Mohamed Suffian Mohamed Hashim, former Lord
President of the Federal Court, said that the amendments acted "contrary
to the spirit of the original constitution which established the Dewan Negara
specially as a body to protect in the federal Parliament, state interests
against federal encroachments."
So what's new in Malaysia Boleh! Just another obscene molestation of the already much mutilated federal Constitution.
And that's the 'full context' within which Jaspal Singh should have made his comments on the Senate, namely, that it is currently one that can no longer protect the interests of minorities or the states, but just a rubber-stamping factory for the federal cabinet's legislations and a back door avenue for the PM to reward failed and rejected politicians like Koh, Shahrizat, etc.
Thus Jaspal Singh should appreciate why his 'countryman' Bhai Karpal has been so outraged by the 'unrepresentative swill'* that is the Dewan Senate today.
* the term 'unrepresentative swill' was first used by former Australian PM Paul Keating to describe the Australian Senate, though his words carried a different meaning to the one I have for the Malaysian Senate, where mine indicates that Malaysian senators are not directly voted into office by the rakyat.
Dr Mahathir was not unlike the fabled King Midas, though of a version which changed everything he touched into disaster (instead of gold).
You may wonder who's King Midas. Well, rather than write the story on my own, here's what I obtained from the web about Midas (slightly edited by kaytee for better reading and clarity):
Midas was a king of great fortune who
ruled the country of Phrygia, in Asia Minor. He had everything a king could
wish for. He lived in luxury in a great castle. He shared his life of abundance
with his beautiful daughter. Even though he was already very rich, Midas thought that
his greatest happiness could only be provided by gold. His used
to spend his days counting his golden coins! Occasionally he used to cover his
body with gold objects, as if he wanted to bathe in them. Gold was his
obsession.
One day (to cut the story short) he did a favour to Dionysus the god of wine and
revelry, who passed through the kingdom of Midas. The god was very grateful to Midas for his kindness, and granted Midas any one wish the king desired. Midas though for a while and said: “I hope that
everything I touch becomes gold”.
 |
Dionysus |
Dionysus warned the king to think carefully about
his wish, but Midas was very firm about what he wanted. Dionysus could do nothing else but to grant the king his wish, that from that day everything he touched would turn into
gold.
The next day, Midas woke up eagerly to
see if his wish became true. He touched a table
which immediately turned into gold. Midas jumped with joy! He then touched
a chair, the door, his bathtub, a table, etc until he was exhausted yet happy at the same
time with all the new gold objects he came into possession!
Then he sat at the table to have breakfast, and while waiting to be served, took a rose between his hands
to smell its fragrance. When he touched it, the rose turned immediately into gold. "I will have to obtain the rose's fragrance without touching it, I suppose," he thought in
disappointment.
When he tried to eat a grape it also turned into
gold! The same happened with a slice of bread and a glass of water. Suddenly,
he was afraid. Tears filled his eyes and at that moment, his beloved
daughter entered the room. When Midas hugged her, she turned into a golden statue! In great despair and fear, he prayed to Dionyssus to take the curse of his magical touch away from him.
Fast forward, and do we recall someone had once cried in equal despair at the curse of what he erroneously imagined would be his magic touch?
And hasn't everything he touched turn into disaster? Forex, Sabah, Senate, the Pandora Box of religion, crooked bridge, etc etc etc, even his beloved NEP ended up with him (not someone else) criticizing his UMNO people for continuing to lean on crutches?
What about the recent elections in Pasir Mas, Shah Alam and the latter's domino effect in Selangor? Just another of his 'Mahathir' magic touch for UMNO!
But alas, unlike King Midas, King Mahathir is not repentant. He doesn't believe in the curse he has in his hands, changing every everything he touched into disaster, even and especially for those he favours.
Yes, I grant he wants to help the UMNO Malays, he wants to strengthen UMNO, yet he makes matters worse for them. That's the Mahathir Midas-like Dilemma.
But let's return to Gobind Rudra's proposal to reform the Senate. Gobind spoilt a serious proposal, for a start, by his rants against Singapore (which I have to admit I have been fond of too, though only against LKY, wakakaka).
However, Gobind behaved in an irrational angry manner, a behaviour which incidentally he had accused Karpal Singh of, when he wrote:
Karpal seeks to destroy what would be an institution that could strengthen democracy and the people’s interests. He is disgusted that P Waythamoorthy was made a deputy minister. So he says close down the the Senate.
But didn’t the DAP appoint Tunku Aziz Ibrahim as senator? And when he was appointed, didn’t the DAP trumpet the fact that he was the first DAP senator?
Yes indeed, DAP did appoint Tunku Aziz to the Senate as allowed by the Constitution, BUT NOT into the cabinet via the Senate 'back door'.
That has been the fundamental difference which unfortunately Gobind, in his anger against Karpal Singh wakakaka, failed to distinguish. Thus, Tunku Aziz was NOT a 'back door' appointment.
Then strangely for someone who claimed to speak for the rakyat, Gobind cast his anger at the Dewan Rakyat in saying:
Karpal’s suggestion for only one house, of a Parliament consisting only of the Dewan Rakyat, is a disguised appeal for the supremacy of parties and politicians, instead of the supremacy of the people.
For a start, to argue that the Dewan Rakyat is not an expression of the supremacy of the rakyat shows his somewhat confused understanding of parliamentary democracy, warts and all.
Additionally, he failed to explain how a Dewan Senate would be different from a Dewan Rakyat in terms of politicians and political parties, since we may be sure that the Dewan Senate would be filled mainly by apppointees from the same political parties in the Dewan Rakyat.
He was talking as if his reformed Dewan Senate will be completely divorced from the Malaysian political sphere. What was he smoking?
Or, has he been prejudiced against the Dewan Rakyat because there isn't in the legislative institution those he wants to see?
But nonetheless let us examine what he has to offer:
What Malaysia needs is a reformed Senate as well as a reformed government and reformed politicians who believe in the principles of democracy and will uphold them. One of those principles is representation of the people. Another is separation of powers. And another is check and balance.
Okay, no problem, though all are motherhood statements thus far. But nothing enlightening. Let's read on.
A reformed Senate, if given due respect from reformed politicians and a principled government, would provide a check and balance against a house of MPs who believe their word should be law merely because they were successful in conning an unthinking and gullible rabble into voting for them.
Again, a motherhood statement with a wee ranting at the end wakakaka, though I question his particular rant against the Dewan Rakyat as not being the law maker. I'm getting worried about his understanding of parliamentary democracy.
Or, I am now even more convinced the people he supports haven't been (or couldn't be) elected into the Dewan Rakyat, hence his invincible prejudice.
A reformed Senate would give voice to ethnic minorities, to those sidelined by the political process, for example allowing all religions to be represented. A reformed Senate would provide a place for those who cannot, or will not, take part in the dirty business of winning votes. Technocrats could be appointed to represent industries and trades, artists and performers, sportsmen, maybe even journalists.
Some good points but I have a few questions for him:
(a) who, apart from ethnic minorities like the Aborigines and other (East Malaysian) natives, are those 'sidelined by the political process'? C'mon, don't be shy or oblique. Say it out aloud.
(b) who is an ethnic minority? How would we define an ethnic minority in Malaysia? One with less than 3, 2, 1 or x% of Malaysian population? Or perhaps one with less than 8%, wakakaka.
(c) what did he mean by 'those who cannot, or will not, take part in the dirty business of winning votes'? Is he advocating a departure from the (his) 'dirty business' of democratic elections? Is he suggesting imperious (note: not imperial, but perhaps Ah Jib Gor's) appointments instead of the choice/voice of the people?
I gather by now Gobind isn't exactly a man in favour of democratic elections, sneering at it as 'dirty business', but I suspect, only because those he supports couldn't get elected into Parliament, wakakaka.
A reformed Senate would have direct elections for people to represent the 14 states. It would also provide for royal appointment, by which minorities and other neglected groups could have a voice.
Again I have to ask who he meant by 'neglected groups'? As I urged before, c'mon Gobind, say it out aloud, or no one will hear you.
But I am now getting the sense he could be a Hindraf sympathizer or even is a member who wants a SARSI wakakaka.
An upper house would provide a place for unpolitical debate, for a calm rethink of what the rowdy politicians in the other place demand.
Unpolitical debate? There is no such animal when one deals with issues pertaining to, or involving the
state or its government, in defining policies and legislations of a state. All these are political. I am afraid by now, I have to regrettably say he's talking SARSI cock. So goodbye Gobind.
I had hoped someone would propose a Senate based on the powerful Australian version, to make amends to King Mahathir's 'Midas' touch on it, but let's leave that lengthy discussion for another day.