TIDAK SETUJU HAPUS ISA - IBRAHIM ALI

KUALA LUMPUR: Seorang Ahli Parlimen semalam mencadangkan kerajaan mengekalkan undang-undang pencegahan mengikut Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) bagi memastikan negara bebas daripada huru-hara yang dicetuskan pihak tidak bertanggungjawab.

Walaupun sudah dua kali dikenakan ISA, Datuk Ibrahim Ali (Bebas-Pasir Mas), mempertahankan ISA dan tidak setuju dengan cadangan beberapa pihak supaya akta itu dihapuskan, tambahan pula undang-undang itu sendiri digubal institusi Parlimen.

Bagaimanapun, Ibrahim berkata, beberapa pengubahsuaian perlu dilaksanakan bagi memantapkan undang-undang itu serta memastikan tidak wujud penganiayaan tahanan.


"Pengubahsuaian perlu dibuat pada Seksyen 8(1)(a) supaya kuasa menahan tanpa perbicaraan dipindahkan daripada Menteri Dalam Negeri kepada Majlis Keselamatan Negara yang diwakili beberapa pihak termasuk Ketua Polis Negara dan wakil Suhakam.

"Selepas 14 hari ditahan, seseorang itu mesti didakwa di mahkamah,” katanya membahaskan usul menjunjung kasih titah ucapan Yang di-Pertuan Agong di Dewan Rakyat, semalam.

Ibrahim yang popular dengan gelaran ‘putera katak’ kerana sering melompat parti, menjelaskan ISA mampu mentarbiah seseorang yang menggelarkan diri mereka ‘pejuang’ dan beliau sendiri mendapat ijazah ketika berada dalam tahanan.


"Kalau takut (ISA) jangan jadi pejuang. ISA adalah untuk pencegahan. Negara ini yang berbilang kaum banyak golongan pelampau. Jika tidak bertindak cepat menerusi ISA, negara mudah terdedah kepada huru-hara.

"Saya boleh kumpul 60,000 orang membantah sesuatu perkara, tetapi demi kebaikan negara kita tidak buat perkara ini," katanya mengaitkan tindakan kumpulan tertentu menunjuk perasaan di tengah-tengah ibu kota.

Ibrahim yang menggunakan sepenuhnya kesempatan setengah jam membahaskan usul itu, tidak memberi laluan kepada mana-mana Ahli Parlimen mencelah, turut mengemukakan beberapa cadangan lain termasuk meminta kerajaan memperkasa orang Melayu dengan melaksanakan Fasal 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan berhubung Hak Keistimewaan orang Melayu.

"Matlamat daripada langkah itu ialah menyelesaikan isu penyusunan semula masyarakat. Selagi ia tidak tercapai, kita membiarkan api dalam sekam terus wujud, tambahan pula dalam keadaan sekarang ada pihak tertentu yang sudah berani menyentuh sentimen orang Melayu dengan mempersoalkan kedaulatan Raja-Raja Melayu," katanya sambil menyifatkan orang Melayu sekarang terlalu banyak bertolak ansur.

Ibrahim berkata, sesudah 18 tahun selepas berakhirnya pelaksanaan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) pada 1990, pegangan ekuiti orang Melayu hanya 18.9 peratus daripada sasaran 30 peratus; bukan Melayu 40.6 peratus dan asing 40.5 peratus.

Beliau turut menyentuh mengenai isu Barisan Bertindak Hak-Hak Hindu (Hindraf) yang membuat pelbagai dakwaan mengejutkan termasuk berlaku pembunuhan kaum India secara terancang dan kuil Hindu dirobohkan.

Ibrahim berkata, kerajaan perlu membuat penjelasan berhubung perkara itu dengan menerbitkan kertas putih supaya semua dakwaan itu tidak lagi menghantui rakyat Malaysia.

"Saya nak menjadi ahli Parlimen berkelas dunia. Saya tak percaya dakwaan ini betul. Justeru, dalam isu keselamatan, kerajaan mesti membuat keputusan yang konsisten.

"Ini tidak, sekali tangkap, sekali bebas, sekali dakwa di mahkamah sekali ampun, sedangkan di Batu Burok (Terengganu), sampai sekarang ditahan. Ini yang rakyat fikirkan," katanya merujuk kepada dua suspek yang didakwa mencetuskan kekecohan dalam ceramah tanpa permit pembangkang di Kuala Terengganu awal tahun ini.

Walaupun sering melompat parti, Ibrahim berkata, beliau seorang yang sentiasa mengenang budi.

Justeru, beliau menyanggah tindakan beberapa pihak yang selalu mencaci dan mengkritik Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Katanya, tanpa Dr Mahathir, Malaysia tidak akan menjadi seperti sekarang. Memang beliau ada juga kelemahan dan beliau sendiri turut mengkritik beberapa isu tertentu.

"Hari ini seolah-olah dia (Dr Mahathir) betul-betul tidak berguna. Dia bukan nak jadi Perdana Menteri dan nasihat yang beliau beri sepatutnya kerajaan terima dengan terbuka...ini tidak, orang surat khabar terus cucuk, kita melenting.

"Jika terus begini, negara kita akan hilang rahmat," katanya.

MataHatiJohor~ : YB Ibrahim Ali seorang pemimpin yang memang kuat jati diri Melayunya. Jiwa beliau jiwa Melayu sama seperti Jiwa Melayu UMNO juga walaupun telah dipecat dari UMNO. Cuma beliau telah disingkirkan secara tidak demokrasi dari UMNO oleh kepimpinan UMNO sekarang.

Beliau pernah ditahan di bawah Akta ISA dan tahu benar apa yang dirasai oleh tahanan ISA. Hari ini, walaupun tidak lagi bersama Kerajaan BN, beliau tetap memegang pendirian yang sama bahawa ISA masih diperlukan di negara berbilang kaum seperti Malaysia ini. Hanya ianya perlu dimantapkan bagi mengelakkan penyalahgunaannya.

Saya yakin sekiranya Pakatan Rakyat memerintah pun ISA akan dikekalkan juga kerana pemikiran mereka pemikiran pembangkang. Mereka lebih sering memikirkan bagaimana untuk menggugat kerajaan sediada, justeru mereka tentunya tidak akan membenarkan ini berlaku semasa mereka di puncak kuasa.

Is there an ‘-ism’ uniting the Pakatan Rakyat?

Ceritalah By KARIM RASLAN


After 50 years of Merdeka the people deserve to have choices, and hopefully a two-party system divided by some kind of ideological difference will emerge.

MANY people feel that the Pakatan Rakyat is nothing more than a cynical “marriage of convenience,” an alliance fuelled by a lust for power and money that will crumble within a couple of weeks.

While I have to agree that the Pakatan’s increasing proximity to the apex of power – namely Putrajaya – has made it more united, I’d also argue that there are some powerful ideological forces at work in the three component parties, and that these political philosophies do mesh.

If I am right (but let’s face it, I have been very wrong in the past!) the Barisan Nasional must respond to the Pakatan in an ideological and philosophical manner as well as politically.

Essentially, the Barisan has to figure out where it stands and what it stands for. Mere “politicking” – scare mongering, cancelling and or delaying federal development projects and threatening racial strife – is old school.

Such primordial, Mahathir-era strategies will not work going forward.

Indeed bullyboy tactics will only allow the Pakatan to stress its victimisation – thereby aligning its treatment at the hands of a mean-spirited, ungenerous Barisan with the rakyat’s sense of marginalisation.

This combination could prove fatal for the Barisan’s chances going forward.

Of course, the obstacles dividing the three Pakatan parties are formidable and we are right to be sceptical, but only up to a point. In the past, the Gagasan Rakyat and Barisan Alternatif withered under Mahathir’s scorn and the sheer brute force of the Barisan directed administration.

Certainly, the DAP, PKR and PAS’ difficulties over the formation of the Perak government and the ongoing Karpal Singh vs ‘Everyone Else’ spat over the Islamic State suggests that the Pakatan is by no means out of the woods.

There is no doubt that the “Islamic State issue” will remain the core ideological challenge facing the Pakatan.

Now, all of these concerns are perfectly valid, but a deeper analysis of the historical and ideological roots of the three parties reveals that they have much more in common than we give them credit for.

Let me begin with the DAP. We are all familiar with the DAP’s social democrat origins. As the “Malayan” half of the PAP after the 1965 Separation, the DAP inherited the socialist rhetoric without Lee Kuan Yew’s mean-spirited real politic.

Moreover the DAP has been a long-term member of the Socialist International, the worldwide grouping of socialist political parties that includes both the British and Australian Labour parties.

PKR’s socialist roots are even easier to identify.

The party came about after a merger between Keadilan and Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) in 2002.

The PRM itself was a successor of the old Malay leftist parties, such as the Kesatuan Melayu Muda (KMM) and Socialist Front of the Merdeka era – the late much-loved writer/academic Rustam Sani being an important link in the chain.

The presence of the old PRM leadership within the PKR (such as Deputy President Syed Husin Ali) shows that the latter has more capacity for “socialist” thought then we are willing to acknowledge.

Its worth mentioning at this point the obsessive focus on Umno in our mainstream media has side-lined a newly emerging force, namely, the Malay “left”.

If one wants to understand this world, it’s worth reading work by writers such as the late Rustam Sani, the historian Farish Noor and watching Fahmi Reza’s ground-breaking documentary.

At the same time we shouldn’t forget Anwar Ibrahim and his friends and allies from ABIM (including Kamaruddin Jaffar who’s since become a prominent PAS leader) have had a deep and abiding commitment to social justice and equity, albeit with an Islamist tinge; witness their protests back in 1974 over the poverty and hunger of Baling’s rice-farmers.

While the PKR’s socialist roots are relatively well documented, PAS’ connection with these political ideas is less well known.

The party is often mischaracterised – incorrectly – as a purely Islamicist political force.

However, a deeper examination of the party’s roots will reveal that pre-Hadi Awang, PAS had strong leftist inclinations.

Certainly, it’s often forgotten that prominent Malay “alternative” leaders such as Burhanuddin Helmy once played a major role in PAS.

Today’s PAS is dominated by the ulama and they are generally wary of all “-isms” with the exception of Islam-ism.

Figures such as Nik Abdul Aziz, Abdul Hadi Awang and the much feared Harun Din have done their utmost to eradicate Burhanuddin and his successor Asri Muda’s contributions to the party.

Nonetheless, the younger generation of PAS leaders – technocrats like Husam Musa, Nizar Jamaluddin and Nasaruddin Mat Isa – are clearly more attune with left of centre issues.

They’ve been careful to identify with the oppressed and the marginalised – the many Malays left behind by the Umno juggernaut – formulating their party’s manifesto around populist issues that resonate on the ground.

Of course over the past decades there has been an on-going vilification of socialism and other leftist ideas, often in the name of “defending” Muslims against the concept of atheism inherent in more extreme political ideologies such as communism.

Still, socialism, populism or social justice – call it what you will – is a vital unifying theme for the Pakatan.

Moreover this kind of rhetoric cuts across racial lines, since the dispossessed are themselves ethnically heterogeneous.

As this becomes the core ideology around which the Pakatan coalesces, I hope that we will in future be able to talk about a “Social Democratic” Pakatan which will in turn force the Barisan to respond by finding its own political “centre”.

Interestingly, the Barisan with its more moneyed, property-owning, aristocratic and traditionalist ethos will evolve hopefully into a Malaysian version of the British Conservative party or indeed the American Republican party – both of which are enormously successful political organisations.

I know this all sounds slightly far-fetched but the prospect of a genuine two-party system divided by some kind of ideological difference is a very exciting prospect and after 50 years of Merdeka the people deserve to have choices.

Ideologies aside though, the final lesson is that both coalitions will need to gradually make their way to the centre if either is to capture enough of the “middle ground” to rule effectively.