On
Malaysia Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng's website, it is stated in his
biodata that he graduated from Monash University, Australia, with a
Bachelor of Economics degree and was a qualified professional accountant
by 1983.PHOTO: ST FILE
PETALING JAYA (THE STAR/ASIA NEWS NETWORK) - Malaysian Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng's qualification in accounting is the latest to come under scrutiny following a series of alleged false education credentials involving Pakatan Harapan leaders.
Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) president Wee Ka Siong, in questioning Mr Lim's credentials as an accountant, said according to Monash University's website, Mr Lim obtained his Bachelor of Economics in 1984.
(MCA) president Wee Ka Siong
"I have no doubt over his degree qualification. However, I wonder how he became a qualified professional accountant in 1983 before he even graduated (in economics)?" he asked in a Facebook posting on Sunday (Feb 10).
On Mr Lim's website: https://limguaneng.com/ , https://limguaneng.com/index.php/biodata/ , it is stated in his biodata that he graduated from Monash University, Australia, with a Bachelor of Economics degree and was a qualified professional accountant by 1983.
Datuk Seri Wee, who is the Ayer Hitam MP, also wanted to know how Mr Lim's qualification as a "qualified professional accountant" was accredited.
"Was it by a local or foreign institution? Which country accepts an economics graduate to pass as a 'qualified professional accountant'?
For a minister who always stresses on the concept of Competency, Accountability and Transparency, please explain and don't keep quiet," he added.
Dr Wee also described as "suspicious" Johor Mentri Besar Osman Sapian avoiding questions from the media on his supposed UPM Bachelor in Accounting obtained in 1985.
"UPM's official website stated that the course was introduced in 1985. How is it possible that there could be such a super-fast graduate produced in the same year!
"If Osman fails to prove the genuineness of his academic credentials, will he still have the dignity to lead the state? This is a question of integrity among leaders," he said.
Citing examples of several world leaders who resigned or were sacked for having fake academic credentials, Dr Wee questioned if the Pakatan Harapan leadership would remain quiet and behave as if nothing happened.
"Or will they respond with the standard Pakatan answer, that a person's academic qualifications have nothing to do with political position," he added.
In Teluk Intan, Bernama reports Perak DAP chairman Nga Kor Ming as backing Tronoh assemblyman Paul Yong Choo Kiong who comes under public scrutiny for his dubious Masters in Business Administration (MBA) from Akamai University, United States, claiming that he had obtained it "legitimately".
This is despite the fact that DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang had labelled the university as a degree mill in 2005.
Mr Yong, 48, was also questioned by Dr Wee as to how he could do his MBA without having a first degree.
The Perak executive councillor has in his biodata listed his primary and secondary school education followed by his MBA.
Responding to the controversy, Mr Yong claimed that his way to enhance his self worth has been blown out of proportion.
He, however, did not reveal how he obtained his MBA.
"What is the relationship between this and politics?" asked Mr Yong.
Sources: https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/malaysia-finance-minister-lim-guan-engs-credentials-as-an-accountant-questioned and
https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2019/02/11/lims-credentials-as-an-accountant-questioned/ Related:
Under scrutiny: A photo of the Cambridge International University and logo taken from its website.
https://youtu.be/x90SmWqP2V4
Politicians having degrees and certificates from questionable higher learning institutions make for bad optics and show poor character, say political analysts.
However, many do it to raise social standing or to win over the masses.
Universiti Malaya law lecturer Assoc Prof Dr Azmi Sharom said that knowingly getting degrees from dubious institutions displayed a lack of confidence in oneself and a lack of good character.
Dr Azmi: ‘Maybe the politicians feel the need to justify their intelligence to the public by having some sort of degree.'
“To actually purchase your degree from these places, then to show off about it, for me it’s not a crime but a sign of poor character.
“Maybe the politicians feel the need to justify their intelligence to the public by having some sort of degree,” said Dr Azmi.
He was commenting on remarks by Deputy Foreign Minister Datuk Marzuki Yahya who said his degree was from the Cambridge International University in the United States, after previously saying he had a degree from the University of Cambridge.
Dr Azmi said he did not believe that Marzuki should lose his job over this matter but that it was done in poor form, adding that people cared more about politicians holding public office doing their job well rather than what certificates they possessed.
“It’s not necessary to have a degree to be a politician, but it would inspire confidence in the public if ministers were academically qualified in the field that they were working on.
“For example, the current minister in charge of environment (Energy, Technology, Science, Climate Change and Environment Minister Yeo Bee Yin) is very qualified in her field and it is very reassuring to know that,” he said.
However, Dr Azmi added that having a degree for a minister was not a “be all and end all” as they could still learn on the job.
Universiti Sains Malaysia political analyst Prof Dr Sivamurugan Pandian said politicians buy dubious degrees because they felt that this was important to boost confidence and trust among the masses.
Prof Sivamurugan: ‘Some who are interested to become politicians feel it’s a disadvantage without a higher education.’
“Some quarters of the public think they will be served better by having lawmakers with education credentials.
“In fact, some who are interested to become politicians feel it’s a disadvantage without a higher education.
“For those who don’t have one, they are willing to go to the extent of finding a dubious degree without realising the consequences in this new information world,” he said.
Prof Sivamurugan believed that politicians with dubious degrees should come clean or voluntarily resign to avoid further damaging the party’s image as the new Malaysia was about integrity.
“However, Marzuki’s case must not be politicised and his party must give him a chance to defend himself,” he added.
In 2017, there were suggestions to the Higher Education Ministry to vet lawmakers with fake credentials, said Prof Sivamurugan, adding that it showed that this was nothing new in Malaysian politics.
UiTM Sabah political science lecturer Mohd Rahezzal Shah said the people will question future decisions made by Marzuki as well as his character and integrity if it was proven that he knowingly bought a certificate from a degree mill.
“If knowing full well that these institutions are degree mills, yet they still get degrees from these places, then it really shows their characters.
“People will judge him (Marzuki) based on that and they will judge his judgment as a leader in the future,” said Rahezzal.
Marzuki, who is also a senator and Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia’s secretary-general, also stood to lose credibility if he claimed that he did not know that the Cambridge International University was a degree mill as a simple Google search would have raised a lot of questions, said Rahezzal.
“As a deputy minister, he is involved in decision-making processes everyday. If he can’t even get the facts right for his degree then he will lose credibility,” said Rahezzal.
He added that many of those who have in the past been caught with dubious degrees were from among prominent businessmen and politicians who wanted to raise their social standing.
“They need to have degrees from foreign countries and the easiest way is to buy them,” he said. The Star
Profile photos of faculty members in question
Under scrutiny: A photo of the Cambridge International University and logo taken from its website.
Checks on the US-based Cambridge International University from which Deputy Foreign Minister Datuk Marzuki Yahya obtained his degree in business administration have raised more questions on its legitimacy.
The faculty members on the website listed one “associate professor”, Dr Patricia Powell, whose profile picture bears the watermark of international online dating site AnastasiaDate that predominantly features East European women.
The profile pictures used for five other women in the adjunct faculty members’ list also looked suspiciously like that of fashion models.
One “Mrs Josephine Fernandens” posed with a pout against a green backdrop while a “Dr Teressa Jane Bright” had bare shoulders and eye makeup fit for the runway.
Other faculty and adjunct faculty members also bore suspiciously low resolution profile pictures.
Attempts by The Star to email multiple faculty and adjunct faculty members for clarification failed when the mail delivery subsystem noted that these email addresses could not be found or the server was unable to receive mail.
The response from the remote server read: “550 No Such User Here”.
With 150 programmes offered, the institution, which claimed to have existed since 1990, only had 12 faculty members and only 13 adjunct faculty members listed on the website.
A Google search on the names of each faculty and adjunct faculty member turned up nothing, neither a LinkedIn profile nor research papers published under them.
Marzuki, who previously said he had a degree from the University of Cambridge pursued through a distance learning programme, admitted on Wednesday that his degree was actually from the Cambridge International University in the United States.
Since that admission, the institution has come under intense scrutiny and increasing suspicion that it is a “diploma mill” that awards degrees with little or no study.
According to higher learning websites, indicators that an institution may be a diploma mill: it is not accredited; doesn’t have a physical address or location listed on the website; admissions entirely depend on a valid Visa or MasterCard; and the website not having an (.edu) web domain.
On its website, Cambridge International University admits it has not been accredited by an accrediting agency recognised by the US Secretary of Education, adding that “accreditation is a strictly voluntary option in the US”.
“There is no mandate by federal law for a school, college or university to be accredited. Many good schools are not accredited,” it said.
There was also no physical address or location of the institution’s office listed on the website, which also does not have the (.edu) domain.
Cambridge International University has no affiliation with the prestigious University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom.
The US-based institution only offers “distance learning” programmes with degree courses costing as low as US$5,000 (about RM20,000) with fees payable via PayPal.
Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2019/02/08/profile-photos-of-faculty-members-in-question/#0QSzO6Txyv7Bz2zo.99
Will the Government deliver or are rosy pledges meant to be broken anyway?
PEOPLE are still harping on election manifesto promises which the new coalition has yet to fulfil.
In the wake of the 14th general election, the 100-day manifesto of Pakatan Harapan is being scrutinised.
Does anyone remember the promises made before GE13 or GE12 or any other election before that?
Remember the Penang Bridge toll promises?
Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak came to town and promised free passage across the bridge for motorcycles.
Hours later, the then Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng cleverly upped the ante and promised that the bridge would be completely toll- free.
In Malaysian lingo, we call this ‘wayang’ or political theatrics.
I found it all very entertaining. I looked forward to each retort from the opposite side.
We should not be like children and cry: “But mummy, you promised!”
Now, Pakatan Harapan did fulfil some of their promises.
The Government abolished the goods and services tax and an earnest hunt has begun for those responsible for the 1MDB controversy.
As for the other promises, maybe not yet? Or at a later date?
You cannot fault Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad for being honest. He told the world Pakatan could not fulfil all the promises in its manifesto because it did not expect to win!
So the politicians were just putting on a show and we, the audience, bought front-row tickets to the ‘wayang’.
Dr Mahathir would know. Can anyone remember any of the manifesto promises that were never fulfilled during his previous 22-year tenure or during the last 10 years under Najib?
I don’t and I have been around for more than three decades, starting my working life the year Mahathir came to power in 1981.
If elections were won just on fulfilling manifestos, Barisan would not have been able to rule for 60 years because there has been volumes of unfulfilled promises.
Elections are usually won on negative rather than positive elements.
We have a saying in the newsroom: people wanna read about sex, drugs and rock ’n’ roll.
At The Star Online, stories along those lines get astronomical level hits.
In politics, seats tend to be won by candidates who can portray how bad the other guy is!
People want to be shocked by scandals, not lulled by promises.
So we do not have to lament the unfulfilled promises.
It is a universal issue which is not confined to Third World countries as even presidential elections in developed countries are won the same way.
One which comes to recent memory is the United States’ presidential elections in 2016.
Everyone thought Hilary Clinton would triumph but Donald Trump ran a smear campaign on her.
People heard all about her leaked emails and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s case on her.
Both candidates spent millions of dollars taking out advertisements in newspapers and on television.
The focus was more on showing how bad the other candidate would be for the country rather than what they would do if elected.
So for all those who are still hung up on Pakatan promises, forget it.
You can shout until the cows come home and nothing is going to happen.
But they still have four years to make good on their promises, before power comes back to us.
They could be saving the best promises for last. Maybe?
Use technology to learn more about them before casting your vote
Cheah taking a wefie with Tanjung Bungah assemblyman Teh Yee Cheu
(behind Cheah) and (from left) Berapit assemblyman Lydia Ong, Speaker
Datuk Law Choo Kiang and state officials during a break at the Penang state
assembly in November.
KEBUN Bunga assemblyman Cheah Kah Peng of PKR is the man of the moment in the political scene in Penang.
Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng barred him from helping with the registration of flood victims for the RM700 aid in his constituency.
Lim, in his Facebook page, said in Chinese that he wouldn’t sit idly when elected representatives do not perform.
He stopped short of naming Cheah, except to say that he heard grouses from Hong Seng Estate residents about not seeing “their assemblyman” during the floods on Sept 15 as well as on Nov 4 and 5. We do not know if this is true.
In any case, Cheah got a letter from the State Secretariat relieving him of the registration duty. Lim and Pulau Tikus assemblyman Yap Soo Huey took over the task.
Cheah, showing his usual gentleman’s demeanour, declined to comment. But this is not the first time he has come under attack from the state administration.
It was learned that he was reprimanded for being unhappy with the passing of the Penang State Park (Botanic) Corporation Enactment 2017.
Penang Botanic Gardens is in his constituency and he feared the Enactment would affect people’s rights after the park was corporatised. It is said he was informed only a few days before the Bill was tabled.
In 2015, Cheah, Penanti assemblyman Dr Norlela Ariffin, Ong Chin Wen (Bukit Tengah), Dr T. Jayabalan (Batu Uban) and Lee Khai Loon (Machang Bubok) were dubbed the ‘PKR Five’ for abstaining in a vote against a Barisan Nasional motion on land reclamation in the state assembly.
Their relationship with Lim soured after that.
How do we define good elected representatives? Keep count of how many times they visit their constituencies?
And then there is the old question: Should we vote for the person or the party? There are many views on this, but as a journalist, I have an occupational advantage.
I have seen a few assemblymen turning up at gotong-royong, spend less than 30 minutes there for photo opportunities and leave. Yes, I know who you are and I am a voter too.
And then I had the chance to cover many state assembly meetings through the years.
This is where we expect constructive debates among the ‘Yang Berhormat’ on issues that affect us. But on a few occasions, there were no fruitful debates or exchange of ideas.
National issues, which cannot be resolved in the state assembly, dominate the proceedings at times. Why? What were our assemblymen hoping to achieve by prattling about things that the hall cannot act on?
They frequently call each other names and bicker in the august House.
In the last meeting, two assemblymen dragged out the name of a newspaper editor and attacked his character in the hall where the editor had no chance to defend himself due to the absolute privilege that lets assemblymen say anything they want there without fear of being sued.
But I was relieved because at least five other assemblymen stood up to defend the editor and talked those two assemblymen down.
Unlike them, I do not have absolute privilege so regretfully, I can mention no names.
With today’s technology, it is easy to get to know political candidates before giving them our votes.
Check out their Facebook pages or Google their names to learn about them.
If they are not up to mark, something might show in their social media exchanges.
Remember, the election season is just around the corner. Use your vote wisely.
A
DAP assemblyman has come to the defence of the Penang Forum, saying
that there was no need for the state government to criticise the
coalition of 20 environmental and civil rights organisations.
GEORGE
TOWN: A DAP assemblyman has proposed for a royal commission of inquiry
to be set up to look into the sinkhole in Persiaran Tanjung Bungah and
the landslides in Penang Hill.
Some phrases have become jargon for lawmakers. Many have been overused, and in most cases misused, by this category of people.
Ten most incredible remarks by our (or any other) politicians:
1. Playing politics – One politician accusing another politician of “playing politics”. If politicians are not playing politics, then what are they supposed to be doing? We expect politicians to, well, play politics and to engage in politicking. That’s their job and that’s the skill they’ve honed. Can we imagine, say, a footballer accusing another of the same act – “he is only playing football.” It’s bizarre when politicians point fingers at their counterparts for playing politics, often with negative connotations, as it amounts to accusing their reflection in the mirror.
2. Serving the people and country – Every politician in any given country says the same thing. They are supposedly only interested in serving the people, the country, religion, race, pets, families and everything they can think of – except themselves! And we are expected to believe that that’s their noble cause and that they don’t have any ulterior ambitions. Yet, they will spend their entire time and resources kicking, back-stabbing, bad-mouthing and clawing their way to the top! Of course, we will duly be told that they can serve the people “better and effectively” the higher they reach, all in the name of the people’s benefit, of course.
3. I will “take note” of the proposal – Which means the politician will do nothing. In fact, if your staff or colleague spouts
the same phrase, it only amounts to the person not deserving a pay rise. Lazy bones syndrome? Highly likely! It’s almost an expression of inertness. Amazingly, it has now become the standard “tactical response” used by politicians to answer fellow Members of Parliament on the opposite bench during Question Time.
4. I “will study” the proposal – This gives the above a run for its money.
The same disinterested, non-committal reply, aka, “I am doing nothing about it”. This merely amounts to, “We will form a sub-committee/a committee/a task force/action committee to study the matter and a report will be submitted to another committee, which will then deliberate the findings.” In short – nothing happens for a while, or probably in the end, nothing happens at all. 5. “I have been misquoted by the press” – This means the politician has screwed up by putting his foot in his mouth (foot-in-mouth disease?), and the only way to get out of the mess, is well, to deny having said it all together.
And if he did say it, then blame the media for taking it “out of context”. And in their minds, this equals: the media has an ulterior motive; the media is biased; the media has an agenda; the media creates fake news.
Well, if the media produces audio or visual evidence to prove the politician’s folly with the said contentious remarks, then the standard operating procedure would likely be “well, I did say it, but I did not mean it THAT way,” or “you did not quite understand what I said”.
6. Fake news – It has frighteningly and sneakily crept its way into Malaysian politics from the United States, President Donald Trump its greatest purveyor. The fake news accusation is a good tactical move to defend illogical/embarrassing situations created by politicians, and used to near perfection by Trump.
It is just as handy for scatterbrain politicians.
7. Trust me – When a politician requests this faith, you know you should believe in your own instincts and scurry in the opposite direction. But it has to be the most overused and, consequently, misused phrase by politicians everywhere, perhaps perfected by North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, who doesn’t even have to worry about standing for elections!
8. Dementia – It’s a disease all politicians should contract if they wish to survive long in the merciless business of politics. You are expected to lose your memory of past actions against your opponents, if it means, you are now required to swallow your indignation to forge a new political partnership.
“What? I took action against you? Did I? It can’t be, it’s someone else who did it. Not me. If I did, well, I hope to pardon you soon.” Sound familiar?
9. The opposition is only interested in toppling us – Well, that’s exactly their job scope, isn’t it ... to take over from the present administration? If they are not interested in toppling existing governments, then aren’t they wasting their time in the opposite side of the camp?
10. There are no permanent enemies, only common interests – In Malaysia, our politicians have turned this into a near artform, hopping in and out of bed so much so voters end up losing track of the number of strange bedfellows.
Let’s not even get into the pillows and strange dreams, or nightmares that have been created for getting in the same sack. One day, a party is accusing another of being an “infidel”, and the next, it is actually working with “infidels”. Almost predictably, after that, it is seen to be friendly with the same party that it has been crossing swords with for decades.
Meanwhile, divorces are announced for the break up with the infidels, yet, the desire to stay in the same house remains, because, well, the rakyat needs to be served.
That’s not all, and this one is even more incredulous – a leader once threw his opponents into the slammer for all kinds of offences, ranging from threatening internal security to sexual perversion, but in the very next instance, touted his once greatest enemy as the leader-in-waiting and probably gave him a BFF status on his FB. Of course, our voters are expected to subscribe to all of this and believe it’s for their own good.
On The Beat by Wong Chun Wai
Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now the group's managing director/chief executive officer and formerly the group chief editor.
On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.
THE biggest concern among Malaysians, as we head towards the general election, is the cost of living. It’s as simple as that.
There have been plenty of political and religious side shows, but for many Malaysians, regardless of race, settling the many bills each month is what worries them the most.
Although Malaysia remains one of the cheapest countries to live in, its citizens have been spoilt for too long.
We are so used to having so many food items subsidised, including sugar, at one time, to the point that some of us have had difficulties adjusting ourselves.
Our neighbours still come to Malaysia to buy petrol, because ours is still cheaper than theirs.
But, as in any elections, politicians will always promise the heavens to get our votes. One of the promises, we have already heard, is the abolishment of the Goods and Services Tax.
No doubt that doing away with GST would appeal to voters, but seriously, even the opposition politicians calling for this are aware that it is a counter-productive move.
In the words of Tan Sri Mohd Sheriff Mohd Kassim, a highly-respected retired government servant, “it is too much of a fairy tale.”
The danger, of course, is that populist electoral pledges are always appealing, even if they are not rational.
Malaysia cannot depend on just about two million tax payers to foot the bill in a country of over 30 million people. It is unfair and unsustainable.
Taxing consumption gives more stability to revenue because income tax is regarded as highly volatile, as it depends very much on the ups and downs of businesses, according to Mohd Sheriff. When the market is soft, revenue collection always sees a dip.
For the government, which has already been criticised for having such a huge civil service, without GST, it could even mean its workers may not get paid when there is a downturn in the economy.
In the case of Malaysia, we have lost a substantial amount of revenue following the drop in oil price.
So, when politicians make promises, claiming plugging leakages is sufficient to end GST, it is really far-fetched and irresponsible.
The Malaysian tax system needs to continue to be more consumption-oriented to make it recession-proof, and, more importantly, the tax net just has to be widened. The bottom line is that, it is grossly unfair for two million people to shoulder the burden.
The government has done the right thing by widening the tax base and narrowing the fiscal deficit. The move to implement GST, introduced in 2014, has been proven right.
GST is needed to provide a strong substitute as a tax consumption capable of off-setting revenue loss from personal and corporate tax.
Beginning next month, India will join nearly 160 countries, including Malaysia, in introducing GST. Like Malaysia, when GST was first introduced, plenty of loud grumblings and doubts have rolled out.
Unlike Malaysia’s flat 6% across the board, India is introducing a more complicated four-tier GST tax structure of 5%, 12%, 18% and 28%, with lower rates for essential items and highest for luxury and demerits goods that would also attract additional cess.
In Singapore, GST was introduced on April 1, 1994, at 3%. The rate was increased to 4% in 2003, then 5% in 2004. It was raised to 7% on July 1, 2007.
Some politicians came under fire recently for purportedly calling for the abolishment of GST, however, some others clarified that they had merely called for a reduction in the tax’s percentage.
Another top opposition politician has come out as the strongest opponent of GST, reportedly saying the claim that Malaysia needs GST is false.
Some other politicians have described GST as regressive, but have not come out with clear ideas on how it should be tackled.
Nonetheless, the ruling party should not make light of these electoral promises.
For many in the urban middle class, they feel the squeeze the most.
They have struggled against the rising cost of living, paying house and car loans, and earning deep levels of debt, as one report aptly put.
The middle class, consisting of over 40% of Malaysians, is also in the income tax bracket, it must be noted.
Last year, an economist was quoted saying that 2016 was a year of a shrinking urban middle class and a happy upper class.
Shankar Chelliah, an associate professor at Universiti Sains Malaysia, said that the Malaysian middle class shrank in metropolitan centres across the country, and that most of its members would end the year almost 40% poorer than they were in 2015.
He said this would be due to the withdrawal of cooking oil and sugar subsidies, depreciation of the ringgit, decrease in foreign inflows and increase in outflows, among other factors.
For many in this middle class range who do not qualify for BR1M handouts, the government clearly has to come up with a range of programmes which can relieve them of these burdens.
It isn’t race or religious issues that will appeal to voters – they want to know how they can lead better lives, and if the opposition thinks contentious issues will translate into votes, they will be in for a surprise.
It is true that the heartland will continue to deliver the crucial votes, and the ruling party will benefit from this, but Malaysia has also become more urban and more connected.
At the end of the day, it is the bread and butter issues that matter most. Let’s hear some solid ideas and programmes which will reduce the burden of Malaysians.
By Wong Chun Wai On the beat, The Star
Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now the group's managing director/chief executive officer and formerly the group chief editor.
On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.
Zunar’s cartoon reflects the glut of titles in society. Image from Aliran Monthly.
IF there’s one Malaysian practice that needs reviewing, it has to be this – the long salutations, thanks to the titles of prominent individuals, at the start of speeches during functions.
I can never understand why addressing the audience as “distinguished guests” isn’t good enough. Surely, the audience would be happy to be called distinguished. Or maybe even just “Ladies and Gentlemen”.
Malaysians, however, have to cringe and listen to speakers formally addressing each and every titled person at functions.
We begin with “Tan Sri Tan Sri, Puan Sri Puan Sri, Datuk Seri Datuk Seri, Datin Seri Datin Seri, Datuk Datuk, Datin Datin and distinguished guests”.
And this before the speaker even begins honouring the more important guests by actually naming them one by one, along with their long titles, honorifics and designations.
All these can take up to 10 minutes before the person finally gets to the actual speech.
Welcome to Malaysia. This is another practice which reflects our obsession with formality and titles. It may sound medieval and strange to visitors to Malaysia but this is the done thing here, presumably because some ego-inflated titled individual got offended when his title was not mentioned in a speech.
But alas, the whole thing has become a mockery of sorts. The intention, good as it may be, is actually offensive to the other equally important guests, those with no titles.
They have ended up at the bottom of the pack, in the category of “tuan tuan dan puan puan” or “ladies and gentlemen.” To put it in perspective, without us realising, this is like the category of “dan lain-lain” or “others” which many Malaysians have stood up against.
One would understand it if such a practice is carried out in a palace where protocols are strictly adhered to but surely, not in ordinary functions?
For one, it takes up precious time when most of us just want to get on with the business of the day or in many instances, get on with the dinner. Please, at 8.30pm, most of us are hungry already.
Many times, guests are made to wait, especially when the guest of honour arrives late. By the time the VIP gets there, and thanks to the long and winding speeches, dinner is finally served – at 9.30pm or 10pm.
One wonders why the VIP has to be ushered into a holding room – another peculiar Malaysian practice – before he makes his grand entrance into the ballroom.
I have attended enough events in Britain and the United States, where VIPs would just walk straight into the function hall without any fanfare.
In London, then mayor Boris Johnson cycled to the opening of a property development site and in Sydney, the mayor parked his car a short distance away and walked to the venue!
He introduced himself to his (very) surprised Malaysian audience – and of course, there was no entourage fussing around him to make him look important, another one of our local standard operating procedure.
To be fair, not all of our VIPs are spoilt silly. Sometimes, it is their officers who make a fuss over these formal arrangements to the event’s host.
Those in the royal circles, who have a career in protocol, push even harder – even when the heads of states themselves do not demand it.
His Highness Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah of Selangor does not even allow waiters to get the napkins ready for him before his meals, insisting on doing it himself.
The Ruler drives his own car often to functions and tells his police motorcade not to put the sirens on because to him, there was no need to put on such a display of importance.
The Sultan of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim Ibni Almarhum Sultan Iskandar, sportingly poses for selfies with his subjects often, sending his security and protocol officers into a frenzy many times.
And most of the time, he drives his car himself. Often, he makes a stop and have a meal at roadside shops, without prior notice. For breakfast, he goes to a mamak restaurant for roti canai quite regularly, again without fuss or advance notice.
At the Cabinet level, Datuk Mustapa Mohamed, the Minister of International Trade and Industry, is certainly the most down-to-earth minister from Umno.
Travellers taking the ERL from KL Sentral to KLIA often see Mustapa travelling alone or taking a flight on Economy Class home to Kelantan. He does not see the need to shout about it or have his officers post a picture on Instagram to get publicity.
Permodalan Nasional Bhd chairman Tan Sri Abdul Wahid Omar insisted on moving around on his own, without the need for bodyguards, when he was in charge of the Economic Planning Unit (EPU). The same can be said of Datuk Seri Idris Jala, who is now chief executive officer of the Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu).
Perhaps their non-political background helps but having said that, there are corporate figures who are even more status-conscious than politicians.
And seriously, what do Malaysian VIPs do with gifts or “token of appreciation” items presented to them at the end of every function? Yep, they are probably gathering dust in some room filled to the brim with other such items in Putrajaya.
At one time, there was a proposal that only a basket of fruits be given as it was more practical but it never got off the ground.
Likewise, this article will have no impact on the issue.
I wish to thank the “Tun Tun, Toh Puan Toh Puan, Tan Sri Tan Sri, Puan Sri Puan Sri, Datuk Seri Datuk Seri, Datin Seri Datin Seri, Datuk Datuk, Datin Datin, tuan tuan dan puan puan yang dihormati sekalian” for reading this.
On The Beat By Wong Chun Wai
Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist
in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various
capacities and roles. He is now the group's managing director/chief
executive officer and formerly the group chief editor.
On The
Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column
weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the
paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected
articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in
conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current
issues in The Star.
Malaysia is in danger of becoming a nation with the most number of decorated people
THIS has to be a record of some sort – a notorious gang of 60 hardened criminals including four low-level politicians with the titles of Datuk and a Datuk Seri, has been netted in a series of swoops.
The Gang 360 Devan gang, involved in murder, drug-pushing, luxury car theft and hijacking, has to be the gang with the most number of titled leaders.
Then, there is also the leader of the notorious Gang 24 – a Datuk Seri – who was among 22 men held in another spate of arrests.
Last December, a gang leader known as Datuk M or Datuk Muda was shot dead by his bodyguard while they were driving along the Penang Bridge. The Datuk was a detainee at the Simpang Renggam centre.
A day later, a video went viral showing a heavily tattooed man being violently beaten up by a group of men believed to be gangsters, at the late Datuk’s funeral.
Three days ago, there was a series of arrests by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency (MACC) which saw a number of Datuks being arrested and charged.
If we hold the record of being the country which has the highest ratio of government servants, we may also soon be the country with the most number of titled people.
And if we are not careful, we could well be a country which has the most titled criminals.
The people being conferred a Datukship seem to be getting younger and some are surprisingly under 30 years old, which begs the question – what have these youngsters contributed to society to deserve such titles?
Last October, Singapore’s Straits Times carried prominently a news report of a teenager who purportedly became the youngest “Datuk” in the country.
“The image that went viral shows the apparent recipient of the title standing in a crowded waiting room while dressed in ceremonial attire with the caption reading: “Youngest Dato in Malaysia ... 19 years.”
The Malaysian media, which carried the news earlier, has not been able to verify the age of the person in the photo. And no one has denied the authenticity of the article, not even the person in the photo, who may actually be older than he looks.
Regardless of which state these titles are from, many Malaysians rightly deserve the recognition from the royal houses because of their community work, in various forms.
One or two states, especially Pahang, seem to be more generous in conferring awards while states like Selangor, Johor, Perak, Sarawak and Kelantan are more stringent in their selection.
The Selangor state constitution states that only a maximum of 40 Datuk titles can be conferred each year.
The Sultan of Selangor Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah has imposed stricter conditions – including the minimum age of 45 – for a person to be conferred the state’s Datukship, to limit the number of recipients and protect the image and dignity of the awards.
In the case of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim ibni Almarhum Sultan Iskandar has expressed his frustrations openly, saying sarcastically “that it has come to a point that if you throw a stone, it will hit a Datuk and when the stone rebounds, it will hit another Datuk”, to illustrate the point that Malaysia is in danger of becoming a nation with the most number of decorated people.
While the increasing number of people with the Datuk title has long been a contentious issue, what Malaysians are concerned about is the number of such titled persons being involved in crime.
Pictures of a certain Datuk with a visible tattoo on his hand, purportedly depicting his gang allegiance, have long gone viral on social media.
Malaysians are asking whether royal houses submitted the names of potential recipients to the police for vetting before conferring them with titles. This is a practice of the Sultan of Selangor. If that were the case with every state, criminals would not have been awarded.
I have complete faith in the ability of our police force. They will carry out their duty of checking the background of such people if asked to do so.
But what is taking place now in Malaysia is also a reflection of our people’s obsession with titles, honorifics and even fake academic titles.
Our former deputy prime minister, the late Tun Ghafar Baba, was just plain Encik, until the day he retired from office.
In Tunku Abdul Rahman’s first Cabinet, after we achieved independence, only five of 15 ministers were made Datuks.
The finance minister at the time, Tan Siew Sin, only held the title of Justice of Peace – which is recognised in Commonwealth countries.
Penang’s first Chief Minister, the late Wong Pow Nee, had no title until he retired, after which he was made Tan Sri. Another was the late Gerakan president Dr Lim Chong Eu who only became Tun upon retirement.
In short, things were pretty simple back then, with proper methodology when it came to conferring decorations, medals and titles. But not today.
There are now so many variations of the Datuk titles – Datuk Seri, Datuk Sri, Datuk Paduka, Dato’, Datuk Wira and Datuk Patinggi (depending on the states) – it has become confusing, even to members of the media.
There are now calls from some titled people that the press should use their titles accurately. I can only imagine the number of corrections the media has to deal with if mistakes are made and some snooty individual gets upset.
In the 1970s, the media decided to standardise how these title holders should be addressed by calling them all “Datuk”. The press also decided to call the Datuk Sri from Pahang “Datuk Seri”.
It is just impossible to check every single title or pre-fix when naming a person.
The reporter does not ask the police where the criminal suspect got his Datukship. Neither can we ask the Datuk criminal as he is being led to the courts in handcuffs, “Where is your Datukship from, Datuk” ?
Besides Brunei, the Malaysian press must be the only one that includes the titles of individuals. Well, there is the British media but they only address those who are knighted with the title “Sir”.
The royalty shouldn’t be the only party blamed for the increasing number of Datuks. Malaysians are willing to go to all lengths to buy the titles, even from bogus sources.
But the titles must not be bestowed on any one with a criminal record or it makes a mockery of this honour.
China Wen:Serve the people well, aim for big accomplishments, not big titles! 