UMNO SHOULD SAY “NO” TO CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES (ARTICLE 121 1A) TO STRENGTHEN THE COURTS

The defacto Law Minister said “a proposed amendment that would revert Article 121 (1) of the Federal Constitution to its original form would be tabled in the next meeting of Parliament”. The original provision accorded judicial power to the High Courts of Malaya and Borneo, which according to him was a principle affirming the separation of powers between the Executive and Judiciary.

(http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/6/12/nation/21527349&sec=nation).

The amendments to Article 121 of the Federal Constitution in 1988 removed the inherent powers of the court and subjected the same to federal legislations. The separation of powers through constitutional re-amendment of Article 121(1A) is to restore the inherent judicial powers of the judiciary as entrenched in the Merdeka Constitution which was taken away in a constitutional amendment as part of the 1987-88 Operation Lalang crackdowns.

To me, UMNO should say “NO” to the said proposed amendment to be tabled to the Cabinet before passing to Parliament especially if the UMNO Supreme Council has yet to analyze, evaluate and understood its ramifications after taking into consideration the practical and historical aspects for the change from its original form.

Besides several reasons, the environment is currently not conducive for UMNO to say YES:

1. Foreign Investors’ Perspective- The perception of certain investors from the Anglo American international community that they have no faith in our judiciary system is a fallacy while their ulterior motive is perceived nothing more than to bring the country to its knees; these “penyagak’ tie their investment criteria to populist reforms. For the good many years, under the Mahathir Administration, Malaysia has achieved tremendous development and progress and it is a country much respected by the Muslim world and the Non-Aligned Nations as well as acknowledged by others in the international community which does not have any political agenda.

Compare then with such bias perception from certain foreign investors- “But in 1988 any appearance of judicial independence was wiped away when Prime Minister Mahathir orchestrated the impeachment and removal of the Chief Justice in response to a political dispute between the prime minister and the courts. When four other judges resisted hearing the impeachment trial, they too were dismissed. This was a major blow to separation of powers and rule of law from which Malaysia has not yet recovered” (http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/20956/Malaysia_IPP.pdf).

Remember the 1997 financial crises when the country was almost “destroyed” had it adopted the recommendations and practices by the World Bank and IMF. Is there much difference now when the immature and inexperienced Minister of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs is strongly advocating the open market practices while disbanding subsidies? Is it with certainty that the flow of FDI into this country will be enhanced with the introduction of such reforms?

The moment the Badawi Government announced judiciary and other populist reforms, the country begun to destabilize as it dances directly and indirectly to the designs of unscrupulous foreign influences and are being capitalized by the Opposition. Being inexperienced and trapped by their selfish populist/ liberalist visions, the flood gates have all opened and the Badawi Government is seen consistently incompetent to govern effectively, making one grave mistake after another, “flip flopping”, to the disgust and anxiety of the majority of the population but to the satisfaction of the Opposition out to capitalize on the protest votes.

2. The Royal Commission on the Lingam Video Tapes - is but a consequence of the trapping instigated by DSAI but then advocated and manipulated foolishly by the Government apparently bent to demonize Tun Mahathir under the pretext of judicial reforms. Can the people continue to condone such unwise decisions taken by the Government in wasting resources while abusing power even if the issue has yet to see any end? Subsequently with arrogance and ignorance, the newly appointed defacto Law Minister, Zaid Ibrahim unearthed the Tun Salleh Abas case

3. The Tun Salleh Abas Case - Zaid had said that if the 1988 judiciary crisis was the root cause of the state of the present day judiciary, the healing process should start from there. He said an apology was the first step towards restoring the independence of the judiciary, regaining public respect for the institution and bringing lawyers back to the fold. Thus the Tun Salleh Abas case was “unearthed” which, to many, was with much malice and shallow thinking, and had brought up nothing except gross confusion to the general public and waste of government resources.

Even the AG’s office finally said the case was closed and no public apology required; could it be that the Government has finally seen the truth in the Tun Salleh Abas case? However, there is but a tiny group of self interested individuals in the Government led by the defacto Law Minister bent on pursuing such populist policies which are not necessary endorsed by the majority of the population. Then there is that call for a Judiciary Appointment Commission etc.

4. The Malaysian Bar Council - under its President, Ambiga has failed to demonstrate that the entity could represent the best interest of the Nation from the perspective of the Judiciary; instead the Bar Council under Ambiga is seen promoting the self interest of human rights as well as bias political aspirations without much regard to accepted local culture and norms of the majority. Did all observe how Ambiga jumped the gun in assuming that Justice Chin was forthright correct in his allegation while others have denied otherwise? (http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2008/06/11/did-msms-reporting-on-justice-ian-chins-revelatio)

Perhaps under Ambiga, the Malaysian Bar Council together with other human rights groups, want to ensure the country is in full complaint with the US Department of State, Undersecretary of Democracy and Global Affairs, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor’s country reports on Human Rights Practices and International Religious Freedoms. (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/). Ridiculous!!!

5. The Justice Datuk Ian Chin case - seemed to enhance the belief that the Executive had indeed been prejudice against the Judiciary. However the case demonstrates this one member of the Judiciary who after all this years pent up with personal frustration decided to explosively revealed the veiled threats by the Executive against the Judiciary then once many, many “moons” ago. The “boot camp” indoctrination referred by Justice Chin was brought out again by none other than the trickster DSAI. The Government was quick to announce there’s no further need to “korek and korek” about such ridiculous past and frustrations. Can we expect more wild explosive exposures from other Judiciary members?

6. The Opposition’s Aspirations - DSAI and the Malaysian Bar Council under Ambiga have shown much disrespect of our accepted norms and culture. Then as expected following Justice Chin exposure, we have the Opposition with the likes of Kapal Singh and LK Siang who takes every opportunity to keep the Malaysian Police occupied with more police reports; no wonder the crime rate in this country increases as the Police are kept away from doing their duties and instead to focus on the selfish interest of these chauvinist politicians.

Indeed these opposition leaders have had this constitutional amendment as their battle cries for a very long time for several reasons and as such they will bark out loud when issues of their battle cries are touched. Next will be the ISA etc. It is frightening indeed that we have also individuals inside the Government/ BN who appear to be in co-hoots with them, willingly or unwillingly.

7. CIRCUMVENTING SYARIAH LAWS - Where decisions of the syariah court affect a non-Muslim, he or she can seek recourse in the secular courts who, in theory, overrule the Syariah courts as the Syariah courts are limited in their jurisdiction by Article 121 of the Federal constitution. In 2006 a judge ruled that Article 121 limited the federal courts from ruling on matters ruled on by the Syariah court when it touches Islamic matter. To some, this was seen as a misinterpretation of the article and the case is under appeal in the court of appeals.

The proposed Interfaith Commission was poured cold water earlier this year. However, religion-based organizations including the MCCBCHS continue to make representations that affect them; freedom to practice one’s own religion as promised by the Constitution. Already, some have already begun the process of undermining Islam- administration and the position of the Syariah courts and the realm of the Agong/ Sultans.

From this light, the proposed constitutional amendment is most dangerous and explosive if indeed attempts are to be imminently made to undermine the fundamentals and practices of Islam being the religion of the majority with the Agong/ Sultan as its head through the proposed amendment of Article 121 (1A). From precedence and existing efforts on “the freedom to practice one’s own religion” as so exposed by the proposed amended constitution, the likelihood indeed is quite certain.

UMNO should ensure that the proposed amendment remain as “still born” for the time being since there seems nothing significantly wrong with our judicial system as is. The 1998 amendment was made when BN had 2/3 majority in parliament and once such proposed amendment to Article 121 (1A) is passed by parliament tomorrow; it is uncertain when further amendments could be made if BN’s shaky status quo of less than 2/3 majority continues.

In these challenging times of uncertainty and tribulations, advocating changes for the sake of changing to please those who think naught except to be in line of international human rights standards is indeed foolish and will only add to greater insecurity. It would be more prudent for UMNO to instead lead BN in focusing to stabilize the electorate and winning back the population’s support and the lost of confidence.

The current oil crisis has exploded and the country is now expounded into greater chaos and dismay with daily public outcries and threats of massive demonstration negating the importance and necessity to have such populist and liberal reforms. With the potential use of police force, if deemed necessary, to quell such demonstration, the Government may have to inevitably challenge the independent powers restored to the Judiciary. What a mockery that will become but that maybe incomparable to the imminent dangers befalling fellow Muslims which will consequently affect the entire community

To win back the crucial support, UMNO and BN can do without these skewed formats of western based democracies and capitalism and of their unscrupulous agencies and human rights ideologies. To allow UMNO and BN to fall into the pitfalls of the opposition could certainly and critically undermine the security of the country.

Thus UMNO’s Supreme Council should be convened to discuss in great depth on such a crucial National issue and hopefully say NO to the said proposed constitutional amendment Article 121 (1A) at this point in time.