So who has ‘Misunderstood’ the ISA?
By Farish A. Noor ~ August 1st, 2009. Filed under: TOM_Main, The Other Malaysia.
(UPDATE: For a blast from the past, see this article, published on December 13th, 2007: Its hard to listen to the people while you gas them in the face.)
It is now being claimed by some that the Internal Security Act has been ‘misunderstood’ by a significant section of the Malaysian public, and if only they can be made to ‘understand’ it they would come to realise that it is after all a good tool that ought to be kept in the coffers of the state.
That such a claim can be made today is interesting, for at least it makes the concession that there are enough Malaysians out there who reject the manifold uses and abuses of the ISA so as to warrant the call to have it abolished, or at least so radically revised that it cannot be abused further. However we are left with the question: Who, exactly, has ‘misunderstood’ the ISA? The Malaysian public or the politicians who run the country?
Lest we forget, let us remind ourselves of what the ISA is all about. The ISA document describes exactly the sort of security threat that it is meant to deal with, and it identifies these threats as military and pseudo-military threats to the nation. It regards as dangerous groups that accumulate and distribute arms, uniforms, banners and flags. In short it is a law that was and is designed to deal with para-military and militia threats to the country that may come from underground terrorist groups or hidden armies that have been set up with the purpose of conducting war against the legitimate state of Malaysia.
Over the decades however we have seen countless Malaysian citizens of all walks of life rounded up under the ISA, ostensibly for the sake of public safety and security. Journalists have been detained ‘for their own safety’. Academics, activists, social workers, religious leaders, students and politicians alike have been the victim of this law. It is for this simple reason that the Malaysian public now feels that the interpretation of the ISA law has far exceeded its limit, and that it has been abused for politically instrumental ends.
Proof of this comes in the form of the many Malaysian politicians who today stand as members of Parliament or the various state assemblies of the land, who were themselves victims of the ISA in the past. If indeed these politicians were real threats to national security, would they have been elected by the Malaysian electorate? The fact that they were voted to represent the people means that the people at least do no see them as security threats, so who does?
This brings us back to the question of who exactly has ‘misunderstood’ the ISA. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the Malaysian public wishes to see blood and mayhem in our streets. Most Malaysians would agree that if some nutter wishes to fly a plane into the KLCC complex or plant a bomb in Parliament such a lunatic has to be apprehended immediately in order to save lives.
But what the Malaysian public objects to is when laws such as the ISA are interpreted at whim by politicians who take liberties with its meaning and import, and when laws such as the ISA are used as the most convenient tool to silence the legitimate political opposition in the country.
Furthermore we all know that the ISA remains as an odd colonial relic from the past, which has been discarded or replaced with laws that are more just and humane in many other postcolonial societies. Yet in Malaysia today – a country where moral policing has become normalised and where a woman is about to be whipped for drinking beer – the ISA is but the tip of an iceberg of routine state control and policing that has gone too far.
Malaysians all want a safe and stable country where everyone can live their lives in ease and safety, but perhaps the time has come to reject not merely the laws but rather the abuse of the law that allows for detention without trial for people who have neither armed themselves or formed guerrilla groups to threaten the Malaysian nation-state. Unless and until the powers-that-be understand this simple fact that ought to be evident even to a child, we would argue that it is the ruling elite who have ‘misunderstood’ the ISA and what it is meant to do. And for that reason, one understands why Malaysians from all walks of life now want us to move on from the despotism of the past and to discard such laws that have been abused for so long, too many times.
August 1st, 2009 at 18:35
Amen & Amen!
August 1st, 2009 at 21:08
The ISA is such a useful tool for UMNO.
They would only support its abolishment if the Act is used on them instead. Bloody hypocrites.
If Zahid Hamidi has his way he wants to call it by a different name. Same s–t, but different packaging. LOLLLLL.
August 2nd, 2009 at 13:32
The ISA, PDRM, MACC & EC are the tools that make sure UMNO will rule Malaysia for the next 1000 years. Smells like Hitler’s proposed Fourth Reich, which spells “single race” dominance and absolute fear driven politics.
August 3rd, 2009 at 09:38
ironically there was no FRU tear gas or water cannon for the PRO ISA (who in their right mind is pro for this draconian law???)
and are we saying if you are ‘pro’ your march is not illegal?? a bit of a slap in the face for the Gerakan boys who didn’t get to hand over their abolish ISA memorandum a day earlier??
perhaps UMNOcracy is at it’s height now but more importantly the Rakyat speak for the return of DEMOcracy to this country.
I am truly ashamed with the powers that be who instead of allowing people to walk peacefully as they had intended, they fired water cannons, tear gas and arrested all and sundry - does the IGP get another title for this amazing display of bigotry???
Aug 1 2009 - another nail in the coffin for the UMNO leaders - wake up your people are talking to you and listen, remember one old pepatah sepandai pandai tupai melompat, akhirnya jatuh ke tanah juga - and I am waiting to see that happen because then we can all use ISA on you instead - and let’s see how the PRO ISA react then ….
August 3rd, 2009 at 13:17
Justice rules, and “Police Can’t Steal Other Kid’s Toys!”
August 8th, 2009 at 00:38
Me First and You Last
Posted by: Tudip@Too deep
If not BN, it will be PR. Two party system is the most suitable for acceptable democracy. I would like to read and analyze the PR manifesto, like the Obama manifesto while he is running for presidential election.
Artificial entities
Governments, local, county, state or federal, are artificial entities created by the people. Governments, collective organizations, were created to protect the life, liberty and property of each and every person.
Unfortunately, government power was usurped long ago by the Elite, the majority of them lawyers, who impose laws favorable to themselves and their corporate cohorts but disastrous to the common citizen. To keep us fighting among ourselves, the Elite fashioned political parties.
The sincere citizens are so preoccupied blaming the specific parties that they fail to recognize that the Elite within both parties utilize the spoils system - no matter which party is in power.
Orchestrated differences
Politicians are like professional wrestlers with orchestrated differences who choreograph their moves and celebrate after each match. Citizens naively believe the rhetoric because we hope things will improve while government Elites of both parties plunder our lives, liberties and pockets. We have all become enslaved and ransacked by a government that was “hired” to protect us from such egregious abuse.
The bulk of society was composed of servants, landless tenants or small yeomen who owned inconsequential land that the Elite didn’t want. The Elite established a “divide and ruled” tactic that is still very much in place in most societies.
Historian Edmund S. Morgan pointed out, “For those with eyes to see, there was an obvious lesson in the rebellion. Resentment of an alien race might be more powerful than resentment of an upper class.”
Edward Bernays, the grand master of propaganda stated: “We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized.”
Who manage our perception?
The government and their compliant corporate press mold and manage our perceptions and prefer that we focus our anger and attention on numerous distractions - the illegal aliens, illusive terrorists, Kugan, Altantuya, welfare recipients, North Korean testing, whether the CIA lied or was it Pelosi, Islamic fundamentalism, sodomy, as if one court appointment can change the political landscape.
Attempt to divert our attention
The fact is that the government Elite set up this entire environment of contention to divert our attention from their treacherous unconstitutional, criminal activities - in both parties. This is all part of Malaysia’s drive into a 1Malaysia, now hyper accelerated under the current administration.
How do we succeed?
If we are to be successful, we must be a unified cohesive group. While one person can surely make a small ripple only a strong unified group can change the current stream of events before it reaches the dangerous rapids of destruction. We cannot expect the blessings of Heaven if we trample and bash others in the process of our otherwise gallant efforts. We are on the same side and fighting against the identical enemy.
Let’s not make enemies of each other in our favour to correct the wrongs that we see in our political system.
Who are Constitutionalists people?
Constitutionalists are a unique breed of people. We have the courage to walk a different path rather than follow the beleaguered, brainwashed crowd. We come from various backgrounds, religions and races. We may be Ibans, Catholics, Protestants, Methodists, Melanaus, Bidayuh, Orang Ulu or Muslims. Or we might not be affiliated with any religion which is fine. Our commonality resides in our love of constitutional freedom. We have a giant task ahead that needs individuals who respect and honour each other with civility.
Religious and Ethnic intolerance
Regrettably, even in this free land, there were and still are instances of religious and ethnic intolerance frequently tolerated and promoted by self serving men in our own government. Sometimes, we do not venture to question the credibility of the allegations.
Racial intolerance leads to bitterness, hatred and violence. Intolerance is most often the result of ignorance. Were we to walk in another’s shoes, we might be more understanding and compassionate.
Who perpetuates hatred and bigotry
Our constitution discourages religious or racial intolerance. It promotes a higher standard of behavior and equality among the citizens of this great land. It is man that perpetuates hatred and bigotry both verbally and physically. The supreme law of the land and the scriptures are not always followed by those who profess belief in them. These two existing standards, both inspired, are the ideal - something to work towards. They give a pattern or model for our lives and measure us as individuals.
If we purport to love, honor and uphold the Constitution and its lofty principles as a document worth saving let us make every attempt to embrace and practice those principles that we so eloquently talk about. Otherwise we would appear hypocritical and lack the credibility of our convictions while claiming to have an alternative plan of action. Generally, civility has been lost. Crassness, vulgarity and rudeness are all too common.
The “me first” mentality really means: me first and you last. Putting your own needs above anyone else is the current and often promoted media trend.
Kick the fella who cheat you.
August 14th, 2009 at 02:55
Its the Internal ‘In’Security Act, silly. You missed the ‘In’ before the “Secrity”. Now, does that explain to you better what the I’i'SA is meant for?