24 September 2009

================================
IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR ALL
The articles are captured from the original writer, MsMarina (with her permission). SambalBelacan is just compiling articles to make easier to find. Any comments received will remain un-respond because it's not mine.Reach her at her very own blog at
http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/ Please.
==================================
Wednesday September 16, 2009
It’s time for us to chill
By MARINA MAHATHIR


WHEN I was little I remember there being a Malaysia Day. I don’t remember what the date was, but now I realise that it must have been Sept 16. But at the time I remember the word “Malaysia” was somewhat a novelty, but an exciting one nevertheless.

I don’t know how it came to be that Malaysia Day disappeared from our consciousness. To be more correct, it has disappeared from the consciousness of those of us Malaysians in the peninsula.

It has only been because of the insistent reminders from our fellow citizens in Sabah and Sarawak recently that we have become conscious of the fact that today is the anniversary of the formation of Malaysia.

As important as Aug 31 is as the day that Malaya became independent, surely the day that we became the modern nation of Malaysia is equally important. We are after all Malaysians, not just Malayans.

So it is fitting that some of us have decided to make this year’s Malaysia Day an extra special one.

After what has seemed like a very bad-tempered stretch of several months when everyone’s emotions have been strung out with one incident after another, a group of individuals decided that enough is enough and that something needed to be done.

But instead of doing something that would only heighten emotions, they decided to do something to underscore the need for reflection, restraint and calmness.

They decided to reject the hatred and injustices of recent months and reclaim our country for the peaceful place that it is.

That was how the idea for the Fast for the Nation, Peace for Malaysia initiative began. As with all good ideas, it is striking in its simplicity. What everyone joining the initiative is doing today is to fast from dawn to dusk.

This is not just to show solidarity with the Muslim citizens of the country but to do something simple together as a way of showing unity.

If there is one thing that brings Malaysians together, it is food. So early this morning, several Malaysians of all races got together to have their pre-dawn meal, the sahur.

In the spirit of inclusiveness, so that there is no barrier to anyone’s participation, the meal was vegetarian. People who would never normally get up so early to eat did so just to join their Muslim friends.

Then in the evening, they will get together again to break the fast. From the very onset of the idea, as is typical of Malaysians, friends have been discussing what they would eat to break their fast.

But they are determined to do it together, with their neighbours, workmates and friends, regardless of race or religion. The citizens who break fast together stay together.

In addition, this initiative calls for participants to do something kind to someone during the day. At heart is the idea that if you do something nice for someone, you will get the same in return at some point.

After months of an environment where retribution seemed to be the order of the day, it was time to reverse that by consciously doing something good.

It could be as simple as offering to babysit, shop for a house-bound neighbour or help someone at work or something more complicated, as long as it’s an act of kindness.

When the project was launched last week, the first 50 people to sign on all said the same thing: the hate and violence exhibited by some people recently are not typical of Malaysians.

We do not solve things through anger and recrimination. Nor do we allow anyone to exploit our differences and divide us.

While our strength is our diversity – and that diversity should always be respected – our national project ever since Sept 16, 1963, so to speak, is to unite.

So Fast for the Nation is exactly what we need.

It is a community-driven grassroots initiative, one not tainted by politics and with genuinely sincere objectives.

Basically it upholds the basic Ramadan thrust of restraint and calmness. In other words, we’re saying it’s time to chill.

Initiatives like this should not be confined to one day a year only.

We can easily think up many similar ideas. Already there have been groups of Muslims going to visit Hindu temples, or inviting non-Muslims to break the fast with them at suraus.

We need to reach out to each other more in natural ways, not at glitzy manufactured events.

Most of all, we need to show that hate is an emotion that is alien to the ordinary Malay-sian.

When we have seen people from all sides behave in the most debased manner, we have to rise above them. And show them what Malaysia is really about.

Happy Birthday Malaysia!

04 September 2009

================================
IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR ALL
The articles are captured from the original writer, MsMarina (with her permission). SambalBelacan is just compiling articles to make easier to find. Any comments received will remain un-respond because it's not mine.Reach her at her very own blog at http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/ Please.
==================================
Wednesday September 2, 2009
Merit comes from making right choices
Musings by Marina Mahathir


Living the faith is not just about avoiding what is prohibited, but more so about doing the right things where morals and ethics are concerned.

IN this month of Ramadan, one naturally focuses on questions of faith. And indeed, with several controversies in the papers, we can’t escape it at all. Every day our lives seem to be increasingly circumscribed until the question of choice in our lives becomes irrelevant.

There are some people in our midst who seem to think that the only way to fulfill our religious obligations is by removing any sort of temptation or challenge in our paths.

Since we are prohibited from drinking, the answer is therefore to remove any form of alcohol from our sight so that we may never have the opportunity to be tempted by it.

Or, to disallow young Muslims to attend events sponsored by alcoholic beverage companies.

The assumption is that by the mere presence of liquor, we would abandon all inhibitions and imbibe.

This suggests two things. One is that the religious education of the young must be so inadequate that they feel totally uninhibited when faced with what they should know is prohibited.

Secondly, our faith is essentially a weak one since it can never restrain us from breaking rules.

There are other faiths that have food prohibitions as well. Many Hindus and Buddhists don’t eat beef. There are people who take no meat at all.

Yet, living in a world of carnivores, where the beef burger is ubiquitous and most people are oblivious of others’ dietary restrictions, they stick to their diets throughout their lives. Do they have stronger faith than Muslims?

I’m trying to imagine a world where our faith is supposedly secured by having absolutely no temptations or challenges at all.

We can ban every form of alcohol (including medicinal ones), we can cull every single pig in the land, but does that mean we will be able to float about blissfully certain that we now have a place in heaven?

In countries where alcohol is completely prohibited, an underground system invariably springs up and people

drink much more, perhaps because it is illicit.

People who are used to ham made from turkey meat and bacon from beef tend to assume, when they travel to other countries, that all the bacon and ham there are also made from the same meats.

Children who have never seen pigs gush over the cuteness of those little pink animals with the funny snouts.

But faith is about more than just prohibited drinks and foods. It is also about morals and ethics. Every day we are faced with choices that challenge our sense of morality.

Do we pay a little extra to the officer in order to expedite our applications? Do we beat the red light, thus endangering other people, just because we are a little late? Do we keep quiet about a mistake we made and let others take the blame?

It is our faith that is going to provide us the answers to these questions. And sometimes these questions can be difficult to answer. Does that mean therefore that we should just get rid of them so that our faith need never be tested?

It would be nice to get rid of corruption completely so that we never have to deal with it. But do we hear of anyone calling for a ban on it? Or mobilising religious officials to catch anyone giving or receiving a bribe?

If our faith directs our way of life, then ethical and moral questions should dog us every day. How is it that those calling for people who drink to be whipped have nothing to say about people who neglect to repay loans? Or who leave their children in destitution?

How is it that the voices that bay for rock concerts to be banned are not just as outraged by the existence of the homeless and the hungry?

Faith, as someone said, needs to be exercised regularly. Otherwise it gets flabby. In what way can it be exercised if we think that living in a religious utopia is what we should aim for?

Is it better for our faith to be exercised by the trivial rather than the big moral questions of poverty, illiteracy and violence?

God said in the Quran, “if it had been His will, He could indeed have guided you all”. (6:149)

We could all be perfectly good if He

had so willed it. But we are given

choices because that is how we earn our merits. We have the opportunity to think about what we should do and then decide.

In that way we have the chance to think about what ethics we want to apply in our lives. Take away that choice and we never have to think about morals and ethics. What sort of human beings would we be then?

24 August 2009

================================
IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR ALL
The articles are captured from the original writer, MsMarina (with her permission). SambalBelacan is just compiling articles to make easier to find. Any comments received will remain un-respond because it's not mine.Reach her at her very own blog at
http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/ Please.
==================================
Wednesday August 19, 2009
Following Jakarta in tackling AIDS
MUSING by MARINA MAHATHIR


The openness and inclusiveness of the Indonesian local organising committee have been impressive.

IT was a subtle but significant moment for those of us who have worked in this field for a very long time. When Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, President of Indonesia, fifth most populous and largest Muslim country in the world, addressed his “brothers and sisters living with HIV”, all of us sitting in the audience couldn’t help our prickly eyes.

In the dramatic setting of the Garuda Wisnu Kencana park in Bali, President Yudhoyono was opening the 9th International Congress on AIDS in Asia and the Pacific (ICAAP). No head of government has deigned to open the conference since the 5th in Kuala Lumpur in 1999. But the Bali conference was exceptional in so many ways.

Before the opening, the First Lady of Indonesia, Ibu Ani Bambang Yudhoyono, hosted a lunch for several AIDS Ambassadors from abroad in her capacity as National AIDS Ambassador. This means that she is committed to upholding the AIDS cause in the country, talking about it and ensuring that the best prevention, treatment, care and support programmes are employed in Indonesia.

At the official opening, she read out a declaration by all the AIDS Ambassadors and Champions present at 9th ICAAP, committing themselves to being advocates for AIDS, particularly in fighting stigma and discrimination against those most at risk of infection and those living with HIV.

The President’s speech itself set the tone for the entire conference where the fight to contain the spread of AIDS in Asia and the Pacific had to be based on human rights principles, protecting the rights and dignity of those most at risk of becoming infected .

As at the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS in 2001 where many countries, including ours, fought to have a listing of the most vulnerable populations excluded from the resulting document, Indonesia has no problem talking about injecting drug users, sex workers, migrant workers or even men who have sex with men.

Indeed, in my two years working with the Indonesian Local Organising Committee, their sheer openness and inclusiveness impressed me. Indonesia, again unlike us, has a National AIDS Commission (NAC), an autonomous body that reports directly to the President, headed by a powerful and very HIV-savvy woman Nafsiah Mboi.

The NAC is a multi-sectoral body, comprising not only doctors and academics but also the private sector, NGOs and representatives of key affected groups including people with HIV. In fact, the NAC has even provided office space for the local networks of these community groups in the same building.

These communities, including youths, were present in all areas of the organising of the conference. They worked on many of the committees, in the secretariat office and as volunteers. And the entire conference was enriched by it.

Indonesia’s AIDS epidemic is younger than ours but has also expanded at a much faster rate. In Jakarta, HIV rates among injecting drug users is exceptionally high and in the far-flung province of Papua, sexual transmission has taken a great toll. Yet, with the help of donors, Indonesia has responded to the challenges with greater speed and much less angst than we have.

Every province now has an AIDS Commission replicating the National one and does their own programmes to deal with HIV issues that may be different from other areas. In this way, there is no one-size-fits-all programme handed down from a central authority. Needle exchange and methadone programmes in Bali for instance have greatly reduced the incidence of HIV among drug users there.

At the ICAAP, we talked about successful programmes, new challenges and were also reminded of the gaps. At the last plenary, just as Ibu Nafsiah of the NAC was speaking, we were interrupted by a demonstration calling for drugs for Hepatitis C, a common co-infection for many drug users with HIV. It was a peaceful and polite demonstration and Ibu Nafsiah immediately responded that she would look at the Hepatitis C issues in Indonesia and find ways to redress them.

Rarely do we ever see a government official take note and act so quickly as she did.

If Indonesia does well, we in Malaysia benefit too since our people have much interaction with one another. If we do well, Indonesia gains too.

Unfortunately while we are committed to fighting AIDS, we also fight shy of a very crucial part of that battle, the protection of the rights of those vulnerable to and living with HIV. Unlike Indonesia, we don’t have government policies specifically addressing human rights issues. Indeed the words rarely get mentioned in government circles.

Health is a human’s right. If we protect the right to health of the most marginalised and vulnerable groups of people in our society, we will advance the health of the entire nation. When will we understand that?

07 August 2009

================================
IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR ALL
The articles are captured from the original writer, MsMarina (with her permission). SambalBelacan is just compiling articles to make easier to find. Any comments received will remain un-respond because it's not mine.Reach her at her very own blog at http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/ Please.
==================================
Wednesday August 5, 2009
Before acting, take a deep breath
Musings by MARINA MAHATHIR


FORGIVE me if I’m repetitive but sometimes repetition is the only way to get some things into people’s heads.

Yoga may be banned in the view of some in this country but there’s one practice in yoga that can be helpful to everybody. And that is breathing.

There are many instances when before we do anything, it’s really helpful to take a few deep breaths because it helps to clear our minds and allows that moment of hesitation before we do something unwise in haste.

There are lots of people who could really have done with three deep breaths this past week. Breathing helps to engage the brain, and the brain is always needed when making decisions.

Thus it was that non-breathing on the part of those in power led to the ugly scenes of thousands of Malaysian citizens being water-cannoned, teargassed and arrested at the weekend.

There are those who complained about the inconvenience of such demos because mostly it prevented them from driving into town to go shopping. Perhaps the complaints are wrongly directed at the demonstrators.

Rather it should be directed at the police who put up road barriers and blocks a full day before the planned demos and caused traffic jams long before a single protestor put a foot down on a street.

Would it not have been better to simply issue warnings that since a demo is expected, people intending to go into the city should just take public transport?

Oh, but the demo is illegal! Being illegal doesn’t exactly stop it from happening, not when people don’t believe it should be illegal.

So if you know something is going to happen anyway, all you can do is ensure that it happens in an orderly manner with the least inconvenience as possible.

Which goes back to the breathing. If those in power had only taken the time to breathe deeply, their brains might have given them a smarter and unexpected plan.

And the plan would be to actually allow the demos to take place but within certain limits.

So one demo could have taken place at Dataran Merdeka, and only there, within specific and reasonable time limits.

The other rival one could have been allowed to take place in another venue also for a specific time limit.

No one from one group should be allowed anywhere near the other. (The Prime Minister later offered stadiums for these demos, a bit belatedly).

This has tremendous benefits because it allows people to vent what they want, and at the same time pulling the carpet from under them completely.

It also allows better crowd control and avoids unnecessary actions like water-cannoning and tear-gassing. And you don’t get stupidities like children being handcuffed and lawyers not being allowed to talk to those arrested.

There may be those who believe that we should stick strictly to the law. But as someone once said, the law can be an ass.

Just because a law is there doesn’t preclude using one’s brains to think of wiser ways to handle a situation. And sticking strictly to the rules isn’t necessarily the wisest thing to do.

Ultimately it is about showing wisdom, a virtue that, unfortunately, our leaders have consistently failed to show.

The law is also supposed to be neutral. Despite the neutral-sounding noises before the two planned demos, one demo did not materialise, which had two effects.

One, it made the actual demonstrators look bad because there is nothing to compare them with.

Two, it allowed for some overwhelming smugness on the part of the lone pro-ISA supporter, claiming to represent 100,000 others, who apparently could hand over his memo at leisure and unmolested. (It turned out his claim that he had delivered the memo was untrue.)

He did still feel the need to hide his T-shirt, which says plenty about his ideas about openness.

What did the tear gas achieve? It lost at least 20,000 votes for the government, even more if you count those not participating but concerned anyway. It lost the votes of those who inadvertently got caught in the mess.

But here’s the thing. While the middle of the city was all eye-stinging chaos, the rest of the city functioned as normal.

People went out lunching and shopping as they would any Saturday, all the while keeping tabs of what was happening on their mobiles.

The city did not shut down; nobody felt any fear of the consequences of such demos. At the same time, they were not oblivious to what the demo was all about.

Which is a sign of the maturity of our people. While the doomsayers are trying to paint demos as the end of all civilisation, the public proved they are indeed civilised, more so than politicians anytime.

10 July 2009

================================
IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR ALL
The articles are captured from the original writer, MsMarina (with her permission). SambalBelacan is just compiling articles to make easier to find. Any comments received will remain un-respond because it's not mine.Reach her at her very own blog at
http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/ Please.
==================================
Wednesday July 8, 2009
Two sides of the same coin
MUSINGS
By MARINA MAHATHIR


When human rights is sacrificed supposedly on the altar of security, nobody feels safe anymore, not even the enforcers.

READING up on the subject of policing and human rights the other day, I came across some interesting documents.

The Commonwealth Human Rights Report on Police Accountability in 2005 describes a concept that is new to me, that of democratic policing.

This is defined as the idea that the police are protectors of the rights of the citizens and the rule of law, while ensuring the safety and security of all equally.

This definition is not new. In 1996, the UN International Police Task Force declared: “In a democratic society, the police serve to protect, rather than impede, freedoms.

“The very purpose of the police is to provide a safe orderly environment in which these freedoms can be exercised.

“A democratic police force is not concerned with people’s beliefs or associates, their movements or conformity to state ideology. It is not even primarily concerned with the enforcement of regulations of bureaucratic regimens.

“Instead, the police force of a democracy is concerned strictly with the preservation of safe communities and the application of criminal law equally to all people, without fear or favour.”

It follows therefore that if we are to call ourselves a democratic country, the functioning of the police is very central to our perception of ourselves.

We can no longer defend our democracy by simply saying that we have elections every five years, but must also look at how our public institutions behave.

To quote the Commonwealth report once again: “As the primary agency responsible for protecting human security, the police are particularly responsible for turning the promise of human rights into reality.

“The failure of the police to properly perform their duties has a significant effect on the ability of citizens to enjoy the full spectrum of all their human rights and can also impact negatively on the ability of governments to deliver on their mandates.”

In other words, in a democratic society, it is quite possible for the police to be the main human rights agency in the country.

People have a right to safety and security, so ensuring that they are able to go about their business safely is a human rights job.

Making sure that their complaints are seen to quickly is another, as well as seeing that investigations are done properly so that justice can be served.

But this only happens if law enforcers see citizens as essentially good people. However if the attitude is that citizens are just one seething mass of potential lawbreakers, then a problem arises.

How do you protect people when basically you think people are just waiting to be bad?

This seems to be the basic difference in perspective between law enforcers and citizens.

Law enforcers believe that people cannot be trusted to behave themselves and therefore must act before they break the law.

Citizens on the other hand believe in what is just and fair and cannot understand why they should face punitive action just for believing that.

Yet, I have seen citizens gather to discuss difficult and sensitive subjects with greater civility than I have seen law enforcers. That is perhaps the other insight.

Civilians learn that the right way to behave is always to be civil even when you heartily disagree with others. Uniformed personnel see things in more black and white; there is simply no room for disagreement.

This inevitably puts law enforcers and civilians on a collision course. Civilians don’t see why things cannot be in the open; law enforcers prefer things to be kept in the dark so that they will always have the upper hand.

Civilians think that they can be trusted to not create chaos and disorder; law enforcers don’t believe so.

This is why we see otherwise peaceful demonstrations become disorderly after the police have acted, not before.

Most people also have a sense of natural justice that forms the basis of their concept of human rights. Even children have a sense of what is fair and what is not.

Yet, there are some people who think that human rights are “ideals” that cannot be realised if we are also to think of security.

The funny thing is when human rights is sacrificed supposedly on the altar of “security”, nobody feels safe anymore, not even the enforcers.

As an example, Israel has never been able to feel safe since it took away the rights of the Palestinians to live in their own land. More tough measures to ensure Israeli security have done nothing to ease the situation. The same can be seen anywhere human rights is suppressed.

Perhaps it is time for major re-education of law enforcement on what human rights means. And that their disregard for it reflects badly on the political masters they serve.