United Front and GE 14

United Front and GE 14

S. Arutchelvan

Arutchelvan (picture above) presented his speech entitled "United Front Theory and GE 14" in "Differentiate between enemy and ally, bury UMNO hegemony" forum organised by Sahabat Rakyat held on 25 Sep 2016 in commemmoration of the 15th anniversary of Sahabat Rakyat at Crystal Crown Hotel, Johor Bahru. 

[Editor's Note]: The following is the video record of Arutchelvan's speech in the forum. The organiser requested all panel speakers including Arutchelvan to submit paper prior to the forum so that their views can be fully elaborated for readers to have a precise understanding. In the absence of paper from Arutchelvan, we can only upload the video record of Arutchelvan in the forum to our blog to allow readers to gain some basic understanding on the contents he presented. To ensure readers understand Arutchelvan's views correctly, we anticipate that he will furnish us with his paper within a reasonable time frame i.e. one to two weeks after and we will upload his paper to our blog.

Arutchelvan's Speech Part 1:

Arutchelvan's Speech Part 2:

Read More

人民之友成立15周年纪念论坛 — 主席团献词（10点40分更新：主图）

——人民之友成立15周年纪念论坛——

主席团献词

主席团：詹玉兰、朱信杰、严居汉

人民之友主席团主席詹玉兰在人民之友为纪念成立15周年而举办的主题为“认清斗争敌友，埋葬巫统霸权”论坛开始前宣读人民之友主席团献词。

不知不觉，人民之友工委会已经走过了15个年头。这一路以来，虽然曲曲折折，但是，我们依然坚持做着同样的事情，即尽一切所能把我们的亲身经历据实的整理出来，前后发表了两篇工作总结。

我们于2011年9月9日举行10周年纪念时，发表了一篇《人民之友10年风雨路程（2001-2011）》的总结性文章。在经历了另一个5年的工作实践之后，我们决定在今年（2016年）再作另一次总结，因此，发表了一篇题为《在过去5年的实践中，提高了4点政治认识》的人民之友（2011—2016）工作总结。

我们视上述的工作为参与民主改革运动应尽的责任。我们之所以做出以上总结，并不是要强求他人接受我们的见解，反之，我们更乐意听取他人的批评与指教。毕竟，社会运动本来就是会不停的在运动着的，或永远没有完结的，因此，它自然需要受到一次又一次的考验，方能继续向前、继续深化的。

在过去短短的五年时间，马来西亚民主改革运动确实经历了其发展与衰退。当前的政治局势是无论是统治集团或被统治集团都处在一个分化改组的阶段。因此，如何能够从这个扑朔迷离、一团混乱的状况中发现其规律性，确实是需要个个和方方面面的努力去完善它的。

我们的团队，在这段期间，也经历了一些波折。组织成员的流动性虽然不大，有的坚持到今天、有的离开了我们。虽然说，它就好比人生一样，有聚有散、有分有离，本来就是一件简单不过的事情。但是，有些离开的成员确实是组织的一大缺憾。尽管如此，值得一提的是，我们能够感受到无论是年轻的工委还是年长的工委，个个都有显著的成长。

更难得的是，人民之友工委会自2013年在迫不得已的情况下离开了大马人民之声（Suara Rakyat Malaysia，简称SUARAM）并没有因此而倒下，而且还毅然决然撑起了人民之友（Sahabat Rakyat）的旗帜，在人力财力单薄的情况下还继续坚持推动马来西亚的民主改革运动。由于我们再也没有接受任何的津贴或资助，每次活动费用都由参与者自愿献捐或征求热心者赞助，我们感激大家一路来的支持，也希望大家往后一如既往的支持我们。

此外，值得鼓励和庆幸的是人民之友也迎来了新的成员的加入。人民之友更殷切希望，未来还会有更多不同阶层、不同背景的民主人士，成为我们的自愿工作者，和我们站在一起，并肩作战，为推动我国民主改革运动做出努力，为我国更好的明天而奋斗！

（2016年9月25日）

Read More

Dimanakah harapan Pakatan Harapan? (Kemaskini pada 27 Sep: Pautan dan gambar)

 Dimanakah harapan Pakatan Harapan?

Penulis: Chow Yu Hui
Ketua Editor The Rocket; ADUN DAP Bilut, Pahang

Penterjemah: See Siew Min

希望联盟，希望在哪里？

Artikel Bahasa Melayu ini merupakan penterjemahan daripada teks asal Bahasa Cina yang dihantar sebagai teks ucapan penulis dalam Forum “Membezakan Sekutu dan Musuh Perjuangan, Menguburkan Hegemoni Umno” sempena ulang tahun ke-15 Sahabat Rakyat yang diadakan pada 25 September 2016 di Crsytal Crown Hotel, Johor Bahru. Sekiranya terdapat sebarang percanggahan antara versi Bahasa Melayu dan Bahasa Cina, versi Bahasa Cina adalah muktamad.

Dalam Pilihanraya Umum yang lalu (PRU ke-13), biarpun Pakatan Rakyat (PR) berjaya meraih 52% undi, PR masih tidak dapat menawan Putrajaya disebabkan pilihanraya yang tidak bersih, dan persempadanan kawasan undian yang tidak adil. Sehari selepas pilihanraya, Najib berhujah tentang “Tsunami Cina” atas keputusan pilihanraya. Pemimpin-pemimpin PR segera membalas bahawa ia sebenarnya “Tsunami Bandar”, namun selepas itu ketiga-tiga anggota Parti PR mula terpedaya, dengan beransur-ansur bersetuju sepakat bahawa kegagalan menarik undi Melayu yang cukup merupakan faktor utama kegagalan PRU ke-13. Bahkan mereka mengharap-harapkan berlakunya “Tsunami Melayu” apabila sokongan rakyat terhadap Najib merosot. Pemikiran tersebut telah menafikan sendiri balasan PR terhadap hujah Najib. Sebenarnya PR telah menyetujui dalam hati bahawasanya “Tsunami Cina” telah berlaku semasa PRU ke-13. 

Maka, Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) pun berpendapat bahawa meraka kehilangan undi Melayu kerana berada dalam Pakatan Rakyat; Demi mendapat kembali pengiktirafan bahawa mereka adalah pejuang tulen Islam, PAS telah menonjolkan Hukum Hudud dan memutuskan sendiri hubungan dengan perjuangan PR; Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) berpendapat Parti Tindakan Demokratik Malaysia (DAP) telah berkembang terlalu kuat sehingga menakut-nakutkan undi Melayu; DAP pula mula berasa parti ini tidak dapat mewakili keseluruhan rakyat Malaysia.

Oleh sebab Chow Yu Hui telah mengaturkan program lain
pada hari tersebut, maka beliau tidak dapat hadir untuk
berucap. Jawatankuasa forum telah melantik Choo Shinn
Chean untuk membacakan makalah beliau (dalam Bahasa
Cina) dan merumuskan dalam Bahasa Melayu.

Parti-parti pembangkang seiras langkah menetapkan ‘memenangi undi Melayu’ sebagai garis umum dalam PRU akan datang. Mereka beranggapan bahawa mereka sudah semestinya boleh menawan Putrajaya seandainya memperoleh sokongan undi Melayu. Maka dalam beberapa tahun kebelangkangan ini, misi utama mereka adalah menenteramkan “kegelisahan Melayu”, dengan sedaya updaya mengelakkan isu-isu sensitif masyarakat Melayu seperti kaum dan agama, walhasil bermacam-macam sandiwara, antaranya:

Demi memenangi undi Melayu, PKR sanggup memeluk PAS yang telah memungkiri prinsip, mengkhianati rakan sekutuannya dan bermain mata dengan UMNO. Biarpun PAS berkeras-kepala mewujudkan pertandingan tiga penjuru dalam pilihanraya kecil Sungai Besar dan Kuala Kangsar, PKR tetap memilih untuk bertoleransi dengan PAS di Selangor, mengizinkan PAS terus berada dalam Kerajaan Negeri Selangor. Ini telah menjadikan Kerajaan Negeri Selangor sebuah kerajaan yang ‘freak’ dan aneh, wahai Setiausaha Agung pula menyeru masyarakat bukan Melayu memahami rusuh resah masyarakat Melayu.

Demi memenangi undi Melayu, DAP sanggup mengenangi Tun Razak; membisu diri apabila kuasa-kuasa Diraja bercampur tangan dalam urusan kerajaan (sebagaimana juga PKR dan AMANAH). Apabila berdepan dengan isu-isu hak istimewa Melayu dan hegemoni Islam, DAP tidak lagi mempertahankan pendirian di medan terdepan seperti dahulu.

Parti Amanah Negara (AMANAH) yang baru ditubuhkan walaupun mewar-warkan ianya parti yang dibentuk oleh kelompok berfikiran progresif, namum masih tidak dapat menbebaskan diri daripada mitos ‘Kegelisahan Melayu’. Presidennya cuba menyakinkan rakyat bahawa adalah mustahil Malaysia akan diperintah oleh orang Cina. Disamping itu ahli-ahli akar umbi pula menyaran DAP supaya tidak meletakkan calon Melayu untuk bertanding dalam kerusi Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN), kerana mengkhuatiri tindakan ini akan memberi gambaran kepada masyarakat Melayu bahawa DAP berwawasan untuk memegang jawatan Menteri Besar, justeru itu menakut-nakuti undi Melayu.

Apa yang lebih tergamam lagi apabila ketiga-tiga parti Pakatan Harapan (PH) berganding bahu mengadakan sidang media pada 19 hb Januari ini, tak tersangka-sangka mereka menekankan lagi bahawa “Pakatan Harapan mengambil peduli dan akan menyelesaikan kegelisahan Melayu”. Mereka sekali lagi menatang keluar Dasar Bersama Pakatan Harapan, menjamin bahawa PH akan mempertahankan hak-hak etnik Melayu tetapi setakat menggunakan istilah “tidak akan mengabaikan” dan berharap boleh mudah membereskan etnik-etnik bukan Melayu lain.

Kabur-kabur harapan Pakatan Harapan

Apakah sebab satu pakatan politik yang mengaku hendak melangkaui politik kaum dan agama, satu pakatan alternatif (untuk memerintah) yang bercakap gah bahawa mereka lebih maju dan berfikiran lebih progresif berbanding dengan BN, begitu asyik dengan kegelisahan satu etnik, merasionalkan “Kegelisahan Melayu”, dan mengutamakan penyelesaian “Kegelisahan Melayu”? Adakah semua ini hanya disebabkan etnik Melayu merupakan majoriti pengundi piliharaya, maka pengundi Melayu semestinya menjadi sasaran perkhidmatan premier PH? Dimana titik ketinggian moral PH dalam meyakinkan orang bukan Muslim dan bukan Melayu bahawa selepas menawan kerajaan pusat, PH tidak akan bertindak sama seperti Barisan Nasional yang mengagung-agungkan Ketuanan Melayu?

Terlebih dahulu, PH semestinya dengan jelas menganalisa di mana “Kegelisahan Melayu”? Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa UMNO melalui agenda-agenda fitnah dan mencemarkan imej DAP melalui media perdana sejak lama dahulu, telah berjaya membentuk persepsi fobia tanpa sebab terhadap DAP dalam masyarakat Melayu, mereka senantiasa ingat DAP ingin merampas “Kuasa Politik” yang dimiliki Melayu. Maka kegelisahan di kalangan Melayu wujud apabila DAP dengan lantang menuntut hak-hak samarata untuk semua, sebagai contoh, mansuhkan ketidaksamarataan hak antara bumiputra dan bukan bumiputra, mansuhkan Dasar Ekonomi Baru, tuntut pembelaan samarata bagi sekolah berbilang aliran, menyeru agar kerajaan melaksanakan meritokrasi dalam pemilihan dan promosi bakat dalam semua bidang.

Kesemua tuntutan mengejar hak samarata semua etnik disasarkan tepat pada pemikiran “Ketuanan Melayu” di kalangan Melayu yang sekian lama ditanam oleh UMNO. Dalam PRU ke-13 Pakatan Rakyat tidak dapat melegakan rasa khuatir di kalangan Melayu tentang kehilangan kuasa politik, biarpun antara parti-parti PR terdiri daripada PKR dan PAS yang ahlinya majoriti Melayu.

Pendek kata, Pakatan Harapan (sebelum ini Pakatan Rakyat) sebagai pakatan alternatif yang bersiap sedia mengambil-alih kuasa memerintah, segala tuntutan progresif yang dipaparkan PH demi membentuk politik era baru Malaysia sebenarnya bercanggahan secara intrinsik dengan “Kegelisahan Melayu”. Nampaknya PH sekarang lebih cenderung dan meletakkan tugas menenangkan rusuh resah Melayu sebagai keutamaan, maka mereka seboleh-bolehnya mengelakkan diri daripada isu-isu yang melibatkan sentimen kaum dan agama supaya tidak terpijak periuk api dan diasak oleh UMNO sekaligus menyebabkan kehilangan lebih banyak lagi undi Melayu.

Persoalannya, betulkah dengan perbuatan sedemikian yang nampaknya pragmatik ini dapat menjamin sokongan undi Melayu? Pada hakikatnya selepas PRU 2008, selepas Pakatan Rakyat dibentuk, tiga parti komponen PR telah menandatangani perjanjian agar menghormati Bahasa Melayu sebagai Bahasa Kebangsaan, mengakui Islam sebagai agama rasmi Negara, dan menerima Peruntukan Hak Keistimewaan Bumiputra dalam Perkara 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Akan tetapi PR masih kehilangan undi Melayu dalam PRU ke-13. Jikalau pakatan berangan-angan boleh mendapat undi dengan menenteramkan kegelisahan Melayu, ke tahap mana Pakatan Harapan harus berundur untuk memperoleh undi Melayu? Adakah PH perlu menyokong perlaksanaan Hukum Hudud? Atau terus mengisytiharkan bahawa tidak lagi memperjuangkan peluang bagi bukan Melayu untuk menyandang jawatan Menteri Besar di Negeri-negeri Melayu?

Bukan Melayu turut Gelisah

Seandainya PH betul-betul berjaya menawan Putrajaya dengan mengelakkan diri daripada tuntutan samarata untuk semua, tetapi hanya dengan menonjolkan isu-isu rasuah dan penyelewengan kerajaan Barisan Nasional (BN), maka barisan pimpinannya akan beranggapan kejayaan ini datang kerana PH berjaya menenteramkan kegelisahan Melayu. Maka kerajaan baru ini akan meneruskan polisi-polisi berat sebelah mengikut kaum dan agama yang digubah oleh kerajaan BN, supaya dapat mengekalkan pemerintahannya lebih daripada satu penggal. Seperti mana kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat/Harapan di negeri Selangor dan Pulau Pinang yang belum nampak lagi melaksanakan apa-apa polisi yang berkesan untuk memansuhkan dasar kuota diskaun bumiputra dalam pembelian hartanah, walaupun telah berjaya menawan pucuk pemerintahan negeri sejak tahun 2008.

Sungguhpun kerajaan PH sebenarnya berupaya membawa serba sedikit perubahan berasaskan kesamarataan, seperti memulihkan pilihanraya kerajaan tempatan, tetapi jika pada hari nanti masyarakat Melayu menyuara lagi kerisauan mereka akan kerajaan baru, khuatir bahawa pilihanraya kerajaan tempatan akan menyebabkan masyarakat Melayu kehilangan kuasa, atau Program Matrikulasi masih mesti memperuntukkan kuota 90% kepada bumiputra, maka boleh dijangka kerajaan baru akan berbelok ke kanan dengan serta-merta supaya mengambil hati dan menuruti selera kalangan masyarakat Melayu yang kononnya “dalam kegelisahan”.

Agenda menghitam-hitamkan imej Pakatan Harapan tidak akan terhenti selagi UMNO masih wujud. Apakah PH, sama ada memerintah atau tidak, mesti mengutamakan pertimbangan terhadap perasaan etnik Melayu, walaupun ia mungkin tidak selaras dengan nilai-nilai sejagat, walaupun ia mungkin memudaratkan masyarakat Malaysia yang majmuk? Kegelisahan Melayu bagaikan lautan yang tak tersampai tebingnya, PH harus berwaspada dalam membelainya, janganlah sampai mengikut jejak lama Barisan Nasional.

Pakatan Harapan perlu insaf bahawa walaupun masyarakat Melayu memang risau akan kehilangan kuasa politik, namum bukankah masyarakat bukan Melayu sebenarnya juga bimbang akan pertembungan kaum dan agama yang kian runcing? Dengan kerajaan yang malfungsi dalam pentadbiran, yang rancak rasuah dan penyelewengan, yang insitusi politik-ekonomiknya kian roboh, dan yang berleluasa ekstremisme kaum dan agama, selain daripada kelompok berkepentingan segera, siapakah rakyat yang akan merasakan tanah air kita ini aman damai dan masa depan penuh dengan harapan ceria?

Apabila kian ramai orang bukan Melayu kecewa lalu berhijrah keluar, kian ramai orang bukan Melayu terpaksa menyeberangi tambak johor untuk mencari rezeki, apakah kegelisahan orang bukan Melayu tidak memerlukan prihatin utama supaya diselesaikannya? Adakah disebabkan pengundi bukan Melayu telah memberi sokongan menyeluruh kepada Pakatan Rakyat dalam PRU ke-13, maka Pakatan Harapan telah menganggap mudah dan ramalkan pengundi bukan Melayu sudah semestinya akan mengundi PH dalam PRU akan datang?

Membatasi pencorakan wawasan masa depan

Perbuatan PH dengan sengaja menekankan kegelisahan Melayu agar memancing undi telah membataskan ruang-ruang bagi PH mencorak wawasan masa depan. Perbuatan demikian dengan tidak langsung juga memanfaatkan UMNO, mengizikannya dengan melulu tanpa risau mempermainkan politik perkauman dan agama, kerana UMNO telah checkmate PH memandangkan PH terpaksa akur kepada undi Melayu, maka daya lawan balik PH memang terhad. Keadaan ini dapat dilihat dari kes Himpunan Baju Merah 916 dan kes rusuhan Plaza Low Yat. Sekarang pula Himpunan BERSIH berasa gelisah kerana peserta Cina melebihi Melayu dalam himpunan BERSIH 4, bagaikan himpunan kehilangan kebenarannya jikalau kekurangan penyertaan orang Melayu.

Pakatan Harapan seolah-olah terketar-ketar dalam menyiasat dan memaksa tanggungjawap si pesalah isu kaum dan agama, tidak berupaya langsung kerana UMNO telah berjaya membina suatu suasana ketakutan putih bahawa hegemoni Melayu/ Islam pantang dicabar. Pembangkang yang sepatutnya memainkan peranan membetulkan permasalahan ini pula tidak dapat merempuh situasi baru dan terikut-ikut langkah UMNO bagai buta kehilangan tongkat.

Pakatan Rakyat berjaya memperoleh sokongan 52% undi dalam PRU ke-13 sebab rakyat dapat menyaksikan azam PR, terasa kemungkinan adanya harapan bahawa pakatan politik ini memang bertekad mengusahakan kebahagiaan seluruh rakyat Malaysia. PR pada masa itu tidak pun melaung-laungkan ingin menyelesaikan “Kegelisahan Melayu”, tetapi membebani tanggungjawab untuk mengusahakan Malaysia Baru. Kini Pakatan Harapan semacam langsung tidak menuju arah ini dan tidak menunjukkan ketegasan yang sedemikian.

Pakatan Harapan kini terperangkap dalam pusaran kaum dan agama yang diplot oleh UMNO. PH kelihatan kekurangan tekad melangkaui politik lama, mengangan-angankan undi orang bukan Melayu masih lagi kukuh bagaikan kubu, maka PH boleh berjaya menawan Putrajaya dengan menyambut hati masyarakat Melayu dan mententeramkan “kegelisahan” mereka. Ini bukannya taktik sementara tetapi tidak sedar diri, telah lupa bahawa tumbangkan BN hanyalah sarana tetapi matlamat muktamad sesuatu parti politik itu adalah untuk membangkitkan kesedaran politik rakyat jelata. Walaupun betapa dekatnya kita dengan kuasa pemerintahan, kita tetap tidak boleh menyongsangkan matlamat ini.

Pakatan Harapan merupakan harapan penyelamat terakhir Negara ini, ia tidak boleh menjadi Pakatan Mengecewakan. Dalam berdepan dengan hegemoni Melayu/ Islam yang dipermainkan oleh UMNO, PH perlu teguh memimpin dan mengharunginya,bukannya respon dan pertahan secara pasif; Bagi PH, bukan kegelisahan Melayu yang perlu diselesaikan tetapi kegelisahan seluruh raktyat; Bukan undi Melayu yang perlu diraih tetapi undi harapan daripada seluruh rakyat.

【Catatan pengarang: artikel ini merupakan lanjutan kepada petikan bertajuk "Pakatan Harapan perlukan undi harapan, bukan undi Melayu" yang telah diterbitkan sebelum ini, mohon maaf jika terdapat kekurangan dalam hujah dan pendapat.】

Read More

希望联盟，希望在哪里？ （9月27日更新链接及照片）

 希望联盟，希望在哪里？

作者：邹宇晖
《火箭报》总编辑、民主行动党彭亨州美律区州议员

Dimanakah harapan Pakatan Harapan?

本文是邹宇晖应邀在人民之友纪念成立15周年而举办的主 题为“认清斗争敌友，埋葬巫统霸权”论坛上发表的论文。作者申明，此文是以他本人发表于《当今大马》读者来函栏目上的《希望联盟需要的不是马来票，是希望之票》一文的基本观点来延伸阐述的见解。

[《人民之友》编者按语] 邹宇晖（左图）接受人民之友邀请作为“认清斗争敌友，埋葬巫统霸权”论坛主讲人，竟然发送了两篇论文给论坛筹委会，其一是《希望联盟，希望在哪里？》，其二是《谁是敌 谁是友？》。 

论坛筹委会基于一名主讲人提供一篇论文的惯例，恳请邹氏自行决定其中一篇作为他提交给论坛的论文。邹氏随即来邮通知，他选择第一篇即本文，作为他提交给论坛的论文。 

论坛筹委会理所当然尊重邹氏的选择和决定，并且相信邹氏做出这项选择和决定，一定有着他本身的考虑和理由。为此，论坛筹委会和邹氏双方同意，将其第二篇论文即《谁是敌 谁是友？》，另外同时张贴在《人民之友》部落格上供人阅览参考。 以下是邹氏的《希望联盟，希望在哪里？》的全文内容——

邹宇辉因在当天已经安排了其他活动，
未克亲临现场发表演讲，其论文由论

坛筹委会委派朱信健代读，

并以马来语简述论文要点。

505大选，在野党获得52%的选票，却因为选举不干净，选区划分不公平而无法入主布城。选后第二天，纳吉发表“华人海啸”论，民联众领袖马上反击，说这是“城市海啸”，但随后三党却潜移默化，慢慢一致认为无法获得足够马来票是505失败的关键所在，更在后来纳吉民意走低时，期盼“马来海啸”的发生，直接否定之前的否定，默认505是一场“华人海啸”。

于是，伊党认为留在民联流失了马来票；为了找回纯伊斯兰斗争认同，用伊刑法自绝于民联的斗争，公正党认为行动党过度强大吓走马来票；行动党则开始认为自己不够全民化。

在野力量不约而同为下届大选定下总路线，就是要赢得马来票，想当然的以为有了马来票，就能改朝换代，因此在这几年，首要处理的就是要安抚马来人的不安，尽量不要提马来社会种族和宗教敏感的议题，结果演变出许多荒腔走板的闹剧，这包括：

• 公正党为了马来票抱住一个背叛原则、背后插刀和与巫统眉来眼去的伊党，即使在大港和江沙补选，伊党坚持打三角战，公正党也依然选择在雪州采取包容态度，让伊党留在雪州政府，让雪州政府成了一个怪胎政府，总秘书要求非马来社会谅解马来社会的焦虑。

• 行动党可以为了马来票去缅怀敦拉萨、在面对皇权干政时保持沉默（公正党，诚信党一样），对于马来特权和伊斯兰霸权问题，行动党也不再像过去一样站在最前线反对，新成立的诚信党虽然标榜是开明派成立的政党，但依然无法逃出马来人不安的迷思，党主席去告诉国人，大马不可能由华人统治，然后基层要求行动党不要在州席置放马来候选人，只因为担心行动党置放马来候选人会让马来社群觉得行动党要做大臣，吓走马来选票。

• 最让人乍舌的是，三党组成的希望联盟更在今年1月19日召开记者会，竟然特地去强调“希盟会正视和解决马来人不安”，然后再次举出希望联盟的协议内容，一再保证希盟会捍卫马来人权益，只用“不会忽略”来忽悠其他族群。

希盟希望模糊不清

为什么一个声称要摆脱种族和宗教政治主宰的政治联盟，一个自诩比国阵进步、开明的替代执政联盟，竟然会一直把某个族群的不安放在嘴边，合理化“马来人不安”，优先解决“马来人不安”？难道就真的因为马来选票占了选民最大结构，因此马来选民就是希盟的首要服务目标吗？那希望联盟还有什么道德制高点，去说服非穆斯林和非马来人，在执政中央后，不会像国阵一样，凡是马来人至上？

首先，希望联盟必须搞清楚，马来人不安在哪里？无可否认，经过巫统长期在主流媒体的议程设置和污蔑抹黑，马来人对于行动党有一种莫名的恐惧，认为行动党是要抢马来人的“政权”，因此马来社群的不安更大体现在行动党过去强力提出的平权诉求，如废除土著非土著的权利差异、废除新经济政策、追求多源流学校平等对待、要求政府实行绩效制选贤与能。

种种的平权诉求都直刺马来社群在巫统领导下所灌输的“马来主权”，即使上届大选，民联里有公正党和伊党两个巫基政党，也依然无法一解马来人对于失去权力的焦虑。

概括来说，作为替代执政联盟的希望联盟（或前身民联），所提出的种种进步诉求以打造大马新政其实与马来人不安有着本质上的冲突，希盟现在看来比较倾向安抚马来人为主，对于一些涉及族群和宗教“敏感”的议题，尽量避而不谈，以免踩中地雷，被巫统追击，流失更多马来选票。

问题是，这种看似务实的做法真的一定能确保拿到马来选票吗？事实上2008年大选后，民联组军后三党就有签下协议，尊重马来语为国语、尊重伊斯兰教为官方宗教、以及尊重宪法153土著特殊权利。然而505大选，民联的马来选票还是流失，如果以为安抚马来人不安就能拿到选票，那希盟要退守到什么样的程度才能获得马来选票呢？是要去支持实行伊斯兰刑事法吗？还是直接宣布放弃争取在马来州属由非马来人出任大臣的机会？

非马来人同样不安

如果下届大选，希盟真的凭着避谈平权诉求，只谈贪腐而改朝换代，领导层就会认为这是成功安抚了马来人不安，那新政府为了不只做一届政府，之前国阵政府所拟定的种族宗教不平等政策也会得到延续，就如雪州和槟城2008民联执政后，也没有做出有效废除土著购买房屋的固打政策。

即使能在一些层面做出相对公平的修改，如恢复地方政府选举，但若有天马来社会再对新政府出现焦虑，担心地方政府选举会让马来社群失去权力，认为大学预科班依然必须有90%固打予土著、新政府将马上右转，以讨好和迎合来解决马来社群所谓的“不安”。

只要巫统一天还在，抹黑就会一直存在，难道希盟不管有没有执政，都必须以马来人的感受为最大考量，即使该感受不符合普世价值，不利于多元社会的马来西亚？马来人不安可说是一个无底洞，希盟必须谨慎看待，切莫走回国阵的老路。

希盟必须了解到，马来社群固然对失去权力感到不安，但非马来社群何其不是对越来越失控的种族宗教冲突感到不安？在一个施政无能、贪污腐败、政经崩坏、种族宗教极端主义充斥的国度，除了既得利益者，又有哪个国民会感觉到自己在这片土地是安居乐业，未来充满希望的呢？

当越来越多非马来人含泪移民，越来越多非马来人越堤讨生活时，非马来社群的不安难道不需要优先获得处理吗？还是因为上届大选非马来人给予民联全面支持，所以希盟下届大选就把非马来选票当成理所当然呢？

限制未来愿景刻画

特意强调马来人不安以换取选票这种做法，限制了希盟对未来愿景的刻画空间，此举也间接助攻巫统，让它继续肆无忌惮玩弄种族宗教政治，因为巫统看死希盟始终要顾及马来选票，反抗力度有限，这可从916红衫军与刘蝶暴动事件可见一斑，现在就连净选盟大游行也因为Bersih 4时华人参与者多过马来人而感到不安，似乎少了马来人的集会就缺少了正当性。

希盟在种族和族群议题上的追究和逼问显得步步为营，欲振乏力，因为巫统塑造了一种马来/伊斯兰霸权不能被质疑的白色恐怖氛围，本来扮演拨乱反正角色的反对党，竟然被牵着鼻子走，无法创立新局。

505大选民联可以获得52%的选票，是因为人民看到民联的决心，感受到有希望，那是一个要为全体马来西亚人奉献的政治联盟，当时的民联也没有口口声声说要解决“马来人不安”，反而以打造一个新马来西亚为己任，而希盟目前看起来根本没有这样的方向和坚持。

如今的希盟却在巫统设计的种族宗教漩涡里打转，缺乏打破旧政治的决心，幻想非马来选票依然稳如泰山，然后迎合安抚马来社群所谓的“不安”后，改朝换代就能水到渠成，这不是一时权宜，这是堕落执迷，忘记了改朝换代只是手段，政党的终极目标是推动人民醒觉，就算再怎么接近权力，也不能本末倒置。

希望联盟是这个国家救赎的最后希望，不能成为失望联盟，面对巫统操弄的马来/伊斯兰霸权，希盟要坚定地冲击与引领，不是被动地回应和辩护；希盟要解决的不是马来人不安，而是全民的不安；要争取的不是马来票，而是全民的希望之票。

[作者原注 ：此文是此前发表的《希望联盟最需要的不是马来票，是希望之票》文章的延伸，意见论点未尽完善，还请见谅。]

Read More

推翻巫统霸权统治（9月27日更新链接及照片）

推翻巫统霸权统治

作者：林德宜 (政策倡议中心董事)

译者：郑晖、陈添平

Overcoming UMNO's Hegemonic Hold Over Malaysia

本文是林德宜博士应邀在人民之友纪念成立15周年而举办的主题为“认清斗争敌友，埋葬巫统霸权”论坛上发表的论文的华文译稿。这篇译稿的文辞含义跟英文原文含义若有不符或有抵触之处，则以原文含义为准。

        林德宜博士

马来西亚人民对巫统霸权持续执政的事实，正在逐渐清醒——这个霸权统治通过了国家安全理事会法令（以下简称“国安法”）把权力更集中在首相（也就是巫统主席）的手上，如今更加强化，持续侵害我国民主制度。这也对我国的多元种族、多元宗教的特性产生不利作用，阻碍我国的社会经济发展。

在我国人民可以摆脱巫统霸权统治之前，了解巫统霸权统治的本质和发展是重要的。

巫统霸权基本上是从1957年由巫统开始跟马华组成政治联盟一直到后来的国民阵线，在国家议会(federal parliamentary)占有实质的垄断地位而形成的。我们可以从以下几个方面来理解——

巫统之所以形成霸权，其中包括：——

1、利用独裁主义的法令条例

林德宜博士因身体状况不适，未克亲临

现场发表演讲。其论文（英文）由论坛

筹委会委派洪佩珊代读，并以华语简述

论文要点。

我国的宪法权利包括许多的个人自由：思想、道德和宗教自由；和平集会的自由；发表意见和传播资讯的自由；结社的自由；法律面前人人平等而不受歧视。

尽管《联邦宪法》一些条文阐明人民享有上述那些基本自由与权利，可是，上述那些有关条文所赋予人民的自由和权利，特别是在紧急法令以及反民主的其他各项法令，包括最新颁布为了对付新的安全威胁的国安法的实施下，已经大体上被剥夺了。这许多法令实施了一个很长的时间，或许是造成反对党及其他反对者屡遭挫折的部分原因。这些镇压性的法令包括：

《1960年内部安全法令》

这项预防性的扣留法令已被重复用来对付巫统政治对手、监控公众生活和民间社会。根据政府提供的数据，已有超过一万人在《内安法令》下被逮捕。

如今《1960年内部安全法令》已废除了，而由另一项压制性略低却同样可憎的《2012年安全保护（特别措施）法令》（Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012）所取代。

《1958年公共秩序（保护）法令》

在《1958年公共秩序（保护）法令》下，相关部长有权对任何公共秩序受扰乱或威胁的地区宣布为“安全保护区域”（proclaimed area），为期可以长达一个月。在这项法令下，警方为了维持公共秩序可以行使广泛权力，这些权力包括封闭道路、设立栏栅、实施戒严、禁止或控制5人或5人以上人数的集合、会议或游行。

《2012年和平集会法令》

《2012年和平集会法令》规定公民只有遵循该法律下的限制条件，才可以组织及参与和平集会。在此法令下，我国公民可以组织和平集会，包括游行活动（见该法令第3条文下关于“集会”和“集会地点”的定义），必须在活动日10天前书面通知当地警方（见该法令第9(1)条文）。大规模的群众集会或游行组成的街头抗议活动是不被允许的（见该法令第4(1)(c)条文）。

《公共秩序（保护）法令》与《和平集会法令》现在已经成为有利于巫统的控制集会自由的工具。拥护巫统的团体如红杉军所举办的抗议示威活动完全不受警方干扰，而那些由反对党所组织的，或者是政府看来含有反国阵色彩的大小集会，却受严厉对待。

为了遏制巫统的霸权，就必须废除由巫统主导的各种压迫和抹杀基本自由和权利的宪法修正案。这种行动是必要的，从而恢复我国人民的自由民主权利，击破巫统国阵的霸权统治。

同时，我们也必须促使政府同意遵守联合国批准的基本人权及自由公约，诸如《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》、《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》和《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》以及其他类似公约。

《2016 年国家安全理事会法令》

在最新出台的《国家安全理事会法令》下，设立了一个国家安全理事会，由首相担任主席。这个国家安全理事会主席有权宣布特定地区为“保安区”。这项法令允许执法当局在没有搜查令及逮捕令的情况下，任意搜查、逮捕保安区内任何“正在犯罪者，或准备犯罪者，或被合理怀疑牵涉犯罪的任何人。

虽然新法令尚未正式实施，在国内已引起许多批评和国外的人权组织如国际特赦组织已表达担忧，恐怕这项新的法令让我国当权者随意进行拘捕、搜查和实施宵禁，践踏人权而肆无忌惮。

据国际特赦组织东南亚及太平洋区部发表的文告称：“新法令赋予政府绝对权力，恐催生更多滥权行为。 (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/08/malaysia-national-security-act-abusive-powers/)

2、为执政党利益而重划选区或调动选民（选举霸权）

顶尖政治学家发现，马来西亚的国州议席的选区划分被操纵；各个选区选民人数悬殊；利用国家机器为巫统国阵候选人助选；幽灵选民、邮寄选民和不在（选区）选民的存在；还有各种各类的不正规、不道德的选举活动已大大削弱了选举的可靠性及合理性。诸如此类的不法手段，用来扭曲选举的结果，削弱了反对党的政治势力，也强化了巫统国阵的霸权统治。

选举委员会是确保选举自由、公平、公正的关键。但他的独立性在1962年选举修正法令下终结了。林鸿海（译音，Lim Hong Hai）在其《Electoral Politics in Malaysia: ‘Managing’ Elections in a Plural Society》（见http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/01361005.pdf)一文中引述杰出的宪法专家H. E. Groves教授的说法：

“很明显，以往的选举委员会是一个独立机构，他们的决定就成为法律，其委员享有永久任期，在新修订的选举法令下，选举委员会变成了一个咨询机构，其委员没有确定任期，薪资除外，一切取决于内阁的喜好。因此，划分选区和选民人数的决定权力已丧失。按照最早的宪法条文规定而成立的选举委员会，从其任期和地位上，是独立自主、公平廉洁的，而现行的宪法条文却把 选区划分的权力完全移到一个只有短暂任期的国会多数派（即当权集团）。当权集团为了赢得选举的政治利益，通过选区不公平的重新划分或调整选民人数， 城乡选区之间的选民人数悬殊，就是有力的证明。”

为了确保选举制度的公正性，以下的改革是必要的：

• 维护”一人一票”原则，用以限制选区大小差异所带来的不公，及阻止选举霸权行为；将“比例代表”的元素（elements of Proportional Representation）纳入选举制度。

• 贯彻”行政中立”原则，用以禁止执政党利用地方发展的保证以及公共服务设施和配备来助选及误导选民，藉此收买选票。

• 保障各个政党在大众传播媒体上有自由和公平的途径。

• 消除选举不公：通过整理选民册、废除国内邮寄选票、启用点墨制。

最后，为保障选举制度和选举程序的公平及流畅，撤销选举委员会公平划分选区的权利的《1962年宪法修正案》应被废除；同时，应该授予选举委员会完整的权力执行它的决定，不受任何外来政治压力所影响。

选举委员会对巫统是多么的屈从，这点可以从其前任主席阿都拉昔（Abdul Rashid）在他于2014年加入马来右翼组织土权时公开宣称他能将在选举委员会任职时累积的经验的知识，在来届大选中用以维护马来人权益，并确保马来人继续享有统治级地位看得出来。 (http://www.tindakmalaysia.com/archive/index.php/t-7259.html)

3、全国性的选区划分不均

上届全国大选，国阵得票总数为5,237,699票，或相等于总投票数47.7%的选票；反观反对党联盟民联得到5,623,984票，达到总投票数的50.9%。结果国阵还是成功得到133个议席继续执政，民联只获得89个议席。民联的整体得票率较前一届大选上升2.9%，国阵则下跌3.9%，然而却只获得额外7个议席。这并非偶然，而是一系列选举设计及操纵下的必然结果。

首先，作为巫统票仓，沙巴和砂劳越的国会议席数量与西马数量存在明显差异。近期的研究显示，东马有22个额外议席，与登记选民人数不成比例。反对党必须在这两个州属胜利才有机会推翻巫统的霸权统治。

其次，巫统与国阵的强项在于西马和东马的郊外选区。为此，巫统及其在沙巴和砂拉越的盟友经常将城市选区和非马来人族群的权益牺牲殆尽。

根据一名学者的近期研究，巫统及国阵赢得上届大选的原因如下：

关于马来西亚选举制度的一个关键事实是，这选举制度旨在保护马来穆斯林权利，使其凌驾于其他族群及宗教团体之上，藉此保证主要的马来人政党巫统的优势。由于马来穆斯林只占总人口数的54%，而且并非每一马来人都支持国阵，他们唯有通过操纵选举系统来继续执政。此外，巫统霸权也在国阵中分别以华人和印度社群为主的两个小政党（指马华和印度国大党）支持下，持续被巩固。(Adam Carr, How They Stole the Malaysian Election)

4、废除地方议会选举

由人民选出的地方政府建立在草根的民主价值和公众责任的基础上。1965年3月2日，全国的地方政府选举被令暂停，当时的执政党承诺“一旦宣布和平及撤消紧急条例”，便恢复地方政府选举。但是，这项承诺至今并未兑现。随着许多巫统及其国阵盟友支配的地方议会充斥着各种浪费、管理不当、滥权舞弊事件，如今我们需要改革现行的由执政党委任的地方政府（也就是恢复地方议会选举，由人民选出自己的代表组织地方政府）。

在《联邦宪法》第113（4）条文下，联邦政府或个别州政府可以行使权力通过恢复地方选举的议案。虽然，这或许不能完全克服执政党权力过度集中的问题，但却能进一步削弱分化巫统国阵的霸权统治。

5、巫统贪污及赞助机器

巫统霸权统治产生的贪污腐败和金钱输送，像癌细胞一样不断生长扩散，其中一个主要根源和相应结果是巫统霸权的不断成长的触角伸进了商业世界及公共服务领域。

其实，媒体最近关于一马（1MDB）弊案和首相私人户头的巨额捐款的报道，这两件丑闻是长久以来举不胜举的滥权案件，说明纳税人数以亿计的金钱都被巫统领袖及其朋党中饱私囊的最新例子。其他的超大型项目如鲉鱼潜水艇购买的佣金案件、与欧洲直升机公司(Eurocopter)的交易、国家皇宫翻新计划，还有自1970年代起协助许多关联公司如土著银行、普腾和马航等度过财政难关，花费了人民超过千亿计的金钱。这些巨大的金融灾害及其相关的可疑的或贪污腐败的勾当从1960年代起已经存在，并延续至今。

贪污腐败和以权谋财的另一面是全国性赞助机器或钱财输送以巫统作为代表。这让巫统国阵阵营里的特定精英和他们在商业世界、公共服务领域的代理人，以及他们（巫统国阵）所代表的社会阶层富裕起来。他们通过控制公共服务，将无数的物质和非物质利益发送到了巫统领袖及其基层支持者的口袋里。

根据陶菲克•伊斯迈（Tawfik Ismail），他是在敦拉萨时代担任副首相的已故敦伊斯迈阿都拉曼的儿子，在接受《马来西亚局内人》的网站（今已关闭）的访谈中指出，“现今的巫统已经变成了一个在我国前所未有的赞助机器，马来民族主义只是作为表面镶饰罢了。” (https://dinmerican.wordpress.com/2015/12/07/umno-patronage-money-dispensing-machine-for-malay-elites/)

他说：“即使在最底层，即支部的层面，支部主席很可能会被任命为村长的官职，妇女组的领袖会被委任为社会/乡区发展局的领导（乡区发展部之下的社区发展），而青年团领导也会被委任为国家干训局 (Civics Bureau) 的领导。如此系统继续保存，巫统将变得牢不可破。

陶菲克也指出，“现今的巫统和政府之间的关系，就像接上保险丝那般互相连接，几乎不可能看出掌权政党的责任到何处终止，和政府的行政职能从何处开始。”

如何拆除此庞大的赞助机器及如何确保我们的公共服务机关保持中立、公平对待所有公民、超越政党政治，很可能是推翻巫统霸权路上最大的障碍。

在一个以“钱者王也”(“cash is king”)为座右铭的首相的领导下，巫统的区部领导层主要由原来是商界人士或渴望成为商界人士的人所组成，而“金钱政治”就是他们提高自己的社会和经济地位的通行证；公共服务领域的高层几乎已经完全被马来人支配，拆除赞助机器，在现阶段几乎是不可能的事情，而这个任务是由一个全新、廉洁、改革的政府来承担，才有望完成。

结论：群起抵抗巫统

巫统对全国的霸权统治已超越政治领域，扩展至文化、经济、社会层面。因此，推翻巫统对全国的霸权统治的唯一办法，就是在所有霸权统治的地方发起对抗，而不仅限于以上所述的主要根源，也不仅限于大选时进行投票。

至少也要积极做到以上所提到的改革方案。

与此同时，我们应该站出来，呼吁除去或中和那些涉及散播种族及宗教不信任及敌对情绪的个人和机构，特别是来自统治圈内人和官僚，尤其是巫统高层和官方媒体，如《马来西亚前锋报》（Utusan Malaysia）和TV3。

散播这类情绪很明显是为了对民众洗脑，藉以加强巫统在马来群众里的影响力，让他们的霸权统治能够无限期延续下去。

对巫统霸权及不断加剧的种族和宗教仇恨政治保持缄默、漠不关心或软弱无力的其他国阵成员党领袖，应该站出来向巫统施压。其他的团体如伊斯兰党、马来穆斯林非政府组织一定要更加活跃地传播进步的伊斯兰价元素，藉此反击巫统宣传的霸权政策及种族妒忌和仇恨政策。

如果我们无法及时对巫统霸权统治展开反击，我们就只能看着国家的资源财富被那些支配国阵的政党领袖挥霍或被跟巫统或巫统伙伴有裙带关系的朋党劫持。我们也能预见种族紧张及分化情况将进一步加剧到转化点，少数族群很多处于防御状态，而执政当局不愿维护少数族群的利益。巫统的霸权统治已导致各方的矛盾升级到无以复加的地步，为社会动荡和不安设置了上演的场所。

参考文献

• Lim Teck Ghee, “May 13: Navigating our ethnic co-existence” in http://www.cpiasia.net/v3/?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=141&Itemid=168&limitstart=25&fontstyle=f-smaller

• “UMNO General Assembly: Beating the drums for another May 13” in http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2011/12/06/umno-general-assembly-beating-the-drums-for-another-may-13/

• “Spewing a poisonous brew on the Chinese 'Lack of Multiracial Spirit'” in http://www.malaysia-today.net/spewing-a-poisonous-brew-on-the-chinese-lack-of-multiracial-spirit/

• “Can Malaysia step back from the brink” in http://www.themalaymailonline.com/what-you-think/article/can-malaysia-step-back-from-the-brink-lim-teck-ghee

Read More

Overcoming UMNO' s Hegemonic Hold Over Malaysia (Updated link and photo on 27 Sep)

Overcoming UMNO's Hegemonic Hold Over Malaysia

Lim Teck Ghee

推翻巫统霸权统治

This article is the full text written by Dr. Lim Teck Ghee specially for the forum in commemoration of the 15th Anniversary of Sahabat Rakyat entitled “Differentiate between ally and enemy, bury UMNO hegemony” held at Crystal Crown Hotel, JB on 25 September 2016.

      Lim Teck Ghee

Malaysians are waking up to the fact that UMNO's hegemonic hold over power – now reinforced by the passing of the National Security Council Act which further concentrates power in the hands of the Prime Minister – effectively the president of UMNO – has been detrimental to our democratic system. It has also had adverse impact on the multi-racial and multi-religious character of our country and held back our socio-economic development.

Before the rakyat can break UMNO's hegemonic grip over the country, it is important to understand how and why this has come about.

Basically UMNO's hegemony, and with it a virtual monopoly of power at the federal parliamentary level through the Barisan Nasional coalition which it dominates since 1957 – comes from diverse sources.

These sources include:

1.Use of Authoritarian Legislation

Dr Lim Teck Ghee was unable to attend the forum and deliver
the speech due to unfit physical condition. The forum
committee appointed Ang Pei Shan to read out his paper
(in English), and outlined the main points in Chinese.

Our constitutional rights include the right to personal freedom, freedom of thought, conscience and religion; freedom of peaceful assembly; freedom of expression and information; freedom of association; and equality before the law without discrimination.

Various articles of the Federal constitution provide a sound basis for these basic freedoms and liberties. However, these provisions have been considerably weakened especially by emergency and anti-democratic laws, including the latest National Security Act, (NSA) enacted purportedly to deal with new security threats. Many of these laws go back a long time and partially explain why efforts by the opposition party and other dissidents have been beaten back. The repressive laws include:

• Internal Security Act 1960.

This preventive detention law has been repeatedly used against political opponents of UMNO and to control public life and civil society. More than 10,000 people have been arrested under the ISA according to government figures.

Since then repealed, its has now been replaced by the less repressive but equally odious Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012.

• Public Order (Preservation) Act 1958.

Under the Public Order (Preservation) Act 1958, the relevant Minister may temporarily declare any area where public order is seriously disturbed or threatened to be a "proclaimed area" for a period of up to one month. The Police has extensive powers under the Act to maintain public order in proclaimed areas. These include the power to close roads, erect barriers, impose curfews, and to prohibit or regulate processions, meetings or assemblies of five persons or more.

• Peaceful Assembly Act 2012

The Peaceful Assembly Act gives citizens limited right to organise and participate in peaceful assemblies subject to the restrictions under the Act. Under the law, citizens are allowed to hold assemblies, which includes processions (see the definition of "assembly" and "place of assembly" in section 3 of the Act), upon giving 10 days notice to the police (section 9(1) of the Act). Street protests, which consist of "mass" marches or rallies, are not permitted (See section 4(1)(c) of the Act).

Both POPPA and PAA have been used to control the freedom of assembly in favour of UMNO and its support groups such as the Red Shirts who are generally left undisturbed in their protest assemblies while discriminating against assemblies or rallies organized by the opposition or what are seen by the government to be anti-BN elements.

To curb UMNO's hegemony, it is necessary to rescind various constitutional amendments that have effectively abrogated other constitutionally protected fundamental freedoms and rights. Such action is necessary for the restoration of our democratic rights and freedoms and the breaking up of UMNO's and BN's hegemonic rule.

There is also a need to make the government conform to international standards through the ratification of United Nation-related principles of human rights and basic freedoms such as the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of Torture, and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment and other similar covenants.

• National Security Council Act 2016

This latest authoritarian piece of legislation provides for the establishment of a the National Security Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, to declare "security zones". This will give authorities the right to search or arrest without warrant any individual “found committing, alleged to have committed, or reasonably suspected of having committed any offence under written laws in the security area

Although the new law has not yet been invoked, critics within the country as well as human rights organizations outside such as Amnesty International fear that the new law empowers the Malaysian authorities to trample over human rights and act with impunity by providing the power to carry out warrantless arrests, search and seize property, and impose curfews at will.

According to Amnesty International's Deputy Director for South East Asia and the Pacific, “With this new law, the government now has spurned checks and assumed potentially abusive powers” (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/08/malaysia-national-security-act-abusive-powers/)

2. Electoral Gerrymandering

Leading political scientists have noted that in Malaysia, at both national and state levels, the manipulation of electoral boundaries; the great disparity of voter numbers among the constituencies, use of the governmental machinery in support of UMNO and BN candidates; the incidence of phantom, postal and absentee voters; and various other irregularities and unethical practices have debased the credibility and legitimacy of the electoral process. These handicaps against the opposition have also strengthened UMNO's and BN's hegemonic power by distorting electoral outcomes.

The Electoral Commission is the key stake player in ensuring free and fair elections. The beginning of the end of the Electoral Commission's independence took place in 1962 with the Constitution (Amendment) Act. According to a leading constitutional law, Profesor H. E. Groves, cited by Lim Hong Hai in his article, Electoral Politics in Malaysia: ‘Managing’ Elections in a Plural Society (see http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/01361005.pdf)

It is apparent that the new amendments as to elections converted a formerly independent Election Commission, whose decisions became law and whose members enjoyed permanent tenure, into an advisory body of men of no certain tenure whose terms of office, except for remuneration, are subject to the whims of parliament. The vital power of determining the size of constituencies as well as their boundaries is now taken from a Commission, which the constitution-makers had apparently wished, by tenure and status, to make independent and disinterested, and has been made completely political by giving this power to a transient majority of parliament, whose temptations to gerrymander districts and manipulate the varying numerical possibilities between “rural” and “urban” constituencies for political advantage is manifest.

To ensure that the electoral system is fair, the following reforms need to be undertaken:

• Uphold the principle of “one person one vote”, by restricting the disparity in constituency sizes and prohibiting gerrymandering; and introducing the elements of Proportional Representation (PR) into the electoral system.

• Adherence to the principle of administrative neutrality, by barring ruling parties from buying votes through development pledges and misusing public service facilities and apparatus for electioneering purposes.

• Ensuring free and fair access to mass media by all parties.

• Elimination of polling irregularities by cleaning up the electoral roll, abolishing domestic postal voting and employing indelible ink.

Finally, to protect the integrity of the electoral system and process, the 1962 amendment to the Constitution which abrogated the Electoral Commission’s right to enforce fair delineation of constituencies should be repealed. At the same time, the Electoral Commission should be granted full power to enforce its decision and should be made free from any form of political pressure or influence.

It is symptomatic of how subservient the EC is to UMNO when its previous Chairman is able to openly assert that his experience and knowledge in the EC can help the majority race keep power on the occasion of his joining the Malay rights group Perkasa in 2014. According to Abdul Rashid, he needs to champion Malay rights and ensure they remain [dominant] in the scheme of things after the next general election (http://www.tindakmalaysia.com/archive/index.php/t-7259.html)

3. Electoral Malapportionment at the National Level

At the last GE, BN polled 5,237,699 votes, or 47.4% of the vote. The opposition PR polled 5,623,984 votes, or 50.9% of the vote. However, the BN won the election with 133 seats against the opposition's 89. The PR increased their vote by 2.9%, while the BN vote fell by 3.9%, yet the PR made a net gain of only 7 seats. This outcome did not happen by accident but by deliberate design and manipulation.

Firstly, Sabah and Sarawak have become UMNO's fixed deposit states with a greatly disproportionate number of seats allocated to them compared to the West Malaysian states. According to a recent study, they have 22 more seats than their proportion of enrolled voters entitles them to. The opposition must win over the two states to break UMNO's power hegemony over the entire country.

Secondly, UMNO's and BN’s strength lies in the rural states of West Malaysia, and in Sabah and Sarawak. To protect this, UMNO and its partners in Sabah and Sarawak will always put the urban and non-Malay vote on the sacrificial table.

According to the author of a recent study on how UMNO/BN has been able to win the last GE:

The key fact about the Malaysian electoral system is that it is designed to preserve the power of the Malay Muslim population over all other racial and religious groups, and within that population, to ensure the dominance of the main Malay party, UMNO. Since only 54% of the population are Malay Muslims, and since not all of them vote for UMNO, this requires rigging the electoral system to ensure UMNO’s continued dominance. UMNO supremacy is also safeguarded by an alliance with small parties representing the Chinese and Indian communities (MCA and MIC respectively) in the National Front (BN) coalition. (Adam Carr, How They Stole the Malaysian Election)

4. Elimination of Local Government Elections

Local government forms the underpinning of democratic values and public accountability at the grassroots. On March 2, 1965, local government elections in the nation were suspended with the promise of its restoration “the very moment peace is declared and the emergency regulations are withdrawn”. This promise has yet to be honored. Today, the need for reform to the present unelected form of local government is urgent in the wake of the systemic wastage, mismanagement and corruption found in many local councils where UMNO and its BN allies wield power.

The reintroduction of local elections, which can be done by either the Federal Government or individual state governments under Article 113(4) of the Federal Constitution can help fragment and reduce UMNO and BN hegemony though it may not completely overcome this power concentration.

5. UMNO's Corruption and Patronage Machine

One of the key sources as well as outcomes of UMNO's hegemonic rule has been the cancerous growth of corruption and patronage which have come with the party's growing tentacles in the business world and civil service sector.

In fact, the twin scandals of 1MDB and the massive donation in the Prime Minister's personal bank account presently in the news are the latest in a long line of power abuses which have cost the taxpayer billions of ringgit while lining the pockets of UMNO's leaders and their cronies. Various mega projects such as the commission for Scorpene submarine purchase, Eurocopter deal, the National Palace project, and others together with the cost of bailing out GLCs, starting with Bank Bumiputra in 1970 and continuing with the bailing out of Proton and MAS have cost us hundreds of billion ringgit. These instances of mega financial disasters and associated questionable or corrupt practices go all the way back to the 1960's. They are continuing today.

The other side of the corruption and power abuse coin which has enriched the select elite in UMNO/BN and their proxies in the business world, civil service and other key strata of Malaysian society is the nation-wide patronage machine or gravy train which UMNO has come to represent. Through its control of the civil service countless material and non-material benefits have been doled out to UMNO's leaders and supporters at the grassroots.

According to Tawfik Ismail, the son of the late Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman who served as deputy prime minister under Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, in an interview with the now shut down The Malaysian Insider, “Umno has now become an unparalleled patronage machine that has Malay nationalism as a veneer" (https://dinmerican.wordpress.com/2015/12/07/umno-patronage-money-dispensing-machine-for-malay-elites/)

In his words, “Even at the lowest level: the branch, the branch head will more likely than not, be appointed to the government position of ketua kampung (village head). The head of the Women wing will be appointed the head of Kemas (Community Development under the Ministry of Rural Development), the Youth head will be appointed the head of the Biro Tatanegara (Civics Bureau).

If this system is sustained, Umno becomes impregnable.”

Tawfik also noted that "Umno and the government have become so fused together, it is impossible to see where the party's responsibilities end and the government's function begins."

How to dismantle this huge patronage machine and ensure that our civil service is neutral, serves all Malaysians fairly, and is above politics is probably the biggest obstacle to breaking UMNO's hegemony.

With a Prime Minister whose motto is “cash is king”; the current makeup of UMNO's leadership where the division heads are primarily businessmen or aspiring businessmen, and money politics is the passport to upward mobility; and a civil service in which the top strata is almost entirely dominated by Malays, dismantling of the patronage machine is an impossibility unless it is undertaken by a new clean and reformist government.

Conclusion: Taking the fight to UMNO

The only way to break down UMNO's hegemonic hold over the country – which has extended beyond the political sphere to cover all aspects of culture, economy and society – is to fight it everywhere where it is found – and not only in the key sources identified above, and in the voting booth during election time.

Minimum proactive actions include those specific reforms outlined above.

At the same time we should speak out and call for the removal or neutralizing of those institutions and individuals guilty of sowing and escalating racial and religious distrust and antagonism, in particular that emanating from the ruling circles and the bureaucracy, especially from UMNO ranks and the official print and electronic media, particularly Utusan Malaysia and TV3.

Such sentiments are clearly being propagated to brainwash the rakyat and strengthen UMNO's hold over the Malay masses so that it can continue in power indefinitely.

Leaders of the other Barisan Nasional component parties who have been silent, indifferent or impotent towards UMNO's hegemony and the escalation of the hate politics of race and religion must find their voices and put pressure on UMNO from within BN. Other key stake players such as PAS and Malay Muslim NGOs must be more active in influencing Islamic elements towards more progressive positions that can counter the hegemonic policies and politics of racial envy and hate propagated by UMNO.

Failure to respond to UMNO's hegemony will see the country’s resources frittered away by the dominant BN party's leadership or hijacked by their cronies with political strings to UMNO and its partners. We could also see racial tensions and divisions escalate towards a breaking point, with the minorities very much on the defensive and the authorities unwilling to protect the minority. UMNO's hegemony has already led to hardened and polarized positions on all sides, setting the stage for instability and social strife.

References

• Lim Teck Ghee, “May 13: Navigating our ethnic co-existence” in http://www.cpiasia.net/v3/?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=141&Itemid=168&limitstart=25&fontstyle=f-smaller

• “UMNO General Assembly: Beating the drums for another May 13” in http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2011/12/06/umno-general-assembly-beating-the-drums-for-another-may-13/

• “Spewing a poisonous brew on the Chinese 'Lack of Multiracial Spirit'” in http://www.malaysia-today.net/spewing-a-poisonous-brew-on-the-chinese-lack-of-multiracial-spirit/

• “Can Malaysia step back from the brink” in http://www.themalaymailonline.com/what-you-think/article/can-malaysia-step-back-from-the-brink-lim-teck-ghee

Read More

谁是敌 谁是友？

谁是敌 谁是友？

作者：邹宇晖
《火箭报》总编辑、民主行动党彭亨州美律区州议员

[《人民之友》编者按语] 本文是作者邹宇晖（左图）应邀作为人民之友举办的主题为“认清斗争敌友，埋葬巫统霸权”论坛主讲人，在预定日期内，传送给论坛筹委会的两篇论文的其中之一。  邹氏自己选择了《希望联盟，希望在哪里？》作为他提呈当天论坛的论文。邹氏和论坛筹委会双方同意，将本文移交《人民之友》部落格，与论坛论文同时发表。 以下是本文的全文内容——

随着马哈迪-慕尤丁开始组军，并且成立新政党准备在来届大选迎头痛击纳吉的巫统，坊间对希盟要不要与马哈迪慕尤丁结盟合作也有分歧。

然而，摆在希望联盟面前更棘手的问题，不是要不要跟土著团结党在大选中合作，至少现在马哈迪和慕尤丁是摆明要跟纳吉一战，这跟希盟的方向是一致，至于对于过去马慕两人的历史过失，希盟的确需要采取更坚定的态度要求他们道歉，以及在大选中如何让他们接受民主政纲，相当确定的是，马哈迪-慕尤丁会是来届大选希盟的“友”，以期他们能够分裂巫统，在选举中把巫统党员的票大幅度转移来反对联盟，促成变天。

希盟最棘手的问题，是要如何处置与伊斯兰党的关系，尤其是在江沙和大港双补选后的惨败。

很多人看到双补选里，伊党依然掌握一定的马来基本盘，因此认为希盟必须与伊党合作，因为伊党依然是“朋友”，必须尽量避开三角战。

首先，选举不是一加一的数学题，纳入伊党后，对希望联盟非马来选票的冲击到底有多大没有人知道；其二，加入伊党，希望联盟如何在伊刑法上取得共识，如何推出共同纲领？就算伊党暂时为了选举利益而搁置，非马来人要对它重建信任也非常困难。

若不结盟，与伊党展开一对一的议席谈判如何，如复制2008年大选模式？如果谈判成功，当然乐以见成，但我持保留态度。毕竟当前局势与2008年有着不同的客观条件，当时没有诚信党从伊党分裂出来，而当年伊党即使没有与行动党直接结盟，也在社运上合作如反大道起价、净选盟1.0等，加上安华居中协调，因此大家都有默契，谈判相对容易。

三角战无法避免

如今伊党不朝不野，既跟巫统眉来眼去，也对诚信党和行动党充满敌意，诚信党现在所持的议席如莎阿南、瓜拉吉赖、雪邦以及所要攻打的议席，像大港、江沙、瓜雪、瓜登等都是伊党过去的传统选区，伊党领袖就算知道三角战会让国阵渔翁得利，也会出战保住面子，要伊党低声下气让出议席几乎不可能。

何况，伊党已经摆明要推动伊刑法到底，假设与伊党谈判成功，选民将会质疑希望联盟胜选后是否会继续与伊党共组联合政府，届时又再次陷入另一个困局。 喜欢与否，只要伊党一天没有放弃伊刑法的坚持，继续跟巫统暗渡陈仓，伊党就是“敌”，不是“友”。因此，我们要为无法避免的三角战而做好准备。

尽快与伊党切割

既然是“敌”，那希望联盟必须破釜沉舟，尽快与伊党做出切割。

诚信党在江沙大港马来区惨败，公正党和行动党难辞其咎，因为无法帮助诚信党在马来区定位成真正的替代伊党的“反对党”。虽然最后有共识推出诚信党候选人以及为其助选，但却依然跟伊党藕断丝连，一定程度会导致马来社群误以为伊党还是“在野党”，或是希望联盟一分子。

尤其是在雪州，因为希望联盟政府没有果断与伊党切割，大港的马来选民也可能产生混淆，而且该名伊党候选人，还是雪州政府的其中一名州议员，因此反国阵的票，或支持雪州政府的票分裂到伊党身上也不出奇，毕竟伊党是历史最悠久的马来反对党。因此，希望联盟领导层必须严正讨论如何与伊党切割政府上的关系，以便能更有效地扶持诚信党，让它名正言顺取代伊党在马来社群的角色。

继续跟哈迪掌控的伊党暧昧不清，也将陷诚信党领袖于不义，他们因为在党选中吃尽苦头而败北，如今好不容易集结所有开明派领袖力量，如果希望联盟还对伊党态度犹豫不决，诚信党领袖将是白白被牺牲。

没有了伊党的铁票，或许来届大选改朝换代难上加难，但政党不能只为了权力而生存，道义也很重要，尤其是诚信党的领袖自308大选后就一直与公正党和行动党并肩作战，岂能弃他们而不顾。

重新定义“改朝换代”

那是否意味着希望联盟应该放弃改朝换代的目标？我想更正确的说法应该是，重新定义“改朝换代”，308过后把改朝换代当成终极目标的做法必须被摒弃，希望联盟三党都要重新认识到，改朝换代不是不重要，但它始终只是手段；启迪民智，开创新政治才是一个政党斗争的目的。

为了改朝换代而选择策略性模糊的“五月五模式”已经随着民联的破局而不复存在。诚信党的出现其实是完整化了后民联的斗争模式，让希望联盟能够抛开伊刑法的包袱，打造一个更加清晰和进步的共同政纲、从巫统的种族政治和伊党的神权政治解放出来，尤其是近几年，马来西亚的伊斯兰化和种族矛盾问题越来越严重，在野党为了选票考量，往往在处理这些议题时，显得扭扭捏捏，不够果断，令人失望。当然，诚信党现阶段依然偶尔在宗教议题上有失言的时候，因此这需要一些时间让三党磨合，但对比当初与伊党的合作，诚信党在种族和宗教议题上相对中庸，也有较大的包容空间。

如果不再把改朝换代当成现阶段唯一或终极目标，把理念置放在选票之上，把理想置放在利益至上，希望联盟才能回到正轨，做回一个真正的反对党，拨乱反正，走向真正的中庸开明，世俗多元道路。这样的大破大立才更能重燃民间改革热情，届时选票也会不请自来，改朝换代就未必没有机会；反之，本末倒置继续把改朝换代当成最终目的，就算没有三角战，人民也未必买账，安顺补选就是最好的例子，虽然一对一，但人民政治疲劳感涌现，投票率一低，反对党最终也会败选。

因此若希盟要认清敌友，埋葬巫统，就要从与伊党完整切割开始。

（作者原注：此文乃根据此前撰写的《告别五月五模式，希盟不走回头路》文章延伸阐述。）

Read More

Oppose State Islamization is the Central Task of Democratic Reform in Our Country at Present

Oppose State Islamization is the Central Task

of Democratic Reform in Our Country at Present

Author: Choo Shinn Chei

反对国家伊斯兰化是我国民主改革现阶段的主要任务

The author of this article Choo Shinn Chei is one of the members of Presidium, Sahabat Rakyat Working Committee. This article was originally written in Chinese language and published on Sahabat Rakyat's blog on 12 September in Choo's personal capacity. In order to fill up the vacancy of a Mandarin speaking speaker in the forum in commemoration of the 15th Anniversary of Sahabat Rakyat entitled “Differentiate between ally and enemy, bury UMNO hegemony” held at Crystal Crown Hotel, JB on 25 September 2016, the forum organising committee arranged Choo Shinn Chei to present his basic view points in this article at the forum. The picture above was taken during Choo Shinn Chei's speech at the forum. 

In the case of any discrepancy between the English rendition and the original Chinese version, the Chinese version shall prevail.

UMNO-led BN hegemonic rule is the root cause of the miserable living conditions experienced by the petty bourgeoisie and working masses of various ethnic groups in our country. Hence UMNO hegemonic ruling clique is the main struggle target of the people of all ethnic groups. During the period 2008-2015, the political struggle for democratic reform against UMNO hegemony was led by Pakatan Rakyat (PR) comprised of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), Democratic Action Party (DAP) and Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS). However, PR which claimed itself as the representative of people’s will against UMNO hegemonic rule did not adopt the demands of the struggle of the oppressed people, not to mention developed consensus of democratic reform agenda. At the end, PR split on the issues of Syariah Laws made use by the UMNO hegemony to divide the people of various ethnic groups.

The political split and restructuring within the ruling clique and within the oppressed people of the country came to a turning point in 2016. The Mahathir and Muhyiddin represented UMNO interests group formed Parti Pribumi Bersatu after losing influence in the partial split occured within UMNO ruling clique. Mahathir seems to be the dominant figure in the struggle against BN since the release of “Citizens’ Declaration” until uniting the opposition parties to fight against BN in the coming General Election (GE).

On the other hand, the struggle line of PAS was overturned ever since the pro-UMNO conservative faction led by Hadi Awang took full control over the party’s leadership. They gave up the idea of overthrowing UMNO hegemony, they are now keen on joining hands with UMNO hegemony to promote the state islamization agenda. Not long ago, PAS joined force with Parti Ikatan Bangsa Malaysia (Ikatan) to form Gagasan Sejahtera in preparation of the coming GE. In the past one year, Parti Amanah Negara (PAN), founded by the progressive faction of PAS formed a new coalition, Pakatan Harapan (PH) together with PKR and DAP. Some of the key leaders in PH attempt to fight against Najib by working with Mahathir after PH suffered defeats consecutively in the Sarawak state election and two by-elections of parliamentary seats in the peninsula.

Regardless of how the situation evolves, the political split and restructuring during this period will yield symbolic results in the coming GE. NGOs should now learn the lessons based on the setbacks experienced in the previous phase of democratic reform especially from the split and disintegration of PR. NGOs have to demonstrate their independent and autonomous character, and recognize the meaning of state Islamization in the perspective of opposing UMNO hegemonic rule. Then NGOs will need to put forward the agenda of opposing state Islamization as a significant content of the current phase of democratic reform in our country in order to re-strengthen the force to fight against the UMNO hegemonic rule.

State Islamization is an Important Ruling Strategy of the UMNO Hegemonic Rule

The fact shows that state Malayisation has been promoted thoroughly by the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique till a Malay racist system has ultimately been established. Through the implementation of racist policies such as the FELDA projects and Bumiputra economic system, state Malayisation enables UMNO hegemonic ruling clique successfully divert the attention of the Malay middle and bottom class masses for a long period of time in order to hinder their political awareness and cheat for their blind supports. The racial conflict intimidation card is also played by the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique so that the oppressed ethnic communities including the Chinese and Indians whose ethnical rights are fully violated feel fearful and frightened whereas their community leaders abjectly surrender to the ruling clique. “Suqiu” incident of Chinese associations in 1999 is a typical example. State Malayisation has been the main means employed by UMNO hegemonic ruling clique to divide and rule the people of various ethnic groups since 1970s. It serves as an important component of their ruling strategy.

As a response to the development of state industrialization in the 1980s, urbanization of the Malay society and improvement of the general education level, as well as the uprising of the Islamic Revivalism and the gradual expansion of PAS at the east coast, the state Malayisation agenda was pushed towards state Islamization rapidly by the Mahathir-led UMNO hegemonic ruling clique. Its significant meaning to the UMNO hegemonic rule to parade UMNO as a party that not only defends the Malay community, but also defends the Muslim community. In addition, UMNO masters the right to speak and govern about Islam via taking control over the regime.

Mahathir solicited Anwar for the Islamization of government machinery which refers to but not limited to the implementation and development of Islamic values in the laws, finance and education sectors including the establishment of Islamic banking, Islamic insurance, Islamic stock index (debenture, unit trust, shares), International Islamic University, Islamic medical centre, upgrading the Islamic bureucracy and developed a foreign policy oriented to the Muslim world. Two autonomous jurisdiction systems, i.e. the secular and Islamic have been created. With the scope of the secular jurisdiction being continuously eroded by the state Islamization drive, the secular state nature of our country is under threat.

On this basis, Najib launched the Malaysian Syariah Index in February 2015 so that the governance of the eight major areas namely law, politics, economy, education, culture, infrastructure, environment and social are in compliance with the Syariah requirements. He is keen in implementing the Islamic law in full. Besides, Najib has called for the supports from the ulamas in developing Islamic administration system and also in implementing the fair and equitable distribution of wealth.

The implication of state Islamization in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society is the marginalization of all the non-Muslims. It is the manifestation of double oppression ethnically and religiously. Long years of state Islamization has resulted in the dissatisfaction of the non-Muslim communities. The Hindraf’s struggle to defend the interests and rights of the Hindu communities was one of the products of the dissatisfactions. In order to achieve the same effect of ruling strategy like the state Malayisation, the “religious conflict” intimidation card has been used by the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique. It was seen in the typical example of “Allah” wording controversy in 2014. UMNO hegemonic ruling clique’s attempt of suppressing the rights to freedom of beliefs and religions of the non-Muslims is to force the non-Muslim communities to accept the fact the Malaysia is an Islamic state and to succumb to the superior position of Islam among others in our country. It is the premeditation of the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique to divide the Muslims and non-Muslims from unity so that it can strengthen and prolong its rule.

All in all, the state Islamization serves as an important strategy of the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique to consolidate its ruling position by dividing the people across ethnic groups. Its ruling position will get even consolidated with state Islamization policies that are more intense. To oppose the UMNO hegemonic rule, one has to oppose the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique from Islamizing the state and oppose every concrete policy of the state Islamization.

Any political party or individual, who fights for the interests of people of all ethnicities, has to expose the plot of UMNO hegemonic clique to Islamize the state, and safeguard the rights of both Muslims and non-Muslims communities, so that the people of all ethnic groups would unite from divide to form an unbreakable strong force to complete the task of burying UMNO hegemonic rule. We have reason to believe that any political party or individual, who claims to oppose UMNO hegemonic rule, but does not oppose state Islamization or even supports it, actually does not genuinely want to bury UMNO hegemonic rule. They just want to take over the throne from the UMNO leaders then continue the ruling strategies of enslaving and oppressing the people.

Opposing State Islamization is Not Anti-Islam

The main content of opposing state Islamization in our country is opposing the laws and policies implemented by the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique whose guiding ideology is to materialize Islamic doctrine that will affect all aspects and levels of the daily lives of non-Muslims. In other words, the state Islamization is a forced assimilation process of the government using Islamic doctrine against the non-Muslim people. Its main feature is the government acts on behalf of the will of the Islamic doctrine to impose the religious doctrine forcefully on the people of all ethnicities and beliefs of the entire nation with an ultimate goal to establish an Islamic state. On the other hand, anti-Islam means the denial of the existence of Islamic religion in Malaysia and the right of anyone to believe in Islam.

A simple example of opposing state Islamization is disagreement of government in regulating the non-Muslims to wear according to the Islamic doctrine when entering the governmental offices. On the other hand, an example of anti-Islam is calling for the government to ban anyone from wearing according to the Islamic doctrine when entering the governmental offices.

Obviously, oppose state Islamization is totally different from anti-Islam. One opposes state Islamization genuinely respects Islam as one of the religions being practiced by the people and wishes Islam as a religion that respects different beliefs and religions of others.

Anti-Islam is a position to create religious strife and violate human rights. On the contrary, oppose state Islamization is a position to maintain religious harmony and uphold human rights. In the era of globalization, anti-Islam means deeming the whole Muslim world as enemy. This is an absurd and seriously undesirable attitude, and is absolutely no shelter in the Malaysia society with Muslims has all the while been the majority population. This is different from opposing state Islamization where one opposes state Islamization merely opposes its instigator, i.e. the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique and those main leaders of PAS who recently promotes Hudud law in Kelantan.

This is especially relevant when a scholar, Farouk A. Peru described that the tendency of Islamofascism in form of systematic oppression is manifested politicially in Malaysia (Note 1). Although opposing Islamization began with initiative to safeguard the rights and interests of non-Muslim masses, its significance lies in the fight against the ruling UMNO hegemonic clique to prevent the rise of fascism and the country from headings towards religious totalitarianism. The Muslims’ rights remains intact in this struggle. In essence, oppose state Islamization is beneficial to all the people being ruled in Malaysia including the Muslims and non-Muslims.

State Islamization which comes with dominant policy thinking only based on a particular religious doctrine, is clearly in violation of the reality that the Malaysian elected goverment shall represent the people of all ethnic groups and religions, and therefore will be opposed by the non-Muslim communities. The rationale of opposing state Islamization is in line with the proposotion of the Chinese and Indian communities in opposing the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique which only focuses on National School and discriminates SRJK(C) and SRJK(T). They oppose the government which diverts the resources from people of all ethnic groups but centralizes in the development and promotion of the Islam and the interests of its followers, while ignores even discriminates, oppresses the other beliefs and religions and their believers.

Therefore, oppose state Islamization is essentially to defend the representation of the interests of the non-Muslim communities in the people-elected government, to safeguard the religious freedom rights of the non-Muslim masses, and maintain equal relationship of mutual respect among religions. This is definitely conducive to the long term harmony with one another in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society.

The feature of state Islamization that vastly violates the principles of democracy and human rights spirit is, only a few priviledged individuals who are so-call proficient in Islam predominate the power of discourse in any policy throughout the process of policy making from the proposal to implementation, under the shield of religious doctrine. In the specific case where Hudud law is being pushed forward by PAS leaders in Kelantan, ordinary Muslims are regarded as ought-to-be-supporters whereas non-Muslims who are considered as non-fluent in Islam should not hold any dissent.

Even if laws of state Islamization are enforced through the democratic process of parliamentary majority, these laws will be resolutely resisted by non-Muslims by all means. Individuals who truly defend the rights to freedom of religion, including Muslims will not agree and support these laws too. This is in view of the fact that society in Malaysia is made up of various ethnic communities and religions.

NGOs should Promote Unity of All People to Oppose State Islamization

At the current stage, all political parties and NGOs flaunting the banner of democratic reform should face the issues of state Islamization, the secular state status of Malaysia and demands of the oppressed ethnic communities for rights to freedom of religion squarely. The threat of the secular state’s character in the Federal Constitution being intentionally deteriorated is no longer a secret. UMNO hegemonic ruling clique will never stop the process of state Islamization in our country as long as it is beneficial for them to stay in power. For the non-Muslim community, state Islamization in our country has reached an extremely stern moment.

Hudud law pushed forward by PAS leadership in Kelantan will be the first to constitutionally breach the secular state nature of our country. There have been some non-Muslim communities fighting to uphold the equality of rights to belief and religion respectively in the past. Hindraf struggle was one among them, which once yielded enormous political influence. Now more non-Muslim organized forces will be gradually mobilized to oppose the implementation of Hudud law.

NGOs with the position of serving the people will realize that the moment has come to put forward the issue of state Islamization as an urgent agenda. The struggle to oppose state Islamization will serve the purpose of opposing UMNO hegemonic rule, as state Islamization serves for UMNO hegemonic rule.

NGOs must treat each and every law and policy of state Islamization that infringe the rights and interests of non-Muslims specifically and fight for the legitimate rights of non-Muslims, with resolute stand in opposing state Islamization. This will bring about the rises of many mass struggles against state Islamization policies, in which will finally be united as a strong mass power against state Islamization.

Mean while, NGOs must explain the essense of state Islamization in the aspect of laws and policies and demands of the non-Muslim masses to Muslim masses, in order to strive for the understanding and support of Muslims. Even though the Muslim masses are temporarily hoodwinked, with the worsening of UMNO hegemonic ruling’s corruptness, they will soon realize that UMNO hegemonic ruling clique is the main struggle target of the people of all ethnic groups in our country.

NGOs must emphasize that opposing state Islamization is not anti-Islam but opposing the UMNO hegemonic rule. Thus, a united front will be gradually formed by people of all ethnic groups and religions opposing state Islamization. This united front will launch a powerful struggle against UMNO hegemonic ruling clique.

The internal contradiction of UMNO ruling clique was gravely intensified when the anger to spurn UMNO hegemonic rule was roared by people of all ethnic groups in our country in the past two general elections. Najib, who has fallen into dire straits due to continuous economic downturn and various scandals swirling around him, will make full use of the ruling strategies, namely the state Malayisation, state Islamization, guise of parliamentary democracy and fascist repression to extricate all kinds of internal unrest and external invasion.

With the notable cooperation of PAS leadership, UMNO hegemonic ruling clique will undoubtedly push forward state Islamization more comprehensively. It can be foreseen that more non-Muslim masses will join in to oppose state Islamization. On 26 May 2016, instigated by UMNO ministers and MPs, the Parliament gave greenlight to PAS president Hadi Awang to table his Private Member’s Bill motion aimed at convoying the implementation of Hudud law in Kelantan for debate. It was later asked by Hadi for the Bill to be deferred to the next parliamentary meeting in October. Again, it was inevitable for all democratic political parties and NGOs to face the question of whether to support state Islamization.

The Functions of Independence and Autonomy of NGOs in the Current Phase of Democratic Reform

The current phase of democratic reform in our country should adhere to the demands of people of all ethnic groups and religions instead of repeating the same mistakes and not learning the lessons from history. In face of the UMNO hegemonic ruling clique that carry out state Islamization as their main ruling strategy, the main demand of struggle of the oppressed masses, especially non-Muslims, is opposing state Islamization. Therefore, leaders of the democratic reform movement must look upon opposing state Islamization as the main content of democratic reform at present.

We hope that DAP carry on their role to represent urban petty bourgeoisie and working class masses, and to continue the fighting spirit of late Karpal Singh to unequivocally oppose Malaysia to become an Islamic state and resolutely oppose state Islamization. We look forward to PKR and PAN with Malays-based masses to face the reality where rights of the non-Muslim masses are being violated by state Islamization squarely. We look forward for their support in the struggle of the people of all ethnic groups to oppose state Islamization, demand for ethnic equality and rights to religion to serve the struggle against UMNO hegemonic rule.

The current phase of democratic reform must strive for wider support from people of all ethnic groups and religions to realize the objective of burying UMNO hegemonic rule. Three matters have to be addressed to achieve it:

(1) All NGOs must demonstrate their independence and autonomous character to proactively put forward the demand of non-Muslim masses in opposing state Islamization as an important content of the struggle against UMNO hegemonic rule at present. Opposition parties (at the federal level) leaders must be urged to response. Finally, NGOs must strive to put forward the position to oppose state Islamization as the main content of democratic reform at present.

(2) Leaders of the main oppostion parties should unite all other political parties that oppose UMNO hegemonic rule such as Socialist Party of Malaysia (PSM), as well as NGOs representing voices of different communities, particularly NGOs that struggle for basic rights of non-Muslim masses, including: Hindraf, who should not harbour any illusion about UMNO and continue to fight for rights of ethnic equality and rights to religion of the Hindu community; NGOs in Sabah and Sarawak that fight for rights to self-determination and rights to freedom of religion; Chinese education leading organizations such as Dong Zong that are not supposed to entertain any illusion about leaders of UMNO-BN and fight against policies that carry forward assimilation of mother-tongue education. Together we shall form a broad democratic united front with the aim of burying UMNO hegemonic rule.

(3) Finally, we believe that as long as all political parties and NGOs respect each other on equal ground regardless of differences in strength and sincerely work together on the basis of seeking accord while containing differences and “everybody has a say”, the democratic united front will definitely grow in strength to realize the people’s aspirations to bury UMNO hegemonic rule.

Note 1: The original quote is “In Malaysia, Islamic discourse is currently reflecting a tendency towards a singular truth. Moverover, this tendency manifests itself politically as systematic oppression. We term this strand within the Islamic tradition as ‘Islamofascism’. In Malaysia, perhaps the most overt example of Islamofascist tendencies is the restriction of the use of the word “Allah” by Christians. This word is deemed the sole property of Muslims and its use by non-Muslims is said to be corruptive to Muslims and may cause them confusion. Other examples of Islamofascist tendencies is the action by Islamic courts to legitimize the abduction of children by parents who had recently converted to Islam, that is converting after their marriage and starting their families with non-Muslim spouses. These policies reflect an attitude which supports a singularity of truth – that of an ultra-puritanical Sunni Islam.” Farouk A. Peru, “Understanding Religious Pluralism”, in “Breaking the Silence – Voices of Moderation: Islam in a Constitutional Democracy”, at pg. 175.

Read More