No plans to make voter registration compulsory

Bernama (25/6/08): The government has no plans to make voter registration compulsory as the system in practice is conducive and not burdensome to the people.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz said if voter registration was made mandatory, it would involve enforcement of the law and could cause problems for the people.

"Compulsory voter registration will be in violation of Article 5 of the Federal Constitution with regards to personal liberty and is against democracy as practised in this country," he said in reply to Datuk Abdul Halim Abdul Rahman (PAS-Pengkalan Chepa) in the Dewan Rakyat here today.

Mohamed Nazri said the government also believed that the high number of registered voters, comprising 73 percent of citizens who were eligible to vote, indicated the people's awareness on their right to vote as provided for in the Federal Constitution.

In addition, he said, the Election Commission (EC) was always holding roadshows and setting up tables for voter registration at shopping complexes to encourage people to register as voters if they had not done so.

"So, I would like to stress here again that we do not want to force people (to register as voters) as the decision is theirs, whether to be a voter or not. We gave the people that choice."

On voters who had died, Mohamed Nazri said the EC carried out a review regularly to remove their names from the voter list for updating purpose.

Opposition MPs press Nazri over indelible ink

The Star (23/5/08): Opposition MPs, unhappy with the decision to scrap the use of indelible ink three days before the general election, put pressure on Minister in Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz.

Nazri said the advice from the Attorney-General that the use of the ink may contravene Article 119 of the Federal Constitution had been discussed at two Cabinet meetings before Parliament was dissolved.

“That Article guarantees one the right to vote. Hypothetically, there could be some voters who had obtained their ballot paper but then refused to have their nail marked with the ink.

“But we cannot stop them because they have the right to vote. When we brought this matter up to the Election Commission, it said it would prepare Borang 10A at all the voting stations.

“This form would attest to the fact that these voters, who had already cast their ballots, did not want their nail marked with the ink. But this would have gone against the original intent of introducing the ink,” he said.

To accusations from Tian Chua (PKR – Batu) and Fong Po Kuan (DAP – Batu Gajah) that this “version” differed from a previous explanation given by Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar concerning reports of smuggling in of the ink, Nazri said the latter was naturally concerned over such rumours.

“But the Cabinet’s concern then was that if this involved a lot of voters, this could lead to a disturbance and become a basis for a court case,” he said.

Nazri said EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Rashid Abdul had made the decision about the ink right after meeting PAS and DAP without referring the matter to the A-G’s office.

“If the Cabinet had directed EC to scrap the use of the ink, we would have had a lot of time to explain the reason for it. Instead, it was scrapped three days before polling day and as a result, we lost a lot of votes.

“The Cabinet rejected the use of the ink because we didn’t agree to it, but it was up to the EC to accept this decision or go ahead with its plan,” he pointed out.

Nazri also told Fong that he would need to refer to the EC about what happened to the RM2.4mil worth of ink bought from India.

Minister says he does not order ACA to investigate

Bernama (22/5/08): Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz said he had not been ordering the Anti-Corruption (ACA) Agency to investigate any case or to take statements.

He said the ACA, however, did contact him regarding a statement made by a Barisan Nasional Member of Parliament that he was offered money by the opposition to cross over.

"Since the ACA had contacted me, I asked them to get in touch with the Kota Belud MP and make a report.

They did not ask for permission (to investigate). They just informed (about the MP's statement) to facilitate their work," he said in the Dewan Rakyat today when winding up the debate on the King's address.

"If I was not informed about it, how would I be able to reply to Lim Kit Siang's (DAP-Ipoh Timur) questions on the issue," he said in reply to Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena) who had asked whether the ACA had to seek permission each time it wanted to act.

On May 15, Kota Belud MP Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahalan revealed that he was offered a large sum of money "that could last for three generations" if he defected to the opposition.

Nazri was also bombarded with questions, especially from opposition lawmakers, as to why the use of delible ink for voters was cancelled only three days before the March 8 general election, why there were conflicting statements between the prime minister and the Election Commission (EC) chairman on the matter, from where the ink was bought and what happened to it now.

He explained that the cancellation was because of the legal implications if some voters refused to be tainted with the ink (on their finger) while they had the right to vote under the Federal Constitution.

He said the use of indelible ink was to prevent multiple voting by any voter but if some voters refused the ink use, then it would defeat its purpose.

Opposition leader Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail (PKR-Permatang Pauh), Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah), Khalid Samad (PAS-Shah Alam), Dr Zulkifli Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) and Mahfuz all stood up to ask who had lied and who was responsible in the matter.

Nazri said when the Attorney-General informed the cabinet that the use of the indelible ink would have legal implications, it rejected the use and informed the EC about it.

"The cabinet had conveyed its rejection but it did not mean that it ordered the EC not to use the ink. Rejection and ordering are two different things," he added.

Clear this murky issue

A thorough probe is needed to identify and punish those responsible for the cancellation of the use of indelible ink for the March 8 polls.

The Star (22/5/08): The octopus is a master of deception. Because of its lack of a backbone, the cephalopod can squeeze into any tight spot when cornered. It can assume any position it wants, thanks to all the suckers.

It can also change its shape or colour at will, but the octopus’ most prominent trick is its amazing ability to squirt clouds of concentrated ink to obscure the scene when faced with danger.

It may be the effect of watching too many National Geographic documentaries, but since the issue of the indelible ink re-surfaced, images of the evasive cephalopod flash in the mind whenever the Election Commission (EC) is mentioned.

Of course, the comparison is a bizarre stretch of the imagination and one that is grossly unfair to the wily marine creature, which has my utmost respect.

After all, the commission, in contrast with the octopus, only appears to have evolved rather rapidly since recently by growing something resembling a spine.

Last Saturday, its chairman Tan Sri Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman made a shocking disclosure about the reversal of the decision to use indelible ink for the March 8 general election.

After opening the National Seminar on Elections 2008: Democracy at Work, he divulged that the Cabinet decided the volte-face on Feb 13, the day Parliament was dissolved and that he was told to take the rap for it.

Two rather nebulous reasons were given for the about turn, the first being security and the second, Article 119 of the Federal Constitution, which covers the right of a citizen to vote.

The Cabinet, he said, had apparently been told about a plan by PAS to sabotage the polls by smuggling in similar indelible ink from Thailand. It seems Umno members who found out about it had also brought in the ink. Rashid claimed that the police gave all the details to him in writing.

Before that story could go to print, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah clarified that the Cabinet had only suggested the cancellation of the use of indelible ink. He said it was up to Rashid to agree or proceed with the original plan.

A quick check on the powers of the EC: Under the Federal Constitution, the EC is vested with responsibility to conduct elections. As an independent authority, the commission is not in anyway subject to direction as to how elections ought to be conducted.

But in this case, it is obvious that the EC was led too easily by the Cabinet’s “suggestion.” As such, can election monitoring groups like Malaysians for Free and Fair Elections (Mafrel) and Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih), be blamed for condemning the commission of being under the thumb of the ruling party?

Rashid only officially announced the plan to erase the ink 20 days later, on March 4, two days before polling day. And he did it with an air of authority, with the country’s top lawmen – Attorney-General Gani Patail and IGP Musa Hassan – flanking him at the media conference.

The Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar has since debunked the smuggled ink story. This was his reply to Batu Gajah MP Fong Poh Kuan in Parliament on May 6:

“After police reports were studied and interviews with complainants and witnesses conducted, there was no evidence to show that (indelible) ink had been smuggled in from Thailand.

“No witness saw the ink. From the statements, no individual, syndicate or any party was identified as having been involved. The complainants and witness’ statements were only based on hearsay.”

In any case, Rashid does deserve some credit for finally coming clean on the real reason for the change of decision, but the cloud of obfuscation over the issue is a long way from being dissipated.

It looks like yet another episode of Malice in Blunderland. Whatever their motives, some people had been lying through their teeth. If their actions had influenced the Cabinet decision to change a major decision, wouldn’t it be an arrant injustice to let them go unpunished?

By right, they should be arrested and charged with making false reports and, more so, for undermining democracy, surely a crime more heinous than being part of an illegal assembly, marching peacefully for a just cause, or lighting candles at Dataran Merdeka.

Perhaps, like the tactics employed by the crafty octopus and cuttlefish, the complainants and rumour mongers were just using the ploy to deceive and camouflage. It could have well been a red herring to obscure more sinister plans.

It’s my imagination working overtime again, but couldn’t the ruse have been targeted for cheating through multi-voting elsewhere with less public scrutiny, like in Sabah, which suffers from a long-standing problem of illegal immigrants?

It is no secret that the locals in the Land Below the Wind had been kvetching about being outnumbered by foreigners, many of whom hold MyKads. Without the indelible ink, wouldn’t it have been a breeze for these people, to vote in the polls?

The IGP and the AG must initiate a thorough probe, especially when they were at hand at the EC press conference justifying the need to scrap the indelible ink. To file the case away under “No further action” is a real bummer.

The general election may be over and done with (ok, there’s still the possibility of a snap polls being called) but let’s clear up this murky matter before moving on to yet unresolved bigger issues.

In case the folks in the EC have forgotten, there needs to be a thorough clean-up of the electoral rolls. Malaysians need to be convinced that there would be no more phantom voters, multiple registrations and transfer of voters from one constituency to another.

While we are at it, how about working on redrawing the boundaries to undo the blatant disproportionate population to seat ratio and to ensure that there is no more gerrymandering of constituencies based on race?

That should keep the EC chairman busy for the next few months until he retires.

The only octopus that M. Veera Pandiyan, Deputy Editor, New Media, has truly felt sorry for is Squidward Johannsen Tentacles, the cashier at Krusty Krab Restaurant in SpongeBob SquarePants.

It was only a suggestion, says PM

The Star (18/5/08): The Cabinet had merely suggested to the Election Commission (EC) to not use the indelible ink for the general election. It was not a directive, said Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

The Prime Minister disclosed that a week before Parliament was dissolved, the Cabinet had made the suggestion, giving its reasons why it did not want the ink to be used.

“We had received information that some quarters had bought the ink although they had no authority to do so and we were suspicious that it could be used to cause confusion and complications during the voting process,” he told reporters yesterday after delivering his closing remarks at the end of the 11th MSC Malaysia International Advisory Panel Meeting.

Abdullah said the Cabinet believed that the election process would go on smoothly and all eligible voters could cast their votes if the indelible ink was not used.

“It was only a suggestion we made to the EC chairman. It was up to him to think it over and agree or to proceed with the original decision to use the ink,” he said.

When the decision to scrap the ink was announced at the eleventh hour of the general election, Barisan Nasional leaders, including Abdullah, had said that they wanted an explanation from the EC on why it was doing away with the indelible ink.

On why the Government did not come clean on the indelible ink in the first place, Abdullah said that if anything tainted the voting process it would be the Government that would be blamed.

Earlier, EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman said the Cabinet decided not to approve the proposal to use indelible ink “on the day of Parliament dissolution, on Feb 13”.

“They did not approve because of two very strong reasons, and I agreed with them over those reasons.

“One was security and the other was law, relating to Article 119 of the Federal Constitution, which states that it is the fundamental right of a person to vote,” he told the press after opening the National Seminar on Elections 2008: Democracy at Work here yesterday.

Asked if he tried to convince the Cabinet otherwise, Abdul Rashid said “he could not” , adding: “But I took responsibility for it.”

“I was told that the Cabinet had been briefed about an attempt by PAS, that they had bought some ink from Thailand, and were going around to mark old voters. And when Umno came to know, they also went and bought the ink. This was given to me in black and white by the police,” he said.

On May 6, Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said in a Parliament reply to DAP’s Batu Gajah MP Fong Po Kuan that police did not find evidence of smuggled indelible ink and statements made by complainants and witnesses were rumours.

Meanwhile, the Opposition said the revelation that it was the Cabinet that did not approve the use of the indelible ink was the “best proof” that the EC was not independent or neutral.

DAP national adviser Lim Kit Siang said it was unacceptable for the Cabinet to have made such a decision and that it went against the spirit of the Constitution of having an independent EC.

PAS research centre director Dr Dzulkifly Ahmad, said: “This is shocking. With this revelation, we come to realise the reasons and rationale why the indelible ink was withdrawn at the eleventh hour. His remark vindicates our claim all along that this is the underpinning reasons. The jigsaw puzzle is now complete.”

Transparency International Malaysia president Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam said he was not only surprised but confused by the conflicting statements.

Malaysia debates indelible ink not used for polls

Thaindian News (18/5/08): Malaysians are debating why indelible ink, imported from India, was not used during the March general elections with the government saying it had “merely suggested” to the election commission (EC) not to use it. The cabinet merely suggested to EC not to use the indelible ink for the general elections. It was not a directive, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said Saturday.

EC chief Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman now wants a review of the poll body’s law and the powers given under the constitution.

It was something “the EC actually requires in order to put the commission in a position of strength. A position where you can really determine the proper conduct of elections,” he was quoted in The Star Sunday.

The prime minister disclosed that a week before parliament was dissolved, the cabinet had made the suggestion, giving its reasons why it did not want the ink to be used.

The suggestion had come after reports that the opposition Pan Islamic Malaysian Party (PAS) had got its own supplies following which the ruling United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) also procured supplies from outside, independent of the government.

The government “acted cautiously” to prevent the use of ink for electoral practices. “We had received information that some quarters had bought the ink, although they had no authority to do so and we were suspicious that it could be used to cause confusion and complications during the voting process,” Badawi told the media Saturday.

About 45,000 bottles of indelible ink had been earlier imported from India that uses it for its own elections and sells to other countries as well.

Badawi, who said everything went well (in the elections) and that everyone had accepted the results, questioned why the matter was being turned into an issue.

“It’s not as if by not using the ink, the whole (elections) process would have been nullified,” the New Straits Times said Sunday.

He said he hoped the media would drop the issue as the elections were over.

However, the debate has revived since Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar said in a parliament reply May 6 that the police did not find evidence of smuggled indelible ink and statements made by complainants and witnesses were rumours.

He said the cabinet believed that the election process would go on smoothly and all eligible voters could cast their votes if the indelible ink was not used.

“It was only a suggestion we made to the EC chairman. It was up to him to think it over and agree or to proceed with the original decision to use the ink,” he said.

When the decision to scrap the use of the ink was announced at the eleventh hour of the general elections, Barisan Nasional leaders including Abdullah had said that they wanted an explanation from the EC on why it was doing away with the indelible ink.

The opposition said the revelation that it was the cabinet that did not approve the use of the indelible ink was the “best proof” that the EC was not independent or neutral.

Transparency International Malaysia’s Indian origin President Ramon Navaratnam said he was not only surprised but confused by the conflicting statements.

Polls body gets 235 complaints

NST (9/5/08): The Election Commission received 235 complaints between 2004 and March about voters who could not find their names in the electoral roll.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said the names were removed for several reasons, including doubts about the identity of voters after the National Registration Department (NRD) could not find their identity card numbers in its database.

He said other reasons included identity cards of "voters" belonging to other people and the names of the dead appearing in the roll.

"As a follow-up on the complaints, the Election Commission referred the matter to the NRD to confirm the status of those who claimed their names were missing."

He added that investigations showed that 72 complaints resulted from wrong data entry in NRD records, which had disqualified them as voters.

He said the NRD chief registrar had inserted the names of 19 people (2004), 17 people (last year) and 36 in March in the roll.

"The NRD has also confirmed that another 149 voters have evidence to show that they are Malaysian citizens and that their names should be inserted into the electoral roll."

EC wants provision for anti-hop law

The Star (16/5/08): The anti-hopping law should be drafted and a new provision inserted into the Federal Constitution, Election Commission (EC) deputy chairman Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar proposed.

He said it was about time an anti-hopping law was introduced, and likened MPs jumping to another party as breaching the trust of voters.

“The EC has never discussed this issue, and feels there is no need to do so, but in my personal opinion, if we look at the purpose and objective of the elections, it is a rational move to provide a law to prevent party-hopping,” he told The Star’s Malay news portal mStar Online.

Wan Ahmad said a special provision could be included in the Federal Constitution to get around Article 48(6).

Article 48(6) of the Constitution states that a person who resigns his membership of the House of Representatives shall, for a period of five years beginning with the date on which his resignation takes effect, be disqualified from being a member of the House of Representatives.

“If the Government is serious, we can insert a new provision in the Constitution, noting that Articles 113 to 120 touch on many aspects relating to elections.”

Wan Ahmad said Article 48(6) was introduced to prevent wakil rakyat from resigning and recontesting just to test their popularity.

“Therefore, a subsection related to the behaviour of MPs and state assemblymen can be included, like the Government taking action to prevent elected representatives from resigning to test their popularity,” he said.

Wan Ahmad acknowledged that there were views that having an anti-hopping law contravened the freedom to pick parties.

“But actually, the wakil rakyat is picked based on the party, and he contested under that particular party’s ticket, manifesto and beliefs.

“So if they choose to leave the party after they are elected by voters, it is a breach of trust,” he said.

Time running out for Abdullah

Aliran (13/5/08): Abdullah Badawi has declared his determination to ensure efficiency, commitment, service to the people and an end to corruption and to pay special attention to the people’s problems. But does he have enough people in Umno to help him? Can he push through meaningful reforms before he is shown the door, wonders K George.

We have already gone through several analyses and comments. I too wish to add to them.

Bersih consisting of DAP, Pas, PKR, PSM and several NGOs called upon the Election Commission (EC) to ensure that the 12th general election would be free and fair, emphasising that some of the past elections (even including by-elections) were neither fair nor free. The Commission responded with certain assurances, one of which was the use of indelible ink.

The Aliran Monthly election issue published a few days after Nomination Day carried a cover story that strongly urged the people to vote for a change. Its editor, P Ramakrishnan, did not mince his words in emphasising the importance of drastically reducing the Barisan Nasional’s long-standing two-thirds majority.

For my part, when Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi started setting up corridors in every nook and cranny of Malaysia, I wrote a couple of articles highlighting his grandiose promises to the people, his shortcomings as Prime Minister, and the drastic increase in corruption and crime in the country.

Ethnic harmony

I am sure that most of the people in Malaysia are happy with the way they voted. The Barisan Nasional has been finally denied the two-thirds parliamentary majority. Besides that, there are now unbelievably five states under the control of the opposition. In spite of the changed political scenario, by and large there is a feeling of unity and harmony among Malaysians. The strident voices of the few fanatics failed to unsettle the peace and harmony of the nation.

Coming back to the election result, I believe there will be harmony amongst the ethnic groups, less competition, improvement in democracy and human rights and very clear setbacks for cronyism and nepotism.

What about open tender? Mahathir and Abdullah both promised open tender but hardly practised it. I hope and pray that the government henceforth will practise social justice, which will remove marginalisation and ensure eradication of poverty.

Parliamentary democracy

Malaysia has chosen parliamentary democracy for its system of governance - but are we really practising it? The system has three separate entities – the Executive, the Legislature (Parliament) and the Judiciary.

In 1988, the then Lord President Tun Salleh Abas and two other senior judges were dismissed by a kangaroo tribunal, manipulated by the Executive. Later, Lim Guan Eng, the present new chief minister of Penang , was imprisoned for 18 months, having been found guilty under the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) and the Sedition Act. What was his crime?

As a Member of Parliament, he was approached by a Malay grandmother for help. She claimed that her 15-year-old granddaughter was raped by a Chief Minister, who was not even questioned by the authorities. When I came to know that the girl had given birth to a child, I suggested in one of my articles that a DNA profile be performed to determine paternity. But who cares!

How many of you are aware that more than 950 journalists had appealed to Dr. Mahathir to repeal the PPPA but in vain. The PPPA empowers the Minister concerned to cancel, withdraw or suspend the licence permit at any time at his sole discretion. His decision cannot be challenged in a court of law. If you go through our statutes, quite a number of the laws have such ouster provisions.

Please bear in mind that we the people elect our representatives to Parliament and the respective State Assemblies to run the country/state. This is basically what democracy is all about. Instead, our elected representatives are controlled by their respective party ‘whips’. Yes, the whip can make you vote against your conscience. Our first PM, Tunku Abdul Rahman, enacted the Internal Security Act (ISA), an atrocious piece of legislation, in 1960. The ISA allows the police to enter a person’s house even at an unearthly hour to arrest him, take him away and lock him up.

Our new Chief Minister of Penang was a victim of the ISA in 1987. His father, not knowing where in heavens his son had been taken to, went to the police station in Kuala Lumpur. A smiling police officer arrested the father and imprisoned him. The officer thanked the father for voluntarily surrendering!

Talking about the most undemocratic and cruel ISA, five Hindraf leaders have been detained under this notorious ISA. One of them, lawyer, S A Manoharan, stood for election and won without personally campaigning. He is now an Assembly member, which means the people’s representative. This was a clear rebuff to Abdullah and a total rejection of Abdullah’s reason for undemocratically detaining the five Hindraf leaders.

Peaceful demonstration is everyone’s right. But for organising a very successful mammoth demonstration these five leaders have been put under ISA on unproven charges. Please, Mr. PM, start your second term of premiership by releasing them, and redeeming your tarnished reputation.

Malaysia's new Cabinet

The new cabinet consists of 32 ministers including the Prime Minister and his deputy. Malaysia’s progress, prosperity, reputation and ethnic harmony all depend upon the Cabinet’s ability, commitment and honesty.

The name of a well-known woman is missing from the list of cabinet ministers. She was investigated by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), which concluded that there was a prima facie case against her for illegally giving out 28.7 million shares to five persons who are closely connected to well-known politicians. For reasons unknown to me, she was also under investigation for giving away thousands of Approved Permits (AP). The value of just one AP is anywhere between RM15, 000 and RM30, 000. There was a government announcement before the elections that anyone under ACA investigation would not be allowed to contest in the elections. Would she have come under that category, I wonder? Anyway, she appears to be upset.

Corruption and crime

In 2004, a few months after Abdullah became the PM, I mentioned in an article that our fourth premier, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was seen as the God-sent saviour of Malaysia. But now he is no more ssen in that light! Corruption and crime seem to be the order of the day. The PM himself mentioned over a year ago that increasing corruption is hurting our economy.

It is our duty to fight against the serious menace of corruption and crime.

The scourge of money politics

During elections in Malaysia, money politics spreads its ugly wings – though hard evidence is hard to come by. Nonetheless, there were a few instances of candidates mysteriously withdrawing from contests, leaving his only opponent to claim victory uncontested.

During the recent elections, a PKR candidate did not turn up to file his nomination papers. He just disappeared; his house was locked; his family was not to be seen anywhere. Days later he was discovered holidaying in Port Dickson. It must have been a well-earned holiday! Is this not another form of money politics? If so, it must eradicated so that our election can be free and fair.

After the election, when I tried to find out whether my PKR friends who had contested the election had won, I was informed that they were all locked up in hotels purportedly for brainstorming and that they could not be reached. I was not only shocked but became worried. It was only later that I came to know that there were attempts to buy some of them.

The Suara Keadilan of the PKR published after the election carried a story on page 6 alleging that Khairy Jamaluddin had lost the election by 83 votes on the first count but the result was reversed with a bundle of postal votes on the second count. Khairy won by 5,746! I was told that the result would be challenged in the court but this is left to be seen.

Many believe, rightly or wrongly, that the BN resorts to such illegal and shameful practices through the postal ballots to tilt the balance in favour of the BN.

U-turn on indelible ink

A few months ago, the Election Commission chairman gave us something to cheer about by announcing the use of indelible ink to stop phantom voting. A few weeks before the 8 March election, it was reported that the EC had ordered nearly 50,000 bottles of the indelible ink costing about RM2.4 million from Mysore, India. But days before the election, the Chairman rudely shocked the nation by stating that the Commission overlooked the enactment of the necessary legislation to permit the use of the indelible ink! But the BN remembered to amend the Constitution to extend the Chairman’s term of tenure to ensure that he was around for the election.

I doubt anybody believed him. The talk is that the election analysts of the Barisan Nasional would have come to the conclusion that the BN was going to face an unimaginable electoral setback. Was this the reason why the BN government extended the service of the Chairman for another year? The net result was that many believe that bus-loads of phantom voters were transported to voting centres.

Abdullah's change of style

The 12th general election had opened the eyes of the people. They now know they have the power not only to change state governments but to teach the arrogant BN a lesson that will not be easily forgotten. They will no longer be pushed around and taken note of democratic countries where ordinary people have brought about effective changes through the ballot box.

Abdullah must have taken note of the peoples mood. On 19 March, a day before Prophet Muhammad’s birthday, Abdullah declared his determination to ensure efficiency, commitment, service to the people and an end to corruption and to pay special attention to the people’s problems. But does he have enough people in UMNO to help him?

There are many Malays who are educated, intelligent, honest, humble, capable and incorruptible. But hardly any of them get elected to the Umno leadership because of rampant money politics. Good people without money and connection cannot get into leadership position in UMNO. That is why UMNO is in such a bad shape. Eventually money politics will destroy UMNO. This is also Dr Mahathir’s prediction. Just imagine, Mahathir himself was not able to get elected as a delegate (a simple post) for the Kubang Pasu division to enable him to participate in the Umno general assembly last year. He and others say money politics was the reason why he did not win enough votes to be elected. Even an ex-PM who had ruled the country with absolute authority for 22 years can be a victim of money politics.

Now that the elections are over, Abdullah should concentrate his energy in running the country effectively.

Here are a few pressing issues that need the urgent attention of the BN:

* IPCMC - The PM was largely responsible for the establishment of the Royal Commission on Police. He promised to implement the Commission’s recommendations, one of which was to establish an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC). It is going to be three years or so but there is no sign of IPCMC. Please implement without any further delay.
* Attorney General - The A-G must be answerable to Parliament. Let us not have another Mokhtar Abdullah.
* Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) - The ACA must be independent and their investigation report of crimes must be made public.
* Local Council elections - Please re-introduce elections for Local Councils as recommended by the Athi Nagappan committee years ago. Councillors must be accountable to the people.
* Freedom of Information - It is time Malaysia enacted a Freedom of Information Act instead of hiding their misdeeds under the Official Secrets Act (OSA).

I hope and pray that PM Abdullah will fulfil all the promises he made way back in 2004.

No evidence of indelible ink smugglers

Malaysiakini (6/5/08): The Election Commission's (EC) controversial decision to

MCPX

cancel the use of the indelible ink four days before the March 8 polls was based on hearsay evidence, the Dewan Rakyat was told today.

Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena): But what happened to the cases where the police had succeeded in tracking down who the culprits were? The allegation on the smugglers of the indelible ink had been an excuse by the government, especially the police, to remove the use of in the first place. (Full report)

EC under fire over ink issue

The Star (8/5/08): The Election Commission (EC) came under fire from both sides of the House following the disclosure that police investigation showed there was no evidence that indelible ink had been brought in from Thailand.

Transport Minister Datuk Ong Tee Keat said it was only appropriate for the EC to clear the air over the last-minute scrapping of the proposed use of indelible ink in the last general election. “It needs to explain the entire episode to the people.”

He was commenting on a written reply by Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar on Tuesday that with the case having been referred to the Deputy Prosecutor’s office, the matter was now classified “no further action”.

Former Human Resources Minister and Alor Gajah MP Datuk Seri Dr Fong Chan Onn said it was unfortunate that the scrapping of use of the ink had influenced the public's perception of the Government.

“It created issues, and the Opposition exploited it. It is unfortunate that the Barisan Nasional suffered because of an error in judgment on the part of the EC,” he said.

Plantation Industries and Commodities Minister Datuk Peter Chin said the EC should have used a more progressive method to ensure that all voters only voted once, such as biometric identity.

Jerlun MP Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir said the EC was “hated” by both sides over its decision to scrap the use of ink, particularly those satisfied with the outcome in the last election.

“Give them space to decide on what’s best for the rakyat next. There are other ways besides using indelible ink to ensure election results are not disputed,” he said.

Opposition leader and PKR president Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail said Syed Hamid’s reply showed that the Government had merely acted on baseless claims.

“Now they have found that everything was just hearsay. Why didn’t they want us to use indelible ink in the first place, while India could do it?” she asked.

PKR vice-president Azmin Ali said it showed that there was a concerted effort by Barisan Nasional, Umno and the police to deny voters a free and fair election.

“We demand the Election Commission and the police be independent bodies.”

PAS Youth chief Salahuddin Ayob said the minister’s answers had proven the Opposition’s allegations of a conspiracy between the police and Umno.

PAS MP for Shah Alam Khalid Abdul Samad said it showed that the EC chairman had failed in his duty.