Speed is of the essence but the task force and Auditor-General must do a thorough investigation and leave no stone unturned in the controversial 1MDB issue.

IT looks like Malaysians would have to start learning about accounting terms from now on if they want to make sense of the many news reports on the controversial 1MDB issue.

The accusations and figures bandied around, purportedly involving billions of ringgit, have been mind-blowing to most Malaysians. It is simply beyond the grasp of most ordinary Malaysians who will never get to see that kind of money in their lifetime. After all, a recent report quoting the Employees Provident Fund revealed that 75% of its 14 million contributors, meaning those who are currently employed, earn less than RM2,000 a month.

Until now, the only time we hear of forensic is when we watch those popular TV police programmes showing investigators removing blood and hair samples at the scene where a crime has taken place.

Now we are hearing about forensic auditing, whereby the Auditor-General and a panel comprising staff from the Attorney-General’s Chambers, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency and the police have been entrusted to investigate and give us the answers.

It must not be forgotten that this is on the order of the Prime Minister.

But the task force would need trained personnel with a strong accounting background, and not just any accountant but those equipped with forensic auditing skills. Those with legal and police experience won’t be good enough for this case.

That means going beyond looking at the numbers when examining the state of the company’s finances. They have to effectively reconstruct the books to look at what lurks beneath, just like what the police forensic team would do when they reconstruct a crime scene, where every piece of evidence has to come together to show them the real picture.

One report defined forensic auditing as the application of accounting methods to the tracking and collection of forensic evidence, usually for investigation and prosecution of criminal acts such as embezzlement or fraud.

With 1MDB, there have been allegations of criminal fraud, but these remain mere allegations. Pointing fingers is the easy part. Furthermore, what has been revealed so far relates mainly to an email trail among various individuals.

The purported exchange of email, as well as the content, will be vigorously challenged in any court of law.

From a layperson’s point of view, he will wonder if the name or names of a person or individuals implicated will actually show up on any document. Or will the perpetrators, if any, be smart enough to make sure their names won’t be there?

Certainly, one would be curious to also see the actual paper trail – documents and agreements which may be far too complex for the ordinary person to comprehend.

The task force will have to gather all such evidence first, before they use their forensic skills to determine if any criminal act, or acts, has or have been carried out. Of course, for most of us, all we want to know is who then is responsible.

Whether the 1MDB is a strategic development company or a sovereign fund, the fact remains that it is a wholly owned government entity and public money is involved.

A RM950mil standby credit has been granted to the company by the government. You can call it “facility” or “standby credit” but in simple language it is a loan. And the bottom line is that the money is public money.

The comprehensive audit of this high-powered task force would also need to look at the work done by the external auditors, considering that the company has had three different auditors in five years.

Deloitte, the current external auditor which was engaged by the fund in December 2013, is its third auditor. It replaced KPMG, which had taken over from Ernst & Young.

The reasons for KPMG’s departure remain unclear although 1MDB has contended that the auditor left on the grounds that it could not complete the accounts. KPMG has so far remained silent on the matter.

Malaysians are right to demand for answers and the Prime Minister has rightly called for a full investigation.

The composition of the task force itself, comprising wholly of government officers, may not satisfy the sceptics.

But let us give Auditor-General Tan Sri Ambrin Buang, who has proven himself to be a man of high integrity, the support to carry out the difficult task ahead. He will have to report his findings to Parliament in the end.

As my colleague, specialist editor N. Shanmugam wrote, “Amrin has to do a good job not only on paper. But he must also be seen as having done a good job, considering the various reports that have emerged.”

Another person who would figure prominently once the investigations are underway would be Public Accounts Committee chairman Datuk Nur Jazlan, an accountant who is also seen as another person of high integrity. His fellow Barisan Nasional MPs sometimes say he is “more opposition than the opposition”.

The PAC would need the Auditor-General’s Report as a basis to begin its own investigation into 1MDB, which has raked up RM42bil in debts since 2009.

The PAC chaired by Nur Jazlan, with DAP’s Dr Tan Seng Giaw as deputy, includes five Pakatan Rakyat MPs and six from the Barisan.

The PAC, by parliament tradition, has sufficient clout to call up any witness to get to the bottom of any financial issue involving public funds. The members will surely want to maintain its integrity when it starts its own probe.

Speed is of the essence but the task force and Auditor-General must do a thorough investigation and leave no stone unturned.

It would be better for 1MDB and the political leadership for things to clear up as soon as possible. Otherwise, the controversy will continue, especially in cyberspace where nothing is sacred and lies and half-truths will escape legal action. The Prime Minister has already filed a suit against an opposition MP.

Beyond the financial matters, the issue has become murky and tricky because the 1MDB controversy is also being used to settle political scores.

It’s a minefield out there when not enough is known accurately, or beyond what has been reported and whispered. These allegations may be unsubstantiated but if they remain unrebutted, then there would be serious implications. It is not a very smart way for the authorities to handle this delicate situation.

There is a need for 1MDB to answer these allegations head-on so that Malaysians can decide. Mere denials would not be good enough as Malaysians expect strong answers.

If it is merely bad business decisions or management incompetency, then we should ask for a management audit. Let’s keep an open mind.

The truth needs to be told and the truth will emerge eventually. But meanwhile, let the Auditor-General and task force carry out their work.

Malaysia has moved on, embracing and accepting the talents of women. The Grant Thornton International Business Report revealed that Malaysia has the highest number of women in the workforce – up to 40% – compared with other Asean countries.

I AM surrounded by women – in a positive way. Until a few years back, I was the only man in the house.

Now, besides my wife, four other females play a key role in my life – my mother-in-law, daughter, maid and my female poodle. Before my sister-in-law got married, she also lived with us.

These days, her two sons come to my house, which is like a daycare centre for my sister-in-law and her husband.

Both my wife and daughter are opinionated and strong-minded, even stubborn, in many ways. The days of submissive women are long over in Malaysia.

My 23-year-old daughter has set the record for being the first law graduate in three generations of Wongs, and is now chambering with a law firm.

The change in gender composition in my life has been really radical because I grew up without sisters, only three brothers.

It would have been nice to have a sister. I am the youngest in the family but I know my parents wanted a daughter too. In the 1960s, there was no scan to tell the sex of the child before birth, and so it was a lot of guessing and hoping.

Actually, my parents were so sure I would be a girl, a sort of wishful thinking, that they even had an English female name ready for me. That was what I was told, but my parents have never confirmed that little piece of information.

And so when I was born, it was just another son to my father who did not bother to turn up immediately at the midwife’s clinic in King Street, which is within walking distance of the old Star office in Penang.

My male-dominated life continued with my enrolment into St Xavier’s Institution for primary and secondary education. Except for Sixth Form, which is co-ed, SXI is an all-boys’ school.

I played football, spent plenty of time at the river near my home catching fish, and, until my hormones began raging during my teenage years, it was just the company of boys for me.

So, from an all-male home, except for my mum, I moved on to an all-female home in Kuala Lumpur. That’s how it changed.

In many ways, it also indicates how Malaysia has moved on, embracing and accepting the talents of women.

When I first joined The Star as a cub reporter, as the most junior journalist was known then, I was interviewed by then editor-in-chief Hng Hung Yong, the Cambridge and Harvard-trained journalist. He remains a journalist today, and certainly a respected one with his intellect.

That was just after I finished my Sixth Form exams, and I left The Star to continue my tertiary education at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. When I rejoined The Star after I graduated three years later, it was the newspaper’s first woman top editor Datuk Ng Poh Tip who interviewed me.

With her Masters degree in political science, she set new standards in the newspaper, demanding that journalists have better education and research abilities and not just be able to file stories. More women editors emerged by then, including Cheryl Dorall, who became Sunday Star editor in the 80s, the first woman to do so.

Fast forward 2015: The Star has changed. I have stopped counting the number of women editors and journalists in the company. In some cases, the men may think they are in charge but it’s actually the women who run the show, even if they refuse to admit it.

I have had the privilege of working under our first woman managing director Datin Linda Ngiam, who went on to become the first woman director of our media group. Both her roles have been records of sorts in the company’s history.

The Star Radio Group chief operating officer Kudsia Kahar, a well-known radio personality, is also a first, and our group’s Capital Radio remains the country’s only radio station dedicated to women, with huge listenership among professionals.

Of the over 1,500 staff in the company, over 40%, and for sure women, would play a bigger role in the years to come.

Our universities and colleges now comprise 60% to 70% of female student intake, and while some have expressed concern at the imbalance, I really do not see why a predominantly female ratio should be of concern.

Gender should not be an issue; what is more important should be the quality of the graduates our universities are producing. The Grant Thornton International Business Report (IBR) recently revealed that Malaysia has the highest number of women in the workforce – up to 40% – compared with other Asean countries. However, not everything in Malaysia is that rosy as the country reportedly has the lowest number of women occupying senior roles, at only 26%.

Grant Thornton said the data also showed that Malaysia was the third lowest globally to have women on the board of companies as chairman, chief executive officer, chief financial officer, executive and non-executive directors.

Malaysian employers must realise that gender diversity is good for business. Grant Thornton rightly pointed out that “it increases financial performance, enriches brand perception in the marketplace, improves problem-solving, enhances team and individual creativity, as well as boosts employee satisfaction and retention.”

In fact, racial diversity is also good for any company as it brings the best talent out, cutting across gender and race.

I am thankful to be born and living in Malaysia. I wouldn’t want to live in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia or some conservative society where women are regarded as inferior by misguided males, some of whom use religious doctrines to keep their power.

Such men with their inferiority complex seem to have forgotten the importance of their mothers, grandmothers and sisters in bringing them up.

Then there are those who continue to blame women for their sexual urges, often citing their dressing as being provocative. Some rapists blame the women and try to play the role of victim instead, as in the numerous cases in India, especially in the rural areas where they are sadly deprived of outlets to release their frustrations.

The reality is, even in Malaysia, rape perpetrators are usually known, or even related, to the victims. Many of these cases take place in rural areas and the victims are dressed in conservative clothing.

PAS-ruled Kelantan, despite its strict religious façade, consistently ranks top in the country with reported rape cases and other social woes. The Internet is filled with statistics on the problems in the state.

The International Women’s Day theme for this year is “Make It Happen”, and certainly most right-minded Malaysians believe in making it happen for all our sisters. I don’t have one but for all women, you are my sisters! We will make it happen!

THE Chinese New Year mood is in the air. I have been eating too much, drinking too much and making my rounds of the festive visits to family members and friends.

In each of these visits, I have been asked to give my views on Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Sirul Azhar Umar and 1MDB. No one asked about the in-fighting in MIC.

I have given them the same answer: this is Chinese New Year. I have a life. I may be a political commentator but I am no expert.

Like everyone, I have made wrong assumptions – but also made correct predictions – on issues. Some of my comments have fallen flat on my face, especially when they turned out to be pretty horrible in the end, while some of my stands have been consistently correct, despite initial public ridicule.

But I am in a nostalgic mood. The last thing on my mind now, as I turn 54 years old in the next few months, are some politicians with super-inflated ego who think they are the smartest people on earth.

As I spend my time with friends and family members, I can’t help but feel thankful for the wonderful things we enjoy in Malaysia.

In Malaysia, we eat too much. Our problem is trying to reduce our weight as we watch on television news of countries at war and people who find their food, water and power supplies cut off.

This CNY, most of the women in our family are not eating rice. Feeling guilty about the lack of exercise but reluctant to give up certain food, I try to eat just half a bowl of rice. After all, how can one enjoy steamed fish in soya sauce without the rice!

And how can they even refuse to touch the prawns – purportedly because they do not want to use their hands to peel off the shell or that it is supposedly laden with cholesterol? Such poor excuse.

But most of all, I feel really blessed and spirited to receive so many greetings from my Malay and Indian friends. Many of them turned up for our CNY lunch in Chinese costume, adding more colour to the festival.

My good friend Datuk Azman Ujang sent his greetings from Mecca where he is performing his umrah, and I told him to pray for me and my family.

My favourite aunt, Sarah Abdullah, made sure her son, Abu Zarin from Sabah, sent his greetings to this uncle before the festival began.

And not forgetting my media colleagues, Aziz Ishak and Rozaman Ismail, who never fail to wish me well. We have certainly gone through plenty together as friends in the same trade. Thank you, Anbu, for being on the line daily sharing our hopes and aspirations for a better Malaysia.

There are also other auspicious reasons as I pen this column on the third day of Chinese New Year. I would have taken a break but my colleague Soo Ewe Jin, who edits this column, reminded me that I have never taken a break, and this column has appeared every Sunday, except on the Sundays that happened to be press holidays, since the first one appeared on Feb 23, 1997.

Today would be just one day short of the 18th anniversary of the On The Beat column. So there can never be a day off even during this festive season.

The very first paragraph I wrote on that day went like this: “I have a confession to make. On Valentine’s Day, I bought my wife three stalks of roses. Not that I am a romantic. I parted with RM40 for the flowers because I am a conformist.”

The article was appropriately headlined, “Declaring your love expensively.”

And I ended that column with another confession, “By the way, I have another confession. Feb 14 was also my wedding anniversary. Again it has nothing to do with my being romantic. It’s an unpardonable crime to forget one’s wedding anniversary. Nobody, even someone as absent-minded as me, could miss this ‘double celebration of a Valentine’s Day wedding anniversary’.”

So much has changed over the years. I realised that in the earlier years of this column, it was more light-hearted. I tried to add humour and I realised that being funny is much more difficult than serious – and worse, it’s not appreciated! But the column developed its own character that in some ways matched my career in journalism.

As I rose through the ranks, and took on more responsible positions, I had to be able to feel the pulse of the nation. Thus, my reflections on the issues of the day became more pronounced.

And in recent times, it looks like this column has been closely monitored by some groups who simply want to lodge police reports against me.

I have accepted this as part of the trade. Just as there are admirers, there will always be people who are angry with my comments.

So every Sunday and Monday, as I read my email, I get adoring as well as hate mail, with some bordering on racist tones.

But as I look back, I remind myself that I have always written purely from my point of view. I write about people and events the way I see it. I write about developments in this country that make me happy, and also about the developments that make me sad.

I have been making a tough stand against the rise of extremism and this has upset some people who still choose to see issues from a narrow racial perspective. But I believe moderation is the right approach.

I can’t help talking about my old teachers and friends of all races as I grow older, talking about the era in which we grew up.

Perhaps most of us went through English-medium schools, which were regarded as neutral ground compared to the present Chinese and Indian vernacular schools and Malay-majority national schools. Only the middle and upper classes are enjoying the private and international schools.

My good friend Keng Hooi often wonders about the whereabouts of our primary school friends – Rahim, Bakri, Tengku Rohiman and Habibul. Where are you? We do get the occasional text from Azmi!

Our country is rich because we are diverse. We may be different but we all know where our limits should be when it comes to our words and actions.

This Chinese New Year, I am glad the Prime Minister in his message reiterated that this diversity is what we must “celebrate, cherish and protect.”

“The lunar new year is one of the biggest celebrations in our country, as it signifies the turn of the Chinese calendar and the new beginning of a new chapter in life,” Najib said.

How true.

The celebrations will go on for 15 days, and I know I will be putting on weight with the many extra dinners over this period.

And over these meals, I realise that we Malaysians who care about this country share a common purpose. We really want this country to do well. We want less politicking and more efforts to be spent on the bread-and-butter issues that affect all of us.

Even as many moan about the state of affairs in Malaysia, all of us do acknowledge that we are truly blessed to be Malaysians.

My father has turned 91. He was born in Kuah, Langkawi. If you do not see his physical features, you would think you were talking to a Malay as he speaks with a thick northern Malay accent.

And my mum, who is 86, is a nyonya who still prefers her sarong. She remains the best cook, insisting on using the freshest items for her peranakan dishes.

Keep the Malaysia we know for its multi-ethnicity and appreciate its pluralism because it is an asset – this is a beautiful country, and we are truly blessed to be born here.

Then, now and forever.

ACCEPT responsibility and apologise. These two actions seem foreign, or, to put it stronger, alien, to our Malaysian leadership culture.

It is exceedingly difficult, almost impossible, for those in leadership positions to be willing to take the rap, admit to a wrong­doing or rectify an error.

And we are not just talking about politicians with their over-inflated egos who refuse to budge from their positions.

Even in the corporate world, the NGO fraternity, and also the religious institutions, few would bravely own up to mistakes, or concede that they could be wrong. Some simply choose to remain slaves to their own ideologies even if the whole world has changed.

Everyone makes mistakes. We are mere mortals after all. Decisions have to be made daily and we all know that not all decisions come out right. But even if we make bad decisions, we can always learn from such experiences to improve ourselves.

Elected representatives are humans too, even if some of us may wonder about their so-called human traits, or lack thereof.

Like everyone else, they will have lapses in judgment. In the heat of the moment, and when they face enormous pressure to respond, they can sometimes make remarks that will get them into deep trouble.

We have seen so many examples in our Dewan Rakyat, and while they can always get away by “withdrawing” their offensive remarks, the recalcitrant ones probably use this tactic to keep themselves in the news.

The astute politician, however, knows that he should never say anything in a fit of anger. In fact, he can always rely on the phrase, “I have no comment to make at this moment”, until things cool down.

But such politicians are rare. Most of them not only want to say something, but also want to share their instant wisdom on social media so that it can spread far and wide, whatever the consequences.

Once posted, there is no turning back. Even if one were to delete an offensive post, someone would have captured that moment in a screen-grab and make it go viral. Even if you are truly pissed off about some issue, it may be wiser to sleep over it before making your views public.

Let’s make this clear. If you tweet or post on your own Facebook account, you cannot blame anyone but yourself. You cannot even blame the press for misquoting you, since it is all there in black and white.

Even the ordinary people have learnt that an offensive or seditious post can have serious consequences because social media platforms are public.

You can set your privacy settings but the moment it is published, don’t be surprised if groups of people turn up at a police station to lodge a report against you. From Mr Nobody, you will become an instant celebrity.

Actually, if the brickbats start to fly, the most noble thing one can do is to own up, admit it was done in a moment of weakness, apologise and move on. Simply deleting the post after the fact can be construed as an admission on one’s part.

Those in prominent positions who now embrace the power of social media should take some lessons about crisis management.

Malaysian leaders, in all spheres of life from political to corporate, need to brush up their skills on how to manage crisis in today’s world. One has to understand social media ethics and manage public relations quite differently in a high-paced world.

For example, if a CEO learns that the products his company makes has a slight problem that may necessitate a recall, he can no longer afford to take his own sweet time to make a decision.

If someone posts about it on social media, he has to respond just as fast. He may have to immediately say sorry even if his lawyers tell him that saying sorry may create liability issues.

I like what life coach Audrey Marlene has to say about situations like this.

“We all like to feel important and have others have a high opinion of us. Some more than others develop an over-inflated view of themselves. These tendencies act to wrap us in what many call ‘denial’, which creates a false perception of self and the inability to accept the truth about us,” she writes.

“It then becomes painful to accept that mistakes are possible and when we make them the first reaction is to point the finger at someone else. We refuse to think objectively and accept any involvement for our actions. Taking responsibility can be a very painful thing to do.”

She goes on to say: “The inability to accept responsibility for our actions and behaviours is a result of insecurity. By taking responsibility one feels they are admitting to being weak, powerless, or an opportunity to lose the respect of others. It may cause one to feel they will lose their sense of value and importance.”

But until more Malaysian leaders learn to accept responsibility for their actions, they should be thankful that we Malaysians are quite a forgiving lot.

During Hari Raya, the “maaf zahir dan batin” practice is so wonderfully enshrined. All religions also emphasise forgiveness and tolerance. To err is human, and to forgive is divine, as we were taught from young.

Taking responsibility and admitting one’s mistake is not a sign of weakness. It can earn you even more respect from the wider public.

Only the insecure and unreasonable diehard followers will tell you to stand your ground, even when it is obviously shaky.

At the end of the day, accepting responsibility is a measure of one’s self-worth and the true sign of strength and courage, as one commentator puts it.

In Malaysia, we have seen how difficult it is for people to own up even if they are caught in the act, so to say.

A politician can be caught on video, not once but a few times, for the most scandalous acts but can still get away by denying it. And there will always be enough fans to swear that the person in the video cannot possibly be their idol.

The same line has been copied by other politicians and, more recently, by one preacher.

A lawyer can be filmed engaging in a questionable deal but he can get away by stating that there may be a physical resemblance, and the person may even sound like him, but of course it is not him.

This nation needs leaders who embrace humility and celebrate diversity. We need leaders who can see things objectively. And we also want them to be human and know how to say sorry.

Even if they slip up, no one will think too badly of them if they admit their errors and are sincere in their repentance. They should not try to wriggle themselves out of sticky situations or, worse, look for scapegoats.

Japanese linguist Namiko Abe said that “apologising is considered a virtue in Japan. Apologies show that a person takes responsibility and avoids blaming others. When one apologises and shows one’s remorse, the Japanese are more willing to forgive.”

Author Brian Koslow wrote, “the more you are willing to accept responsibility for your actions, the more credibility you will have.”

It is Chinese New Year and I wish all readers Gong Xi Fa Cai. I seek your forgiveness if anything said in this article has hurt anyone. I write simply to remind ourselves to learn to take responsibility, to apologise and to forgive. These are noble traits for all of us.

It is bewildering that there are those who can imagine political motives tinged with religious and racial overtones in small trading enterprises.

THE joy of being Malaysian must surely be in the immense variety of food, representing the rich diversity of our nation, before us. We Malaysians love our food passionately.

This is a great nation – where else but here in Malaysia do we wake up and can’t decide what we should eat for breakfast? And even as we tuck into our breakfast, we are already thinking about the spread of choices for lunch, and dinner too.

Coming from Penang, I am very selective when it comes to food. It must be nothing but the best.

Before I moved to the Klang Valley some 25 years ago to work, my day in Penang would start with nasi kandar.

It was difficult for friends outside Penang to comprehend why I wanted to eat rice, the dreadful carbohydrate, in the morning.

It seemed awfully wrong for anyone who wanted to stay healthy, but the 7am trip to my favourite nasi kandar stall in Kampung Melayu in Air Itam was like a pilgrimage.

In Petaling Jaya, where I currently reside, I found my nasi kandar at Kayu Nasi Kandar, which had its origins in Penang.

But it was at a small outlet in a coffee shop in SS2 that I first met its owner Burhan Mohamed. I would eat there at least once a week. From a customer to a good family friend, that’s how my relationship with Burhan has developed over two decades.

I also like the char kueh teow served by a Chinese hawker in Kelana Jaya. It is great stuff and her customers are predominantly Malays.

Then there is the nasi lemak kukus outlet in SS2 operated by a Malay. The long queues there each morning comprise mainly non-Malays.

The same scenario is repeated at the famous Jalan Tangsi nasi lemak stall, which used to operate under a huge tree, and also at Nasi Lemak Antarabangsa in Kampung Baru.

Every morning, we are thankful for the many nasi lemak stalls by the roadside that offer us delicious breakfast – the ones wrapped in banana leaf and newspaper! That’s a Malaysian institution and we swear it’s a lot better than the nasi lemak served on a plate!

Halal restaurants have sprung up so that Muslims can enjoy Chinese food but, more importantly, businessmen understand the consumer power of Malays. It is just business sense to cater to a wider market.

By and large, Malaysians have never connected the business of food to a racial angle. It would simply be ridiculous. By extension, we can include other kinds of businesses as well.

None of us really cares about the ethnicity of a trader so long as the price is deemed fair, the quality of goods sold is good and the service favourable.

It would be strange, even stupid, for a Chinese consumer to continue buying from a Chinese trader who continues to raise his price. He would rather buy from a trader of another race if the rival offers a better deal.

That’s common sense and that’s how things work in real life. It is bewildering, to say the least, that there are those who can imagine political motives tinged with religious and racial overtones in such enterprises.

I prefer kopi kaw in a warung or coffee shop, served by the Ah Pek in his Pagoda singlet, simply because I am old school, and I do not want to buy an expensive cup of branded coffee at a fancy coffee chain.

In fact, nowadays, we have a lot of ­modern-day coffee shops that usually ­operate in the malls and try to replicate the traditional coffee shop in terms of the drinks and food they serve.

But I still prefer to eat Ipoh koay teow in Sea Park and have roti canai at the mamak shop near my home. I think the food is more authentic, not to mention cheaper. So the extra money I pay for the air-conditioned comfort and cool ambience at fancy coffee shops is not worth it.

Maybe the younger generation will disagree with me, but never mind. The point is that people still look for good food because it is good food. And they do not even mind travelling great distances to savour a particular dish.

We are now going through a period when people are concerned about stretching their ringgit.

Somehow, they wonder why despite the price of petrol coming down, prices of many things that are part of daily life are still going up. And food is really a big part of the equation.

Recently, we ran a cover story on how a plate of char kueh teow was now not only more expensive, but also came in smaller portions. Many of our readers could identify with that.

Chinese New Year is just around the corner and I am sure many are trying to figure how much to put into the ang pow, especially when their employers have not been generous with bonus and increments.

These are the real bread-and-butter issues that affect everyone. And it will be good if we spend less time arguing with one another over inconsequential matters and concentrate on the bigger picture.

There is a term in psychology called cognitive priming. Simply put, it means that if your mind is currently thinking of something, you will tend to see that thing over and over again.

So, if you are planning to buy a new car of a particular make, it will show up at every nook and corner, as if to confirm that you are on the right track.

Malaysia seems to be going through this phase. Because of those who continue to fan racial and religious sentiments, now even the ordinary people are beginning to see everything through racial and religious prisms.

Even in the most ordinary things, we are too quick to raise the racial or religious angle without getting all the facts.

Social media can be both a blessing and a curse. While information can be quickly shared, comments that are given in an instant, without time for reflection and understanding, can really make matters worse.

We are a diverse nation. And just like the rich variety of food before us, we should rejoice in the diversity of views. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

The nasi lemak may be categorised as one dish, but everyone will tell you that the nasi lemak at one place is quite different from the nasi lemak at another place. So, even within the same category, you will have your differences.

Only politicians and those with certain agendas like to categorise people by race – that because they are of the same race, they must vote in the same way, eat in the same way, talk in the same way, and live in the same way.

It is time for all Malaysians to pause and look closely at how things really are. They should just turun padang and see the real Malaysia. And the best representation of this is when we gather together to eat and enjoy each other’s company.

The damaged billboard of the Datum Jelatek Project is seen following a demonstration by a group of residents in Taman Keramat, Kuala Lumpur recently.

No one should be allowed to think that race-based protests are tolerated or, worse, encouraged, because the authorities continue to close an eye to such protests.

IGNORANCE, prejudice, politically and racially motivated advice and, worse, economic disparity in an urban setting are a potent, and potentially volatile, combination.

The race-based protest against the Datum Jelatek condominium project in Keramat, Ampang Jaya, is hugely disturbing and it would not be wrong to say that the incident, though local in nature, should be of national concern because of the increasing racial polarisation gripping the country.

Malaysians are by now used to reading about protests by local residents in the Klang Valley and other major urban centres against the construction of apartments, malls, highways and even schools near their neighbourhoods.

The fight by residents to preserve space in their own backyard has never been so loud. It’s simply because residents feel squeezed and, more importantly, they are now more conscious of their rights, more willing to challenge the authorities, more astute at organising themselves, and more clever at using the social media and the press to highlight their plight.

Developers, especially the high-end ones who build exclusive gated properties and charge high maintenance fees, have found that they can no longer increase rates at their whim and fancy.

The residents scrutinise every bill and nothing escapes their attention. Then there are also those residents who are overwhelmed by the rapid changes taking place around them in the name of development.

Many of them stay in areas at the fringe of some of the prime districts that are already bursting at the seams.

For these people in closely-knit communities, there is a genuine fear over the loss of identity and even their homes.

We should look at what happened in the Datum Jelatek protest last Sunday in this context.

The protest turned rowdy when some 100 protestors reportedly turned aggressive and broke into the construction site.

While the police managed to bring the situation under control, what was worrying was that the protestors – and we are not even sure if they are residents – were in a frenzy because they had been led into believing that the project would transform the area into a Chinese district.

They claimed that Malays had been sidelined and that one or two blocks would be sold mainly to foreigners.

The RM1.2bil Datum Jelatek project, which started in 2008 on a 2.4ha land next to the Jelatek LRT station, comprises four blocks of luxury condominiums, a hotel, offices and a shopping centre.

The condominiums are being built on the former site of four blocks of Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor (PKNS) flats, owned mostly by Malays, which were demolished in late 2010.

The project received its planning approval in November 2011 from the Ampang Jaya Municipal Council, but actual work had been postponed several times over a variety of issues.

This is normal in any project where the residents in the immediate surroundings have a right to voice their objections, and to point out procedural matters within a specific time period.

It is also common to have public protests but this becomes a problem when other parties get involved.

Whoever had a hand in organising the protest last week certainly did not believe in civil discourse.

Worse, they played the racial card and directed the protestors to vent their anger at the Chinese for daring to enter into the Malay enclave. In this case, the Chinese has become the bogeyman for nothing.

According to a media report, members of the Selangor chapter of Perkasa were seen among the rowdy crowd in the protest that was supposedly under the ambit of the Datum Jelatek Action Committee (BBDJ).

BBDJ chairman Salleh Samad was quoted as saying that the demonstration was organised to warn Selangor Mentri Besar Azmin Ali to stop the condominium project, saying that “it would open the floodgates to other races entering the Malay-majority area.”

Selangor Perkasa chief Abu Bakar Yahya, who was present, allegedly made racially inflammatory and offensive statements, going by a report in a news portal.

It is worth noting that the developer, Datum Corp International Sdn Bhd, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of PKNS and its management team is almost entirely bumiputra.

And we are now told that 1,097 bumiputra buyers had registered their interest to buy the 674 units available.

This means that the condominiums could entirely have only Malay residents although the PKNS quota for the project is 50% for bumiputra and 50% for non-bumiputras.

We can be sure that after this widely reported racially-slanted protest, potential buyers from other ethnic groups will shy away from this project, proudly proclaimed by the developer in its website as “the epitome of luxury in the heart of metropolitan city.

“A sanctuary in the middle of the hustle and bustle of a cosmopolitan city, Datum Jelatek is an oasis of rest and relaxation with world-class amenities and still be a stone’s throw from the excitement of a modern city.”

There is a lot of damage control to be done. According to the developer, the Keramat residents were not directly involved in the protest as the company had already met with them in stages to listen to their grievances.

It has already lodged a police report and is contemplating taking legal action against those involved.

The high number of interested Malay buyers has also proven that the community can afford to buy the apartments despite the high prices, and claims that the project would be swarmed by the Chinese are sheer rubbish and nothing more than a figment of the imagination of racist minds.

With the support and coordination of various stakeholders, local residents can benefit from the economic spin-offs of the projects in the area, even if they cannot afford to buy the units.

Local businesses can bloom and jobs can be created because of the project, and this is something that should be highlighted by the major stakeholders to the residents to counter the outsiders who seek to poison their minds.

The police have said that no arrest has been made so far, but they would investigate reports of trespassing by the protestors. But I think many Malaysians want to know what action will be taken against those who made racially inflammatory remarks at the protest and if they will be able to get away scot-free.

We should all be concerned about any form of racial or religious provocation by any individual or group.

We want the authorities to be fair and firm and not allow any form of race-based protest. Last week’s protest over the Datum Jelatek project is not just a local issue, but a matter of deep concern for all.

No one should be allowed to think that such race-based protests are tolerated or, worse, encouraged, because the authorities continue to close an eye to such protests.

This is not the Malaysia that rational Malaysians know. We certainly cannot allow such extremists to take control of the country’s directions.

Whatever their race or religion, they must not be allowed to grow and threaten the country that we all call our home.

Filepic: Malaysian multi racial of all background that symbolize Malaysia.

Removing the race columns from all forms would be a giant step in achieving national unity, as it would emphasise oneness.

IT’S a small step but the Sabah and Sarawak governments must be commended for their efforts to scrap the term “dan lain lain” or “others” in the race column in government forms.

While the three major races – Malay, Chinese and Indian – have their own columns in these forms, all other minorities in the country simply were classified as “dan lain lain”. It is not wrong to say that the term “dan lain lain” is demeaning and is almost equivalent to the term “alien”.

In fact, after 57 years of independence, it is incredible that we are still asking Malaysians to state their race.

While the Federal Government has insisted that there is a need to keep the race columns to help the government monitor the development of each race, it could certainly emulate what Sabah and Sarawak have done.

Even in the peninsula, putting minorities under the “dan lain lain” column would hardly help the government get an accurate picture of these ethnic groups, who are Malaysians, like everyone else.

Surely, as a responsible government, it would also want to know in greater detail the position of the Eurasians, Portuguese, Siamese, orang asli and other minorities.

Last week, the Deputy Home Minister rightly pointed out that in Sarawak, those classified under the “dan lain lain” group in the state actually outnumbered the Malays, Chinese and Indians. These three races are only distinct under a peninsula-driven classification.

The Sabah government has also decided to follow Sarawak and agreed to remove the “dan lain-lain” option in the race column on government documents. Those filling in the forms can now identify their ethnicity in the blank space provided.

According to Sabah State Secretary Tan Sri Sukarti Wakiman, “the state government will come up with a list of ethnic races in Sabah to be handed to the National Registration Department to reference in processing birth registration applications and Malaysian identity cards for those from Sabah”.

The “dan lain-lain” column in the race category has been a point of contention among Borneo’s native races who are mostly from ethnic communities, with Sabah itself having over 30 ethnic groups.

But it would not be wrong to say that many Malaysians have long questioned the need to state one’s race, and religion, on any form.

The requirement not only creates a deep psychological impact on Malaysians but gives the impression that we are officially divided by our racial and religious identities five decades after independence.

We will continue to be regarded as a country that is obsessed with race and religion when our nationality takes a back seat. We proudly see ourselves as Malaysian when we are overseas but the moment we step back on Malaysian soil, we are reminded about our race and our religion.

In many countries, it has become taboo, even unlawful, to state one’s religion in any official form. Religion is deemed as a private matter which no one, especially the government, has any business to ask.

In fact, Indonesians are required only to state their nationality in official forms, never their racial identity.

It is a diverse country like ours but because of assimilation, one cannot distinguish an Indonesian’s race and religion simply from the person’s name.

Removing the race columns from all forms would surely be a giant step in achieving national unity, as it would emphasise oneness.

While the Federal Government has given various reasons as to why it needs to maintain the race column, it could, for a start, eliminate this column in forms where the issue of race has absolutely no bearing.

As an example, if a Malaysian wants to seek the approval of the municipal council to carry out renovation of one’s property, it makes little sense that he has to state his race in the application form.

This may be a small start, but we need to do away with such requirements, especially if they have no bearing on the collation of statistical data.

This need to identify our race goes beyond official matters. I was at a shopping mall recently and decided to sign up for a discount card which cost me RM15. Guess what? I had to state my race in the application form.

To be fair, in the United States, there are still certain forms which require information about one’s race. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development still insists on racial information, especially when one is seeking assistance, but there is a disclaimer – there’s no penalty if you choose not to fill up the entire form because you do not want to state your race.

The private sector should also remove such columns about race and religion from their job application forms. They should also not state their racial preferences when they advertise their job vacancies.

Employers, both in the private and public sectors, must be able to see the tremendous advantage of having a multi-ethnic and even multi-national workforce.

Sabah and Sarawak have made a bold move which may provide the necessary catalyst for further changes. But as with any change, there will always be fears and concerns.

Those who are against removing the race column have expressed reservations on the loss of rights, privileges and identities. These are sentiments brought up by well-meaning people. We have to respect and understand certain realities.

But at the same time, we must also not be fearful of embracing changes – Malaysia and Malaysians need to grow up.

If we aim to be a developed nation, it is necessary that we also accept values fitting of a developed nation. Narrow sectarian, religious and ethnic issues are hallmarks of a Third World country. What Sabah and Sarawak have done would hardly meet calls to remove the race column but at least, “dan lain lain” has disappeared.

There will still be the need to state one’s race but at least we have given recognition and respect to our fellow Malaysians on how they should be identified in this category. It’s a baby step but we must congratulate the Sabah and Sarawak state governments. It’s a good start.

Social Media

Today, thanks to social media, just about anyone can now share an opinion in an instant. But Malaysians are in need of clever and intelligent discourse.

IT is a mark of our maturing society that we are now beginning to be able to engage in discourse, even on the most sensitive of issues, without causing offence to one another.

The ability to disagree without being dis­agreeable is to be lauded. Too often, we have seen how individuals or groups prefer to engage in name-calling and verbal abuse, rather than talk rationally about an issue.

I have been a journalist for over 30 years and have also covered the Dewan Rakyat in my earlier years. While there was a fair share of those who spoke just to make sure they got themselves in the news, there were also many outstanding politicians with the gift of the gab who could debate rationally, their arguments punctuated with much wit, and they had the uncanny ability to cool things down when temperatures went up a few notches.

Older Malaysian journalists have told me of their experiences following the great debating skills of our founding fathers like Tunku Abdul Rahman and the earlier Opposition figures like the Seenivasagam brothers, S.P. and D.R., and Tan Sri Tan Chee Khoon.

They were legends who did not have to raise their voices or resort to using racial remarks to make themselves heard. They had class and have deservingly been accorded their place in our history.

Today, we are more exposed to how people engage in civil discourse for a wide variety of issues through different platforms. Democracy has never been so noisy.

Thanks to social media, just about any­one can now share an opinion in an instant. The more savvy politicians too have embraced social media but they are aware that they will never escape scrutiny and, of course, criticism for whatever they say.

But Malaysians are in need of clever and intelligent discourse. They want to read beyond generalised statements found in blogs and on Facebook. Instant responses, often clouded by emotional prejudices, cannot take the place of rational debate.

If anyone, especially a public figure, stands up for something, he must be prepared to square off with someone with a directly opposite view. It’s the same for academics who have to face peer review and cannot simply rattle off their views without being willing to listen, or offer space, to contrarian views.

For Malaysia, we have of late seen an active engagement of views over issues like race and religion. We have seen the emergence of the voice of moderation, as more people, many of them prominent members of society, speak their minds.

I am proud that this media group, which I helm as its chief executive officer, has given fair and equal opportunity to all sides to articulate their views. This is how it should be. So, if we give space to the so-called Group of 25, we have likewise given space to the Group of 32. So long as the debate remains civil, we should allow this to carry on. More importantly, both sides have called for a meeting of the minds on the issues affecting the nation.

It does not matter if even The Star’s Voice of Moderation campaign has been criticised by the Group of 32. We are ready to be cri­ticised by anyone, as long as they back it up with sound and rational viewpoints. We may be on direct opposites but most of us, whatever our beliefs, surely do not subscribe to any form of name-calling and threats.

When 32 men and women with consi­derable knowledge and accomplishments come together to take a stand, we ought to hear them out. Surely they are no different than any of us in wanting the country and its people to continue to do well. Never mind if we may not subscribe to some of their views, but differing views is a basic of democracy.

Let me put on record that I also share some of the views expressed by the Group of 32, such as those about economic disparity and corruption.

Be that as it may, it is unfortunate that there are some who are only able to see the world, or Malaysia, via a racial or religious prism.

The minority groups of different faiths make up a substantial number of this country’s population. They need not be reminded, over and over again, that they have to be grateful and that as a minority, they must be submissive and not speak up.

The Star has been criticised for purportedly using Malay personalities to voice their moderate views against the other Malay groups who do not share their liberal views.

Nothing could be further from these warped arguments. When we first initiated this campaign, ahead of National Day and Malaysia Day, we wanted to emphasise the importance of moderation. It needed to be pointed out that moderation was a key criterion for Malaysia to secure a seat in the United Nations Security Council.

There is also a government-funded Global Movement of Moderates (GMM), initiated by the Prime Minister, of which I am a trustee. Surely, if we talk about moderation on the world stage, we also need to practise it at home. Former MP Datuk Saiffudin Abdullah, another moderation advocate, heads the GMM.

It is also important to note that most of the writers and contributors featured in the campaign have been long-term columnists with The Star. They include Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir, Zainah Anwar, Azmi Shahrom, Zaid Ibrahim, Wan Saiful Wan Jan and Karim Raslan. They were not plucked from the air with no basis. Many of them have long been associated with The Star.

Minister Datuk Seri Idris Jala also writes for us and former diplomat Tan Sri Razali Ismail, who is also the chairman of GMM, is someone I have known for some time. Zainah has been a good friend since 1990 when I first met her as a journalist. And I am privileged to know her other family members as well. I hold her in high regard.

These are the people, who happen to be Malays, who have always been the moderates in our country. They have always been given the space to articulate on issues that they care about, including moderation. What the campaign has succeeded in doing is to make more people aware of the need to speak out if they do not want the forces of extremism to gain ground.

It is an insult to suggest that the Group of 25 and other moderates who support them are being used as pawns in a racial plot. These people have long-established credentials with sterling service records to the country.

Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin, who is the coordinator of the group, is not only a former ambassador but also one of the top legal brains in this country, having served more than 25 years in the judicial and legal service including stints as a magistrate and Sessions Court judge. At Wisma Putra, she handled territorial and maritime issues before her posting as Malaysia’s ambassador to the Netherlands, where she also served as Malaysia’s co-agent to the International Court of Justice on the Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan case.

Then there is Liyana Khairuddin, who initiated the #iam26 social movement in support of the eminent Group of 25. Unknown to many, Liyana, who humbly prefers to be known as just a scientist, is a virologist who specialises in HIV research.

I agree wholeheartedly that the Malays have been generous and it was the community’s willingness to share and build consensus that chiefly helped us get our independence and build Malaysia to what we are today. But we must not forget that without the support of the other communities, there would be no independence and without the Sabahans and Sarawakians, there would be no Malaysia either. Our founding fathers, who travelled to London for the talks, did so as a multi-racial team, lest we forget.

Every community has its share of extremists. This writer has criticised groups like Dong Zong and Hindraf, with its racist overtones, long before even Perkasa was born.

There have also been personal attacks, almost all the result of racial prejudices, from people who do not know me. But it is worth repeating here that my love for the Malay language and culture was the main reason why I sat for the Malay Literature paper in my Sixth Form examination, when it was called Higher School Certificate. I had to memorise Sejarah Melayu and Tuhfat Al-Nafis. I studied Islamic History as well.

When I entered Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, I chose the Malay Letters Department in my first year as an extension of my love for Malay literature. Pantun, Indonesian and Malay literature enriched my life greatly, and I have spoken out many times that there is no basis to the fear of learning about Islamic Civilization in our public universities.

It was a compulsory course in UKM and remains so, and I had the privilege of listening to the lectures of the late Fadzil Noor, who went on to be become a PAS president, and former lecturer Dr Haron Din, who is now a PAS elder.

I find it odd that there are politicians who still attempt to use the teaching of Islamic Civilization as a political issue. I learnt it 30 years ago, and I can’t think of any non-Muslim in my batch who converted as a result!

I have continued to be engaged with the works at the Al-Bukhary Islamic Museum, where I continue to collect some of the best books on the religion by the museum.

In fact, there are family members who have embraced Islam and my favourite aunt is a tudung-clad Muslim who naturally shares my moderation stand.

Many of my Malay friends find the views of certain extreme Malay groups embarrassing but they are caught in a situation where they know they will be criticised if they openly declare themselves as liberals.

All these recent discussions, passionate in many aspects, have helped me to forge a wider world view and have a greater appreciation of our communities in Malaysia. In the process, they have also strengthened my moderation views.

From the start of the campaign, we have emphasised that we wanted to speak about common values of all races and religions such as compassion, tolerance, patience, understanding and mutual respect.

We cannot pretend that religious extremism does not exist in this country. In fact, extremism in all forms can be found everywhere; such is the nature of men.

Religious extremism is not widespread in Malaysia but it is a threat nevertheless because the words and actions grab a lot of attention. They intimidate and agitate and, in certain circumstances, they can quickly spiral out of control.

We cannot afford to be dismissive about something that can potentially wreck our way of life.

God, by whatever name we call Him, has made Malaysia a plural society. He has put colour into our lives. He must have a reason for doing so, and surely if we believe in God, He would want us to live in harmony and to showcase our plurality in our daily lives – not just for show to the tourists!

French nationals attend a vigil in solidarity with the victims of the shooting at the Paris office of the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in front of the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall to memorize the people attacked by gunmen on French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo in Paris that killed 12 people in Taipei on January 9, 2015. – AFP

THERE is outrage sweeping across newsrooms throughout the world over the heinous murder of 12 people, 10 of whom were journalists, in the attack on the Charlie Hebdo headquarters in Paris on Wednesday.

The other two killed were policemen – one was the police guard of the editor Stephane Charbonnier, and the other, who was shot in the street during the getaway, was a Muslim officer of Moroccan descent.

Charlie Hebdo is a French satirical weekly newspaper that pokes fun at just about everything under the sun, including revered religious figures.

We may not agree with the mocking of religious and political figures by this magazine but it is hard to justify any act of terror in retaliation to the magazine’s work. It was just plain murder, but carried out in the name of religion.

These terrorists have done nothing to help non-Muslims have a better understanding and appreciation of Islam, which promotes peace and tolerance.

They have, in fact, caused serious ­damage and have given those who push the Islamophobia agenda an excuse to take their plans a step further.

The world’s media community shares the grief of the families of these journalists who were killed while performing editorial duties.

It is important to note that Muslim leaders including Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak have come out quickly to condemn this horrendous act.

“Malaysia condemns in the strongest terms all acts of violence. We stand in unity with the French people. We must fight extremism with moderation,” he said in a Twitter posting on Thursday.

Likewise, our Foreign Ministry also said, “Nothing justifies taking innocent lives. Malaysia is united with the families of the victims, the Government of France, and the French people.”

But even as we condemn the killings, there is an important lesson for the world, especially the Western world, to learn from this tragedy.

There may be no sacred cows for the Western media because of their fervent belief in the freedom of expression. But the reality is that not everyone accepts nor appreciates such a principle.

And because we are so globally connected, it is no longer possible to operate just within a particular society that embraces such an approach. The media’s work, from whichever part of the world, has basically become freely available to everyone.

World political leaders and entertainment figures can be lampooned without any major consequences, but like it or not, religion remains an emotionally charged issue.

The demography of many European countries, especially France, the United Kingdom and Holland, has changed drastically with a high Muslim population. In fact, there are six million Muslims in France, making it the country with the most number of Muslims in Western Europe.

While Europe expects all Muslims to accept assimilation into Western values, not everyone can accept the regular mocking of Islam and, in this case, to denigrate and desecrate a Prophet, as Dr Chandra Muzaffar, president of the International Movement for a Just World, aptly described.

Certainly, the right of expression does not include the right to insult what is regarded as sacred and important to any religion and, by extension, the millions of its faithful.

The Prophet, Jesus, Buddha and the Hindu gods cannot be likened to politicians who are merely human beings who can be subjected to scrutiny, which satirical magazines can target regularly.

When it comes to matters of faith, so-called rationality is not something that can be applied nor used as argument for freedom of expression.

It is important that the Western media does not fan fears of Islam following this Paris tragedy. The reality is that many such incidents are perpetrated by evil people with their own agendas, not about their religion.

The recent incident in Sydney, for example, showed us how the authorities and the people of Sydney came together to reassure the Muslims there that although the gunman was a Muslim, the hostage crisis at the café was not about his religion.

There are good and bad people in every faith, as well as among those who do not believe in any religion.

There are, for example, white supremacists among Christians. Have we forgotten the 32-year-old right wing extremist Anders Behring Breivik, who went on a shooting spree in 2012 in Norway?

Certainly, all right-minded Christians did not condone the action of the pastor of the Christian Dove World Outreach Center in Florida who announced he would burn 200 Quran on the 2010 anniversary of the Sept 11 attacks.

His stupidity caused 20 innocent people to be killed as his threat sparked protests in the Middle East and Asia. He later apologised and pledged never to burn a Quran, but that came too late as lives were already lost.

Surely, the action of this man, who calls himself a pastor, is not representative of the religion.

In every religion, there will always be extremists who interpret their holy books to suit their personal or political agendas. There will be people who want to act and sound like religious figures and, likewise, there will be religious figures who want to be political figures. When the line between religion and politics becomes blurred, it becomes dangerous.

Religion can be so easily manipulated because the ordinary adherents of the faith are, by nature, fearful of challenging any religious authority, especially those who dress up to look religiously pious.

I remain a believer that the Sedition Act should be kept intact simply because there should be zero tolerance for anyone whose actions or words can lead to security concerns. But there should be a golden rule – please exercise the powers fairly. We cannot scream for certain individuals to be hauled up for sedition charges and in the same breath call for its abolition. We need to be consistent.

Let no Malaysian have the perception that some individuals or organisations have special protection that allows them to get away with offensive remarks or actions. Nor should the Sedition Act be used to shut up a political opponent or, worse, an academic who cites a case study in an article or gives a view to a newspaper.

But more importantly, the one lesson from Paris for the rest of the world is that we must never let extremists have their way. Moderation must always prevail. And let’s not forget that we must not let evil defeat us but instead conquer evil with good.