Bersih (clean), an electoral reform movement, surprised the government when it successfully mobilized thousands of people in the streets on April 28. It was reported to be the biggest rally ever held in Malaysia. But before Bersih, there were several “people power” initiatives that deserve recognition, such as the Occupy Dataran Merdeka, the student march against the “inefficient and exploitative” national school loan program, and the popular indignation against the operation of a rare earth refinery in the town of Kuantan.

Bersih has three demands: the resignation of the Election Commission, the cleaning up of the electoral roll, and the presence of international observers at the general elections. The government claimed that it had already addressed the concerns raised by Bersih, but its response didn’t impress protestors, who were violently dispersed by the police. The fact that Bersih managed to gather a record number of protesters in the streets of Malaysia and in other cities around the world should be placing genuine pressure on the ruling coalition, which has been in power for the past 55 years, to rethink its tactic of nonchalantly dismissing all reform advocates as proxies of the opposition.

Despite the insistence of its leaders that Bersih is nothing more than an electoral reform movement, it has already evolved into a credible and powerful network of citizens who want to remove the nondemocratic aspects of Malaysia’s system of government. In fact, the campers at Occupy Dataran and the student protesters early last month openly advocated the demands of Bersih even though their campaign and activities aren’t directly related to Bersih.

What bound the campers at Occupy Dataran, who simply wished to reclaim the public space where the grassroots can gather and discuss the meaning of transparent governance, and the Bersih participants, was their shared commitment to expose the anti-people and anti-democratic policies of the government. The student protesters who are complaining about excessive fees in the student loan program are similar to young people in the Bersih march who are frustrated with the structural weaknesses of the electoral system. Many students who supported the march for free higher education also joined the Bersih event.

Another outstanding example of citizen protest in Malaysia is the campaign against the operations of Lynas Corporation, an Australian company that was permitted by the government to construct the world’s largest rare earth refinery plant. Residents living near the plant have petitioned the government to stop the operations of Lynas because of safety and health concerns. So far, the government has failed to convince the residents to support the project. Protests have already erupted in Malaysia and even places like Australia to show solidarity with the communities that will be affected and displaced by the controversial investment.

Change is being demanded by a significant constituency that has already emerged in Malaysia. We’ve already seen the manifestos and the tactics of this rising movement in recent weeks, and this force has the potential to influence the results of the general elections this year. This force can become stronger if it can combine the broad appeal of Bersih, the passion of the campers at Occupy Dataran, the youthful idealism of student protesters, and the grassroots initiative of the anti-Lynas campaign.

The question now is whether this force can defeat the battle-tested ruling coalition, which has access to state resources and superior political and election machinery?

Written for The Diplomat

Malaysia’s Dubious Voter Numbers

Malaysian election reform coalition Bersih (Clean), which gathered more than 50,000 people together in the streets of Kuala Lumpur last year, will hold another sit-in protest this weekend in frustration over the failure of the government to implement key electoral reforms. Dubbed Bersih 3.0, the gathering will push for the resignation of Election Commission officials, who are accused of orchestrating a clever cover-up of a fraud prone electoral system.

The assembly is expected to be a major political event despite the insistence of the organizers that it’s not trying to undermine the leadership of the ruling coalition, which has been in power in one form or other for the past 55 years. However, the presence of opposition personalities at the event could further bolster the claim of government supporters that Bersih is an initiative of partisan political forces.

But whatever Bersih’s affiliation with the opposition, whether real or imagined, this shouldn’t weaken the argument that Malaysia’s electoral process needs to be more democratic and transparent in order to avoid the suspicion that voting results can be easily manipulated in favor of administration candidates.

One of Bersih’s demands, which is to clean up the electoral roll, is actually supported by many analysts, who have uncovered inconsistencies in the voter registration database. For example, a surprisingly high 90 percent of ballots cast through the postal voting system have favored the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition. Furthermore, 42,000 voters whose status as citizens can’t be verified by the government are still registered.

Since the victory by the opposition in Selangor in 2008, voter registration in that state has increased by 22 percent (more than 340,000 voters) compared to the national average of only 16 percent. Meanwhile, opposition parties are also perplexed by the fact that there are 1,000 people registered to vote who are 100 or older, while one “voter” was apparently born in 1853.

Ong Kian Ming, project director of the Malaysia Electoral Roll Analysis Project, believes that at least 3.4 million cases, or about 27 percent of the electoral roll, need to be validated. He found, for example, that 3.1 million voters have conflicting details for their voting constituencies, and he also questions the 65,455 “foreigners” on the electoral roll, the majority of whom are located in Sabah, a province notorious for giving foreigners fake documentation papers. Finally, he says he wants to probe the removal of 106,743 voters and the registration of 6,762 new voters, which was done without a public announcement last year.

These election numbers are expected to be raised at the Bersih rally this weekend. Hopefully, the government won’t resort to violence again, as it did at last year’s Bersih event. What the government and the Election Commission should instead do is explain the perceived irregularities in the electoral database. And if they can’t defend the statistical anomalies, they must immediately acknowledge the errors and assure the public that all the dirt in the electoral roll will be cleaned before the general elections.

Written for The Diplomat

Although political analysts expected Suu Kyi and the NLD to dominate the elections, many observers were surprised that the election results were announced so quickly, which couldn’t have been done without the approval of the junta-backed civilian government. It seems the ruling generals have been fulfilling their earlier commitment to accommodate the entry of opposition forces in mainstream politics.

There have been a couple of surprises along the way, starting with the junta’s approval of the NLD’s application to register as a political party, which legalized Suu Kyi’s candidacy. The second surprise was the failure of any conspiracy, if there was any, to rig the results in favor of the junta-endorsed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP).

The decision to respect Suu Kyi’s electoral mandate should be appreciated as the latest in a series of broad reforms Burma’s junta has been implementing in recent years. These include: reviving parliament, the unprecedented release of hundreds of political prisoners, and holding open elections.

But the generals aren’t naïve politicians. Rather, they’ve devised a method to placate Western governments while maintaining their iron grip in the government. Thus, the NLD’s landslide victory, while impressive, has only earned them 43 seats in a chamber of 600 members. In contrast, unelected military officers compromise one-third of the parliament. Nonetheless, Western governments, urged on by Burma’s neighbors, are considering lifting sanctions against the country, with Washington already promising to ease some of them.

Still, this doesn’t mean that the NLD’s recent victory was unimportant. On the contrary, the election demonstrated that Suu Kyi continues to enjoy widespread popularity at home and abroad despite having been under house arrest for two decades. Similarly, her party’s victory also demonstrated its organizational strength has weathered the numerous government attempts to dismantle it. Although it hadn’t run a campaign since 1990, the NLD managed to defeat the government-backed machinery that campaigned on behalf of the NLD’s main rival.

The results also proved that NLD supporters have remained loyal while also appealing to young people, as seen by the number of first-time voters and the large youth gatherings that were held to celebrate the victory of Zay Yar Thaw, one of the pioneers of Burmese hip-hop and a veteran NLD member.

Despite the country’s restrictive Internet rules, Burmese netizens actively monitored the elections through various social networking sites, especially on Facebook. Htoo Tay Zar, a prominent citizen media journalist, noted the popularity of the NLD during the campaign period. “Most people always said the NLD was an opposition party. For me, the USDP is more like an opposition party. Today, I just witnessed USDP’s campaign trip around Khawmu township. No one pays attention to them. Party members are just like sleeping on the truck After all, they are the opposition party since they oppose people’s desires,” he wrote.

Netizens also exposed some visible election violations such as the issuance of tampered ballots and vote buying. But the most interesting revelation was the use of a photo of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to Burma last November in the campaign posters of the pro-government USDP. Netizens thought it was an inappropriate form of campaigning, but its political significance should be highlighted. Basically, it further validated the observation that Burmese officials are slowly abandoning their anti-Americanism.

The recent by-election was a triumph of the people’s will. But the building of a more mature democratic society will require a series of transition periods. It’s hoped that Suu Kyi and the NLD will maximize their parliamentary voice to push for more substantial democratic reforms in Burma. But the essential question is this: Will the junta allow the pro-democracy constituency to further expand its influence?

Written for The Diplomat

U.S. Plays Philippines War Games

Last week, the Philippine government protested what it called China’s incursion into the country’s territorial waters in Scarborough Shoal. It also vociferously opposed North Korea’s decision to launch a rocket into space because of the debris that might land on Philippine soil. But while it has been obsessively suspicious over the real motives of China and North Korea, it readily welcomed the entry of United States troops into the country this week.

Around 4,500 soldiers from the U.S. Pacific Command have joined 2,300 Filipino troops in the 28th Philippine-U.S. Balikatan (Shoulder-to-Shoulder) exercises that are being held from April 16 to 27. Most of the military exercises will be held in Palawan Province, which is the nearest island to the highly contested Spratly islands. China is among the claimants of these islands.

By April 30, the U.S. and Philippine governments will be meeting in Washington to finalize details of the deployment of additional U.S. troops in the Philippines and the holding of more war games in other parts of the country. News reports suggest U.S. Marines from Okinawa are being moved to Guam and rotated to several Southeast Asian countries, including the Philippines.

As China and the U.S. vie for military supremacy in the Asia-Pacific, the Philippines it seems has already decided to maintain closer military ties with its former colonial master over its Asian neighbor. The choice didn’t surprise analysts because the United States has been an influential force in the Philippines’ domestic politics over the past century.

Despite the decision of the Philippine Senate not to renew the U.S. bases treaty in 1991, U.S. troops were still able to visit and stay in the Philippines for an indefinite period because of the subsequent signing of several military agreements between the two governments. In fact, a de facto U.S. military camp exists in Zamboanga City in Mindanao Island where 600 U.S. Special Forces have been based since 2002.

Regardless, the war games and the continued presence of U.S. military troops in the country are being opposed by activist groups for various reasons.

First, some groups claim that these maneuvers violate Philippine sovereignty. They have also wanted to confirm if the visiting U.S. warship has nuclear arms because the Philippine Constitution explicitly bans nuclear weapons in the country.

In addition, activists have expressed fears that the war games could attract terrorists who might wish to plan an attack against U.S. soldiers in the Philippines. Finally, the government has been accused in the past of allowing U.S. soldiers to participate in actual combat operations against local rebels. The U.S. is suspected by some of providing drones during several local military offensives against rebel camps at a time when the Philippines is facing a separatist movement in Mindanao and a homegrown nationwide communist insurgency.

But it’s not only activists who have complained. Farmers and fishermen also complain because the war games are affecting their livelihoods. Some farmers say they have been driven from their land, while fishermen say they have been prevented from fishing near the site of the military exercises.

Renato Reyes of the leftist group Bayan summarized the opposition to the entry of U.S. soldiers in the Philippines: “The U.S. wants it known that it is still top dog in this region, to the great dismay of many peace-loving peoples in Southeast Asia. We do not want our country to be used as a U.S. outpost and playground. We are not a laboratory for U.S. drone wars. We do not want the U.S. meddling in our internal conflicts and regional issues. We do not want the Philippines acting like the U.S. troops’ doormat in the region. We do not want U.S. troops using our country as their Rest and Recreation destination of choice.”

Maybe it’s time for the Philippine government to review its foreign policy. While it has the right to forge military ties with the U.S., it shouldn’t equate the geopolitical interests of the U.S. with the Philippines. It must strive to adopt an independent foreign policy instead of merely parroting the viewpoint of the U.S. government.

Written for The Diplomat

But PAP could defend the populist measures as concrete proof that the government is willing to try new ideas when necessary to ease the hardships suffered by ordinary Singaporeans. Indeed, PAP could argue that it’s not at all wrong for any government to draft a budget program that seeks to build a fair and inclusive society. It can cite, for example, the cash incentives to seniors, the support programs for persons with disabilities, and the subsidies for low-income families as targeted measures to extend emergency assistance to vulnerable groups in society. For a party accused of being indifferent to the situation of its citizens, these “shock and awe” populist measures represent a welcome and refreshing change in the mindset of the party’s ageing leadership.

Meanwhile, the commitment to lessening the country’s dependence on foreign labor, and the allocation of $1.1 billion to boost the capacity of public buses, directly address two of the principal issues in last year’s elections: the influx of foreign labor, which locals blame for their dwindling job prospects, and the worsening traffic congestion in the city state.

The government has recognized that simply importing labor isn’t sustainable. According to the budget brief, hiring more foreign workers “will test the limits of our space and infrastructure. Plus, if foreign labor is too easily available, companies will have less incentive to upgrade, design better jobs and raise productivity.” Aside from giving tax breaks to firms that hire locals, especially seniors and disabled workers, the government has reduced the Dependency Ratio Ceilings for various key sectors of the economy. This means companies must employ more locals in the next two years.

But perhaps the most controversial item in the budget is the proposed infusion of $1.1 billion to buy 550 public transport buses to reduce crowding and waiting times. Many people are now questioning the rationale of using public funds to help a privately listed transport company. They are also worried about the higher operating cost that could lead to higher bus fares. As an alternative, they want the money to be issued as a loan to the company. Or maybe it’s time to reconsider the opposition proposal to re-nationalize the transport industry.

The budget has also been criticized for its lack of stimulus programs to help revive weak spots in the domestic economy, and there are also suggestions that more should be given to fund sectors that are currently mired with low productivity.

The big challenge for the Singapore government is how to convince the public about its sincerity in instituting major policy reforms in government and the economy. What politicians have to do is to simply back up their rhetoric with swift action. Otherwise, the 2012 budget will be caricatured as a grand document with empty populist promises. If this happens, it could spell the end for the 50-year reign of the PAP.

In the meantime, the public is right to anticipate the initial benefits of the healthy doses of populism that the PAP has injected into the budget.

Written for The Diplomat

Philippine Justice or Grudge?

Philippine Chief Justice Renato Corona was impeached in the House of Representatives in December after 188 legislators signed an impeachment petition. Under the law, only 96 signatures are required to immediately send the case to the Senate.

According to the impeachment petition, drafted by allies of President Benigno Aquino III, Corona betrayed the public’s trust, violated the Constitution, and is guilty of graft and corruption. The eight articles of impeachment contained allegations that Corona illegally amassed his personal wealth during his incumbency in the Supreme Court, and that he used his position to undermine and block the criminal cases filed by the government and concerned private citizens against his patron, former President Gloria Arroyo.

In other words, Corona’s impeachment was presented to the public as a key component of the government’s anti-corruption drive on the one hand, and a necessary reform for effectively prosecuting abusive public officials in the previous administration on the other.

In the past three months, the Senate has been transformed into an impeachment court. The prosecution panel has already finished its presentation of evidence and witnesses on the three articles of impeachment that highlighted Corona’s questionable wealth and bias toward former Arroyo.

Meanwhile, the defense has already begun presenting its witnesses. (It was cut short when Congress adjourned last week for the summer and Lenten break). The trial will resume next month, although it’s still uncertain whether the impeachment case could be finalized before the end of the second regular session of Congress in June.

Many are disappointed with the performance of the prosecution team, and some legal experts criticized the weak evidence and arguments presented during the trial. But in fairness to the prosecution, they were able to prove the disparity between Corona’s income as a public official and his numerous bank accounts and high-priced properties in different parts of metro Manila. They also succeeded in pointing out Corona’s failure to publicly disclose all his assets, something that’s required for every employee and officer of the government.

But it isn’t just the less than solid performance of the prosecution that could jeopardize the case. Actually, the president’s unusual combative stance against the chief justice in the past six months gave credence to accusations that Aquino is less concerned about ending Corona’s corrupt lifestyle and canine loyalty to the former president than pursuing a personal vendetta against the chief justice, who led other members of the Supreme Court in issuing a landmark decision to distribute the president’s family-owned sugar and rice plantation to thousands of small farmers.

Then there are valid concerns that the president is hyping the impeachment to distract a public worried about price hikes, low wages and abysmal social welfare programs. The opposition has in fact advised the president that his extraordinary enthusiasm and determination to impeach Corona should be applied to solving the country’s other problems, like poverty, unemployment, and environment disasters.

The Corona impeachment was initially an accountability and anti-corruption measure that received overwhelming public support. But the president’s questionable motives in spearheading the impeachment, and his apparent vindictive attitude towards a single individual, have transformed the issue into something else. Unfortunately, the sins of the previous administration that the impeachment was supposed to reveal haven’t been given much attention.

The trial is no longer about the chief justice and the crimes he allegedly committed against the Filipino people. It’s Philippine democracy that is now on trial today.

Written for The Diplomat

Aside from ASEAN One, there are bigger projects that seek to foster unity in the region. For example, there has been talk of sending a single regional team to the Olympics. Meanwhile, some economists are in favor of a single regional currency and even the establishment of a Southeast Asian bank network. In addition, tourism officials are currently studying the feasibility of adopting a single travel visa for the whole region.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations has a big role in facilitating the success of these region-wide efforts. It has the authority to coordinate with government ministers of its member countries to ensure regional cooperation on various issues and policies. And it can tap the resources of its members and even global institutions to implement innovative programs.

But despite its modest success in promoting cultural exchanges, especially in organizing summits and conferences, ASEAN has miserably failed in the past four decades to resolve conflicts and divisions in the region. Its policy of non-interference has weakened its political influence and organizational capability. It couldn’t even sanction member countries accused of committing widespread human rights violations.

In fairness to ASEAN, advocating unity isn’t its primary function, a fact that further highlights the need for alternative models on how to strengthen the Southeast Asian community. The question is whether it’s still possible to undertake region-wide activities despite the border clashes of its neighboring states, the rise of racist and ultra-nationalistic attitudes among politicians, and the general lack of interest in the issue among Southeast Asians.

ASEAN’s refusal to act as one body has allowed economic and military superpowers like the United States, China, and Japan to conveniently stage their geopolitical games in the region. There’s no unified ASEAN front willing to confront China’s aggressive efforts at claiming territory and resources in the region, and no ASEAN effort to check the expansion of the U.S. military presence in the Asia-Pacific. Worse, ASEAN member countries are in many cases choosing to align themselves with either one of the superpowers to boost their clout in the region.

Meanwhile, it feels like an insult to the ASEAN idea that smugglers, drug traffickers, and terrorists seem to be more successful in building strong, albeit underground networks in the region. Despite the illegal nature of their activities, they are able to recruit and indoctrinate individuals who understand the strategic value of connecting the grassroots of one country with the remote villages of another country in the region. In short, they are sometimes better able to maximize the advantages of Southeast Asia than ASEAN’s leaders are.

Overhauling the ASEAN way of doing things is something that should have been done years ago. Isn’t it strange that ASEAN countries are ready to welcome the arrival of U.S. warships on its shores while remaining hesitant to welcome Timor-Leste as a new member of the regional grouping?

ASEAN should do some serious soul-searching on how to assert its political relevance, and must do more to prevent global superpowers, criminal gangs and terrorist cells dominating the region’s political economy and agenda.

The first challenge for this new ASEAN, though, would be to build a more cohesive community in this part of the world.

Written for The Diplomat

For tourists, Southeast Asia conjures visions of exotic islands in places like Phuket, Bali, and Boracay. For investors, it’s a relatively safe destination, where their capital can flourish in global cities like Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, and Bangkok. Its ancient history is preserved at Angkor Wat, its rich biodiversity is visible in Borneo, and its readiness to blend with foreign cultures is highlighted by the folk Catholicism in the Philippines.

But Southeast Asia is more than just white sand beaches, temples, and resorts.

Unfortunately, it’s seldom mentioned that Southeast Asia is actually one of the most war-ravaged places on the planet. Indeed, there are still several unfinished wars in the region. For example, the world’s longest ongoing civil war involves the Karen National Liberation Army, which has been fighting for independence from Burma’s central government for the past 60 years. Meanwhile, the Maoist-influenced Communist Party of the Philippines has been waging an armed revolution in the Philippine countryside since 1969, making it the world’s longest communist insurgency.

While Timor-Leste succeeded in becoming an independent nation in 2002, it was able to achieve this only after more than two decades of bloody struggle with Indonesia. Speaking of violent conflicts in Indonesia, it seems West Papua’s current bid for independence is unlikely to be resolved peacefully. Separatist movements are also thriving in southern Thailand and the southern Philippines. Thailand’s Islamic insurgency, in particular, has intensified in recent years, and some analysts believe it could soon become Asia’s biggest insurgency.

Several countries in the region are still hurting from the scars of past wars. Laos is officially the most heavily bombed country in the history of warfare. Between 1964 and 1973, the United States military dropped more bombs on Laos than it did worldwide during the whole of World War II. Nearly a third of them failed to detonate, and they are scattered across half of the country’s agricultural land. Some experts have warned that it will take a century before the 80 million cluster bomblets can be completely removed.

But a recent study has claimed that more bombs were actually dropped by the United States on Cambodian soil. Official estimates pegged the total tonnage of bombs dropped on the country at 500,000 tons, but the new study revised the figure to 2.8 million tons of U.S. bombs. Whether the new findings are accurate or not doesn’t change the fact that Cambodia, like Laos, is among the most heavily bombed countries in the past century.

If Cambodia and Laos suffered tremendously from U.S. military offensives, think of the damage inflicted on Vietnam during the long, nightmarish decades of full-scale U.S. armed intervention in that country. The human casualties are easy to count, but the impact of that war in a poor rural nation can’t be measured in numbers alone. For instance, the war ended more than three decades ago, but Vietnamese fields and forests are still contaminated with Agent Orange and other harmful chemicals used by the U.S. to defeat the Vietcong.

While it’s a welcome development that Khmer Rouge atrocities are being documented, and that the perpetrators are now facing trial, they can’t erase the trauma of the genocidal war that led to the slaughter of almost two million innocent people.

Global headlines often mention Southeast Asia in relation to news reports on the fastest growing economies and the rising military tensions between the United States and China in the Asia-Pacific. They describe the potential of the region in terms of trade and commerce on the one hand, and its geopolitical value if military superpowers should collide in the future on the other. What they always fail to include in the discussion is the ongoing local wars in many places in the region, and the roots of these conflicts which include, among other issues, the negative legacy of centuries of colonialism and neo-colonialism. In short, they speak of Southeast Asia as a place with no past, where only the present and future matter.

The duty of Southeast Asians is to remember the region’s painful past and, when needed, exorcise the ghosts of history that continue to haunt the present.

Related article:

ASEAN Solidarity
Unfriendly neighbors

Last year, more than 200,000 workers in the garment sector went on strike in protest over their pauperized working conditions. The government responded by reminding employers to strictly enforce the occupational safety and health standards required by law.

To further highlight the demands of garment workers, the Asia Floor Wage network organized Cambodia’s first ever People’s Tribunal on Minimum Living Wage and Decent Working Conditions early this month. It was also the first tribunal in the Asia-Pacific aimed at establishing a standard on the issue of fair pricing for garment manufacturers and, in particular, strengthening the bargaining power of female workers within the global supply chain.

Aside from the wage issue, the tribunal also discussed the alarming rise of mass fainting incidents in many garment factories. In 2011 alone, the Free Trade Union reported that 2,300 workers fainted in five factories. Initial investigations revealed that many workers suffered from low blood sugar, malnutrition, dehydration, food poisoning and over-exertion. The government later confirmed that the fainting cases were related to poor working conditions in many factories.

During the tribunal, workers in the “fainting factories” recalled how they regularly work for 12 to 14 hours a day while being exposed to strong chemicals in hot and poorly ventilated environments. Most of the female workers said they also have to travel long hours, standing in overcrowded trucks, to get to work each day.

To stop the fainting, factory owners merely need to ensure that occupational safety and health policies are implemented. Specifically, workers should be taught how to properly handle chemicals and electrical equipment. In addition, workers should be given time to rest at the weekend, while any overtime worked during peak factory production periods should be undertaken in compliance with the law.

The tribunal succeeded in articulating the demands of garment workers, but the proposed reforms still need to be aggressively presented to the government and the global clients of Cambodia’s garment factories. Just a week ago, 162 garment workers in a Preah Sihanouk factory were reportedly rushed to various hospitals and clinics after they fainted at work.

A few years ago, there was a global outcry over the recruitment of child workers in Southeast Asia’s infamous sweatshops, an outcry that forced Western companies, employers, buyers, and local governments to sign a pact against this unfair labor practice. Today, consumers should likewise be informed that clothing companies are able to cut the prices of goods at the expense of Cambodia’s fainting workers.

Written for The Diplomat

Indonesia Police Target Teens?

Indonesians are shocked and angered by reports that children accused of petty crimes have been arrested and beaten by the police.

In Soe City in eastern Indonesia, a 16-year-old boy was arrested and charged with stealing and selling eight pink adeniums from a private garden. In the Central Sulawesi capital of Palu, a 15-year-old boy identified as only A.A.L. was beaten by the police and faced a possible five-year jail sentence after he was accused of stealing a pair of used sandals owned by a policeman. In Bali, a teenager was convicted for stealing a wallet containing 1,000 rupiah (11 cents). In Cilacap, Central Java, two men were charged with stealing 15 banana bunches. Deli Suhandi, a 14-year-old boy accused of stealing a phone card worth 10,000 rupiah ($1.12) that he found lying in the street, could face a seven-year prison term.

The initial reaction of many people was to condemn the unnecessary violence employed by the police in apprehending the teenage suspects. Subsequently, symbolic protests were organized by ordinary citizens in front of police stations, courts, and even local parliament buildings across the country. In Soe, 1,000 pink adeniums were deposited by protesters in front of the police station to show support for the young flower thief. Meanwhile, children’s rights activists have began collecting coins to highlight the case of the wallet teenage thief in Bali. In Cilacap, the Muhammadiyah Students Association has launched a campaign that aims to gather 1,000 bananas and demand the freedom of the banana thieves.

But the action that has gained global attention is the “sandal protest,” which saw thousands of ordinary Indonesians throwing worn-out sandals in front of police stations all over the country. The protest was successful and the boy was returned to his parents without receiving a prison term.

The widespread protests reflect the people’s outrage over the human rights abuses suffered by the juvenile offenders and the unfair treatment of the poor by the police. The issue reinforced the perception that policemen are harsh to petty criminals but lenient to big time law violators, especially corrupt public officials. The protests are no longer simply about children’s rights, but also the injustices experienced by the poor.

The protests have the potential to develop into a genuine grassroots movement that could inspire and empower the poor to demand for more democratic reforms in the country. Instead of dismissing the localized actions, the government should be ready to address some of the reasonable demands of the protesters. For example, the passage of Juvenile Court legislation and the adoption of a restorative justice approach in dealing with young delinquents. The president should also order law enforcers to undergo human rights training and review standard procedures for apprehending suspected criminals.

If the police desire the community’s support for the campaign against criminality, they must first erase a reputation of giving rich criminals preferential treatment while condemning the poor to face the full force of the law. Ultimately they need to fulfill their duty as upholders of justice.

Written for The Diplomat

The junta-backed Burmese government surprised even its supporters when it released 651 political detainees last Friday (it was dubbed the “Beautiful Friday the 13th” by some netizens on Facebook). Those released included activists, journalists and opposition leaders who had been languishing in the country’s 43 prisons and 100 labor camps for years. The government’s decision to grant amnesty to dissidents was immediately welcomed by its neighbors and by Western powers led by the United States, which vowed to restore formal ties with Burma. If sanctions are removed, Burma can expect an influx aid and investment from rich countries. Hopefully, this would also help to end the country’s years of political isolation.

Despite its poor human rights record, it seems Burma has broadly been doing the right things since reviving its parliament, conducting more open elections, releasing Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest, and now this latest prisoner release. Will the government be able to sustain the democratic reforms it has promised for this year?

Meanwhile, in Malaysia, Anwar’s acquittal was described by opposition groups as a victory for justice after claims the Najib Razak government orchestrated the sodomy case against Anwar to undermine the opposition. The high-profile trial dragged on for two years, which led many people to question the independence of the courts.

Anwar’s acquittal can therefore help restore confidence in the courts, and may help convince ordinary citizens that a transparent and independent judiciary still exists in the country, despite the perceived machinations of the ruling party. Now that Anwar is free, the opposition can also direct its attention to upcoming elections and working out how to defeat the ruling coalition, which has been in power for several decades already. Maybe Malaysia can also review the proposal to repeal its oppressive sodomy laws.

But if the Malaysian judiciary survived the Anwar Ibrahim case, the Philippine judicial system is still facing its biggest crisis after Chief Justice Corona was impeached by the House of Representatives last month. He is now embroiled in a trial in the Senate’s impeachment court. Corona is accused among other things of using his position to protect his patron, former President Gloria Arroyo, who is being prosecuted for corruption and electoral fraud. He’s also accused of amassing ill-gotten wealth after his appointment in the Supreme Court.

Corona’s impeachment is supported by advocacy groups that consider the Chief Justice to be the main stumbling block to holding Arroyo accountable for the crimes she allegedly committed when she was in power. Some groups even view it as a long term campaign to transform the Supreme Court into a more independent and pro-people institution.

Lastly, Singapore’s decision to slash the salaries of government ministers, reportedly the highest paid public servants in the world, should be seen as another victory of the people. The record low number of votes garnered by the ruling party, which has been in power since 1959, forced the government to form a committee to review the pay scale of high-ranking ministers.

Surprisingly, the committee recommended hefty pay cuts for all ministers. The prime minister will see a 36 percent pay cut while the president’s salary will be reduced by 51 percent. Some citizens aren’t satisfied with the recommendations, and think their politicians are still overpaid. And indeed, the prime minister and president will still earn more than Barack Obama, even after their salary reductions. But the pay cuts should still be welcomed as an initial compromise by Singaporean politicians who rarely bow to public pressure. What citizens should focus on is the campaign for more economic reforms to bridge the very large income gap in this prosperous city state.

Political prisoners are now free, an opposition leader is acquitted of a sodomy charge, a chief justice is on trial, and politicians will receive pay cuts. These are inspiring political reforms that have taken place even before the first month of the new year has ended. Aside from the eviction of urban poor residents in Phnom Penh, and the deteriorating conditions of evacuees in flood damaged villages in southern Philippines, 2012 has started remarkably well for Southeast Asia.The January Spring

Written for The Diplomat

Politicians may be getting younger, but it doesn’t mean the old guard is completely excluded from politics. Indeed, it continues to be politically relevant despite the rise of a new generation of voters who are skeptical of old-style politics.

Lee Kuan Yew became Singapore’s first prime minister in 1959, and ruled the country for three decades. When he stepped down from power in 1990, he was appointed senior minister. His son, who became prime minister in 2004, designated him minister mentor. He’s the country’s longest serving minister, the world’s longest serving prime minister, and still holds a parliamentary seat. The only global icon who rivals Lee Kuan Yew’s feat of longevity is Fidel Castro, who became Cuba’s leader in 1959.

Mahathir served as Malaysia’s prime minister for 22 years. His political party remained undefeated in the polls, and when he retired from politics, he was offered an emeritus role in the new government, but rejected the offer. But despite no longer holding a position in government, he’s still a feared political figure in Malaysia and has the luxury of being able to criticize the prime minister, a foreign leader, or other countries from time to time. He has consistently attacked the West, for example, for supposedly undermining the economies and sovereignty of developing nations.

King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand and Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei are highly respected and well-loved political icons in their respective countries. King Bhumibol, the longest reigning sitting monarch, is the only political figure who can unite Thailand’s warring political forces. Thai politicians show their devotion to the King by strictly implementing a law that forbids anyone insulting the royal family. Meanwhile, Sultan Bolkiah has continued to exercise a direct role in the governmental affairs of his country since his coronation in 1968.

In addition, although Juan Ponce Enrile was never president of the Philippines, he has been influential politically since the 1960s. He was the oldest senator of the republic to be reelected last year, despite an overwhelmingly young electorate. He’s also the senate president, which makes him the third most important lawmaker in the country.

After serving their country for decades, these politicians were expected to retire from politics, but it seems they are incapable of taking a less active role in public affairs. Despite their age and frail health, they still hold powerful positions in government, political parties respect their views and voters continue to re-elect them.

Schooled in the tradition that a country’s leaders are infallible, they continue to expect everybody to agree with their views, even if their beliefs seem to most to be obsolete. Yet despite them being out of touch, no one in government seems to have the stature to antagonize them.

It’s a strange situation indeed when elderly statesmen are still calling the shots despite the future of their countries lying with a much younger future.

Written for The Diplomat

Thailand’s Turbulent Year

Three issues made 2011 an interesting but turbulent year for Thailand: Yingluck Shinawatra, the three-month flooding disaster, and lese majesté.

Yingluck made history when her party dominated the elections this year, which allowed her to become Thailand’s first female prime minister. Her critics, though, accused her of being a mere proxy of her brother, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted from power in 2006. Yingluck’s victory didn’t impress many feminists, but it’s still a significant gain for the political opposition identified with Thaksin.

Still, it was the deadly flooding tragedy, not Thaksin, which proved to be the first serious challenge to Yingluck’s leadership. As expected, her enemies portrayed her as a weak and incompetent leader who failed to handle the floods properly. Massive floods hit most countries in Southeast Asia this year, but Thailand suffered the most when floodwaters submerged a third of the country’s provinces, including major industrial estates, 4.4 million acres of agricultural land, and 470 areas of Bangkok. More than 600 people died in the floods, while 2.4 million families have been displaced from their homes in the past three months.

However, Thailand’s international image suffered not only because of the country’s flooding woes, but also because of the government’s aggressive efforts to implement its very strict and rigid lese majesté laws. Aside from convicting a 61-year-old man to 20 years in prison for sending text messages that insulted the royal family, Thailand’s harsh laws attracted global attention when authorities banned 761,416 webpages that are deemed offensive to the King.

Thai politics certainly seemed less bloody and violent as the year went on compared with the Yellow Shirt airport takeover in 2008, the Red Shirt riots last year, and border clashes with Cambodia earlier this year. But as in previous years, they are still more divisive than ever. The flooding disaster, which was reported to be the worst in 50 years, is also expected to generate a political backlash in the coming months if the government is unable to provide immediate and sustained assistance to flooded communities.

It can only be hoped that when the monsoon rains return next year, Yingluck will be better prepared to minimize flooding casualties. But she should also start addressing the other contentious political issues in the country, such as rising inequality, erosion of democratic values, creeping censorship of online media, and corruption in high places.

Written for The Diplomat

Malaysia’s Bersih (Clean) was the most outstanding protest event of 2011 in the region. The event, which was initially organized to ask for very sensible and doable electoral reforms (e.g. cleaning up of the electoral roll and the use of indelible ink), in the end became a pro-democracy action because of the massive participation of the civilian population in the streets – and the violent reaction of the state.

And like the tech-savvy Arab protesters, the Bersih marchers maximized social media to broaden the movement’s appeal among the apolitical segments of the local internet community. More importantly, it gave ordinary Malaysians the opportunity to imagine the formation of a united and patriotic community of individuals committed to the defense of democracy.

Bersih isn’t just the name of Malaysia’s new revolution; it should also be recognized as Southeast Asia’s Tahrir Square.

Next to Bersih were the various Occupy protests in Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines. They didn’t succeed in sustaining big crowds, but through their militant and creative actions, they were able to highlight the worsening poverty in their societies while the tiny elite of privileged families and corporations are accumulating obscene wealth.

The Occupy protests in the Philippines were joined by students and other young people who used planking as a unique and funny way of expressing their anger over the state budget cuts on education and other social services. Early this month, the Occupy-like campout protests of students near the presidential palace were violently dispersed by the police.

Perhaps the most underrated protest of the year was the rally of Cambodian villagers who dressed up like the Na’vi tribe from the 2009 science fiction film Avatar in opposition to the government’s plan to convert the Prey Lang forest into plantations and mines. Prey Lang is the largest remaining primary lowland dry evergreen forest in the region.

We should expect more Avatar-inspired actions because the story of Prey Lang is similar to other rural communities in the region affected by large-scale development projects like dams, mining, and commercial rezoning. Environmental protests actually intensified this year, and one of them succeeded in forcing Burma’s government to cancel its hydroelectric dam project on the Irrawaddy River.

Not all those who fight for land rights, even through non-violent means, are able to freely express and organize their campaigns – a fact underscored by the experience of seven activists in Vietnam who were arrested, charged, and found guilty of overthrowing the government.

Finally, the protesters whose actions perhaps most symbolized the deep hatred and frustration of the poor against an oppressive system were Pham Thanh Son of Vietnam and Sondang Hutagalung of Indonesia. Son burned himself early this year in front of Da Nang’s municipal office to protest the confiscation of his family’s property by local authorities, while Sondang set his body on fire just a few weeks ago in front of the presidential palace to condemn the anti-poor policies of the government.

There were no London-like urban riots in Southeast Asia this year, but the great floods that destroyed rice fields and food crops in almost all countries of the region could lead to food and rice protests next year.

The challenge for politicians is not to view dissent as the cause of disorder in society, since this will only lead to violent solutions. Instead, they should treat it as a symptom of greater issues that governments must address like rising inequality, corruption, and bad governance.

Written for The Diplomat

2012 promises to be an exciting and significant year for this tiny nation. It will celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Restoration of Independence, the 100th anniversary of the Manufahi Revolt and the 500th anniversary of the arrival of the first Portuguese in the country. It will also conduct the third presidential and parliamentary elections since democracy was restored.

During the budget deliberations, civil society groups questioned the abnormal increase in the budget, the country’s continued dependence on oil revenues, and the unusually high number of mega infrastructure projects. But the most controversial issue was the decision of the government to obtain foreign debt next year. Timor-Leste currently has no debt from other countries or international financial institutions.

The Timor-Leste Institute for Development Monitoring and Analysis notes that the increase in the country’s budget is one of the highest in the world. In nominal terms, the 2012 budget is 35 percent higher than 2011. If adjusted to inflation, it’s 25 percent larger than last year, while the budget has grown 273 percent since 2006. The group cited a report from the IMF World Economic Outlook that identified Zimbabwe as the only country in the world whose state budget grew faster during the last four years. Many are concerned about the inflationary impact of rising state expenditures.

Many from the Institute are also concerned that the budget doesn’t reflect the need to develop non-oil industries. Income from oil and gas provides 95 percent of state revenues, making Timor-Leste the most petroleum-export dependent country in the world. “In the medium term, our oil wealth can’t even pay for provide half the level of services the government will provide next year. That’s why we need to develop our non-oil economy.”

Meanwhile, some parliamentarians criticized the decreasing budget allocation for the education, health, and agriculture sectors and alleged that the government “prefers investing in mega projects which are beyond its capacity to execute and will end up in misuse of lots of money.” One of these huge infrastructure investments is the Tasi Mane Project, which will involve the development of an integrated petroleum infrastructure in the county’s south coastal zone in the next two decades.

But the most controversial, if not unpopular, budget-related issue is the plan by the government to secure $33 million in loans for the Dili sanitation and construction of national roads. It’s the first time the government has asked parliament to approve a proposal to borrow money from foreign institutions, and it immediately drew opposition from civil society groups who initiated a petition drive signed by more than 137 organizations based in 32 countries urging the government to “keep the nation debt-free and refrain from borrowing money from international lenders to protect its future generations.” The groups warned that “Rather than repeat the mistakes of other developing countries that have struggled with debt during recent decades, Timor-Leste should learn from their experiences, which often inflicted great hardships on their people.”

Despite the criticisms, the government maintained that the budget is service and development oriented, and will stimulate the local economy while addressing the human development needs of the people. The government also boasted that the budget process is one of the most transparent in the world. Indeed, it created a Budget Transparency Portal that allows the public to access budget documents. It also provides a daily summary of budget deliberations in parliament.

For the government, the budget proposal reflects the renewed optimism in the country’s future, but for many civil society groups, the budget could harm the economy in the long run.

Written for The Diplomat

Malaysia’s Troubling “Peace” Bill

The Malaysian Parliament has unanimously approved the controversial Peaceful Assembly Bill, which critics warned would make it extremely difficult for citizens to organize protest activities. Activists denounced it as a repressive measure intended to curtail the people’s freedom of speech and expression.

The opposition, for its part, was so outraged by the hasty introduction of the measure (MPs received copies of the bill only on November 22) that they staged a walkout during the voting process. Outside the parliament, lawyers organized a “freedom walk” to dramatize their rejection of the bill, which they think is in violation of several international human rights norms. Protesters also took Prime Minister Najib Razak to task for reneging on his pledge during the Malaysia Day celebration in September to review section 27 of the Police Act 1967 in order to uphold the people’s freedom of assembly.

Lim Chee Wee, president of the Malaysian Bar, identified the dangerous provisions of the bill that could undermine the constitutional rights of Malaysian citizens:

1) Prohibition of street protests;

2) Prohibition of organization of assemblies by persons below the age of twenty one years;

3) Prohibition of participation in peaceful assemblies of children below the age of fifteen years;

4) Unduly onerous responsibilities and restrictions on organizers and assemblies;

5) Excessive fines for non-compliance of the bill.

Civil libertarians are also horrified over the other insidious provisions of the bill, like the prohibition of rallies near a place of worship or any area that the government may declare as “protected,” the banning of foreign journalists in a protest assembly, and the granting of power to the police to use tear gas, chemical-laced water, batons and shields as well as arbitrary arrests on participants if these are deemed necessary by authorities to make the assembly peaceful and orderly. Activists are also worried over a provision that gives police forces the right to disperse an assembly if participants are heard giving statements that “promote feelings of ill-will, discontent or hostility among the public.”

Police are given such extensive powers to disperse assemblies without official permits that even an outdoor birthday party can be classified as an event that needs police approval. Furthermore, the police can impose numerous conditions when they approve the conduct of an assembly. And, if they decide to disperse a crowd, they are given the right to use “all reasonable force” in dealing with protesters.

Perhaps the restrictive Peaceful Assembly Bill is the government’s preemptive legal effort to prevent another Bersih (clean) march, which could further weaken the ruling coalition’s chances in the next elections. Bersih was organized in July by election reform advocates, but it has evolved into a strong political movement after the police violently dispersed a crowd of about 50,000 in the streets of Kuala Lumpur.

Maybe the bill won’t be able to stop Bersih or other protest assemblies organized by the big political forces, but it can minimize the influence of these events by limiting the protest actions in select venues. And because of the broad definitions used in the bill, it can also affect the activities of non-political groups.

After Bersih, everybody expected the government to implement reforms that would convince the people about its commitment to democracy and transparency. But with this bill, it seems the government prefers to provoke its enemies and weaken their ability to shape public opinion by banning street protests. The bill appears proof that the government is afraid of the radical potential of Bersih and the emergence of a Malaysian Spring that could finally deliver the fatal blow to the ruling coalition’s decades-old reign in Malaysia.

Written for The Diplomat