Apa dah jadi dengan Malaysia Today?

Tindakan Suruhanjaya Telekomunikasi dan Multimedia menyekat akses ke laman web Malaysia Today boleh memberi kesan yang tidak baik terhadap pembangunan negara. Sungguhpun isi kandungan laman web tersebut penuh kontroversi, namun tindakan menyekat akses mungkin bukan pilihan terbaik. Ini mencerminkan polisi kerajaan terhadap kebebasan bersuara di internet, dan pastinya imej ini kurang baik pada mata masyarakat dunia.

Benar, kebebasan bersuara tidak seharusnya diberi tanpa batasan. Islam sendiri meletakkan lunas-lunas panduan saluran terbaik bagi rakyat untuk bersuara. Kenyataan-kenyataan daripada pemimpin-pemimpin kerajaan bahawa kebebasan bersuara perlu dibatasi dengan perasaan tanggungjawab juga ada benarnya. Cuma, sepatutnya jika benar tindakan blogger penuh kontroversi, Raja Petra Kamaruddin, telah melanggar undang-undang, maka eloklah dia didakwa dahulu di mahkamah. Biar mahkamah menentukan sama ada dia telah melakukan kesalahan atau tidak. Sekiranya sekatan dibuat tanpa ada pendakwaan, ini pasti memberi kesan buruk terutama kepada pelabur-pelabur asing yang sebelum ini melihat Multimedia Super Corridor sebagai peluang besar untuk melabur sekaligus menaikkan nama Malaysia di kalangan negara-negara berteknologi maju.

Tidak banyak beza antara sekatan terhadap Malaysia Today dan Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA). Jika benar bersalah, eloklah didakwa di mahkamah, jangan disekat atau dipenjara. Saya sendiri bukanlah sokong sangat Malaysia Today, banyak juga benda yang mengarut di situ. Tapi biarlah segala tindakan kita mengikut undang-undang. Jika benar dia didapati bersalah oleh mahkamah, maka saya sendiri menyokong tindakan menyekat laman web tersebut. Selagi siasatan masih berjalan dan dia belum didapati bersalah, tidak patut rasanya ia disekat.

Bajet 2009

Alhamdulillah, seronok juga apabila mendengar banyak manfaat untuk rakyat daripada Bajet 2009. Keadaan ekonomi yang dihimpit inflasi pasti telah banyak menyusahkan hidup rakyat. Kenaikan harga bahan api baru-baru ini telah menyebabkan harga barangan dan perkhidmatan melambung tinggi. Kos kehidupan yang tinggi ini sekiranya tidak dikawal pasti akan menyebabkan taraf kualiti hidup jatuh. Rakyat yang hidup dalam kemiskinan pasti menjadi mangsa paling teruk. Hak mereka untuk mendapatkan barangan asas harian, perkhidmatan pendidikan, kesihatan dan lain-lain keperluas asas akan terputus. Rebet minyak yang diberi kerajaan tempoh hari nyata gagal menyelesaikan masalah ini. Rebet hanya dinikmati oleh mereka yang memiliki kenderaan, dan rata-rata pemilik kenderaan adalah dari golongan pertengahan. Walaupun rebet sedikit sebanyak mengurangkan beban pemilik kenderaan, kenaikan harga barang pastinya lebih dirasai oleh golongan miskin yang tidak mampu memiliki kenderaan.

Maka Bajet 2009 yang diumumkan kerajaan nampaknya memang ditujukan ke arah membantu golongan yang benar-benar memerlukan bantuan. Memanglah tiada suatu pun yang sempurna, dan mungkin bajet ini masih boleh ditambah baiki.

Biarkan saja pelbagai komen kurang enak dari pembangkang. Sekiranya mereka benar-benar ikhlas, apa salahnya beri cadangan kepada kerajaan untuk membaiki kelemahan pada bajet. Bila bajet tidak membantu rakyat, mereka akan kata kerajaan zalim. Bila banyak yang diberi kepada rakyat, dikatakan gula-gula untuk mengelabui mata rakyat pula. Pada pandangan saya, agak sukar untuk mengaitkan Bajet 2009 dengan muslihat politik kerana pilihanraya umum baru sahaja berlalu, dan kerajaan telah mendapat mandat yang agak kuat untuk memerintah untuk tempoh empat-lima tahun lagi.

Seronok jadi rakyat. Apa yang diberi, ambil jangan ditolak. Undi tetap rahsia, iye tak?

Temuduga... Dugaan Betul

Interview (temuduga) session with top officials of X with regard to Y's application for study leave.

Mr. Y: Assalamu'alaykum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh!
Chairman: Wa'alaykumussalam. You want to do your PhD at university Z, correct? Tell me why do you want to go and study there.
Mr. Y: I want to go there because there is nothing there. No entertainment, no detraction. Basically an ideal place for study.
Chairman: You are going to work on this oil price and U.S. presidential cycle. Seems more like oil price and change of prime ministership in Malaysia. Interesting. Now tell me about this paper.
Mr. Y: This is just a tentative title for my paper, since in university Z, all PhD candidates are required to do coursework for the first two years, and only after passing the comprehensive exams they are allowed to start writing. In this study, I plan to look whether there is a significant correlation between oil price and U.S. presidential cycle. This is based on a previous study done by Professors Santa Clara and Valkanov on stock market performance and U.S. presidential cycle. They found that there is a significant relationship between presidential winners and stock price. The stock market performs better when a Democrat candidate won the presidential election, up to 9% higher returns to investors compared to when a Republican took office.
Top Official 1: That is not true. It should have been the other way around. Republicans are more business friendly compared to Democrats. So that paper is wrong, stock market performs better under Republicans!
Mr. Y: ...? Ok sir, I don't think we need to argue on this. Firstly, the study was not conducted by me. It was done by two professors, and they have published their findings in journals. I'm just using their technique to guide my research.
Top Official 1: This is the problem with journals nowadays. I believe their paper must have been published in unreputable journals. Journals cannot be trusted! Rubbish works!
Mr. Y: (Journal of Political Economy cannot be trusted?!) Ok sir, if you still want to argue, I have provided references and arguments to support their techniques and findings in my research proposal. And here you are just merely saying that this paper is rubbish, that journal is unreputable, bla... bla... bla.. without even citing anything to support your arguments. Unless if you give me constructive facts and references, I will stand firm on my analysis.
Chairman: You should not challenge our authority!
Mr. Y: Why can't I? I'm a young man, and I consider all of you in this meeting to be older and wiser than me. You always teach us the young generations to always provide evidence to support our claims and theories. I'm just practicing those principles that you yourself taught us!
Top Official 1: I have all the papers to support my claim, and I will send them to you! Leave your e-mail with the committee.
Mr. Y: Are you sure that those papers that you read are not rubbish, and they have been published in reputable journals, sir?
Chairman: This is an interview. An interviewee should answer questions only, and don't aski provocative questions!!
Mr. Y: Who are you? (Top Official 1 - asking so many questions...)
Chairman: You will know later. Now you may go. Such a rude manner!
Mr. Y: Thank you and assalamu'alaykum.
Chairman: So rude!!!

Hmm... I guess I'm always bad for interviews. Another top official advised me to apologize to these people. My collegaues? All of them supported me, since one month earlier one of them went to the interview and the same person slashed her. Ok, I think although I'm right in defending my views, but I may have crossed the line while doing it. I think it's normal for younsters to overreact, and the elders to overfeeling. So a letter of apology was sent. My friend who was slashed last month did not, and she stand firms by her opinion that top official 1 was wrong. Then the Chairman told me: "We don't want you to be an arrogant professor one day later on with your sutdents." Yea, right. I had seen one clearly during that interview session. By the way, I never received the e-mail as promised. University Z? I don't really care anymore. To be a man of principles is more important.

Bersederhanalah, Jangan Agresif Sangat

Mereka masih terlupa pengajaran baru-baru ini. Kempen yang terlampau agresif dan bertubi-tubi akhirnya akan menyebabkan masyarakat simpati dan muak dengan jentera kempen. Siapa agaknya yang mengepalai strategi kempen ini? Tambah muak dengan saluran media utama. Jika beginilah keadaannya, pasti kepercayaan terhadap saluran media utama semakin hilang. Propaganda pun man man lah sikit. Teringat salah satu ulasan yang diberi, kempen-kempen banyak yang syok sendiri, walhal anda bercakap dengan masyarakat setempat bukan penyokong sendiri!

Inilah akibatnya jika tidak mengambil iktibar. Syabas buat Pakatan Rakyat! Semoga hak-hak rakyat akan terus terpelihara dengan baik.

Mengapa Mubahalah?

Pilihanraya Kecil Parlimen Permatang Pauh sudah selesai. Tentunya politik Malaysia tidak akan seperti dahulu lagi. Cuma, isu sumpah mubahalah yang berkaitan dengan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim pasti akan berterusan. Hairan juga apabila melihat banyaknya pro dan kontra dalam isu sumpah mubahalah, dan perbezaan ini bukan sekadar disuarakan oleh orang kebanyakan, malah percanggahan turut berlaku di kalangan 'ulama.

Teringat kembali bahawa cadangan asal sumpah mubahalah ini dilontarkan oleh Mufti Kerajaan Negeri Perlis. Itupun setelah tertuduh seringkali mendakwa bahawa sistem kehakiman dan mahkamah di Malaysia tidak adil dan dimanipulasi oleh kerajaan. Maka, oleh kerana tertuduh sendiri tidak mempercayai kredibiliti mahkamah, pastinya apa jua keputusan yang tercapai kelak tidak boleh dipercayai. Maka sumpah mubahalah dilihat sebagai cadangan yang mampu menyelesaikan isu ini. Mahkamah tidak boleh dipercayai, maka elok penuduh dan tertuduh sama-sama bersumpah mubahalah. Sumpah mubahalah bukan seperti sumpah-sumpah biasa lain. Ini disebabkan pihak-pihak yang terlibat akan mengajak penyokong-penyokong mereka sama-sama bersumpah dan bersungguh-sungguh meminta Allah melaknat mereka andainya mereka berbohong. Tiada manusia normal yang berani meminta Allah melaknati mereka dengan bersungguh-sungguh, oleh itu sumpah mubahalah dilihat sebagai suatu jalan keluar disebabkan tertuduh sendiri mempertikaikan kredibiliti mahkamah.

Sudahnya, rentak kini bertukar. Sumpah mubahalah dianggap tidak selari dengan tuntutan agama disebabkan penuduh sepatutnya membawa saksi dan bukti untuk membuktikan tuduhan tersebut. Hairan juga, pada awalnya tertuduh sendiri mempertikaikan kredibiliti mahkamah. Sekarang tertuduh meminta penuduh membawa saksi dan bukti. Seolah-olah kembali mempercayai mahkamah. Sepatutnya, jika saksi dan bukti yang dipinta, sejak awal-awal lagi tertuduh tidak patut mempertikaikan mahkamah. Maka cadangan sumpah mubahalah ini tidak akan keluar.

Ada pula yang berpendapat sumpah mubahalah ini mudah dimanipulasi. Iyalah, zaman sekarang sesiapa pun berani bersumpah minta laknat dan berbohong. Cuma mungkin mereka lupa sesuatu, bahawa laknat yang dipinta itu pastinya akan ditunaikan Allah jua suatu masa nanti. Masyarakat perlu sesuatu untuk dijadikan sandaran. Jika mahkamah boleh dimanipulasi, sumpah mubahalah mungkin alternatif yang baik. Jika sumpah mubahalah juga boleh dimanipulasi, maka tiada apa lagi yang boleh dipercayai dan kita tunggu saja pembalasan dari Allah. Jika tidak di dunia, di Akhirat tetap menanti.

Yang menjadi kemusykilan, ada juga manusia yang setelah lapan kali dipaksa liwat baru membuat laporan. Ingatkan sekali kena paksa terus lapor. Apapun, nantikan sahaja perbicaraan mahkamah.

God Help Us All!

Subhanallah! Another shocking news for Malaysians especially, when the de-facto leader of People's Aliance, Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim is accused of sodomy. 10 years ago the same accusations caused him to loss the Deputy Prime Ministership of Malaysia and was sent into jail in 1998. A police report has been lodged and the case now is under police investigation.

Some believe that it is a politically-motivated conspiracy to send him into jail again, since if that happens the three-pact People's Alliance will loose it's uniting factor and loose the chance of wrestling the Federal Government from Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's National Front. If this claim is true, then the very foundation of our beloved nation is in ramshackle. Nothing can be trusted. Government, Courts, Judges, Police Force, etc. These are institutions that should be protecting the people and ensuring justice is done.

Some people say that it is normal for anyone accused to deny the accusations, but at the same time they defended some other people from accusations (click here to know the story).

Sometimes it is funny to see how people react based on unknowns and hearsays. Remember that when Jews and Christians were disputing about Abraham, whether he is a Jew or a Christian, Allah says:

"Verily, you are those who have disputed about that of which you have knowledge. Why do you then dispute concerning that of which you have no knowledge? It is Allah Who knows, and you know not."

[Surah Ali 'Imran, 3:66]

Whenever any news came out, and we are uncertain whether it is true or not, we should not add more fuel to the fire. Remember what Allah says:

"O you who believe! If a Fasiq (liar - evil person) comes to you with any news, verify it, lest you should harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful for what you have done."

[Surah al-Hujurat, 49:6]

Since the accusation is not yet verified, we should wait patiently until the investigation is done. Until the claim is proven true, the accused is innocent. If he is innocent, then let us pray that Allah will help him and help us to save him from unjust. If everything else fails, then Allah will not fail him in the Day of Judgment.

*My two-cents worth of point: I don't think it's difficult for a person like Anwar to prove that the accusation is false. Remember, Anwar is not like other ordinary citizen of Malaysia. There must be many people who know Anwar's where about during the time when he is accused of committing the crime, at least his own family and other personal assistants. Compared to 10 years ago when the "victim" claimed he cannot remember the exact date since it happened many times and more than a year ago, this time the "victim" gave exact date which is last Thursday, 26 June 2008. So I think it should be easy for him to provide evidence and alibis, but again, the burden of proof is upon the accuser and not the accused!

Cup or Coffee?

A group of alumni, highly established in their careers, got together to visit their old university professor.

Conversation soon turned into complaints about stress in work and life.

Offering his guests coffee, the professor went to the kitchen and returned with a large pot of coffee and an assortment of cups porcelain, plastic, glass, crystal, some plain looking, some expensive, some exquisite - telling them to help themselves to hot coffee.

When all the students had a cup of coffee in hand, the professor said: "If you noticed, all the nice looking expensive cups were taken up, leaving behind the plain and cheap ones. While it is but normal for you to want only the best for yourselves, that is the source of your problems and stress. What all of you really wanted was coffee, not the cup, but you consciously went for the best cups and were eying each other's cups.

Now if life is coffee, then the jobs, money and position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold and contain Life, but the quality of Life doesn't change. Some times, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it."

Don't let the cups drive you... Enjoy the coffee instead.

* * * * *

Prof Dr Maliah Sulaiman
Deputy Dean (Students Affairs)
Kulliyyah of Economics and Management Sciences