INDONESIA: BEYOND THE INDICATORS

BREAKS MY HEART when I hear stories of children wanting to go on schooling but can't because the parents are just not able to meet the cost. This should not happen in a world of plenty when talk is about the so-called "throwaway society", the buying of consumer fashion items good only while fashionable. Like herbaceous plants viable only specific to its own season, but unlike them the pleasure given is fleeting at best.

Unfortunate for today's world, education is a perennial, it goes on year after year. Education was and, hopefully still is, a social staple intended to enlighten, to bring on greater social justice through social mobility. So why has many decades of so-called 'universal' education brought humankind, instead, to this brink, of priorities gone berserk? Is there any place left in this world where basic needs are still nominally priced, if not completely free?

Let me go back to the beginning. Someone close had called me, only just now, to have a chat and share his troubles. Just as a matter of interest, trouble is here defined by its territorial and social origin. It depends on where my friends are from. The handful of Londoners will have cheery news or when its bad its those very personal problems you share with the bestest of friends. In Malaysia we tend to exchange tales on politics, economics and state of the nation issues liberally laced with gossip and hearsay to give it better texture. My Thai friend e-mails me about going off to holiday with family living in the provinces where the air is fresh and invigorating. I haven't heard from the sole friend I have in the Philippines but I guess he is happy with what is occupying him at the moment. From Indonesia, however, the pains tend to be personal but very much to do with public policies.

Of course, social class too determine the way life is lived everywhere, including Indonesia. And speaking of education, the upper and middle classes there make it a point to send their children abroad. Even another ASEAN country will do because, I have been told, entry to the very best Indonesian universities are far too competitive. Furthermore, learning in English will give their children a head start in life.

That is, if you can afford the start, in the first place. And recently, quite unexpectedly with Reformasi, education in Indonesia has entered the era of free enterprise, meaning, schools now have economic fees. Schools mind you, not institutions of higher learning! The laws of demand and supply play a big role in determining the quantum of school fees in today's Indonesia. As a result many, mainly from the lower middle classes and below, falter, threatening to obliterate the future of a potentially huge pool of humanity. There is, of course, a reason for this: inadequate public funds. And by some tragic coincidence, Indonesia under its first directly elected president, SBY, has been beset with natural disasters the most horrific being the tsunami that devastated Aceh and North Sumatra on Boxing Day 2004, a few months after he took office. For the President it must have seemed like a baptism of fire not to be easily doused, incoming oceans notwithstanding.

Nonetheless, for all its domestic problems, Indonesia is a beautiful country with a beautiful people, gentle and warm, not yet properly arrived in the rapacious rat-race of capitalist exploitation. Of course, one hears horrendous stories of corruption and it is almost at the top of the world's list of nations blighted with corruption, but remember far too many Indonesians are either unemployed, barely employed or underemployed. Now what access do these people have to be corrupter and to become corrupt. That they have not all turned to crime is an indicator of a resilience to be reckoned with. Added to this are the multitudes employed in insipid jobs, corruption-wise that is. These are the majority. So please do not tarnish every Indonesian with the same brush for, in doing that we abandon the opportunity to find friendship and pleasure in this, one of the world's most soulful country: its culture rich, its art profound, its learning deep. Is it any wonder then that Indonesians are a proud people.

At the same time though they fall under the international category of poor countries because of low income per capita. Poverty and pride, therefore, rages in many forcing on them what are otherwise unpalatable choices. Their labour is exported into the most menial and harshest sectors of the economies of countries that can afford for their own population the choice of opting out from such terrible jobs. These jobs the migrant labour (euphemistically called TKI, tenaga kerja Indonesia) do at wages that are often below the norm -- but then again this is why they are referred to bluntly as "cheap labour" and are much sought after by foreign employers planning to lock in large margins of profit.

Many more, however, stay home to harness whatever means to life are at hand. It is amongst them that one discovers how low the cost of living can get to maintain very decent standards of life when one does not aspire to needless throwaway consumer items; and learn, how precious pride is to preserve, honour to keep and community to have.

BODY-SNATCHERS: EPILOGUE

GOOD SENSE has prevailed. Thank God. MAIS, the Selangor Islamic Council, has withdrawn claims over the remains of the late Rayappan Anthony and his burial will be held by his family according to Christian rites. In the end, they accepted the fact that Anthony was no longer a Muslim at the point of his death, after exhaustive investigations to prove otherwise.

What this means is that a Muslim may leave the religion, after all. Well, at least for the convert. The late Rayappan Anthony’s final contribution to his fellow citizens is thus an important one. No longer do Malaysian converts to Islam who changed their minds about being Muslim need feel that they have to flee this country to die just so they can rest in peace. For, this is exactly what I hear on the grapevine. Now all they have to do is make absolutely certain that the evidence of their renouncing Islam is beyond doubt.

As a Muslim I feel much saddened by the whole sorry episode.

Firstly, it embarrasses me that the procedures, vis-à-vis religious matters, which have huge legal implications, are left uncertain. On the one hand, the non-Muslims operate under a secular system. Their religion is a private affair, pursued in their own time and on their own terms with the religious establishment of their choice. On the other hand, Muslims like me live very much under a strong Islamic state apparatus, which would like to be even stronger than it already is.

Secondly, I am saddened by Islam’s failure to hold on to its converts. All Muslims know that the converts, mualaf, are special. Provisions for the way they are to be received by Muslims exist in the Qur’an. They are to be treated with great care: “Alms shall be used for the advancement of Allah’s cause…and those that are converted to the faith.” [9;60] And yet, cases such as Rayappan are not uncommon. It reflects badly on the Muslim community; a situation made worse because the state provides for the administration of the religion and the zakat, the wealth tax, should enable a perfectly good welfare system. Instead, we hear talk of those who are supposed to be looking after our soul wanting a slice of the commercial action.

Maybe what the government ought to do is impose on those entrusted with the administration of the religion a kind of internship, the way doctors do, before they are allowed to even come near a Muslim, dead or alive. Why is it Muslims think little of their soul when its impact upon society is so great? Is it any wonder then that converts do not stay and those born into the religion have to be forcibly restrained from leaving? A crying shame really!

RETURN OF THE "BODY-SNATCHERS"

NON-MUSLIMS should no longer play fast and loose with their faith, whatever it may be, if they know what’s good for them.
If they do not like what happened to the late Everest climber, Moorthy, and what is happening to the recently departed Rayappan Anthony then do not even consider becoming a Muslim: not for love, not for money and definitely not for fun!
For be warned, there is not a single escape clause in this unspoken, indeterminate contract. Even marriage vows, for instance, promises release upon death, but not this. It insists on binding you to it for all eternity. And after you are in it, you will feel most bonded to it when you least want it. Choice, by the way, you would have given up at the point of entry.
It is like choosing to live in a dictatorship. Why would you, whose every act, every move and every decision can be a conscious choice reaffirming your human agency, choose to give up choice only to live within strict taboos, a rigid regimentation and perpetual supervision? Okay, it is highly probable that you may feel suitably cleansed by the taboos, but can you stomach the regimentation? Possibly too, if you are the sort invigorated when regimented, but can you take the feeling of being constantly interfered with? Maybe yes, because you find comfort in being part of the majority.
This is what it means to be Muslim in Malaysia and surely this requires the kind of commitment that only passion can lend. Are you then passionate about becoming a Muslim or are you driven to it by passion? This question you must contemplate over and over and when you are done contemplating meditate on it, over and over. And if after all of that you remain determined then, by all means, go for it.
But why has it come to this? The Moorthy case hints at the problem.
His conversion to Islam is almost hearsay. It was purported to have happened on his sickbed with no hard evidence that it ever took place. If he had really converted, Moorthy, according to his widow, never talked to the family about it and given the importance of such a decision to people of faith, this is incredible. One would have thought if he had embraced Islam with all its consequences it would be unlikely for him not to let his family know, if for nothing other than to ensure that when he does go his soul would be suitably attended to. Why convert to Islam when you do not particularly care what happens to you in the after-life, especially given the stark contrast of this, most final rites of passage between those of Islam and Hinduism?
In this instance would it not have been wiser if the officers of the Religious Department involved had based their actions on documented evidence? Was his conversion card ever produced? In short, did he or did he not embrace Islam?
The current controversy regarding burial rites revolves around one Rayappan Anthony (alias Mohammad Rayappan). Here there is indeed evidence, both documented and otherwise. His conversion is not disputed. He took the faith and consequently a Muslim name when he left his Christian family and identity to marry a Mulim woman. However, there is every proof of him having renounced Islam and returning to Christianity. According to newspaper reports, his MyKad states that he was a Christian. And yet JAIS had little compunction about distressing his bereaved family. After the “body-snatching” they tried to subpoena Christians to appear before what is an exclusively Muslim court.
There are two issues here. First, the assumption is that to JAIS, once a Muslim always a Muslim. As soon as one embraces Islam one forfeits one’s constitutional right to freedom of religion. (By the way, for those born into the religion this is the given condition as the Lina Joy and the four elderly Kelantanese cases, to name but two, demonstrate.)
And second, it is obvious that the Islamic establishment, in over-stepping the boundaries of its jurisdiction – the issuing of subpoenas to Anthony’s three daughters who are Christians – is intent on creating a dangerous legal precedent. Let us, for argument’s sake, accept that it may have some claim over Rayappan Anthony, but does that give it any semblance of a right to even attempt to invoke its powers over the non-Muslim daughters? Now that the sisters are going to the civil court for redress what will the judgment be? In the Moorthy case the judge felt quite unable to sit in judgment of an Islamic issue as everything to do with Islam is the purview of the parallel Shariah Court system.

As this matter is now before the courts it would be skating on thin ice to speculate, but let us hope that the 'integrity' of our legal system, dualistic as it is, is preserved. We may not be able to turn the clock back to before 1988, but at least we would have put arrogance firmly in its place: checked, if not checkmated.

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE LAH

SIASAH, in its current edition, asks the provocative question, “Is Ku Li willing to challenge Pak Lah?” The paper is, of course, referring to Malaysia’s former finance minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, who once took on Dr. Mahathir Mohammad. That was way back in 1987, some twenty or so years ago.

Strange that a generation later the possible challenger has not changed, but the prime minister has, albeit after 22 long years. Is this a reflection on UMNO’s inability to cultivate a new crop of leaders?

That the question of a challenge against the president of the party is being bandied about comes as no surprise given the recent open hostility towards Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s premiership by Dr. Mahathir, the man single-handedly responsible for putting him there in the first place. Given the intensity of each passing shot by the latter one is forgiven for believing that the prime minister’s days in office are numbered because if it had instead been a live round of bullets the country would have had a state funeral. The accusations leveled were so unapologetically vicious.

But survived it he did. If Dr. Mahathir had intended to unseat Abdullah he must be sorely disappointed. Didn’t anyone bother to tell him that it is near impossible to topple an incumbent? He, more than anyone, should know this. Two former prime ministers did their utmost to get him out of office and both failed miserably. These scenarios are text book perfect.

Malaysia inherited the British system of government where the prime minister is primus inter pares, first amongst equals. He holds all levers, not only to power, but also the fate of party aspirants in his hands. And, in today’s flourishing crony capitalism, the long arm of the prime minister reaches beyond government and politics. In this country, at least, he is all powerful – if he chooses to be. It is obvious that Abdullah Badawi has chosen to be!

So why even entertain the notion that there might be a change at the top, so soon?

It is the nature of politics. If for the ordinary mortal the pursuit of happiness is vague, the same cannot be said for the politician. As he lives and breathes his one pleasure is the pursuit of power. Now that Abdullah Badawi has power he does not see any reason for relinquishing it. Natural that. Unfortunately, this is not a one-horse race. Every politician worth his salt relishes the thought that he might be next in line and since Dr. Mahathir has stirred the hornet’s nest there will be those willing to exploit the breach.

The point is why Ku Li, why him as a possible candidate to slip through that crack? Why not others? Okay, Anwar Ibrahim is probably not the right man. Fresh from prison, his credentials as former finance minister will cut no ice in the face of aggressive competition from others, like another former finance minister, Daim Zainudin. Why not Daim if what we want is experience at the economic helm. After all, his departure from office is more recent.

Maybe it is because he too was handpicked by Dr. Mahathir plucked out of the blue and deposited into office. A one-portfolio minister, formerly a businessman, Daim is not charismatic. To make matters worse he was far too aloof for a politician. His achievements notwithstanding, the UMNO grassroots is more impressed by accessibility then performance.

For to them, a job well done is no big deal. Was not Dr. Mahathir never a finance minister? And yet he was able to put the economy into overdrive in just a few short years. Furthermore, ministers move from one portfolio to another so that, should they ever become number 1, they would have had a feel of what it takes to find the balance necessary for good governance of the country.

Then again, if this is the case, why not ask a sitting cabinet minister with many years of service, one who is Dr. Mahathir’s legacy. Unfortunately, serving under the former prime minister does little for a minister’s image. None could outperform Dr. Mahathir. Nobody could outthink him. And, no one could out boss the boss. Whether intentionally or otherwise, Dr. Mahathir’s cabinet ministers were never made to appear as convincing prime minister material.

Is it any wonder then that we appear to be caught in a time warp?

Not that Tengku Razaleigh is not a legitimate contender. His credentials are neither tarnished by insinuations of corruption nor blemished by the rabid racism of UMNO’s recent General Assembly. He was the first Malay finance minister and a successful one at that, having laid the foundation for the Bumiputra economy. Remember, too, he came close to defeating Dr. Mahathir that time. But, like he says, he is an old man. Then again Dr. Mahathir was 78 before he threw in the towel.

However and most pertinent to the issue is that all this talk of challenge will probably be stillborn. For, UMNO has never properly understood that in a democracy, democratic practices should be all pervasive, especially in the party that spearheads the ruling coalition.

DOING AWAY WITH PRETENCE

TWO OF MALAYSIA’S longstanding mainstream newspapers most closely affiliated to the ruling party UMNO are about to be merged. The New Straits Times and Utusan stables will become one if things go according to the plan of those who are willing it to happen. (For details go to http://archives.thestar.com.my/last7days/)

Will it make a difference to the ordinary person on the street? NO. Why should it. Its same-o, same-o right? Except now there is no need to pretend that there might be a difference. Its one big, happy family feeding us the tripe that has become this country’s staple. Here the media has taken the bottom line to heart. Take in the advertising dollars at whatever cost. And, given that the editorial line is all about self-censorship and sucking-up what else is there left to give to the readers other than banality and mediocrity ubiquitously referred to as “human interest”.

Let’s be clear here. The advertising dollars would flow in fast and furious too if we did have a free press. Malaysians have been known to read, and vociferously, in the days when their intelligence was not being sorely insulted; when news was really newsworthy and the newspapers were indeed the Fourth Estate. Then the pen was free and mighty and hence able to act as a check and balance mechanism to the possible excesses of government.

Not that this power is no longer there. Rather it has been hijacked to spin the spin in favour of the vested interests that have ignored past ethical practices such as the popular political maxim that business and politics do not mix in liberal democratic systems. Period. No ifs or buts and that the line separating them should be glaringly clear. Just look at all the standard texts on politics and government and tell me that I am wrong. It is these kinds of blurring of the lines that have made media freedom and objectivity a lost cause. For, when politics and business mix public opinion (i.e. you and I), which the media shapes and modulates, cannot be allowed the pleasure of rocking the capitalist boat of wealth creation.

Things have changed dramatically since those days of innocence. (To my detractors I'm sure it is derided as days of naivete.) Once upon a time it is possible to pick up a newspaper or listen to a radio report and know that what is being written and said is as near to objective truth as is humanly possible. Once upon a long time ago ethics was taught to children at school. Remember the Civics classes? Yes, much of the moral high ground is but sweet memories of a bygone age. Nowadays even the ambitions of the young have changed. In the old days, as the expression goes, children wanted to be doctors and lawyers. Today far too many of our young contemplate a future in business and politics regardless of what their academic disciplines are. Now that success is measured in monetary terms, can you blame the kids for not knowing better?

To add insult to injury, in today'sMalaysia there are no sacred cows. Only one thing matters: money and more money the means to ostentation. And, if standards have to be sacrificed, traditions forfeited, so be it. Profit margins must be kept fat at whatever cost. Success is no longer measured by such noble intangibles as service to the community and the nation, but rather a wonderfully black balance sheet that keeps the fat cats fat.

Or, have we as a nation bred a population that has little need for true human agency and thus have no real interest in newspapers that carry issues that will substantially impact our lives? Instead, in this age of instant gratification, is it enough for Malaysians to be fed accurate information on where to shop for wants and needs and to be told where the good value for money is? In short, is it true that all today's readers want is to know where the "value buys" are? Sadly, going by the look of the country's most successful English newspaper this is probably very near the truth.

And so, who will be badly affected by this proposed merger of the country's flagship newspapers? Not you and me mate, our fate vis-a-vis the media was sealed when the boundaries between politics and business were withdrawn. It is the fat cats in there. Who will survive the merger? Remember, its lonely at the top and who will that loner be? That will probably depend on who the "senior partner" is in this takeover bid. Not that it matters really. Going by precedent, golden handshakes in either stable is nothing to be sneezed at.