Why NOT Taking To The Streets Would Be Madness

The recent social political development in Malaysia has prompted me to write on something I feel very strongly about, and no longer fear to speak about openly.

There are some people who very elegantly express that the recent demonstrations and rallies are forms of madness. Madness as in the state of being mentally ill, or an extremely foolish behavior, nothing related to anger. Surprisingly there were many that sang praises for him, some called it the most rational piece on LoyarBurok this week. That, ladies and gentlemen, is a dangerous development.

When people start looking at madness as rational we would eventually destroy ourselves.

Ladies and gentlemen, you saw videos of buses allegedly ferrying foreigners to polling stations on polling day. On top of that there are also videos of foreigners being interrogated while lining up to cast votes, and videos of people who are supposedly being paid off for votes by some people, it doesn’t even have to be Barisan Nasional. Rationally, what would the conclusion be? (apply balance of probability) That there was massive fraud in the recent general elections. Would it not be madness as in foolish to think otherwise? Besides the above mentioned evidences, there were also reports of blackouts in many polling stations, allegation of tampered votes, improper procedural executions, reports of the “indelible” ink being easily removed, reports of many names of voter who voted previously missing, and allegation of gerrymandering. Also do keep in mind that the government has openly indulged in using money to vie for votes, do not forget Bersih, Bersih 2, Bersih 3 and Himpunan Kebangkitan Rakyat. Do not forget Najib’s call to hold Putrajaya at all cost. Do not forget all the seditious Barisan Nasional campaign materials.

I also respectfully think that Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s vow to not stop rallying until BN is forced out of Putrajaya is madness. Is it not madness that after all those allegations all you do is rally? Rationally think about it for a moment, consider the burden of the allegations ranging from a whole lot of fraud in elections, to various financial scandals, to various deaths and murders, to various seditious actions, to shopping scandals, to racism, abuse of power, land scandals, violence, crudeness — and yet they win the elections. Is it not madness that we went to elections with all those allegations being exposed?

But of course, Anwar Ibrahim is an intelligent man (still betting on him to be PM. Fingers crossed) if he was to call for a revolution, they would probably gun him down and then form a committee to blame everything on him. Now some people were threatening to hit the streets to force BN out, are we not doing that already? Considering the inconvenience it has caused road users against the democratic peaceful display of rejection of the fraudulently obtained election results, and the offended feelings of Malaysians of Chinese ethnicity it was all good. There was an estimate of 120,000 people who attended the rally in Kelana Jaya, and nothing got burned down or broken.

Perhaps some people meant that to hit the streets would be a picture of Malaysians running amuck torching cars and vandalizing buildings. Well of course it is not madness to mean that, but certainly ignorant of the fact that Malaysians have been hitting the streets even before 2008. It was pretty much clear at Himpunan Kebangkitan Rakyat who was responsible for all the chaos during any rallies or demonstrations prior to it. If the men in black are well behaved there is no need for any violence and this has been tested and proved in the recent rallies and demonstrations.

Considering the number of scandals, abuse of power, corruption, racisms, and what not, I think and I strongly feel, so strong that I must express it here that I am surprised a revolution has not brewed in Malaysia yet. I will say this, that IT IS madness (as in foolish) to ignore history, to think that Malaysia will somehow escape any revolutions and always have peaceful democratic transitions.

Honestly, I think that NOT hitting the streets when allegations of corruption, racism, election frod, vote buying, murder, abuse of power and giving of citizenship in return for votes is PURE MADNESS.

When there is a threat to our nation’s future, we send our young men to die for us in battle. What do we do when the evil is within us, and it controls the police, military, and judiciary?

Would we not be mad if we let a party which has cheated in elections to rule? Would we not be mad to accept an election that was won fraudulently? It is our nation we are talking about, there is direct assault on our rights as enshrined in the constitution. We spent our tax money for a clean election, but we get a tainted one, why should we accept this?

At this juncture some people say take it to the courts, prove the allegations, but these same people also know that the courts are also controlled by the same evil. These people also quote decided cases giving an impression that the judiciary is credible. These people expect us to trust those few decided cases to suggest that we can trust the courts.

With all due respect to the judicial institution, I am obliged morally by my profession to state that the public has no confidence in the judiciary. It is madness that we have ex judges shamelessly making biased, mad, racist remarks. Greater the madness is the fact the Barisan Nasional government appointed a member of UMNO as the chief justice, who supposedly acts impartially. (apply the maxim that not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.)

These people also think that the courts under the Najib administration is the same court under the Badawi administration. Now it is clearly established that the Prime Minister appoints the Chief Justice, while the fact that our government controls the judiciary is that clear that we should be able to take judicial  notice upon it. Therefore the balance of probability is that the courts to change according to the Godfather of the day.

Why did the court acquit Anwar Ibrahim? Because putting him away will shorten the life span of UMNO and increase his numbers of supporters exponentially. They could have easily assassinate him, but then his enemies are quite obvious. Hence they resorted to depicting him as a bisexual, why? Because they want the people to reject him.

These people think that the fact Utusan was found liable in a few civil suits is good enough to have faith that the judiciary doesn’t take instruction from the Prime Minister. Such a thought, belief or conclusion is ignorantly conceived. In civil matters, the defamed will normally sue the maker of the defamatory words for compensation. The amount of the compensation depends on the damage caused to the reputation of the person suing. In criminal cases, the punishment for defamation is a jail sentence for a maximum of two years, or a fine, or a combination of a jail sentence and a fine [Section 500-502 Penal Code]. Now, compare the volume of damages awarded in each of the cases Utusan was found liable against the damage to the opposition politician suing. Apart from that how many of those cases was Utusan criminally charged? Just because there are cases which are decided on clear cut libel cases does not establish that the courts are truly independent. The fine details tells tales of how they manufacture perceptions that the courts are impartial.

Some people think the fact that the courts annulled JAWI’s action against Borders gives it credibility. The book that was the subject matter of that case was written by a lesbian and it was something about religion and sexuality. To these people, simple cases like these makes a big difference, and they go about preaching that the courts are credible and the PM doesn’t make calls to any judges. As far as Rosli Dahlan goes, I remember him withdrawing the suit for settlement, not winning.

These people also think that election fraud allegation is to be dealt by process of court. Courts can easily be biased when deciding on election matters as the precedent would not affect other civil or commercial matters.

I personally think that going to court for an election petition which will be heard by judges that were appointed constructively by the Prime Minister to decide on fraud allegation is madness akin to going to elections with a party that indirectly controls the Election Commission chairman.

These people keep preaching about proper channels and what not, but is it not madness that we accept an election that is tainted from the very beginning? Naturally they would ask about the seats that the Opposition did win, which is besides the point. The situation could be easily doctored to increase a 20% winning into 55%.

Also do note how the Prime Minister blamed the Chinese performing badly in the election. Besides that also note how mainstream news released results, it was as if there was only UMNO and DAP contesting in the elections. My guess is that they were trying to engineer another 13 May.

Lastly if anyone thinks that we should get on with things, that person must be purely delusional, or a Barisan Nasional member, or  simply foolish.

This is not a relationship, this is about democracy, it is about our future.

I am not willing to let cheaters, murderers and liars walk free after corrupting the very mechanism that our country operates upon.

It is my duty as a citizen of this country to bring and end to these betrayals.

For those that want to stay at home, go ahead. You are responsible for your own conscience. As for me, I am joining the rakyat in forcing a government that has betrayed the people’s trust out of administration.

I will hit the streets. It is my right to do so. We have done it many times, and we will do it again. Rise, and do the right thing. Accepting tainted election results is not just foolish, but also highly immoral.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Lingswaran Singh has been a LoyarBurokker since he was 5. He speaks an open but disinterested language, dictated not by passion but that of humanity. Independence is his happiness. His country is the world, and his religion is to do good. He too is an emissary of Lord Bobo Barnabus, tasked to enlighten Malaysians through loyarburok.com, this awesome blawg leading the quest for world domination.

Posted on 15 May 2013. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.

Read more articles posted by Lingswaran Singh.

Read this first: LB Terms of Use

15 Responses to Why NOT Taking To The Streets Would Be Madness

  1. Educational institutions make use of the modern technology for the security purposes, record keeping and for making the processes fast. It has replaced the old file keeping system that was difficult to use with both the entry and retrieval of data.

  2. James

    Distrust in the independence of the judiciary is the demise of the Rule of Law. If the opposition comes into power, will it sever the link between the Executive and the Judiciary? As far as I'm concerned, that has never been promised. So a change in power doesn't mean a change in judges' attitude. So distrusting isn't gonna help either. As much as there are more perverse cases that haven't been discussed, there also more encouraging cases that haven't been highlighted. So believing in the Judiciary, however slim a hope that may be, is a proper course. Exhaust internal legal remedies. Then seek external aid.

    Even if 51% come out, we must remember there's 47% who voted for the other. How much could fraud tip the votes? Reducing it to 30%? Why 30% genuinely thought the mandate should be maintained?

    I guess world domination takes more than blogging. Literally go, not with 51%, but the 47%.

  3. candy

    "I personally think that going to court for an election petition which will be heard by judges that were appointed constructively by the Prime Minister to decide on fraud allegation is madness akin to going to elections with a party that indirectly controls the Election Commission chairman"

    Well said, I cannot agree more!

  4. mohan47

    Fully agree with this article.We should not be pussyfooting around this issue.Given half a chance this rogue regime will somehow continue to perpetuate its evil.Expecting to rectify matters through the so called court process is as you put it, pure madness/foolishness.Rampant fraud was so obvious and yet we have people who refuse to see the pink elephant in the room.

  5. Tony's Basement

    What is true madness is an entire country agreeing to participate in a General Election when they already knew how much fraud was going to take place. We should have done everything you said above before the GE and put in place an independent EC before the GE

  6. art harun

    *can we have a discouse without labeling people?

  7. Loh Siew Cheang

    Are you a lawyer?

    • Loh Siew Cheang

      I guess you might not be, because obviously you are ignorant of the Federal Court case of Asean Securities Paper Mills Sdn Bhd v CGU Insurance Bhd [2007] 2 MLJ 301, where Nik Hashim FCJ (delivering the Court's judgment) held:-

      "The standard of proof required where there is an allegation of fraud in a civil proceedings must be one of beyond reasonable doubt and not on balance of probabilities" [see in particular paragraph 16 of the judgment]

      So there you go, SLAM DUNK. In basketball terms, this is not only a SLAM DUNK, but a FACIAL DUNK. Sorry to have to correct you, but considering 5 ignorant individuals have liked your reply (as therefore agreeing to your statement), I am left with no choice.

      • Lingswaran Singh

        Yes i am a lawyer, and i am aware of that case. However i do not agree with it, because it would be madness for me to consider it good authority. The standard for burden of prove is higher in criminal matters as the punishment may include prison term. Civil matters have always been, and should remain with balance of probability. That is the universal application of common law. Asian Security is in my opinion a bad case law. Making the burden of prove to beyond reasonable doubt for a civil action is unreasonable. I thank you for correcting me, but really there is nothing to be corrected as i have not made any mistakes. I appreciate your attention, but i see that it was made with mala fide intentions. I apologize if i have offended you. I had no idea you were a lawyer. If you think this is about slam dunking or face dunking, i am afraid you missed the point. My torment is serious, our laws are being developed in the wrong direction and this is largely because the ruling government has cheated in almost all fields. Responsibly, i have to push so that our law develops in the right direction. The apex court may have its views, i have mine. I apologize again,

  8. art harun

    I have absolutely no problem with this article. Attending rallies is part of freedom of expression.

    But I do object to this one:

    Quote: Lastly if anyone thinks that we should get on with things, that person must be purely delusional, or a Barisan Nasional member, or simply foolish. : end quote

    Can we have a discourse with labeling people? I think this article is excellent but sadly this particular sentence demote it a bit.

  9. DanieLoHH73

    I wonder if there's a possibility of filing a defamation class suit against Najib, Utusan, and all the bigots that have blamed the Malaysian Chinese for the election result by labeling Malaysian Chinese ungrateful, and many other unsavory terms… is it possible? And would there be a lawyer willing to take up this cause? What would be the legal and political consequences if such a cause of action be taken?

  10. Loh Siew Cheang

    Fraud – burden of proof = beyond reasonable doubt, not balance of probabilities. Applicable in Court and should apply in real life.

    • Brilliant! You should consider lawyering. I totally agree with what you have said as long as it is in regards to criminal matters. Thank you so much for pointing it out.

      In civil matters, the defamed will normally sue the maker of the defamatory words for compensation. The amount of the compensation depends on the damage caused to the reputation of the person suing. (balance of probability)

      In criminal cases, the punishment for defamation is a jail sentence for a maximum of two years, or a fine, or a combination of a jail sentence and a fine [Section 500-502 Penal Code]. (beyond reasonable doubt)

  11. martiantivist

    Totally second everything you said!