The fight for justice

I used to work for the Presidential elections in Afghanistan and hence still have a lot of concerns and passion for the electoral operation there. In the midst of all the preparation for the Parliamentary Election in September 2005, I was filled with a sense of fear.

I chose not to renew my contract with the Joint Electoral Management Body (JEMB), a body which is part the UN and part the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) of Afghanistan, last year simply because of my intolerance towards the practices of nepotism and corruption within the electoral management in the region I was responsible for.

Despite a long and carefully articulated letter to the headquarters backed with facts and cases, my effort to make a change in the system fell on deaf ears.

The only response I received was, “You write beautifully!” which of course was an insult to me.

By then, I realised that nothing I did would ever change the system particularly when those who were in the position to make decisions did not seem to care much about the integrity of the process. I guess when you can’t beat them...my own position is not to join them.

This year, things are different although not without fear. I am finally a human rights officer being assigned to the Political Rights Verification Campaign (PRVC), a joint United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission project. The project is aimed at verifying whether there is a conducive environment for a free and fair election in Afghanistan.

In a country where intimidations from local commanders, anti-governmental entities, pro-Taliban supporters and corrupted senior governmental officials are just part of an Afghan’s daily affairs, it is indeed a very difficult operation but no doubt a much needed one.

From working for the election previously to assessing the credibility of the election, I was very excited.

It is my duty to collect information of those who violate the principles of non-intimidation, non-partiality and non-discrimination.

Thankfully the people I am working with are true human rights defenders with great principles and true sense of integrity. So, my work is not really something I fear for.

My fear is this. Given the new electoral system and laws, each province is given a specific number of seats depending on the size of the population.

According to the constitution and the electoral laws, women are required to fill at least 25 per cent of the total seats, which of course is a huge step for a country like Afghanistan. I doubt that women actually fill up more than 10 per cent of the parliamentary seats in all established democratic countries.

Due to the Single Non Transferable Vote (SNTV) electoral system, only independent candidates are allowed to contest in the elections and not political parties.

The candidates can belong to a specific political parties but he or she is not allowed to contest under the political party’s name.

With the recent completion of the candidate nomination period, the Joint Electoral Management Body (JEMB) has registered more than 6,000 candidates. There is yet a vetting process to be carried out in order to produce the final candidate roll.

The only criterion for a candidate to be deemed ineligible is if he or she has been or is convicted of a crime by a competent court. The culture of impunity is well known in Afghanistan due to the weakness of the rule of law institutions.

There are still many provincial courts in the country, which are not functioning at all due to the lack of qualified judges and prosecutors. Most judges are trained in the Sharia Law and have no in-dept knowledge of civil and criminal laws or procedures. In addition to that, the judiciary system is reputable for being corrupted.

Having said all this, it is not difficult to deduce that the vetting process for electoral candidates will not provide any impact and on the extreme, means nothing at all.

It has been more than a week since the end of the candidate nomination period and a few hundreds candidates have somehow gave up on the contest even before it has begun. There are only two explanations for this.

Firstly, some of the candidates must have been intimidated or threatened by stronger candidates backed by dominant political parties.

There have been many unverified reports of intimidation and self-censorship all over the regions and although the UN has no credible evidences to back these allegations up, nobody who has stayed in Afghanistan long enough will dispute them.

Secondly, due to the specific number of allocated seats, the exercise of “pre-selection” of candidates has taken place in many places. It is not difficult to assume that in certain regions or provinces, the political race will run along the line of ethnic groups.

For instance, in order to have “favoured” candidates win the election by default, it is logical to intimidate other candidates into withdrawing their nominations.

So, these are my fear. Sometimes I feel that my effort and time are wasted here. Many times I fear for the Afghans who truly want to see their children grow up in a peaceful country without intimidation or discrimination.

With the recent bombing and killings of innocent Afghans in a mosque in Kandahar, my fear becomes magnified. If the Afghans do not start to pick themselves up, I doubt anybody else could. Those who truly want to make a change are often being killed or terrorised.

How then, could things change? Am I deluded to believe that things will change for the better for these people?

Yes, these are the reasons why I have been asking myself what the hell am I doing here. And what makes me think twice to stay? As Andrew Beckett, a character played by Tom Hanks in Philadelphia said, “What I love most about the law? I love most about the law is because not often but very occasionally, you are a part of justice being done.”

So, what has kept me here despite being frustrated and disappointed, is that the little faith left in me says perhaps, just perhaps, I might be a part of justice being done in Afghanistan.

I finally left Afghanistan after living there for 2 years. Although I managed to survive a death threat, I eventually succumbed to eczema. Unfortunately, I felt that I have left without leaving much impact.

This was first published in The Malaysian Insider on 27 March 2010.

“How to stop corruption like that?”

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Accidental lessons

This article was first posted on The Malaysian Insider on 21 November 2012 and LoyarBurok on 11 December 2012.

It was 1991. My classmates and I were punished for being noisy in class. We were told to stand up and remain silent for the rest of the lesson. The silence was deafening until Cikgu stormed towards the back of the classroom and barked, “Why are you smiling?! Is this supposed to be funny?”

Alarmed, we all turned around to find out who had the misfortune of inciting Cikgu’s sudden outburst. It was Lee, the boy who hardly spoke during lessons. If anything could be said about Lee, he stayed away from trouble and wore a pleasant demeanour on his face.

Cikgu repeated her question. This time with greater force. Puzzled, Lee had no choice but to answer, “Err… no. But, but, but is it a crime to smile?”

I was stunned because I didn’t know Lee had it in him to speak up against a figure of authority.

“Ohhhhh… you think you’re so smart, is it? Stand on your chair now!” Cikgu decided to play the power card. They always did when they had no answers to smart questions.

Lee did as he was told and the smile disappeared from his face.

Many of us still remember this incident and Lee will always be remembered as the guy who got punished simply because he smiled.

Recently, when my husband got into a minor fender-bender with a taxi driver, I was reminded of this story. As the article unfolds, I hope it will serve as a cautionary tale for all.

It’ll serve you well to know that if your car has been hit by a vehicle used for carriage of passengers for hire or reward (or what is commonly known as a taxi, rental car, public bus, school bus and factory bus) to be referred to as “public vehicle” hereafter, you are not entitled to make a No-Fault Own Damage (ODN) or Knock-For-Knock (K-F-K) claims, even if you have a police investigation report proving that the other party is at fault.

The only claims you can make are of your own insurance, which will then affect your No Claim Bonus (NCB) or to claim directly from the perpetrator’s insurance, which can be an insurmountable task if the latter is not co-operative.

Now, this is alarming news to me because I did not know, as I suspect many of you don’t either, about this. It got my husband and I very concerned. How and where can we find out more information? Could this be an explanation why taxi and bus drivers drive as recklessly as they do here?

Dissatisfied with my motor insurance company’s response, I’ve since then made multiple enquiries to different insurance companies, the Road Transport Department, the General Insurance Association of Malaysia (PIAM), Bank Negara and even three motor workshops.

The calls and Internet searches I made generated a lot of frustration and failed to answer satisfactorily why public vehicles are exempted from ODN and K-F-K claims. Only one person came up with a direct response (although not necessarily plausible or reliable) in an online public forum.

According to this person, the measure was taken to discourage people from driving private cars. See it as some form of vice tax, if you like. I’m not entirely sure whether this is indeed the rationale behind this ridiculous policy but at least someone offered an opinion other than just re-iterating what has suddenly become an obvious policy.

The Road Transport Department said that they are not responsible for insurance regulation and referred me to the Ministry of Finance. I did not pursue with the latter.

I had to make four telephone calls to obtain a written policy stating the exemption from AXA Affin Malaysia. The first call was answered by someone whose standard response seemed to be “cannot.” Period. My husband and I have taken to calling these people Ms/Mr Cannot and they seem to dominate the service industry in Malaysia. Before you can even explain what you’re asking for, they’ll tell you with great certainty and conviction that you cannot.

Kurnia Insurans Malaysia and Etiqa Insurance have the same policy on their websites. AIA Malaysia’s telephone operator said that this should not be true but was unable to confirm. She also said that all motor insurance policy should apply across the board because they are being regulated by Bank Negara. When I called Bank Negara, there was no one who could answer my query. They promised to call me back but they haven’t.

Zurich Insurance Malaysia Berhad informed me that they, too, practise the same policy. According to their officer, the policy is a result of an agreement made by all the insurance companies. Although I was disappointed by the answer, I was pleased that they were helpful enough to explain what I could do instead.

“You can claim third party insurance directly from the taxi. If you don’t want to go through the hassle of doing this, some workshops will help you. You just need to obtain the police investigation reports,” she said.

“How do you make a claim directly from the taxi? I don’t have his insurance details?”

The taxi driver had conveniently claimed ignorance when I asked for his insurance details. He said he had to call his company to find out and until today, I haven’t managed to get an answer from him. I was told by several people that this is to be expected.

“I hope you have his registration number. As long as you have it, you can find out from JPJ.”

“Does the workshop charge a fee for this service and if yes, how much?” I asked.

“Yes, I think they charge a fee but I really don’t know how much. What I can do is to give you a contact. You can call them and enquire.”

I called the number and to my great surprise, the lady who answered the phone said they don’t charge anything if I can furnish them with all the relevant documents. If I am unable to do so, they will charge a runner fee of RM150.

I’ve also talked to another workshop recommended by someone else and according to the workshop, as long as I send my car to my insurance panel workshop, I can make a KFK claim.

My insurance panel workshop offered us two solutions: 1) submit a ODN claim but our NCB will be forfeited and our insurance will cover the cost of repair, or 2) submit a third party claim but we’ll have to pay for the NCB adjuster fee and cost of repair first. We may be able to get it reimbursed by the taxi’s insurance later but it is entirely up to the latter’s discretion.

My husband and I haven’t quite decided yet what to do with our car. Although no injuries were inflicted (albeit a huge bruise to our morale), the simple principle of justice remains that we shouldn’t be paying for other people’s mistake. It isn’t just about the cost of repair but the time spent on dealing with it.

In my attempt to find answers, I’ve remained utterly confused and defeated. My French husband has cheekily asked me, “Why didn’t I marry a Swede? Why do you have to be Malaysian? It’s the first time I’ve heard of such stupid policies.”

Just like my friend, Lee, who shouldn’t have smiled, we shouldn’t have rejoiced so quickly with the knowledge that it was someone else’s fault when the accident happened. Just like Lee who asked the question “Is it a crime to smile?” and was then punished without any clear reason whatsoever, we are being punished in a similar fashion.

How safe can you be on the road if the rules do not punish those who inflict damage and injury to others? I can be a responsible and safe driver but it doesn’t protect me against those who aren’t. Something’s clearly wrong and how do we get to the bottom of this?

If you ever encounter an accident with a public vehicle (which I sincerely hope you won’t), it’ll be wise to obtain the vehicle’s insurance information immediately.

Meanwhile, do stay safe on the road.

Technorati Tags: AIA Malaysia,AXA Affin Malaysia,Bank Negara,Etiqa Insurance,General Insurance Association of Malaysia,Knock-For-Knock,Kurnia Insurans Malaysia,Lim Ka Ea,Loss Adjustor,Loss of Use,No Claim Bonus,No-Fault Own Damage,Road Transport Department,third party claims,Zurich Insurance Malaysia Berhad,Road accident+Public Transport

“To sign or not to sign?”

That was a decision I was forced to make one early morning at a private hospital in Kuala Lumpur.

“I’m not signing. The hospital can go fuck itself!” My husband’s mind was made up even before I could blink my sleepy eyes twice.

For a brief second, I almost dismissed my husband’s reaction as a tad too melodramatic and was very close to signing what had already begun to threaten the tranquility of our rare morning together. But I didn’t.

I let out a big sigh and told the young woman at the front desk, “Sorry, I can’t sign this. We won’t consent to this.”

Once I had said it out loud, the look on her face told me that things were not going to be smooth for my husband and I that day. The wide eyes behind her glasses looked shocked, confused and uncomfortable. I might be biased but I thought she also reeked of judgment.

“I’m sorry but this is a hospital policy. You have to sign this if you want to get tested,” she said a bit too timidly. I don’t know how, but she seemed to sense that this would not go down well on us.

I looked at my husband, not as an attempt to persuade but for an affirmation of our decisions.

“Nope. I’m not going to sign.” He walked away to signal his unwillingness to waste any more time on this matter.

I let out another big sigh as I found myself losing patience too.

“Look, we have no problem signing a consent form for HIV testing but we do have a problem with this clause here. See? It says, if tested positive, you guys will be notifying the Government Authorities,” I explained.

“But this is the law,” she tried to convince me.

So if the law requires you to jump off the Penang Bridge, you would?

I rolled my eyes and sighed again.

“I know but we don’t agree with this law. So we’re not going to consent as a sign of our protest,” I said instead.

We were then told to wait at the lounge while she consulted her manager.

After ten minutes, an older woman came and asked to speak to me privately. She ushered me to the corner of the room and said to me in a low voice, “M’am, your medical package includes HIV screening. We’re not sure whether it is possible for us to exclude this testing.”

I stared her. It was my turn to look shocked, confused, uncomfortable and judgmental. By then my patience had hit a record low and I couldn’t help myself but to retaliate in full force.

I can’t remember what I had told her precisely but I surprised myself that day for being eloquent as I made my case. The conviction and anger inside me helped me to articulate my argument to her and in summary, I told her that nobody could force my husband and I to test for HIV/AIDS.

“Of course, of course. You’re right. Let me go and check with the company who offered you the package to confirm that it’s OK for you to go through the check-up today without the test.”

My husband looked defeated. He was convinced that we were not going to have our routine medical check-up that day. In a determined voice, I said to him, “If she comes back and tells us no, I swear I’m going to give them hell.”

After waiting for another 15 minutes, hell remained mine.

For close to ten years, my husband and I had gone through routine HIV tests annually. In fact, before we had our first sexual intercourse, we had ourselves tested. This is how strongly we feel about protecting each other from HIV/AIDS. The episode above was the first time that we had actually skipped a HIV test.

Many of you may wonder why we had made such a ruckus over this.

I had recently learned from a friend that testicular cancer is apparently rather common amongst Canadian adolescents. According to her, because most adolescents are embarrassed to talk about their private parts, many choose to remain silent when they feel an abnormal growth on their testicles. By the time they decide to seek treatment, the cancer has already advanced considerably.

I suppose the same principle applies here, except multiplied by ten because of the stigma HIV/AIDS carries. Because of our strong fear of stigmatisation, we would rather not get ourselves tested. Because of the lack of information, we are not sure what the Government Authorities would do with our medical record. In the meantime, the hospital did nothing to help us understand the procedure of HIV disclosure. If anything, the hospital did everything wrong that day to gain our trust. This problem could have been potentially solved by sound public relations and communications practices but instead, the hospital staff made us felt like we were the enemy.

When I first saw that young woman’s reaction when we declined to sign the consent form, and her subsequent looks after that, I knew that I had made the right choice not to sign the paper. She carried a look that spelled, “They have AIDS. That’s why they’re not signing the paper.” She was very awkward with us. She would tense up whenever we appeared before her. When we went to collect our test results a week later, we felt unwelcomed. The doctor who went through our report dismissed me when I told him that I thought I felt a lump on my neck. He did not even feel my neck. He behaved as if he couldn’t wait to get rid of us.

Act 342, Section 10 (2) is the clause that compels every medical practitioner to notify the government authorities if he/she is aware of the existence of any infectious disease. Under the same section, it also compels anyone, other than a medical practitioner, to do the same. This means, if I know my work colleague has HIV/AIDS, I must report this to the authorities.

In the United Kingdom, the General Medical Council states that a disclosure of HIV positive patient to anyone other than a healthcare professional is unlawful. Their Data Protection Act provides legal redress to people living with HIV/AIDS if their confidentiality rights have been breached. In Malaysia, there is no such law yet unless the personal data is used for commercial purposes.

In the United States of America, hospitals do report to the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, but only after they have removed all personal information from the patient’s record. This is mainly because the federal and state funding for HIV/AIDS is often targeted at areas where the epidemic is strongest.

An American survey revealed that one-third of 20,000 respondents knew at least one person who is afraid to take HIV test for fear of prosecution if they are tested positive. More than 60% of Americans do not know whether their state has a HIV specific disclosure law. Accordingly, many people at risk may prefer not to get tested for HIV rather than risk being accused of or criminally charged for non-disclosure if they are tested positive. In a similar survey, when asked what motivated people to disclose their condition, majority of them cited moral or ethical reasons; honesty, love, desire to protect their loved ones. Less than 1% said that the law is the primary motivation.

All these studies point to the understanding that having a disclosure law such as the Act 342, Section 10, does not help to reduce the risk of HIV/AIDS. On the contrary, it has significant repercussions because it stops people like my husband and I from getting tested and seeking appropriate treatment once diagnosed.

Driven by curiosity, I called two organisations* relevant to this subject matter for more information. I could not get through one but the other told me that I could get an anonymous HIV test for free.

“Total anonymity? How come the law doesn’t apply to you guys?”

“That’s because we’re an NGO. There are a couple of NGOs around that do anonymous testing. Do drop by and get yourself tested. It’s important.”

Free anonymous testing with an NGO versus a private hospital that doesn’t seem to give a toss, it’s a no brainer really who will have a more successful campaign against the spread of HIV/AIDS.

* The identities of the organisations have been deliberately kept confidential to avoid getting them into trouble with the authorities.

This article was first published on The Malaysian Insider on 5 March 2013.

It generated quite a bit of discussion on a friend’s Facebook. According to this friend, the local NGOs are not exempted from reporting to the Government Authorities if you’re tested positive for HIV. He also left a comment on my Facebook and here’s what he said:

“Also, at the NGO, you are testing live with a person, who then gives you the result. You are no longer anonymous to him. Some people don't go to such NGOs because they may know people from the community who are volunteers at the NGO. So actually, this creates a different problem. People who would go for such testing in spite of the social barriers (being recognised, reporting, etc) are already monitoring their sexual health -- even if some do test positive eventually. The problem is getting people for whom the lack of anonymity prove a deterrent. Some people also have to overcome the guilt of being judged for being irresponsible at such an NGO as these NGOs have been aggressive in promoting Safe Sex messages with moralistic overtones (you are irresponsible if you don't use condom, you are a slut if you have multiple sexual partners, etc). It is a lot to overcome for most people. In Taiwan, their anonymous testing works like this: you get your blood taken for testing and you are given a code and a phone number to call; you call the number and tell them your code and you get your result without needing to reveal your name at all.”

Another person left a comment on this article:

“As a matter of fact[ly], both Malaysian and Singaporean law requires medical practitioners to report patients tested positive for HIV. Both deport and ban entry to foreigners if tested positive while in the country.”

Technorati Tags: HIV/AIDS disclosure law,anonymous HIV testing,stigmatisation facing people living with HIV/AIDS,Act 342 Section 10,Act 342 Section 10(2),US Centres for Disease Control,General Medical Council,United Kingdom

Accidental lessons

This article was first posted on The Malaysian Insider on 21 November 2012 and LoyarBurok on 11 December 2012.

It was 1991. My classmates and I were punished for being noisy in class. We were told to stand up and remain silent for the rest of the lesson. The silence was deafening until Cikgu stormed towards the back of the classroom and barked, “Why are you smiling?! Is this supposed to be funny?”

Alarmed, we all turned around to find out who had the misfortune of inciting Cikgu’s sudden outburst. It was Lee, the boy who hardly spoke during lessons. If anything could be said about Lee, he stayed away from trouble and wore a pleasant demeanour on his face.

Cikgu repeated her question. This time with greater force. Puzzled, Lee had no choice but to answer, “Err… no. But, but, but is it a crime to smile?”

I was stunned because I didn’t know Lee had it in him to speak up against a figure of authority.

“Ohhhhh… you think you’re so smart, is it? Stand on your chair now!” Cikgu decided to play the power card. They always did when they had no answers to smart questions.

Lee did as he was told and the smile disappeared from his face.

Many of us still remember this incident and Lee will always be remembered as the guy who got punished simply because he smiled.

Recently, when my husband got into a minor fender-bender with a taxi driver, I was reminded of this story. As the article unfolds, I hope it will serve as a cautionary tale for all.

It’ll serve you well to know that if your car has been hit by a vehicle used for carriage of passengers for hire or reward (or what is commonly known as a taxi, rental car, public bus, school bus and factory bus) to be referred to as “public vehicle” hereafter, you are not entitled to make a No-Fault Own Damage (ODN) or Knock-For-Knock (K-F-K) claims, even if you have a police investigation report proving that the other party is at fault.

The only claims you can make are of your own insurance, which will then affect your No Claim Bonus (NCB) or to claim directly from the perpetrator’s insurance, which can be an insurmountable task if the latter is not co-operative.

Now, this is alarming news to me because I did not know, as I suspect many of you don’t either, about this. It got my husband and I very concerned. How and where can we find out more information? Could this be an explanation why taxi and bus drivers drive as recklessly as they do here?

Dissatisfied with my motor insurance company’s response, I’ve since then made multiple enquiries to different insurance companies, the Road Transport Department, the General Insurance Association of Malaysia (PIAM), Bank Negara and even three motor workshops.

The calls and Internet searches I made generated a lot of frustration and failed to answer satisfactorily why public vehicles are exempted from ODN and K-F-K claims. Only one person came up with a direct response (although not necessarily plausible or reliable) in an online public forum.

According to this person, the measure was taken to discourage people from driving private cars. See it as some form of vice tax, if you like. I’m not entirely sure whether this is indeed the rationale behind this ridiculous policy but at least someone offered an opinion other than just re-iterating what has suddenly become an obvious policy.

The Road Transport Department said that they are not responsible for insurance regulation and referred me to the Ministry of Finance. I did not pursue with the latter.

I had to make four telephone calls to obtain a written policy stating the exemption from AXA Affin Malaysia. The first call was answered by someone whose standard response seemed to be “cannot.” Period.

My husband and I have taken to calling these people Ms/Mr Cannot and they seem to dominate the service industry in Malaysia. Before you can even explain what you’re asking for, they’ll tell you with great certainty and conviction that you cannot.

Kurnia Insurans Malaysia and Etiqa Insurance have the same policy on their websites. AIA Malaysia’s telephone operator said that this should not be true but was unable to confirm. She also said that all motor insurance policy should apply across the board because they are being regulated by Bank Negara. When I called Bank Negara, there was no one who could answer my query. They promised to call me back but they haven’t.

Zurich Insurance Malaysia Berhad informed me that they, too, practise the same policy. According to their officer, the policy is a result of an agreement made by all the insurance companies. Although I was disappointed by the answer, I was pleased that they were helpful enough to explain what I could do instead.

“You can claim third party insurance directly from the taxi. If you don’t want to go through the hassle of doing this, some workshops will help you. You just need to obtain the police investigation reports,” she said.

“How do you make a claim directly from the taxi? I don’t have his insurance details?”

The taxi driver had conveniently claimed ignorance when I asked for his insurance details. He said he had to call his company to find out and until today, I haven’t managed to get an answer from him. I was told by several people that this is to be expected.

“I hope you have his registration number. As long as you have it, you can find out from JPJ.”

“Does the workshop charge a fee for this service and if yes, how much?” I asked.

“Yes, I think they charge a fee but I really don’t know how much. What I can do is to give you a contact. You can call them and enquire.”

I called the number and to my great surprise, the lady who answered the phone said they don’t charge anything if I can furnish them with all the relevant documents. If I am unable to do so, they will charge a runner fee of RM150.

I’ve also talked to another workshop recommended by someone else and according to the workshop, as long as I send my car to my insurance panel workshop, I can make a KFK claim.

My insurance panel workshop offered us two solutions: 1) submit a ODN claim but our NCB will be forfeited and our insurance will cover the cost of repair, or 2) submit a third party claim but we’ll have to pay for the NCB adjuster fee and cost of repair first. We may be able to get it reimbursed by the taxi’s insurance later but it is entirely up to the latter’s discretion.

My husband and I haven’t quite decided yet what to do with our car. Although no injuries were inflicted (albeit a huge bruise to our morale), the simple principle of justice remains that we shouldn’t be paying for other people’s mistake. It isn’t just about the cost of repair but the time spent on dealing with it.

In my attempt to find answers, I’ve remained utterly confused and defeated. My French husband has cheekily asked me, “Why didn’t I marry a Swede? Why do you have to be Malaysian? It’s the first time I’ve heard of such stupid policies.”

Just like my friend, Lee, who shouldn’t have smiled, we shouldn’t have rejoiced so quickly with the knowledge that it was someone else’s fault when the accident happened. Just like Lee who asked the question “Is it a crime to smile?” and was then punished without any clear reason whatsoever, we are being punished in a similar fashion.

How safe can you be on the road if the rules do not punish those who inflict damage and injury to others? I can be a responsible and safe driver but it doesn’t protect me against those who aren’t. Something’s clearly wrong and how do we get to the bottom of this?

If you ever encounter an accident with a public vehicle (which I sincerely hope you won’t), it’ll be wise to obtain the vehicle’s insurance information immediately.

Meanwhile, do stay safe on the road.

After this article was posted, I received a private response from an insurance agent, Sandra Shao, who has kindly explained the following.

There are two options in cases like this:

1) File a 3rd party claim. Submit all relevant documents (police investigation report) to the 3rd party insurance. If you do not have the details of the 3^rd party’s insurer, you’ll need to run a JPJ search. (If your workshop has experience in dealing with cases like this, they will be able to assist you to run the search). Meantime, you’ll have to pay for all the repair work first.

In the meantime, do hire a Loss Adjustor who will prepare a report on the extent of the damage and he/she will put in a Loss of Use timeframe. Loss of Use is the estimated repair time but does not include any waiting time; i.e. delay in obtaining spare parts, etc. The report will take about seven days depending on various factors.

You can hire a Loss Adjustor directly or through your workshop’s contacts. The fee is based on a schedule. Some may tend to inflate the cost of repair but the Insurer will send a representative to verify the damages claimed.

With this option, your NCB is maintained.

2)  File a Own Damage claim. Bring your car to your panel workshop and your insurance will pay for the damage. However, your NCB will start from 0% again at the time of renewal of your insurance.

Sandra recommends the first option although the procedure is tedious but it’s worth doing as you get to keep your NCB, especially if it’s already at 55%.

According to Sandra, many people choose the easiest way out, with as little inconvenience as possible. Upon discovery that they’ve lost their NCB and asked to pay a higher premium, they often argue that these options were not explained to them. The bottom line is, it is never an easy way to deal with accidents of this nature, but if you handle it properly from the start, it’ll save you from a rude awakening when you renew your insurance.

Sandra provided insights on the different standards applied to insurance claims for private and public vehicles. According to her, they are both assessed separately. Public vehicles are on the road frequently and hence, the possibility of being involved in an accident is higher. This translates to higher risk which prompted insurance companies to deal with them separately. Likewise, the premiums for both types of vehicles are different.

Another difference is that private vehicles are not required to be inspected by PUSPAKOM annually. It’s easier to renew road tax for private vehicles while public vehicles can only renew their road tax with JPJ, only upon certification from PUSPAKOM. The road tax rate also differs.

Sandra cautioned that an accident with a motorcycle is even more complicated.

The drafting of insurance laws in Malaysia follows those in the United Kingdom. So, Malaysia is not unique in having such regulations. She is unsure whether such law has been amended in the United Kingdom.

Technorati Tags: AIA Malaysia,AXA Affin Malaysia,Bank Negara,Etiqa Insurance,General Insurance Association of Malaysia,Knock-For-Knock,Kurnia Insurans Malaysia,Lim Ka Ea,Loss Adjustor,Loss of Use,No Claim Bonus,No-Fault Own Damage,Road Transport Department,third party claims,Zurich Insurance Malaysia Berhad,Road accident+Public Transport

Talking ‘bout evolution

This article was first published on The Malaysian Insider on 12 December 2011.

As a child, it was mandatory to obtain Mom and Dad’s permission before I could leave the house. It was also mandatory to inform them of my whereabouts at all time. Thankfully, I was mature enough to understand that the rules were imposed in my best interest. Hence, I followed them without much resistance.

Dad was however, particularly unreasonably strict. He would go to the extent of forbidding me from participating in optional school trips and innocent outings with my cousins. There were times when I would spend days prior to the actual trip obsessing about how I would ask Dad’s permission, only to know that the answer would be a strict no. I would resort to political tactics by using Mom as an ally. Sometimes it worked, but most of the time it ended up in failed negotiations and days of cold war that followed.

You see, Dad is a reclusive and introvert person. He believes in traditional values based on hard work and sacrifices. He believes that one must sacrifice frivolous pursuits and individualistic wants in order to maintain harmony and achieve academic and professional success. He also believes that if you release a horse’s rein, the horse will go wild and never return once it has tasted freedom.

So I grew up feeling in awe and at the same time resentful of Dad. I respect and admire him for his integrity and honourable pursuits and yet I can never agree with this particular principle of his that restriction is necessary to keep a person from straying. Perhaps, that is one of the reasons why I’ve become fiercely independent and suffocate under authoritative environment.

A couple of months ago, I had the opportunity of accompanying a group of young American fellows on a private tour of Malacca. The tour guide was an elderly man who takes great pride in his origin as a bona fide Malaccan. He was the perfect person for the job as he was knowledgeable, passionate and eloquent in his narrations.

I was particularly amused by his footnotes, some of which were not entirely relevant to the purpose of that tour. You see, he avidly shared his strong condemnation of the government’s destructions of historical monuments and treatment of indigenous people. He was a sympathiser when it came to the topic of corruption and he even claimed that he works closely with indigenous tribes to protect their lands. You could see that he abhors some of the government’s policies and was not ashamed to express it, even before a group of foreigners.

After the tour, a few of us, including the elderly gentleman, stopped at on old-fashioned coffee shop on Jonker Street to have coffee. I brought up the subject of the Bersih 2.0 rally in the most innocent of manner and asked what he thought about it.

Indeed, he got pretty heated up but to my surprise, he was extremely critical of the demonstrators. He said that he did not condone the rally at all. He agreed that dissent is necessary but definitely not Bersih 2.0’s method of choice. He argued fervently that assembly of any kind in protest of the government is not the Malaysian way. National harmony must not be compromised at all cost.

When asked what else could be done if all diplomatic negotiations have failed, he was unable to produce a convincing answer. When asked how a peaceful assembly can be harmful, he struggled to articulate his thoughts. His point of argument was solely from a cultural perspective. It’s simply not the Malaysian way of doing things.

I found the juxtaposition of his contrasting views intriguing and could only conclude that he belongs to an older generation of Malaysians who still hold on to certain traditional values that are simply too strong to let go.

There are lessons to be learned from these two stories. I grew up in a generation that places greater value and appreciation for human rights and liberty as result of economic progress and globalisation. We are no longer isolated from the rest of the world and hence, are able to evaluate, compare and conclude for ourselves that respect for human rights and true democracy is fundamental towards progress and human evolution. Some would say that this is solely a Western concept but seriously so what? Isn’t it naïve to say that we want to be as progressive as Sweden but only insofar as its economy is concerned but not its form of democracy? Isn’t the very piece of garment worn by most Malaysians on a daily basis influenced by Western fashion? Besides, honestly what is the Malaysian way? Is the Malaysian culture based on corruption and abuse of power?

Democracy and respect for human rights is synonymous to progress. Brutal killing as a form of entertainment in a gladiator arena is a thing in the past. Child abuse and gender discrimination are now prohibited by our laws and they were not plucked out of thin air. It would be extremely foolish of the government to believe that all Malaysians of my generation would be content with just economic progress and half assed implementation of selected rights according to their whims and fancies.

Nature would dictate that human beings will continuously fight for their own survival. Once they’ve succeeded in that, they will move on to fight for freedom and progress. It’s called evolution and has been historically proven by the fall of great dictatorial empires.

Some would argue that there are those who genuinely reject progress and it’s only a selected few who impose on them the notion of progress. As true as it may be, the key word here is choice.

Dad’s method of discipline was wrong. If I had in any way betrayed his trust, he would have the right to punish me, but not to restrict me from the very start. The same applies to those who want to go on a peaceful street protest. It may not be everyone’s cup of tea but that choice must be presented to those who have the desire to do so. Punish those who abuse that right but not those who want to exercise that right responsibly.

Evolution is part of nature and it will happen whether we want it or not. There comes a time when every child will want to grow up to become a free adult. The question is when and how. This is something the government must think about.

Technorati Tags: Malacca,Bersih 2.0,peaceful assembly,democracy,gladiator,evolution,Peaceful Assembly Bill 2011

Say No to the Peaceful Assembly Bill 2011!

An example of video posted by someone on the bus

Technorati Tags: Peaceful Assembly Bill 2011,PAB2011,PA2011

The truth shall set you free

This post was originally posted by The Malaysian Insider on 4 July 2011.

Whenever I flush the toilet at home, my cat, often seen lazing on the floor would spring to her feet and run for her life. It’s obvious that the sudden sound of rushing water petrifies her tremendously. 

Sometimes, out of strange habit, I find myself warning her that I will be flushing the toilet in false hope that she would not get agitated. I used to think that once she gets accustomed to the noise, she would get over her unreasonable fear.

I’ve had her for more than two years and each time I flush the toilet, it still has the same effect on her, with or without my warning. 

It then dawns on me that my cat will continue to have this fear simply because she is unable to comprehend what is happening. There’s nothing I can do about it for how does one explain to a cat what a flushing mechanism is?

Life is full of fears. We fear for our safety, we fear for our future, we fear humiliation and we fear death but what we probably fear the most is what we don’t know, just like my cat. 

In the past weeks, the government has been carrying out a campaign to instill fear in the rakyat. We have been warned that if we participate in the Bersih campaign, we will be committing a crime and as result of that, our freedom will be taken away.

It is quite understandable that every reasonable person will be frightened by this knowledge. If the most fearsome thing in this world is indeed ignorance, why are we then still afraid despite knowing the consequences of our actions? 

Many people have asked me whether I am afraid. The simple truth is, yes I am but not so much of what will happen in the next couple of days, but of what will become of our beloved country if we continue to allow the government to intimidate us.

Knowing what might happen to my security and freedom is only half as scary as not knowing the fate of our country and the future of young Malaysians. 

Great religions and nations teach us to stand up for the truth. Our government teaches us otherwise. When a government becomes the main agent provocateur of fear and at the same time warns its people that they will be guilty for provoking fear and instability, something is fundamentally wrong. 

So far, the real culprit for instilling fear and provocation seems to be coming from the government, not those who choose to wear yellow T-shirts, blow bubbles into the air, carry yellow balloons and walk peacefully on their streets on July 9. The colour yellow does not provoke, but public threats of arrest and detention do. 

A few days ago, I confessed to a friend that what’s happening in Malaysia stresses me more than what I had experienced in Afghanistan, Ethiopia and Cambodia. He was surprised and wanted to know why. My answer to him, “Because this is not supposed to happen here. You expect it to happen in those countries but not here.” 

What most people don’t seem to understand is how fundamentally tragic and wrong it is to be ruled by a government that imposes arbitrary laws that go against the core principles of human rights and to add salt to the wound, resist the call by its people for free and fair election. I’ve seen it in Afghanistan, Ethiopia and Cambodia and sadly, Malaysia seems to have hopped on the bandwagon. 

Some friends have argued with me that Malaysia is far better off than these countries. I was asked to evaluate our economy and told that I should come to the conclusion that we are better off. I’m reminded that we’re blessed for having a government that promotes economic growth and I should just be grateful. 

It would be a persuasive argument but for the nagging question that if a man provides for his family, does it entitle him to do whatever he wants with them? Are they saying that if their father has looked after their welfare, then surely they should be able to forgive him for raping their sister? 

These days when I walk on the street, I look over my shoulders, not for snatch thieves but for the police. When an innocent citizen feels threatened by the very people they depend on for protection, something is wrong.

When an anxious child who is afraid of the dark is being told that monsters will come after them when the light is turned off, something is wrong. If you still don’t know how to differentiate who the real coward and culprit is in this situation we’re facing today, then shame on you for refusing to believe and see the truth. You’re not a cat and you should know better.

For close to half a century, we have been living in fear. I’ve seen that fear in my parents and friends. I’ve experienced how we have conditioned ourselves to lower our voices when we talk about “sensitive” issues.

I’ve seen how people disguise themselves as someone they’re not simply because they believe it is safer to live a lie than to face the truth. The only credit the government can ever claim is that they’ve run a pretty successful campaign, thanks to us.

We’ve come to a crossroad where we either rise above our fear or allow it to perpetuate for generations to come.

Plato once said, “We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.” 

We have been living this real tragedy for far too long. 

Technorati Tags: Bersih,Plato

, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Yellow

The unsung heroes of Malaysia

Originally posted on The Malaysian Insider under the title “Reconnecting with one’s identity” on 24 April 2011.

The year was 1996.

I was 15 years younger and also 15kg lighter (if only they are both inversely related).

My only worries were to pass my examinations and for the boy whom I had a huge crush on to give me his time of the day. In my mind, we would have beautiful babies together.

The thought of returning home never occurred to me but it didn’t stop me from being an active member of the Malaysian Student Society. United Kingdom seemed far better off then.

Although it has been 15 years, I still think about the days when we, the Malaysian students, put up a swashbuckling performance at the annual Malaysian Evening gala. We did Malaysia proud by being hospitable, warm and friendly ambassadors. Our enthusiasm and solidarity were infectious and we built friendships that transcend ethnicity and religious affiliations through those years.

I miss the days when the Malay-Boys-Who-Can-Sing-And-Play-Music living downtown would invite my friend and I for home-cooked fish head curries. Apparently the fishmonger next door were selling the discarded heads for peanuts and like monkeys, we devoured every single morsel with much gusto and appreciation.

We also had a Malay friend who could measure the saltiness of his girlfriend’s satay sauce just by sniffing at it. Hers was the best satay sauce I have ever tasted. To reciprocate, my friend and I would make popiah and to our great surprise, they were well-received.

I mustn’t forget our one and only Indian Malaysian student. He was known as the quiet and shy guy who was joined at the hips by two other Chinese Malaysian students. They were really nice because they never forget to celebrate my birthday when I was alone during Easter holiday.

That was the only time when I remember being Malaysian.

15 years later, I am older and the questions running through my mind are of a different nature.

Would my marriage survive? Will I become a mother? Have I done enough for my ageing parents? Would I be able to afford a vacation in the North Pole so that I can see the polar bears? Would I die for my country? Would Malaysia ever change?

At 35, I have become cynical and resentful of so many things in life. What is certain is that the years gone by have served as a cruel reminder of how brutal time and poor eating habit can be.

Having worked and lived in four war-torn countries has somehow contributed a lot to my increasing lack of faith and respect for humankind. Although Malaysia is not at war, apathetic Malaysians combined with a morally corrupted government do very little to change my perception of human beings.

At the end of the day, I deduce we’re all just the same.

That changed on 2 April 2011 at Fort Cornwallis, Penang.

Perhaps it’s true that everything does happen for a reason. What happened for me was to leave my cushy life as an expatriate’s wife and to accept the challenging task of helping Malaysians understand the Federal Constitution. And the reason? I desperately needed to restore my faith as a Malaysian again.

The “Rock for Rights” concert organised by Bar Council’s MyConstitution Campaign, Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia and Frinjan on 2 April, reminded me of the semangat Malaysia I felt 15 years ago, but only better as I didn’t have to be in a foreign land to feel that I belong.

While working on this project, I got to know many Malaysians from very different walks of life and was privileged to learn from them. Many of them are either students or hold regular jobs such as teaching, marketing, public relations, writing, computer programming, event planning, environmentalist and lawyer.

Being an amateur who struggled to put together a concert, the bands and those involved were understanding, patient and forgiving. Many of them were just grateful that they had this rare opportunity to share their artistic talent as musicians and message as Malaysians. They are clearly no ordinary bands as they were not driven by monetary gain but only by their passion as musicians and Malaysians.

I asked Darren Teh from An Honest Mistake why they had decided to participate in this project.

He replied “We want to bring our music to the next level which is to cause change in someone’s life. Being part of this project helps us achieve that. When people listen to our song and knowing the reason behind the lyrics, it helps them connect with us ‘emotionally’. Besides that, knowing that we are adding value to the community, raising awareness of our rights and educating them through music – we are going beyond the boundaries of music, beyond just simple listening pleasure. We are proud to have been part of this entire project.”

I asked Petak Daud, an 18 year-old musician who stunned the crowd with his soft acoustic renditions of songs that speak loudly against the abuse of power by the police and government, what gave him the courage to sing such songs. He said, “The situation surrounding us is becoming worse. We’re like decomposing fleshes which in a matter of time will disappear altogether. This is my mission. I want to wake Malaysians up so that they can see the abuse taking place in this country.”

If a seemingly shy 18 year-old boy who unwittingly scratches his hair while he speaks on stage has the courage to sing such songs, why are most of us still keeping silent?

Azmyl Yunor has a theory – shopping malls and capitalism. According to him, Malaysia’s rapid economic growth over the last three decades has metamorphosised us from being Malaysians to creatures who are continuously motivated by economic gain above everything else. Before we could truly understand who we are as a nation, we occupy our time by shopping.

I told Azmyl that I was shocked by how passive the crowd was at Fort Cornwallis. While some of us cheered and danced to the music, many kept their seats warm by just watching without any expression on their faces. He smiled at my observation and shared his other theory of self-censorship.

Decades of living in a country where preventive laws and religious teachings are imposed have taught us that freedom of expression is vulgar and wrong. He said music is a form of escape. He wouldn’t be caught dead screaming on top of his lungs and rolling on the floor under normal circumstances.

The night was high when Barcode got everyone up to sing the Negaraku. I was exhilarated and I sang our anthem like how most kids would sing to Justin Bieber these days. And like the cool night breeze that provided us with much comfort, the affirmation that I love Malaysia came.

Ammar Khairi from Maharajah Commission shared similar sentiments. He said, “I sincerely hope that there will be many more patriotic souls in Malaysia as opposed to nationalists or even worse, haters. The difference is, a patriotic person would give out his heart and soul for the country and yet continually criticise constructively for a better Malaysia, whereas nationalistic pride is nothing more than waving the flag and declare your allegiance blindly and accepting everything that is told to you by the powers-that-be as the supreme truth.”

Later that night, the party continued. We, the Malaysians, shared and celebrated our identity by laughing and dancing the night away. Fellow columnist, June Rubis who flew in all the way from Sarawak to be our emcee (and to be starved as she emceed for 12 hours straight), screamed on top of her lungs, “I love you, you and you!” She whispered to me and said she would do it all over again.

I stayed high for the next couple of days. 15 years is a long wait after all.

Technorati Tags: Rock for Rights,Bar Council,MyConstitution Campaign,Frinjan,Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia,Azmyl Yunor,An Honest Mistake,Maharajah Commission,Petak Daud,Barcode,Fort Cornwallis,Penang,June Rubis

When being independent isn’t enough

This was first published in The Malaysian Insider on 31 January 2011.

When I was a child, my Father would play his favourite game with me. It was a game that I would call Lets-test-whether-my-daughter-loves-me-enough-to-forgive-me game.

He would ask me this: “Say that I’ve committed a crime. You’re the presiding Judge. Would you hand me a guilty verdict?”

“Yes.” That would be my answer, all said without a pause in between.

I didn’t even think about asking him what sort of hypothetical crime he could have committed and what would have motivated him to break the law. My logic was simple and straightforward then. (Note: grey was certainly not in my colour dictionary at that time.) I thought if a person commits a crime, he/she must be judged guilty and be sent to jail immediately.

In my juvenile mind, I didn’t consider whether there could be possible mitigating factors which could influence my judgment and subsequently lead to exonerating my Father’s crime.

My monosyllabic answer did not thrill my Father one bit. He would often argued in exasperation.

“But I’m your Father! You won’t even use your position to help me out?” “Sure? No question about it?” “But I gave you life and I feed you! How could you?”

He tried to use the my-blood-runs-through-your-veins’ card but sadly to no avail. I was that stubborn.

Despite my predictable and solid answer, he continued to play this game with me throughout most of my childhood years until one fine day he decided to stop. I never knew why but I am making a mental note to ask him when I see him next.

Sometimes I wish I had studied psychology so that I could analyse my relationship with my Father but most importantly how much of my character and personality as a child has reflected on my moral integrity and principles as an adult.

As an adult, I often find myself confronted by issues that pose as ethical and moral conundrums; should I tell my friend that her husband is cheating on her? Should I accept a gift even if I don’t deserve it? Should I euthanise my critically ill pet? Should I buy this pirated DVD even though I know it’s illegal? Should I hire a less competent person just because he/she would need the income more than the one who is really competent?

Thankfully, I’ve cultivated an appetite to ask questions and find the answers to help me judge. Granted, I don’t always make the right judgment but it forces me to first ask myself whether I would be more ready to accept stealing if I were starving and penniless before passing a guilty verdict.

There is one question which often sparks a great deal of debate amongst the NGO circle. Would you consider it ethical to accept funding from political parties or big corporations that may be violating free and fair trade agreement, environmental, health or human rights policies?

A few years back when I was living in Phnom Penh, the Cambodian Red Cross (CRC) launched a huge fund-raising event in conjunction with World Red Cross and Red Crescent Day. It managed to collect a staggering US$4 million from various local and foreign private companies and various other undisclosed sources. It was no surprise seeing that the CRC President is an influential person and hence was able to use her status to garner strong support from the business community.

It’s not a secret either that the CRC President is the wife of Hun Sen, the Prime Minister of Cambodia.

During the World Red Cross and Red Crescent Day; amidst thousands of people, including members of the press and other high profile representatives from international aid organisations, the Prime Minister handed over a mock cheque of US$4 million to the President of the CRC.

This gesture, which was regarded as a formality by many Cambodians was highly criticised by certain international community. The matrimonial connection between the President of CRC and the Prime Minister has always been a point of contention for those who understand the concept of independence within the Movement. Nevertheless, Hun Sen and his wife appeared prudent enough to keep a distance from each other in public for most of the time.

All recognised national Red Cross/Red Crescent societies must subscribe to the seven fundamental principles (humanity, universality, unity, independence, neutrality, impartiality and voluntary service) of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. While playing an auxiliary role to the State, they are expected to maintain independence at all time.

In many countries, including developed ones, many governments are known to provide funds to their national Red Cross/Red Crescent societies and this is not against the Movement’s constitution. However, it’s imperative that they maintain independence by staying away from government influence when making decisions and executing their duties and responsibilities.

I think the CRC’s independence is challenged for two strong reasons; the intimate relationship between the two main personalities and the lack of faith in a corrupted government led by Hun Sen. Cambodia’s poor human rights record, weak rule of law and continuous violation of a free and fair election process have drawn multiple question marks on the Prime Minister’s credibility.

The fact that the CRC’s President “shares the same bed” with the Prime Minister has caused great discomfort to foreign stakeholders and guardians of the Movement. To be fair, the CRC’s President tries hard to exclude the participation of the Prime Minister in many CRC events just to avoid such criticism. But is that enough?

My Father’s little game would not have happened in real life. My close relation with him would have automatically disqualified me from presiding over his case. Not only must justice be done but must also seen to be done. I could be as impartial as possible but my personal relationship with my Father would always cast a doubt in the public’s eyes.

So, what’s my stand on this issue?

First of all, CRC is not a judiciary but a humanitarian institution. Its main duty is to provide humanitarian aid for those in need. When facing a dilemma such as this (particularly when it’s difficult to change or challenge a sovereign institution so entrenched in its tradition and culture), it’s always helpful to go back to the main foundation and objectives of the institution.

In this case, it’s clear that at the end of the day, the Movement’s duty lies in the interest of the people. The international community needs to weigh this delicate matter carefully before making a judgment in condemning the institution’s independence which can potentially harm its diplomatic relationship and hence jeopardise its core mandate.

I read a commentary made by Jean Pictet, former Director-General of the ICRC, on the Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross. He wrote:

“It is clear indeed that the Red Cross Society in a country under an authoritarian regime cannot serve as a centre for opposition to the regime or to any party or faith. It can thus display an attitude of benevolent neutrality towards temporal or spiritual authorities, maintain good relations with them and co-operate with them in humanitarian activities, since the National Societies are called upon to serve as auxiliaries to governmental institutions.”

“Neutrality also is the attitude observed by the ICRC in its relations with governmental entities, treating them on the basis of equality, not expressing itself on their legitimacy, not considering whether they are recognised, not judging their politics. If it acts in this way, it does so not in order to waste its energies in idle diplomatic procedures but so as to gain access to victims in need of help, and these victims are in the power of the States. It is therefore necessary to obtain the required authorisation from States and to maintain the relations of confidence essential for continuing co-operation.”

While it is a duty for the Red Cross Movement to push for an institution’s independence, it is as much a duty for them to ask themselves whether they have been neutral in exercising its judgment.

In humanitarian field, neutrality is perhaps the most important of all principles because at the end of the day, those who seek to benefit from humanitarian aid should not be judged by their religion, race, political affiliation, etc. This also means that they should not be deprived from aid simply because their government or national Red Cross/Red Crescent society has failed to satisfy the Movement’s criteria of independence. Why should they be further inflicted by the wrongs of others?

The fundamental real threat would be if funds are not being channelled to those in need but to further profit those who already have their pockets filled. This, however, is another issue altogether.

So, if Philip Morris wants to donate US$1 million to a free clinic I’m running, I’ll take it. My action won’t have any impact on them because they would continue to produce cigarettes anyway, but be sure that it’ll have a huge impact on a 40 year-old mother who needs dialysis but can’t afford it and, it will have an impact on her whole family.

Technorati Tags: Cambodian Red Cross,Hun Sen,Red Cross/Red Crescent National Society,International Committee of Red Cross,Jean Pictet,Philip Morris,Red Cross Movement. Phnom Penh,World Red Cross and Red Crescent Day

In Search of Besa

This article was first published in The Malaysian Insider on 23 January 2011.

Norman Gershman talking about his Besa project

It is quite a fallacy to think that Malaysia is internationally famed for being a moderate Muslim country that takes pride in its multi-racial and multi-cultural DNA.

When words got around that a Malaysian was volunteering for the Ethiopian Red Cross, I received a surprising but rather interesting visit from a very eager high ranking local staff at my office. He was Muslim. Normally this piece of information wouldn’t have mattered but in this story, it does.

When he introduced himself enthusiastically, I could sense that he was waiting to ask me something that was related to my nationality since he couldn’t stop gushing over how excited and honoured he was to meet someone from Malaysia.

The question finally came out and it was most unpleasant, not to mention unexpected.

“Is it true that when you arrive at the airport in Kuala Lumpur, there is a big sign which says ‘Jews are not welcomed. Please go home’?”

The initial smile that was plastered on my face disappeared instantaneously as I looked at his face holding the biggest and most gleeful grin I had ever seen in my life. He looked extremely pleased with himself; almost like a scientist who was about to discover a rare formula of epic significance before screaming out “Eureka!”

My heart sank. I was disgusted and he felt it. There was no celebration but only disappointment. From both sides.

“Ummm….you’re not a Muslim, are you?” he asked uncertainly but with eyes filled with hopes. Needless to say, my answer ended our conversation abruptly. From then onwards, he avoided me like the plague.

What an utterly charming man, he was.

When I am on home ground, I continue to hear disturbing stories of religious intolerance in Malaysia. Whether these stories have any truth in it or not, it is another matter altogether because in a democratically fragile country such as ours, an open and independent investigation into religious dispute would often result in a suicide mission accompanied by a big opened can of ugly worms.

The recent spat over the azan in Pantai Dalam area is one such example. Instead of trying to solve the issue in a mature, rational and civil manner, calls for the imposition of the Internal Security Act against the complainant was made en masse. It would make more sense to investigate and conduct a study to establish whether there is indeed a need to implement laws that regulate the loudness of calls to prayers, especially in residential areas.

I must confess that I do wonder myself whether the complainant had taken the opportunity to talk to the Imam of the mosque about the problem before taking the last measure of writing a letter of complaint to the Prime Minister. I suppose when it comes to religious matter, rationality and understanding seem to be the enemies, rather than ignorance and hostility.

I am a resident of Pantai Dalam and was most disappointed to know that the dispute was declared solved just because the complainant has allegedly decided to move out from the area for fear of reprisal. For me, this issue is far from being solved and it worries me tremendously to know that in order to co-exist together in this country, someone, usually the minority has to surrender in defeat. Whatever happens to striving for a win-win situation?

Someone told me recently that while she was living on campus in one of the local universities, a group of Muslim student leaders would often visit her dorm to make sure that Muslim students like her, would remain religiously pious. They were strictly forbidden from interacting with non-Muslims. They were constantly fed with ridiculous lies and religious propaganda so that they would avoid non-Muslims at all cost. For example, they were told that Christians walked around with holy water and with one single drop of the said water on a person, he or she would automatically become a Christian.

I feel sad and worried when I hear such stories. What will become of our nation when we continuously allow ourselves to hate and fear each other? Surely, something needs to be done.

Not too long ago, I attended a photo exhibition called Besa: Muslims Who Saved Jews in World War II by photographer Norman H. Gershman at a Reformed Jewish temple while I was in the United States on a fellowship programme. It was the first time I’ve heard the stories of Muslims in Albania who risked their lives to save more than 2000 Jews during Hitler’s reign in Europe.

Gershman had travelled to Albania over the course of 7 years to search, speak and record the stories of those Muslims and their children. From there, he learned the meaning of Besa, a code of honour rooted deeply in Albanian culture and incorporated in the faith of Albanian Muslims. Besa demands that one take responsibility for the lives of others in their time of need.

I read the story of Ismet Shpuza from Gershman’s coffee table book with photos of his exhibition.

“My parents lived in the town of Durres. In 1944, my father befriended the Jewish family of Raphael (Rudi) Abravanel. They were originally from Yugoslavia. He provided the family with false passports for Rudi, his wife, and two children, and escorted them to the border. They escaped first back to Yugoslavia, then to Italy. Then our family lost all trace of the Abravanels. It was through the help of another Righteous Albanian, Refik Veseli, that in 1990 we again made contact with Rudi and his family, now living in Israel. We received letters and exchanged telephone calls. It seems strange to be asked why my father did what he did for this Jewish family. Besa is a tradition of the entire nation of Albania.”

I don’t think we hear enough of these stories and I don’t think we’re doing enough to promote religious harmony and understanding; not just the kind that demand us to accept and bury any unresolved issue under the carpet but the kind that teaches all of us to honour a code which compel us a duty to admonish hatred and fear amongst each other.

Being away from home for some time, I’ve also discovered that Malaysian Muslims are respected worldwide by their fellow brothers and sisters. It made me happy and proud when an Algerian, Kosovar or Senegalese Muslim told me that they like Malaysian Muslims a lot because during haj, the latter are amongst the most polite, courteous and friendly nationalities in the world.

It is pleasant and nice to hear such compliments but strangely enough, I don’t seem to hear the same kind of flattery when I am at home.

Where is our own besa?

If you know of any compelling story or testimony of Muslim and non-Muslim Malaysians living together and honouring each other as fellow human beings and neighbours, please write to besa4malaysia@gmail.com. Any photographer who would like to take up the challenge of documenting this should contact the same email.

 

Technorati Tags: Besa,Norman Gershman,Reformed Judaism,Temple Emmanuel,Pantai Dalam,Internal Security Act,Albanian Muslim,Second World War