Malaysiakini :: Letters
Malaysiakini :: Letters |
| Bersih rally: As always, the trigger happy police Posted: 09 Jul 2011 04:56 AM PDT When teenager Aminulrasyid Hamzah was shot dead by the police in a car chase some time ago, the policeman who had pulled the trigger was charged in court. It was argued then, shouldn't it be the mother who had allowed the boy to go out at night be the one to be charged instead? Had Aminulrasyid not been allowed to go out late at night, the police would not have shot him. Did the police have a choice, it was asked? The police had in the end chosen to shoot. Similarly, more than a hundred police reports including those from associations were made against the Bersih 2.0 rally fearing that the rally would cause chaos in Kuala Lumpur and business would lose income. Even though the street rally had been called off, the police took pre-emptive actions anyway to stop people from assembling in Merdeka Stadium. Road blocks were set up all over the city, causing massive traffic jams citywide. The city virtually ground to a standstill with very little activity. Certainly people who operate businesses in the city has been affected and it would also have discouraged tourists from coming to or going around city. Certain quarters are blaming Bersih 2.0 for their loss of business. In truth, it was the police action of blocking the city's roads that led to traffic jams and losses of business. But Bersih is blamed to be the cause of the police action. Hence, it is said to be Bersih's fault. Isn't this the same as in the Aminulrasyid case? Doesn't the government have a choice - to allow Bersih to have the rally under police supervision rather than to adopt a confrontational approach to stop it at all costs? Certainly, the government had a choice. The confrontational approach was taken in the end. So why should the public blame Bersih for losses of business and massive traffic jams, that are in fact due to police action? |
| Bosses can't stop you from expressing rights Posted: 08 Jul 2011 09:16 PM PDT A human being performs many roles in his or her life and many of these roles overlap. What is important to remember is that one role does not override or deny another. So you are the hardworking breadwinner and loving parent. By earning a living you have provided basic care for your children. Likewise, there is you, the responsible worker who produces and consumes, and there is you, the citizen, who safeguards your collective material and non-material wellbeing in solidarity with fellow citizens. Do you suspend your duty as a citizen who might wish to uphold your democratic rights just because your employer orders you to? The answer should be a shiningly clear 'no'. Your employer's contract over your life is limited to that which you had willingly signed up for, namely, to provide him a specific service at the workplace during your stipulated workday in exchange for wages. Beyond that, your employer has absolutely no control over you and your role as citizen just as he has no say in your role as a mother or a father to your child. It is not just that your employer has no legal right on this matter. Your employer is irrelevant on this matter, insofar as you do not intend to hurting him, damage his property or harm his work process. And that is all there is to it. So if you get a circular from your boss that sounds like this, "as a responsible corporate and [insert company name] citizen, our main focus should be on this journey to transform our company" and that the company "does not condone our staff involvement in any illegal activity", you are free to crumple it and leave it right where it belongs - in the standard-issue wastepaper basket. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysiakini :: Letters To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan