Search This Blog

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Sudan is more progressive than Malaysia

Written by  Mariam Mokhtar

The two countries – Malaysia and Sudan, are like chalk and cheese.

Sudan is the largest and one of the most geographically diverse countries in Africa. The south is an area of swamps and rain forests and is separated from the mostly desert north by mountain ranges. The River Nile splits the country from east to west. Sudan's borders were drawn up by colonial powers with little regard to cultural realities on the ground.

On the other hand, equatorial Malaysia consists of two regions, famed for their dense rainforests and separated by 640 miles of the South China Sea.

Sudan has a population of 43.2 million (UN 2010) in an area of 2.5 million sq. km. The life expectancy is 58 years (men), and 61 years (women). The main exports are oil, cotton, sesame, livestock and hides, gum Arabic. The GNI per capita is USD 1,220

Malaysia has a population of 27.9 million in an area covering 329,847sq.km. The life expectancy is 73 years (men) and 78 years (women). The main exports are electronic equipments, petroleum and liquefied natural gas, chemicals, palm oil, wood and wood products, rubber and textiles. The GNI per capita is USD 7,230 (World Bank 2009)

Sudan's independence was rapidly overshadowed by conflict. Two rounds of north-south civil war cost the lives of 1.5 million people, and the Darfur conflict has displaced two million people and killed more than 200,000.

President Omar Hassan al-Bashir came to power in a military coup in 1989 and has ruled with an iron fist ever since.

Most northerners in Sudan are Arabic-speaking Muslims, while the various ethnic groups in the south are mostly Christian or follow traditional religions.

The government is based in the north and many southerners feel discriminated against. North and south have had a long history of fighting.

Southerners are angry with attempts to impose Islamic law on the whole country.

Last Sunday, four million people took part in the country’s referendum on whether Sudan should split in two.

The referendum is a result of the 2005 Naivasha Agreement between the Khartoum central government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army/Movement.

The vote was a condition to end almost two decades of conflict between north and south.

South Sudanese expatriates were allowed to vote and decide the future of their country. These Sudanese expatriates had to qualify for ‘Out of Country Registration and Voting (OCV). The 2009 Referendum Act identified eight countries which they considered ‘densely populated’ by communities of South Sudanese outside Sudan. These were Australia, Canada, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, United Kingdom and the United States.

Unlike the southern Sudanese, Malaysians who are living overseas are prevented from exercising their right to vote even though Article 119 of the Federal Constitution grants the right to vote to all Malaysian citizens of the age of 21 and over who are resident and registered in a constituency or who are registered as absent voters in accordance with election laws.

Regulations made by the Election Commission exclude the vast majority of the estimated one million Malaysians living overseas. Currently, only students, government servants and members of the Armed Forces and their spouses living overseas have the right to cast their vote by post.

The Malaysian government has no provision for Malaysians overseas to vote at Malaysian embassies and consulates abroad.

Other Malaysians living overseas can only vote if they register to vote in Malaysia and physically return to Malaysia to cast their ballots on election day.

Malaysians would like the government to stop the discrimination against Malaysian citizens living and working outside Malaysia.

Why is the government not willing to engage these Malaysians in charting the future course of Malaysia?
If a less developed country like Sudan can extend the right to vote to their overseas citizens, then why can’t Malaysia?

No comments:

Post a Comment