Skip to content

Discontent in BN parties over Cabinet posts

May 18, 2013

May 18, 2013 (TMI)

File photo of Najib announcing his new Cabinet line-up in Putrajaya on May 15, 2013. BN parties are not happy with some of his choices. — Reuters pic

KUALA LUMPUR, May 18 — All is not well among Barisan Nasional (BN) parties over the distribution of Cabinet posts as Sarawak’s PRS has decided to reject its appointments while SPDP is also upset its four federal wins did not get the party anything.

Several senior Sabah Umno MPs are also grumbling that they were overlooked in the Cabinet appointments while other Umno lawmakers are disputing Hindraf’s P. Waythamoorthy’s selection despite him running down the government previously.

Media reports say Datuk Joseph Entulu Belaun will not take up his appointment as minister in the Prime Minister’s Department and Datuk Joseph Salang Gandum has openly rejected being a deputy minister again.

BN secretary-general Datuk Tengku Adnan Mansor told Utusan Malaysia today that the coalition has accepted Gandum’s refusal of his deputy tourism minister post.

PRS president James Masing said the majority of the party’s supreme council members had agreed to reject Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s offer, saying they felt “sidelined” and “deserved to be treated better.”

PRS gained six federal seats and SPDP four to add to BN’s 133-seat haul, doing better than BN parties in Sabah, Sarawak and even the peninsula that were better rewarded.

MIC, which won four seats, got two ministerships and two deputy minister posts while SUPP and PBRS got full ministerships despite each winning only one federal seat.

“PRS and SPDP, which are rural-based parties, are not properly treated by the present government.

“The rural areas in Sarawak are Barisan Nasional ‘fixed deposit’. If you don’t take care of it, somebody will come by and withdraw it,” Masing warned in a report by Free Malaysia Today.

Masing, who chaired an emergency supreme council meeting, said a majority of PRS members felt that a ministerial post in the PM’s Department was unsuitable for PRS.

The news portal also quoted SPDP deputy secretary-general Paul Igai as saying: “I cannot blame party members if they are angry, because it is difficult to accept the prime minister’s decision.

“They’ve even asked whether it was a deliberate attempt to exclude us or whether it was a gross oversight on the part of the prime minister.”

There is a record 13 ministers from east Malaysia in Najib’s Cabinet unveiled last Wednesday.

The Malaysian Insider understands that senior Umno MPs were miffed that they were bypassed in favour of Kota Belud MP Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan, who became minister in his second term as a federal lawmaker.

Other Umno MPs are said to be angry that Waythamoorthy was made a deputy minister, pointing out the Hindraf man went into self-exile after the 2007 Hindraf rally where he waged an international campaign to castigate Malaysia for its allegedly bad treatment of Indians.

They pointed out that the Najib administration should reward those who won and worked hard for the coalition rather than those who have not contributed or acted against them in the past.

Hawking’s boycott: ‘threaten to open floodgate with more and more scientists to regard Israel as a pariah state’

May 16, 2013

Stephen Hawking’s boycott hits Israel where it hurts: Science

Hilary Rose and Steven Rose Political Science hosted by The Guardian

What really winds up Israel is that this rejection comes from a famous scientist, and it is science that drives its economy, prestige and military strength .
Stephen Hawking mystery
Hawking’s boycott ‘threatens to open a floodgate with more and more scientists coming to regard Israel as a pariah state’. Photograph: PA

Stephen Hawking‘s decision to boycott the Israeli president’s conference has gone viral. Over 100,000 Facebook shares of the Guardian report at last count. Whatever the subsequent fuss, Hawking’s letter is unequivocal. His refusal was made because of requests from Palestinian academics.

Witness the speed with which the pro-Israel lobby seized on Cambridge University’s initial false claim that he had withdrawn on health grounds to denounce the boycott movement, and their embarrassment when within a few hours the university shamefacedly corrected itself. Hawking also made it clear that if he had gone he would have used the occasion to criticise Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians.

While journalists named him “the poster boy of the academic boycott” and supporters of the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement celebrated, Ha’aretz, the most progressive of the Israeli press, drew attention to the inflammatory language used by the conference organisers, who described themselves as “outraged” rather than that they “regretted” Hawking’s decision.

That the world’s most famous scientist had recognised the justice of the Palestinian cause is potentially a turning point for the BDS campaign. And that his stand was approved by a majority of two to one in the Guardian poll that followed his announcement shows just how far public opinion has turned against Israel’s relentless land-grabbing and oppression.

Hawking’s public refusal follows that of prominent singers, artists and writers, from Brian Eno to Mike Leigh, Alice Walker and Adrienne Rich, all of whom have publicly rejected invitations to perform in Israel. But what winds Israel up is the fact that this rejection is by a famous scientist and that science and technology drive its economy. Hawking’s decision threatens to open a floodgate with more and more scientists coming to regard Israel as a pariah state. Its research ties with European and American scientists must be protected.

That Israel, a Middle East country, has managed to secure membership of the European Research Area and the many collaborative links with European labs underlines the importance of these links. When European parliamentarians challenged its membership on the grounds of Israel’s numerous breaches of UN resolutions and of the European Human Rights conventions, the European Commission responded to the effect that research trumped human rights.

Israel’s science and technology are not just a source of prestige and technological innovation, but underpin its military strength. It was an Israeli engineer who developed the drones that the US now employs in quantity. Israeli home-produced chemical weapons minimally match those of Syria, and Israeli universities amply supply the Israel Defence Forces with the sociological, psychological and technological methods it employs to suppress Palestinian protests against the occupation.

The complicity of Israeli academia in Israeli state policy is incontrovertible. However, this is the first time that a scientist of Hawking’s status has taken so public a stand – and the hyperventilating response of the Jerusalem conference organisers (it is worth noting that the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where the conference Hawking refused to attend was to be held, is built on illegally annexed Palestinian land) has only added to its public impact.

Lastly it has been the very public debates over the rights and wrongs of an academic boycott that have drawn attention to the subservience of the Israeli universities to the state. Until the boycott began internal critics were few and far between, and some of the sharpest such as Ilan Pappé were forced out. However, this subservience is beginning to yield. When in 2012 the education minister attempted to close the politics department at Ben Gurion on “academic grounds”, it was immediately recognised as a political attack on one of the very few departments where academics were willing to name Israel as an apartheid state. Prof Gilad Haran from the Weizmann Institute launched a petition stating “We sense that academic freedom in Israel’s higher education system is in severe danger.” The department remains open – one small victory.

Hilary Rose is a feminist sociologist of science and emerita professor at Bradford University. Steven Rose is emeritus professor of neuroscience at the Open University. They recently co-authored Genes, Cells and Brains: the Promethean promises of the new biology, and were among the co-founders of BRICUP, the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine

Nakba (Catastrophe) Day 2013: Palestinians Mark 65th Anniversary Of 1948 Displacement

May 16, 2013

END THE NAKBA

“They took  us out one after the other; shot an old man and when one of his daughters cried,  she was shot too. Then they called my brother Muhammad, and shot him in front of  us, and when my mother yelled, bending over him – carrying my little sister  Hudra in her hands, still breastfeeding her – they shot her too.” (12  year old witness at Deir Yassin, 9 April, 1948)

The UN Partition  Plan of 1947 had awarded 55% of the disputed land to the Jews (when they owned  less than 6%) and 45% for the Palestinian state. Through a militaristic policy  of ethnic cleansing the Zionist leadership seized more land by force and drove  out or killed the indigenous Palestinians. The violent and inhuman atrocities of  the Zionist army was the backdrop to the declaration of “Independent Israel” on  14 May 1948. The Zionist Project had by “Independence” acquired 78% of  Palestine, expelled 750,000 Palestinians and destroyed 400 Palestinian villages.  A catastrophe of monumental proportions for the indigenous Palestinians!

The Nakba  continues with further confiscation of Palestinian land for Jewish settlements  and its occupation of Jerusalem. Four million Palestinians mostly in refugee  camps in neighbouring countries have been refused right of return despite UN  Resolution 194 reaffirming; “…refugees wishing to return to their homes  and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the  earliest practical date, and that compensation should be paid for the property  of those choosing not to return and for the loss of or damage to  property…”

The Goldstone Report on the  invasion of Gaza in Dec 2008 noted that; “the destruction of food supply  installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factories and residential  houses was the result of a deliberate and systematic policy which has made the  daily process of living, and dignified living, more difficult for the civilian  population.” thus turning Gaza into the largest open prison in the  world.

The racist,  immoral and illegitimate actions of Israel has turned it into a rogue nation,  increasing its political isolation in the global community. Where super powers  have failed the Palestinians, civil society has responded with vigour and  outrage to say “Enough is Enough”. There is a worldwide campaign  of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) to put pressure on  Israel to abide by international law.

Since her inception in Jan 2009, VPM has been unrelenting in her  pursuit towards advocating justice and self-determination for Palestine. In more  tangible forms, VPM has transferred RM 5 Million worth of funds to finance  various medical, educational, housing, micro-financing and women’s projects in  Palestine.

Our  upcoming 2nd Kuala Lumpur Palestine Film Festival from 17-19 May 2013  is an altruistic film fest to reach out to an audience largely not exposed to the realities of the  humanitarian crisis in Palestine. The  movies juxtapose the complexity with the simplicity of the life of a  Palestinian. The films reflect the legendary spirit of an entire people that  stays unbroken in spite of over sixty years of brutal occupation. It is about  ordinary people living extraordinary lives.

The ultimate objective of all these global humanitarian effort is  to end the longest military occupation in modern history, transform the tragic  history of Palestine and END THE NAKBA.

Get up ! Get involved ! Viva Palestina ! Long Live Palestine !

Dr Musa Mohd Nordin

Chairman, Viva Palestina  Malaysia

MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH  05/15/13 12:28 PM ET EDT

Nakba Day 2013A Palestinian demonstrator covers his face after inhaling tear gas fired by Israeli troops, not seen, during clashes outside the Ofer military prison, near the West Bank city of Ramallah, Tuesday, May 15, 2012 during the 64th anniversary of “Nakba”, Arabic for catastrophe, the term used to mark the events leading to Israel’s founding in 1948. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were forced from their villages during the war over Israel’s 1948 creation, an event they commemorate every y

 

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Tens of thousands of Palestinians marked the 65th anniversary of their mass displacement during the war over Israel’s 1948 creation, marching in the streets and in some parts of the West Bank clashing with Israeli security forces.

Every May 15, Palestinians hold rallies to commemorate the “nakba,” or “catastrophe” – the term they use to describe the displacement, when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were driven from their homes during the fighting. The dispute over the fate of those Palestinians and their descendants, now numbering several million people, remains at the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

The United Nations General Assembly approved a partition of British-ruled Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states in 1947. In May 1948 Israel declared independence.

Israel views the Palestinians’ return as demographic suicide and expects the displaced and their descendants to be taken in by a future Palestinian state. But intermittent Israeli-Palestinian attempts to agree on the terms of such a state have so far failed.

Across the West Bank on Wednesday, sirens wailed at noon for 65 seconds to commemorate the 65 years since the “nakba.” Thousands marched in Ramallah from the grave of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to the city center. Many wore black in a sign of mourning, holding Palestinian flags and large keys symbolizing the homes they left behind.

“The right of return will not die,” chanted the protesters. Schools closed at midday and parents brought their children to the demonstration.

In Ramallah, 38-year-old Manwal Awad brought her 11-year-old twins to the protest. “Every year I bring them with me to inherit the story of our nakba, and to keep the dream of return,” she said.

Rallies were elsewhere in the West Bank as well, and in several places demonstrators throwing rocks clashed with Israeli security forces, who responded with tear gas, Israel’s military said. Near the volatile city of Hebron, a fire bomb hit at an Israeli military vehicle, causing it to overturn and injuring four soldiers, the military said.

In east Jerusalem, Israeli police used water cannon and officers on horseback to disperse an “illegal march,” police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said. Nineteen protesters were arrested for throwing rocks and bottles at police that injured three police officers, he said.

Seven other Palestinians suspected of attacking several Jews as they walked to the Western Wall in the Old City were also arrested, he said.

In Gaza, around a thousand people marched to the U.N. headquarters in Gaza City, where the demonstrators chanted: “We shall return. We will never give up or compromise over our land.”

Militants in Gaza, which has been under the control of the militant Hamas group since 2007, fired a rocket into southern Israel that exploded in an open field causing no injuries, Israel’s military said.

In a televised speech on Tuesday night, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said the Palestinian cause earned international acceptance last year with the United Nations’ de facto recognition of a Palestinian state in east Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

“We won the support of the world,” Abbas said, adding that Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians are “condemned internationally.”

Last year, Abbas created a stir when he told Israeli media that he himself has no wish to live in Safed, the city of his birth, in northern Israel.

Although widely condemned by Palestinians, Abbas’ remarks were seen as a reflection of a decades-old understanding among Palestinian officials that likely only a limited number of refugees would ever be able to return to their original homes in Israel as part of a compromise that would result in a future peace agreement.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has been trying to renew Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, which collapsed four years ago over the issue of Jewish settlements. Palestinians insist they will not resume talks unless the construction of settlements in territories they want for their future state ends first. Israel says negotiations should resume without preconditions and that settlements will be resolved through talks along with the other issues.

In efforts to jump-start the talks, Kerry has managed to persuade Arab leaders to reissue their 2002 peace proposal with new incentives, including a suggestion that final borders between Israel and a future Palestine could be modified from the 1967 lines through agreed land swaps.

The 2002 initiative, which at the time was endorsed by the Arab League and the 57-member Organization of Islamic Cooperation, offered Israel normalized relations in exchange for a full withdrawal from territories captured in 1967. However, it was overshadowed by Israeli-Palestinian fighting and was greeted with skepticism by Israel.

Israel has been mostly quiet on the proposal so far.

On Wednesday, the Palestinian statistics bureau in the West Bank issued a statement saying the number of Palestinians today has reached 11.5 million. Of those, 4.4 million live in the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza; 1.4 million in Israel while the remainder live in the diaspora.

___

Associated Press writer Ibrahim Barzak contributed to this report from the Gaza Strip.

×

The Islamists’ paradox: Inclusion and moderation

May 15, 2013

Khalil Al-Anani , AhramOnline Tuesday 14 May 2013

The theory of inclusion/moderation posits that the more ideologically fanatical parties are included in the political process, the more rational their conduct becomes. This has not been the case with the Muslim Brotherhood

Since Egypt’s January 25 Revolution, the condition of Islamists has dramatically changed. This requires rethinking the phenomenon, understanding its complexities and the challenges it poses, which promise to greatly influence decisions on the future of the country.

The most significant transformation in the Islamists’ dynamic and organisation structure over the past two years is growing politicisation that has integrated Islamists into the political process after the revolution, whether through participation in political parties and elections, engaging in the public domain, and involvement in issues and debates that touch upon most topics that the revolution forced into the public debate.

What is most notable about these transformations is the link between the inclusion of Islamists and the level of moderation in their ideological and intellectual rhetoric and political conduct. It is a topic that is not addressed by the elite or experts, although it is theoretically and practically central and important.

In other words, in order to understand and evaluate the political performance and ideological discourse of Islamists – away from superficial media coverage or political ideologisation – one must understand the dynamics and outcomes of the inclusion process of Islamists over the past two years, and how this has impacted the thinking, discourse and conduct of most of them. This should be done as part of a broader framework to allow comparison to other similar cases.

Over the past decade, the inclusion-moderation theory has been circulating in much literature about Arab Islamist movements. Arab and Western researchers and thinkers have made landmark contributions in this domain, including Amr El-Shobki, the late Hossam Tamam, Jordanian researcher Mohamed Abu Roman, and others.

In the West, one cannot overlook the theories and writings of Mona Al-Ghobashi, Jillian Schwedler, Carrie Wickham, Nathan Brown, Marc Lynch, Eva Wegner, Steven Brooke and many others.

The theory of inclusion and moderation is based on the simple notion that whenever ideologically fanatic parties and movements, as well as anti-establishment movements, are included in the political process, the more rational their ideological rhetoric and political conduct become. They become more realistic, pragmatic and respectful of the rules of the democratic political game.

This theory was proved successful in similar cases, such as in many socialist, leftist and religious parties after World War II in Germany and Italy, which were included in the political process and thus adapted and rationalised their political rhetoric and conduct.

This theory has also succeeded in other Islamic countries, such as Turkey, where Islamist parties and currents were gradually integrated since the 1970s until they reached power in 2002 under the leadership of the Justice and Development Party. Islamist Turks developed their rhetoric and intellectual and ideological discourse, and became a more culturally and socially conservative party rather than a fundamentalist religious one.

According to these examples and experiences, it was only logical that some researchers approached Arab Islamist parties and movements from the same angle, to test whether the theory of inclusion and moderation could be applied.

Thus, the question in the case of Egypt is: how far has the inclusion of Islamists over the past two years resulted in the moderation of their ideological discourse and political conduct? This may be a difficult question to answer right now for several reasons.

First, because of the short period that has passed to test the interactive dynamic between both variables (inclusion and moderation) in an objective and viable manner; second, the fragmentation of the Islamist plane and wide variety of Islamist players, which requires a definition of those who this theory is being tested on and applied to; and third, and most importantly, the criteria for measuring moderation.

Not only is there a heated debate among researchers about the concept of moderation, but also about the values and criteria for referencing the content of this moderation, which is coloured by the researcher’s cognitive and ontological bias, whether implicit or explicit. This is a dilemma that many researchers of Islamist movements admit to.

Despite the conceptual difficulties of measuring the extent and degree of needed moderation, one can confidently say the dynamic and cognitive map of Islamists after the revolution has changed on the dialectical relationship between the two variables (inclusion and moderation). Some hardliners have steered towards maturity and rationality, while some moderates became hardliners and dogmatic.

For example, many Salafists and jihadists adopted more realistic politics and some have sometimes described this as opportunism. Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood, which is known for its moderation and strong pragmatism, has become more hard-line and obstinate about its positions in a manner that has perplexed observers and experts even more than politicians.

In other words, at a time when it was expected that the complete inclusion of the Brotherhood in the political process would lead to its adopting a discourse of consensus and soft policies towards other forces, there is a tendency by the Brotherhood to adopt very conservative and reserved policies that are not compatible with the revolutionary condition that Egypt has lived over the past two years.

Instead of the Brotherhood and its representative in power, President Mohamed Morsi, adopting a revolutionary political agenda and progressive religious and ideological discourse, many were surprised that the Brotherhood is veered instead towards the religious right, and is still hesitant about dismantling the structures of tyranny and corruption that were the main trigger of the revolution. At the same time, it is trying to clone the former regime to keep its grip on power.

While the political conduct of the Brotherhood has discouraged many and made them lose hope in the possibility of viable democratic transition, others viewed it as the group’s organisational, doctrinal and ideological authoritarian structure that existed before the revolution. Today, doubt is no longer confined to whether the Brotherhood has the political competence and skill to manage the affairs of state, but the group’s thought and ideological credibility and commitment to democracy as a value, conduct and discourse is also in doubt.

Meanwhile, the negative transformation in terms of the Brotherhood’s conduct and discourse is a serious challenge to the theory of inclusion and moderation in its current form. It also reveals the weakness of its interpretive model and the fragility of its main assumptions, and undermines its causal relationship.

First, a quick comparison between Brotherhood rhetoric and conduct before and after the revolution reveals that oppression, not inclusion, was the motivation for developing the group’s intellectual discourse and maturity and rationality of its political conduct. This is perplexing and perhaps requires behavioural and psychological study of the group.

Second, the sudden transformation of the Brotherhood and switching its political status from an opposition movement that was suppressed for decades to becoming the sole party in power, was not accompanied by any transformation or transition in vision, thought process or policies.

Third, unlike in the cases of Turkey, Morocco, Jordan, Yemen and Kuwait, the Brotherhood was not integrated gradually but was suddenly and quickly catapulted into the driver’s seat and put in charge of running the country and affairs of state without any technocratic experience, or psychological, ideological or organisational readiness.

Four, the Brotherhood’s sudden inclusion did not occur under normal circumstances or at lower levels that could help the group reposition itself or organise its thoughts and priorities. Instead, it came after a people’s revolution, followed by mismanagement and severe floundering by those who were in charge of democratic transition after Mubarak’s ouster.

Finally, the inclusion of the Brotherhood occurred at a time of high tension as well as identity, religious and social polarisation that mostly took the form of competition/conflicting rather than consensus/cooperation, not only among political and ideologically divergent forces, but also within the Islamist camp itself. This has put, and continues to put, the Brotherhood under pressure from political and religious outbidding, which forces it in the direction of reticence rather than openness.

GPMS sepatutnya ketengah masalah PRU13

May 15, 2013


Harakahdaily, 15 Mei 2013

KUALA LUMPUR: Gesaan lucut kewarganegaraan terhadap rakyat Malaysia yang membantah keputusan Pilihan raya Umum ke-13 (PRU13) adalah tindakan reaktif berasaskan emosi.

Pengarah Eksekutif Pusat Penyelidikan PAS, Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad berkata ia juga tidak mengendahkan masalah-masalah yang mencacatkan proses pengundian pada hari itu.

Dr Dzulkefly berkata Gabungan Pelajar Melayu Semenanjung (GPMS), selaku gabungan terpelajar yang besar, sewajarnya lebih proaktif untuk mengangkat isu tersebut untuk diselesaikan.

Sebuah akhbar melaporkan Setiausaha Agung GPMS, Zambri Mohd Isa mahu kewarganegaraan 21 rakyat Malaysia yang menunjuk perasaan terhadap dakwaan penipuan PRU13 di Singapura, Rabu lalu dilucutkan.

Zambri berkata perbuatan mereka itu menjatuhkan imej negara.

“GPMS macam tidak memahami perkara latar seperti tidak mahu dan enggan menerima akan hakikat bahawa pilihanraya itu yang sarat dengan perkara yang dipertikaikan,” kata Dzulkefly dipetik Selangorku.

Beliau menambah rakyat yang membantah keputusan PRU13 lalu itu terbit dari keprihatinan yang serius akan sistem demokrasi Malaysia.

“Penggesaan untuk melucutkan warganegara ini adalah diambil dengan cara sangat emosi.

“Bantahan seperti ini adalah masih lagi sifatnya demokratik, tambahan bukti-bukti itu makin nyata dan semakin meluas,” katanya yang juga AJK PAS Pusat.

Najib bertambah seksa selepas menang?

May 15, 2013

Harakahdaily, 14 Mei 2013

KUALA LUMPUR: Setelah menang, Presiden Umno sepatutnya gembira dan senyum lebar tetapi nampaknya Datuk Seri Najib Razak bertambah seksa selepas menang.

Yang paling ketara, beliau gagal markah lulus ‘kembalikan 2/3 majoriti BN bahkan merosot pula iaitu dari 140 kerusi Parlimen merosot kepada 133.

“Ia pula adalah hasil sumbangan Borneo yang masih tidak terkena tsunami semenanjung,” kata Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (gambar kiri) dalam analisis awalnya tentang pilihan raya umum kali ini.

Dr Dzulkefly, Pengarah Eksekutif Pusat Penyelidikan PAS (PPP) berkata, Najib juga malu besar apabila gagal projek ‘tawan Selangor’nya.

Sebagai Pengerusi Perhubungan Umno Selangor dan menyerang Pakatan habis-habisan, kononnya rakyat tersiksa dan jangan ulangi kesilapan, namun semuanya gagal.

“Sebaliknya PR semakin kuat dan menguasai 2/3 majoriti di DUN Selangor,” kata Dr Dzulkefly.

Kata beliau, Najib (gambar kanan) kini adalah PM sebuah kerajaan minoriti pertama dalam sejarah politik tanah air.

Undi popular BN yang diketuai Najib merosot ke paras 48% sementara PR mendapat 52%.

Ini bermakna, lebih ramai rakyat yang mahukan PR atau lebih ramai rakyat yg menolak BN, katanya.

BN hanya menang kerana sistem British yang berasaskan pertama lepasi tiang atau ‘First pass the post’.

Kalau kalau sistem ‘perwakilan berkadar’ (Proportional Representation), sudah sah BN sudah tumbang, tambahnya.

Katanya lagi, yang paling malang bagi Najib kini rakyat tahu bahawa ‘BN menang dengan pelbagai penipuan’.

“Ia macam budak yang meniru diangkat menjadi ketua kepada pelajar cemerlang, masakan mahu diterima rakan-rakan seangkatannya. Ekoran itu, kerajaan Najib telah menjadi begitu buruk,” tambah beliau.

Menurut beliau yang juga timbalan pengerusi pasukan Post Morterm PRU 13 yang ditubuhkan PAS, pelbagai faktor serta bukti sedang dihimpunkan.

Antaranya membeli, menyogok dan merasuah pengundi dengan bayaran RM300 ke RM1000 satu undi.

“Petisyen akan dimajukan sebaik saja pewartaan keputusan PRU dibuat. Andainya mahkamah masih punya kewibawaan kerajaan minoriti diramalkan akan bakal tumbang dalam enam bulan pertama..insya AlLah.

“Kita redha takdir tetapi tidak samasekali boleh menerima penipuan….sampai bila mahu begini?” katanya tegas.

PAS – the face and image of a contemporary Islamic political body

April 12, 2013

PAS dons coats over robes to hone electoral image

MOHD FARHAN DARWIS (TMI)
KUALA LUMPUR, April 12 ― Once known as the party of white skullcaps, turbans and robes, PAS has undergone a socio-political change that has helped sharpen its Islamist credentials in order to stay relevant and acceptable to a plural society.

Several PAS leaders acknowledged the firebrand party had shed its hardline, conservative shell and told The Malaysian Insider they were proud they had leaders who were willing to metamorphose for the sake of the party’s continuity.

“The strength of the leadership of clerics is now supported by the strength of the professionals and activists… this makes PAS respected by friend, and feared by foes,” said Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, executive director of PAS’s research centre.

Unlike other political parties in Malaysia, PAS has been openly religious from the start of its formation in 1951. Decisions within the party are made not only by a central political council but also by its Majlis Syura ― a council of clerics consisting of trained Islamic scholars ― that powers the heart of PAS.

A former lecturer of medical science in Universiti Sains Malaysia, Dr Dzulkefly said the changes in PAS have helped the party stay “fresh” without compromising its religious principles.

“PAS has emerged as the face and image of a contemporary Islamic political body and it is refreshing… it is now an Islamic movement that is facing the challenge and brings dynamism to the fight,” said the academic-turned-politician who won public office in Election 2008.

Since last year, PAS, a founding partner in the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) opposition pact, has been seen actively recruiting former senior civil servants and even businessmen. It has also selected some of them to run for public office in the May 5 polls.

Among them are former director of the police criminal investigation department, Datuk Fauzi Shaari, who has been named to stand in the Larut parliamentary seat.

Architect and building specialist, Datuk Raja Kamarul Bahrin Shah Raja Ahmad, was also recently named as a candidate for the Kuala Terengganu federal seat. There is also corporate figure Datuk Abdul Rahman Maidin who has been selected for the Tasik Gelugor federal seat in Penang.

The party has also set up a PAS Supporters’ Club to field non-Muslim candidates in Election 2013. Its president, Hu Pang Chow, a Chinese Christian, has been picked to stand in Ayer Hitam, Johor.

“We need to prove that we have qualified candidates to capture Putrajaya,” said PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu, who added the party would place more corporate figures to clean up Putrajaya.

Political pundits also see the evolution in PAS as a worldwide phenomenon, such as how renowned Islamic organisation, Egypt’s Ikhwanul Muslimin, picked Mohammed Morsi, an engineer, to be its chairman.

“It’s a positive sign to the party, because with a changed image, it’s no longer known only as a party of white kopiahs and ‘jubah’,” said political analyst Asri Salleh, using the Malay terms for skullcaps and the ankle-length loose robes popularly associated with PAS members.

“On the contrary, the participation of former government servants, lawyers, doctors and so on will certainly bring their image into PAS and at once, the people will see PAS’s new image,” said the lecturer from Universiti Teknologi MARA based in Terengganu.

Apart from seeing the evolution that has enabled PAS to be part of the PR pact, Asri was concerned that the metamorphosis would affect the party’s original supporters who had fought for a different policy and goal.
“Maybe their early supporters… during the reign of the clerics in PAS, some would be dissatisfied and will leave the party,” he said.

Asri said that if that happened, PAS would lose its influence and the vote from those early supporters.
“However, it is normal for political parties to change… if Barisan Nasional has its transformation, PAS has its evolution.”

The party’s Federal Territory deputy commissioner, Ahmad Zamri Asa’ad Khuzaimi, said PAS’s openness has caused the people and professionals to choose to be with PAS.

“We evolve but do not compromise on policy… our policy is clear and they who are not aligned to that policy will usually leave the party, but supporters are still loyal to the party,” said the lawyer who is also in the party’s legal and human rights department, referring to several prominent personalities who have left.

“We are open; in fact, the president has also been reprimanded in the congress,” the 38-year-old said, referring to Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang.

“We are strict and have principles,” he added.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 240 other followers