled to Nong Chik's events

FT Minister Raja Nong Chik may have abused his power, channeling funds allocated for a public housing residents’ association in Lembah Pantai to his own programs.

The Apartment Sri Putra residents' association is allocated RM10,000 in assistance to run its program, which include a fire prevention training planned for April this year. But it had to be canceled after the funds were allegedly spent on a ‘Raja Nong Chik meets with the locals’ event organized by the local Umno branch.

Seeking clarification, Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah told of how her constituents tried to apply to City Hall or DBKL, but were turned away.

“When they called DBKL to use their allocation, they were told that it was used for a programme organised by Umno which invited the minister.  But when we brought this matter up with DBKL, the mayor said that we have to bring the matter up to the ministry as he is only a civil servant,” Nurul told a press conference on Friday.

Big ambitions
Raja Nong Chik is the head of the Lembah Pantai Umno division and aspires to be nominated as his party's candidate for the constituency at the next general election, widely expected to be held this year.
If successful, he is likely to face Nurul, who won the seat in 2008 in a David vs Goliath
contest against Women's minister Shahrizat Jalil. Now at the centre of a corruption scandal that Nong Chik has been accused of stirring up, Shahrizat is unlikely to be chosen to contest the seat. Speculation is rife she may soon have to step down as minister as well as head of Wanita Umno.

Apartment Sri Putra residents' association committee member Abdul Rahim Mohd Noor, who was also at the press conference, said the remainder portion of the allocation was used for a 'maulidur rasul event' organized by the local surau committee.






Malaysia Chronicles.com

Racial eyesores on the Malaysian landscape

The recent outbreak of violence with racial overtones at Petaling Jaya Selatan squatter settlement requires Malaysians to face up quickly to this most critical yet unresolved problem of racism and racial discrimination in Malaysian society. 

 

This agenda is highly appropriate and timely because this year happens to be the year the United Nations will hold its conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (WCAR) in Durban, South Africa in August.

Racism and racial discrimination have been part of Malaysian political, economic, social and cultural realities ever since colonial times. Today, race has been so deeply institutionalised that it is a key factor determining benefits from government development policies, bids for business contracts, education policy, social policy, cultural policy, entry into educational institutions, discounts for purchasing houses and other official policies.

Practically every aspect of Malaysian life is permeated by the so-called 'bumiputra policy' based on Malay-centrism. This is unabashedly spelled out by political leaders in the daily mass media in Malaysia.

It is an established fact that racial polarisation is prevalent in various Malaysian institutions. A new survey by Universiti Malaya shows that 98 per cent of Malay students do not mix with non-Malays while 99 per cent of Chinese students and 97 per cent of Indian students do not mingle with the other races.

While the government tries to account for this problem by blaming other extraneous factors such as the existence of vernacular
schools, it is clear that the roots of polarisation lie in this institutionalisation of racism and racial discrimination.

Integral part

Racism is an integral part of the Malaysian socio-political system. The ruling coalition is still dominated by racially-defined component parties, the United Malays National Organisation (Umno), the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC). These parties compete for electoral support from their respective constituencies by pandering to 'racial' interests. Invariably, their racist inclinations are exposed at their respective party congresses.

Some opportunistic opposition parties likewise pander to their constituencies using racist propaganda to win electoral support and they have also contributed to the vicious circle of racial politics which has characterised Malaysia all these years.

Umno, the ruling party, continues to insist that 'Malay unity' and even 'Malay dominance' is essential for national unity. 'Malay dominance' is invariably used interchangeably with 'Malay privileges', which the ruling Malay elite justifies through the Federal Constitution.

Consequently, we have witnessed the periodic controversies over the alleged challenges to Malay special privileges every time sections of Malaysian society call for non-racist solutions to Malaysian problems. The recent fracas over the appeals by the Chinese Associations of Malaysia (Suqiu) is a case in point. There have been other cases in recent Malaysian history in which the ruling party has allowed racist reactions to be used against the non-Malay communities.

White Paper

The official White Paper on the mass ISA detentions of 1987 documents the Umno Youth rally at the Jalan Raja Muda Stadium on Oct 17, 1987, at which racist and seditious sentiments were flagrantly displayed, e.g.: "May 13 Has Begun; Soak it (the kris) with Chinese Blood…" Umno leaders, including those who are ministers today, were among the rabble rousers on the podium. 

The ruling party condoned such racism on the grounds that theirs was a reaction to the protests by the Chinese organisations over the posting of unqualified officers to the Chinese schools in 1987. In the same way, Umno Youth tried to justify their recent boorish protest over Suqiu at the Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall by the fact that they were 'provoked' by Suqiu. These realities are principally because they were trying to externalise the internal problems within the ruling party, Umno itself.

Even more recently on Feb 4, 2001, a Malay Action Front rally was organised by former and current Umno leaders using the emblem of an unsheathed kris (Malay dagger) against a blood-red backdrop and calling for the further extension of Malay rights and privileges. Racism and racial discrimination are also manifested in the way indigenous peoples are uprooted from their traditional homelands and displaced to ill-planned resettlement schemes to make way for dams, plantations and other industrial projects. Many development agencies do not respect their native customary land rights. The underlying assumption in official circles is that their cultures and way of life are backward and they need to be 'modernised'. They are rarely properly consulted over these projects and their fate is tantamount to 'ethnocide'.

Migrant workers, including foreign domestic workers, are another group of people who face racism and racial discrimination in Malaysia. There are over two million foreign workers in the country, out of which there are over 10,000 hired as domestic help. The negative and derogatory perception of foreign workers held by many Malaysians condone the abuse of these workers. As women, foreign domestic workers are often subject to verbal, physical and even sexual abuse. The are discriminated against because of their gender, race as well as class.

Affirmative action

The ruling party Umno prides itself on the supposedly 'successful' affirmative action in favour of bumiputra. Bumiputra literally means 'princes of the soil', the official epithet for Malays and other indigenous peoples but which excludes the original peoples, i.e. the Orang Asli of Peninsula Malaysia. This has been the cornerstone of development plans since the New Economic Policy was started in 1971.

Consequently, while this populist bumiputra policy has been applied to the benefit of bumiputra as a whole, the new Malay ruling elite is strategically placed to reap the full benefits of this racially-based policy. Totally committed to capitalism and to privatisation, this policy has ensured that the non-Malay local and foreign elite have also gained from the New Economic Policy since 1971. This class cohesion among the Malaysian ruling elite underpins the racialist politics which has characterised Malaysian society since Independence.

It is time for Malaysians to reaffirm the non-discriminatory basis of the Federal Constitution and to uphold human rights principles which are strictly anti-racist.

Article 8 (1) of the Constitution clearly spells out the principle of equality of all Malaysians while Article 12 (1) allows no discrimination against any citizens on the grounds of religion, race, descent or place of birth.

Article 153 on the special position of Malays was inspired by the affirmative action provisions of the Indian Constitution to protect the minority under-privileged class of harijans. Ours is fundamentally different from those provisions because the ethnic group in whose favour the discrimination operates in Malaysia happens to be the one in political control, the Malays.

Malay dominance

At the time of Independence in 1957, four matters in relation to which the special position of Malays were recognised and safeguarded were: land; admission to public services; issuing of permits or licences for operation of certain businesses; scholarships, bursaries or other forms of aid for educational purposes. The Constitution certainly does not adhere to any notion of "Ketuanan Melayu" (Malay dominance), which is a totally racist concept.

When the Constitutional (Reid) Commission was considering whether such a provision should be included in the 1957 Constitution, it made the following comments:

"Our recommendations are made on the footing that the Malays should be assured that the present position will continue for a
substantial period, but that in due course the present preferences should be reduced and should ultimately cease so that there should be no discrimination between races or communities." (Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission 1957, Govt Press, para 165, p.72)

After the Tunku was deposed in 1971, the new Malay ruling elite felt that adequate opportunities had not been made available to Malays, especially in education and that there should be a larger proportion of Malays in the various sectors. In 1971, under Emergency conditions, Article 153 was duly amended to introduce the quota system for Malays in institutions of higher learning. Clause (8A) specifically provided for the reservation of places for bumiputra in any university, college and other educational institutions.

Quota system

Nevertheless, the quota system was not intended to be the totally non-transparent and non-accountable and unfair system we know it today:

Firstly, Article (8A) makes it clear that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong can only order a reservation of a proportion of such places for the Malays. It would therefore mean that the quota system is applicable only on a faculty basis and more importantly every faculty or institution should reserve places for students of every race. No faculty or institution under this provision could cater for the Malays alone to the exclusion of the other races.

Years after the implementation of this racial quota system, there was no trace of any such order being made by the Agong nor was there evidence of any such order having been gazetted. Such a directive would thus seem to have been made by the officials of the Ministry of Education.

Thus, it is not clear whether the quota system is made applicable on an institutional basis or on the basis of the total number of places available in a particular course of study of all the universities in the country. To apply the quota system on the total number of places available in any particular university will again be a wrong interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution.

Article 153 (8A) does not authorise the administrators of any university to refuse admission to any student of a particular race. It only allows a proportion of the places to be reserved for Malay students. On such a reasoning, the constitutionality of institutions like the Asasi Sains in the University of Malaya or the science matriculation course of the Universiti Sains Malaysia which cater only for bumiputra students is doubtful.

Furthermore, the Constitution of the University of Malaya expressly prohibits discrimination on grounds of race for the admission of any student to any faculty or institution of the university. In this context too, the constitutionality of other institutions which admit students of a particular race only to the exclusion of other races is also doubtful as it violates the equality provision of Article 8.

From the above, it is clear that the question of the constitutionality of the quota system as it has been practised since 1971 especially in totally bumiputra institutions has never been tested.

Original intentions

We know what the original intentions of the 'Malay special privileges' provision in the Merdeka Constitution were, but to maintain that it is a carte blanche for all manner of racial discrimination as we have witnessed since 1971 is a violation of the spirit of the Constitution.

International law sets major limits on affirmative action measures. Notably, affirmative action policies must be carefully controlled and not be permitted to undermine the principle of non-discrimination itself nor violate human rights. Holding the equality principle uppermost, the raison d'etre and reasonableness for differential treatment must be proven.

Another important criterion to ensure successful affirmative action and synonymous with international law is that such special measures should be introduced for a limited duration as was suggested by the Reid Commission in its Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission in 1957.

A consequence of the so-called affirmative action policies up to now is that for the poor of all ethnic communities, including the
indigenous peoples in Malaysia, these objectives of wealth redistribution for their benefit have not been met.

While it is widely recognised that racial polarisation exists in many Malaysian institutions such as schools, universities, the civil service, it must be stressed that this is not a 'natural' consequence of a plural society.

On the contrary, through the years there have been deliberate attempts by those in power to create divisions among the people.
 

There is general agreement that racial polarisation has its origins in the colonial divide-and-rule strategy. This has been well-documented in studies by W R Roff (The Origins of Malay Nationalism, 1974:24) and Hua Wu Yin, (Class and Communalism in Malaysia, Zed Press 1983)

The racialist formula was institutionalised in the Alliance at Independence and perpetuated by the Barisan Nasional to the present day. Attempts at creating racial discord among the people continue to be perpetrated in public institutions and the mass media whenever it suits the politicians.

These instances have been well-documented. (See Kua Kia Soong (edited) 'Polarisation in Malaysia: The Root Causes', K Das, Ink, KL 1987; 'Mediawatch: Use and Abuse of the Malaysian Media',Huazi Research Centre 1990 )

Of all the official policies and public institutions which practice racial discrimination, there is none more pervasive than the New Economic Policy (NEP) which was implemented as a fait accompli after the Emergency was declared in 1969.

Elite cohesion

Although its specific objectives were 'restructuring of society to correct the economic imbalance of wealth holding which led to the identification of race with economic function' and 'eradication of poverty irrespective of race', the NEP has been implemented these 30 years in a racially discriminatory way with little transparency or accountability.

Just 10 years after the NEP was implemented, the 1980 census showed that more than 80 percent of all government executive officers were Malay; Malays held 75 percent of publicly-funded tertiary education places; and 96 percent of Felda settlers were Malay.

By 1990, it was widely held by observers that the wealth restructuring policy objective was very much on target if nominee companies listed under 'other Malaysians' were analysed. It is also well-known that many of these nominee companies have been formed by the bumiputra elite.

All the same, these figures showing ownership of equity capital, however distorted, also reveal that the rich non-Malay elite have done quite well under the NEP. This perhaps accounts for the elite cohesion which has held the Barisan Nasional coalition together for so long. The evidence further shows that the NEP's 'wealth restructuring' has mainly resulted in increased wealth concentration and greater intra-ethnic inequality.

By the mid-80s, it was found that the top 40 shareholders in the country owned 63 percent of the total number of shares in public companies; the top 4.4 per cent of investors in the Amanah Saham Nasional had savings amounting to more than 70 percent of ASN's total investments.

The ASN is a prime example of a savings institution, secured by Malaysian taxpayers irrespective of race, but which blatantly discriminates against non-bumiputras. This racial discrimination extends to loans, end-financing, purchase of housing, shares
allocation, etc. 

Problem ignored

Racial discrimination in the education policy is manifested in unfair financial allocations to the different sectors and language streams and the reluctance of the government to allow development of the mother-tongue schools of the non-Malays.

Thus the number of Chinese and Tamil primary schools in the country have actually dropped from 1,342 and 888 at Independence to 1,284 and 535 today respectively, even though the population of the communities has doubled in the last 44 years. The government has continued to ignore the grave problem of the shortage of qualified teachers for these schools for years.

By 1990, the realities of the racially discriminatory quota system in education were as follows: an average of 90 percent of loans for polytechnic certificate courses, 90 percent of scholarships for Diploma of Education courses, 90 percent of scholarships and loans for degree courses taken in the country and almost all scholarships and loans for degree courses taken overseas were given to bumiputras.

Regarding the enrolment of students in residential schools throughout the 80s, 95 percent of them were bumiputra. The enrolment in Mara's Lower Science College, the Maktab Sains Mara, was almost 100 percent bumiputra throughout the 80s.

High time

Racial discrimination in the realm of culture is seen not only in the education policy but also in the discrimination against non-Malay cultures and religions in the National Cultural Policy. Non-Muslims face obstacles in their freedom to build places of worship and access to burial grounds, among other complaints.

Racism and racial discrimination have dominated Malaysian society for far too long. Now that the Malay ruling elite has clearly gained control of the Malaysian economy, it is high time for a new consensus based on non-racial factors such as class, sector and need to justify affirmative action.

It is time for all Malaysians who hunger for peace and freedom to outlaw racism and racial discrimination from Malaysian society once and for all and to build real unity based on adherence to human rights, equality and the interests of the Malaysian masses:

Non-racial solutions to Malaysian political institutions

1) Political parties formed on the basis of race to further the interests of their respective races should be outlawed as such
practices are inconsistent with international conventions against racism and racial discrimination;

2) Ratify all the international covenants and UN Conventions that have not been ratified by the Malaysian government to ensure that all legislation in the country abide by international human rights standards;

3) Enact a Race Relations Act and institute an Equal Opportunities Commission to combat racism, racialism, and racial discrimination in all Malaysian institutions;

4) Delineation of constituencies must be based on the principle of 'one person, one vote' and there should not be wide discrepancies between the number of voters in different constituencies;

5) Reintroduce elected local government so that problems of housing, schools, etc. can be solved in non-racial ways;

6) Ensure that there is no racial discrimination in the civil and armed services and that every ethnic community has equal chance of promotion;

7) Establish an Independent Broadcasting Authority which is fair to all ethnic communities in Malaysia; 

Non-racial solutions to Malaysian economic development

8) There must be full transparency and accountability to ensure that contracts and shares are not dispensed on a racial basis through nepotism, cronyism or corruption;

9) Public money must not be used to bail out failed private businesses under the guise of affirmative action;

10) Government policies should be strategically aimed at reducing income disparity between the rich and poor regardless of race, religion, gender, disability or political affiliation;

11) Small and medium industries, the backbone of national industrialisation, should be developed without racial discrimination;

12) Fair and adequate support should be provided to all sectors including pig farmers especially during times of crisis;

13) Land should be fairly distributed to farmers of all ethnic communities;

14) The racially-based quota system should be replaced with a means-tested sliding scale mechanism for deserving entrepreneurs; 

Non-racial solutions to Malaysian social development

15) Modernise the 450 or so New Villages in the country which have existed for more than 50 years, in which many of our small and medium industries are located and where basic infrastructure is inadequate;

16) Improve the living conditions (e.g. a guaranteed minimum monthly wage) and basic amenities such as housing, education and health facilities of plantation workers;

17) Ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and members of their families;

18) Set up an Equal Opportunities Employment Commission to address all forms of discrimination in the workplace;

19) Gazette all communal lands of the Orang Asli and other indigenous peoples so that they can control their own land resources and choose their own way of life;

20) Enact laws to confirm the rights of urban settlers and obligations of developers to provide fair compensation and alternative housing to urban settlers;

21) Cater to the special needs of women, children, senior citizens and the disabled;

22) Provide more recreational facilities for the youth regardless of race to allow them to develop positive and healthy lifestyles and to encourage tolerance and awareness of cultural diversity and equality;

23) Establish a housing development authority to direct construction of low and medium-cost public housing for the needy irrespective of race;

24) Poverty eradication programmes to benefit the poor of all ethnicity must be seriously pursued;

Non-racial solutions to Malaysian education

25) Special assistance must be based on need by under-privileged sectors and classes and not on race;

26) Institute a means-tested sliding scale of education grants and loans for all who qualify to enter tertiary institutions regardless of race, religion or gender;

27) Recognition of educational certificates, diplomas or degrees should be dealt with by the National Accreditation Board on strictly academic grounds and not politicised or subject to racial discrimination;

28) Schools using the mother tongue of Malaysian minorities should be built as long as there is a demand for them in any catchment of these ethnic communities and they should not be racially discriminated against in financial allocations;

29) Establish a long-term solution to the crisis of teacher shortage in the Chinese and Tamil schools;

30) Amend the Education Act 1996 to reflect the national education policy as originally stated in the Education Ordinance 1957 ensuring the use, teaching and development of the mother tongue of all Malaysian ethnic communities;

31) Make available compulsory Pupils' Own language (POL) classes within the normal school curriculum as long as there are five pupils of any ethnic community in any school;

Non-racial solutions to Malaysian cultural policy

32) Promote knowledge, respect and sensitivity among Malaysians on Malaysian cultures, religions and ethnicity;

33) All places of prayer and worship for all ethnic communities should be gazetted in their areas of domicile free from any encumbrances and there should be no arbitrary restrictions on these places of worship;

34) National artistic and literary awards and scholarships considerations should be for all works by Malaysians regardless of the language in which they are written;

35) All ethnic Malaysian cultures should be fairly represented in official cultural bodies and the media. 

DR KUA KIA SOONG, 

former ISA detainee 

Member of Parliament

Director of Suaram.

REVIEW - An Analysis of Malaysia’s 12th General Election

1.    Introduction

In our pre-election analysis, we estimated that the Opposition parties will win about 50 parliamentary seats and face a very strong challenge from DAP-Keadilan in Penang. We also warned of the strong wind blowing in the Indian and Chinese communities towards the Opposition. We did not and could not then anticipate the equally strong wave of Malay support for the Opposition which resulted in the Opposition gaining 82 seats in Parliament, denying the Barisan Nasional of its two-thirds majority, the first time since the May 1969 General Election. We had in our pre-election analysis noted the possibility of a divided outcome with a strong Malay government against a strong non-Malay Opposition. However, this did not materialize as Malay support for the Opposition was also strong resulting in multi racial Keadilan winning 31 seats and PAS 23 seat in Parliament. In fact, the popular votes obtained by UMNO (35.5%) and combined PAS/Keadilan (34.8%) was almost equal. Whilst the loss of Penang state to the Opposition did not come as a surprise after the first week of campaign with massive turnout at DAP ceramahs and large donations collected on the spot for the DAP candidates, the fall of Perak and Selangor was totally unexpected. What happened? What caused the massive swing?

Some facts on the 12th General Election should be noted and analysed. The Barisan Nasional within Peninsular Malaysia failed to obtain a majority of popular votes cast. It only obtained 49% of the popular votes in Peninsular Malaysia whereas the Opposition had the majority of popular votes – 51%. UMNO won 35% of popular votes against 34.8% won by PAS and Keadilan. Although the Barisan Nasional won 140 seats in Parliament, 54 seats came from Sabah and Sarawak. So, without Sabah and Sarawak, Barisan Nasional will not have even obtained a simple majority in Parliament. If the Federal Territory was to be considered as a state, the Barisan Nasional actually lost 6 states. In Negeri Sembilan, it survives with only a 4-seat majority. In Pahang, Barisan Nasional even lost the state capital, Kuantan. Even the Barisan Nasional fortress of Johor was successfully penetrated by the Opposition this time with both DAP and PAS winning seats. There are no safe bastions for Barisan Nasional anymore.

Although, the Chinese and Indian votes have decisively swung to the DAP and Keadilan, causing MCA, MIC and Gerakan to lose massive support, it was totally unexpected for UMNO to lose in urban and semi-urban Malay seats like Titiwangsa and Lembah Pantai (in Kuala Lumpur city), Shah Alam, Hulu Langat, Kuala Langat, Kuala Selangor, Gombak, Ampang, Sungei Petani, Merbok, Kulim, Nibong Tebal, Balik Pulau (in Penang), Parit Buntar and Bagan Serai in Perak. Barisan Nasional even loss Kuantan – the capital of Pahang and Indera Mahkota. With increasing urbanization with the urban population projected to increase to 73% in 2020, up from 62% in 2000, can UMNO prevent a slide in urban Malay votes? What made the urban Malays desert UMNO? This question needs to be addressed. For the MCA and MIC, it was clearly their worst ever electoral performance ever. In 1969, MCA won 13 out of 24 seats contested (54%), whereas this year MCA only won 37.5% of parliament seats contested. Gerakan was totally wiped out in Penang – its stronghold. The DAP campaigned that a vote for MCA or Gerakan is a vote for UMNO to capitalize on the anger of the Chinese community over UMNO. Hence, the track record of MCA and Gerakan was ignored with an emotional swing against UMNO.

2. What the Election Results Mean

Several broad conclusions can be drawn from the 12th General Election:-

(i) It is a seismic shift in Malaysian politics. A political tsunami as the Star headlines said. The old ways of campaigning may no longer work. Putting fear into voters minds did not work. The use of mainstream media to create spin or to demonise the opposition was detested by urban voters and had a counter-effect instead. From feedback, many urban voters were turned off by the spin especially in NST and Star.


(ii) The victory of DAP, Keadilan and PAS in many areas showed that voters do not buy the argument that the Chinese won’t support PAS and DAP won’t get Malay votes. As Dr. Farish Noor reported from the PAS Headquarters in Kota Baru on Saturday night (polling night), Kelantan PAS supporters cheered when the DAP gained control of Penang. So the notion Malays won’t support DAP was debunked that night in Kota Baru.


(iii) Makkal Sakhti (People Power), the cry of HINDRAF, caused a tidal wave of support from the Indian community towards the opposition. This seismic shift of Indian voters contributed to the defeat of many Barisan Nasional candidates, not only MIC candidates.


(iv) The Barisan Nasional’s brand of race-based politics is no longer an attractive proposition to voters. Chinese voters deserted MCA and Gerakan. Indian voters swung away from MIC. Many Malay voters switched to Keadilan, making Keadilan the biggest opposition party with 31 parliament seats. The Opposition parties won, not on race-based issues but across a range of issues that cuts across ethnic lines. The MCA and MIC lost whilst trying to portray themselves as defenders of their race. UMNO lost ground to Keadilan even with Anwar calling for an end to NEP. Is this then, a new paradigm for Malaysian politics that Malaysian voters are more taken in by wider national issues such as corruption, crime, cost of living, social justice and human rights which cuts across all ethnic groups rather than narrow ethnic issues that favour any particular race? Even MCA championing the cause of Chinese schools didn’t get much support from the Chinese community. But, PAS delivered votes to DAP and Chinese voters supported both PAS and Keadilan. Should MCA remain purely a Chinese party when it lost more Chinese votes to the DAP or should it become a multi-racial party and widen its appeal to non-Chinese? This has set the stage for a new era of multi-racial politics in Malaysia, perhaps the beginning of a two-party system which is healthy in any democracy.


(v) The loss of Penang, Kedah, Selangor and Perak can perhaps be partially attributed to complacency in the Barisan Nasional camp. Over-confidence in a proven track record may be another factor. In Penang, the non-Malay voters were unhappy with Gerakan for being unable or unwilling to stand up to UMNO. However, the Opposition’s ability to capture, in particular, Penang and Selangor, the jewels in the crown so to speak, and even Perak to a lesser extent, will enable DAP and Keadilan to attempt to provide a new model of governance, which if they succeed, could further strengthen their grips on these states in the next General Elections and extend their support in other states like Negeri Sembilan (remember earlier point: Barisan Nasional only have 4 seat majority in Negeri Sembilan). However, if the DAP and Keadilan mess up, they will lose their opportunity and the voters in the 3 states Penang, Perak and Selangor may revert to the Barisan Nasional. It is however, unlikely DAP and Keadilan will squander their chance. It is left to be seen if the new State Governments in Penang, Perak and Selangor can deliver. If so, expect them to control these states for at least two terms if the state governments are administered well with good governance, accountability and transparency.


(vi) The point has also to be made that never in the history of Malaysia has the Prime Minister ever lost his own home state. In Penang, UMNO/Barisan Nasional only retained 2 parliamentary seats, that of the Prime Minister and Second Finance Minister Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop. The 12th General Election by any reckoning is UMNO’s worst-ever performance, worse than in 1969 and 1999.

3. What Caused the Swing to the Opposition

The political tsunami was brought about by various factors, foremost of which is the perceived arrogance of power. All racial groups – Malays, Chinese and Indians have the perception that the Barisan Nasional did not hear or listen to the voice of the people. The Barisan Nasional mishandled the Bersih and HINDRAF protests. This show no tolerance for public assemblies and no outlet for grievances which resulted in the aggrieved parties voting against the Barisan Nasional in the ballot boxes. The Barisan Nasional’s over-confidence and poor intelligence failed to identify growing anger and frustration of the people. The Prime Minister’s challenge to Opposition supporters not to demonstrate but to take it to the ballot box also made many fence sitters and opposition sympathizers to vote for the opposition. The Barisan Nasional failed to effectively read the mood on the ground. Many urban voters in particular the fence sitters were put off by the propaganda, spin and one-sided coverage on TV and in NST and Star.

A contributory factor could be internal bickering over the choice of candidates within the Barisan Nasional component parties not only in UMNO but also in MCA and Gerakan. Apart from the above, other factors also contributed to the unprecedented swing in support to the Opposition. These can be attributed as the 9C’s:-

(i)                 Change : A massive mood swing brought about by the opposition’s promise of change and reform.

(ii)                 Crime : Growing anger at the seeming inability of the Federal Government to tackle crime effectively.

(iii)               Cost of Living : Rising frustration over increases in the cost of living.

(iv)              Corruption : Growing perception that corruption has worsened over the past four years. (v)               Courts : Disgust over the Lingham enquiry and concern about judicial independence.

(vi)              Convergence of Issues : All these issues coming to a head at the same time and perception that government is not listening or effectively addressing them. There is really no one single big issue but a convergence of issues that caused people to be dissatisfied and angry with the Barisan Nasional.

(vii)             Communications Technology : The power of the internet and blogs to provide alternative information, that is downloaded, printed and distributed even to kampungs and new villages. With the spin in NST, more people trust the blogs more than the mainstream media.

(viii)            Credible Leadership : For the first time, the Opposition was able to present credible leadership and credible alternatives. The Anwar factor is pivotal. More than the 1998 reformasi campaign this year is much more an Anwar-coordinated campaign. DAP, Keadilan and PAS put up young, credible candidates. Lim Guan Eng, a Monash economics and accounting graduate, taking charge of Penang instead of his father Lim Kit Siang provided a younger and less belligerent face to the electorate backed by credible candidates like Prof. Ramasamy, Lim Chin Tiong and Jeff Ooi.

(ix)              Campaign Strategy : The Barisan Nasional’s campaign strategy was much of the same. The old school approach – some carrots and sticks. It offered development on the one hand, it threatens on the other, warning the Chinese and Indian communities that they will have no representation in government. The Chinese and Indian voters didn’t buy this argument this time. At one point in Penang, feedback from many Chinese voters is they don’t mind not even having a Chinese Chief Minister to teach the Barisan Nasional a lesson. Promises and fear didn’t work this time. UMNO also took Malay voters for granted. On the other hand, the Opposition’s strategy was low-key, humble and non-threatening. PAS didn’t speak of an Islamic State. DAP didn’t campaign to capture Penang as was the case during Tanjung I, II and III. All DAP asked for was to deny Barisan Nasional two-thirds majority both in Penang and in Parliament. This softer approach compared to Kit Siang’s aggressive style in 1990, 1995, 1999 won DAP many sympathetic votes. The use of blogs as alternative media was also highly successful.

For the Chinese voters, memories don’t fade easily. Often politicians tend to think people have short memories. But the Chinese voters are still upset and aggrieved over the waving of the keris incident at UMNO Youth Assemblies and the racial rhetoric in the 2006 UMNO General Assembly. Chinese voters also perceived MCA and Gerakan to be too subservient to UMNO. For the Indian voters, HINDRAF was a key factor. The power of Makkal Sakhti (People’s Power) is real and translated into votes for the Opposition throughout the country where there are sizeable number of Indian voters. For Malay voters, Anwar provided an alternative leadership. He read the Malay mood well. To the Malay voters in Anwar’s campaign speeches, the NEP because of its over-obsession with Bumiputra equity, benefitted only UMNO Puteras and didn’t benefit the ordinary people in the rural heartland. UMNO Youth was also perceived to be brash and arrogant.

4. Looking Ahead

What the 12th General Election provided is a timely wake-up call to all political parties. They need to change, reform and deliver. For the Barisan Nasional, it means reinvention to stay relevant. For the Opposition in control of the 5 State Governments, it means the need to deliver what they promised. Can they work together? The question, looking ahead, is how UMNO will react. Will it be magnanimous and learn the right lessons? Will it change and reform from within and lower racial rhetoric to win back non-Malay support or will it up the ante to become even more ultra-Malay to retain whatever Malay support it still has? Will UMNO remain united and cohesive or will there be a scramble for positions in its coming General Assembly and party elections? The internal dynamics in UMNO in the lead up to party elections need to be watched.

For the Opposition, the key question is whether the new State Governments in Penang, Perak and Selangor can perform and deliver and meet the expectations of the people? Will there be a witch-hunt against Barisan Nasional supporters? Will they be able to cooperate and work closely together? Will they gain the support of civil servants? Will they be able to cooperate and work with the Federal Government? What will be the impact on Government-Linked Companies controlled by or connected to these state governments? For the MCA and MIC, the question is whether they should continue to narrowly fight for Chinese and Indian interests or should they reinvent themselves to become multi-racial parties like DAP and Keadilan and champion wider national issues such as corruption, human rights, judicial independence and economic opportunities.

For the Gerakan and PPP, the key question is whether they should continue to exist and if so, what is their niche in Malaysian politics? Should they bring about the merger of smaller parties in the Barisan Nasional including those in Sabah and Sarawak? Will the 2008 Election lead to the emergence of a two-party system in Malaysia? For the Prime Minister, this is an opportunity to clean house. To listen more to the voice of the people and not to be disconnected to the feelings on the ground. We have in Pak Lah a decent man, a dedicated and pious Muslim. He should use his strength to reinvent himself and renew UMNO and Barisan Nasional. Credit ought to be also given to the Prime Minister for providing more democratic space and a fairer, freer election as well as for his stoic acceptance of the democratic voice of the people, and for not reacting ala the midnite snatch in Sabah in the mid-1980’s or having an Operasi Lallang or May 13/NOC type reaction. There is clearly a need to review certain National Policies that causes unhappiness and decisiveness. Will the Barisan Nasional leadership, be able, perhaps more willing to rise to the occasion to bite the bullet?


In the final analysis, despite the massive swing to the opposition, the Barisan Nasional still remained in office at Federal level and has a comfortable majority to provide continuity and political stability. This analysis provides some key facts and pose some key questions that need to be pondered over in the days and months ahead. Whatever it is, Malaysian politics post March 8, 2008 will not be the same again. It is time for a new beginning. A new era has begun. More importantly, to note that the morning after, most surveys showed that many Malaysians from all races and different walks of life felt good over the election outcome. Dated: 13th March 2008





By Asli