Comment
By WONG CHUN WAI

IT HAS fallen short of the expectations of most Malaysians who wanted a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate the eight-minute video clip said to involve a prominent lawyer chatting with a senior judge to broker the appointment of judges. 

A three-man independent panel headed by former Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor has been formed to probe the authenticity of the video clip. 

Those who favour a Royal Commission of Inquiry have said that it will have wider powers to gather evidence while others argue that the independent panel is sufficient to carry out the investigation.  

But an important step has been taken. Bar Council chairman Ambiga Sreenevasan has put on record that she has faith in Haidar and the other two members, social activist Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye and former Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mahadev Shankar, saying all three are of the highest integrity. The Bar Council, she said, is prepared to cooperate with the panel.  

The respect accorded to the panel is important because what Malaysians are interested in is to know the identity of the lawyer in the clip and whether the conversation was real. 

The wheels of justice have also taken a step further with Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail saying the Anti-Corruption Agency has been directed to record a statement from Datuk V.K. Lingam, the lawyer implicated in the video clip. 

Lingam will be required to verify the authenticity of the clip and almost certainly be asked whether he is the man in the video clip, as claimed by those who released it.  

Lingam is said to be overseas on a business trip in Europe and has not responded to calls from the media, who wanted him to respond to the allegations. 

Those who cry for justice, many with the best of intentions because of their growing frustrations with the system, must also allow those implicated to defend themselves. That is what justice is all about. 

Do not forget that many of us were quick to believe the allegation that it was a Chinese national who was forced to do nude squats and captured on video. Malaysian officials hurriedly apologised to Beijing while talk shows in Taiwan and Hong Kong condemned Malaysia. In the end, she turned out to be Malaysian, creating plenty of red faces.  

Let’s not be too impulsive, even if we seem quite sure of what we have seen. Sometimes, it is best we do not assume too much. 

Another important point: seven years ago, Lingam was pictured with then Chief Judge of Malaya Tun Eusoff Chin while on a holiday trip to New Zealand in 1994, which created a storm. There were plenty of insinuations, which led to Eusoff threatening to sue anyone who claimed the trip was paid for. 

He showed credit card bills and bank statements for the trip, adding that he had met many lawyers and students who wanted to have photographs taken with him. 

“Judges are not robots. Judges are human beings. They have to have friends. When they die, their friends will have to bury them. Only people without relatives and friends will be buried by, maybe, the hospital authorities,” he told reporters in 2000. 

There are many defence arguments in the present case – no one is sure whether there is a judge chatting on the other side as there has been a denial. The person could claim he was merely bragging while the video clip itself could have been edited by the opposition.  

It has not helped that those named in the video clip have preferred not to respond to the allegations. The judge implicated has denied talking to the lawyer, through de facto Law Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Nazri Abdul Aziz. 

By keeping silent, those implicated have allowed the controversy to drag on and Malaysian lawyers cannot be blamed for being angry because the integrity and credibility of the judiciary is at stake. 

It would be foolish to dismiss the march involving the more than 2,000 lawyers, activists and the public as, in the words of Nazri, “unbecoming.” Nazri also shot down the Bar Council’s memorandum to the Prime Minister asking that a permanent judicial commission be in charge of judicial appointments. 

The march certainly was not spontaneous, as claimed by a Bar Council official, as transportation was organised and prior notices given. But the point is that no one should ignore a protest by a multi-racial group of professionals, who cut across all political affiliations. 

The protest would probably include members and supporters of Barisan Nasional component parties, who have expressed their displeasure at the judiciary and have demanded for quick intervention to restore confidence. It has remained an issue since the sacking of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President in 1988. 

It is understandable that Putrajaya would prefer a delegation instead of 2,000 people on the streets to voice their unhappiness. And surely, they do not want such large-scale protests to happen again but it is imperative that the leadership hear these voices. 

There is no need for politicians to always adopt a partisan stand to any dissenting opinion, particularly if it can be accommodated for the good of the country. 

In all fairness, too, we must commend Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi for his willingness to quickly order an investigation by the independent panel.  

Note from the Webmaster:

In response to this comment, a letter was published in The Star on Tuesday October 2, 2007

Nazri explains statement on ‘lawyer’s protest’

WHAT I like about your paper is because it has been very fair to me. Once again, I seek your forbearance to allow me to explain my statement about “Lawyer’s protest” which was quoted and commented upon by Wong Chun Wai in his recent article. 

Fundamental to the concept of an independent judiciary is the non-interference of either the executive or the legislative in the judiciary.  

I believe this was the reason the lawyers in Pakistan protested, because there was interference by the executive in the judiciary when President Gen Pervez Musharraf sacked the CJ of Pakistan. 

However, in Malaysia, it is the other way around. Lawyers took to the streets to ask the executive to interfere in the judiciary. They were asking the Prime Minister to take action against the CJ. 

Hence the term “unbecoming” used by me in describing the action of the lawyers. 

As to the immediate dismissal of their proposal, it is only because I have dealt with this matter earlier with the members of the Bar, including attending a forum organised by them on the same issue; and on both occasions I have said the stand of the government is No. 

Also, as an insider, I do know the Government is comfortable with the present arrangement in appointing judges as accorded by the Constitution, coupled by the Prime Minister’s stance of keeping at arm’s length decisions made by judges.  

The Deputy Prime Minister has also said there is no necessity at the moment to form a Royal Commission to appoint and promote judges. 

I have always been direct, and see no point in giving hope when there is none. 

I have been informed there are 13,000 registered members of the Bar, and 1,000 protesting lawyers is hardly a majority; and compared with the 10,000,000 voters, it is a drop in the ocean. 

I believe the opposition will make an election issue out of this. Let us wait for the people to decide in the coming general election. 

I do not know whether I am right or wrong but if I do err, I am very sure it is on the right side. 

MOHAMED NAZRI ABDUL AZIZ,
Minister in The Prime Minister’s Department. 

The four-year-old video, probably recorded by someone known to the lawyer, has become the subject of a controversy because if there were any truth to the accusations by the opposition, it would have serious implications on the judiciary. 

The media has treated the subject with care because they are aware of the mega suits that will follow if the accusations cannot be substantiated. 

The bloggers, less worried about the financial and legal implications, have identified the lawyer and senior judge and some have even uploaded the video clip.  

The Bar Council members have decided to march to the Prime Minister’s Office tomorrow to hand over a memorandum demanding a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate the allegations. 

The protest march, if it takes place, is unprecedented, because the last time such a gathering took place was in the late 1980s, when the Bar protested against then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad over the Official Secrets Act and other laws. 

Together with unionists, journalists, academicians and activists, they wore anti-OSA badges and black armbands at the entrance of the Parliament in protest against these laws, which they regarded as draconian. These laws are still in existence today. 

On Sunday, the senior judge implicated in the video clip denied he was the person in question. Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz, the de facto Law Minister, said he was contacted by the judge who denied the allegation. 

Although the issue has upset many Malaysians, it will be difficult to prove the allegations. For a start, the authenticity of the video clip would have to be proven to ensure it was not doctored.  

It is an eight-minute video clip, which the opposition has admitted was edited. Parti Keadilan Rakyat, which released it, has said this was done to protect the whistle-blower. 

Secondly, although the video clip is clear and the person on the video can be identified, or least bears much resemblance to the said lawyer, the fact that it was edited makes it very difficult to use it as evidence in court. 

Thirdly, it would not come as a surprise if the lawyer in question claimed he was merely play-acting to impress his listeners of his “brokering power”.  

In short, he could say he was merely bragging. But if that is the case, then he has plenty to explain to the Bar Council, of which we can assume he is a member, and he might walk away with just a slap on the wrist. 

Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail has said there was no criminal element in the video clip as the conversation was monologue in nature. He said there was no clear reference that the lawyer was talking to a top judicial officer. 

But the opposition is not letting such defences off lightly. They have pointed out the sequence of events, saying there were many coincidences, and that no one should downplay the gravity of the case. 

The controversy has also become louder because the lawyer concerned has not issued any denial. Now, that his name has been widely circulated and implicated, he should come out to give an explanation. 

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has correctly called on the police to investigate the matter, saying “we cannot treat this matter lightly” as the integrity of the judiciary is in question. 

Certainly, PKR is doing so to score political points as the party could have instead given the video to the police or Anti-Corruption Agency. But this does not mean we should ignore the controversy. 

We shouldn’t shift the goal post – because the issue at hand is the integrity and credibility of the judiciary, which is an important branch in the concept of separation of powers in a democracy. 

The judiciary serves as a check and balance to allow democracy to function effectively.  

It also serves as an important avenue for the people to seek justice, including seeking redress from the executive. 

Democratic countries with established judicial systems are more attractive to investors because businessmen have confidence they could rely on the courts if they have problems, compared to authoritarian or theocratic countries. 

It is important that we protect the image of our judiciary. There should not be any perception that the system can be tampered or worse still, bought, because it would not just dent its credibility but erode it. 

The world, not just Malaysians, is watching how the authorities handle this episode.  

ON THE BEAT WITH WONG CHUN WAI

IT was a dumb idea from the beginning. The Selayang Municipal Council (MPS) rightly deserves the bashing from many Malaysians for its inane dog-catching competition. 

The council may have good intentions by holding a contest with prize money to reduce the number of unlicensed mongrels in the district but the whole exercise was certainly ill conceived. To put it bluntly, it was insensitive and cruel. 

The media first started reporting the competition as a Klang Valley metro news item but it soon generated into a national controversy as the angry public made protest calls to newspaper offices. 

The MPS had offered residents at least RM11,000 in cash prizes if they could catch up to over 150 stray dogs within six months to solve the stray dog problem in the area. 

Its president Zainal Abidin Azim said the competition was introduced as it had received about 80 complaints about stray dogs every month, adding that despite catching 200 stray dogs every month as part of its animal control management, the problem had remained unsolved. 

Under the competition, residents were required to deliver the dogs alive with photographs of the captured animals as proof while the council would provide tools for these bounty hunters. 

The first prize winner would walk home with RM15,000, the runner-up RM13,000 while the third-placed winner RM11,000. The MPS also offered RM20 for each stray dog caught as an incentive to the dog-catchers. 

Mongrels may not be the top choice of many serious dog owners but animal lovers cannot accept untrained residents going around the neighbourhood nabbing these canines.  

These hunters are not just hurting the animals but may even endanger themselves because these stray dogs could become vicious and attack them in defence. 

Last week, common sense finally prevailed when the MPS called off the competition following a meeting between state executive councillor Datuk Tang See Hang, Zainal and animal rights groups and pet owners. 

Tang, who had earlier launched the ludicrous competition, said the decision had to do with safety concerns expressed by various groups that untrained hunters could hurt themselves. 

The MPS has now agreed to work closely with the SPCA and other animal rights groups to ensure that dogs are handled and caught by trained personnel. The council will also be strict on irresponsible pet owners who abandon their pets. 

Without doubt, there must be an effective programme involving the MPS and the SPCA to reduce the number of stray dogs in the district because no one wants to come into contact with wild or sick dogs. 

But such competitions, as dog handler and professional groomer Noraini Rozaiti Mahmud said, would inherently attract over-zealous residents and this “could result in someone getting injured and the dogs being blamed and crucified for attacking a person”. 

Many dog owners are also worried that this competition would reinforce the perception, if not prejudices, among some people that dogs are bad, dirty and deserve to be killed. 

Dogs are regarded as pets, if not family members, by most of us. But their role as animal companions to the elderly, sick and particularly the blind has not been given due recognition. For many of the elderly who stay alone, these furry animals have become their only source of joy and loyal companion.  

Some of us take for granted these intelligent animals and only realise their crucial role as rescuers during earthquakes, even in countries that forbid ownership of these animals for religious reasons. It is during such emergencies that these four-legged rescuers have to be flown in to save human lives.  

Dogs have now been used by enforcement agencies to sniff out pirated DVD manufacturers, something unheard of previously. Anti-drug agencies have long relied on dogs to nab traffickers at airports. 

Children who are given dogs as pets learn the meaning of responsibility and affection early in life. And when their pet dies, they experience grief. These are lessons in life that the young learn.  

What the MPS and the SPCA can do is to work together to tackle the problem, including paying professionals to nab these dogs.  

The residents in Selayang should be encouraged to neuter their dogs to stop the growing number of these animals. 

It is not just dogs that the council should worry about – stray cats and crows that rummage rubbish bins are unsightly, and some kind of control is necessary to keep the district clean. 

Irrespective of our religion, it is important we show that animals are God’s creatures and should be properly treated.  

What kind of message are we sending when we adopt inhumane and barbaric measures to clamp down on creatures we deem unwanted and wild?  

As Mahatma Gandhi said, “The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way animals are treated.”  

COMMENT
By WONG CHUN WAI

MY STOCKBROKER friend calls me for two reasons – to exchange tips on hot stocks in Bursa Malaysia and, when the prices are rocketing, to heap praise on the Government about what a wonderful job it is doing. 

But business has been a little slow lately. So now he spends time reading the blogs and finding fault with the Government. Nothing seems right to him as the bearish market hits his pocket.  

If the Government had its way, it would certainly like the stock market to have a bullish run, at least until the general election. 

It knows the trickle down effects on the economy. Plenty of money in the people's pockets, especially urban voters, is the only feel good factor that matters. 

But external forces, beyond our control, have come into play with the elections just about six months away. 

The sub-prime mortgage crisis that hit Wall Street and spread across the United States has also affected the global markets. 

It may seem like a complicated financial issue but it is essentially the story of housing loan borrowers with bad credit history being given loans that they can no longer service. 

Those loans, popularly referred to as mortgages in the US, are known as sub-prime because the people they are given to are not prime borrowers. To American bankers, they are regarded as B-grade or second chance borrowers. Or worse, people who would normally not qualify for loans. 

These mostly lower income borrowers, such as the elderly and new immigrants, were told that they could get loans even higher than the value of their houses. 

They were promised low interest rates during the first or second year, and, as the prices of homes were then going up, they were told that they could refinance their homes to keep their payments down. 

But the housing bubble burst and these borrowers were suddenly told that their interest had been reset to double digits. They also found that they could no longer refinance their homes. 

Unable to cope with the number of loan defaulters, many lenders filed for bankruptcy sending shock waves through the economy. 

This crisis hit the United States because, for years, banks, hedge funds and lenders bluffed themselves and everyone else into believing that property prices would go up, borrowers would always service their loans and no financial institutions would go bust. 

It is a sick story of greedy financiers. After lousy borrowers got their loans, the lenders turned around and sold the loans to investment banks that in turn repackaged them for re-sale to investors. 

Working with rating agencies, these B-grade loans became “investment quality securities.” It is very much like a person from Harlem who has his social standing upgraded after moving to Manhattan with a new name and a new suit. 

With the possibility of millions of such B-grade borrowers losing their homes, panic buttons were pressed and it has now become much harder and more expensive to borrow. In economic terms, there is now a financial contagion. 

The US sneezed and the rest of the world caught a cold. 

From rating agencies such as Standard & Poor, Moody and Fitch Ratings, to poor federal regulators, lawyers can be expected to make tons of money filing suits against these agencies. 

The worse part is that no one can predict what will happen next and for the ordinary American Joe, the issue is murky and complex and all the financial jargon makes it difficult for him to fully grasp the great impact on his life.Here in Malaysia, Bank Negara has taken a cautious stand on the crisis, saying it is premature to make a conclusive assessment on its impact to Malaysia while a prominent local banker said he wasn’t worried as his businesses were tied to the Middle East, India and China. 

But what is certain is that Bursa Malaysia is expected to be trading on a “tight range” or in short, stock prices could be weak. 

We can only hope that the subprime mortgage crisis on Wall Street won't drag Main Street USA along.  

Over here in Malaysia, we just want to make a little pocket money for the festive season. Of course, it would be nice if the stock market is hot ahead of the elections.  

 By WONG CHUN WAI

FOR two weeks, actor Mel Gibson was just another regular guy in Bangsar in Kuala Lumpur. He walked into an Indian shop for his roti canai and teh tarik in Jalan Telawi and even tried banana leaf rice. 

He went to a gymnasium, shopped for groceries and played with kids at the house of a businessman where he stayed. 

For a big Hollywood name, not many Malaysians recognised him instantly. Many took a while to recognise the famous face and found it hard to believe that the man himself could be at their regular mamak shop. 

For one, Gibson looked smaller in real life. In some ways, he is a little shrunk, unlike the hunky stature that we are used to on the big screen. He even looks older. 

The American actor-producer-director is known for his roles in Mad Max and Lethal Weapon. In 2004, he produced and directed Passion of the Christ, the eighth-highest grossing film in history, and is regarded by Forbes magazine as one of the most powerful celebrities. 

On Tuesday, my colleagues and I were invited to meet the 51-year-old Oscar winner at his suite at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Singapore. 

Together with Malaysian businessman Datuk Vinod Sekhar, he was preparing to talk to delegates at the Forbes Global CEO Conference. 

Wearing a chequered shirt, a blue blazer and matching denim jeans and “recycled US$10” brown Crocs slip-ons from Costa Rica, Gibson wanted to talk about a new passion: the environment. 

Gibson is known for his philanthropy to the indigenous people of South America but not so for the green cause, espoused by actors like Leonardo DiCaprio. 

But that seems set to change now with his involvement in Green Rubber Global, a tyre-recycling company. 

Green Rubber is a subsidiary of the Petra Group of Companies headed by Vinod.  

It was Vinod's father, Tan Sri B.C. Sekhar, fondly known as Mr Natural Rubber, who pioneered the Delink techonology that Green Rubber is using to turn old rubber into new. 

The technology essentially reverses the process of vulcanised rubber, thus transforming them back into their original raw state and make them usable again for high-end applications.  

Gibson tells his listeners that he has taken up the cause because “I have seen the process and it blew my mind,” rattling off figures “that there are over two million tyres in dumpsites awaiting disposal, the number-one waste hazard in the United States.” 

The shareholders of the company, which also includes actor Bruce Willis, believe that by 2020, China and India would have gobbled up all the world’s rubber supply. 

The worldwide deficit would make the recycled rubber valuable. And profitable, of course. 

Not everyone is convinced of the reliability and even practicability of the process. There is strong resistance from the rubber industry, while others claim the equipment would be too expensive. 

But Vinod has set up a factory in Sungai Buloh, Selangor, and another one will soon come up in New Mexico in the United States. 

Gibson’s new green image has certainly generated huge interest, even among the serious businessmen attending the conference. Seasoned reporters, used to meeting celebrities, jostled to pose for photographs with Gibson. 

He even did an impromptu tap dance on stage before the panel discussion started. 

The moderator of the panel discussion had to remind the delegates that “there should be no movie-related questions.” 

Gibson told his attentive listeners that pushing the environment cause was difficult because “I use disposable razor” and “use wood to build houses.” He believed education and marketing would help. 

His last film, Apocalypto, was about the decline of the Maya civilisation, which reached its peak around 600. 

“It deals with the destruction of environment in a subtle way,” he said, adding that he would consider making a movie about the environment. 

“I did not learn enough in school, I did my learning as I moved along but I will see what I can do.” 

Asked whether he would make a movie about recycling rubber, he told a reporter that “maybe it could be called Stretch.” 

Gibson, who owns an island in Fiji and multiple homes in California, said he would be heading to the Pacific for a rest. 

The man who was spotted at Singapore’s banana leaf Apollo Indian Restaurant in Race Course Road said he would be returning to Malaysia. And, of course, Bangsar.

In many ways, it was a Budget for Malaysian families. It struck a chord for many Malaysian wage earners who have to juggle with their household expenses and worry about everyday matters like housing, transportation and safety. 

For parents with schoolgoing children, they would probably welcome the news that from next year, the textbook loan scheme would be provided to all students regardless of their families’ income and with no restriction on the number of eligible children. 

That wasn’t all. Abdullah said that effective 2008, there would be no more annual fee for primary and secondary schools. Last year, the Government abolished examination fees for the PMR, SPM and STPM. 

Many of us, in our 40s and 50s, can probably recall that some of our parents could not afford to pay for our examination fees and the number of papers we sat for our exams was based on what we could afford. 

Even after we passed our examinations, the number of universities and colleges was limited. Today, we have lost count of the number of our public universities and private colleges with twinning programmes, with young Malaysians able to get foreign university degrees without even setting foot overseas in many disciplines. 

Free uniforms 

To encourage participation in school uniformed units, the Government is providing a free uniform for one activity for school students from families with a monthly income of RM1,000 and below. It would have been better if the ceiling was higher as for many in the major towns, even a RM2,000 household income is a struggle. 

But the most important item was the Government’s move to make owning a house affordable, especially those without fixed income, such as farmers and small traders. The setting up of a fund to provide guarantees to two banks, with an initial allocation of RM50mil, is unprecedented. 

Abdullah went one step further by announcing that EPF contributors could make monthly withdrawals for the financing of their home loan repayments, which is a major burden for most of us. 

If the other goodies seem to benefit only the lower income, the home loan repayment scheme would help the majority of middle-income Malaysians. It would be a big step towards improving their quality of life. 

This is a major move which would benefit the five million EPF contributors, cutting across all races and religions. This is truly a Malaysian gift in the first Budget after the country’s 50th independence, and is expected to involve up to RM9.6bil annually for the purchase of houses. That aside, RM381mil has been set aside for the implementation of low-cost housing programmes. 

It was good to hear the Budget committing to a comprehensive public transportation system, including rail and bus network in major cities, with over RM12bil to improve the traffic system in Kuala Lumpur and Penang. 

It is important to note that the people’s complaints of increasing crime have been taken seriously by the Government. A sum of RM6bil has been allocated for the police. 

The key words used by Abdullah were “police presence” and “visibility” – that means we hope to see policemen on the beat or in their patrol cars, not just stopping motorists by the roadsides, which, unfortunately, seems to be the perception of many Malaysians.  

With an additional 2,000 cars, 1,900 motorcycles and 1,600 laptops, this would help the police fight crime more effectively. 

Tackling crime 

The use of London-style camera surveillance would also go a long way in helping the police to eliminate crime as photographs would be recorded more effectively. To supplement the network cameras in busy streets, shopping areas, airports, bus and train stations, studies have shown that improved lighting in crime-prone areas are essential.  

As the plan involves recruiting 60,000 new personnel over the next five years, the force should seriously consider holding walk-in interviews in designated places such as schools, shopping complexes and community halls. 

The Higher Education Ministry has adopted such a method and has successfully recruited many lecturers. Such walk-in interviews also mean more transparency. There is no reason why the police, with the support of Chinese associations, cannot hold such recruitment exercises to encourage more Chinese to join the force. 

A racially balanced, decently paid police force with fair promotion prospects that would attract good talent is essential as policing becomes more sophisticated. It means recruiting graduates in accountancy, law, chemistry, forensic science and information technology, 

Without doubt, it has been a Budget with plenty for all, focusing on the bread-and-butter issues. It will be hard not to think of it as an election budget. 

FORMER top policeman Tan Sri Rahim Noor is a righteous man. To be precise, he is a true Malaysian patriot, unlike many politicians who make such self-proclamations but with no record to prove it.  

Last week, the ex-Inspector General of Police made a bold statement: he said that if he were to be reborn, he would want to be a “complete Malaysian”.  

In short, he would not want to be identified by his race. 

All he wants is that his identity card merely state that he is a Bangsa Malaysia, nothing more. He has even gone one step further: he feels there is no need for his religion to be stated on such documents, as that is strictly a matter between him and God. 

“I am not being emotional but only want to be a Malaysian,” said the man who has been through Malaysia’s darkest moments, including fighting communist insurgents and seeing the end of the struggle against the Communist Party of Malaya. 

Rahim, who served for over 30 years in the force, including as Special Branch director, said he was also concerned that certain people had exploited religion to the extreme. 

These are surely powerful words that would make many of us sit up. He may have his flaws, but how we wish more of our leaders would pay attention to and, more importantly, take in what Rahim has said. 

After 50 years as a nation, why should Malaysians be made to feel guilty when we talk about forging Bangsa Malaysia, Rakyat Malaysia or, for that matter, anak bangsa Malaysia? 

We can call it by any other name for political correctness but the point is that it is the common aspiration and hope of any right thinking Malaysian to feel that they are one – one country, one nationality and one destiny. 

No one should be made to think that the hopes and aspirations that our founding fathers had fought for have been whittled away because of racism, chauvinism and intolerance. 

Like Rahim, many Malaysians are worried, rightly or wrongly, that what has divided the people has become more defined than what unites us. Only the ignorant would claim there are no signs of polarisation along ethnic and religious lines. 

There are good reasons why we are concerned because it is the unity and tolerance among the three major races that have brought the country its independence and glued this nation together for the last 50 years. 

If our countrymen, on the eve of independence in 1957, were overcome with mixed emotions of optimism, uncertainty and doubts, there are plenty of good reasons why we are also in a similar mood. 

In the minds of many Malaysians, we are at a crossroad and the road that we take would determine our destination in the next 50 years. 

In the words of Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam, it would be whether we take the Prime Minister’s Jalan Adil (Road to Fairness for all Malaysians) or the Jalan Ketuanan (Road to Dominance) that some chauvinists want to pursue.  

The two other choices are Jalan Tidak Apa (Indifference), which comprises Malaysians who accept any trends or developments because of the perception that there is nothing they can do; and Jalan Keluar, where fearful and unsure Malaysians talk of migrating because they have lost hope in their country. 

We are at a transition. If Rahim, a man who has fought every form of the country’s traitors, can talk about a Bangsa Malaysia, let no one threaten us to stop talking about this Malaysian hope. 

No one can stop change. The Malaysian media still talk about a group of ageing politicians who stormed into a police station to lodge a police report against a particular blogger but the group reportedly did not know how to surf the Internet and a reporter had to be roped in to search for the website in question. 

Then there is another leader who is talking about taking action against Youtube, the video sharing portal, presumably not knowing that there are no Malaysian laws against portals and websites registered overseas. 

Yet another politician compared bloggers to communists and leftists, political terms which have become meaningless to the younger generation.  

It is a little scary because the statements of these leaders have given the impression of how cut off they are from Generation Y. With their Ipods, MTV and Google, Generation Y is not tuned in to these leaders.  

Think about these facts and statistics: Malaysians who are 30 years old next month were just born when Saturday Night Fever was shown; and around this time, the TV remote control was introduced. Yet, they seemed not too long ago. 

If many Malaysians are worried that some leaders are lost in the digital divide, they are equally concerned that bright political wannabes, some with impressive British and American academic credentials, are not introducing fresh ideas to politics but have latched on to the tired formula of race to climb the party ladder. 

Communal politics, like the political ideologies during the Cold War, would eventually disappear. The demography of Malaysia has changed so fast, much more than what the people have noticed. 

Fifty years ago, the Alliance had only three major parties but today the Barisan Nasional has 14 component parties. Among the opposition, there are other alternatives besides DAP and PAS. 

In a country of 25 million people, there are over two million foreigners, the legal ones that is. In short, as the Chinese population dwindles, there are now more Indonesians, Bangladeshis, Nepalese and Myanmars than the two million Indians. 

The political landscape is set to change over the next 50 years, whether we like it or not. There may no longer be enough boxes for just Malays, Chinese, Indians dan lain-lain (others) when we fill our forms because, as much we want foreigners to only work here, many would also stay back. That is the history of immigrants anywhere in the world and Malaysia is no exception. 

Tan Sri Rahim, you have our highest respect for speaking up for most Malaysians who share the belief that we just want to be known as Bangsa or Rakyat Malaysia – nothing more and nothing less. 

Being known as Malaysian does not dilute one’s ethnic, religious and cultural identity. After 50 years, there should be no more such fears. We hope we don’t need to wait for another 50 years to see this become a reality.  

By WONG CHUN WAI

FOR a long, long time, I thought Tunku Abdul Rahman only made the Merdeka cry three times, no thanks to the archive footage that we see on television. The first Prime Minister actually made the historic cry that reverberated across the stadium seven times, but none of my teachers told me that. 

In fact, my ignorance continued until I became a journalist. I found out about the “deep, excited response” which “echoed in the crowded stands to be flung back again by the amplifying horns” – that was how The Sunday Times issue of Sept 1, 1957, reported that event.  

The page one story, with the headline “This is it” and sub-heading “Across a stilled stadium, the magic words of nationhood”, was written by one Allington Kennard, presumably a white man. 

The front-page picture wasn’t of the Tunku raising his hand to proclaim Independence. Instead, the picture showed the Tunku bowing to the Duke of Gloucester, the Queen’s representative, as he received the Constitutional Instrument. 

Priced at dua kupang (20 cents), the newspaper, which is now stored in microfilm form at the National Archives, remains one of the best records for young Malaysians like me who want to know about Aug 31. 

My school teachers and university lecturers never told me that by 2am, people had gathered at the Padang, what is now known as Dataran Merdeka, and an hour later, Merdeka Stadium started to come to life. 

But there was a “blustering storm” and “a grey and clouded dawn threatened the day with ruin” with “nearly 2,000 men of the Federation forces billeted in schools not far from the stadium, paraded in driving rain” and “they were soaked to the skin”. 

Full of colour 

At the stadium field, it was reported, “the film and television cameras were stacked on their tripods like some strange stadium harvest, protected against the rain by plastics and oil skins”. It was dramatic. That was how the white man reported, with plenty of colour, that historic day.  

But the rain stopped at the right time. Reading the report, which gave me goose pimples occasionally, I knew why Malaysia remains a lucky country after 50 years. God was, and remains, kind to us all. 

Walking from the dais, shouts of “Merdeka” rose again and again, as the storm “disappeared over the hills, now the sun lavished its lustre on a brilliant scene, on the sparkling stands, the glittering uniforms, the incredibly gaily hued throng on the embankments of the stadium.” 

That's awesome. And yet no one told us that. 

The ceremony didn’t end at Merdeka Stadium as Malaya’s first King was later sworn in at Istana Negara, witnessed by the Tunku and his Cabinet. The Governors of Penang and Malacca – Sir Raja Uda and Leong Yew Koh respectively – were handed warrants of appointment. 

In the evening, tiaras, champagne and even a dancing princess were the highlights at Balai Rong Seri. Dinner comprised grapefruit, sharks fin soup, nasi pulau, roast chicken, curry kurma and sambal.  

It was reported that after dinner “a strikingly attractive Malay princess, Tengku Nor Asiah, 20, captivated the guests with a performance of a century-old Kelantan love dance – the Tari Ashek.” 

Outside, on the lawn, there was a dragon dance, 14 joget dancers and an Indian temple dance. “A talented group of singers from Malacca entertained the guests with Portuguese, Malay, and other songs.”  

It was very multi-racial and classic Tunku, making sure every race felt they had a place in this newborn country. 

It was real and not some form of tokenism, which we sometimes see at some cultural fare. Malaysia is made up of three main racial groups, why be shy about it. There is no need to be apologetic. 

I cannot imagine the joget dancers making their appearances at official functions now. In fact, they have disappeared completely as religious conservatism chips away at the face of Malaysia. The nearest we have now is poncho poncho, a form of line dancing.  

The beautiful Malay culture with its gentleness, which we love so much, seems to be losing its ground to Arab culture. 

Who would have thought that the elegant kebaya would at one point almost become extinct but for the active intervention of the late Datin Seri Endon Mahmood; and for that matter, the wayang kulit and mak yong in Kelantan? 

That wasn’t all. On the eve of National Day, the Tunku who was speaking at the Alliance rally remarked: “Humble yourself before God, whether it be in mosques, churches and temples or in our homes, Give thanks to Him for His blessing He has showered upon us.” 

It took a great leader like the Tunku, truly a leader of all Malaysians, to make such a statement. Such openness has become a rare commodity, in some ways, in Malaysia 2007. 

The Straits Echo, a Penang-based newspaper, on its Aug 31 issue, had the apt headline “Birth of a new nation – Tunku hailed as Father of Independence”. 

The Pinang Gazette and Straits Chronicle, another English daily based in Penang, reported on Aug 28 that mosques in Penang and Province Wellesley held special Merdeka sermons, which were prepared by Haji Ahmad Badawi, the father of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.  

It reported that a four-page Jawi typewritten sermon was made available to every mosque in the state. 

The newspaper also reported the anxiety of titled community leaders as independence approached. They wanted to know whether their decorations, medals and honours conferred by the British government could still be worn after Merdeka and whether Justices of Peace, appointed by the British government, would be able to perform their functions from Sept 1, 1957. 

For the ordinary Malayans on Aug 31, it was a holiday. Dendam Pontianak, which starred Maria Menado, was screened at the Odeon in Kuala Lumpur and Penang to full houses.  

(Remember at one time, an Information Minister banned such horror movies during the 80s but luckily sanity has prevailed and we are back to watching such locally-made movies of this genre.) 

The rival show was Kaseh Sayang, which had Aziz Sattar and Normadiah in the lead. Burt Lancaster’s Gunfight at the O.K. Corral was the English choice for most moviegoers. 

Good old days 

Young Malayans were swinging to Pat Boone’s Love Letters In The Sand and Elvis Presley’s Teddy Bear, which were on top of the charts in the United Kingdom and United States. Rock and roll was the order of the day with the young and restless dancing to the beat of Bill Hayley and the Comets. 

In sports, the Malayan soccer side ranked among the top in Asia with the ability to compete against the best Asian teams; 50 years later, we have gone down the pits. Very much like our politics, you may say. 

At the Rex Cinema in Kuala Lumpur, the hottest item was a live show by a four-woman group from Australia, who called themselves Bubla Folies, a slick dance team.  

Alas, some of us would frown on that, too, today. Who would have thought that the Gwen Stefani concert would be an issue after 50 years and why do we even bother to entertain this group of PAS-inclined students, who should be more worried about passing their exams, improving their English and making themselves employable?  

They are just a group of small but vocal minority and certainly the majority should never submit to their wishes. It’s the tyranny of the minority that Malaysians have to stand up to if we want to keep the Malaysia we love. Malaysia is not Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran, let’s be clear. 

Aug 31, 1957 – I wasn’t born then. The retired teachers and the older folks tell me that things were better then, perhaps out of nostalgia.  

We have had the best times, the worst times and, surely, there can be better times but Malaysia will remain our home, that’s for sure.  

IT’S 8.30pm on a Friday night, some time before the party crowd in Jalan Telawi packs into the many fancy restaurants and pubs in Bangsar.  

At the newly opened Rick’s Cafe Casablanca at One Bangsar, Sir Richard Branson walked in with a few AirAsia staff.  

In his blue jeans and cotton long-sleeved shirt, the British billionaire walked towards a handful of guests for the private party.  

“Hi, I am Richard, nice to meet you guys,” said the grinning icon, who owns over 300 companies under the Virgin label, including Virgin Airlines and Virgin Megastores, as he extended his hand.  

Clearly relaxed and comfortable, one of the richest men in the world had just generated a storm at a ceremony to announce Virgin Group’s decision to take a 20% stake in AirAsia’s long-haul carrier, AirAsia X.  

He had attended the function wearing a traditional Malay outfit and headgear – no surprise to those who know Branson and AirAsia chief executive officer Datuk Tony Fernandes.  

Both businessmen love to execute public relations exercises and, in the case of Branson, pulling unnerving, even ludicrous stunts.  

The bearded blond-haired Briton had wanted to land for the ceremony in Putrajaya in a hot air balloon but Fernandes talked him out of it as the administrative capital was just too near the KL International Airport.  

Branson has been involved in a number of world record attempts since 1985 on his hot air balloon, including crossing the Atlantic Ocean in the fastest recorded time.  

Between 1995 and 1998, he and Steve Fossett made a number of attempts to circumnavigate the globe.  

In 2004, he decided to travel across the English Channel in an amphibious vehicle and, again, he smashed all records.  

“I was told to be practical this time,” he laughed, finally settling for the Malay warrior headgear, which of course was another record.  

Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, too, could not resist laughing at Branson’s publicity stunt when the two met at the Deputy Prime Minister’s residence.  

Najib, who was also wearing his baju Melayu for his Friday prayers, took a look at Branson and said: “At least there is something we have in common.”  

Although this is not Branson’s first trip to Malaysia, he has been soaking in the hospitality. At the ceremony, he took Freddie Laker Jr aside, and pointed out to him the reporters representing the Malay, Chinese, Indian and English media.  

“That’s Malaysia for you. They are Malaysians and they come from different races, and they all speak English,” he said.  

Freddie Laker Jr was invited to Kuala Lumpur for the event by Fernandes. The late senior Laker was the role model of Branson and Fernandes.  

The man started Laker Airways, the first budget airline, in 1966. It went bust in 1982, buckling under intense competitive pressures. It was tagged one of Britain’s greatest corporate failures at that time but many ordinary Britons donated money in an attempt to save that airline.  

But what struck the group of guests was Branson’s approachable and down-to-earth manner. As this writer sought the help of a waitress to take a photograph with him, he insisted that I return the favour by clicking another picture of the waitress and him.  

One prominent chief executive officer was starstruck and could not stop counting his lucky stars as Branson sat next to him. Knowing his easy style, the host had sensibly insisted on no protocol and free seating for dinner.  

As the party began, with Black Eyed Peas’ Mas Que Nada blaring out from the speakers, Branson walked towards the AirAsia crew present, including a few invited from Thailand. Branson must have charmed them.  

His magic was to make his listeners feel comfortable and showing them he was interested in what they were doing.  

To the invited journalists, he insisted on details like the circulation, the readership profile and thrust of their newspapers.  

Branson, after all, started his first business in London publishing a successful magazine called Student.  

On Saturday morning, he flew to New York on a chartered AirAsia flight to make sure he was on time for his daughter’s birthday party.  

Both Branson and Fernandes have shown that CEOs can be hip and cool; that’s surely a lesson for our Malaysian businessmen.