Search This Blog

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Current Global Economic Impact on Malaysia

SPEECH BY
TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD
AT THE MAFAA DIALOGUE
AT THE SHERATON HOTEL SUBANG, PETALING JAYA
ON WEDNESDAY, 20 AUGUST 2008
—————————
“Current Global Economic Impact on Malaysia”
1. Malaysia is a trading nation. It had been one for 1800 years. It is hard to believe this but this is what I read in a paper written by an American academic who was attached to one of the Malaysian Government Universities.
2. In the beginning it was only about collecting jungle produce like gums and aromatic wood to exchange for lacquer ware, ceramic and paper etc from China. Since then we have made tremendous progress in trading. Now we produce and export, apart from raw rubber and palm oil, also microchips and electronic manufactured goods.
3. A trading nation is very sensitive to what is happening to its trading partners. Obviously when partners do well, we can expect to export more and do well ourselves. And the reverse is also true. When partners suffer from economic disease, we tend to catch the disease as well.
4. That is why you may remember we promoted the slogan “prosper thy neighbour”. When neighbours are prosperous we can expect to sell more to them and vice versa. Apart from that in these days of easy travel and porous borders we can expect a fallout from neighbours with problems in the form of illegal immigrants.
5. Today we have become a world trade centre, exporting and importing from almost 200 different countries. The economic health of these countries are important to us. And certainly the economic health of the world is extremely important to our own economic health.
6. What is the economic situation in the world today? There is turmoil and unprecedented increases in the prices of practically everything.
7. We have seen some inflation before but never on the scale we are seeing now.
8. Oil for example went up by almost 400%. Other raw materials like steel, copper, aluminium have also gone up sky high. So have food grains and edible oils.
9. The increases in prices of these basic raw materials have inflated the prices of everything else.
10. Oil is crucial to transportation, whether by land, sea or air. The sharp increase in oil price must push up the cost of everything that is transported by any means anywhere. We have as yet not found alternative fuels and improvements in fuel efficiency have not reduced consumption significantly.
11. World consumption of fuel oil goes up everyday. Although new reserves are being found and produced, production has not been able to keep up with consumption. Demand pull has increased the price a little but the ridiculous increase of 400% is more due to speculation and manipulation. On any day more oil is traded than is produced or available in storage. These activities are what cause the increase in oil price, the apparent shortages and again the greater increase in price.
12. The increase in other raw material price is due to increased demand by two economic giants, especially China. Together with India and several other Newly Industrialising countries of Asia, all developing rapidly and involved in massive construction and industries the demand for raw material like steel, copper, aluminium, rubber, edible oils, food grains has caused shortages and unprecedented increases in price. The shortage of food grains was caused by seasonal decreases in production. But this is going to happen again and again.
13. The war in Iraq is another important factor. Every United States President has promised to reduce the deficit in the U.S. budget but at the end of their terms the deficits have increased. But President Bush is going to leave to his successor the biggest budget deficit in the U.S. history. But worse than that he will leave behind a much-devalued U. S. dollar.
14. It is due to his reckless spending on tax cuts of 1.3 trillion for the rich. The war in Iraq has already cost the U.S. 3 trillion dollars according to (former World Bank Chief Economist) Joseph Stiglitz and will continue to cost more.
15. Other countries would have gone bankrupt with the twin deficits the United States suffers from. Although the United States has not, still the faith in the U.S.D. as a trading currency and as reserves has all but disappeared. The dollar is but a shadow of its former self. Once countries reject the U.S.D. as trading currency and as reserves the greenback would become quite worthless. Unfortunately the countries, including Malaysia, which hold dollar reserves will lose also. That is why countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Japan and little Singapore keep on trying to shore up the US Dollar.
16. Of course it is not just Bush who is making the US Dollar useless. It is the playing around with money by institutions and funds in the US. Loans and mortgages are sold like commodities. The amounts involved are huge. Cash has almost been outlawed as plastics of all kinds are used as money in daily transactions.
17. Banks distribute credit cards without caring whether the holders would have money to pay or not. They claim to know the average losses and therefore despite failures to meet credit card debts they would still make profits.
18. But when millions of credit cards are used worldwide the bad debts must be quite considerable. People are living on the never never as never before. But one day all these shuffling of figures in bank books must blow up.
19. Apparently that is what has happened to sub prime lending for housing. Banks and institutional funds are falling like nine-pins. The Great United States which use to tell us not to bail out bankrupt companies now put up as much as 200 billion dollars to bail out the banks and now the mortgage companies with fancy names like Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae.
20. With all these things happening to the financial sector of the United States the Dollar cannot possibly stay strong. When it weakens a lot of countries which hold reserves in US Dollar must suffer. And Malaysia too must feel it as despite very early warnings we still like a chunk of our reserves to be in US Dollar.
21. Inflation takes place all the time in every country. Certainly Malaysia is not an exception. The factors influencing inflation are internal as well as external. And as a trading nation with total trade of more than 100 billion a year, Malaysia cannot possible escape the current world wide inflation, an inflation which affects every one of our trading partners.
22. Nevertheless we would be more fortunate than most of our neighbours. This is due to the unusual rise in the prices of the commodities we export. We also export manufactured goods but the imported contents of these are high and they have all increased in price. Still the trade balance will remain much in our favour for some time.
23. What are the raw materials we export? Although we are a small producer of oil, our population is not big. After consuming about two thirds we can still export a tidy sum. Together with our foreign oil operations our revenue from oil actually exceeds our total revenue from income and corporate tax. For a country with a small oil production we have done rather well and hopefully will continue doing well for some time.
24. All the taxes and dividends from Petronas would go to the Government Consolidated funds and much of it would be used to subsidise pump prices for oil. The Government has withdrawn much of this subsidy but I think even at the higher pump price there would be some subsidy element.
25. Oil price may go down but never to the old level. So Malaysians will have to put up with high oil price.
26. Gas is subsidised by Petronas. Now gas has to be imported by Petronas at world prices. To sell it at low prices fixed by the Government for the IPPs (Independent Power Producers) would mean Petronas would have to subsidise it. Other oil companies would not want to do it. Perhaps you may have noticed that Natural Gas for motor vehicles is only sold by Petronas.
27. Over time consumption of oil and gas will exceed local supply. There will be no excess to export and to earn the money to subsidise oil and gas prices. Government revenues from other sources would not be enough to subsidise oil prices. So we will have to face this prospect of high oil prices, even if world prices go below US100 Dollar per barrel.
28. With increases in oil prices other goods and services will increase in price also. And of course the increases in raw material prices world wide will increase the cost of these at home. Construction material and construction cost must all go up.
29. Generally the impact of Current Global Economy on Malaysia would be to raise the cost of living – i.e. it will cause inflation. Now the rate of inflation is said to be 7%. This is misleading. For most ordinary people it must seem much more. Just the increase in oil price is 40%. And the increase in other food products are much higher.
30. Malaysians will be facing unprecedented inflation rate. The result must be demands for increases in wages and salaries. This must add to cost and will contribute to increases in prices of local products as well as exported goods.
31. But then the increases in oil and raw material costs must affect other countries too. Our competitors would not be free from high inflation. So the competitive advantage of the low labour cost countries would not increase much as their costs would also have to go up.
32. But oil is not the only raw material we export. We also export palm oil and rubber together with some tin, pepper and cocoa. All these have increased in price and will therefore increase our export earnings. In fact the present increase in the value of our trade and the surplus are mainly due to the increases in oil, palm oil and rubber prices.
33. The raw material price increases are far more beneficial to us than the increase in the price of manufactured goods. This is because much of the manufactured goods have imported contents which have all increased in price. The profit margin may not increase percentage-wise. Besides although the figure for exports of manufactured good may be quite high, we would earn little for they are mostly tax-free.
34. Still manufacturing will remain important because of the employment of large numbers of people. Unfortunately more foreigners would be likely to be employed and their remittance would be very substantial. The outflow of cash would be quite substantial.
35. Although the cost of travelling would go up, there will continue to be more tourists coming to Malaysia. This is because our main source of tourists are China and other Asian countries. These countries are likely to grow higher than world average and more people would be wage earners in new industries. They would want to travel.
36. Initially the people in newly industrialising countries would go to places closer to their countries. We are close to all these countries and so we would benefit from the economic growth of these countries. Our tourist industry does not depend on Europe or America. So the reduction in the numbers of European and American tourists will not affect us.
37. Although palm oil and rubber production can go on producing forever, but Malaysia is short of land. More and more of our estates would be developed in foreign land. This will contribute to our economy.
38. Malaysia’s growth will slow down as much because of global regression as by local factors. What is certain however is that we will have a high cost environment domestically and internationally? All countries will have to learn to deal with this new global and domestic environment.
39. For a time we would be less negatively affected than most other developing countries. But eventually we will have to face the fact of a world in economic turmoil, a high cost world and a shifting of the centers of growth from the West to the East.
40. When finally the world learns to live in this environment Malaysia will find everything has changed. The old comfortable way of growing the economy will be gone. Whether Malaysia will emerge better off or worse would depend upon our understanding of the changes and the adjustment we will make. We will see our trade and our growth becoming more influenced by the countries of Asia, in particular China and India. The increasing wealth of the Gulf States will also change the direction of our trade and the sources of foreign investments.
41. Investments from the oil-rich states would be largely in property development. If we succeed in training our workforce we may continue to attract high-tech industries.
42. Of course the impact on Malaysia of current global economic changes would depend much on how we adjust to them and how we manage them.

Sunday, October 12, 2008

PM moots idea of direct membership

The Star Paper today reports:
Sunday October 12, 2008
PM moots idea of direct membership
The Prime Minister has mooted setting up a “new group” in Barisan Nasional to enable supporters to enrol as direct members instead of having to join its component parties. Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said this multi-racial membership would not only make Barisan more inclusive but could be a good beginning for its reform.
My commentws: It is a good idea! For a start to start moving toward a multiracial party. Hopefully, they will set a time frame to dissolve all the rest of the component parties including Umno. Even if it takes 5 0r 10 years.
If not it will become a ploy! This is because the aim of becoming a multiracial party is not being pursued. What do you get at the end? You get all the rest of the racial based parties like Umno, MAC and MIC running with other component parties, how are the individuals who come in to BN compete in a party alone?

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Wise Decision And A Class Act

by M. Bakri Musa
Prime Minister Abdullah’s decision to resign is wise. That decision is good for him, his party, and most of all, for our nation. I am certain it was not easy for him to reach that decision but in the end he did it, “guided by my conscience” and placing “the interests of the nation above all else.”
I applaud him, especially considering the intense last minute pleas by his many well-meaning supporters. It was a decision that was not expected by many, yours truly included. This is one instance where I am only too happy to acknowledge my misjudgment of the man.
Abdullah’s plaintive admission, “I know I’ve not been doing well; it’s time for someone else to take over,” must come only after the most difficult introspection. To admit to one’s limitations is never easy, especially for a leader, as there are always supplicants and subordinates who are only too willing to filter the harsh reality. Some leaders never get it at all. Saddam Hussein went to the gallows still believing that he was Allah’s gift to the Arabs.
I applaud Abdullah’s wise decision for another important reason. I never underestimate the potential multiplier effect of a single good decision. Properly seized upon, it will lead to many other positive consequences. Already judging from his resignation statement, Abdullah is now all the more committed to reforming the anti-corruption agency and the process of judicial appointments, among others.
Freed of the burden of his political future, and fully aware that these last few months could well determine his legacy, Abdullah will hopefully be more focused.Dignified Statement
Abdullah ready set a standard of sorts in the dignified manner in which he announced his stepping down. He made sure that his cabinet colleagues and fellow leaders in the Barisan Nasional coalition hear of his decision first, in private, and directly from him.
When he made his statement, it was a formal affair, surrounded by his cabinet colleagues and fellow UMNO leaders. He also read from a prepared text; this was not the occasion to ad lib. His tone was proper; his body language and emotions displayed appropriate. He did not blame anyone, nor did he express regret. There was no hint of personal disappointment or a sense of being betrayed. Abdullah gave proper due to the serious occasion.
As well he should. The country has been good to him; he had the privilege of serving the highest office in the land, granted only to a lucky few.
The content of his announcement may have surprised many, but not its timing. There was no unexpected statement that would shock the audience and move them to public hysteria. Nor was there uncontrolled sobbing of his supporters, as the embarrassing public spectacle that accompanied Mahathir’s first announcement of his retirement.
When there are no public tears, then the question whether those displays of emotions are genuine does not arise. As we now know from subsequent events, those earlier hysterical displays of affection as shown by the likes of Rafidah Aziz during Mahathir’s announcement of his retirement were a fraud. Those histrionics were more for public consumption rather than genuine expressions from the heart.
In his resignation statement, Abdullah wisely avoided anointing his successor. He expressed only the hope that Najib would take over, and reemphasized that point in case it was missed. This was not a lukewarm endorsement for Najib or an attempt at getting even with him, rather Abdullah’s correct reading of our constitution.
The leadership of our land has to be earned. It is not your private heirloom to be passed on to a member of the next generation who strikes your fancy. Abdullah is correct in reminding everyone that Najib first has to win UMNO’s presidency.
Abdullah showed great wisdom, besides not being presumptuous, in not even hinting who Najib should pick as his deputy should he win UMNO’s presidency.
Abdullah’s Five Goals
To his credit Abdullah articulated five goals he wished to accomplish in the remaining few months of his tenure. I would be satisfied if he could accomplish two, or at most three. Apart from strengthening the Anti-Corruption Agency and setting up the Judicial Appointment Commission, Malaysians would be satisfied if he were to establish an effective social safety net.
Those three objectives are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, they are closely related. If we have a judicial system that has the respect and confidence of the people, that would go a long way towards reducing corruption. And by eradicating corruption, then we would have enough resources to devote to helping the needy. We have currently wonderful programs for the poor, at least they are on paper, but because of endemic corruption and abusive political patronage, those programs suffer through considerable leakages.
There is one major reform, supported by many in UMNO, that Abdullah could initiate. That is, remove the current onerous burden placed on challengers to senior party leaders. Instead, relax the rules such that anyone with the minimal number of nominations by individuals, not divisions, could compete. When no candidate could secure a majority vote, then have a run-off election between the top two vote getters.
Abdullah’s calls for a convention of his Barisan coalition parties “to improve inter-racial and inter-religious relations.” I respectfully suggest a more modest and readily achievable goal: focus on improving UMNO. Leave the coalition alone. A clean, strong and effective UMNO will mean an equally clean, strong and effective Barisan.
Such a simple and easily implemented reform initiative would effectively dent the corrosive powers of the party’s warlords that have created the cesspool of money politics. By removing this onerous nominating barrier, the divisional meetings currently underway this month would become mute, at least as far as nominating candidates are concerned. Perhaps then those meetings could become more meaningful with members using these opportunities to discuss substantive policy matters instead of trying to create camps around personalities. That would also elevate the deliberative levels of those meetings to the benefit of the members and UMNO.
Only by opening up the nominating process and encouraging as wide a field of candidates as possible, could UMNO attract and produce its own Barack Obama. All Malaysians, not just UMNO members, would then benefit.
Those four objectives, three for the nation and one for UMNO, are well within Abdullah’s reach. Focus on them, and Abdullah would be able to redeem his leadership. That would be a legacy worth striving for.

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

PM to end guessing game

Today the Sun paper reports on the front page that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will announce today or tomorrow whether he will defend his position as Umno president or make way for his deputy Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak at the party polls in March.What caught my eye on the report was: Abdullah said for now, he wanted to focus on the reforms that he had promised the rakyat, "I know the law minister (referring to Datuk Zaid Ibrahim who resigned) is not around anymore to undertake this, but that does not mean that it must stop...it (judicial reform) is not his idea, it was mine in the 2004 (BN) manifesto and what I promised I must deliver."I really hope, I think it is the hope of all people wanting to see the judicial reform made as soon as possible. It is better late(imagine it was his manifesto in 2004,not done yet) than never! If he succeed in the reform, he will leave a legacy for correcting the wrongs left by Mahathir. Better still, I hope he wll abolish the draconian ISA and release all detainees arrested under ISA. If they have done anything wrong they should be charged in court.According to what he just said, it will be logical, for him to contest the Umno president post. Let's wait and see.

Friday, October 3, 2008

Abolish ISA once and for all by Zaid

Zaid Ibrahim writes open letter to PM
Sep 30, 08 1:53pm
In our proclamation of independence, our first prime minister gave voice to the lofty aspirations and dreams of the people of Malaya: that Malaya was founded on the principles of liberty and justice, and the promise that collectively we would always strive to improve the welfare and happiness of its people.
MCPX
Many years have passed since that momentous occasion and those aspirations and dreams remain true and are as relevant to us today as they were then. This was made possible by a strong grasp of fundamentals in the early period of this nation.The federal constitution and the laws made pursuant to it were well founded; they embodied the key elements of a democracy built on the rule of law. The Malaysian judiciary once commanded great respect from Malaysians and was hailed as a beacon for other nations.
Our earlier prime ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn were truly leaders of integrity, patriots in their own right and most importantly, men of humility. They believed in and built this nation on the principles and values enunciated in our constitution. Even when they had to enact the Internal Security Act (ISA) 1960, they were very cautious and apologetic about it. Tunku stated clearly that the Act was passed to deal with the communist threat.“My cabinet colleagues and I gave a solemn promise to Parliament and the nation that the immense powers given to the government under the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silent lawful dissent”, was what the Tunku said.
Our third prime minister, Tun Hussein Onn, reinforced this position by saying that the ISA was not intended to repress lawful political opposition and democratic activity on the part of the citizenry. Gov’t has failed the peopleThe events of the last three weeks have compelled me to review the way in which the ISA has been used. This exercise has sadly led me to the conclusion that the government has time and time again failed the people of this country in repeatedly reneging on that solemn promise made by Tunku Abdul Rahman.
This has been made possible because the government and the law have mistakenly allowed the minister of home affairs to detain anyone for whatever reason he thinks fit. This subjective discretion has been abused to further certain political interests. History is the great teacher and speaks volumes in this regard. Even a cursory examination of the manner in which the ISA has been used almost from its inception would reveal the extent to which its intended purpose has been subjugated to the politics of the day. Regrettably, Tunku Abdul Rahman himself reneged on his promise. In 1965, his administration detained Burhanuddin Helmi, the truly towering Malay intellectual, a nationalist who happened to be a PAS leader. He was kept in detention until his death in 1969. Helmi was a political opponent and could by no stretch of the imagination be considered to have been involved in the armed rebellion or communism that the ISA was designed to deal with.This detention was an aberration, a regrettable moment where politics had been permitted to trump the rule of law. It unfortunately appears to have set a precedent and many detentions of persons viewed as having been threatening to the incumbent administration followed through the years.
Even our literary giant, ‘sasterawan negara’ the late Tan Sri A Samad Ismail was subjected to the ISA in 1976. How could he have been a threat to national security? I need not remind you of the terrible impact of the 1987 Operasi Lalang. Its spectre haunts the government as much as it does the peace-loving people of this nation, casting a gloom over all of us. There were and still are many unanswered questions about those dark hours when more than a hundred persons were detained for purportedly being threats to national security. Why they were detained has never been made clear to Malaysians.Similarly, no explanation has been forthcoming as to why they were never charged in court. Those detainees included amongst their numbers senior opposition members of parliament who are still active in Parliament today.
The only thing that is certain about that period was that Umno was facing a leadership crisis. Isn’t it coincidental that the recent spate of ISA arrests has occurred when Umno is again having a leadership crisis? ‘Militant’ Ezam back in Umno In 2001, Keadilan ‘reformasi’ activists were detained in an exercise that the Federal Court declared was in bad faith and unlawful. The continued detention of those that were not released earlier in the Kamunting detention facility was made possible only by the fact that the ISA had been questionably amended in 1988 to preclude judicial review of the minister’s order to detain.Malaysians were told that these detainees had been attempting to overthrow the government via militant means and violent demonstrations. Seven years have gone and yet no evidence in support of this assertion has been presented. Compounding the confusion even further, one of these so-called militants, Ezam Mohamad Noor, recently rejoined Umno to great fanfare, as a prized catch it would seem. At around the same time, members of PAS were also detained for purportedly being militant and allegedly having links to international terrorist networks. Those detained included Nik Adli, the son of Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, the menteri besar of Kelantan. Malaysians were made a promise by the government that evidence of the alleged terrorist activities and links of these detainees would be disclosed. To date no such evidence has been produced. The same formula was used in late 2007 when the Hindraf 5 were detained. Malaysians were told once again that these individuals were involved in efforts to overthrow the government and had links with the militant Liberation Tiger of Tamil Eelam of Sri Lanka. To date no concrete evidence have been presented to support this assertion.It would seem therefore that the five were detained for their involvement in efforts that led to a mobilisation of Indian Malaysians to express, through peaceful means; their frustration against the way in which their community had been allowed to be marginalised. This cause has since been recognised as a legitimate one. The Hindraf demonstration is nothing extraordinary as such assemblies are universally recognised as being a legitimate means of expression. In the same vein, the grounds advanced in support of the most recent detentions of Tan Hoon Cheng, Teresa Kok and Raja Petra Kamarudin leave much to be desired. The explanation that Tan Hoon Cheng was detained for her own safety was farcical. The suggestion that Teresa Kok had been inciting religious sentiments was unfounded as was evinced by her subsequent release. As for Raja Petra Kamarudin, the prominent critic of the government, a perusal of his writings would show that he might have been insulting of the government and certain individuals within it.
However, being critical and insulting could not in any way amount to a threat to national security. If his writings are viewed as being insulting of Islam, Muslims or the Holy Prophet (pbuh), he should instead be charged under the Penal Code and not under the ISA.In any event, he had already been charged for sedition and criminal defamation in respect of some of his statements. He had claimed trial, indicating as such his readiness and ability to defend himself. Justice would best be served by allowing him his day in court more so where, in the minds of the public, the government is in a position of conflict for having been the target of his strident criticism. Law used against dissidents The instances cited above strongly suggest that the government is undemocratic. It is this perspective that has over the last 25 plus years led to the government seemingly arbitrarily detaining political opponents, civil society and consumer advocates, writers, businessmen, students, journalists whose crime, if it could be called that, was to have been critical of the government.How it is these individuals can be perceived as being threats to national security is beyond my comprehension. The self-evident reality is that legitimate dissent was and is quashed through the heavy-handed use of the ISA. There are those who support and advocate this carte-blanche reading of the ISA. They will seek to persuade you that the interests of the country demand that such power be retained, that Malaysians owe their peace and stability to laws such as the ISA. This overlooks the simple truth that Malaysians of all races cherish peace. We lived together harmoniously for the last 400 years, not because of these laws but in spite of them.I believe the people of this country are mature and intelligent enough to distinguish actions that constitute a ‘real’ threat to the country from those that threaten political interests. Malaysians have come know that the ISA is used against political opponents and, it would seem, when the leadership is under challenge either from within the ruling party or from external elements. Malaysians today want to see a government that is committed to the court process to determine guilt or innocence even for alleged acts of incitement of racial or religious sentiment. They are less willing to believe, as they once did, that a single individual, namely the minister of home affairs; knows best about matters of national security.
They value freedom and the protection of civil liberties and this is true of people of other nations too. I attempted to push for reform Mr Prime Minister, the results of the last general election are clear indication that the people of Malaysia are demanding a reinstatement of the rule of law. I was appointed as your, albeit short-lived, minister in charge of legal affairs and judicial reform.
In that capacity, I came to understand more keenly how many of us want reform, not for the sake of it, but for the extent to which our institutions have been undermined by events and the impact this has had on society. With your blessing, I attempted to push for reform. High on my list of priorities was a reinstatement of the inherent right of judicial review that could be enabled through a reversion of the key constitutional provision to its form prior to the controversial amendment in 1988.
I need not remind you that that constitutional amendment was prompted by the same series of events that led not only to Operasi Lalang but the sacking of the then Lord President and two supreme court justices.Chief amongst my concerns was the way in which the jurisdiction and the power of the courts to grant remedy against unconstitutional and arbitrary action of the executive had been removed by Parliament and the extent to which this had permitted an erosion of the civil liberties of Malaysians.
It was this constitutional amendment that paved the way for the ouster provision in the ISA that virtually immunises the minister from judicial review, a provision which exemplifies the injustice the constitutional amendment of 1988 has lent itself. I also sought to introduce means by which steps could be taken to assist the judiciary to regain the reputation for independence and competence it once had. Unfortunately, this was viewed as undesirable by some since an independent judiciary would mean that the executive would be less ‘influential’. I attempted to do these things and more because of the realisation that Malaysia’s democratic traditions and the rule of law are under siege. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with giving everyone an independent judiciary and the opportunity to a fair trial.
This is consistent with the universal norms of human rights as it is with the tenets of Islam, the religion of the federation. Unchecked power to detain at the whim of one man is oppressiveness at its highest. Even in Israel, a nation that is perpetually at war the power to detain is not vested in one man and detention orders require endorsement from a judge. If there are national security considerations, then these can be approached without jettisoning the safeguards intended to protect individual citizens from being penalised wrongfully. In other jurisdictions involved in armed conflicts, trials are held in camera to allow for judicial scrutiny of evidence considered too sensitive for public disclosure so as to satisfy the ends of justice.
If this can be done in these jurisdictions, why not here where the last armed struggle we saw, the very one that precipitated the need for the ISA, came to an end in the 1980s?ISA was never intended to be permanentAny doubts as to the continued relevance of the ISA in its present form should have been put to rest by the recommendation by the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) that the ISA be repealed and an anti-terror legislation suited to the times enacted in its place. Containing as it did a sunset clause in its original times, the ISA was never intended to be a permanent feature on the Malaysian legal landscape. Through its continued use in the manner described above and in the face of public sentiment, it is only natural that the ISA has become in the mind of the people an instrument of oppression and the government is one that lends itself to oppressiveness.
Its continued use does not bode well for a society that is struggling to find its place in the global arena. It does not bode well for the democracy that is so vital for us to develop sustainably. Mr Prime Minister, I remember very clearly what you once said; that if one has the opportunity to do what is good and right for the country, then he must take on the task. I respect you deeply for that and if I were confident that I would have been able to do some good for Malaysia, I would have remained on your team.
Sir, you are still the prime minister and you still have the opportunity to leave your footprint in Malaysian history. I urge you to do so by repealing the ISA once and for all. Let us attempt to fulfil that solemn promise made by our beloved first prime minister to the people of this country. Yours sincerely Zaid Ibrahim