Category: Komentar

Send in your opinion to [email protected].
Kirimkan pandangan anda kepada [email protected].

  • In History Of Presidencies, Colour Blind Reality Of The Ordinary Singaporean Is The One Factual Highlight

    In History Of Presidencies, Colour Blind Reality Of The Ordinary Singaporean Is The One Factual Highlight

    A letter from Patrick Low on the Elected President.

    Dear Fellow Singaporeans

    Comes September 2017 we may be going to the polls to elect our 8th President reserved for the Malay race only. Notwithstanding the constitutionaI amendments passed in Parliament I am not convinced of the wisdom and logic of changing our Presidential system to ensure that a member of the minority must always have a chance to become President via rotation.

    As a Singaporean who lived through the time of our first President or the Yang di- Pertuan Negara appointed in 1959 in self governing Singapore to the 7th President elected in 2011 race was never an issue in my mind and in the minds of countless Singaporeans.
    He can be Chinese Malay Indian or Eurasian elected or appointed it did not make any difference. What matters most is the President must serve the people. If he is honest sincere and capable he will be able to unify all Singaporeans regardless of race language class and religion.

    As a 72 year old Singaporean it is my privilege to grow up colour blind even through the worst racial riots in 1951 1964 and 1965. I was a child of 6 when I first witnessed the horrors of the Maria Hertog riot from a cubicle window in Jalan Besar. Then came the 2nd and 3rd racial riot in 1964/65 when we were part of Malaysia. We were at the Cathay Cinema when racial riots broke out and we were told to go home.

    But none of these riots change our generation’s perception that in multiracial Singapore race should not matter and should never be allowed to matter certainly not in the choice of a President whether he is black white brown or yellow.

    It never occur to me that a Malay should not be the head of state in Chinese majority self governing Singapore in 1959. Neither did I have any reservation to a Eurasian President Dr. Benjamin Sheares a distinguished gynaecologist who served us well from 1971 to 1981.
    Then came our third President Mr. Devan Nair an Indian MP who came from the ranks of the PAP. He unfortunately had to leave office after 4.5 years as a result of personal health problem.

    Next came President Wee Kim Wee another appointive President who hailed from the Straits Time Press. He was a “baba” Chinese Singaporean who performed his role so well that he became known as the People’s President.

    Another well loved President was Mr. Ong Teng Cheong the first elected President in Singapore history. He was our Deputy Prime Minister before he took office but completed only one term owing to differences in perception of the President’s role as a guardian of our reserve.

    After him came the 2 term President S R Nathan a civil servant who was moderately popular with the people attending President’s Charity galas to raise funds for the people. Again race was not an issue even though the previous Indian President did not fare too well and had to leave office under a cloud.

    Now we are nearing the end of the term of Mr Tony Tan an endorsed elected Chinese PresIdent who was a former DPM in the PAP government.

    So all in all we have had 7 Presidents over 58 years. 1 Malay, 2 Indians, 1 Eurasian and 3 Chinese. Out of the seven 4 were appointed and 3 were elected. As far as the people are concerned it does not matter as long as they are men of integrity and perform the jobs well to serve the people.

    Without going into the merits and demerits of the government’s rationale for amending the Constitution to allow for a reserved Presidential Election for only members from the Malay race my main objection is that such a change violates the Singapore Constitution and undermines the daily National Pledge recited by all school children every morning that:

    “We the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion to build a democratic society based on justice and equality so as to achieve happiness prosperity and progress for our nation”.

    If we have any regards at all to the history of our Presidencies one fact that stands out is the colour blind reality of the ordinary Singaporean. There was never any perceived notion that the Presidency must be rotated by race to ensure fairness to the minority. All the friends acquaintances and strangers I meet on the streets and in the parks in the last one year invariably dismiss race as a factor in their reckoning of what makes a good President.

    The issue of the President holding the second key to the national reserve should also not be an issue for he is surrounded by the Council of Presidential Advisors whom he has to take advice from. So whether he is Malay Chinese Indian or others the key that he holds is a collective key held by a panel of advisors nominated by the government.

    As for the financial qualifications required of a Presidential candidate it is most unlikely that the government would be able to headhunt for one who would meet all the stringent requirements.
    In fact all our past Presidents never had the experience of running a $500 million company. Where then do they get the forte to disagree with the government on opening our national coffers.
    However in raising the bars so high the government turns what should be a level playing field into a pole vault pitch ruling out the possibility of sourcing for a few good men who can genuinely understand the plight of the ordinary people and work for their welfare.

    The office sadly is in danger of becoming the precinct of the rich and powerful.

    In this day and age when governments all over the world are beginning to lose the trust of the people it is incumbent on the PAP leadership not to erode that trust further by imposing a albatross around the people’s neck.

    Given the challenge from a former Presidential candidate Dr Tan Cheng Bok that the reckoning of the first elective President does not reside in Mr Wee Kim Wee’s term but rathet in Mr. Ong Teng Cheong’s it would be prudent for the government to pause before rushing to implement it’s Reserve Presidency – an area where angels may fear to tread.

    It would also be doing itself a huge favour to hold a referendum to ascertain the wishes of Singaporeans whether race is indeed a factor in the choice of our Head of State. Afterall what is the hurry when more haste produces less speed and further undermines the trust of the people in the midst of a economic recession and a very uncertain world.

    Patrick Low
    4th April 2017

     

    Source: Soh Lung Teo from Patrick Low

  • Commentary: We Pray Not To Be Misled By You Again

    Commentary: We Pray Not To Be Misled By You Again

    We can gladly say that our Minister Masagos Zulkifli has scored several political points this week (claps for him) and that he will never be the people’s choice or at least the Malay Muslim community’s as the EP of Singapore. Nope, out of the question, never gonna happen. We are disappointed and you have shamed the community. However, we thank Allah SWT for showing us your true colours. We pray not to be misled by you again.

    When you accused WP’s Faisal Manap of attempting to cause division in Singapore’s social cohesion by raising the issue of hijab again, you also made an indirect ad hominem towards him by guilt of association using a picture taken of Faisal Manap and Zulfikar Shariff years ago in a mosque. So what is the Minister implying, that it was tantamount to being radical? Anyone who has a picture taken with Zulfikar must be put under suspicion? That is just low, way low even for minister. Then what about you being in the same picture with Netanyahu or gracing his presence?? Lagi worst kan.

    Instead of character assassinating our MP who is merely representing the minority Malay community in his ward, why don’t you tell him what you can do for the people. A religious debate in parliament where both sides are showing what they have done for an issue. Not one raise, the other sweep it away. Or has it been cast in stone that you’ve washed your hands off us and our issues, Mr Masagos? 🙁

     

    Yusuf Saiful

    [Reader Contribution]

  • Commentary: Imam Fined, Amos Yee Received Jail Term, Pastor Got Warning. Why The Difference?

    Commentary: Imam Fined, Amos Yee Received Jail Term, Pastor Got Warning. Why The Difference?

    Salam admin,

    I am a bit relieved the case of the Imam’s controversial remarks has been resolved in a manner that is amicable to all parties. Everyone should get their just desserts for the mistakes that they have committed, and now they got it.

    But I’m not saying that all were grave mistakes though particularly for the Imam. I don’t think he meant to incite violence against Jews or Christians in general. It probably stemmed from indulgence of religious rhetoric that has become habitual among some unenlightened preachers, and perhaps their environment.

    However in times where the threat of terrorism is consuming the world, what he explicitly said triggered what we least want to happen in Singapore – racial disharmony. Sadly, such incident shows how fragile Singapore’s social cohesion is.

    With that said, how is this case different from what happened to Amos Yee several months ago? Why did he receive a heavier punishment for a similar ‘crime’ he committed? Oh i sure you know what he did to purposely wound the feelings of Muslims and Christian.

    The difference is that Amos was given prison sentence for intending to wound religious feelings whereas the Imam was fined for making offensive remarks against Christians and Jews. Can the government enlighten the people what ‘crime’ constitutes a jail term and what for a fine.

    Additionally, not many people remember this but 7 years ago, a Senior Pastor from the Lighthouse Evangelism independent church made insensitive, disparaging remarks about Buddhism. He was derogatory about Buddhist concepts like karma and nirvana but he wasn’t charged. In fact, all Rony Tan had to do was to apologise for his troubles. What he got in the end was just a warning from the government.

    Now the burning question is why was the imam fined and yet Amos received a jail term and the pastor got a warning?

     

    Reader’s Contribution

    Kat

  • Commentary: Trend Melancong Bersama Bukan Trend, Tapi Biasa

    Commentary: Trend Melancong Bersama Bukan Trend, Tapi Biasa

    Saya sebenarnya tidak rase yang hal couple pergi holiday same-same ini boleh dikatakan “trending”. Mungkin sebab dalam zaman saya ini kelakuan seperti ini memang common sangat. ramai kawan-kawan yang pergi melancong bersama, ataupon ajak lagi kawan lain yang couple jugak. mereka semue belum kahwin lagi, ade yang dah tunang ade yang stakat dating aje.

    Actually nak cakap pasal travelling dengan pasangan ni kalau ikut segi ugama memang salah. tapi saya berpendapat yang ade jugak bende positive yang boleh kami belajar dari ini.

    Cuba fikir kalau kita pergi holiday dengan gf atau bf kite, kami semue dapat pergi explore dunia bersama. Experience bende baru bersama, mungkin bende-bende yang tidak boleh kami buat di Singapura. Dapat jugak melihat pasangan kita, perangai dia, suka tak suka dia. Bonding katakan.

    Lagi satu, sebagai couple yang masih membesar atau tengah sibuk kerje, mungkin kite susah nak dapatkan mase untuk spend time bersama. Atau ibubapa tidak suka kite kluar ngan pasangan selalu sangat. Dan macam-macam alasan lain aje lah. Jadi, holiday inilah satu jawabnya untuk spend quality time together. kalau satu minggu jumpa sekali, atau satu bulan jumpa setakat brapa jam aja. This is the chance. This the only way dapat escape bersama buat sementara.

    Lagipon kalau nak ikut batasan pon boleh dengan tidur berasing. Memang impossible jugak kalau dua orang melancong tapi nak spend duit sewa dua bilik, tak masuk akal. kalau betul nak boleh lah order single bed, dah macam lain. tido kat couch pon boleh biar perempuan tido kat katil. Ikut hati masing-masing juga.

    Last, kalau kita pergi mcm gini bersendirian tidak lah lain sangat dengan kalau pergi holiday dengan pasangan dan family dia. Ok memang ada parents control sebab parents ada, tapi niat kalau bukan jahat then tetap ok kan?

     

    Salam,

    T

    Readers’ Contribution

  • Malaysia Attorney-General: Non-Muslims Rattled By Increasing Islamisation

    Malaysia Attorney-General: Non-Muslims Rattled By Increasing Islamisation

    NON-MUSLIMS are against Islamic criminal law amendments as they perceive them as another step towards the Islamisation of Malaysia, Attorney-General Mohamed Apandi Ali candidly told The Malaysian Insight yesterday.

    It does not help either that the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 (or better known by its Bahasa Malaysia acronym, RUU 355) Bill was mooted by PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang, the propagator of hudud laws in Kelantan in the 1990s, with Terengganu following suit later.

    Wading into the issue after Barisan Nasional decided not to table Hadi’s private member’s bill in line with the principle of consensus, Apandi said this issue was always going to be a problem.

    “When Hadi introduced this bill and tried to incorporate the 100 lashes and other severe punishment, the perception of non-Muslims was that hudud is coming, in the guise of the private member’s bill.”

    In fact, Apandi said, RUU 355 was simply to amend the existing Syariah Criminal Law Act to enhance punishments.

    It was also to give Muslims a sense of “feeling good”, as the shariah court currently is even lower than the powers of the magistrate’s court. RUU 355 was to have increased the power of the shariah court  to the position of a Sessions Court.

    “They (non-Muslims), however, read it as the beginning of an Islamic state government like the ones in Iran, Iraq and Syria, despite being told it was not applicable to non-Muslims. That is why the strong resistance.”

    On a personal note, Apandi is relieved that the ruling federal coalition had made a U-turn on RUU 355, as that meant he would not have to draft the amendments to Hadi’s bill, which he felt would have been opposed anyway.

    “When we draft, we have to show that it is a government bill, so in the first place, my office will have to make sure that it is different from Hadi’s draft.

    “So maybe, just maybe, we may exclude Sabah (and Sarawak), to make it different, and even reduce the sentences.

    “On the number of strokes, and even the sentences, I would have probably reduced them.

    “The difference from the current laws which the Syariah Court Criminal Jurisdiction covers, imprisonment is only up to three years. They want to change it to 30 years, such a big disparity.

    “As for fines, currently it is RM1,000, they want to increase it to RM100,000. The disparity is so big. People are going to start questioning the logic behind this.

    “So that is why the perception by the people outside will be ‘Oh, this is definitely going to be hudud’.”

    Apandi also said he had mentioned the matter to BN politicians and they have indicated their concerns to him.

    Many had said it would be difficult for them to explain to their supporters if the government had adopted Hadi’s bill.

    They had also warned that BN could lose seats, especially in Sarawak and Sabah, if the government did not make that RUU 355 U-turn.

    Apandi also feels RUU 355 was more political than legal.

    “The purpose and intention of this is to reap political mileage. Have you heard anybody from the public clamouring for increase of powers of the shariah court? No, nobody asking is asking for it, isn’t it?

    “To my reading, it is mainly political. He (Hadi) has to satisfy the states that have already established hudud laws.

    “People in those states are beginning to question him: ‘Hey, we have the law, why can’t we enforce them? What’s happened?’ He needs to say something to these states. And that is why he is trying to get federal support.

    “So, yes… it’s political!”

     

    Source: www.themalaysianinsight.com