Hindraf and the Pluralization of the Malaysian-Indian Community

By Farish A. Noor
www.othermalaysia.org

Since it came to the public stage of Malaysian politics the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) of Malaysia has been cast as a troubling phenomenon, but to whom? Predictably the reaction of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) and its leadership has been to respond to Hindraf’s demands by stating that it is a troublesome organisation that is bent on dividing (and consequently weakening) the Indian community. Hindraf however has defended its actions on the basis that the MIC has singularly failed to defend the interests of the Hindus of Malaysia, and that the leadership of the MIC is entirely beholden to the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition instead. The vernacular Malay press in turn has attacked Hindraf on the grounds that it was seen and cast as being “anti-Malay;” though Hindraf in turn has proclaimed its loyalty to the concept of Malaysia as a universal idea while rejecting the notion of Malay cultural and ethnic supremacy.

Needless to say, these manifold configurations and postures has made it difficult to locate Hindraf on the Malaysian political landscape; but it has also expanded that very same political landscape to include a new range of disaffected and marginalized political actors. What many critics have failed to recognise is that despite the verbal pyrotechnics employed by Hindraf, it has actually contributed to the pluralization and complexification of the Indian minority, and by doing so has rendered the simplistic mode of race-based politics in Malaysia more and more difficult.

While Hindraf’s appeal to the Indian minority in Malaysia is primarily communal and sectarian it has also introduce a cleavage – both political and ontological – in the Malaysian-Indian community itself. Hindraf’s sustained efforts to highlight the marginalization, alienation and discrimination in all walks of life did not merely challenge the staid rhetoric of the Malaysian state whose brand of multiculturalism dates back to the mode of race-relations first developed during the colonial era, but more importantly rendered hollow the MIC’s claim to be the main representative, patron and protector of the Malaysian-Indian community.

Many of the accusations levelled by the leaders of Hindraf towards the leadership of the MIC and its President Samy Vellu in particular were based on long-held grouses that were nurtured over Samy Vellu’s long stewardship of the party: During the time of Samy Vellu the MIC expanded its patronage machinery and used its educational outreach unit, the Maju Institute of Educational Development (MIED) to sponsor the education of more than 10,000 Tamil schoolchildren. In 1982 Maika Holdings was created by the MIC to help pool together the economic resources of the Indian minority so that they could collectively invest in Malaysia’s economic development. Maika however was criticised by some as a patronage arm of the MIC, despite the fact that it was built from the collected sum of RM 106 million that was raised by many poor Tamil families. Following a succession of mismanagement scandals, Maika faced serious losses and many of the Tamil families could not recover their investments. In the face of growing criticism of his leadership Samy Vellu maintained a strong grip on the MIC: S. Subramaniam, who was brought into the MIC during the time of former MIC President Manickavasagam, was one of the strongest opponents of Samy Vellu, and accused the latter of mismanagement of the party. Nonetheless Subramaniam was defeated at the MIC Annual General Meeting of 2006, shoring up Samy Vellu’s position in the party even further.

When Hindraf began mobilising its supporters in 2006 in defence of the Hindu temples that were being demolished all over the country, much of its criticism was directed towards Samy Vellu and the senior leadership of the MIC who they accused of betraying the Indian minority and not being able to stand up to the demands of the UMNO party that leads the ruling BN coalition. Linked to the Hindu temples issue were other complaints related to the MIC’s finances, its alleged failure to uplift the economic condition of the Hindus; its failure to defend Hindu culture, language and identity, etc.

As a result of these complaints being aired in public, Hindraf had inadvertently exposed the class divisions that now exist within the membership of the MIC and the gulf of power, wealth and influence between the MIC leadership and the rest of the Indian minority community. This is ironic considering the fact that the MIC was originally set up by Indian activists like John Thivy, K. Ramanathan and Budh Singh in 1946 to defend the interests of the Indian working class and to struggle for economic and social equality in the first place. By emphasising the weakness and marginalization of ordinary Malaysian-Indians and contrasting their lot to the opulence and luxury of those who claimed to be their leaders and spokesmen, Hindraf has actually introduced the fault-line of class difference within the Indian community itself, thereby rendering any simplistic attempts to homogenise the Malaysian-Indians as a singular political constituency more problematic.

Here lies the paradox that Hindraf itself has introduced into the equation of Malaysian politics: On the one hand it is a communitarian and sectarian organisation that seeks to mobilise and consolidate the Indian minority in Malaysia on the basis of an exclusive racial and religious identity; but on the other hand it has succeeded in doing so by adopting the rhetoric and discourse of betrayal and neglect of the community by some of its own; namely the leaders of the MIC. Hindraf has therefore contributed to the problematization of the category of “Indian-ness” itself, making it consequently more difficult for both the MIC and the ruling National Front to maintain its divisive form of communal sectarian politics that has always relied upon the instrumental fiction of neatly divided and compartmentalised racial groupings. What Hindraf has done via its street demonstrations and campaigns to discredit the MIC leadership is to demonstrate that the Indian community is not a singular bloc that can be reduced to one essentialized stereotype or compartmentalised within neatly-defined and hermetically sealed borders.

The responsibility, therefore, falls on the shoulders of the parties of the ruling National Front that have for so long maintained the culture and norms of divisive race and religion-based politics in the country. Malaysia is in need of a new politics that transcends racial and ethnic divisions, or at least one that recognises the complexity of the plural communities that reside in this country. One thing however is certain for now: Hindraf’s very presence on the political stage signals that some sections of the Malaysian-Indian community no longer see the MIC as the sole patron and protector of the Malaysian-Indians of Malaysia.

Dr. Farish A. Noor is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University of Singapore; and one of the founders of the www.othermalaysia.org research site.

Hindraf rally: A plea of the dispossessed?

Aliran

The Hindraf protests are, in effect, a cry of the dispossessed, says Subramaniam Pillay, and this could radically alter the future political landscape. If there is a much larger opposition in the next Parliament, the whole dynamics of human and economic rights will undergo a dramatic change.

In November 2007, two major rallies took place in Kuala Lumpur. The first, held on Saturday, 10 November, was organised by Bersih, a coalition of NGOs and political parties campaigning for a clean-up of the electoral process. The second, held on Sunday, 25 November, was organised by the Hindu Rights Action Front or Hindraf.

On the surface, they appear very different: one was fighting for free and fair elections while the other was highlighting the plight of the Indian community in Malaysia. Participation in the Bersih rally, although multi-ethnic, was largely Malay, while the Hindraf event was almost exclusively made up of Indian participants.

But there are many similarities too. Firstly, the turnout was huge in both cases in spite of the threats and intimidation from the police and government leaders both prior to and during the rallies. Secondly, they were both mainly peaceful till the police intervened with their heavy-handed reaction. Thirdly, in both the gatherings, the police fired tear gas canisters and sprayed water laced with toxic chemicals on some of the participants. Fourthly, in both cases a clear majority of the participants were from the lower income group. more...

Terengganu di penuhi dengan bangunan dan pembinaan tidak siap

(Foto: LPT belum siap,jadual dipinda lagi)
buletinonline

Kuala Terengganu, 15 Feb - Tahukah anda, satu lagi rekod kejayaan Idris Jusoh adalah, Terengganu dipenuhi dengan bangunan dan pembinaan yang separuh siap

Hampir semua pembinaan yang dibuat oleh Kerajaan Negeri Terengganu sehingga kini adalah bangunan yang separuh siap dan terbengkalai.

Antara bangunan yang paling lama terbengkalai dalam sejarah negeri Terengganu ialah Plaza Paya Bunga. . Selepas 10 tahun pembinaan dibuat sewaktu zaman Wan Mokhtar, Idris telah berjanji untuk siapkan pada tahun lalu. Namun sehingga kini ia masih belum boleh dimasuki kerana beberapa masalah teknikal.

Selain itu, semua projek kerajaan pusat yang menjadi tajuk ‘Impian menjadi realiti’ juga masih belum menjadi realiti. Tiga projek Mega yang bukan projek kerajaan negeri iaitu Lapangan Terbang Sultan Mahmud, Stadium, Lebuhraya Pantai Timur telah mengalami kelewatan.

(Foto:stadium masih dibina)
Namun begitu, beberapa pembinaan telah dibuka untuk kegunaan orang ramai, walaupun didalam keadaan yang separuh siap. Antaranya adalah Lapangan Terbang Sultan Mahmud, Taman Tamadun Islam dan Masjid Hadhari di Jerteh.

Implikasinya adalah sangat merbahaya. Apabila sesuatu bangunan atau pembinaan itu belum siap bermakna ia tidak mendapat sijil menduduki(CF). Dengan itu, sekiranya berlaku kemalangan kepada para pengguna, kemungkinan tuntutan insuran tidak akan dilayan oleh syarikat-syarikat insuran.

Selain dari itu, kos pembinaan tambahan keatas bangunan atau pembinaan yang telah digunakan tetapi masih belum siap, akan bertambah. Contohnya Lapangan Terbang yang telah digunakan akan mengalami kerosakan. Kos pembaikpulihan akan menjadi kos tambahan yang mengakibatkan kos pembinaan sesuatu bangunan akan bertambah.

(Foto:Replika di TTI yang belum siap)

Sehubungan dengan itu, sumber Buletin Online memberitahu bahawa atap utama Stadium belum boleh dipasang sehingga hari ini. Keadaan ini berlaku kerana kontraktor dari Korea yang sepatutnya membuat pemasangan telah meninggalkan projek. Selain dari itu, ramai sub-kontraktor projek pembinaan stadium tidak memperolehi bayaran dan meninggalkan projek.

Stadium utama dijangka akan menjadi tapak utama Sukan Malaysia(SUKMA) yang dijadualkan berlangsung pada 31 Mei hingga 9 Jun, 2008. Sebelum itu, pada bulan Mac, akan diadakan satu kejohanan yang dipanggil pra-SUKMA yang juga dijadualkan menggunakan stadium sebagai lokasi kejohanan. Mungkin kejohanan tersebut juga akan berlangsung di stadium yang belum siap lagi!

Penggunaan bangunan atau pembinaan separuh siap kini telah menjadi satu amalan oleh kerajaan UMNO/BN Terengganu. Ia adalah melambangkan sikap Idris yang gelojoh dan tergesa-gesa, dengan angkuh untuk menunjuk-nunjuk bahawa dialah seorang Menteri Besar yang hebat!

(Foto: Hotel Felda yang ditangguh pembinaan kerana belum dihantar laporan alam sekitar-EIA)

GONG XI FA CHAI BERSAMA PAS

Terima Kasih PAS - Kaum Tionghua Pulai Baru, Tepoh
buletinonline

Kuala Nerus, 15 Feb – Sambutan Tahun Baru Cina diadakan di markaz PAS sudah tidak menjadi sesuatu yang pelik kerana sikap PAS yang terbuka kepada semua kaum.

Justeru itu, satu Majlis Sempena Sambutan Tahun Baru Cina 2008 telah diadakan di Markaz PAS Kampung Bukit Berangan, DUN Tepoh dekat sini, semalam. Seramai sepuluh orang wakil kaum Tionghua dari Kampung Pulai Baru diraikan bersama-sama dengan ahli dan penyokong PAS tempatan.

Mereka(kaum Tionghua) tidak kekok untuk bergaul bersama ahli dan penyokong PAS, makan dengan tangan secara bersila dan ada wanita Tionghua yang datang memakai kain batik biasa.

Turut hadir didalam majlis tersebut adalah Ustaz Hj Abu Bakar Abdullah, Timbalan Ketua Dewan Ulamak Negeri Terengganu, merangkap yang Dipertua PAS Kuala Nerus, Encik Ng Chai Hing dan Pengerusi Kelab Penyokong PAS Terengganu.

Wakil-wakil dari kaum Tionghua Kampung Pulai Baru telah berbesar hati menerima jemputan tersebut dan bersama-sama dengan program yang diadakan sebagai tanda terima kasih mereka kepada Kerajaan PAS yang lalu.

Kerajaan ‘berkebajikan’ PAS yang memerintah Terengganu dari tahun 1999 hingga 2004 telah mengotakan janjinya untuk memberikan sekeping tanah tapak rumah kepada setiap keluarga, tidak mengira fahaman politik atau pun bangsa dan agama, dengan syarat mereka tidak mempunyai tanah untuk mendirikan rumah.
“Kampung Pulai Baru adalah antara warga yang bertuah, mereka menerima geran diatas tanah yang telah mereka teroka sekian lama dari Kerajaan PAS yang lalu” kata Ng Chai Hing didalam ucapan aluannya sebagai menyampaikan ucapan terima kasih bagi pihak warga Tionghua Kampung Pulai Baru.

Sekatan polis sana-sini, kaum India berbaju oren 'mungkin' berhimpun lagi

Wan Nordin Wan Yaacob
harakahdaily.net

KUALA LUMPUR, 16 Feb (Hrkh) - Polis telah mengadakan sekatan jalan dibeberapa batang jalan masuk ke Kuala Lumpur sejak malam tadi lagi.

Sekatan diadakan termasuk di hadapan Fakulti Kejuruteraan UPM, dari Tol Sungai Besi menghala ke pusat Bandaraya dan dilaporkan juga dari beberapa batang jalan lain menuju ke Kuala Lumpur.

Penulis yang menaiki bas dari Seremban ke Kuala Lumpur terkejut dengan sekatan yang diadakan di jalan susur keluar dari Tol Sungai Besi ke Kuala Lumpur yang mengakibatkan kesesakan kira-kira 5 kilometer.

Beberapa orang penumpang bas tersebut merungut dan marah kepada pihak polis yang 'mengganggu' perjalanan, sedangkan hari ini adalah hari cuti dan hanya beberapa syarikat swasta sahaja yang membuka perniagaan.

Penulis semalam dihubungi wartawan sebuah akhbar tabloit yang baru yang bertanyakan tentang kemungkinan adanya himpunan aman di kalangan Hindraf di Kuala Lumpur.

Namun penulis tidak mendapat maklumat berhubung himpunan itu.Sampai sahaja di Pasar Seni, keadaan seperti biasa tiada kelibat kelompoh Hindu berkumpul.

Namun semasa menaiki LRT Star menuju ke Titiwangsa, penulis terlihat kira-kira 50 orang di kalangan kaum India berkumpul di kawasan benteng berhampiran Dataran Merdeka.

Namun tiada sebarang tanda himpunan akan diadakan sehingga jam 9 pagi tadi.

Polis Bertindak Ganas Menyuraikan Himpunan Bunga Ros Hindraf

KeADILan

Kuala Lumpur, Feb 16 - Lebih kurang 300 penyokong Hindraf berkumpul pagi ini untuk menyampaikan bunga ros dan senarai tuntutan kepada Perdana Menteri.

Himpunan tersebut berlaku di Jalan Raja Laut selepas tempat asal di Parlimen dikepung polis. Polis bertindak menggunakan meriam air dan gas pemedih mata untuk menyuraikan himpunan tersebut secara ganas.

Polis berpakaian preman juga mengejar orang yang masih berkeliaran.

Polis bertindak keras di Balai Brickfields

Tian, Amjal dan Ginie dtangkap: Polis bertindak keras di Balai Brickfields

KeADILan

Kuala Lumpur, 15 Feb - Ketua Penerangan KeADILan Tian Chua dan aktivis reformasi Jalaluddin Abdul Manap (juga dikenali sebagai Pak Amjal) telah ditahan polis jam 4 petang tadi ketika menyerah memorandum kepada pejabat DYMM Seri Paduka Baginda Yang diPertuan Agong menuntut sistem pilihanraya yang adil dan bersih.

Kira-kira sepuluh aktivis dan pemimpin Bersih, termasuk Mohamad Sabu dan Dr Hatta Ramli turut bersama dalam program tersebut. Difahamkan empat trak FRU dan trak water cannon serta lebih kurang 200 orang anggota polis berkawal di Istana Negara ketika itu,

Tian Chua dan Pak Amjal telah dibawa ke IPD Brickfields.Kira-kira pukul 9 malam, polis telah selesai mengambil kenyataan daripada kedua-duanya, tetapi mereka masih tidak dibebaskan. Mereka yang ditempatkan dibilik tamu tanpa bergari turut dikunjungi oleh Penyelaras Suaram Yap Swee Seng dan Koordinator Media KeADILan Ginie Lim. Pada ketika ini Tian dberitahu oleh Pengawai Penyiasat ASP Hidayat bahawa beliau mendapat arahan supaya menahan beliau di dalam lokap.

“Awak nak tangkap saya atas kesalahan apa. Awak telah mengambil kenyataan dari saya, jadi bebaskan saya,” kata Tian. Hidayat tetap berkeras dan berkata beliau menerima arahan. Apabila Hidayat berkata dia tidak dapat memberi alasan penangkapan, Tian meminta untuk bercakap dengan orang yang memberi arahan tersebut.

Hidayat kemudian masuk ke dalam bilik dan mengarahkan dua pegawai yang tak beruniform untuk menahan Tian, tetapi Tian berkata dia masih mahu bercakap dengan orang yang memberi arahan untuk mendapat alasan penahanan. Kedua-dua pegawai polis itu kemudiannya meninggalkan Tian dan kembali ke pejabat.

Mereka datang semula setengah jam kemudian bersama kira-kira lapan orang pegawai polis beruniform dan tujuh orang pegawai polis yang tak beruniform. Kali in mereka datang dengan kasar, aggresif dan gaya seperti ingin menangkap penjanayah. Dua orang dari mereka mula menengking dengan amat kuat dan menolak Yap serta Ginie keluar dari bilik. Mereka kemudian beramai-ramai menarik Tian dengan kasar dan tidak berperikemanusiaan dan menggari tangannya.

Peguam Sivarasa yang dihubungi sebelum itu tiba tetapi gagal mendapat apa-apa penjelasan dari pihak polis melainkan diberitahu Tian akan dibawa ke lokap balai polis Jalan Pantai. Kemudian Tian diheret dengan kasar dan dibawa oleh lebih sepuluh anggota polis menuju ke van yang sedang menunggu di halaman. Ginie cuba mengambil gambar aksi-aksi samseng polis ini, tetapi ketika ini Hidayat mengarahkan Ginie ditangkap atas alasan ‘menghalang tugas polis’.

Apabila peguam cuba meminta penjelasan, seorang pegawai polis memberitahu bahawa Ginie akan ditahan dilokap Jalan Travers. Ketika berita ini ditulis jam 1 pagi, Ginie masih lagi ditahan di Balai Brickfields. Mereka dijangka akan direman pagi esok.

More on page 1060

It's a simple X but thousands get it wrong every election

REJECTED: Any markings or words that can identify the voter (1); ballot papers marked with rude, sensitive or mocking words (2); marks outside the ballot paper instead of in the given space (3); empty ballot papers (4); where any picture or symbol is drawn on any part of the ballot paper (5); and marks that cover all/both candidates (6).

NST
AROUND the world, a simple X is all it takes to mark the spot on a ballot paper. But just leave it to Malaysians to get a little more creative when stating their choice of candidate.

By scribbling their own names on ballot papers to drawing symbols on it, hundreds of thousands of Malaysians spoilt their votes in past general elections.

According to Election Commission figures, there were 134,058 spoilt votes cast for state assembly seats and 165,018 for parliamentary seats in 2004.

And apart from their names and symbols, some voters pencilled in triple approval and disapproval marks and marked X on the reverse side of the ballot papers.

Some even went so far as to scrawl bad words under the names of candidates.
“Kartun pun ada!” (Cartoons are also drawn!), says Election Commission secretary Datuk Kamaruzaman Mohd Noor.

Recently, Wanita Umno chief Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz asked members to help educate voters to minimise spoilt voters.

“This is serious as in some areas, the majority we got was less than the number of spoilt votes,” she was quoted as saying.

“In some constituencies in Kelantan, the Pas (opposition party) majority was small but the number of spoilt votes was bigger. It could have been the other way around — we could have won or lost.”

Based on the large number, she suggested that some voters may be new or too old to remember how to vote and that Wanita Umno should go to the ground to teach them the basics of voting.

But Kamaruzaman says that people spoiled their votes on purpose.

“It’s intentional. Plain and simple,” he said when asked whether voters spoiled votes because they were ignorant about procedures.

“As a layman, tell me, is it very difficult to just put an X in the box for the person you want to choose? Just think. Is it difficult?

“The just don’t like the candidates.”

Kamaruzaman added that although the numbers looked large, spoilt votes made up a small percentage the total votes cast in an election.

Over the years Johor has consistently recorded high spoilt vote numbers and came out tops in the last election.

The spoilt votes cast in this state accounted for almost 15 per cent of all spoilt votes in parliamentary seats in the country, and 17 percent in state seats.

Perak and Selangor followed close behind Johor with more than 20,000 spoilt votes in parliamentary seats and close to that number for the state seats.

Perlis had the lowest number of spoilt votes for state seats at 1,890 votes and Putrajaya recorded just 28 spoilt votes for parliamentary seats.

But if a voter has made a genuine mistake - like marking a tick instead of an X - his vote can still be taken into account, as along as the intention is clear, assured Kamaruzaman.

He said some voters even drew circles around the name of their candidate of choice or marked an X on the name, instead of in the box beside the candidates’ names.

Others have marked the given box with an asterisk, line or dot.

“These are called doubtful votes.

“The person doing the counting will hold up the doubtful vote for the agents of candidates to consider.

“These agents, who are present during vote counting will be asked whether the vote is acceptable,” explained Kamaruzaman.

If the agents agree, the votes are accepted.

“We only really reject if the voter has made a mark for both candidates on the ballot paper because we don’t know what his intention was; who he has chosen.”

From a biscuit tin to a transparent box

FROM good old biscuit tins to state-of-the-art translucent containers, ballot boxes have come in all shapes and sizes throughout the country’s election history.

These pictures are from the 50 Years of Democracy and Elections in Malaysia commemorative book. Picture No 1 shows an old tin labelled tou piao xiang.

This loosely translates into 'box to drop in ticket'.

It was used in the first general election in 1955 where people voted to select representatives to the local and municipal councils.

The see-through ballot box (No 11) will make its debut at the 12th general election.

At a reported cost of RM16 million, some 50,000 of these lightweight boxes will replace the old black metal ballot boxes that have been in use for several elections now.

Wicker baskets, quirky posters and all

THERE was a time when ballot papers were transported in sealed wicker baskets.

A time when local councillors were elected and the list of ballot papers ran several sheets long.

These pictures and the story of how Malaysia came to vote is told in a tidy 200-page coffee table book called 50 Years: Democracy and Elections in Malaysia.

Published by the Election Commission, the book opens with an explanation of the constitutional monarchy.

Illustrated with photographs in sepia tone, it details the early years of Malaya’s administration and how elections were first introduced in the country.

The book also covers the evolution in elections - from the delineation of constituencies to the conducting of elections.

Pictures of quirky posters, lines of voters, flag wars and news reports explain the modern day elections.

The book even dedicates an entire section to how old ballot papers are destroyed.

What Kind Of Candidates Do We Need?

mysinchew

Parliament has been dissolved, the nomination and polling days have been fixed as well. This will be followed by the announcement of candidate lists by political parties and the battle begins.

Even as Malaysia calls itself a democratic country, the candidate selection of its political parties us yet to break away from the hand picked method As political parties have not set a direct election system in their parties, the final decision in choosing candidates lies on the hand of the party's leader.

The direct election system in the party is more democratic and fair. It can avoid bias decisions being made by the party's leader as well. Otherwise, there would be internal power struggles that eventually affect the selection of candidates that might bring disappointment to the people.

Malaysian voters used to vote for the party instead of the candidate. This voting tendency of ignoring the professional image of the candidates and their ability and personal integrity is not a good sign. It could affect the future political situation of the country.

Voters are in fact the boss and therefore, it is their basic responsibility to be strict but not fussy and forgetful. And as a responsible voter, the first thing you should do is to cast your vote on the polling day.

“Bad officers are elected by those good citizens that do not vote”. Therefore, we should appreciate our right to vote. Although we are still not able to vote for the candidate we want through the direct election system, we are still able to tell the political parties through our votes that if the candidates they chose do not meet the requirements of the people, we are certainly not to vote for him.

After 50 years of democratic practice, we should be more mature and should not give out our right to speak for “what kind of representative we want”. We have to loudly tell the major political parties that the candidates we want must possess the following qualifications:

1. To seek truth from facts, not be extreme and not be arrogant;
2. Be tolerant and understanding, not to please the people with triviality;
3. To stand firm, do not blindly follow speculations;
4. To prioritise the people's interest, not to receive bribe;
5. To be self-disciplined,
6. Dare to speak out, not to be afraid of those with power;
7. To keep promises, not to deceive voters;
8. To respect differences, not to disregard public opinion;
9. To distinguish between right and wrong, not to talk nonsense;
10. To look ahead with wisdom, not be blunt.

These requirements involve the qualities and personal integrity of the candidates. They should be knowledgeable, visionary, have conviction, be good in carrying out his tasks, analytical and communicative. We are not being fussy but our aim is to increase the quality of the candidates and our election culture.

Our democratic system has not matured yet even though we have been independent for 50 years. We cannot deny that racial issues still exist in our country and we should take serious note of the Indian problem. We should realise that the ideal of gaining voters support by rational policy and to building a healthy democratic political system could not be reached as long as the racial suspicion and fair governance issues are yet to resolved.

We are still far away from the true democracy. But the elections could reflect the will of the people. Therefore, we should not give up on our dream. Even if we have to cast our votes with tears, we should not give up any chance to practise democracy. We should firmly believe that we can achieve true democracy one day as long as we do not give up hope on it! (By LIM MUN FAH/ Translated by SOONG PHUI JEE/ Sin Chew Daily)