‘Party-hopping is part and parcel of the democratic process’ – so says PKR Youth deputy chief Khairul Annuar Ahmad Zainuddin, according to a report in Malaysiakini yesterday.
This is he.
People, remember the face and remember the name.
Come next elections, should Khairul be nominated, you would do well to think twice whether you would want to give him your vote.
This man does not appear to understand the very basics of honouring a trust reposed unto an elected rep by the rakyat.
On a different note, SV Singam asked in a comment whether I have had a reply to my letter to DSAI.
No.
Posted in: People Power
The People's Parliament 
headache
March 25, 2008
Not a smart chap, is he?
He is unwittingly declaring to all and sundry that he has the democratic right to party-hop…How the hell did he get to be a deputy chieftain?
Well done, katak no satu!
SV Singam
March 25, 2008
I have been saying all along that I do not trust PKR. This is why it is paramount that DAP and PAS can find cause to be able to stand together without depending on PKR to be the glue.
Is there something we can do to make that happen? Perhaps this is already happening quietly.
Futurist
March 25, 2008
The man is simply playing Machivellian politics. He is trying to ward off UMNO onslaught more than he hopes to gain others. You scare others before they scare you.
Nimo
March 25, 2008
But there is something good in leaving one’s party. This is because we have few good people in UMNO and few others in MCA. What about if they join us in PAS, PKR and DAP? Otherwise the BN system will consume them. So, there is nothing wrong in fishing for the good before they are swallowed.
You can switch parties in the US and the UK without going for a by-election. The reason being the manifesto and the principles of the “other” party may appeal to someone and they join that party. We can encourage that without being too shoddy and mean as well. Remember, idealism is not born through sweet dreams. It has to be built through tedious and tiring process that has its own failures till up up up and up the perfection ladder.
Hsin
March 25, 2008
UMNO’s new found morality is laughable. While it preaches water, it drinks wine. There is more to the ear than meets the eye. If they were honest, they should have done it before when they had absolute control. Now that they feel weak, they are preaching morality. It is utter nonsense.
Basically this new measure is for political expediency and not about morality and political maturity and trust. Secondly, UMNO and BN want to suffocate all their elected members. For example, there is this obnoxious collective responsibility that allows no room for contradiction and diverse opinion. In this case, BN will continue to do its dirty things but whenever an MP feels the need to talk against it, he will be suppressed. If heels he is on the wrong side and therefore he should go to the better side, he will be denied since BN passed the BN anti-hopping legislation. So, it brings more harm than good. It denies people the fundamental right of association. It shackles people and denies them the right to oppose, evaluate later and correct things. It is immoral.
anti hop
March 25, 2008
Looks like PKR is a BN clone. People who hop from one party to another are nothing more than leeches, hopping to gain financially and get a position in the government. Yes, remember the faces of those who hop and those who support hopping.
citizen4u
March 25, 2008
Well, snakes come in different shapes, sizes and colours. Most camouflage themselves according to the environment.
In politics, snakes slither away when an opportunity presents itself.
If Khairul Anuar Ahmad Zainuddin thinks for once that party-hopping is morally right, then we don’t such snakes in out midst.
Abdullah
March 25, 2008
The man has a point. You didn’t give the condition he has given on BN being supported on the anti-hopping law. I think the PKR Youth wants Proportional system rather than the Westminster First-Past-The-Post system. This is because if we maintain the current system (1st-past-the-post), then one can argue that a candidate has been chosen by the majority solely due to his/her appeal, ability and input rather than a party. So he is correct in saying that BN should adopt the Proportional System if it is honest in curbing party hopping. I agree with him on this. Otherwise, under the current Westminster system, election is mainly candidate based so if someone leaves UMNO to Join PKR or PAS, he has the people’s (constituency) support. Many countries interpret it this way including UK.
Bob K
March 25, 2008
I hope the quote above is taken out of context as it can be very nuanced. I was going to blog about it but I think Tian made a good case here :
http://www.tianchua.net/en/2008/03/25/changing-rules/
petestop
March 25, 2008
The honorable thing to do if you want out, is to resign and let the Rakyat decide.
These kataks should be squashed and let them mati katak.
PKR should not apply the same formula as when they are in UMNO/BN, otherwise it is a repeat of the same formula.
Faz
March 25, 2008
The Statement can be best understood in the general context that he has given and not the small portion that was sliced here. The man doubted the sincerity of UMNO knowing what UMNO is made of. Then he explained why he is against it and compared notes with many things. That has to be considered lest we go astray.
Bob K
March 25, 2008
Why is there the presumption that PKR means ex UMNO/BN? In all fairness, the proportion of former UMNO/BN elements in PKR are a minority within the organisation.
Granted that elected public officials deserve to be scrutinised for what they say and do, but to apply a blanket presumption on the whole of PKR is to pour contempt at the sacrifices put in by many who have given up helluva lot to get into this fight in the first place and have continued to run the race amidst the threats, lost opportunities, and persecution for more than a decade.
PKR’s approach may seem too pragmatic or gradualist to some, but maybe that’s why REFORMASI was adopted as the clarion call rather than REVOLUSI.
Having said that, the watchdog role of civil society is greatly appreciated by many of us who do not have the propensity or personality to take up a more overt political role within the party. It does help keep us and our leaders honest. It just gets a wee bit tiresome to have to deal with unfair criticism and ad hominems all the time.
malayamuda
March 25, 2008
most of the BN MP’s probably didnt deserve to win in the first place. Their opponents probably got more votes had it not have been for the postal and ghost votes.
Syahredzan Johan
March 25, 2008
Bro,
I think we’re all getting a little too fixated with the party-hopping issue. No one has actually switched sides, the ‘rumours’ of the East Malaysian MPs have so far been proven untrue. So until and unless someone actually switches, let’s just wait and see.
2 weeks after our victory, already we’re on each other’s back. In in a time when we should be united to form a cohesive alternative to the ruling coalition (whose UMNO, I believe, has totally lost the plot), attacking each other will only weaken us.
You yourself said : Have faith in our elected representatives.
Syahredzan,
Thanks for the reminder.
Ok, let’s wait and see. I’m going to move on.
sandrav
March 25, 2008
One can move on, but I like better the adage that it is better not to trust anyone, including ones’ elected party. I think we should still keep up the onslaught to PKR, so that they understand how some of us feel. We are more than willing to give them a chance, but this might be the beginnings of the dismantling of their promises to the rakyat, and we should be reasonably alarmed when anything happens that goes against our sense of what PKR initially promised.
PKR got my vote in the last general elections, because I was sick of the old way of doing politics ( through secret meetings and silent politiking). When I listened to DSAI, I was inspired by his version of a new dawn in Malaysia, and what he emphasized as openness and honesty to the people.
Rather than news reports focussing on PKR fulfilling election promises, PKR has now chosen to go the way of BN, in terms of buying kataks over. And they have the audacity to rationalize this in the newspapers! This reminds me of the last scene of Animal Farm, and pardon me if I am over reacting and going back to being cynical over any kind of politics, but there it is. If I knew they were going to do this, I would not have voted PKR. I would have just stayed at home.
malayamuda
March 25, 2008
make these 5 states model states DSAI and come next GE we will definately reward you.
PKR/DAP/PAS BOLEH !!!
Discrimination69
March 25, 2008
Discrimination69
BR must not be seen to be power crazy. WE dont condone crossovers as it is immoral and unethical and for BR to accept such candidates, they are asking for trouble as they are putting rotten eggs into their own basket. Please focus on delivering your election promises and let the poor survive, then we will do the necessary to sweep clean BN in next GE when more young voters will listen to their parents and siblings how to vote. Show us that you are clean and efficient and fair to all or you might get the boot in next GE, be reminded that “Arrogance and Pride is the Beginning of Downfall”
SV Singam
March 25, 2008
I want to share with you what I wrote in Tian Chua’s blog…
Discussing why UMNO/BN want to prevent party hopping at this time is totally pointless, unless your objective is UMNO-bashing. I prefer to examine the ethical issues.
Tian Chua identifies some valid situations where party hopping may be justified. But we also are well aware that the freedom to hop has been abused to steal power. This situation will not change in the near future. There are many instances where freedoms have been restricted or removed because people abuse the system. That is a fact of life that we have to accept. Politics is no exception.
The bottom line here is the will of the people who voted. GE12 was radically different from previous elections in that people voted for opposition parties irrespective of the race or party affiliation of the candidate. Let us not delude ourselves that it was otherwise. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that those people voting for BN candidates wanted BN to stay in power.
If we now accept BN turncoats, we are helping them to break the trust of their electorate. That is unethical. By doing that, we put ourselves at the same level as the BN parties.
I suggest one of 2 solutions.
1. The person resigns his seat and seeks a fresh mandate in a by-election.
2. The person leaves his party and remains an independent, voting according to his conscience.
Both of these solutions will help us evade the ethical dilemma and demonstrate the higher moral ideal that we strive for.
But if the urgency of taking over the federal government is given precedence, then we are no better than BN!
garfield city
March 25, 2008
One need not just WONDER why BN with UMNO as “taiko” could just simply rule us, election in election out, judging by those comments that target DSAI & PKR for their brickbats in this issue of party frogs. Haven’t they forgotten the shrewd & snaky tactics employed by the fallen demon whenever it lost a battle. For 50 years, we suffered so much (needless to detail) & now we (peolpe’s power by BR) are presented with a golden opportunity blessed by GOD to forsee an imminent change at Parliament level.We should be welcoming this SPECIAL GIFT from GOD but instead we go about criticizing DSAI & PKR for welcoming possibly good & capable BN people into our fold to be involved in a brand new struggle for the betterment of Malaysia. Some people out there must be brainless to even think DSAI is a simple politician as if he doesn’t what he is doing. Leave him alone & don’t sabotage him further or I would suspect you people must be a devil in disguise (BN supporters). Or if you think you can succeed as a “gentleman politician” you can always avail yourself in GE2013. I’ll bet you will even lose your deposit.
garfield,
Gift from God? Morely likely a test from God!
Rest assured I will not leave DSAI alone as long as I am unsure of his politics. It’s up to him to assure us.
Sam
March 25, 2008
I personally think that all the while he is too ambitious and i don’t think he can do better in the future than what he did when he was in UMNO. And i don’t think Malaysian today would allow any person to demolish the democratic system.
RAJ RAMAN
March 25, 2008
katak/frog,i will rather call them grass hopper.why anwar in a hurry to form a goverment with grass hopper.can he trust them whom may not have principles.they jump for political gain.anwar have 5 state to prove to us he can make the state more clean from corrupt bn.maybe its tough for him due to bn control our tax payer money,but by showing us he can unite us and prosper this 5 state,anwar is the next pm in waiting.que a bit lah anwar.dont jump q like grass hopper.learn from your past.u came up to fast to be deputy pm and you paid the price in jail.thanks.raj raman.race;dreaming to be malaysian putra.religion;my problem to anwser to god when time comes.(haris, dsai to buzy to reply to u.he might forgotten who u r.he is busy try to catch grass hopper,not frog wish very easy)
r
March 25, 2008
this are all the katakis of semangat 46 family breed tats y they say this sort of nonsence!
lung
March 25, 2008
If he has not been misquoted, it would do well if PKR & any BR party clamps down hard on such characters.
If they don’t, rest assured, the rakyat will do that for them.
Malaysians may be generally polite & timid but times have changed. We have shown no inhibitions at the polls & BR should need to reminder on that.
lung
March 25, 2008
I meant “no reminder”
Bobby Lim
March 25, 2008
What’s wrong with party-hopping? It’s acceptable in many democracies. Aren’t we a democratic country?
In the States, a Democrat congressman can vote on the side of the Republicans and a Republican can vote in favor of the Democrats. And they ain’t ashamed to do it in public and will not get rebuked by their respective party leaders. This is true democracy, my friends!
Over here in Malaysia, MPs and ADUNs (especially those in the BN) have to “toe the party line” and vote according to the party’s stand on issues in Parliament. In other words, there is no dissenting voice. Even if the issue at hand is against his/her conscience, an MP/ADUN has to act like a zombie and vote according to the party leadership’s instructions otherwise the party “Whip” will be used against him/her. Where is the ethics?
Look at the Terengganu MB crisis. A few days ago, I read a report (true or not, I don’t know) somewhere that the 22 ADUNs were “locked” up in a room and forced to sign a document supporting the PM’s nominee otherwise they could not go home to have dinner (or supper?) with their families or girlfriends! Anyone else interested to talk about ethics? Don’t need to ‘cos there ain’t any in Malaysian politics.
Faz
March 25, 2008
If you believe in what the MSM says or take points out of their contexts, we will land in a ditch. Some people pretend to be good and idealist not knowing that we measure what they say against our own reality. Blaming others or suspecting them due to ossified thinking steeped in personal prejudice and phobia will blind some people in seeing the hard truth and forging ahead for a better Malaysia in the long run.
The allegations made against PKR are engineered by nefarious elements and they have no resemblance whatsoever of the truth. Of all PKR MPs, none was an UMNO MP before. Their mentality is therefore different only that they are realistic than DAP and PAS which exlusively represent “Chinee schools” and “Islam’s affairs”. We need to know to our enemy and read between the lines and think ahead rather than getting emotional and regurgitating hackenyed mantra that was implanted in our heads along time ago. Chinua Achebe says: “We need to soil our hands a bit for us to build a better nation. We need to know the ways of the corrupt before we demolish the corrupt.” Welcome to Malaysia.
guabaysong
March 25, 2008
If an elected representative belonging to a party identifies with another party more due to certain reasons, why is he not allowed to join the other party?
I agree with YB TC. Nothing wrong with switching parties for the correct reasons. Ideally, after doing so, an elected rep would resign to pave way for a by-election.
Haris purposely took Khairul’s words out of context. Personal vendetta perhaps?
At least Khairul challenged Najib while some prominent self-proclaimed Half-Malay lawyer did not.
whatever, lah
atanck
March 25, 2008
gosh… things start to unravel…
i dun feel good a. lready. let’s stop the frogging
J.H
March 25, 2008
PAS rejects any legislation of anti-hopping bill saying it is UMNO’s political manuevering and not about democracy
http://www.bernama.com/
Now you know why PKR also is opposed to that cheap stunt. Malik Imtiaz too is opposed to this new BN cheat.
guabaysong
March 25, 2008
Mr Haris: Sorry for the double post, but can you please attach the following to my previous post?
“To be fair, Khairul was paraphrased in the Malaysiakini article. There was a chance that the author may have took things out of context.
Haris had maliciously left inverted commas to make it look like a quote. It was devious of Haris because he is a lawyer and should understand the implication of his punctuations”
Thank you. You play your role, I play mine.
I apologise to Khairul and to all readers for the inadvertant use of inverted commas when I reproduced the excerpt from Malaysiakini.
Gua’s suggestion that it was actuated by malice is another one of his fanciful flights.
Sharing
March 25, 2008
LET DUST OF EMOTIONAL BE SETTLED AFTER GE12
AND BE RATIONAL TO GO FOR A BETTER FUTURE!
WHERE HUMAN RIGHTS ARE TO BE EXERCISED
FOR BOTH CANDIDATES AND VOTERS!
———————————————–
Let’s realize that under the Provokes of Bersih, Hindraf (backed by DSAI, I suppose!)
GE12 was the MOST emotional GE ever
leading in many cases Voting Oppositions disregard of even DAP/PAS/PRK not to mention Candidates at all!
Same for some Candidates when choosing Party.
For those Candidates not parachuting, the Chance that Voters had voted because of the Person than the Party is there.
DSAI be taken as Opportunist as well as some “promoted” by The Star one or two years ago, for safety sake should be in this category.
DSAI has used “the avoid of 3-corner fight” not on basis of a better Candidate but more chance for PRK.
This leads to the failure of Sarawak and Sabah, I suppose!
After the Dusty GE12, it should be time for Voters and Candidate to find the rational way out!
CHANGING PARTY should be encouraged with a fair way along Human Rights!
Hooping should be defined as those changing for personal gain WITH the ignorance of the Rakyats!
Anti-hooping would be confusing and misleading if this is not well defined to including any changing of Party!
Changing Party is NORMAL and be encouraged to change to BR if those are genuine in believe and to practice Human Rights!
It is time to layout out What are Human Rights and How are they to be practiced!
Changing of Party is one of these for both Voters and MP!!
Please wash the “Political Stage” with more Legal aspects towards Human Rights!
Many Politicians especially from BN are too Addict in playing Political tricks than legal Obligations!
STOP THE TRICKS and Tell People the Proper Legal Way to go!!
Hiding the fact that without 1/2 of Parliament Seats nothing can be changed in Malaysia is a Political Trick!
Those practiced, now have to confess and put things right for People to realize and walk!
If encouraging more capable MP to change to BR properly can take over 1/2 of Parliament Seats before GE13.
Please do so!!
Instead of Anti-hooping Act, an Act to allow a proper switching should be drafted!
Many other BIAS acts will come if BR cannot get hold of at least 1/2 the Parliament seats!
A PM without Political Trick with practice of Human Rights will be the Right PM for Malaysia or it will be again a disaster ahead!
EMERGENCY IS TO GOT HOLD OF PARLIAMENT FOR NECESSARY AMENDMENT OF CONSTITUTION & LAWS!!
koolgeek
March 25, 2008
just vote these ppl out should they ever get nominated.
zik
March 25, 2008
Jumping to BR from corrupted BN VS UMNO-PERDERHAKA TO OUR BELOVED KING… I give my vote to the 1st one.A leader FROM A PARTY(which party you knowla) who didN’t respect the wishes of our Royal Highness..Go to Trengganu la this time.. I’m sure a lot of them regreted voted for UMNO..AND THEY WISH THEIR ADUN lompat to PAS..
Beh Sai Kong
March 25, 2008
As others have indicated, this is not as simple a matter as we wish it to be and we who advocate strict applications of moral rules need to realise the complexity involved here. Look at it this way. One of the things the rakyat had (or should have)voted for is the personal integrity of the candidates. But what is the implication of this? The implication is that the candidate must be willing at all times to stand by his or her own conscience. The test of this is that the elected MP must cast his or her vote in parliament in accordance to personal conscience. However, in this the BN whip often stands in his or her way. In BN you either vote as prescribed by the whip or you land in big trouble and would be subjected to disciplinary action.
Now the question is: What do the voters want from their MP’s- always vote as dictated by the party whip, or vote according to conscience?
If our answer is according to conscience, then the MP concerned would in effect have gone against his or her own party. Now to hear most of the comments posted here, it would seem that to go against the party under whose banner you have campaigned for election is in effect to go against the wish of those who voted for you (?)
The issue is complex. In earlier posts on this very blog, it has sometimes been vigorously (and quite rightly) argued that it is not just the candidate’s party which should determine our vote but the personal integrity of the candidate as well.
To say then that voters only vote for a party rather than the individual candidate is at best only half the truth. The other half of the truth is that voters would expect the candidate they had voted for to stand by his or her own conscience.
In the realities we find ourselves in after the recent elections whereby the BN only needs to lure away just 8 opposition MP’s to win back their much sought after two-thirds parliamentary majority whereas the opposition would need to win over a whopping total of 30 BN MP’s to barely form a simple majority government, we need to ask ourselves which is in fact the greater wish of the voters who created the political tsunami. Is our greater wish to deny the BN government a two-thirds majority or is it to support a so-called “party-hopping” bill?
If you think that it is a better idea to distrust DSAI and instead trust BN with its supposed wish to pass a law against party-hopping out of their purity of heart, you will in all probability be inadvertently helping BN to achieve their own objectives. By the time this anti-party hopping bill is passed, most probably they would have won back the two-thirds majority and by the time it is passed, the doors will be nicely closed to prevent a counter strike. Case closed. We lose out again.
Besides, should we deny the people of Sabah and Sarawak their right to show their displeasure to BN? It is after all their number of seats in parliament which keep BN in power and yet BN could not care less about the 20-point agreement under which the two states had made their decision to join Malaysia. This is what their MP’s are talking to DSAI about while the mainstream media is crying out “Foul!”
Beh,
Please see my rejoinder to Kim Chan’s comment to this post.
Annoyed
March 25, 2008
This is nothing but opportunism at best: to go with what looks promising for now. That being the case, one wonders what idealogy he subscribes to for the long term. It would seem his idealogy will change along with his loyalties. Shifting loyalties is questionable ethics.
DR SURESH KUMAR
March 26, 2008
It is really dissapointing to see such a statement from Khairul Annuar but it does’t come as a surprise to me as i had envisaged it from the beginning,nevertheless I urge everyone to remain calm and wait for a reply from DSAI himself in response to bro haris’epistle.I hope it is forthcoming,if it doesn’t then i assume that PKR is indeed taking the rakyat who voted them in for a ride and we rakyat will then decide their destiny,’makkal sakthi’is still very much alive.Do not give too much of importance to Khairul at this point of time.
Justice69
March 26, 2008
Hahahaha…WUAHAHAHAHAHA!!! This is tactic politic la bro. Scare BN a bit…now BN crying all honour, no hopping, this and that. Actually, BN is scare now, looking over their shoulders, scare of the Katak. If I were DSAI, I would advice my liutenants to say this…scare the BN a bit…make them shake. I like when he says, why only 23, but not 53 hoppers….what a cheeky fella…hahahaha. I like DSAI!!! Bro, don’t be dungu la….take it easy. This fella is bright chap…
robin hood
March 26, 2008
Can u marry someone caught bed hopping and divorced?
Can u really trust that person whole heartedly from the bottom of your heart?
Can u breathe deeply and ask yourself honestly and truthfully before letting out any shrieks of holier than thou indignant replies of forgiveness ???
Product of the System
March 26, 2008
I was pretty skeptical of Anwar Ibrahim prior to the elections.
Now with all this new faces we’re seeing of PKR, i personally feel justified in a way.
Justified but not proud.
http://unwantedcitizen.blogspot.com/2008/03/do-you-trust-this-guy.html
http://unwantedcitizen.blogspot.com/2008/03/from-umno-to-pkr-hegemony.html
I hope I’m wrong. Still wishing for change.
kim
March 26, 2008
Haris, when we worked on Getting A New MP, we said we want a MP that represents the voters, not a MP that represents the party. Whoever the MP we have elected must first speak for the people, not the party.
I participated on that program because I agree with the idea. Now, this new call from you seems to suggest that we have elected the party to represent us, not that individual. Don’t you think this seems to go against the very spirit we worked on earlier?
I am not convinced of this course.
Kim
Kim,
Premised on the aspirations of our initiative, let us assume you did vote LIm Lip Eng of the DAP.
Whilst he is from DAP, you voted him and expected him to represent you first before the party.
Suppose that now you hear that he wants to join MCA.
Are you ok with this? Do you want to know why? Do you want an explanation from him? Are you not concerned that by switching to a different party from that which he was aligned to when you elected him, he may not live up to your expectations?
I do not question his constitutional right to dissociate with DAP and associate now with MCA. That is guaranteed to him under Article 10.
I merely contend that he has a moral obligation to revert to you and the other voters, explain his reasons and get your sanction.
Chong
March 26, 2008
The thing is lompat just started to be unethical when BM MPs trying to jump out of their ship.
The best thing to do is jump and have a re-election.
Vivien
March 26, 2008
I urge everyone not to look at this issue on the surface only. Yes, it is immoral for one to switch
party after it has won a state or parliamentary seat.
But, if a person who has joint a particular political party is not allowed to hop to another party, then it is undemocratic. What happens if he is not agreeable to the party’s ideologies or what happens if he has a fallout with certain members of the party. This happen time to time. Think before you judge or comment. This is a complicated issue.
Vivien,
Please see my rejoinder to Kim Chan’s comment to this post
SV Singam
March 26, 2008
Sharing, I’m sure you are aware that constitutional amendments require a 2/3 majority vote. I sure hope BR will never get that kind of majority, whether in parliament or at state. If there is a danger of that happening, I will probably vote for BN or whoever is in the opposition at that time.
As to constitutional amendments, what I would like to see happen is for the unnecessary amendments of the UMNO regime be reversed. Let us go back as much as possible to the original document that our founding fathers designed for us.
Kathy
March 26, 2008
I agree with SV Singam that it is all a matter of ethics. But then, do politicians have ethics?
I think the most important thing that all elected reps need to do now is to start working on real issues that matters to the people who voted for them.
Is there a performance appraisal that can be conducted on the elected reps by the public on their work performance in every six months to a year period? Why wait every four to five years to tell them that they are not doing the work right by voting for the other party?
kaki ayam
March 26, 2008
haris, didn’t have time to read all the precious comments. But would like to thank you for highlighting this issue to us. Like most people, I would prefer representative who wish to jump ship to resign and have a new by election. Anything less would be unethical.
kakiayam
alan
March 26, 2008
I think u guys are too emotional. All these talks about party hopping seems more like a strategy by DSAI. It has been a form of psychological stress for BN that they had to send an investigation team to check on their counterparts in East Malaysia. Now BN is on the defensive! Even Yong Teck Lee said it was an insult to have ppl from the Peninsula to spy on them. They (BN) began to tremble over just a few statements made. Why don’t we take advantage of this little leverage instead of questioning DSAI or PKR or the alternative front or Barisan Rakyat on their motives? Even if it is true that DSAI/PKR have met those ppl from BN, you have to understand that the BN ppl that comes to DSAI/PKR and not DSAI that went over to meet them! And it is also with conditions that no money talks or positional talks be brought up as those ppl (BN) are looking for better options and alternatives rather than staying in BN. Do look at the positive side of ppl. We must look forward to the future and accept those we can make positive changes. As I see it, those BN ppl who wants to hop to the alternative front are leaders of their communities. I believe the call for change can be done from top-down approach and not just bottom-up. As community leaders, their supporters would be more open to understand and support the leaders action. Do understand that maybe in the past these BN leaders had done some wrongdoings and still their supporters support them and as true leaders don’t you think their supporters will support them more if their leaders do the right thing and explain to their supporters/ppl on their actions for the best interest of the ppl? The effect will be overwhelming!
alan,
Your last sentence makes my case.
Yes, explain to the voters before you defect. Get their concurrence.
Sagaladoola
March 26, 2008
I would like to say this.
Party-hopping is indeed a democratic process. It is a freedom of choice.
However, this fella should bear in mind here the reason people voted for him. In the future, if people choose not to vote for him or campaign against him because of his stand on “party-hopping”, that would be part and partial of democratic process as well.
🙂
Regards,
http://sagaladoola.blogspot.com
Saga,
The democratic process envisages our participation in governance thru the election of a rep who has taken a certain position on issues, either by his articulation of the same or, as often happens, by his association with a political party whose positions on certain issues are a matter of public knowledge.
When that rep chooses to exercise his constitutional right to dissociate from the party on whose platform he contested and won, and then associate with another that may not espouse the same stand as the former, this has little to do with the democratic process.
What this rep must, in all good conscience do, is revert back to those who chose him and get a fresh mandate. This is the ideal. This would honour the democratic process.
Pratamad
March 26, 2008
SORRY IF I HAVE TO SHOUT A BIT HERE.
People, please be fair and comment only under the full context. In all statements about defection of BN MPs, KeADILan has always insisted that any such defection is way of the respective BN MPs endorsing KeADILan’s political principles, and absolutely no financial or rewards of any kind be involved. In other words, this is plain simple freedom of association, as enshrined in our Constitution.
For a more complete legal and moral analysis, you should read a very good piece in Disquiet by Malik.
Allow me to say that article like the above is taking matter out of context and it’s not fair to the person implicated.
sing lau
March 26, 2008
When the sea rages, the scum begin to float and manifest itself.
Haris sir, please expose all such low principle-less character.Too many politicians (I didn’t say all) are just liars.
SV Singam
March 26, 2008
Kathy,
We can expect politicians to be governed by factors other than ethics. Pragmatism and expediency come to the fore. Dirty tricks are not far behind. That is why it is the responsibility of the electorate to keep politicians straight.
You’re right, once every 4 or 5 years is not enough. It is exactly for this reason that PP is in the process of forming RepWatch Committees. But RepWatch Committees can only advice. If the politician chooses to ignore the electorate, he can only be sacked when the contract of employment (the electoral mandate) expires.
KevinP
March 26, 2008
my thoughts on those kataks… I just hope they focus on running the five states and make the difference in Parliament for now.
http://malaysianjoe.blogspot.com/2008/03/hippety-hop-hop.html
ladyRP
March 26, 2008
If you want to hop party, go ahead (it is your right which party you want to be) BUT resign first and let the rakyat decide wheather they still want you. On another note, personally i do not trust DSAI but i voted PKR (BR) simply to let BN know arrogance is not the way. As each day passes, i’m filled with gloom and i asked myself is BR really any different from that of BN? Hmmm que sera sera
Bobby Lim
March 26, 2008
Hello People, ethics and morals in politics went out the window after the 1969 GE. It doesn’t exist anymore.
The only reason why UMNO is so crazy about passing an anti-hopping law so soon after the 12GE is to save itself, and the BN, from sinking. Why didn’t it pass the law earlier when it had the 2/3 majority for the past 40 years? Why now, suddenly? Think! It’s because they were doing so well politically that the opposition had no ghost of a chance of unseating the ruling party, even if 30 of the latter’s MPs became “kataks.” But now, everybody seems to have awakened from their slumber and “kataks” and “frogs” have become the latest catchword.
There are hordes of very unhappy people in UMNO (and BN) with some of them openly challenging the leadership. Did they ever do that before the 12GE? No. You don’t have to believe me but you can read all about it on the web. The BN just realised that they could very well be on the Opposition bench in Parliament if something was not done quickly, based on “ETHICS and MORALS.” Enter the so-called anti-hopping law.
By supporting this law, we are playing into the BN’s hands. Of course, the other side of the coin is that Opposition MPs are also denied the chance to turn into “frogs” as well.
Ah well, just let the MPs do what they want if it’s done in the best interest of the voters and the country. This is a free(?) country after all, or is it not? If you’re unhappy with your MP jumping ship, you still have the chance to vote him/her out come 13GE.
This is just my personal opinion.
Bobby,
I am not in favour of any anti-hopping law. Read my rejoinder to Kim Chan’s comment to this post.
smallworld
March 26, 2008
To,Haris Ibrahim
Are you going to register “Parti Barisan Rakyat”.
Short name is – PBR.
PBR sure win 80 % of all votes in next GE13.
If PKR agree to hoping, that is bad sign.
Syabas. Barisan Rakyat.
Paul Warren
March 26, 2008
A lot of people on both sides of the divide have been locked up in cages of their own making. From politicians to voters perceptions controls their actions most times.
Just because a lot of Malays voted PKR,PAS or DAP does not necessarily mean their perceptions have necessarily shifted. A lot of that vote was a registration of anger and frustration. Similarly, a lot of those who voted in BN did so out of a sense of inevitability, fear, conditioning and some maybe even duress or profit.
The morning of the 9th March, the day after, must surely have rattled the cages these people have been put in. There are those who wanted to give their votes to opposition, now regretting, that they did not really mean to have the opposition win 4 states. Yes they wanted to hurt UMNO, but not destroy it. Yet others who voted BN out of fear or whatever, may probably feel the sense of liberty pass them by. I am quite certain many would have sensed a liberation and emancipation of themselves having voted the opposition for the first time.
Coming back to leaping frogs. Can a voter leap? Can a voter regret upon emancipation from his actions of the immediate past?
Maybe I am underestimating the voter. But the under informed, the suppressed, those acting in fear, those who only know the confines of their coconut shells have not really had a free vote. I get the sense the Sabah and Sarawak political parties too conduct themselves on a certain premise. But then again these guys on the East keep changing their premises as often as I go to the barbers to have my hair cut. Obviously they have some uniquely selfish objectives for themselves and the parties have crafted themselves into coalitions on the assumption that that will be the surest way of getting at what they want. And they will jump if a better deal was available elsewhere, and this they have proven many a time.
I am stating an assumption here that Sabahans vote their parties in not because they are BN but so that they will make the best deal for them. Like they vote PBS, so that Pairin can then make the best deal for them. Well, Pairin can make a better deal right now for his constituents if he crossed just as he and others have done so many times before. Of course they then got to be educated about what ethical politics is all about!
Why I am prepared for frogs this time around? Well, I fear another day of the country under Badawi and UMNO’s pretense of themselves being the hereditary governors and custodians of our country.
Just imagine, if we all operate on a certain premise, surely UMNO too will have to factor the possibility that this might just be the last term for them to be ruling. Now, if we all believe them to be a bunch of opportunists who will plunder and pillage, what will they be capable of doing?
Paul,
Please read all my postings and rejoinders on this issue.
I have never once said do not do a ‘frog’.
What I ask is that if elected reps are going to jump ship, go back to those who put them in the assembly, and to not make this decision without prior consultation with the those who elected you.
The most obvious form of consultation would be a by-election. That, however, may not be the only way.
Obama
March 26, 2008
Getting worry that what people say “Same wine different bottles only” of PKR.
Still believe many wise men said, “never trust politicians”
Birdseye
March 26, 2008
Sharing,
“Instead of Anti-hooping Act, an Act to allow a proper switching should be drafted!”
Much of ding-dong here centers on whether party-hopping is a good thing. From an ethical viewpoint, I do not think it is proper. An elected MP or ADUN who does that lets down the party on whose coat tails he had clung to during the election process as well as the people who had voted for him on party grounds. Like those who really did not care whether the candidate was qualified or not. Only thing that mattered was he must be contesting under a non-BN party – and did not have a silly haircut! Principles espoused by this grand People’s Declararation were discarded in favour of the more expedient principle to oust the BN.
I hope an act to stop party-hopping will materialize. Parties most like to benefit from party hopping are naturally lukewarm about the proposal. That’s just cynicism at work.
What would an act to allow proper switching be like? It is, in essence, anti-hopping legislation, right?
Birdseye,
I am personally not in favour of any anti-hopping legislation. I think its prohibition should rest on a moral footing, the sanction for such act without consultation with the voters being delivered at the next general elections.
It should be left to people power.
Sid
March 26, 2008
I haven’t read all the responses, but are people really up in arms about this?
This is politics we’re talking about, and Haris, you should know that a politician is a politician is a politician.
In fact, this guy should be commended for going against the flow and saying what he believes. Anyone who actually thinks DAP, PAS, BN or any party would be against hopping if it was in their favour is really naive.
KShan
March 26, 2008
Well, well, why should anyone of us be surprised? PKR has yet to explain why a few of its candidates failed to show up during the nomination day in this past election!!
Lots of people are voting PKR simply to punish BN. Do they really trust PKR? I can’t say for others but definitely not “many” of my friends/colleagues/family mambers.
KevinP
March 26, 2008
I concur with Paul Warren’s views in that Malaysians perception has not actually changed and they actually voted out of anger and frustration. Then again that is another topic another day. What I do not agree is to outwardly soliciting for frogs and yet on another hand you say that you jump on OUR TERMS.
They won the seat on their principles and terms didnt they? The people voted them because they believe in their terms and principles, so for me, these frogs are just political opportunists and it would be best for PKR/DAP/PAS to have a stand that anyone wishing to jump will need to relinquish the seat and re-contest it under another banner. That would be best but darn… these politicians are such opportunists… I was wrong.. they are not the pawn… we..the voters ARE.
http://malaysianjoe.blogspot.com/2008/03/why-bn-lost.html
Paul Warren
March 26, 2008
O.k Haris, sorry if I have suggested otherwise. I guess I am looking at the expedient way and in a sense with Sabah politics especially where they seem to gravitate around their leaders it would appear the leaders have carte blanche approval of what they should do. Voters there never punished their elected representatives for frogging all the time. So why now? I bet they can pull off a better bargain for themselves as a state.
My own motivation here derives from the worry of the sacking that might happen of the country if UMNO or sections of it operate under the premise of it losing grip in 5 years.
headache
March 26, 2008
First thing first – I read here and on a few other blogs that the US permits kataks (expressly or implied?). However, it would be useful if we are also provided details and instances of such hopping and its repercussion (if any) – would appreciate if someone could provide links: it would be help us tremendously in understanding the pros and cons of hopping.
Food for thought – why can’t we have an anti-hopping law? It could be enacted in such a way so as not to conflict with the constitution – e.g. not a legislation that ‘forbids’ but one that ‘conditionally permits” hopping. The right of the individual (the YB) versus the right of the other individuals affected by the YB (the voters). e.g “He can associate with another party if he resigns from all position and titles (anything else) he gained or obtained due to his association with the current party”. In fact, the statement actually sounds like a employment contract – which is lawful and does not infringe the constitution.
I am not a constitutional lawyer (whatever that means). However, the right to associate cannot be a blanket right – e.g. even if the constitution permits freedom of speech, should the papers be given a blank cheque to print whatever they want (re. dutch printing of caricatures comes to mind)?
alan
March 26, 2008
Yes, the elected rep in “ideal” world should ask or inform their supporters the logic and reason why they want to jump ship. However, being a leader you should have a clear conscience of things that will benefit the ppl you lead. A true leader will see that somethings are for the ppl benefit and their own supporters sometimes can’t comprehend what it is all about. Bitter things doesn’t necessarily mean it is bad. Sometimes it is for our own good. If all leaders need to ask for consent from every one of the supporters for anything good he wants to implement then he better steps down and ask someone else with courage to be the leader. Take for example our own prophet Muhammad SAW. Why would the prophet wrote letters to state leaders (i.e King Kisra from Persia) to accept and embrace Islam. There’s a simple reason that as state leader, you’d expect he’ll be able to control and advise the ppl.
As a leader you have the right to hear the opinion of your supporters but the decision lies on the shoulder of the leader himself. And I believe those BN MPs would have done that and conclude that for the best interest of the ppl in their constituents and Malaysian ppl, he must do the right thing that is to RESIGN from BN and join the ideals of the Barisan Rakyat. And again, it shall be done as per stated earlier with no conditions attached either monetary or positional gains.
Sagaladoola
March 26, 2008
Haris said:
What this rep must, in all good conscience do, is revert back to those who chose him and get a fresh mandate. This is the ideal. This would honour the democratic process.
COMMENT:
Yup, agreed. That was what I was trying to say albeit in an indirect way.
🙂
Regards,
http://sagaladoola.blogspot.com
SV Singam
March 26, 2008
Paul, I have the same worry that you have about UMNO looting freely and with ACA and police protection over the next 5 years. But I am compartmentalising my feelings.
If we compromise on a principle now because of expediency, the foundation of the future political climate is being laid on very weak ground. That is why it is important to stand firm on ethical issues.
If, as some PKR stalwarts claim, Anwar is simply grandstanding to shake the BN, that is fine. But I expect him to be a pragmatist who will not allow niceties of ethics to divert him from his goal.
On our part, we have to put the politicians on notice – our stand is clear. If they truly represent us, they will comply. Should they fail to do so, we will see them again in 4 – 5 years.
If we don’t stand firm, we will be letting down People Power.
Sharing
March 26, 2008
SV Singam,
Thanks your comment to my post.
1. I believe we both are casting Doubt on what DSAI has done or is doing.
2. Thanks for advising that 2/3 is needed for amendment of Constitution which I am not in the picture. Hope you realize the roots of problems start with the “Monopoly” of the Parliament without Independent Houses of Legislation, Execution & Monitoring or may be even a Penalty clause on MP not doing the job. Therefore, amendment of Constitution is a MUST, including necessary Job Specification of the Ministries and the Ministers and the Penalties clause of not doing the job.
3. A lot of Laws are BIAS that hinder any possible change. Therefore, getting hold of enough Parliament seats to amend Laws is also fundamental to any possible change. I assume 1/2 of the Parliament Seats is required to achieve in this case.
3. Most probably your contradiction of not wishing 2/3 majority to happen but wishing amendment of Constitution is confused by your hesitation if BR can get 2/3 majority?
IF THIS IS THE ONLY WAY AND UNDERSTOOD BY ALL MALAYSIAN, with A CLEAR AND FAIR EC, I am sure it will come!
I am sure with a Clear & Fair EC and if BR had been pushing for 1/2 of the Parliament Seats, this already could have achieved.
What is needed may contradict with what can be achieved!
But Conditions required should be well layout and should not be skipped!!
———-
Birdseye,
1. If Hooping is defined as Unfair switch as defined in my post, it should be stopped which in line with part of what you think that is what switching could be about. But it should not stop a Change for Better for the Rakyats which you may miss.
2. Parties in Malaysia is not yet Human Rights orientated. And, Candidates have to get endorsement from Party before they can start. Therefore, the kind of loyalty in commensurate with the efforts of the Party onto the Candidates should not be demanded at the present moment. Along the line of Fairness for ALL, a Healthy switching should be allowed and legislated or amendment on those clause around MP, if any.
Anti-hooping without allowing a healthy switching is against Human Rights. So, this topic is worth debating and watch until all are clear with its Principle and Direction when switching can be with Good intentions as well as BAD!!
The next question most probably is
What should it be (on possible switching) and
What can be done or cannot be done by the Opposition in Parliament when it comes!!
I assume the worst situation, without 1/2 of the Parliament seats, BR cannot stop BN to do whatever they want in “Anti-hooping”!!
bloggersiva
March 26, 2008
talk practically & logically, whether the concern person is fit for the designation or not, this is the arguement, i would like to appreciate the comment given by the Paul warren, well said paul …..
garfield city
March 26, 2008
Hey, fellas! Our country is called Malaysia and not UTOPIA, make no mistake. I fully agree with alan Mar26 8.58am & Bobby Lim Mar26 10.48am whom i also believe are TRUE supporters of BR. If one has decided to back BR and want change then let us sit back & relax while we enjoy watching our beloved BR leaders slug it out with BN. If anybody regrets now for his/her choice of BR, they can always have a different choice come next GE. Where were these people who talk about ETHICS when we were once ruled by a Mamak? These same poeple cannot even differentiate between Ethic and Strategic. Can someone imagine the time,effort & cost incurred in going back to meet so-called supporters for their opinion? Can anyone guarantee the feedback from them is wise and trustworthy, and not words of sabotage? Seasoned DSAI is wise in his plan, and we don’t try to be smarter than him. Why didn’t u people dare stand up agaisnt that mamak when he was in power, why the silence then, and now the clamouring for DSAI to exercise political ethics? Don’t ever doubt him now for what he had suffered those past years. U fellas will only know the true meaning of politics after u have gone through all the unjust political persecutions and even while in jail,your food would be poisoned for u. Until then, u people will never truly know the meaning of TEARS.
garfield,
This is all getting rather tiresome
Steve F.
March 26, 2008
Haris,
I’m not sure I got you right. The way I understand it is you are now saying that you are not against party-hopping if the elected representatives have reverted to the rakyat who elected him/her.
However, your denunciation of Khairul makes no mention of this at all. I can understand if your current position is an afterthought and if it is, you should state so in the main post as an addendum.
The way you left the post above is to the effect of: “since Khairul said that party-hopping is part and parcel of democracy, we should think twice before voting for him the next round if he stands for election”.
Steve,
Please read my letter to DSAI.
Two concerns were raised.
One, enticements or inducements to defect. This, DSAI has said, is not on.
Second, getting the concurrence of the voters.
I don’t think my current position is an afterthought. This has been my position from the outset.
For me, it was troubling that the deputy youth chief of PKR took the view that party-hopping is part and parcel of democracy.
In my view, frogging must be seen as a potential disruption to a democratic process, and not the norm.
Bobby Lim
March 26, 2008
To everyone above.
I’m sure you are aware that 15-16 of the Parliamentary seats were won by the BN on questionable grounds.
Two most talked-about seats are Lumut and Rembau. If there had been no malpractices by the UMNO/BN/EC, these 15-16 seats could be in BR’s hands. There is every possibility that the voters voted for the BR in these places but last minute postal and ghost votes turned the tide in the BN’s favor. If that’s true, then the voters somehow voted in the “wrong” candidate, an MP not of their choice. Put it another way, the voters and the BR were “robbed” in broad daylight. So, where do ethics and morals come in?
Would it be ethically and morally wrong then if 15-16 MPs from the BN jumped ship and join the BR? Some of you would say so. If that’s so, then I hope you will also be “hantam-ing” UMNO/BN/EC for being without ethics and morals in the other blogs. Then you can count yourself as being a fair and just minded Malaysian.
Bobby,
Where is the evidence in respect of your contentions re : the 15-16 seats?
If the evidence is at hand, the answer is an Election Petition to challenge the result.
If there is no evidence…
KShan
March 26, 2008
Wow! The new spokeperson of DSAI! All the “u people”, “u fellas” spitting all over… phew!! Probably this is how DSAI addresses others who are not his kind.
pavlova
March 26, 2008
Yes haris, i can see this is getting all tiresome.
Let’s not waste our breath here and arguing our points fervently.
Instead, can RepWatch do something?
pavlova,
We’re working on the repwatch
Sharing
March 26, 2008
garfield city,
Make no mistake that DSAI=BR!
What were run after by Bersih and Hindraf are not more than Human Rights. The same why he had been suffered is also because Human Rights had been forgotten long long time ago. Or, even not yet in existence in Malaysia.
Any leader coming to lead should promote rational understanding of Human Rights to be well specified by Laws. If this has been in his mind, he should have pointed out Amendment of Laws and Constitution are the fundamental for all possible Changes to put Human Rights and so the Laws on TOP of any political campaign! Target for at least 1/2 of the Parliament seats should have been promoted and not allowing the emotional promotion of Voting any Opposition but not BN!!
Trust cannot be taken when Black & White cannot be given. Therefore, the basis of BR is the People’s declaration which are to be fine-tuned and more defined into Constitution & Laws!
DSAI has suffered because he was in Political War with MHT and to certain extent, considered by MHT as “defector” and not because of he wanted to defense Fairness for the Rakyats! He is not the only one to stand against the mamak! His being tortured should have sympathy of all who have Fairness in mind. But, did he realized Fairness to be applied during his Good Time and also now? Where he has to be fair to the Rakyats. Fair with Transparency and Ethics not with Bribery, at least! If it is going to apply to take BN defectors in! Because he has suffered the torture by the mamak that at last minute MTH came to confess he was wrong with DSAI and supported Opposition? Why MHT should play the same keys as his? UNMO IS UNMO in or out!!
I am one of the most, looking for a Majority BR government so as to Change. But, surely NOT by political tricks!! or even Bribery!!
Tricks is not equal to Smart when fairness is forgotten!!
SV Singam
March 26, 2008
Sharing, there is no confusion.
Absolute power is dangerous. BN enjoyed absolute power with the 2/3 majority. That is how Mahathir corrupted the constitution, shackled the judiciary, clipped the powers of the royalty and silenced the free press.
In politics, there are very few good guys. It takes a certain kind of mind-set for a person to become a politician. It is the rare person of integrity who can refrain from abusing power. This is why I don’t want even the BR to gain a 2/3 majority.
So how can the damage to the constitution be repaired? This can only happen when both the government and the opposition agree that the amendment is good for the nation. We are so used to government and opposition never agreeing that the idea of non-partisan voting seems strange. But that is the stage of parliamentary evolution that we have to reach.
Some of us here are idealists who speak about a future that many of you cannot understand or cannot believe in. But without that future vision, we have no road-map with which to guide the evolution of our democracy.
The politicians have to be pragmatic. But those who seek to guide them cannot let go of their ideals. Otherwise, we may end up building ourselves a hell-hole.
The people who drafted the original constitution were idealists. We have to restore their ideal as much as possible. It may take many years. But impatience will only result in a less-than-perfect solution.
I hope I am making sense.
Singam,
The most sensibile thing I have read in a long, long time.
ps.nathan
March 26, 2008
I believe that as at present the rules/regulations do not permit a person who resigns his seat to re-contest the same seat…this amendment was done after Sharil resigned and re-contested his seat, and won it, in Johore Baru some years ago.
So can someone enlighten us on the relevant law as applicable now…
Cikgu,
I believe you are right.
This law, in my view, should be repealed.
There can be numerous instances when an elected rep may have to resign to make a point on behalf of his constituents.
That point can only be made if he is then permitted to offer himself at the by-election and win. This would evidence that the voters are with him on the point in contention.
shar101
March 26, 2008
72 hours and counting. The letter was addressed to you, AI.
Show voters you care about them before and after the GE to do the right thing.
Oh yeah, one more thing. When you’re eligible to run for public office, do try and get elected as an MP. I hear Lembah Pantai may be available soon.
How you respond on the issue of voters’ mandate (in whatever circumstances) will have a direct bearing on your chances of winning or otherwise.
munnabhai
March 26, 2008
This is a fine example of the people that does not understand the Rakyat aspirations. DSAI should distance himself from this statement and come out clearly with his stand. State it clearly that he will never go against the Rakyat mandate. Makkal Sakti Makkal Sakti Makkal Sakti
Bobby Lim
March 26, 2008
Hi Haris
It’s easy to ask for evidence before you believe something to be true or false.
Let me ask you this. Everybody is complaining (except the UMNOputras) about the mega and price-inflated projects granted to certain favored people in UMNO/MCA/MIC. Under the OSA, no details can be revealed but we know this has been going on for ages. Because all these malpractices have been covered up, no one can dig up any “official” information concerning these projects. Yet rumors are being circulated every week. Can you say that these malpractices don’t exist then? Remember, you don’t have any real “proof” here. Yet, in the 12GE, the voters turned their anger on the BN and voted against the coalition because this was one of the big issues concerning the rakyat.
What about corruption? You and I don’t have any proof but all of us “seem” to know who the corrupted ones are. And again, we turned our frustration on the BN (AAB, in particular) for not cleaning up the Govt. Do we have any real proof of who is gulity? The guilty ones are under the protection of some higher authority. Would you and others have voted for the BN then, if there was no evidence of corruption in the system? We acted the way we did because we perceived that corruption existed based on our observation and on the things going on in and around the country.
Strange, isn’t it, to talk about showing proof first before you believe there are 15-16 marginal seats that went to the BN. They didn’t pass the OSA for nothing. I suppose you still don’t believe that there phantom voters, questionable postal votes, names missing from the electoral rolls and multiple names registered at one address.
Here, read the following blogs if you want “proof”:
http://teresakok.com/2008/03/18/unfair-unjust-election-of-2008/
http://teresakok.com/2008/03/07/evidence-of-bn-sending-phantom-voters-to-kelantan-2/
http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/4191/1/
I will take a break now and rest my case.
Bobby,
I think in the last elections, the rakyat reacted to a wealth of circumstantial evidence of corruption, cronyism and condonation of the same and an unwillingness to bring culprits to book by BN leadership.
I will cite 1 instance.
Zakaria Deros. His rise from rags to riches as exemplified by the mansion went without any accounting to the rakyat as to how it was acquired.
We have not been informed that ACA had begun investigations into his wealth acquisition.
We know that he was not disciplined by the party stalwarts.
Whilst he was dropped during the last elections, his place was taken by his nominee daughter-in-law.
We, the rakyat, do not have the evidence of corrupt practices by Zakaria and condonation and possibly implication in the same by his party leaders.
However, I would contend that the circumstances would entitle us to infer corrupt practices and vote as appropriately guided by that inference.
My 2 sen.
VotedForChange
March 26, 2008
In the Westminster parliamentary style democracy that we have in Malaysia, we vote for the candidate, not the party. While I agree that voters should scrutinise the reasons for party-hoppers, I do not believe that there should be an anti-hopping law. As far as I know, no other mature democracy has such an Act in force.
Helen Ang
March 26, 2008
SV Singam,
You say above in this thread: “If we compromise on a principle now because of expediency, the foundation of the future political climate is being laid on very weak ground.”
Earlier before the election, you commented on my post, Kelana Jaya: Compromise and keeping to convictions, saying:
“PP is largely a forum for intellectuals who, one assumes, can happily debate esoteric topics on matters of principle and yet, when it comes to critical decisions, are able to make the necessary choices. But if that is a mistaken assumption, then one must ask, is this the time to be juggling niceties of principle?”
Can you elaborate please (?) because I do see a gradation somewhat in your statements (1) and (2).
Bentoh
March 27, 2008
It’s funny how PAS and DAP chief pledged to support anti-hopping… while DSAI and PKR remain silent about this issue… 😉
Sharing
March 27, 2008
SV Singam,
Absolute Power is because Malaysia has only a Parliament and not 3-house system. Having 2/3 majority is for the forming of Cabinet for running the Government. Legislation and Monitoring could be of another majority. Therefore, the Absolute Power can be avoid and this must be understood by the Voters. This is the basis of a Democratic Government!!
I wish to have a Majority government, at this moment, is in terms of sufficient voting rights in the Parliament to Change the Constitutions to allow a 3-house system to avoid absolute power!!
The Change of a country need to change the mindset of the People. Therefore, it had been my emphasis that a Human Rights civil society has to promote and educate People and Parties the Principle and Direction of Human Rights so that a more Rational society can be built up along the Law – be it be Voters or Parties!
Therefore, all have to start with What it Should be before seeing How it could be!
THEREFORE, THE CHANGE OF CONSTITUTIONS AND LAWS ARE A MUST IN MALAYSIA BEFORE DEMOCRACY CAN HAVE A ROOT!
And, essential that People and Party are to be educated to do so via Law and not Campaigning every now and then!!
At present, when anyone complain to any Government Office, they will be asked how many are with them and not how Legal they are to raise the issues!!
As pointed out by ps nathan and others, please give us a better picture on the Rules and Regulations on MP for any further discussion or we will be the blinds talking the Elephant!
SV Singam
March 27, 2008
Helen,
You’re right. I appear to have changed my stance.
You reckon I should go back to my earlier viewpoint and now support the principle of party-hopping?
Or you prefer that I apologise for having a view contrary to yours on the election of Gwo Burne?
temenggong
March 27, 2008
Haris,
You may be erring on the side of being too ideological, too principled and too politically correct.
The political situation is loaded against us, therefore we have to be politically expedient as and when practicalities require, so as to expedite the political change that we seek. The jumping of some BN MPs over to the opposition is a foregone conclusion. We have to deal with it in practical terms.
The jumpers can stay as independents but vote along with the opposition. This is the compromise. Agreed?
No issue
Ahmad Navi Abdullah
March 27, 2008
Dear Harris,
Let us look at it this way. The party hoppers are doing it on their own free will, no persuasion, no money or promises of posts. It is within their right. As Temengong said, these party hoppers have decided and nothing we say is going to prevent them from leaving BN. The parties they want to join (PKR in this instance) should put them through a oeriod of probation to test their seriousness in wanting to join the New Coalition of PKR-DAP-PAS; till then they remain as independent candidates and vote along the party lines or as their conscions allows them to.
We do however question the morality of the people who hop.
While I realize the moral obligations of being ethical, I cant stop feeling excited over the prospects of a non BN Government being formed.
Birdseye
March 27, 2008
SV Singam,
“I appear to have changed my stance”.
So soon? And you “appear to” have changed. So you haven’t really changed?
Helen,
Remember Pizza Hut saga? So what must SV Singam do to appease you?
Singam,
Man, you should run in the next GE under Barisan Rakyat. I think you have the ability to change your stance while staring at his constituent right in the eye. Not many people can do that. I’m in awe. Really.
shar101
March 27, 2008
Ahhh.. Birdseye’s fuzzilogic at work.
And I thought some of us are already confused, perplexed and fidgeting on positions.
The new MOI minister would go bonkers if he decide to have a peek here. If he has the ‘cheek’ to, of course (no pun intended).
Only on the blogs, folks.
*That PKR fella answered yet, Haris?*
Shar,
No reply
SV Singam
March 27, 2008
It may look like I have changed. It may sound like I have changed. Eh? 🙂
Seriously, I didn’t think it was worth the trouble to explain myself. The circumstances were different. But arguments are so tiresome. Already too much hot air has flowed over this thread alone. We should have better things to do.
You would really support a candidate who can change his stance so easily? I am shocked!
Paul Warren
March 27, 2008
Hahahaha!!! Helen oh Helen!!! And, oh man SV!!
I tell you, it is quite all right to take a posittion not so the same as Haris as I have over frogging. And I remain so. Of course the methodology is something is where maybe I am prepared for a one time leap to just change the governing parties whereas Haris’ position has been consistent in that they got to go back to their constituents. I guess I give far less currency to the constituents to decide correctly on this. Presumptive and arrogant, you might say. But, ya, I might be. But I would prefer to characterise that approach as audacious. Somehow that is more appealing I guess.
Ah, how I love the language!
And the best part. I think, as Haris will agree, a smooth single always helps in smoothening out differences better than all the shit we might write in here.
Paul,
Don’t know how else to put it but here goes.
If the politicians will insist on continuing to slither on their bellies, I think the rakyat will have to stand upright.
We, the rakyat can and must provide the balance in the political dynamics of the country.
We failed to for the last 50 years.
And, yes that single seems long overdue!
SV Singam
March 27, 2008
The following is taken from MalaysiaToday “Ghapur Salleh actually wanted to resign from Umno Sabah just before the 8 March 2008 general elections so that he could contest the election on a PKR ticket. Anwar Ibrahim, however, would not allow him to do so. Ghapur grumbled to his friends that all Anwar needed to do was to give the word and he, plus a few other close associates in Umno Sabah, would cross-over and contest the election under the PKR banner. Anwar, of course, had his reasons. He wanted Sabah and Sarawak to be the ‘reserve team’ in the event the opposition wins enough seats to form the federal government.”
So it seems that Anwar and Ghapur conspired to hijack votes meant for BN in Sabah. The interesting question is, if the Sabahans had known what would happen in the Peninsula, would they still have voted for BN? We will never know? So we can’t definitively answer the question, is the trust of the voters being betrayed?
I think the most honourable solution would be for dissenting Sabah BN MPs to quit BN and offer to support BR as independents. But if Anwar absorbs them into PKR and offers them positions as a reward, it is just as tainted and corrupt as BN paying money to frogs.
dzul
March 27, 2008
Well done, bro.
We are very proud of you !!!
MORE TO COME !!!
alibaba
March 27, 2008
Hi Harris,
Our political system is too complex, it involves to many parties. We have 9 ruler in 9 states. Each political party is fighting for their own races. The most corrupted leaders are located in East Malaysia. Every party has their own agenda. So, how are we going to call ourselves as a “Bangsa Malaysia”, if we can’t reach a common purpose of ideology among all Malaysian. Today, BR has denied 2/3 parliament seats from BN. Every race has their own reason of discontenting toward BN. Can this sentiment be last until the next GE? I really have doubt.
I hate party hoppers. If this can lead BR to form a new government, I will give my fully support to BR.
What I want to see is a quick reform in our judiciary system, education system, economic policy and others.
SV Singam
March 27, 2008
A new ingredient has been introduced into this soup.
It seems that Ghapur et al wanted to contest on the PKR ticket for GE12. But Sdr Anwar told them to stay on the BN ticket as a backup. Basically it was a strategy to steal BN votes. Being frogs of the highest order, they would have negotiated a plum deal.
So if Sdr Anwar has already promised them rewards for hopping when he says hop, he will have to fulfill those promises when the time comes.
But all of that wheeling-dealing had taken place even before these here idealist anti-hop folks set out their expectations of Barisan Rakyat vis-a-vis party-hop. So now Sdr Anwar faces two conflicting ethical dilemmas – does he honour his earlier promise to the Sabah frogs or does he bow to the demands of the rakyat (well, some of them, anyway)?
No prizes for guessing how he will choose.
JJ
March 28, 2008
The same rule has to apply. When a person hops into UMNO, we accuse UMNO of money politics. When a person hops into PKR, we say it is free will. Less we forget, this election is not about the individual candidate. For sure, many of the PKR/DAP/PAS candidates are elected because the rakyat is voting against the BN. So if any of the PKR/DAP/PAS candidate jump ship, they are betraying their electorate. The same would apply to a BN candidate.
I very much doubt any of the MPs will jump ship without a promise of some form of rewards. I would not have voted for a candidate if he/she declares up front that he/she reserves the right to change party after the election.
Cheers.
Birdseye
March 28, 2008
Shar101
Let me know which part of my post you do not understand and I will try to help you.
Richy
March 28, 2008
The problem with some of these young leaders are they don’t think before talk.Being leaders and being in the front line they need to understand the subject well and what they stood for. However this also happens with some senior politicians.
For instance YB Lim found himself stepped on fire by announcing boycott recently. Dato Zaid Ibrahim who spoke candidly on government apologizing to judges was shot down by his own cabinet ministers. So I guess this young leader needs to learn his lesson like others.
Personally I would say this- anyone who wants to jump ship ( hopefully on principle. Imagine Zaid Ibrahim who wants to reform but do not have the support yet decides to join PKR or DAP for same purpose)should resign or vocate his seat and must get down to field to explain to voters who supported him.
nick
March 28, 2008
like chua soi lek said…
“politics is politics…please la….ultimately the behaviour of politicians will be the same”
temenggong
March 28, 2008
The pre-election deal with east malaysian parties was, full implementation of the 20 Points Plan for Borneo 1965, a deputy prime ministership for Sabah or Sarawak in rotation, plus senior mininsterial posts. Nothing wrong with that, on the contrary its the least they deserve.
Kevin
March 28, 2008
Aiya, Haris,still on this? I am having serious withdrawal symptom without newspaper with the coldturkey treatment… sigh… but am overcoming it by printing out materials to take to my throne room…. any long term cure in sight???
http://www.malaysianjoe.blogspot.com
Kevin,
Any suggestions?
Kevin
March 28, 2008
Haris,
Am seeking you for the cure and you ask me for suggestions? geez… gotta spend some money on printer toner.. gotta print out loads of materials to read… its more expensive than reading lies but.. I guess its good for the body mind and spirit.. hehehe…
peace, brethren
March 28, 2008
re temenggong’s comment:
First we had race-based appointments. Now that the Rakyat has voiced its collective displeasure at that, we have origin and party-based appointments. Sigh. Am I to despair of our ministers and leaders ever being appointed based on MERIT?
Kevin
March 28, 2008
I think its not easy to straight away divorce Malaysia from racial politics, there will be people who will still harp and play up the issue and also PKR are splinters from UMNO so, I guess the culture is roughly the same except that PKR seems to be more willing to change while UMNO entrenched in their feudalism finds it hard to even fart.. and when they do, fuhhh…. this is what we get now… that is only a FART… wait till they sneeze… that is coming attraction in Dec.
Paul Warren
March 28, 2008
Hey Kevin can you stop using my other monicker in vane please! Associating it to UMNO!!!
I’m the one and only Oldfart!
shar101
March 28, 2008
Birdseye,
Implied meanings were intimately discussed in the backroom while waiting for word from AI.
Wish he would do so quickly and we can move on to the next stage.. ermm.. shocking revelation.
Cheers.
SV Singam
March 28, 2008
Temenggong,
Sabah and Sarawak agreed to join Malaysia with the understanding that they would enjoy certain privileges. Nothing wrong with that, so long as there is some understanding that, after the passage of some agreed period of time, the special privileges will not be needed anymore. Of course, in view of the UMNO rape of all other privileges, the clock would have to be restarted.
But those goals would be better served if their MPs applied to join Barisan Rakyat under their own banner, or even as a group of independents. Merger with PKR or any other peninsular party can be addressed later. If they were to do it this way, I reckon the Sabah/Sarawak folks would feel less used.
Sabahans/Sarawakians… what is your view in this?
Kevin
March 28, 2008
ooops, sorry… Paul…. well what other term do you use for when one is releasing boddily gasses through their orifice?
Gan
March 28, 2008
wah … this write-up attracted 107 comments !! must be hot and a subject close to everybody’s heart.
politics is politics lah …. neither pure black nor pure white, and, always in varying shades of grey.
My take is, the tolerance to which level of grey will be subjected to the gravity of the situation.Sorry-lah, this might sound abit “lallangy”,
All very subjective lah, no easy way out answer.
Kopi_O
March 29, 2008
There are many whom support what Anwar is doing. There are many reasons why they do. Many are Barisan Rakyat supporters whom are looking at the long term effects of this decision. I have no time now to elaborate. Whatever it is, we captured more then 55% of the popular vote in Sememanjung, taking a rought guess at the % of phantom votes. I don’t think the Sabah & Sarawak people votes should be counted in whom runs our federal government in Sememanjung. Politics there is very different. I don’t know, is is possible to have two federal governments, a separate one for Sabah & Sarawak. Maybe these two states should even separate & form their own country. Yes… teach we semenanjung people a lesson. Many in power here are taking you for granted. You are not really sharing in the nations or even your own lands wealth.
fenway
March 29, 2008
SV Singam, you wrote:
“Sabah and Sarawak agreed to join Malaysia with the understanding that they would enjoy certain privileges. Nothing wrong with that, so long as there is some understanding that, after the passage of some agreed period of time, the special privileges will not be needed anymore”
==========================================
However, to correct you. Not to enjoy certain privileges. BUT guaranteed under the Constitution. 18 points for Sarawak.
The biggest mistake for Sarawak was to give up the Education system which what was previously guaranteed, is now streamlined to the Federal education system. Blame Tun Mahathir for that!!
Thank God, point 6 on immigration law is not given up by Sarawak, unlike Sabah. Look what happens to Sabah now. I rest my case. I dread the day when these 18 points are further meddled in Parliament.
And Datuk Seri Anwar’s so called ‘fishing’ for Sarawak frogs….read today’s headlines in The Borneo Post….you can draw your own conclusions with this news. I have.
http://www.theborneopost.com/?p=33233
SV Singam
March 29, 2008
Fenway,
I guess privileges was not the suitable word. Special arrangements would have been more appropriate. My apologies if you were offended.
On another thread, a Sabahan commented about people refusing to support “parti semanjung”. Does this sentiment hold in Sarawak as well?
I believe Sarawakians and Sabahans would be best served by their own parties joining the BR coalition as equals instead of disappearing into the PKR body. This will also support the principle of preventing too much power from accumulating in one place.
kim
March 31, 2008
Hi Haris, thanks for reverting on my comments.
This posting of yours has attracted so many comments, and my apology for not being able to read most of them. So, if there is repetition in my reply to you, please accept my apology.
My answer to your question if I will be OK with Lim switching party is No, I am not OK, and if I want to know why, my answer is, yes, I will be very anxious to know why. But I will wait. I will give him a chance to prove himself under the new party. If he fails to deliver his promises, I will not vote for him again during the next general election.
Haris, due to article 48(6) of the Federal Constitution, where the person resigns from his membership of the House of Representatives, shall for a period of 5 years from the date of resignation, disqualified from being a member of the House, I am willing, and I hope you will agree with me, to give the candidate a chance.
Hi Kim,
Yes this law needs to be repealed as one can envisage many instances when a rep may have to resign to make a point on bhalf of his constituents.