In spite of Hindraf and recent scandals of Lingam-Gate, Port Klang Free Zone scandal of RM4.6 billion & body snatching/conversion cases, “the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIC) still expects the BN to retain its two-thirds parliamentary majority, although the coalition is unlikely to trounce the opposition as comprehensively as it did at the last election, in 2004″ – The Economist.

If EIC’s expectation were correct, it must be because of the following calculations – besides the other normal privileges of incumbency such as having well oiled election machinery, plenty of money and control of mass media) that BN banks on: –

· the first is retention of majority support of Malaysian Malay voters; and

· the second is same electoral system proven weighted in its favour in relation to what BERSIH complains. It is same system based on delineation of constituencies in last election in 2004. Even the Chairman of Election Commission, Tan Sri Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman) is the same as in 204. In 2004, the number of registered voters stood at 10,284,591. The current electoral roll, gazetted for 2008 lists (out of a population of about 23 million) 10,922,139 voters making by way of increase a fractional difference of only 148,969 new voters.) (What we don’t know is how many especially of the young who have registered to vote but do not find their names in Electoral Roll; how many are phantom, how many are persons dead with life proxies parachuted to vote for them. Also we don’t know how many of 10,284,591 will not vote or spoil votes. In 2004, 7+ million voted & BN secured 92% parliamentary seats with only 4.4 million votes).

If ever there are concerns on BN’s side – and corresponding hopes on its detractors side – they will centre on these two variables: –

(a) whether those Malaysian Indian voters who traditionally support the BN may swing their votes the other way in constituencies in which they hold the balance as king makers owing to recent discontent galvanized by temple demolishment and Hindraf’s activities; and

(b) the mood of voters in Sabah & Sarawak, whether Opposition would secure further foothold. The signs favour the DAP. In the last Sarwak state election the DAP made the biggest gains among opposition parties, winning 6 of the 9 seats which the BN was denied from achieving a clean sweep, compared to only one seat DAP won in the 2001 election.

Predictably if BN does comparatively worse than in 2004 (though still retaining two third), the casualties will are the non Malay component parties of MCA, Gerakan and MIC.

The interesting question is whether the new additional procedure of using indelible ink – to prevent multiple voting – will be something ‘uncontemplated’ that may upset incumbent BN’s apple cart.

UMNO for example would depend on vote bank of rural constituencies. How will the introduction of indelible ink and transparent ballot boxes affect rural or semi literate electors/voters? Maybe no effect, maybe some effect….

Will some folks be confused by the new additional procedure as to, for example, try to mark the cross on the ballot papers by the particular finger earlier dipped in indelible ink therefore spoiling their vote or something silly like that?

The Opposition parties generally welcome the new procedures to mitigate incidences of rigging. The use of indelible ink by Election Commission’s (EC) was not something looked favourably upon by BN – see http://www.jeffooi.com/2007/06/bn_opposes_indelible_ink.php

What’s the reason?

This additional procedure may make processing eligibility of an elector/voter twice longer than it otherwise would ordinarily take…..

Because here, besides polling officers checking name and NRIC on electoral roll, reading out the name and NRIC number, and crossing out name on electoral roll, they have to check one’s fingers, get the left forefinger to dip in and be marked with indelible ink, before obtaining signature or thumb impression of the elector/voter on the counterfoil of the ballot paper which is to be issued to him to signify electoral roll number has been noted by the polling officer.

First time, any kind of teething problems uncontemplated may arise – for examples electors/voters having misgivings to have their fingers marked by such ink via a straight line on the nail, they asking for explanations, arguments over nail polish etc, availability of acetone to remove such polish to reinstate one’s constitutional right to vote, :) presiding officers in the polling stations misapplying the ink or ink supply runs out etc all of which will delay and cause the queue to be longer and longer, with some who could not wait, returning home or others still waiting, unable to vote by the end of polling ???

Then these ballot boxes (in the past the yellow one for the parliamentary contest, and the white one for the state contest) – if they are “transparent boxes” and though marked “PARLIMEN” and “NEGERI” are however now not distinguishable by colour like before – will not so educated elector/voter get confused when casting the ballots, into wrong boxes?

Will there be many spoilt votes by these new additional procedures and if so whose supporters are more likely penalized or disenfranchised by mistakes?

It will be a big joke if election results in some areas of close fight are affected not by big issues of the day or calculations of core votes versus swing votes but procedural foul ups by these new features of indelible ink and transparent ballot boxes!

What all this means?

Out of 19 parliamentary seats and 40 state seats, it means Barisan Rakyat cannot capture at least 21 state seats to form the state government of Penang. (Unless the narrow margin is otherwise unexpectedly bridged by uncontemplated factors like problems posed by indelible ink or transparent ballot boxes).

It means PKR and PAS cannot deliver their share of state seats because Penang Malays favour BN. (Even if majority of Penang electors/voters are Chinese, Penang has a significant minority in whose favour constituency boundaries have been drawn to give UMNO/BN the electoral advantage).

It means the DAP mauls Gerakan and MCA, UMNO holding its own well against PKR/PAS that make no inroads at all – and UMNO is being delivered the bargaining chip to take Gerakan out and nominate its candidate as chief minister!

The gravy train now takes another track to UMNO power brokers long coveting for the reversion of the jewel crown of chief minister post.

It means no benefit at all to MCA and Gerakan to continue playing, in the interest of receiving crumbs of patronage, the so called BN power sharing game of outwardly representing plural Malaysia’s interest but actually appeasing, placating and being subservient to and humiliated by UMNO’s dictates – because now, even the crumbs are withheld or redistributed back to the dominant party that gives.

Overall, it is signal to MCA, MIC & Gerakan throughout the land that it is times out – this game of hypocritically representing interest of other communities and selling principles for positions!

It may be harbinger to implosion of the power sharing arrangment of BN (as distinct from UMNO).

Let UMNO rule alone. At least it is better than the farce.

Election Commission (EC) cited legal and security reasons for 11th hour cancelling the use of indelible ink

As early as in Jan 12 Malaysians For Free and Fair Elections (Mafrel) chairman Abdul Malek Hussin already pointed out to EC that the use of indelible ink was not provided for under the Elections (Conduct of Elections) Regulations 1981 and so its use must be sanctioned by way of amendment of these regulations and gazetted. However this has not been done – and cannot be done since Parliament has already been dissolved.

EC chairperson, Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman apparently took legal advice (likely from the AG). He said that the use of indelible ink would not be effective as the country’s constitution allowed those who refuse to have their fingernail marked with the ink to still be issued with a ballot – source Malaysiakini.

If the EC tries to bar someone from voting for refusing to have “indelible” ink marked on his finger, the voter/elector could cause an altercation in poling station ostensibly threatening security – and ultimately could also challenge legality of the entire balloting in the particular stream/poling station on grounds that his constitutional right to vote has been infringed; if he and others likeminded could not be legally forced to dip his or their finger(s) in ink, and the whole dipping process becomes, as such voluntary, what’s the point in requiring others to do so???

BN, as has been said, relies quite a lot on its traditional Malay/Muslim constituency to deliver the votes and is worried that mischief makers could also last minute sow doubts and confusion amongst electors/voters that certain ingredients in the indelible ink are not halal (whether true or not). One can’t really anticipate kind of teething problems that can arise. Certain polling stations must run out of vats of ink : does that mean that polling has to be delayed or postponed?

The examination of nails for polish and application of such ink and then wiping it off with a tissue to avoid staining of ballot papers – and the answering of queries by public on such ink of, for example, what is the ink’s purpose and how long it would remain on fingers, all of which might delay the voting process and aggravate queues in certain stations. Even with proper administering of ink it would take at least 30 seconds to get the ink on the voters’ fingers, then another 30 seconds for the ink to get dried so taking slightly more than a minute per voter in addition to checking MyKad against electoral roll, getting signature/thumb print on ballot counterfoil, crossing out the name after ballot issued.

If explanations were not properly given, that would take time, illiterate voters especially in rural areas of BN’s vote bank might mistakenly try to mark ballot papers with a fingerprint dipped with ink instead of a cross made with a pencil, thereby spoiling the vote. (This actually happened in certain areas in Mozambique’s lections in 2004). Imagine also the enormous task to train election workers throughout the country to administer this ink and answering queries.

In Afghanistan’s first elections in 2004 in which indelible ink was used, there were complaints that the indelible ink used to mark voters’ fingers could be washed off. One woman candidate, Masooda Jalal, told the Associated Press: “The ink that is being used can be rubbed off in a minute. Voters can vote 10 times.”

Indelible ink is just a security measure to appease critics. It is hard to imagine there is no alternative security measure to guard against multiple voting. What is important is drawing the electoral roll up properly.

I read this from a surgeon one Dr Chris Anthony who correctly observed that “What we really need is not marking our fingers with indelible ink but for our EC to be neutral. What we need is a transparent EC not transparent ballot boxes”!

Well, whatever our ink’s quality, somebody – don’t know who – would have made a little money from sourcing 48,000 bottles of indelible ink worth RM2.4mil from India, which now will not be used.

NST March 05, 2008 has given wide coverage to comments by MCA strategist Datuk Wong Mook Leong (a senior lawyer) advising Malaysian Chinese voters that their dilemma is that electoral gains by DAP at MCA’s expense would be at the expense of the Malaysian Chinese community’s interest. “ If DAP won big in the polls, Wong said, the biggest loser would be the Chinese community, as cabinet posts would be lost as well”. Wong said if DAP wanted to fight UMNO, then it should contest against Umno.
“They claim to want to bring change, but what DAP is doing is splitting the community and negating the progress MCA has been fighting for since making its comeback in the 1999 election,” Wong said.

What an argument! Who says the DAP is not contesting against UMNO or that contesting against MCA is not also contesting against UMNO???

Wong’s central thesis of DAP’s gains = MCA’s loss = Chinese community’s loss assumes that MCA’s loss is Chinese community’s loss in terms of influence on UMNO dominated government, a questionable assumption. What kind of influence does MCA exert in the first place?

This is what MCA president Ong Ka Ting got to show for in past eight years: –
· building new or relocating 89 Chinese primary schools, getting approvals for 1,000 additional classrooms for Chinese schools and amassing RM550 million for the development of Chinese new villages.
· lobby for the abolishment of the rule that government agencies only engage bumiputera companies when purchasing goods worth between RM10,000 to RM15,000;
· secure 2,300 Public Services Department (JPA) scholarships for Chinese students and had also successfully lobbied the government to increase the intake of non-bumiputeras into the civil service.

What needs to be clarified here, in response, is this: –

Educational concessions mentioned by OKT are what Malaysian Chinese Malaysians are entitled, as of right in the first place for which no special gratitude ought to be demanded.

People are now making a shift of focus from parochial communal issues (chinese educationists’ demands) to larger national issues for the country’s good. these are issues of freedom of religion and the body snatching conversion cases involving article 121(1)a of the constitution. Here MCA’s ministers, finding courage in numbers, signed a memorandum of petition along with other non malay/non Muslim ministers for submission to the Prime Minister, only to retract it, and scurried away with tails behind their legs the moment UMNO’s ministers made noise. And yet MCA Youth leader Datuk Liow Tiong Lai said that there was no master and slave relationship in BN’s power sharing concept. If that were so, why the helpless response when in the UMNO Assembly the keris was brandished at MCA’s minister’s faces with impunity? [The Youth chief who brandished the keris was later embraced by MCA’s president to “make up” :) ]. And what about the attack on Sugiu???

What’s use of lobbying for Chinese participation in govt’s contracts of RM10,000 to RM15,000 when they keep quiet of larger issues of the extension of NEP (after refashioning its name from NEP to NDP and so on and so on) after 2020 for another 50 years? Or whose ministers as transport Minister issued guarantees couched innocuously as “letter of comfort” without Ministry of finance’s prior approval in excess of ministerial authority leading to RM4.6 billion Port Klang Free Zone bailout?

MCA’s being slotted a few ministerial or deputy ministerial and cabinet positions are mere patronage crumbs in exchange for acquiescence and subservience to UMNO’s Ketuanan or other failed policies: don’t expect the rest of Chinese community to take vicarious symbolic pleasure in these concessions to ignore other fundamental rights being curtailed.

The fact that so many Malaysian Chinese migrate – the fact that an overwhelming majority of their parents put their children not in government national schools is the market’s indictment of MCA’s ineffectiveness to represent their interests or to influence national education policies in a manner catering of their educational needs.

What about some of your stalwarts claiming the farce of representing and championing Chinese’ rights have to contest in non Chinese constituency to win a seat?

Speaking of loss in terms of cabinet positions and influence on UMNO dominated government, to Wong, I would ask: how do you know if DAP garners majority of Chinese votes, your big UMNO brother would not invite DAP to join the BN and kick you out ? (Of course whether the DAP would accept the offer upon UMNO’s terms is another matter).

In fact MCA has to be careful of the in-fighting and jostling of positions amongst its members. If their main intention to be in MCA is to get the crumbs of positions how do you know for sure that those MCA members who are not fielded or given positions will not, in the quiet, cast their votes for DAP, PKR or even PAS????

You don’t admit how pathetic your situation is – either silent or speaking in muted terms, in whimpers at best, when it comes to standing for your community’s interest or articulating the larger national interest. So if you really want to represent your community’s interest as you claimed, then you should forgo your short term miniscule rewards and crumbs and be bold to leave the BN’s fold in order to free yourself from the chains of BN’s coalition’s dsicipline and then speak out in voice stentorian what is right (as distingusihed from what is wrong) for community – and nation’s interest.