Sunday November 25, 2007

CAFE LATTE CHAT 

IN his preamble, The Star's acting group chief editor Datuk Wong Chun Wai pointed out that power sharing in this country has been a numbers game. The Chinese now comprise only 25% of the total population compared to some 35% a decade ago. Only about 30 of the 219 parliamentary seats are still predominantly Chinese.  

What are the possible impact and implications of the shrinking Chinese votes on the power-sharing model? Can the community afford a weaker representation in the ruling Barisan Nasional?  

Healthy debate: The panel including (from left) Liew, Soong, Khoo, Wong and Roger airing their views during the first Cafe Latte Chat at Menara Star recently.

How can the Chinese community rediscover their political influence in the governance process?  

Are the grouses and sentiments real and legitimate?  

What is the way forward? 

The participants in this session are corporate lawyer Roger Tan, Insap research director Fui K. Soong, DAP election strategy advisor Liew Chin Tong, Sedar Institute director Gavin Khoo Khay Peng and The Star's associate editor Joceline Tan. 

Below are excerpts from the discussion chaired by Wong. 

Urban And Restless 

Wong: Let's start with the perception that urban voters especially the Chinese are in an anti-establishment mood. 

Joceline: There is clearly unhappiness mainly among the intelligentsia, people who read newspapers, watch TV, (and) follow current events about a variety of issues. They are also mainly urban-based and middle class so areas like the Klang Valley and also Penang would be areas to watch. But sometimes as a reporter, I get the sense that when people tell me something, like the Chinese are unhappy, I tell someone else, and he or she tells others and after a week, it comes back to me. So you wonder how much is hearsay and how much is real. We don't have a polling system to provide us with more scientific feedback.  

Soong: Much like marketing, understanding voters, how they behave – these are all behavioural patterns. They are important factors for all political parties including the MCA. But talking about communal politics, this is where a lot of people fail to understand the issue of ethnicity. The West is beginning to reject this issue in politics. But we can't run away from the issue of multi-ethnicity in Malaysia. 

Where Malays are concerned, religion is one line that you don't touch. For the Chinese, it's language. In Sabah and Sarawak, when we talk about the indigenous groups, we do not refer to them just as Bumiputra because for them it's about tribal identity. But from our studies we find we can't take away how Malaysians view themselves in terms of ethnicity. But they are proud of being Malaysians and, as I always say, traffic lights don't just break down just for the Chinese or if the drains are stuck, it affects everyone.  

Liew: As of April 15, there were four million Malays still unregistered as voters. For now, the Government can still segregate urban and rural votes on the assumption that urban areas are still Chinese dominated and that most Malays vote in their kampung. But DAP would not only have to appeal to the Chinese if the four million urban Malays were to enter the electoral roll. Maybe it can transform itself into a party that champions all urban Malaysians. Umno's Malay hegemony is because it controls most of the seats in the rural areas. Once you have Malays who live and work in urban areas, the issues will change; the articulation of ideas would be different.  

Pendulum Votes 

Wong: What are your views on the urban Chinese vote swing in the next elections?  

Liew: There is a large number of swing voters in urban politics, even in Australia and the United States. In Malaysia, maybe DAP will get more votes this time around, but not necessarily more seats. I don't think we will win many more seats in the next election because of the way the electoral system structures the seats. Besides, there aren’t many urban seats available. From what we hear, we may get an increase in popular votes but it would not be as great as in 1986. But even in 1990, the dynamics were different: there were hopes for a change of government, at least for a majority of Chinese. You don't see it this time around because Umno is so strong. 

Roger: A Chinese vote swing in favour of DAP would be quite a disaster for the community's representation in government where the MCA is concerned. The Chinese in the rural and urban areas have a different way of thinking. They are still inclined towards the MCA because the majority are grateful for the new villages created during the Emergency.  

The MCA grassroots and connectivity are stronger when dealing with rural Chinese who generally still think along Chinese representation.  

This is not the case in the urban areas where issues and educational backgrounds are different. They think in terms of national interest, national issues and also the importance of a strong opposition. So we see a lot of Chinese turning towards the DAP and other opposition parties. 

But when you talk about shrinking Chinese votes and representation in the government, the Chinese-based parties should unite.  

This may be a near impossibility, but there was talk of MCA and Gerakan getting together in the last elections. I thought that was a good idea.  

Soong: Once in a while – I don't know why – the Chinese community has this self-destruct mechanism. But the machinery, the infrastructure, is there whenever there are issues in rural areas. In urban areas, however, I believe MCA has not handled urban issues or maybe even urban Chinese issues in a way that meets their needs, which are very different. Their outreach, particularly to the professional groups, has been difficult because of the economic advances. There has to be more direct involvement with the population, to make them see that the very same economic advances were possible because of the stability provided by the Barisan framework.  

Wong: When people have a problem they go to (Datuk) Michael Chong but some feel MCA is not “shouting” enough and they use DAP for that. They want the best of both worlds, so they vote DAP for Parliament and Barisan for state. Is this a Chinese dilemma? 

Soong: If everyone thought that way, it would be koyak (finish) for us. I mean it's a selfish thought because it's as if they are saying they are interested only in the progress of their kawasan while hoping that others would vote the opposition into parliament for a voice.  

Khoo: We have to look at the psyche of political parties. Gerakan, for example, has the same rhetoric chant as MCA – it does not want open confrontation. It keeps saying that we do things quietly; we serve the society and community in our own way by cooperating with the government. They believe in closed-door negotiations. 

About the inability to connect with urban voters, it's not so much about urban or rural voters but more of the generation gap, the inability to connect with the new generation of Chinese Malaysians. Failure to integrate comes from two main reasons. One is that race-based political parties are still working at the post independence mindset. At that time, it was necessary for race-based parties to be formed.  

These political parties fail to realise that there must be an evolutionary process. There should be a timeframe to work together and integrate so that a real Malaysian political party can emerge. The second reason is that political parties claim to represent certain communities by their names and, for that matter, Gerakan has also become very “Chinese-centric” because of this. 

Roger: I would equate the relationship of MCA, Umno and MIC as a marriage of 50 years. So imagine that in this married situation, if Umno and MCA continued to shout at each other, the marriage would be broken. But there are a lot of Chinese who would love MCA to be more vocal and raise issues in a more open way so that MCA is seen as a party that will not be bullied.  

But once we do that, we are going to have a reaction. If you look at our 50-year history, there have been instances where MCA has spoken up and each time, there was strong reaction from Umno.  

Chinese Votes Crucial In Malay Areas 

Wong: When the Chinese supported the opposition in 1969, there was a loss of representation in government. They know they can never be “king” but they can be the king-maker in close-fought seats. Given the shrinking Chinese population, would that mean they would face less and less political clout? 

Liew: I prefer the analogy of the 1990 election when the majority of Chinese voted opposition and this prompted the government to announce Vision 2020 four months after the elections. It was the recipe to address Chinese discontent and because they knew the Malay ground was very weak at that time. The Chinese were the king-maker in 1990, so they decided to sustain their support by addressing the issues.  

MCA will not face serious consequences in the next elections because half of their seats are Malay-majority and Umno is relatively strong at the moment. In addition, many urban voters face a dilemma in the sense that services and amenities are linked to patronage. Many Chinese Malaysians feel it's their right.  

Soong: About 65% of Umno seats are multi-racial seats. When the candidate or constituency is dicey, the Chinese tend to vote for the opposition. They are leveraging against each other.  

Roger: From my observation, if Umno and PAS vie for a seat, the Chinese would vote for Umno. As for those seats that are for MCA and DAP, the Malays go for MCA. So it's not quite correct to say that MCA relies on Malay votes in order to survive. The Chinese were the king-maker when there was trouble in Umno in 1999. 

Wong: In a contest between two Chinese parties, how would the DAP win the Malay vote? 

Liew: The press is restricted and DAP has no free access to mainstream media. It is difficult for the opposition to preach the national message. For the Malays, DAP is a Chinese chauvinist party. For the Chinese, PAS is given the same view. There's no chance for DAP to make a national conciliatory step. We are forced to go on the ground and that's challenging.  

In addition, the electoral system is structured in such a way that it gives Barisan the advantage. As such PAS has won in purely Malay seats and DAP, unfortunately, has also won only in purely Chinese seats.  

Khoo: It's simplistic to think that anyone can just form political parties to replace MCA, Gerakan or even DAP because history has shown that parties such as Parti Negara and Pekemas have not achieved any effect. The multi-racial system is inevitably what our system must include and there must be evolution.  

We cannot just base it on the post-independence model and say we are going to use it for the next 50 years. If the dominant party tells you we will still be using the same model in 2057, then something is wrong. That's why I think it's very pertinent for political parties within the system to see what they can do to influence the dominant partner to change the system.  

Roger: But in the urban areas, the Malays would still vote for Umno simply because Umno is seen as the protector of Malay rights and the Constitution. Also, many Malays vote for them out of gratitude for what they have done.  

Urban Voice 

Liew: About half of the Malay electorate voted PAS and Keadilan in 1990, so for Malays not to vote for Umno is possible. But Abdullah is still very strong and seen as a champion of the Malays. Things might change in the years ahead because we may no longer assume that Chinese are urban and Malays are rural, as more Malays move to urban areas.  

The current administration has not addressed this issue and the disappointment will show in the next election. But there is no way Umno will change unless and until they have to face the swing voters in urban areas. When it has to face younger Malays who have different ideas about the world, then it would have to adapt.  

Joceline: The critical group in the next elections would be the urban voters, a large proportion of them being Chinese. Their access to information, the media and the Internet shapes their worldview about politics, democracy, or what is due to them. They see things differently from those outside the urban centres.  

Any party that serves this urban grouping will have to come around to their way of thinking and to address the issues. Even Umno will face a similar situation as urban Malays grow in size. They can still raise the keris and it works for the rural crowd but they'll have to start rethinking the urban vote because there's going to be a critical mass of urban voters. 

Khoo: Many issues cut across racial lines in urban areas. The government focuses too much on politics, too little on governance. People want this to be addressed – imbalances, abuses, corruption and poor public delivery system. They're also concerned about the inability of the government to control economic opportunities, which lead to escalating costs. When high prices hit the Chinese, it also hits the Malays and Indians.  

In his concluding remarks, Wong said: “There seems to be several streams of thought here. We agree the Chinese community is shrinking and some of us are concerned the community will lose political clout if the trend continues.  

“But others take comfort that as the political sphere changes, especially in urban areas, the Chinese voters – as a minority – would remain a key factor. The urban voters, it has also been pointed out, also share many commonalities regardless of their ethnic background. Malaysians would be able to see a clearer perspective of this in the next general election. –Transcribed by PAUL CHOO and M. KRISHNAMOORTHY 

Sunday December 2, 2007

Bloggers, Politics and The Elections
View video 

When Malaysians next go to the polls, they will no longer be wooed solely by conventional campaign methods.  

The emergence of the multimedia in the political landscape will see the Internet being used in an unprecedented way to persuade voters and win votes. They will range from blogs and websites on the Internet to the ubiquitous sms' and, more recently, self-made videos on YouTube and social networking on Facebook. 

Lighter moment: The panellists (from left) Khairy, Khoo, Ooi, Nai Chee, Chia, Chun Wai and Raslan sharing a joke.

The second round of Café Latte Chats chaired by The Star's acting group chief editor Datuk Wong Chun Wai explores this new force on the political landscape. 

The panellists who turned up at The Star's recording studio were an interesting mix of personalities. They are Deputy Information Minister Datuk Seri Chia Kwang Chye, Kota Melaka MP and lawyer Wong Nai Chee, Umno Youth deputy chief Khairy Jamaluddin, DAP's e-campaign director and blogger Jeff Ooi, Sedar Institute director Khoo Kay Peng and The Star Online editor Raslan Shariff. 

Chun Wai: The general election could be just a few months from now. Will conventional methods of campaigning play second fiddle to the Internet in the general election? 

Chia: It will increase and the potential is great, but that it will be dominant, I beg to differ. I see a greater potential on Youtube because a video says everything without having to explain. That kind of online content has impact. The blogger influence will also be big on younger voters because a recent survey shows that 75% of those under 25 go online. But to control blogs is close to impossible because of the very nature of the technology. I see more bloggers and blogs in the next general election. 

Talk, not shout? 

Chun Wai: There has been more democratic space than before, but Malaysians are still grappling with the idea of speaking up – people in cyberspace often shout, unable to discuss, using inflammatory language, calling names and making allegations. On the other hand, there are the older politicians who are fearful of this new medium and unable to see the need for greater expression. 

Nai Chee: The Government is still trying to live with this new development. We are still in the infancy stage but one of the guarantees of the Multimedia Super Corridor (renamed MSC Malaysia) was to not curb Internet content except maybe using certain legislation to control the situation.  

The Internet is a global trend and we have to spend a lot more effort on the medium because you have to deal with information not found in the conventional media. I remember the alleged corruption of a deputy minister in the Internet and it caused such a hoo ha. We can't control it, we just have to acclimatise ourselves to it. 

Ooi: There are two extremes in the media ecosystem. But describing Malaysia as more liberal compared with 22 years of the Mahathir era, I think that is not by design, more by accident. Bloggers, news portal like Malaysiakini thrive because they play a complementing role to what are official mouthpieces. They have changed the pattern of news and information. 

But you need credibility to command trust, you need to substantiate what you claim. I do not condone bloggers who hide behind anonymity, use inflaming words and so on. It's so peculiar in Malaysia that when you throw hard questions, it's the old school ministers who respond negatively. It will take a few more years for people to accept the Internet as a form of life such as in the first world. 

Chun Wai: People question the objectivity of the mainstream media but no one seems to question bloggers who make allegations and are proven wrong, like all those allegations made about you, Khairy. 

Khairy: The opening up of the media space is by a conscious design of the government after the 2004 elections, not by accident. The level of tolerance for organisations like Malaysiakini to go into official press conferences and grill ministers is much greater than before. 

I'm not a participant or blogger per se, but if you have the “Top of the Pops,” I'm probably No.1 almost every month or week when it comes to being the victim of blogs. But I take it as fair game as this is an entirely new medium. The veracity or credibility of information and blogs is sometimes suspect, so you have to take it with a pinch of salt.  

Blogs are increasingly important but you have to see it in the context of Internet penetration. The impact is going to be limited in the coming elections but it's going to sway voters in three or four elections to come. I come from the biggest political party in Malaysia whose strength lies in the rural sector. Information there comes from ceramah, opposition papers and mainstream media.  

Chun Wai: Some bloggers think their views reflect that of the rest of the country. People sometimes believe what they want to believe.  

Khoo: I think that happens on both sides. Some bloggers are opinion makers, they create certain information, other bloggers pick it up and the voice suddenly seems huge. The government side seems hostile to what bloggers do but there is also a great deal among politicians in the government. But generally, there aren't many people with original opinions, good views or substantiated statements. 

The Internet and the Rural Voters 

Raslan: When I balik kampung, people there hardly go into the net or go for the sort of news urban people go for. Cyberspace gets a disproportionate amount of attention because of the government reaction. We have four million people on dial-up and a further one million on broadband, mainly in urban areas. The National Broadband Plan wants to wire up 50% of households by 2010. Maybe the political impact of the Internet will be greater in the elections after that. 

Chia: Only 20% of those who access blogs read political blogs. Opposition parties have been more active in this alternative media. The ruling party is lagging behind because of their comfort level with the traditional media. But it's going to be more important for us in the future. 

Nai Chee: It's not so much about access to rural people but more about people's priorities. Rural priorities are still very much bread and butter issues – electricity, water, cost of living. The majority of bloggers are addressing urban middle class issues.  

Khairy: As far as Umno is concerned, I think we are not doing enough. That is an admission on my part. I don’t think there is any Umno leader who runs a blog, maybe Shahrir on and off. That is something we need to rectify quickly. The technology is still something that is alien to the Umno leadership and that is something we have to correct. 

The impact of blogs on the rural electorate cannot be dismissed because of the process of osmosis and it is possibly something that needs our attention. There was on Malaysia-Today, which everyone knows is a strongly-opinionated portal, these chronicles, a fantastical, fictional account of this guy who had the same name as me, and it was made into a book that was printed in English and Malay and distributed at the Umno general assembly.  

Something created online could actually make its way into the rural heartland via Umno delegates. There is a process of conversion, from what is taking place in urban domain into rural domain. But it's basically still a small ecosystem. If you look at the responses posted to blogs, its quite incestuous, basically the same people with the same opinions. I'm taking it in the context of what is said about me every week, every month, recycled arguments from last year or the year before.  

What the government parties are doing – I know the MCA and Gerakan are quite active in courting online space simply because contest is in urban seats. 

Chun Wai: The mainstream media always has to think of libel, unlike bloggers who get away with a lot of things. Many people don't realise that when they read things on the Internet that may not appear in the mainstream media. The major newspapers are public listed companies and they are easy targets. Very few want to sue bloggers. 

Ooi: We also get defamation suits. The ground rules are the same for the mainstream media and bloggers and we are pretty fine with it. I always say that if you want to say your piece, substantiate it. And be ready always to face the consequences in court. That has definitely seeped in among up and coming bloggers.  

Take Rocky's Bru, in the last 18 months, his traffic has almost equalled or surpassed mine. People who reveal their identity command respect and credibility and help you touch the hearts of your constituents. But there are so few political bloggers who can be considered reliable in terms of evidence and subject matter. 

I foresee blogs playing a role but it will be a footnote role and in a way that uses a convergence of multimedia forms. For example, PAS has videos on Harakah daily and within three days, they are converted into DVDs and distributed to the masses. When you are so limited, you have to be resourceful. But first and foremost, you must have credibility. 

Legal actions, bloggers and mainstream media 

Chun Wai: Khairy, all sorts of things have been written about you in blogs but you have not sued them.  

Khairy: I choose not to take legal action because politically, it puts more attention on the blog which is precisely what they want. As a politician, the moment I start suing somebody, I’ll be suing somebody every day because people say things about you every day. You can't go to court every time somebody says an untruth about you. You use whatever channels you think are credible and tell your side of the story. That is the cut and cross of politics. But sometimes you have to go to the courts. Anwar is suing me over a speech I made in Kuala Kangsar. He obviously hasn’t come up to deny what I had to say, he decided to take it to court. I'm not crying about it, this is a grown-ups' game.  

Chun Wai: You have moved from blogging into politics and you will likely be contesting in the elections. Someone will come along and challenge you and say, Jeff, what credibility are you talking about? 

Ooi: I think I’ll let my record show. What will be tough is how do we reconcile one's profile as a blogger with that of your constituents. You are not going to have an ideal situation where you only talk to the educated or Internet-savvy. The problem with bloggers is that most of them are talking to the converted. They pontificate about the power of blogs but do not know how to move beyond that small sphere. That is the major challenge.  

There is a formula towards making blogs less lethal. The moment the Printing Presses and Publications Act is withdrawn and Malaysian media can behave the way journalists operate, then blogs will be rendered ineffective. That is food for thought. 

Khoo: The perception is that the Government does not want to engage, they want to do things in a closed-door manner without publicity. This mindset has to change because the Internet is all about engagement. When bloggers blog about something, they get immediate responses, whether the reader agrees or disagrees. 

Khairy: Many of these political blogs for their own reasons take a very strong stand against the Government. So if you ask if we are willing to engage, yes we are. But it's very difficult because many of the postings and editorialising in these blogs suggest that it can become very personal.  

Take for example, Rocky's Bru. It is no secret that Rocky started this Bru after he left one news organisation. He was very angry, cynical and had a chip on his shoulder and that is reflected through his blog. As for Jeff, his blog has evolved, then Jeff made that step to become a DAP member, to say he is going to contest in the elections. All well and good because we know where he's coming from.  

You can engage with people, but you must also understand where they're coming from, their history and background, the axes they have to grind. I would much prefer that we create our own domain and ecosystem so that people can see what we are doing. If they like it, they can stay and comment. If you don't, they can go. That is the power of the Internet, free choice. 

Ooi: The growth of blogs in the last three years goes to show the ground has moved, that people are not afraid to voice and share opinions and feelings. They are not being anti-government, they are pro-Malaysia. Bloggers are not there to pontificate but to provide context to issues in a world of information explosion. Treat bloggers with respect that they will do their research and come to their own conclusion.  

The digital division – government and bloggers 

Chun Wai: Bloggers must be responsible for what they write, when civil actions are taken against them, they claim it's an infringement of their expression. 

Khoo: It's all about perception – I think on both sides there is wrong perception and each views the other with great distrust. Bloggers will say government is not credible and vice-versa. Political approach has to change, from government and opposition. The Government has to be willing to create its own domain and engage with people because the Government can enable change. When that happens, freedom of expression won't be the main focus anymore. If outlets are legitimate, open and flexible, I'm sure in time the truth will surface. 

Chun Wai: The need to change, to open up, is taking place. When will we actually see ministers and deputy ministers adopt an open view of things? 

Chia: I think the situation will change. Younger politicians will go more and more into blogs and engage online. I see the trend already. If we don't move along, we will drown. To survive, a lot of people will go in. 

Raslan: There is still a lot more to be done on both sides. Education for bloggers and people who read blogs. More and more Malaysians want to be treated as equals on an intellectual level and not in a feudal structure. More and more, people don't want to be talked down to. They want to be engaged on the same level. Once we have that, mutual respect on both sides, then we will find a way out. 

Conclusion 

Chun Wai: We can conclude that this election will be the beginning of what has been regarded, in many developed countries, as the 'Google election' era. It may not have a strong impact but for certain, in the coming years, we will see a greater convergence of the print and online video. The new generation of Malaysians have used online access as a major communications tool. The older politicians find themselves vulnerable but there is no running away from it. The younger generation also believes that a bigger democratic space is the way forward.  

Compiled by Royce Cheah and Paul Choo 

Sunday December 9, 2007

CAFE LATTE CHAT

THE Café Latte session on crime and security saw Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan turning up in full uniform and wearing the “Saya Anti Rasuah” badge on his chest. 

Speaking up: The panellists from left, Ambiga, Lourdes, Musa Hassan, Wee and Wong sharing a light moment during the recent discussion.

His presence underscored his seriousness about tackling crime issues, which have become the No. 1 concern of Malaysians who feel that the country is not as safe as it used to be.  

Crime and security, said Café Latte moderator Datuk Wong Chun Wai, were set to be hot issues in the next general election. The people wanted to hear from elected representatives about what was being done to improve their standard of living and whether that included safe cities and the kind of action they could expect from the police force. 

More recently, Kuala Lumpur folk have had to cope with protest gatherings, following which there had been much debate over the role of the police in dealing with the matter. Besides Musa, this session included Malaysian Bar Council chairman S. Ambiga, Ayer Hitam MP Dr Wee Ka Siong and The Star's crime desk chief Lourdes Charles.  

Busting crime 

Wong: How are the police addressing the people's concern about crime and security? 

Musa: The trend of crime has changed. It is not like before (traditional crime) where crimes only involved local people. Globalisation has brought in an influx of immigrants and the population has increased; people are migrating from the kampung to towns and youths are getting into unlawful activities. Criminals are also not like before because we have people bringing their culture here. It is normal in Jakarta to see people racing here and there. Our youths tend to imitate the wrong things, that's why we see all these Mat Rempits now.  

The police need to enhance their crime prevention techniques – more patrol cars and surveillance. I am planning a “community policy” for closer relations between the community and police. I've directed the OCPDs in Penang and Johor to draw up sectors, with a community policy officer assigned to each sector. This officer will acquaint himself with the residents and respond to problems they face. I’ve suggested that every housing area have a box for residents to address letters to the police and alert them of security problems. 

I've also asked the government for equipment like CCTVs and updated office equipment. This will also help us in monitoring purposes. As for logistics, we would like to have more helicopters to detect crime because having an aerial perspective is very effective.  

Wong: These things will not happen overnight. What will you be doing in the short- and middle-term? 

Musa: I am utilising Rakan Cop and working towards having sectors in housing areas. This would enable the policemen to have all the information about what is happening in these areas. Intelligence gathering is also important, so I'm trying to enhance this and I’ve also asked the police to work as an integrated system.  

We do not only want the CID to be handling cases but also all officers to be involved. We are constantly using them for crime prevention and other activities. There are now a number of police officers in a certain area and they being assisted by the General Operations Force.  

Corruption 

Wong: As a lawyer, what are your views on this, Ambiga?  

Musa: There's a link between crime and corruption, that's why we are going all out in the Anti Rasuah campaign. When I took over as IGP, there were many transfers as some officers could not be stationed at certain places for various reasons. I think we’ve contained it (corruption) but it's still there. It's not easy to fight corruption because the public must also be educated. Some find the easy way out by offering bribes.  

Nowadays, a lot of crimes are committed not by individuals but syndicates who deal in human trafficking, gambling and so on. These syndicates have to be tackled, especially the top guns.  

Wong: Your fight against corruption has resulted in bullets being sent to you and you have some serious cases 0still pending in court. How are you coping with such issues, especially when it involves your own men?  

Musa: I've given them stern warning. In several cases, I told them they would be transferred if they were still involved. But the working facilities of these policemen would have to be taken care of if they are to excel. I have urged the Government to build new police stations. You hear talk about people being arrested, placed in lock-ups and then dying while in custody. The situation becomes topsy-turvy because these are old buildings. For the new ones I’ve already planned for CCTVs to be installed so that we can monitor what's happening in the cells. 

Crime in the city 

Wong: Wee, Johor has a reputation as a crime-infested city.  

Wee: I must congratulate the police for what they have done in Johor. I can see positive changes in terms of the security level and the people feel safer now. The crime rate has gone down tremendously. I also see the crime issue in Johor as a blessing in disguise because political parties, NGOs and top police officers in Johor joined together to fight for more equipment such as walkie-talkies and increased personnel. There are now about 1,000 police personnel looking after Johor Baru which is three times the size of Singapore.  

They have even mobilised the Federal Reserve Unit and General Operations Force to assist the CID and police in intelligence work. These are the changes I have seen but there is definitely room for improvement because Johor is the most important gateway for foreigners, especially Singaporeans. When a crime in Johor is highlighted in the Singapore media, there is a kiasu attitude and they are scared to come over, especially if it involves a Singaporean. 

Wong: You can’t blame them. They are coming over to spend, they want to feel safe. 

Musa: We must also remember that Singapore wants people to spend within the country and boost their economy rather than come to Johor. That is why we sometimes see the Singaporean media highlighting things in Johor to deter them from coming over. We also have information about Singapore’s underground gangsters operating in Johor. That is a problem now.  

I have close working relations with the Singaporean police so that we can crack down on these syndicates. Johor gangsters are so rich they are now buying property in Singapore. Most of these syndicate members are kingpins whom I am going all out to fight. But sometimes these people have close relations with certain other people, making it very hard for us to fight them.  

Wong: Lourdes, do Singaporeans face a language problem when they try to lodge police reports in Johor? 

Lourdes: To a certain extent, yes, because when Singaporeans go to a police station they are only proficient in English and find difficulty making a report in Bahasa Malaysia. 

Wong: But there have been complaints all over about the difficulty of lodging reports and officers asking complainants to lodge the report elsewhere.  

Musa: I have often asked the public to report police officers for refusing to take a report. Complain to the OCPD. The OCPD’s number is listed in the police station. If the OCPD does not act, I will personally take action against him. Like I’ve said, there are various ways to lodge a police report. You don't even have to come to the station, just call an officer and he or she will lodge the report for you. You can even write a letter to us. We will consider that as a report. 

Wong: Can the police set up a roadblock and flag down people on the highways, for example, for speeding? The public thinks the police are flagging them down for money. 

Musa: A policeman cannot just flag down cars. If a roadblock is to be conducted, a proper signboard and required approval must be obtained. These roadblocks are necessary because of cases of lorries being hijacked and cars stolen. I’m trying hard to clean up such perceptions because I know that when a policeman stops a car and hassles the driver, people would say “kutip duit la, itu”. If the officer is professional, just stop the car, ask for the motorist’s IC and issue a summons.  

Ambiga: The police do not seem to be doing much about the Mat Rempit problem. 

Musa: Our people are doing extensive surveillance on them. There have been times when they have even crashed through our roadblocks. The Mat Rempit gangs can be very aggressive and violent. There have been cases when their members were arrested and the gang threw stones at the police station where their buddies were held. The parents have a role to play here. These people are mostly teens, they don't even have licences when they begin riding motorcycles. They are blatantly going against the law and their parents should be made accountable for their actions. But people do not like it when I say this. 

Ambiga: It's a responsibility but whether you can prosecute the parents is a different issue. 

Wong: Crime prevention is one thing, but making the country safe is another. Recent events like the public demonstrations have caused uneasiness, especially regarding race relations. Is this a challenge for the police? 

Musa: We are neutral, we're not close to any particular parties. We do not care about colour, creed or religion. We do not have such emotions. I've told my officers we are professionals, we should not have any such emotions when protecting the country and its citizens.  

Take the Bersih rally. They want the Government to improve the electoral system. They urged the use of indelible ink and even to do away with the postal votes. They want more media coverage of the Opposition. They raise the issue of phantom voters in the electoral roll. They have met the Election Commission, which has agreed to quite a number of the suggestions made. As far as I can see, the authorities have tried to accommodate them.  

Wong: The perception is that the police are more flexible when it comes to pro-government gatherings. 

Musa: It boils down to the same thing. All gatherings need a permit.  

Ambiga: Pro-government gatherings get the permit and vice-versa for other gatherings. 

Musa: During the Hindraf demonstration, there were fiery speeches. Being in a multi-racial country, one cannot just say anything one likes because that would hurt feelings. A number of speeches were made under the pretext of a Deepavali gathering. They even went to the point where they claimed there was ethnic cleansing of Indians in the country. It is very bad for a multi-racial country. 

Ambiga: But what about the Bersih rally? 

Musa: We have to ask what was the objective of having the rally. Of course, they wanted to tell people that the government was not right.  

Ambiga: But what's the harm in that?  

Musa: There is no harm, but by then Bersih had already had the discussion with the relevant authorities of their intention, and it was made known to everyone. And most of the things discussed that were deemed of significance to the electoral roll had already been agreed upon.  

Ambiga: Not enough credit is given to the rakyat. I believe that we have the ability to gather peacefully.  

Lourdes: There have been approved gatherings by the National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE) and Cuepacs but at times such gatherings get unruly. Such was the case in Batu Buruk where fiery speeches resulted in the situation getting out of hand. It is a bit sensitive. 

Ambiga: There are allegations that government agencies are the ones going to such events and causing the problems.  

Musa: Such things could be likened to throwing stones and then hiding one's hand. I was very angry after the Hindraf rally because there were claims that the police had murdered someone during the incident. This is completely ludicrous. 

Wong: Are you under pressure with people planning to hold counter demonstrations with even bigger crowds? 

Musa: That is what I'm afraid of. SMSes have been going out supposedly from Indians warning that Malays would be gathering to fight them. Then the Malays would also supposedly send warnings that there would be riots, another May 13. Such rumours are really bad and I've made press statements on this.  

Wee: As an MP, I have a different view. I do not subscribe to any form of violence or gathering that would incite racial hatred. That is my fundamental principle but the issues raised by Hindraf, the social problems among the Indians, need to be addressed by the Government. Many of them are unemployed and forced to move out from the estates. They end up in the city with nothing. We have to address these issues.  

On the other hand, a friend of mine who owns a petrol kiosk along Jalan Tun Razak said that during the Hindraf gathering, a group of Indian youths went into his shop and took cigarettes and mineral water without paying. My friend was too afraid to stop them. No one dared to say anything. It got out of hand because the Hindraf organisers could not control them.  

Ambiga: The minute the police heard about the Hindraf gathering, the permit was refused. There was just too much opposition to their intent. If the police had let them go on, the incident would have been concluded under an hour and they would have gone home. The same applies to the Bersih gathering. The police came down so hard and the reaction was equally hard. 

Musa: We did not want the same thing to happen as in Batu Buruk. We informed them (the Bersih organisers) that if they wanted to send a memorandum to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, we would personally assist and escort them. There was no need for a gathering. It was the same with Hindraf. We were afraid of a racial clash so we would not allow for it. 

It would have been better if they had gathered at Stadium Negara or Stadium Bukit Jalil. I might even have joined them there. I acknowledge human rights because it is in our Constitution. But then again we must look at the issue of rights. Every person would have his own translation of what “rights” constitute and that would cause problems.  

Wong: The situation arose because for the past 20 or 30 years, people have not really been able to speak out. But times have changed.  

Musa: I believe in having dialogues. We are a democratic country, why can't we have dialogues with the leaders instead of going to the street? Yes, you get people to join you, but would it not be more sensible to have the leaders hear what you have to say? We had roadblocks because we received information that Hindraf would use underground gangsters and we wanted to ensure that no weapons or arms were used. 

Ambiga: Don't you agree the Bersih march was peaceful?  

Musa: I cannot agree when you have more than 10,000 people gathering, and all that shouting and jeering. Was there really any need for that? The government and rakyat knew what they wanted because they had spoken and negotiated with the EC. What then is the use of all these demonstrations? The Constitution states that we can have the freedom of speech and gathering as long as it is in accordance with the law. That is why the law is there. 

Ambiga: We have to change our mindset. There is a place for peaceful assemblies in civilised society and we should find a place to do these things.  

Wee: We must utilise existing platforms to convey grievances of the community. There are political parties and NGOs that address the issues affecting Indians and even bring them up to the Prime Minister or his deputy. 

I do not think Hindraf had no other alternative to attract the government's attention. As a multi-racial country, we have to observe stability.  

I read the Hindraf letter, which was very controversial. There were claims of a so-called policy of “cleansing”, which is very serious. If you talk about the unemployment of Indians or vocational training for Indian youths, I am certain the government would listen.  

Ambiga: The reason this happened was because no one was listening. The street demonstration was a symptom of underlying problems. Our focus should be on those underlying problems. It was frightening for me when I went to the police station to see the 90% of those remanded from the Hindraf rally were young people.