reduced and recycled

The government is nothing if not predictable. Hours after the rally and on the bus on the way back to JB, I heard a local news report on air with a procession of ministers repeating the same thing over and over: this gathering was illegal, this isn’t the Malaysian way, and this gathering was a disruption of the peace. For the government to have moved so fast suggests only one thing: panic.

And the newspapers the past 2 days have been nothing if not frustrating, on the one hand, and amusing on the other. Frustrating because of the obvious blindness with which it reports, and amusing because our ministers can spew crap with the best of them. Bersih’s already prepared a 5-point rebuttal of the government’s reasons for disallowing a permit for the rally, over here.

The dubious facts reported in the mainstream media are being torn to shreds. I thought I’d look at the other bits of spin that were making it rounds in the mainstream media, below.

The protests were not allowed because…
a) The country prizes peace and stability Peaceful and stable, I bet they mean something like East Germany before the wall came down, eh? A country which prizes peace and stability begs the question as to the means by which this peace and stability are won. Peace and stability by any means might as well be a peace and stability bought at the threat of racial riots and at the point of a keris. Such a peace betrays the government’s questionable ethics.

b) Protests are not the Malaysian way Well this certainly isn’t true. Take the May 13th incident. A bunch of rambunctious opposition members held a procession. Then UMNO held a counter-procession. If protests aren’t the Malaysian way, then perhaps they are UMNO’s way? You’ve heard the other examples by now: Khairy leading a protest against Condi Rice’s visit; the protests against the Myanmar government involving UMNO and other groups. Hmmm…

c) The public should not protest but decide at the ballot box This is the stupidest argument I’ve ever seen - and I still see people spouting this argument. I mean, check this out: I say the electoral system is not just and transparent and therefore I rally for change. You say if you want change then vote in an election a party that would make those changes, don’t rally.

But I’m saying the electoral system is not just and transparent - and you want me to submit to the very system I’m protesting against in order to win so that I can change the said system.

Does anyone not see the stupidity? The government is asking me to appeal to the very thing I’m protesting against. DUH!!!

d) There have never been any peaceful rallies yes, especially when you’ve declared that you’d crush the BERSIH rally. Is it any wonder? Yes, a rhetorical reply, but we could argue about civil disobedience if you’d want to. What does not change is the fact that the police attacked without provocation. Who is the aggressor?

And then there are some of the things that the government have said in the past two days that warrant a reply.

e) The rally was an opposition party initiative and gimmick no, this was a initiative stemming from the concerned rakyat. Come on, the DAP were marching side by side PAS people! Sisters in Islam were marching with PAS stalwarts! There was no partisan sloganeering, there were no party colours or flags, just the BERSIH yellow. If that’s not enough, let’s try another tact.

Electoral reform, like civil rights and human rights, aren’t partisan issues. Elections are a pillar of any democracy. A failed electoral system undermines democracy.

ZAM declared on Al-Jazeera that Malaysia is a democracy.

He must therefore agree that a failed electoral system, if such is the case, is a grievous failure in Malaysia’s purported democratic system. But the electoral system is evidently flawed - hence the fact that his government’s Electoral Commission agreed to two of the four proposals for reform put forward by BERSIH.

But the government has done nothing to address the issue of phantom voters or postal voters.

If such exist, then these would undermine the electoral process. Neither the government nor the Electoral Commission have even investigated the veracity of the claims of phantom voters or the abuse of postal voters, despite evidence gathered by the rakyat during the Ijok and Machap by-elections.

So my question: if ZAM thinks Malaysia is a democracy, why wasn’t he marching with BERSIH?

f) Involving the monarchy is wrong Malaysia is a federal constitutional elective monarchy. The federal head of state is the monarch. Appeals to the government via the opposition members of parliament have fallen on deaf ears. These appeals concern a very serious issue, i.e. electoral reform.

The appeal to the monarch is an appeal to the head of state as the last resort given the failure to even discuss this issue with any coherence in parliament given the overwhelming majority enjoyed by the BN government. Add to this fact the debacle concerning the Islamic Family Law bill during which Najib declared that BN members of parliament cannot think for themselves - they must think along party (i.e. coalition) lines.

So what chance was there for such an issue to pass muster in parliament? No chance at all. Fine, so we appeal to the federal head of state to look into the matter, being the final, official check and balance to a runaway government. The delicate question is, just how much do we want the monarch to interfere with government? This question has been made irrelevant by UMNO’s overwhelming dominance in government.

That’s just a few I can think of at the moment. I’m sure there’ll be new spin tomorrow ;) Like I said, this government is nothing if not predictable.