VIVA News

Pakatan Rakyat, kata Anwar, meraih 53%. Barisan Nasional hanya 45%.

Tak ada yang mengejutkan dari Pemilihan umum Malaysia 5 Mei lalu. Kubu Barisan Nasional kembali menang. Di tengah protes yang terus bergulir ke rezim itu dalam satu dekade ini, terhitung sudah 56 tahun koalisi yang dipimpin UMNO ini menguasai pemerintahan Malaysia.

Barisan Nasional meraih 133 kursi parlemen dari 222 kursi yang tersedia. Sementara pihak oposisi berhasil memperoleh 89 kursi.

Tapi koalisi oposisi Pakatan Rakyat kali ini protes keras atas hasil pemilu itu. Mereka menuduh ada kecurangan yang dilakukan Najib Razak cs. Pemimpin oposisi Anwar Ibrahim lantas menggelar apel protes yang dihadiri 40 ribu pendukungnya di Stadion Kelana Jaya, 8 Mei.

Anwar tentu saja meradang. Dalam wawancara khusus denganVIVAnews, Anwar mengatakan penghitungan komisi pemilu Malaysia telah dicurangi oleh rezim Najib Razak. Berdasarkan penghitungan independen, seharusnya yang menang adalah Pakatan Rakyat, bukan Barisan Nasional.

Satu jurus curang yang dimainkan Najib, kata Anwar, adalah dengan mendatangkan para pemilih bayangan untuk ikut menyerbu kotak suara. Dia menduga mereka datang dari Bangladesh dan Myanmar. Lalu apa rencana Pakatan Rakyat selanjutnya? Berikut wawancara lengkapnya:

Menurut anda, apakah pemilihan umum Minggu lalu telah berjalan bebas dan mewakili rakyat?
Justru itu isu yang sedang kami bantah sekarang, Soal kecurangan-kecurangan yang terlihat jelas sekali. Meskipun begitu dukungan rakyat masih terlihat kuat kepada koalisi Pakatan Rakyat.

Contohnya salah satu yang kami teliti sekarang, baik yang terperinci maupun yang mutakhir, di tanah Melayu kami meraih suara 53,03 persen. Sementara koalisi Barisan Nasional hanya memperoleh 45,07 persen suara.

Tapi yang menang malah koalisi Barisan Nasional. Justru ini yang aneh. Sedangkan versi nasional menyatakan Pakatan Rakyat memperoleh angka 51 persen dan Barisan Nasional 47 persen.

Angka 51 dan 47 ini versi siapa?
Itu versi Komisi Pemilu. Lima puluh satu persen itu dengan segala penipuan, kecurangan, dan datangnya orang-orang asing dari Bangladesh dan Myanmar ikut memilih sebagai pemilih bayangan. Bayangkan kalo pemilu dilakukan secara bersih. Saya rasa kami akan dengan mudah meraih suara hingga 60 persen

Jadi seharusnya yang dinyatakan sebagai pemenang adalah koalisi oposisi?
Ya. Namun untuk saat ini kami sedang membuktikan dulu bahwa Komisi Pemilu bersekongkol dengan pihak pemerintah. Kami memiliki foto dan video ada pemilih asal Bangladesh dan Myanmar yang dikirim oleh polisi untuk ikut memilih.

Apakah ada juga tenaga kerja asal Indonesia yang dimanfaatkan sebagai pemilih bayangan?
Sudah berkurang jumlahnya. Karena dukungan terhadap oposisi dan Anwar lebih kuat. Mereka pernah diiming-imingi untuk bekerja di Malaysia, tapi diberikan gaji pembantu, dan mereka tetap memilih Anwar.

Anda sebelumnya juga mengatakan ada kecurangan pada tinta pemilu?
Mereka sengaja menggunakan tinta yang tidak tahan lama. Tinta itu bisa dicuci dan dapat hilang. Kami curiga ada pemilih yang bisa memilih dua atau tiga kali. Kami memiliki bukti yang cukup, ada empat orang yang memilih partai  yang sama sampai tiga kali.

Bisa disebutkan di daerah mana saja yang terbukti ada kecurangan?
Kecurangan yang terbukti terjadi di 30 negara bagian. Bukan hanya satu tapi banyak yang sudah dicek.

Rencananya mau diserahkan ke siapa barang bukti kecurangan yang anda miliki?
Kami akan melaporkan polisi dan komisi pemilu ke pihak berwenang. Yang Pakatan Rakyat ingin ubah adalah sistemnya. Setelah itu, kami serahkan kepada rakyat. Dokumen dan rekaman video ini akan kami serahkan kepada media massa dan akan kami unggah ke Youtube.

Kami akan mengeluarkan semua bukti ini ke media sosial karena di tingkat atas semua dikontrol oleh pemerintah. Rakyat saat ini marah sekali karena pemilu dicurangi oleh pemerintah, bekerja sama dengan komisi pemilu yang tidak bebas.

Anda menuntut penghitungan suara pemilu. Betul begitu?
Iya. Tapi tidak perlu semua dihitung ulang. Kami hanya menuntut penghitungan ulang di daerah yang terbukti ada kecurangan.

Pada pemilu awal 30 April lalu, ada setengah juta pemilih yang memilih. Dan ini tidak dipantau sama sekali. Wakil partai oposisi tidak diberikan izin untuk memantau.

Padahal yang memilih saat itu sekitar 30 persen (dari pemilih total). Jadi ini sudah ada penipuan.

Menurut anda, dibandingkan pemilu lima tahun lalu, pemilu kali ini seperti apa?
Pada pemilu kali ini, sebelumnya ada kepanikan di tengah masyarakat untuk menolak mereka. Akhirnya pemerintah terdesak dan melakukan penipuan, karena hasil yang terlalu kentara oposisi akan menang.

Apakah masyarakat yang menolak termasuk etnis China. Terbukti masyarakat China yang sebelumnya memilih pemerintah lalu beralih ke oposisi?
Partai UMNO dan Perdana Menteri Najib Razak menyebut ini “tsunami China”. Itu dilakukan untuk mengelabui mata rakyat supaya orang Melayu marah. Tapi jika dilihat lagi faktanya, jumlah pemilih China tidak banyak, hanya 25 persen, membuktikan masyarakat Melayu masih kuat. Mereka ingin
mengadu domba China dan pribumi.

Dari sistem demokrasi yang ada di Indonesia, apa yang bisa dipelajari oleh Malaysia untuk pemilu lima tahun mendatang?
Indonesia sudah lebih maju sistem pemilunya dan berlangsung bebas. Kalau calon presiden di Indonesia bisa berdebat. Sementara di Malaysia, Najib menolak berdebat dengan saya.

Secara objektif ada ruang di mana kita harus mempelajari pemilu dari Indonesia. Walaupun saat ini masih ada permasalahan kesenjangan kaya dan miskin, korupsi, tapi secara institusi demokratis bisa dipelajari.

Tapi pimpinan UMNO ini terlalu arogan. Bagi mereka Indonesia itu cuma soal TKI saja. Mereka seharusnya memiliki sikap yang lebih realistis menerima kenyataan bahwa Indonesia dari sudut pandang memantapkan demokrasi dan pengurusan pemilu yang jujur dan adil harus dipelajari pengalamannya.

Malaysia seharusnya mengundang komisi pemilu Indonesia untuk memantau pemilu di Malaysia, tapi komisi pemilu di sini tidak bersedia.

The Malaysian Insider

Satu tinjauan di lamat web yang direspon oleh beberapa belas ribu orang bersetuju supaya Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim berundur dari pimpinan utama Pakatan Rakyat dan ketua pembangkang di Parlimen. Itulah kira-kira sebagai reaksi setelah Pakatan tidak dapat kerusi selalyaknya bagi memenangi PRU 5 Mei lalu.

Respon itu sesuai dengan kenyataan yang pernah Anwar buat bahawa dia akan berundur sekiranya Putrajaya tidak dapat ditawan. Maka itulah dituntut oleh responden.

Responden bersetuju dia berundur kira-kira 80 peratus. Ia tinggi tetapi belum sampai 15,000 orang. Jika seluruh anggota Perkasa mengambil bahagian mungkin yang mahu dia berundur naik 100,000.

Sekalipun Pakatan belum berjaya menguasai Putrajaya tetapi yang mengundinya di seluruh negara yang  direkodkan oleh SPR hampir 51 peratus atau 5.5 juta tidak termasuk yang lesap, sedang BN yang diisytihar menang itu diundi oleh 5.2 juta saja.

Perlembagaan tidak mengiktiraf undi popular sebagai pemenang, tetapi Pakatan telah menang dari segi demokrasi. Maka ada justifikasi Anwar tidak perlu berundur. Pakatan mengikut kekeliruan pengiraan undi tidak  dapat kerusi secukupnya, sedang ia menang undi popular.

Pakatan bukan tidak menang, cuma ia tidak dapat berkuasa. Keputusan muktamat sekarang menunggu apa mahkamah kata apabila sekitar 30 petisyen pilihan raya akan dikemukakan selepas ia diwartakan.

Jika Anwar dalam situasi yang ada mengubah fikiran tidak berunsur tidak dikira dia tidak berpegang kepada janji. Janjinya kiranya Pakatan kalah serba serbi. Sekarang Pakatan tidak kalah serba serbi.

Katakan Pakatan kalah serba serbi, Anwar seorang tidak boleh menentukan dia patut berundur atau mesti menerus usaha menawan Putrajaya. Anwar boleh menawarkan diri berundur tetapi pimpinan Pakatan dari segi moral berkuasa untuk bersetuju atau tidak bersetuju.

Kalau Anwar mahu menjadi ketua atau calon Perdana Menteri, dia memerlukan persetujuan konsenses Pakatan. Kalau pimpinan Pakatan tidak setuju, maka dia tidak boleh jadi pemimpin. Dan apabila dia hendak berundur pula, dia tidak juga boleh buat keputusan sendiri. Dia kena dengar apa pimpinan PAS dan DAP kata.

Apa jua keputusan yang Anwar hendak buat, dia mesti berunding dulu dengan pimpinan PAS dan Pakatan.

Setakat ini kedudukan yang ada di tangan Pakatan Rakyat ialah Ketua Pembangkang di Parlimen. Jika mengikut parti mana yang banyak kerusi ia DAP. Anwar sendiri pun tidak boleh berkeras terus menjadi Ketua Pembangkang. Dia pun tahu Lim Kit Siang perlu ditanya dulu. Dia sudah menyatakan kesediaan untuk memberi kepada pihak yang lebih berhak.

Tetapi Lim Kit Siang sudah menyatakan supaya Anwar wajar meneruskan kedudukan itu. Tiada di kalangan keluarga PR membantah Anwar meneruskan kempen menawan Putrajaya.

Dengan Anwar dikehendaki mendengar apa kerabat Pakatan kata, bukan apa tinjauan laman web kata.

Keupayaan Pakatan Selangor mencapai keputusan yang lebih baik  dari PRU 2008 adalah bukti Pakatan dan pimpinan tiga serangkainya — Anwar, Abdul Hadi Awang dan Lim Kit Siang — adalah isyarat Pakatan belum ditolak dan mereka mesti meneruskan kempen yang belum selesai.

The Malaysian Insider

Bersih 2.0’s “People’s Tribunal” may not have any legal standing but will serve as a “moral force” to investigate allegations of electoral fraud, said Datuk Ambiga Sreenavasan when defending the polls watchdog’s final attempt at proving wrongdoing in the May 5 polls.

The renowned civil rights activist told The Malaysian Insider that Bersih 2.0 will soldier on with its plan to set up the tribunal which, she said, should be announced in two or three weeks’ time, despite earning condemnation from polls regulator Election Commission (EC).

“It is true that it is not set up under any law or statute. That is why it is called the People’s Tribunal,” she said.

“It will be an evidence-gathering tribunal and what we have is the moral force to examine the allegations. That is its main aim — to gather evidence,” she added.

On May 6, a day after the tumultuous 13th general election, Bersih 2.0 announced its plan to set up the tribunal to look into the hundreds of reports of alleged cheating that took place during the polls.

The coalition of over 80 non-governmental organisations insisted that the polls results had favoured the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) largely because of these irregularities, and said it would not recognise the outcome until it had verified all allegations of fraud.

In the polls, BN continued its half-a-century unbroken rule and emerged victors yet again despite winning with a significantly smaller seat majority in the 222-seat Parliament.

It is true that it is not set up under any law or statute. That is why it is called the People’s Tribunal. — Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan

The ruling pact snapped up 133 seats this time to Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) 89, failing yet again to recapture the coveted two-thirds parliamentary majority that it first lost in the 2008 general election.

PR refused to accept its losses, however, pointing to the fact that it had won the overall popular vote by scoring 51 per cent of votes cast, while BN only took 48 per cent — an outcome reminiscent of the 1969 polls when the ruling pact first lost the popular vote.

The federal opposition pact of PR has since confirmed plans to file election petitions to challenge the results in 27 federal seats where BN had won with marginal majorities, allegedly due to electoral fraud.

PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli has also said that the same complaints will be brought before Bersih 2.0’s “People’s Tribunal” where, he said, PR’s evidence was likely to be treated with more seriousness than in any court of law.

Ambiga told The Malaysian Insider that the tribunal will be presided over by a five-member panel, which will include individuals of repute and who will not be members of any political parties or even from Bersih 2.0 itself.

She said the panel will likely come up with a set timeframe to conduct its probe, apart from deciding on appropriate terms of reference before commencing any hearing.

“We will then expect some sort of recommendations or findings to be made. This will be presented to all the relevant authorities, including human rights bodies like Suhakam,” she said.

“For Bersih… our role is just to facilitate the setting up of the tribunal. Further to that, we will not get involved. It must be completely independent,” she added.

Ambiga also explained that the setting up of the tribunal was taking longer than originally planned due to the complexity of its scope of investigation, as well as the selection of its panel members.

“We originally wanted to have it done by June but it looks impossible at this point. We should announce the panel within two or three weeks’ time.

“But as to when the panel will begin their hearings, that would be entirely up to the members to decide,” she said.

Despite widespread protests against its handling of the 13th general election, the EC has insisted that it had conducted the polls fairly and successfully, citing the higher turnout of voters at a whopping 84 per cent as evidence of voters’ confidence in the Malaysian electoral system.

“We have conducted a successful polls, there was an 85 per cent turnout… we have good job as you can see from the turnout,” EC deputy chairman Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar said last week.

PR has been organising mammoth rallies across the country to prove voter dissatisfaction against the polls, which PR de facto chief Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has insisted had been stolen from his pact.

23 MEI 2013 (KHAMIS)

8.30 – 12.00 MALAM

DEPAN PASARAYA MAIDIN KUALA IBAI,

KUALA TERENGGANU

PART 1: Queue, Goodie Bags & Food At Techduology LIVE

Alright.. after everyone queued for their goodie bags and lucky draw numbers and filled stomach with food by Starbucks, it was time to begin the show.

Crowd were all seated and all focused on Ben and I.

We started off by sharing some information about Techduology and showed them some blooper videos.

Right after that, we played a treasure hunt game which got everyone to run around Starbucks looking for hidden objects. First 7 to come back to us will get a prize.

Prizes for this round were sponsored by Starbucks!

Alright! All got your prizes? Now lets get back to your seats and continue with the next agenda.

NEXT!

Malaysia-Chronicle

PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli ridiculed his rivals in Umno for cowardice and being out of touch with the people over a spate of rallies that have taken the nation by storm.

“Intimidation and fear tactics don’t work anymore. It only worked on Zahid Hamidi in 1998, that’s why he turned around within the first 2 weeks after the first demo. If Zahid Hamidi thinks everyone is like him, he is sorely out of touch with the public,” mocked Rafizi, who is also the newly-elected MP for Pandan.

“You can see that despite several statements made by the authorities, the people are still coming out because this is a big issue. I would suggest that Zahid does not interfere in the job of the police. Let the police do their work professionally. We don’t need another Home Minister who makes the silliest comments.”

Zahid’s U-turn of the decade!

Rafizi was referring to Umno vice president Zahid Hamidi, who taking over as Home Minister from Hishammddin Hussein last week had promptly warned the Opposition and rally-goers that action would soon be taken against them.

In the 1990s, Zahid was a staunch supporter of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, who had then been the Umno deputy president. Zahid had protested against Anwar’s jailing on trumped-up sodomy and corruption charges in 1998, but recanted and cut all ties with Anwar after former premier Mahathir Mohamad threw him into jail under the Internal Security Act. Zahid was released in 1999 after he reversed his stance and declared loyalty to the Umno leadership controlled by Mahathir.

It is also worth noting that during the 53th Umno General Assembly in 1997, Zahid had lashed out against Mahathir, calling for an end to cronyism and nepotism in the government. In response, Mahathir publicized the names of those Malay/Bumiputeras who had received shares and high positions in government-linked corporations (GLCs) and these had included Zahid.

Not your father’s country either : Stop the polemics and do your job!

Apart from sabre rattling on the Blackout 505 rallies spearheaded by Anwar and his Pakatan Rakyat coalition, Zahid has also attracted public odium for himself and his Umno party for saying that those unhappy with the current political system in Malaysia should migrate.

His brash comments sparked a wave of public condemnation and added impetus to the Blackout 505 movement to protest electoral fraud and to demand re-elections in seats where the Opposition claims it has accumulated evidence of vote-rigging and phantom voters.

Zahid’s comments have also sparked a wave of “lu siapa” and “ini bukan negara bapa kau” (who are you to ask us to leave, this is not your father’s country) comments against him at the rallies.

“This country is also not (Anwar’s) father’s. It is neither my father’s country nor his father’s country,” Zahid said in an outburst to the press earlier this morning.

Although not a week has elapsed since he was picked to replace the controversial Hisham, who was slammed for stirring up hornets’ nests and creating racial tensions, it looks like Zahid may “outperform” his predecessor going by the fires he has lit in just the space of a few days.

“If he has time, he should tackle the issue of false I.C.s and phantom voters. That is more in line with his job. He needs to know the boundaries and not interfere with the professional work of the police,” said Rafizi.

Would anyone take heed of what Mukhriz says?

The 36-year-old PKR leader also slammed Mukhriz Mahathir for disallowing a Blackout 505 rally scheduled for Tuesday night to be held at a stadium in Alor Setar. Mukhriz, who is Mahathir’s youngest son and newly-appointed chief minister of Kedah, had drawn flak for his high-handed action and accused of being “like father like son”.

“It doesn’t surprise us at all because they have always behaved us this way. It doesn’t even register on our mind what he (Mukhriz) says or what kind of warnings he makes because we have stepped forward to a new Malaysia to a much more liberated Malaysia. What he thins belong to the past and I dont think a lot of people will take heed of what he says,” said Rafizi

“We are more interested in maintaining professional relations with the police because public safety and public order is of utmost importance and we are sure that any rallies if done properly and with full cooperation with the police will have positive results as has taken place in the past two weeks.”

New IGP and Blackout 505 in Kedah to proceed

When asked if the new Inspector General of Police Khalid Bakar who last week took over from the retiring Ismail Omar would affacet Pakatan’s relations with the police, Rafizi said he would wait and see.

Khalid has been widely condemned over many cases and he has even been caught red-handed trying to cover up mis-practices and wrong-doings such as in the Kugan Ananthan murder case as well as in trying to insinuate wrong-doing on the part of the Opposition to give Prime Minister Najib Razak’s administration a ‘boost’ in image.

Such partisan conduct by the senior members of the police force has led to a tremendous loss of public confidence in the police, with most Malaysians having the perception that their cops were out to harm them or solicit bribes rather to protect them and maintain law and order.

“We are more than willing to wait and see. I am more than willing to give the benefit of doubt to Khalid Bakar,” said Rafizi.

He added that the Blackout 505 rally in Kedah would proceed and a new venue to be announced on the social media network soon.

“I am sure 40 to 50,000 people will still come to Alor Setar or Pokok Sena, even if it has to be held in Mahfuz Omar’s house,” said Rafizi, referring to the Kedah PAS commissioner, who is helping to organize the event.

The Jakarta Globe

After the 13th general election in Malaysia recently, Prime Minister Najib Razak grumbled about a “Chinese tsunami” that barged against his Barisan Nasional coalition, leaving it with only 47 percent of the popular vote. Barisan Nasional has a Chinese component, the Malaysian Chinese Association, but the Chinese vote went heavily to the opposition Pakatan Rakyat, a three-party coalition led by former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.

Still, thanks to the gerrymandering of rural constituencies and to the huge perks of incumbency, Barisan Nasional won 133 of 222 parliamentary seats at stake and retained power. Najib remains prime minister.

So why is he grousing about a Chinese tsunami? I think it’s because he has felt a tectonic shift — in this case a tectonic shift in the political mood of Malaysia. It well may be that Malaysian politics will never be the same again. That doesn’t bode well for the Barisan Nasional, or for Najib himself.

Perhaps it’s a comeuppance. There were numerous reports of shenanigans attributed to the ruling coalition. Of flying voters. Of immigrants in Sabah who were given identity cards on condition they would vote for the ruling coalition. Of padded voters’ lists. Of people long dead who were able to vote. Of the Barisan Nasional campaign doling out a total of $2.5 billion to poor voters, and resorting to other forms of subsidy schemes.

If these reports are true, and the evidence is piling up that they’re accurate, then there’s nothing that the local politicians of the Philippines, past masters of election fraud, can teach their Malaysian counterparts. However, to the credit of the Malaysian politicos, although there were some accounts of violence, there wasn’t a single shooting throughout the campaign.

As for the tsunami, it wasn’t Chinese. True, most Chinese Malaysians are sick and tired of the discrimination they’ve suffered over four decades. It rankles that they don’t have equal rights in business, in the civil service and in education. They clamor for a Malaysia that is a meritocracy like next-door Singapore. But there aren’t enough Chinese voters to raise a tsunami.

The tsunami was Malaysian — Muslim Malay and Chinese and Indian Malaysian. Urban, young and idealistic Malaysian. It had nothing to do with ethnicity. It had everything to do with a thirst for change. They’re through with divisive racial politics. They want an end to corruption and cronyism. They want to unleash the potential of a richly diverse Malaysian nation.

Once again, Anwar Ibrahim has failed to win the prime ministership, but he has led Malaysian politics out of the wilderness — and that should be enough for now. He won’t rest, however. Insisting the elections had been stolen from Pakatan Rakyat, he is leading public protests reminiscent of Cory Aquino’s civil disobedience campaign in the Philippines after she thought Ferdinand Marcos had robbed her of the presidential election in 1986.

Aquino’s protest movement led to regime change only because it merged with a military coup. For a people power revolution to succeed it must be supported by a sizeable part of the military, or else the entire military must stay neutral. That won’t happen in Malaysia. But national politics will continue to change. Meanwhile, the Najib government will try to rule with a weak and questioned mandate. It will have to cope with the divisions it has largely created, economic problems from exorbitant election spending, and extravagant promises impossible to keep.

Najib himself is politically wounded. His rivals in the ruling party, the United Malays National Organization, smell blood. That’s a pity because among party eminences, he is the one who has a streak of the reformist in him. To survive, UMNO must undergo sweeping and painful reform to match the shifting mood of Malaysian politics. Otherwise, the election this month was its last hurrah.

The New York Times

Not long ago he was flirting with the idea of semiretirement, maybe a teaching job at an American university. But now Anwar Ibrahim, the leader of the Malaysian opposition, former political prisoner and longtime bugbear of the establishment, says those plans are firmly on the shelf.

After a disputed election this month, in which he and his allies won a majority of votes but failed to capture control of Parliament, Mr. Anwar has returned to his roots as a political street fighter, drawing large crowds across the country to protest what he calls mass vote rigging.

“Rise up!” he beseeched a crowd of thousands crammed last week into a field in this seaside city. “We won the election, but we were robbed of victory.”

Street politics is a sort of political oxygen for Mr. Anwar, who turns 66 in August. His wife jokes that when he complains of aches or fatigue, the only way she can revive him is with a microphone and a crowd.

As a Malay radical in the 1970s, he led student protests for expanded Malay rights and was imprisoned for two years without trial. In the 1990s, he led tens of thousands of followers through the streets of Kuala Lumpur, the capital, embarrassing the government during a visit by Queen Elizabeth II. He was later convicted of sodomy, a charge brought by his political enemies that was ultimately overturned. He spent six years in prison.

Now, as Mr. Anwar poses a new type of challenge to his government, many questions loom for him — and indeed for this relatively prosperous but unsettled country of about 30 million people. How long will he continue to protest the election results? And how long will the government, which has been slowly relaxing its mildly authoritarian powers, put up with the unrest?

At stake in the battle, besides the questioned validity of the election, is a fight over two visions for the future of this multiethnic country: the government view that continues to favor the Malays and those linked to the governing coalition with preferences versus Mr. Anwar’s campaign to curtail patronage and make government assistance operate on the basis of need, not ethnicity.

For Mr. Anwar, a Malay who once defended those preferences, the shift is a personal sea change, which some say is born of political ambition but that he says came to him during years of reflection in jail.

“My dream was to have a Malaysian spring that would be unique in the sense that we would do it through votes, not in the streets — a peaceful transition into a vibrant democracy in Malaysia,” Mr. Anwar said in an interview at his modest office in an obscure neighborhood outside Kuala Lumpur. Now, with victory elusive, he said he wanted a peaceful resolution but hedged when asked how far he would take his protests.

Malaysian politics, so closely entwined with the country’s ethnic complexity, can be bewildering to outsiders.

Like Indonesia, Myanmar and many other countries in Asia, Malaysia is a product of European colonialism and still a work in progress. The mix of ethnic Malay, Chinese and Indians (a much smaller group) is far from a melting pot — more a Babel of language, a hodgepodge of foods and a tense coexistence of Islam, Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism.

Malay Muslims have a slim majority of the population but have dominated politics since independence from Britain in 1957. Their wide-reaching set of preferential policies — cheap loans, scholarships and government contracts among them — were put in place in large part to help them rise in a society in which much of the wealth was held by the strongly entrepreneurial Chinese, who make up about a quarter of the population.

Under the social contract of decades past, ethnic groups shared power within the governing coalition led by the United Malays National Organization, or U.M.N.O. But that informal compact is now in tatters, with a majority of Chinese Malaysian voters defecting to the opposition over resentment of what many term “second-class citizenship.”

The falling out between the governing party and Chinese Malaysians seems mutual. “It’s the first time that a Malay government thinks it can govern virtually without any minority representation,” said Bridget Welsh, an associate professor at Singapore Management University and a leading researcher on Malaysian politics who said that many people “feel traumatized” by the election and the alleged irregularities.

The May 5 election was the closest that the opposition had come to defeating the governing party. Mr. Anwar and his allies won 51 percent of the vote, compared with 47 for the governing coalition. That was not enough for Mr. Anwar to win control of Parliament because the governing coalition is strong in rural areas, where it captured many more small districts, adding up to a comfortable majority of 133 seats, with 89 for the opposition.

There are glimmers of a multicultural Malaysian identity among Mr. Anwar’s supporters. At rallies where speaker after speaker proclaims interethnic brotherhood, Chinese Malaysian women in skimpy shorts stand next to Malay Muslim women fully covered in Islamic robes. Chinese Buddhists drape themselves in the green flag of the opposition’s Islamic party.

Mr. Anwar, his supporters say, is a sort of midwife in the slow birth of Malaysia’s multiethnic identity.

“Anwar sparked people’s thinking,” said Mohammed Razif, a 30-year-old Islamic teacher who attended the rally Tuesday. “Malaysia is a multicultural country, but only recently I realized that not every race is treated equally.”

Najib Razak, the prime minister who was returned to power after the elections, announced what he described as a “unity cabinet.” It includes several new faces, including the head of the local chapter of Transparency International, an anticorruption group.

“Together we will act to bring about national reconciliation,” he said.

Yet his new cabinet is most notable for the dominance of Malays — and the near absence of ethnic Chinese. Mr. Najib angered many in the opposition when he said that his coalition’s weak showing was the result of a “Chinese tsunami,” the withdrawal of support by Chinese Malaysian voters.

The opposition said the shift in support was by voters of all ethnicities and that singling out Chinese Malaysians served only to deepen divisions.

Such anger and frustration are palpable at opposition rallies, where protesters wear black because, as their T-shirts proclaim, they see May 5 as “the day that democracy died.”

At the rally in Kuantan, leaders of the opposition took turns addressing the crowd, but when Mr. Anwar’s arrival was announced, people rose to their feet and cheered. An ethnic Chinese woman, wearing a Malaysian flag draped over her shoulders, began jumping up and down.

“At the moment, he’s the only leader who can keep the opposition together,” Selva Raja, a courier-company employee who attended the rally, said.

Mr. Anwar paced the stage, telling the crowd that the election had been stolen and that the governing party was trying to divide the country.

“Look to your left; look to your right; look in front of you and behind you,” Mr. Anwar said. “You will see Chinese, Malays and Indians. This is the new Malaysia.”

Here is an example of how we tend to, knowingly or unknowingly, inspire each other by the little things we do everyday so long as we do them well.

Lee Hom sang Tan Sri P. Ramlee’s Getaran Jiwa during his Open Fire concert in Malaysia two months ago. Watch the video below.

So I have been asked by my friends, “Eh, I heard he sang Getaran Jiwa”, and I would reply, “Yah, he did”.

Getaran Jiwa became stuck in my mind recently that way, thanks to Lee Hom. Haha.

I first learned Getaran Jiwa upon joining the SMK Subang Jaya choir in 1999 as a soprano. We performed it on stage in more than one occassion. But the 13-year-old Yvonne didn’t fully understand or pay attention to the lyrics and the song’s meaning. I was more concerned with getting the pitch right, whether my vocals were as good as the next person, or be carried away by the melodious harmonization that we, as a choir, were producing.

After Lee Hom’s recent performance, which I didn’t physically hear, of course – my heart did. It all came back to me – the emotion that this song conjures.

While I was painting Love Canvasses Malaysia last week, Getaran Jiwa was the song that kept playing in my mind while I tried my best to maintain a steady heart – one unaffected by the political dramas that were going on.

Getaran Jiwa is about how songs and music can awaken the soul or heart, how they can enlighten mankind.

I am older and wiser now, so I can understand the song’s meaning from a higher perspective.

It is by no coincidence that the composer coupled this song with a gentle and soothing melody. It reminds me of two things:

1) To enlighten people, we need not use force.

2) Those who are truly enlightened and liberated, are not easily perturbed by chaos. They are steady and calm.

That must be why Getaran Jiwa kept playing in my mind as I painted Love Canvasses Malaysia. My intention for painting Love Canvasses Malaysia is to encourage people to see beyond all the chaos and confusions that are happening currently, and be able to see what is truly important to us as a people.

Thanks, Lee Hom, for embedding Getaran Jiwa in my mind. Bet you didn’t expect your performance to inspire me this far.

A very common misconception about divorce is that a lot of couples think that they would have to be living separately for more than three years before they can file for divorce. The truth is if both parties agree to divorce, then you don’t need to be living separately.

Andy Low from Low & Partners talked about the money matters in divorce cases in Malaysia, during the webinar I hosted with Evanna Phoon. Here is what he said:

I have clients that stay together during the divorce proceedings and still stay together after divorce proceedings just for the sake of the kids. So, that is possible. Separation for two years is only one of the reasons to file for divorce. It doesn’t mean that you have to live separately in order to qualify yourself for a divorce proceeding. This is a very common misconception.

Second misconception is that they thought they will be automatically divorced if they have lived separately for more than 2 years. This is also incorrect because they would still need to file an application before they are divorced. There’s no such thing as “automatically divorced,” you have to apply for it.

Now, another misconception is that application for divorce cannot be made within 2 years of the marriage when, in fact, there are exceptions available. Sometimes parties can opt for annulment if they are qualified or eligible for annulment. There is no “not more than 2 years of marriage” limitation for annulment.

I want to touch a bit on: “The Brief and the General Procedure of the Joint Petition Divorce” before we talk about the monetary part because I want to establish that going for a joint petition divorce it is much easier. When you go for a unilateral divorce, which is a single petition, it will take more time.

Generally, if both parties agree, then you need to engage with a lawyer. We discuss the settlement with your spouse, and then you sign the divorce petition, and you wait for the hearing date, and you attend to the court, and get a certificate. While for unilateral divorce proceedings, you need to consult a lawyer also, and you may need to also apply to the JPN for a tribunal.

The objective of the tribunal is to actually provide a platform for the parties to reconcile. For example, if the husband would like to file for divorce, then the husband needs to actually submit an application to the JPN and attend the tribunal. It is actually the intention of the government to allow a chance to reconcile the parties before they have really decided to go ahead with the divorce proceeding.

In doing the so called tribunal sessions, the government officers, JPN officers will try to understand the reasons behind the break-up of the marriage or will try to ask you questions like why you want to live separately, and in all those things. The ultimate objective will be to reconcile the parties. However, if you insist on filing for a divorce after the JPN session, you can enclose the tribunal’s letter and file the application to the court, which is the third step.

Afterwards, the procedure will be very different depending on the spouse’s subsequent actions. So, we cannot determine the general time involved because we do not know whether or not your case will be contested by your spouse.

Now, what are the usual disputes that arise from a marriage?

For Premium Webinar Members, you can watch the full session here:

Divorce Procedure in Malaysia Law is a post from: KCLau.com

The Malaysian Insider

PKR’s Rafizi Ramli today offered proof of phantom voters, which he alleged was widespread fraud that could potentially “discredit” the recently-concluded general election, besides put the integrity of Malaysia’s identity card in doubt.

“The moment you have similar IC used by different people, so much so that the genuine or actual person proving the identity is denied to vote, that means this is part of a bigger planning to allow phantom voters to come in,” the PKR strategy director said at a press conference.

Rafizi (picture)listed eight people who had approached PKR about being denied their right to vote as others had already voted in their names, while also showing reporters the police reports which he said they had lodged voluntarily.

The Pandan MP said that these complaints were also made in the constituencies where the federal opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) had won, which he said showed that the alleged electoral fraud was “widespread” and “systemic”.

But Rafizi said that such evidence has bigger implications than just proving the existence of phantom voters in the electoral roll, claiming that the National Registration Department (NRD) had failed to guarantee that the country’s ICs are genuine and unique to all Malaysians.

“What comfort do we have that our ICs are now not subjected to counterfeiting, not subjected to fraud, where people can have multiple ICs to do various things with different identities?” he asked.

In Sabah, a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) panel today resumed its hearings on the state’s illegal immigrants issue and allegations that foreigners were given citizenship in exchange for their votes.

This story I’m about to share, is indeed an awkward one but amazing at the same time.
PUMA’s latest collaboration collection with Hypebeast, has produced 2 pairs of shoes that looks like what you normally eat in the morning. Dim Sum.

Inspired by ‘Har Gau’ and ‘Siu Mai’, 2 of the most well known dumplings in the dim sum category, they have came up with what you see in the photo above.

I’ve got myself the Siu Mai! Why? Cos I like the colour and Siu Mai is actually my favorite. Yummy.

Posing a bit first. Hahah

Based on my usage, I find it really comfortable and it kinda stands out when I wear it out. Which is a good thing.

The PUMA x HB ‘Siu Mai’ Blaze of Glory OG is outfitted in a luxurious yellow leather and suede upper. The shoe is highlighted by a cushionCELL midsole in white and rounded out by a neoprene boot for fit and comfort.

The PUMA Blaze of Glory collection will be available at Crossover Sunway Pyramid and Crossover City Square, Johor Bahru at RM499. It is limited and if I’m not mistaken, there are only 40 pairs in Malaysia. So better be quick if you are interested!

Every purchase of the Dim Sum Project shoes will come with a pair of Hypebeast X Puma chopstick and a bag as shown in the photo above.

This is one of their promo video. Check it!

PUMA MALAYSIA: https://www.facebook.com/PumaMalaysia

Download audio file (PgHkn-2013-05-20.mp3)

((( iPhone & iPad users CLICK HERE to LISTEN )))

Guests: Seng Kah, Si Cheng Lau, Belacan Ke, King Kong, Kari Puff, Namsai, Jagung, O· Theng, Chhai Buei

This episode is for those who miss home. If you have left home for work or school, you must know what we discussed. Find out how many of us actually cried when we missed home.

(((DOWNLOAD AUDIO FILE)))

Press Statement By Penang Chief Minister and DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng In Kuala Lumpur On 19.5 2013

Newly-minted Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Paul Low should not adapt so quickly from President of Malaysian Transparency International to BN spokesman by being adept in BN’s culture of lies in explaining why Cabinet members should not publicly disclose their assets. Paul Low lied when the said that Penang Chief Minister and state exco members’ public declaration of assets whilst positive was ‘informal’ because officials who fail to declare their assets would not be penalised, or if the declaration is significantly inaccurate in reflecting a person’s wealth.

I wish to remind Paul Low that when he was Malaysian Transparency International President, he had lauded the Penang state government’s leaders for being the first government in Malaysia to publicly declare their assets. Instead of adopting a similar measure to uphold public integrity in the Federal government, why is he taking a different position now?

Penang’s public declaration assets are certified by an international accounting firm and a pledge signed by the EXCO members that they provided true and correct information. All EXCO members who fail to declare their assets will be unceremoniously sacked. Isn’t that a sufficiently harsh penalty to ensure full compliance?

The Penang state government has taken a step further by now requiring all elected Penang State Assemblymen, not just EXCO members to publicly declare their assets. Now that Paul Low is a BN Minister, he has swallowed the BN propaganda “hook, line and sinker” that publicly declaration of assets would threaten the personal security of Cabinet members.

What have Cabinet members have to hide? Penang state leaders have public declared their assets and yet our personal security has not been harmed. Perhaps it is because our assets are pitifully few to make much of an impact. If at all our personal security is threatened, it is by racists from BN supporters and Perkasa.

Would Paul Low take the lead by publicly declaring his assets?
Under the present BN system, a declaration of assets is made privately to the Prime Minister. How would one know whether the information supplied is accurate? With a public declaration of assets, there can be a checking and verification system in addition to that done by international accounting companies. As an accountant himself, Paul Low should know that such verification by international accounting firms are much more reliable, credible and trustworthy than government agencies monitoring and auditing the declarations, as government agencies are subject to Ministerial directives.

Behaving like a BN apologist to justify why public declaration of assets should not be implemented because it would discourage wealthy, talented and skilled persons from serving the public is unacceptable. Public service requires sacrifice and that “one must not only be clean but also seen to be clean”.

Would Paul Low take the lead by publicly declaring his assets? I still remember when Paul Low met me last year on Transparency International’s Integrity Pledge, he had refused my request that a public declaration of assets be included. Paul Low explained that by including the public declaration of assets into the Integrity Pledge, BN would not sign. Clearly he was tailoring the Integrity Pledge not to promote public integrity but to suit BN.

Paul Low must demonstrate that he can make a difference in cleaning up corruption in the BN Federal government by giving a clear and unequivocal commitment to promote public integrity. Only when the BN government commits to a public declaration of assets and implementation of open competitive tenders can convince the public. Anything less would only fuel suspicion that Paul Low is merely a plant and apologist to dress up UMNO and BN as anti-corruption.

LIM GUAN ENG

——BM Version —

Kenyataan Media oleh Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang merangkap Setiausaha Agung DAP, Lim Guan Eng di Kuala Lumpur pada 19 Mei 2013.

Paul Low tidak patut memakai budaya pembohongan BN dengan mendakwa bahawa ahli kabinet tidak patut mengisytiharkan harta seperti yang dilakukan Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang kerana proses di Pulau Pinang itu tidak rasmi.

Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri yang baru, Paul Low tidak seharusnya bertukar begitu cepat daripada Presiden Transparency International Malaysia kepada jurucakap BN dengan menggunakan budaya pembohongan BN apabila menerangkan kenapa ahli Kabinet tidak perlu menhisytiharkan harta secara umum. Paul Low telah berbohong apabila beliau menyatakan bahawa pengisytiharan harta Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang dan ahli EXCOnya adalah tidak rasmi meskipun positif kerana pegawai yang gagal mengisytiharkan harta atau deklarasi yang dibuat tidak tepat dengan kekayaan seseorang, ia tidak dihukum.

Saya ingin mengingatkan Paul Low bahawa sewaktu beliau menjadi Presiden Transparency International Malaysia, beliau memuji pemimpin Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang kerana menjadi kerajaan yang pertama dalam Malaysia yang melakukan pengisytiharan harta secara umum. Sebalik menggunakan pendekatan serupa demi meningkatkan integriti di Kerajaan Persekutuan, kenapa pula beliau memiliki pendirian berlainan sekarang?

Pengisytiharan harta Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang disahkan oleh sebuah firma perakaunan antarabangsa dan diakujanji oleh ahli EXCO bahawa mereka telah memberikan maklumat yang tepat dan benar. Semua ahli EXCO yang gagal mengisytiharkan harta mereka akan dilucutkan jawatan. Bukankah itu hukuman berat yang mencukupi untuk memastikan semuanya patuh?

Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang kini telah mengambil satu lagi langkah dengan memerlukan semua Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri, bukan sahaja ahli EXCO untuk mengisytiharkan harta. Sekarang Paul Low sudah menjadi menteri BN, beliau telah akhirnya menelan semua propaganda BN kononnya pengisytiharan harta akan menggugat keselamatan menteri kabinet.

Apa yang mahu disembunyikan oleh ahli Kabinet? Pemimpin Negeri Pulau Pinang telah melakukan pengisytiharan secara umum, tetapi keselamatan peribadi kami tidak pun terancam. Mungkin kerana asset kami begitu sedikit untuk memberi sebarang kesan. Kalau pun keselamatan kami diancam, pastilah kerana penyokong BN dan Perkasa yang rasis.

Bolehkah Paul Low mendahului dengan mengisytiharkan hartanya sendiri?

Di bawah sistem BN, pengisytiharan harta dibuat secara peribadi kepada Perdana Menteri. Bagaimana kita boleh tahu sama ada maklumat yang diberikan itu tepat atau tidak. Dengan pengisytiharan secara umum, sistem pemeriksaan dan verifikasi boleh diadakan sebagai tambahan kepada apa yang dilakukan firma perakaunan antarabangsa. Sebagai seorang akauntan, Paul Low pastinya tahu bahawa verifikasi oleh badan perakaunan antarabangsa pastinya lebih boleh dipercayai, dan lebih amanah berbanding agensi kerajaan yang mengaudit deklarasi tersebut, kerana agensi kerajaan adalah tertakluk kepada arahan Menteri.

Dengan bersikap seperti seorang apologis BN bagi memberi justifikasi kenapa pengisytiharan harta secara umum tidak patut dilaksanakan kerana ia akan menghalang mereka yang kaya, berbakat dan berkemahiran daripada berkhidmat kepada awam amatlah tidak boleh diterima. Perkhidmatan awam menuntut pengorbanan dan seseorang itu diboleh sahaja dilihat sebagai bersih, tetapi dipastikan bersih.

Adakah Paul Low akan mendahului dengan mengisytiharkan hartanya secara terbuka? Saya masih ingat ketika Paul Low menemui saya tahun lalu tentang Ikrar Integriti Transparency International, beliau telah enggan menerima permintaan saya bahawa pengisytiharan harta secara terbuka disertakan sekali. Paul Low menerangan bahawa dengan memasukkan pengisytiharan harta secara terbuka ke dalam Ikrar Integriti, BN tidak akan menandatangan. Jelaslah beliau sebenarnya beliau merekabentuk Ikrar Integriti itu bukan untuk menggalakkan integriti awam tetapi untuk disesuaikan kepada BN.

Paul Low mesti menunjukkan bahawa beliau mampu membawa perubahan dalam membersihkan rasuah dalam Kerajaan Persekutuan BN dengan memberikan komitmen yang jelas untuk menggalakkan integriti awam. Hanyalah apabila kerajaan BN berkomitmen untuk melakukan pengisytiharan harta secara umum dan melaksanakan tender terbuka maka rakyat akan percaya. Apa sahaja yang kurang daripada itu hanyalah akan menambahkan curiga bahawa Paul Low hanyalah seorang apologis yang dipergunakan secara kosmetik untuk menunjukkan kononnya UMNO dan BN itu anti rasuah.

LIM GUAN ENG

—- Mandarin Version —-

槟州首席部长兼民主行动党秘书长林冠英于2013年5月19日在吉隆坡发表的声明：

刘胜权不应采纳国阵的撒谎文化，声称内阁成员不应像槟城民联州政府般公布财产，因槟州的处理是非正式的。

新上任的首相署部长刘胜权不应这么快就从马来西亚国际透明组织主席的身份，摇身变成为国阵代言人、善于融入国阵的文化，解释为何内阁成员不应公布财产。刘胜权谎称槟州首席部长及行政议员的公布财产举动，虽然是正面但却是“非正式”的，因为没公布财产或有关公布无法准确反映相关人士的财富的话，有关官员并不会被对付。

我谨在此提醒刘胜权，当他还是马来西亚国际透明组织的主席时，他称赞槟州政府的领袖，成为马来西亚史上第一个公布财产的政府。他理应采取同样的措施，要内阁成员公布财产以维护联邦政府的公众诚信，可是为什么现在他却换了一个截然不同的位置？

槟州的公布财产举动，是获得国际会计师事务所认证的。同时，所有的行政议员也签署了一份宣誓书，阐明所提供的资料是确实的。任何无法公布财产的行政议员，将会毫不客气地被开除。难道这不是为了确保议员遵守条例的严厉处罚吗？

如今，槟州政府更进一步要求所有的民选议员，不只是行政议员公布财产。可是，如今晋身为国阵部长的刘胜权，已经把国阵牵强的理论全部啃下，称公布财产将会危及内阁成员的人身安全。

内阁成员到底有什么是见不得人的？槟州民联政府的领袖都已经公布财产，而我们的人身安全并没有受到任何的威胁。或许是我们的财产少得可怜，没有太大的影响。如果说我们的安全受到威胁，想必是国阵支持者或土族权威组织的种族动作吧？

刘胜权会否带头公布财产呢？

在现有的国阵体系下，申报财产是私底下向首相申报。那我们要如何知道申报的资料是准确的呢？若公布财产，加上获得国际会计事务所认证后，就能建立一个检查及检验的系统。作为一名会计师，刘胜权理应知道，透过国际会计所的认证，是比政府机构的监督及审计更确实、可靠及可信赖，因为政府机构是依据部长指示行事的。

刘胜权表现得像国阵的辩护者，自圆其说地讲解不应该落实公布财产的理由，称这将导致来自富裕家庭者、人才及有技能者却步投身公共领域，是无法被接受的理由。投身公共服务领域是需要牺牲的，作为领袖，人民要的不只是廉洁，更需要看起来给人感觉到是廉洁。
刘胜权会否带头公布他的个人财产？我还记得，当刘胜权去年与我会面，针对国际透明组织的选举廉正宣言时，他拒绝了我要将公布财产纳入的要求。利胜权当时的解释是，若我们纳入公布财产这项条件，国阵将不会签署这个廉正宣言。很明显地，他是为了迎合国阵的要求而修改廉正宣言的方式，而不是在推广公众诚信。

刘胜权必需证明他能够带来改变，给予一个明确和毫不含糊的承诺，推广公众诚信，清除国阵联邦政府的贪污。只有当国阵政府承诺公布财产、落实公开招标政策后，才能够说服民众。否则，刘胜权只不过是一个被安置在联邦政府内的国阵辩护者，以为巫统及国阵在反贪上涂脂抹粉。

林冠英