Bila tibanya PRU, barulah menampakkan yang sebenarnya

Apabila bermulanya musim pilihanraya umum (PRU) kita semua akan nampak pelbagai karenah yang berlaku baik di sebelah Barisan Nasional (BN), mahupun di pihak Pakatan Rakyat (PR). Pelbagai bentuk masalah, persengketaan, pertelagahan dan perbalahan antara puak akan terbongkar untuk tatapan umum.

Bagaimana ianya berlaku? Apabila seseorang pemimpin atau wakil rakyat yang lalu tidak dicalonkan semula; apabila seseorang wakil rakyat yang lalu dicalonkan ke kerusi-kerusi yang tidak dapat dimenangi dengan mudah; bila seseorang pemimpin itu ataupun wakil-wakil rakyat yang lalu tidak sehaluan dengan para pemimpin tertinggi puak, puak yang berbalah di antara satu sama lain. Malah ada yang diketepikan oleh kerana prestasinya kurang memuaskan sewaktu berkhidmat pada penggal yang lalu.

Dan apabila diumumkan seseorang pemimpin atau wakil rakyat tersebut telah diketepikan, bermacam-macam tindakbalas dapat kita lihat hampir pada setiap hari di dalam laporan akhbar-akhbar, berita-berita daripada internet, di kalangan ahli-ahli dan para pemimpin parti yang bertanding dan sebagainya.

Masing-masing merasa tidak puashati terhadap tindakan para pemimpin mereka, alasannya adalah kerana mereka telah bertungkus lumus selama beberapa tahun untuk membuktikan kebolehan mereka sebagai seorang wakil rakyat, ada yang menuduh pucuk pimpinan parti pilih kasih, berpihak kepada puak lain yang lebih berpengaruh dan sebagainya.

Tindakbalas yang seterusnya daripada mereka-mereka ini adalah meletakkan jawatan mereka dan keluar parti untuk bertanding sebagai calon bebas, keluar parti dan menyertai parti lain untuk bertanding atas tiket parti yang baru disertainya.

Ianya bukan sahaja sedang menular di dalam PR, bahkan BN turut terasa bahang akibat daripada tindakan sebahagian besar pemimpin-pemimpin parti yang kecewa kerana telah diketepikan dengan begitu sahaja.

Boleh juga dikatakan, apabila terjadinya tindak balas tersebut, ianya akan menimbulkan beberapa tandatanya sama ada sesiapa yang menyertai sesebuah parti itu benar-benar faham dengan perjuangan dan objektif sesebuah parti politik yang mereka sertai, dan pada masa yang sama, adalah sesebuah parti politik itu mempunyai ideologi parti yang kukuh bagi mendidik dan memastikan ahli-ahli parti mereka senantiasa taat setia kepada perjuangan parti?

Dalam pada itu, apabila seseorang pemimpin itu keluar parti untuk menyertai parti lain ataupun bertanding sebagai calon bebas semata-mata kerana ingin bertanding di dalam PRU, ianya berkemungkinan besar akan menjejaskan kredibilitinya, jika sekiranya pemimpin tersebut tidak mempunyai alasan-alasan yang kukuh dan munasabah yang menyebabkan beliau terpaksa berbuat demikian.

Di mana silapnya di dalam kancah politik ini yang penuh dengan kekecewaan dan adegan-adegan keluar parti? Pertamanya, para pemimpin atau calon-calon yang pentingkan diri sendiri, kedua sengketa antara puak di dalam parti, ketidakpuashati terhadap pucuk pimpinan parti, dan kelemahan pemimpin ataupun calon-calon tu sendiri.

Kesilapan tersebut kerap berlaku oleh kerana kebanyakan parti-parti politik pada hari ini telah lupa dengan perjuangan asal dan ideologi politik mereka yang sebenarnya. Fenomena yang dapat kita lihat pada hari ini adalah kebanyakan menyertai yang menyertai parti-parti politik adalah kerana ingin mendapatkan faedah, bertanding di dalam pilihanraya, memegang jawatan dalam parti dan untuk mengejar kedudukan serta pangkat di dalam kerajaan.

Fakta-fakta yang sebenar yang perlu dipraktikkan oleh seseorang pemimpin dan ahli adalah mempelajari dan memahami ideologi parti yang mereka sertai, perjuangan yang pernah dilalui oleh parti berkenaan dan apakah   yang dapat disumbangkan oleh para pemimpin dan ahli berkenaan kepada parti yang mereka anggotai.

Pendek kata, seseorang pemimpin atau ahli itu sepatutnya memikir apakah yang dapat disumbangkan kepada parti berkenaan yang dianggotai mereka dan bukannya apa yang dapat parti sumbangkan kepada mereka.

Yang dapat kita saksikan sekarang adalah masalah tersebut sedang menular di dalam parti-parti yang mempunyai jumlah keahlian yang begitu besar sehingga tidak terbilang angkanya dan akibat daripada itu kualiti keahlian dalam parti-parti tersebut akan menurun mendadak apabila tidak ada proses tapisan yang menyeluruh bagi memastikan mutu keahlian terjamin.

Boleh dikatakan kebanyakan parti-parti politik yang mempunyai jumlah keahlian yang begitu besar telah hilang kawalan terhadap struktur dan organisasi dalam parti mereka.

Pilihanraya Kerajaan Tempatan dan Disentralisasi Kerajaan

Baru-baru ini, Barisan Nasional (BN) dan Pakatan Rakyat (PR) telahpun mengemukakan kepada orang ramai manifesto pilihanraya mereka masing-masing bagi memenangi hati dan sokongan daripada rakyat jelata pada pilihanraya umum ke-13 (PRU13) yang dijangka akan diadakan pada 5 Mei 2013 depan. Sama ada isi kandungan manifesto masing-masing itu mempunyai persamaan tidak menjadi isu. Yang lebih penting di sini adalah sama ada BN ataupun PR boleh menunaikan segala janji-janji mereka selepas PRU13 nanti, namun itu juga masih bergantung kepada BN atau PR, gabungan mana yang akan berjaya mencapai tangannya ke Putrajaya nanti.

Pertama, perkara pokok yang gagal disebut di dalam kedua-dua manifesto BN dan PR di sini adalah berkenaan dengan kedudukan Akta Kerajaan Tempatan. Rakyat jelata selama ini memang inginkan sesuatu perubuhan dan pembaharuan yang lebih efektif di dalam perkara ini oleh kerana masalah-masalah yang melibatkan perkhidmatan kerajaan tempatan yang sehingga kini masih tidak memuaskan hati rakyat jelata. Pelbagai bentuk perkhidmatan kerajaan tempatan seperti khidmat pungutan sampah, pembuangan sisa-sisa, sistem perparitan dan jalanraya, tiang lampu, terlalu banyak karenah birokrasi, kelemahan di dalam perkhidmatan pelanggan, kurangnya pembaharuan di dalam infrastruktur tempatan dan banyak lagi.

Di dalam perkara di atas, BN langsung tidak menyebut mengenai perlunya agar pembaharuan dapat dilaksanakan di dalam perkara ini, lantas kita akan beranggapan bahawa BN tidak akan berminat mengketengahkan perkara tersebut apabila berkempen lagi kerana BN lebih selesa dengan kedudukan kerajaan tempatan yang ada sekarang di mana kesemua yang dipertua majlis, datuk-datuk bandar, ahli-ahli majlis dan dewan bandaraya adalah dilantik secara langsung. Yang pasti, BN tidak akan sekalipun membenarkan pilihanraya di adakan di peringkat kerajaan tempatan.

Manakala di sebelah PR pula, memang tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa parti komponen PR, DAP selama ini telah memperjuangkan pemansuhan Akta Kerajaan Tempatan bagi membolehkan pilihanraya kerajaan tempatan diadakan di peringkat majlis daerah, perbandaran dan dewan bandaraya. Di dalam manifesto PR kali ini, ianya tidak menyebut secara khusus mengenai tajuk tersebut, sama ada mereka akan memansuhkan akta itu bagi membolehkan pilihanraya kerajaan tempatan diadakan. Di dalam pilihanraya umum yang lalu pada tahun 2008, manifesto DAP ada secara khusus menyebut mengenai perkara ini, tetapi rakan DAP di dalam PR, iaitu PKR dan PAS tidak menyebut perkara tersebut di dalam manifesto masing-masing.

Yang kita amat pasti sekarang adalah BN sememangnya tidak akan merombak apa-apa peruntukan di dalam Akta Kerajaan Tempatan kerana mereka berkeras mahu mengekalkan kedudukan kerajaan tempatan yang ada sekarang, manakala di pihak PR pula, mereka tidak memberikan komitmen mereka yang menyeluruh mengenai akta tersebut yang telah lama menjadi penghalang kepada pembaharuan yang perlu dilaksanakan di peringkat kerajaan tempatan.

Kedua, disentralisasi kerajaan yang membolehkan kerajaan-kerajaan negeri mempunyai lebih kuasa dan kata putus di dalam hal-hal kerajaan tempatan, perlantikan dan pertukaran pegawai-pegawai kerajaan negeri, perlaksanaan dasar, isu-isu berkaitan dengan pentadbiran tanah, perkhidmatan pembekalan air, pengangkutan awam, khidmat pembentungan dan banyak lagi yang telah sekian lama menjadi suatu beban kepada rakyat jelata di kebanyakan kawasan di seluruh negara. Cabaran utama di sini adalah terdapat banyak konflik dan pelbagai bentuk pertindihan kuasa di dalam beberapa jenis perlaksanaan dasar yang membabitkan kerajaan-kerajaan negeri dan persekutuan sehinggakan ianya melibatkan penderitaan rakyat jelata yang tidak berdosa.

Kita ambillah satu contoh yang terbaru, krisis pembekalan air di negeri Selangor yang disebabkan oleh Syabas, sebuah syarikat konsesi bekalan air yang dimiliki oleh kerajaan persekutuan telah banyak kali gagal di dalam menghalang krisis air di negeri tersebut daripada berlanjutan dengan begitu lamanya. Oleh kerana kerajaan negeri Selangor hanyalah sekadar pemegang saham yang paling minimum dalam Syabas, kerajaan negeri tidak dapat berbuat apa-apa bagi melaksanakan pembaharuan pada syarikat tersebut yang kini dalam keadaan yang tenat.

Kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang pada awalnya telah menentang keras pemindahan milikan syarikat bekalan air negeri tersebut kepada kerajaan persekutuan dan sejak daripada itu, telah berjaya menguruskan syarikat bekalan airnya dengan baik sehinggakan syarikat bekalan air tersebut menjadi sebuah badan kerajaan negeri yang paling untung di dalam negara ini.

Perkara yang seterusnya adalah pengurusan perkhidmatan pungutan sampah yang dahulunya di bawah kuasa kerajaan-kerajaan negeri kini telah diambil alih oleh kerajaan persekutuan melalui beberapa konsortium-konsortium yang dilantik. Kecuali negeri-negeri Selangor, Pulau Pinang dan Perak, kesemua kerajaan negeri difahamkan telah menyerahkan sepenuhnya kuasa dan pengurusan perkhidmatan tersebut kepada kerajaan persekutuan untuk diuruskan.

Bagi perkhidmatan pengangkutan awam pula, masalah ini telahpun berlarutan dengan begitu lamanya dan sehingga kini, masih belum ada jalan penyelesaian yang berkesan. Buat masa sekarang terdapat tiga buah agensi kerajaan persekutuan yang mempunyai kuasa dan kata putus terhadap perkhidmatan pengangkutan awam ini, yakni, Lembaga Perlesenan Kenderaan Perdagangan (CVLB), Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan (JPJ) dan Suruhanjaya Pegangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD). Di kebanyakan keadaan, dasar-dasar, undang-undang serta peraturan yang ditetapkan oleh ketiga-tiga agensi persekutuan ini biasanya bertindih dan bercanggah di antara satu sama lain, dan ada pula yang telah diduplikasikan sehinggakan ianya menimbulkan kekeliruan dan percanggahan apabila adanya penguatkuasaan, pemberian lesen, perkhidmatan dan pematuhan.

Disebabkan oleh pelbagai jenis karenah dan masalah di dalam sektor pengangkutan awam ini, kerajaan-kerajaan negeri tidak dapat menyelesaikan masalah tersebut apabila adanya aduan-aduan daripada rakyat jelata mengenai ketidakberkesanan perkhidmatan pengangkutan awam di negeri-negeri masing-masing. Disebabkan oleh kelemahan dalam perkhidmatan pengangkutan awam yang telah lama berlanjutan dan tiadanya jalan penyelesaian yang muktamad, rakyat jelata terpaksa memilih untuk membeli dan menggunakan kenderaan milik sendiri untuk ke mana-mana. Akibat daripada itu, jumlah kenderaan di atas jalanraya telah meningkat dengan begitu mendadak sekali sehinggakan ianya menyebabkan kesesakan lalulintas yang paling buruk sekali dalam negara ini. Kita tengoklah keadaan di negeri-negeri Selangor, Pulau Pinang dan Kuala Lumpur sekarang, khususnya di kawasan-kawasan bandaraya yang penuh sesak dengan kenderaan pada setiap hari.

Kerajaan persekutuan boleh membina seberapa banyak jambatan, jejambat, lebuh-lebuhraya serta terowong-terowong, namum, ianya tidak akan dapat menyelesaikan masalah kesesakan lalulintas di dalam negara ini dengan berkesan jika sekiranya mutu perkhidmatan pengangkutan awam tidak diperbaiki dengan sepenuhnya dan ianya akan terus menjadi suatu beban kepada rakyat jelata yang kini sedang menggunakan kenderaan milik sendiri untuk ke mana-mana.

Isu yang seterusnya adalah berkenaan dengan pegawai-pegawai perkhidmatan awam yang sedang berkhidmat untuk kerajaan-kerajaan negeri. Kepada siapakah mereka perlu bertanggungjawab, kerajaan-kerajaan negeri atau kerajaan persekutuan? Sewaktu pegawai-pegawai perkhidmatan awam ini berkhidmat untuk kerajaan negeri, daripada siapakah mereka sepatutnya mendapatkan arahan? Kerajaan-kerajaan negeri atau persekutuan? Keadaan ini sememangnya telah banyak mengelirukan, bercanggah dan kadangkala bertentangan di antara satu sama lain.

Yang jelas di sini adalah semua pegawai-pegawai awam, baik yang berkhidmat di bawah kerajaan negeri mahupun kerajaan persekutuan adalah di bawah kawal selia Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam (JPA) yang dipertanggungjawabkan untuk menguruskan perlantikan, kenaikan pangkat, pertukaran pegawai dan pengurusan pembayaran gaji-gaji pegawai-pegawai awam. Manakala JPA pula adalah dikawal selia oleh Jabatan Perdana Menteri (JPM).

Oleh kerana kuasa dan pengurusan perkhidmatan awam ini adalah dipusatkan sepenuhnya di peringkat persekutuan, kerajaan-kerajaan negeri langsung tidak mempunyai kuasa ataupun kata pemutus di dalam hal-hal yang berkaitan dengan para pegawai-pegawai awam seperti perlantikan, kenaikan pangkat, pertukaran dan sebagainya. Keadaan yang seringkali berlaku, apabila sesebuah kerajaan negeri yang ingin mencalonkan pegawai-pegawai pilihan mereka untuk menjawat sesuatu jawatan dalam kerajaan negeri, JPA pula akan mengemukakan calon-calon mereka untuk mengisi jawatan-jawatan tersebut sambil mengetepikan pilihan yang dibuat oleh kerajaan negeri.

Perkara yang sama turut berlaku di dalam pengurusan peringkat kerajaan tempatan di mana apabila kerajaan-kerajaan negeri merancang untuk memperturunkan arahan dasar yang baru ke peringkat kerajaan tempatan, yang dipertua majlis perbandaran atau daerah dan datuk bandar dengan tiba-tiba ditukarkan oleh JPA ke jabatan-jabatan lain tanpa terlebih dahulu memaklumkan perkara tersebut kepada kerajaan negeri. Akibat daripada perbuatan JPA itu, seringkali terjadi dasar-dasar yang dilaksanakan oleh kerajaan-kerajaan negeri terbantut dan tergendala kerana ketiadaan pegawai-pegawai pelaksana secara tiba-tiba. Selain dari itu, penantian perlantikan baru oleh JPA juga sering tertangguh tanpa sebab-sebab yang munasabah.

Kerajaan-kerajaan negeri tidak mempunyai pilihan lain dan terpaksa menanti ketibaan pegawai-pegawai awam lantikan JPA yang baru bari mengisi kekosongan yang timbul kerana kerajaan-kerajaan negeri tersebut tidak mempunyai sebarang kuasa di dalam menentukan sama ada pegawai ini perlu dikekal, dinaikan pangkat atau ditukar serta ditugaskan ke projek-projek ataupun mengikut kepakaran yang diperlukan di dalam pentadbiran negeri. Hakikatnya adalah tidak ada langsung sebarang undang-undang atapun peruntukan yang membolehkan kerajaan-kerajaan negeri menahan atau membatalkan sebarang keputusan yang telah dikeluarkan oleh JPA.

Kita tengoklah contoh, apa yang telah berlaku pada kerajaan negeri Selangor sebelum ini. Kerajaan negeri dan JPA masing-masing telah mengemukakan calon-calon pilihan mereka untuk menjawat jawatan setiausaha kerajaan negeri (SUK) dan ianya telah menimbulkan perbalahan apabila JPA gagal memaklumkan  terlebih dahulu kepada kerajaan negeri mengenai aturan perlantikan barunya secara rasmi. Seorang yang dipertua majlis perbandaran yang secara tiba-tibanya telah ditukarkan ke sebuah jabatan persekutuan apabila beliau mengeluarkan kenyataan umum menyokong suatu dasar yang dipelopori oleh kerajaan negeri. Di Pulau Pinang, perkara seumpama turut berlaku, dengan menyaksikan pertukaran yang kerap di kalangan pegawai-pegawai awam kerajaan negeri yang saling bertukar ganti dalam masa yang singkat tanpa dimaklumkan secara rasmi kepada kerajaan negeri.

Masalah-masalah dan pelbagai bentuk cabaran yang diketengahkan di atas ini adalah merupakan isu-isu yang utama yang membabitkan bebanan yang terpaksa ditanggung oleh rakyat jelata. Kita juga sedar bahawa terdapat juga masalah-masalah lain yang berkait dengan perkara-perkara yang diketengahkan di sini yang kebanyakan adalah disebabkan oleh kelemahan struktur kerajaan tempatan yang ada sekarang serta pemusatan perkerajaan yang sepenuhnya. Namun demikian, bagi memberikan penekanan yang menyeluruh terhadap perubahan kepada keadaan sekarang, kita perlulah memberikan perhatian yang lebih terhadap perkara-perkara pokok di peringkat atasan sebelum kita beralih kepada peringkat yang seterusnya.

Di dalam menentukan sama ada pembaharuan tersebut dapat dilaksanakan atau sebaliknya, rakyat jelata haruslah menggunakan pemikiran mereka dengan lebih bijak apabila melaksanakan undian mereka di dalam PRU13 yang akan datang. Masa hadapan rakyat jelata adalah bergantung sepenuhnya kepada bagaimana undi mereka diajukan dan kepada siapa.

Can UMNO perform as an effective opposition?

Many of us are expecting that Umno would be send over to the opposition bench come next general elections as our people are getting fed up with its current dirty politics.

The question here is, will Umno be able to perform as an effective opposition in the first place? For more than 55 years of Umno’s ruling at the federal level as well as in most of the states, Umno leaders are still complaining that the Malay community nationwide are being sidelined and the official religion of this country, Islam is under threat. When they are complaining, it is everything about race and religion. Umno leaders are doing everything it can to drum up the sentiments of race and religion in its politics of revenge, hate and threatening.

So, for more than 55 years of governance, and yet Umno leaders are still complaining that the Malays are being sidelined and Islam is under threat. Who is in the wrong then? Why are the Malays are still being sidelined when Umno is still in power? Why is Islam under threat while Umno is still in power effectively? Why is PKR being blamed for selling away the interests of the Malays? Why is DAP being blamed for trying to establish a Christian State? Why is PAS being blamed for being unIslamic? Is this the fault of the Opposition front Pakatan Rakyat (consisting of PKR, DAP and PAS) when the Malays in this country still under Umno’s control are being sidelined and Islam is under threat?

For 55 years, and yet the Malays are still being sidelined and Islam is also under threat while Umno still controls the entire nation. That means Umno had failed in their governance one hundred percent. When this country is still under Umno, and yet they are still complaining that the race that they claimed to be representing are still being sidelined and the religion that they claimed to uphold is under threat, then Umno has been proven to be the master of all these failures.

In this case, when they failed as the government of the day, we are wondering if Umno would be able to perform as opposition members if they were to be send over to the opposing bench come next general elections? We doubt that as well. It because, when they are governing, they are doing nothing much to convince our people on many issues on our nation, which are related to public interests, such as finance, economy, government spending, rising inflation, subsidies, labour issues, illegal immigrants, rising crimes, power abuse, corruption and many more.

What Umno leaders know are merely on promoting sentiments of suspicion on race and religion by putting more and more fire so that revenge, hate and threat would rise, and if these so, Umno would definitely take advantage of the entire situation. And once the race and religious issues are being harped on continuously, they will bring in the royals to help them to drum up the entire situation, so that those who speak up against them would be labelled as “penderhaka” or persons committing treason.

So, what is Umno good for the country being in the government of the day or in the opposition bench? They would definitely serve no purpose at all as all these subject are not in the interest of our people and the nation entirely.

Therefore, if we were to vote in a new government to replace Umno or whoever it is in the BN coalition, we ought to bring in the other smaller political parties as well to perform as new Oppositions instead of passing this responsibilities over to Umno or BN. Why not give the role of the new Opposition to Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM), Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM), Parti Kesejahteraan Insan Tanah Air (KITA), Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP), Sabah & Sarawak State Reform Party (STAR), Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (Gerakan) and People’s Progressive Party (PPP) as these political parties are seen to be more of a Malaysian-oriented and issues-focused, rather than based on race or religion?

What can Umno, MCA or MIC could do? As long as Umno still exists, they will continue to harp on issues related to the Malays, Islam and imagining that they are being under threat, same goes to MCA, who will continue harping on the danger of this country might be coming under the rules of Hudud, while MIC will continue talking about Indian rights but nothing has been done in the end. Then, in this case, let us bring in the new Opposition instead of letting this role in the hands of Umno.

Umno Sudah Kehabisan Modal, Sedang Beralih Ke Zaman Jahiliah

Umno sudah kehabisan modal. Oleh kerana mereka telah kehabisan modal, Umno sehingga kini masih lagi tidak berani untuk mengumumkan pembubaran parlimen. Kata mereka, Umno dan Barisan Nasional (BN) begitu yakin sekali akan dapat mencapai kemenangan besar di dalam pilihanraya umum (PRU13) yang akan datang, tetapi mereka pula yang asyik menunda pembubaran parlimen.

Ya, Umno sudah pun ketandusan modal. Mereka ini sudah ketandusan segala-gala kebaikan yang ada padanya sehinggakan mereka terpaksa menggunakan agenda-agenda yang melibatkan keganasan, perkauman dan yang paling terbaru pornografi (adegan atau lakonan seks dalam video).

Selaku rakyat Malaysia, ianya sememangnya menyedihkan kita kerana di dalam negara ini terdapat sebuah parti politik yang telah berkuasa lebih daripada lima puluh lima tahun sanggup melakukan perkara-perkara yang keji ini demi untuk mengekalkan kuasanya. Apakah parti tersebut sudah tidak ada lagi dasar-dasar yang dapat diketengahkan kepada rakyat dan negara, sehinggakan agenda-agenda keganasan, perkauman dan pornografi terpaksa digunakan pada saat-saat yang sebegini.

Sudah lupakah Umno, bahawa negara kita yang di sebut Malaysia ini mempunyai pelbagai kaum, kebudayaan dan agama yang sangat menitikberatkan budaya-budaya dan tingkahlaku yang sopan santun, serta perlakuan modal yang beradat serta bertamadun?

Jika sekiranya Umno itu masih mendakwa diri mereka ini sebagai pejuang tunggal hak-hak orang-orang Melayu dan agama Islam, halal tak jika parti tersebut asyik memain-mainkan keganasan, sentimen perkauman dan penayangan filem atau video yang berunsurkan seks bebas? Adakah kesemua bentuk perlakuan ini seiiring dengan apa Umno perjuangkan selama ini?

Apa yang Umno sedang lakukan sekarang ini bukannya untuk memperjuang atau mempertahankan hak-hak keistimewaan orang-orang Melayu dan agama Islam pada amnya, tetapi sebaliknya apa yang mereka sedang lakukan ini kesemuanya akan merosakkan masyarakat yang kononnya mereka wakili dan fahaman agama yang mereka dakwa pertahankan selama ini.

Kita tengoklah masyarakat yang Umno asyik mendakwa telah mempertahankannya selama lebih daripada lima puluh lima tahun lamanya, apa yang sudah terjadi? Masyarakat tersebut pada majoritinya masih mundur dan tidak mendapat bekalan asas seperti elektrik, air dan jalanraya yang sempurna di kawasan-kawasan penempatan mereka, kadar jenayah dalam negara ini semakin meningkat dan ini pun majoritinya datang daripada masyarakat tersebut, keruntuhan akhlah dan moral, salahlaku seks, berkembangnya gejala mat rempit, samseng jalanan dan apajua yang bertentangan dengan agama turut datangnya daripada masyarakat tersebut.

Jadi, apa yang Umno telah dan sedang buat di dalam usaha menangani masalah tersebut? Tidak ada sebenarnya, sebaliknya Umno telah mempergunakan golongan yang telah runtuh akhlak dan moral mereka untuk membantu melakukan keganasan politik bagi menentang lawannya, iaitu parti-parti pembangkang dengan melabelkan kesemua mereka ini dengan pelbagai nama-nama NGO agar Umno tidak diheret ke dalam kancah tersebut apabila terjadinya sesuatu yang tidak diingini.

Mungkin ramai di antara kita masih tidak tahu, akan tetapi Tuhan dan Allah s.w.t. sedang memerhati segala tindak-tanduk manusia di bumi ini dan akan memastikan mereka-mereka yang bersalah itu menerima hukuman yang setimpal di suatu hari nanti.

Sudah cukuplah dengan tempoh selama lima puluh lima tahun ini. Sepatutnya negara ini akan maju ke hadapan, akan tetapi, apa yang Umno sedang lakukan ini akan membawa negara kita kembali ke zaman Jahiliah. Jahiliah itu bermaksud, sesebuah negara atau masyarakat yang sangat mundur dari segi akhlak dan sosial.

Baiklah kita usahakan perubahan untuk negara dan generasi kita yang akan datang sekarang daripada memikirkan apakah yang akan berlaku sekiranya sebuah kerajaan baru dibentuk. Fikirkanlah akibatnya, jika Umno terus diberikan "mandat". Kepentingan negara kita perlu diutamakan.

Shadow Cabinet in Malaysia. Are there any legitimacy?

Where is your Shadow Cabinet to prove your ability in governance? This is the question which is usually demanded by leaders of the Barisan Nasional (BN) to challenge the Opposition front Pakatan Rakyat (Pakatan) to prove their ability to work together (PKR, DAP and PAS) to govern this nation should they were to takeover Putrajaya after the 13th general elections (GE13).

First of all, let us all ask the BN leaders and ourselves before we jump into some sort of conclusion or being influenced by what is being mentioned by all those BN leaders. Are the institution of an Official Opposition Front Bench and the establishment of a Shadow Cabinet being recognized in our nation? Does the Federal Constitution states that such institutions for the Opposition must be established? Or are there any provisions in any laws in this country which stated that the Shadow Cabinet would be recognized and shall work equally with the government of the day to provide various check and balance?

The answers to the above questions and highlights are No. There are not even a single provision within any laws or the Federal Constitution in this country that allows the Official Opposition Front Bench to be recognized and the institutionalization of a Shadow Cabinet to provide checks on the government of the day.

In this case, are those BN leaders really sincere in wanting the Shadow Cabinet to be established at the Opposition side? Are those BN leaders aware that there are no provisions in any law nor the Federal Constitution that could recognize the Opposition's institution within the parliamentary and governance system in this country? If these BN leaders are well aware of the current situation and yet still talk cheap on this subject, we would regard their words as a mere politics of hate and to discredit their opponents as much as possible. In fact they are not sincere at all when talking about democracy in our nation.

And when Pakatan has decided to reveal the kind of Opposition Front Bench Committees which consist of three to four representatives (PKR, DAP and PAS) in each portfolios to oversee their counterparts in the Putrajaya administration, these BN leaders immediately attack the Pakatan leadership on their line-up by accusing them of disunity within the opposition coalition and the later also could not agree on the allocation of the cabinet portfolios to their component party representatives.

So, why are the BN leaders picking at the Pakatan leadership on the question of Shadow Cabinet when they knew that a proper institution for the Opposition bench has never been exist at all via any law or the Federal Constitution.

Just look at how the opposition parties in other countries work. We can look at the clear examples in New Zealand, Australia, Canada, Thailand, Japan and United Kingdom. In these countries, the opposition parties elected to their respective national legislations are recognized as Official Opposition or Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. In this status, the members of the Opposition bench in these countries are given due recognition equally to that of the government of the day. The Leader of the Opposition in these countries sits and stands on the same status with that of the Prime Minister of the sitting government and as an Opposition leader, he or she is authorized to officially establish the Shadow Cabinet to provide check and balance on the government of the day's administrations, policies and implementations.

Asides being officially recognized, the Shadow Cabinet in these countries are also being allocated a portion of the government funding in order to allow the shadow cabinet ministers and their team to work on various research work, public reviews, to have offices within their establishment and to seek many kinds of cooperation with the government ministries, departments and agencies to check and view on approvals, projects, policies and implementations which has been carried out by the government and their ministers.

We would like to ask the BN leaders, do we have all those facilities here for the Official Opposition in Malaysia? First of all, only the position of the Opposition Leader is being recognized and there are no mention that his Shadow Cabinet would also be recognize as an official status equal to that of the BN government ministries. Apart from this, Opposition Leader is only given a small token of allowance, there the fact that is there are even no allocation being provided to the Opposition members of parliament (MP).

The annual allocation are instead channel to the Fake MPs (defeated BN candidates of the currently Opposition-held constituencies) who are functioning as Constituency Coordinators working under the direct jurisdiction of the Implementation and Coordination Unit (ICU) of the Prime Minister's Department.

So, since the Oppostion MPs are being systematically denied their annual allocations and grants by the BN government, how can we all expect an unrecognized institution of Shadow Cabinet to exist and function effectively like their counterparts in other countries?

In fact, having the Opposition Front Bench Committees which consist of three to four representatives in each cabinet portfolios are already some kind of initiatives being carried out by the Pakatan leadership knowing that they will not be given any funding or allocation by the government to carry out their duties and responsibilities for the people and our nation. In doing this they will have to depend on donations from our people and other well wishers in order to get their jobs done.

Besides, Pakatan component parties have also resort to establishing their own public-funded think tank institutes in order to support their MPs and state assemblymen in carrying out their policy research and reviews. The privately owned think tanks established are the Institut Rakyat (PKR), Research for Social Advancement (DAP) and the Pusat Penyelidikan PAS (PAS).

We are pushing this buck back to the ruling BN. Where is the legitimacy of the Opposition bench in the parliament? Are there any equal recognition for the Opposition bench in this country? If you are sincere in wanting the Opposition bench to have an upright Shadow Cabinet, why are you not initiating any measures to amend the Federal Constitution or to enact any proper laws to provide due recognition to the Opposition bench and to allow them to enjoy the various annual allocations and grants for their constituencies?

For what you have been doing onto the Opposition, do you think this is real democracy? Are there any parliamentary democracy in the parliament itself? Are the Opposition MPs being provided with sufficient facilities to allow them to carry out their responsibilities as MPs and representatives of our people?

If the BN leaders couldn't do anything to improve the democracy of this institution, they should then cease all their empty talks immediately.

Reform the Parliamentary System as well!

Besides having the need to reform the entire government machinery in order to reflect its professionalism and making it into a service-oriented corporation, the Parliamentary System in this country ought to undergo the reform as well.

As we can see, eventhough our country is practicing parliamentary democracy, our nation's parliament does not seem to be functioning as it was supposed to be. Yes, there are loopholes, a lot of loopholes in the current parliamentary system. People has been commenting that Malaysia is adopting a rubber-stamped parliamentary system which is only task to proposed and approve laws. Which means, the political parties who hold the majority number of seats in the parliament shall always be a winner and limited debates are only allowed in order to provide some "democratic avenue" to the Opposition bench to provide their views.

This is correct, having an absolute majority and having always got the powers to approve and amend laws or bills does not necessarily demonstrate that our parliamentary system is sound and democratic. It is insufficient. In a democratic parliamentary system, there are more to be demonstrated in order to show to the people the transparent way of policies being decide and not dictate.

Tabling of laws and bills

When a governing party intends to table a law or bill in the parliament, the method which has been carried out were, having those books or paperwork being published and then distributed them to respective members of parliament by just putting at each of the parliamentarians' sitting positions' desks. At times, these proposed laws and bills are provided earlier but sometimes there are only provided at the last minute.

For example, the Peaceful Assembly Act, the amendments of the University and University Colleges Act (UUCA), Election Offences Act, Security Offences Act and so on were done in a rush prompting many members of parliament to complain that they do not even have the sufficient time to review and to prepare their feedbacks on those proposed laws and bills. In the end those laws and bill are simply being approved by hand-vote of majority from the ruling party's bench. So, are such practices called democracy when members of parliament are simply not been given the sufficient time to review and debate on those subject prior to the approval in parliament? This means, the law was not collectively approved but instead it was approved simply because the majority said so.

This is call, limited democracy.

Parliamentary Select Committees

As at today, the practice of establishing a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) was only being carried out whenever there are mounted pressures from certain parties or groups to make an issue into that of public interests or to bring up some matters to the attention of the parliament, such as cleaning up the electoral rolls currently being managed by the Election Commission (EC) and the Lynas Advance Material Plant (LAMP) project in Pahang.

Right now, there is only one permanent PSC overseeing the accounting and audits onto the government ministries, departments and agencies, which is called the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). The other parliamentary-based committees which are ineffective or even inactive which are still functioning only in name only, are the Selection Committee, Standing Orders Committee, House Committee and Privileges Committee.

There are no other PSC which were supposed to be formed to oversee the various government ministries, departments and agencies, to scrutinize the appointment of government officials, proposed policies, proposed laws and bills and so on.

Just look at the other countries around us, take the nearest, Thailand and The Philippines, these two countries' parliament do have sufficient numbers of select committees to oversee the ministries and departments respectively.

When we have such PSC to oversee the performance of various ministries and departments, to scrutinize the appointment of its officials and to seek their commitments on their standards and ethics, only then the many problems and mismanagement as well as the bureaucratic within the government would be able to be reduced, thus promoting and enhancing a more professional nature in the government machinery to reflect it as people or service oriented organization readily to seek and serve.

We could see now, there are a lots of unnecessary or unaudited procurement of under-quality weaponry system, submarines, naval patrol vessels or any other defense equipment by the defense ministry if continue to be left unchecked, would lead our entire nation open to external threat. As such, there should be a PSC for Armed Services to vet and scrutinize the various activities and expenditures undertaken by the defense ministry in order to ensure our nation is readily prepared in its line of defense should any threat arise.

Now coming to the number of death in police custody, corruption and power abuse within the police force, RELA and so on. These agencies are under the jurisdiction of the home affairs ministry which is responsible of maintaining the security and public order of our nation. Then, a PSC on Public Security should be established to provide a check and balance onto what is happening in its various security agencies. From time to time the PSC would then summon the inspector-general of police or the director-general of RELA for some sort of parliamentary hearing in order to ensure things and security measures are in proper order.

Then, other important PSCs which should be established are Housing and Local Government; Health; Education; Finance; Transport; Communications; Trade and Industry; Agricultural; Human Resources; Foreign Affairs; Youth and Sports; Public Works and so on. What we are trying to elaborate here is the number of PSCs should be established in accordance to the number of portfolios or combined portfolios of ministries that the government has.

Malaysian Anti Corruption Agency (MACC) and Election Commission (EC)

Other than PSCs for ministerial portfolios, PSCs should also be established to oversee the sensitive agencies such as the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) and the Election Commissions (EC) in order to ensure the effectiveness of these two organization in discharging their duties and responsibilities for the people and the nation.

Currently, both MACC and EC are under the direct jurisdiction of the Prime Minister's Department when they are supposed to be under the direct jurisdiction of and answerable to the parliament. By doing this only the people would be able to cast away their doubts on the actual impartiality of these two important agencies tasked in combating corruption and the running of general elections respectively.

Reform to Modernize, not Westernize

In many occasions, the Barisan Nasional (BN), particularly the dominant component party, Umno likes to compare modernization with westernization. Actually, these two words have complete two different meaning. Umno likes to confuse people on the Opposition's reform agenda with bringing in western methods which would undermine the ethnicity, culture and the religions in this country.

Whatever they label as westernization are wrong. Reform is not the purpose to westernize but to modernize. In gearing up our nation for the next phase, it is important that the government and businesses seeks for modernization in order to improve their service and efficiencies.

Just look at these countries, like New Zealand, Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Korea, Japan and even The Philippines, their parliaments, national legislative assemblies or congress do consist of so many portfolio-based select committees to oversee their governments' day to day administrations and activities and to ensure running of these departments and agencies are free from both political interference or influences thus promoting professional and effective service to their people at large.

That why, when you see the ruling parties of these countries change more frequently then ours, these nations are still running effectively and there are not much impact at all on these countries' economy and businesses. It is because the civil service sectors has been fully impartial and professional in discharging their responsibilities to the people and the nation irrespective of any political presence.

This is only a short commentary and proposal on how to reform and modernize our nation's parliamentary system, there are lot more to do in order to enhance the other parts within the system. In doing this, we need to seek some good examples as reference.

For those who wanted to further understand the definition of this commentary and proposal, you may log into the government websites of those countries which we had mentioned herein.

Who Will Eradicate Corruption, then?

According to Dr Chandra Muzaffar, the chairman of the Yayasan 1Malaysia, who is also the former PKR deputy president, changing the government in this country would not solve the problems of corruption within the nation's establishment.

Asides, Dr Chandra also mentioned that not only is BN corrupt but the opposition Pakatan Rakyat is also corrupt in its administrations and politics. It shows that Dr Chandra is not only narrow minded when making such statement but he is not looking at the broader prospect of the proposal made by Pakatan Rakyat in its recently released electoral manifesto.

So, does Dr Chandra mean, since Pakatan Rakyat is also corrupt, why not let BN who is "totally corrupt" to continue governing this nation so that these BN leaders could squander more in billions of Ringgit from our people? In this subject, where does Dr Chandra looking at? It looks like he looks forward for our nation to fall backwards instead of moving forward.

Yes, Dr Chandra maybe right in his thought and we will rate him 70 percent, for now. We agree that whoever is in power would become corrupt because of the materialistic nature of these politicians, especially those who has been in power for decades continuously. The fact here is, BN has already been in power for more than 55 years, while the opposition Pakatan Rakyat had just started to taste the corridor of power in March 2008 when they managed to wrest power in the states of Kedah, Perak, Penang, Selangor and Kelantan.

Let us come back to the case of Dr Chandra's word, "Pakatan Rakyat is also corrupt". Let us help Dr Chandra to understand the entire situation. Combating corruption, be it whether BN or Pakatan Rakyat is in Putrajaya would not be easy, but at least, Pakatan Rakyat leaders has the strong political will to present their effort to our people that they had undertook to combat this negative element in their Common Policy Framework and their recently released Electoral Manifesto. And this is Pakatan Rakyat's strongest political will to combat corruption.

So, Dr Chandra, where is BN's political will in combating corruption? BN has been in power for more than 55 years now. First, the Anti Corruption Agency (ACA), then it was upgraded to Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC), even then, until today, these previous and current entities are both under the Prime Minister's Department when the commission-based MACC was supposed to be under the jurisdiction of the parliament.

Since the MACC is still under the jurisdiction of the Prime Minister's Department, can we see any clear independence and impartiality of MACC in its effort to eradicate corruption? Why are all those most corrupted politicians in the BN are still in their powerful seats despite so many exposure on their wrongdoings and their millions of Ringgit in fortune which are all doubtful.

Under BN, only those small fries as well as unimportant personalities and leaders with least power within the party and administration are being charged and convicted for corruptions. Most of these so-called convicted ones were merely scapegoats standing out for their big bosses up there.

So, Dr Chandra again, is this call political will on the BN side? Why is MACC until today still being labelled as ineffective in its role in combating corruption? Why are people still having so many negative impression on the MACC until today, despite so many efforts being carried out by the later. Efforts are only educating the public on corruption. What is very weak and ineffective now are on the Enforcement and Prosecution side of the MACC, of which the BN government had until today refused to grant these powers to the MACC.

In this case, Dr Chandra, the BN government has no political will at all in combating corruption. In the lay person's point of view, the BN is not serious in this effort at all. The have created all sorts of transformation programme here and there, making so many announcements and luxurious launching, but in carrying out these efforts, these BN leaders are half-hearted.

Then, does Dr Chandra still wants the monster to remain in control of our nation just because the cat has eaten a teaspoon of sugar? Just think about it. Use your wisdom please!