TR EMERITUS

By Dr Lee Hock Guan & Dr Johan Saravanamuttu, For The Straits Times THE new leadership line-up in Malaysia shows a significant change to Datuk Seri Najib Razak's camp and his supporters. The results show that factionalism in Umno remains significant, and that it is the faction behind Umno president and future prime minister Najib which is in control. The three deputy vice-presidents elected are seen to be staunch Najib supporters. Most crucial was Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin's successful bid for the deputy president's post. He was the one who had led the call for outgoing Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's resignation. Based on the show of solidarity on the final day of the Umno assembly, new Umno president and incoming Malaysian prime minister Najib may be willing to work with, rather than against, his predecessor Mahathir Mohamad. But it remains to be seen just what the relationship will entail. However, the victory of Datuk Seri Abdullah's son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin in the race to be Umno Youth chief, which Tun Dr Mahathir vigorously tried to prevent, shows that there are some limits to Dr Mahathir's influence. Mr Najib will have to deal with the unexpected win of Mr Khairy, who outstripped his nearest rival, former Selangor menteri besar Khir Toyo, by 50 votes and clipped the ambitions of Dr Mahathir's son, Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir. The Supreme Council will have a mix of Najib supporters and others from various regions and states. Mr Najib can further strengthen his position as party president by appointing several members of his choice to the council. The results show that apart from Mr Najib, the Johor group is also in the power bloc, led by Mr Muhyiddin and Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Hussein. There is also recognition of the importance of Sabah to Umno. Sabahans now have a vice-president and three Supreme Council members. Perak also has the formidable Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who topped the vice-presidents' votes. This could be significant given Umno's current embroilment in Perak politics. Among the significant losers were Domestic Trade Minister Shahrir Samad and Johor Menteri Besar Abdul Ghani Othman. Datuk Shahrir is noted for his political integrity and reform-mindedness, while Datuk Abdul Ghani's loss could prefigure a new Johor menteri besar. Stung by defeat, Mr Shahrir indicated last Friday that he would vacate his Cabinet post. While Mr Najib may have firm control over Umno, continued factional politics means balancing appointments, ministerial positions and state-level positions. Datuk Mustapa Mohamed, who topped the Supreme Council votes, would ensure some Kelantanese presence (as would Datuk Awang Adek, elected into the council), while Datuk Shafie Apdal would ensure that Sabah's interests are taken into account. It has been suggested that Mr Najib plans to make significant changes to the Cabinet and that the defeats of Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar, Mr Shahrir, Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said and Datuk Seri Rais Yatim have made his job easier. Key ministerial posts would have to be given to the three new vice-presidents. The Home, Defence and Foreign Affairs ministries could see changes. Following convention, one would expect new women's wing leader Shahrizat Abdul Jalil and Mr Khairy to be slotted for Cabinet posts. Despite the show of solidarity, for true party unity the Najib leadership will have to show concrete results, such as winning support on the Malay ground and delivering goodies (contracts and business opportunities) to Umno members. This is because a split in Umno would only benefit the opposition, especially Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS). Given Malaysia's electoral system, the incoming premier cannot push too hard against non-Malay voters who are inclined towards the opposition. Neither can Mr Najib alienate Malays voters, who could easily swing to PAS. In fact, his main task is to balance the needs of non-Malays and Muslim-minded Malays to win back ground lost during and after March 8 last year. Compared to Mr Abdullah, Mr Najib will clearly take a harder stance vis-�-vis the opposition parties - Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), PAS and the Democratic Action Party (DAP). He may target the more threatening PKR under Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's leadership and play a softer line vis-�-vis PAS and DAP. It is likely that he will deploy legal instruments, the courts and the police to contain oppositional politics rather than outright coercion such as arrests under the Internal Security Act. Previous pronouncements by key Umno leaders show strong support for the continuance of the pro-Malay New Economic Policy (NEP). However, Malay businessmen like CIMB group chief executive Nazir Razak and politicians like Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah have said the NEP impedes economic competitiveness. A sizeable portion of Malays are upset by the way the NEP has been abused to benefit Umno politicians and well-connected businessmen. Spreading the benefits of the NEP more widely among Malays could help Mr Najib's party win back the Malay ground. But this has to be done without eroding support from non-Malays. In the past, with strong growth, it was possible to implement 'growth with equity', but this is hard to achieve given the bleak economic scenario. Umno members may be heaving sighs of relief that badly tainted politicians such as Tan Sri Muhammad Muhammad Taib and Dr Khir did not attain the high positions sought. As things turned out, the party's election results confirmed what many had already glimpsed - that there were serious splits within the party. Depending on developments in the near future, this may discourage Mr Najib from using an iron fist against opponents and civil society in the coming months. Harsh measures may gain him short-term advantages, but these will be at the cost of serious long-term damage to himself, Umno, the Barisan Nasional and the country. It does seem that Mr Najib got most of the people whom he wanted in the party leadership. This will provide him with some badly needed self-confidence to carry out the party reforms he proposed just before the general assembly. He knows that the world is watching, and he will want to do something soon to gain credibility in the eyes of voters and the local and foreign media. Dr Lee Hock Guan is Senior Fellow, and Dr Johan Saravanamuttu is Visiting Senior Research Fellow, at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Their latest book on the recent Malaysian general election is March 8 Eclipsing May 13 (co-authored with Ooi Kee Beng). Source: Straits Times  Read More →

By Eugene Yeo I refer to the letter by Mr Tan Teck Hau titled "Dr Allan Ooi's death: Rather than point the finger" which was published on page 22 of TODAY. (read letter here) I am absolutely appalled and disappointed that the TODAY editors felt fit to publish such a misleading, insensitive and meaningless letter. Either Mr Tan does not comprehend simple English or he misunderstood the intention of the Ooi family in their request to MINDEF to set up an independent panel to address the deceased doctor's concerns about his work. Nowhere in the letter did the Ooi family point any fingers at MINDEF. All they ask is for MINDEF to answer some questions which has been troubling them. (read the Ooi family's letter here) A life has been lost and the only way the grieving family can bring the matter to a proper closure is to find out the mitigating factors behind Dr Allan Ooi's decision to end his life. If the same tragedy happens to Mr Tan's son, brother or friend, will he be so callous to brush the matter aside too? Won't he demand answers from MINDEF who owes the deceased doctor a moral duty of care as his employer? Mr Tan's argument that Dr Allan Ooi is solely responsible for signing on the dotted line of his bond is most disingenuous. Is it reasonable to expect a 18 year old teenager fresh out of junior college to know what he really wants in life? The aspirations and expectations of people do change with time. How many of us actually go on to fulfill our childhood dreams when we enter the workforce? Dr Allan Ooi expressed unhappiness over the nature of his work which did not fully utilize his knowledge and skills as a medical doctor. Apparently, he had informed his superiors of his intention to break the bond which his family can well afford to pay for. However for some strange reasons, he wasn't allowed to and this was his main grouse against the SAF. And this is where the family is demanding for answers from SAF. Why was Allan's bond unbreakable? This was not stated in the contract which Allan signed. Is it reasonable and fair for SAF to stop Allan from breaking his bond when there were no such provisions put in print? Would Allan have signed the bond if he knew that he would not be allowed to break it under any circumstances in the future? Is there a possibility of a misrepresentation here? May I ask Mr Tan which is more important: life or money? How much does it cost to conduct such an inquiry? Surely it won't be more than the Apache helicoptors which SAF had bought? Can it be more than the monthly salary of the Defence Minister and all the top MINDEF honchos? We are talking about a life lost here. No matter how much it costs, MINDEF should pay for the setting up of an independent panel to investigate the matter. Will taxpayers mind paying for a peace of mind to know that MINDEF will be responsible and accountable for their children who is currently serving their national service? Actually MINDEF does not even need to fork out a single cent for this purpose. All it needs is to agree for the panel to be set up and allowed its officers to be summoned for questioning. Dr Allan Ooi's family will probably be willing to fund the operation of the panel and the owners of this blog will not mind contributing to see that justice is done. It is most cruel of Mr Tan to rub salt to the family's wounds by insinuating that they have neglected Allan and thereby are partly culpable for the tragedy. The Ooi family is a closely knitted family. Allan was close to his siblings especially his younger sister whom he doted on. He had brought up his problems at work to his family and his father had offered to pay for the penalty incurred in the course of breaking the bond. Somehow Allan must have felt that there is nothing much his family can do to help him since the onus lies with SAF to permit him to break his bond and he did not want to cause them any distress. That's why he left without a word to be alone by himself. How can Mr Tan expect his family to locate him in Australia when even SAF and the police are unable to do so? Both Mr Tan and TODAY owe the family and friends of Dr Allan Ooi an apology for hurting their feelings and insulting the dignity of a dead man who is unable to defend himself. To paraphrase Mr Tan's own words - "instead of pointing the finger at the Ooi family, perhaps it’s time he look around and see what he can do for fellow Singaporeans". His grossly inappropriate letter is definitely not a way of offering sympathy or help to a family mourning the premature passing of a loved one.   Also read Ng E Jay's rebuttal here  Read More →

By Lim Yii Tong, Guest Columnist During my 3 months Basic Military Training (BMT) more than 10 years ago in Nee Soon Camp, a fellow recruit from a neighboring company hanged himself from a fan in his bunk using his bedsheet. Two weeks later, another platoon mate attempted suicide by slashing his wrists. He was charged and sent to the Detention Barracks. I am sure most Singapore males who have served national service had heard similiar stories before. Suicides is not uncommon in the army, just that the press seldom reports on it and MINDEF does not reveal figures of the number of servicemen who committed or attempted suicide yearly. Technically speaking, committing suicide is a military crime. A serviceman who is seriously contemplating ending his life for whatever reason better make sure he succeeds for the consequences of failure are dire. He will be subjected to an intensive and sometimes humiliating psychiatric examination, charged by a military court and usually sentenced to a few weeks of detention after which an indelible mark will be left on his service record. Unless he can make his mark in the private sector, it is highly unlikely that he will be able to find any meaningful employment in the public sector which still dominates much of Singapore's economy. MINDEF has good reason to keep such sensitive information out of public scrutiny for not only will it dampen morale within the armed forces and erode public trust and confidence in the institution, it may also lead to increasing calls for mandatory conscription to be abolished in the future. National Service has grown to be accepted as the price to pay for Singapore citizenship over the years. Implemented in 1967 by then Defence Minister Goh Keng Swee, it has seen 3 generations of Singaporeans entering its files and ranks in service of the nation. In fact, it has become part and parcel of Singapore life intimately woven into the fabric of our society. Dr Allan Ooi's case is unique because he was probably the first SAF scholar to have chosen to end his life allegedly due to work pressures which had triggered intense public interest not seen before. For the past few weeks since the unfortunate tragedy, the internet chatrooms were abuzzed with discussions and debates on the matter. "Allan Ooi" became one of the top search words in Singapore's cyberspace. While public sympathy remains at large with the family, some argued that the deceased doctor had an obligation to the SAF to fulfill the terms of his scholarship since his undergraduate course was sponsored by them. The family's timely letter to the media which revealed that MINDEF's earlier statement that "a bond be breakable only in 'strong, extenuating circumstances'" was not stated in the contract he signed when he was 18 years old has opened a Pandora's box for MINDEF. Though scholars owe a moral duty to the organization financing their studies to complete the period of bond as stipulated in the contract, as far as I am aware, they are allowed (not encouraged) to break their bonds if they are able to pay the penalty. I was offered an EDB scholarship (which I didn't take up) after completing my 'A' levels and nowhere in the contract did it state that the bond is unbreakable. I am sure this applies to all other scholarships including the SAF Overseas Merit Award and the Local Study Award. An unbreakable bond is not only unreasonable, it is a form of modern slavery which denies the worker's basic human right to seek a suitable employment befitting his knowledge and skills. Will anybody sign a contract which is "unbreakable"? If the allegations contained in the letter are indeed true, MINDEF will be hard pressed to account for their policy of coercing unhappy scholars to remain in service against their will. While it is far-fetched to approportion blame for the tragedy to MINDEF, it is pertinent that deficiencies within the system are highlighted and rectified. Under Article 23  of the UN Universal Declarations of Human Right, everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. (source) In this instance, the right of Dr Allan Ooi to "free choice of employment" overrides the MINDEF's right to demand him to complete his bond. I support the Ooi family's call for an independent panel with oversight powers to be set up to address the concerns of the deceased doctor and I sincerely hope MINDEF will give the public and not just the family a full disclosure of the case.  Read More →