Media Statement by:

William Leong Jee Keen

MP Selayang

25 December 2018

Amend the Federal Constitution to Prevent Defection by MPs

The Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir, in his interview on 20 December 2018, says he personally prefers a strong opposition and does not like a two-third majority in Parliament. Acting President, Dato Seri Mohamad Hasan, said on 21 December 2018 after chairing his first Supreme Council meeting that he proposed to restructure UMNO to stem the tide of party defections. By these statements the way is clear to change the laws to prevent defections by members of parliament. There is bipartisan support to attain the two-third majority required to repeal Article 48(6) of the Federal Constitution and to substitute it with a new provision to provide for the seat to be deemed vacated upon a member of parliament leaving the political party upon which he was elected.

There are two opposing views on anti-hopping laws. One strongly held view is that even in a first-past-the post system of election, a member of parliament who leaves the party on whose platform he was elected while holding on to the seat, has committed a fraud on the voters. Such an action is seen as making a mockery of the democratic process since it amounts to overturning the decision of the voters expressed at the general elections.

The opposing view is that the seat belongs to the voters, who want their representative to exercise his personal judgment on their behalf which means defecting if the representative believes that this is in the voters’ best interest. An often cited reason for defecting is that it is the party and not the elected representative which has changed its positions and policies. It is argued that by banning party defections it will increase the power of party bosses who are leading the party astray from its original objectives.

Whichever position one takes as to whether the seat belongs to the political party or the elected representative, there can be no argument that it belongs to the voters. Therefore, the only reasonable solution in a situation where the elected representative feels he has to leave his original party to join another or to be an independent, is to resign as a member of parliament and stand in the ensuing by-election to allow his constituents to decide. This cannot, presently, be done because Article 48(6) of the Federal Constitution provides that a member of parliament who resigns is disqualified from contesting for five years. Article 48(6) was inserted in the Federal Constitution in 1990 after Shahril Samad resigned as an UMNO MP and won the by-election as an independent.

It is time for New Malaysia to return the power to decide whether it is the party bosses or the elected representative that changed, back to the voters. This can be done by substituting Article 48(6) with a provision that provides as follows:

“The seat of a member of parliament shall become vacant if he ceases to be a member of, or resigns from or is expelled from the political party for which he stood in the election.”

Pending the amendment, the Pakatan Harapan component parties must not allow the 17 defecting UMNO or any other BN elected representatives to join their party. It is not whether they are corrupt or not but by accepting them as members or worse appointing them to be ministers or to be part of the Government, this will betray the voters’ decision to reject Barisan Nasional. Such acceptance will violate the trust and mandate given to Pakatan Harapan:

 

I a) It is against the principles set forth in the “Deklarasi Rakyat” in particular paragraph 37 that called on all Malaysians, irrespective of race, religion, politics, beliefs or party to save Malaysia through carrying out the necessary reforms by rejecting BN;

b) It betrays the trust given by the people to Pakatan Harapan which stated philosophy and purpose (page 11 PH Manifesto) is consistent with the concepts of Maqasid Syahriah (the Higher Objectives of the Syariah) to carry out a continuous agenda of reform guided by shared values such as knowledge, liberty, truth, social and economic justice, pride, civilization, unity, merit-based society, democracy and justice for all;

c)  It is going against the very ground Pakatan Harapan had called on the people to reject BN, which is that, although BN purportedly practice a political model called “consociationalism,” in reality it is one where BN’s political elites practice racial politics premised on dividing our society on racial lines to ensure the political elite is in power (Pillar 5 of the PH Manifesto page 102);

The people have given the mandate to Pakatan Harapan to save Malaysia by uniting the nation to create an inclusive society and to maintain the harmony of a multi-racial and multi-religious Malaysia. It is now up to Pakatan Harapan to show that it has the political will to do so. Let this amendment to the Federal Constitution be a Christmas Gift to save Malaysians from the anxiety that May 9 is not a false dawn. Let this amendment show Pakatan Harapan’s resolve as a 2019 New Year Resolution to make change a reality.

 

A Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all.

William Leong Jee Keen

Member of Parliament for Selayang        

Human Rights in Malaysia: Let's Focus on Commonalities Not Differences

Human Rights in Malaysia:

 Let’s Focus on Commonalities Not Differences

Human Rights in Malaysia

1.              I am pleased and honoured to have been given a chance to share my thoughts at Suhakam’s 2018 Human Rights Day Celebration on 9^th December 2018. I wish to share those thoughts and expand on them in this article.

2.              On 10^th December 2018, the World celebrated the 70^th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Unfortunately, 61 years after Malaya gained her independence and the formation of Malaysia in 1963, our country has yet to ratify the Declaration. Despite not ratifying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Government spearheaded the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights.

3.              On 8^th December 2018, taking the highest as 500,000 or the lowest at 50,000 (depending on whose estimate one takes to be more accurate, which, in any event is a substantial number of people) marched to Dataran Merdeka to hold a demonstration. It was to celebrate the Government’s decision not to ratify the International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (“ICERD”).

4.              More important than whether we ratify the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or apply the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, Malaysians must ask how do we, in our daily lives, deal with our fellow Malaysians?

5.              We respect the Federal Constitution, Article 153 on the special position of the Malays and natives of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of that Article. We agree with the justification for the New Economic Policy which is to promote social cohesion and address inequality. We agree that we must help the Bumiputera break-out from the vicious cycle of poverty and address inequality under which they labour. On the same ground, can we then in good conscience leave behind the poor Indians, Chinese, Kadazans, Muruts, Dayak, Orang Asli and others? Can we allow those caught in the inequality traps languish in extreme deprivation because they are of a different ethnicity or religion or living in a rural or interior region? Do we respect each of our fellow Malaysian’s inherent dignity and worth as a human being or do we accept racial discrimination as part of our society’s norms? It appears after 61 years, we have not been able to reach agreement on these matters.

A New Government A New Approach

6.              We have a new government, let’s adopt a new approach. It is time we focus on our commonalities and not on our differences. We can then build from there.

Cairo Declaration of Human Rights

7.              How far apart are we? Let’s look at the first recital to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.”

8.              Now let us look at Articles 1(a) and (b) of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights:

(a)           All human beings form one family whose members are united by their subordination to Allah and descent from Adam. All men are equal in terms of basic human dignity and basic obligations and responsibilities without any discrimination on the basis of race, colour, language, belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations. The true religion is the guarantee for enhancing such dignity along the path to human integrity.

(b)           All human beings are Allah’s subjects and the most loved by Him are those who are most beneficial to his subjects, and no one has superiority over another except on the basis of piety and good deeds.”

9.              There are more ideas and concepts in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that are in common with the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights than there are differences. It’s bound to be because they are both about the same universal values.

10.          In answer to the argument that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are Western liberal concepts that are anathema to Asian values, Anwar Ibrahim in his keynote speech at the Asian Press Forum entitled “Media and Society in Asia” said way back on 2 December 1994:

“If we want to speak credibly of Asian values, we too must be prepared to champion those ideals which are universal and which belongs to humanity as a whole. It is altogether shameful, if ingenious, to cite Asian values as an excuse for autocratic practices and denial of basic rights and civil liberties. To say that freedom is Western or unAsian is to offend our own traditions and forefathers who gave their lives in the struggle against tyranny and injustices. It is true that Asians lay great emphasis on order and society stability. But it is certainly wrong to regard society as a kind of false god upon whose altar the individual must constantly be sacrificed. No Asian tradition can be cited to support the proposition that in Asia the individual must melt into a faceless community.”

11.          In answer to the argument that non-ratification of the ICERD means Malay rights and Islam allows discrimination, it has been said there is no such thing as a racist Muslim. One is either a racist or a Muslim but never both. There is a beautiful passage in Surah [49] Al-Hujarat Verse 13:

“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).

12.          The Prophet unequivocally condemned tribalism or racial discrimination. It is reported by Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah said:

“Whoever fights under the banner of a man who is blind (to the cause for which he is fighting for), who raging for the sake of tribalism or calling for tribalism, or supporting tribalism, and is killed in this state will have died upon ignorance (jahiliyyah).”

Source: Sahih Muslim 4898, Grade: Sahih

Jubayr ibn Mut’im, one of the Companions reported the Prophet said:

“He is not one of us who calls for asabiyyah (tribalism/nationalism) or fights for asabiyyah, or who dies for asabiyyah.”

Sunah Abi Dawud 5121, Grade: Sahih

Therefore, Islam categorically forbids all forms of racial, national, tribal or ethnic superiority. The Quran and the Sunnah expressly forbids discrimination based on race, colour, language, ethnicity or nationality. Every human is a dignified and honoured being.

13.          Thus, it is not our Asian values, race, culture or religion that allows racial or any other form of discrimination but our own personal values. We need to have the courage to say it is wrong when discrimination is practiced by others. Therefore, it is up to each of us to muster the courage and to honestly open our hearts to know the other races better. If we can do so we will find that our God-given diversity is a blessing and not a curse. We can do this by starting a new discourse. It is unfortunate that the Speaker did not allow Anwar Ibrahim’s motion to be debated in Parliament on the Cabinet’s decision not to ratify the ICERD. It would have greatly assisted this public discourse which we must pursue for a new Malaysia. Anwar said it is important to have the debate to avoid any confusion amongst the people that Pakatan Harapan does not deny the position of Bahasa Malaysia, the position of Islam as the official religion of the Federation, loyalty to Malay Royalty and the special position of the Malays and Bumiputera. It is important to have a “juxtaposition of ideas.” The non-ratification of the ICERD does not mean that we accept racial discrimination. Justice requires the rejection of all forms of discrimination. (Hansard 6^th December 2018 page 34-36).

14.          We can start rebuilding our society on the areas where we are on common ground. When we do so, we will find the differences become smaller. With goodwill and good faith, we can then bridge these differences. I suggest we work on three areas.

Inequality and Elite Capture

15.          Firstly, we must address inequality. Inequality is corrosive, it erodes human rights, negatively affects economic growth, it squanders talents, stifles social mobility and undermines the very foundation of society.

16.          If we take off our racial tinted lens, look through the haze and smoke of labels and emotional rhetoric, we will see who are those that benefit by our society being racked by inequalities, the breaking down of social cohesion and the tearing apart of our social fabric. They are the elites.

17.          Not one of the citizens and the governments of the 179 parties to the ICERD gain one cent or suffer any prejudice whether Malaysia ratifies the ICERD or not. Not one single Bumiputera household in the B40 is going to secure a privatization project or mega contract because of the non-ratification of the ICERD. Despite the NEP, inequality of income and inequality of wealth have been increasing. The rich are becoming richer and the poor poorer. Throughout the 47 years of the NEP, it is the elites who secured government contracts, projects, privatizations, concessions, being bailed out when things go wrong and turning from millionaires into billionaires. They are the ones who stand to gain by ethnic fractionalization and are now seeking to regain their powers of political patronage to maintain their contracts, profits and rents. 

18.          Elite capture of the BN Government allowed the elites to bend laws and policy choices in their favour. These enabled the elites to block reforms. They were able to perpetuate their positions leading to a vicious cycle of corruption at the expense of the majority. There is no trickle-down effect of the gains by the elites to the Bumiputeras or non-Bumiputeras. This caused the gap in wealth between the rich and the poor to increase.

19.          Even now, the elites are coalescing over the new political leadership in the hope of finding new hosts and cutting new deals.

20.          We can and must agree to avoid elite capture of the new government.

Unfettered Discretionary Power and Corruption

21.          Secondly, we must agree to put an end to corruption. Unfettered discretionary power and an opaque system for the admission of places in the universities, the selection for jobs and award of contracts have led to corruption. We all know that checks and balances to power and requirements for transparency and accountability are the foundations of good governance. There is a famous passage in the Federalists Paper No. 51 by James Madison in defense of proposed national constitution that would establish a structure of “checks and balances”:  

“If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government, which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”

22.          We must restore the checks and balances and put in place transparent and objective criteria on procurement, selection and appointments to end political patronage and rent-seeking. In recent times some of our political leaders and government servants proved they are certainly no angels and a few are more mortal than others. The new Government may be made of sterner stuff but by bringing back checks and balances, we will deliver our politicians and government servants from the temptations of power.  

The Civil Service and Meritocracy

23.          The third is addressing political patronage in the civil service. UMNO/BN wanted a civil service committed to their political agenda and believed that party allegiance will ensure the successful implementation of their policies. It led to the politicization of the civil service. Promotion and advancement were based on political patronage. Those who were not prepared to play ball were put into cold storage or transferred out while the compliant had their tenure extended. Those concerned to protect their pensions and retirement benefits have to serve in silence while the national coffers were plundered.

24.          We must agree to reinstate meritocracy in the civil service where promotion and advancement is based on capabilities and performance not political patronage. The most able people will produce the best possible results. A country governed by the best and the brightest must surely be better than one that is not.

25.          It is important to restore the public service to its previous professional excellence so that the government can provide high quality education, affordable access to healthcare and public transport, provision of public services to ensure Malaysians enjoy substantive equal opportunities for advancement, transparency, accountability so that the political, social and economic human rights can come to fruition.

Conclusion

26.          The belief in human rights, respect for the inherent dignity and human worth cannot be achieved by the government pushing from the top down. It must come from the bottom up. It must be cultivated into our citizens that fundamental freedoms are basic to our individual well-being. It must be ingrained into our national consciousness that there is no place in our society for discrimination, hatred and bigotry. This must become our new national ethos otherwise there is no use in voting for change. Let’s stop marching and start talking.                

William Leong Jee Keen

MP Selayang

11 December 2018

PH Reforms: We’ll Be Watching You

PH Reforms: We’ll Be Watching You

“There is many a slip between the cup and lip”

Ancient Asian proverb

1. The impetus that mobilized thousands of Malaysians onto the streets and millions to cast their votes for Pakatan Harapan is the yearning for reform. With the full cabinet in place and  the 14th Parliament first sitting repealing the Goods and Services Tax Act and the Anti-Fake News Act and enacting the Sales and Service Tax, Malaysians look forward to the implementation of the other long-awaited policy changes. The abovementioned ancient Asian proverb reminds us, in the short time gap between the two events that is, obtaining the electoral mandate to implementation of the reforms, certain forces can intervene and things can go wrong.

2. It has been a long and difficult road to elect PH into government. Many sacrificed not only their time and efforts but also their careers, faced baton charges, tear gas, suffered physical injury and loss of personal liberty to secure the historical change in government. However, the journey for reform is far from over. In fact, it is only the beginning. Winning the election is merely the first phase - obtaining the electoral mandate. We are now at the second phase - the design and formulation of the detailed reform policies. The third and most challenging phase is their implementation to secure and consolidate public acceptance of these reforms.

3. Vigilance is needed to ensure the electoral mandate given to PH is translated into the desired reforms and successfully implemented. Public opinion and public support are important both to prevail upon the PH Government to keep its promises and ensure the final form of the policy changes are in line with the voters’ aspirations as well as to guard against intervening forces blocking and snatching away the reforms from the jaws of victory.

4. The obvious parties who will seek to block the reforms are: 

a. First, the new opposition, UMNO and what is left of BN together with PAS; 

b. Second, economic elites whose business interests are intertwined with the previous regime, these are the rent-seekers; and 

c. Third, due to the politicization of the civil service and system of political patronage, those civil servants whose sympathies remain with the previous regime or whose personal interests lie against these reforms.

5. The PH Government faces its own difficulties in implementing the reforms in the PH Manifesto. This is because the government debt and financial position are worse than reported or have not been disclosed. The Government debt and liabilities including contingent liabilities and off-balance sheet financing exceeds RM 1.087 Trillion. There is a total shortfall of RM19.248 billion for GST refund from 2015 to 2018. The Prime Minister has said that the PH Manifesto should not be taken to be followed like a bible. PH must now do its best to fulfill the promises and find justifications for pledges that cannot be met.     

6. One of the reasons the PH Government finds it difficult to implement its promised reforms is the crucial Malay/Muslim vote. UMNO/ BN and PAS have continued unabated their rhetoric of “Race, Religion and Royalty.” The organizers of the “Himpunan Kebangkitan Ummah” (Gathering for Muslim Revival) held on 28 July 2018 at Kampong Baru, claim the interest of the Malay-Muslim majority are being eroded after PH led by Tun Mahathir won the elections.  UMNO/PAS naturally aim not only to retain the support of the 50% who voted for them (36% for BN and 14% for PAS) but also to win back the voters they lost to PH. Merdeka Center reports that only 25-30% of the Malays voted for PH while 34-40% voted BN and 30-33% supported PAS. The “swing voters” in this group is a significant intervening force to the successful implementation of reforms because of their capacity to determine electoral success or defeat in future elections.  

7. In the circumstances it must thus be acknowledged, the PH Government must tread carefully in framing issues deemed sensitive to Malays if they are to gain their trust. However, the PH Government must at the same time demonstrate its courage and leadership to chart a new trajectory for the nation. This is where the previous government failed. It was unable to muster the political will to push through the New Economic Model. When the going got tough, the then government quit. The PH Government must demonstrate it has the courage to act in the best interest of the nation. It will need much intestinal fortitude to carry out public engagement to explain the reforms and correct the misleading argument that inclusive economic policies are a zero-sum game. It is not true that what is good for one group means it must be bad for the other. Public engagement and public discourse are thus important to provide the people with the necessary information and explanation of the issues involved. Public opinion and public support are therefore important to sustain our policy makers in addressing the issues raised by the opposition political parties in their efforts to block the reforms.       

8. The second group, the rent-seeking entities, still have substantial commercial influence although their principals no longer hold the reins of political power. They have much to lose if these reforms are implemented. They will seek to obstruct and engage in a war of attrition to block the reforms in the hope for their mentors to be returned to political power. 

9. Public discourse will  reveal the difference between the interests of genuine businesses and the narrow interests of the “rent-seeking elites.” Public discussion will also expose the fallacies of the arguments by these “rent-seeking elites.” Public discussion will help channel public opinion towards policies that are in the interests of the greater good. It will show that policies valued by the public are consistent with the interests of responsible corporations and good business practice such as good governance, economic stability, welfare of all citizens and provision of assistance to all in need regardless of race and religion.         

10. The Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister have repeatedly warned and reminded the third group, the civil servants, to  carry out their duties professionally. They are bound to ensure  the policies of the government of the day are successfully implemented. Despite such warnings and reminders, it appears certain civil servants may have abused their position to block the reforms. The situation has reached a level where the Attorney General, himself, has to issue a warning that those who leaked information to the previous regime in contravention of their obligations of confidentiality will be investigated and charged.

11. In order to deal with this third group, the PH Government may have to seriously consider implementing a policy of lustration and vetting. Lustration (from the Latin verb “lustrare”, to ceremonially purify) refers to a policy that seeks to cleanse a new regime from the remnants of the past.   

12. Until recently some scholars and practitioners believe transitional justice and its mechanisms of truth seeking, prosecution, reparations and institutional reform are meant to apply only to violations of civil and political rights involving physical injuries, killings or loss of personal freedom. There is now a growing number of advocates who believe that transitional justice mechanisms must apply also to violations of economic and social rights including crimes such as large-scale corruption and despoliation. Otherwise by leaving large scale corruption and plundering to ineffective domestic institutions and ordinary criminal trials, there is perpetuated an impunity gap with no accountability for economic crimes.      

13. Ukraine is among the first to include corruption in its lustration and vetting policy. Lustration is a policy that was put in place by post-conflict or post-authoritarian governments such as Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, the Baltics and Georgia to remove from public institutions personnel who have been implicated in activities that call into question their integrity and professionalism, such as human rights violations or abuses or corruption, as a way to build confidence in the public sector. Vetting is the process by which a lustration policy is put into effect. Vetting is a form of administrative, rather than criminal accountability. Lustration and vetting help to reform public institutions from being instruments of repression and corruption into entities dedicated to public service and marked by integrity and accountability. Criminal investigations and prosecutions take time, while a truth and reconciliation commission will not offer the people a proper catharsis when culprits may not seize the opportunity to tell the truth. A lustration and vetting policy will ensure those who have violated the trust repost in them by engaging in large scale corruption and massive embezzlement of state funds are not allowed to act with impunity and continue in office totally absent of accountability. Public discussion on the need and viability of a lustration and vetting policy will assist the policy makers in their deliberations.

14. The successful implementation of reforms is dependent on countering the first, second and third groups and winning the hearts and minds of the swing voters. Public opinion will remind the PH Government that taking care of its core supporters, especially on salient issues in the PH Manifesto are of critical importance. Where the people care about the issue, have meaningful opinions on it and support the political party and its candidates based on it then the politicians have to pay attention and respond to the public opinion on it. 

15. The point is a simple one. The Government of the day has to honour its election promises, be responsive to public opinion and the wishes of their constituents or face defeat in the next election. It will be highly irrational for policy makers seeking re-election to respond to pressure from the three groups; the opposition political parties, the rent-seekers and civil servants in a manner inconsistent with public opinion and wishes of the constituents who put them into government. 

16. The corollary to this is the public must pay attention to what the PH Government does or does not do with regard to implementation of the reform policies. Without such public scrutiny and responsiveness, policy makers may become complacent. They may have little incentive to carry out what the public wants or are lulled into believing there is no real cost for not doing so. For this reason the majority cannot afford to remain silent. Public opinion must reflect the voice of the majority, otherwise a vociferous minority may be wrongly taken as representing the opinion of the public when it is not so. All Malaysians have a duty to be watchful of the reforms and a right to express his or her opinion.

17. In the final analysis, it has been often said but it bears repeating that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. It is worthwhile for Malaysians to remind both the PH Government and BN/PAS opposition the following words written by Sting in the 1983  album “Synchronicity” :

“Every breath you take

  Every move you make

  Every bond you break 

  Every step you take 

  I’ll be watching you”   

William Leong Jee Keen

Member of Parliament Selayang

17 August 2018