Showing posts with label Conference of Rulers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Conference of Rulers. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

#MH370 Most people don’t know enough about Malaysia and its government. Here’s what you should understand.


By Adam Taylor. Published by The Washington Post on 20 March 2014.

Malaysia's government is in the spotlight due to its handling of the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, which disappeared just 40 minutes after leaving Kuala Lumpur en route to Beijing on March 8.

It's an unusual situation for the country. Malaysia doesn't usually make headlines -- it's not a huge tourist destination, like its neighbor Thailand, and it hasn't had a recent disaster like the Philippines or Indonesia. Instead, Malaysia has mostly become known as a quiet success in Southeast Asia in recent years, where GDP per capita was well ahead of Thailand and Indonesia and the economy was expected to grow between 4.5 percent and 5.5 percent in 2014.

Now, with the Malaysian government facing scrutiny from all corners, everyone is beginning to wonder: Is there more to Malaysia than meets the eye?

The geography and history of Malaysia

Look at a map of modern Malaysia and the geography of the place may strike you as unusual. Roughly half of the country exists on the Malay Peninsula, bordering the lowest tip of Thailand. The other part of the country is on the northern part of Borneo island, which it shares with Indonesia. In both of these two parts there are smaller states: the city-state of Singapore, which sits just off the coast of the Malay Peninsula, and Brunei, which is in the Malaysian part of Borneo.

The modern Malaysian state began with the Federation of Malaya's independence from the British Empire in 1957, but the area had been populated for a far longer time -- in Sarawak's Niah Caves in East Malaysia, there's evidence of human remains from 40,000 years ago. The first independent state covering the region is commonly considered to be the Malacca sultanate, an Islamic Malay monarchy that controlled the area from 1400 to 1511, when the city of Malacca was captured by a Portuguese invasion. After a long period of Portuguese rule, the Dutch took it over in 1641, with the British Empire gradually taking over Penang in 1786, Singapore in 1819, and Malacca itself in 1824, ultimately securing control of what would later become Malaysia.

British rule continued until World War II, when Japanese troops were able to overrun the unprepared British authorities and take over the area. After Japan lost the war, the British returned but could not regain the authority they had before due to their war. An anti-colonial insurgency known as the "Malayan Emergency" began in 1948, compelling Britain to create the Federation of Malaya that same year, which in turn became became independent in 1957. In 1963, modern Malaysia was created with the Malaysia Agreement; North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore joined it in a new independent state, though Singapore would be expelled two years later. (Brunei, which had once been at the center of the Bruneian Empire, remained an independent, and oil-rich, sultanate).

Malaysia's complicated ethnic politics

Toward the end of British rule, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO) emerged as a political force dedicated to protecting ethnic Malays and the Islamic religion. Since independence, the party has been a part of every government alliance.

Today, Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy, loosely modeled after the United Kingdom: The head of state is the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, effectively a monarch elected by Malaysia's traditional Malay rulers. The prime minister is the head of government, officially appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to lead a majority in Malaysia's lower house of parliament. While the constitution of Malaysia, which came into force in 1957, says all Malaysian citizens are equal, Bumiputera (a designation that refers to the indigenous people of Malaysia, including ethnic Malays) are singled out for special treatment in Article 153. That section of the constitution begins: It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.

The logic behind Article 153 was that Chinese and Indian immigrants to Malaysia had been favored during British rule, and both had subsequently gained economically while Malays and others remained in poverty. After independence, these economic disparities had begun to cause problems in the country: Singapore's removal from Malaysia was based in part upon a number of race riots that took place in the country between Chinese and Malay groups in 1964, and Kuala Lumpur had its own race riots in 1969. In 1971, economic measures referred to as the “New Economic Policy” (NEP) were implemented to favor Bumiputera, offering them positive discrimination in the civil service and business in a bid to improve their economic standing.

The quiet, yet successful, economy

Under British rule, Malaysia became one of the world's biggest exporters of tin, palm oil and rubber. And as one of the three countries that controls the Strait of Malacca, an important shipping route, it still plays a key role in international trade. High-tech manufacturing has  become a successful part of Malaysia's economy, and Kuala Lumpur is now a global center for Islamic banking. The city is also home to Petronas Towers, which replaced Chicago's Sears Tower (now Willis Tower) as the world's tallest building in 1998 and held the title until 2004.

All this has resulted in a pretty favorable economy. The Doing Business Project recently ranked the country as 6th in its annual rankings, and GDP per capita is higher than neighbors like Thailand and Indonesia.

Despite these good signs, there have been criticisms that the country's ethnic policies were in effect creating a lack of competition and stifling opportunities for non-Bumiputera. The Economist recently noted that 25 percent of the population is thought to be Chinese and to control much of the country's business, while Indians were said to be around 7 percent and overrepresented in professional careers. The magazine warned that Malaysia faces a brain-drain unless more opportunities are put in place for non-Bumiputera ethnic groups.

An angry opposition

As you might expect, 50 years of virtually uncontested rule has resulted in some problems. Writing recently for Bloomberg Businessweek, Joshua Karlantzick argued that the country's ruling coalition only managed to win elections last year due to "gerrymandering, outright thuggery, and opposition parties’ inability to stop squabbling and make connections with rural voters." Despite some minor signs of change, the NEP remains a significant factor in Malaysian political life and its business world, with the ruling parties apparently afraid to alienate the Malay majority who make their base.

The Malaysian government's manner of dealing with opposition leaders also appears to show it's on the back foot. The best-known opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim, was sent to jail on corruption and sodomy charges in 2000. While the sodomy charges were overturned in 2004 and he was released, Anwar is now facing the threat of jail again on more sodomy charges.

An ethnic Malay and former member of UMNO, Anwar was once deputy prime minister of Malaysia but fell out with leaders. He now leads a multi-ethnic three-party opposition group called Pakatan Rakyat, running on a manifesto that aims to end the NEP ethnic policies and promote a system of meritocracy.

Why this all matters to MH370

The response to the disappearance of MH370 from the Malaysian government and Malaysia Airlines (a state-run company) is seen by many as evidence of a lack of ability among the country's political and business elite -- a result of decades of positive discrimination in favor of Malays and a lack of competition in business and politics. Malaysian officials aren't used to dealing with a free and open press, and they have blundered in their attempts to deflect questions about the plane. While they are no longer suspected of involvement in the plane's disappearance, the fact that two passengers were traveling on fake documents has embarrassed both the airline and the state.

It's possible Malaysia's internal politics could have played a direct role in the plane's disappearance. It's true, for example, that pilot Zaharie Ahmad Shah was a member of an opposition party and distantly related to Anwar (Anwar himself has said that the speculation about political motives was "grossly unfair" to the pilot). The country's Muslim Brotherhood-styled Islamist party, the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS), is also a part of Anwar's opposition coalition and increasing in popularity, though speculation about an Islamist-backed terrorist attack remains just speculation.

A more likely problem for Malaysia is that of perception. A country once known for its quietly strong economy is becoming better known as something else: a disorganized, unmeritocratic country completely unable to cope with a real emergency.

[Correction amended 3/25/2014] Link:

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Put Interest Of The Nation First

REFLECTING ON THE LAW
By SHAD SALEEM FARIQI

The Star, 20 May 2009

There are no winner-take-all solutions to the Perak political crisis, a hydra-headed monster that cannot be eliminated by ding-dong judicial decisions.

THE Perak political crisis can be likened to a malignant cancer that is voraciously spreading to the lymph nodes of our other institutions – the Sultanate, the judiciary, the federal executive, the civil service, the police, the law officers of the Crown, the court registry, the Anti-Corruption Commission and the Election Commission.

The longer we wait, the farther the affliction will spread. It is time, therefore, to stop this madness, this divisiveness, this polarisation.

There are no black and white, open and shut, or simple solutions.

The issues are so complex and so interconnected that arguments from both sides of the divide have depth and richness.

In sych a politically-charged situation, the courts cannot supply any satisfactory solutions. The judiciary is suited to resolving legal issues, not political ones.

The courts usually provide piecemeal solutions to simple, succinct questions.

But when there is a bottomless cesspool of polarising and contentious issues, no court, here or anywhere, can wipe away the discord and restore harmony and sanity.

Thus, even if after an agonizingly slow course of interim proceedings, ap peals and cross appeals there is an authoritative judicial determination of who the legitimate Mentri Besar is, a plethora of other connected is sues — each capable of toppling the apple cart — will still be left unaddressed.

Among the issues are the validity of the resignation letters by the three who opted out of Pakatan Rakat to be Independents friendly to Barisan Nasional; the unilateral power of the Speaker to declare Assembly seats vacant; and the power of the Election Commission to make a ruling on the same issue.

If there are calls for a vote of confidence on the floor of the House, the Speaker may frustrate it by disqualifying and barring 10 out of 59 members of the Assembly from attending the proceedings.

Is the Speaker subject to a restraining order from the court, or are proceedings in the Assembly immune from judicial interference?

If the result of a vote of confidence is influenced by exclusion of a large number of members, is the Sultan bound by it?

Or does he have any other way of determining the question of “confidence of the members of the Assembly”?

There are disagreements about the legal validity of the “assembly un der the tree” and the resolutions it passed.

The removal of V. Sivakumar as Perak Assembly Speaker and the installation of Datuk R. Ganesan as the new Speaker aroused deep revulsion and raised many legal issues.

The repeated dismissal and rein state ment of the Secretary of the Perak Assembly, the State Secretary and the State Legal Advisor pose ma ny queries.

Scores of local authority personnel have lost their jobs in the musical-chair manner in which governments are rising and falling in Pe rak.

Till a judicial decision is made on the validity of the removal and the rein­statement, there will be doubts about the legality of any decisions they may have made.

Partisan tactics by the police within the premises of the State Assembly raise constitutional issues of the sanctity and privileges of state as semblies.

The officers involved may one day have to appear before the Privileges Committee to answer charges of contempt.

In sum, the political crisis in Perak is like a hydra-headed monster that cannot be eliminated so easily by ding-dong judicial decisions.

Let us stop this insane and naked show of unprincipled politics.

Let us accept that in this stalemate, there are no winner-take-all solutions.

For this reason, recourse to the courts is pointless. The warring factions should negotiate and accommodate.

There are four more years to the next general election.

Barisan and Pakatan can agree to share two years each at the helm.

Alternatively, there is the political possibility of appointment of a neutral, caretaker government advising dissolution and state elections within 60 days from the date of dissolution.

There is the legal sledgehammer of federal intervention through an emergency proclamation under Arti cle 150 of the Federal Constitu tion, as happened in Sarawak in 1966 and Kelantan in 1977.

This may restore order out of chaos to pave the way for a state poll in due course of time.

The country as a whole is more important than the fate of Barisan or Pakatan in Perak.

In Rome, Nero played the fiddle while the city burned. We should not allow that to happen to us.

Perak politicians have no right to paralyse the rest of the country or to distract us from the many urgent and daunting tasks staring us in the face.

Among them are an economy reeling under the effects of the world financial turmoil, racial polarisation, the conflict between civil and syariah courts, and the deeply divisive is sue of religious conversion of minors upon one parent changing his or her religion.

The liberalisation of the economy requires deft handling. The review of such controversial laws as the ISA requires thorough con sultation and deep soul-searching. The education system is ripe for review.

Because of the shenanigans in Perak, the country is on the verge of a political precipice.

We are afraid both to climb or to fall. But the ground is slipping be neath us.

Quick action is needed.

The public is fed up with political intrigues and wishes a closure to this Perak temasya.

Perhaps the Conference of Rulers can exercise its powers under Article 38 (3) to discuss issues of national importance and to propose some via­ble solutions to the Perak crisis.

Perhaps the Yang di-Pertuan Agong can draw on his vast prerogative power to advise, caution and warn about the long-term effects of Perak to the integrity of our legal and political system.

Perhaps politically disinterested, towering personalities like Tun Musa Hitam or Tan Sri Razali Ismail could be roped in to broker peace and to stop this haemorrhaging of public trust.

We have had enough of political mudslinging and acrimony. We need to move on to the real problems and challenges of living.

Prof Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi is a Professor of Law at Universiti Teknologi Mara