The detention and deportation on Feb 16 by the Malaysian authorities of Australian senator Nicholas Xenophon (Independent, South Australia) has, not unexpectedly, been widely commented upon both in Australia and Malaysia.
What has been interesting to read is the range of comments in both countries, whether in agreement or otherwise with the course of action taken by Malaysia.
What has been interesting to read is the range of comments in both countries, whether in agreement or otherwise with the course of action taken by Malaysia.
It must at the outset be clarified that Xenophon has neither been charged nor convicted of any offence under Malaysian law. Any assertion that he was deported because he had broken Malaysian law is unsubstantiated.
T
he allegation that, as a foreigner, he had participated in a public assembly on April 28 last year remains merely that - an allegation. It has not been proven in any court of law in Malaysia.
The other allegation that Xenophon was deported because he represented a threat to Malaysian national security must, with respect, seriously overstate his power and influence.
Indeed, some of the Australian criticism of Xenophon takes the very exact opposite view, namely: who is he, an unimportant and insignificant independent politician from South Australia, that he might dare to have the temerity to tell the Malaysian government what to do?
One cannot have it both ways.
Indeed it appears to have been totally overlooked that Xenophon had visited Malaysia last November. This was several months after the April 28 public assembly.
T
he allegation that, as a foreigner, he had participated in a public assembly on April 28 last year remains merely that - an allegation. It has not been proven in any court of law in Malaysia.The other allegation that Xenophon was deported because he represented a threat to Malaysian national security must, with respect, seriously overstate his power and influence.
Indeed, some of the Australian criticism of Xenophon takes the very exact opposite view, namely: who is he, an unimportant and insignificant independent politician from South Australia, that he might dare to have the temerity to tell the Malaysian government what to do?
One cannot have it both ways.
Indeed it appears to have been totally overlooked that Xenophon had visited Malaysia last November. This was several months after the April 28 public assembly.
N
othing was said then about him having broken Malaysian law, or being an enemy of the state.
othing was said then about him having broken Malaysian law, or being an enemy of the state.
His visit was tofile a police report against certain BN-controlled mainstream newspapers for falsely accusing him of making pejorative remarks about Islam.
So the question must be asked: what is it that he has supposedly done since the November 2012 visit to make him an undesirable person, to be made so unwelcome and ignominiously treated by the Malaysian government? Is it because of his persistence in drawing attention to the state of democracy in Malaysia? Or to the shenanigans in relation to our electoral process and voter rolls?
In truth we do not need Xenophon to expose the evil actions of the powers that be in creating an uneven playing field in the Malaysian electoral process.
Malaysians themselves are doing a sterling job of it on their own, as can be seen from the trickle of testimony being given to the Royal Commission of Inquiry on immigrants in Sabah, on what is popularly referred to as 'Project M' or 'Project IC', which were dark and devious programmes of unlawfully enfranchising undocumented migrants in order for them to cast votes for the BN in Sabah in elections held in the 1980s and 1990s.
That such clandestine activities were allegedly facilitated by government agencies and civil servants acting upon the supposed directions of higher powers and with the apparent connivance of the Election Commission has consequently cast doubt on the integrity not just of the electoral roll in Sabah but nationally.
Entrenched double-speak
But what Xenophon has done is to draw Australian attention to this and other nefarious practices going on in a country that represents itself as a model of democracy:
- the overwhelming control and domination of the print media and broadcast news by the government and the lack of equal access by the federal opposition parties;
- the inherent gerrymandering and manipulation of electoral constituencies; and
- the uneven application of the law relating to free speech, free assembly and free association, to name but a few.
What the Australian government and people, and indeed those of other friendly nations, must be concerned with is the decline in the standards of democracy, not very high to begin with admittedly, in a country aspiring to developed nation status by 2020.
The asynchronicity of aspiration and action by the Malaysian government is symptomatic of the entrenched double-speak between policy and practice in Malaysia.
So the question must be asked: what is it that he has supposedly done since the November 2012 visit to make him an undesirable person, to be made so unwelcome and ignominiously treated by the Malaysian government? Is it because of his persistence in drawing attention to the state of democracy in Malaysia? Or to the shenanigans in relation to our electoral process and voter rolls?
In truth we do not need Xenophon to expose the evil actions of the powers that be in creating an uneven playing field in the Malaysian electoral process.
Malaysians themselves are doing a sterling job of it on their own, as can be seen from the trickle of testimony being given to the Royal Commission of Inquiry on immigrants in Sabah, on what is popularly referred to as 'Project M' or 'Project IC', which were dark and devious programmes of unlawfully enfranchising undocumented migrants in order for them to cast votes for the BN in Sabah in elections held in the 1980s and 1990s. That such clandestine activities were allegedly facilitated by government agencies and civil servants acting upon the supposed directions of higher powers and with the apparent connivance of the Election Commission has consequently cast doubt on the integrity not just of the electoral roll in Sabah but nationally.
Entrenched double-speak
But what Xenophon has done is to draw Australian attention to this and other nefarious practices going on in a country that represents itself as a model of democracy:
- the overwhelming control and domination of the print media and broadcast news by the government and the lack of equal access by the federal opposition parties;
- the inherent gerrymandering and manipulation of electoral constituencies; and
- the uneven application of the law relating to free speech, free assembly and free association, to name but a few.
What the Australian government and people, and indeed those of other friendly nations, must be concerned with is the decline in the standards of democracy, not very high to begin with admittedly, in a country aspiring to developed nation status by 2020.
The asynchronicity of aspiration and action by the Malaysian government is symptomatic of the entrenched double-speak between policy and practice in Malaysia.
We imbibe the language of human rights, yet give it a local twist that perverts the very meaning of those words. We speak of moderation, and yet do nothing when extremists threaten with fierce words and fiery action.
As Malaysia approaches her next and most critical general election to date, her neighbours must and need to have regard for what is going on. International attention, whether from Australia or elsewhere, is a consequence of globalisation.
No longer can countries choose to hide their bad practices, nor should they be allowed to, behind the high walls of national boundaries. Curtains of various materials have crumbled, be they iron or bamboo.
Just as we are called not to remain silent when our neighbour mistreats a spouse or abuses a child, the international community must speak up against bad practices wherever they occur.
As Malaysia approaches her next and most critical general election to date, her neighbours must and need to have regard for what is going on. International attention, whether from Australia or elsewhere, is a consequence of globalisation.
No longer can countries choose to hide their bad practices, nor should they be allowed to, behind the high walls of national boundaries. Curtains of various materials have crumbled, be they iron or bamboo.
Just as we are called not to remain silent when our neighbour mistreats a spouse or abuses a child, the international community must speak up against bad practices wherever they occur.
Certainly no man is an island, entire of itself, let alone a country. A globalised world and international attention is the appropriate antidote to cross-border ‘nimby-ism’ (‘not in my back yard’).
We cannot say that what happens in one country is not the business of another, not when we trade with that country, share military defence agreements with that country, play host to that country's young people as they hunger for higher education, or intend to enter into refugee swap deals with that country.
We cannot sit idly by knowing that a country is facing deep and divisive currents and choose to do nothing. Prevention being better than cure, friends must step in to counsel, caution and cajole.\
Fair game
If none of these arguments appeal to readers, then finally let us also not forget that our prime minister himself has made his appeal to the Australian people, in articles and interviews published in the Australian media.
We cannot say that what happens in one country is not the business of another, not when we trade with that country, share military defence agreements with that country, play host to that country's young people as they hunger for higher education, or intend to enter into refugee swap deals with that country.
We cannot sit idly by knowing that a country is facing deep and divisive currents and choose to do nothing. Prevention being better than cure, friends must step in to counsel, caution and cajole.\
Fair game
If none of these arguments appeal to readers, then finally let us also not forget that our prime minister himself has made his appeal to the Australian people, in articles and interviews published in the Australian media.
It is preposterous to suggest that Australian public opinion, indeed international public opinion, does not matter to our premier.
This is a prime minister who has sought to be seen chatting with President Barack Obama, having tea with Queen Elizabeth II and meeting His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI.
To me, it is fair game for an Australian politician to speak to the issues of Malaysia when a Malaysian politician has chosen to engage directly with the Australian public. What is sauce for the goose must also be sauce for the gander.
And when our prime minister goes on to proclaim to Australians that Malaysia is a liberal and progressive nation, which he did in an article published in The Sydney Morning Herald on Oct 27, 2011, it must by necessity constitute an invitation to one and all to come to Malaysia and verify that we are indeed so.
To have turned Xenophon away at the door was an unwarranted, unwelcome and unfriendly act that publicises the paranoia and prejudice of the powers that be in Malaysia for all the world to see.
Rather than shifting it to the sidelines, it will have the contrary effect of placing up front and centre stage, even more, the egregious events transpiring in Malaysia.
This is a prime minister who has sought to be seen chatting with President Barack Obama, having tea with Queen Elizabeth II and meeting His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI. To me, it is fair game for an Australian politician to speak to the issues of Malaysia when a Malaysian politician has chosen to engage directly with the Australian public. What is sauce for the goose must also be sauce for the gander.
And when our prime minister goes on to proclaim to Australians that Malaysia is a liberal and progressive nation, which he did in an article published in The Sydney Morning Herald on Oct 27, 2011, it must by necessity constitute an invitation to one and all to come to Malaysia and verify that we are indeed so.
To have turned Xenophon away at the door was an unwarranted, unwelcome and unfriendly act that publicises the paranoia and prejudice of the powers that be in Malaysia for all the world to see.
Rather than shifting it to the sidelines, it will have the contrary effect of placing up front and centre stage, even more, the egregious events transpiring in Malaysia.
ANDREW KHOO writes here as a member of the Bersih steering committee.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.