Neither Yesterday, Nor

Tomorrow

Foreword

Saifuddin Abdullah

I was an UMNO guy for 29 years (1986-2015). I was especially active in the
partys organisational matters since 2000 and held a variety of positions, from
Information Chief of an UMNO Division , to a Member of Parliament, a
Federal Deputy Minister and a Member of the UMNO Supreme Council. From
206 onwords, I started writing about politics, advocating for reform from
within (both UMNO/BN and the government). This was part of struggle to
realise an idealism that I have held onto since my secondary school days. I
believe in making things better for all and in self-improvement. I tried to read
as much as possible and meet as many authors and scholars as possible. I am
very fortunate to have had the opportunity of reading (some, if not all) the
works of the contributors to this book and of meeting them in person. John
Funston, Clive Kessler, James Chin and Bridget Welsh are accomplished
scholars. They have published some of the seminal works on Malaysia politics.
I am indeed honoured to have been invited to write the foreword of this book.
This book is about the 70 years of UMNOs existence. The four
contributors look from different perspectives at: UMNO under Dato Seri
Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak; UMNOs identity and legitimacy; how
The Malaysia Chinese view UMNO; and if institutional changes within
UMNO are possible. The common theme of the essays in this book is the
argument that UMNO is weakening and its future is less and less certain and
because UMNO is the most dominant party in Malaysia, one should also ask
the most dominant party in Malaysia, one should also ask the 4.2 billion
question - what about Malaysias future ?

I am writing from my own perspective and personal experience. I hope

these reflections are useful in closing the gaps in our knowledge of the party.
Even though I have left UMNO, and am now heading the Pakatan Harapan
(Alliance of Hope) Secretariat, and working hard to challenge UMNO (and
BN) and win the next general election (GE14), I have no regrets about my time
in UMNO, no hard feeling and I maintain cordial relationships with many of
my friends in UMNO. Almost all of the points in this write-up are things that
I have previously spoken and written about, and tried to implement as policy,
while I was in UMNO. I am thankful to thr editors of Sinar Harian, Sin Chew
Daily and The Edge Malaysia for allowing me to use some of the contents of
my column in their esteemed publications for the purpose of this write-up.

UMNO today is no longer the real UMNO

I was first introduced to UMNO by my late grandmother (my late mothers

mother), Aminah Akil, when I was a primary school kid in the late 1960s. She
was an active member of the UMNO Branch in her village. Today, this branch
Kampung Tanjung Kerayung Lebak is one of the 96 branches in the
Temerloh UMNO Division, which is one of the 191 UMNO Divisions of
UMNO Malaysia.
I used to see her proudly putting on the famous UMNO womens official
dress, i.e. the white baju kurung, red sarung (traditional Malay dress) and red
head scarf. When I asked where she was going, her standard answer was to
help people. I do not remember her using word politics with me. It was
always to help people. She did not ask for money from the branch or division
leaders to buy her UMNO uniform. When asked to carry out party works in
nearby villages or towns, she had to take public transport because she could
not afford to own even a motorcycle. She did not ask money for the fare or a
per diem allowance.
With her very supportive late husband, Uda Busu Leman, they were ordinary
simple village folk. She was a mindwife. My grandfather was a farmer. They
had three daughter; Sapiah, Ramlah (my mother) and Siti Esah.
My grandmother, together with the others of her generation, and especially
the Malay teachers, who played a pivotal role as grassroots leaders, were
examples of the hundreds of UMNO members who prefer to call themselves
Orang UMNO (UMNO people) rather than Ahli UMNO(UMNO
members). For them, their attachment to UMNO was more than just being a
member. Their essential understanding of politics and their reason for joining
UMNO was to help people. It was service politics at its core. They were
party volunteers, filled with the idealism and generosity of volunteerism. In
spite of not having much, they were very committed and made sacrifices in
their own ways to help others who were less fortunate. They were the members
of yesterdays UMNO, which I call UMNO Berjuang (the fighting UMNO).
This was an UMNO that fought for a struggle and a cause which in turn made
the party strong. UMNO was strong not only because it won handsomely in
elections, but also because it was respected by all, especially the Malays. These
kind of members are a rare species in todays UMNO.
In 1989, when I was thinking about joining a political party, I was actually
looking for a multiracial party. I wanted to be a BN member. But because BN
is a coalition, and there was no avenue then to become a direct member, I had
to join one of its component parties. So, I joined UMNO as a member of my
grandmothers branch,
By that time, UMNO was no longer like it was in the 1960s. Even though
teachers are still important, their pivotal role has either been replaced by
businessmen, or they have to share it with the latter. My grandmothers role
was replaced, mainly, by Pemaju Masyarakat KEMAS (full-time staff of the
ministry of Rural Development who manage and teach at KEMAS
kindergartens and attend to grassroots social development work).
Volunteerism has declined.
I call todays UMNO UMNO berwang (UMNO with money). Money
politics was already the new normal by the end of 1980s, but it
Has deepened future. Money politics comes in various forms. The most
obvious is the buying of votes by candidates standing for the UMNO Supreme
Council and senior positions at the divisional level. Sometimes, money politics
occurs even at the branch level. Other forms would range from members being
paid allowances to carry out party work, to the sponsorship of party uniforms,
activities and fares, and to the award of governmental business and contracts.
I have been writing on the urgent need to fight against money politics since
2006 as part of my advocacy of a New Politics, which later become the title
of my fourth book (2008), which was launched by Najib (when he was Deputy
Prime Minister and UMNO Deputy President).
Politics need money. But money must never be the reason for politics. It
must be regulated. It becomes wrong when money is used to advance political
expediencies. Yet because money politics is now the norm, some UMNO
members do not see it as money politics, or do not see it as wrong, or they
simply ignore it. Worse is that some actually like it, because they thrive on it.
If we do not put a stop to money politics, there will be people who will use
money to gain power, and use the power that they have secure more power.
This will go on and on. It will become a vicious circle. The effects are very
bad: dirty politics, corruption, leakages, control by the rich, black money and
loss of faith in our democracy. Hence, as an example, I have been supporting
the proposal by Malaysia academic Terence Gomez, to formulate law on
political financing.
The 1MDB scandal the mother of scandal involving Prime Minister
and UMNO President Najib Razak is a classic example of how money politics
has corrupted the party to the core. The scandal has badly hurt UMNO and the
whole country in terms of leadership, corruption, governance, the economy and
right (including the special position of the Malays/Bumiputeras as well as the
quality of political freedom and the rule of law). I started having serious
reservations toward UMNO and its leadership, after GE13, when the political
transformation component
In the Government Transformation Programme launched by Najib when he
become prime minister was discontinued. I was a strong supporter of this
transformation programme, especially the political dimension, and was hopeful
that Najib would do even more. I wrote a book on it, entitled Memacu
Tranfomasi (Helming Transformation) (2013). To me , the Government
Transformation Programme was a major factor in helping UMNO/BN win, or
survive, GE13. After the election, I suggested to Najib that he should continue
and do more to further this programme. But, he paused the needed
transformations, and in certain areas, actually made U-turns.
Therefore when, on a single day because of the 1MDB investigation
he fired former Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, Minister
Dato Seri Mohd Shafie Afdal and Attorney General Tan SriAbdul Gani Patail,
and transferred out (without notice) two senior officers of the Malaysia Anti-
Corruption Commission (MACC), I told myself that enough was enough. That
was that the day when I made up my mind to leave UMNO. On 15 October
2015, I officially joined Keadilan (Parti Keadilan Rakyat or PKR).

Is UMNO really fighting for the Malays?

I have always been wary of the problem of the politics of race. UMNO is a race
based party, but it is not a racist party. I am of course aware that of late, from
many perspectives, UMNOs position is debatable. I will come back to this
point later. At this juncture, I refer to UMNOs Malay Agenda. UMNO
prides itself upon the idea that it is the only party that fights for the survival,
welfare and progress of the Malays (and Bumiputeras). It accuses other of
betraying the Malays. After being in UMNO for some time, I began asking, is
this so? What is the meaning of betrayal? Which Malays are being betrayed?
UMNO has been on power since independence. As the self-proclaimed
guardian of the Malays, how does the party fare?
This brought me to the book by Muhammed Abdul Khalid, entitled The Colour
of Inequality. According to Muhammed, the overall economic growth that
would gradually pull everyone up to a higher level of wellbeing what
economists call the trickle down effect does not necessarily include
everyone. Some end up progressing faster and future that others, while a
sizeable section lags behind ... hence creating a dangerous phenomenon:
widening inequality ... the wealth gap remains high post 1990 almost at
the same level for the past twenty years The relatives income gap between
urban and rural in 2012 is the same as the year Malaysia obtained its
independence in 1957! The gap between the rich and the poor also didnt
seem to improve Among the Bumiputeras , the inequality .. remains
stubbornly high. Based on the Amanah Saham Bumiputera (ASB) 2013 annual
report, about 72 per cent of its investors has an average investment of RM554,
the top 0.2 per cent having 1,308 times more at RM725,122.
On income, Muhammed stated, Post 2009, there seems to be a widening
relative income gap between the Bumiputera and the Chinese. The relative
income gap grew by 10 per cent during the period of 2009 2012, which is the
highest increase since the introduction of NEP in 1970 the gap increased
during the administration of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak
On implementation failure, he stated, Another possible reason for low
wealth ownership of the poor, especially for the Bumiputera, is the failure of
the government and Bumiputera politicians to enforce and monitor the
implementation of the policies aimed at improving their social-economic
position.
Muhammed stated, The failure to monitor and to enforce could be
rectified had the Bumiputera politicians, especially in the main ruling party,
UMNO, played the important role of ensuring that the objectives are achieved
According to one former vice president of UMNO,
and concurred by the former Prime Minister and former Deputy Prime
Minister, there has never been an instance, not even once, of the economic
agenda or blueprint of the Bumiputera being thoroughly discussed during the
UMNO Supreme Council meetings. In the words of a former Prime Minister,
this could be because they would not do a proper study because the results
would be very disappointing it shows failure on the part of the government.
The inaction of the biggest Bumiputera political party in safeguarding the
interest of the Bumiputera is due to genuine lack of interest to help the groups.
According to a former Prime Minister, the Supreme Council members and the
ministers are mainly interested in what they can get out of politics for
themselves. (own emphasis added)
I am not surprised by Muhammeds account. In my tenure as an UMNO
Supreme Council Member, the only time a national policy was properly
brought to the attention of the Supreme Council was on the usage of English
as the medium for the teaching of mathematics and science in schools. The
Education Ministrys Director General at that time, Tan Sri Alimuddin Mohd
Dom was invited to brief us as to why the government has announced that the
programme was to be stopped and replaced with a new one. Note that the
briefing was made after the announcement of the decision on the programme
was already made.
One of the main weakness of UMNO is the lack of seriousness in policy
making, monitoring and evaluation of programmes that are implemented. I
think this is due to UMNO having being in power for as long and feeling that
it is indispensable, to the extent that it is living in a comfort zone. The other
reason is its culture of over relying on the civil service.
So, UMNO is not only a corrupt party, it has failed the community it has
pledged, since the partys founding, to protect. It is thus no wonder that UMNO
has lost the respect of the majority of Malaysians, including the Malays, and
especially the new middle ground. This helps us understand why the UMNO-
led BN lost its two-thirds majority in Parliament in GE12 and GE13, and, more
importantly, lost the popular vote in GE13.
 Why UMNO is still in power?

But, why is UMNO (and the BN) still in power? There are many factors. To
me, the three major factors are the unfair election system, the politics of race
(plus religion) and the development of a culture of fear.
It is common knowledge that the Malaysia electoral system is rigged. The
people have been calling for a better system, i.e. one that is really clean and
fair. This brought about the formation of Bersih (Coalition for Free and Fair
Election), now Bersih 2.0. After various activities, especially a series of well-
attended demonstrations and the proclamation of Bersihs 8 Demands, the
government established the Parliamentary Special Select Committee on the
Improvement of the Electoral Process, before GE13. Unfortunately, not all of
Bersihs demands were met. And, for the demands that were met, many have
yet to be fully implemented.
The problem is, UMNO/BN has used its majority in Parliament to amend
provisions of the Federal Constitution related to the redelineation (or
delimitation) exercises in the past to allow for malapportionment and
gerrymandering in drawing constituencies.
The other problem is that the public confidence in the Election
Commission (EC) is declining. According to Merdeka Center, in 2008, 77 per
cent of the public were satisfied with the ECs conduct. In 2012, it dropped to
51 per cent! Public perception of irregularities in election process is on the rise.
In 2004, 14 per cent agreed that there were irregularities. In 2008, it was 22 per
cent. In 2012, it shot up to 49 per cent!
The EC has not announced when it will start the next national redelineation
exercise (now overdue). The last exercise was in 2003. In the meantime, civil
society and opposition parties have been working hard to educate and empower
the people to play an active role in the coming redelineation process. The EC
has been urged to consult all stakeholders-especially the public at every stage
of the process.
 But the experience of the redelineation process in Sarawak in 2015 only
confirmed the ECs way of doing things without due consultation with the
public. The people filed a legal suit to challenge the process of the exercise,
but unfortunately, the applicantss legal journey ended when the Federal Court
dismissed their application for leave.
The Sarawak redelineation exercise increased the number of state seats
from 71 to 82. The impact of the exercise was clearly shown in the recent
Saraak election. BN won with a landslide victory and the redelineation was
been a factor in the electoral outcome in many seats, including Batu Kawah
and Piasau. But that is to be expected. Because the redelineation exercise has
traditionally given the BN an unfair edge.
On 9 August 2016, the Sabah State Assembly passed two bills that will
lead to a redelineation exercise that will increase the number of state
constituencies from 60 to 73. And again, as highlighted in the speeches of a
few members when debating the bills, there has been no proper consultation
between the EC and the stakeholders so far.
What is equally worrying is that, to date, some 118,774 voters have been
estimated to have been moved to a different state constituency. From that
number, over 40,000 of them were also moved to a different parliament
constituency. This is the preliminary analysis by Bersih 2.0. This has happened
on the basis of the recent locality correction exercise undertaken by the EC.
The locality determines the state and parliamentary constituency of a voter.
The number of a voters moved in several state and parliamentary
constituencies are large enough to affect the outcome of an election. Examples
of voters moved to another state constituency include: from Sungai Abong to
Bentayan(6,322 voters), from Batang Kali to Kuala
Kubu Baharu (5,590 voters) and from Permanis to Jementah (2,448 voters).
Examples of voters moved to another parliament constituency are: from
Kalabakan to Tawau (2,742 voters), from Sekijang to Segamat (2,694 voters)
and from Subang to Shah Alam (1,937 voters).
Because of the severity of the non-consultative relocation of voters, on 1
July 2016, Pakatan Harapan leaders led by Keadilan Vice President Nurul
Izzah Anwar and NGO activists led by Bersih 2.0 Chairman Maria Chin
Abdullah, went to the EC headquarters in Putrajaya to deliver a memorandum
demanding that the EC explain the specific reasons for the correction of each
locality and return voters who were moved across state and parliamentary
constituencies to their original constituencies.
Such locality corrections violate the spirit of the Federal Constitution
because, in effect, they are tantamount to a redelineation exercise. Any
redelineation requires the approval of a Parliament by law. This is a
redelineation exercise through the back door. It is bad for democracy. And this
may be the single most important factors that will save UMNO/BN in GE14.

UMNO plays the Race Card

As I have alluded to earlier, I have always been concerned with the problems
of the politics of race. According to Ooi Kee Beng in his book, Merdeka for
the Mind: Essays on Malaysian Struggles in the 21st Century, racialism is the
promotion of race as an elementary classification of humans in public
discourse. This may expressly inform government policy making or it may not,
but the idea of race however unclear is accepted as a relevant part of much
of Malaysias social interaction. A racialist is therefore someone who is
conscious about race, and is accepting of it as an unproblematic category.
This does not make him a racist, but racialism is a prior condition for racism.
A racist in turn is someone who feels or shows disdain for others based
upon their racial affiliation. This may be by virtue of prescribed