The Malaysian government charged opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim this week for illegal protests urging electoral reform. Considering Mr. Anwar’s past legal travails, having twice been tried on trumped-up charges of sodomy and twice exonerated, one might assume this is another politically motivated prosecution.
But this case is different. Mr. Anwar was practicing civil disobedience, and now he is paying the price. The real verdict will come at the ballot box in the next general election, expected later this year, when voters will get to decide whether Prime Minister Najib Razak’s political reforms are proceeding at an appropriate pace, or Mr. Anwar is right to press for faster change.
Prosecutors accuse Mr. Anwar and two of his party members of taking part in a street protest last month, which is illegal under the new Peaceful Assembly Act. He also allegedly violated a court order when he encouraged demonstrators to enter an area that was off limits. The prosecution says it is enforcing the law without fear or favor. Mr. Anwar says he’s innocent and that the charges are “politically motivated.”
Behind these claims is a contest for the hearts and minds of Malaysian voters. The demonstration in question, called “Bersih 3.0” after the Malay word for clean, was the third in five years that brought NGOS and opposition parties together to demand an end to electoral fraud. And like the last two rallies, this one ended in violence, mostly from the police side.
Most significantly, the public reaction to these spectacles has been different from what many expected. The ruling United Malays National Organization thought it would rally its base by repressing last year’s protest, but Bersih 2.0 created such a storm of censure—at home and abroad—that it forced Mr. Najib to push political reforms. He trumpeted the Peaceful Assembly Act, passed late last year, as giving protesters more freedom. However, the law is only slightly more permissive than its predecessor. Demonstrators no longer need police permits, but the act contains two serious restrictions: protesters are limited to designated arenas and can’t take to the streets. That’s the basis for the charges against Mr. Anwar and his associates this week.
Last month’s Bersih rally occurred because many urban and middle-class Malaysians are unhappy with Kuala Lumpur’s half-hearted reforms. Mr. Najib is changing laws—including the notoriously repressive Internal Security Act that allows detention without charges—but he’s replacing them with piecemeal improvements that still include draconian measures.
While Mr. Najib deserves credit for his reforms, the opposition also has good reasons to criticize them as inadequate. The real question is whether Malaysian society is best served by a faster pace of change and the opposition’s confrontational tactics. If Mr. Anwar wants to practice civil disobedience, he can’t pretend to be innocent at the same time.
A more straightforward way to convince the public that the Peaceful Assembly Act is an unjust law would be to plead guilty and pay the fine ahead of the election. Both sides have to learn to put their faith in the electorate rather than the courts.
Ulasan dari akhbar Malaysia berkaitan ulasan berita diatas:
'Anwar patut mengaku bersalah'
KUALA LUMPUR 26 Mei - Pelbagai pandangan diberi melalui media dan ruang siber selepas penasihat Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim; Timbalan Presiden PKR, Mohamed Azmin Ali dan Ketua PKR Chabang Rembau, Badrul Hisham Shaharin didakwa di mahkamah baru-baru ini atas tuduhan melanggar undang-undang ketika demonstrasi jalanan Bersih 3.0 di sini 28 April lepas.
Ketiga-tiga mereka juga dikenakan pertuduhan menghasut Tangam Raju, Rajesh Kumar Gejinder dan Farhan Ibrahim supaya membuka sekatan di sekeliling Dataran Merdeka di Jalan Raja di sini, yang dilarang dimasuki peserta perhimpunan, pada hari sama.
Kesemua mereka mengaku tidak bersalah terhadap dua tuduhan itu. Mereka merupakan individu pertama yang didakwa mengikut Akta Perhimpunan Aman (PAA), yang berkuatkuasa mulai tahun ini.
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), akhbar harian kewangan antarabangsa yang amat berpengaruh, menyiarkan pendapatnya yang mengatakan Anwar patut mengaku bersalah terhadap pertuduhan itu sekiranya beliau percaya perubahan yang dilaksanakan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, tidak memadai.
Rencana berkenaan bertajuk Malaysian People's Court, Anwar's civil disobedience and the next election, berpendapat cara lebih jelas untuk meyakinkan orang ramai bahawa PPA merupakan undang-undang yang tidak adil adalah dengan mengaku bersalah dan membayar denda menjelang berlangsungnya pilihan raya umum.
Rencana berkenaan, yang disiar dalam ruangan Review and Outlook Asia pada Khamis berkata, dengan mengambil kira segala ranjau dan duri yang dilalui Anwar sebelum ini, termasuk dua kali menghadapi pertuduhan berkaitan liwat dan dua dua kali juga dibebaskan, "mungkin ada orang yang membuat tanggapan bahawa ini satu lagi pendakwaan yang bersifat politik.
"Bagaimanapun, kes ini berbeza. Anwar bertindak melanggar tuntutan sivil dan kini beliau perlu menanggung padahnya.
"Keputusan sebenar akan datang daripada peti undi pada pilihan raya umum akan datang, yang dijangka diadakan lewat tahun ini, apabila pengundi akan memutuskan sama ada perubahan politik yang dilaksana Najib berjalan pada kadar yang sewajarnya atau Anwar bertindak betul dengan mendesak perubahan dilaksana dengan lebih pantas".
Akhbar itu seterusnya menulis: "Jika Anwar ingin melanggar tuntutan sivil, beliau tidak boleh berpura-pura tidak bersalah, pada waktu yang sama".
WSJ berkata, walaupun Najib patut diberi pujian kerana melakukan perubahan, pembangkang juga mempunyai alasan kukuh untuk mengkritiknya sebagai tidak memadai.
"Persoalan sebenar adalah sama ada masyarakat Malaysia lebih memerlukan perubahan pada kadar lebih pantas atau taktik konfrontasi yang dianjur pembangkang," kata rencana itu. - BERNAMA
saifulfromslim
No comments:
Post a Comment