Interestingly enough, when doing my personal research on Freedom of Information in Malaysia, my blog comes up in the top 10 searches on Google! Apparently there isn't too much information online itself on freedom of information in our country.
A rather sad irony.
This is one version of response to current efforts undertaken to restore a Constitutional Malaysia. (You can still sign the online petition) Here freedom of speech is given an ugly name, and is labelled as a Western concept. The fact that human rights is also attacked and played down in the following letter is telling of the larger opinion its writings reflect. I'm not one to stir up dissent but I'm rather amazed at what I read. Check it out below. More blogging to come… right now, signing off after a busy but rewarding weekend.
Dear friends
It very unfortunate for me to received comment that slanders me as ignorant and other wild accusation. Clearly show that the person him/herself ignorant about him/her religion and understanding.
I do belief that Malaysia is an Islamic country not just from 1957 but dated from Malacca Sultanate. It is important we that accept this as it already manifested in the federal constitution that Islam as official religion of federation. Yet it’s not denying others to profess any religion and ensure protection of all.
To conclude 200% for sure that Malaysia is Islamic country. Why so hard for others to accept the basic and fundamental of our nation. Its not that you are deny professing whatever religion. Yet these people don’t want to accept that Islam is the official religion. This is the issue.
Secularism fanatic.
Lately there is a small group try to gain support, promoting and infuse secularism in Malaysia. They use whatever means to shake the bedrock of our country. I strongly oppose to turn Malaysia into secular country which against the value that we all carried. I do believed that Malaysian need to show 200% support to Islam Hadhari to clearly show that secularism don’t have place in this country.
The model of secularism such freedom to profess any religion, freedom of speech and human right already delivered by Malaysia. I see the secularism is carries by the people with hidden agenda. I do have a bad feeling about this that it will bring disaster to Malaysia. We cannot tolerate with secularism.
I did attend a seminar organized by Article 11 and Bar Council which the outcome pretty shameful as small group of people cry that they have more right than others and try to interfere Islam matter by requesting the abolishment of Article 121 (1A). This is totally absurd and unjust to Malaysian Muslim. The amendment introduce because the Muslim had treated unjustly by court before the amendment took place. And now we heard that this small group wants to reintroduce this unjustly article under banner of justice. Totally absurd.
During the seminar several individual did quoted some cases that clearly being interpreted according to personal emotion and out of context. Just to backup their issue and to rise up sympathy. All in the name of freedom of speech and even seek protection under Article 11. I do wonder if they using this as a platform to gain support before they destroy the harmony of this nation.
Time to accept and realized.
I do hope for those who still clouded will realized and accept that Malaysia will never adopt secularism and Malaysia is Islamic nation as accepted before and after Merdeka. Don’t live in denial. For sake of this country lets focus on more important issue such as the merger of different school system that creates and nurture division among us. And I do believe we should move forwards for better Malaysia.
That’s all for now my friends. Please do share your view with clear mind and cold head.
Sayonara!
(Taken from Muslim-Brothers.org)
Our country's Rukunegara is stated at the front page of any official document, and yet all contents thereafter rudely ignore it. Wake up, planners! Wake up, writers! Wake up, prominent leaders!
Our Nation, Malaysia is dedicated to: Achieving a greater unity for all her people; maintaining a democratic way of life; creating a just society in which the wealth of the nation shall be equitably distributed; ensuring a liberal approach to her rich and diverse cultural tradition, and building a progressive society which shall be oriented to modern science and technology.
…if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move.
Sam Harris, in his book The End of Faith, claims that the state of terrorism, hatred and fear in this world stems from one thing, and one thing alone: Faith-based religions.
It seems to be a common viewpoint these days, that religions like Judaism, Islam and Christianity get attacked for being the primary cause of terrorism in the world. This is based upon the argument that the holy scriptures of each of the three explicitly outline commandments to kill and not to practise tolerance.
Thus, he postulates that, for example, Muslims in carrying out acts of terror against infidels are merely carrying out their religious duty. There is therefore no such thing as an "extremist Islamic group", or "fundamentalist". If adhering closely to religious principles means following the text, he says, then a Muslim is merely being a good Muslim.
Likewise, a Christian who truly believes in the truth in his faith will only be able to carry out acts of evangelism at the cost of tolerance, because he is merely following scriptural truth. This, to him, is a way of inciting hatred amongst different nations. In this day and age, he believes there should be a complete wipe out of faith-based religions, as the 21st century has no room for intolerance in plural societies.
Faith Freedom International seems to take an extreme stance in considering Islam, the religion itself, the source of terrorism. I am not so sure about this, as I still believe that liberal Muslims will maintain that these are contextual and relevant only to the period of writing itself.
As a Christian who takes her Bible seriously, I do believe that taking context into consideration is of utmost importance. The principle behind the action is maintained, taking into account the reasons for it.
The End of faith? Only if human misinterpretation takes place.
Cut, Sylvia Plath
What a thrill —
My thumb instead of an onion.
The top quite gone
Except for a sort of a hinge
Of skin,
A flap like a hat,
Dead white.
Then that red plush.
Little pilgrim,
The Indian's axed your scalp.
Your turkey wattle
Carpet rolls
Straight from the heart.
I step on it,
Clutching my bottle
Of pink fizz.
A celebration, this is.
Out of a gap
A million soldiers run,
Redcoats, every one.
Whose side are they on?
O my
Homunculus, I am ill.
I have taken a pill to kill
The thin
Papery feeling.
Saboteur,
Kamikaze man —
The stain on your
Gauze Ku Klux Klan
Babushka
Darkens and tarnishes and when
The balled
Pulp of your heart
Confronts its small
Mill of silence
How you jump —
Trepanned veteran,
Dirty girl,
Thumb stump.
Enter Law Enforcer with super vision, sharp eyes scanning all ground for possible Male-Female couples (or male-male, female-female, god forbid!) in close proximity. Bionic vision zooms in to focus upon subjects A and B. The No-Kiss-Polis scouts out for interlocking lips, fingers and hands clasped around the other's back (this constitutes the horrifying act of hugging) and other general behaviour which epitomise moral indecency.
Yes, indeed, our capital Kuala Lumpur of Malaysia (the very modern country in South East Asia, heard of it?) has progressed to this very state!
How victorious its citizens should be that the city council is now looking out for their interests. It is preposterous, the sort of behaviour carried out by Ooi Kean Thong and Siow Ai Wei recently, isn't it? After all, kissing in public is definitely out of line with Asian values. Hugging is also a no-no. I feel I owe my life to the Datuk Bandar of KL! He will save me from all uncomfortable future couples who display indecent moral behaviour. As reported in the NST,
“The court unanimously held that the Datuk Bandar of Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) was correct to charge two students with behaving indecently by hugging and kissing at the Kuala Lumpur City Centre Park. The court ruled the section invoked by the Datuk Bandar to punish persons caught behaving indecently in public was constitutional.”
The Malaysian Bar has issued a statement on morality and how when a law is imposed, this creates a problem because of its generalization possibility, and questions how boundaries will be drawn. Says Yeo Yang Poh, its chairman,
Laws on decency should only be invoked if the impugned conducts has threatened public order or the public’s sense of decency; not because it has offended the sense of decency of an individual or some individuals in authority.
Now don't all of us Malaysians feel so great about marketing our country to the world at large? Don't you think that the tourism industry is so going to expand rapidly? That now finally we can live up to the slogan of "Malaysia, Truly Asia"? Aren't you simply cluckingly proud of the fact that our streets will be free of any sort of public affection, including holding of hands, whilst strolling along the (KLCC) park? That instead, this will be replaced by the patrolling officers in No-Kiss mode, striking with stern rods whoever braves the directive? Yes, indeed let us continue a policy of looking towards our role models over in the mid-east.
Note: The writer does not support indecent display of affection of course. But laws against moral indecency including hugging and kissing in public… can slowly escalate to the punishment of any sort of physical touch if legislation is not kept clear.
Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have put him!"So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen. Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. (They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)
And so I rise to the sun, I rise to the Son, this dark morning as Mary did, having stayed awake the whole night (for work, not for any other reason), but rise to greet,
the sun, The Son, the One.
Let's have a Little Language Lesson, shall we?
The monotheistic religions refer to their higher being as "God". Let's see what the word is translated into, in the different colourful languages of the world:
These generally refer to the same entity. However, due to cultural differences, inevitable when one studies Language, the way each society refers to that same entity is not the same. Therefore, one faces a difficulty where the Latin Deus is really the same as that of the Spanish Dios, and so on. Taking into consideration the context of time, society and culture, one then understands each's reference point.
Nevertheless, if there is no better way of explaining a certain point one attempts to make, than to refer to the word itself, one does it.
If I am speaking Spanish to a Barcelonian, will I temporarily pretend I am unable to speak Spanish and say "God" instead of "Dios"? I will not.
I'm not making any criticisms here at all, but just wondering aloud as to the reasons for this. (Page 3) Does banning certain words really do anything?
A rose by any other name should smell as sweet.
A God by any other name should mean the same.
I was graciously invited by Cynthia Gabriel to join her in a panel discussion last night. Hosted and interviewed by Gayathry from CIJ (Centre of Independent Journalism), we spent about half an hour in verbal banter on a hot topic of the day! Freedom of Information in Malaysia, or the lack thereof.
It was an interesting session, me not having had any experience whatsoever in being a panelist for the public. Cynthia was the former Executive Director of SUARAM, Malaysia's Human Rights group (Suara Rakyat Malaysia: Malaysian Citizens' Voice). She currently leads the Freedom of Information Coalition, a network of NGOs and groups that are advocating for maximum information disclosure at all levels.
She cited examples of how the lack of information leads to bad governance. And why quote the Official Secrets Act for issues that citizens have a right to access information for? Pertinent examples would be water and health. She mentioned that Malaysians continue to live in an environment of secrecy and fear, where something as simple as Air Quality was for so long hidden from us.
Coming from a Research Centre myself, I spoke about practical problems faced when trying to access data and statistics. The first problem is the inconsistency of data definition in tables released by official departments. This makes it difficult to make cross-comparisons between categories, and time analyses. Secondly, access to information is a problem, where the Ninth Malaysia Plan is singularly available at one shop, which is difficult to get to (near Sungai Besi). (But go and get a copy if you can, expensive though: RM80) Finally, I concluded by saying that Freedom of Information will allow for better quality research, which will in turn contribute to better governance; on both the government and corporate fronts.
What we agreed upon was that there's lots of education, training and increasing awareness to be done, convincing civil servants and the public that FoI will in fact benefit everyone! When there's accessibility to information, this provides a feedback mechanism for government and corporate agencies to improve themselves further. If citizens give positive feedback based on this information, then by all means they ought to be happy about it! Why fear when you're doing your duty correctly, right? Anyway, onto the recording.
If I talk too fast and sound very excitable, it's because I am.
If I sound inexperienced on this topic, it's because I am.
But I'm ready and willing to learn! You can't fault that.
Here's the link to the radio panel discussion: Click Here. It will later be available on radio stations.
The issue of religious conversion in Malaysia is basically this.
If you are a Muslim who has decided to convert to any other religion, it is ridiculously difficult for you to obtain permission to alter the official status of your religion on any document. Reason being, affairs of Islam fall under the jurisdiction of the Syariah court. The simple and logical argument, however, is that if you are no longer a Muslim, the Syariah laws ought to hold no authority over you any longer. Instead, this should be a matter of decision from the civil courts.
Of course, theory is seldom well translated, much less implemented, into logical terms in such situations. Academics and legal individuals have belaboured this issue for many years, and only recently have we begun to see the light of some sort of direction.
Lina Joy's case was heard in court, and some background info from Malaysiakini:
Joy – whose Muslim name was Azlina Jailani – converted to Christianity in 1998 and is married to a Christian individual. She had successfully applied in 1998 to change her name but failed to have the entry ‘Islam’ deleted from her identity card.
and the Sun article has this to say:
The Federal Court will now hear and decide which court – Syariah or civil – will have jurisdiction to decide on the religion of a Muslim who renounces Islam as his or her religion and seek to rectify the status on his or her identity card with the NRD.
Cyrus Das, her lawyer, thinks that:
The court must once and for all decide whether a government department can impose a regulation in the absence of a written law authorising it.
Let's get a move on it!
My most recent activities are found on my LinkedIn page here.
