| News from Home and around US -- from Global Information Network |
| Malaysia: Moderates say Constitution trumps Islamic Law By Baradam Kuppusamy KUALA LUMPUR (IPS/GIN) -- Moderate Muslims and nonMuslims, fearful of incursions by Islamic 'Shariah' law into their private space, have launched a movement to restore Malaysia's secular constitution as the country's supreme law. In a nationwide campaign, they hope to persuade Malaysians to endorse a memorandum worded in guarded English that "reaffirms the supremacy of the constitution." The campaign is being organized by the Bar Council and Article 11, a coalition of 14 nongovernmental organizations named after the constitutional provision that upholds fundamental rights for all Malaysians "regardless of religion, race, descent, place of birth, or gender." Significant is the participation of Sisters in Islam, a leading Muslim feminist group. Together, the campaigners demand that the Malaysian government and the judiciary uphold the supremacy of the constitution; ensure governance in accordance with the constitution; reaffirm Malaysia is not a theocratic state; and recognize the independence of the judiciary. / "It's time to take it (the constitution) down from the shelf, dust it off, and use it on a daily basis. The federal constitution must be treated as the most important document in our lives because it is the supreme law," prominent lawyer Cyrus Das said at a well-attended forum March 12 that discussed erosion of fundamental secular rights. They fear that the country is inexorably moving toward an Islamic theocratic state as officers of the government, judiciary, and parliament (which are more than 65 percent Muslim) abdicate their duty to defend the secular constitution. "They took an oath to defend the constitution but they are not doing it," said lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarvar, an outspoken defender of secularism, civil law, and democratic rights. "We want to reaffirm the supremacy of the secular constitution because there is a danger Malaysia is being turned into an Islamic state in a silent and insidious manner. "The minds of politicians, judges and civil servants have become clouded -- they see themselves as Muslims first and citizens second," said Malik. "The moderate Muslim majority is silent and we want to awaken them with our campaign." Already, more than 1,000 people, including prominent politicians, lawyers and retired judges -- Muslims and non-Muslims alike -- have signed the memorandum addressed to Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, urging that his government put the constitution first. "Liberty and justice for all Malaysians may only be through an independent judiciary. Sadly, Malaysians have witnessed the subordination of our judges to the legislature and executive," the memorandum said. "In recent cases in the high courts, our judges have declined to adjudicate on pressing issues. Simply because of an element of Islamic law, litigants are left without any remedy," it said. "This is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs and one which no civil society must endure." However, the campaign clashes with Muslim groups that reject the constitution as un-Islamic because it is a man-made document and is inherited from the British colonials. Two debates are currently raging among Muslim intellectuals, political analysts say. At one level, Muslim intellectuals say the Quran comes first for Muslims, not the man-made constitution. Increasingly, this view is heard within government and the judiciary and, lawyers say, has colored court judgments. Wherever Islam is a factor, civil rights, laws, [and] legal protection are giving way, according to many lawyers. At another level, the debate is over reforming the constitution to make it more Islamic. "A growing number of Muslim now believe in reforming the constitution and if they have sufficient numbers in parliament, they can make the changes," an academic told IPS./ Unlike before, however, more Muslims and nonMuslims alike are now speaking up after years of silent suffering, something sparked by a more liberal climate under Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi. CHINA: Can billions in rural spending correct trade imbalance? By Antoaneta Bezlova BEIJING (IPS/GIN) -- Beijing's new drive to boost rural spending and close the wealth gap between the booming cities and its neglected countryside is being promoted as a safety valve for rising trade tensions between China and the outside world. / By expanding China's consumer spending boom from the cities to the vast rural areas, Beijing hopes to generate need for imports and address the country's trade imbalances. The plan for a "new socialist countryside," unveiled at the meeting of China's parliament the first week of March, aims to shift development resources from the cities to the countryside by pouring in billions of dollars in social spending and farm aid. Chinese leaders have promised new schools, hospitals, roads and other aid, hoping that by increasing the disposable income of the rural population they can spur more consumption of imported goods and services and reduce trade discord. "Frictions between China and its trade partners are now no longer limited to the trade sphere," comments Mei Xinyu, expert on international trade practices with the Ministry of Commerce. "They are now affecting the whole economic structure. For instance, since 2002, they have been the main reason behind the outside pressure on China to appreciate its currency." Developed countries are involved in most of China's trade disputes concerning trade volumes. But developing countries file most of the dumping complaints against China, says Mei Xinyu. China remains the most frequent subject of new anti-dumping investigations, with 22 initiations directed at its exports from January to June 2005, according to a report by the World Trade Organization. Central Bank Governor Zhou Xiaochuan said that a prime target of the new government policies would be to lift consumer spending and imports to narrow the trade gap./ China's trade surplus in 2005 was more than $102 billion, according to data released by the customs department in Beijing ? more than three times the 2004 figure. This dramatic surge has strained relations with the United States and European Union, the nation's largest export markets. Both have imposed quotas on imports of Chinese textiles and the EU last month said it would slap tariffs on leather shoes from the mainland. Under pressure to limit China's exports, the Bush administration has started talking tougher on confronting China over its trade practices. Some U.S. lawmakers are urging the government to label China a currency manipulator in a report due [this] month, saying the nation is keeping the yuan undervalued to give its exporters an unfair advantage. Sens. Charles Schumer, a Democrat, and Lindsay Graham, a Republican, are sponsoring legislation that would impose tariffs of 27.5 percent on Chinese-made goods unless the yuan is allowed to rise faster. Chinese exports have continued soaring despite Beijing's decision last year to make the yuan about 2 percent stronger against the dollar and to allow it to float in a restricted margin against a basket of currencies instead of being pegged directly to the U.S. dollar. Chinese government officials have said they are not pursuing a trade surplus with the U.S. and are seeking to address the gap. The government will "correct the imbalance between imports and exports" by raising incomes to spur demand for foreign goods and encouraging purchases of technology, Premier Wen Jiabao said in his national address on March 5. "We are willing to continue to adopt active measures to gradually solve the trade imbalance with the U.S.," Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing told reporters in Beijing on March 7. USA: U.S. firms fear blowback from ports debacle By Emad Mekay WASHINGTON (IPS/GIN) -- U.S. lawmakers who killed a deal that would have transferred management of terminals in six U.S. ports to an Arab company say they will forge ahead with legislation targeting foreign ownership of critical U.S sectors. The plans sent shockwaves through U.S. business groups, who are worried that such a move could discourage international investment in the U.S. and invite retaliation against U.S. corporations abroad. The United Arab Emirates-owned company, DP World, said March 9 that it was abandoning its quest to take over six U.S. ports, a day after Congress' House Appropriations Committee voted 62-2 to bar DP World from holding leases or contracts at U.S. shipping facilities. However, congressional leaders vowed that they would still pursue new regulations banning foreign ownership of infrastructure related to national security, such as domestic airlines, and alter what is now a controversial review process of such deals. One proposal under consideration in Congress would establish citizenship and other requirements for companies that own or control critical infrastructure assets, and would require existing foreign owners to divest their shares in those companies. The proposals would change how the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which represents 12 U.S. departments and agencies, vets deals for their national security implications. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, cosponsored the National Defense Critical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2006, which defines "critical infrastructure" as "any system or asset, physical or virtual, that is so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of the system or asset would have a debilitating effect on national security, economic security, or public health and safety." Democrats in Congress also vowed to make the controversial ports deal a major issue in the upcoming midterm congressional elections. "We feel Dubai Ports World has given us a great opportunity to talk about these issues and how we would do things differently," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a Democrat from New York who had sponsored an amendment to bury the DP deal. U.S. businesses initially stayed silent during the firestorm, giving only tepid backing for the DP deal, but the rising opposition in Congress that has now extended to possible action against all foreign investments in the United States has clearly nudged them to speak out. Bill Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC), a business lobby group, said that such an action "would send the wrong message to our allies and potentially backfire on the United States." This concern was echoed by numerous other business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Council for International Business (USCIB), the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), and the Business Roundtable, all important trade and industry lobbies. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in a statement that Congress should not interfere in the review process, and warned that any legislation that alters the role CFIUS plays in deciding the viability of these types of sales could have dangerous implications for the future of foreign direct investment in the United States. Several business groups have also written to congressional leaders urging them not to change the regulations. |
 |