Bullying beyond schools and workplaces

This write-up was published in the Sun on 17 Oct 2024 pg.10

Bullying in schools, workplaces, and on social media has been increasingly highlighted in recent headlines. Is this issue more rampant now? Not necessarily. Bullying has long been a significant problem, but increased awareness and expanded reporting platforms have brought it more into the spotlight. Social media, in particular, has extended bullying beyond traditional environments, allowing cyberbullying to occur anytime and anywhere. This makes it more pervasive, persistent, and harder to escape, which can give the impression that bullying is more common today.

Bullying is often viewed as a social malaise, but it is actually both a social and psychological problem, involving complex interactions between individual behavior and societal dynamics. Its causes are multifaceted, including power imbalances, social hierarchies, and psychological factors like insecurity, aggression, or a desire for control. Women and girls, especially, are often disproportionately affected by bullying, typically by men in positions of power. Factors like power dynamics and psychological motivations often contribute to this behavior, where traditional gender roles and societal norms perpetuate male dominance. Men who bully women often have underlying psychological issues such as low self-esteem, a need for validation, or past experiences of abuse. These issues can drive them to project their insecurities onto others, particularly women they perceive as vulnerable.   

In Malaysia, school and workplace bullying are handled by the Ministry of Education and other relevant ministries and government agencies, while cyberbullying is addressed by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC). Despite these efforts, improvements in policies and enforcement are needed to more effectively address bullying in all its forms.

One overlooked area is perhaps bullying within private sports and social clubs, as well as thousands of societies/associations such as Residents’ Associations; including political parties and NGOs, all of which come under the purview of the Registrar of Societies (ROS) in the Ministry of Home Affairs. These entities play an important role in community bonding, but bullying can lead to divisions and a less cohesive community. Addressing bullying in these settings will foster healthier communities and reinforces positive social standards.

A recent case of blatant bullying of a lady member through abuse of power by its leadership in a prominent sports and social club of Royal status in the Klang Valley has underscored the need for ROS to take a more proactive role in ensuring good governance in clubs to curb this bullying issue. Bullying within a club, particularly when involving individuals in authority/power who selectively enforce rules or apply discriminatory punishments, -- to the extent of breaching club constitutional rules to impose a wrongful conviction -- undermines the integrity of the club and alienates members. The Societies Act provides a framework for overseeing club activities, but enhancements to this oversight could offer better protection to members, especially if good governance based on the rule of laws is emphasized. Suggestions include:

1. Strengthen Oversight and Monitoring Mechanisms

Enhanced Reporting Systems: ROS could implement a reporting mechanism (much like the ADU@KL of DBKL) where members can complain and report instances of bullying, discrimination, or unfair treatment without fear of retaliation. This would allow issues to be addressed at an early stage before they escalate to legal suits in court.

Regular Audits and Inspections: ROS could conduct more frequent and unannounced audits of clubs -- especially for those with a track record or history of disputes and court cases with members -- focusing on compliance with constitutional rules and byelaws. Audits could include reviews of how rules are enforced and whether there is evidence of discrimination or bias.

External Ombudsman: Establishing an independent ombudsman for clubs and societies could provide a neutral party to whom grievances can be reported. This role could ensure that all complaints are investigated fairly and that corrective actions are taken in a timely manner.

2. Clearer Guidelines on Governance and Accountability

Transparent Rule Enforcement: ROS could mandate that clubs provide clear, written policies on how rules are enforced, including specific criteria for punishments and disciplinary actions. This would help ensure that enforcement is consistent and fair. In the case cited above, the lady member was punished disproportionately with 3 months’ suspension and RM 500 fine based on a wrongful conviction. This double punishment is rare and unprecedented in the club, and is widely perceived by club members as a case of bullying, selective prosecution and victimization.

Mandatory Training for Club Officials: Implementing mandatory training for club officials on ethical leadership, anti-bullying, and anti-discrimination practices would help foster a more inclusive environment. This training could be required by ROS as part of the process for elected or appointed club positions.

Governance Audits: Periodic governance audits by ROS could assess the fairness and transparency of decision-making processes within clubs. These audits could be used to evaluate the extent to which officials adhere to ethical governance standards and rules of law.

3. Enhanced Legal Recourse and Enforcement

Stronger Legal Consequences for Misconduct: ROS could work with legal authorities to establish clearer legal consequences for club officials who engage in bullying or discriminatory practices. This could include penalties for clubs and individual officials that fail to take action against bullying or are themselves involved in bullying!

Empowered Mediation and Arbitration Services: Offering mediation and arbitration services through ROS could provide a formal pathway for resolving disputes between members and leadership. This could be an alternative to legal action, providing a quicker, less costly way to address grievances.

In conclusion, it goes without saying that regular reviews of the Societies Act would help keep governance practices of clubs and societies up-to-date with current challenges, including the issues of bullying. This review process could include input from members of the public, legal experts, and civil society to ensure a broad perspective on needed updates.

Seniors' Wildgoose Chase for Sinovac Booster

December 2021

One of the recent announcements from the MOH (Ministry of Health) is that all seniors aged 60+ who have received two doses of Sinovac earlier will have their fully vaccinated status withdrawn in February 2022 if they do not get their booster shots by then. It is not mentioned though if the booster must be Pfizer which is provided free. Given such urgency as reflected by the stern warning, does the authority wonder why many seniors are still dithering?       

When 40% of the seniors did not show up for their booster shot appointments in November last year, for whatever reasons, the authority responded quickly with various announcements. It was from the horses’ mouths, through their tweets or media statements, we learnt that Sinovac boosters would be approved soon by the MOH and made available at PPVs (Pusat Perkhidmatan Vaksinasi) nationwide, in STAGES. Seniors, especially those who cannot take Pfizer boosters because of medical issues, can now request for Sinovac at the PPVs they are assigned to. However, up until end of December last year, when these seniors received their booster shot appointments – some for the 5^th time!!! -- they found that Sinovac booster is still either unavailable at the PPVs, or they have to PAY for it! Some irate seniors quipped that announcements by the various authorities in November last year were like smoke screens, ambiguous and lack clarity, leading to confusion and false expectations. Perhaps it was a case of the media reporters misquoted or misinterpreted the tweets and announcements? We hope the authority will quickly clarify this matter by stating explicitly if it is MOH or Cabinet decision that seniors must either take the free Pfizer boosters or PAY for Sinovac boosters.

Given that worldwide, vaccine booster is a highly politicized issue, with experts and various studies offering conflicting opinions and conclusions, it is important that rakyat are not forced to accept the mandate “take the Pfizer booster for free, or PAY for Sinovac booster if you need it”.

One can understand the need to speed up the booster program before the huge stockpile of costly vaccines expires. But the MOH must get its priorities right and be more systematic in the booster roll-out operations. It is really not a Herculean task to find out the reasons behind the 40% no-show for booster appointments, and follow up with appropriate actions. One just needs to look into the database, identify those who need Sinovac boosters because of medical issues or fear of heterologous boosters, and let them get their desired boosters soonest possible. As it is, until quite recently, boosters have been offered to walk-ins of all ages rather randomly. A friend who accompanied her mother for her booster appointment at a PPV found the venue so crowded that they had to stand and wait in the hot sun for hours. It is no surprise that the duo decided to just return home to wait for another appointment!

Over the past two month or so, there was sporadic news of free Sinovac boosters being given in PPVs in the Northern states of Kedah and Penang, Triang in Pahang, and even in Senawang Convention Center in Seremban. There were reportedly long lines of walk-ins, including some anxious seniors who started to queue from as early as seven in the morning to ensure getting the Sinovac boosters. Surely the authority should feel some compassion for them, especially if they are the ones who cannot take the Pfizer booster because of some medical issues? Why subject these seniors to such hardship and unnecessary risk? This aside, why is there still no clear plan or schedule of where the ‘promised’ Sinovac vaccines are being sent to nationwide? Why such a haphazard way of distribution? Can ProtectHealth website do more than just listing the PPVs? Perhaps they can include contact information and also state clearly what vaccines are available for FREE at which PPVs and when? This will save a lot of frustrations having to find the contact information of PPVs and then call them – often to no avail-- to find out what vaccines are available.

Sometime last month, Selangor started offering about 15,700 free Sinovac boosters, supposedly to complement the effort of the Federal Government. However, it seems to be for walk-ins too with no priorities for seniors. It is not clear where the state government has acquired or purchased the Sinovac boosters. Whatever, this program presents a glimmer of hope for many seniors in the Klang Valley who had been frustrated with their wildgoose chase for the elusive free Sinovac boosters ‘promised’ since November last year.  After turning down two or three appointments, many just gave up the wait for more appointments from MySJ. They either paid for the Sinovac boosters or just tried their luck with Selangor Government’s offer through Selvax/Selangkah. For the latter ‘lottery’, some had to wait till end of January and even February for the booster appointments.

There is also this urgent question about the two million doses of Sinovac donated by China recently. Together with the one million or so doses donated earlier last year, there are now perhaps a total of 3 million donated doses in the stockpile? Surely we must try to use them up quickly before the need to extend expiry date once again? Interestingly, some photos of China-made Sinovac vials have been circulated on social media, allegedly taken in PPVs and private clinics where payment is required. Could this be malicious fake news? We hope so because all rational right thinking people know that it is unethical and morally wrong to make the rakyat pay for donated vaccine boosters. What more when vaccination is a national public health service that should be FREE for all rakyat? To quash such ‘rumors’, it is time the MOH starts making the distribution of these donated Sinovac boosters more systematic and transparent. The rakyat and tax payers have the right to know where exactly these three million doses will be sent to and when, who will get them for free and who will have to pay. If not, lack of transparency will only fuel more speculations and undermine the MOH’s effort in speeding up the nation’s vaccination program.

Booster Shot Concerns

(An abridged version with a different title was published in The Sun/ The Star 15 Nov 2021)

News that the Ministry of Health will be giving booster jabs to all frontliners and seniors is welcome by most quarters. Unfortunately, the recent announcement by the Minister of Health that Pfizer booster jabs will be given to seniors who already received two doses of Sinovac has created a lot of anxiety and uneasiness. This is especially so for those who are well read. They have strong apprehension about the safety of such heterologous booster shots. To add to their alarm is the press statement by the minister that this heterologous administration will be part of the government study, done in an off-label manner, meaning this booster jab is used in a way other than officially approved for. So, can we blame the seniors for the perception that they are being used as guinea pigs?!

Even though it was barely a few days ago that MySejahtera  has started notifying these seniors about their booster jab appointments, the ministry should have got the drift by now. Many seniors either did not confirm their appointments, or they    confirmed but did not show up for the vaccination. MySejahtera only asks recipients of booster jab offers to click a button to confirm, no other options are available. (Sounds like hard selling snake oil, take it or leave it, as one senior quipped!)  Those who found the date and time of jab appointment unsuitable tried calling helpline, but like before, to no avail. Some just clicked to confirm, out of anxiety, and then decided not to show up. One senior complained that he was given two doses of Sinovac because of health issue, but now they want to give him Pfizer as booster!

Many people are of the opinion that the decision to mix two Sinovac jabs with Pfizer as booster shot is not substantiated by findings of any study or analysis of data collected by the Ministry of Health thus far. It is callous to say the least, subjecting the vulnerable seniors to unknown and unnecessary risks. This is especially so in the midst of many experts, including a WHO scientist, warning and cautioning the use of heterologous vaccinations by individuals. (https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/who-warns-against-mixing-matching-covid-vaccines-2021-07-12/..... ) The Chinese government is also very prudent and responsible, stating that there will be no mixed booster shots until scientists are sure.  (https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3153424/no-mixed-covid-19-booster-shots-china-until-scientists-are-sure)

Therefore, our burning question is: Why not give a third Sinovac to these seniors as booster? After all, a study in Turkey involving 30 million vaccinated citizens has indicated that the highest level of protection was seen in people who received three doses of inactive vaccines (Sinovac), rather than in those who received two doses of inactive vaccines and one booster shot of an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer). (https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/COVID-vaccines/3-doses-of-Sinovac-is-better-than-mixing-with-Pfizer-Turkish-minister) Our neighbor Singapore down south is doing just that now, giving three doses of Sinovac to those who do not want mRNA vaccine as booster. Can we do the same here?

 

What's the SOP for administering vaccine jab?

(Published in the Star 24 May 2021)

Of late, several video clips have been making the rounds on social media, alleging that some people were injected with empty syringes or that insufficient doses were administered. Although at least one of such video clips had since been found to be a case of misunderstanding, others are still awaiting investigations. This has naturally alarmed the public, prompting some to take precautionary measures when they turned up for their vaccination. One of my friends, a retired dentist, asked to see the bottle and the syringe after her jab, as she wanted to take photos, but was refused and told to respect the nurse’s job! A very delicate situation indeed. Another friend who went to another vaccination center had no such problem. The nurse was very professional, showed her the vial and syringe both before and after the jab.

Such different experiences at two vaccination centers beg the question: Does the SOP for the nurses who administer jabs require them to show the vial and syringe before and after each jab? If yes, well and good, ALL nurses should just follow the SOP and no questions will be asked. If no, I think it is high time the authority reviews the SOP to ensure such transparency in the vaccination process.

In conclusion, it must be emphasized that although we have utter respect for and confidence in our thousands of dedicated frontliners, there is no denial that such malpractice though rare, can happen, as has already been found out in some other countries.        

Speeding up Second Phase Registration and Vaccination

Elderly wary of vaccines 

(A slightly edited version with this title was published in the Star 16 April 2021)

The Minister of Health is wondering why most of the seniors have not registered for the second phase vaccination. Although I have not done a survey to find the exact answer, many people including medical and other professionals from this age group have shared with me their thoughts related to this matter. One of the main reasons is that they are waiting to see if the authority will eventually be “enlightened” and “caring” enough to give them the choice of what vaccine they want to be inoculated with. Many feel outraged that they do not have a choice of what is injected into their bodies!

Given that most of the vaccines now available worldwide have not been ADEQUATELY tested, and that some involve relatively new technology; their preference for a vaccine they deem more widely “tried and tested” and therefore “safer”, is perfectly understandable.  Besides, there is also the perception that some ministers, both past and present, have used the “delay strategy” – not to mention other covert ways -- to get their preferred vaccines. So, these seniors harbor the hope that if they wait and see, they too may get their choice vaccine later!

What can the government do to speed up registration and vaccination for the coming second phase involving these “wait and see” seniors? Firstly, let us bear in mind that seniors are a very vulnerable group, many with complicated or even multiple medical pre conditions that warrant careful considerations when it comes to vaccination. Secondly, risk factors have to be minimized when choosing a vaccine for them, in light of various negative reports about undesirable and longer term side effects of some new tech vaccines, whether proven or not at this point in time. As such, those seniors who are well informed would surely be more willing to register for vaccination if they are given a choice. As it is now, it does look to them like “register now, and you risk not knowing what vaccine you are going to be injected with!”

At this juncture, I would also like to refer to a letter to the editor “Don’t deny right to choose vaccine” (The Sun, 22^nd Feb. 2021). Various people have also voiced similar opinion since then, but all to no avail so far. Not too long ago, the government finally announced that they will be getting the private hospitals involved to speed up registration and vaccination. This is good news.  Perhaps now is the time to seriously consider giving the public, especially the seniors, a choice. The MOH can just announce which hospital is using which vaccine so that people who prefer that particular vaccine can register with the hospital concerned. This will kill two birds with one stone: Speed up registration and vaccination, and at the same time, give people a choice. From what I heard recently, in Singapore, each vaccination center only carries one type of vaccine. So, the public effectively get to choose the vaccine they prefer when they register with the center of their choice. Is this not something we can do here in Malaysia?  In addition, since the government is looking into setting up vaccination centers in big factories and workplaces, why not include recreational clubs with sizable senior membership, such as the Royal Lake Club and Royal Selangor Club in the Klang Valley?

Finally, to protect the vulnerable seniors and to attain herd immunity nationwide as soon as possible, we cannot wait for the private hospitals to procure their own vaccines. It will be too long a wait, knowing that currently there is an acute shortage of vaccines worldwide. We have to start the government vaccination programs in private hospitals NOW and not later.

Don’t deny right to choose vaccine

 Published in The Sun, 22nd Feb. 2021

Amidst the rush to get ourselves vaccinated against the corona virus, many are wondering why is it that we the taxpayers are denied the right to choose the type of vaccine we prefer. Is it not a tenet of democracy that we should have this right of choice? Maybe both the legal experts and the medical professionals can weigh in with their views and enlighten the public? We heard that in some countries, Republic of Serbia for one, people there actually have a choice of which vaccine they prefer to be inoculated with.

Perhaps this is also an opportune time for the Malaysian government to carry out a survey to find out which vaccine is preferred by the rakyat of Malaysia. This can be easily incorporated into the registration process, whether in MySejahtera or other platforms. We also believe that this whole exercise of vaccination should be carried out with absolute transparency, making public details such as the distribution of the different vaccines by phases, and by states in the country. In this context, needless to say, we are particularly interested to know what kind of vaccine all the ministers --  especially those who were involved in vaccine procurement -- will be receiving, for the sake of accountability, if nothing else. Last but not least, as recipients of the vaccine, we would like to know if the authority will inform us about which vaccine we are receiving, before we turn up for the vaccination.

Whither Education Reforms?

(Slightly edited version  published in The Sun 14th August 2019)

Whither the much vaunted education reforms in Malaysia if the Ministry of Education (MoE) does not stay focused on more important and urgent matters? Should not the Minister of Education and his deputy dispense their time and effort to designing long term plans and strategies to reform the school curriculum to foster national unity, and meet the challenges of globalization and Industry Revolution 4.0? Why bulldoze and introduce Khat that most Malaysians intuitively know will stir up unnecessary controversies, with no help to national unity in any way? Did they not engage in lengthy discussions with their MoE curriculum officers to clarify issues about learning objectives and learning outcomes? Obviously not, because the press statements published in media headlines-- after they claimed to have reached a compromise with Dong Zhong-- border on absurdity! How can one attain a real “appreciation” of Khat without learning the Jawi alphabet? Only “appreciation” and no “learning” is rather meaningless from a strictly education point of view.

As an education specialist who has served in schools, the Curriculum Development Center of the MoE and the Education Faculty of a public university for many years, I feel compelled to write this letter to raise pertinent questions to seek answers, and to appeal to the Cabinet to re-consider their decision. The decision to go ahead with implementation is insidious, as more controversies will certainly arise in the years to come, when Year 4 pupils progress to years 5 and 6. What then? More rounds of altercation, protest, and negotiation? Promises made now about “no compulsion”, “no learning”(?) and “no examinations” are for the present, not cast in stone for the future. This is a reality in Malaysian politics as we have witnessed thus far.

For the sake of real education reforms and nation building, please mull over the following

1) Time and again, it has been pointed out that the school curriculum is already overloaded as it is. There are a thousand and one important things we want the kids to learn. We need to be pragmatic and select the most essential and urgent. The MoE should focus on how to trim the overloaded curriculum to make learning fun and enjoyable for the schoolchildren, especially those in primary schools. The dismal revelation by Dr Sivachandralingam  (The Sun, 8^th August 2019) should certainly raise an alarm and deep concerns: A recent  study has shown that as many as 30% of pupils from Tamil schools consistently fail in Bahasa Melayu (BM)! Will the introduction of Khat improve their learning and mastery of BM? Very unlikely, it can only make things worse, because the inclusion of this new language element -- whether three or six pages in the textbook -- will only dilute the original BM curriculum, taking up precious teaching time that should rightly be devoted to helping these under-performing pupils read and write BM

2)  As it is, pupils in the vernacular primary schools, at such a young and tender age, already have to grapple with the learning of three languages: two using the Roman alphabet  – English and BM—and the third using an entirely different language form and writing system, be it Chinese or Tamil.  And now, they have to learn a third, the Jawi alphabet. In this context, statements such as “appreciation” and “no learning” seem baffling, to say the least. How will teachers present Khat/Jawi calligraphy in class without teaching the pupils the individual letters in the Jawi alphabet? Unless it is simply copying the Khat as a pretty drawing or pattern. If so, how does this kind of “drawing” activity enrich and enhance the learning of BM?

3) An article in Sin Chew (8^th August 2019) by Dato Wu Hen Can ( 吴恒灿 ) who attended a special meeting held by the Minister and his deputy on Aug 1, has drawn my attention to more curricular concerns. It was mentioned that in the DSKP (Dokumen Standard Kurikulum dan Pentaksiran), the learning outcomes as reflected there (4.4.2 and 4.4.2) clearly indicate that the Khat activity is NOT limited to mere superficial recognition and “appreciation”. They actually require pupils to be able to identify and pronounce individual letters in Simpulan Bahasa written in the seni Khat; and in addition, to be able to write the same! Not easily attainable learning outcomes, and a lot of learning, I must say. So, unless these expected learning outcomes have been removed from the said document and curriculum plan as proposed by Dato Wu in that meeting, I do not see how Khat can be used in class as an activity for learning BM, no matter how creative the teachers are, without the need for pupils to learn all the letters in the Jawi alphabet. My main concern now is: Will such an added burden of learning another alphabet help our Year 4 pupils read and write better BM? Is there a need for them to learn Jawi to read and write better BM?

4)  Are all BM teachers in vernacular schools equipped with the knowledge and skills to teach Khat? Some people go to the extent of suggesting that we do have many unemployable graduates who can fill the void in such skills. This is beside the point, for now. More important questions are: Is Khat really “optional”, and teachers or pupils can choose not to teach or learn it, especially when it is not included in examinations? What will happen in subsequent Year 5 and Year 6 after this? For those teachers who are overly zealous in striving to attain those learning outcomes as reflected in the said DSKP, will they end up spending too much time teaching the new alphabet, at the expense of honing pupils’ reading and writing skills in BM, which should be a priority in our curriculum reform effort?   

Let us heed the scathing criticism of past Cabinet ministers, as well as the learned views of scholars, well-versed in Jawi and its history. These people do not think there is a need for kids in vernacular schools to learn Khat, and they said so with no hidden agenda. Why not just focus on real education reforms and avoid diversions that court controversies or provide fodder for opportunistic politicians to create disharmony. To give due credit, the existing Year 5 BM textbook already includes adequate and very appropriate content to create awareness and impart basic knowledge about Khat/Jawi, and even much more. “Don’t fix it if it ain’t broke”, we should just keep this status quo. Let us move on and focus on real education reforms by:

1)  continuing to channel efforts and resources to narrow the gap between the haves and have-nots, between  urban and rural schools; in terms of IT infrastructure, physical amenities and facilities in schools. Make ALL schools truly conducive for learning, reduce class size and improve instruction to make teaching and learning more effective and fun

2)  laying  a strong foundation to develop in our students STEM skills, higher-order thinking skills, and proficiency in English and other languages that will help them meet the challenges of Industrial Revolution 4.0 and  globalization, and last but not least

3) laying due attention to the holistic development of individual students much emphasized in the Malaysian National Philosophy of Education (1988) which is so eloquently articulated and yet often overlooked or slighted in our often blinkered – or politicized? – views of education reforms.

The current furore over the inclusion of Khat in the vernacular primary school Year 4 curriculum is NOT going to blow over soon. It is of public interest that answers to questions raised above, and the rationale behind the Cabinet decision to doggedly proceed with implementation, must be made crystal clear without ambiguities, to address the concerns of all stakeholders, and allay their misgivings. More importantly, all decision-makers, especially the MoE must have the young pupils’ best interest at heart, bearing in mind that a good curriculum for learner-centered instructional approach is one that is planned by taking into consideration the needs of learners and input from all stakeholders, including the parents, teachers and the community at large. 

Dr Gan Siowck Lee

12 August 2019

A Tribute to Mr Lee Kuan Yew

1923-2015

Singapore is Lee Kuan Yew and

Lee Kuan Yew is Singapore

A giant in history, a statesman of exceptional intellect,

steely resolve, relentless tenacity...

Welcome to a study tour on Hudud‧歡迎參加伊刑法觀摩團

The following is a translation of an article by Mr  鄭丁賢,  Deputy Editor-in-Chief of Sin Chew, published on Sunday, 11 May 2014: 

Malaysian government and political parties are generally very enthusiastic about study tours to investigate, and/or observe whatever…. For example, a study tour to Antarctica to visit penguins. Ooops, I mean to study climate change. Thus, there has been a constant stream of visits to Europe, the U.S., China, Japan, and Australia. Such investigation is almost a routine, must go on…..

Curiously, we rarely hear of such visits to certain Middle East and North African countries. If we want to implement Islamic criminal law, how can we not visit these countries? Somalia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Iran, Saudi Arabia , or Indonesia's Aceh, each and everyone should be worth a study tour.

Hadi Awang is so passionate and confident about Islamic criminal law, keeps urging people to believe and to accept it. For real action, why not organize tours to learn about Islamic criminal law in Islamic States? Lead us to the Middle East and North Africa to see how the implementation of Islamic criminal law has brought about a peaceful society, developed economy, and purity of minds.

Are there readers interested to participate? It will certainly be very exciting.

For example, going to Aceh in Indonesia, one can examine woman- caning. Recently, a local woman accused of having an affair was raped by eight men as a punishment for violation of her religion. Later, she will also have to face the punishment of caning.

Going to Pakistan, one can visit the women's prison, where one thousand women accused of adultery are imprisoned. Curiously, only two men were accused of adultery. Could it be that only two men committed adultery with a thousand women?

Similarly, in the Taliban -controlled areas in Pakistan where women are prohibited to pursue education, a disobedient girl like Malala was even shot! Today, fundamentalists are still threatening her.

In Nigeria, the militant Islamic group "Boko Haram" kidnapped 200 female students, barred them from schools, and threatened to sell them into slavery. But their leaders claimed possession of two girls, a 9 -year-old and a 12- year-old, all these are done in the name of religion.

If you go to Somalia, be sure to visit the "Somali Youth Party" controlled central and southern regions, where you can witness the implementation of Islamic criminal law, including the amputation of hands and stoning. From terrorist attacks in Uganda to explosion in the malls, all these are worth “observing”.

If the Islamic criminal law can solve our many problems in Malaysia as claimed -- such as putting an end to the crime of corruption -- then go to these countries mentioned above to see if they have indeed become a paradise, or hell on earth .

Someone said that if hudud law doesn’t work, we can always go back to the civil law.  

In the 1970s, during the era of Iran's Pahlavi Dynasty, this country promoted modernization based on Western model, adopting capitalism. However, its relatively closed political system and government resisted democratic reforms. Wealth was under the control and monopoly of capitalism, resulting in huge growing gap between the rich and poor.

Iranian people’s discontent rose, they were bent on overthrowing the Pahlavi regime. However, they did not use the means of modifying capitalism and promoting democracy and freedom, but chose to align themselves with radical religious forces, with the elders of Ayatollah Khomeini as co- leaders.

Finally, under a series of demonstrations and protests, the Iranian government was paralysed, the King became a common enemy, and ultimately the Pahlavi regime was overthrown. Led by Ayatollah Khomeini, theocratic politics came into power, and the world's first Islamic republic was founded.

Soon, Iran's economy began to decline, and political freedom was further curtailed. Even though Iran has one of the largest oil reserves on earth, and despite the good foundation laid down by the economic modernization policy during the Pahlavi era, Iran degenerated into an even more impoverished and corrupt country, all within a very short time.

A theocratic utopia thus built, was based on mere ideal that was never verified. Nor was there ever any successful precedent of such a system. It lacked effectiveness in terms of actual operation.

For decades, many Iranians wanted to change, to revert, and wrest back power from the hands of the theocratic government. Through election, they managed to elect a relatively liberal president. However, from Rafsanjani to Khatami, they have failed to change the system of theocratic supremacy. The most powerful in Iran is not the elected president, but the supreme religious leader of the country. The supreme leader controls the executive, legislative, judicial and military sectors, including tight control over all civilians in Iranian society. There is no turning back again in today’s Iran.

Many naïve people gamble with luck when they think that temporarily accepting theocratic rule is a way of using its power to change the status of their discontent. Once their purpose is achieved, they think election can be deployed to oust theocratic power. This article hopes to provide a history lesson for them. 

A Tribute to YB Karpal Singh (1940-2014)

The voice of Justice

Opposition MP extraordinaire

The Tiger of Jelutong......

His untimely demise is a big loss to all Malaysians who believe in Justice! 
May he RIP...amen.

This is a photo of him and me taken at the American Independence Day celebration party in July 2013.
He is one person who truly deserves to be addressed as YB, Yang Berhormat.

The Magical Power of a Flying Carpet

The following is what I translated from an article by the Deputy Editor-in-Chief of Sin Chew Daily, published on 8 January 2012:  

I am not sure if Deepak is a carpet merchant, or a businessman who flies in on a carpet. (Gan SL: Maybe a carpetbagger from somewhere?) 

On the surface, he appears to be a carpet merchant, involved with the import and sale of carpets from the Middle East, nothing unusual.

However, his “experiences” are quite extraordinary, as manifested by exceptional maneuvering achievable only if one rides on a flying carpet!  

He admitted to his involvement in the Mongolian woman case, even claimed to have influenced investigator Bala in his second statutory affidavit, with the latter overthrowing his own first affidavit. To date, the exact whereabouts of Bala is still unknown.  

Deepak claimed to have close ties with certain "powerful people", enjoying and maintaining such contacts because of some mutual business interests.   

He also said he wanted to publish a book to expose BIG secrets. The result was an e-book titled "The Black Rose". (Gan SL: Ask me and I shall send an e-copy to you.)  

This eBook did not live up to expectations, as there is no real big expose or insider story. (Gan SL: At least not stuff that most people don’t already know). Perhaps he lacks the skill of a writer? But the more likely reason is: He only wanted to create a smoke screen, holding back something with the intention of just conveying a veiled message, a cliffhanger of sorts, for better and bigger show to come…..

Deepak’s efforts so far have not been in vain. He gained fame (Gan SL: Or infamy?) overnight, enough to hog the Malaysia New Year's Eve spotlight for a while.  

In fact, his words and actions have been well-planned. Letting go and withdrawing them at will, just like maneuvering a flying carpet: He disappeared after throwing a shocker, waited for the message to “ferment”; then he re-appeared to throw another shocker, creating another fresh topic for more speculations.  

Media were all drawn to him, with no shortage of online publications keen to co-operate with and support him. In addition, he also attracted the interest of the opposition parties, all in hot pursuit of him. Yes, Deepak is certainly useful to all of them!   

Of course, they are all being used by Deepak, too.   

Question is: Why is Deepak doing all this? Obviously, he is NOT advertising to sell carpets, neither is he aspiring to become a writer.   

The real story is gradually emerging…….  

Deepak and Wanita Umno Selangor Chairman Raja Ropiaah are business partners. Ropiaah’s company Awan Megah and the Department of Defense has a privatization deal. Awan Megah is responsible for the construction of a defense research center in Putrajaya, in exchange for 200 acres of land in Klang owned by the Ministry of Defence. (Gan SL: FYI, her mentor is said to be none other than the Cowgate scandal ex-minsiter.)

Deepak and Ropiaah had an agreement: Deepak’s company Astacanggih will develop this piece of land.     

For some reasons, this agreement later “turned sour”. Awan Megah did not give the development project to Astacanggih, but instead, sold the land to the listed company Boustead; whose major shareholder is the Armed Forces Fund Board (LTAT).  

With this turn of event, Deepak saw the appetizing roast duck flying away! He threatened Ropiaah and her company with legal action for breach of contract. At the same time, he started blowing whistle on various political inside stories.  

So, the flying carpet magic comes from both political and economic connections.  

After some hullabaloo, Boustead proposed a business scheme: The company will pay 130 million ringgit to Awan Megah for the acquisition of that piece of land, and another 30 million ringgit for a 80% stake of Deepak’s Astacanggih share. 

If the three parties are all satisfied with the deal, Deepak will no longer blow the whistle or break BIG news. (Gan SL: So, not all whistle-blowers are selfless, public-spirited beings.)  

I am thinking aloud: Deepak has made use of the media and the opposition, but has he really achieved his original goal?   

Sharp observers, however, will ask: Where now is the much talked about National Defense Research Center? Will it still be built? If yes, it will be funded by whom?  

How come the government's privatization policy can be at the beck and call of the fairy tale flying carpet? And, obscured by so many clouds?  

Our bewilderment aside, shouldn’t the truth be told?  

More update here: http://www.mysinchew.com/node/81776?tid=12

Winnable Candidate?

What is a winnable candidate in Malaysia?

According to the New Straits Times, “The catch-phrase "winnable candidates" is gaining a lot of currency since it was first bandied about over a year ago by Umno leaders.” Frankly, I am not sure if I should be amused or annoyed by this strange usage of the adjective “winnable”. My hunch is that Simon Winchester may actually frown upon this new meaning UMNO politicians have assigned to "winnable".

In my humble opinion, it’s something of a misnomer to refer to someone as a “winnable candidate”. Winnable refers to something that can be won, not someone who can win. A war or a battle is winnable, an election or a parliamentary seat may be winnable, but a candidate who can win is not “winnable”, unless he is like the infamous three Perak MP’s: can be won over by money politics to change the government! J  

So, back to semantics, does UMNO want to field “winnable” candidates (who can be won over by money politics or even PKR?) or candidates who can win?  

 

 

Tiger Wives, East & West

After all the news about Tiger Moms, recent headlines have been hogged by Tiger Wives!

So, Wendi Deng is now the subject of tweets in the world of twitter….where snide remarks and wisecracks are aplenty….Examples, apparently from the West, are: Time to get a Chinese wife, not only can she help build your business empire (alluding to biz in China), she can be a Tiger Mom (alluding to Amy Chua) to bring up your children, and even double as your body guard!” and "Marry a kungfu bella!"

Wendy has lots of credentials, a smart cookie no doubt. She was born in Shandong (tall and strong), went to study in the US at age 19, got her business degree from Yale, moved on to work in HK, where she caught the eye of her then big boss, Rupert Murdoch. The rest is history….

After the valiant and gallant act of protecting her doddering hubby from a foam pie, a British MP remarked that she has a great left hook. But no, it wasn’t a left, it was in fact a right hook…or more precisely, a right-hand slap, accurately and speedily delivered by an accomplished ex-volley ball player from China, no less! J

Wendi’s sensational and meteoric rise to media stardom reminds us of other Tiger Wives of Western origin: Carla, First Lady of France; Cherie, wife of Tony Blair; Anne, wife of the infamous IMF ex-CEO Strauss-Kahn; and last but not least Melania, wife of Donald Trump with her famous words:  “I have a big boy, Donald, and a little boy, Baron. I take care of both very well.”  That sums up what a Tiger Wife is….as The Daily Telegraph said, The Tiger Wives’ Club is small….she knows that her spouse is less than he seems, and she, in fact, is rather more. She’s plucky; he’s lucky. J 

NOT suicide, NOT homicide... Now it is suicide

Logically, if a person is found to have died of an “unnatural” cause, what can it be if it’s neither suicide nor homicide? How about accident? If someone threatens you, pushes you towards an open window, where you lose your balance and fall through by “accident” and die, is this homicide? No? At least it is a case of manslaughter? No? How about using one of Simon Winchester’s favorite words” chance-medley”?

The following paragraph caught my attention when I was reading Winchester’s book “The Professor and the Madman”, not least because I was so intrigued and upset by the two cases of bizarre death – for want of a better description --at MACC office. 

According to Simon Winchester: “… chance medley is a wonderful legal word – the language of law offers up a profusion of delights – is ancient (first seen in 1494) and is defined as an

accident or casualty not purely accidental, but of a mixed character.

Chiefly in manslaughter by chance-medley (for which later writers have used chance-medley itself): “the casual killing of a man, not altogether without the killer’s fault, though without an evil intent; homicide by misadventure…….”

My questions are: Shouldn’t someone be held culpable for a chance-medley? The Bar Council claims that the foreign forensic expert did not conclude that Teoh Beng Hock committed suicide. So, it was RCI who made this conclusion, but substantiated by what evidence? Will there be another RCI for the case of Ahmad Sarbani Mohamed? I am waiting with bated breath….