JUDGES ARE NOT GODS, DEATH PENALTY WON’T DETER CRIME – NOR WILL IT HELP VICTIMS & THEIR FAMILIES RESOLVE THEIR PROBLEMS: YET MANY MALAYSIANS ‘CRUEL’ ENOUGH TO USE IT AS POLITICAL BAIT

There are two major things to watch when the parliamentary sitting resumes on Monday.

First of all, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, winner of the Port Dickson parliamentary by-election, will make a triumphant comeback to the Parliament.

Another focus will be tabling the abolition of mandatory death penalty, which actually draws the attention of majority of Malaysians.

News of the abolition of death penalty has come a little too sudden and shocking to many, giving the public an impression that the views of a handful of people have superseded the views of majority of Malaysians.

Death penalty has been in practice since time immemorial and for thousands of years has been used to punish people committing capital crimes. However, as the human race becomes more and more civilized, laws have come into being and there have been contentions and arguments over the topics of “human rights” and “humanitarianism”, making death penalty one of the most controversial issues.

Such controversies are universal the whole world over, with the proponents and opponents holding very polarized views.

Because of this, many countries are handling this issue very cautiously, with governments opting to keep the existing practices while initiating discussions on the issue and waiting for the right time to come up with a final decision.

Opponents of the abolition of death penalty are of the opinion that this is an issue closely related to the lives of ordinary citizens and as such, public views should be consulted, for example by holding a referendum which is seen as a more civilized and persuasive approach.

The feelings of the victims’ families more so must be taken into account, as the lives of heinous perpetrators bound for the gallows are now suddenly spared.

In Malaysia, capital punishment is handed down to three serious crimes, namely narcotics, firearms and manslaughter. Even though there are no scientific evidences to support the claim that death penalty can effectively reduce the crime rate, it remains the most effective deterrent factor to remove the evil forces and reassure the public.

Nevertheless, there have been calls by the increasingly influential human rights groups in the country urging the government to abolish death penalty on the pretext that the State should not abuse the public power to terminate the lives of ordinary citizens.

What needs to be exterminated is crime, not human lives. The deterrent effect of death penalty is just a myth.

Death penalty will not protect or solve the problems of the victims. Moreover, the judges are not gods, and there is always a remote probability of miscarriage of justice.

In Malaysia, many of the condemned drug traffickers are believed to be “drug mules” exploited and cajoled by much more powerful syndicates. The death sentences passed down to them are too harsh and reckless, and they should be given an opportunity to repent through a jail sentence instead.

Organizations against the abolition of death penalty are of the opinion that the condemned convicts deserve a second chance and should be allowed to return and contribute to the society after serving their jail sentences in the future.

Indeed there are two sets of highly polarized arguments and queries on the issue of abolishing death penalty. The government should have studied this issue more thoroughly before making a decision whether or not to abolish death penalty.

MYSINCHEW

SOMETHING’S VERY WRONG IN MAHATHIR’S ADMINISTRATION: AFTER ECRL, GAS PIPELINE CANCELLATION FIASCOES, AZMIN WHO’S FIGHTING FOR SURVIVAL IN PKR ALLOWED TO MAKE USE OF ‘BUMI AGENDA’ TO BUILD MALAY SUPPORT FOR HIMSELF – YET VERY CAPABLE MALAYS LIKE RAFIZI VIEWED AS ‘NATIONAL RISK’ & SHUT OUT FROM DR M’S GOVT

Now we are told that the “Bumiputera agenda” is not politics but a national agenda of great importance to the wellbeing of our country. Economic Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Azmin Ali has promised us that this policy will differ from its predecessors and that, this time, the Government will get it right.

The Bumiputera are awaiting this policy paper with much anticipation, but I am not too excited about it. Many fear that it will be yet more humbug—more of the same excuses to gain political support but will bring no real benefit to ordinary people. Many feel that this so-called “new approach” will be the same as before: recipients of benefits will be decided by some people at the top for reasons known only to themselves.

Before we go into the mechanics and philosophy of this new Bumiputera policy, here is a true story for you: A Minister offered a Malay of some ability a certain position in a government body, but the offer was withdrawn by someone higher up (or perhaps “more powerful” is more accurate). This same Malay was then given another offer by another Minister, but this offer was also withdrawn.

I have much sympathy for this unfortunate Malay because, for reasons unknown to him, he is regarded as a national risk and not a team-player. I find that surprising because I know this Malay reasonably well. He will not do what is wrong, nor has he the habit of “closing one eye” and covering up the misdeeds of his boss. Beyond that, he is a man of integrity and a team-player. He is the kind of person a reformist Government needs.

The incident involving this unfortunate Malay is not important in the larger scheme of things, but the way decisions are made by this new Government should worry all of us. The most important question is: do our Ministers operate under the surveillance of some “higher power”?

If Ministers are not empowered and allowed to decide what is good for his or her Ministry on small matters such as appointments, how can we expect our Ministers to do great and difficult things for the country? Ministers will not be able to make difficult decisions in future because they might be overruled, publicly embarrassed or even reprimanded by some Cabinet Committee.

It makes many people wonder who actually rescinded the Sabah Gas pipeline project when we have paid more than 80 per cent of the contract sum. It does not make sense. Why not just compel the Chinese contractors to complete it. At least the people of eastern Sabah will have enough Gas to light up their homes.

Then we have the ECRL project. When we add the cost of the project which we have paid to the Chinese Contractors with the usual amount of compensation for termination of this nature, it will cost us at least RM 20 billion. Why not pay RM 50 billion for the project to be completed? Again who is behind this decision, the Ministers collectively or some power from above?

Coming back to the new Bumiputera policy, I would like to suggest that Azmin should present a White Paper not just on FELDA but also a paper entitled Getting the Bumiputera Policy Right. In this paper, Azmin can give us a comprehensive outline of the new philosophy and what the new approach will be like. He must also define clearly what characteristics “deserving Bumiputera” should possess—these characteristics must be objectively verifiable, otherwise subjective selection will recur.

Next, the Government must disclose the process it intends to use to ensure that deserving Bumiputera can be helped. The Government must also account for the different types of problems facing non-Malay Bumiputera: how will the new approach help them?

ZAID.MY