May I ask, “What’s so unconstitutional about allowing the use of the indelible ink in the upcoming GE?” AG Gani Patail opined that (he believes) the Federal Constitution does not allow the authorities to force a voter to be marked with permanent ink. But the nine member panel of the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) that was formed to look into the electoral reforms demanded by Bersih 2.0 however does not agree with the AG. Now, is this another of the AG’s trickery to ascertain the BN government’s opportunity of winning the next GE by disallowing the use of the indelible ink? There is already a growing perception that this is another of the AG’s trickery, and even the driver of the taxi that I rode in this afternoon think so.
India, the world’s largest democracy has been using the indelible ink, and what is so unique about our constitution that has ‘outlawed’ the use of the indelible ink? Why has India to use the indelible ink when they are said to be the true practitioner of democracy? They don’t need to, and I don’t think we have reached the same level as India with regards to the practice of democracy, and it is for this reason that we should be using the indelible ink during the elections, instead of India. I am no constitutional lawyer, but the AG’s opinion sound rather odd to me. I hope Prof Abdul Aziz Bari, a constitutional expert can throw some light into this issue for all Malaysians to be conscious of the truth.
In a recent interview via email with Malaysiakini, former EC boss Tan Sri Abd Rashid had reaffirmed his support in the use of the indelible ink for the 2008 GE that was withdrawn during the final hours prior to the elections. In a media interview he made at the time, Abd Rashid claimed that the decision not to use the indelible was for security reasons, but did not reveal the source that had influence him to make that decision. I now believe that Abd Rashid was pressured (or was he ordered) by someone to withdraw the decision that he had in the first instant wanted to use of the indelible ink. I just wonder what happened to the indelible ink purchased from India at the costs of RM 1.2 million of taxpayers’ money for the 2008 GE? Hope it wasn’t drained out into the South China Sea.
Badrul Hisham aka Chegubard in a recent press conference has vowed that he would organize a much larger Bersih-like rally if he finds that the government does not heed to the electoral demands of Bersih 2.0 first before calling for the GE; believed to be held early next year. A Bersih 3.0 is not what all like-minded Malaysians would like to see happening to the country. I believe that should Bersih 3.0 proceed, it would be the youth that will be taking the lead. And did we not see in recent times how the youth were able to galvanize themselves into a strong and potent force to rally and protest in the UIA’s Prof Abdul Aziz Bari’s case? And have we not witnessed the massive support of our youth towards the Bersih 2.0 rally overseas? These are clear signs of growing popular people’s protest that our government cannot ignore, and I am not at all surprised that to ignore would only lead to serious consequences to the government, even leading to the possibility in the change of government by force. We have seen such trends in the North African Muslim states recently where powerful governments were brought to its knees by a popular people’s uprising against a repressive government. Let this be a warning to ourselves that such a trend could happen to us at anytime.
Enough has been said that the 13th GE will be a ‘mother of all battles’ of sort. It is a do-or-die for the opposition and similarly, PM Najib has vowed to defend Putrajaya even if bones and bodies were to be crushed. These are strong statements citing the desperation of the BN government to defend itself from relieving power. Likewise, in the case of the opposition, losing this election would not only diminish all hopes of them making any sizable inroads into Putrajaya in the future, but what is worse I think the opposition’s failure would call for an end to their challenge.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION