Sebagai gerakan Islam yang menjadikan al-Quran dan Sunnah sebagai petunjuk, PAS tentunya akan pastikan setiap langkah yang dihayun berpijak pada landasan syarak.
Soal tahaluf siyasi atau kerjasama politik bukan perkara baru bagi PAS. PAS pernah berbahas panjang sebelum memutuskan samada menyertai kerajaan campuran dengan Perikatan atau tidak. Kemudian, sebelum menjadi parti komponen BN ketika mula-mula BN tertubuh menggantikan Perikatan, PAS juga membahaskan soal ini.
Namun ketika itu belum ada Majlis Syura Ulama. Walau pun ada Dewan Ulama, namun ia tidak ada peranan ala-legislatif MSU. Istilah Tahaluf Siyasi pun belum popular.
Persoalan tahaluf siyasi mula dibahaskan dengan terperinci menjelang kerjasama PAS-Semangat 46 sebelum Pilihanraya Umum 1990. Sebelum PRU 1999, sekali lagi perkara ini dibincangkan bagi menjelaskan kedudukan hukum berkaitan kerjasama dengan DAP.
Namun, posisi PAS hari ini jauh berubah. Hari ini PAS berdepan dengan realiti sebagai anggota kerajaan campuran. Kerajaan Selangor, Perak mahu pun Kedah bukan kerajaan PAS, namun kerajaan pakatan. Setiap gerak PAS akan kerap dipersimpangan antara agenda Islam dan hasrat rakan-rakan. Di sinilah perlu ada satu garis panduan tahaluf dalam pemerintahan kerajaan pakatan.
Tahaful siyasi menjelang 1990 tidak lagi relevan. Pada waktu itu, PAS berjaya meletakkan asas bahawa Islam sebagai ad-deen sebagai asas kerjasama. Hasilnya, bila kerajaan Angkatan Perpaduan Ummah tertubuh, Tok Guru Nik Aziz tanpa ragu mengisytiharkan Islam sebagai addeen sebagai asas kepada tema pemerintahan kerajaan Kelantan yang berslogan Membangun Bersama Islam.
Tahaluf siyasi menjelang 1999 juga belum cukup mantap untuk dijadikan rujukan. Dokumen tahaluf pada waktu itu lebih menjurus kepada kerjasama sebagai pembangkang. Terma rujukannya adalah persetujuan untuk berpakat dengan KeAdilan dan DAP dalam soal-soal yang disepakati termasuklah dalam berdepan dengan pemerintah BN. Dalamnya tiada panduan tentang pemerintahan dalam kerajaan campuran bersama-sama parti lain, terutamanya DAP.
Pilihanraya 2008 ini memaksa PAS untuk melangkah lebih jauh kehadapan. Penguasaan di peringkat negeri bersama-sama dengan rakan pakatan lain menjadi asas pengalaman untuk memerintah negara. Namun sebagai harakah Islam PAS perlu memastikan laluan dan batasnya, agar PAS selaku komponen kerajaan tidak pula menjadi sasaran cemuhan pencinta Islam.
Selama ini PAS mengkritik kerajaan kerana tidak melaksanakan Islam. PAS juga kuat mengkritik DS Anwar ketika beliau cuba 'mengislamkan' kerajaan dari dalam dulu. Polisi kerajaan berkaitan judi, arak, pergaulan bebas, hiburan melampau, penolakan hudud, kuasa Mahkamah Syariah yang terhad serta segala macam peraturan taghut kerajaan BN selama ini menjadi sasaran PAS dan para ulama pro PAS. Maka, apa sikap PAS dalam soal-soal ini bila bersama dengan kerajaan campuran?
Tak dinafikan bahawa perkara di atas itu bukan segalanya dalam perjuangan PAS. Soal kebajikan rakyat, hak kebebasan, penentangan rasuah, keadilan sosial, serta banyak lagi tema besar yang dikongsi oleh PAS dan rakan BA lain. Mungkin ada yang berkata:"Buat apa nak bising-bising perkara ini? Kita buat perkara yang disepakati dulu? Yang tu cerita kemudian!". Ya, kita boleh berkata begitu, namun sikap ini tidak boleh menyelesaikan masalah. Jangan sampai bila ia sudah meletup dan ribut, barulah kita sibuk mencari dalil, rasional dan jawapan. Zaman defensif sudah berlalu, PAS khususnya para ulama perlu bertindak segera dan cepat.
Secara perincinya PAS perlu mentajdidkan (memperbaharui-menyegarkan) Fiqh Tahaluf Siyasi yang dirangka dahulu. Selain itu, PAS juga perlu merangka Fiqh Taghyir (Perubahan) atau Fiqh Tajdid (Pembaharuan) bagi memberikan garis panduan dalam langkah-langkah perubahan ke arah pemerintahan Islam.
Para ulama di Malaysia amat memerlukan daya penelitian yang tajam dan luas, serta memahami waqi' di Malaysia. Hakikat bahawa negara ini berbilang kaum perlu diambil kira. Juga realiti kejahilan umat muslim dan non-muslim tentang Islam dan pemerintahan Islam juga perlu diperhatikan. Usah terlalu terikat dengan fatwa ulama dibenua Arab atau Indo-Pakistan. Latar budaya dan komposisi agama di sana jauh berbeza.
Ulama haraki di Malaysia perlu mampu berdiri sendiri merangka fiqh yang sesuai dengan realiti. Usah syok sendiri sehingga lupa untuk mendapatkan pandangan dari pakar politik, pakar undang-undang semasa, pakar antropologi dan ekonomi. Fiqhul Waqi' tak akan mampu dikuasai tanpa pandangan dan panduan dari pakar-pakar disiplin ilmu lain.
Bila PAS bersama dengan parti-parti lain menubuhkan kerajaan campuran, persoalan-persoalan asas ini perlu diteliti agar setiap tindakannya tidak merempuh batas syarak:
1. Adakah asas PAS menyertai pakatan itu?
2. Adakah penyertaan itu membolehkan PAS melaksanakan Islam? Jika tidak, adakah penyertaan itu mendatangkan lebih banyak manfaat dari mudarat? Atau ia dikira memilih mudharat yang ringan antara dua mudharat? Perincikan apakah manfaat dan mudarat yang dimaksudkan itu.
3. Apakah yang perlu menjadi syarat asas penyertaan PAS dalam kerajaan campuran itu? Jika berlaku pelanggaran syarat oleh rakan-rakan, apakah tindakan PAS?
4. Sejauh manakah PAS boleh berkompromi dalam soal hudud, judi, arak, dan seumpamanya?
5. Adakah kompromi itu bermaksud 'penangguhan pelaksanaan Islam'? Jika ia ditangguhkan, sampai bila ia akan tamat?
6. Apakah dalil dan hujah yang mengizinkan tindakan-tindakan PAS di atas?
Harap-harap, para ulama PAS dengan bantuan ulama-ulama lain termasuk dari IPT, pondok dan lain-lain--juga ulama antarabangsa-- dapat duduk dan memerah otak bagi meletakkan garis panduan ini.
Dalam pergolakan politik hari ini, tak mustahil PAS dan rakan-rakan akan memerintah Malaysia dalam masa yang sangat dekat. Keperluan kepada perkara ini amat mendesak dan penting. Hari ini pun saya percaya pimpinan PAS di Perak dan Selangor dalam teraba-raba menantikan panduan syarie kerja berkerajaan campuran. Jangan pula satu hari nanti penceramah bebas atau NGO Islam, serta rakyat akan berkata:'Apa beza PAS dengan UMNO--kedua-dua tak laksana Islam". Masa tu baru lah baru lah nak menggelabah.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Pak Lah ibarat buah ranum
Perlu kah anda desak Pak Lah letak jawatan. Tak ada bukti kukuh bahawa negara akan makin sejahtera bila Pak Lah berhenti sekarang dan diganti oleh Najib. Rasanya lebih baik Pak Lah kekal dulu sehingga Anwar ke Parlimen dan buat undi tak percaya ke atasnya. Atau sehingga Ku Li atau sapa-sapa yang jantan melawannya.
Masa tu UMNO pecah dua atau tiga. Atau sehingga PRU berikutnya sekitar tahun 2012. Jika Pak Lah terus kekal hingga tahun tu, insyaallah bukan sahaja India dan Cina terus meluat, orang Melayu di Kota Tinggi dan Ulu Tembeling pun mengidam kat BR.
Pak Lah ibarat buah belimbing yang ranum. Biar dia dia terus masak, lembik dan reput di situ. Dia akan gugur sendiri. Itu lebih baik daripada Najib mengambil alih dan pura-pura meremajakan UMNO (berapa kali dah UMNO nak diremajakan!).
Masa tu UMNO pecah dua atau tiga. Atau sehingga PRU berikutnya sekitar tahun 2012. Jika Pak Lah terus kekal hingga tahun tu, insyaallah bukan sahaja India dan Cina terus meluat, orang Melayu di Kota Tinggi dan Ulu Tembeling pun mengidam kat BR.
Pak Lah ibarat buah belimbing yang ranum. Biar dia dia terus masak, lembik dan reput di situ. Dia akan gugur sendiri. Itu lebih baik daripada Najib mengambil alih dan pura-pura meremajakan UMNO (berapa kali dah UMNO nak diremajakan!).
Thursday, March 27, 2008
A strong, compassionate nation
Petra Gimbad
"Freedom is first of all a responsibility before the God from whom we come." – Alan Keyes
Two things have haunted me during the last month or so. First, the bloody tribal wars in Kenya after their most recent elections; the second, the book Infidel, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
A dear Kenyan friend was dazed when I called to ask whether he and his loved ones were alright. Thankfully, they were. He gave his take on what happened back home.
"There were the elections. The victory was close, and those who lost, were suspicious that the elections were rigged. Frankly, I am too. Now they’re fighting and killing each other based on ethnic lines. My neighbours are fighting and killing each other."
His words chilled: "The elections before this recent one was good. People felt such a wave of optimism, there was hope for the country. Had you asked me how I felt in 2002, I could not have foreseen what’s happening now. I did not."
It is Kenya, once a model for African nations, which makes me realise what a fragile thing peace is – considering such a thing happened in a place once full of hope, in just a few years. How easily we swing back to our cultural roots to justify evil.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, formerly a Dutch politician of Somalian origin, has received death threats for her views on Islamic fundamentalism.
Some attribute the historical origins of fundamentalism to Protestant extremism, for its black-and-white explanations of what the world should be and how we should behave through the Bible.
Holy books rely on the interpretation of human beings. It is some of these interpretations that many fear.
The view in Infidel that Islam justifies terrorism and cruelty to women is too simplistic to my mind; still, it is a powerful book, compelling and asks difficult questions requiring urgent answers.
A friend noted that this fundamentalism, this desire to understand the world too simplistically, is a force which is sweeping through the world. "It’s happening in New Zealand too," he said, "and we’re quite an atheistic country."
I suspect that people are overwhelmed by what’s happening locally and globally; they are confused and struggling because they cannot understand what is going on through the lens they have been given to view society.
We have inherited and cultured outdated education systems that do not equip us with the skills to cope with a complex world. I may be wrong.
Since the results of the Malaysian elections emerged, I have been dazed. A taxi driver commented a couple of months ago, that he supports Barisan Nasional but wants a stronger opposition so that better laws will be passed.
His perspective, which moves beyond naming some parties as good and others as bad, was heartening. I still maintain in principle that both capable and incapable politicians exist in all parties alike.
What matters more is that our identity as a democracy gives voice for our complex society to voice its needs and wants, and to voice them in a way that is heard. Heard in such a way that it is implemented by the system in a compassionate manner and which allows solidarity to flourish.
When I read exuberant emails from euphoric Malaysians who cannot stop smiling, I am glad, for I am invigorated too. Not because the opposition has won, but that a stronger system of checks-and-balances is now in place. This is just the start.
The running of a country is a complex thing and too important to be left in the hands of politicians from any party. I hope for and feel that we are capable of great changes within the next few years, but I fervently pray that we are conscious as a nation that change has to occur at all levels.
The issues which existed for the last few decades have not disappeared. Apathy still abounds – there is a tone of victory which rings "We hope and know that the opposition will achieve what we want" without thought to what our responsibilities are as citizens and voters from now until the next election. Ironically, many who cheer and jeer consist of those who did not bother to register to vote and were planning to migrate.
If we really care for this country, we will realise that the fight to build a nation that is strong yet compassionate is not a sprint effort in the form of one election. The marathon is not over; the battle must be fought for the long haul.
Petra is a media officer at the All Women’s Action Society. Comments: feedback@thesundaily.com
"Freedom is first of all a responsibility before the God from whom we come." – Alan Keyes
Two things have haunted me during the last month or so. First, the bloody tribal wars in Kenya after their most recent elections; the second, the book Infidel, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
A dear Kenyan friend was dazed when I called to ask whether he and his loved ones were alright. Thankfully, they were. He gave his take on what happened back home.
"There were the elections. The victory was close, and those who lost, were suspicious that the elections were rigged. Frankly, I am too. Now they’re fighting and killing each other based on ethnic lines. My neighbours are fighting and killing each other."
His words chilled: "The elections before this recent one was good. People felt such a wave of optimism, there was hope for the country. Had you asked me how I felt in 2002, I could not have foreseen what’s happening now. I did not."
It is Kenya, once a model for African nations, which makes me realise what a fragile thing peace is – considering such a thing happened in a place once full of hope, in just a few years. How easily we swing back to our cultural roots to justify evil.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, formerly a Dutch politician of Somalian origin, has received death threats for her views on Islamic fundamentalism.
Some attribute the historical origins of fundamentalism to Protestant extremism, for its black-and-white explanations of what the world should be and how we should behave through the Bible.
Holy books rely on the interpretation of human beings. It is some of these interpretations that many fear.
The view in Infidel that Islam justifies terrorism and cruelty to women is too simplistic to my mind; still, it is a powerful book, compelling and asks difficult questions requiring urgent answers.
A friend noted that this fundamentalism, this desire to understand the world too simplistically, is a force which is sweeping through the world. "It’s happening in New Zealand too," he said, "and we’re quite an atheistic country."
I suspect that people are overwhelmed by what’s happening locally and globally; they are confused and struggling because they cannot understand what is going on through the lens they have been given to view society.
We have inherited and cultured outdated education systems that do not equip us with the skills to cope with a complex world. I may be wrong.
Since the results of the Malaysian elections emerged, I have been dazed. A taxi driver commented a couple of months ago, that he supports Barisan Nasional but wants a stronger opposition so that better laws will be passed.
His perspective, which moves beyond naming some parties as good and others as bad, was heartening. I still maintain in principle that both capable and incapable politicians exist in all parties alike.
What matters more is that our identity as a democracy gives voice for our complex society to voice its needs and wants, and to voice them in a way that is heard. Heard in such a way that it is implemented by the system in a compassionate manner and which allows solidarity to flourish.
When I read exuberant emails from euphoric Malaysians who cannot stop smiling, I am glad, for I am invigorated too. Not because the opposition has won, but that a stronger system of checks-and-balances is now in place. This is just the start.
The running of a country is a complex thing and too important to be left in the hands of politicians from any party. I hope for and feel that we are capable of great changes within the next few years, but I fervently pray that we are conscious as a nation that change has to occur at all levels.
The issues which existed for the last few decades have not disappeared. Apathy still abounds – there is a tone of victory which rings "We hope and know that the opposition will achieve what we want" without thought to what our responsibilities are as citizens and voters from now until the next election. Ironically, many who cheer and jeer consist of those who did not bother to register to vote and were planning to migrate.
If we really care for this country, we will realise that the fight to build a nation that is strong yet compassionate is not a sprint effort in the form of one election. The marathon is not over; the battle must be fought for the long haul.
Petra is a media officer at the All Women’s Action Society. Comments: feedback@thesundaily.com
DrM speaks up on Rulers and politicians
By: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad (Fri, 28 Mar 2008)
A Concerned Malaysian has expressed his worry over the role being played by Sultans in the appointment of the Mentri Besar.
His Royal Highnesses have clearly refused to take the advice of the Chief Minister i.e. the Prime Minister. Instead, they have chosen on their own a member of the state legislature to head the Government.
We hear a lot of opinions on the propriety of the action by the Sultan. Some say he has the right to do this while others point out that as a constitutional ruler, he could not do this.
The Constitution says that the Ruler or Head of State must choose the elected member who enjoys the support of the majority of members in the legislative body to be the Prime Minister or the Mentri Besar. Subject to this provision, the Ruler it is who chooses and appoints the Prime Minister or Mentri Besar.
The Prime Minister, as Prime Minister, has no role in the choice of the State Mentri Besar or Ketua Menteri. His naming of candidate who should be the Mentri Besar is purely a party matter. Obviously, if the State is captured by the Opposition Party, he cannot name the candidate.
However, if the Ruler chooses someone who does not enjoy majority support, he could be deposed at a sitting of the legislative body through a vote of "no confidence".
After that, another member can be appointed by the Ruler to take his place. But if for some reason, there is no other candidate or the candidate with majority support is considered unsuitable by the Ruler, a new Government cannot be formed. The Ruler may then dissolve the legislative body and a new election may be held.
This new election may lead to the same impasse. The Ruler may not like the member with majority support.
However, it should be noted that this kind of thing had never happened during the premiership of the four previous Prime Ministers. Concerned Malaysians should wonder why.
Is it just that the particular Ruler is being difficult, unwilling to accept the principles of democracy, wanting to return to feudalism and the absolute authority of the monarch?
I do not think so. There must be a reason why the Ruler refuses to accept the candidate named by the party. But the Ruler chooses not to reveal the reasons and indulge in public debates. He merely expresses his displeasure by refusing to do what normally the Rulers would do.
Concerned Malaysians must ask what has the particular candidate done which is so wrong that it incurs the displeasure of the Ruler.
There are lots of talks in the town. Terengganu is blessed with petroleum deposits. It should get 5% of the total earning from oil production. The Federal Government; fearing the previous PAS government might use this money wrongly had withheld payment.
But when the Barisan Nasional (BN) regained Terengganu the money, now called "Wang Ehsan", was lavishly spent by the Federal Government on Terengganu. It is not a small sum. Over these years "Wang Ehsan" totalled several billion.
We know that since the BN regained Terengganu in 2004, all kinds of projects have been developed in Terengganu. This includes The Monsoon Cup, luxury housing for sale to foreigners, Crystal Mosque and theme park, university, etc. Some of these projects are very good but many are totally unnecessary and wasteful.
But what the Terengganu people are saying is that all these mega projects costing billions of Ringgit have been contracted out to people outside Terengganu. Terengganu contractors got practically nothing.
But additionally, they say the contracts all went to one person and they are suspicious that behind this person are members of the first family.The rumours also say that the previous Mentri Besar was responsible for these things happening and of course, they think that he might have benefited financially.
The rumours went on to say that the Prime Minister might have influenced the Mentri Besar into doing wrong things. These are all rumours. It will be quite impossible to prove anything as the perpetrators are skilled in hiding themselves.
This is not good for a Government keen to abolish corruption and be transparent. To clear its name, an investigation should be made.
But the public is leery of investigations by Government agencies and departments. Even Royal Commissions are not highly regarded. The people believe, not true of course, that the Government has been interfering with the work of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), the Police and the Attorney General (A-G)'s Chambers. The say this is borne out by the results of investigations by these agencies.
When a Deputy Minister was accused of accepting money for the release of a detainee, the A-G said there was no case because the detainee said he did not give any money to the Deputy Minister. It is so easy. If you have a case involving someone, all the enforcement agencies need to do is to ask him whether he was involved. If he says "no", then there is no case.
For some reason, judges are finding that people accused of murder are not guilty because of insufficient evidence by the police. Yet people who are totally not involved in a case, who were not accused of any misdeeds and who did not appear in court at all and been given a hearing are found guilty and publicly condemned.
The public cannot be blamed for not having faith in Government agencies doing investigations. The public cannot be blamed for suspecting cover-ups by the Government or worse still the Government may be using these enforcement agencies to threaten people.
To clear its good name, the Government should get credible foreign agencies to do the investigation. Of course, they must be given full access to the documents etc.
Now my detractors are going to say I did worse things when I was Prime Minister. Well, if that is so, let us have the foreign agencies investigate me also. I am aware that people are looking into possible misdeeds by me during my 22 years so as to threaten me and ask me to shut up. So far they have not found anything.
Not only have I not taken anything that was not due to me while I was Prime Minister but I have given back to the Government and the people everything that I had received as gifts during my tenure of office.
The Government had offered me land in Kedah and Langkawi and I had refused to accept. I have a 5-acre plot in Putrajaya which I paid for even though the Government was offering it to me free.
Unless there is a frame-up, I think there should be nothing to pin on me. Even other accusations against me, including the dismissal of judges, were not my doing and I do not feel obliged to apologise. Ask the Tribunal to apologise.
The person asking that the Government should apologise for what happened to Tun Salleh Abbas may have forgotten that as President of the Muslim Lawyers Association, he fully supported the action that was taken. He castigated the Bar Council for condemning Tun Hamid Omar over the dismissal of judges. Now he wants to be more correct than correct. I wonder why.
A Concerned Malaysian has expressed his worry over the role being played by Sultans in the appointment of the Mentri Besar.
His Royal Highnesses have clearly refused to take the advice of the Chief Minister i.e. the Prime Minister. Instead, they have chosen on their own a member of the state legislature to head the Government.
We hear a lot of opinions on the propriety of the action by the Sultan. Some say he has the right to do this while others point out that as a constitutional ruler, he could not do this.
The Constitution says that the Ruler or Head of State must choose the elected member who enjoys the support of the majority of members in the legislative body to be the Prime Minister or the Mentri Besar. Subject to this provision, the Ruler it is who chooses and appoints the Prime Minister or Mentri Besar.
The Prime Minister, as Prime Minister, has no role in the choice of the State Mentri Besar or Ketua Menteri. His naming of candidate who should be the Mentri Besar is purely a party matter. Obviously, if the State is captured by the Opposition Party, he cannot name the candidate.
However, if the Ruler chooses someone who does not enjoy majority support, he could be deposed at a sitting of the legislative body through a vote of "no confidence".
After that, another member can be appointed by the Ruler to take his place. But if for some reason, there is no other candidate or the candidate with majority support is considered unsuitable by the Ruler, a new Government cannot be formed. The Ruler may then dissolve the legislative body and a new election may be held.
This new election may lead to the same impasse. The Ruler may not like the member with majority support.
However, it should be noted that this kind of thing had never happened during the premiership of the four previous Prime Ministers. Concerned Malaysians should wonder why.
Is it just that the particular Ruler is being difficult, unwilling to accept the principles of democracy, wanting to return to feudalism and the absolute authority of the monarch?
I do not think so. There must be a reason why the Ruler refuses to accept the candidate named by the party. But the Ruler chooses not to reveal the reasons and indulge in public debates. He merely expresses his displeasure by refusing to do what normally the Rulers would do.
Concerned Malaysians must ask what has the particular candidate done which is so wrong that it incurs the displeasure of the Ruler.
There are lots of talks in the town. Terengganu is blessed with petroleum deposits. It should get 5% of the total earning from oil production. The Federal Government; fearing the previous PAS government might use this money wrongly had withheld payment.
But when the Barisan Nasional (BN) regained Terengganu the money, now called "Wang Ehsan", was lavishly spent by the Federal Government on Terengganu. It is not a small sum. Over these years "Wang Ehsan" totalled several billion.
We know that since the BN regained Terengganu in 2004, all kinds of projects have been developed in Terengganu. This includes The Monsoon Cup, luxury housing for sale to foreigners, Crystal Mosque and theme park, university, etc. Some of these projects are very good but many are totally unnecessary and wasteful.
But what the Terengganu people are saying is that all these mega projects costing billions of Ringgit have been contracted out to people outside Terengganu. Terengganu contractors got practically nothing.
But additionally, they say the contracts all went to one person and they are suspicious that behind this person are members of the first family.The rumours also say that the previous Mentri Besar was responsible for these things happening and of course, they think that he might have benefited financially.
The rumours went on to say that the Prime Minister might have influenced the Mentri Besar into doing wrong things. These are all rumours. It will be quite impossible to prove anything as the perpetrators are skilled in hiding themselves.
This is not good for a Government keen to abolish corruption and be transparent. To clear its name, an investigation should be made.
But the public is leery of investigations by Government agencies and departments. Even Royal Commissions are not highly regarded. The people believe, not true of course, that the Government has been interfering with the work of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), the Police and the Attorney General (A-G)'s Chambers. The say this is borne out by the results of investigations by these agencies.
When a Deputy Minister was accused of accepting money for the release of a detainee, the A-G said there was no case because the detainee said he did not give any money to the Deputy Minister. It is so easy. If you have a case involving someone, all the enforcement agencies need to do is to ask him whether he was involved. If he says "no", then there is no case.
For some reason, judges are finding that people accused of murder are not guilty because of insufficient evidence by the police. Yet people who are totally not involved in a case, who were not accused of any misdeeds and who did not appear in court at all and been given a hearing are found guilty and publicly condemned.
The public cannot be blamed for not having faith in Government agencies doing investigations. The public cannot be blamed for suspecting cover-ups by the Government or worse still the Government may be using these enforcement agencies to threaten people.
To clear its good name, the Government should get credible foreign agencies to do the investigation. Of course, they must be given full access to the documents etc.
Now my detractors are going to say I did worse things when I was Prime Minister. Well, if that is so, let us have the foreign agencies investigate me also. I am aware that people are looking into possible misdeeds by me during my 22 years so as to threaten me and ask me to shut up. So far they have not found anything.
Not only have I not taken anything that was not due to me while I was Prime Minister but I have given back to the Government and the people everything that I had received as gifts during my tenure of office.
The Government had offered me land in Kedah and Langkawi and I had refused to accept. I have a 5-acre plot in Putrajaya which I paid for even though the Government was offering it to me free.
Unless there is a frame-up, I think there should be nothing to pin on me. Even other accusations against me, including the dismissal of judges, were not my doing and I do not feel obliged to apologise. Ask the Tribunal to apologise.
The person asking that the Government should apologise for what happened to Tun Salleh Abbas may have forgotten that as President of the Muslim Lawyers Association, he fully supported the action that was taken. He castigated the Bar Council for condemning Tun Hamid Omar over the dismissal of judges. Now he wants to be more correct than correct. I wonder why.
Towards a real democracy by Tricia Yeoh
The stronghold that was BN for 50 years was considered invincible and immutably guarded. But as the walls of Trojan have taught, it is the resolute movement of the people, silent but sure, that breaks down fixtures seemingly permanently in place.
Calls for change resounded across the country. The results of Malaysia’s 12th general election speak for themselves, resulting in the governance of five states (Kelantan, Kedah, Penang, Perak and Selangor) gained by non-Barisan Nasional (BN) coalitions and two-thirds majority lost by BN at Parliament level.
What was most surprising was the significant reduction in the percentage of popular vote received by the BN coalition, from 63% in 2004 to 51.2% nationally, and 49.8% excluding East Malaysia. The fact that just slightly more than half in Malaysia is in support of the present ruling government is shocking to say the least. An estimated 35% of the Chinese voted for the BN, 47% of the Indians and 58% of the Malays – showing a 30%, 35% and 5% swing respectively towards the opposition compared with the 2004 elections.
Some 16 million people out of Malaysia’s population of 27.5 million were eligible to vote. With 70% voter turnout out of the 10.2 million registered voters, Malaysia had an estimated 7.14 million people voting. Out of this, 51.2% voted for BN, giving a final figure of 3.66 million Malaysians in support of the coalition government.
Gerakan suffered the most, losing 80% of its Parliament seats, MIC 67%, MCA 51.6% and Umno 27.5%. The opposition gained significantly, with Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) gaining 30 new parliamentary seats, and DAP and PAS 16 each.
The BN secured a 63% representation in Parliament to form the next government, compared with its 91% achievement in the previous 2004 elections. Reduced to 140 seats in the Dewan Rakyat, it will now have to contend with increasingly heated debates as discussions ensue on Bills, the Constitution, Budget and national level affairs. This is a natural step towards an enhanced democracy, one that augurs well for Malaysia’s much-publicised dream of achieving developed-nation status.
Whilst most were shocked at the astounding results, it is not altogether surprising. As BN leaders set up independent panels to uncover the "real" reasons behind their failure, many should have seen this coming a mile away.
All elements were in place for the "perfect storm". Rising prices, increasing crime rates, the rise in inter-ethnic and inter-religious tension, and unaddressed corruption led to the widely held perception that the government was not doing its job satisfactorily. Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s style of leadership exacerbated these inherited problems. Another catalyst was the internet, playing-ground for information dissemination, opinion shaping and mass organisation of individuals into groups.
That all Malaysians believed in a new alternative opposition is untrue. The reality is that many were exercising a punishment vote against the incumbent Government.
The winds of change blew against racial politics towards a needs-based policy regardless of race, aligned along principles of justice and equality. However, the Chinese and Indians had nothing to lose in placing their bets on an alternative policy giving equal opportunity, since many consider having been on the losing end anyway.
It was the Malays that had to play a risky gamble. Since the opposition stated in no uncertain terms its plan to get rid of the New Economic Policy (NEP), surely this would have convinced Malays to vote the BN?
The surprise swings were in the states of Perak and Selangor, the more urban of Peninsular Malaysia’s regions. Historically, urbanisation increased the number of Malays in city centres, forming more mixed seats to the advantage of BN.
The trend shifted this year, with urban Malays perhaps conceding that ethnic-based affirmative action is no longer relevant in today’s competitive society. The BN mantra of "racial representation" seems to be watering down in favour of "representation by principle".
The "Anwar factor" has rocked the boat, with Malay majority seats won by DAP, a party conventionally shunned by Malays; and the Chinese were willing to put aside their distrust of Anwar because of the PKR-DAP relationship. Hence, the DAP-PKR alliance earned brownie points for both parties in the Malay and Chinese communities.
It requires a colossal paradigm shift to envision BN weakened and the opposition forming new state governments. This heralds a new era, one that perhaps sees the beginnings of a two-party system based on ideological principles. Race-based systems will be a thing of the past and parties should strategise likewise, in accordance to current trends.
The next four years will be a probation period for the three parties, and they must optimise the public’s trust. This one opportunity has been granted and many will be ready to criticise should they fall into the same trap of greed and cronyism.
DAP needs to reassure its Malay constituents that it stands equally for all rights, including bumiputra interests. It is time to reconcile its ideological principles and focus on areas of common values, objectives and strategies to fulfil pre-elections promises.
Immediate work must be done, legislating local council elections; ensuring media freedom; declassifying information for public accessibility; and initiating electoral reform. It would be a great pity if Malaysia loses its momentum on achieving real policy reform due to administrative conflict. The road to real democracy begins here, and it should not be marred by political infighting. The people cannot be disappointed again.
The writer is the director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies. Comments: feedback@thesundaily.com
Calls for change resounded across the country. The results of Malaysia’s 12th general election speak for themselves, resulting in the governance of five states (Kelantan, Kedah, Penang, Perak and Selangor) gained by non-Barisan Nasional (BN) coalitions and two-thirds majority lost by BN at Parliament level.
What was most surprising was the significant reduction in the percentage of popular vote received by the BN coalition, from 63% in 2004 to 51.2% nationally, and 49.8% excluding East Malaysia. The fact that just slightly more than half in Malaysia is in support of the present ruling government is shocking to say the least. An estimated 35% of the Chinese voted for the BN, 47% of the Indians and 58% of the Malays – showing a 30%, 35% and 5% swing respectively towards the opposition compared with the 2004 elections.
Some 16 million people out of Malaysia’s population of 27.5 million were eligible to vote. With 70% voter turnout out of the 10.2 million registered voters, Malaysia had an estimated 7.14 million people voting. Out of this, 51.2% voted for BN, giving a final figure of 3.66 million Malaysians in support of the coalition government.
Gerakan suffered the most, losing 80% of its Parliament seats, MIC 67%, MCA 51.6% and Umno 27.5%. The opposition gained significantly, with Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) gaining 30 new parliamentary seats, and DAP and PAS 16 each.
The BN secured a 63% representation in Parliament to form the next government, compared with its 91% achievement in the previous 2004 elections. Reduced to 140 seats in the Dewan Rakyat, it will now have to contend with increasingly heated debates as discussions ensue on Bills, the Constitution, Budget and national level affairs. This is a natural step towards an enhanced democracy, one that augurs well for Malaysia’s much-publicised dream of achieving developed-nation status.
Whilst most were shocked at the astounding results, it is not altogether surprising. As BN leaders set up independent panels to uncover the "real" reasons behind their failure, many should have seen this coming a mile away.
All elements were in place for the "perfect storm". Rising prices, increasing crime rates, the rise in inter-ethnic and inter-religious tension, and unaddressed corruption led to the widely held perception that the government was not doing its job satisfactorily. Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s style of leadership exacerbated these inherited problems. Another catalyst was the internet, playing-ground for information dissemination, opinion shaping and mass organisation of individuals into groups.
That all Malaysians believed in a new alternative opposition is untrue. The reality is that many were exercising a punishment vote against the incumbent Government.
The winds of change blew against racial politics towards a needs-based policy regardless of race, aligned along principles of justice and equality. However, the Chinese and Indians had nothing to lose in placing their bets on an alternative policy giving equal opportunity, since many consider having been on the losing end anyway.
It was the Malays that had to play a risky gamble. Since the opposition stated in no uncertain terms its plan to get rid of the New Economic Policy (NEP), surely this would have convinced Malays to vote the BN?
The surprise swings were in the states of Perak and Selangor, the more urban of Peninsular Malaysia’s regions. Historically, urbanisation increased the number of Malays in city centres, forming more mixed seats to the advantage of BN.
The trend shifted this year, with urban Malays perhaps conceding that ethnic-based affirmative action is no longer relevant in today’s competitive society. The BN mantra of "racial representation" seems to be watering down in favour of "representation by principle".
The "Anwar factor" has rocked the boat, with Malay majority seats won by DAP, a party conventionally shunned by Malays; and the Chinese were willing to put aside their distrust of Anwar because of the PKR-DAP relationship. Hence, the DAP-PKR alliance earned brownie points for both parties in the Malay and Chinese communities.
It requires a colossal paradigm shift to envision BN weakened and the opposition forming new state governments. This heralds a new era, one that perhaps sees the beginnings of a two-party system based on ideological principles. Race-based systems will be a thing of the past and parties should strategise likewise, in accordance to current trends.
The next four years will be a probation period for the three parties, and they must optimise the public’s trust. This one opportunity has been granted and many will be ready to criticise should they fall into the same trap of greed and cronyism.
DAP needs to reassure its Malay constituents that it stands equally for all rights, including bumiputra interests. It is time to reconcile its ideological principles and focus on areas of common values, objectives and strategies to fulfil pre-elections promises.
Immediate work must be done, legislating local council elections; ensuring media freedom; declassifying information for public accessibility; and initiating electoral reform. It would be a great pity if Malaysia loses its momentum on achieving real policy reform due to administrative conflict. The road to real democracy begins here, and it should not be marred by political infighting. The people cannot be disappointed again.
The writer is the director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies. Comments: feedback@thesundaily.com
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
PAS dan Agenda Negara Islam
Istilah negara Islam hari ini kelihatan sebagai satu istilah yang menakutkan bagi sesetengah pihak. Banyak pihak cuba mengelakkan dari menggunakan perkataan ini dalam ucapan dan tulisan. Ada juga yang mahukan perkara ini dilupakan dahulu.
Namun saya mahu perkatakan juga tentang perkara ini.
Masalah utama tentang negara Islam ialah kekurangan maklumat dan salah faham. Salam faham dan kekeliruan berlaku dalam beberapa peringkat, contohnya:
1. Salah faham dan kekeliruan dalam soal ISTILAH negara Islam
2. dalam soal sama ada istilah itu wajib digunakan atau tidak
3. dalam soal kerangka perlembagaan (constitutional framework) dan pengisian (substance) negara Islam
4. dalam soal KEUTAMAAN dalam pelaksanaan Islam
5. dalam soal keserasian (compatibality) negara Islam dan demokrasi
Kesannya Negara Islam ditakuti, digeruni dan dianggap sebagai sesuatu yang perlu dilupakan (atau diabaikan buat sementara). Bahkan ada dikalangan pendokong Islam pun yang cenderung untuk mengenepikannya dahulu. Bagi saya pendekatan ini terpesong.
Ya. Kita terima hakikat bahawa istilah Negara Islam telah disalahfahami. Namun ini tidak bermakna kita perlu meninggalkan perjuangannya. Apa yang perlu dilakukan ialah memberikan kefahaman dan penerangan tentangnya. Jika istilah itu ditakuti, tinggalkan istilah itu. Istilah 'Negara Islam' atau 'Islamic State' bukan segala-galanya.
Bahkan jika dilihat dari skop yang lebih luas, agenda Islam bukan setakat mencapai apa yang disebut 'negara Islam' itu, bahkan lebih luas. Jadi gunalah apa-apa istilah lain. Contohnya 'Agenda Islam', 'Agenda Sejagat', 'Agenda Rahmat', 'Negara Rahmat", atau 'Negara Berkebajikan'. Ya, Negara Berkebajikan itu (walaupun skopnya lebih kecil) boleh menjadi asas dalam menggariskan bentuk pemerintahan yang selari dengan Islam. Yang penting PAS yang mempelopori mesej itu dalam PRU baru-baru ini tidak melupakan Fasal 5 Perlembagaan PAS yang menyebut tentang cita-cita Islamnya.
Seterusnya susuli pula dengan penerangan, pendidikan dan penjelasan tentang agenda Islam itu. Penerangan melalui lisan, tulisan juga tindakan atau contoh teladan. Mereka yang keliru sedang memerhatikan kerajaan yang diterajui PAS di Kelantan dan Kedah. Juga menyaksikan Menteri Besar Perak serta exco-exco PAS di Perak dan Selangor. Pemimpin PAS yang punya kuasa eksekutif ini berperanan menunjukkan model agenda Islam.
PAS tidak boleh mengambil sikap bersembunyi. Mengaku tidak mahu jadikan Kedah, Perak dan Selangor negeri berkonsep Negara Islam, tetapi dalam masa sama tetap memperjuangkan agenda Islam. Benar, selagi PAS berkongsi kuasa, PAS tidak boleh secara keras menguatkuasakan agenda Islam tanpa persetujuan rakan-rakan pakatan. Tambahan pula sebahagian kandungan agenda Islam tidak tercatat dalam manifesto. Namun ini tidak pula menghalang PAS untuk berterus terang. Berterus terang bagi menjawab persoalan berikut:
1. Adakah PAS mempunyai cita-cita jangka panjang untuk melaksanakan agenda Islam?
2. Adakah PAS akan laksanakan agenda Islam di negeri-negeri yang diperintah secara bersama dengan PKR dan DAP?
3. Adakah PAS akan terus bekerjasama dengan DAP dan PKR walaupun tidak dibenarkan melaksanakan agenda Islam?
4. Jika DAP dan PKR memberikan lampu hujau, adakah PAS akan melaksanakan agenda Islam?
Soalan-soalan ini perlu dijawab dengan telus. (Saya ada cadangan formula jawapannya. Nanti ditulisan lain). Tak lama lagi (insyaallah) pakatan Barisan Rakyat akan memerintah Malaysia. PAS menjadi salah satu anggotanya. Soalan-soalan diatas perlu dijawab sebelum kekeliruan semakin parah dan membarah. Sikap menyembunyi dan berdiam diri akan menambahkan lagi kekusutan.
Namun saya mahu perkatakan juga tentang perkara ini.
Masalah utama tentang negara Islam ialah kekurangan maklumat dan salah faham. Salam faham dan kekeliruan berlaku dalam beberapa peringkat, contohnya:
1. Salah faham dan kekeliruan dalam soal ISTILAH negara Islam
2. dalam soal sama ada istilah itu wajib digunakan atau tidak
3. dalam soal kerangka perlembagaan (constitutional framework) dan pengisian (substance) negara Islam
4. dalam soal KEUTAMAAN dalam pelaksanaan Islam
5. dalam soal keserasian (compatibality) negara Islam dan demokrasi
Kesannya Negara Islam ditakuti, digeruni dan dianggap sebagai sesuatu yang perlu dilupakan (atau diabaikan buat sementara). Bahkan ada dikalangan pendokong Islam pun yang cenderung untuk mengenepikannya dahulu. Bagi saya pendekatan ini terpesong.
Ya. Kita terima hakikat bahawa istilah Negara Islam telah disalahfahami. Namun ini tidak bermakna kita perlu meninggalkan perjuangannya. Apa yang perlu dilakukan ialah memberikan kefahaman dan penerangan tentangnya. Jika istilah itu ditakuti, tinggalkan istilah itu. Istilah 'Negara Islam' atau 'Islamic State' bukan segala-galanya.
Bahkan jika dilihat dari skop yang lebih luas, agenda Islam bukan setakat mencapai apa yang disebut 'negara Islam' itu, bahkan lebih luas. Jadi gunalah apa-apa istilah lain. Contohnya 'Agenda Islam', 'Agenda Sejagat', 'Agenda Rahmat', 'Negara Rahmat", atau 'Negara Berkebajikan'. Ya, Negara Berkebajikan itu (walaupun skopnya lebih kecil) boleh menjadi asas dalam menggariskan bentuk pemerintahan yang selari dengan Islam. Yang penting PAS yang mempelopori mesej itu dalam PRU baru-baru ini tidak melupakan Fasal 5 Perlembagaan PAS yang menyebut tentang cita-cita Islamnya.
Seterusnya susuli pula dengan penerangan, pendidikan dan penjelasan tentang agenda Islam itu. Penerangan melalui lisan, tulisan juga tindakan atau contoh teladan. Mereka yang keliru sedang memerhatikan kerajaan yang diterajui PAS di Kelantan dan Kedah. Juga menyaksikan Menteri Besar Perak serta exco-exco PAS di Perak dan Selangor. Pemimpin PAS yang punya kuasa eksekutif ini berperanan menunjukkan model agenda Islam.
PAS tidak boleh mengambil sikap bersembunyi. Mengaku tidak mahu jadikan Kedah, Perak dan Selangor negeri berkonsep Negara Islam, tetapi dalam masa sama tetap memperjuangkan agenda Islam. Benar, selagi PAS berkongsi kuasa, PAS tidak boleh secara keras menguatkuasakan agenda Islam tanpa persetujuan rakan-rakan pakatan. Tambahan pula sebahagian kandungan agenda Islam tidak tercatat dalam manifesto. Namun ini tidak pula menghalang PAS untuk berterus terang. Berterus terang bagi menjawab persoalan berikut:
1. Adakah PAS mempunyai cita-cita jangka panjang untuk melaksanakan agenda Islam?
2. Adakah PAS akan laksanakan agenda Islam di negeri-negeri yang diperintah secara bersama dengan PKR dan DAP?
3. Adakah PAS akan terus bekerjasama dengan DAP dan PKR walaupun tidak dibenarkan melaksanakan agenda Islam?
4. Jika DAP dan PKR memberikan lampu hujau, adakah PAS akan melaksanakan agenda Islam?
Soalan-soalan ini perlu dijawab dengan telus. (Saya ada cadangan formula jawapannya. Nanti ditulisan lain). Tak lama lagi (insyaallah) pakatan Barisan Rakyat akan memerintah Malaysia. PAS menjadi salah satu anggotanya. Soalan-soalan diatas perlu dijawab sebelum kekeliruan semakin parah dan membarah. Sikap menyembunyi dan berdiam diri akan menambahkan lagi kekusutan.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Tahun 2008 memahat sejarah politik
Pilihanraya 2008 memberikan warna baru kepada politik Malaysia. Walau pun pertukaran kerajaan Persekutuan belum berlaku namun banyak peristiwa besar yang menggemparkan negara telah muncul.
1. Kemenangan besar pakatan pembangkang yang mula disedari malam 8 Mac atau awal pagi 9 Mac lalu mengejutkan rakyat. Bukan rakyat sahaja, pemimpin-pemimpin politik, petugas parti dan sekalian rakyat, termasuk mereka yang mengundi begitu terkejut dengan apa yang berlaku. Pada malam tu saya, isteri, ayah, mak dan adik beradik lain berada di Jertih. Sedang mengikuti urutan keputusan dari siaran TV yang lembab itu, saya menerima SMS dari abang sekitar jam 11.00 malam: 'sah BA kuasai 5 negeri: kelantn, kedh, png, slgor,perak'. Saya bacakan SMS tu kepada semua. Masing-masing teruja dan terkejut. Saya percaya ramai yang begitu.
2. Pemerintahan parti bukan BN di Selangor dan Perak adalah satu yang diluar dugaan. Seingat saya tak ada pemerhati politik yang meramalkan demikian, kecuali Tun Daim. Daim Yang Diam itu memang jarang buat public statement. Tapi hari itu--dalam tiga bulan sebelum pilihanraya--dia beri amaran dengan meminta BN berhati-hati dengan negeri Kedah, Penang dan Selangor. Pemerhati yang lain, baik ahli politik mahu pun ahli akademik tidak membuat ramalan kukuh tentangnya. Memang ada ucapan-ucapan tokoh politik yang menyebut akan menguasai negeri-negeri ini, namun ia lebih bertujuan untuk menaikkan semangat, bukan benar-benar serius.
3. Kemelut penubuhan kerajaan-kerajaan negeri juga menarik. Tahun 2008 menyaksikan dua negeri BN berdepan dengan konflik hebat. Pendekar Shahidan Kassim cepat mengalah. Ini kerana dia dah tahu dia susah bertahan sebab memang kebanyakan calan pro kepadanya tak disenaraikan untuk DUN. Sheikh Ahmad Radzi dan adik Sultan telah memainkan peranan dari awal lagi. Di Terengganu keadaannya lain. Idris Jusoh pandai main wayang. Dia tahu Baginda tak gemarkan dia. Tapi dia tahu Pak Lah memerlukan dia, maka dia menggunakan kedudukan itu untuk membuat percaturan sejak dari pemilihan calon. Hampir semua yang bertanding pro dia. Atau sekurang-kurangnya tak berani lawan dia. Tinggal Ahmad Said yang sikit samseng, berani nak engkar kehendak Idris. Maka Ahmad Said dipilih istana untuk menjadi Menteri Besar. Episod MB Terengganu belum berakhir hingga saat ini. 22 Adun yang khabarnya 'dikurung' oleh Idris masih bertegas mahukan Idris. Kita tengok siapa yang paling degil...
4. PRU ke12 menyaksikan sokongan orang Melayu kepada DAP dan orang bukan Melayu kepada PAS bukan lagi suatu yang pelik. PAS bergerak ke arah kematangan politik. Ini fasa baru buat iklim politik PAS. Era Kiri, era Islam nasionalis, era kepimpinan ulama dah pergi. Kini era keterbukaan. PAS terbuka kerana tidak mencatatkan kalimah 'negara Islam' dalam manifesto, juga terbuka kerana meletakkan seorang calon bukan Islam di Johor. PAS terbuka kerana sudi bekerjasama dengan DAP dalam agihan kerusi dan kempen pilihanraya, walau pun melalui PKR. Orang PAS berkempen untuk mengundi DAP. PAS terbuka kerana tidak lagi membangkitkan soal agama calon dalam kempen pilihanraya. Keterbukaan PAS ini berkesan dan disambut meriah oleh penyokong dari masyarakat India dan Cina. Mereka tak segan silu membuka pos PAS dan membawa bendera dan logo PAS. Hasilnya PAS banyak menang dikerusi campuran, walau pun gagal menang di kerusi majoriti Melayu termasuk yang pernah dimenangi pada tahun 1999, seperti di sekitar Sabak Bernam, Semantan, Tahan, Jerlun, dan beberapa kerusi di Terengganu.
5. Kerajaan campuran melibatkan PKR, DAP dan PAS merupakan fenomena baru. Walau pun ada sedikit kacau di Perak, namun ia sangat cepat diselesaikan. Nampaknya rakyat kelihatan selesa dengan kerajaan baru. MB baru yang dilantik punya kekuatan tersendiri. Tan Sri Khalid nampaknya mampu menandingi populariti Khir Toyo atau Mat Taib. Ir Nizar pula punya tarikan tersendiri dalam meraih perhatian masyarakat Cina, India dan Melayu. Beliau cuma perlu buktikan ketangkasannya mentadbir. Buat masa ini kerajaan 3 serangkai ini kelihatan lebih stabil dari sesetengah kerajaan negeri BN terutamanya Terengganu dan Perlis. Sebenarnya kemelut di Terengganu itu banyak membantu menutup mulut BN untuk mengkritik kerajaan-kerajaan Barisan Rakyat.
6. Kegagalan BN mendapat majoriti 2/3 mengundang krisis teruk dalam BN. Gelombang krisis itu tidak kelihatan dari luar. Tapi saya percaya ia lebih dahsyat dari yang kita ketahui. Ibarat bisul. Saiznya nampak besar. Ubat yang disediakan Pak Lah tidak mujarab, dia makin merebak dan tunggu masa untuk meletup.
1. Kemenangan besar pakatan pembangkang yang mula disedari malam 8 Mac atau awal pagi 9 Mac lalu mengejutkan rakyat. Bukan rakyat sahaja, pemimpin-pemimpin politik, petugas parti dan sekalian rakyat, termasuk mereka yang mengundi begitu terkejut dengan apa yang berlaku. Pada malam tu saya, isteri, ayah, mak dan adik beradik lain berada di Jertih. Sedang mengikuti urutan keputusan dari siaran TV yang lembab itu, saya menerima SMS dari abang sekitar jam 11.00 malam: 'sah BA kuasai 5 negeri: kelantn, kedh, png, slgor,perak'. Saya bacakan SMS tu kepada semua. Masing-masing teruja dan terkejut. Saya percaya ramai yang begitu.
2. Pemerintahan parti bukan BN di Selangor dan Perak adalah satu yang diluar dugaan. Seingat saya tak ada pemerhati politik yang meramalkan demikian, kecuali Tun Daim. Daim Yang Diam itu memang jarang buat public statement. Tapi hari itu--dalam tiga bulan sebelum pilihanraya--dia beri amaran dengan meminta BN berhati-hati dengan negeri Kedah, Penang dan Selangor. Pemerhati yang lain, baik ahli politik mahu pun ahli akademik tidak membuat ramalan kukuh tentangnya. Memang ada ucapan-ucapan tokoh politik yang menyebut akan menguasai negeri-negeri ini, namun ia lebih bertujuan untuk menaikkan semangat, bukan benar-benar serius.
3. Kemelut penubuhan kerajaan-kerajaan negeri juga menarik. Tahun 2008 menyaksikan dua negeri BN berdepan dengan konflik hebat. Pendekar Shahidan Kassim cepat mengalah. Ini kerana dia dah tahu dia susah bertahan sebab memang kebanyakan calan pro kepadanya tak disenaraikan untuk DUN. Sheikh Ahmad Radzi dan adik Sultan telah memainkan peranan dari awal lagi. Di Terengganu keadaannya lain. Idris Jusoh pandai main wayang. Dia tahu Baginda tak gemarkan dia. Tapi dia tahu Pak Lah memerlukan dia, maka dia menggunakan kedudukan itu untuk membuat percaturan sejak dari pemilihan calon. Hampir semua yang bertanding pro dia. Atau sekurang-kurangnya tak berani lawan dia. Tinggal Ahmad Said yang sikit samseng, berani nak engkar kehendak Idris. Maka Ahmad Said dipilih istana untuk menjadi Menteri Besar. Episod MB Terengganu belum berakhir hingga saat ini. 22 Adun yang khabarnya 'dikurung' oleh Idris masih bertegas mahukan Idris. Kita tengok siapa yang paling degil...
4. PRU ke12 menyaksikan sokongan orang Melayu kepada DAP dan orang bukan Melayu kepada PAS bukan lagi suatu yang pelik. PAS bergerak ke arah kematangan politik. Ini fasa baru buat iklim politik PAS. Era Kiri, era Islam nasionalis, era kepimpinan ulama dah pergi. Kini era keterbukaan. PAS terbuka kerana tidak mencatatkan kalimah 'negara Islam' dalam manifesto, juga terbuka kerana meletakkan seorang calon bukan Islam di Johor. PAS terbuka kerana sudi bekerjasama dengan DAP dalam agihan kerusi dan kempen pilihanraya, walau pun melalui PKR. Orang PAS berkempen untuk mengundi DAP. PAS terbuka kerana tidak lagi membangkitkan soal agama calon dalam kempen pilihanraya. Keterbukaan PAS ini berkesan dan disambut meriah oleh penyokong dari masyarakat India dan Cina. Mereka tak segan silu membuka pos PAS dan membawa bendera dan logo PAS. Hasilnya PAS banyak menang dikerusi campuran, walau pun gagal menang di kerusi majoriti Melayu termasuk yang pernah dimenangi pada tahun 1999, seperti di sekitar Sabak Bernam, Semantan, Tahan, Jerlun, dan beberapa kerusi di Terengganu.
5. Kerajaan campuran melibatkan PKR, DAP dan PAS merupakan fenomena baru. Walau pun ada sedikit kacau di Perak, namun ia sangat cepat diselesaikan. Nampaknya rakyat kelihatan selesa dengan kerajaan baru. MB baru yang dilantik punya kekuatan tersendiri. Tan Sri Khalid nampaknya mampu menandingi populariti Khir Toyo atau Mat Taib. Ir Nizar pula punya tarikan tersendiri dalam meraih perhatian masyarakat Cina, India dan Melayu. Beliau cuma perlu buktikan ketangkasannya mentadbir. Buat masa ini kerajaan 3 serangkai ini kelihatan lebih stabil dari sesetengah kerajaan negeri BN terutamanya Terengganu dan Perlis. Sebenarnya kemelut di Terengganu itu banyak membantu menutup mulut BN untuk mengkritik kerajaan-kerajaan Barisan Rakyat.
6. Kegagalan BN mendapat majoriti 2/3 mengundang krisis teruk dalam BN. Gelombang krisis itu tidak kelihatan dari luar. Tapi saya percaya ia lebih dahsyat dari yang kita ketahui. Ibarat bisul. Saiznya nampak besar. Ubat yang disediakan Pak Lah tidak mujarab, dia makin merebak dan tunggu masa untuk meletup.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)