The Thailand Prime Minister's office compound has been occupied by anti-government protesters for weeks and yet the PM has chosen restraint rather than taking action against the trespasser.
Ironically, the Malaysian government, facing with increasingly critical online commentaries, has resorted to arrest a prominent "cyber transgressor" - an online political blogger - under a draconian security law that allows for indefinitely detention.
The Umno-led Malaysian government, with all law enforcement agencies under its control and a record of oppresive encorcement, clearly favors the strong arm approach to thwart the opposition.
Whereas the Samak/Thaksin Thai government, with a likely partisan Royal House and a watchful military, all that could be meted out by the administration is a softie restraint.
In my view, Malaysia needs a full jab of human right and Thailand needs a strong dose of the rule of law.
Seeing our neighbors situation, we ought to be thankful and hence watchful of our liberty and the rule of law in Hong Kong
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think you should compare HK with Singapore and Taiwan, not to the multi-racial and multi- religion of Malaysia and Thailand
dear fren, thank you for your comment.
i speak of liberty and the rule of law as universal values that they applicable everywhere.
The content maybe different from place to place but the core content I think is the same everywhere.
i will argue for the same value in malaysia as in china.
Speaking of comparing apple to apple, I think Thailand is far less multi-racial and multi-religion like Malaysia. Buddhism in Thailand is more dominant with up to almost 90% of population are followers.
Spore is perhaps more like Thailand with a very dominant ethnic community - the latter with siamese and the former with chinese. Religion-wise, Spore is a lot more diversified.
speaking of Taiwan, they are pretty homogenic but the Ah Bian made the society as divisive as possible with wai sheng ren, ke jia ren (as in Hakka) and fu lao (as in Hokkien).
why I made the last comment in a post which has little relevance with HK? It was no intended as a comparison at all.
In 2003, there were 500000 hongkonger marching against a security legislative proposal which eventually led to its abandonment and the fall of former Chief Executive. That's the reason why peoples gotta be constantly watchful over these two pillars of constitutionalism.
The rule of law and liberty in Malaysia were rather healthy through out (except 1969) until they were critically undermined by the Mahathir Administration from 1980s.
To this day, we haven't seen their recovery. I will say that the PR has the urgency of now to bring down the Umno-led government.
I am in support. there are many things we can do, online petition, online commentary, online contribution even if we are not physically there.
Agree. Rule of law and liberty should not be subject to a multi-racial or a multi-religious "discount factor". If that is the case, one should really be fearful for Australia or the USA!!
As mentioned in certain exchanges months ago, the significance of race and religion is that they serve as easy "emotional faultlines" for social division for political ends.
Ironically, the faultlines become less potent when there is an overwhelming majority as in the case of Thailand or Singapore or in Brunei. Yes, it remains an issue but not one that threatens the political balance. Put in another way, one cannot get into power by manipulating 15%. The result is often one of greater pragmatism rather than greater oppression, because both sides can talk sense to one another without (too much) politics getting in the way.
Ironically, which is why sometimes ethnic minorities finds it easier to thrive under autocratic or absolutist rule. Yugoslavia under Tito or minorities under the Roman Empire comes to mind.
Anyway I digress.
Yes, it is true that Malaysia is stronger than Thailand on the rule of law and the reverse is true on human rights. But I would argue that the difference in approach between Malaysia and Thailand is simply one of political calculation. The unambiguous victim in both cases is democracy.
The Thai government is constrained by what the King would allow. Given the lack of condemnation (tacit support?) from the palace for the anti-government mobs, the government knows that any harsh action would doom its chance for survival. Whatever you think of the government, it was democratically elected by a landslide. So liberty without rule of law is anarchy and the result, less democracy not more; as correctly discussed in the Federalist Papers.
The Malaysian case is, I feel, an irrational and ineffectual attack by a democratically elected government on liberty mis-using the law (ISA) as a figleaf. The resulting backlash may herald greater liberty and democracy but if not careful, the erosion of the rule of law.
Frankly, I cannot see the logic of evoking the ISA. What is the strategy? the end-game? Now how does Pak Lah's government plan to get out of all these?
Honestly, it all sounded like panic, incompetence or even political self-sabotage. And by doing so, it handed Anwar the perfect cover. Now, if project 916 fails the arrests provided him the perfect excuse. Besides by putting another nail in BN's coffin, would greatly induce BN members and MPs to consider jumping a sinking ship.
I have always said that Anwar is doomed to fail if he forms the government too soon - with the opposition alliance as it is. Doomed by management incompetance and political infighting between DAP and PAS, not to mention the lack of electoral legitimacy. Reforms cannot survive on good intentions alone. His best hope is to use the slow demise of the BN government to:
1. Form a government-in-waiting
2. Win over reformist politicians from the BN
3. Train a new cadre of leaders at the State EXCO level especially in Peneng, Selangor and Perak
4. Formulate and communicate with the Malaysian people specifically what they mean by reform
5. Start depoliticizing the civil service and major institutions
But of course, politics and reality is rarely so neat.
This post appeared in Opinion Page of SCMP, on Sept 21, 2008.
I refer to the unrest in Thailand involving anti-government protesters at the prime minister's office compound, with the government choosing restraint whenh it could have treated them as trespassers.
Ironically, the Malaysian government led by United Malay National Organization (Umno) Party, a Malay ethnic party, faced with increasingly critical online commentaries, resorted to arresting a prominent online political blogger, under a draconian security law that allwos indefinite detention.
The Umno-led Malaysia government, with all law enforcement agencies under its control and a record of oppressive enforcement, clearly favours the suppressive approach to thwart the opposition.
Whereas, the Thai government, with likely royal sympathy and a menancing military, all that could be meted out is capitulation towards protesters.
In my view, Malaysia needs a full jab of human right and Thailand needs a strong dose of the rule of law.
The more we see our neighbours' situation, the more we ought to be thankful and therefore watchful of our liberty and the rule of law in Hong Kong.
K.Y. Tan,
Ma Wan
Post a Comment