Date: Saturday, 24 July 2010
Time: 12:00-21:00
Location: British Museum + sekitar London

Please RSVP here or by sending e-mail to 232877 at soas dot ac dot uk.

Dear all,

We have decided to take a break from our (boring/interesting/delete as appropriate) lives and go to the British Museum for some Southeast Asian history lesson! (yeay)

These are the tentative activities:

12:00-13:00 – Lunch and prayer at MSD

13:00-13:30 – Travel to Tottenham Court Road from Queensway station

13:30-16:00 – Our ‘education session’

16:00-18:00 – Our kopitiam session, perhaps at the British Museum as well

18:00-21:00 – It’s been suggested that we have a movie night. I was hoping for Harry Potter but I don’t think so

So, please feedback as necessary. More to follow.

Yours truly,
Azmi

Date:     Saturday, 19 June 2010
Time:     11:30-13:30
Location:     Room 511, Level 5, Electrical and Electronic Engineering Building, Imperial College London

Please RSVP here or by sending e-mail to 232877 at soas dot ac dot uk.

Dear all,

Our next meeting is timed to hopefully be after most of the exams but before everyone flies off for summer holidays. If in fact, you still have one or two last papers, well, this is early warning, so you can revise in advance. We have 2 main items on the agenda for this meeting, which are:

1. New Economic Model

The much-hyped successor to the New Economic Policy (a.k.a. Never-Ending Policy) is almost out and about in full. We expect a full disclosure in conjunction with the launch of the 10th Malaysia Plan (2011-2015) in early June, so we can expect commentaries from various parties by the time of our meeting.

Reading list will be attached once the documents are out. We look forward to authoritative commentaries like the ones on the Allah issue. Please contribute wherever you can.

*This is the provisional reading list for now:
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/business/article/key-points-of-10th-malaysia-plan/
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/10mp-to-bring-subsidy-cuts-investment-boost/
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/10mp-big-numbers-that-dont-add-up/
http://www.neac.gov.my/sites/default/files/Executive%20Summary_0.pdf
http://www.btimes.com.my/Current_News/BTIMES/articles/quah/quah.pdf

2. MF London direction: 2010-2011 and beyond

We have had a brainstorming and fruitful discussion on the future of Malaysia Forum London on May 6, although we still need to consult the wider community and come out with a refined action plan especially with regards to the next academic year since many current members will no longer be around and we will need to have members who are committed to carrying the torch. Your participation is most coveted. Please extend the invitation to others who you feel may even have the slightest inkling of interest.

*Other concerns

We shall add to the list as we go along and as members suggest – that includes you, yes, you reading this now. Venue will be confirmed as soon as we get one. If you have any issue with the time, please write to me or post on the Facebook event wall and we will take it from there.

Many thanks for your kind attention

Azmi
on behalf of Malaysia Forum

Date: Thursday, 06 May 2010
Time: 19:00-21:00
Location: Flat 46 Bickenhall Mansions, Bickenhall St London W1U 6 BR

(This is on UK election night after all, so we could also err…gossip…about politics!)

For those who are coming, please bring something-be it food or drink. Also, if possible, please RSVP here or send an e-mail to 232877 at soas dot ac dot uk (if you want to remain anonymous to the wider world). Thanks and we look forward to having you with us!

Date: Saturday, 03 April 2010
Time: 15:30 – 17:30
Location: Flat 46 Bickenhall Mansions, Bickenhall St London W1U 6 BR

It will be timely to hear one of Malaysia’s greatest economic minds speak to us on the NEP and perhaps find out what the NEM (New Economic Model) might or might not address with regards to not just the economic future of Malaysia, but also the social and political. As we know, this issue is a heated one and will have potential ramifications across various facets of Malaysian life.

Jomo is currently serving as the United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development in the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

Jomo is widely perceived to be an outspoken intellectual, with unorthodox non-partisan views. During the Asian financial crisis in 1997-98, Jomo was one of the earliest advocates of capital control measures, which then Prime Minister Tun Mahathir Mohamad eventually introduced to curb excessive currency speculation. However, when Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was imprisoned without trial under the Internal Security Act soon after and sacked as Mahathir’s deputy, Jomo publicly condemned the move.

Feel free to invite your friends as well as we hope to make this a dinner event with some simple food and drinks. Please RSVP here if possible. Otherwise, please send an e-mail to 232877 at soas dot ac dot uk.

YB is keen to meet all Malaysians here in the UK especially students to speak on his personal experiences and have a frank discussion on a wide range of issues. There will be a significant amount of time for Q and A.

Date: Saturday, 20 March 2010

Time: 13:30 – 16:00

Location: Pippard Lecture Theatre, Level 5, Sherfield Building, Imperial College London.

Please RSVP here if possible.

Date:  Saturday, the 13th of  March 2010

Time: 3-5pm, a group will be going to dinner afterwards

Location: Imperial College London

Please RSVP here.

Reading List: General/Overview

A chronology of the Perak crisis

Making sense of the Perak controversy (Malaysian Insider article by Malik Imtiaz Sarwar)

Questions to ponder

Reading List: Technical

Lascelles Principles

The Speaker: excerpt from House of Commons Factsheet

The Sultan’s Constitutional Powers: A Comment (re Nizar v Zambry (HC(Malaya)) by Kevin Tan

When is a Resignation not a Resignation? A Crisis of Confidence in Sabah (re Kahar Mustapha v Mohd Said Keruak (HC(Borneo)) by Andrew Harding

Coping with Party-Hopping by Shad Saleem Faruqi

The Morality of Members of Parliament Crossing the Floor by William Leong

MB v MB, Federal Court Judgement

ADUNs v Speaker, Federal Court Judgement

BN v Speaker, Federal Court Judgement

Summary of the discussion

About fifteen people turned up for the discussion on the constitutional crisis in the state of Perak, based loosely on the reading list above and in particular the document ‘Questions to Ponder’.

Called ‘the constitutional crisis of our generation’, these recent events have woken (young) Malaysians up to the importance of documents such as the Constitution and Standing Orders. The Perak saga involved different parties such as Sultan Azlan, politicians from both sides, civil servants, the rakyat and civil society. It reveals a lack of understanding of the spirit of constitutional monarchy and also separation of state, government and political party among Malaysians.

After initial reactions to the case, the discussion turned to whether it is morally acceptable for members of parliament to cross the floor. Perhaps only as a last resort action ‘against’ their party, which is true of none of the recent cases. The principle of freedom of association would appear to be an argument in favour. The article by William Leong suggests that our political system is such that MPs are voted ‘as themselves’ and not as placeholders for their parties. This may be true in theory, but if the perception is otherwise, that is to say that people vote for parties rather than candidates then there is a moral question.

Do people vote for parties or for candidates? It would appear sometimes for one and sometimes for the other. (It was noted that in Malaysia people sometimes also vote on ‘religious’ lines.) Example of Sharir Ahmad who resigned from BN and was returned by his constituency as an independent, thus causing then PM Mahathir to amend the constitution (1990) such that MPs who resign are barred from standing for five years. (This was clearly in bad faith.) Another example of a Kluang MP who was only born there and was voted in simply because of the BN banner.

People should vote only for candidates and not for parties. No, people should vote for whom/whatever they want – it is their right. An MP can determine whether or not it is OK to party hop based on whether people voted for him or his party. In the two cases above, this was clear. This is ideal but unworkable given the character of most politicians.

It was proposed that, as a compromise, MPs who party-hop could be required to resign after three or six months. This allows government to continue in the case of an emergency and removes most benefits to party-hoppers. Some disagreed with this proposal based on freedom of association. Yes, but it is constrained by the community that one is in.

What mechanisms do parties have to prevent hopping? Holding undated resignation letters is immoral. Is it possible to have a contract between a candidate and his party? No, issues of public office cannot be made a matter of private contract – no court would enforce it.

Would we be having this discussion if 9/16 had happened? PR promised to dissolve Parliament after forming the government. Do we believe that?

A technical question was raised about how confidence is determined in the assembly. Generally, any supply bill (that is to say involving money) is traditionally seen as a vote of confidence. The same goes for the budget, any major piece of legislature and, in England, the Queen’s speech. Other things can also be made issues of confidence; this is usually done to pressure party members to vote along party lines.

Next, the discussion turned to the actions of DS Nizar, in particular whether he should have resigned, given the action of the Sultan not to accede to his request to dissolve the assembly. It was quite clear that he has lost the confidence of the majority of the ADUNs. Yes, but in the Malaysian context, would resigning have been seen as ‘going down too easily’? Perhaps not if the move was properly explained. This is hard to do when the media is controlled; it is hard to be gentlemen when the other side are not. The announcement by the PM on national TV of the fall of Perak was a clear indication of federal interference in state matters, not to mention government control of the media.

It was opined that finally neither Sultan Azlan nor DS Nizar acted in the best interests of the state – a case of bad faith all the way on all sides, a statement which is true of all actors in the larger story as well. However, probably the biggest losers in this story are not BN or PR but the Perak royal family, who have lost credibility in the eyes of their subjects.

There are arguments on both sides for whether the Sultan did the right thing; however, if he wanted to spare the state more elections, he could simply have summoned a sitting of the DUN to put it to the vote. He should not have decided on behalf of his subjects. This is complicated by the fact that the Speaker would not have recognised the three party-hoppers. Yes, but it would still have been 28-27 as the Speaker does not vote. In Malaysia, he would have. So it would have been inconclusive.

The point of highest moral hazard was when the Speaker was dragged out of the DUN. (At least he was not beheaded!) The civil service was clearly one-sided in this matter. Does the average Malaysian realise this? There is a lot of confusion over the distinctions between the government, the state and the civil service. Example: ‘Satu lagi projek BN’ on roadworks, as if the party BN owned the JKR.

There were some questions about the role of the Speaker. Why was he not independent in this matter? On what basis was he appointed Speaker? In the UK, the Speaker has to be an MP or ADUN. In Malaysia, this is no longer the case. In the UK, the Speaker resigns from his party. In subsequent elections, no major party stands against him/her. His/her constituency is dealt with directly by ministers. All of these are conventions and not law.

Conventions are very important, especially in legislative assemblies because they make the laws that govern the whole country and are in some sense above the law. They are/should be governed by honour. As in game theory, someone has to make the first move to get the ball rolling. Who will be the first Speaker to take the risk of resigning from his party?

It is interesting how Malaysians pervert parliamentary conventions. E.g. in other countries the Speaker calls in MPs for a vote by voice. In Malaysia, the Speaker calls in BN MPs when there are not enough of them to pass a government bill. The last budget nearly failed to pass because not many BN MPs were in Parliament. It was noted that this would have been seen as a vote of confidence…under certain conventions.

What other conventions should we try to adopt? What rules are there for bills to be debated? In the UK there are opposition days. This probably helps with having substantive debate and bipartisanship.

The last part of the meeting was devoted to preparing questions for YB Datuk Seri Nizar during his visit the following weekend. The meeting was adjourned at 6pm after several participants had to leave; the rest headed out for dinner after the meeting.

Disclaimer: As with most of our meetings, this discussion was held under the Chatham House Rule; this summary has been written in accordance with this. Please note that all views expressed above are of the participants and not of MF as a whole.

Date:  Saturday, the 30th of January 2010

Time: 3-5pm, a group will be going to dinner afterwards

Location: Imperial College London

Texts to look at if possible before the meeting

General:

1. Hasbeemasputra Abu Bakar interview on the Fairly Current Show
2. Sivin Kit interview on the Fairly Current Show
3. Commentary from an observer, brief guide to Muslim reactions
4. Another commentary
5. A summary of the case in English and BM.

Optional readings for ‘technical’ matters:

1. Mengapa Kata ‘Allah’ dan ‘TUHAN’ dipakai dalam Alkitab Kita?
   Document from the Indonesian Bible Society
2. Justice Lau Bee Lan’s judgment
3. Linguistic opinion from a student of Arabic: ‘So Allah is the proper noun for THE GOD, at least in Arabic and in the Middle East. Whether you want to argue that this is the God of Islam or the God of the Universe is up to you [Nik Aziz: is there any other God?], but etymologically, in Arabic, ilah = (a) god; allah = al-ilah = the god. Note the prefix al- to signify “the.” The Hebrew Elohim for God shares the same triconsonantal roots: vowel-L-H. Non-Muslim speculations that “the word ‘Allah’ in English (as seen in any English dictionary) is a mispronunciation of both the Arabic and the Hebrew word for God” are at best unhelpful, distracting, and downright wrong…Whether Allah is a proper or generic noun in Malay, both linguistically and East-Malaysian application-wise, is a different matter.’

Summary of the discussion

On Saturday the 30th of January, about thirty Malaysians from the London area and beyond gathered at Imperial College London for a discussion around ‘the Allah issue’ and subsequent attacks against places of worship. A reading list had been distributed beforehand to inform participants about the basic facts of the case, linguistic and theological subtleties as well as to place all of the above in the broader context of Malaysian society.

The conversation began, after a round of introductions, with the afore-mentioned topics and rapidly moved on to larger issues. Below is a roughly chronological summary of the discussion. Some liberty has been taken in grouping related comments together.

We remember where we were when we heard the news. We thought ‘This is not my country; this is not Malaysia’. It is not good to read about this from overseas as the media tends to overplay things.

On the ground, most people don’t seem to care. There were also some ‘feel-good’ initiatives on the ground — e.g. people giving out flowers on the street — not reported in the media. We are confident that this is an issue that Malaysians, left to themselves, can sort out reasonably and peacefully.

If Malaysians are not up in arms, who is behind this? Whose interests are being served? Several possibilities were proposed. This is all about power. It was noted that we are still under four declared states of emergency which have not been lifted.

We must be careful not to say ‘Ordinary Malaysians are not involved; this is just manipulation’. Manipulation can lead to real, on-the-ground effects. Are we sure we have not been influenced in some way? What is the sociological reality?

This is a question of voice, who speaks for whom, who speaks for which community? It is important to remember that there is politics even in religious circles.

A slight detour: Is the language of FDI the only one that politicians understand? It is important not to believe in the FDI bogeyman. Investors do look for ’stability’, but also at other factors. The net FDI flow is difficult to ascertain due to the lack of data. However, in the period of economic uncertainty, leading economists suggested that unemployment rate is the most reliable indicator of a country’s economic situation instead of GDP or FDI figures. Also, to what extent should we play the capitalist game? Certain countries, notably in Europe have chosen lower growth in order to preserve certain social and cultural values.

US blacklists are only partially effective, example of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act — legislation in place and implemented, but slowly and to date perhaps ineffectively. Is development incompatible with democracy? Book: World on Fire, Amy Chua. In any case, we think that Malaysia has passed the stage where this question is relevant.

Coming back to the main topic: is the deafening silence from the public a sign of maturity? Or of complete apathy? A little of both?

There was an argument that the public has been less reluctant to express their sentiments as BERSIH and Anti-ISA rallies have demonstrated. The (dismal) size of recent “pro-ban” demonstrations and the active effort of promote mutual understanding perhaps could be taken as a sign that the relative calm on the street is a sign of maturity, not apathy amongst the public.

Will the government win the appeal? Almost certainly. The question is what sort of fallout there will be at the local, national and international levels. For example, leading Muslim scholar Dr Yusuf Al-Qaradawi in his recent Malaysian visit had expressed dismay at this ‘issue’ – which to him is a non-issue. We must move away from the mentality of ‘the government knows best’. They have been elected to govern, not to rule.

The main question here is how we can “mematangkan rakyat Malaysia” – to increase the level of awareness and promote mature thinking. Theological arguments cannot be used to decide a case like this i.e. to pronounce on other religions. Religious leaders have not been given platforms in this debate; most forums are organised by political interests. Ordinary Malaysians should invite religious leaders to more neutral/informational gatherings such as this.

With regards to religious leaders, there should be more support for independent religious forums to reach consensus free of unwanted interventions. The “Allah” issue seems to have precipitated the public’s mistrust for state religious institutions to the point that recent JAKIM/IKIM’s efforts seem to have fallen on deaf ears.

It is important to know that from an East Malaysian perspective this is basically a peninsular issue. People live in peace in EM. There is a church in Sarawak, ‘Gereja Mariam Bonda Allah’. Nobody has a problem with this except Peninsula folk. News from Sarawak can be obtained from websites like http://www.sarawakupdate.com/ directly.

To wrap up, three keywords: power, voice, kematangan. We have talked about the power of politicians, the government, multi-nationals, the international community. Where is the power of the Malaysian people? Many people claim to speak for this or that group, the media also has a voice. Where is the voice of the Malaysian people? Kalau tak peduli pun, kita kena tulis surat kepada akhbar to say ‘Isu ini, memang kita tak peduli, signed rakyat Malaysia.’ As ordinary Malaysians, let’s step up to the plate, exercise our power, make our voice heard and help each other towards maturity.

Several participants prayed before and after the main meeting. After the meeting, most of the participants adjourned to a restaurant for dinner, more informal chitchat as well as to discuss possibilities for future events. Watch this space!

Disclaimer: the Malaysia Forum abides by the Chatham House Rule for its communications; this summary has been written in this spirit. Please note that all views expressed above are of the participants and not of MF as a whole.

If you’re interested in joining a group of Malaysians who care about our country and care about staying in touch with Malaysian goings-on, come check out our first gathering:

8pm, Friday 11th December 2009

46 Bickenhall Mansions, Bickenhall St
Marylebone, London, United Kingdom W1U 6BR

It will be a potluck—bringing a dish or two would be very much appreciated, but we value your company either way. See you soon!

Questions? Contact John: johnleemk AT gmail.com or +44(0)7538 407765

You can also RSVP on Facebook.