Archive for November, 2009

It is human nature after all..

Folks, as I was surfing the internet, I came across this story which I thought worthwhile to post it on my blog for you to share and appreciate the moral of the story.

Here it goes…

A farmer and his son wanted to sell their donkey in the market.
So, they walked to the market, pulling the donkey along with them.

They passed by a field and met another farmer who called out to them, “What’s wrong with the both of you? Why are you walking when you have a donkey that you can ride on?”

The farmer looked at his son and told him to ride on the donkey.
The son obliged.

A while later, they met a lady who was on the way back from the market herself.
“Shame on you, young man,” she said. “How can you let your father walk all the way to the market while you are riding on the donkey? Get down this instance and let your father ride the donkey”.

The son, red-faced, got down from the donkey and told his father to ride it instead.

Not too long later, they met a couple of farmers who were working on their fields.
“Look at that,” one of the farmers said to the other. “The father is having a good time riding the donkey, while his son has to suffer the heat and walk.”

The farmer and his son were dumbfounded.
Finally, they decided that they would both ride on the donkey.

The donkey, struggled to walk as the combined weight of the farmer and his son was just too much for him to bear. As it was trying it’s best to put one step after another, another farmer walked pass.

“What are the both of you doing? Are you crazy? Can’t you see that you are too heavy for the donkey? It is the both of you who should be carrying the donkey to the market, not the other way round.”

The farmer and his son then got down of the donkey. After a while, they decided that the donkey is too tired to walk to the market and decided to carry the donkey themselves. They tied the donkey to a stick, upside down, and carried the stick over their shoulders.

The donkey, who had had about enough that day, did not like being upside down. It kicked, and brayed and struggled and managed to get itself free. It then ran away, as fast as it could.

The moral of the story : There is no way one can please everyone.  It is  human nature afterall….



The scourge of money politics?

Folks, please don’t get me wrong. I am not here to worship the virtues of money politics but rather to bring this much ostracised subject on the table for further deliberation as to its importance or otherwise in a political organisation and whether or not it is time that Parliament should legislate to partly legitimise to a certain extent the use of political funds as per practiced in America.

As of now, it is an offence for any election candidate be it in a political party election, a by-election or for that matter the general election as the case may be to use money to canvass for political support. In a party election, it is regulated by the Disciplinary Committee purportedly empowered under its constitution whilst in either a by-election or a general election, it is regulated by the Election Laws specifically under  section 10 (Bribery) and sections 19 (maximum expenditure) and 20 ( certain expenditure to illegal practice) of Election Offences Act, 1954.

In a party election,  a very glaring example of the might of the Disciplinary Committee is the three year suspension of a former vice-president of UMNO, YB Tan Sri Isa Samad of Negri Sembilan who was found guilty of indulging in money politics and the prohibition of an UMNO Vice-President and current Malacca Chief Minister, YB Datuk Seri Mohd. Ali Rustam from contesting the UMNO Deputy President post in the last party election. 

However, in both cases, there was no follow-up action taken by the MACC to further investigate and bring these very prominent UMNO politicans to book as it is now said that a political offence i.e  indulging in money politics is merely a technicallity. However, a technical offence or not, the victim of such an offence would be forever traumatised and very often than not, becomes a political liability to his political organisation unless of course, if he is Tan Sri Isa Samad. 

It is of course incumbent upon UMNO to show the good example to its fellow component parties in Barisan Nasional.   And its component members, whether big or small, prominent or negligible, one has to emulate the big brother in so far as taking action against indulgers of money politics in its respective organisation.

However, the perennial question is to what extent the maxim of procedural fairness in bringing the alleged politician to book before the Disciplinary Committee has been adequately complied with?  and whether or not certain aspect of the definition of fair campaigning and the expenditures involved have been adequately addressed by the Committee before a decision is handed down or meted out to the alleged politician? 

In a small component political party in Barisan Nasional for example, the maxim of procedural fairness has to be strictly adhered to especially so when the said party is trying its level best to portray its image as being multi-racial and all.  When I say to adequately adhere the practice of procedural fairness, it means the party has to follow an established practice that is indeed being widely accepted as fair by political parties in the United Kingdom for the greater good of the party concerned.

What is an established practice is not subjective but rather very objective and specific that should be followed barring any political complication on the face of the party concerned. For example, if a party member has lodged a complaint against an aspirant for a political post in a party election to the Disciplinary Committee, it must first take cognisance of the following factors:-

(1)  the time when the complaint is lodged. Is it inordinate?  Meaning has it been lodged after the time provided for lodgment of complaint and therefore, time-barred?;

(2) if the complaint lodged is within the time frame allowed aforesaid, How soon can the Disciplinary Committee convene to deliberate on the complaint  for the purpose of appointment of  its officers to do preliminary investigation;

(3) after preliminary investigation wherein the complainant and relevant witnesses are called to give their statments, the member being complained against must be informed and required to appear before the said Committee to enable it to hear his or her part of the story;

(4) when both parties have been given the opportunity to give statments, the said Committee will have to deliberate the evidences presented before them and if they feel that there is a case for the said member to answer, only then would they have to call him or her to answer the charges; and

(5) In the event that the said member failed to present himself or failed to rebut the charges preferred against him or her by the said Committee, then the proper penalty shall be meted out  after his or her mitigation (if any) has been adequately considered.

All the above must be strictly adhered to lest we will be perceived as being merely witch hunting or arbitrarily taking the law into our own hands.


Blog Stats

  • 26,624 hits


November 2009
« Oct   Jul »